Hacker News Reader

Comment by 2-718-281-828 | Hacker News Reader

It is interesting that we - according to science - need less food than we think. I can't find a good primary source but supposedly feeling a little hungry after a meal is good for you. And we definitely are conditioned by advertisement and food corps to eat more than we need to. I remember advice about managing your blood sugar by constantly snacking. Also this 1g proteins per kg body weight is pretty exaggerated. I'm currently at the beginning of a 36 hour fast. I'm doing that about every two to three weeks. It does feel good. But yes, I'm hungry. Then again - life is short and eating should be enjoyed.

View on HN

I’m trying to lose weight again, and it’s obvious there’s a few different levels to hunger:

- I could eat something, but I’m good right now <- this should probably be what I feel like most of the day

- Feeling hangry, don’t piss me off!! <- this means I’m probably about to cheat

- Feeling dizzy and lightheaded <- I f*cked up and I should’ve been eating more

Feeling hangry is likely more about blood sugar than lack of calories.

It seems like this should be true, but is it really? It should be easy to test, just do the finger stick when you are hungry and see what your blood sugar measures at that time.

I recently tried to decrease my calorie consumption, improve portion control, and eat better foods[1]. I was surprised to find how much of my desire to eat stemmed from boredom. Especially since I'd traditionally considered myself someone who didn't care about food much.[2]

[1] I ended up mostly abandoning the decreased calorie consumption; however, I've maintained the portion control and better quality foods.

[2] Looking at it now, I think it might actually be: I don't care as much about eating specific foods that I crave. However, I care a lot about being able to eat foods that I at least somewhat like whenever I want. So I found switching to more healthy foods relatively easy; however, I found cutting out sweet foods completely or eliminating snacking very difficult.

> according to science ... I can't find a good primary source but supposedly

Thanks for the insight

according to science was specifically regarding serving sizes. that's what the article is about. it's drawing its motivation from official US government health institutions which I would assume (hope) are run by scientists at least with regard to those recommendations.

no source is regarding the you should feel hungry. but then again this follows from this article as a corollary.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK555906/

That ancient wisdom from many societies. Hindu Ayurvedic advise to eat slowly until satisfied not full.

Hindu Ayurvedic definitely didn't need to piss in the bottles to not to be fired while enjoying the privilege of working for the greater good of the man[0] in the most democratic country of all countries.

[0] and we even know the name of than man

What exactly are you ranting about? What connection your statement has with Ayurveda?

It's amusing what it needs to be spoken out, but ancient wisdom isn't applicable for the current times - they are different.

I wonder if that applies to people who are trying to build muscle and/or increase athletic performance? In those cases it seems like one would need to eat significantly more than what a lot of those sorts of studies/diets seem to recommend.

We are conditioned by millions of years of evolution to eat more than we need to.

yes - because of consistently experienced scarcity of high caloric nutrition back in the days. so when you got the chance you should eat as much as you can. but now with supermarkets and fridges this ancient programming is harmful and hence those recommended serving sizes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com