|
|
|
|
|
by TheOtherHobbes
2104 days ago
|
|
It really isn't. Small sandwich + crisps + sugary soda or coffee >= 700 calories, which is around twice what someone sedentary needs for lunch unless they start their day with a decent run. Add a chocolate bar and you're over 800. Start with a bigger roll or a wrap instead of a small sandwich and you're over 900. It's also a huge carb hit, which is not ideal for staying awake later. And it's low in bulk, which will lead to snacking later. All of this gets worse as you get older and your metabolism slows down. It's sort-of-ok for someone in their twenties, but literally lethal for someone in their fifties. Pret are at the better end of the spectrum, and they also sell salad-related items which are less of a problem. But this kind of sandwich lunch culture in general is a huge contributor to obesity. It doesn't look like a lot of food, it doesn't really fill you up, but it is a lot of calories. |
|
What are you on about? That's under a third of the daily recommended calories for a man.
Even if you ate this three times a day... you're going to be under.
> around twice what someone sedentary needs for lunch
So a 350 calorie lunch? So that'd be under half the recommended daily intake total even if you ate a large breakfast. So people living on about 1000 calories a day? How does that work? Most people's weights would be in freefall.
People have weird warped views about how many calories things are. For example did you know if you ate a full McDonald's meal with fries and regular Coca-Cola for every meal... you'd be under your recommended calorie count?