Jul 02, 2008 12:11
I'm not exactly dieting, but I am reducing my calorie consumption, hopefully in a permanent way. I'm pretty much having two rigorous meals of about 400 calories, and then one meal where I can go to town and rock up to 1200 without having to worry about it. It's worked okay for the last few days, and the one decadent-ish meal a day helps to keep me from flipping the hell out, because homegirl loves to eat, and eat a lot. (That meal really should be breakfast in terms of assisting my metabolism, but I'm just not that hungry in the mornings, and a half cup of dry cereal, half cup of nonfat yogurt, a piece of fruit, and a cup of tea is actually a struggle to get through. Instead, I exercise pretty hard for 15 minutes as soon as I get out of bed in the morning.)
Anyway, here's my comment-fishing question for ya, and I want some spirited-to-the-point-of-vicious debate on the topic:
If there is no healthy food option, it better to eat something kinda (or very) unhealthy, or to just skip the meal? Or two? Or three? (There have been times when there were just no healthy food options around me... visiting family and being far away from any grocery stores, attending college when PFM was the food service, Great Britain, etc.) What's the limit?
Discuss! (Just kidding on the UK. But actually not really. I just had very bad luck both times I was there. Unhealthy AND gross. Bakewell tarts? What the hell, you guys?)
health,
comment fishing,
food