Showing posts with label eat this not that. Show all posts
Showing posts with label eat this not that. Show all posts
Monday, February 25, 2013
Monday, December 31, 2012
2012 Goals!
2012 was a great year. Accomplished many things health wise. I've completely stopped eating meat and chicken. Still eat seafood, need a little variety.
March I placed second in a weight loss challege.
In June I started working out at Train Studios. They emphasize on core training using ropes, kettle bells, TRX and your own bodyweight. My waist dropped 2 inches and my shirt size went from XL to L.
2013 will bring many changes including juicing. My biggest goal is to be down 60 ibs by my 1 year annivesary at Train Studios.
Sunday, November 11, 2012
THE FATTIEST FOODS IN AMERICA
THE FATTIEST FOODS IN AMERICA
6. FAT OFFENDER #6: A BURGER : Ruby Tuesday Triple Prime Bacon Cheddar Burger
New rule: The more syllables in a menu item's name, the more fat there's likely to be in the dish. Less than 3 percent of the beef produced in this country earns the USDA's "prime" rating, and that's not a bad thing. Prime beef, as it turns out, is the fattiest beef you can sink your teeth into. If you really want a burger, you're better off heading elsewhere. Not one of Ruby's has fewer than 700 calories. Go with the Plain Grilled Top Sirloin and earn all the beefy protein without the superfluous calories.
EAT THIS INSTEAD!
Plain Grilled Top Sirloin
5. FAT OFFENDER #5: A STEAK: Chili’s Flame-Grilled Ribeye with broccoli and mashed potatoes
For a healthy diet, the USDA recommends you cap your daily saturated fat intake at 20 grams. This meal more than doubles that, and it's only 12 ounces of meat. Sure, ribeye is a notoriously fatty cut, but it's primarily the bath of butter that pushes this steak's fat count to such unhealthy heights. Switch to the Guiltless Grill Classic Sirloin and save an astounding 1,090 calories.
EAT THIS INSTEAD!
Guiltless Grill Classic Sirloin with steamed veggies
4. FAT OFFENDER #4: MEXICAN FOOD: Chili’s Bacon Ranch Chicken Quesadilla
Traditional Mexican food is big on seasoning and light on cheese, but with this quesadilla, Chili's takes a different approach. Trying to appease palates primed for indulgence, the restaurant layers on the fat in four ways: cheese, ranch, bacon, and sour cream. Go with the Margarita Grilled Chicken and you'll cut the overall fat content by more than 80 percent.
EAT THIS INSTEAD!
Margarita Grilled Chicken
3. FAT OFFENDER #3: A 'HEALTHY' SALAD: IHOP Chicken and Spinach Salad
Chicken? Good. Spinach? Good. IHOP’s Chicken and Spinach Salad—downright deplorable. You'll need to i-hop for four hours to burn it off. This salad is exactly what makes restaurant food so questionable and potentially unhealthy. The name makes it sound like a paragon of nutritious eating, yet the numbers reveal it to be just the opposite. The chicken here is actually fried chicken, and the spinach is little more than a small bed for bacon and cheddar cheese. You could snarf down six pancake short stacks and still take in less fat. Save yourself the waistline damage and opt for the Simple & Fit Simply Chicken Sandwich instead.
Click here for all of today's nutrition, health, and fitness news!
EAT THIS INSTEAD!
Simply Chicken Sandwich with fresh fruit, side salad, and reduced-fat Italian dressing
2. FAT OFFENDER #2: 'HEALTHY' FISH: Applebee’s New England Fish & Chips
The American Heart Association recommends eating fish rich in omega-3 fatty acids at least twice a week. By doing so, you lower your risk of such chronic diseases as heart disease and cancer. But if you prepare fish by deep frying it in a tub of bubbling fat—like Applebee's does with this artery-clogging monstrosity—you reverse all those benefits. Opt for Applebee's Garlic Herb Salmon instead. It offers 109 fewer grams of fat, nearly two-thirds fewer calories, and a heap of flavor that will still leave you satiated.
EAT THIS INSTEAD!
Applebee’s Garlic Herb Salmon
1. FAT OFFENDER #1: PASTA: Cheesecake Factory Fettuccini Alfredo with Chicken
Cheesecake Factory prefers to keep its nutritional stats hidden, but a law in California forced it to reveal saturated fat. Total fat is still a mystery, but this meal breaks through the 100-gram ceiling on saturated fat alone! The culprits here are the oversized portion and the thick, fat-riddled alfredo sauce. The typical restaurant recipe for this sauce relies on some combination of cream, butter, oil, and cheese, and there's no reason to believe that Cheesecake's version strays from the norm. Unfortunately, the chain offers no single pasta dish with fewer than 1,100 calories, so keep yourself safe by sticking to the new Skinnylicious menu.
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Would you eat a stack of 16 sugar cubes?
This website breaks down the sugar content in common things you eat and drink.
http://www.sugarstacks.com/
http://www.sugarstacks.com/
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
More Than Half In 39 States Will Be Obese
We Americans already know how fat we are. Can it get much worse?
Apparently, yes, according to an advocacy group that predicts that by 2030 more than half the people in the vast majority of states will be obese.
Mississippi is expected to retain its crown as the fattest state in the nation for at least two more decades. The report predicts 67 percent of that state's adults will be obese by 2030; that would be an astounding increase from Mississippi's current 35 percent obesity rate.
The new projections were released Tuesday by Trust for America's Health with funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Trust for America's Health regularly reports on obesity to raise awareness, mostly relying on government figures.
The group's dismal forecast goes beyond the 42 percent national obesity level that federal health officials project by 2030. The group predicts every state would have rates above 44 percent by that time, although it didn't calculate an overall national average.
About two-thirds of Americans are overweight now. That includes those who are obese, a group that accounts for about 36 percent. Obesity rates have been holding steady in recent years. Obesity is defined as having a body-mass index of 30 or more, a measure of weight for height.
Trust for America's Health officials said their projections are based in part on state-by-state surveys by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from 1999 through 2010. The phone surveys ask residents to self-report their height and weight; people aren't always so accurate about that.
The researchers then looked at other national data tracking residents' weight and measurements and made adjustments for how much people in each state might fudge the truth about their weight. They also tried to apply recent trends in obesity rates, along with other factors, to make the predictions.
Officials with Trust for America's Health said they believe their projections are reasonable.
And New York City's health commissioner agreed. "If we don't do anything, I think that's a fair prediction," said Dr. Thomas Farley whose city banned just supersize sugary drinks to curb obesity.
Trust for America projects that by 2030, 13 states would have adult obesity rates above 60 percent, 39 states might have rates above 50 percent, and every state would have rates above 44 percent.
Even in the thinnest state — Colorado, where about one-fifth of residents are obese — 45 percent would be obese by 2030.
Perhaps more surprising, Delaware is expected to have obesity levels nearly as high as Mississippi. Delaware currently is in the middle of the pack when it comes to self-reported obesity rates.
The report didn't detail why some states' rates were expected to jump more than others. It also didn't calculate an average adult obesity rate for the entire nation in 2030, as the CDC did a few months ago. But a researcher who worked on the Trust for America's Health study acknowledged that report's numbers point toward a figure close to 50 percent.
CDC officials declined to comment on the new report.
Whichever estimates you trust most, it's clear that the nation's weight problem is going to continue, escalating the number of cases of diabetes, heart disease and stroke, said Jeff Levi, executive director of Trust for America's Health.
By 2030, medical costs from treating obesity-related diseases are likely to increase by $48 billion, to $66 billion per year, his report said.
The focus of so much of the ongoing debate about health care is over controlling costs, Levi said. "... We can only achieve it by addressing obesity. Otherwise, we're just tinkering around the margins."
___
Listed are 2011 obesity levels followed by the Trust for America's Health projections for 2030. States are listed in order from the highest to lowest projections in 2030:
Mississippi, 35 percent, 67 percent
Oklahoma, 31 percent, 66 percent
Delaware, 29 percent, 65 percent
Tennessee, 29 percent, 63 percent
South Carolina, 31 percent, 63 percent
Alabama, 32 percent, 63 percent
Kansas, 30 percent, 62 percent
Louisiana, 33 percent, 62 percent
Missouri, 30 percent, 62 percent
Arkansas, 31 percent, 61 percent
South Dakota, 28 percent, 60 percent
West Virginia, 32 percent, 60 percent
Kentucky, 30 percent, 60 percent
Ohio, 30 percent, 60 percent
Michigan, 31 percent, 59 percent
Arizona, 25 percent, 59 percent
Maryland, 28 percent, 59 percent
Florida, 27 percent, 59 percent
North Carolina, 29 percent, 58 percent
New Hampshire, 26 percent, 58 percent
Texas, 30 percent, 57 percent
North Dakota, 28 percent, 57 percent
Nebraska, 28 percent, 57 percent
Pennsylvania, 29 percent, 57 percent
Wyoming, 25 percent, 57 percent
Wisconsin, 28 percent, 56 percent
Indiana, 31 percent, 56 percent
Washington, 27 percent, 56 percent
Maine, 28 percent, 55 percent
Minnesota, 26 percent, 55 percent
Iowa, 29 percent, 54 percent
New Mexico, 26 percent, 54 percent
Rhode Island, 25 percent, 54 percent
Illinois, 27 percent, 54 percent
Georgia, 28 percent, 54 percent
Montana, 25 percent, 54 percent
Idaho, 27 percent, 53 percent
Hawaii, 22 percent, 52 percent
New York, 25 percent, 51 percent
Virginia, 29 percent, 50 percent
Nevada, 25 percent, 50 percent
Oregon, 27 percent, 49 percent
Massachusetts, 23 percent, 49 percent
New Jersey, 24 percent, 49 percent
Vermont, 25 percent, 48 percent
California, 24 percent, 47 percent
Connecticut, 25 percent, 47 percent
Utah, 24 percent, 46 percent
Alaska, 27 percent, 46 percent
Colorado, 21 percent, 45 percent
District of Columbia, 24 percent, 33 percent
Apparently, yes, according to an advocacy group that predicts that by 2030 more than half the people in the vast majority of states will be obese.
Mississippi is expected to retain its crown as the fattest state in the nation for at least two more decades. The report predicts 67 percent of that state's adults will be obese by 2030; that would be an astounding increase from Mississippi's current 35 percent obesity rate.
The new projections were released Tuesday by Trust for America's Health with funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Trust for America's Health regularly reports on obesity to raise awareness, mostly relying on government figures.
The group's dismal forecast goes beyond the 42 percent national obesity level that federal health officials project by 2030. The group predicts every state would have rates above 44 percent by that time, although it didn't calculate an overall national average.
About two-thirds of Americans are overweight now. That includes those who are obese, a group that accounts for about 36 percent. Obesity rates have been holding steady in recent years. Obesity is defined as having a body-mass index of 30 or more, a measure of weight for height.
Trust for America's Health officials said their projections are based in part on state-by-state surveys by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from 1999 through 2010. The phone surveys ask residents to self-report their height and weight; people aren't always so accurate about that.
The researchers then looked at other national data tracking residents' weight and measurements and made adjustments for how much people in each state might fudge the truth about their weight. They also tried to apply recent trends in obesity rates, along with other factors, to make the predictions.
Officials with Trust for America's Health said they believe their projections are reasonable.
And New York City's health commissioner agreed. "If we don't do anything, I think that's a fair prediction," said Dr. Thomas Farley whose city banned just supersize sugary drinks to curb obesity.
Trust for America projects that by 2030, 13 states would have adult obesity rates above 60 percent, 39 states might have rates above 50 percent, and every state would have rates above 44 percent.
Even in the thinnest state — Colorado, where about one-fifth of residents are obese — 45 percent would be obese by 2030.
Perhaps more surprising, Delaware is expected to have obesity levels nearly as high as Mississippi. Delaware currently is in the middle of the pack when it comes to self-reported obesity rates.
The report didn't detail why some states' rates were expected to jump more than others. It also didn't calculate an average adult obesity rate for the entire nation in 2030, as the CDC did a few months ago. But a researcher who worked on the Trust for America's Health study acknowledged that report's numbers point toward a figure close to 50 percent.
CDC officials declined to comment on the new report.
Whichever estimates you trust most, it's clear that the nation's weight problem is going to continue, escalating the number of cases of diabetes, heart disease and stroke, said Jeff Levi, executive director of Trust for America's Health.
By 2030, medical costs from treating obesity-related diseases are likely to increase by $48 billion, to $66 billion per year, his report said.
The focus of so much of the ongoing debate about health care is over controlling costs, Levi said. "... We can only achieve it by addressing obesity. Otherwise, we're just tinkering around the margins."
___
Listed are 2011 obesity levels followed by the Trust for America's Health projections for 2030. States are listed in order from the highest to lowest projections in 2030:
Mississippi, 35 percent, 67 percent
Oklahoma, 31 percent, 66 percent
Delaware, 29 percent, 65 percent
Tennessee, 29 percent, 63 percent
South Carolina, 31 percent, 63 percent
Alabama, 32 percent, 63 percent
Kansas, 30 percent, 62 percent
Louisiana, 33 percent, 62 percent
Missouri, 30 percent, 62 percent
Arkansas, 31 percent, 61 percent
South Dakota, 28 percent, 60 percent
West Virginia, 32 percent, 60 percent
Kentucky, 30 percent, 60 percent
Ohio, 30 percent, 60 percent
Michigan, 31 percent, 59 percent
Arizona, 25 percent, 59 percent
Maryland, 28 percent, 59 percent
Florida, 27 percent, 59 percent
North Carolina, 29 percent, 58 percent
New Hampshire, 26 percent, 58 percent
Texas, 30 percent, 57 percent
North Dakota, 28 percent, 57 percent
Nebraska, 28 percent, 57 percent
Pennsylvania, 29 percent, 57 percent
Wyoming, 25 percent, 57 percent
Wisconsin, 28 percent, 56 percent
Indiana, 31 percent, 56 percent
Washington, 27 percent, 56 percent
Maine, 28 percent, 55 percent
Minnesota, 26 percent, 55 percent
Iowa, 29 percent, 54 percent
New Mexico, 26 percent, 54 percent
Rhode Island, 25 percent, 54 percent
Illinois, 27 percent, 54 percent
Georgia, 28 percent, 54 percent
Montana, 25 percent, 54 percent
Idaho, 27 percent, 53 percent
Hawaii, 22 percent, 52 percent
New York, 25 percent, 51 percent
Virginia, 29 percent, 50 percent
Nevada, 25 percent, 50 percent
Oregon, 27 percent, 49 percent
Massachusetts, 23 percent, 49 percent
New Jersey, 24 percent, 49 percent
Vermont, 25 percent, 48 percent
California, 24 percent, 47 percent
Connecticut, 25 percent, 47 percent
Utah, 24 percent, 46 percent
Alaska, 27 percent, 46 percent
Colorado, 21 percent, 45 percent
District of Columbia, 24 percent, 33 percent
Monday, September 17, 2012
Sunday, July 1, 2012
Monday, June 4, 2012
Friday, May 25, 2012
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Burger King Veggie Burger
In case you didn't know Burger King has a Veggie burger and it's great! 
It's called the BK Veggie and it's made by MorningStar.
It's called the BK Veggie and it's made by MorningStar.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
THE WORST DRINKS IN AMERICA
THE WORST DRINKS IN AMERICA
15. Worst Light Beer: Sam Adams Light
124 calories, 9.7 g carbs
Light beers generally range from 95 to 110 calories, but the Sam Adams Light contains 124. Kind of defeats the purpose of a light beer, especially when you can choose a regular Guinness Draught for just one more calorie. Choose a true light beer: Beck's contains 60 fewer calories than the Sam Adams (that's almost as little as one-half the caloric impact!).
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Beck's Light
64 calories, 3.9 g carbs, 3.8% alcohol by volume
14. Worst Lemonade: Minute Maid Lemonade (20-ounce bottle)
250 calories, 67 g sugars
This classic lemonade favorite has the sugar equivalent of 5 Good Humor Vanilla Ice Cream Sandwiches, and you’d need to do a full hour of vigorous housecleaning to burn off all the calories. Switch to the much-less-caloric (and equally refreshing) Crystal Light option.
Click here for today's nutrition, health, and fitness news!
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Crystal Light Pink Lemonade On-the-Go Packet (16 ounces prepared)
10 calories, 0 g sugars
13. Worst Energy Drink: Rockstar Original (16-ounce can)
280 calories, 0 g fat, 62 g sugars
Americans spent $4.2 billion on high-octane elixirs in 2008. Even with dozens of brands found in the cooler, Rockstar stands out as the most sugar-loaded of the various and sundry energy drinks. Compared with its closest competitor, it has 20 extra calories, which is just enough to make it the worst possible choice for instant energy. And with research on the long-term effects of taurine and guarana still cloudy, you're better off getting your buzz from coffee, a proven source of antioxidants and other beneficial nutrients. But if you must grab a can, you can't get better than the low-carb concoction below.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Monster Lo-Carb Energy (16-ounce can)
20 calories, 0 g fat, 6 g sugars
12. Worst Bottled Coffee: Starbucks Vanilla Frappuccino (9.5-ounce bottle)
200 calories, 3 g fat (N/A g saturated), 31 g sugars
Most people don't associate coffee with milk shake-like loads of sugar, but that's exactly what's happening inside this bottle. Add one of these to your diet every morning and you'll add about 21 pounds of flab to your body in a year.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Java Monster Vanilla Light Coffee + Energy (15-ounce can)
100 calories, 3 g fat (2 g saturated), 10 g sugars
11. Worst Beer: Sierra Nevada Bigfoot Ale (12-ounce bottle)
304 calories, 32 g carbohydrates, 9.6% alcohol
You know a beer is in trouble when it needs to invoke the image of an oversize mythical beast just to describe itself. Perhaps a better name would have been Jabba the Hut Ale. Beer gets most of its calories from the booze itself, and with nearly 10 percent alcohol in each bottle, this brew is likely to create a beer belly nearly as quickly as it creates a buzz.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Guinness Draught (12-ounce bottle)
126 calories, 10 g carbohydrates, 4% alcohol
10. Worst Bottled Beverage: Sobe Liz Blizz (20-ounce bottle)
310 calories, 1 g fat (0.5 g saturated), 77 g sugars
Don't be fooled by the natural motifs that adorn Sobe's bottles. Spin this one around and you'll see that it's made from water, sugar, skim milk, and cream. We've said it before and we'll say it again: Don't buy products with cartoon animals on the front. This repugnant reptile will shatter your weight loss dreams. In fact, this one bottle contains more sugar than 11 Rainbow Popsicles.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Sobe Cherimoya Punch Lean Machine Lifewater (20-ounce bottle)
0 calories, 0 g fat, 0 g sugars
9. Worst Soda: Sunkist (20-ounce bottle)
320 calories, 84 g sugars
All full-sugar sodas are evil, but they weren't all created equal. A 12-ounce can of Coke-the tooth-rotting standard-contains 140 calories and 39 grams of sugar. That same size can from Sunkist packs 190 calories and a staggering 52 grams of sugar. Tack on the extra 8 ounces in this orange monster and you begin to understand why soft drinks are often cited as one of the top contributors to obesity and diabetes in this country.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Honest Ade Orange Mango (16.9-ounce bottle)
100 calories, 24 g sugars
8. Worst Juice Imposter: Arizona Kiwi Strawberry (23.5-ounce can)
360 calories, 0 g fat, 84 g sugars
If kiwi and strawberry are both fruits (and they are, we fact-checked it), then why does this can contain only 5 percent juice? Because it's made from watered-down high-fructose corn syrup-enough of it, in fact, to give this drink the sugar equivalent of 7 bowls of Froot Loops cereal. The most disturbing part of this beverage is that it normally costs just $.99, making it the cheapest source of empty calories we've ever uncovered.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Diet Snapple Noni Berry Juice (17.5-ounce bottle)
33 calories, 0 g fat, 2 g sugars
7. Worst Slush: Sonic Route Large Lemon-Berry Cream Slush (20 ounces)
600 calories, 24 g fat (17 g saturated), 88 g sugars
To be fair, this belly blaster is more of a shake-slush hybrid: half sugar-saturated ice and half high-fat ice cream. Think it sounds tasty alongside a Sonic Cheeseburger and fries? Maybe so, but that's a meal that will cost you more than 1,500 calories.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Small Lemonberry Real Fruit Slush (14 ounces)
190 calories, 0 g fat, 50 g sugars
6. Worst Holiday Coffee Drink: Starbucks Venti 2% Peppermint White Chocolate Mocha (20 ounces)
640 calories, 21 g fat (13 g saturated), 94 g sugars
Between the candies and the casseroles, we already have plenty of temptations to deal with during the holidays. We certainly don't need Starbucks' surreptitious sugar overload thrown into the mix. The name implies indulgence, sure, but the fact that this cup holds more sugar than 9 Krispy Kreme doughnuts is pretty appalling. Settle for a candy cane in your coffee or find a different drink.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Grande Skinny Cinnamon Dolce Latte (16 ounces)
120 calories, 0 g fat, 16 g sugars
5. Worst Hot Chocolate: Starbucks Venti 2% White Hot Chocolate (20 ounces)
600 calories, 23 g fat (14 g saturated), 78 g sugars, 360 mg sodium
Thanks to Starbucks' monstrous creation, this classic winter comfort beverage is now sullied with more than a full day's worth of saturated fat and as much sugar as nearly 4 Hershey's chocolate bars.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Grande Nonfat Vanilla Crème (16 ounces)
270 calories, 7 g fat (4.5 g saturated), 38 g sugars
4. Worst Cocktail: Red Lobster Traditional Lobsterita
890 calories, 0 g fat, 183 g carbohydrates
Lobsterita means a lobster tank-size glass filled with booze and high-fructose corn syrup. You'd have to drink 4 regular on-the-rocks margaritas to outdo the massive calorie load. Pair that with a dinner and you might be pushing a full day's calories in one meal. If you want to get drunk, take a shot. If you want to enjoy a cocktail, make sure it doesn't start with a bottle of mix-your body and your taste buds will thank you.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
Malibu Hurricane
200 calories, 0 g fat, 35 g carbohydrates
3. Worst Float: Baskin-Robbins Large Ice Cream Soda with Vanilla Ice Cream Float (32 ounces)
960 calories, 40 g fat (25 g saturated, 1.5 g trans), 136 g sugars
If you're going to have a float, it's best to limit yourself to one small scoop of ice cream and a reasonable pour of soda, yet Baskin-Robbins' smallest portion is 32 ounces! Unfortunately, if the ice cream mogul doesn't begin offering smaller sizes, your options are limited. Either split a small float or cut the soda out of the equation.
EAT THIS INSTEAD!
Vanilla Ice Cream Scoop (4 ounces)
260 calories, 16 g fat (10 g saturated, 0.5 g trans), 26 g sugars
2. Worst Smoothie: Smoothie King's The Hulk, Strawberry (40 ounces)
2,070 calories, 64 g fat (26 g saturated), 250 g sugars
To be fair, this smoothie is designed to help people gain weight—and for that reason alone, it isn’t our Worst Drink in America. The problem is that we live in a nation in which two-thirds of us are overweight, and the number of professional body builders doesn't constitute a significant demographic. Plus, if you really want to put on some pounds, just eat 9 Odwalla Super Protein bars. That's how many it would take to match this caloric load.
DRINK THIS INSTEAD!
The Shredder, Strawberry (20 ounces)
356 calories, 1 g fat, 41 g sugars
1. Worst Drink in America: Cold Stone Creamery PB&C Shake Gotta Have It Size
1,750 calories, 118 g fat (64 g saturated, 2 g trans), 140 g sugars
The PB&C is intended to denote peanut butter and chocolate, but the more accurate translation might be potbellies and cardiovascular disease. After all, this one drink does pack more calories than a dozen ice cream sandwiches and more saturated fat than nearly 20 large orders of McDonald's French fries. And what's even more depressing is that no shake on Cold Stone's menu, not even the small sizes, falls below 900 calories. Choose a small ice cream and use the 1,380 calories for something with at least a trace of nutritional value.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
One whole month no MEAT!
This past month, I didn't eat any meat and this last week did have some fish. No chicken, beef or pork. It was hard, but was able to do it.
Too graphic for weak stomachs!
The advantages to eating meat:
FLAVOR
-The flavor of a dead animal in your mouth for a few minutes.
---
---
The advantages to not eating meat:
THE ANIMALS
-When you eat meat, you are very likely to support the suffering
of animals. The vast majority of all animals for food production is
kept in extremely small, dark quarters and rarely gets to walk, fly or
swim freely. The killing process is in many cases lengthy and involves
a lot of suffering.
of animals. The vast majority of all animals for food production is
kept in extremely small, dark quarters and rarely gets to walk, fly or
swim freely. The killing process is in many cases lengthy and involves
a lot of suffering.
-Animals feel pain, remember pain, and have long-lasting behavioral changes due to pain and discomfort.
-Animals are not worth any "less" than a human. Animals are
different than humans. Humans can do things that animals can't do,
animals can do things that humans can't do. Just because an animal can
not scream, cry, talk or have facial expressions does not mean that the
animal does not have pain or discomfort or is not aware of its
surroundings.
different than humans. Humans can do things that animals can't do,
animals can do things that humans can't do. Just because an animal can
not scream, cry, talk or have facial expressions does not mean that the
animal does not have pain or discomfort or is not aware of its
surroundings.
OTHER HUMANS
-Many people in the world are starving due to grain shortages
(also soy and others). among other factors of course. Producing one
pound of red meat requires appr. 17 pounds of grain. If people quit
eating meat, there would be more than enough grain to feed everyone.
(See "ENVIRONMENT" section)
(also soy and others). among other factors of course. Producing one
pound of red meat requires appr. 17 pounds of grain. If people quit
eating meat, there would be more than enough grain to feed everyone.
(See "ENVIRONMENT" section)
-Thousands of people work in the meat industry, most of them are
paid extremely low wages and work under physically and psychologically
unhealthy conditions. The jobs are very dangerous in many cases. Read
the book "Fast Food Nation" for a lot of information about those
jobs.
paid extremely low wages and work under physically and psychologically
unhealthy conditions. The jobs are very dangerous in many cases. Read
the book "Fast Food Nation" for a lot of information about those
jobs.
ENVIRONMENT
-According to a 2006 United Nations initiative, the livestock
industry is one of the largest contributors to environmental
degradation worldwide, and modern practices of raising animals for food
contributes on a "massive scale" to air and water pollution, land
degradation, climate change, and loss of biodiversity. The initiative
concluded that "the livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or
three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental
problems, at every scale from local to global." (LEAD digital library:
Livestock's long shadow - Environmental issues and options)
industry is one of the largest contributors to environmental
degradation worldwide, and modern practices of raising animals for food
contributes on a "massive scale" to air and water pollution, land
degradation, climate change, and loss of biodiversity. The initiative
concluded that "the livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or
three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental
problems, at every scale from local to global." (LEAD digital library:
Livestock's long shadow - Environmental issues and options)
-Animal farming greatly increases the greenhouse effect. Animal
farming produces 65 percent of human-related nitrous oxide (which has
296 times the global warming potential of CO2) and 37 percent of all human-induced methane (which is 23 times as warming as CO2).
It is also accused of generating 64 percent of the ammonia, which
contributes to acid rain and acidification of ecosystems. (LEAD digital
library: Livestock's long shadow - Environmental issues and options)
farming produces 65 percent of human-related nitrous oxide (which has
296 times the global warming potential of CO2) and 37 percent of all human-induced methane (which is 23 times as warming as CO2).
It is also accused of generating 64 percent of the ammonia, which
contributes to acid rain and acidification of ecosystems. (LEAD digital
library: Livestock's long shadow - Environmental issues and options)
-It takes appr. 17 pounds of grain to produce one pound of red
meat. To grow, transport and clean the grain and to wash, transport,
slaughter and process the animals, hundreds of liters of fresh water
are needed, as well as lots of oil (mainly to transport the grain and
animals and to get the water from one place to another). Lots of
electrical energy is needed to keep meat cold to keep it from rotting
fast (it still rots) between the killing of an animal and the
consumption of its meat. In other words, it is a huge waste of energy
and resources.
meat. To grow, transport and clean the grain and to wash, transport,
slaughter and process the animals, hundreds of liters of fresh water
are needed, as well as lots of oil (mainly to transport the grain and
animals and to get the water from one place to another). Lots of
electrical energy is needed to keep meat cold to keep it from rotting
fast (it still rots) between the killing of an animal and the
consumption of its meat. In other words, it is a huge waste of energy
and resources.
HEALTH
-Many large-scale studies have shown vegetarianism to
significantly lower risks of cancer, ischemic heart disease, and other
fatal diseases. (Key, Timothy J, et al., 1999 "Mortality in
vegetarians and nonvegetarians: detailed findings from a collaborative
analysis of 5 prospective studies" American Journal of Clinical
Nutrition, Vol. 70, No. 3, 516S-524S, September 1999) and others
significantly lower risks of cancer, ischemic heart disease, and other
fatal diseases. (Key, Timothy J, et al., 1999 "Mortality in
vegetarians and nonvegetarians: detailed findings from a collaborative
analysis of 5 prospective studies" American Journal of Clinical
Nutrition, Vol. 70, No. 3, 516S-524S, September 1999) and others
-Non-lean red meat, in particular, has been found to be a direct
cause of cancers of the lung, esophagus, liver, and colon, among
others. (Meat can raise your lung cancer risk, too", MSNBC, 2007-12-11)
and others
cause of cancers of the lung, esophagus, liver, and colon, among
others. (Meat can raise your lung cancer risk, too", MSNBC, 2007-12-11)
and others
-American vegetarians tend to have lower body mass index, lower
levels of cholesterol, lower blood pressure, and less incidence of
heart disease, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, renal disease,
osteoporosis, dementias such as Alzheimer's disease and other
disorders. (Mattson, Mark P. (2002). Diet-Brain Connection: Impact on Memory, Mood, Aging and Disease. Kluwer Academic Publishers.)
levels of cholesterol, lower blood pressure, and less incidence of
heart disease, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, renal disease,
osteoporosis, dementias such as Alzheimer's disease and other
disorders. (Mattson, Mark P. (2002). Diet-Brain Connection: Impact on Memory, Mood, Aging and Disease. Kluwer Academic Publishers.)
-Eating of red meat has been linked to earlier manifestations of impotence in men, due to the high saturated fat content.
-Studies by
Harvard University as well as other studies conducted in the United
States, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and various
European countries, have confirmed that vegetarian diets provide more
than sufficient protein intake as long as a variety of plant sources
are available and consumed.
Harvard University as well as other studies conducted in the United
States, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and various
European countries, have confirmed that vegetarian diets provide more
than sufficient protein intake as long as a variety of plant sources
are available and consumed.
---
There are a lot more advantages to not eating meat. If you want to
find out more, please do an online search for "vegetarianism".
find out more, please do an online search for "vegetarianism".
How do I become a vegetarian?
-You quit eating meat. It's probably easiest to quit "cold
turkey". After about two weeks, you will likely have completely lost
the desire to consume animals and you will wonder how you were ever
able to chew on a dead animal.
turkey". After about two weeks, you will likely have completely lost
the desire to consume animals and you will wonder how you were ever
able to chew on a dead animal.
-When you quit eating meat, try to also reduce eating junk food,
sodas, and eat as little refined sugar as possible. That way, you will
likely automatically eat more of those foods that will give you all the
nutrients you need.
sodas, and eat as little refined sugar as possible. That way, you will
likely automatically eat more of those foods that will give you all the
nutrients you need.
-To avoid protein deficiencies, try to eat plenty of beans, nuts, grain-based products and soy-based products.
-To avoid iron and vitamin B-deficiencies, try to eat plenty of green leafy vegetables.
Remarks
I decided to only post a few references. I have researched all
above points thoroughly. If you want more specific information or look
at studies, please do an online search and you will likely easily find
tons of information.
above points thoroughly. If you want more specific information or look
at studies, please do an online search and you will likely easily find
tons of information.
I realize that the very first statement on this website is not
correct at all times. In extremely rare cases, you may be able to eat
meat and not contribute to suffering, terrible working conditions and
all the other things shown in the pictures. If I were put in a forest
with nothing else to eat, I would probably go ahead and try to catch,
kill and eat an animal. I would still not feel good about it, but my
will to survive will most likely drive me to do such thing. It is
natural. Please keep in mind that "natural" does not necessarily mean
"good" or "right".
correct at all times. In extremely rare cases, you may be able to eat
meat and not contribute to suffering, terrible working conditions and
all the other things shown in the pictures. If I were put in a forest
with nothing else to eat, I would probably go ahead and try to catch,
kill and eat an animal. I would still not feel good about it, but my
will to survive will most likely drive me to do such thing. It is
natural. Please keep in mind that "natural" does not necessarily mean
"good" or "right".
Animals who are killed by predators in their natural environment
have the huge advantage that they got to live a life in freedom and got
to do the things that likely made them happy. I am aware that some
animals suffer in nature as well, but that is probably very different
and a lot less the case in nature than when being part of the food
production industry.
have the huge advantage that they got to live a life in freedom and got
to do the things that likely made them happy. I am aware that some
animals suffer in nature as well, but that is probably very different
and a lot less the case in nature than when being part of the food
production industry.
About this website
You probably got to this website because you saw "NOMEAT.NET" on a
t-shirt. The person who wore that shirt was most likely me, the guy who
put this website together. Feel free to ask me any questions about
vegetarianism or whatever you want to ask me. I have 27 t-shirts with
"NOMEAT.NET" on them in all kinds of different material colors and
print colors. A while ago, I realized that I was almost always wearing
t-shirts that had random stuff printed on them, mostly names of big
companies. I decided that instead of supporting those big companies, I
might as well support something that I consider worthwhile -
vegetarianism. If just one person eats one piece of meat less, it was
worth it. Thank you for reading!
t-shirt. The person who wore that shirt was most likely me, the guy who
put this website together. Feel free to ask me any questions about
vegetarianism or whatever you want to ask me. I have 27 t-shirts with
"NOMEAT.NET" on them in all kinds of different material colors and
print colors. A while ago, I realized that I was almost always wearing
t-shirts that had random stuff printed on them, mostly names of big
companies. I decided that instead of supporting those big companies, I
might as well support something that I consider worthwhile -
vegetarianism. If just one person eats one piece of meat less, it was
worth it. Thank you for reading!
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Worked hard in January.
Numbers came in strong in January. Now ready to move forward on my skinny campaign. Between the holidays, birthday and other celebrations, I fell off my mark. I'm back in full effect starting tomorrow.
Friday, January 20, 2012
15 Reasons Never to Let Anyone You Love Near a McDonald’s
Real food is perishable. With time, it begins to decay. It’s a natural process, it just happens. Beef will rot, bread will mold. But what about a McDonald’s burger? Karen Hanrahan saved a McDonald’s burger from 1996 and, oddly enough, it looks just as “appetizing” and “fresh” as a burger you might buy today. Is this real food?
How many cows does it take to keep the world loaded with Big Macs? I had to do a some research and a little math, but according to a brief video inside one of McDonald’s 6 meat processing plants, about 500,000 pounds of beef is processed per day, per plant. If an average beef cow weighs 1,150 pounds, that means 2609 cows a day are turned into burgers. That’s 952,285 cows per year. And that’s just in the United States. Eating a hamburger may not be worse than driving a Hummer, but it’s bad. One hamburger patty does not necessarily come from one cow. Think about that. You’re eating bits of hundreds of cows.
Soybean oil, pickle relish [diced pickles, high fructose corn syrup, sugar, vinegar, corn syrup, salt, calcium chloride, xanthan gum, potassium sorbate (preservative), spice extractives, polysorbate 80], distilled vinegar, water, egg yolks, high fructose corn syrup, onion powder, mustard seed, salt, spices, propylene glycol alginate, sodium benzoate (preservative), mustard bran, sugar, garlic powder, vegetable protein (hydrolyzed corn, soy and wheat), caramel color, extractives of paprika, soy lecithin, turmeric (color), calcium disodium EDTA (protect flavor).
Cheap oil and cheap syrup. Many people depend upon cheap food such as the sort offered at McDonald’s. So shouldn’t we be examining regulations that subsidize corn syrup but consider fruits and vegetables – the building blocks of a healthy body and green planet – to be “speciality” crops? Shouldn’t we be promoting urban gardening, community gardens and spreading information about low-cost farmers’ markets and CSAs? And focusing on the abundant choices of cheap food that are tasty and green?
Still not convinced? Maybe this 1970s trip through McDonaldland will give you enough nightmares to keep your loved ones away forever.
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
I was lied to about BMI..
When I started this blog over a year ago, my focus instead of weight was BMI score. I always thought it was somewhat flawed, due to everyone having different muscle mass. The index is basing everyone have the same muscle mass.
The Truth about BMIAmericans think the body mass index can tell them if they're at a healthy weight. But they're wrong
The next time you happen to catch a Minnesota Vikings game, take a look at Adrian Peterson, the team's 6'1, 217-pound running back. Now ask yourself: what kind of physical characteristics would you attribute to him? Athletic? Lean? Fit? All of these certainly sound like valid answers to us—but his clinical classification might surprise you.
By any normal standards, Peterson is one of the fittest men on the planet. But by our country's system of measuring body fat, he's overweight. If you're like most people, you've probably heard of the 'body mass index,' or, as it's more informally known, BMI. It's a popular formula used to not only gauge if a person is overweight or obese, but also how great their risk is for future health problems.
BMI is a relatively straightforward equation that measures a person's body fat by comparing their weight to their height:
(Weight in pounds) / (Height in inches) (Height in inches) x 703
You can also figure out your BMI without doing any math, here: Log onto http://nhlbisupport.com/bmi/ for an online calculator.
There are four different categories a person can fall into, ranging from underweight to obese. They are:
*18.4 or lower: Underweight.
*18.5 to 24.9: Normal weight.
*25 to 29.9: Overweight.
*30 or higher: Obese.
According to the National Institutes of Health, being overweight or obese by this measure can put you at risk for heart disease, type II diabetes, and even some cancers.
But BMI doesn't work well for individual people. One of the formula's obvious flaws, explains Alan Aragon, the Men's Health Weight Loss Coach and a nutritionist in California, is that it has no way of discriminating between fat and muscle—which is the case with Peterson.
Part of the problem is that BMI was never designed as a tool for judging any individual person's weight—either by physicians or the general public, says Timothy Church, a professor of health at Pennington Biomedical Research Center. In fact, the formula was originally intended to measure the collective weight of an entire population, but because of its straightforward math and distinctive categories (i.e., if you score a 25 on the BMI scale, you're overweight), it soon also took off.
Here's how BMI was born: In the early part of the 20th century, medical studies began to show a link between excess weight and an early death. So doctors and insurance companies started to seek out an easy method to determine a person's body-fat percentage. Insurance companies were especially concerned with this task, and devoted portions of their budget to discovering an obesity-determining calculation.
It wasn't, however, until physiology researcher Ancel Keys published a study in 1972 called "Indices of Relative Weight and Obesity," that the modern version of BMI came about. Keys conducted a series of studies on male populations in order to test if any pre-existing mathematical equations could measure a group's relative amount of body-fat. Fortunately for him, one did. The "Quetelet Index," (a.k.a., weight divided by height, squared) which was developed by Belgian statistician Adolphe Quetelet in the mid-1800s, proved to be successful.
To Keys' credit, he never intended for physicians or insurance companies to use this equation—but BMI was just too perfect. Because it was simply a math equation, it was quicker, easier, and cheaper to use than more direct and accurate measures—like the underwater weighing test, which measures how much you weigh by how much water you displace, and the skin fold measurements, which calculates how much fat you have beneath your skin.
"BMI was really pushed by [companies like] Metropolitan Life," Church said. "It was meant to give them an excuse to charge [their clients] more."
The formula received its official stamp of approval in 1985, when the NIH cited it as the index of obesity, Ever since then, BMI has gradually become more and more accepted—now it's the standard, go-to formula for determining what makes a healthy weight, even among regular people, says Frank Hu, Ph.D., professor of health and nutrition at the Harvard School for Public Health.
Another issue is gender. The Quetelet Index—and corresponding Keys study—were both created from research on male populations. An entirely different formula was originally used for determining obesity in female populations, and yet, doctors use the same equation for both genders, says Church. In the beginning, the NIH differentiated between men and women by establishing different "thresholds" for one's BMI, to account for the variance between men and women in the equation. But even that difference dissolved in 1998. When pressed for the reasons why, an NIH spokesperson declined to comment.
So why has no one tried to change the system? One reason is that imprecise numbers from BMI aren't dangerous, says Hu. And besides, doctors are able to determine risk factors using other measurements.
Still, the alternatives to BMI aren't perfect either. The most common of which is the waist circumference test, which measures abdominal obesity (a.k.a., the fat around your stomach). It's slightly better than BMI at measuring someone's risk for illnesses like heart disease and diabetes, say our experts, because it measures fat specifically, instead of taking into account the weight of a person's muscle mass.
The truth is, people know if they're overweight—so be your own judge. Look in the mirror, monitor your jean size, and talk to your doctor. But don't rely on a flawed formula to determine your health status.
The Truth about BMIAmericans think the body mass index can tell them if they're at a healthy weight. But they're wrong
The next time you happen to catch a Minnesota Vikings game, take a look at Adrian Peterson, the team's 6'1, 217-pound running back. Now ask yourself: what kind of physical characteristics would you attribute to him? Athletic? Lean? Fit? All of these certainly sound like valid answers to us—but his clinical classification might surprise you.
By any normal standards, Peterson is one of the fittest men on the planet. But by our country's system of measuring body fat, he's overweight. If you're like most people, you've probably heard of the 'body mass index,' or, as it's more informally known, BMI. It's a popular formula used to not only gauge if a person is overweight or obese, but also how great their risk is for future health problems.
BMI is a relatively straightforward equation that measures a person's body fat by comparing their weight to their height:
(Weight in pounds) / (Height in inches) (Height in inches) x 703
You can also figure out your BMI without doing any math, here: Log onto http://nhlbisupport.com/bmi/ for an online calculator.
There are four different categories a person can fall into, ranging from underweight to obese. They are:
*18.4 or lower: Underweight.
*18.5 to 24.9: Normal weight.
*25 to 29.9: Overweight.
*30 or higher: Obese.
According to the National Institutes of Health, being overweight or obese by this measure can put you at risk for heart disease, type II diabetes, and even some cancers.
But BMI doesn't work well for individual people. One of the formula's obvious flaws, explains Alan Aragon, the Men's Health Weight Loss Coach and a nutritionist in California, is that it has no way of discriminating between fat and muscle—which is the case with Peterson.
Part of the problem is that BMI was never designed as a tool for judging any individual person's weight—either by physicians or the general public, says Timothy Church, a professor of health at Pennington Biomedical Research Center. In fact, the formula was originally intended to measure the collective weight of an entire population, but because of its straightforward math and distinctive categories (i.e., if you score a 25 on the BMI scale, you're overweight), it soon also took off.
Here's how BMI was born: In the early part of the 20th century, medical studies began to show a link between excess weight and an early death. So doctors and insurance companies started to seek out an easy method to determine a person's body-fat percentage. Insurance companies were especially concerned with this task, and devoted portions of their budget to discovering an obesity-determining calculation.
It wasn't, however, until physiology researcher Ancel Keys published a study in 1972 called "Indices of Relative Weight and Obesity," that the modern version of BMI came about. Keys conducted a series of studies on male populations in order to test if any pre-existing mathematical equations could measure a group's relative amount of body-fat. Fortunately for him, one did. The "Quetelet Index," (a.k.a., weight divided by height, squared) which was developed by Belgian statistician Adolphe Quetelet in the mid-1800s, proved to be successful.
To Keys' credit, he never intended for physicians or insurance companies to use this equation—but BMI was just too perfect. Because it was simply a math equation, it was quicker, easier, and cheaper to use than more direct and accurate measures—like the underwater weighing test, which measures how much you weigh by how much water you displace, and the skin fold measurements, which calculates how much fat you have beneath your skin.
"BMI was really pushed by [companies like] Metropolitan Life," Church said. "It was meant to give them an excuse to charge [their clients] more."
The formula received its official stamp of approval in 1985, when the NIH cited it as the index of obesity, Ever since then, BMI has gradually become more and more accepted—now it's the standard, go-to formula for determining what makes a healthy weight, even among regular people, says Frank Hu, Ph.D., professor of health and nutrition at the Harvard School for Public Health.
Another issue is gender. The Quetelet Index—and corresponding Keys study—were both created from research on male populations. An entirely different formula was originally used for determining obesity in female populations, and yet, doctors use the same equation for both genders, says Church. In the beginning, the NIH differentiated between men and women by establishing different "thresholds" for one's BMI, to account for the variance between men and women in the equation. But even that difference dissolved in 1998. When pressed for the reasons why, an NIH spokesperson declined to comment.
So why has no one tried to change the system? One reason is that imprecise numbers from BMI aren't dangerous, says Hu. And besides, doctors are able to determine risk factors using other measurements.
Still, the alternatives to BMI aren't perfect either. The most common of which is the waist circumference test, which measures abdominal obesity (a.k.a., the fat around your stomach). It's slightly better than BMI at measuring someone's risk for illnesses like heart disease and diabetes, say our experts, because it measures fat specifically, instead of taking into account the weight of a person's muscle mass.
The truth is, people know if they're overweight—so be your own judge. Look in the mirror, monitor your jean size, and talk to your doctor. But don't rely on a flawed formula to determine your health status.
The truth about BMI!
Following 'The Thin Commandments'By Jacque Wilson, CNN
Darryl Roberts examines a vegetable in his documentary, "America the Beautiful: The Thin Commandments." STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Darryl Roberts says America has a health problem, not a weight problem
Roberts is filming three documentaries on beauty, health and sex
"America the Beautiful 2: The Thin Commandments" focuses on the diet industry
(CNN) -- At 6'3" and 277 pounds, Darryl Roberts had a body mass index of 34.6. Anything over 30.0 on the BMI scale is considered obese, and his doctor warned him that his blood pressure was too high.
So the doctor gave Roberts some medication and told him to take the pills daily. Side effects, she cautioned, could include erectile dysfunction. Roberts balked. "Can't I just exercise and eat healthier?" he remembers asking.
"Think about it," Roberts says with a laugh. "A 40-something year-old man on a race not to take pills that cause erectile dysfunction. Every guy I tell that to goes, 'Oh my God, I can relate to that.' "
The documentary filmmaker bought a bike and started adding salads to his diet. Two months later he returned to the doctor and was pronounced perfectly healthy -- despite having lost only 6 pounds.
It's a journey that he chronicles in "America the Beautiful 2: The Thin Commandments," a follow-up to his first award-winning film. The documentary focuses on the United States' unhealthy obsession with dieting and losing weight.
"We have a health problem, not a weight problem," Roberts says matter-of-factly.
CNN spoke with Roberts about his film, why he believes the BMI system should be outlawed and the award he's most proud of. The following is an edited version of that interview:
CNN: Why did you start filming the "America the Beautiful" documentary series? What sparked your passion for the topic?
I always had this knack for attracting really awesome, quality women in my life. Like I had a five-year [relationship], a five-year and an eight-year relationship. [But] I used to travel around the country with these athletes and entertainers, running into these women that would hang out at the gate.
After doing that for a while, I went, "Wow, you know what? I want a girlfriend that's awesome like the one I have, but that looks like these [groupies]." After being exposed to them for so long I could no longer appreciate the awesomeness of the woman that I was with. So that's when I started thinking, "Why did I do that?" Like when you have so much, why was beauty so important? That gave me the idea to do a documentary.
CNN: What did you learn from your first documentary?
I was sitting around watching my film one day and it occurred to me -- it just hit me -- all these three things: plastic surgery, cosmetics and eating disorders, are things that primarily affect women. And we still have an archaic appreciation for women in our country because if things primarily affect women, nobody does anything about it. But when it affects men, they do something about it right away. ... It's like we're in 1910. Everything looks really sophisticated because you have computers, you have iPads, you have smartphones and tablets, and everything you see looks so developed, but underneath it, I don't believe we value women the way that we should in this country.
CNN: Why did you decide to focus on dieting in your second documentary, "The Thin Commandments?"
When I was traveling with the first film, I went to 287 universities. At each one ... somebody would stand up and say, "Wow, we really like your film, but you didn't deal with the dieting industry. Why not?" So I go on the computer one night just researching dieting, and I come across this website that has the BMI, body mass index, of celebrities. So according to this website, the BMI of Tom Cruise, Will Smith, Mel Gibson, The Rock, Christian Bale, LeBron James -- all these celebrities -- make them either overweight or obese. And I'm like, "This is the most ridiculous thing I ever heard."
So then I did some more research on BMI. The government uses it, doctors use BMI, schools use BMI, and I'm like, "This is how they get you." In the first film, I show how we use beauty as a weapon against the American public -- now we're using weight as a weapon against the American public.
CNN: What is wrong exactly with the BMI system?
It was invented in like 1830 ... and it was invented to show sizes of populations. Like, for instance, the entire population of the United States. It was never intended to be used for an individual diagnosis of someone's health and how much they should weigh. That came in the 1970s with this guy Ancel Keys when he reformulated it to the current BMI thing.
Then in 1998, some of the scientific advisers of Weight Watchers went to the government and said, "Hey, you know what? The number that's used for the overweight category for BMI should be lowered." And the government did it. They lowered it. And when they lowered it, literally 25 million people became overweight, overnight. But guess what: Those are new customers now for the dieting industry.
CNN: Can you really say obesity isn't a big problem in this country? Why are you, in a way, fighting against that sentiment?
First off, because [if] you are defining [obesity] by BMI, then it's erroneous. So what we may have as a problem in this country is a health problem. That I agree with. We show it in the film. We have a health problem. And what we also show in the film is that health problems come to people with or without weight. So the film is making the point that we should be focusing on the health of people and not their weight.
Where we have problems is lifestyle choices. We have too many people eating fast food. We have too many people not exercising. We have too many people not engaging in healthy lifestyle behaviors. My point is if we have more people engaging in healthy lifestyle behaviors, we will become a healthier nation, whether we lose weight or not. If you think about it -- it makes sense, right?
CNN: Tell me about the third documentary in the "America the Beautiful" series. What will it be about?
So far I've done the health and beauty series, so the next one will complete it and make it the health, beauty and sex series, which are the three biggest things affecting our youth. It will be about the sexualization of our youth. Everyone says that's going to be the whopper there. I'm going to start it in January. I have no idea what I'm going to find. I always start my documentaries with no preconceived notions, and I jump in interviewing people to see what I can find.
CNN: What award for your documentaries have you won that you're most proud of?
There's a film festival that Will Smith and Meryl Streep are affiliated with -- the Giffoni Film Festival. It's a film festival for kids. They never show documentaries, only feature films that appeal to kids, right? But with ["America the Beautiful"], the Giffoni Film Festival made an exception to let a documentary in there. I went to the screening, and I was terrified that my film was going to put all these kids in a comatose state. We went to the awards presentation, and they announced the audience award and called our name. I went into shock. Here are kids voting a documentary as their favorite film in this big film festival. That was literally my proudest moment.
CNN: Where can people see "America the Beautiful: The Thin Commandments"?
[It's] actually touring around the country in theaters. We've been to six cities so far; we'll go to 30 more. They can go to our website at AmericatheBeautifuldoc.com and go to the screening schedule and see when we'll be coming to a city near them. It [also] comes out on DVD in March.
Darryl Roberts examines a vegetable in his documentary, "America the Beautiful: The Thin Commandments." STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Darryl Roberts says America has a health problem, not a weight problem
Roberts is filming three documentaries on beauty, health and sex
"America the Beautiful 2: The Thin Commandments" focuses on the diet industry
(CNN) -- At 6'3" and 277 pounds, Darryl Roberts had a body mass index of 34.6. Anything over 30.0 on the BMI scale is considered obese, and his doctor warned him that his blood pressure was too high.
So the doctor gave Roberts some medication and told him to take the pills daily. Side effects, she cautioned, could include erectile dysfunction. Roberts balked. "Can't I just exercise and eat healthier?" he remembers asking.
"Think about it," Roberts says with a laugh. "A 40-something year-old man on a race not to take pills that cause erectile dysfunction. Every guy I tell that to goes, 'Oh my God, I can relate to that.' "
The documentary filmmaker bought a bike and started adding salads to his diet. Two months later he returned to the doctor and was pronounced perfectly healthy -- despite having lost only 6 pounds.
It's a journey that he chronicles in "America the Beautiful 2: The Thin Commandments," a follow-up to his first award-winning film. The documentary focuses on the United States' unhealthy obsession with dieting and losing weight.
"We have a health problem, not a weight problem," Roberts says matter-of-factly.
CNN spoke with Roberts about his film, why he believes the BMI system should be outlawed and the award he's most proud of. The following is an edited version of that interview:
CNN: Why did you start filming the "America the Beautiful" documentary series? What sparked your passion for the topic?
I always had this knack for attracting really awesome, quality women in my life. Like I had a five-year [relationship], a five-year and an eight-year relationship. [But] I used to travel around the country with these athletes and entertainers, running into these women that would hang out at the gate.
After doing that for a while, I went, "Wow, you know what? I want a girlfriend that's awesome like the one I have, but that looks like these [groupies]." After being exposed to them for so long I could no longer appreciate the awesomeness of the woman that I was with. So that's when I started thinking, "Why did I do that?" Like when you have so much, why was beauty so important? That gave me the idea to do a documentary.
CNN: What did you learn from your first documentary?
I was sitting around watching my film one day and it occurred to me -- it just hit me -- all these three things: plastic surgery, cosmetics and eating disorders, are things that primarily affect women. And we still have an archaic appreciation for women in our country because if things primarily affect women, nobody does anything about it. But when it affects men, they do something about it right away. ... It's like we're in 1910. Everything looks really sophisticated because you have computers, you have iPads, you have smartphones and tablets, and everything you see looks so developed, but underneath it, I don't believe we value women the way that we should in this country.
CNN: Why did you decide to focus on dieting in your second documentary, "The Thin Commandments?"
When I was traveling with the first film, I went to 287 universities. At each one ... somebody would stand up and say, "Wow, we really like your film, but you didn't deal with the dieting industry. Why not?" So I go on the computer one night just researching dieting, and I come across this website that has the BMI, body mass index, of celebrities. So according to this website, the BMI of Tom Cruise, Will Smith, Mel Gibson, The Rock, Christian Bale, LeBron James -- all these celebrities -- make them either overweight or obese. And I'm like, "This is the most ridiculous thing I ever heard."
So then I did some more research on BMI. The government uses it, doctors use BMI, schools use BMI, and I'm like, "This is how they get you." In the first film, I show how we use beauty as a weapon against the American public -- now we're using weight as a weapon against the American public.
CNN: What is wrong exactly with the BMI system?
It was invented in like 1830 ... and it was invented to show sizes of populations. Like, for instance, the entire population of the United States. It was never intended to be used for an individual diagnosis of someone's health and how much they should weigh. That came in the 1970s with this guy Ancel Keys when he reformulated it to the current BMI thing.
Then in 1998, some of the scientific advisers of Weight Watchers went to the government and said, "Hey, you know what? The number that's used for the overweight category for BMI should be lowered." And the government did it. They lowered it. And when they lowered it, literally 25 million people became overweight, overnight. But guess what: Those are new customers now for the dieting industry.
CNN: Can you really say obesity isn't a big problem in this country? Why are you, in a way, fighting against that sentiment?
First off, because [if] you are defining [obesity] by BMI, then it's erroneous. So what we may have as a problem in this country is a health problem. That I agree with. We show it in the film. We have a health problem. And what we also show in the film is that health problems come to people with or without weight. So the film is making the point that we should be focusing on the health of people and not their weight.
Where we have problems is lifestyle choices. We have too many people eating fast food. We have too many people not exercising. We have too many people not engaging in healthy lifestyle behaviors. My point is if we have more people engaging in healthy lifestyle behaviors, we will become a healthier nation, whether we lose weight or not. If you think about it -- it makes sense, right?
CNN: Tell me about the third documentary in the "America the Beautiful" series. What will it be about?
So far I've done the health and beauty series, so the next one will complete it and make it the health, beauty and sex series, which are the three biggest things affecting our youth. It will be about the sexualization of our youth. Everyone says that's going to be the whopper there. I'm going to start it in January. I have no idea what I'm going to find. I always start my documentaries with no preconceived notions, and I jump in interviewing people to see what I can find.
CNN: What award for your documentaries have you won that you're most proud of?
There's a film festival that Will Smith and Meryl Streep are affiliated with -- the Giffoni Film Festival. It's a film festival for kids. They never show documentaries, only feature films that appeal to kids, right? But with ["America the Beautiful"], the Giffoni Film Festival made an exception to let a documentary in there. I went to the screening, and I was terrified that my film was going to put all these kids in a comatose state. We went to the awards presentation, and they announced the audience award and called our name. I went into shock. Here are kids voting a documentary as their favorite film in this big film festival. That was literally my proudest moment.
CNN: Where can people see "America the Beautiful: The Thin Commandments"?
[It's] actually touring around the country in theaters. We've been to six cities so far; we'll go to 30 more. They can go to our website at AmericatheBeautifuldoc.com and go to the screening schedule and see when we'll be coming to a city near them. It [also] comes out on DVD in March.
Saturday, November 12, 2011
Enjoy All the Trimmings--and Still Stay Trim
SparkPeople's 500-Calorie Thanksgiving Feast
Thanksgiving is a time for family, gratitude, and, of course, food. The typical holiday meal can have more than 4,500 calories and 229 grams of fat, according to the Caloric Control Council. That's almost three days worth of food for most of us! Butter, cream and white bread seem to be lurking in almost every dish, and the meal never seems to end.
For those of us who are trying lead healthier lifestyles, moderation and healthy eating are just as important on Thanksgiving. Fortunately, it is possible to eat right and still enjoy yourself on Turkey Day!
To help, I created brand new SparkRecipes for a three-course Thanksgiving meal that clock in around 500 calories! (Dessert, not included in that number, will add 150 calories or fewer, if you have room for it.)
Use the chart below to compare my Thanksgiving feast with a traditional meal. The more recipes you use from this list, the more calories you'll save--without sacrificing taste or tradition!
This SparkPeople meal has 510 fewer calories and 39 fewer grams of fat than a traditional feast! You'll find all the recipes to make it below! These recipes include a veggie-rich soup to start your meal off right, the juiciest turkey you'll ever taste, several sides, two desserts, plus a cranberry relish that will leave the store-bought jelly quivering in its can.
Thanksgiving is a time for family, gratitude, and, of course, food. The typical holiday meal can have more than 4,500 calories and 229 grams of fat, according to the Caloric Control Council. That's almost three days worth of food for most of us! Butter, cream and white bread seem to be lurking in almost every dish, and the meal never seems to end.
For those of us who are trying lead healthier lifestyles, moderation and healthy eating are just as important on Thanksgiving. Fortunately, it is possible to eat right and still enjoy yourself on Turkey Day!
To help, I created brand new SparkRecipes for a three-course Thanksgiving meal that clock in around 500 calories! (Dessert, not included in that number, will add 150 calories or fewer, if you have room for it.)
Use the chart below to compare my Thanksgiving feast with a traditional meal. The more recipes you use from this list, the more calories you'll save--without sacrificing taste or tradition!
| SparkRecipes Feast | Calories | Fat | Traditional Meal | Calories | Fat |
| Herb Roasted Turkey, 3 oz light meat | 140 | 3 g | Turkey, 3 oz light meat | 140 | 3 g |
| Apple Cider Gravy, 2 T | 20 | 0 g | Gravy, 2 T | 50 | 2 g |
| Vegetable and Fruit Stuffing, 1/2 c | 78 | 1 g | Stuffing, 1/2 c | 180 | 9 g |
| Roasted Root Vegetables, 1/2 c | 82 | 2 g | Mashed potatoes, 1/2 c | 220 | 8 g |
| Cranberry Relish, 2 T | 42 | 0 g | Cranberry jelly, 2 T | 55 | 0 g |
| Steamed green beans (or another green vegetable), 1/2 c | 15 | 0 g | Green bean casserole, 1/2 c | 120 | 8 g |
| Roasted Squash Soup, 1 c | 128 | 3 g | Cream-based soup, 1 c | 250 | 18 g |
| Total: | 505 | 9 g | Total: | 1,015 | 48 g |
This SparkPeople meal has 510 fewer calories and 39 fewer grams of fat than a traditional feast! You'll find all the recipes to make it below! These recipes include a veggie-rich soup to start your meal off right, the juiciest turkey you'll ever taste, several sides, two desserts, plus a cranberry relish that will leave the store-bought jelly quivering in its can.
Thursday, September 8, 2011
Honeymoon is over AKA Fat Recall!
Now that I been married a whole month and gained 13 pounds, it's time for a Total Fat Recall! Now I'm back on my grind and not looking back. Stay tuned.
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
How To Lose Weight: Is It Easy? NO! That Is, Unless You Know How To Diet Correctly
No one would suggest that losing weight is easy. The facts are in: it takes commitment, time, and change. However, we may be able to take some of the difficulty out of the task by making a few simple adjustments.
The last three decades have shown a remarkable increase in the percentage of people who are overweight or obese. Eating has become the national pastime. We eat when we socialize, watch TV or movies, work (isn't someone just always bringing donuts?). We eat to reward ourselves, to relieve frustration, to calm our nerves, to busy our hands, and, we drink "pop" with abandon, and so on.
The problem with this constant eating is that we have lost touch with the natural, inborn triggers that tell us when we are hungry and when we are full. Eating, for most of us, has no relationship with hunger. We eat because the food is there...we keep eating because there's food left.
The nutrition laboratory at Cornell University tested the theory that we will naturally stop eating when we are "not" hungry. They created a "bottomless soup bowl" which was constantly refilled by means of a hidden tube at the bottom of the bowl. They served soup from a regular bowl to half of a group and soup from the constantly refilled bowl to the other. What happened? The diners eating from the automatically-filled bowl ate 73% more soup than the normal bowl group. Clearly, we eat because the food is there.
Further, we don't concentrate on the food during the process of consuming it. Our minds are fully engaged with something else...TV, chatting, reading...we can call this "mindless eating" (unfortunately it is anything but "fat-less" eating).
Yet another problem is that we eat too fast...a sign of the times in which we live perhaps. Still, the negative effect of that habit, weight-wise, is that even if we are aware of our brain-activated "full signal", we will have eaten more than necessary by the time the neurons have gotten the message...all because we are eating too fast.
Another theory that has been shown by numerous studies is that we eat up to 45% more from large plates than we do when the same amount of food is served in smaller plates. We seem to feel that the plate should be filled...if it is not, we are left feeling unsatisfied or even deprived. Also, the larger the plate or bowl, the larger the portions we will automatically dish up.
So, what's the bottom line? There are several simple steps we can take in order to help with our quest toward weight loss.
1. Develop a habit of "mindful" eating. When we eat, let's eat...nothing else. If we're going to consume calories we might just as well fully enjoy each bite. (If we don't fully enjoy each bite, perhaps it's time to put the fork down?)
2. Have scheduled eating times...three small meals and healthful,satisfying snacks in between (vegetables, fruits, reduced-fat cheese, whole grain breads and crackers, a handful of nuts).
3. Eat when you are aware that you are hungry. Don't munch just because the food is there.
4. Eat slowly and focus on the signal you will receive from the brain that you are full. Then, stop eating.
5. Use smaller plates and bowls for serving food.
While losing weight may not be easy, perhaps we are making it a lot more difficult than it need be?
The last three decades have shown a remarkable increase in the percentage of people who are overweight or obese. Eating has become the national pastime. We eat when we socialize, watch TV or movies, work (isn't someone just always bringing donuts?). We eat to reward ourselves, to relieve frustration, to calm our nerves, to busy our hands, and, we drink "pop" with abandon, and so on.
The problem with this constant eating is that we have lost touch with the natural, inborn triggers that tell us when we are hungry and when we are full. Eating, for most of us, has no relationship with hunger. We eat because the food is there...we keep eating because there's food left.
The nutrition laboratory at Cornell University tested the theory that we will naturally stop eating when we are "not" hungry. They created a "bottomless soup bowl" which was constantly refilled by means of a hidden tube at the bottom of the bowl. They served soup from a regular bowl to half of a group and soup from the constantly refilled bowl to the other. What happened? The diners eating from the automatically-filled bowl ate 73% more soup than the normal bowl group. Clearly, we eat because the food is there.
Further, we don't concentrate on the food during the process of consuming it. Our minds are fully engaged with something else...TV, chatting, reading...we can call this "mindless eating" (unfortunately it is anything but "fat-less" eating).
Yet another problem is that we eat too fast...a sign of the times in which we live perhaps. Still, the negative effect of that habit, weight-wise, is that even if we are aware of our brain-activated "full signal", we will have eaten more than necessary by the time the neurons have gotten the message...all because we are eating too fast.
Another theory that has been shown by numerous studies is that we eat up to 45% more from large plates than we do when the same amount of food is served in smaller plates. We seem to feel that the plate should be filled...if it is not, we are left feeling unsatisfied or even deprived. Also, the larger the plate or bowl, the larger the portions we will automatically dish up.
So, what's the bottom line? There are several simple steps we can take in order to help with our quest toward weight loss.
1. Develop a habit of "mindful" eating. When we eat, let's eat...nothing else. If we're going to consume calories we might just as well fully enjoy each bite. (If we don't fully enjoy each bite, perhaps it's time to put the fork down?)
2. Have scheduled eating times...three small meals and healthful,satisfying snacks in between (vegetables, fruits, reduced-fat cheese, whole grain breads and crackers, a handful of nuts).
3. Eat when you are aware that you are hungry. Don't munch just because the food is there.
4. Eat slowly and focus on the signal you will receive from the brain that you are full. Then, stop eating.
5. Use smaller plates and bowls for serving food.
While losing weight may not be easy, perhaps we are making it a lot more difficult than it need be?
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Heavy:Season 1, Ep. 1 - Tom/Jodi
I watched the documentary Heavy. I talk about how I'm morbid obese according to the BMI charts. Watching this truly showed people who are morbidly obese. I am obese, but I setting to get to my goal weight by any means necessary.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)