Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Best diet

  1. Sep 2, 2010 #1


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I am 9LBs overweight for my ideal BM, i all ready go to the gym 3-5 times a week.
    So what sort of food should i be eating.
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 2, 2010 #2


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    What do you do at the gym? What type of diet are you on now? It depends a lot on your body type and genetics.

    Generally speaking though, low fat and low calorie diets work for a large number of people. I wouldn't worry to much about being 9-lbs over weight. In fact, I'm overweight according to the BMI (which is a load of archaic crap if you ask me).

  4. Sep 2, 2010 #3
    When people say they want to lose weight, they usually mean they want to lose fat. If they could lose that fat, but for whatever reason their weight stays the same, I'm sure they'd be happy.
    I think the best way to lose fat is to look at everything you eat during the day and replace it with a lower calorie version. Stop using any condiments or sauces on your food; it's unnecessary calories. Mustard's fine, but I don't use it because I think it can slowly stain teeth and make them not as white as I'd like. You could also use sugar substitutes like stevia, that's pretty good. People eat too much sugar, so you should cut out as much of that as possible. You'll eventually get used to the lack of sweetness, then when you switch back to eating the same amount of sugar, like in oatmeal for example, it'll be too sweet.
  5. Sep 2, 2010 #4
    Lots of fresh vegetables and fruits. A rule of thumb is, you should be eating the rainbow(i.e. a wide variety of food). Try eating lean cuts of meat and stay away from sweets as much as possible, but it's okay to eat them once in a while.

    Also, what is your body composition like? A guy with a BMI of 35 that has 2% bodyfat is easily better off than a guy with a BMI of 28 and 20% bodyfat.
  6. Sep 2, 2010 #5
    I agree, lots of fruits, veggies and whole grains. Going to the gym is a great way to shape up. Just make sure to start out slowly.
  7. Sep 2, 2010 #6


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Be sure to increase your water intake.
  8. Sep 2, 2010 #7
    + 1

    All this talk of reducing caloric intake is logical, but in practice is not very effective at all.
    I.E., Weight loss happens when the calories you take in is < the calories that you burn.

    The way I like to think about diet is this: "What will make me the healthiest?". So, no fast food, sweets, or anything processed. I like to use the example of indigenous tribes that grow their own vegetables and slaughter their own (grass fed) cows or livestock in general. If you look at their overall health, wellness, and life expectancy and compared it to that of industrialized nations it would be greater in all aspects. They really take Hippocrates literally when he said "Let your food be your medicine".

    So, in conclusion, if you really want to get on the right diet plan, set goals for what you want to feel and look like (Do NOT set numerical goals! E.G., I weigh 200 lbs and I won't be happy until I'm 170 lbs because your weight fluctuates a lot from day to day [sometimes up to four pounds]), then start eating stuff that comes out of the earth and cows that are grass fed (not grain fed).

    P.S. Some people claim that grains are bad for humans because in the grand scheme of things we have only been eating grains for a relative hour to the 23 hours of the evolution of the human digestive tract. And because of this some say that we aren't meant to eat grains, even though we can digest them. This is not my opinion, I'm just saying this because it's relevant and interesting.

    EDIT: Also, stay active. Diet is only part of the equation for wellness.
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2010
  9. Sep 2, 2010 #8
    You first say reducing calorie intake is not very effective in practice, but then you say you need to take in less calories than you burn. The rest of your post basically explains how you can reduce calorie intake.
    Actually, the greatest life expectancies are from pretty industrialized nations.
    If we can digest them, I don't see the problem.
    People say the same thing about milk. Because some people are lactose intolerant, that means humans as a whole "aren't meant to drink milk". Well, I can digest lactose just fine. It's not a matter of what we're "meant" to do, it's a matter of what we can do. I don't think we're "meant" to eat sushi, since fish aren't naturally wrapped in rice, but we do it because we can.
  10. Sep 2, 2010 #9
    If by "we" you mean yourself, then enjoy! Approximately 75% of all human adults are lactose intolerant.

    It's lowest for those of Dutch descent (less than 1%), and about 5%, in the U.S. and Northern Europe, though for Native Americans, it's close to 100%
  11. Sep 2, 2010 #10
    There have been some misunderstandings.

    You're right, I say that reducing calories is not very effective in practice. BUT, then I say "I.E. (Id est - Latin for "That is"), weight loss occurs when the calories you take in < the calories you burn. Here I'm clarifying what all of you were saying when you talk about solely reducing calories to lose weight. And you are correct again, if someone were to follow exactly what I said in my post, they would ingest less calories than the average person. BUT, that isn't my point. My point is that calorie counting is futile. I believe that if you eat two double cheeseburgers from McDonalds everyday for lunch, and then just start eating one to reduce your calories, nothing will happen because your still eating really unhealthy food even though we can digest it (but what does that matter right? It's not about what we're "meant" to do, but what we CAN do. Right?).

    Then you disagree with me and say that the greatest life expectancies come from "pretty industrialized nations". I think you might have life expectancy and mortality confused (or, I could). Regardless, do you think that if someone grew their own food and lived like a primitive person (E.g. [Latin for exemplum gratia, or "for example"], having consistent low level exercise, a stable social life, and a consistent diet) that they would live a shorter life than someone from an industrialized nation with a steady diet of fast food, little exercise, and a slightly less stable social life? I don't think they would. I think that the former would outlive the latter not only in years, but in quality of years as well.

    Then you say "If we can digest it, I don't see the problem". This probably wasn't thought out, and was probably unintentionally left vague. But, we can technically swallow mouth wash and still be fine. We can also ingest the 3 in 1 oil that is sold at my dad's hardware store and live. What's the problem? Both of those are very toxic and consequently very bad for our bodies and brains.

    And yes, fish don't come wrapped in rice for our enjoyment. But, most nothing comes straight from the ground (or sea for that matter) ready for our immediate consumption. But, fish and rice are both naturally occurring food sources. Just the mere coupling of them together does not (IMO) mean that we're not supposed to eat sushi.

    Also, I think you are grossly underestimating how many people are lactose intolerant. Plus, I don't understand the concept of milk being inherently bad for humans as our mothers carry it around all day if we were to get hungary (as babies of course). Maybe we're just intolerant to cows or goats milk.
  12. Sep 2, 2010 #11


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Hey, Woolie! My wife and I generally avoid processed foods. We eat our own produce and wild game, of course, but that's not an option for many people. Can you buy "shares" at a local farm and get weekly boxes of in-season vegetables? That would be a great start. Also, if you eat fish and meat, it would be good for you to get to know the fish-mongers and butchers in your area. That way, you can get an idea where they buy their stock.

    When we buy processed food, it is generally in the form of pasta, canned vegetables, and fresh-frozen vegetables. Any "food" with more than a handful of ingredients on the label cannot be found in our pantry. If you have a bakery nearby, patronize it, and avoid baked goods that can last for 2 weeks without refrigeration. Most breads have very few ingredients, and they are all basic ones.

    I guess what I'm saying is that picking a suite of foods to eat (low-cal, low-fat, etc) and watching your intake levels may not be as important as choosing foods that are unprocessed and are good for you. Cruciate vegetables like broccoli contain anti-oxidants, and fresh onions and garlic may have health benefits, too. Fresh fruits (especially blueberries, cherries, etc) should also have a place in your diet daily.
  13. Sep 2, 2010 #12
    Cool! Good for you! :)

    Something like that. I've participated in two food co-ops, one in N.C., but the food came from the Ohio River Valley. The other one is here in the Springs, but as I'm single, I haven't been able to participate in it, much. They take orders in advance from a menu, sometimes months in advance. I don't think they grow to order, but they do factor monthly/seasonal/and annual sales into what they plant.

    In answer to your question, though, yes - I think you can buy shares in a local farm. I distantly recall this, but have no data at hand...

    I think that's smart.

    Well... I keep bread in the freezer and fridge, so it lasts quite a while.

    I'd agree with this, as much as I support getting some form of daily exercise, and peaking one's heart rate for a couple dozen minutes in one's training range about three times per week.

    I love blueberries! I put them in my morning oatmeal.
  14. Sep 3, 2010 #13
    75% of all humans are lactose intolerant but only 5% of Americans are? Why such a big difference?
    Nothing will happen because subtracting one cheeseburger from your diet won't reduce your calories very much.
    You're mixing up what I was applying "what we can do" to. I wasn't saying that in regards to eating whatever you want if you can digest it. I said it in regards to eating grains. If we're not meant to eat it, that suggests that it's detrimental to our health or we shouldn't eat it for any other reason. The fact that we recently started eating it isn't a reason not to eat it.
    Oh yeah, that would be the best way to live. But the reason that I think the stats don't reflect that is because usually those people don't have access to the medical care that people in industrialized nations do.
    I would've been dead at 21 if I didn't have access to a hospital.
    Which is why we shouldn't drink that. If someone says we're not meant to eat grains, then that implies it's harmful to our health or is somehow a negative thing. I don't know of any for grains, do you?
    True, which is why there's no reason to say we're not meant to eat it. Just like grains and milk. If we can eat it and it's healthy for us, I don't see how someone can say we're not supposed to eat it.
    Of all the people I know, only two are lactose intolerant, or so they say, but they can still drink milk, just not a lot of it. That may be because I live in America.
    I think most people become lactose intolerant as they age.
  15. Sep 3, 2010 #14


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Maybe it's all that heavy water he's been drinking.
  16. Sep 3, 2010 #15


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

  17. Sep 3, 2010 #16
    30% protein, 30% fats, 40% carbs. :P
  18. Sep 3, 2010 #17


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    9lbs and you are looking for a diet? Tell me you are joking.
  19. Sep 3, 2010 #18
    Its in the mirror Borek, not in the BMI :P Some ppl with "healthy" BMI are just fat like they are pregnant (and the irony is that they aint women). Not saying is Wolf's case :P
  20. Sep 3, 2010 #19
    Interestingly, I looked it up to see what it's toxicity level was and discovered it's not due to radioactivity (even pure heavy water is non-radioactive), but because heavy water interferes with an organism's mitotic apparatus, which prevents cell division.

    Mammals die when about 50% of their body's water has been replaced by heavy water.

    So, even though it's not radioactive, it's definately not a candidate for "best diet."
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook