Not getting anywhere? Here might be the reason why...
Replies
-
This thread gave me the ebola0
-
RockstarWilson wrote: »Yeah.... if I don't proofread my stuff enough times, it comes out weird. On that topic, I believe there is a strong correlation between obesity, the amount of inherent and triggered diseases reported, and the change in process by which we obtain food. Some of this is unavoidable, as a population needs to be fed, and we all can't be hunter-gatherers.
Yes, obviously there are diseases that are caused/corelate with obesity. But changing the way we obtain food didnt cause them. Changing the way we prepare those foods, and quantity, caused obesity, which can cause disease, but not the food itself.0 -
-
How often do you think that someone that is eating at a caloric deficit will have glycogen stores in the muscle and liver maxed out?RockstarWilson wrote: »
sorry...couldn't see that through all the mudflinging.
Carbs get used by the body for energy (expended into the atmosphere and recycled in some form or fashion), stored as glycogen for future use, or stored in the muscle and fat tissue as a reserve for when the glycogen gets depleted.
If you exercise, the body will use carbohydrates from what can easily be digested, then it will dip into the reserve glycogen, and then it will have to figure out another energy source. Once it gets to that point...you might experience fatigue as it runs out. that is why if you go though a heavy workout, you will need to replenish with gatorade or something to continue. That is what the wall is (the point of physical exhaustion when working out where you feel wirey or empty).
Do you think that someone who is participating in strength training or other training will be fully depleted of glycogen during training? Does the body at any point burn fat while training?
In my personal experience, I have discovered that my exercise routines have been lengthened by reducing my carb intake. I eat minimal carbs, and although I have not started measuring glucose levels, I know that my body is not relying on glycogen for primary energy. It is not relying on it because I am training it to not do so.
As I have learned from multiple sources, fat is burned extensively when weight training, as the body burns fat more efficiently at a lower heart rate. However, I think that if you eat something before working out, and then work out in the "fat burning" mode, you will not burn fat at an optimal rate as the body will first use the nutrients in the food being digested. There is a complex process for how the body can use fat cells. If it is not in that fat burning mode, you won't get as much out of your workout as you might think, IMO. I do not know the physical processes for why this is, but as stated above, my body can go much farther for longer than I could when I was eating over 50% carbs. I can do a full 1000 calorie burn workout, or a 2 hour weight training session before breakfast, and know I am burning fat, but -most- people who rely on carbohydrates must eat something either before or while working out to sustain, as their body has burned through the food that was being digested overnight and it is looking for more. I have tried working out before breakfast when I was eating mostly carbs, and my personal experience left me light headed, hungry, and empty shortly into the routine.
Even if I don't work out in the morning, I usually don't have to eat for about 4-6 hours after I wake up. I know my body is in a fat burning mode because of this. I am satiated, and while my meals are heavy when I do eat, I don't need to eat as frequently. Where people can sometimes go wrong is when they eat many meals a day, and have more opportunity to overeat.
Back to your initial question, though: It depends on how much glycogen you have stored. Since there is a finite amount of stored glycogen in your body, it has to be burned through at some point. But at a lower heart rate, you are telling your body to try to burn the fat. If the carbs are mostly taken out of the equation (and therefore the max glycogen stores), then it makes sense that the body is already using the fat for most energy output, and weight lifting will accelerate the fat burn.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
Well, science disagrees with you.
0 -
RockstarWilson wrote: »Yeah.... if I don't proofread my stuff enough times, it comes out weird. On that topic, I believe there is a strong correlation between obesity, the amount of inherent and triggered diseases reported, and the change in process by which we obtain food. Some of this is unavoidable, as a population needs to be fed, and we all can't be hunter-gatherers. But my hypothesis is simply that the conventional wisdom that says we should eat between 50-70% carbohydrates for healthy weight loss and good overall health is wrong. The body only stores two things in mass quantities: fat and protein. It stores very little carbohydrates as sugar, in comparison. So if a person eats 50-70% carbohydrates and works at a desk job where they are typically close to their non-sleeping BMR, how can they possible use the amount of energy that the body wants to use? that energy has to go somewhere, and it cannot be destroyed. So if you cant use it, and the reserves are full, where else will it go? How do you explain being hungry by lunchtime even though you haven't used all that energy? Keep in mind, I am talking to the sedentary person, not the personal trainer. The personal trainer can most likely eat cake all day and not get fat (although, they might have a bevy of other issues haha).
More questions:
How does the body store protein?
some of it goes to the muscles, the rest gets broken down and goes many other places throughout the body, but it is mostly not used for frontline energy
The body does not use sugar/carbs for storage? Where did you get that from?
I am not sure what you mean by that.
From breakfast to lunch time you don't believe we burn energy?
Of course you burn energy. But if you at a 600 calorie breakfast, and only burn 250 of it in that, say, 4 hour time span, it would make sense that that energy has to be stored. Since you are eating again at lunch, the body uses that energy first, and so on and so forth.
Why are you trying now to apply your theories that you claim are for an overall sedentary person to the people on this site where the majority participate in some kind of physical activity?
1. Sedentary does not mean you do nothing at all in the day. I don't know the proportions of who is sedentary or who is completely active all day every day. There are a lot of people who come on here that are NOT active all day, and have jobs where they sit for 8-10 hours per day. For instance, I am a sedentary college student, as I sit on my butt a lot of the day in class or doing homework. But I do things that are active throughout the day and I record them as exercise. As a generalization, people who have active lifestyles are not overweight, as they have a harder time overeating, and therefore this post does not apply to them. As another generalization, people who are sedentary for most the day can more easily overeat, and are -generally- more obese than the former.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
in for the lolz0
-
in for idiocy ….0
-
I think M finally stumped him, it might be over.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
0 -
"Carbohydrate
For carbohydrate, the body’s stores are relatively close to the daily intake. A normal non-carb loaded person may store 300-400 grams of muscle glycogen, another 50 or so of liver glyogen and 10 or so in the bloodstream as free glucose. So let’s say 350-450 grams of carbohydrate as a rough average. On a relatively normal diet of 2700 calories, if a person eats the ‘recommended’ 60% carbs, that’s 400 grams. So about the amount that’s stored in the body already.
For this reason, the body is extremely good at modulating carbohydrate oxidation to carbohydrate intake. Eat more carbs and you burn more carbs (you also store more glycogen); eat less carbs and you burn less carbs (and glycogen levels drop). This occurs for a variety of reasons including changing insulin levels (fructose, for example, since it doesn’t raise insulin, doesn’t increase carbohydrate oxidation) and simple substrate availability. And, as it turns out, fat oxidation is basically inversely related to carbohydrate oxidation.
So when you eat more carbs, you burn more carbs and burn less fat; eat less carbs and you burn less carbs and burn more fat. And don’t jump to the immediate conclusion that lowcarb diets are therefore superior for fat loss because lowcarb diets are also higher in fat intake (generally speaking). You’re burning more fat, but you’re also eating more. But that’s a topic that I’ve not only addressed previously on the site but may look at in more detail in a future article with this piece as background."
Okay, I might have been wrong in my understanding of carbs and their getting stored as fat. That might be false. I like the article, and I will have to read more from it.
It does resound my notion that if you eat more carbs, you will burn less fat, though, as the article infers that as more carbs come in, carbs have to come out, and the body will not be able to access maximum fat burn as it is emitting the energy from the glycogen stores. So, if you eat a granola bar before working out, you are not getting the maximum "fat burn" that it may say you are on the treadmill. Infact...the article says you wouldn't even be close to it.
Thank you for providing something....
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
OldSportOldsport wrote: »RockstarWilson wrote: »For the complex process of carbs to fat conversion:
http://www.livestrong.com/article/374068-how-do-carbohydrates-convert-to-fat/
http://diabeteshealth.com/read/2007/04/24/5143/why-eating-too-many-carbs-makes-you-fat/
http://www.extension.iastate.edu/humansciences/content/carbohydrate
http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/happens-unburned-carbohydrates-2461.html
I can agree with a calorie deficit. If you are eating too much food in general, you will gain weight. But simply put, you cannot burn fat if your body is expecting carbs, and is burning energy that is stored as glycogen.
These are not academic articles. Also none of them actually back up what you're saying. Let me break it down for you.
People eat carbs - yay calories \o/
They eat too many carbs
and gain weight
They eat fewer carbs that don't give them enough calories to maintain their body as is. The body eats the carbs it does get up and then also takes from the fat cells to keep necessary functions going.
Calories in, calories out. If your body burns more (through your BMR and daily activity) than you eat you will lose body fat (and some lean tissues also) because that's what fat stores are for - times of scarcity. I'm honestly not seeing what you don't grasp about this process. Do you honestly think someone could eat 1000 calories of pure carbohydrate and yet not lose body fat?
I think people are assuming I am working in absolutes. I am not. It is my fault for not being specific. As I said to another poster, my presentation could be better. Carbohydrate intake inhibits fat burn, and carbohydrates get digested fast, so most people on a high-carbohydrate diet eat more frequently. Since the body will use the carbohydrates and glycogen reserves first, as it converts to energy quicker than fat does, you will burn less fat if you eat carbohydrates throughout the day. It is like paying the minimum payment on the mortgage. You are paying mostly interest, and very little principle.
I could sit here and cite a bunch of sources for people on everything I say, but that is not my point. I simply want to get the hamster turning the wheel for the people that are stuck.
I am sorry for overlooking your statements.
0 -
Cool story bro0
-
Im still waiting for any "fundamental" science (besides the one that told me I was -partially- wrong) that tells me I am completely wrong. I don't have that. Instead, I get a bunch of people that tell me I am an idiot and leave it at that. Science is about learning, so if you just tell me I am an idiot, and you don't tell me why, you do not support science. I have not made ONE insult to any of you, so why must you make some to me? List your sources that tell me I am an idiot. Please. I would really like to know....0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I love this.vismal wrote:Do you even science?
"New" diseases often show up because humans have done something to disturb its natural habitat, such as cutting down forests, moving into new territory, eating new animals.as soon as we started farming fruits and stuff, we started contracting all these weird diseases.
In Asia, one place where plague is endemic in the rodent population has a long-standing native superstition that the rodents are unclean, not to be bothered. People who bother them die. They knew nothing about bacilli, they just knew that people who bothered the rodents died, so they kept away. New non-natives came in, bothered the rodents, and died. But they also (eventually) figured out _why_ they were dying: plague.
It's believed that HIV came from monkeys (infected with SIV) to humans when the humans had to eat new meat, didn't have enough food to live where they were. (And weren't smart enough to stop having children.) Some prion diseases got into humans the same way.
Because people had easy access to food.As soon as we started mass-producing processes stuff to feed an exponentially-increasing population, everyone started to get fat
And yes, in part because putting sugar in food is relatively cheap, tastes good, gets people to eat more food.
I know a vegetarian who's quite fat. Surprises me every time I see her.by this logic, vegetarians should all be fat
Her husband (who eats meat) & children (who aren't allowed to eat meat) are fat too.
That word you keep using. I do not think it means what you think it means.Presentation is key, I guess. One of my fallacies.
Translation: I don't have anything to back up my assertions.I don't have a formal list of sources for where I got my information, but most historical references are common knowledge0 -
Well, here you're actually pretty much right. The energy gets used to run the various processes that keep us alive, and the excess is heat... which only a physicist would describe (accurately) as 'radiation'.RockstarWilson wrote:Carbohydrates get used by the body for energy and that energy gets emitted as radiation.
Glycogen is carbohydrates stored in muscle.Extra carbohydrates get stored as glycogen for future use, or stored in the muscle and fat tissue as a reserve for when the glycogen gets depleted.
And yes, excess calories from any source will be stored as fat.
Yes, that's where your body switches to largely burning fat, which it converts back to glucose.if you go though a heavy workout, you will need to replenish with gatorade or something to continue. That is what the wall is (the point of physical exhaustion when working out where you feel wirey or empty).
So don't drink the carbs, let your body do what it's designed to do.
Here's a table which explains the healthy ranges for macros:the conventional wisdom that says we should eat between 50-70% carbohydrates for healthy weight loss and good overall health is wrong
http://www.iom.edu/Global/News Announcements/~/media/C5CD2DD7840544979A549EC47E56A02B.ashx
page 1, carbs, 45 - 65% of calories (4 cal per gram)
page 2, fat, 20 - 35% of calories (9 cal per gram)
page 4, protein, 10 - 35% of calories (4 cal per gram)
So doing 45, 25, 30 would be within recommended ranges, low on carbs, high on protein, which leads to more weight loss, and specifically more fat loss.
Well, you're partially right. Working out before breakfast has been shown to burn more fat, simply because while we're sleeping we're not eating, so the body has run down its glucose & glycogen stores. Then you throw in running or weightlifting and it's pulling more from fat.I can do a full 1000 calorie burn workout, or a 2 hour weight training session before breakfast, and know I am burning fat, but -most- people who rely on carbohydrates must eat something either before or while working out to sustain, as their body has burned through the food that was being digested overnight and it is looking for more.
"findings suggest that there may be an advantage for body fat regulation and lipid metabolism in exercising before compared with after breakfast."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23167985
You're not "telling" your body anything.at a lower heart rate, you are telling your body to try to burn the fat
You're always going to be burning some glucose and some glycogen and some fat (but rarely muscle).
When you work out lightly, you burn fewer calories, and they lean more toward carbs.
When you work out heavily, you burn more calories, and they lean more toward fat... BUT you're also burning more carbs, simply because you're burning more calories overall.
Work out at whatever level you want, just do it.
So you want people to believe what you say without any sort of proof?I could sit here and cite a bunch of sources for people on everything I say, but that is not my point. I simply want to get the hamster turning the wheel for the people that are stuck.
Well, this is the interwebs...0 -
hahaha. Fallacies. Ive got nothing for that. I definitely meant flaws. They are the same thing, but have different contexts.
Although, kind of ironic that I used that word, considering the backlash.0 -
Actually, you're not _completely_ wrong.Im [sic] still waiting for any "fundamental" science (besides the one that told me I was -partially- wrong) that tells me I am completely wrong
I did a blog post about high-protein diets, including links to 6 studies supporting the idea that eating more protein (and thereby fewer carbs) is beneficial for weight loss.
"Compared with low protein diet the high protein diet was associated with better weight maintenance when individuals with greater body mass index and waist circumference were analyzed."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24992329
"Emerging scientific evidence suggests that a diet rich in high-quality protein is a beneficial dietary strategy to prevent and/or treat obesity."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24645300
"A high-protein breakfast promotes weight loss"
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24923232
(granted, they were only studying obese Chinese adolescents)
"reductions in total carbohydrate intake, increases in protein intake, and adoption of a Mediterranean diet seem to be more effective in inducing weight loss than reductions in fat intake"
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24911982
"Evidence points to a higher protein intake in combination with resistance exercise as being efficacious in allowing preservation, and on occasion increases, in skeletal muscle mass with dietary energy restriction aimed at the promotion of weight loss."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24791918
"Diets high in protein and/or low in carbohydrate produced an approximately equal to 2.5-kg greater weight loss after 12 wk"
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15113737
0 -
Well, here you're actually pretty much right. The energy gets used to run the various processes that keep us alive, and the excess is heat... which only a physicist would describe (accurately) as 'radiation'.RockstarWilson wrote:Carbohydrates get used by the body for energy and that energy gets emitted as radiation.
Glycogen is carbohydrates stored in muscle.Extra carbohydrates get stored as glycogen for future use, or stored in the muscle and fat tissue as a reserve for when the glycogen gets depleted.
And yes, excess calories from any source will be stored as fat.
Yes, that's where your body switches to largely burning fat, which it converts back to glucose.if you go though a heavy workout, you will need to replenish with gatorade or something to continue. That is what the wall is (the point of physical exhaustion when working out where you feel wirey or empty).
So don't drink the carbs, let your body do what it's designed to do.
Here's a table which explains the healthy ranges for macros:the conventional wisdom that says we should eat between 50-70% carbohydrates for healthy weight loss and good overall health is wrong
http://www.iom.edu/Global/News Announcements/~/media/C5CD2DD7840544979A549EC47E56A02B.ashx
page 1, carbs, 45 - 65% of calories (4 cal per gram)
page 2, fat, 20 - 35% of calories (9 cal per gram)
page 4, protein, 10 - 35% of calories (4 cal per gram)
So doing 45, 25, 30 would be within recommended ranges, low on carbs, high on protein, which leads to more weight loss, and specifically more fat loss.
Well, you're partially right. Working out before breakfast has been shown to burn more fat, simply because while we're sleeping we're not eating, so the body has run down its glucose & glycogen stores. Then you throw in running or weightlifting and it's pulling more from fat.I can do a full 1000 calorie burn workout, or a 2 hour weight training session before breakfast, and know I am burning fat, but -most- people who rely on carbohydrates must eat something either before or while working out to sustain, as their body has burned through the food that was being digested overnight and it is looking for more.
"findings suggest that there may be an advantage for body fat regulation and lipid metabolism in exercising before compared with after breakfast."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23167985
You're not "telling" your body anything.at a lower heart rate, you are telling your body to try to burn the fat
You're always going to be burning some glucose and some glycogen and some fat (but rarely muscle).
When you work out lightly, you burn fewer calories, and they lean more toward carbs.
When you work out heavily, you burn more calories, and they lean more toward fat... BUT you're also burning more carbs, simply because you're burning more calories overall.
Work out at whatever level you want, just do it.
So you want people to believe what you say without any sort of proof?I could sit here and cite a bunch of sources for people on everything I say, but that is not my point. I simply want to get the hamster turning the wheel for the people that are stuck.
Well, this is the interwebs...
First off.....that is a post! I wish I knew how to post like you did. Although I know you aren't completely agreeing with me, I appreciate the feedback, and the detailed explanations.
I am doing three things in this post:
1. asserting my comprehension of what I am learning
2. interpreting the feedback and adjusting my opinions based on new information
3. Instigating intellectual stimulation for someone that is stuck.
If I help just one person progress by this post (as over 1,000 people have looked), it is a good post.
I will work on my sourcing.0 -
-
It's no secret that more protein and less carbs helps with weight loss. Dieters have been saying it for a million years, so when the studies came out, nobody was very shocked, I don't think.
When tons of people say the same thing, all the time. year after year, decade after decade, it's never a huge surprise when the studies come out saying, "They were right!"
It won't surprise me if they one day determine that eating soon before bed doesn't turn out to be related to weight gain. I've only been hearing a bodrillion reasonable people swear to that my whole life, so I wonder and wait.
Every body is different, though, so everyone has to do what works for them. 0 -
RockstarWilson wrote: »
Did something for me :laugh:
Yeah sedentary people can exercise or otherwise be in a calorie deficit. Low carb isn't the end all be all. Some days I do a much better job sticking to my calorie goals when I eat a muffin (hello sugar) for breakfast. It's what satisfies me and actually tides me over until lunch. Protein and fiber in higher quantities does help to feel satisfied on fewer calories, but each person is still different
If I did a workout and burned 100% carbs, it wouldn't matter one damn bit if I'm in a deficit. Ultimately my body still requires a total amount of energy to get through the day and that has to come from somewhere. If it's not the food I've ingested, it's body fat. That's a pretty basic concept about weight loss. You don't need to workout at a low intensity just because you're burning a higher percentage of fat. It's like if someone offered you $10,000 with $9,000 available on the first day in cash, or $20,000 with only 10% available right away as cash, which would you take? Hahah that's Actually a terrible example, many people might take the 10 grand.
A lot of people do come here because they're at the end of their weight loss rope. 90-something percent of them are not in a deficit and need to tighten up their logging. There's no mystery, and very few special snowflakes
0 -
RockstarWilson wrote: »
Did something for me :laugh:
Yeah sedentary people can exercise or otherwise be in a calorie deficit. Low carb isn't the end all be all. Some days I do a much better job sticking to my calorie goals when I eat a muffin (hello sugar) for breakfast. It's what satisfies me and actually tides me over until lunch. Protein and fiber in higher quantities does help to feel satisfied on fewer calories, but each person is still different
If I did a workout and burned 100% carbs, it wouldn't matter one damn bit if I'm in a deficit. Ultimately my body still requires a total amount of energy to get through the day and that has to come from somewhere. If it's not the food I've ingested, it's body fat. That's a pretty basic concept about weight loss. You don't need to workout at a low intensity just because you're burning a higher percentage of fat. It's like if someone offered you $10,000 with $9,000 available on the first day in cash, or $20,000 with only 10% available right away as cash, which would you take? Hahah that's Actually a terrible example, many people might take the 10 grand.
I was thinking, "It depends on how badly they need the cash." If the bookie is coming tonight, with his friends, to collect, 10K now is better than 20K a month from now.
0 -
Yeah sedentary people can exercise or otherwise be in a calorie deficit. Low carb isn't the end all be all. Some days I do a much better job sticking to my calorie goals when I eat a muffin (hello sugar) for breakfast. It's what satisfies me and actually tides me over until lunch. Protein and fiber in higher quantities does help to feel satisfied on fewer calories, but each person is still different
If I did a workout and burned 100% carbs, it wouldn't matter one damn bit if I'm in a deficit. Ultimately my body still requires a total amount of energy to get through the day and that has to come from somewhere. If it's not the food I've ingested, it's body fat. That's a pretty basic concept about weight loss. You don't need to workout at a low intensity just because you're burning a higher percentage of fat. It's like if someone offered you $10,000 with $9,000 available on the first day in cash, or $20,000 with only 10% available right away as cash, which would you take? Hahah that's Actually a terrible example, many people might take the 10 grand.
A lot of people do come here because they're at the end of their weight loss rope. 90-something percent of them are not in a deficit and need to tighten up their logging. There's no mystery, and very few special snowflakes
This.
Also, OP, you seem to be missing this point (emphasis added by me):MKEgal wrote:And yes, excess calories from any source will be stored as fat.
And since we're arguing with personal experience: I feel satiated longer when I eat meals that contain all three macronutrients. Scrambled eggs with veggies and meat, for example, fill me up quickly but don't last that long. If I add some bread (even if I reduce something in the scrambled eggs and thus don't add calories with the bread but just shift the macronutrient ratio), I'll feel satiated longer.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions