Why You Should Eat Less

I recently started eating much less. I only eat enough to give me energy when I am hungry, and I completely avoid many types of foods and drinks that other people consume en masse on a regular basis. I also fast every now and then, but not even for a whole day. I may in the future, but I don't actively pursue fasting now.

It is really not that hard, to stop eating so much. It only takes a little will, determination, and attention to what you are eating throughout the day, when you are hungry, etc.

Over-eating contributes to the following:

• Being overweight (and all its health implications)
  
• Having less energy; feeling tired all the time
  
• Increased toxins in the body (fluoride, mercury, etc.)
  
• Sugar (sodas, desserts, candy, etc.) severely inhibiting serotonin production in your intestines
  
• Sugar inhibiting healthy bacteria populations in the intestines
  
• Decreased nutrient intake (high-fructose corn syrup is bad about this)
  
• Calcification of pineal gland (related to fluoride)

And I could go on, but the combined effects of all these things won't hit you full force until you FEEL what difference it actually makes, when you start eating less.


It's not a linear relationship between eating less and feeling better, either. There is a definite "curve" to the relationship.




Imagine something, anything you have experience with, that becomes increasingly sensitive to input the more you refine and purify it, such that a "fine tuning" gives you exponentially more results. Modern physical sciences are even an example of this, that the more we learn, the more rapidly we advance to learning even more.

Your body's health also behaves in such a way. When you start peeling away the different food-related ailments that you may or may not even realize you are suffering from, your body becomes increasingly and increasingly sensitive to its own state of health and well-being. I cannot stress how much better you will feel, and how much more positively and energetically you will embrace your world, when you start limiting what you eat.


It would also be wise to avoid these foods, little by little at first, and then completely avoiding them altogether when you are ready for it:

• Sodas and sugared soft drinks or candy (anything with excessive processed sugar)
  
• Tap water and anything containing tap water
  
• Anything known to contain fluoride, including tooth paste (there are non-fluoride tooth pastes)
  
• Beef, chicken, fish, and other meats that are NOT from local or organic farms, etc. (if you knew what you were eating, you would have to be stupid to continue)
  
• Milk containing artificial bovine hormones (any milk that does not explicitly say it does not have these on the label, probably DOES have them)
  
• Canned soups, or anything canned (the plastic lining in the cans leaches into the food and is a neuro-toxin)
  
• "Enriched" processed flour (is not as bad for you as it is completely devoid of any true nutritional value)

I have switched primarily to these foods and even eat these in moderation (especially meats) for best results:

• Purified water, OJ, occasionally organic or hormone-free milk
  
• Fresh fruits and vegetables (especially locally-grown, also organic is good -- try to minimize time between being picked and being sold!)
  
• Wild, raw plants (pick up a wild edibles book -- these are among the healthiest things you can possibly eat)
  
• Nuts and peanut butter (yes, rat feces is allowed in peanut butter... oh well)
  
• Meats, especially fish, that you KNOW where it's coming from and how it's produced (local, organic, etc. -- go fishing!)

I'm not trying to lay down laws, only offer suggestions. Use your own discretion -- it will become increasingly fine-tuned the healthier you become.

I can actually tell how my body is going to respond to a food, immediately when I begin chewing it. Your body is very well-adapted and most people do not realize what an amazing tool it is (when it's healthy!!!) as far as letting you know what it "likes" and "doesn't like."


I mentioned a non-linear relationship earlier. There is a related but inverse nutritional property of all foods:




This represents the nutritional value of ANY food after it has been removed from its living producer, or as soon as the actual life of the food you are eating is terminated.

The healthiest food to eat is raw food because raw food is still much more "alive" than food that is days or even weeks old, especially with fruits and meats, to a lesser extent nuts and some long-lasting vegetables.

When you eat something that was just alive a second ago, that you just picked, etc., you are receiving MUCH more nutritional value, to a much subtler and finer level, than if you take the same food and let it sit around for a few days.

Processed flour from grains, well, grain loses 80-90% of its nutritional value in the first few days in which it is dead. By the time you buy a loaf of bread, you might as well be eating paper. Which is why I say it is not so much bad (even though it is processed questionably) as much as it is simply devoid of nutritional value.


So, I implore you all, if you haven't already, consider changing your eating habits and watch how quickly your body adjusts to it and you start feeling more energy.

An interesting post, but before I make comments on it, I do have a few questions for you.

1) What is your height?
2) What is your weight?
3) What is your sex?

I am just trying to find out why eating too much is an issue for you, and you are now encouraging people to follow in your footsteps. Something is not adding up right here.

reply to post by TLomon


Would you mind if I ask you the same, since I also find your response interesting?

I'm a male, 5'10, 140 lbs. I really don't see what difference it makes though, because this isn't just something that affects people of a certain weight, it affects people of all weights. Notice I didn't say anything about an "ideal" weight for a certain height, etc., either. It's all a personal thing that I would leave to the individual.



Edit to add -- it is a "spiritual" issue to me. I also meditate, etc. All these things are traditional in the far East. It is for this reason that I encourage it and post this here. It's liberating. Try it, don't argue about it. Do you think it would have adverse effects on you?

[edit on 12-7-2009 by bsbray11]

For about 5 years now, I eat one "meal" a day, and then piece through the rest of the day Works out well for me, overall, i've always been a bit of a "bird" when it comes to eating (peck my way through the day lol)

It works, FOR ME, but might not for everyone else. My wife, for example, due to heart issues she has, needs protein quite a bit, and all throughout the day, or she feels miserable. For her, my diet does not work


You are correct with the "faster you eat it, the more nutritional it is" idea, though. That's been known for a long time, but most people just don't seem to realize it.

As you said, though, the body is an extremely fine engine, and any fuel you add to it, it will make use of. even "bad" stuff, it'll do for a bit

Fair enough. 6'2", 175 lbs, male.

Your BMI is smack in the middle of normal range (not that the BMI is everything, but it is something to gane a basis off of). My BMI is slightly higher then yours, but I do work out 3-5 times a week, and my muscle mass has been increasing significantly. Side affect of this: I am eating more. Am I considered overweight (even borderline)? Not by a longshot. I am thin and wirey.

I have a different take on food. My friend recently stated this observation about me since I first lived out on my own. If I crave something, I eat that. I believe cravings are your unconcious mind piecing together that food item X contains nutriant Y. My doctor has reviewed my diet and can't suggest anyway to improve it.

Your suggestions takes two different paths simultaneously. First, you suggest being concious about what you eat - I am not disagreeing with you about that in principal. However, the second part - which is effectively reducing your calorie intake. That is the part that puzzles me.

Is obesity a problem in the US? I believe it is - but it is not caused by over eating by itself. It is caused by under-physical stimulation. More and more people are sitting in front of the TV (or computer) instead of being outside riding bikes, swimming, hiking, etc. People are afraid to let their children out to play - the TV has become the babysitter. Parents are too busy to help develop active lifestyles in their children that they perpetuate the problem.

The diet thing is also an issue. People eat less quality food (aka McDs, etc.). They skip out on the vegetables and fruit. My kids freaked out a teacher because my son's favorite food is corn on the cob, and my daughter loves sushi. (These answers coming from pre-3rd graders). Kids eat what their parents eat. Parents set the example. I don't eat vegetables because they are healthy for me. I eat vegetables because I honestly enjoy them. (And none of that sickly cheese sauce - that just ruins the taste for me).

Anyway, I hopethis explains my viewpoint on your subject.

reply to post by Jomina


Yes, I should qualify this with the fact that people with health disorders that put limitations on their eating habits should do whatever they need to personally to address that issue first.

Originally posted by TLomon
My BMI is slightly higher then yours, but I do work out 3-5 times a week, and my muscle mass has been increasing significantly. Side affect of this: I am eating more. Am I considered overweight (even borderline)? Not by a longshot. I am thin and wirey.

I understand exactly where you are coming from. I don't personally work out like that, but I know if I did, I would obviously have to eat more. My primary concern honestly is the quality more than the quantity of what I eat. Though reducing the quantity also helps eliminate the quantity of toxins, it isn't the only way.

I also only eat what I am craving! That is the only time I do eat, is when I'm hungry and craving something specific. The only unhealthy food I notice that I crave is fast food, and coincidentally I recently read that fast food is actually physically addicting. I might eat one burger every 2 or 3 weeks, when I am out, but it immediately makes me feel somewhat sick after I eat it, which just serves to remind me of what I am doing.

Our biggest difference seems to be that I pursue sitting meditation and my diet is geared around that, but you work out, so you require much more energy than I do.

I have been eating much less for about a month now, complete ban on any chocolate, sweet sugary food, crisps and any fast food.

I feel so much better its amazing, i'm not depressed, i have lost 10 pounds in a month without exercise.

I feel more optimistic and have more energy.

Star 4 U !

reply to post by bsbray11


Can you show me the data points you used to generate those two graphs?

Didn't think so, you fraud and scientific hack. Who the hell are you? Sorry, but putting graphs of functions in your post only makes you seem silly and retarded to people who actually know what they're reading and how to analyze scientific material.



Also, you recommend juices, but not things like sodas due to sugar content...except they have pretty much the same amount of sugar. You're also off with tap water, since the only alternative is bottled water, and bottled water is just dirtier tap water held to lower governmental standards. Water filters are nice though. Fluoridated toothpaste is also fine as long as you don't swallow it like an idiot. The rest is sort of okay advice but greatly hyperbolized...really it's just a matter of maximizing certain things and minimizing others. Whole grain bread is a good substitute for white bread, for example.

I've been eating vegan for 3 years now, and the first year lost about 100lbs. At 6' i was about 280lbs and couldn't get down below that, whatever i did. I was FAR from inactive, i'd work an 8 hour minimum shift as chef in a kitchen where it was warfare, 200+ dinners in 4 hours of service. Before work i'd get in some biking, and i'm not talking about pedaling around the block, i ride biketrials, bmx freestyle, and freeride. After work i'd hike, at night when it was cool, i'd do average 20 miles of mountain trail running in 4 hours at between 5-7000' altitude. The only time i wasn't riding, running, or working full tilt was when i was sleeping. I was still 280lbs I had some fat, but i had WAY more muscle than i ever need to do what i do. I fasted for about a week, water only, and then slowly day by day started giving myself a few calories here and there, raw foods, real stuff nothing processed.

I dropped about 30lbs the first month, and continued to steadily drop weight as i brought my calorie intake back up with the most nutritious and natural foods i could get. I also started limiting my exercise, i think i was getting too much, and i got down to 180lbs. Now i'm somewhere around 220-230 which is where i naturally end up without starving myself or limiting my exercise.

I'm not a vegan, i just eat vegan, which means i still use honey, and i do eat REAL meat, like fresh wild fish, and venison, elk, and stuff that comes from nature, not farms.


To out it simply, don't eat anything that isn't food and you'll be okay. Thing is, most of the stuff that's sold isn't food.

Read the labels, a label that has Water, Tomatoes, black beans, corn, onion, jalapeno, cilantro, garlic, lemon juice is actually food. And it's tasty when you chop it all up and make southwest salsa.

Anything that has words like hydrogenated, high fructose, benzoate, and other scientific chemical sounding things that you KNOW don't fall off trees or run or swim or were even alive once. I have yet to see a potassium benzoate based life form that looked edible.

If they've gotta add preservatives and chemicals to make it safe, then it's not safe either way.

Just eat real food that's actually food, do whatever physical activity you love, and you'll be just fine.

Something that'll make your body feel AWESOME is fresh Tempeh. Whenever i'm feeling a bit low energy i'll score some and chow down. It's something that almost everyone finds strange at first, but eat enough of it to feel good and after that your body will tell you when you need tempeh. Most people i know that do tempeh didn't like the taste at first, but after they felt it's benefits physically, would get cravings for it. I've had several people tell me they eat tempeh because it's what their bodies tell them they need.

But if you think of it like this, all those chemicals you eat are shouting out all their chemical messages through the body's systems, conflicting each other, and creating a chaos. Chemical feedback signals are the din of a crowded room of conversation. When you stop eating poison there's not a crowd of chemicals shouting, so it's easier to hear who's shouting, and respond to individual messages. It's like the diffrerence of hearing a crowd at a rock concert and a civilized intellectual discussion.

Think before you eat, and it's better to be hungry than to be poisoned, don't eat what's not food.

reply to post by DezertSkies


Thank you for posting that, because that is amazing. It just goes to show.

Originally posted by Johnmike
Can you show me the data points you used to generate those two graphs?

There is no data behind them, they are simply graphics of what a non-linear curve and the inverse of the same curve look like. If you ever take a statistics class you will see many such data curves given as examples of various types of phenomena, that are generalized and not backed by specific data.

I couldn't produce experimentally-validated points to represent how eating better has affected the way I feel. But if I could, it would look something like the first one. If you don't buy it, all I can tell you, is try it yourself, like I am saying. If not, then I really don't care what you eat. And on that note let me take the opportunity to ask, has something crawled up your butt or is there some other reason you are apparently offended by my post? Actually you don't have to answer, because I don't really care. It's a rhetorical question.

Sorry, but putting graphs of functions in your post only makes you seem silly and retarded to people who actually know what they're reading and how to analyze scientific material.

I know how to read and analyze scientific material. I am an EE major. Post me a free-body diagram, I'll solve it. Once again, has something crawled up your butt?

Also, you recommend juices, but not things like sodas due to sugar content...except they have pretty much the same amount of sugar.

Fruit sugars are not quite the same as processed cane sugar and high fructose corn syrup, etc. To suggest they are is to not understand the difference. I also refuse to even put fluoride in my mouth. You have lots of blood vessels and etc. in your mouth with very thin membranes, especially under your tongue and such. But this isn't a thread for fluoride discussion, you are free to ingest it if you want.

[edit on 12-7-2009 by bsbray11]

Just tripped over this thread.

Great subject and info BSBray.

Despite my ignorant in many areas, this is one I just happen to have some knowledge in.

General observations for starters. There was a study done somewhere not long ago that did a control with well-fed rats and ones that ate half the amount of food. The one's that ate less lived something like 50% longer.

It's not good to generalize about people and animals, or even different individuals.

Everyone has their own slightly different metabolism, food absorption capabilities, level of activity, etc.

Culture and genes play important roles. North American Indians, as I recall, or at least Eskimoes, do best with what they call "Feast/Famine" eating habits. Like our earliest ancestors, going sometimes for days without food, then gorging on a fresh kill, particularly in Winters.

Myself, I peculiarly do my best and am clearest thinking just drinking coffee in the daytime and eating one meal after 9 O'Clock in the evening. Breaks all the rules and not recommended, but it works for me.

Most Western people have screwed up the way their body processes food it would take months for them to find their natural intake demands. Massive amounts of sugars are processed, incredible levels of sodium, and other imbalances have force the digestive system to adapt to unnatural demands.

A few friends who are very healthy insist that fasting one day a week is very beneficial.

Myself the longest I've gone is a 10 day fast with only lemon juice, cayenne pepper, molasses(?). It works as detox, knocks off fat, and recalibrates your metabolism.

I'm careful of special diet recommendations, as I know some work for some, but not all.

But generally, if nutrition is available, the less food your system has to process, the emptier your stomach and intestines are, the better off you are.


Mike

One of the side effects of eating less than recommended or usual is low blood pressure.

I have low blood pressure to begin with, and I am 95 lbs but healthy... but days where I really don't eat or don't eat well, I almost pass out when I stand.

So uh, use caution if you're already tiny.

i agree 100 percent with you... but can you help me find research supporting

* Sugar (sodas, desserts, candy, etc.) severely inhibiting serotonin production in your intestines
* Sugar inhibiting healthy bacteria populations in the intestines

* Calcification of pineal gland (related to fluoride)

i have looked to find that info somewhat but admittedly have not poured over tons of articles

Originally posted by smallfaction
i agree 100 percent with you... but can you help me find research supporting

* Sugar (sodas, desserts, candy, etc.) severely inhibiting serotonin production in your intestines
* Sugar inhibiting healthy bacteria populations in the intestines

* Calcification of pineal gland (related to fluoride)

i have looked to find that info somewhat but admittedly have not poured over tons of articles

For sugar and the intestines look for articles on yeast in the intestinal tract.

Elaine Gottschall talks about these and other important sugar and general diet related issues in her books.


Mike

reply to post by smallfaction


No problem:

Up until the 1990s, no research had ever been conducted to determine the impact of fluoride on the pineal gland - a small gland located between the two hemispheres of the brain that regulates the production of the hormone melatonin. Melatonin is a hormone that helps regulate the onset of puberty and helps protect the body from cell damage caused by free radicals.

It is now known - thanks to the meticulous research of Dr. Jennifer Luke from the University of Surrey in England - that the pineal gland is the primary target of fluoride accumulation within the body.

The soft tissue of the adult pineal gland contains more fluoride than any other soft tissue in the body - a level of fluoride (~300 ppm) capable of inhibiting enzymes.

The pineal gland also contains hard tissue (hyroxyapatite crystals), and this hard tissue accumulates more fluoride (up to 21,000 ppm) than any other hard tissue in the body (e.g. teeth and bone).

After finding that the pineal gland is a major target for fluoride accumulation in humans, Dr. Luke conducted animal experiments to determine if the accumulated fluoride could impact the functioning of the gland - particulalry the gland's regulation of melatonin.

Luke found that animals treated with fluoride had lower levels of circulating melatonin, as reflected by reduced levels of melatonin metabolites in the animals' urine. This reduced level of circulating melatonin was accompanied - as might be expected - by an earlier onset of puberty in the fluoride-treated female animals.

www.fluoridealert.org...

There is more information there, I just searched for "fluoride pineal gland" on Google and that was the first hit. It actually says it doesn't cause calcification but builds up in calcified tissues in the pineal gland.

There you also have information relating to how fluoride affects melatonin, another neurotransmitter, in your body.

Most of the serotonin is produced and absorbed in the gut! The implication is that with any gut damage, a lot of the serotonin function is lost. Healing the gut should help restore this to some extent. See Michael Gershon's book 'The Second Brain."

www.enzymestuff.com...

Explain to interested patients that serotonin in the brain is associated with mood and cognitive functions, but 95% of the body's supply of the molecule is produced in the gut and its function has not been understood.

www.medpagetoday.com...

Consuming sugar actually raises insulin levels and enables serotonin production in the brain in the short term (insulin allows tryptophan to enter the brain and be converted to serotonin), but since the majority of serotonin is actually produced in the gut, maintaining a healthy gut is more responsible for over-all levels of the hormone in the body.

Also, though it temporarily boosts insulin levels and allows serotonin production in the brain, regular consumption of sugar decreases insulin sensitivity, inhibiting production.

Serotonin is synthesized from the amino acid tryptophan by the enzyme tryptophan hydroxylase in the cells of the duodenum and is released into the general circulation.

www.orthosupersite.com...

Enzymes bind to sugars and catalyze particular biochemical changes in the sugars through amino acids on the surface of the enzyme. Examination of the surface of the enzyme would show pits or clefts with exposed tryptophan residues. The tryptophan does not hydrogen bond with water, i.e. it is hydrophobic. Similarly the top and bottom faces of sugar, such as glucose, are hydrophobic. If a sugar crashes into a tryptophan, as a result of thermal motion, the sugar will stick, because exposing the hydrophobic of both surfaces to water is a higher energy state; the sugar is bonded to the tryptophan.

,,,

I have explored hundreds of protein structures derived by X-ray crystallography and NMR. Sugar-binding enzymes, such as glycosidases, glycanases, lectins, etc., usually have tryptophans to bind the sugars. Examination of enzymes that bind long chains of sugars have a series of tryptophan stepping stones that are spaced and oriented to bind the faces of the sugars.

...

Glucose chains are very long in the polysaccharides that we are familiar with as starch. Small lengths up to about a dozen sugars would be call dextrins. If these dextrins are connected end to end, they become cyclodextrins. The cyclodextrins can be of different sizes, but instead of being bracelets for different sized wrists, the cyclodextrins bind to molecules of different sizes. Since the inner surface of the cyclodextrins is hydrophobic, other small hydrophobic molecules that can slip into the rings, will get stuck. These bound molecules, which would otherwise interact with your senses to produce smells, are odorless. Thus, cyclodextrins can eliminate odors and that is just what they do in the product called Febreze.

coolinginflammation.blogspot.com...


So the link above shows how chemical precursors to serotonin in the body (trpytophan) will bond with sugars, forming "bracelet" molecules into which other molecules can lodge. This ties the tryptophan up and prevents it from being converted to serotonin.

The Wikipedia page on serotonin discusses its synthesis within the body: en.wikipedia.org...

Serotonin concentrations in the duodenum and pancreas of rats fed 9, 22 (control), and 45% protein diets for 21 days were analyzed 15 minutes before (fasting levels) and 45 minutes after an oral glucose load. Fasting levels of serotonin were significantly higher in the duodenum of rats consuming the low and high protein diets. Plasma glucose levels were significantly higher in fasted rats receiving the low protein diet. Glucose load caused a significant decrease in duodenal concentration of serotonin and an increase in pancreatic serotonin among rats fed all three diets. The results suggest that duodenal serotonin levels change in response to diet composition whereas pancreatic serotonin is altered by glucose load.

jn.nutrition.org...

I found that interesting as well though I am not sure what it implies. I also found on one of the pages linked above that proteins containing various other proteins in proportion to the tryptophan will compete with the tryptophan and inhibit it entering the brain to be converted to serotonin. Which means the proportion of tryptophan to other proteins in a meat affects the resulting serotonin levels.


I've heard before that sugar is harmful to most bacteria, like alcohol, which is why sugary and alcoholic drinks are not very susceptible to spoiling. Here are links to that effect:

The question that Cassi asked "why won't bacteria grow in a high sugar environment?" is a good one. The principal behind bacteria not growing in this type of environment is actually one of the common food preservation techniques that have been used for centuries, even though people may not have known how they were actually preserving the food. The reason for most bacteria's inability to grow in a high sugar environment is the same as the reason for their inability to grow in high salt environments.

Both sugar and salt bind up the water and thus makes the water unavailable to the bacteria to use. In essence, while the environment may seem like it has a lot of water in it, most of the water is tied up by the salt or sugar. Bacteria require a certain amount of "available" water to survive and grow. Spoilage of jams and jellies is usually due to molds and not bacteria because of the high sugar content. Molds do not require as much water for growth and survival as most bacteria.

www.madsci.org...


You are probably already aware that there are LOADS of helpful bacteria in your intestinal tract, which would be greatly affected by excess sugar for the exact same reason. I have read before that there are more helpful bacteria in your intestines than there are actual cells in your body, but off the top of my head I don't have a source for that one.

I hope that is at least enough information to get you started.

bravo bravo!

I dont eat nearly as much as I used too.

I also fast every few months, im 6' 2-3" and 140 pounds so I don't like to fast that often cause of weight.

I have became a serious health freak. But I tend to go in wave, I'll go about a month on a massive health freak campaign, then I'll slack off and eat some foods I'd normally avoid (right now I'm eating sun chips which I know is littered with msg)

Still though I always avoid GMO's, fast food, overly processed foods if a better option is available, and you'll always see me staring down ingredient listings of foods when at the store.

Funny though, I'm 18, in one year I have only gained 1 or 2 pounds average, I'm very thin yet toned. A year ago I was intaking massive amounts of food, and I had to in order to keep my weight up. After beginning to eat healthier, and especially after fasting, I don't eat as much food as before, and my weight is relatively the same.

Great post Op

[edit on 13-7-2009 by Scarcer]

reply to post by bsbray11



I agree about raw food.....I love raw fish and raw steaks. I have several portions each week. No need to be concerned about bacteria, it's everywhere. Raw meat and fish, especially ahi tuna and filet mignon.

Don't eat salad anymore, no nutrutional value. I only drink tap water, don't like to spend money on water or filters, my body filters stuff pretty well.

After my life as a Navy combat medic, I became aware of my body, and net/net: no doctor visits for 30 years. Went in for my first physical, everything is OK. No pills to take. Some of this stuff (a lot of it) is genetic. Eventually it will be easy to know what you should eat and not eat based on your genes.

Food Hog

Originally posted by Johnmike
reply to post by bsbray11

 

Can you show me the data points you used to generate those two graphs?

Didn't think so, you fraud and scientific hack.

You could have gotten your point across without being so dang rude.

Also, you recommend juices, but not things like sodas due to sugar content...except they have pretty much the same amount of sugar.

First your talking about totally different types of sugar. One is sugar the other is high fructose corn syrup. Second, the OP probably failed to specify that it's only all natural juices without any added sugar that you should drink. Natural sugar is fine and is one reason why nutritionists recommend using honey to sweeten certain foods and drinks instead of using sugar.

Fluoridated toothpaste is also fine as long as you don't swallow it like an idiot.

You still absorb the fluoride through the pores in your mouth, regardless.

Originally posted by Johnmike
reply to post by bsbray11

 

Can you show me the data points you used to generate those two graphs?

Didn't think so, you fraud and scientific hack. Who the hell are you? Sorry, but putting graphs of functions in your post only makes you seem silly and retarded to people who actually know what they're reading and how to analyze scientific material.



Also, you recommend juices, but not things like sodas due to sugar content...except they have pretty much the same amount of sugar. You're also off with tap water, since the only alternative is bottled water, and bottled water is just dirtier tap water held to lower governmental standards. Water filters are nice though. Fluoridated toothpaste is also fine as long as you don't swallow it like an idiot. The rest is sort of okay advice but greatly hyperbolized...really it's just a matter of maximizing certain things and minimizing others. Whole grain bread is a good substitute for white bread, for example.

How about showing us your scientific material please? Otherwise your making yourself look like a hypercritical fool. Just saying but your grammar and word choice makes you come across as so.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by Scarcer]

eat less? WRONG. That is the worst advice you can give somebody. Under-eating is just as bad.


Without a calorie surplus (and enough protein), muscle cannot continue to grow. In fact, I say eat more quality food, and undergo a muscle building routine/cardio.