• Upgrades have been completed! Including conversations, 😁😎🏀⚾⚽ Emojis and more.. Read more



don't understand

Chipmunk89

but you can call me Toni!
Because you're filling yourself up with foods that have less calories :)
 

shelleylovesjelly

Full Member
Superfree food have fewer calories than other foods, and may even by calorie negative (you burn more calories digesting them than are actually in the food), so bulking up a third of your meal with these means you can have a big plate full of food that isn't too high in calories.
 

kingleds

Gold Member
You're supposed to eat the superfree instead of other foods, so you shouldn't be having a bigger plate of food. If you think about a spag bol pre SW, it would have only had some tomatoes & onions in it, the rest is mince, probably 80%, meaning your meal was nearly all protein & carbs.
Now a greater proportion would be peppers, mushrooms, onions, etc, a lower proportion would be mince, maybe 50%. Add in a average sized portion of pasta, and you're eating your 1/3rd superfree. If you aren't sure if there's enough superfree in your meal, have some more on the plate - instead of pasta. This also means your pack of mince should go further too.
 

ermintrude

Gold Member
Like the others said, you're NOT eating "a bigger plate of food". Without the superfree you would fill your plate up 100% with free food and syns which is much hiugher in calories than superfree food.

When you fill your plate 1/3 full with superfree food (which is relatively negligible calories) there is only space for 66% of it to be full of free food and syns.

So by filling your plate up with superfree you are automatically reducing the portion size of higher-calorie food you eat such as meat, potatoes etc.

Its not a case of eating "more" its about eating *the right kind* of food - reducing the amount of higher-calorie stuff you eat - by filling the plate up with low-calorie stuff so there is just less space to fit high-calorie stuff in. You eat the *same volume* of food (a plateful) but *what* you eat has far less calories in it than it would if you didn't pad it out with superfree (veg etc)

here's a really rough example

250g carrots = 100 calories
250g beef = 300 calories
250g pasta = 450 calories

So if you ate a plate full (750g) of just beef & pasta it would around 1200 calories. If you filled it 1/3 full of carrots it would only be about 850 calories. Thats about 350 calories saved - not that much but if you do it at *every* meal, *every* day it saves a HUGE amount of calories over the week. Simples :)
 

Jael

Full Member
ermintrude said:
Like the others said, you're NOT eating "a bigger plate of food". Without the superfree you would fill your plate up 100% with free food and syns which is much hiugher in calories than superfree food.

When you fill your plate 1/3 full with superfree food (which is relatively negligible calories) there is only space for 66% of it to be full of free food and syns.

So by filling your plate up with superfree you are automatically reducing the portion size of higher-calorie food you eat such as meat, potatoes etc.

Its not a case of eating "more" its about eating *the right kind* of food - reducing the amount of higher-calorie stuff you eat - by filling the plate up with low-calorie stuff so there is just less space to fit high-calorie stuff in. You eat the *same volume* of food (a plateful) but *what* you eat has far less calories in it than it would if you didn't pad it out with superfree (veg etc)

here's a really rough example

250g carrots = 100 calories
250g beef = 300 calories
250g pasta = 450 calories

So if you ate a plate full (750g) of just beef & pasta it would around 1200 calories. If you filled it 1/3 full of carrots it would only be about 850 calories. Thats about 350 calories saved - not that much but if you do it at *every* meal, *every* day it saves a HUGE amount of calories over the week. Simples :)

That's put so well! Really shows how/why SW works :)
 

ermintrude

Gold Member
i do love a calculation and stats! cant you tell i work in accounts. haha! x

heh :D Im a nerd, an Example Freak - I cannot comprehend anything without EXAMPLES! :p :cool:
 

tara40

Loves Norman Reedus
Can I just ask you experts. By eating the superfree foods do they speed up your metabolism in any way. As I find that if for example I eat a big bowl of pre SW bolognaise I feel like a slug after, but if I have a big bowl of SW bolognaise I feel light on my feet, if that makes sense.
 

Pouchie

Full Member
Thankyou everyone and especially ermintrude, that made everything so much clearer. Definately going to stock up on the superfree ;)
 

Jael

Full Member
tara40 said:
Can I just ask you experts. By eating the superfree foods do they speed up your metabolism in any way. As I find that if for example I eat a big bowl of pre SW bolognaise I feel like a slug after, but if I have a big bowl of SW bolognaise I feel light on my feet, if that makes sense.

Well, most superfree are also speed or superspeed, so they should
 

ermintrude

Gold Member
Can I just ask you experts. By eating the superfree foods do they speed up your metabolism in any way. As I find that if for example I eat a big bowl of pre SW bolognaise I feel like a slug after, but if I have a big bowl of SW bolognaise I feel light on my feet, if that makes sense.

Yeah kind of. Carbohydrates come in different kinds - simple & complex. Simple carbohydrates are basically sugars and your body doesn't have to break them down, it can absorb them immediately. So after eating them you immediately have a 'high blood sugar' - but as they are absorbed so quickly your blood sugar then falls again very quickly, so you feel tired and sluggish with 'no energy'.

Complex carbohydrates on the other hand take time to break down and absorb - so there isn't that initial hit of energy absorbed and nor is there the sudden drop where you feel tired and sluggish as your soon as your blood sugars fall again. Instead blood sugars slowly rise and then slowly fall again as they are slowly broken down - so you dont get either a sudden alertness (like you would eating chocolate or something) but you dont get the sudden drop again either.

The other thing is that the body has to use energy up in this breaking down process - it is hard work to break things down - so simple carbohydrates (sugars) require minimal energy to break down whereas complex carbohydrates (fibrous, superfree stuff) require a lot more - you have to USE energy to CREATE energy from the food you break down. Some foods like celery have so little content in them that it costs more energy to break them down than the energy you get out of them - this is the 'negative calories' idea. This is less to do with the sluggishness thing though, just shows why you should be eating superfree.

Hope that helps :)
 

Jael

Full Member
ermintrude said:
Yeah kind of. Carbohydrates come in different kinds - simple & complex. Simple carbohydrates are basically sugars and your body doesn't have to break them down, it can absorb them immediately. So after eating them you immediately have a 'high blood sugar' - but as they are absorbed so quickly your blood sugar then falls again very quickly, so you feel tired and sluggish with 'no energy'.

Complex carbohydrates on the other hand take time to break down and absorb - so there isn't that initial hit of energy absorbed and nor is there the sudden drop where you feel tired and sluggish as your soon as your blood sugars fall again. Instead blood sugars slowly rise and then slowly fall again as they are slowly broken down - so you dont get either a sudden alertness (like you would eating chocolate or something) but you dont get the sudden drop again either.

The other thing is that the body has to use energy up in this breaking down process - it is hard work to break things down - so simple carbohydrates (sugars) require minimal energy to break down whereas complex carbohydrates (fibrous, superfree stuff) require a lot more - you have to USE energy to CREATE energy from the food you break down. Some foods like celery have so little content in them that it costs more energy to break them down than the energy you get out of them - this is the 'negative calories' idea. This is less to do with the sluggishness thing though, just shows why you should be eating superfree.

Hope that helps :)

Ermintrude, you are like the fount of all slimming world wisdom :). I live it. Makes stuff so much clearer than in the book
 

Pouchie

Full Member
Ermintrude you have just given me a lightbulb moment, everything you say makes complete sense but I know if I read it in a book I wouldn't get it :confused:. Thankyou soo much for helping me stick with the plan honestly last night I just thought I don't get it I give up, but reading what you have posted today has completely kept me on track. xxx
 

hannata

I can haz cake?
Yeah sw really need to rethink their books. They just say have a third superfree and don't explain how pivotally important it is to sucess on EE. Even the c's aren't always the best in the world at pressing that part.

Ermintrude, have you thought about becoming a consultant for sw? x
 

manda72

Full Member
I stopped going sw after losing 2.5stone and went to ww. coz i stopped losing but i also think it was coz i use to always do green days but thought id try EE and thought i was doin ok but id lose then put on and didnt understand why till some one said i was doing it the wrong way..i was having chicken, sw chips and mushy peas as i thought peas were ss so that was ok.But im gonna give sw another go.Especially after reading this and other threads xx
 

ermintrude

Gold Member
Ermintrude, you are like the fount of all slimming world wisdom :). I live it. Makes stuff so much clearer than in the book

Well I dont know if thats the 'official' wisdom behind it but its (one) logical reason why it *does* work - whether thats the reason they set the rules that way I dont know.
 

Scorpiolady2710

Loves smilies
I agree....it makes sense reading it the way you put it rather than trying to get your head around it any other way.

Thanks. :thankyou:
 




Top