[citation needed]

No study exists showing a calorific excess resulting in weight loss or a calorific deficit resulting in weight gain. All diets, no matter how you dress them up, involve calorie restriction. Eating 200 calories below what you need, average for men is 2500kcal so 2300kcal, is not a starvation diet. As I say you could eat a zero carb diet, but eat too much and you will get fat.



We can't really use single populations as evidence to base dietary recommendations for everyone else. We are an adaptable species, the Inuit survive on what they have available and they will have different genetics to cope with their high fat diets. Those "poor pot bellied kids" are like that due to malnutrition and lack of food in general not because they simply ate too much rice although I'm more surprised you even wrote that. Rice is a staple in many countries. Look at India, a very populous country and one that is the highest in terms of rice consumption in the world, yet it has one of the lowest incidences of overweight people.


Sorry and no offence but I'm not interested in a diet guru with things to sell, particularly one who got their doctorate in nutrition from the Clayton College of Natural Health, the same place as Gillain Mckeith.

If you are concerned about insulin, I think you will find this series of articles quite interesting.

Now don't get me wrong, nutrition is a contentious and constantly evolving subject so in a decade I might be gladly eating my carby hat but until I see more evidence, I'm not convinced by the low/no carb craze, even more so when every man and their dog each have their own versions they're trying to promote/sell. Nutrition is always one of those subjects where you have to agree to disagree. :smiley:

When you make a claim, it's up to you to prove it. :wink:

Care to explain why your brain runs on glucose i.e. sugar? :stuck_out_tongue:

​what's that got to do with a porridge bowl H x

You don't actually have to only use it for porridge, I'm sure it could be used for soup or pasta etc. Heat added anyway, good price for this range!

​Yeah, but this is a cooking utensil, not porridge? would you vote a frying pan cold because it *could* be used to cook unhealthy food?

So does alcohol, red meat, coffee, toothpaste. Never mind voting cold, just give up eating and drinking everything. Porridge is the future voted hot.

​The packaging from my "commercial porridge" states the ingredients as "100% wholegrain oats" - how do they get away without declaring the sugar?

​what a silly coment. even if it was 100% sugar,we're supposed to vite on the bowl not porridge itself! Blimey!

Worst comment ever!!

Oh lawd :disappointed:

Your post causes cancer..

Although research has shown that cancer cells consume more sugar (glucose) than normal cells, no studies have shown that eating sugar will make your cancer worse or that, if you stop eating sugar, your cancer will shrink or disappear. However, a high-sugar diet may contribute to excess weight gain, and obesity is associated with an increased risk of developing several types of cancer.

So being a fat ******* is more likely to cause cancer, porridge is healthy than a bacon sandwich. Cogito ergo sum, you are an idiot.

Great deal by the way, have some non-cancer causing heat from me.

And we let these people vote!!!!

What a strangely pointless post.

Dates contain sugar therefore cancer.

Your post is irrelevant.

People come for the deals, but stay for the self righteous irrelevant musings..

I think you meant 0.5g of sugar per 40g serving. "Each 40g serving made with water contains Calories 150 8%, Sugar 0.5g <1%, Fat 2.2g 3%, Saturates 0.4g 2%, Salt trace <1% of an adult's guideline daily amount" Come to think of it, these figures don't add up. 0.5g as a % of 40g = 1.2%, 2.2g = 5.5% and 0.4g = 1%. Go figure that one :confused: