Weezl and friends Phase 2 -giving it a whirl for Shirl! Testing meal plan for a month

Allegra

weezl74 wrote: »

so that would put you in the one of the 300 people visiting 2 and a bit times a day, and you're as I see it contributing lots and as much as you would like to?

but there's 299 more with the same no of visits and 24 people who look at it 4-5 times a day (me excluded)

So I'm just thinking I'm missing them. Or am I being dumb with the data?

Do bear in mind that some of us will look at it from both home and work, which might skew the data ever so slightly, as it might register a single user as two individual ones (work and home), or in my case, probably about 6 as I work on different sites and workstations during the week Not raining on your parade at all - I always find your google analytics info encouraging and motivating, and even if you halve that number, it's still a lot of users

BTW, I have found over the last few days that every time I found a thread that would have benefited from CFR being mentioned, someone had already beaten me to it, and it's often someone I've not seen on this thread at all ! So there may well be people who visit the site repeatedly, looking over things and mulling over recipes, that do not read this thread at all. The word is spreading....

weezl74

queen_of_string wrote: »

Skills

QOS - Big picture and sideways thinking. Rewriting sentences and paragraphs. Transcribing, verbatim or main themes, from Skype convos, if you choose to record them. Testing recipes ( tend not to stick very well to recipes though!) so best when these are recipes in development. I CAN do most other things if they are required, but mostly they bore me to death :-). Currently under occupied but that will change in a couple of weeks :-).

ooooh you are under occupied! Can I put an end to that:Dand ask you to look at the batch cooking guide (from the OS thread) I'll need an email address for you?

weezl74

Allegra wrote: »

Do bear in mind that some of us will look at it from both home and work, which might skew the data ever so slightly, as it might register a single user as two individual ones (work and home), or in my case, probably about 6 as I work on different sites and workstations during the week Not raining on your parade at all - I always find your google analytics info encouraging and motivating, and even if you halve that number, it's still a lot of users

BTW, I have found over the last few days that every time I found a thread that would have benefited from CFR being mentioned, someone had already beaten me to it, and it's often someone I've not seen on this thread at all ! So there may well be people who visit the site repeatedly, looking over things and mulling over recipes, that do not read this thread at all. The word is spreading....

but if all your 6 workstations were putting you in the 1 in 300 category then you'd have consistently visited the site more than 15 times a day for all of the 44 days (not just looked at 15 pages, visited 15 times and looked at averagely 8 pages each time).

I dunno, but it just seemsunlikely?

tho you may be VERY bored at work

Do people know what I mean though, the 300 keenies seem a bit under involved (than they might like to be).

Or am I clutching at straws?

taka

weezl74 wrote: »

obviously sian is being modest, but the above would be helpful if people would post it. With if you feel willing/able an idea of how much if any time energy you have for the project.

So it might say:

mseusername-good at spreadsheets, editing text, having ideas. Available in 10-15 min chunks 2 times a week for little projects this month. Or somesuch.

Or is that a bit too formal and scare you all off

List of skills
Sian- pointing out problems and then not having a clue how to fix them

QOS - Big picture and sideways thinking. Rewriting sentences and paragraphs. Transcribing, verbatim or main themes, from Skype convos, if you choose to record them. Testing recipes ( tend not to stick very well to recipes though!) so best when these are recipes in development. I CAN do most other things if they are required, but mostly they bore me to death :-). Currently under occupied but that will change in a couple of weeks :-).

taka - Good at maths, simple spreadsheets and researching things that can be completed quickly. Good at looking at small details and problem solving. Poor at eloquent writing/editing. Access to online Science publications and can help to decipher scientific papers if necessary (though nutrition is really not my field!). Nervous, inexperienced cook (veggie) who tends to follow recipes to the letter. Expert at lurking! Mostly on MSE during afternoons at work or just after work has finished so only have lunchtime or short breaks available to help during the day unless I have a late timepoint and not on MSE much in the evenings (unless I know I need to be in advance). Much more time at the weekends to help. Have access to both IE and Firefox on 3 computer OS's - Vista (home desktop), Windows XP home (netbook) and Windows XP professional (work desktop). I can also sometimes access a Mac (a really old one only running IE5! :eek: :rotfl:)

I like the "About us" Allegra! Well done! :T

PS I may account for a couple of the 300, 2 and a bit visits a day - 1x work computer, 1x home netbook. Not sure I've visited CFR from my home desktop as I don't use it much anymore... I've also visited it from an old Mac once of twice but thats only when I'm bored running my samples on a piece of equipment at work.

weezl74

Lesley_Gaye wrote: »

it would certainly suggest that without anything else to go on

some I think would pop on and look around the site, look at the recipes. There's a lot to look at and digest and would take several go's.

It's possible that these are Shirley's and they are getting their head's around it in preparation to doing the plan in July

Or, how about people like my Mum, who looked at the recipes, then on another day was pondering what to have that day, and went on to the site thinking, hmm, let's just have another look at that recipe. But no, that wouldn't be an average of several times a day tho would it

now that is very interesting lesley:) cos I was thinking the 300 weren't shirleys (or precontemplative shirleys) because each visit is more than 8 different page hits and its more than 2 visits a day, so for 44 days she's come on and looked at 17 pages... I dunno, but doesn't that seem a bit more keen than just, 'what am I making for supper tonight then?'

I'm thinking of shilrls as being the 3900 who come on and look at 10 pages a day everyday.

But I was thinking of the 300 who come on and look at more than 17 pages a day everyday as more 'bought in'.

aless02

weezl, i'm not ignoring ur question, but need to do digging so will reply after F is in bed and DH relinquishes the computer.

Aless - basic HTML knowledge, good at digging/researching via internet. Interested in weight loss aspect of nutrition. No current work commitments mean can be online at any point in the day. Very internet proficient. Proofreading.

Anything else? i take minutes for work, but haaaaaate it so i will NOT volunteer that skill

weezl74

righty ho aless

I'll say a little more about my further thinking and then you have the max to go on.

My understanding is based on 3 key facts:

weightloss will be achieved by fewer cals going in than are burned regardless of whether they are fats/carbs/protein

fat and protein creaty satiety or fullness, carbs especially simple carbs create more hunger.

given shirl's finances I'd rather she was full feeling on 3 meals a day, rather than full feeling on 3 meals and 3 snacks a day.

Plus her very beneficial omega 3s and 9s are being delivered through the oil.

So I think my hope is that we can calc the points and she can choose 3 meals and maybe one snack a day and be wwithin points, but still full enough.

If we reduce the fat, I worry that she will not be satiated and therefore be hungry and therefore spend more money on food which actually she doesn't need.

Is any of this making sense?

aless02

weezl74 wrote: »

Aless, would it explain better if I said what my reservation is about shirl just reducing the fat?

I take your point. Will it help if I explain my specific angle?

I'm a snacker - a grazer. Most diet plans nowadays recommend this as it keeps your blood sugar at a constant level and keeps metabolism working throughout the day. Therefore, I need to find things to eat throughout the day that are both interesting enough that I don't lust for unhealthy/expensive snacks and aren't too high in calories that they push the whole day too high (if I feel 'bored' of the snacks I have at home, I'm much more tempted to cheat and go out and buy something unhealthy AND pricey). So for me, and the average person following average dieticians' recommendations, cutting out the snacks is not a helpful option. Making the snacks less caloric is, however! Unfortunately, the only real way to cut calories here is to either lower the oil or the sugar - and lowering the sugar would involve buying a more expensive sweetener substitute. That and reducing cheese from main meals.

I know we need a certain amount of fat per day, most certainly. People dieting need fat, but usually seek to reduce the worst kind - saturated fat.

Not sure what the answer is - maybe Shirl should cut her meals in half and eat them over the course of the day. This wouldn't work for me, as with a busy life and such you don't have time - a working Shirl needs a quick snack she can eat at her desk, not half a portion of risotto to see her through 'til dinnertime.

I don't know the nutritional maths and how much fat/sat fat your plan is seeking to provide...women need less anyway, of course, and someone on a diet can further reduce this depending on their starting weight and how much they need to lose. I understand your need to strike the balance, but we're also not trying to be a dieting service! As I understand, you only want a sentence or 2 just to 'nudge' Shirley in case she freaks out at 30g of fat for dinner...following a prescriptive diet plan would be something she has to work out on her own, just like the rest of us!

Not sure if that was remotely helpful.

weezl74

thank you Aless.

I understand that a few people had success with reducing the sugar in the carrot cake. Potty someone in the survey lost 150g of sugar didn't they?

Shirl will still have to be very disciplined and eat only her little square, but reducing the sugar in that could be an option.

I guess the apple curd could go lower sugar too...

Thing is, how do we keep sugar out of shirls but in bobs jenny's and jason's... anyone any ideas?

aless02

weezl74 wrote: »

thank you Aless.

I understand that a few people had success with reducing the sugar in the carrot cake. Potty someone in the survey lost 150g of sugar didn't they?

Shirl will still have to be very disciplined and eat only her little square, but reducing the sugar in that could be an option.

I guess the apple curd could go lower sugar too...

Thing is, how do we keep sugar out of shirls but in bobs jenny's and jason's... anyone any ideas?

I don't put any sugar in my apple curd and it's lurvely.

But your last point is the real sticker...she'd have to cook twice which is demotivating in itself! Therefore too difficult and probably not worth our efforts for what is supposed to be a subsistence planner .