We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
After all, there is no doubt that eating less does keep one's body younger, more sexual, and more vigorous, and, as with sleep, the older you get the less food you need. For women, there is a definite connection between weight, insulin-resistance, and breast cancer too.
Works for me. I have not finished a meal in a restaurant for 20 years, and I never would. We prosperous, overweight Americans probably need to re-learn when enough is enough, to re-learn to identify the inborn sensation of satiety if we wish to be fit, strong, and light on our feet. Tasty and abundant food is wonderful, but we need very little of it to remain healthy unless we spend the day digging ditches with shovels.
Carbs? I only touch them on weekends, and in small amounts even if we do daily work-outs and plenty of recreational sports. No, I am far from being anorectic, but I will never leave my muscular Size 6 Tall.
It's not all that much about grim "self-control" as it is about identifying the point at which hunger is alleviated. It doesn't take much food to do that. Unless you're a growing kid, amazingly little. A small handful of almonds or olives will do it. The best, tastiest restaurants serve the tiniest portions for good reason. You pay for the flavor and the quality, not for volume.
In the Western world, and increasingly everywhere on earth, prosperity and food abundance make it possible for every day to become a secular Feast Day of some sort, making the sensation of satiety fade into the background. Still, being able to identify satiety is a more general theme, whether in possessions, substances, money, love, food, etc. I should expand on the topic here, someday. Not at Christmastime, though, when saturnalian greed and self-indulgence were somehow added to the Roman Mass and Feast Day of the Nativity of Christ. I blame those three wise men for that, even though I'm sure they meant well.
In the end, I believe that what we are insatiable for, if we feel insatiable, is for relationship with God. We displace that hunger elsewhere, into the fun and easy stuff. I guess it's all good, but not great.
i find it amazing how an article about nothing (probably "how to properly piss or shit" would also be a hit- see southpark) can elicit so many zealous(t) responses. I am not interested in anyone elses eating habits, nor do I much care for other people being interested in mine. Especially with some ideology attached to it. How should "we" eat? Can you feel the mental illness behind this statement? And off we go to find "the diet"
I always finish my restaurant meals, and am very pleased with the results. I add a bottle of red wine as well. I have only a wage idea of my "size". You can be fat, thin, "muscular" 6, neither are particularly "virtuos", nor a lasting condition.
weight-insulin resistance (another quack term)-cancer correlation does not neccessarily correlate with how much you eat, nor does correlation mean causation.
I am rather sceptical about this report, that is, I do not find it worthy of consideration.
as for the "objective text":
The following 2 paragraphs alone contain a multitude of conflicting statements
"You have to be skeptical about any report, but this is worth consideration.
After all, there is no doubt that eating less does keep one's body younger, more sexual, and more vigorous, and, as with sleep, the older you get the less food you need. For women, there is a definite connection between weight, insulin-resistance, and breast cancer too."
its nothing but pure marketing through direct suggestion (keeps the body "sexual"... I just have to laugh, it doesnt even mean anything). as for the "report" itself, well, it is blatantly inaccurate and utterly unscientific. Eating "less" (than what?)
not to mention it goes directly along the lines of UNs "fight against obesity". I call this entire sight a complete load of leftist marketing bullshit, aimed at "religious-conservative" target group.