What kinds of snacks are good to eat on a diet? To get some fruit servings, I think the Chilled Fruit by Del Monte are really good. The Citrus Bowls are my favorite, especially the grapefruit one. Anybody try these? When I was buying regular fruit it keep going bad, and I was always throwing it away, so this stuff works well for me. If you want to check the nutrional info, here's the link: bit.ly/qYT4q
-
Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
-
Check Out IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex
Snacks & Diet
- Thread starter Luv2Dance
- Start date
Anything is good if it fits into your daily macronutrient allowance.
I prefer snacks that are typically higher in fat and/or protein (i.e nuts, seeds, protein shakes), as they tend to make me fuller and help to hold me over until the next full meal. Just having carbs alone (1 serving of the fruit cup is 0g fat, 14g carbs, 1g protein) tends to make me, and many others, just more hungry.
However, you want to be careful with the fructose that is present in the product. A little fructose here and there from raw fruit sources isn't a big deal, although you want to be careful with things that contain high fructose corn syrup. Prepared fruit cups may contain HCFS in the solution that the fruit is suspended in (I can't find the ingredient list on the website, just the nutrition facts. Also, i'm not sure if that particular product is suspended in a syrup -- must fruit cups are--I'm just speculating on the particular product that you mentioned).
If you are unfamiliar with HCFS and its effects on health, feel free to google it. Specifically, 'high fructose corn syrup and insulin resistance' is something to look into.
I prefer snacks that are typically higher in fat and/or protein (i.e nuts, seeds, protein shakes), as they tend to make me fuller and help to hold me over until the next full meal. Just having carbs alone (1 serving of the fruit cup is 0g fat, 14g carbs, 1g protein) tends to make me, and many others, just more hungry.
However, you want to be careful with the fructose that is present in the product. A little fructose here and there from raw fruit sources isn't a big deal, although you want to be careful with things that contain high fructose corn syrup. Prepared fruit cups may contain HCFS in the solution that the fruit is suspended in (I can't find the ingredient list on the website, just the nutrition facts. Also, i'm not sure if that particular product is suspended in a syrup -- must fruit cups are--I'm just speculating on the particular product that you mentioned).
If you are unfamiliar with HCFS and its effects on health, feel free to google it. Specifically, 'high fructose corn syrup and insulin resistance' is something to look into.
if you're diet is based on the glycemic index there are certain fruits you want to avoid as they spike insulin, e.g. dates & watermelon.
Food GI Value
Cherries 22
Grapefruit 25
Prunes 29
Apricots, dried 30
Apple 38
Peach, canned in juice 38
Pear, fresh 38
Plum 39
Strawberries 40
Orange, Navel 42
Peach, fresh 42
Pear, canned 43
Grapes 46
Mango 51
Banana 52
Fruit Cocktail 55
Papaya 56
Raisins 56
Apricots, fresh 57
Kiwi 58
Figs, dried 61
Apricots, canned 64
Cantaloupe 65
Pineapple, fresh 66
Watermelon 72
Dates 103
thanks, that's what I meant, I have to watch my insulin, on a strict cutting diet, been doing great eating really clean and timing my nutrient take accordingly. I guess no more canteloupe for me, I'll have to find cherries!
The whole "GI" thing is pretty flawed. I mean, who eats foods in isolation? Besides, a Mars bar has a GI of 65. Glycemic Index of Mars Bar, GI Value - so that's better than watermelon or dates, right?
And what about dextrose: GI = 100 (gasp!) - and yet, dextrose has no fructose, so it won't interfere with satiety signals like sucrose or dried fruit will.
Ultimately, it's the calories. I got fat on a low-GI diet; I ate too much, so I gained. Pretty simple.
And what about dextrose: GI = 100 (gasp!) - and yet, dextrose has no fructose, so it won't interfere with satiety signals like sucrose or dried fruit will.
Ultimately, it's the calories. I got fat on a low-GI diet; I ate too much, so I gained. Pretty simple.
Ben dur
Registered
i dont see why insulin response matters for cutting anyhow...
a 100 calorie spike
and a 100 calorie smooth curve
both increase calorie intake by 100 calories...
this is just like the myth about cardio before breakfast... (burns pure fat)
it only works if the rest of your diet is below maint...
if i burn 300 calories of pure fat(before breakfast) or 300 calories of mixed sources (anytime of day), but i consume the same calories... at the end of the day the math comes out the same
1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1=10 (low gi)
10=10(high GI)
still 10 calories there...
a 100 calorie spike
and a 100 calorie smooth curve
both increase calorie intake by 100 calories...
this is just like the myth about cardio before breakfast... (burns pure fat)
it only works if the rest of your diet is below maint...
if i burn 300 calories of pure fat(before breakfast) or 300 calories of mixed sources (anytime of day), but i consume the same calories... at the end of the day the math comes out the same
1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1=10 (low gi)
10=10(high GI)
still 10 calories there...
For pure fat loss reason it doesn't matter I think, but if you spike your blood sugar/invoke an insulin response by eating a lot of simple carbs (sugar for example) that causes many people to eat following the crash in blood sugar levels.
there is much more to the equation than just calories, and this is where I disagree with Lyle McDonald, whom I assume that you get a lot of info from.
We've probably done this argument so many times before, but what's the equation then? I see it as being fairly basic, eat less than you need to lose fat and use resistance training to hold onto muscle.
Besides some basic dietary guidelines with protein, fat, and some basic supplements (multi + fish oil) I don't see the complexity anymore.
Lyle's good at concentrating and explaining the state of the art, but he gets his information the same place I do: from peer-reviewed research.
If you're arguing "comfort while running a deficit", there are some very good reasons to pay attention to the insulin response - particularly where fructose is involved, since fructose interferes with the normal satiety due to insulin. Ironically, fructose has a very low GI: 23 according to this source: Glycemic Index Food Chart: List of Glycemic Values of Foods
Under the conditions of a carefully monitored, calorie-controlled diet, there is no evidence that GI has any impact upon fat loss.
Unless you have something for me to read, Prince?
If you're arguing "comfort while running a deficit", there are some very good reasons to pay attention to the insulin response - particularly where fructose is involved, since fructose interferes with the normal satiety due to insulin. Ironically, fructose has a very low GI: 23 according to this source: Glycemic Index Food Chart: List of Glycemic Values of Foods
Under the conditions of a carefully monitored, calorie-controlled diet, there is no evidence that GI has any impact upon fat loss.
Unless you have something for me to read, Prince?
Bradicallyman
Registered
You say GI has no impact on fat loss, what about the quality of food? Lets take two people with the same metabolism, age ect., who eat below maintenance every day. One person eats healthy and the other gets almost half of their calories from junk. Not considering the health issues involved with all of the junk food, will they both experience the same fat loss?
I have always wondered this because I keep hearing that a calorie is a calorie when it comes to losing/gaining weight. And then I will read that certain foods mess with your hormones and can impact your weight.
Are we assuming they're following the basic guidelines in regards to minimums of protein and fat?
If so, I'd say that yes they should experience the same fat loss. If no, I would say that they will not experience the same fat loss - the one lacking from the basic needs will experience more muscle loss and less fat loss (especially if resistance training is lacking).
Bradicallyman
Registered
Yes I was assuming that they were both getting enough protein/fat.
So clogged arteries aside, your saying that the person getting their same amount of calories from big macs and cokes would lose as much as the person getting their calories from chicken breast and brown rice assuming they are getting enough protein and fat and have the same workout plans?
Pretty much. There might be an few ounces difference from the thermogenic effects of different macros, but nothing significant.
If you're bringing big macs into play, let's assume there is no MSG in them though as consuming that in any significant quantity causes all kinds of weight trouble.
540 total cals
29g fat
10g saturated
45g carbs
3g fiber
25g protein
1g sodium
There are plenty of 'healthy' foods that you can get those macros from as well. The only difference is that perhaps a chicken breast sauteed in 2 tablespoons olive oil w/ a cup of broccoli, and a serving of rice may be more filling. However, the dish that I mentioned has almost exactly the same macros as the Big Mac.
There isn't anything fundamentally 'artery clogging' about any particular food item.
Other than, say, a high fructose intake, or something like transfat (which frankly isn't really a food anyway), I would tend to agree (both of these have been shown to worsen lipid profiles).
Saturated animal fat is a healthy fat for your body; it's a natural fat and your body knows what to do with it. Furthermore, under the conditions of a caloric deficit, there won't be a whole lot of artery-clogging going on in your body.
Now I'm not arguing for an "all junk food, all the time" diet, okay? Before I get any hate-mail..."Now, MariAnne, I know you're FOR junk food and you're AGAINST exercise..." (I have actually had someone deliberately misinterpret my statement: "don't try to exercise off the weight" as "don't exercise". People hear what they want to hear) - I eat a pretty healthy diet. I feel better and am less hungry when I eat plenty of meat, green veggies and healthy fats, little sugar and almost no grain. But I'm a total wimp when it comes to hunger and I hate feeling like shit.
I don't keep my weight down by eating "clean" - I keep my weight down by keeping a tight check on my caloric intake, and that control is a whole lot more comfortable this way. If you can keep your calories within range while eating crap, knock yourself out.
Dr. Spears I haven't read as much (not a big "zone" fan, but it seems to be comfortable for some); but I'm finding with these authors the overlapping information demonstrates how the truth tends to converge.
Ben dur
Registered
i dont know much about the "zone" diet.
i read a few articles about the anti inflamatory, anti catabolic, matabolism boosting effects of fish oils
and his recomendation to eat "colorful" veggies
but yes, i agree
they, and yourself, tend to support each other..
i just thought i would jump in, and discuss, after reading
"I feel better and am less hungry when I eat plenty of meat, green veggies and healthy fats, little sugar and almost no grain."
i read a few articles about the anti inflamatory, anti catabolic, matabolism boosting effects of fish oils
and his recomendation to eat "colorful" veggies
but yes, i agree
they, and yourself, tend to support each other..
i just thought i would jump in, and discuss, after reading
"I feel better and am less hungry when I eat plenty of meat, green veggies and healthy fats, little sugar and almost no grain."
