Truck Month Spring Reading 2016 Amazon Fashion Learn more nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc $5 Albums Fire TV with 4k Ultra HD Subscribe & Save Mother's Day Gifts Amazon Gift Card Offer ctstrph2 ctstrph2 ctstrph2  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Fire, Only $39.99 Kindle Paperwhite AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl ReadyRide Bikes from Diamondback SnS
Customer Discussions > Health forum

How to stop eating three hourse before going to sleep?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 126-150 of 300 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 1:07:41 AM PST
Treehugger© says:
There's a good explanation of the Zone Diet on webmd. I'd copy/paste parts of it for you except I'm on my smartphone now and I don't feel like turning on my desktop computer now. You can also read reviews of Sear's books on Amazon.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 7:29:40 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 10, 2012 9:41:49 AM PST
Spinoza says:
Treehugger© says:

You should know that if a person starves themself their body goes into survival mode and food will be stored as fat more readily when eaten.

Spinoza says:

Sure, we all know that. Who mentioned anything about starving yourself? I didn't. I'm recommending you eat when you're hungry, intelligently, reasonably, and don't worry about WHEN.

I'm also recommending daily rigorous exercise. Why aren't you?

YOU are the one telling us to starve ourselves even if we are hungry before bed.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 8:07:58 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 10, 2012 9:03:49 AM PST
Spinoza says:
S. Kessler says:

Spinoza, quoting selected "authorities" who agree with you is not way to win an argument.

Spinoza says:

It is if those "authorities" happen to be correct. That means the other person's "authorities" aren't.

Sorry, not everyone here is right all the time, especially if they are promoting contradictory concepts. Both CANNOT be correct. Only one argument is correct, because it's based upon fact borne out by experimentation, rather than anecdote and hearsay.

Generally I try to employ reason, logic, and fact to win an argument. You've read my posts before. Sometimes that doesn't work, and so I employ authoritative references. They generally have more power to convince than less authoritative references.

My assumption is that a certified nutritionist would be most authoritative, since it is they who study and research the topic. I believe a number of my references were from certified nutritionists - rather than a layman who writes a diet book based upon nothing but... well, you tell me what?

S. Kessler says:

The science is in that weight loss is not a simple calculation of calories in versus calories out. Weight loss, and more important, maintenance, is much more complicated than that, with one's individual body chemistry and the quality of the calories taken in mattering a great deal.

Spinoza says:

The "science" is, is that, all other things being equal, the MOST CRUCIAL FACTOR in weight loss is burning off more calories than you consume. Period.

It then makes sense not to eat manufactured and processed "nutrition bars," no matter how healthy, because you are substituting empty calories for nutritious calories, and if you can eat an apple instead of a "nutrition bar," you would smart to do so.

If you are eating these "nutrition bars" as a meal replacement, then all you are doing is eating fewer calories at a specific meal time than if you had eaten a full breakfast, lunch, or dinner.

Decreasing calories is a proven weight loss strategy. Decreasing those calories by eating more nutritious foods that are lower in calories is smart and will get results. Eating empty calories and skipping meals is not smart, and it will not get you the same or better results, and it isn't any "healthier" for you than eating a Snickers bar.

Yes, we're all different. We all metabolize food consumed at different rates. You and I eat a slice of cheesecake, one of us will metabolize it slower or faster than the other; but not by much, and not by any amount that is going to make a significant difference over time, unless you have a serious metabolic disorder.

And we'll both have eaten calories that could have been better taken in as healthy protein, carbs, and fat. We both should have eaten a small steak, or piece of chicken or fish, or a green salad.

Snacking is also part of a healthy diet. I never snack, except perhaps in the evening before bed. That is one way in which I limit my caloric intake - by making those calories healthy ones.

BUT WE STILL ALL METABOLIZE FOOD THE SAME WAY, AND YOU STILL NEED TO BURN OFF MORE CALORIES THAN YOU CONSUME, IF YOU WANT TO LOSE WEIGHT, REGARDLESS OF WHEN THE FOOD IS EATEN. PERIOD.

When you eat meals is not nearly as crucial, if it is at all, than HOW MUCH YOU TAKE IN AND HOW MUCH YOU BURN OFF. PERIOD.

Meaning that it is much smarter to, for example, come home at the end of the day, and exercise before eating. The increase in your body's metabolism from the exercise will carry on over into your meal time and even into your sleep time. It will also cut your appetite a bit, and you will likely eat LESS than if you didn't exercise, as well as raise your metabolism and have the benefits of burning off more calories than if you just came home and ate dinner (regardless of the time of day) and went to bed.

You're burning off calories. Your body neither knows nor cares whether those calories are being burned off at 6:00 pm, 8:00 pm, or 11:00 pm.

By the same token, your body neither knows nor cares that you are eating those calories at 7:00 am, 7:00 pm, or 3:45 pm.

By the same token, your body digests food the same way, no matter when you eat it.

As I have said, some people are uncomfortable eating before bed. Some people experience acid reflux if they eat before bed.

Some people, like myself, experience acid reflux if they DON'T eat before bed. That's why I have a little snack, sometimes not so little, before bed. Everyone is unique, as you say.

But the manner in which the body digests and processes those nutrients, is not.

A pound of body fat equates to approximately 3500 calories. So if you have a calorie deficit of 500 calories (meaning that you burn 500 calories more than you eat each day) you would lose approximately one pound per week:

500 x 7 = 3,500

It's easy to see that a calorie deficit of 1000 calories would mean that you'd lose approximately two pounds per week.

Rigorous exercise, done regularly, permanently increases the body's metabolism, and those effects are long lasting.

THAT will get you results, guaranteed. It's easy to remember and track, too. I've been doing so for 30 years. I've gained about one pound a year since graduating high school (weighing in at 125 lbs at the age of 18). Most of that is muscle mass from exercise.

If you've been following this sort of diet or regime for any reasonable amount of time, and you're not getting results (that is, you're still overweight) then I would have to assume you are not completely compliant, OR THE CONCEPT IS BULLSH*T AND DOESN'T HOLD UP TO SCRUTINY.

Ever notice professional athletes often gain a lot of weight after retiring? Do you know why?

It's because they stop being physically active and continue to eat the same or more calories as they did during their career. They consume more calories than they burn off - and so, people say, "There goes what's left of a good physique."

S. Kessler says:

That being said, I have no opinion on whether the eating large meals before bedtime has any affect of weight gain or loss.

Spinoza says:

Too bad. I do, and we all have a vested interest in staying healthy and at a reasonable weight, as we are now finding that a majority of the illnesses that bedevil us are no longer caused by infection or contagion, but by lifestyle and eating habits.

Over half of us are clinically obese. The amount of money spent to treat illnesses of lifestyle is staggering - in the hundreds of billions of dollars. The amount of early death and suffering because of being overweight is also staggering.

Overweight and obesity are Public Health Enemy Number One. We need sound nutritional science to work with, not nonsense and anecdote that doesn't hold water.

S. Kessler says:

The only testable impact I am aware of is how a large meal before bedtime can result in acid reflux, which is really bad if you're prone to it. That's why I try to eat dinner early in the evening. If I need a bit of something before bedtime because I have that uncomfortable gnawing feeling, I will eat a small bit of cheese, a handful of nuts, or a square or two of good chocolate.

Spinoza says:

Ah, I see you agree with me, then. The only testable impact is acid reflux, and even THAT is in doubt, because, as I've said, some of us experience acid reflux if we DON'T eat.

Actually, not eating before bed and weight loss is "testable," too. Everyone who has tried it to lose weight and failed miserably, is a testament to its uselessness as a weight control strategy.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 8:38:41 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 10, 2012 8:55:37 AM PST
Spinoza says:
Treehugger© says:

Balance bars have protein, carbs and fat. You can't live on them but they are not candy. Candy is sugar last time I checked lol

Spinoza says:

Sugar is carbohydrates the last time I checked, lol. The problem with candy and chocolate bars is that they are mostly empty calories.

So are these "nutrition" bars. They're not "nutritious," not in the sense that a turkey sandwich is "nutritious" or an apple is "nutritious" or a steak is "nutritious."

They were originally designed not for dieters, but for athletes who need a quick and easy source of energy that is portable. Before "nutrition" bars came on the scene, athletes ate Snickers and Milky Way bars and simply a chunk of good old Hershey's chocolate.

Simply easier than carrying around a turkey sandwich in your pocket, and no refrigeration needed.

That is exactly what I did back in the day. Then Madison Avenue realized they could make a fortune by conning enthusiastic but gullible athletes into paying twice as much for a "nutrition" bar that has a more "balanced" ratio of protein to fats to carbs.

The macronutrients, like fat, are still coming from the same fat you find in chocolate bars. The protein is still coming from nuts like peanuts (where much of the fat comes from, as well) that you find in chocolate bars.

These nutrition bars are essentially identical in ingredients to chocolate bars, they simply are smaller and contain fewer calories, and those calories are "balanced."

Still bullsh*t. You'd get the same effect from eating an apple or a banana or a piece of fruit, and much cheaper, and much healthier.

But, you want to be taken in by Madison Avenue, support these companies making bucks off your gullibility, remain ignorant of sports physiology and nutritional science, and think you can lose weight by eating chocolate bars, uh, but not before bed time, of course....

Go ahead. Be my guest. Stay fat.

It's your funeral. Literally.

Nutrition Facts: ProteinPlus Protein Bar - Cookies and Creme

Serving size 1 bar
Calories 300
Calories from fat 50
* Percent Daily Values (DV) are based on a 2,000 calorie diet.
Amount/Serving
% DV*
Total Fat 6g
9%
Sat Fat 3.5g
18%
Trans Fat 0g

Cholesterol 0mg
0%
Amount/Serving
% DV*
Sodium 170mg
7%
Total Carb 38g
13%
Dietary Fiber 1g
4%
Sugars 18g

Protein 23g
46%

Vitamin A 0% * Vitamin C 100% * Calcium 40% * Iron 45% * Vitamin E 100% * Thiamin 100% Riboflavin 100% * Niacin 100% * Vitamin B6 100% * Folate 100% * Vitamin B12 * Biotin 100% Pantothenic Acid 100% * Phosphorus 35% * Magnesium 30% * Zinc 35% * Copper 40% * Chromium 20% *
Ingredients
POWERBAR TRISOURCE™ PROTEIN BLEND (SOY PROTEIN ISOLATE, WHEY PROTEIN ISOLATE, CALCIUM CASEINATE), GLUCOSE SYRUP, CHOCOLATEY COATING (SUGAR, FRACTIONATED PALM KERNEL OIL, COCOA, WHEY, NONFAT MILK, SOY LECITHIN, NATURAL VANILLA FLAVOR), GLYCERIN, MALTITOL SYRUP, COOKIE BITS (RICE FLOUR, SUGAR, CANOLA OIL, ALKALIZED COCOA, RICE STARCH, BAKING SODA, SALT), NATURAL FLAVOR, ALMOND BUTTER, HIGH OLEIC CANOLA OIL, SOY LECITHIN, PEANUT FLOUR, MINERALS: CALCIUM PHOSPHATE, MAGNESIUM OXIDE, ZINC GLUCONATE, IRON (FERROUS FUMARATE), COPPER GLUCONATE, CHROMIUM ASPARTATE, VITAMINS: VITAMIN C (ASCORBIC ACID), VITAMIN E ACETATE, VITAMIN B3 (NIACINAMIDE), PANTOTHENIC ACID (CALCIUM PANTOTHENATE), VITAMIN B6, VITAMIN B2, VITAMIN B1 (THIAMIN MONONITRATE), FOLIC ACID, BIOTIN, VITAMIN B12. CONTAINS ALMOND, MILK, PEANUT AND SOY INGREDIENTS. MADE ON EQUIPMENT THAT ALSO PROCESSES WHEAT.

Posted on Nov 10, 2012 11:06:34 AM PST
Treehugger© says:
Spinoza, you have confused virtually everything I have written. You won't be hearing from me anymore.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 1:20:37 AM PST
[Deleted by the author on Nov 11, 2012 1:26:28 AM PST]

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 7:15:32 AM PST
Spinoza, I gotta be honest. The Grady Diet is almost proudly unscientific. It's about gathering different practices that work. Glad to see that you believe with exercise: me too. As not not eating before bedtime--I opened that can of worms once. Anyhow, I do admire your knowledge and scientific rigor. By the same token, Treehugger is grounded in excellent practices borne by his experiences. Well as the Romans might have said, Carpe diet!

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 8:38:11 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 11, 2012 8:38:52 AM PST
Astrocat says:
Treehugger, what stands out for me in Spinoza's remarks on "if you're hungry...have a little snack", is the acceptance of the idea that being hungry is a bad thing. I've found that using my will power and not eating after 6:30 or 7:00 is much more beneficial than giving in just because my stomach isn't full.

I've found that I have to eat first thing in the morning, even if I'm not hungry, because if I walk on an empty stomach I get weak about halfway through. But as far as the evening, I have an apple and yogurt with fruit around 6:30 and that's it for the day. And sometimes I'll throw in a low-calorie cracker with a teaspoon of peanut butter, but nothing more than that.

Posted on Nov 11, 2012 1:21:34 PM PST
Treehugger© says:
I think the best approach for health is a healthy breakfast and lunch. This will help maintain energy levels during the day. If a large meal is eaten at dinner then that means either: 1. you failed to eat enough for breakfast or lunch 2. you are eating too many calories and weight gain will occur. If you are very active then 3 meals might be needed, if so then the overall caloric intake for the day can be adjusted with the last meal, but eating to close to bedtime is not a good idea.

Posted on Nov 11, 2012 1:30:40 PM PST
Treehugger© says:
Nancy, I know about not having enough stores to do a full duration workout so eating enough before is required. My doctor advised me when I wanted to loss 50 lbs that hunger is a good signal. So simple.

Some people claim everyone gains back the weight they lose and sadly that is true. But didn't those people learn anything when they lost weight in regard to caloric needs and why would you want to gain weight and put yourself through all that again?? didn't they feel like crap when they were fat?

In case I didn't mention it, I exercise about 8 hrs a week on average so I know that exercise is key to health.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 8:10:56 PM PST
S. Kessler says:
Treehugger: In case I didn't mention it, I exercise about 8 hrs a week on average so I know that exercise is key to health.

SK: I hate to point this out, but your personal anecdote about how many hours YOU exercise has no bearing on whether exercise is "key to health". Do you understand what a testable hypothesis is and what you have to do to actually test it?

Posted on Nov 11, 2012 9:54:32 PM PST
c--kuta says:
Ok I don't think anyone covered it so what is a large meal exactly?

I doubt many are taking 30 to 60 min to prepare a meal just before bed and then eating. I could be wrong of course. I would think a bag of chips would easily satisfy most of those right-before-bed cravings and enable the person to get to bed quicker.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 12, 2012 12:49:03 AM PST
Treehugger© says:
I started reading about nutrition 40 years ago and I haven't stopped. Kessler hasn't given any thought to the subject until this thread came along and he found someone to attack.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 12, 2012 3:07:06 AM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Nov 12, 2012 3:56:10 AM PST]

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 12, 2012 3:11:16 AM PST
Spinoza says:
Treehugger© says:

I think the best approach for health is a healthy breakfast and lunch. This will help maintain energy levels during the day. If a large meal is eaten at dinner then that means either: 1. you failed to eat enough for breakfast or lunch 2. you are eating too many calories and weight gain will occur. If you are very active then 3 meals might be needed, if so then the overall caloric intake for the day can be adjusted with the last meal, but eating to close to bedtime is not a good idea.

Spinoza says:

I think eating at rigid times, especially when one is not hungry, is the surest way I know to overweight and obesity.

Eating when one is hungry, whether one is hungry at 5:00 am, 8:00 am, 1:00 pm, or 11:00 pm, eating until almost satiated, and then not eating again until one is hungry again makes the most sense to me, rather than eating three meals a day because that is what everyone else is doing.

Everyone else is fat, Treehugger, or haven't you noticed?

Americans eat far to much at meals, and far too often. I do just fine with one or two meals a day, eaten when I am hungry for them, and not when the culture tells me I should eat.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 12, 2012 3:22:40 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 12, 2012 4:22:21 PM PST
Spinoza says:
S. Kessler says:

Treehugger: In case I didn't mention it, I exercise about 8 hrs a week on average so I know that exercise is key to health.

Spinoza says:

Actually, there are many "keys" to health, exercise being just one of them. Another is diet, and yet another is psychological. Mental hygiene, of you like.

S. Kessler is correct, however. Exercise demonstrably improves cardiovascular and musculoskeletal fitness, and aids in weight loss, and this had been known for quite some time.

Not eating several hours before bed has not. That simple.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 12, 2012 3:26:17 AM PST
Spinoza says:
Treehugger says:

Some people claim everyone gains back the weight they lose and sadly that is true. But didn't those people learn anything when they lost weight in regard to caloric needs and why would you want to gain weight and put yourself through all that again?? didn't they feel like crap when they were fat?

Spinoza says:

It's not about losing weight. It's about replacing weight from fat with weight from muscle.

I have gained about a pound a year since graduating high school. Most of that gain has been muscle, however, not fat.

You could, then, conceivably gain "weight" while dieting and exercising, and that would be just fine, because the weight is muscle.

It ain't simply about losing weight and food, Treehugger.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 12, 2012 5:25:32 AM PST
Treehugger© says:
"I think eating at rigid times, especially when one is not hungry, is the surest way I know to overweight and obesity"

thats it, you think it is

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 12, 2012 8:15:50 AM PST
S. Kessler says:
Excuse me? I've followed nutrition information for my entire adult life, the ups, downs, ins, and outs. And yes, we're talking MORE than 40 years. It's interesting how your only defense is an unwarranted assumption that happens to be totally wrong.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 12, 2012 2:42:18 PM PST
Treehugger© says:
SK: I hate to point this out, but your personal anecdote about how many hours YOU exercise has no bearing on whether exercise is "key to health". Do you understand what a testable hypothesis is and what you have to do to actually test it?

TH: I lost weight by exercising more and eating less. It is simple math.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 12, 2012 5:06:14 PM PST
S. Kessler says:
No, it's not "simple math". The factors in weight loss are complicated. One person's experience is not an adequate amount of evidence to drive general practice for everyone else. Yes, eating less is important. Being active is important. But so are other factors involved, such as the composition of the foods one eats. I'm happy you lost weight doing what you're doing. But you know that there are plenty of people who watch their calorie intake AND exercise and then wonder why they are not losing weight. This is very common. No one simple formula works for everyone.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 12, 2012 5:26:22 PM PST
Treehugger© says:
Eat less and be more active= lose weight. Be sedentary= unhealthy

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 12, 2012 6:18:26 PM PST
Spinoza says:
Treehugger© says:

SK: I hate to point this out, but your personal anecdote about how many hours YOU exercise has no bearing on whether exercise is "key to health". Do you understand what a testable hypothesis is and what you have to do to actually test it?

TH: I lost weight by exercising more and eating less. It is simple math.

Spinoza says:

Yeah, now it's simple math. For a hundred posts it was "not eating before bed causes weight loss" and now it's "simple math."

You mean simple math like "decreasing caloric intake and increasing caloric burning off by exercise like I've been posting about for the past umpteen posts...?!!!

Jeez Louise. I KNEW it would end like this...

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 12, 2012 7:22:48 PM PST
S. Kessler says:
Health is about more than losing weight, you know.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 13, 2012 3:24:26 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 13, 2012 3:30:14 AM PST
Spinoza says:
Here's an explanation of the Spinoza Diet - much simpler, and you don't have to buy any books or attend any classes or purchase any pre-packaged meals.

1. Eat a healthy, balanced diet containing foods like meat, poultry, dairy products, seafood, fruits and vegetables, and whole grains. try not to eat any processed foods (meaning you have to cook for yourself using natural, fresh ingredients). Try to eat more protein than carbs or fat, but don't get obsessive about it. That's what got you into your current situation in the first place.

Then make sure you burn off more calories than you consume.

2. Get one hour of vigorous cardiovascular and muscle-building exercise a day. Whatever you like, as long as it gets your heart rate up and you enjoy it (because then you're more likely to do it). Bicycling, walking, swimming, jogging, running, it's all good. I prefer hiking (I belong to several hiking clubs that hike around NYC on the weekends) and weightlifting.

3. Get plenty of rest, fresh air, and sunshine. It's good for you mentally and physically.

That's it. No repressive diets, no timing of meals, no obsessions with particular allegedly "charmed" substances like honey. No fantasies of losing weight by eating a particular food, eating at a particular time, or taking a particular supplement. No nonsensical beliefs that something is going to magically burn off fat while you sleep (absurd Hibernation Diet - how ridiculous!) No obsessions with ridiculous, unscientific diets written by unscrupulous laymen seeking to make a buck off your desperation and gullibility and scientific illiteracy.

Why people are so ready to listen to nonsense, rather than time-honored and field-tested, proven weight loss strategies is beyond me.

I have to conclude its laziness, ignorance, or a lack of real commitment to do what is necessary to lose weight and be healthy, or all three.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Health forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Health forum
Participants:  20
Total posts:  300
Initial post:  Oct 29, 2012
Latest post:  Dec 19, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 5 customers

Search Customer Discussions