Not getting anywhere? Here might be the reason why...
Options
Replies
-
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have anything to back up my assertions.I don't have a formal list of sources for where I got my information, but most historical references are common knowledge0 -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 -
RockstarWilson wrote: »Historically, humans have relied on fats in the winter, and (maybe) plants in the summer. Inuits had no choice but to rely on whale and walrus meat and fat. Mammals other than humans use fat to keep themselves alive when plants and fruits aren't available. But as I educate myself on how my body processes nutrients, I am finding it interesting that as soon as we started farming fruits and stuff, we started contracting all these weird diseases. As soon as we started mass-producing processes stuff to feed an exponentially-increasing population, everyone started to get fat. Diseases and disorders came out of the woodworks. Coincidence? Probably not.
I just had to highlight the (non-diet related) bit that gave me cancer. The reason new diseases came about is because agriculture caused humans and animals to be cooped up together and farming fruits and veg brought disease carrying birds and rats into to human settlements because they ate the fruit and veg too. Also the population is increasing because of agriculture and farming, not the other way around. Nowadays, part of the reason for the prevelance of certain disorders and diseases is because we're at a weird point in our evolution where physically we're still incredibly similar to hominids and our early human ancestors but our environment and the way we live is so different, essentially we're waiting for our bodies to catch up to our brains.
Scientist out!0 -
RockstarWilson wrote: »
LOL NOW that is funny coming from the OP ….
why don't you post your crap on FB?????-1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions