Support NeoGAF

[elrechazado]

Everyone needs to ignore elrechazao immediately. Calories in/out is the principle factor of weight loss. He is gravely misinformed.

Are types of food a factor? Yes.
Are hormones a factor? Yes.

Ultimately though, as long as you burn more calories than you consume, you lose weight. End of discussion. I'd personally like to see him peddle his ideas on the bodybuilding.com forum, only to be laughed at incessantly.

That's some excellent science you have there.

:lol

My 135lbs lost says otherwise. And I did this on the advice on my "Junk" General Practitioner.

You lost 135 pounds based on the thrifty gene theory? that's a neat trick.

So I should beleive you or my doctor? How bout the results I have seen myself? Are you even a doctor? :lol

Who ever said you haven't lost weight? Congrats on that, it's awesome. I myself have lost over 80 pounds. Understanding the science behind why you're losing weight doesn't change the fact that you're losing it. And misunderstanding why you're losing it doesn't mean you're right just because you lost it.

It's not like you can dispute the science of what the hormones and organs in your body are actually doing. Not believing that insulin does what it does, or that your liver metabolizes fructose into fat doesn't make that not happen in your body.
Well, apparently some people in this thread can, but that doesn't mean they're right

 

[thewhiterabbit]

That's some excellent science you have there.

You lost 135 pounds based on the thrifty gene theory? that's a neat trick.

It is. I lost 135 pounds and never felt better in my life from it. I just had a wonderful lunch. Pepperoni sandwich on whole wheat with romaine lettuce, 2 slices of tomatoes and some mustard. 2 hard boiled eggs, a banana and a 5.5fl oz v8 low sodium

520 caloires. I had 391 calories for breakfast.

I ran 5 miles in a hr today so thats a extra 1,000 calories today. I get to eat 2,000 more calories today. And I will be eating again in 2-3 hrs.

I lost it cause I burn more calories than I eat. This was all explained to me by my doctor. Some one who went to medical school.

 

[elrechazado]

It is. I lost 135 pounds and never felt better in my life from it. I just had a wonderful lunch. Pepperoni sandwich on whole wheat with romaine lettuce, 2 slices of tomatoes and some mustard. 2 hard boiled eggs, a banana and a 5.5fl oz v8 low sodium

520 caloires. I had 391 calories for breakfast.

I ran 5 miles in a hr today so thats a extra 1,000 calories today. I get to eat 2,000 more calories today. And I will be eating again in 2-3 hrs.

[IM]http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l89/leftyy2k4/Weightlosscompare.jpg[/IM]

Like I said, that's great and you should be proud - not being sarcastic at all. Now how does you having lost weight prove the thrifty gene theory? I don't think you read anything I wrote.

 

[funkmastergeneral]

It's not that simple dude, but enjoy whatever works for you.

 

[thewhiterabbit]

Like I said, that's great and you should be proud - not being sarcastic at all. Now how does you having lost weight prove the thrifty gene theory? I don't think you read anything I wrote.

I used to eat 6000-8000 calories a day. Thats how. I changed my diet and lost tons of weight. Than I could exercise. You can only do so much at 400+ 50+bmi. I cut out sweet tea and alcohol, fried foods and salt.

I started tracking my calories and gradually been lowering my daily allowed calories as I lost weight.

The proof is in the fucking pudding man. I know what I did and how I did to get where I am .

It's not that simple dude, but enjoy whatever works for you.

It is. For any one willing to stop being a fat ass. Eat less and move. You will surprised at how many don't even know how much is a proper serving. Weigh your food and wear a heart rate monitor to track calories burned.

 

[Laguna X]

I can't really get into this as I have to get ready for work, but if you are dismissing what elrechazao is saying then you're doing yourself a great disservice. Thewhiterabbit, the reason you are losing weight (congrats, btw) isn't solely because you're restricting calorie intake, but rather because you're diet is much better than it was.

 

[elrechazado]

I used to eat 6000-8000 calories a day. Thats how. I changed my diet and lost tons of weight. Than I could exercise. You can only do so much at 400+ 50+bmi. I cut out sweet tea and alcohol, fried foods and salt.

I started tracking my calories and gradually been lowering my daily allowed calories as I lost weight.

The proof is in the fucking pudding man. I know what i did and how I did to get where I am .

Sigh, you aren't reading, so I'm done with you. Congrats on your weight loss, none of which refutes anything I've been saying. At all.

 

[BobsRevenge]

I used to eat 6000-8000 calories a day. Thats how. I changed my diet and lost tons of weight. Than I could exercise. You can only do so much at 400+ 50+bmi. I cut out sweet tea and alcohol, fried foods and salt.

I started tracking my calories and gradually been lowering my daily allowed calories as I lost weight.

The proof is in the fucking pudding man. I know what i did and how I did to get where I am .

Did you cut out fried veggies!?

WTF HOW DO YOU EAT YOUR VEGGIES THEN!? :lol

Personally, I've been pan frying summer squash all the time recently. I actually fry a lot of things. I think its just a matter of what you're frying. Deep frying I stay away from, but pan frying? ALL over that shit.

edit: Personally, I don't think anyone here can really speak with much authority on what exactly causes weight loss. You've got your leptins, your insulins, your calories, your other what-have-yous, but when it comes right down to it there are SO MANY factors that its no wonder that even the researchers still seem a bit confused sometimes.

 

[thewhiterabbit]

I can't really get into this as I have to get ready for work, but if you are dismissing what elrechazao is saying then you're doing yourself a great disservice. Thewhiterabbit, the reason you are losing weight (congrats, btw) isn't solely because you're restricting calorie intake, but rather because you're diet is much better than it was.

:lol

You can get fat if you eat enough carrots. Wake the fuck up.

The reason better foods help is cause they help to actually nourish the body so I am not always hungry. Thats where people fail. They eat empty calories.

I still eat ice cream, cakes etc. Just in moderation.

 

[ShOcKwAvE]

That's some excellent science you have there.

Unlike you, I don't need to report all the articles and studies I've read to make my point. If anyone is interested in what science they have, feel free to head on over. It VASTLY outweights any amount of studies elrechazao can post.

This is NeoGAF. That is BodyBuilding.com. Where do you think the most body-knowledgeable people hang out?

 

[elrechazado]

Did you cut out fried veggies!?

WTF HOW DO YOU EAT YOUR VEGGIES THEN!? :lol

Personally, I've been pan frying summer squash all the time recently. I actually fry a lot of things. I think its just a matter of what you're frying. Deep frying I stay away from, but pan frying? ALL over that shit.

Me too, delicious. Pan frying eggplant and zucchini, summer squash, garlic. So damn good.

Unlike you, I don't need to report all the articles and studies I've read to make my point. If anyone is interested in what science they have, feel free to head on over. It VASTLY outweights any amount of studies elrechazao can post.

This is NeoGAF. That is BodyBuilding.com. Where do you think the most body-knowledgeable people hang out?

bodybuilding websites are the premiere source for information on biochemistry, hormone research, and food science. Thanks for sharing that bro.

 

[thewhiterabbit]

Did you cut out fried veggies!?

WTF HOW DO YOU EAT YOUR VEGGIES THEN!? :lol

Personally, I've been pan frying summer squash all the time recently. I actually fry a lot of things. I think its just a matter of what you're frying. Deep frying I stay away from, but pan frying? ALL over that shit.

I meant deep fried foods. I used to eat almost everything deep fried. In canola oil but still deep fried.

Fried chicken every day lol. Now I have skinless boneless chicken breast I bake. Pan frying is ok. But no more deep fried foods.

Unlike you, I don't need to report all the articles and studies I've read to make my point. If anyone is interested in what science they have, feel free to head on over. It VASTLY outweights any amount of studies elrechazao can post.

This is NeoGAF. That is BodyBuilding.com. Where do you think the most body-knowledgeable people hang out?

Exactly. If any one thinks I would listen to Gaf for any medical advice they are mistaken lol. As I said before I was educated by my doctor. And I can not thank him enough.

 

[ShOcKwAvE]

bodybuilding websites are the premiere source for information on biochemistry, hormone research, and food science. Thanks for sharing that bro.

Anyone want to bet that he's never actually been to the website? He appears to have no idea what it contains.

 

[thewhiterabbit]

Anyone want to bet that he's never actually been to the website? He appears to have no idea what it contains.

Maybe I should print out his posts and go get my money back from my Doctor :lol

 

[ShOcKwAvE]

Maybe I should print out his posts and go get my money back from my Doctor :lol

Well let's be clear, it's not like his information is bunk. No one's saying that. His dismissal of a fundamental weight-loss mantra is what bothers me. He seems to think there's no science to back it up. Weight loss is a combination of many factors, just like I said in my first post. Unfortunately, he doesn't understand that the body MUST BURN CALORIES to maintain itself if it's not ingesting enough of them. Where do they come from? Unless you starve yourself, the answer is FAT.

 

[elrechazado]

I'll let you guys state what you think you are actually refuting.

Is it the role of insulin in the body's fat storage mechanism?
Is it the role of leptin in appetite?
Is it about inflammation?
Is it about the law of thermodynamics that you clearly don't understand?

I'll be happy to answer your questions if you'd like to say something useful beyond "lol u should read bodybuilding.com" and make what you think are clever remarks.

Science is a cool thing guys, you ought to try it. You guys sound like creationists saying "just read the bible man". Fun on a forum I suppose, but you're embarrassing yourselves honestly.

As for "fundamental mantras", those are as useful as believing the earth is flat when they've been proven incorrect scientifically. People still believe that cholesterol is bad too, and that high fat diets cause obesity. This is common knowledge. Wrong, but "fundamental". And believing that's more important than being correct, right?

anyway, enjoy your little clever remarks, they've been amusing, in that you haven't made a single substantive point in support of what you're saying. Like teh_pwn, I'm actually headed to play starcraft 2.

 

[thewhiterabbit]

Well let's be clear, it's not like his information is bunk. No one's saying that. His dismissal of a fundamental weight-loss mantra is what bothers me. He seems to think there's no science to back it up. Weight loss is a combination of many factors, just like I said in my first post. Unfortunately, he doesn't understand that the body MUST BURN CALORIES to maintain itself if it's not ingesting enough of them. Where do they come from? Unless you starve yourself, the answer is FAT.

My wife is tracking her calories to gain weight :lol

Yes there are tons of factors. But for 90 percent of us fatties its to many calories in. Not enough calories being burned. When this was explained to me I was so skeptical. No way its this easy.

I feel bad for all those people spending money on get thin quick crap. :lol

 

[nomster]

I feel bad for all those people spending money on get thin quick crap. :lol

But that's not elrechazo and the rest are talking about.

 

[thewhiterabbit]

I'll let you guys state what you think you are actually refuting.

Is it the role of insulin in the body's fat storage mechanism?
Is it the role of leptin in appetite?
Is it about inflammation?
Is it about the law of thermodynamics that you clearly don't understand?

I'll be happy to answer your questions if you'd like to say something useful beyond "lol u should read bodybuilding.com" and make what you think are clever remarks.

Science is a cool thing guys, you ought to try it. You guys sound like creationists saying "just read the bible man". Fun on a forum I suppose, but you're embarrassing yourselves honestly.

As for "fundamental mantras", those are as useful as believing the earth is flat when they've been proven incorrect scientifically. People still believe that cholesterol is bad too, and that high fat diets cause obesity. This is common knowledge. Wrong, but "fundamental". And believing that's more important than being correct, right?

anyway, enjoy your little clever remarks, they've been amusing, in that you haven't made a single substantive point in support of what you're saying. Like teh_pwn, I'm actually headed to play starcraft 2.

http://www.webmd.com/diet/guide/expert-qa-losing-a-lot-of-weight-michael-dansinger-md

Michael Dansinger, MD, an assistant professor at Tufts University School of Medicine in Boston. He’s a leading authority on diet and weight loss, and he’s had plenty of experience helping obese people slim down – he’s the nutrition doctor for the TV show The Biggest Loser.

Do you feel that there are many different paths to successful weight loss?
The idea that there's one best plan for successful weight loss is incorrect. It’s like saying there's one best color, or one best type of music. For each individual there very well may be one best dietary approach. But there is a broad spectrum of eating strategies -- dozens of unique approaches -- that all work well for weight loss and overall health improvement. The most important thing is to find an approach you can stick to, because adherence, rather than diet type, is the key to success.

I do think that good plans tend to have some common features. They often include a daily food journal with calorie counting, 90% adherence to a strict eating plan, and about seven hours a week of exercise – cardio and strength training.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/weight-loss/MY00432

Your weight is a balancing act, and calories are part of that equation. Fad diets may promise you that counting carbs or eating a mountain of grapefruit will make the pounds drop off. But when it comes to weight loss, it's calories that count. Weight loss comes down to burning more calories that you take in. You can do that by reducing extra calories from food and beverages and increasing calories burned through physical activity.

I can go on and on. I can post link after link.

But that's not elrechazo and the rest are talking about.

I was not referring to him with that statement.

 

[Aquavelvaman]

The earth is flat! The earth is FLAT

 

[ShOcKwAvE]

Don't worry, he says he's going to play SC2 but he'll secretly lurk for a few minutes to read responses :lol

Seriously, where to I begin with this guy? I love how we claims we haven't proved our points unless we post every article and study we've ever read! Apparently if it's not included with our post, it's just "clever remarks with Creationist themes." Somehow, his defensive tone and childish insults are supposed to convince us that he's right?

Yeah dude, all those nutrition experts who work for BodyBuilding.com and post on the forum are all wrong! You're totally right - you should email them and educate them. Come to think of it, all those studies showing caloric restriction's affect on weight loss are wrong too. Shit, the majority of the scientific community has it backwards! What are you still doing posting here, elrechazao? You need to get the word out! /sarcasm

Attention Everyone:

Go to BodyBuilding.com and see for yourself. Forget this stupid argument we're all having. The content area of the site is filled with workout plans, nutrition and diet advice based on (gasp) science! In addition to educated experts, the forum has THOUSANDS of helpful people who live and breathe this stuff. They don't waste time playing SC2 - they're reading the studies elrechazao is so fond of. I recommend the Advanced Nutrition section

 

[elrechazado]

Don't worry, he says he's going to play SC2 but he'll secretly lurk for a few minutes to read responses :lol

Seriously, where to I begin with this guy? I love how we claims we haven't proved our points unless we post every article and study we've ever read! Apparently if it's not included with our post, it's just "clever remarks with Creationist themes." Somehow, his defensive tone and childish insults are supposed to convince us that he's right?

Yeah dude, all those nutrition experts who work for BodyBuilding.com and post on the forum are all wrong! You're totally right - you should email them and educate them. Come to think of it, all those studies showing caloric restriction's affect on weight loss are wrong too. Shit, the majority of the scientific community has it backwards! What are you still doing posting here, elrechazao? You need to get the word out! /sarcasm

Attention Everyone:

Go to BodyBuilding.com and see for yourself. Forget this stupid argument we're all having. The content area of the site is filled with workout plans, nutrition and diet advice based on (gasp) science! In addition to educated experts, the forum has THOUSANDS of helpful people who live and breathe this stuff. They don't waste time playing SC2 - they're reading the studies elrechazao is so fond of. I recommend the Advanced Nutrition section

Alt tab is a beautiful thing. You haven't said a single thing that leads me to believe you know what you're talking about, and I honestly have no idea what principle you are freaking out over. I already asked you to articulate what point I've made that you disagree with, but your only response is "read bodybuilding.com".

I read scientific studies, but thanks for trying. You might be interested in what Dr. Lustig says. He's only an MIT/Cornell trained brilliant dr and endocrinoligist and obesity specialist. But he doesn't post on bodybuilding.com, so take what he says on these issues with a MAJOR grain of salt.

"Dr. Lustig graduated from MIT, and received his M.D. from Cornell University Medical College. He performed his pediatric residency at St. Louis Children's Hospital, and his clinical fellowship at UCSF. From there, he spent six years as a post-doctoral fellow in neuroendocrinology at The Rockefeller University in New York.

Dr. Lustig has authored over 70 research articles and 35 chapters. He is the Chairman of the Obesity Task Force of the Lawson Wilkins Pediatric Endocrine Society, a member of the Obesity Task force of The Endocrine Society, and on the Steering Committee of the International Endocrine Alliance to Combat Obesity. "

You're really making me laugh though. In other news, I just recovered some protoss artifacts.

 

[thewhiterabbit]

Alt tab is a beautiful thing. You haven't said a single thing that leads me to believe you know what you're talking about, and I honestly have no idea what principle you are freaking out over. I already asked you to articulate what point I've made that you disagree with, but your only response is "read bodybuilding.com".

I read scientific studies, but thanks for trying. You might be interested in what Dr. Lustig says. He's only an MIT/Cornell trained brilliant dr and endocrinoligist and obesity specialist. But he doesn't post on bodybuilding.com, so take what he says on these issues with a MAJOR grain of salt.

"Dr. Lustig graduated from MIT, and received his M.D. from Cornell University Medical College. He performed his pediatric residency at St. Louis Children's Hospital, and his clinical fellowship at UCSF. From there, he spent six years as a post-doctoral fellow in neuroendocrinology at The Rockefeller University in New York.

Dr. Lustig has authored over 70 research articles and 35 chapters. He is the Chairman of the Obesity Task Force of the Lawson Wilkins Pediatric Endocrine Society, a member of the Obesity Task force of The Endocrine Society, and on the Steering Committee of the International Endocrine Alliance to Combat Obesity. "

You're really making me laugh though. In other news, I just recovered some protoss artifacts.

:lol

I love how you ignored my post. I guess its only science if you say it is science. Who sounds like a bible toting creationist?

You are a joke. Please do not stop. Please keep posting. I have not laughed this hard in awhile.

Dr. Lustig is a nationally-recognized authority in the field of neuroendocrinology, with a specific emphasis on the regulation of energy balance by the central nervous system. He is currently investigating the contribution of biochemical, neural, hormonal, and genetic influences in the expression of the current obesity epidemic both in children and adults. He has defined a syndrome of vagally-mediated beta-cell hyperactivity which leads to insulin hypersecretion and obesity, and which is treatable by insulin suppression. This phenomenon may occur in up to 20% of the obese population. He is interested in the hypothalamic signal transduction of insulin and leptin, and how these two systems interact. He is studying the cardiovascular morbidity associated with hyperinsulinemia, and developing methods to evaluate and prevent this phenomenon in children. He is also analyzing the contribution of the autonomic nervous system to insulin secretion and insulin resistance in obese children, and the utility of assessing insulin dynamics in targeting obesity therapy.

Yes a percentage of fat people are fat cause they have imbalances. Its 10-20%. We are talking about the 80-90% of us who are fat cause we over eat and don't exercise enough.

My wife would fall in a range of people who don't gain weight.

These are not the norm. For the majority of us calories in vs calories burned.

 

[elrechazado]

:lol

Yes a percentage of fat people are fat cause they have imbalances. Its 10-20%. We are talking about the 80-90% of us who are fat cause we over eat and don't exercise enough.

These are not the norm. For the majority of us calories in vs calories burned.

The people he's talking about there have a specific and abnormal condition treated with special insulun suppression drugs, and is not the common cause of obesity, which you might know if you read anything. He treated that specific subset with experimental drugs not for that purpose that happen to suppress insulin. His normal course of treatment is not "eat less, make people exercise", which has been failed govt policy for years now. I'd really encourage you to read the latest research.

As for the rest of your ranting, it's amazing how you seem to have no conception of what we're discussing. Your quotes from the biggest loser guy are all fantastic and refute fuckall of what I said before. Again, you're the one pointing to disproved theories like the thrifty gene, and when pointed out that even the original proponent of that theory has disproved it, you counter with general weight loss quotes that have nothing to do with what we were discussing.

Interestingly, if you go back a few dozen pages or so you can read me having similar arguments with some of the people in this thread over this issue, and arguing on your side in favor of nonsense like the calories in calories out theory of weight loss. I read the science, read the studies and the reports, and realized I was wrong.

I wish you the best of luck in your weight loss journey, and I'll pass on any further conversations with you and bodybuilding.com guy, (for real this time, enjoy the last word) because this is not productive, and you'd rather flip out over your perceptions rather than have a rational discussion.

 

[Chinner]

why is there so much attitude in this thread? relax people.

 

[thewhiterabbit]

Oh 1 more thing. This whole debate is based on 1 doctors HYPOTHESIS.

This is what he came up with based on looking at people with brain tumors. It has not been proven in the real world. While calorie restriction and exercise regiments have been.

So once again who is the Creationist?

My sugar intake is probably higher now than when I was fat. I eat alot of fruits. Fruits with every meal.

We need to remember correlation does not mean causation. And Dr Lustig has done ZERO studies on his hypothesis. Kind of like those creationists

 

[moniker]

The way I see it, it's always calories in/out that matters in the end, one way or another, but it's a lot more complex than it first looks.

The thing is that calorie restriction doesn't really work for a lot of people in the long run. Western diets high in sugar and starch screws with the natural hormone balance (insulin, leptin and ghrelin etc.) which encourages both fat storage and overeating (since the body's natural signal of hunger and feeling full doesn't work as intended anymore).

There's also other things that affects the calorie equation. For example, if you're in ketosis (due to carb restriction), your body will synthesize glucose from non-carbohydrate sources. This process is called gluconeogenesis and it's highly endergonic, which means it needs energy to do the conversion (your body uses energy to able to use energy from the food your eating).

 

[thewhiterabbit]

why is there so much attitude in this thread? relax people.

He saw a YouTube video of 1 crank doctor and he thinks he an expert.
It is sad really. Like trying to explain evolution to a republican. :lol

The way I see it, it's always calories in/out that matters in the end, one way or another, but it's a lot more complex than it first looks.

The thing is that calorie restriction doesn't really work for a lot of people in the long run. Western diets high in sugar and starch screws with the natural hormone balance (insulin, leptin and ghrelin etc.) which encourages both fat storage and overeating (since the body's natural signal of hunger and feeling full doesn't work as intended anymore).

There's also other things that affects the calorie equation. For example, if you're in ketosis (due to carb restriction), your body will synthesize glucose from non-carbohydrate sources. This process is called gluconeogenesis and it's highly endergonic, which means it needs energy to do the conversion (your body uses energy to able to use energy from the food your eating).

That is a lie and not based in fact. People do not properly track their calories or want instant results. Or some people have underlying emotional issues and deal with it by binge eating. That is why they fail.

Western diet has nothing to do with it. Calories in vs calories out. Nothing more.

 

[Chinner]

so is this basically a metabolic/low carb vs calorie in/out argument?

welps.

 

[thewhiterabbit]

so is this basically a metabolic/low carb vs calorie in/out argument?

welps.

No. This is a calories don't matter vs calories in/out argument. According to Dr Lustig you can eat as much calories you want as long as you limit fructose. You can get fat on anything. this whole argument is a joke

 

[elrechazado]

so is this basically a metabolic/low carb vs calorie in/out argument?

welps.

Yes, or in other words, a science vs. faith argument :lol

 

[thewhiterabbit]

Yes, or in other words, a science vs. faith argument :lol

What science? This is Dr Lustigs idea and his only. No research as been done and he got denied to try and do one.

You are the one ignoring science. There have been thousands of studies on calorie restriction. I mean damn.

 

[moniker]

That is a lie and not based in fact. People do not properly track their calories or want instant results. Or some people have underlying emotional issues and deal with it by binge eating. That is why they fail.

What I meant by "doesn't work in the long run" was that they fail in way or another (probably due to be hungry all of the time) not that it doesn't work technically if you're strict and stick to a calorie restricted diet. The reason why they fail doesn't really matter but calorie restriction just isn't a reasonable solution for a lot of people. That is not a lie.

Western diet has nothing to do with it. Calories in vs calories out. Nothing more.

Riiight... so now you're claiming that hormones like leptin and ghrelin doesn't play a part in appetite/hunger/satiation/feeling full? Or that different diets don't affect the levels of these hormons?

 

[natethegreat409]

Fat. 300ish

Possibly too skinny 180ish

Me a couple months ago. I've put on a few more lbs since then. I'm at 220.

 

[Domino Theory]

What science? This is Dr Lustigs idea and his only. No research as been done and he got denied to try and do one.

You are the one ignoring science. There have been thousands of studies on calorie restriction. I mean damn.

u mad

 

[Chinner]

well, i'm sorry bro but i'm on the side of the metabolic argument. not that i'm dismissing your argument. i eat about two/three times as much as i used to do and i still lost weight :lol . anyway, as i said a few posts ago i'm skinny as fuck so i am attempting to carb up on certain days as i want to put on muscle weight.

i'm not really keen on the dick waving in this thread, theres alot of hurr hurring in this thread but not much actual back up. everyone seems more interested in winning the argument, as opposed to actually providing an argument.

so i'm just gonna step in now (not that i'm an expert) and just supply some info from my side:
i generally recommend the SA thread on low carbing it's kind of intimidating in its size, but theres so much information there (with sources) that it'll probably answer your questions.

anyway, seen your pics and stuff; some nice progress you're doing there.

 

[thewhiterabbit]

More science. These are actual Studies.

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2009/3/4/study-justifies-calorie-counting-for-people/

“We’ve shown that any reasonable diet can provide weight loss, as long as caloric intake is reduced,” said Katherine D. McManus, Director of Nutrition at Brigham and Women’s Hospital who headed the diet intervention committee for the study. “It’s exciting—the message encourages long-term healthy eating habits.”

http://www.active.com/nutrition/Articles/Study__Calories_count_more_than_carbohydrates_in_diets.htm

"There's nothing magical about carbohydrates," said Dena Bravata, a Stanford University social science researcher and lead author of the study. "Low-carb diets are effective in the short run, but it's because people on them are consuming less calories."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16566208/

Count calories.
Researchers identified these “big losers” using newspaper and magazine ads, according to a new study published in the Mayo Clinic Health Letter. The average weight loss in the group was 72 pounds.
The successful dieters had various methods for counting and controlling their intake of calorie and fat grams, such as restricting their intake of certain foods and eating smaller portions.

I love science

 

[thewhiterabbit]

What I meant by "doesn't work in the long run" was that they fail in way or another (probably due to be hungry all of the time) not that it doesn't work technically if you're strict and stick to a calorie restricted diet. The reason why they fail doesn't really matter but calorie restriction just isn't a reasonable solution for a lot of people. That is not a lie.



Riiight... so now you're claiming that hormones like leptin and ghrelin doesn't play a part in appetite/hunger/satiation/feeling full? Or that different diets don't affect the levels of these hormons?

People fail cause they don't keep it up after the weight comes off. I am not claiming anything. I am explaining scientific proven fact that counting calories leads to weight loss.

People fail cause they stop. And return to old habits. That is very different than it not working or stops working. In plan to track my food till I die. I will run every morning for an hour as I do now till I am physically unable too.

I have made a commitment to changing my lifestyle. It gets easier every day.

I am not hungry all the time. I eat a well balanced meal every 2-3 hrs. I eat 4-6 small meals a day. People fail cause they "diet" and starve themselves. This is why people should consult their doctor to find a meal plan that works for them.

Infact I am overdo for a meal now. I am going to eat me 400-500 calories. I aint even that hungry.

 

[Chinner]

some really interesting presentations (both about 1 hour 30 +, but worth it)

Gary Taubes at Dartmouth

Sugar: The Bitter Truth

 

[moniker]

"Low-carb diets are effective in the short run, but it's because people on them are consuming less calories."

And just why are they consuming less calories? Because the body's hormone levels go back to normal and the signal system of hunger / feeling full works as it should again.

You can get fat on any diet of course, but not all diets are equal. One that makes you go longer periods of time without getting hungry again must be superior to the alternative (if the total amount of the calories in the meal before is the same of course).

 

[thewhiterabbit]

And just why are they consuming less calories? Because the body's hormone levels go back to normal and the signal system of hunger / feeling full works as it should again.

You can get fat on any diet of course, but not all diets are equal. One that makes you go longer periods of time without getting hungry again must be superior to the alternative (if the total amount of the calories in the meal before is the same of course).

Did you read the link?

They were tracking their food. One of the biggest things that "dieting" does it makes people have to adhere to a plan.

Its when they stop the diet or tracking they mess up. I suggest you read the article and stop missing the forests for the trees. There was another study showing how effective a food diary is no matter the diet plan.

Thats why I provided links. And if you want to argue the studies findings go do your own study :lol

 

[moniker]

People fail cause they don't keep it up after the weight comes off. I am not claiming anything. I am explaining scientific proven fact that counting calories leads to weight loss.

People fail cause they stop. And return to old habits.

Exactly! And getting to the bottom of why that happens is key to turning this obesity epidemia. The sucess rate of low carb diets over a longer periods of time is much higher than your usual low fat / high carb ones.

In plan to track my food till I die. I will run every morning for an hour as I do now till I am physically unable too.
I have made a commitment to changing my lifestyle. It gets easier every day.

This is awesome and I'm happy for you, but do you think this is realistic for a large portion of the overweight people? I takes determination and willpower that most people lack.

Did you read the link?

They were tracking their food. One of the biggest things that "dieting" does it makes people have to adhere to a plan.

Its when they stop the diet or tracking they mess up. I suggest you read the article and stop missing the forests for the trees. There was another study showing how effective a food diary is no matter the diet plan.

Thats why I provided links. And if you want to argue the studies findings go do your own study :lol

Of course it works as long as you stick with it, I've never claimed otherwise.

 

[thewhiterabbit]

Exactly! And getting to the bottom of why that happens is key to turning this obesity epidemia. The sucess rate of low carb diets over a longer periods of time is much higher than your usual low fat / high carb ones.



This is awesome and I'm happy for you, but do you think this is realistic for a large portion of the overweight people? I takes determination and willpower that most people lack.



Of course it works as long as you stick with it, I've never claimed otherwise.

And they deserve to be fat. Their failure does not negate that any one who wants too can simply track their food, weigh their portions and exercise.

I say fuck they fat asses. And knowing I used to think like them gets me up and running every day. I want to thank them for the motivation. :lol

I am eating another one of my small meals btw I use this site and iphone app.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/ Any one trying to lose should check it out

 

[moniker]

Here's some more science for you: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa0708681

Low-Fat Diet
The low-fat, restricted-calorie diet was based on American Heart Association20 guidelines. We aimed at an energy intake of 1500 kcal per day for women and 1800 kcal per day for men, with 30% of calories from fat, 10% of calories from saturated fat, and an intake of 300 mg of cholesterol per day. The participants were counseled to consume low-fat grains, vegetables, fruits, and legumes and to limit their consumption of additional fats, sweets, and high-fat snacks.
Mediterranean Diet

The moderate-fat, restricted-calorie, Mediterranean diet was rich in vegetables and low in red meat, with poultry and fish replacing beef and lamb. We restricted energy intake to 1500 kcal per day for women and 1800 kcal per day for men, with a goal of no more than 35% of calories from fat; the main sources of added fat were 30 to 45 g of olive oil and a handful of nuts (five to seven nuts, <20 g) per day. The diet is based on the recommendations of Willett and Skerrett.21
Low-Carbohydrate Diet

The low-carbohydrate, non–restricted-calorie diet aimed to provide 20 g of carbohydrates per day for the 2-month induction phase and immediately after religious holidays, with a gradual increase to a maximum of 120 g per day to maintain the weight loss. The intakes of total calories, protein, and fat were not limited. However, the participants were counseled to choose vegetarian sources of fat and protein and to avoid trans fat. The diet was based on the Atkins diet (see Supplementary Appendix 2).22

The people on low carb diet lost more weight than the other groups even though they were on a non–restricted-calorie diet. That should tell you something. And it's the secret to the diets success - people are able to loose weight without resorting to counting calories (since the body's functioning properly again, like I mentioned).

 

[thewhiterabbit]

Here's some more science for you: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa0708681

The people on low carb diet lost more weight than the other groups even though they were on a non–restricted-calorie diet. That should tell you something. And it the secret to the diets success - people are able to loose weight without resorting to counting calories (since the body's functioning properly again, like I mentioned).

I am not debating different diets. As I said. Calories in vs calories out. If you want to plan a food plan around certain foods fine. Knock yourself out.

Go ahead eat 4,000 calories of low carb food. Bet you would struggle too. You would be full before you hit 3,000 :lol .But if you could everyday you would gain weight.

 

[Schlep]

Both low carb and a restricted calorie diet that includes whole grains have been shown to work for losing fat. The argument has always been about whether low carb is a healthy lifestyle, not its effectiveness.

Obviously there are people from both camps in the thread, and both have had success. Just chill.

 

[moniker]

I am not debating different diets. As I said. Calories in vs calories out. If you want to plan a food plan around certain foods fine. Knock yourself out.

Go ahead eat 4,000 calories of low carb food. Bet you would struggle too. But if you could everyday you would gain weight.

I think you're missing the point. "Western diet" causes many people to gain weight when not calorie restricted, low carb diet causes many people to normalize their weight when not calorie restricted.

 

[Dabookerman]

So. Started this low carb diet last week.. And I lost a kilo. What the flying fuck. Protein.. FUCK YEAH!

 

[thewhiterabbit]

I think you're missing the point. "Western diet" causes many people to gain weight when not calorie restricted, low carb diet causes many people to normalize their weight when not calorie restricted.

They were counseled to eat veggies and steer clear of meats.

ow-Carbohydrate Diet
The low-carbohydrate, non–restricted-calorie diet aimed to provide 20 g of carbohydrates per day for the 2-month induction phase and immediately after religious holidays, with a gradual increase to a maximum of 120 g per day to maintain the weight loss. The intakes of total calories, protein, and fat were not limited. However, the participants were counseled to choose vegetarian sources of fat and protein and to avoid trans fat. The diet was based on the Atkins diet

Fruits and veggies are filling cause they have tons of fiber. If you actually tracked their calories they would have been low. This study does not show you can eat unlimited calories of low carb as you are suggesting.

And Atkins tends to work cause the foods are filling. Like protein. And your ignoring all the studies I posted that show calories matter.

 

[cubicle47b]

I am not debating different diets. As I said. Calories in vs calories out.

How long did you eat 6000-8000 calories a day? Because you should have gained 206 lbs of fat per year on 6000 calories a day at 400 lbs with a moderate activity level.