Slim Fast; Optimal ratio of fat/protein/carbs for weightloss

[ap0258]

hey guys,

i'm starting out again on my weight loss. i have a couple of questions:

Is Slim Fast a good alternative to eating breakfast? When I wake up in the mornings, I am NEVER hungry to eat something. When I do, I have to force myself. I was thinking maybe a drink would be good enough? That led me to slim-fast! Is this a good alternative for breakfast and jump-starting your metabolism? Also, is eating a snack before going to sleep better for your metabolism since you have an almost 8 hour break in your sleep where nothing goes in? What about drinking a casein protein shake before you goto sleep? (i weight lift almost 4x a week!)

Also, what is a good ratio to have for fat/protein/carbs for the best weightloss. Does this usually depend on the person? If it does, how do you figure yours out?

Thanks for your time. I know i asked a lotta questions at once...i'm just that in search of answers!

 

[LowFatMilk]

I'm not a big fan of Slim Fast, I think it's far too expensive and only works for weight loss because of it's low calorie scheme. Ultimately you're not going to want slimfast for breakfast every day, but I certainly think it's better than NOTHING.

What about making your own low calorie fruit smoothie every morning instead?

Also sometimes, you just have to get into the habbit of eating. I didn't eat breakfast for years and years, and now I never miss it because I got used to eating it and expecting it every morning.

 

[Sage]

I would recommend staying away from Slim Fast. It has way to much sugar and his loaded with synthetic ingredients.

If you're not hungry, don't force yourself to eat. Morning is a time when the body is just coming of a fast. I would suggest it is better to ease back into digestion. A good alternative I would suggest would be "green drink". Not only is it cleansing, but has a high nutrition to calorie ratio.

 

[Cookn]

I, also, am not a fan of Slimfast, however my Lovely Lady is. I guess it's like everything else in life, in moderation, it's ok. It's not what I would consider optimum, but if it works for you, so be it. That being said, I won't let her have it for breakfast. The word "Break Fast" tells it all, it's the most important meal of the day. It literally signals your body to wake up or break the fast, like everyone says it gets your motor running. Slimfast is a highly processed product and as such it's very easy for your body to use and thusly requires little from the body and does little to ,shall we say, get the internal fires started. If, instead, you had consumed a meal rich in un-processed food like something with whole grain, oat meal or a whole wheat muffin or something like that. You've loaded the digestive system with a bunch of complex carbohydrates that it's going to have to work on for a while. All of a sudden messages are sent to all the sites around the body, it's time to get to work guys, the fires start ramping up, the juices start flowing, it's your metabolism kicking it into gear and getting ready for the day ahead. I'll bet you thought that you were just having breakfast, didn't you ? You just turned the key on you. Are you a sports car or a truck ?

 

[Steve]

Can I see the peer reviewed literature you're pulling your data from regarding unprocessed foods increasing metabolic rate, please?

 

[Doc Bunkum]

hey guys,

i'm starting out again on my weight loss. i have a couple of questions:

Is Slim Fast a good alternative to eating breakfast?

Speaking of peer reviewed literature, there's a mountain of evidence out there that suggests it's a good idea to eat breakfast if you're trying to lose "weight" - even if you have to force yourself to get into the habit.

ie: Timlin MT, et al. Breakfast eating and weight change in a 5-year prospective analysis of adolescents: project EAT (Eating Among Teens) Pediatrics 2008;121:e638-645

The relationship between breakfast eating and body mass index was assessed in 2216 adolescents. The eating habits of the study participants were assessed at the start of the study and then 5 years later. Basically, what the researchers found was the skipping breakfast was found to be associated with increased body mass index. Also, the more breakfasts were skipped, the greater BMI tended to be. These findings are in keeping with previous research linking skipped breakfast with an enhanced tendency to gain weight.

It should be noted, of course, this doesn't prove that skipping breakfast causes weight gain. But this study did find that individuals who were attempting to lose weight were more likely to skip breakfast, which is consistent with the idea that some people may skip breakfast in an attempt to lose weight.

So then why would skipping breakfast cause an increase in BMI?

Several reasons.

1. Skipping breakfast can lead to the general over-consumption of food later in the day.

2. Skipping breakfast can mean an over-ravenous appetite at lunch which can lead to a preference for carbohydrate-based meals that cause a spike in blood sugar levels that lead to fat deposition in the body.

3. Caloric restriction (ie: through skipping meals) can cause the metabolic rate to slow, making the conversion of food into energy less efficient.

Something to consider.

 

[Steve]

Or, and I think the biggest factor at play, most people who skip breakfast, in general, don't have an overly positive relationship with food. People who tend to skip breakfast also tend to eat shit in general and not be very conscious of what they're putting in their mouths.

At least in my experience.

 

[Doc Bunkum]

Uh, yeah.

Something we tend to take for granted. Tell people to eat a healthy breakfast and they think we mean a bowl of Froot Loops and a cup of coffee, or a couple of Pop Tarts (not suggesting ap0258 does).

It only takes a few minutes to cook up a bowl of oatmeal (not that instant oatmeal crap), a banana and a protein drink.

Or an omelet made from a couple of egg whites with some spinach and low fat cheddar along with some yogurt and piece of fresh fruit.

Nothing complicated, but eating this way will keep you powered up all day.

That Egg Whites International site I mentioned in another thread has some terrific recipes/ideas on that link I just gave, along with a Recipe section in their forum.

Recipezaar is one of my favorite resources and has 16,174 breakfast ideas on that link.

 

[Steve]

I've used recipezarr or whatever it's called... it's a great link.

Thanks for the other.

 

[Cookn]

Steve,

I don't believe that I said the unprocessed food "increases" metabolism, I think I said it starts it. By that I meant your body starts to work on complex carbohydrates as soon as they enter the body, beginning when you ingest the food with the application of digestive enzymes when you chew and the process continues all the way through you digestive system. When you ingest food, Slimfast in this case, in liquid form, you take vital metabolic operations away from the process of digestion. Most of the reasons complex carbohydrates are so valuable to your system are that the nutrients aren't readily available and the body has to work longer to make the sugars and nutrients available for use. Because of this fact, complex carbs will keep your metabolic system active longer at a higher rate, because it has to work longer to get the things it needs, processed. With complex carbohydrates much of the digestion process in done in the small intestine rather than the stomach. In liquid form, you take much of the bodies workload away because you decrease the amount of work required to get what it needs from the food. You've ingested the food in an almost ready to use form, much less metabolic action required to use the sugars and nutrients.

I can throw together a breakfast of complex carbs, in about as much time as it takes to open a can of Slimfast, and I feel a whole bunch better 2 hours down the road. To me, and this is personal feelings, opening a can of Slimfast would show a lack of commitment on my part and would not be a long term solution for me. Maybe it's a selfish way to look at it, but If I can get my 57 year old butt out of bed and fix a healthy breakfast in under 10 minutes, anybody can.

 

[Doc Bunkum]

Maybe it's a selfish way to look at it, but If I can get my 57 year old butt out of bed and fix a healthy breakfast in under 10 minutes, anybody can.

Absolutely!

So what's in a Slim Fast diet shake?

The 4 main ingredients are skim milk, sugar, fructose, and cocoa. In other words, milk, sugar, and sugar. Other ingredients include various vegetable oils, emulsifiers, and a dubious vitamin blend.

A 375ml (1.5 cups) shake contains 12 grams of protein -- slightly less than what you'd obtain drinking the same amount of 1% low-fat milk.

This same shake contains 38 grams of carbohydrates -- 20 grams more than if you drank the equivalent amount of 1% low-fat milk (with those additional carbs coming from the added sugar). Considering that milk contains significant amounts of vitamins A and D, Riboflavin, Niacin, Vitamin B12, Calcium, Phosphorous, Magnesium and Zinc, I'd suggest that you chuck the Slim Fast shakes (vitamin blend and all), and simply drink milk instead.

OK... that's problem number 1 -- the shakes are little more than an expensive, sugar-laden milk supplement.

What's wrong with the Slim Fast diet?

The daily caloric limit is set so low as to be detrimental to any long term weight loss...

con't:

 

[Steve]

Looking back over your post, you said:

It literally signals your body to wake up or break the fast, like everyone says it gets your motor running.

I'd be interested in seeing where you're pulling this data from, assuming by motor you mean metabolism.

If that's not what you mean, please forgive my assumption.

I don't believe that I said the unprocessed food "increases" metabolism, I think I said it starts it.

You said:

Slimfast is a highly processed product and as such it's very easy for your body to use and thusly requires little from the body and does little to ,shall we say, get the internal fires started.

I think most would read that to mean processed foods slow metabolism.

Can you show me data on this?

By that I meant your body starts to work on complex carbohydrates as soon as they enter the body, beginning when you ingest the food with the application of digestive enzymes when you chew and the process continues all the way through you digestive system. When you ingest food, Slimfast in this case, in liquid form, you take vital metabolic operations away from the process of digestion. Most of the reasons complex carbohydrates are so valuable to your system are that the nutrients aren't readily available and the body has to work longer to make the sugars and nutrients available for use. Because of this fact, complex carbs will keep your metabolic system active longer at a higher rate, because it has to work longer to get the things it needs, processed. With complex carbohydrates much of the digestion process in done in the small intestine rather than the stomach. In liquid form, you take much of the bodies workload away because you decrease the amount of work required to get what it needs from the food. You've ingested the food in an almost ready to use form, much less metabolic action required to use the sugars and nutrients.

I'd be interested in hearing what you believe this to net to in terms of energetic costs.

I personally believe you are splitting hairs here but I'll wait to see your data.

I can throw together a breakfast of complex carbs, in about as much time as it takes to open a can of Slimfast, and I feel a whole bunch better 2 hours down the road.

I would agree.

I'm not making this out to be processed vs. unprocessed.

I solely interested in your data pertaining to metabolic rate changes in response to time of feeding and type of feeding in terms of CHO.

 

[Cookn]

My data comes from "Total Nutrition, The Only Guide You'll Ever Need" from the Mount Sinai School of Medicine, Chapter 5 "Carbohydrates" by Victor Herbert MD. Unless I interpret the information wrong that's what I can gather from the information written there. If you have another source that disproves the information or offers another point of view, I would love to see it so that I could broaden my knowledge on the subject.

 

[Steve]

I appreciate your viewpoint. Most cry like babies when they're called on their information.

Good on you.

You seem like you like burying your face in data, which is a good thing in my opinion assuming you know how to remain unbiased and logical. That said, I suggest you start perusing through research banks such as pubmed for things you're interested in.

There is no data (research) in humans that skipping a single meal or even a day’s worth of meals does anything to metabolic rate. Things simply don't work like that in regards to our metabolisms. In fact, research that does exist relating to fasting actually shows a minimal increase in metabolic rate in response to the early stages of fasting, so you better believe skipping a single meal is going to have about half of zilch affect.

In terms of the thermic effects of food you're discussing relative to processed vs unprocessed and complex vs. simple... the data just isn't there that I've seen. Net calories and nutrients matter beyond a lot when it comes to this stuff, but the package they're delivered in come in a distant second.

I've been dieting people down for pretty many years and I do 'my homework' in terms of research. Not that I know it all, which is why I was asking if you have any peer reviewed information to support your claims. As you, I love learning.

I replied to your post simply b/c you seemed to be painting a picture that didn't match the reality of my experience as a trainer and didn't vibe with the data (or lack thereof) that I've seen to date.

 

[SonofJorEl]

In life IMHO "logic" should rule...and a lot of what Steve brings up IMHO seems "logical"...especially in regards to fasting/missing a meal..

In any event..I just had a quick question for you guys..

I see a lot of you talking about "egg whites" when consuming eggs..(obviously a solid source of ever-important protein)...

My question is...for somebody to lose weight at a solid (but not unhealthy) rate....is eating eggs "yolks-included" really that bad? (not cooking with butter)

I mean, assuming that your overall caloric intake is still creating that "caloric deficit" that you need, as well as making sure you're not stuffing your face with fat in other foods that you consume...

Just curious...thanks again for the replies...I've learned so much from Steve and some of you others over the last week it's really energizing..

For the last few years I really have been struggling to lose the fat I want to, which is really disconcerting because I've always been a weightlifter, and while I look "big" I've realized that I can really look and feel even better if I could just lose about 30 lbs. of fat...

My struggle just comes from the "energy" to do this...but this site, and especially the info that I've reaped here have really energized me to meet my goals..

I'm eager to weigh in Sunday morning and update my counter..

 

[Steve]

Take a look at this article from Lyle McDonald:



I have no problem with whole eggs, dieting or not.

 

[Doc Bunkum]

It's all a matter of choice, I suppose.

Here, I scammed these charts from CalorieKing so you can make a comparison.

If saturated fat and cholesterol isn't a concern, then go for it.

But I like the white simply because it's odorless and tasteless and mixes with most anything and I don't see any benefit to the yolk.

Of course, the white has to be partially cooked before you can get any benefit from it. The trick is to soft cook the egg until the white just starts to coagulate. Then you're home free. Takes a bit of practice to get it right.

That's why I was asking about those places selling egg whites. They're already heat treated so you can chug them straight from the jug or mix them in a shake. They're suppose to be 100% digestible.