Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

There’s Nothing Magical About Breakfast

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 189 posts

Re: There’s Nothing Magical About Breakfast

#171

Post by scotty79 »

will_brown wrote: post #109
gutnor wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is fairly amusing. Or not. The effect of caffeine as an appetite suppressant is nowhere close to letting you skip a meal (that's what we are talking about when saying breakfast, not 5 corn flakes with a sip of milk). A lot of people take their tea/coffee without sugar and the calorie content of a table spoon of milk is negligible.

>The effect of caffeine as an appetite suppressant is nowhere close to letting you skip a meal I don't know what you mean by saying caffeine doesn't let someone skip a meal, no one is asking permission. Most can skip a meal with or without caffeine, but the caffeine would only help curb hunger pains in those few hours before lunch. I am not suggesting caffeine has some magical properties (though we all know it does).…

> hunger pains

Is that a real thing or just figurative speech? Only pain I ever got from hunger was headache.

Re: There’s Nothing Magical About Breakfast

#173

Post by ghaff »

magicbeanss wrote: post #131
iopq wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except for people who eat Soylent, they're so far alive and healthy.

I've never been so sad as when I read the New Yorker profile[1] of the creator of Soylent. Most people understand that food can be extremely healthful, and is a crucial part of culture and social bonding. [1] http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/05/12/the-end-of-food

It's not so much the idea of smoothies or protein shakes or yogurt drinks or whatever (tasty) on-the-go nutrition you choose. It's the mentality around "lifehacking" and my work being too important and all-consuming to partake in the types of life activities that the muggles do.

Re: There’s Nothing Magical About Breakfast

#174

Post by aianus »

magicbeanss wrote: post #131
iopq wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except for people who eat Soylent, they're so far alive and healthy.

I've never been so sad as when I read the New Yorker profile[1] of the creator of Soylent. Most people understand that food can be extremely healthful, and is a crucial part of culture and social bonding. [1] http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/05/12/the-end-of-food

> is a crucial part of culture and social bonding.

The average American meal is not a healthy, fulfilling group activity. Soylent is there to replace those meals and free up time and money to more frequently enjoy the other type of meal (or whatever else you might want to do with your time).

Re: There’s Nothing Magical About Breakfast

#175

Post by glandium »

henriquemaia wrote: post #157
swozey wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's completely right, the origin of "breakfast" is ending your nightly fast. It's been in use since at least the 15th century, prior to that (Old English) morgenmete was used; morning meal.

The same logic happens with the Portuguese word "desjejum", which can be broken in almost the same manner, meaning "that [meal] which breaks your fast (des+jejum).

Interestingly, in french, it's the same kind of roots (déjeuner, dé- (quite like the un- prefix in english), jeuner (fast)), but the word doesn't actually point to the morning meal, but instead, it points to lunch. The word for the morning meal is "petit déjeuner", literally "small un-fast". Presumably, people were not having a morning meal a long time ago.

Re: There’s Nothing Magical About Breakfast

#176

Post by will_brown »

scotty79 wrote: post #171
will_brown wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The effect of caffeine as an appetite suppressant is nowhere close to letting you skip a meal I don't know what you mean by saying caffeine doesn't let someone skip a meal, no one is asking permission. Most can skip a meal with or without caffeine, but the caffeine would only help curb hunger pains in those few hours before lunch. I am not suggesting caffeine has some magical properties (though we all know it does).…

> hunger pains Is that a real thing or just figurative speech? Only pain I ever got from hunger was headache.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_(motivational_state)#Hu...

Pains is used interchangeably with pangs, but yes it is a real thing.

Re: There’s Nothing Magical About Breakfast

#177

Post by will_brown »

epimetheus wrote: post #117
will_brown wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The effect of caffeine as an appetite suppressant is nowhere close to letting you skip a meal I don't know what you mean by saying caffeine doesn't let someone skip a meal, no one is asking permission. Most can skip a meal with or without caffeine, but the caffeine would only help curb hunger pains in those few hours before lunch. I am not suggesting caffeine has some magical properties (though we all know it does).…

That's all milk though, and be sure you look at the unsweetened data. A 16oz, Ice Coffee (which is what I prefer so that's what I'm posting), is a mere 5 calories[0] - drip coffee with no sweetener or splenda or some other low/no calorie sweetener would be the same. [0] - http://www.starbucks.com/menu/drinks/iced-coffee/iced-coffee...

I acknowledged that in my original post:

>Second, unless coffee is black it is probably far from zero calories, with dairy and sugar maybe between 200-300 [empty]

Notwithstanding the fact that you and I tend to drink coffee black, we likely are in the minority. The fact that starbucks beverages are over 200 calories at a ratio of 5:1 tend to support my assumptions about the demands of the market (based on a sample of 51 starbucks beverages).

I think a lot of people took issue with my figures (200-300), but they are starbucks figures not mine. Still my point remains, even if an average coffee is 120 calories a number others have conceded who otherwise said I grossly exaggerated, I wouldn't consider that skipping breakfast insofar as one can have a very nutritious breakfast for that amount of calories (say 1 whole egg and 2-3 egg whites; even bacon and an egg).

Re: There’s Nothing Magical About Breakfast

#178

Post by will_brown »

vonmoltke wrote: post #160
will_brown wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The effect of caffeine as an appetite suppressant is nowhere close to letting you skip a meal I don't know what you mean by saying caffeine doesn't let someone skip a meal, no one is asking permission. Most can skip a meal with or without caffeine, but the caffeine would only help curb hunger pains in those few hours before lunch. I am not suggesting caffeine has some magical properties (though we all know it does).…

> A Starbucks 16oz coffee with no sugar and just 2% milk still has over 100 calories (120), just shy of a 12oz coke (140). That is for a Cafe Misto, which is half-milk. Most people do not put nearly that much milk or cream in their coffee.

Iced coffee = 110 (with 2%, not whole milk or cream)

http://www.starbucks.com/menu/drinks/brewed-coffee/iced-coff...

Notwithstanding the fact most people do not use half-milk, I think you can look at the fact the starbucks drinks are >200 calories at a rate of 5:1 as indicative of the market demands.

Just look at their list of best beverages[1]:

1. 540 cal/16oz 2. 470 cal/16oz 3. 250 cal/16oz 4. 360 cal/16oz 5. 190 cal/16oz 6. 440 cal/16oz 7. 250 cal/16oz 8. 380 cal/16oz 9. 440 cal/16oz 10. 35 cal (1.5oz)

[1]http://www.starbucksdrinks.com/best-starbucks-drinks-list

Re: There’s Nothing Magical About Breakfast

#179

Post by vonmoltke »

will_brown wrote: post #178
vonmoltke wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A Starbucks 16oz coffee with no sugar and just 2% milk still has over 100 calories (120), just shy of a 12oz coke (140). That is for a Cafe Misto, which is half-milk. Most people do not put nearly that much milk or cream in their coffee.

Iced coffee = 110 (with 2%, not whole milk or cream) http://www.starbucks.com/menu/drinks/brewed-coffee/iced-coff... Notwithstanding the fact most people do not use half-milk, I think you can look at the fact the starbucks drinks are >200 calories at a rate of 5:1 as indicative of the market demands. Just look at their list of best beverages[1]: 1. 540 cal/16oz 2. 470 cal/16oz 3. 250 cal/16oz 4. 360 cal/16oz 5. 190 c…

> Iced coffee = 110 (with 2%, not whole milk or cream)

> http://www.starbucks.com/menu/drinks/brewed-coffee/iced-coff...

That drink is not just milk and coffee. It contains a flavored simple syrup and falls squarely in the realm of "coffee-flavored beverages".

> Notwithstanding the fact most people do not use half-milk, I think you can look at the fact the starbucks drinks are >200 calories at a rate of 5:1 as indicative of the market demands.

Honestly, the market demand is for coffee-flavored beverages, not for real coffee. Calling the majority of what Starbucks sells "coffee" is really pushing it. Conflating that shit with actual coffee, black or doctored, is ridiculous.

Re: There’s Nothing Magical About Breakfast

#180

Post by pizza »

raverbashing wrote: post #121
PaulHoule wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anybody is telling you to eat when you are not hungry, check to see if they are selling something.

This is the kind of thing that sounds right but makes absolutely no sense at all Exactly because the sense of hunger is not correlated with the exact need to eat is that we have obesity. Eating only when hungry sounds like a good idea but then you get (usually fat) people complaining they are hungry all the time. An average adult will spend around 12h (and probably more) physiologically fine without food, until its g…

What does depletion of glycogen have to do with hunger/being "physiologically fine"? People who are ketotic after about 1 or 2 days, or people who have just hit "the wall" during an ultra-long workout, don't have much glycogen to go on, but still get hungry just fine.
Post reply on HN