Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Mirror.co.uk)   Do you try to eat healthy? You might have an eating disorder   (mirror.co.uk ) divider line
    More: Ironic, Nutrition disorder, dairy products, health food stores, organic products, osteoporosis  
•       •       •

4063 clicks; posted to Geek » on 07 Jun 2011 at 7:27 AM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



136 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2011-06-07 01:33:43 PM  

badLogic: Even these "bad" foods can still be eaten on occasion. We go out for Mexican food every now and then (2-3 times a month) and I have no problems with maintaining weight while having a few tacos.


Oh I have "cheat days" where I'll have pizza or ice cream or whatever I feel like. I keep a stash of mexican coke in the garage and have one of those once a week because it reminds me of when I was a kid before soft drinks started tasting like ass flavored pancake syrup. The cold glass bottle is nice too.

The way we view food in the US borders on insanity. In general we eat the worst possible diet and the response to this is usually some form of fanaticism in cutting out food X or group Y which is why people are reading "things you shouldn't eat" as "things you can never ever eat again".

I shouldn't drink soft drinks but I do on occasion and when I do I make sure it's something I like and I do it in moderation. I shouldn't eat cake but I do on occasion and when I do it's the ungodly delicious cake from the bakery across town. I'll eat good mexican food on occasion but when I do I make it count and eat the good stuff.

What they're talking about in TFA are the people who say "you can't ever eat X" where X is the evil food of the week. That's where the insanity creeps in. So go to McDonalds and eat a double quarterpounder with cheese if you want but I can tell you that if you've been eating from List A for a few months you're probably want to skip it for something that tastes a little better.
 
2011-06-07 01:34:12 PM  

Jesus v2.0: Jubeebee: You low-carb people are worse than the low-fat people.

Yeah, but at least we're not obese like the low-fat people.

And seriously, your complaint that a low carb diet doesn't work for endurance atheletes like marathon runners? Look around, how many of those do you see? We don't have a problem with hordes of endurance athaletes fainting away because they're not getting their 5K Calories a day. We do have an epidemic of obesity and diabetes.

Also, I'm sane about eating. Everyone knows that cake isn't something that is good for us but we eat it sometimes anyway because we like it. It's the same with List B. If you want corn on the cob or a piece of cake with buttercream frosting, go ahead, just don't make that list the farking basis for your daily diet.


You have to recognize that there's a world of difference between a multigrain bread and cake with buttercream frosting, right?

No single food group should be the basis of your daily diet. Like I said, loading up entirely on grains is no better or worse than loading up entirely on protein. You can have grains and starches in every farking meal and be perfectly healthy.

The food itself isn't bad, which is what you were originally saying. Eating an imbalanced diet is bad, and it doesn't matter how you overdo it. The ubiquity and caloric density of grains and starches make it easier to imbalance a diet that way, I'll admit, but that's a behavioral problem, not a dietary problem.

dittybopper: Probably the best diet, though, from a nutritional standpoint, would be one that mimics a hunter/gatherer lifestyle. Lean meats, fruits, vegetables, greens, nuts.


Anyone else, I'd go off on an anti-paleo rant, but for you, dittybopper, a hunter/gatherer diet makes perfect sense. Shine on, you flint-knapping, blackpowder shooting, coonskin hat wearing diamond.
 
2011-06-07 01:35:34 PM  

kasmel: star_topology: kasmel: There is absolutely nothing wrong with corn in general. Corn meal and corn flour, with pretty much any legume, make a whole protein and between the two offer a considerable amount more actual nutrients.

Corn does jack crap for you, and somehow that it's become the base of 90% of our food's contents (if you include GMO's) Ok maybe not 90% but it's in farking everything. And especially if you're a corn farmer, then you really have no problem with corn! Hooray corn subsidies!

Corn, it's what's bad for you. (TL;DR Alert)

http://nutrition.about.com/od/askyournutritionist/f/protein_combo.htm
http://www.organicfacts.net/nutrition-facts/cereals/nutritional-value-​of-corn-a n d-rice.html
http://www.personal-nutrition-guide.com/nutritional-value-of-corn.html

HFCS is bad because it's grossly overused. Corn itself, as a vegetable, isn't bad, and can be a valuable part of a healthy diet.


HFCS (or corn sugar as they are attempting to rebrand it) is not just bad due to gross overuse, but it metabolizes differently then standard table sugar. A recent study at Princeton^ showed "Rats with access to high-fructose corn syrup gained significantly more weight than those with access to table sugar, even when their overall caloric intake was the same."
 
2011-06-07 01:36:52 PM  

kasmel: star_topology: kasmel: There is absolutely nothing wrong with corn in general. Corn meal and corn flour, with pretty much any legume, make a whole protein and between the two offer a considerable amount more actual nutrients.

Corn does jack crap for you, and somehow that it's become the base of 90% of our food's contents (if you include GMO's) Ok maybe not 90% but it's in farking everything. And especially if you're a corn farmer, then you really have no problem with corn! Hooray corn subsidies!

Corn, it's what's bad for you. (TL;DR Alert)

http://nutrition.about.com/od/askyournutritionist/f/protein_combo.htm
http://www.organicfacts.net/nutrition-facts/cereals/nutritional-value-​of-corn-a n d-rice.html
http://www.personal-nutrition-guide.com/nutritional-value-of-corn.html

HFCS is bad because it's grossly overused. Corn itself, as a vegetable, isn't bad, and can be a valuable part of a healthy diet.


Can I make an addendum. Nutrition has been sacrificed for sugar content and shelf life in some sweet corn hybrids.

My solution (as always) is grow your own. But damn it all if this summer just won't start. My corn had better be knee high by July!
 
2011-06-07 01:38:49 PM  

kasmel: http://nutrition.about.com/od/askyournutritionist/f/protein_combo.htm
http://www.organicfacts.net/nutrition-facts/cereals/nutritional-value-​of-corn-a n d-rice.html
http://www.personal-nutrition-guide.com/nutritional-value-of-corn.html

HFCS is bad because it's grossly overused. Corn itself, as a vegetable, isn't bad, and can be a valuable part of a healthy diet.


Like I said earlier, if I want a complete protein I'll eat some meat. Since I haven't limited myself in that respect there is little reason for me to eat something that is high in simple carbs and low in fiber and other nutrients. If I want something sweet I'll eat some fruit.
 
2011-06-07 01:44:26 PM  

Huck Chaser: Holy hell, there are a lot of morons in this thread. "I eat healthy and exercise, and now they're saying I have an eating disorder!" No, they're not. Shut up.


No shiat. Would people read an article about OCD and say "Oh, so I'm not a slob and I like to keep my house clean, now they're saying I have a disorder?"

If thing, person, or behavior A shares some similarities to thing, person, or behavior B, that does not mean that A is exactly the same as B.
 
2011-06-07 01:45:43 PM  

TravisBickle62: Millennium: pup.socket: what's wrong with cutting sugar out or exercising?

Nothing, as long as you're sensible about it. It's when people get obsessive about these things (or just about anything else, really) that problems start.

What are the problems?


The same problems that tend to show up with obsessions of other kinds. Typically, the hyper-narrow focus that defines an obsession leaves other areas of a person's life neglected.

It is worth noting that being passionate about something is not, by itself, an obsession. Neither is an obsession merely a passion taken to an extreme degree (though it is possible for obsessions to develop in such conditions). The difference between a health-conscious person and an orthorexic is much like the difference between a cat lover and a Crazy Cat lady, or between a collector and a hoarder.

That my waist is too small?

True orthorexia -an obsession with healthy eating and exercise patterns- is unlikely to cause that particular problem. In fact, the situation itself would put a person's orthorexia to the test: an underweight person with orthorexia would seek to get back up to a healthy weight. If that doesn't happen, then the problem is something altogether different.
 
2011-06-07 01:48:22 PM  

kasmel: HFCS is bad because it's grossly overused. Corn itself, as a vegetable, isn't bad, and can be a valuable part of a healthy diet.


One thing I share with the low-carb people is irritation over the notion that corn is a vegetable.

Corn is a grain. Just because you find it in the canned vegetable aisle in WalMart doesn't make it a vegetable. Potatoes aren't vegetables either.

Your mom's homecooked meal of buttered corn, mashed potatoes, and meatloaf doesn't count as 'meat and two veg.' You'd be better off making plain hamburgers on white buns, because at least then you wouldn't be eating farking meatloaf.
 
2011-06-07 01:50:37 PM  

star_topology: kasmel: There is absolutely nothing wrong with corn in general. Corn meal and corn flour, with pretty much any legume, make a whole protein and between the two offer a considerable amount more actual nutrients.

Corn does jack crap for you, and somehow that it's become the base of 90% of our food's contents (if you include GMO's) Ok maybe not 90% but it's in farking everything. And especially if you're a corn farmer, then you really have no problem with corn! Hooray corn subsidies!

Corn, it's what's bad for you. (TL;DR Alert)


Are these the same people who did zip4tweens.com or something?
 
2011-06-07 01:50:51 PM  

Jesus v2.0: I keep a stash of mexican coke


This reads very funny when taken out of context.

In context, however, Zevia (new window) has been a God-Send for a former "Coke" addict like myself. If the slogan wasn't already taken, it tastes "more like the real thing" than Diet Coke.

/5 months and counting without a Coke
 
2011-06-07 01:51:36 PM  

Jubeebee: Corn is a grain. Just because you find it in the canned vegetable aisle in WalMart doesn't make it a vegetable. Potatoes aren't vegetables either.


Out of curiosity, what are potatoes (and presumably other tubers) if not vegetables?
 
2011-06-07 01:57:17 PM  
Haven't we learned that almost everything is good in moderation?
Tons of red meat will clog your arteries (along with the pound of fries you deep fried to go with it), but having some variety in your protein intake is nothing bad. Salt can be bad for your blood pressure, but completely eliminating it doesn't make you 100% healthy.
How many studies have shown that a drink or two a day is actually good for you?
And if you're working out, you need to have excess energy intake. Otherwise, your muscles and bones will be the casualty of your workout. Michael Phelps consumes somewhere between 8k and 12k calories per day when he's training. Obviously you don't need that high of a level, but you still need a good amount if you're working out 1 hr twice a day.
 
2011-06-07 02:01:05 PM  
This may be the most idiotic thing I have ever read on the Internet. I honestly am having trouble convincing myself it's not satire.
 
2011-06-07 02:01:30 PM  

merkey88: working out 1 hr twice a day


Good lord, that's a lot of exercise.
 
2011-06-07 02:04:27 PM  

solokumba: She should organize her fridge better.
Her peppers are all over the place.
They should be in a bin with the carrots and celery.


And she should move the orange juice so we can see more cleavage.
 
2011-06-07 02:05:54 PM  

Huck Chaser: merkey88: working out 1 hr twice a day

Good lord, that's a lot of exercise.


Not really.
 
2011-06-07 02:06:43 PM  

star_topology: Zevia (new window) has been a God-Send for a former "Coke" addict like myself.


I wish I liked stevia-based stuff, but it just tastes awful to me.
 
2011-06-07 02:15:19 PM  

Uchiha_Cycliste: Huck Chaser: merkey88: working out 1 hr twice a day

Good lord, that's a lot of exercise.

Not really.


I would bet that 14 hours/week is easily in the top percentile among regular exercisers. I didn't even hit that when I ran track in college.

Also, please note that I didn't say "excessive" or "too much."
 
2011-06-07 02:23:33 PM  

Huck Chaser: Uchiha_Cycliste: Huck Chaser: merkey88: working out 1 hr twice a day

Good lord, that's a lot of exercise.

Not really.

I would bet that 14 hours/week is easily in the top percentile among regular exercisers. I didn't even hit that when I ran track in college.

Also, please note that I didn't say "excessive" or "too much."


I was thinking 10 a week. No rest days IS excessive/too much. So, 5 days, 1 hr in the morning, work all day, one after. If you can fit it in your schedule it's perfectly reasonable. If you can use that time productively by commuting its double win.

It's also worth noting, 2x1h exercises a day have a very different characteristic than 1x2hr every day. They are short enough you don't need to eat during them, you can recover afterwards fairly quickly from both, and if done in the right zones don't really deplete your energy stores much. Now, if you start throwing anaerobic efforts into those hours, it becomes a whole different ball game. If you stay under that threshold, even if you are flirting with it the whole time, you should be cool to do it over and over assuming you eat enough. Think of it as exercising every 10 to 12 hours, for an hour.
 
2011-06-07 02:27:27 PM  
For no particular reason I am compelled to add: all your base, your base, your base, all your base are belong to us.

\mmmmm base
 
2011-06-07 02:28:31 PM  

Millennium: Jubeebee: Corn is a grain. Just because you find it in the canned vegetable aisle in WalMart doesn't make it a vegetable. Potatoes aren't vegetables either.

Out of curiosity, what are potatoes (and presumably other tubers) if not vegetables?


In terms of maconutrient content and their place in your diet, they are closer to grains and other starches than they are to, say, radishes. The botanical definition of a food is not always its dietary definition: cucumbers are considered vegetables, even though they are technically the fruit of the plant.
 
2011-06-07 02:34:16 PM  
I ate over a pound of bacon, deep fried fish, deep fried jerkey, deep fried bacon, and deep fried cookies last weekend.

Does that mean that I'm in the clear?
 
2011-06-07 02:52:35 PM  

Uchiha_Cycliste: It's also worth noting, 2x1h exercises a day have a very different characteristic than 1x2hr every day. They are short enough you don't need to eat during them, you can recover afterwards fairly quickly from both, and if done in the right zones don't really deplete your energy stores much. Now, if you start throwing anaerobic efforts into those hours, it becomes a whole different ball game. If you stay under that threshold, even if you are flirting with it the whole time, you should be cool to do it over and over assuming you eat enough. Think of it as exercising every 10 to 12 hours, for an hour.


Very true. Biking an hour to and from work would be hard at first, but I imagine you'd get used to it pretty quickly, and once you were you could keep it up pretty much indefinitely as long as you ate and rested properly. Bike messengers and rickshaw drivers are exercising more or less all day, and they seem to do all right.

But like you said, if you try to do heavy squats or deadlifts every 12 hours and you aren't spending the entire rest of the day sleeping and eating, you'll breaks yourself down right quick.
 
2011-06-07 03:48:10 PM  
Huck Chaser
Holy hell, there are a lot of morons in this thread. "I eat healthy and exercise, and now they're saying I have an eating disorder!" No, they're not. Shut up.

Right. It refers to people who are so obsessed with eating healthy that they wind up not eating healthy. Or, they eat healthy but are so preoccupied with it that their lives are negatively affected in another way. In the same way that a person so obsessed with hygiene may wash their hands to the point where they become more susceptible to infection. If it's not detrimental, then it's not a disorder.

Dion Fortune
I always laugh when I hear or read "consult your doctor before going on a diet". Everyone is on a diet, whether they are conscious of it or not.

Yeah. I once heard a (fat) hospitalist dietician say "I need to go on a diet". I was blown away. One does not "go on a diet", one merely "has a diet". This is not a semantic quibble. This reflects the unnervingly common idea that you "diet" to lose weight, then switch back to your normal diet when you've met your goal. It's why people have trouble keeping the weight off. It's reinforced by people shilling fad diets, who want to promise easy 1-month solutions to what is a life-long problem. They sell false hope, because the real solution (i.e. eat right and exercise for the rest of your life) is harder to commercialize and less appealing to consumers. I imagine that some serial dieters might q

The only times it's legit to actually "go on a diet" is when there is some changing external requirement, such as athletic competition or medical condition, that requires you to vary your diet over time. Though even then, I'd prefer to refer to it as "changing my diet".
 
2011-06-07 03:55:14 PM  

Purple_Jack: Healthy is an adjective not an adverb, subby.


^

Right. Eating a healthy WHAT, subby? Healthy is an adjective to describe living things. A cat can be healthy. A meal can be healthful.
 
2011-06-07 04:34:49 PM  

falkone32: Dion Fortune
I always laugh when I hear or read "consult your doctor before going on a diet". Everyone is on a diet, whether they are conscious of it or not.

Yeah. I once heard a (fat) hospitalist dietician say "I need to go on a diet". I was blown away. One does not "go on a diet", one merely "has a diet". This is not a semantic quibble. This reflects the unnervingly common idea that you "diet" to lose weight, then switch back to your normal diet when you've met your goal.


Actually, it is a semantic quibble, and an incorrect one at that. Words can have multiple meanings based on context, and "diet" is one of them; both your definition and the dietitian's definitions are correct.

I do agree with you that "going on a diet" is a very poor method for achieving sustainable weight loss, but that doesn't affect the definitions of the word itself.
 
2011-06-07 04:38:08 PM  

Huck Chaser: falkone32: Dion Fortune
I always laugh when I hear or read "consult your doctor before going on a diet". Everyone is on a diet, whether they are conscious of it or not.

Yeah. I once heard a (fat) hospitalist dietician say "I need to go on a diet". I was blown away. One does not "go on a diet", one merely "has a diet". This is not a semantic quibble. This reflects the unnervingly common idea that you "diet" to lose weight, then switch back to your normal diet when you've met your goal.

Actually, it is a semantic quibble, and an incorrect one at that. Words can have multiple meanings based on context, and "diet" is one of them; both your definition and the dietitian's definitions are correct.

I do agree with you that "going on a diet" is a very poor method for achieving sustainable weight loss, but that doesn't affect the definitions of the word itself.


Now that I'm rereading your post, I think I misinterpreted you, and you were saying that while you acknowledge that the word has multiple definitions, you wish the dietitian's definition would go away. Woops!
 
2011-06-07 04:42:32 PM  

kukukupo: What you eat matters. A little.

What really matters is what you do.


Not necessarily. What you eat matters a great deal. It affects hormones like insulin (which moves calories into fat storage) and it affects how long you're satiated (500 calories of cheescake will not keep you satisfied & not-hungry nearly as long as 500 calories from a lean meat + veggies + high-fiber carb source like beans).

Also, exercise really doesn't burn as many calories as we'd like to think. If you bust your ass on some cardio machine for half an hour or an hour (and actually work, not just stroll while reading a magazine), you'll burn the equivalent of a can of coke, maybe a 20oz coke if you really work hard. It's a hell of a lot easier to just not drink the coke in the first place. Depending on the source, I've read that running a marathon, one of the most physically demanding activities people do, burns 3000 to 4000 calories. That's roughly one pound of fat (3500 calories). For how intense & physically demanding a marathon is, that really isn't that much...

What you eat plays a much bigger role than being not-fat than how much activity you get.

All that said, exercise is extremely important for being fit & healthy. But we should look at exercise as making us healthier & more physically capable, not just as a way to burn calories.
 
2011-06-07 04:49:46 PM  

jimb213: All that said, exercise is extremely important for being fit & healthy. But we should look at exercise as making us healthier & more physically capable, not just as a way to burn calories.


That, and it increases your basal metabolic rate, which in the long run burns more calories than the exercise itself.
 
2011-06-07 05:09:34 PM  

jimb213: Also, exercise really doesn't burn as many calories as we'd like to think. If you bust your ass on some cardio machine for half an hour or an hour (and actually work, not just stroll while reading a magazine), you'll burn the equivalent of a can of coke, maybe a 20oz coke if you really work hard. It's a hell of a lot easier to just not drink the coke in the first place. Depending on the source, I've read that running a marathon, one of the most physically demanding activities people do, burns 3000 to 4000 calories. That's roughly one pound of fat (3500 calories). For how intense & physically demanding a marathon is, that really isn't that much...


The problem is that people like don't consider intensity and length when it comes to exercise. 30 minutes of jogging isn't squat if your pace is 4mph. Second, exercise is a long-term commitment. One pound of fat may not sound like much, but it is a LOT to lose in one day.

I saw a very vivid example of hard exercise at work during a college band camp. People like to joke about band camps, but this was the Michigan Marching Band, which is relatively famous for its physical intensity. Their trademark moves include rapid high-kick steps that burn energy like sprints, and snap-and-lock movements that require strength and muscle endurance. Nothing to BRAG about, but it'll wear you out. Physical drills were six hours a day, every day, for almost three weeks. One of my friends was a hot blonde. . . with an equally hot identical twin (oh lawd) who didn't join. After camp I got to see them side-by-side. They looked indistinguishable three weeks prior, but while the latter twin retained a fair-skinned girl-next-door homebody look, her band sister had lost about twenty pounds. Her stomach was as flat as a washboard (not to mention very tan). It was like a real-life "before/after" thing. Exercise doesn't lead to weight loss? Bullshiat. You just haven't done enough.

Of course, today's desk jockeys don't work out 6 hours a day. Not enough hours in a day. But that's precisely a problem we need to confront. Before we pooh-pooh exercise, we need to keep in mind that exercise isn't something that was historically done 30 minutes a day, and/or on weekends. Our ancestors had to bust their butts. People who eat steak & eggs for breakfast and not gain a pound aren't burning off the calorines on thirty-minute sessions on exercise bikes.
 
2011-06-07 05:13:34 PM  
Er, my point isn't that we all need to exercise 6 hours a day. I understand that most of us can't. My point is that the time investment is precisely why exercise is so difficult. There's no easy answer to this problem, but one thing I do to compensate is deliberately make my lifestyle more labor-intensive. For example, I don't take elevators in any instance where I travel less than a few floors, even if one is available. I travel as part of my job, and I'll have to go all the way to the end of the hall to take the stairs when the elevator is in the central lobby. So? Half the time I'll still beat it. Is that hard exercise? No. But do a hundred little things like this a day and the burned calories will add up.
 
2011-06-07 05:36:43 PM  

DoctorCal: Eat healthy what?

Most of what I eat is dead.


Most?
 
2011-06-07 05:48:56 PM  
Your band camp example supports my point... it took your friend 6 hours of intense exercise every day for three weeks to lose those 20 lbs. It takes a huge effort for exercise to really burn a significant amount of calories. Most people aren't contestants on The Biggest Loser, so they can't devote that kind of time and energy to working out.

I never said you can't lose fat via exercise, just that it's not the be-all-end-all of fat loss, and I think proper nutrition and eating habits are more important for (and have a bigger impact on) getting to and maintaining a healthy weight.

Again, exercise is extremely important for overall health (strength, endurance, flexibility, blood pressure, lung capacity, etc...), but diet is more important for weight loss.
 
2011-06-08 10:07:06 AM  

Jesus v2.0: Fat doesn't make you fat. Sugar, HFCS and other simple carbs make you fat by screwing with your insulin.

And trust me, you stick with List A and you'll be wolfing down all the avacados and bacon you can get your hands on because the rest of it is so low in fat.


I already eat a bunch of avocados. I can't get enough of those things. It's just that... the idea that bacon would be on a list of 6 things to get you healthy seems silly, but apparently you're not even close to the only one saying it.

dittybopper: Why not? Reasonable amounts are fine, especially if it isn't cooked in it's own fat.


How would you cook it then? I only know how to fry it.

TravisBickle62: When I decided to get in shape again I had a hard time overcoming my fat-phobia so every day I would fry up some bacon, have it as an appetizer, then cook some steak in the bacon grease, lost weight like it was going out of style.

I stick with mostly lean meat these days but will still throw down on some bacon.


Wat? You were exercising though right? With that kind of protein intake I almost have to assume you were doing some lifting.

meat0918: Save the bacon fat for cooking with!

It's better for you than some random hydrogenated vegetable oil.


I already do this. We put some bacon grease into our steamed cabbage. Let it get a little burned on the edges, man it was good.

badLogic: Pretty much this. One of the worst pieces of mis-information out there around diet, is that fats are bad for you. Same as you, I cut out the simple carbs, sugar, hfcs, etc... and dropped 25 lbs over the winter. Hoping to drop another 20 or so over summer with bike training.


Sigh... looks like I'll really need to research this.

Thanks all of you.
 
2011-06-08 10:51:52 AM  

TravisBickle62: CrazyGabby: This thread makes me want fudge.

Of course, I'm 30 weeks pregnant, so everything makes me want fudge.

I was anorexic in college, and cannot figure out how I ever lived that way. Now I wonder if I'll every see my pre-baby flat stomach again, but life is too damn short for it to revolve around not eating. Of course, it's also too damn short to be so unfit that you can't walk up the driveway without getting winded. Balance, people.

TFA is not about anorexia, which we can all agree is a very bad thing. It's about orthorexia, which is as yet not a recognized condition. Orthorexic people do not starve themselves, they are very particular about WHAT they eat, not how much.


Oh, I'm well aware of the difference. My point was more that life is too short to obsess over it, whether it's what you're eating or how much.
 
2011-06-08 03:26:54 PM  

This Looks Fun: dittybopper: Why not? Reasonable amounts are fine, especially if it isn't cooked in it's own fat.

How would you cook it then? I only know how to fry it.


Microwaved bacon turns out shockingly well. Just take a plate, put two or three layers of paper towel, a layer of bacon, and another layer of paper towel, and then zap it until it's as crisp as you like it. This way, the paper towels soak up most of the fat.
 
Displayed 36 of 136 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report