3 Vs 4

[fatpossum]

Why is it that LL allows 4 packs a day(regardless of height) whereas CD allows only 3 for shorta**ses like me?

I have checked the calories and there is little in it i.e. the difference between four LL packs and 4 CD packs is very little and so adding another CD pack would be neither here nor there - and still allow for excellent weight losses.

The fact that SS+ is an option further confuses me. Why is we are allowed to have 3 packs + a small meal but not an extra pack? I would prefer this - I am not keen to mix packs and food - it can be the thin (unintentional pun) end of the wedge.

I like to stick to SS but it is hard when there are only three packs a day - I have one in the morning (about 7.30p.m.) and then another (about 6.00p.m. after work) and the last around 10.00p.m. (I really look forward to that one).

If I have to miss out one the lunch time one is easiest for me - my days are frenetic and so that's the one I would miss least (even before CD I seldom ate during the working day - except for the 4.00p.m. stress-induced raid on the tea fund biscuit barrell!! ).

It would be nice to be able to have a pack for breakfast, then one for lunch, then one for dinner and the final one for supper. That's how it is on LL.

Anyone know what the rationale is?

Could it be linked to cost? i.e. it allows CD to be even more competitive in the VLCD stakes.

 

[passionflower]

Sorry I cannot tell you as i am new to this as well, but what I can tell is that is not recomended that you eat anythign after 8pm and that is not while on a diet that is as a rule and to do with health reasons.

 

[Luci-De-Milo]

Why is it that LL allows 4 packs a day(regardless of height) whereas CD allows only 3 for shorta**ses like me?

I have checked the calories and there is little in it i.e. the difference between four LL packs and 4 CD packs is very little and so adding another CD pack would be neither here nor there - and still allow for excellent weight losses.

The fact that SS+ is an option further confuses me. Why is we are allowed to have 3 packs + a small meal but not an extra pack? I would prefer this - I am not keen to mix packs and food - it can be the thin (unintentional pun) end of the wedge.

I like to stick to SS but it is hard when there are only three packs a day - I have one in the morning (about 7.30p.m.) and then another (about 6.00p.m. after work) and the last around 10.00p.m. (I really look forward to that one).

If I have to miss out one the lunch time one is easiest for me - my days are frenetic and so that's the one I would miss least (even before CD I seldom ate during the working day - except for the 4.00p.m. stress-induced raid on the tea fund biscuit barrell!! ).

It would be nice to be able to have a pack for breakfast, then one for lunch, then one for dinner and the final one for supper. That's how it is on LL.

Anyone know what the rationale is?

Could it be linked to cost? i.e. it allows CD to be even more competitive in the VLCD stakes.

You can have 4 packs a day with SS+.

SS+ has two options; three packs with a 200kcal small meal, or 4 packs with 200ml skimmed milk.

As for the reason why CD gives less packs to us shorties, it is to do with calorific/carb content as far as I know. Ask a CDc on here, they'll be able to help you xx

 

[JaxieD]

Why is it that LL allows 4 packs a day(regardless of height) whereas CD allows only 3 for shorta**ses like me?

I have checked the calories and there is little in it i.e. the difference between four LL packs and 4 CD packs is very little and so adding another CD pack would be neither here nor there - and still allow for excellent weight losses.

The fact that SS+ is an option further confuses me. Why is we are allowed to have 3 packs + a small meal but not an extra pack? I would prefer this - I am not keen to mix packs and food - it can be the thin (unintentional pun) end of the wedge.

I like to stick to SS but it is hard when there are only three packs a day - I have one in the morning (about 7.30p.m.) and then another (about 6.00p.m. after work) and the last around 10.00p.m. (I really look forward to that one).

If I have to miss out one the lunch time one is easiest for me - my days are frenetic and so that's the one I would miss least (even before CD I seldom ate during the working day - except for the 4.00p.m. stress-induced raid on the tea fund biscuit barrell!! ).

It would be nice to be able to have a pack for breakfast, then one for lunch, then one for dinner and the final one for supper. That's how it is on LL.

Anyone know what the rationale is?

Could it be linked to cost? i.e. it allows CD to be even more competitive in the VLCD stakes.

Hi Fatpossum,

SS+ allows you to have either 3 packs per day (4 if over 5'8 or male) and 200kcals green and white meal OR 4 packs PLUS 200mls skimmed milk.

It is personal choice - obviously the 4 packs per day is more expensive but the weight loss from both SS and SS+ is more or less the same.

Hope that helps

 

[fatandfedup]

or you could try splitting one of your packs into 2 so that u do get 4. i split all my pascks and have 6 instead of 3 i find this easier.

 

[polishrose]

I second the splitting packs idea I always split my soup packs-I have the soup in a mug and half a pack is just right.

 

[Caz]

Basically, it's not that you get less, it's that us tallies get more. It isn't based on the calories etc. 3 packs a day has everything that you need with your height, all the vitamins, nutrients etc. 3 a day while they still have enough calories for us tallies, they don't have enough vitamins and nutrients, which is why we need the extra pack.

 

[KD]

Why is it that LL allows 4 packs a day(regardless of height) whereas CD allows only 3 for shorta**ses like me?

I have checked the calories and there is little in it i.e. the difference between four LL packs and 4 CD packs is very little and so adding another CD pack would be neither here nor there - and still allow for excellent weight losses.

The fact that SS+ is an option further confuses me. Why is we are allowed to have 3 packs + a small meal but not an extra pack? I would prefer this - I am not keen to mix packs and food - it can be the thin (unintentional pun) end of the wedge.

I like to stick to SS but it is hard when there are only three packs a day - I have one in the morning (about 7.30p.m.) and then another (about 6.00p.m. after work) and the last around 10.00p.m. (I really look forward to that one).

If I have to miss out one the lunch time one is easiest for me - my days are frenetic and so that's the one I would miss least (even before CD I seldom ate during the working day - except for the 4.00p.m. stress-induced raid on the tea fund biscuit barrell!! ).

It would be nice to be able to have a pack for breakfast, then one for lunch, then one for dinner and the final one for supper. That's how it is on LL.

Anyone know what the rationale is?

Could it be linked to cost? i.e. it allows CD to be even more competitive in the VLCD stakes.

LL used to be 3 packs, but when they did a mass shake up (excuse the pun), they changed it to 4, added some 'extras' (ie DVDs to watch at the meeting) and almost doubled the weekly price.

I may be wrong, but I think the 'new' packs have less in them, so they probably still added up to the same in terms of nutrients, calories etc.

As others have said, you can still split the cambridge ones (I always did), and of course, there's SS+ which will give you an extra pack :clap:

 

[KD]

Sorry I cannot tell you as i am new to this as well, but what I can tell is that is not recomended that you eat anythign after 8pm and that is not while on a diet that is as a rule and to do with health reasons.

This really is a myth. There is no reason why you can't have your shake at 2 o'clock in the morning if you so wish.

 

[passionflower]

Oh I have a few GP's in the family and they unanimously said that is not healthy eating after 8pm.

 

[KD]

Oh I have a few GP's in the family and they unanimously said that is not healthy eating after 8pm.

Well, since GPS aren't really trained in nutrition, that doesn't mean much. I am surprised that they would give advice such as this without checking facts.

Do they happen to give a reason for why the body suddenly decides it knows the exact time?

 

[tillyfloss]

hiya PF, just curious as to their reason for this?
I must admit I always heard it wasnt healthy to eat big carb laiden meals late, but am curious as to what they say?

x

 

[fatpossum]

The whole 'don't eat late unless you want to be fat' debate is longstanding.

There are those who say that eating late results in fat being stored in the body and those who say it doesn't really matter when you eat, it's the total daily calorie intake and output which matters.

I am in camp number two.

I too have my last pack late at night - I look forward to it. Can't say its done me any harm. Indeed I would say it leaves me feeling full (relatively speaking!! ) before I go to bed.

 

[passionflower]

It has nothing to do with getting fat if you eat after 8pm, is to do with the fact that it takes about 2 hours for food to travel through the digestive system, by not eating 2-3 hours before going to sleep you avoid having heart burn something to do with some valves that produce the active gasses getting weaker as you get older.
I have also found this little bit on a different site.
The reason for not eating dinner or a snack after 8:00pm is quite simple. The body is made up of many different types of chemicals which help digest food and sleep. Like a car needing gas to continue to move, our bodies are scheduled like a machine. From 8:00 at night, our bodies begin to produce the chemicals of insulin and glucagons, as well as melatonin. All these chemicals are being produced to encourage and help sleep.
By eating during the time of the production of the sleep helping chemicals, our body doesn't know what to do and has to switch back into producing the daytime chemicals.

 

[KD]

The whole 'don't eat late unless you want to be fat' debate is longstanding.

I remember there has been debate, but gosh, it was dispelled ages ago. Can't remember who started it, but think it was some juicing company or something.

Loads of published research has said otherwise, so thought that the majority had put that myth behind them.

Here's a pretty good one, but I'm sure there's a lot on pubmed (just can't be bothered to search )

[FONT=Verdana,Arial][FONT=Verdana,Arial]"This suggests that calories cause weight gain no matter when you eat them."[/FONT][/FONT]

OHSU News - OHSU Scientists Dispel Late-Night Eating/Weight Gain Myth

 

[KD]

It has nothing to do with getting fat if you eat after 8pm,

But that article, on that blog is entitled

Stopping Eating after 8 p.m. Will Help Weight Loss



Which has been proved to be a load of tosh.

 

[passionflower]

Which has been proved to be a load of tosh.

Gosh I certainly feel bad about your harshness in your reply I dont think is at all needed, all I have done was simply state the reasons I have been told is best to avoid eating late, and while I couldn't remenber all the other benefits for this I came across that site doing a quick search and found that bit of info. I shall be more carefull in the future of posting any info like that and just join in the small happy chat, will leave the important bits to those that are so obviously more qualified.

 

[KD]

Gosh I certainly feel bad about your harshness in your reply I dont think is at all needed, all I have done was simply state the reasons I have been told is best to avoid eating late, and while I couldn't remenber all the other benefits for this I came across that site doing a quick search and found that bit of info. I shall be more carefull in the future of posting any info like that and just join in the small happy chat, will leave the important bits to those that are so obviously more qualified.

I was just pointing out that the article you posted, which you said was nothing to do with weight...just happened to be an article about weight

Didn't mean to sound harsh. The article just happened to be a load of tosh. I assume you didn't write it, so please don't take it personally.

 

[passionflower]

That was the reason I only copied what I THOUGHT was interesting info regarding this, while not making any claims. Oh and after years of evolution our bodies know very well the time of day.

 

[tillyfloss]

Hiya PF,
I am sure that KD really didn't mean to upset you (and that she doesn't need me to defend her )
i think the problem arises (and it's one of my personal bug bears ) is that on here we all bring lots and lots of information to the 'table' sometimes, when it is put over as fact, as in your case you tell us that you have had this information from several GP's many people will just take the information as fact, and not question it. In a few weeks another post will appear where 'the facts' as they have now solidly become, will appear again.Its sometimes like Chinese whispers, information can and does get taken out of context and it can be really confusing for all of us trying to choose the right information. For me eating a big meal late at night does give me heart burn, but I was interested why professionals stated that it is unhealthy.
I hear what you are saying about Melatonin, but having a daughter who has synthesised melatonin as she doesn't produce her own, I didn't know about insulin production preventing melatonin production. (Also Insulin is produced everytime a carbohydrate meal is consumed, not just at night, other wise those who eat heavily sugar laden meals would be hyperglycaemic by the time 8pm came along) Glucagon is then produced to counteract the effect of the insulin that is often over produced (it's a balancing act that goes on in the body all the time as far as I know) Its this mechanism that often causes cravings.
Also many people actually get very sleepy after a meal and many people on here report not being able to sleep unless they have a meal before bed, as going to bed hungry can keep some people awake soon.
Again,
I think it's a case that somewhere out there, there will be solid research on this subject, but I would be loathe to take the word of a GP who often have to be "jack of all trades and masters of little", this was a quote from my own GP btw (who was telling me that sometimes they just can't keep up with current research because of their huge workloads) not a slight on your family

x