Originally Posted by billyymc
The diet soda thing makes sense...not a causal thing, but I'd imagine consumption of soda goes along with consumption of junk.
But any thougts about why the oatmeal? A half cup of rolled oats (uncooked) has only 150 calories. I eat it at least five days a week, either for breakfast or lunch. I usually add a few almonds and a few dried cherries or raisins. Def hasn't caused me to gain weight. Maybe it's an over compensation thing....people feel like if they deny themselves in the morning by eating oatmeal instead of bacon and eggs, they can gorge later?
With diet soda there is a chemical reaction, as well as the psychological one.
With oatmeal it is a perception, and hunger feeling. I'm looking for the actual article that says it, I'll post it when I find it.
I believe that oatmeal is a good health food, if you can control yourself and the rest of your diet.
Thanks for calling this out! I have a bad tendency to say something and leave it hanging there!
This article gets to the same sort of conclusion with Snackwell Cookies.
There have been studies to show rapid short-term weight loss, studies by Samaha, Foster, Yancey, and Stern, and a comparable study in an adolescent population by Sondike. But these studies are all about restricting food choice, restricting calories and weight loss in the short term. We have no evidence that we're on a path towards sustainable dietary change. We do, in fact, have evidence to the contrary.
We focused exclusively on cutting fat more than a decade ago. Rather than emphasizing the consumption of health-promoting foods conducive to lifelong weight control, we had a rapid proliferation of low-fat, high-calorie, low-nutrient junk foods, epitomized by Snackwell cookies. The population essentially assumed that we could all eat Snackwell cookies until they came out our ears, and since they were low-fat, our weight would improve.
Well, of course, just the opposite occurred. Our calorie intake went up, and so did our weight.