Is it really not calories in that matters?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:also wanted to add that a calorie is nothing more than a unit of energy. Use all the energy you consume/need you stay the same weight. Burn more energy than you consume and your body will burn fat or muscle to make up the difference. Consume excess energy that your body doesn't need right now and it will store that energy for later in the form of fat or muscle if you are lifting weights.

Every diet causes you to lose weight by the same mechanism- consuming fewer calories than you need and burn fat and some muscle. There are 1000 ways to do this in the form of all the diets out there, but at the end of they day they are all the same. There is no right or magic diet for everyone, the right diet is the one that works for the individual who can stick with it for the rest of their life so as not to regain the weight.

So how do people lose weight and build muscle at the same time?

[Anonymous]

Conventional wisdom is you can’t lose weight and build muscle at the same time. People usually cut calories to lose fat and then eat a surplus of calories while focusing on muscle building and then cut again to lose any fat gained while building muscle for their desired aesthetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Conventional wisdom is you can’t lose weight and build muscle at the same time. People usually cut calories to lose fat and then eat a surplus of calories while focusing on muscle building and then cut again to lose any fat gained while building muscle for their desired aesthetic.

+1

This is why body builders have a building phase and a cutting phase.
Now when you lose weigh your muscles will look bigger/more defined but that is because you have removed the layer of fat so you can see them better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conventional wisdom is you can’t lose weight and build muscle at the same time. People usually cut calories to lose fat and then eat a surplus of calories while focusing on muscle building and then cut again to lose any fat gained while building muscle for their desired aesthetic.

+1

This is why body builders have a building phase and a cutting phase.
Now when you lose weigh your muscles will look bigger/more defined but that is because you have removed the layer of fat so you can see them better.

Also, muscle weighs more than fat. As you begin to gain muscle mass, you will weigh a bit heavier and look slimmer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I 100% believe it is calorie in and calories out. I failed to lose weight for years because I couldn't admit that while I ate a "healthy" diet I was simply eating too much. People underestimate how many calories they consume and over estimate calories they burn.

The reason people lose weight when they cut carbs isn't because carbs are bad or make you fat but because they eat less calories. It's very easy to over eat the white stuff much more difficult to overeat broccoli. Now if you could manage to eat 4000cal/day of broccoli then you would gain weight from broccoli.

I totally agree.

The leading soda company paid researchers to come up for this conclusion.
Lower carb people eat more calories and lose weight.
Personally I eat more calories mostly good fats and lose weight.

Nah. I don’t think any of defy the law of thermodynamics

It's not a matter of thermodynamics but of biology -- hormones, insulin, etc. and how they react to the food we eat and the regulation of blood sugar and fat tissue.

All calories are not the same and sugar and white flour are particularly fattening, increasing glucose and insulin and leading to storing more fat. And, once you have excess fat and insulin resistance, your body thinks you need food even when you don't, making you hungry and overeat and/or feel sluggish and low energy so you move less. Read "How we Get Fat" by Taubes.

So, eliminate sweets, minimize bread/grains. Make sure every meal is satisfying with a good amount of protein/fat so you remain satiated and can space out your meals. This allows your insulin to drop after the meal so your body switches to releasing fat from the cells rather than just running on glucose. For some people extended fasting works. For me, I feel awful when I try that but feel good and have been slowly losing weight by sticking with three meals per day, sometimes one afternoon snack of fruit+nuts or cheese if I know I have to eat dinner late.

The calories in-calories out fallacy is propped up by the sugar industry that funds biased research to try to make the case that sugar isn't bad for you. They are wrong. And, no long-term trials have shown improvement in weight or reduction in heart attacks by eating a low-fat diet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I 100% believe it is calorie in and calories out. I failed to lose weight for years because I couldn't admit that while I ate a "healthy" diet I was simply eating too much. People underestimate how many calories they consume and over estimate calories they burn.

The reason people lose weight when they cut carbs isn't because carbs are bad or make you fat but because they eat less calories. It's very easy to over eat the white stuff much more difficult to overeat broccoli. Now if you could manage to eat 4000cal/day of broccoli then you would gain weight from broccoli.

I totally agree.

The leading soda company paid researchers to come up for this conclusion.
Lower carb people eat more calories and lose weight.
Personally I eat more calories mostly good fats and lose weight.

Nah. I don’t think any of defy the law of thermodynamics

It's not a matter of thermodynamics but of biology -- hormones, insulin, etc. and how they react to the food we eat and the regulation of blood sugar and fat tissue.

All calories are not the same and sugar and white flour are particularly fattening, increasing glucose and insulin and leading to storing more fat. And, once you have excess fat and insulin resistance, your body thinks you need food even when you don't, making you hungry and overeat and/or feel sluggish and low energy so you move less. Read "How we Get Fat" by Taubes.

So, eliminate sweets, minimize bread/grains. Make sure every meal is satisfying with a good amount of protein/fat so you remain satiated and can space out your meals. This allows your insulin to drop after the meal so your body switches to releasing fat from the cells rather than just running on glucose. For some people extended fasting works. For me, I feel awful when I try that but feel good and have been slowly losing weight by sticking with three meals per day, sometimes one afternoon snack of fruit+nuts or cheese if I know I have to eat dinner late.

The calories in-calories out fallacy is propped up by the sugar industry that funds biased research to try to make the case that sugar isn't bad for you. They are wrong. And, no long-term trials have shown improvement in weight or reduction in heart attacks by eating a low-fat diet.

All those starving Ethiopian kids kind of support that "fallacy."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I 100% believe it is calorie in and calories out. I failed to lose weight for years because I couldn't admit that while I ate a "healthy" diet I was simply eating too much. People underestimate how many calories they consume and over estimate calories they burn.

The reason people lose weight when they cut carbs isn't because carbs are bad or make you fat but because they eat less calories. It's very easy to over eat the white stuff much more difficult to overeat broccoli. Now if you could manage to eat 4000cal/day of broccoli then you would gain weight from broccoli.

I totally agree.

The leading soda company paid researchers to come up for this conclusion.
Lower carb people eat more calories and lose weight.
Personally I eat more calories mostly good fats and lose weight.

Nah. I don’t think any of defy the law of thermodynamics

It's not a matter of thermodynamics but of biology -- hormones, insulin, etc. and how they react to the food we eat and the regulation of blood sugar and fat tissue.

All calories are not the same and sugar and white flour are particularly fattening, increasing glucose and insulin and leading to storing more fat. And, once you have excess fat and insulin resistance, your body thinks you need food even when you don't, making you hungry and overeat and/or feel sluggish and low energy so you move less. Read "How we Get Fat" by Taubes.

So, eliminate sweets, minimize bread/grains. Make sure every meal is satisfying with a good amount of protein/fat so you remain satiated and can space out your meals. This allows your insulin to drop after the meal so your body switches to releasing fat from the cells rather than just running on glucose. For some people extended fasting works. For me, I feel awful when I try that but feel good and have been slowly losing weight by sticking with three meals per day, sometimes one afternoon snack of fruit+nuts or cheese if I know I have to eat dinner late.

The calories in-calories out fallacy is propped up by the sugar industry that funds biased research to try to make the case that sugar isn't bad for you. They are wrong. And, no long-term trials have shown improvement in weight or reduction in heart attacks by eating a low-fat diet.

No one is arguing that certain foods will satisfy you better or make your body feel better. Obviously 2000 calories of protein and vegetables will leave you feeling a lot better and more full than 2000 calories of Twinkies, but as the guy who did the twinkie diet showed, you CAN in fact lose weight if you eat just twinkies, as long as you remain in a calorie deficit.

People think they are "eating more" when they switch to whole foods, and they probably are eating a lot more volume because whole foods tend to have more volume per calories, but if they are losing weight they it is because they are eating in a calorie deficit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a complex question and no one really knows the answer. We still rely on studies done in the 1890s that determined how many calories are in a gram of fat, protein or carbohydrate. Understanding how a food contributes to your body composition is really almost impossible. It’s likely a combination of genetics, environment, hormones, medications and bacteria. Also labels are not accurate (calorie and nutrient contact can be drastically off). I’ve worked in nutrition for 20 years - 10 years in a clinical setting and ten in a sports setting. I’ll be the first to admit we know very little about nutrition other than some real basics:

1. Eat whole foods- try to avoid foods that have been processed, had nutrients stripped or nutrients added. If you are trying to get lean, put the focus on lean proteins, vegetables, fruit and, to a lesser extent, whole grains.

2. Drink less alcohol

3. Try to get enough sleep for your body.

4. Exercise

5. Try intermittent fasting.

6. Find things to celebrate about your body and stop worrying so much about fitting in to a certain standard. It’s a huge waste of time and energy. I think that will help in two ways - it will free you from the time suck of dieting and, hopefully, allow you to enjoy your food more. Taking the worry out of eating allows you to eat more intuitively, enjoy your meals and not feel like overeating.

I hope some of this helps!

Umm.... This is wildly inaccurate and totally scientifically illiterate. Literally thousands of studies (from lab studies to large scale behavioral studies) are conducted each year on all aspects of nutrition. What kind of credentials qualified you to work in nutrition?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I 100% believe it is calorie in and calories out. I failed to lose weight for years because I couldn't admit that while I ate a "healthy" diet I was simply eating too much. People underestimate how many calories they consume and over estimate calories they burn.

The reason people lose weight when they cut carbs isn't because carbs are bad or make you fat but because they eat less calories. It's very easy to over eat the white stuff much more difficult to overeat broccoli. Now if you could manage to eat 4000cal/day of broccoli then you would gain weight from broccoli.

I totally agree.

The leading soda company paid researchers to come up for this conclusion.
Lower carb people eat more calories and lose weight.
Personally I eat more calories mostly good fats and lose weight.

Nah. I don’t think any of defy the law of thermodynamics

It's not a matter of thermodynamics but of biology -- hormones, insulin, etc. and how they react to the food we eat and the regulation of blood sugar and fat tissue.

All calories are not the same and sugar and white flour are particularly fattening, increasing glucose and insulin and leading to storing more fat. And, once you have excess fat and insulin resistance, your body thinks you need food even when you don't, making you hungry and overeat and/or feel sluggish and low energy so you move less. Read "How we Get Fat" by Taubes.

So, eliminate sweets, minimize bread/grains. Make sure every meal is satisfying with a good amount of protein/fat so you remain satiated and can space out your meals. This allows your insulin to drop after the meal so your body switches to releasing fat from the cells rather than just running on glucose. For some people extended fasting works. For me, I feel awful when I try that but feel good and have been slowly losing weight by sticking with three meals per day, sometimes one afternoon snack of fruit+nuts or cheese if I know I have to eat dinner late.

The calories in-calories out fallacy is propped up by the sugar industry that funds biased research to try to make the case that sugar isn't bad for you. They are wrong. And, no long-term trials have shown improvement in weight or reduction in heart attacks by eating a low-fat diet.

No one is arguing that certain foods will satisfy you better or make your body feel better. Obviously 2000 calories of protein and vegetables will leave you feeling a lot better and more full than 2000 calories of Twinkies, but as the guy who did the twinkie diet showed, you CAN in fact lose weight if you eat just twinkies, as long as you remain in a calorie deficit.

People think they are "eating more" when they switch to whole foods, and they probably are eating a lot more volume because whole foods tend to have more volume per calories, but if they are losing weight they it is because they are eating in a calorie deficit.

You may lose weight on an all Twinkies diet but 1) you will feel much hungrier than a real food diet so you'd likely end up eating more than 2000 calories to try to satisfy your hunger and 2) your blood chemistry would be a mess. You might be thinner but massively unhealthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I 100% believe it is calorie in and calories out. I failed to lose weight for years because I couldn't admit that while I ate a "healthy" diet I was simply eating too much. People underestimate how many calories they consume and over estimate calories they burn.

The reason people lose weight when they cut carbs isn't because carbs are bad or make you fat but because they eat less calories. It's very easy to over eat the white stuff much more difficult to overeat broccoli. Now if you could manage to eat 4000cal/day of broccoli then you would gain weight from broccoli.

I totally agree.

The leading soda company paid researchers to come up for this conclusion.
Lower carb people eat more calories and lose weight.
Personally I eat more calories mostly good fats and lose weight.

Nah. I don’t think any of defy the law of thermodynamics

It's not a matter of thermodynamics but of biology -- hormones, insulin, etc. and how they react to the food we eat and the regulation of blood sugar and fat tissue.

All calories are not the same and sugar and white flour are particularly fattening, increasing glucose and insulin and leading to storing more fat. And, once you have excess fat and insulin resistance, your body thinks you need food even when you don't, making you hungry and overeat and/or feel sluggish and low energy so you move less. Read "How we Get Fat" by Taubes.

So, eliminate sweets, minimize bread/grains. Make sure every meal is satisfying with a good amount of protein/fat so you remain satiated and can space out your meals. This allows your insulin to drop after the meal so your body switches to releasing fat from the cells rather than just running on glucose. For some people extended fasting works. For me, I feel awful when I try that but feel good and have been slowly losing weight by sticking with three meals per day, sometimes one afternoon snack of fruit+nuts or cheese if I know I have to eat dinner late.

The calories in-calories out fallacy is propped up by the sugar industry that funds biased research to try to make the case that sugar isn't bad for you. They are wrong. And, no long-term trials have shown improvement in weight or reduction in heart attacks by eating a low-fat diet.

None of what you wrote addresses the fundamental fact that if you eat fewer calories than your body burns you lose weight. This has been demonstrated repeatedly by lab studies -- most notably with the Minnesota starvation experiment.

Lots of things impact how a specific individual metabolizes food and how much energy they get from that food as well as how much people eat. None of those things impact the fundamental science that chemical reactions which break down sugar or fat or protein need to happen in order for an organism to stay alive and move around. If less fuel comes in than is required for metabolism+movement, the organism will consume stored fat and eventually muscle mass in order to survive. Then it will die. That's basic science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I 100% believe it is calorie in and calories out. I failed to lose weight for years because I couldn't admit that while I ate a "healthy" diet I was simply eating too much. People underestimate how many calories they consume and over estimate calories they burn.

The reason people lose weight when they cut carbs isn't because carbs are bad or make you fat but because they eat less calories. It's very easy to over eat the white stuff much more difficult to overeat broccoli. Now if you could manage to eat 4000cal/day of broccoli then you would gain weight from broccoli.

I totally agree.

The leading soda company paid researchers to come up for this conclusion.
Lower carb people eat more calories and lose weight.
Personally I eat more calories mostly good fats and lose weight.

Nah. I don’t think any of defy the law of thermodynamics

It's not a matter of thermodynamics but of biology -- hormones, insulin, etc. and how they react to the food we eat and the regulation of blood sugar and fat tissue.

All calories are not the same and sugar and white flour are particularly fattening, increasing glucose and insulin and leading to storing more fat. And, once you have excess fat and insulin resistance, your body thinks you need food even when you don't, making you hungry and overeat and/or feel sluggish and low energy so you move less. Read "How we Get Fat" by Taubes.

So, eliminate sweets, minimize bread/grains. Make sure every meal is satisfying with a good amount of protein/fat so you remain satiated and can space out your meals. This allows your insulin to drop after the meal so your body switches to releasing fat from the cells rather than just running on glucose. For some people extended fasting works. For me, I feel awful when I try that but feel good and have been slowly losing weight by sticking with three meals per day, sometimes one afternoon snack of fruit+nuts or cheese if I know I have to eat dinner late.

The calories in-calories out fallacy is propped up by the sugar industry that funds biased research to try to make the case that sugar isn't bad for you. They are wrong. And, no long-term trials have shown improvement in weight or reduction in heart attacks by eating a low-fat diet.

None of what you wrote addresses the fundamental fact that if you eat fewer calories than your body burns you lose weight. This has been demonstrated repeatedly by lab studies -- most notably with the Minnesota starvation experiment.

Lots of things impact how a specific individual metabolizes food and how much energy they get from that food as well as how much people eat. None of those things impact the fundamental science that chemical reactions which break down sugar or fat or protein need to happen in order for an organism to stay alive and move around. If less fuel comes in than is required for metabolism+movement, the organism will consume stored fat and eventually muscle mass in order to survive. Then it will die. That's basic science.

Yes, if you restrict calories of any kind you will lose weight but if you don't keep enough fat/protein in your diet you are also going be massively hungry and find it all but impossible to stick to that diet. And, when you ultimately start eating more because nobody (outside of a famine or an eating disorder) is going to comply with that, you will gain the weight back and likely more. Plus, you would have lost weight from muscle and fat but the regain will be fat so you are worse off than when you started.

What works for me is a combination of the advice from Michael Pollan + Ellyn Satter (usually cited re: feeding children but the advice applies to everyone) -- eat real food, eat three meals per day so you come to the meal hungry and leave satisfied. If you must have a snack, plan for it in the afternoon and include a fat or protein. Limit sweets to special occasions only. Basically, this is how people ate 100 years ago and we didn't have an obesity epidemic. I don't know why it got so complicated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I 100% believe it is calorie in and calories out. I failed to lose weight for years because I couldn't admit that while I ate a "healthy" diet I was simply eating too much. People underestimate how many calories they consume and over estimate calories they burn.

The reason people lose weight when they cut carbs isn't because carbs are bad or make you fat but because they eat less calories. It's very easy to over eat the white stuff much more difficult to overeat broccoli. Now if you could manage to eat 4000cal/day of broccoli then you would gain weight from broccoli.

I totally agree.

The leading soda company paid researchers to come up for this conclusion.
Lower carb people eat more calories and lose weight.
Personally I eat more calories mostly good fats and lose weight.

Nah. I don’t think any of defy the law of thermodynamics

It's not a matter of thermodynamics but of biology -- hormones, insulin, etc. and how they react to the food we eat and the regulation of blood sugar and fat tissue.

All calories are not the same and sugar and white flour are particularly fattening, increasing glucose and insulin and leading to storing more fat. And, once you have excess fat and insulin resistance, your body thinks you need food even when you don't, making you hungry and overeat and/or feel sluggish and low energy so you move less. Read "How we Get Fat" by Taubes.

So, eliminate sweets, minimize bread/grains. Make sure every meal is satisfying with a good amount of protein/fat so you remain satiated and can space out your meals. This allows your insulin to drop after the meal so your body switches to releasing fat from the cells rather than just running on glucose. For some people extended fasting works. For me, I feel awful when I try that but feel good and have been slowly losing weight by sticking with three meals per day, sometimes one afternoon snack of fruit+nuts or cheese if I know I have to eat dinner late.

The calories in-calories out fallacy is propped up by the sugar industry that funds biased research to try to make the case that sugar isn't bad for you. They are wrong. And, no long-term trials have shown improvement in weight or reduction in heart attacks by eating a low-fat diet.

None of what you wrote addresses the fundamental fact that if you eat fewer calories than your body burns you lose weight. This has been demonstrated repeatedly by lab studies -- most notably with the Minnesota starvation experiment.

Lots of things impact how a specific individual metabolizes food and how much energy they get from that food as well as how much people eat. None of those things impact the fundamental science that chemical reactions which break down sugar or fat or protein need to happen in order for an organism to stay alive and move around. If less fuel comes in than is required for metabolism+movement, the organism will consume stored fat and eventually muscle mass in order to survive. Then it will die. That's basic science.

Yes, if you restrict calories of any kind you will lose weight but if you don't keep enough fat/protein in your diet you are also going be massively hungry and find it all but impossible to stick to that diet. And, when you ultimately start eating more because nobody (outside of a famine or an eating disorder) is going to comply with that, you will gain the weight back and likely more. Plus, you would have lost weight from muscle and fat but the regain will be fat so you are worse off than when you started.

What works for me is a combination of the advice from Michael Pollan + Ellyn Satter (usually cited re: feeding children but the advice applies to everyone) -- eat real food, eat three meals per day so you come to the meal hungry and leave satisfied. If you must have a snack, plan for it in the afternoon and include a fat or protein. Limit sweets to special occasions only. Basically, this is how people ate 100 years ago and we didn't have an obesity epidemic. I don't know why it got so complicated.

I get that. I am not arguing that what you eat doesn't matter for health and well being and ease of diet adherence. I was simply answering the question on whether calories are all that matter for WEIGHT LOSS. and that answer is yes, if all you care about is the number on the scale then you need a calorie deficit. people who claim that you can eat more calories (notice I said CALORIES not quantity) and still lose weight as long as those calories are x, y and z foods because some food defy the rules of thermodynamics are wrong. To lose weight you need a calorie deficit. Certain eating styles work better for some people than others, but at the end of the day all diet meant for weight loss do the same thing- create a calorie deficit.

[Anonymous]

Its not just calories in and out. I actually eat more calories on Keto and occasional IF than I did before yet I have lost a ton of weight. When I was younger, I noticed that I would gain weight whenever I ate a bunch of potatoes or rice. I thought I was crazy but I definitely saw a pattern.

Insulin is a big factor in weight management. The problem now is that everyone has the wrong food pyramid stuck in their heads. Nutrionists are just parroting what they were taught 10-20 years ago and they aren't the brightest bulbs anyway.

[Anonymous]

Calories are a big part but it’s complicated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its not just calories in and out. I actually eat more calories on Keto and occasional IF than I did before yet I have lost a ton of weight. When I was younger, I noticed that I would gain weight whenever I ate a bunch of potatoes or rice. I thought I was crazy but I definitely saw a pattern.

Insulin is a big factor in weight management. The problem now is that everyone has the wrong food pyramid stuck in their heads. Nutrionists are just parroting what they were taught 10-20 years ago and they aren't the brightest bulbs anyway.

Immune issues and allergies might have a lot to do with this. If you have wheat sensitivity or dairy allergy, but don't know it, they will wreck you body and weight loss might not be possible due to inflammation.