5 ms·

> Plenty of vegetables can be eaten raw And this is what I do, but it doesn't meet my caloric needs unfortunately. I really wish I could sustain myself off of

> Plenty of vegetables can be eaten raw And this is what I do, but it doesn't meet my caloric needs unfortunately. I really wish I could sustain myself off of just that. Same with some of your other suggestions. I know because I've tried for a while :) > Think about how people eat when they are camping People eat like that because they're camping > I would say most meals you should be able to make within 15 minutes of chopping/prep, plus 5 minutes if it needs to be fried Yeah that's just not true

alisonatwork 5y ago
I'm not sure what you mean by your "caloric needs" being so high that you cannot possibly meet them with a meal made in 20 minutes. You could eat a stick of butter in 5 minutes. No sugar. Plenty of calories. In fact, that's exactly what some thru hikers do. If you really require a vast amount of calories, this is solved by eating fat, which you could get in oils, nuts, seeds, butter, cheese and processed meats - all of which require zero cooking time. If you don't like the taste of any vegetables, or noodles, or porridge/oatmeal, or bread, or fruit, or stir-fried meat, or anything that does not require being stewed or baked or smoked for several hours... then just say so. But then that's a personal preference for the type of food you choose to eat - it doesn't mean that it takes "so much time" to cook nutritional, varied and delicious food. It's fine if you only enjoy a very limited set of foods, but I suspect most people have a broader palate.
zepto 5y ago
> And this is what I do, but it doesn't meet my caloric needs unfortunately. I really wish I could sustain myself off of just that. Same with some of your other suggestions. I know because I've tried for a while :) From the way you talk, it sounds like a diet full of sugar and quick to prepare processed foods is actually the optimal one for you because your body and mind simply can’t deal with anything else. If this is the case, then maybe it’s best to enjoy convenient foods, and enjoy ‘living’, and not worry about health consequences because that will only detract from your present enjoyment.
- surfpel 5y ago
  Such a passive aggressive comment. I don’t understand why people feel the need to be so vitriolic in the face of an experience that doesn’t match their own on this site
  - zepto 5y ago
    You’re reading something into my comment that isn’t there, indeed it’s the opposite of what I wrote. The point is that people keep offering you suggestions because you seem to be saying there is a problem. You’re obviously wrong that the problem can’t be solved since lots of people have solved it. That isn’t a matter of your experience not matching others. What we are left with is that you are simply making a choice based on your own priorities and preferences. I genuinely think that if this is true, you would be better off simply being happy with your choice. That sentiment is about respecting what is true for you and wishing you well. I imagine there are a lot of people who have similar priorities to you and are just fine with that.

alisonatwork 5y ago

I'm not sure what you mean by your "caloric needs" being so high that you cannot possibly meet them with a meal made in 20 minutes. You could eat a stick of butter in 5 minutes. No sugar. Plenty of calories. In fact, that's exactly what some thru hikers do. If you really require a vast amount of calories, this is solved by eating fat, which you could get in oils, nuts, seeds, butter, cheese and processed meats - all of which require zero cooking time. If you don't like the taste of any vegetables, or noodles, or porridge/oatmeal, or bread, or fruit, or stir-fried meat, or anything that does not require being stewed or baked or smoked for several hours... then just say so. But then that's a personal preference for the type of food you choose to eat - it doesn't mean that it takes "so much time" to cook nutritional, varied and delicious food. It's fine if you only enjoy a very limited set of foods, but I suspect most people have a broader palate.

zepto 5y ago

> And this is what I do, but it doesn't meet my caloric needs unfortunately. I really wish I could sustain myself off of just that. Same with some of your other suggestions. I know because I've tried for a while :) From the way you talk, it sounds like a diet full of sugar and quick to prepare processed foods is actually the optimal one for you because your body and mind simply can’t deal with anything else. If this is the case, then maybe it’s best to enjoy convenient foods, and enjoy ‘living’, and not worry about health consequences because that will only detract from your present enjoyment.

surfpel 5y ago
Such a passive aggressive comment. I don’t understand why people feel the need to be so vitriolic in the face of an experience that doesn’t match their own on this site
- zepto 5y ago
  You’re reading something into my comment that isn’t there, indeed it’s the opposite of what I wrote. The point is that people keep offering you suggestions because you seem to be saying there is a problem. You’re obviously wrong that the problem can’t be solved since lots of people have solved it. That isn’t a matter of your experience not matching others. What we are left with is that you are simply making a choice based on your own priorities and preferences. I genuinely think that if this is true, you would be better off simply being happy with your choice. That sentiment is about respecting what is true for you and wishing you well. I imagine there are a lot of people who have similar priorities to you and are just fine with that.