What are the best appetite suppressors? page 3

[sakura_girl]

For me, it is coffee with cream. Not coffee by itself or cream by itself, but the combination.

Otherwise, fasting 1-2 hours past a regular meal works wonders as well.

[ChocoTaco369]

In principle, this makes perfect sense. But if I eat lean chicken breast and mashed potato/turnip mix with minimal added fat, I'm going to be sitting there counting the minutes until I'm hungry enough to eat again because I would feel deprived from such a boring, bland meal. But there's different kinds of hunger and we all probably experience them differently.

If I eat a big, buttered steak, I'm good until the same time the next day, easy. n=1.

That's absolutely true. So you have to balance food reward with caloric intake.

I choose to use spices over added fats in the majority of situations. Salt, pepper, herbs, gravies and citrus juices are lighter and very flavorful. Chicken breast may sound boring, but wrap it in aluminum foil with lemon, garlic and rosemary and bake it in the oven - that's next to zero added calories and it adds volumes of flavor. Not everything has to be covered in bacon grease and butter to be enjoyable. Chicken or beef stock reduced with a tablespoon of potato starch is also a very low calorie gravy that tastes great. Toss in some peppercorns and a sprig of time...yes please.

[ChocoTaco369]

That wouldn't work for me. Filling up fast with starches means blowing my calorie limit yet being hungry again soon. Filling up by gorging myself with low fat meats means blowing my protein limit and putting on weight. And I find no staying power with watery vegetables at all. Your list of food never to eat reads like the list of foods I have lost weight on.

Starches have higher satiety per calorie than fats. Compare white potatoes to nuts. The issue is you're confusing flour with starches. Your perception is starches is based on the satiety you get with pasta, bread and other grain flour-based foods, which take no effort to digest and are highly processed. I'm talking about potatoes, sweet potatoes, parsnips, jicama and squashes when I say "starches." They are low calorie, high water content and very difficult to overeat. White potatoes have one of the highest satiety indexes of any food.

If you lost weight eating sausage and bacon daily, you likely had a lot of weight to lose. They'll be advantageous versus bread, pasta, sweets, fast food and the like, but you likely won't really lean out on them.

[cori93437]

Yes, Choco... tell people that their N=1 experiences are wrong.

What does N=1 mean again?

[sakura_girl]

That's absolutely true. So you have to balance food reward with caloric intake.

Well, Cori, to be fair, he did make this statement, which I think holds true for all cases. However, the balancing act is different for everyone, which ends up being an n=1 at that point?

[ChocoTaco369]

What Choco is talking about is CW dieters mentality... eat low caloric foods and eat MORE of them for satiety. To that I say "Phooey". Not what I want at all.

No, it isn't. The topic of this thread is the foods that are the best "appetite suppressors." Most people do not have the genetics to maintain uber-leanness. You have to make a choice what is more important to you - leanness or enjoyment of food. By you choosing sausage, bacon, ribeye and lamb as your foods of choice, you can be perfectly healthy and you'll enjoy eating but you'll probably fall 10-15 lbs short of your weight loss goals. Similarly, if you are the kind of person that hates cooking and really doesn't enjoy food, you probably wouldn't be on this site to begin with, right?

So make your choice. Chicken breast and eye round will lean you out faster than sausage and chicken thighs - the protein content is higher per gram. It's up to you if you can sustain that. The problem arises when this turns into a cycle of endless frustration - you won't give up high calorie foods but you don't want to do endless cardio and you want to be lean. Something's gotta give! You can't have it all. I have chosen to adhere to the middle ground. I enjoy food a lot so I eat fattier meats regularly, and it truly holds me back from being very lean, but it's worth it to me to enjoy my meals and I've just accepted I won't have that ripped look. I'm at peace with it. If you're not a foodie and would be happy eating less exciting food for body composition, well, I just told you how to do it.

[ChocoTaco369]

Yes, Choco... tell people that their N=1 experiences are wrong.

What does N=1 mean again?

You're purposely skewing data.

There is a HUGE difference between going from 250 lbs to 200 lbs and going from 200 lbs to 150 lbs. You can regularly consume sausage, bacon and added fat when you're very overweight because these foods are vastly superior to fast food and foods made of refined flours and sugars (which a person is undoubtedly eating to get very overweight). But to go from average weight to very lean with ab definition - that's a completely different story. If you're okay with being 15-20 lbs overweight, you don't have to give up these foods. If you want strong ab definition, you have to reduce your fat intake unless you're genetically gifted or extremely active.

[RichMahogany]

No, it isn't. The topic of this thread is the foods that are the best "appetite suppressors." Most people do not have the genetics to maintain uber-leanness. You have to make a choice what is more important to you - leanness or enjoyment of food. By you choosing sausage, bacon, ribeye and lamb as your foods of choice, you can be perfectly healthy and you'll enjoy eating but you'll probably fall 10-15 lbs short of your weight loss goals. Similarly, if you are the kind of person that hates cooking and really doesn't enjoy food, you probably wouldn't be on this site to begin with, right?

So make your choice. Chicken breast and eye round will lean you out faster than sausage and chicken thighs - the protein content is higher per gram. It's up to you if you can sustain that. The problem arises when this turns into a cycle of endless frustration - you won't give up high calorie foods but you don't want to do endless cardio and you want to be lean. Something's gotta give! You can't have it all. I have chosen to adhere to the middle ground. I enjoy food a lot so I eat fattier meats regularly, and it truly holds me back from being very lean, but it's worth it to me to enjoy my meals and I've just accepted I won't have that ripped look. I'm at peace with it. If you're not a foodie and would be happy eating less exciting food for body composition, well, I just told you how to do it.

Tell me that next time I make weight for a 135-lb MMA fight by eating fatty steak, bacon, eggs, slices of butter, and cheese and cutting the yams and turnips and plantains out of my diet.

[cori93437]

No, it isn't. The topic of this thread is the foods that are the best "appetite suppressors." Most people do not have the genetics to maintain uber-leanness. You have to make a choice what is more important to you - leanness or enjoyment of food. By you choosing sausage, bacon, ribeye and lamb as your foods of choice, you can be perfectly healthy and you'll enjoy eating but you'll probably fall 10-15 lbs short of your weight loss goals. Similarly, if you are the kind of person that hates cooking and really doesn't enjoy food, you probably wouldn't be on this site to begin with, right?

So make your choice. Chicken breast and eye round will lean you out faster than sausage and chicken thighs - the protein content is higher per gram. It's up to you if you can sustain that. The problem arises when this turns into a cycle of endless frustration - you won't give up high calorie foods but you don't want to do endless cardio and you want to be lean. Something's gotta give! You can't have it all. I have chosen to adhere to the middle ground. I enjoy food a lot so I eat fattier meats regularly, and it truly holds me back from being very lean, but it's worth it to me to enjoy my meals and I've just accepted I won't have that ripped look. I'm at peace with it. If you're not a foodie and would be happy eating less exciting food for body composition, well, I just told you how to do it.

You have said 1000 times over that it's CALORIES.

So... Calories.
If the portions are smaller that is an individual choice.
I can still eat all the veggies I want pretty much because really, it would take about a truck load of romaine lettuce to make a drop in the bucket if I chose that route.
Also... those smaller portions are more satisfying than a large portion of low fat meat IMO.
YMMV.
N=1
All that jazz.

Also... I never felt satisfied at all PERIOD when eating low fat, no matter how much food I consumed.
When eating low fat food volume was simply irrelevant for me.
Even with a full belly I was walking around wanting to pick at foods like I was hungry.
That is not normal or healthy.
Lack of fat in the diet was affecting how I responded in regard to satiety.

[RichMahogany]

When eating low fat food volume was simply irrelevant for me.
Even with a full belly I was walking around wanting to pick at foods like I was hungry.
That is not normal or healthy.
Lack of fat in the diet was affecting how I responded in regard to satiety.

This was my point. I want (and ultimately eat) more food despite not necessarily being properly "hungry" when I don't have my animal fats.