The Student Room Group

Healthy New You: Your Change For Life #3

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Piggsil
Anyone got any good recipes for veggies that are a bit different? Getting a bit bored of steamed veg or making various purees. I just made some bacon braised brussels sprouts but looking for some easy and interesting ways to eat veg (usually as a side dish).


I made some really nice veg yesterday. I was having lamb steak which I marinated in rosemary and garlic. I sautéed some onions and garlic with a sprig of rosemary, added a lamb stock cube and a dash of white wine and reduced, added in some frozen petit pois at the end. Was lovely and sweet and went really well with the lamb.
Original post by alabelle
That's dedication! :tongue: Hope your headache clears for you


It's raining too. And I missed my bus so I'm walking to the gym. Believe me... This is completely out of character :tongue:

Posted from TSR Mobile
Ordered my first take away of 2014 :wink:
Original post by Piggsil
Anyone got any good recipes for veggies that are a bit different? Getting a bit bored of steamed veg or making various purees. I just made some bacon braised brussels sprouts but looking for some easy and interesting ways to eat veg (usually as a side dish).

I like cheesy peas...exactly as it sounds lol. Everyone in my flat thinks it's weird but I like it :biggrin: I just eat it as a snack too it's so good
Bought myself some new workout gear tonday :smile: Since I'm now working out 5 days a week (and am planning to start going to yoga after work) I decided I could so with some more stuff. Plus, my sports bras are completely falling apart (think I bought them at some point in second year, so they are nearly three years old..)

So I got two super pretty bras from M&S (and spent a small fortune), but then got two pairs of cropped trousers from Sports Direct for £9 so I suppose it all balaces out :tongue:
Original post by outlaw-torn
It's raining too. And I missed my bus so I'm walking to the gym. Believe me... This is completely out of character :tongue:

Posted from TSR Mobile


Flipping heck... I'd take that as a sign and wouldn't go anywhere near the gym! :tongue:
Yesterday was the third day. Once I logged everything I ate, it turned out that I'd eaten just under the calorie limit I was aiming for over the summer without even noticing or consciously restricting myself :biggrin: I'll wait till it happens more often before being too enthusiastic, but that is exactly what I expected to see happen after reducing/eliminating sugar: a restored correct hunger mechanism.
Original post by Piggsil
Anyone got any good recipes for veggies that are a bit different? Getting a bit bored of steamed veg or making various purees. I just made some bacon braised brussels sprouts but looking for some easy and interesting ways to eat veg (usually as a side dish).

I'll message you…

alabelle:

Spoiler

(edited 10 years ago)
Yogurt question: what type of yogurt is best?
I've stopped eating Muller lights because they're full of sweetener and other crap. Moved onto Petit Filous/Munch Bunch because the packaging sings the praises of calcium etc…to find out they contain like 12g of sugar each. I can't stand the taste of plain natural/Greek yogurt even with a dollop of honey, should I just condition myself to like it?
Original post by infairverona
Yogurt question: what type of yogurt is best?
I've stopped eating Muller lights because they're full of sweetener and other crap. Moved onto Petit Filous/Munch Bunch because the packaging sings the praises of calcium etc…to find out they contain like 12g of sugar each. I can't stand the taste of plain natural/Greek yogurt even with a dollop of honey, should I just condition myself to like it?

That's a shame, it is the best! Basically yoghurt with a lot of probiotics is the best for you. Low fat yoghurt has a higher milk content, and thus a higher sugar content, because the milk part contains various sugars where the fact component is sugar free. If you are in any way lactose or dairy intolerant, then full fat yoghurt is the best, because more fat there is, the less of those sugars that are allergens. Also thicker and more probiotic the yoghurt is, the more of the original milk has been transformed into something different - the allergens get converted into something that people are less likely to have a bad reaction to. Where you stand on preferring sugar or fat in your diet is up to you. Its worth noting that dairy fat is a healthy kind of fat.

Oh and don't trust the marketing on calcium. It is true that they contain calcium, but (a) you need to have various other micronutrients present in your diet to actually absorb and make use of calcium. So this means if you just ate tons of petit filous, the calcium would be wasted. And (b) even though it contains it, its not really even that high a source in comparison to various other vegetables, meats etc.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Craghyrax
Yesterday was the third day. Once I logged everything I ate, it turned out that I'd eaten just under the calorie limit I was aiming for over the summer without even noticing or consciously restricting myself :biggrin: I'll wait till it happens more often before being too enthusiastic, but that is exactly what I expected to see happen after reducing/eliminating sugar: a restored correct hunger mechanism.

I'll message you…

alabelle:

Spoiler



The blogger acknowledges that some sugary foods contain more micronutrients than other sugary foods (i.e. comparing fruit with a lollipop) but I think her basic argument is this: it is wrong to demonise sugar in general, because sugar doesn't cause people to binge, or to put on weight. That's all down to the person in general. Often when people give up sugar they're doing it because they think it will magically fix their diet (how many people on your news feed 'detox' in January and end up eating six chocolate bars when they give up... I know a few at least). And I think she's right in that respect. I don't think it's good to be judgemental of people but I hear a lot of pseudoscience around this subject (e.g. sugar is bad... when really it's just another type of carb). I think this is the closest thing to common sense I've seen in a while. And I don't imagine that paelo/low-carb followers are judging other people. But it wears you down when you're trying to lose weight and all you see is the *heavy lifting + low-carb* crowd, as if there's no other way to be successful. I know for sure that has led to me feeling demotivated in the past, because I know that kind of diet will never work for me. It's been refreshing actually, to stick to myfitnesspal lately and see that weight can come off no matter how you balance your calories. Sometimes it's good to take it back to basics. I'm a big fan of 'everything in moderation!' Which just doesn't apply to cigarettes.

And I'm primarily talking about myfitnesspal here, not this forum. Though I do see a lot of this mentality here too.
Original post by infairverona
Yogurt question: what type of yogurt is best?
I've stopped eating Muller lights because they're full of sweetener and other crap. Moved onto Petit Filous/Munch Bunch because the packaging sings the praises of calcium etc…to find out they contain like 12g of sugar each. I can't stand the taste of plain natural/Greek yogurt even with a dollop of honey, should I just condition myself to like it?


I've got muller vitality ones at the moment, but like you I've noticed the high sugar content... do you get the fat-free greek yogurt when you buy it? I don't like that kind very much because it tastes kind of fake... but I love the normal kind. Maybe give that a try. Other than that I like the chocolate mousses you can get but they're probably terrible for huge amounts of sugar too :tongue:
Original post by alabelle
The blogger acknowledges that some sugary foods contain more micronutrients than other sugary foods (i.e. comparing fruit with a lollipop) but I think her basic argument is this: it is wrong to demonise sugar in general, because sugar doesn't cause people to binge, or to put on weight.
Too much sugar (note, I'm acknowledging context here) definitely causes cravings and energy crashes. Whether you then binge in response to those cravings is your own choice. So no, sugar does not hypnotise you and force you to behave in ways that you don't want to. You still have control and can choose what you do. But it is a fact that it creates cravings, and that fructose in particular messes up your hungry/full feedback mechanism. The blogger did not present any science to contradict that. She simply denied that this was true, without engaging with the specific biochemistry of how these processes happen.
I can't agree that pointing out these facts instantly results in 'demonising sugar'. It is merely raising awareness to the different ways your body deals with different types of food. Once you know this, you can work out for yourself if you are experiencing a problem in this regard. If you aren't, then feel free to ignore it.


That's all down to the person in general. Often when people give up sugar they're doing it because they think it will magically fix their diet (how many people on your news feed 'detox' in January and end up eating six chocolate bars when they give up... I know a few at least). And I think she's right in that respect. I don't think it's good to be judgemental of people but I hear a lot of pseudoscience around this subject (e.g. sugar is bad... when really it's just another type of carb). I think this is the closest thing to common sense I've seen in a while.


Absolutely, sugar is a type of carbohydrate. None of the researchers or (good) practitioners criticising it are suggesting any other wise. They are just pointing out that your body finds it harder to metabolise carbohydrates in a safe and beneficial way when important micronutrients are not present, and
when they are eaten in a volume that your body finds it hard to deal with.
To elaborate: To metabolise carbohydrates into energy, your body needs B vitamins, phosphorus, magnesium, iron, copper, manganese, zinc and chromium. If the food you eat gives you these micronutrients, then your body can metabolise carbohydrates well. If not, then the actual act of eating the carbohydrate depletes your stores of these micronutrients, which causes a whole bunch of bad things to happen. Refined carbs and sugar have had these benefits removed from them. Vegetables, squash etc still have these attached. This is all that people mean when they say 'good' carbs or 'bad' carbs.
Now here the context that you're mentioning is important again. If you already eat a nutritious diet, then you will be in a much better position to handle refined carbs if you have them from time to time. But if you were already eating a diet that was deficient in these micronutrients, then your micronutrient levels were already critical before you swallowed some refined carbs and expected your body to deal with it. The thing is… for a typical Western eating pattern, the latter IS the context. Hence, it is quite reasonable to assume that for most people in our society, sugar = bad.
And that's just one of the problems, blood sugar levels are a separate thing that I could go into.

I have to say, I'm very confused as to why this doesn't seem like 'common sense' :confused:
And I don't imagine that paelo/low-carb followers are judging other people. But it wears you down when you're trying to lose weight and all you see is the *heavy lifting + low-carb* crowd, as if there's no other way to be successful. I know for sure that has led to me feeling demotivated in the past, because I know that kind of diet will never work for me. It's been refreshing actually, to stick to myfitnesspal lately and see that weight can come off no matter how you balance your calories. Sometimes it's good to take it back to basics. I'm a big fan of 'everything in moderation!' Which just doesn't apply to cigarettes.

And I'm primarily talking about myfitnesspal here, not this forum. Though I do see a lot of this mentality here too.

I can see that, but this is regrettably unavoidable. For instance, if I were feeling sensitive then I could also feel worn down by being in this thread, because the emphasis is very strongly on calorie counting, and losing weight. My goal isn't actually about losing weight, but if I were feeling sensitive about my weight, then being in here would make me feel as though I ought to be inspecting the labels of everything I eat and weighing myself regularly. So it works both ways.
The big problem is this: we all want to be accepted and respected for our own choices and beliefs. This means that people are critical if someone makes a general statement. But our bodies, and science, don't work that way. Even though there are some differences, certain aspects of nutrition work the same way for everyone. So that means that if you communicate these facts, it is impossible to do so in a way that's not going to be very absolute and generalised.
infairverona: the supermarket brands of full fat greek yoghurt are my favourite sort. The Fage authentic greek yoghurt in round pots is… an acquired taste. I could understand you not liking that.
Original post by Craghyrax
Too much sugar (note, I'm acknowledging context here) definitely causes cravings and energy crashes. Whether you then binge in response to those cravings is your own choice. So no, sugar does not hypnotise you and force you to behave in ways that you don't want to. You still have control and can choose what you do. But it is a fact that it creates cravings, and that fructose in particular messes up your hungry/full feedback mechanism. The blogger did not present any science to contradict that. She simply denied that this was true, without engaging with the specific biochemistry of how these processes happen.
I can't agree that pointing out these facts instantly results in 'demonising sugar'. It is merely raising awareness to the different ways your body deals with different types of food. Once you know this, you can work out for yourself if you are experiencing a problem in this regard. If you aren't, then feel free to ignore it.


All foods cause a rise in energy followed by a fall. I don't see why sugar is always singled out. As was pointed out, carbs also work in the same way. The 'spike' might be higher with sugary foods but it's not a reason to cut out sugar altogether. I happen to believe that these *cravings* are exaggerated as an excuse for habitual bingeing. Like 'I binged last night, must have been all that bread I had at lunch'. It's wrong to blame the food for a person's choices. This is where I think the demonisation of sugar comes from.

The blogger didn't try to say that sugar doesn't cause energy to rise and fall (that would be silly). Instead, she pointed out that fruit acts in exactly the same way. But people rarely advocate giving up fruit, and if they did, they'd be missing out on vital micronutrients.


Absolutely, sugar is a type of carbohydrate. None of the researchers or (good) practitioners criticising it are suggesting any other wise. They are just pointing out that your body finds it harder to metabolise carbohydrates in a safe and beneficial way when important micronutrients are not present, and
when they are eaten in a volume that your body finds it hard to deal with.
To elaborate: To metabolise carbohydrates into energy, your body needs B vitamins, phosphorus, magnesium, iron, copper, manganese, zinc and chromium. If the food you eat gives you these micronutrients, then your body can metabolise carbohydrates well. If not, then the actual act of eating the carbohydrate depletes your stores of these micronutrients, which causes a whole bunch of bad things to happen. Refined carbs and sugar have had these benefits removed from them. Vegetables, squash etc still have these attached. This is all that people mean when they say 'good' carbs or 'bad' carbs.
Now here the context that you're mentioning is important again. If you already eat a nutritious diet, then you will be in a much better position to handle refined carbs if you have them from time to time. But if you were already eating a diet that was deficient in these micronutrients, then your micronutrient levels were already critical before you swallowed some refined carbs and expected your body to deal with it. The thing is… for a typical Western eating pattern, the latter IS the context. Hence, it is quite reasonable to assume that for most people in our society, sugar = bad.
And that's just one of the problems, blood sugar levels are a separate thing that I could go into.

I have to say, I'm very confused as to why this doesn't seem like 'common sense' :confused:


But this is what I'm talking about when I say a balanced diet is important. People who cut out sugar are not eating a balanced diet, they're avoiding sugar for very little reason other than *it's bad*. Also, bad carbs are often presented as bad even when they contain micronutrients. For example, cereal or bread. So that doesn't even make sense! People cherry-pick what they think are bad, and cut them out of their diet without cause. I don't believe that your average Westener is deficient in micronutrients. Lots of our food has vitamins added to it, and most people have enough money to eat a regular diet. Since you don't need tons of of vitamins to survive, most people probably don't need *5 a day* etc. to stop them from being malnourished.

I can see that, but this is regrettably unavoidable. For instance, if I were feeling sensitive then I could also feel worn down by being in this thread, because the emphasis is very strongly on calorie counting, and losing weight. My goal isn't actually about losing weight, but if I were feeling sensitive about my weight, then being in here would make me feel as though I ought to be inspecting the labels of everything I eat and weighing myself regularly. So it works both ways.
The big problem is this: we all want to be accepted and respected for our own choices and beliefs. This means that people are critical if someone makes a general statement. But our bodies, and science, don't work that way. Even though there are some differences, certain aspects of nutrition work the same way for everyone. So that means that if you communicate these facts, it is impossible to do so in a way that's not going to be very absolute and generalised.


This thread actually has quite a mix... there are others who avoid carbs and sugar too. That's the popular way of dieting right now, and has been since Atkins... more so since paleo. I don't agree that *working both ways* makes it ok. If someone was feeling sensitive about the way this thread was working, I'd hope they'd mention it so it could be discussed! I agree that everyone has different needs... but sometimes I see some ridiculous stuff. No body (unless they have a serious disease, backed up by a professional) needs to cut sugar and carbs out of their diet long-term. So this is why I posted this... I think it's interesting and explains why I'm so fed up of people on myfitnesspal acting like carbs will cause your stomach to explode. It actually (like I said) has very little to do with this thread.
Spent this morning reading all of the labels in my kitchen to work out what I could and couldn't eat. Ended up feeling a bit glum so I went out and rode 5 or so miles on my bike just to cheer myself up!


Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 10 years ago)
I'm going out for dinner tonight.. anyone want to help me pick a main course that isn't tooooo unhealthy? My local pub is closing down so we're going for our last ever meal there.

http://www.dovecotepubhendon.co.uk/uploads/675fda17-a1c5-56e4-050d-439d94041030.pdf

I don't really fancy a jacket potato. Nothing really jumps out to me as being very healthy...
Original post by lolololol
I'm going out for dinner tonight.. anyone want to help me pick a main course that isn't tooooo unhealthy? My local pub is closing down so we're going for our last ever meal there.

http://www.dovecotepubhendon.co.uk/uploads/675fda17-a1c5-56e4-050d-439d94041030.pdf

I don't really fancy a jacket potato. Nothing really jumps out to me as being very healthy...


The salad sounds pretty healthy... and I usually find that curries are pretty low in calories compared to other pub food. But it's impossible to tell without proper nutritional info.
Original post by alabelle
The salad sounds pretty healthy... and I usually find that curries are pretty low in calories compared to other pub food. But it's impossible to tell without proper nutritional info.


I know :frown: Hmm, maybe I'll try the curry. I've found lasagne to be lower in calories sometimes (eg at Wetherspoons) but that's doubtful with the garlic bread and it just seems so unhealthy when I'm eating it. I might just get something I like and not worry too much about it seeing as I'm never going to be eating there again! :frown:
Original post by alabelle
I've got muller vitality ones at the moment, but like you I've noticed the high sugar content... do you get the fat-free greek yogurt when you buy it? I don't like that kind very much because it tastes kind of fake... but I love the normal kind. Maybe give that a try. Other than that I like the chocolate mousses you can get but they're probably terrible for huge amounts of sugar too :tongue:


The only ones I've actually liked so far are the new Muller no fat flavoured ones, the lemon one is lovely and so is the strawberry one. I'm thinking maybe I could flavour it myself with strawberry extract or something, or is that unhealthy as well?


Original post by Craghyrax
infairverona: the supermarket brands of full fat greek yoghurt are my favourite sort. The Fage authentic greek yoghurt in round pots is… an acquired taste. I could understand you not liking that.


I've tried Total 0% and that's the main one I don't like :frown: I can just about stomach Sainsbury's natural with lots of honey/agave syrup but that sort of defeats the object of opting for a lower sugar version!
Original post by alabelle
All foods cause a rise in energy followed by a fall. I don't see why sugar is always singled out. As was pointed out, carbs also work in the same way. The 'spike' might be higher with sugary foods but it's not a reason to cut out sugar altogether.
The higher insulin spikes with sugar are a problem if you have lots of them all the time. Insulin spikes also trigger cortisol release. Cortisol is a stress hormone that has some good effects (getting you out of bed in the morning) but has a harmful effect if it is being released all the time. Basically your body doesn't want to be in a stress state the whole time, and there are various health problems that this causes.

However, I didn't mention insulin in my last post at all. I specifically pointed to the issue of refined carbohydrates and sugar not being accompanied by the necessary micronutrients to metabolise them safely.
I happen to believe that these *cravings* are exaggerated as an excuse for habitual bingeing. Like 'I binged last night, must have been all that bread I had at lunch'. It's wrong to blame the food for a person's choices. This is where I think the demonisation of sugar comes from.
I don't disagree with you on this point, but its a separate issue to whether or not sugar is bad :smile:

The blogger didn't try to say that sugar doesn't cause energy to rise and fall (that would be silly). Instead, she pointed out that fruit acts in exactly the same way. But people rarely advocate giving up fruit, and if they did, they'd be missing out on vital micronutrients.
This is a great example of a good instance of sugar. The co factors in fruit are there to help your body process the sugar in a beneficial manner. And fruit is contributing to those micronutrients you need, rather than subtracting from it. It also helpfully contains fibre, which means you can't go on eating it forever without getting full. Unlike chocolate.
So I don't see what your point is, here. If anything it just confirms that there are good and bad foods.

But this is what I'm talking about when I say a balanced diet is important. People who cut out sugar are not eating a balanced diet, they're avoiding sugar for very little reason other than *it's bad*.
Feel free to have this argument with those people, whoever they are. But I have given you several good reasons that are a lot more involved than 'because its bad' (this would be a circular argument anyway).

I agree with you that a balanced diet is important. The problem here is that the average diet includes far too little fruit, vegetables good fat (which is vital for brain functioning and a great many other natural functions). When people eat cereal for breakfast, a wrap for lunch, and pasta for dinner they are having anything but a balanced diet.

Finally, who said anything about people cutting out sugar? What I am on is a three week detox. It is temporary. And if there's one thing I've learned over the last few days, its that people put sugar in everything. I was in London all day yesterday. I went to Marks and Spencer and tried to find food that didn't have added sugar. There was only ONE salad in their range that didn't have it, and it was a nasty greek salad. I tried to buy some plain grilled chicken. It had sugar too! There is no danger of people not getting enough sugar in this society. The detox I'm on includes some fruits, and if you are somebody eating a low carb diet (low in relation to the norm, not low for your body), you get a great many sugars from things like dairy, tomatoes, carrots and so forth.

Also, bad carbs are often presented as bad even when they contain micronutrients. For example, cereal or bread. So that doesn't even make sense!
Research shows that when food manufacturers fortify products that have been stripped of their nutrients, it is still much less beneficial for the body than eating an equivalent that has all those nutrients in naturally. (Compare a sweet potato with pasta) If you draw a chart that compares the nutritional composition of a fortified cereal or bread with a nutritious starchy vegetable, then for the same amount of calories the latter performs considerably better.
Furthermore, getting the right amount of macronutrients to metabolise your food is complex. There are several vital micronutrients that only have the desired effect when other micronutrients are also present and accessible. If you add certain minerals and vitamins to food, they won't be absorbed by the body unless other micronutrients are present too. Nutritious food sources contain the right mix in them already. Manufacturers probably could get this balance right for some of the key micronutrients, but at present they don't. Vitamin D is one of the major things that is essential for a huge amount of things, and even though you can buy it in supplement form, there is no way to get anything like as much as your body optimally needs this way partly because it is often manufactured in a form that is not easily accessible for the body and partly because the best sources is exposure to sun, or eating animals that have been exposed to sun.

So it does make perfect sense. You can't simply wave a food and say 'this has some micronutrients in it, so its fine'. You have to actually look at how much, and whether it is enough for the specific food that is being metabolised.
The good news is you only need to do that if you're eating artificial processed foods. Nutritious foods naturally have the right balance already.

People cherry-pick what they think are bad, and cut them out of their diet without cause. I don't believe that your average Westener is deficient in micronutrients. Lots of our food has vitamins added to it, and most people have enough money to eat a regular diet. Since you don't need tons of of vitamins to survive, most people probably don't need *5 a day* etc. to stop them from being malnourished.
See above. And I agree that if you eat a carby diet you could be someone who goes for years without really noticing bad effects. But that doesn't mean its not damaging your body. Sustained insulin spikes over time can lead to you developing insulin resistance (Type II diabetes), and almost all of the major Western chronic diseases (heart attacks, strokes, diabetes, alzheimers) have been linked through research to inflammation. Inflammation is your bodies response to stress (like the stress it experiences when there are ongoing insulin spikes). Inflammation also occurs when you don't have enough micronutrients. But the problem is that your body could be in a state of inflammation for years without you putting the pieces together.

This thread actually has quite a mix... there are others who avoid carbs and sugar too. That's the popular way of dieting right now, and has been since Atkins... more so since paleo. I don't agree that *working both ways* makes it ok. If someone was feeling sensitive about the way this thread was working, I'd hope they'd mention it so it could be discussed! I agree that everyone has different needs... but sometimes I see some ridiculous stuff. No body (unless they have a serious disease, backed up by a professional) needs to cut sugar and carbs out of their diet long-term. So this is why I posted this... I think it's interesting and explains why I'm so fed up of people on myfitnesspal acting like carbs will cause your stomach to explode. It actually (like I said) has very little to do with this thread.

Apart from the two new people who are also doing the sugar detox over the last two days, I haven't come across anybody in this thread who has mentioned eating low carb. And I've been reading it for months! The detox is only 3 weeks, so it is not permanent. And I also showed above that you get plenty of natural sugar and carbohydrates on such a diet anyway. I agree with you that I hope people can mention it if they are feeling sensitive or threatened. I hope the same thing too. But I am not sure how to interpret your linking of the blog article as soon as low carbing suddenly came up? If its just a general point to the world at large, then ok. But if you did post it because you felt that we were shoving our views down your throat, then I will try to change how I post :smile:
(edited 10 years ago)

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you