Incompatibility 101

Subway should never be shared.

“You can have everything you want but no onions and no capsicums.”
“………ugh. but onions and capsicums are the ONLY vegetables i add!”

“I love pickles.”
“i hate them. they’re disgusting.”

To think i ate a footlong by myself two days ago.

 

The Dieter and ice-cream

We have a dieter by the name of sam (the most common name i kn0w, any resemblance is purely purely coincidental) or should i say dietress, according to my rather reasonable generalisation from common observation — that is more common.

Sam’s favourite food is Ice Cream. But wait, ice cream is fattening because it contains simple sugars. The body is meant to break down proper food into sugar and not obtain sugar externally directly. Ice cream is fattening and Sam doesn’t want to get fat because she’s a dietress. (Yes, a dietress)

Sam could do the following:

a) not eat ice cream at all — that way Sam wouldn’t get fat. Success right? But this is imba (/unbalanced, like how its too much of a good thing) because the cost is sort of great — Sam really wants to eat the ice cream… This in my opinion isn’t worth it (then again, in my opinion, we shouldn’t restrict ourselves either. Come HEDONISM!)

b) substitute ice cream in place of proper food — if i have a calorie budget, it’s going to my favourite food. Screw rice and uh… nutrition? If I value ice cream more than health, perfectly worth it.

Ahh, horror horror, I didn’t expect to get this when i searched for “Hot babe sunbathing at beach”/”fat chick on beach” my friend sent this to me (considering she’s quite skinny hehe *winks*) I laugh. I’d rather look at an Evil Clown right now… okay, maybe not.

c) take low-fat/calories ice cream — This will work assuming that Sam does not eat more ice cream. This will not work because Sam will eat more ice cream. Let’s suppose that the ‘Limit’ on how much ice cream Sam eats in a day is because of a guilt factor (what some people call ‘sinful’). The impression that the ice cream has less calories will lower this guilt factor, causing her to eat more ice cream. In the same way that mandatory seat belt regulations would make people more reckless…. or how when i went for tuition some time back, i ended up not studying at all.
Oh well, too bad for Sam. If she ends up taking in more calories when the increase in serving is greater than the decrease in calories per serving (or should i say percentage increase/decrease), its her fault for not calculating properly.

d) puke it out — yes, bulimia, after eating your dinner and ice cream, induce vomiting. That way, you wouldn’t get fat (: Question: How the heck do you induce vomiting? Probably take pills (which may be poisonous) and to stick your fingers down your throat (which isn’t too effective) Ouch at the process of puking. Eww at the outcome of puking. I wouldn’t want to taste my dinner twice. Not worth the effort.

The Lloyd Solution that I don’t recall anyone coming up with, its the GOLDEN MEAN between anorexia and bulimia. Perfect balance. Don’t completely abstain and avoid the ouch and eww of seeing your dinner again.

E) Eat all you want, but do not swallow, spit it out. Brilliant isn’t it? Like this, you wouldn’t get fat and you get to enjoy the cold sweet ice cream. Great success.

Don’t swallow, just spit it out.
.

.

.

But anyway, on the counterintuitive  “seatbelt hypothesis”, I think it varies from person to person and his or her degree of consciousness. A more safety conscious person will not drive more recklessly just because the cost of an accident is lower. Likewise, a work conscious person is stil going to carry on with a normal workload even with tuition. Sam can very well eat the same amount of ice cream with low-calories and it’d work out (oh oh, Sam can go Work Out, but I’d never suggest something like that, slobbery and slothism for the win).

Plus, I’d also assert that Sam is already eating to his limit (for me, the limit to ice cream is the End of the Box) Having less calories in his ice cream or any other reason is not going to make her eat more. This assertion however is flawed because it is clear that she is *restraining* herself already, in otherwords eating below her limit (that, is after all what a diet is)

But my solution still wins, Low fat does not mean no fat (lol, low crimes does not mean no crime) No fat is better than low fat.  I re-emphasise my point:

Don’t swallow, just spit it out.