Reply to Is it really not calories in that matters?

Forum Index » Diet, Nutrition & Weight Loss

Reply to "Is it really not calories in that matters?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]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. 
[/quote]

I totally agree.[/quote]
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.[/quote]

Nah. I don’t think any of defy the law of thermodynamics [/quote]

[b]It's not a matter of thermodynamics but of biology[/b] -- 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.
[/quote]

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.[/quote]

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.
[/quote]

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. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics