HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: liana@nexus.yorku.ca (Liana Simons)
Subject: Cesear Salad Dressing
Organization: York University, CS Dept. Toronto
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:15:00 GMT

I was watching a TO based show on diets and fitness today and they had
a Cesear Salad recipe.  I know the cal per person is 121 but I didn't
write down the grams fat (maybe 4).

Serves 8 people

romaine lettuce
Dressing:

	In a food processor combine the following ingredients:

	1/2 cup low fat cottage cheese (try .5%)
	1 Anchovey
	2 Tbsp water
	2 Tbsp skim milk
	2 Tbsp good olive oil
	2 Tbsp lemon juice (fresh)
	2 Tbsp Parmasian (sp) cheese
	1 clove crushed garlic.
	fresh ground pepper.

	Process until fine, if too thick add water.

Croutons:
	
	cut up one slice of bread and bake at 250 for 10 min.

Mix everything together and enjoy.  One thing that they did mention was that
your typical cesear salad that you get anywhere could be as high as 900 cal.
When I get my new copy of Diet Pro I'll put this through and find out
how much fat is in it.

Liana
a	
Newsgroups: alt.support.diet
From: npm@dale.cts.com (Nancy Milligan)
Subject: Re: Snack foods
Organization: Titan Linkabit Corporation
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 18:20:54 GMT

I'm a big fan of the baked tortilla chips you can find now.  I served them
along with some fat-free bean dip at a part recently and you should've
heard my guests exclaiming over it!  


--
Nancy P. Milligan 				npm@dale.cts.com
Titan Linkabit					cts!dale!npm
3033 Science Park Road
San Diego, CA 92121
Newsgroups: alt.support.diet
From: jessica@wrs.com (Jessica Hart)
Subject: Salad Bars
Followup-To: alt.support.diet
Summary: Watch Out!
Organization: Wind River Systems, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:43:39 GMT


Several folks have posted saying saladbars at Shoney's and such
are a diet lifesaver. They are but only if used with caution. I guess
you all are probably already aware of this. Out here where I live we
have a place called "Fresh Choice" that actually offers nonfat salads
MARKED AS SUCH! And nonfat (or rather, 98% nonfat) muffins. It's nice
to know they have been thinking about food the same way I would if
I was cooking it. So often I ask what the ingredients in something are,
only to get a rather incomplete list (they forget to mention the
onions were sauteed in oil, for example).

I guess we nonfat eaters are the new "weird diet people" now that
vegetarianism is pretty well accepted.


Newsgroups: alt.support.diet
From: gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu (Gopal Agrawal)
Subject: Re: Diet Methods
Organization: Computer Science Department, Texas A&M University
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 02:50:14 GMT

In article <16896DE56.MOSTERBE@cmsa.gmr.com> MOSTERBE@cmsa.gmr.com writes:
>Have any of you tried the Deal-a-Meal Plan by Richards Simmons?  Did you have
>success?  I recently started the Plan and have lost 10 lbs. in 3weeks!!

Isn't a loss of more than 2 pounds a week considered dangerous ?

regards,
--   
   ______ ______ ______ ______ __  |\/\/\/|
    ____/  __  /  __  /  __  /  /  |  \  /|  LIFE's COMPLEX - IT HAS
   / __   /   /  /   /  /   /  /   | (o)(o)  REAL & IMAGINARY PARTS.
  /   /  /   /   ___/  __  /  /    C      _) 
_____/ _____/ __/   __/ __/ ______/ | \___|  
E-mail - gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu       |   /   All Std. Disclaimers apply.

Newsgroups: alt.support.diet
From: lkoch@troy.hssc.ksc.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: Help with Pumpkin Muffins Receipe
Organization: NASA
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 14:19:30 GMT

In article <27371@oasys.dt.navy.mil> dudley@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Karen  
Witkoski) writes:
> I tried to email Linda M. Koch, who posted a wonderful receipe for  
pumpkin
> muffins, but my email was returned from the postmaster.  So Linda, if
> you see this post please email me @   dudley@oasys.dt.navy.mil, or post
> on this newsgroup.
> 
> I tried to make pumpkin muffins according to Linda's receipe but my
> muffins turned out too moist...almost uncooked.  I baked them for as
> long as I could without burning them.  The tope was done, but the inside
> and bottom were raw.  This is Linda's receipe.
> 
> PUMPKIN MUFFINS
> 
> 2/3 c. nonfat milk (powdered milk)  (USE ONLY THE DRY POWDER -- DON'T  
ADD WATER!)
> 6 T. flour
> 2 tsp. pumpkin pie spice
> 1 tsp. cinnamon
> 1 tsp. baking soda
> 1/3 c. brown sugar substitute
> 1 tsp. vanilla
> 2 eggs (or equivalent egg substitute)
> 1 c. pumpkin
> 1/2 c. grated carrots
> 4 T. raisins or 1 c. applesauce
> 
> 
> Mix all together.  Place in (pam) sprayed muffin pans.  Bake in 350
> degree F oven about 18-20 minutes (may need to be longer when using
> applesauce option).
> 
> I think my mistake was to take to nonfat powdered milk and add to water
> to make 2/3 cup.  Please let me know what I did wrong.  They smelled
> great and the tops tasted good.  But I couldn't serve them to anyone.
> Please help me.  I'd love to make these for Thanksgiving.
> 

Right!  The 2/3 cup is the powdered milk measurement -- do NOT add water.   
The muffins are moist to begin with, so I can understand on pudding like  
they must have come out with.

Linda
Newsgroups: alt.support.diet
From: jbyrd@chpc.utexas.edu (Jan Byrd)
Subject: Re: Snack foods
Organization: Center for High Performance Computing, Univ. of Texas System
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 16:36:48 GMT

|> In article <BxB4Aw.5oB@dale.cts.com> npm@dale.cts.com (Nancy Milligan) writes:
>I'm a big fan of the baked tortilla chips you can find now.  I served them
>along with some fat-free bean dip at a part recently and you should've
>heard my guests exclaiming over it!  

I haven't investigated these chips at all, but I remember seeing a recipe
in a magazine for baked tortilla chips that went something like this:

    - cut corn torillas into fourths
    - arrange on a cookie sheet
    - POUR OIL ALL OVER THEM   [my own emphasis added here]
    - bake

It was then that I got the impression that "baked, not fried" doesn't
ALWAYS mean "nonfat", and in some cases it could be a manufacturer's
clever way of deceiving the public into thinking the product is fat-free.

You still need to read the labels (list of ingredients and the nutrient 
breakdown) to be sure.

Jan
Newsgroups: alt.support.diet
From: mazur@inmet.camb.inmet.com (Beth Mazur)
Subject: Re: Oprah Show on Food Compulsions
Organization: Intermetrics Inc, Cambridge MA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 23:22:35 GMT

In <BxMH0w.31r@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> molnar@Bisco.CAnet.CA (Tom Molnar) writes:
>I wish I could figure out why it is I overeat.  I don't seem to fit any of
>the models. 

And so we come back, full circle, to the Rational Recovery theory.  
Given that, as they say, we have "considerable control over our facial
and limb muscles" and we overeat in spite of our expressed desire to
either a) lose weight or b) not overeat, they suggest that it is our 
inability to face "deprivation" (e.g., only half a box of donuts) or 
"hunger" that causes this.

In other words, CO-types are unable to tolerate intense "feelings"--and
sometimes those feelings are related, not to one's childhood, but to
the eating situation itself!

Men, of course, do not figure very prominently in eating disorder 
literature.  It is possible that this is because heavier men are not
subject to the same guilt complexes about their appearance that women
are, so they tend to not get so obsessed about eating.  Perhaps more
men overeat just because they like to.

And the reality is that not all overweight, or even overeaters, are 
compulsive.  As one of Oprah's guests described "we're a secret society,
but we recognize each other."  And one of the membership rules is 
essentially "overeat fast in private."  As Lauren suggests (and as
Geneen Roth commented on Oprah), tasting and/or enjoying the food 
rarely fits into it.  But that doesn't mean the binge is not food
related (i.e., take a compulsive overeater past a cinnamon roll shop
and I'll bet you money you've just set off a binge).

Beth Mazur                   "...life is more than a vision.  The sweetest
mazur@inmet.inmet.com         part is acting after making a decision."
...!uunet!inmet!mazur                                  -- The Indigo Girls
From: rfelix@netcom.com (Robbie Felix)
Newsgroups: alt.support.diet
Subject: Re: Diet Methods
Date: 8 Nov 92 16:38:25 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Nov7.220053.1@vms.ocom.okstate.edu> churchwell@vms.ocom.okstate.edu (Kimberly B. Churchwell) writes:

>foods that I wouldn't normally order by themselves.  The Shoneys
>restaurants in our area, for example, offer a seafood buffet on Friday
>and Saturday evenings.  I can fill up on salad, baked fish and low-cal
>veggies, and still enjoy a piece or two of the deep-fried shrimp or
>catfish. 
Hi Kimberly!

A few years ago ( right after losing 15 pounds), I took a few months
off and traveled around the country. I was driving, worried that
between sitting on my butt for long periods in the car *and*
restaurant food, I was going to be back to ground zero at the end of
the trip!

I also found Shoney's ( in a pretty substantial portion of the
country) and ate at their salad bar/buffet almost everyday for a few
weeks. Because I am also vegetarian, it was the perfect solution to a
low-calorie,low-fat, vegetarian's needs! 

I piled my plate with salad and veggies.

Between the salad bar approach to food and running 5 miles every day,
I came home weighing *less* than when I left. It was truly a
miracle!!!

rf


>-- 
>Kimberly B. Churchwell, Prog./Analyst, Okla. State U.  | TANSTAAFL, but
>Osteopathic College--churchwell@vms.ocom.okstate.edu   | even so, I never
>BIX--kchurchwell  AOL--KChurchwel  CIS--72170,1552     | quit hoping.
From: MOSTERBE@cmsa.gmr.com
Newsgroups: alt.support.diet
Subject: Re: Diet Methods
Date: 9 Nov 92 19:39:23 GMT
Organization: GM Research Labs

In article <1992Nov7.025014.16979@tamsun.tamu.edu>
gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu (Gopal Agrawal) writes:

>
>In article <16896DE56.MOSTERBE@cmsa.gmr.com> MOSTERBE@cmsa.gmr.com writes:
>>Have any of you tried the Deal-a-Meal Plan by Richards Simmons?  Did you have
>>success?  I recently started the Plan and have lost 10 lbs. in 3weeks!!
>
>Isn't a loss of more than 2 pounds a week considered dangerous ?
>
>regards,
I don't think it's dangerous at the beginning of a diet because your food
habits change so dramatically the first weeks losses are the most.  After that
it tapers off to  1 1/2 to 2 lbs. a week.  I've seen people at WeightWatchers
lose 8 lbs. the first week!  You don't want to lose weight to quickly because
you'll just put it back on.  I feel good and my clothes fit so much better
already.  This group is a great help.  It's nice to share our success/failures
with people who KNOW what we're talking about.  I especially loved the thread
about the horror of clothes shopping.  I can certainly relate to that.  The
major stores cater to very small women!  They need to redo their standards
because the percentage of women who wear those sizes is not a majority!
Thought for the day, "What you eat in private, you wear in public".
Maureen
From: crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford)
Newsgroups: alt.support.diet
Subject: Two whole weeks
Date: 9 Nov 92 16:25:44 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

Just what the subject line says.  For two weeks, I haven't been
overeating.  It was a little harder this past weekend; lots of
opportunities to overeat socially.  But I'm trying to see this as a
lifetime thing, not a diet thing; as long as I stick with the new eating
overall, I'll be fine.  No failures.  No "breaking" the diet.  Just
consciously chipping away at a lifetime of abusing food and eating for
crazy reasons.

The foot is getting better; thanks to everyone for the exercise advice. 
I've decided to go the route of "butt-disco."  Put on funky music, sit on
my butt, and flail my arms and legs around to the beat.  8-)  

Oh, this past weekend my SO and I burned my high heels.  I'd been hacking
them up with scissors over the past few weeks (it was the high heels that
messed up the foot) to burn off some frustration.  Watching them burst
into flame in the fireplace was soooooo gratifying.


-- 
The trick of reason is to get the imagination to seize the actual world --
if only from time to time.     -- Annie Dillard, "An American Childhood"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lauren Crawford  //  crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu
From: abel@vax.sonoma.edu
Newsgroups: alt.support.diet
Subject: Re: THERMOJETICS
Date: 6 Nov 92 17:19:03 GMT
Organization: Sonoma State University

In article <9200@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>, jsl+@pitt.edu (John S Lundberg) writes:
> In article <Bx9yzD.n2G@news.cso.uiuc.edu> tww40334@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Tom Wentworth) writes:
>>Do you need to lose weight or do you want to keep weight off that you've
>>already lost?    Here is the solution:   Thermojectics, a brand new 
>>weight loss product (approved by the F.D.A.) is now here.
>>It is in tablet form and works by increasing your body's metabolism, which 
>>allows you to burn fat even while doing nothing.   
> 
> Nothing?  Ya mean like if you've died?  And HOW, pray tell, do "herbs"
> increase one's metabolism?

NoDoz tablets contain caffeine, the same stuff that is in tea.  If 
you drank a lot of tea or coffee, or consumed NoDoz tablets, your 
activity level would increase (at least mine does) and you would 
spend less time at the lowest energy level (you won't be able to 
sleep).  I have no idea what is in Thermojectics, but it sounds like 
a bad idea to me.  If you want to use drugs to lose weight, why not 
talk to your doctor?
> 
>>You can consume up to 1800 calories a day and still lose weight.  
> 
> I'd bet that this would be true for the majority of dieters even if
> "Thermojectics" were a placebo, so BFD.  
> 
I agree.  Anyone who increases their physical activity, whether by 
taking drugs or just consciously doing it, will be able to consume 
more calories because they are burning more calories.

[sales pitch and retort deleted]
From: rudi@igc.ethz.ch (Rudi van Drunen)
Newsgroups: alt.support.diet
Subject: weight-height relation
Date: 5 Nov 92 21:31:44 GMT
Reply-To: rudi@igc.ethz.ch
Followup-To: alt.support.diet
Organization: ETH, Zuerich

Hi !

I am curious what the 'good' weigth at a given length is, and how one
calculates this. There seems to be an index to be calculated from ones
height and weight which gives you a number which tells you how much over
or underweight you are. Does someone on th net know this formula, and 
the details on this ?

I want to know this as I want to loose some weight as told me by the
physician who checked my blood pressure and pulse. It was on the high side
and would be lowered if I lost weight I was told. 

Also  : Is there a proof of a relation between bodyweight and blood pressure
and resting pulse ? I'm 6 ft, and 230 lb.  My pulse is about 84 (rest)

Any comments wil be appriciated. Please use Email, as I don't read the news
that often

Rudi.  (rudi@igc.ethz.ch)
From: wvenable@algona.stats.adelaide.edu.au (Bill Venables)
Newsgroups: alt.support.diet
Subject: Re: Diet Methods
Date: 10 Nov 92 13:20:30
Organization: Department of Statistics, University of Adelaide
NNTP-Posting-Host: algona.stats.adelaide.edu.au
In-reply-to: gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu's message of Sat, 7 Nov 1992 02:50:14 GMT

It seems to me John Lundberg made by far the most sensible and practical
contribution on this thread, and I regret I didn't hang on to his remarks
while I had the chance.  The gist of it was that diet and other fat loss
methods *and* the regime norms and goals have to be particular to the
person.  Blanket rules are at best useless and sometimes downright
dangerous.

>>>>> "Gopal" == Gopal Agrawal <gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu> writes:

Gopal> Isn't a loss of more than 2 pounds a week considered dangerous ?

And the contention underlying this question is just the kind of thing I
mean.  How can one possibly give a sensible answer other than "maybe"?  Is
it really concievable that *any* particular weight loss per week is going
to be equally safe or dangerous for a person of, say 15 stone, and another
of 30?  Or for two people both of, say, 18 stone, but one a young 6'3" male
athlete in peak condition and the other a 5'4" morbidly obese older female?

It seems to me that if you need to undergo a rehabilitation programme of
any kind the onus is squarely on you to devise a safe, practical way to do
it, and to seek as much professional help as you need to do it properly.

How do these inane blanket global rules ever get started?  
--
___________________________________________________________________________
Bill Venables, Dept. of Statistics, | Email: venables@stats.adelaide.edu.au
Univ. of Adelaide, South Australia. | Tel: +61 8 228 5412  Fax: ...232 5670
From: mazur@inmet.camb.inmet.com (Beth Mazur)
Newsgroups: alt.support.diet
Subject: Re: Oprah Show on Food Compulsions
Date: 12 Nov 92 18:25:27 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Intermetrics Inc, Cambridge MA

In <1du26hINNl97@agate.berkeley.edu> mossman@sag1.ssl.berkeley.edu () writes:
>Thanks to some kind person here, I saw Oprah's show yesterday on food 
>compulsions. It was fantastic but TOO SHORT! It was partly a plug for 
>an author named Geneen Roth and her book, "When Food is Love" 

My only caveat about this show is that "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."
Even those of us who are lifetime compulsive overeaters (I am one) eat
sometimes just because food tastes good and is there.  In other words, not
every episode of overeating needs to be related to some feeling or
subconscious action.

In addition, I happen to believe that there is a physiological component
to binge eating that is related to blood sugar and insulin levels.  I'm
not sure how helpful it is for people to be thinking "I'm eating because
I can't deal with my sexuality" when it could very well be "I'm eating
because my insulin levels are sky-high and my brain is screaming at me
to eat."

But, as I said in the original note, I'm glad that compulsive overeating
is losing its reputation as Cinderella to anorexia and bulimarexia's step
sisters.  As somebody said, knowledge is power.  Frankly, I was amazed
that Oprah claims to have just recently become aware of the connection
between overeating and emotions.

Me?  I hate to say I'm past that, but five years of therapy didn't appear
to do much for my overeating (my mother says "it got you ready to give it
up"--yeah, like over a year and a half afterwards).  But its also possible
that I just wasn't willing to do the hard work that Roth asks people
to do.  And that's figuring out what eating is about when you aren't
hungry.  (Frankly, I'm finding that giving up sugar has helped me, in terms 
of eating behavior, far more than the therapy did.) 

So anyways, definitely check out Roth's book.  But if anything is true,
it is that we are all individuals, so Roth's pronouncement that "food
is love" may or may not be the case.  Sometimes it's just a box of donuts.

Beth Mazur                   "...life is more than a vision.  The sweetest
mazur@inmet.inmet.com         part is acting after making a decision."
...!uunet!inmet!mazur                                  -- The Indigo Girls
Newsgroups: alt.support.diet
From: mprisco@lynx.cat.syr.edu ()
Subject: Re: time of day
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 08:59:30 EST

Followup-To: 
Distribution: 
Organization: Syracuse University
Keywords: 

In article <1992Nov6.171326.24034@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> wensel@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Sharon Taylor) writes:
>Two comments:
>
>First of all, please change the "Subject:" field when
>you post a message with a new topic.  I'm tired of
>seeing the subject field
>"Re: Won't have Sex with a Fat Guy/Successful weight loss"
>
>Anyway, I wanted to comment on the following post:
>
>>I don't really believe the time of the day one eats matters all that much.
>>What does matter is the total amount of energy one takes in and the total
>>amount of energy one uses during the day. If you use more calories (by way
>>of excercise) than you get by eating, you will lose weight. Of course, 
>>if you cut back on your late-night meals, you will simply be cutting the
>>total amount you eat, and that will help. Unless you compensate for the
>>loss by having an extra pancake in the morning.
>
>I've found that the time of day I eat is extremely important.
>I am always less successful with my weight loss on the days when 
>my calorie consumption is concentrated at the end of the day
>(specifically, the evening).  Even if the total calorie count
>is exactly the same, I am more successful when most of my
>calories are consumed earlier in the day.
>
>I'm interested in what other people have experienced
>in terms of the time of day they eat most of their calories.
>
>/sharon
>(wensel@cory.berkeley.edu)

How do you measure this?  I mean, if you weigh yourself every 
morning, I'd guess you're likely to see a gain the later
you eat the night before.  I only suggest this because I always
have most of my calories from 6pm on.  	If I estimate the WW diet
(level II) at about 1200 calories, I'd say I have under 400 of these
during the day ( for WWer's that's 2B, 1FA, 1P, 1F).  Yet I've
had great success.  Of course I only weigh in once a week and its
before I consume most of my calories for that day.  I have to
believe that in the scheme of things, it doesn't really matter.
I mean, if I were eating more of my calories earlier, would I
have lost 80 lbs instead of 74 by now???

Margot



--
"I think we're passing through here kind of fast,
  Did you think these tracks in the dust can last? "
                                         - David Crosby
Newsgroups: alt.support.diet
From: mprisco@lynx.cat.syr.edu ()
Subject: Re: body image
Organization: Syracuse University
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 16:01:14 EST

In article <BxGr7B.G0D@dale.cts.com> npm@dale.cts.com (Nancy Milligan) writes:
>Cory Harper Jacques (cj14+@andrew.cmu.edu) wrote:
>> Any suggestions on buiding a positive body image? 
>
>That's really tough.  I think I'll always have a distorted body image.
>I lost 60 pounds and I will always see myself as kind of fat.  But
>give it some time.  My image got better as time went by.  I think
>some of the things that really helped were buying wonderful new clothes
>in teensy sizes and knowing that I looked spiff.  Also the complements
>from friends helped buoy my image.  But the minute I focus in on my
>(still) pudgy thighs or ripples of cellulite, the rest of my
>wonderful new body seems to pale in significance.

Oh boy..I've just been going through this lately.  I don't have
a full length mirror but was looking at myself in the shower
and ugh- seems like these 70 something pounds ahven't made any
difference at all!  Of course, the funny thing is after weighing
130lbs from ages 16-23 or so it took me a long time to feel
*fat* again.


>
>So often I think we look at the attribute we hate the most and base our
>entire self-image upon it.  I'll probably ALWAYS have some cellulite, and
>flabby thighs.  But I've also got this absurdly small waist and tiny
>wrists and rather nice arms and ...
>
>Also, make yourself more aware of how this new body FEELS and how it
>fits into space better.  I was jazzed that my butt and thighs no longer
>expand the entire width of the bathtub.  That I don't feel squashed into
>chairs, that I can easily crawl under my desk (if I have to).  And I 
>loved the way I could just launch myself off the ground, leap into the
>air, and skip and bounce and sprint.  I felt, at age 33, like a little
>kid in my new body. :)

This is so cool.  And true, I think.  But of course I have
a way to go yet until I'm where I want to be.  But its true
that I don't feel quite so earthbound as I did (literally-
now I can try hang gliding and maybe try for a private pilot's
license-things I'd never do 70+ lbs ago!)  but I still feel
alot of inertia when I think of going out and running...
>--
>Nancy P. Milligan 				npm@dale.cts.com
>Titan Linkabit					cts!dale!npm
>3033 Science Park Road
>San Diego, CA 92121

Margot


--
"I think we're passing through here kind of fast,
  Did you think these tracks in the dust would last? "
                                         - David Crosby
Newsgroups: alt.support.diet