5 ms·
As a skinny young man with a big appetite I've found myself using these calorie counts as a way to maximize calories for the lowest price.
by drak0n1c 8y ago
As a skinny young man with a big appetite I've found myself using these calorie counts as a way to maximize calories for the lowest price.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- josephorjoe 8y agoI use to be like that (the snickers bar had the best calories/price ratio in the office vending machine), but I'm not any more (the popcorn has the lowest calories in the office vending machine). Something very unfortunate happened to my metabolism in my 30s... do enjoy it while you can :)
- themodelplumber 8y agoAs a formerly obese person and big loser with almost infinite capacity for stress eating, I love the calorie counts for all of the times they've helped me when I've been in calculation mode (which is healthy, for my personality dynamic). Sometimes a vague-sandwich is all it takes to get off the rails and put my old, bad habits in the driver's seat again. BTW back when I weighed around 300 lbs. I remember buying a box of Little Debbie's peanut butter snacks for the exact reason you stated (and eating it all). Major calorie density for cost. That became a sort of pornographic activity for me, building up energy stores outside of any real energy-risk context.
- sbenitoj 8y agoThis is the point I made below, whole foods are superior to calorie counts No one eats a grass-fed steak and goes into a downward spiral. Tons of people spiral out of control if they consume even small amounts of junk food. WHAT you eat matters more than HOW MUCH you eat long term. Calories matter, but different foods affect your body differently!
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y agoAs another former >300lbs man, let me politely suggest that you are completely full of shit. Calories are by far and away the most important metric when losing weight. Controlling food addiction is an issue too, but you're not going to solve it by eating "whole foods".
- sbenitoj 8y agoWhy were people before the 1950s almost completely unaware of calorie counts but almost all lean?
- jonknee 8y agoThey ate fewer calories, but still had lots of starch.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y agoThey did a lot more physical labor and food was much more expensive, for starters.
- sbenitoj 8y agoThat sounds true but the evidence shows otherwise. Women in the 1950s were mostly lean and did almost no exercise. Look around at the people who are the most physically active today (day laborers/construction workers). They’re active all day, and yet most are still overweight. It’s not about activity, it’s about consuming quality food to fix your hormone levels.
- AstralStorm 8y agoPlease provide evidence that hormonal balance or other endocrine mess is involved. I'm quite interested in such. I think it is combination of both increased calorie intake and somewhat reduced physical work thus caloric demand - mostly sitting (in car, at work) instead of walking or standing. Having food be more palatable and caloric plays into this too but seems secondary.
- ProfessorLayton 8y agoHeh, I occasionally shop at 99¢ stores, and am often amazed at how many calories one can buy for a dollar. Chocolate pound cake is the clear winner (not counting items that are just ingredients like cooking oil etc.): 900kcal/99¢! (~1.09 after tax where I live)
- chrisseaton 8y agoIs vegetable oil better? Or what about sugar or syrup?
- cjsawyer 8y agoSure but eating cake is much less likely to make you sick than drinking vegetable oil
- EpicEng 8y agoDo you sit down to a nice meal of sugar and vegetable oil often?
- chrisseaton 8y agoWell I don't sit down to a meal of chocolate pound cake either.
- EpicEng 8y ago...but people do. No one does the former... pretty sure you understand that and are just being purposely dense.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y agoA 10oz jar of creamy peanut butter from the dollar store has ~1700 Calories.
- ProfessorLayton 8y agoAgreed, but if we count ingredients then a jug of cooking oil wins hands down.