[Drew]

Originally Posted by Jason

No actually you can. If you can cook

Jason, as a cook, I'm going to say that there's no hard or fast rules here but by and large rg1570 is right here - 400 calories is not THAT much. When you consider that the normal american is on a 2000 calorie a day diet, or rather should be, that comes to about 667 calories a meal on average if they're all the same size.

So, what, a 2-ounce lean sirloin served with a single potato wedge, baked with no salt and no butter?

Also, re: the chicken quesidilla, since when the fuck have carbs been BAD for you? The Atkins diet is the single biggest load of horseshit I've ever heard of. Count calories, sure, but don't give me carb stats and expect to scare me - carbs are only a problem if your caloric intake exceeds your caloric needs and the carbs have to be stored (read - transformed into fat). If you eat well and get plenty of excersize, carbs are great for you.

[Metal Ken]

Originally Posted by Drew

that comes to about 667 calories a meal on average if they're all the same size.

Add 3 glasses of skim milk and you'd be at 2300 calories easily. leaves you absolutely no room for snacks or drinks at all for the rest of the day, if you were trying to keep your calorie count around 2000.

[Jason]

Originally Posted by Drew

Jason, as a cook, I'm going to say that there's no hard or fast rules here but by and large rg1570 is right here - 400 calories is not THAT much. When you consider that the normal american is on a 2000 calorie a day diet, or rather should be, that comes to about 667 calories a meal on average if they're all the same size.

So, what, a 2-ounce lean sirloin served with a single potato wedge, baked with no salt and no butter?

Also, re: the chicken quesidilla, since then the fuck have carbs been BAD for you? The Atkins diet is the single biggest load of horseshit I've ever heard of. Count calories, sure, but don't give me carb stats and expect to scare me - carbs are only a problem if your caloric intake exceeds your caloric needs and the carbs have to be stored (read - transformed into fat). If you eat well and get plenty of excersize, carbs are great for you.

Um if you eat 3 meals a day then it would be 667 when you should be eating smaller 5-6 meals a day. You can eat grilled chicken and sweet potato and come under 400 calories.

Also way to go once again drew and single out part of a sentence that mentions carbs ignoring the fact that its 742 calories! for whatmost peole view as and appetizer. You are correct carbs can be great for you if you eat the right ones and the right portion sizes.

Note to drew, NOONE uses the atkins diet anymore

[Drew]

Yeah but everyone still hates carbs.

And you got my logic completely backwards, Jason. I can eat ice cream and lard and come in under 400 calories if I watch my portion sizes. I'm not saying 400 is too small a caloric target, I'm just saying that while it's a given that all Americans overeat badly, even if we follow the portion size guidelines by the USDA, your 400 calorie target is still only 2/3 of what a recommended meal is. Now, if USDA considers a serving of beef to be 6 ounces, if we size down proportionally we're talking four ounces of lean beef, a half a baked potato, and a carrot stick and one stick of brocolo. Served with water.

Sure, it's possible, but a well-rounded meal? That's laughable.

I think the bigger problem here is that I can go to a restaurant and order an appetizer, and generally the thing will be so large that unless I split it with someone I won't even be that hungry when my entree shows up... Which will be more than I can eat anyway. My problem of coruse is I've got that Italian-American compulsion about not leaving food on my plate...

[Jason]

Originally Posted by Drew

Yeah but everyone still hates carbs.

And you got my logic completely backwards, Jason. I can eat ice cream and lard and come in under 400 calories if I watch my portion sizes. I'm not saying 400 is too small a caloric target, I'm just saying that while it's a given that all Americans overeat badly, even if we follow the portion size guidelines by the USDA, your 400 calorie target is still only 2/3 of what a recommended meal is. Now, if USDA considers a serving of beef to be 6 ounces, if we size down proportionally we're talking four ounces of lean beef, a half a baked potato, and a carrot stick and one stick of brocolo. Served with water.

Sure, it's possible, but a well-rounded meal? That's laughable.

I think the bigger problem here is that I can go to a restaurant and order an appetizer, and generally the thing will be so large that unless I split it with someone I won't even be that hungry when my entree shows up... Which will be more than I can eat anyway. My problem of coruse is I've got that Italian-American compulsion about not leaving food on my plate...

I understand your logic drew. It's calories in calories out BUT you need to make sure there quality.

Like I'm going use them as the barometer of what I should eat. Go look at what they suggest for protein intake for a male Fucking idiots.

PS. Drew your spelling is getting pretty horrid man

[Drew]

Jason, you have to consider the fact that YOUR dietary needs, as a guy in training to be an athlete, are not really in line with the average american. There's no need to push protein as heavily as someone lifting and trying to build muscle mass would if you spend your days in a cubicle and get a half hour or hour of exercise a night walking your dog, say. It doesn't make sense, a body not actively building muscle doesn't need that kind of protein. I mean, protein shakes aren't for everyone, you know...?

EDIT - and what's so bad about my spelling? I just ran a spell check on my post, and aside from typos on "broccoli" and "course," I found no mistakes. The keyboard I'm typing on at work has this bad habit of doubling up certain letters, but aside from that...

[Jason]

I DO consider my dietary needs BUT the protein intake they have is way under. Also I never said anything about protein shakes. Protein and fiber is what keeps you full and feeling satisfied.

About your spelling yeah it was that one word. I just noticed words here and there from all yoru posts lately. Damn spell checker!

[noodles]

Originally Posted by Jason

Um if you eat 3 meals a day then it would be 667 when you should be eating smaller 5-6 meals a day. You can eat grilled chicken and sweet potato and come under 400 calories.

Applebee's portions aren't exactly what I'd call a regular sized meal. They damn sure cannot be classified as a small meal for the 5-6 a dayers.

[Jason]

Originally Posted by noodles

Applebee's portions aren't exactly what I'd call a regular sized meal. They damn sure cannot be classified as a small meal for the 5-6 a dayers.

Correct and correct. I wasn't the one who said applebees btw

[noodles]

Not saying you were.

I think most people put far too much weight on calories. To take Drew's lean steak example, the calorie intake will be higher than, say, a garden salad, but that salad actually has a higher chance of making you put on weight. Protein cannot be metabolized into fat--your body either uses it or eliminates it.

This is the basic principal behind the Atkins diet. Fill up on nothing but protein, and you're going to lose weight as your body burns its fat stores for energy. As Drew said, it is also a stupid idea. You're not eating balanced meals, you're not getting essential vitamins and nutrients your body needs, and you're royally hosing your metabolism. It is a diet that is reflective of the lazy attitude of Americans in general. No one likes to hear that plenty exercise--both cardiovascular AND weight training--are the key to losing weight. You can't be fit without being in good shape, no matter what the starving models will tell you.