Thread: 7,000 animals?
View Single Post
 
Old 03-29-2015, 08:01 AM
dbussone's Avatar
dbussone dbussone is offline
Sage
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 7,833
Thanks: 0
Thanked 86 Times in 78 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo2012 View Post
Here's a read I found on moderation, what do you think?

The problem is, moderation works for very few people.

You know this to be true. You’ve tried it countless times. (And if it actually worked for you long-term, you wouldn’t need any more diet advice, would you?)

For those who don’t have a health condition or food sensitivities, you may feel even more pressure (or desire) to “moderate” instead of deprive yourself—but there are perils associated with this dietary concept for you, too.
The biggest problem with moderation is that it relies on willpower. And given what we know about willpower, and the kinds of foods that are tempting us day in and day out, “everything in moderations” is a long-term losing proposition.

The kinds of foods we are attempting to moderate— “foods with no brakes.” These are calorie-dense, carb-dense, nutrient-poor foods designed by food scientists to make you crave them, without any of the nutrition or satiety factors that tells your brain to stop eating them. They rewire pleasure, reward, and emotion circuitry in your brain, creating habit loops that are near impossible to break with sheer willpower. Stress—any kind of stress—makes these cravings and habits stronger. And the kicker? These same foods also mess with hormones like leptin and insulin, creating metabolic imbalances that further promote cravings and hunger such that no amount of willpower can overrule them. (Hormones >willpower.)

The very concept of “moderation” is intangible—so fluffy as to be meaningless. Does it mean you only eat one cookie at a time, or cookies once a week, or just one bite of cookie a few times a day? The truth is, most of us haven’t take the time to map out exactly, specifically what “moderation” means to us. Even if we did, the “moderation” would probably creep when it suited our needs. (It’s easy to justify that second glass of wine when the bottle is open and you hate to waste it.)

We also like to negotiate with ourselves when we’ve set less-than-firm goals… “I’ll have two glasses tonight, but none tomorrow.” But what happens tomorrow? We are creatures of instant gratification, quickly discounting future benefits in favor of immediate payoff—which means tomorrow usually finds us justifying that one glass of wine yet again. Or one potato chip?

Habit research shows that black-and-white goals—without any room for interpretation, justification, or negotiation—are far easier to meet than squishy goals. “I will eat less sugar,” “I will exercise more,” “Everything in moderation”… all examples of squishy goals with loads of room for us to bend them to our will and desire.

.

Everything in moderation - works for me ...and my genetic background. Try it, you might like it.
__________________
All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope.
Winston Churchill