Lunch Thread

[gusm]

Hi Guys, Been pondering light lunch options for longer trips. Tried a few options like OSM's, dried pasta/noodles with soup packets, cheese, salami and crackers. After some new ideas. I use back countries for breakfast and dinner but wanted something cheaper for lunch (since they are relatively expensive).

[HOO]

I pretty much just eat jerky or biltong to keep me going until dinner


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Joe_90]

Lots of snacks while glassing usually. Nuts, chocolate, and the like.

Tararua biscuits are pretty awesome but quite dense.
- 250g butter
- 1 1/2 cup of brown sugar
- 1/2 tin sweetened condensed milk
- 2 cups Flour
- 2 teaspoons baking powder
- 2 cups rolled oats
- 1/2 cup coconut

[Moa Hunter]

After a lot of reading, comparing nutrition etc came to the conclusion that a jar of peanut butter and some of the high energy crackers like the Arnotts 'Vita-wheat' is as good or better than any of the expensive dehy stuff and can be eaten with no prep. Also a bag of camel dates, a lot of energy and a low Glycemic index number

[Nick-D]

After a lot of reading, comparing nutrition etc came to the conclusion that a jar of peanut butter and some of the high energy crackers like the Arnotts 'Vita-wheat' is as good or better than any of the expensive dehy stuff and can be eaten with no prep. Also a bag of camel dates, a lot of energy and a low Glycemic index number

Yeah shit loads of calories and brain food in peanut butter. I alternate between that and cheese n salami on crackers for lunches/ snacks during the day. Especially when bush hunting I like to feed my brain, as soon as I feel my mind starting to wander or I find myself walking rather than hunting I sit down and have a snack.

I fucking hate OSM's and other similar big bars.

[High Country Boy]

Trialed a few things but reckon now that wraps cheese and salami are the go. Found crackers too bulky but wraps can be put flat and take up almost no room. A compact pack is important by keeping it near your centre of gravity. One 6 pack lasts 3 days at 2 a day which is pretty good. Cheese and salami are very good for lasting energy due to the high fat content opposed to something more sugary

[264 magic]

jeez i missed out on a lot when a culler,,our breakfast consisted of a fresh breath of air and a quick sprint around the dunny
i go on hunt talk a lot and the amount of young people that are overweight is staggering,,look on utub on gun threads and virtually all are rotund
how can these people enjoy life is beyond me,,sorry if ive put some of you off your dinner etc

[piwakawaka]

Those flavoured tuna sachets go good not sure about energy content tho

[sako75]

If not too far from the hut/camp head back and have a couple of salami and cheese toasted sammies in the frying pan
Head back out after a siesta when the deer start moving again

[noboots]

Other than skipping lunch and living a better live by eating once per day my advice would be to buy a dehydrator. I am about to go on a week long trip so have been hard at it marking jerkey, dehydrating apples, banannas, beans, broccoli etc. It's all fairly cheap and if you do the same stuff in back to back batches you don't have to clean it in between.

[7.62]

Endurance athletes will consume food every 30-45mins to keep the body fuelled. Foods that are about 50-60% carb with 10-20% sugar are normally the go, basically complex carbs for sustained energy with a bit of readily available energy from sugars. Electrolyte sports drinks are used as well for hydration and additional carbohydrates. This sort of nutrition is useful if you’re doing a big hard walk with a heavy load to a campsite, or other similar scenarios. For general hunting you wouldn’t be using that much energy so your calorie intake won’t need to be as high, and not as carbohydrate focussed. I use a mixture of foods like OSMs, nuts, some dried fruit, and a bit of dark Ghana chocolate. I’m also a fan of crackers with a decent layer of butter, with salami & cheese. For hard core exercise it’s OSMs, bananas (not that practical, I know!), gels, and electrolytes.

[noboots]

@7.62 thats the convential wisdom but it's changing. High carb diets, particularly processed carbs, make people eat frequently due to the blood sugar crashes caused by high insulin which is caused by high carb intake. Once you get off the suger and processed carbs you are less hungry, have sustained energy and you don't have the crashes.

This about it this way. When our anchestors didn't have anything to eat they would have to catch the next thing. It would make no evolutionary sense for poeple to stop functioning if they haven't eaten for 45min. Humans would have died out long ago if that was true. Another way of looking at the whole thing is that almost all of us have a good reserve of body fat (> 18% for adult males) and most of us have too much (> 24%). If you have body fat then you can't really be hungry just because you haven't eaten for a few hours. Not eating for a while also has quite a few benifits including raising human growth hormone.

It's all changing. High fat diets are the new black. Exercing while in the fasted state is the thing to do.
https://www.ironman.com/triathlon/ne...e-athlete.aspx

Regarding heart disease and cholosteral which is the thing that started all this low fat high sugar madness. I eat nothing but green veg and fat (including a lot of saturated animal fat). In 2016 my cholosteral was 4.7. A month ago it was 3.6. Good cholosteral is up, bad is down.

So basically do the opposite of what the doctor tells you. If the convential wisdom was right most of the population would be skinny. Just walking in the mall tells you that the majority of people are horribly overweight which logically means the convential wisdom is wrong.

[Moa Hunter]

@7.62 thats the convential wisdom but it's changing. High carb diets, particularly processed carbs, make people eat frequently due to the blood sugar crashes caused by high insulin which is caused by high carb intake. Once you get off the suger and processed carbs you are less hungry, have sustained energy and you don't have the crashes.

This about it this way. When our anchestors didn't have anything to eat they would have to catch the next thing. It would make no evolutionary sense for poeple to stop functioning if they haven't eaten for 45min. Humans would have died out long ago if that was true. Another way of looking at the whole thing is that almost all of us have a good reserve of body fat (> 18% for adult males) and most of us have too much (> 24%). If you have body fat then you can't really be hungry just because you haven't eaten for a few hours. Not eating for a while also has quite a few benifits including raising human growth hormone.

It's all changing. High fat diets are the new black. Exercing while in the fasted state is the thing to do.
https://www.ironman.com/triathlon/ne...e-athlete.aspx

Regarding heart disease and cholosteral which is the thing that started all this low fat high sugar madness. I eat nothing but green veg and fat (including a lot of saturated animal fat). In 2016 my cholosteral was 4.7. A month ago it was 3.6. Good cholosteral is up, bad is down.

So basically do the opposite of what the doctor tells you. If the convential wisdom was right most of the population would be skinny. Just walking in the mall tells you that the majority of people are horribly overweight which logically means the convential wisdom is wrong.

This is a great thread very useful ideas to get our teeth into. I am with 7.62 on this one though noboots. Using Carbs to provide energy during a period of high demand. The longest lived populations have diets comprising complex carbs, Low Fat, raw fruit, raw green vege and low protein so carbs can't be bad. The Glycemic index of 1000 foods has some revelations - most fruit is quite low on the index relative to Glucose because the predominant sugar is Fructose. It is those Sucrose loaded foods that send insulin levels up and down along with Pasta / wheat flour, white rice etc. But there are good carbs. Some foods are hard to digest like preserved meats and foods high in Lectins the preservatives and Lectins both acting as enzyme inhibitors.

[noboots]

This is a great thread very useful ideas to get our teeth into. I am with 7.62 on this one though noboots. Using Carbs to provide energy during a period of high demand. The longest lived populations have diets comprising complex carbs, Low Fat, raw fruit, raw green vege and low protein so carbs can't be bad. The Glycemic index of 1000 foods has some revelations - most fruit is quite low on the index relative to Glucose because the predominant sugar is Fructose. It is those Sucrose loaded foods that send insulin levels up and down along with Pasta / wheat flour, white rice etc. But there are good carbs. Some foods are hard to digest like preserved meats and foods high in Lectins the preservatives and Lectins both acting as enzyme inhibitors.

I think that this is a complex multi dimensional problem so doesn't have a simple answer. I would add a couple of things into the mix. Long lived populations that don't eat carbs do exists. Two examples would be the Intuit and Australian Aboriginals. Intuit lived exclusively on fish and marine creatures. The closest they would get to a carb is moss which was likely more about vitamins and minerals rather than any significant carbohydrates. They lived a hard physical life in the hardest environment on earth and their health only went to crap when they started eating processed western food and then it went to crap very quickly.

Aboriginals were a little different as they lived in a place that could grow crops, they just didn't need to as they were perfectly in tune with their environment. With no significant agriculture they ate wild food gathered from their environment which lacked a significant source of carbs. Like the Intuit their health was good until we improved it with western food and it's now turned to crap.

Does all this mean that everyone should live on fat and avoid carbs like I do? The answer to that is no. Humans are adaptable omnivores and despite my two examples you would be able to find many examples of agricultural societies that live long and healthy lives. I guess my point is that there are two major energy pathways in humans (fat and carbs) and both are valid ways to fuel yourself. One thing of note that while there are healthy vegetarian populations around the world there are no healthy vegan societies. Humans are omnivores and are designed to eat at least some animal products. If your ethics don't agree with that then take it up with evolution.

Regarding sugar, fructose and the glycemic index. It's important to note what it does an doesn't measure. It does measure the rise in blood sugar caused by certain foods. It doesn't measure the rise in insulin or the amount of calories that you take in. A food that causes a rapid rise in insulin isn't going to cause a spike in blood sugar (because the insulin lowers it) but it is going to make you fat, sleepy and get type 2 diabetes.

Regarding types of sugar. Sucrose is a combination of fructose and glucose. Fructose is fruit sugar. Glucose is the type of suger that is in your blood and is the most available energy source for the body. The conventional wisdom is that Fructose is better because it has a lower GI. Hidden in this fact is a horrifying truth. Glucose is absorbed directly into the blood. Fructose is adsorbed by multiple organs including the liver. What this means is that fructose is like a homing missile for your liver. Most overweight people already have fatty liver syndrome so eating fructose is just jamming more sugar directly into an already overflowing liver.

For anybody concerned about your health I would recommend not taking my word for it and instead reading the three books by Dr Jason Fung (Guide to Fasting, The Obesity Code, The Diabetes Code). Fung (unlike most people who write diet books) is a Dr and all of his facts are backed up by links to published medical studies. I have the e books if anyone wants a copy. Otherwise buy the audio book and listen to it on the way to work.

[Moa Hunter]

I think that this is a complex multi dimensional problem so doesn't have a simple answer. I would add a couple of things into the mix. Long lived populations that don't eat carbs do exists. Two examples would be the Intuit and Australian Aboriginals. Intuit lived exclusively on fish and marine creatures. The closest they would get to a carb is moss which was likely more about vitamins and minerals rather than any significant carbohydrates. They lived a hard physical life in the hardest environment on earth and their health only went to crap when they started eating processed western food and then it went to crap very quickly.

Aboriginals were a little different as they lived in a place that could grow crops, they just didn't need to as they were perfectly in tune with their environment. With no significant agriculture they ate wild food gathered from their environment which lacked a significant source of carbs. Like the Intuit their health was good until we improved it with western food and it's now turned to crap.

Does all this mean that everyone should live on fat and avoid carbs like I do? The answer to that is no. Humans are adaptable omnivores and despite my two examples you would be able to find many examples of agricultural societies that live long and healthy lives. I guess my point is that there are two major energy pathways in humans (fat and carbs) and both are valid ways to fuel yourself. One thing of note that while there are healthy vegetarian populations around the world there are no healthy vegan societies. Humans are omnivores and are designed to eat at least some animal products. If your ethics don't agree with that then take it up with evolution.

Regarding sugar, fructose and the glycemic index. It's important to note what it does an doesn't measure. It does measure the rise in blood sugar caused by certain foods. It doesn't measure the rise in insulin or the amount of calories that you take in. A food that causes a rapid rise in insulin isn't going to cause a spike in blood sugar (because the insulin lowers it) but it is going to make you fat, sleepy and get type 2 diabetes.

Regarding types of sugar. Sucrose is a combination of fructose and glucose. Fructose is fruit sugar. Glucose is the type of suger that is in your blood and is the most available energy source for the body. The conventional wisdom is that Fructose is better because it has a lower GI. Hidden in this fact is a horrifying truth. Glucose is absorbed directly into the blood. Fructose is adsorbed by multiple organs including the liver. What this means is that fructose is like a homing missile for your liver. Most overweight people already have fatty liver syndrome so eating fructose is just jamming more sugar directly into an already overflowing liver.

For anybody concerned about your health I would recommend not taking my word for it and instead reading the three books by Dr Jason Fung (Guide to Fasting, The Obesity Code, The Diabetes Code). Fung (unlike most people who write diet books) is a Dr and all of his facts are backed up by links to published medical studies. I have the e books if anyone wants a copy. Otherwise buy the audio book and listen to it on the way to work.

From my own studies on dietary influence on longevity, I found that the Inuit had the shortest average lifespan and of the Aboriginal I cannot comment. The longest lived populations from memory are starting from longest life expectancy - The Hunza ( pre westernisation of diet ) the (old way of life) Okinawans, the bean and corn eaters of Costa Rico, Sicilian Shepards, and the SDA at Loma Linda California. Eating foods that are difficult to digest taxes the body and ages it using up digestive enzymes. Eating foods that are easy to digest, like fruit that will naturally brown when exposed to the air (oxidising), and green vegetable juices is far less aging than foods high in lectins, foods that contain enzyme inhibiting preservatives and also fats which are just sugars formed into a more complicated molecule.