How soon until NYC is NOT a food destination?

[CWS4322]

If people would follow those two very basic and very simple rules there would not be such a thing as morbid obesity and half of our population wouldn't be pre-diabetic nor have full-blown diabetes.

Cutting back on those two things, and this includes juice, I squeeze fresh oranges or grapefruit, and when in season, pomegranates, in the summer beets/carrots/veggies (there is a lot of added sugars in juices), one can easily drop 10 lb over the course of a year without dieting. I'm just lucky I do not really care for carbs or sweet things. Not that I don't eat any carbs or sweets, but a tablespoon of high-quality chocolate chips tossed with some nuts and sprinkled with chilpolte chili powder is one of my favorite snacks. And, as far as carbs go, I rarely eat bread so if I make burgers, I don't eat a bun and I almost always eat whole wheat, not white. I know it is easier to go through the drive through and order a burger, fries, and a "super-sized" drink than it is to go to the grocery store, take the groceries home, and cook. I'm self-employed so I work mostly from home. I'd have to make a special trip to go to a drive-through. It amazes me how much money people spend on fast food. I just picked up just over a pound of ground chicken for $1.11. I have five pre-made burgers in the freezer that I can either eat as burgers or thaw and toss into a spaghetti sauce. That comes out to 22 cents a burger. Now, the portion size is not 1/2 lb, it is the size of my ice cream scoop and fit in the palm of my hand--the recommended portion size for meat.

 

[Addie]

I am still in the process of learning to not cook for an army. Even though my kids are out of the house for a long time, I have continued to cook special dishes for them. I make a full pound of mac and cheese and before I send it to them I take a hefty portion for myself. I finally stopped do that. This time when I went shopping I didn't even go near the bread department. Little by little I am cutting back of the foods I usually buy to include my kids in.

Women have the problem of when they have a second or third child, the weight seems to want to hang around for a long time. That little girl figure she had with the first child has filled out with added weight. Her breasts are larger to produce milk for the child. Her hips have widened for the birth experience. Here thighs have added muscle to support her during her pregnancy. All of these changes with added muscles stay with her. But the worst thing is that during her first trimester, her appetite is out of control and she can't get enough to eat. Her "friends" tell her she is now eating for two. Thus the start of becoming overweight.

 

[Andy M.]

I am still in the process of learning to not cook for an army. Even though my kids are out of the house for a long time, I have continued to cook special dishes for them. I make a full pound of mac and cheese and before I send it to them I take a hefty portion for myself. I finally stopped do that. This time when I went shopping I didn't even go near the bread department. Little by little I am cutting back of the foods I usually buy to include my kids in.

Women have the problem of when they have a second or third child, the weight seems to want to hang around for a long time. That little girl figure she had with the first child has filled out with added weight. Her breasts are larger to produce milk for the child. Her hips have widened for the birth experience. Here thighs have added muscle to support her during her pregnancy. All of these changes with added muscles stay with her. But the worst thing is that during her first trimester, her appetite is out of control and she can't get enough to eat. Her "friends" tell her she is now eating for two. Thus the start of becoming overweight.

I don't think that's my problem.

 

[Skittle68]

I don't think that's my problem.

+1

Me either- my doctor says I'm a baby making machine (born with wide hips lol) My sister too- she had two 9 1/2 lb babies (not at the same time) naturally, and was only in labor for about ten hrs total for the first one, and 8 hrs for the second one. She was also back down to her pre-pregnancy weight within 3 months. My mom who had three kids is 10 lb heavier than me, and two inches taller (I weigh about 110-115 when I'm in my ideal range. Right now I'm closer to 120, and trying to get back to 110. It's always a battle for me to stay in the middle of my BMI)

 

[Zereh]

I almost always eat whole wheat, not white

Interesting tidbit: Blood sugar levels bounce higher after eating whole-wheat bread than eating an equivalent amount of carbs (12g or so) of plain sugar! The thought is that this has to do with all of the DNA modifications (introduction of foreign, sometimes synthetic, genes & not to be confused with benign cross-pollinating practices) that have been made to wheat.

 

[kadesma]

Interesting tidbit: Blood sugar levels bounce higher after eating whole-wheat bread than eating an equivalent amount of carbs (12g or so) of plain sugar! The thought is that this has to do with all of the DNA modifications (introduction of foreign, sometimes synthetic, genes & not to be confused with benign cross-pollinating practices) that have been made to wheat.

Blood Sugar levels vary from person to person. I do better with wheat than white. Crossants,bagels and such send my BG levels sky high. That is why I preach to diabetics how important it is to do tests after meals and eating certain foods like fruits,ice creams and such. Testing lets you learn about your body and how much you cn safely eat.
kades .

 

[taxlady]

Interesting tidbit: Blood sugar levels bounce higher after eating whole-wheat bread than eating an equivalent amount of carbs (12g or so) of plain sugar! The thought is that this has to do with all of the DNA modifications (introduction of foreign, sometimes synthetic, genes & not to be confused with benign cross-pollinating practices) that have been made to wheat.

Do you have any references for that?

 

[blissful]

I just had to search around........to see if this was true.
http://www.medindia.net/patients/calculators/glycemic-index.asp

The glycemic index (GI) for whole grain bread is 72
The GI for sugar is 65

The site say "The food having a higher GI breaks down quickly and shoots up your blood sugar levels rapidly. While the food having a lower GI takes a longer time to get digested and absorbed, resulting in slower and gradual changes in blood sugar levels."

I was surprised by this.

 

[GLC]

I didn't believe this when the rumors first started coming out- I thought it was just sugar derived from a different source, but it is 55% fructose, 42% glucose, and 3% saccharides, whereas sucrose (normal sugar) is 50% fructose and 50% glucose. The molecules in HFCS are also free and unbound, ready for absorption due to the processing, while in sucrose each fructose molecule is attached to a corresponding glucose molecule, and must go through an extra metabolic step to be utilized. It's possible that the extra fructose is being processed for fat while the glucose is being stored as carbohydrate for energy in the liver and muscles. That's just a theory, but the fact that HFCS causes weight gain more so than sugar consumed in the same calorific amounts is pretty much undeniable.

I still think it's misdirection. Even if you take the theory as fact. There are obviously differences in how various sugars are metabolized. But to pretend that one form of sugar is a prime mover in obesity is another one of those notions that is popular because it seems to relieve people of direct responsibility. In other words, it is silly to imagine that, had HFCS not come to exist, there would be no problem.

There are only two sugar issues in general obesity. One is the amount consumed of foods containing significant portions of sugars. The second is not really outside that, but it is useful to note the existence of more food choices that have significant sugar portions. The first is essentially eating too much of the wrong things. The second is being presented with too much of the wrong thing.

Rounding, an 8-ounce Coke is about 100 calories. A 32-ounce Coke is then about 400. Any difference between the Coke in them being sweetened with HFCS or with cane sugar is then trivial. The Cokes represent the problem of being presented with too much, 32-ounce fountain drinks being unheard off pre-obesity epidemic. But processed foods frequently use sugar to enhance flavor, to give them zowie taste. Sugar was always used that way, of course. But the number of processed foods being offered and being consumed has grown enormously.

Sugar is not the only problem, certainly, but it aggravates the "big portion" general problem.

But to talk of fat, sugar, fiber, or any other food component as something that is key to effectively mitigating obesity is to ignore, in the most ridiculous way, the single factor without which there would be no problem - eating a lot more food than previously.

 

[danbuter]

Let's ban HFCS.

Or lower the tariffs so that companies can use sugar that would then be cheaper than HFCS.

 

[taxlady]

I just had to search around........to see if this was true.
Glycemic Index Calculator | Medindia

The glycemic index (GI) for whole grain bread is 72
The GI for sugar is 65

The site say "The food having a higher GI breaks down quickly and shoots up your blood sugar levels rapidly. While the food having a lower GI takes a longer time to get digested and absorbed, resulting in slower and gradual changes in blood sugar levels."

I was surprised by this.

That site contradicts itself. It says shows this chart:

 

[Andy M.]

...But to talk of fat, sugar, fiber, or any other food component as something that is key to effectively mitigating obesity is to ignore, in the most ridiculous way, the single factor without which there would be no problem - eating a lot more food than previously.

Bravo! We're fat because we eat too much. Plain and simple.

Don't worry about carbs or fats or proteins in your diet because they are carbs or fats or proteins. Worry about them all because they bring calories to the party.

 

[blissful]

That site contradicts itself. It says shows this chart:

The site doesn't appear to be SELLING anything though, just giving information. WHOLE WHEAT products was not a choice for finding the GI level. WHOLE GRAIN products was available at 72. I would expect that whole wheat and whole grain to be in the same category. And GRAINY BREAD is mentioned at a low GI. I wonder if it has more to do with how finely a grain is ground than anything else.

 

[Greg Who Cooks]

I would expect that whole wheat and whole grain to be in the same category. And GRAINY BREAD is mentioned at a low GI. I wonder if it has more to do with how finely a grain is ground than anything else.

Degree of milling has a lot to do with how quickly the product is digested, and whether the bran is left on or milled off.

 

[TATTRAT]

there used to be some old joke about bad habits and how they affect other people.
it went something about how we all have bad habits.

smokers' bad habit has a side effect whereby other people around them are forced to breathe in their wafting smoke.

my bad habit is drinking beer. it's side effect is having to pee frequently.

to be fair, if i have to breathe in your smoke, i should be allowed to pee on you...

Is that like the old Summer rule: I don't swim in your toilet, so don't pee in my pool?

 

[TATTRAT]

Bravo! We're fat because we eat too much. Plain and simple.

Don't worry about carbs or fats or proteins in your diet because they are carbs or fats or proteins. Worry about them all because they bring calories to the party.

A. Frickin. MEN.

People hwo go on these fad diets don't realize that Sugars, Carbs, Fats, alllllllllllofthat stuff, is PART OF A BALANCED MEAL.

I also hate the phrase "I'm on a diet", we are ALL on a diet. . . a diet is what you eat/what sustains you. No matter WHAT you are eating, that is your diet.


As for NYC, while I don't consider it a food destination for the reasons of world class Cuisine, and world famous Chefs, I have always though of it as more of a food destination for all the mom and pop, side street, back alley hole in the wall places that offer some of the more Authentic world cuisines, without having to go to Spain for AMAZING suckling pig, or Luzon for AMAZING lechon, or The Szechuan Provence for a proper hot pot.

While there is certainly plenty of top notch Chefs doing their thin in the Big Apple, I liken that to more of a touristy thing.

Chicago is more of a food destination for me(sorry, BT).

 

[TATTRAT]

Also, all these laws and stuff trying to pass are just silly.

This isn't the forum to get into big brother govt talk, but that being said, there have been people trying to tell others how they should live their lives since the dawn of time, it's nothing new, and it certainly won't be the last time it's tried.

Food is not a drug, it's not a crime, and it is one "vice" that everyone can partake in. It's not guns, cocaine, prostitution, gambling, booze, it's FOOD. it is one cultural thing that EVERYONE can embrace, and enjoy, and besides maybe being guilty of the calories, with moderation, food isn't going to kill you. That goes for no matter WHAT city you are in.

 

[buckytom]

A. Frickin. MEN.

People hwo go on these fad diets don't realize that Sugars, Carbs, Fats, alllllllllllofthat stuff, is PART OF A BALANCED MEAL.

I also hate the phrase "I'm on a diet", we are ALL on a diet. . . a diet is what you eat/what sustains you. No matter WHAT you are eating, that is your diet.mi


As for NYC, while I don't consider it a food destination for the reasons of world class Cuisine, and world famous Chefs, I have always though of it as more of a food destination for all the mom and pop, side street, back alley hole in the wall places that offer some of the more Authentic world cuisines, without having to go to Spain for AMAZING suckling pig, or Luzon for AMAZING lechon, or The Szechuan Provence for a proper hot pot.

While there is certainly plenty of top notch Chefs doing their thin in the Big Apple, I liken that to more of a touristy thing.

Chicago is more of a food destination for me(sorry, BT).

i completely agree. what makes nyc special is the diversity. tourists are actually part of that diversity, in a way.

but it's the little holes in the wall that are the true, sustaining gems here; not the celebrity flash in the pan joints.

the big time restaurants here are like broadway shows. they're great for a short time, but when you're on their 5th change of cast members, it ain't the same. but they're still there, packing the house.

 

[Skittle68]

I still think it's misdirection. Even if you take the theory as fact. There are obviously differences in how various sugars are metabolized. But to pretend that one form of sugar is a prime mover in obesity is another one of those notions that is popular because it seems to relieve people of direct responsibility. In other words, it is silly to imagine that, had HFCS not come to exist, there would be no problem.

There are only two sugar issues in general obesity. One is the amount consumed of foods containing significant portions of sugars. The second is not really outside that, but it is useful to note the existence of more food choices that have significant sugar portions. The first is essentially eating too much of the wrong things. The second is being presented with too much of the wrong thing.

Rounding, an 8-ounce Coke is about 100 calories. A 32-ounce Coke is then about 400. Any difference between the Coke in them being sweetened with HFCS or with cane sugar is then trivial. The Cokes represent the problem of being presented with too much, 32-ounce fountain drinks being unheard off pre-obesity epidemic. But processed foods frequently use sugar to enhance flavor, to give them zowie taste. Sugar was always used that way, of course. But the number of processed foods being offered and being consumed has grown enormously.

Sugar is not the only problem, certainly, but it aggravates the "big portion" general problem.

But to talk of fat, sugar, fiber, or any other food component as something that is key to effectively mitigating obesity is to ignore, in the most ridiculous way, the single factor without which there would be no problem - eating a lot more food than previously.

I agree with that- after all, I have been exposed to HFCS my whole life, and I'm not overweight because I consume unhealthy foods in moderation. My point was just that I used to believe that sugar and HFCS metabolized the same in your body, and now that I know they don't, I make a point to avoid it more than I would have otherwise. For example, using honey in a recipe that calls for corn syrup. Not saying that just because it causes more weight gain than sugar, consumed in equal amounts, that it is completely to blame

 

[Bolas De Fraile]

Dr Titli's Guide to LOSING WEIGHT - YouTube