OP Update - 3000 miles in 10 months... so Why am I still fat? - Page 25 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

05-22-2004, 05:42 AM

"Denver C. Fox" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].com...
> >Body For Life (in case anyone doesn't know) is a diet and exercise
program
> >which is hugely popular and successful. A staple of the program is
> >carbohydrate---pasta, potatoes, rice, bread.
> >
> >[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
> >
>
> Be just a bit careful here.
>
> Portion size is critical in BFL. No larger than your fist.
>
> Rice should be whole grain.
>
> I don't find that typical pasta (your usual spaghetti, etc.) is one of the
> recommended foods for BFL.
>
>
>
> Bread should be whole grain.

Agreed. But Bill Phillips is also a fan of potatoes, both sweet and
non-sweet. Portion size is key for any sort of weight loss plan, I would
think. :-)

05-22-2004, 06:25 AM

On Sat, 22 May 2004 10:52:18 GMT, "Gooserider"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
>"Badger_South" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>> On Fri, 21 May 2004 22:29:26 GMT, "Gooserider"
>> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>
>> >Your "science" is specious, at best. It also doesn't hold up to the light
>of
>> >day. You still haven't answered the obvious question----do people lose
>> >weight in caloric deficit? Yes or no? It's a simple question.
>>
>> It depends...
>>
>> -B
>> $1 to Lyle.
>
>Even Lyle McDonald would admit that people lose weight in caloric deficit.
>Notice I didn't say caloric "reduction". If people use more calories than
>they intake, they will lose weight.

You are correct on all counts. Apologies.

Best,

-B

05-22-2004, 06:25 AM

On Sat, 22 May 2004 10:52:18 GMT, "Gooserider"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
>"Badger_South" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>> On Fri, 21 May 2004 22:29:26 GMT, "Gooserider"
>> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>
>> >Your "science" is specious, at best. It also doesn't hold up to the light
>of
>> >day. You still haven't answered the obvious question----do people lose
>> >weight in caloric deficit? Yes or no? It's a simple question.
>>
>> It depends...
>>
>> -B
>> $1 to Lyle.
>
>Even Lyle McDonald would admit that people lose weight in caloric deficit.
>Notice I didn't say caloric "reduction". If people use more calories than
>they intake, they will lose weight.

You are correct on all counts. Apologies.

Best,

-B

05-22-2004, 06:25 AM

On Sat, 22 May 2004 10:52:18 GMT, "Gooserider"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
>"Badger_South" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>> On Fri, 21 May 2004 22:29:26 GMT, "Gooserider"
>> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>
>> >Your "science" is specious, at best. It also doesn't hold up to the light
>of
>> >day. You still haven't answered the obvious question----do people lose
>> >weight in caloric deficit? Yes or no? It's a simple question.
>>
>> It depends...
>>
>> -B
>> $1 to Lyle.
>
>Even Lyle McDonald would admit that people lose weight in caloric deficit.
>Notice I didn't say caloric "reduction". If people use more calories than
>they intake, they will lose weight.

You are correct on all counts. Apologies.

Best,

-B

05-22-2004, 06:25 AM

On Sat, 22 May 2004 10:52:18 GMT, "Gooserider"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
>"Badger_South" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>> On Fri, 21 May 2004 22:29:26 GMT, "Gooserider"
>> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>
>> >Your "science" is specious, at best. It also doesn't hold up to the light
>of
>> >day. You still haven't answered the obvious question----do people lose
>> >weight in caloric deficit? Yes or no? It's a simple question.
>>
>> It depends...
>>
>> -B
>> $1 to Lyle.
>
>Even Lyle McDonald would admit that people lose weight in caloric deficit.
>Notice I didn't say caloric "reduction". If people use more calories than
>they intake, they will lose weight.

You are correct on all counts. Apologies.

Best,

-B

05-22-2004, 06:25 AM

On Sat, 22 May 2004 10:52:18 GMT, "Gooserider"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
>"Badger_South" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>> On Fri, 21 May 2004 22:29:26 GMT, "Gooserider"
>> <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>
>> >Your "science" is specious, at best. It also doesn't hold up to the light
>of
>> >day. You still haven't answered the obvious question----do people lose
>> >weight in caloric deficit? Yes or no? It's a simple question.
>>
>> It depends...
>>
>> -B
>> $1 to Lyle.
>
>Even Lyle McDonald would admit that people lose weight in caloric deficit.
>Notice I didn't say caloric "reduction". If people use more calories than
>they intake, they will lose weight.

You are correct on all counts. Apologies.

Best,

-B

05-22-2004, 10:34 AM

On Sat, 22 May 2004 05:01:00 -0400, "Roger Zoul"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>Rick Onanian wrote:
>:: <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>::: LC would be the best for him, but calorie reduction will work too.
>::
>:: Is LC not a form of calorie reduction? I thought the whole point of
>
>Sure....mostly....but one can restrict calories on other approaches....LF

A more clear and accurate way to say it would have been:
"LC would be best for him, but other forms of calorie reduction
will work too."
or
"LC would be best for him, but calorie-counting will work too."

Note: The above is reformation of sentences, not an endorsement or
suggestion of LC or any other type of special diet.
--
Rick "Pedant" Onanian

05-22-2004, 10:34 AM

On Sat, 22 May 2004 05:01:00 -0400, "Roger Zoul"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>Rick Onanian wrote:
>:: <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>::: LC would be the best for him, but calorie reduction will work too.
>::
>:: Is LC not a form of calorie reduction? I thought the whole point of
>
>Sure....mostly....but one can restrict calories on other approaches....LF

A more clear and accurate way to say it would have been:
"LC would be best for him, but other forms of calorie reduction
will work too."
or
"LC would be best for him, but calorie-counting will work too."

Note: The above is reformation of sentences, not an endorsement or
suggestion of LC or any other type of special diet.
--
Rick "Pedant" Onanian

05-22-2004, 10:34 AM

On Sat, 22 May 2004 05:01:00 -0400, "Roger Zoul"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>Rick Onanian wrote:
>:: <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>::: LC would be the best for him, but calorie reduction will work too.
>::
>:: Is LC not a form of calorie reduction? I thought the whole point of
>
>Sure....mostly....but one can restrict calories on other approaches....LF

A more clear and accurate way to say it would have been:
"LC would be best for him, but other forms of calorie reduction
will work too."
or
"LC would be best for him, but calorie-counting will work too."

Note: The above is reformation of sentences, not an endorsement or
suggestion of LC or any other type of special diet.
--
Rick "Pedant" Onanian

05-22-2004, 10:34 AM

On Sat, 22 May 2004 05:01:00 -0400, "Roger Zoul"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>Rick Onanian wrote:
>:: <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>::: LC would be the best for him, but calorie reduction will work too.
>::
>:: Is LC not a form of calorie reduction? I thought the whole point of
>
>Sure....mostly....but one can restrict calories on other approaches....LF

A more clear and accurate way to say it would have been:
"LC would be best for him, but other forms of calorie reduction
will work too."
or
"LC would be best for him, but calorie-counting will work too."

Note: The above is reformation of sentences, not an endorsement or
suggestion of LC or any other type of special diet.
--
Rick "Pedant" Onanian