I'M getting fed up with all this weight loss crap because really i dont know whats going on.
Options
Replies
-
Stop complaining and start reading up on your facts about health and nutrition. You cant expect to have a 6 pack just with basic exercise and diet. There is such a thing as genetics... and if that isnt the issue maybe you need to shock your body. Try carb cycling and circuit training... try alternating aerobic and anerobic exercise... Hell, I got past a plateau by eating pizza and drinking beer! My body needed a rest!!! When I rested I was stronger and more motivated and my body healed!
0 -
BusyRaeNOTBusty wrote: »3000 calories a day is too much to lose fat on.
Not necessarily. My husband has to eat 4000 calories a day just to gain 1/2 lb per week (he's bulking). If he ate 3000 calories per day, he'd lose weight. And it's not as if he exercises a ridiculous amount. He lifts for about an hour 4x/week and has a job where he stands a lot, but that's it. Pretty much no cardio.
Sure, not all guys are like that, but saying 3000 calories is too much to lose fat isn't necessarily true.0 -
JZ_Evolution_Mark2 wrote: »Stop complaining and start reading up on your facts about health and nutrition. You cant expect to have a 6 pack just with basic exercise and diet. There is such a thing as genetics... and if that isnt the issue maybe you need to shock your body. Try carb cycling and circuit training... try alternating aerobic and anerobic exercise... Hell, I got past a plateau by eating pizza and drinking beer! My body needed a rest!!! When I rested I was stronger and more motivated and my body healed!
so basically your saying if its genetics I cant lose belly fat???0 -
stevencloser wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »
You linked your research from a blog. Lyle wrote the book on ketogenic diets. Even he would have major issues with your "carbs fuel weight gain" statement. I get 50-60% carbs how come I don't gain weight? Oh thats right calories in/calories out. Just to add low carb forums are full of people who are not losing weight and even gaining weight because they believe and are told that calories don't matter.aqsylvester wrote: »
Nonsense.aqsylvester wrote: »taylorblade
Central obesity is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease, especially if the fat is accumulating right up around your internal organs (a more dense, hardened feeling belly). Is your waist to hip ratio less than 0.9? (a good measure of central obesity).
I'm surprised the best advice you've gotten is eat at a calorie deficit and exercise more (or just get over it).
This is a cultural myth that food/beverage companies are doing their darnedest to maintain. Why? So you can eat anything you want (all their processed products) as long as you get the right number of calories. Also, ultimately, your weight gain is your fault, it is based on your personal will power.
This is totally false. Not all calories are created equal (carbs fuel weight gain, fats and proteins do not). And nutrients from real foods are much better utilized than from man-made "health" foods like shakes and bars. I have a hunch you are eating too many carbohydrates and not near enough fat. You probably eat a lot of lean protein. If you are serious about making a change, the first and best thing you can do is cut all processed foods from your diet. Anything with added sugar, vegetable oils like canola or soybean, and all grains (not nutritionally dense, just a filler food).
By doing this you will accomplish 2 things:
1. nourish and satisfy your body with nutrients
2. decrease total inflammation in your body which also helps to decrease leptin resistance
Once you are only eat real, whole, single ingredient food, which will naturally decrease your appetite... look at your macronutrients (fats, carbs, and proteins). Keep your carbs at or below 20% of you intake. Keep your fats at least 40%. The remainder protein. Your body will naturally shed weight. Most likely this breakdown of macros will happen naturally by eating whole foods.
There is A LOT to learn. I know I probably said some new terms. And here is a great resource from my favorite nutrition blog:
http://authoritynutrition.com/low-carb-diet-meal-plan-and-menu/
This blog has evidence-based articles on topics from leptin resistance to processed foods to healthy fat. Good luck!
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/how-we-get-fat.html/
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/nutrient-intake-nutrient-storage-and-nutrient-oxidation.html/
Hmmmmm, I'm the one spouting "nonsense" from extensively researched and evidence-based articles (you know, using the scientific method, peer-review, meta-analysis, ever heard of any of it?), while you link to me a bodybuilding website without a single referenced source? So what exactly are they basing their claims on?
Now, I'm enough of a critical thinker not to call whatever "Lyle McDonald" says nonsense without doing my own research. I'll probably read and understand the similarities and differences much better than an immature thinker who so articulately and dispassionately states a one word response (being facetious). Good luck to you, oh destroyer of thoughtful, considerate discourse!
For starters, let me say, I think the ketogenic diet is great... as long as it's real food and not processed. Truly, diets have varied greatly over the millennium of human existence, but our current obesity epidemic started with the advent of processed foods... of course, looking back over history there have been pockets of obese population sectors who were usually poverty stricken and eating a high carbohydrate, nutritionally devoid diet.
You may be active enough to tolerate heavier amounts of carbs. But overall, lowering carbs decreases the body's output of insulin which decreases fat storage and blockade of leptin. Yes, I linked a blog, but he is evidence based, citing real studies... and not fringe studies. He keeps up with mainstream RCTs and meta-analyses from serious journals like JAMA and AJCN.
How about you check it out for yourself? Do some reading on it? THEN make a weighted, judicious response.
What? The obesity epidemic started when food became abundant and people's movement in and out of work decreased. And before that, the ones who were obese were never the poor, always the rich, because they had food in abundance and didn't have to physically work as opposed to the poor. Look at paintings of kings and other rich people from a few hundred years back.
Obesity = Eating too much + moving too little.
If is was that simple, what's going in in America since 1985? Obesity rates have absolutely sky-rocketed. About 30% of us are obese. Have our eating and movement habits really changed THAT much? Just check out this TED Talk at the 2:00 mark to see obesity prevalence maps from the CDC website. Watch the whole thing if you have time. This is MUCH bigger issue than a simple math problem of calories in - calories out.
http://www.ted.com/talks/dean_ornish_on_the_world_s_killer_diet
I don't agree with everything Dr. Dean Ornish says, but he does a powerful job here of revealing how serious this issue is.
*On a side note, go to the current CDC maps and not a single state has less than 20% obesity rate (all would be in red by his color scheme).
http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/prevalence-maps.html0 -
Eating too much + moving too little is what's going on.aqsylvester wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »
You linked your research from a blog. Lyle wrote the book on ketogenic diets. Even he would have major issues with your "carbs fuel weight gain" statement. I get 50-60% carbs how come I don't gain weight? Oh thats right calories in/calories out. Just to add low carb forums are full of people who are not losing weight and even gaining weight because they believe and are told that calories don't matter.aqsylvester wrote: »
Nonsense.aqsylvester wrote: »taylorblade
Central obesity is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease, especially if the fat is accumulating right up around your internal organs (a more dense, hardened feeling belly). Is your waist to hip ratio less than 0.9? (a good measure of central obesity).
I'm surprised the best advice you've gotten is eat at a calorie deficit and exercise more (or just get over it).
This is a cultural myth that food/beverage companies are doing their darnedest to maintain. Why? So you can eat anything you want (all their processed products) as long as you get the right number of calories. Also, ultimately, your weight gain is your fault, it is based on your personal will power.
This is totally false. Not all calories are created equal (carbs fuel weight gain, fats and proteins do not). And nutrients from real foods are much better utilized than from man-made "health" foods like shakes and bars. I have a hunch you are eating too many carbohydrates and not near enough fat. You probably eat a lot of lean protein. If you are serious about making a change, the first and best thing you can do is cut all processed foods from your diet. Anything with added sugar, vegetable oils like canola or soybean, and all grains (not nutritionally dense, just a filler food).
By doing this you will accomplish 2 things:
1. nourish and satisfy your body with nutrients
2. decrease total inflammation in your body which also helps to decrease leptin resistance
Once you are only eat real, whole, single ingredient food, which will naturally decrease your appetite... look at your macronutrients (fats, carbs, and proteins). Keep your carbs at or below 20% of you intake. Keep your fats at least 40%. The remainder protein. Your body will naturally shed weight. Most likely this breakdown of macros will happen naturally by eating whole foods.
There is A LOT to learn. I know I probably said some new terms. And here is a great resource from my favorite nutrition blog:
http://authoritynutrition.com/low-carb-diet-meal-plan-and-menu/
This blog has evidence-based articles on topics from leptin resistance to processed foods to healthy fat. Good luck!
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/how-we-get-fat.html/
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/nutrient-intake-nutrient-storage-and-nutrient-oxidation.html/
Hmmmmm, I'm the one spouting "nonsense" from extensively researched and evidence-based articles (you know, using the scientific method, peer-review, meta-analysis, ever heard of any of it?), while you link to me a bodybuilding website without a single referenced source? So what exactly are they basing their claims on?
Now, I'm enough of a critical thinker not to call whatever "Lyle McDonald" says nonsense without doing my own research. I'll probably read and understand the similarities and differences much better than an immature thinker who so articulately and dispassionately states a one word response (being facetious). Good luck to you, oh destroyer of thoughtful, considerate discourse!
For starters, let me say, I think the ketogenic diet is great... as long as it's real food and not processed. Truly, diets have varied greatly over the millennium of human existence, but our current obesity epidemic started with the advent of processed foods... of course, looking back over history there have been pockets of obese population sectors who were usually poverty stricken and eating a high carbohydrate, nutritionally devoid diet.
You may be active enough to tolerate heavier amounts of carbs. But overall, lowering carbs decreases the body's output of insulin which decreases fat storage and blockade of leptin. Yes, I linked a blog, but he is evidence based, citing real studies... and not fringe studies. He keeps up with mainstream RCTs and meta-analyses from serious journals like JAMA and AJCN.
How about you check it out for yourself? Do some reading on it? THEN make a weighted, judicious response.
What? The obesity epidemic started when food became abundant and people's movement in and out of work decreased. And before that, the ones who were obese were never the poor, always the rich, because they had food in abundance and didn't have to physically work as opposed to the poor. Look at paintings of kings and other rich people from a few hundred years back.
Obesity = Eating too much + moving too little.
If is was that simple, what's going in in America since 1985?
Yes. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2722815/Daily-calorie-intake-countries-world-revealed-surprise-U-S-tops-list-3-770.htmlaqsylvester wrote: »Have our eating and movement habits really changed THAT much?-1 -
aqsylvester wrote: »
If is was that simple, what's going in in America since 1985? Obesity rates have absolutely sky-rocketed. About 30% of us are obese. Have our eating and movement habits really changed THAT much?
Yes they have. Here is a study (from a peer reviewed journal, not an opinion piece):
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1001050
Here's a summary:
"Competing theories attempt to explain changes in total energy (TE) intake; however, a rigorous, comprehensive examination of these explanations has not been undertaken. Our objective was to examine the relative contribution of energy density (ED), portion size (PS), and the number of eating/drinking occasions (EOs) to changes in daily TE.
While all three components have contributed to some extent to 30-y changes in TE, changes in EO and PS have accounted for most of the change. These findings suggest a new focus for efforts to reduce energy imbalances in US adults."
Basically we are eating more frequently (EO) and in larger portion sizes (PO). Not really a surprise that we have an obesity problem.0 -
taylorblade wrote: »
Here is some images of me forgive me for posting selfies lol but this is my belly fat percent and how much muscle I have. But can somebody please tell me about how much belly % fat does it look like I have.
OP. You are a good looking young man. Nice muscle development in your chest, shoulders and arms. Based on your pictures I'd advise you to continue eating about 3000 calories (which seems to be maintenance for you), aim for 130-150 grams of protein per day and get a solid lifting program (Starting Strength, Stronglifts 5x5 for examples). Given that you are a 18 year old man who is pretty new to lifting, you should be able to accomplish a "body re-composition" easier than most. I know you have more fat than you want right now, and you don't want to do a bulk, so re-comp is what you want.
What is it about lifting that you do not like?0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »
If is was that simple, what's going in in America since 1985? Obesity rates have absolutely sky-rocketed. About 30% of us are obese. Have our eating and movement habits really changed THAT much?
Yes they have. Here is a study (from a peer reviewed journal, not an opinion piece):
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1001050
Here's a summary:
"Competing theories attempt to explain changes in total energy (TE) intake; however, a rigorous, comprehensive examination of these explanations has not been undertaken. Our objective was to examine the relative contribution of energy density (ED), portion size (PS), and the number of eating/drinking occasions (EOs) to changes in daily TE.
While all three components have contributed to some extent to 30-y changes in TE, changes in EO and PS have accounted for most of the change. These findings suggest a new focus for efforts to reduce energy imbalances in US adults."
Basically we are eating more frequently (EO) and in larger portion sizes (PO). Not really a surprise that we have an obesity problem.
Yes, of course, that's true. Of course we are eating too much to account for our energy expenditure, that's the whole point! (and a pretty obvious one for a study to make). But the question is "WHY?" Why are we overeating to such a great extent? Why is leptin not doing it's job? The answer is hugely multi-factorial, far more complicated than just "It's your fault you're fat. Stop eating so much and move more."0 -
aqsylvester wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »
If is was that simple, what's going in in America since 1985? Obesity rates have absolutely sky-rocketed. About 30% of us are obese. Have our eating and movement habits really changed THAT much?
Yes they have. Here is a study (from a peer reviewed journal, not an opinion piece):
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1001050
Here's a summary:
"Competing theories attempt to explain changes in total energy (TE) intake; however, a rigorous, comprehensive examination of these explanations has not been undertaken. Our objective was to examine the relative contribution of energy density (ED), portion size (PS), and the number of eating/drinking occasions (EOs) to changes in daily TE.
While all three components have contributed to some extent to 30-y changes in TE, changes in EO and PS have accounted for most of the change. These findings suggest a new focus for efforts to reduce energy imbalances in US adults."
Basically we are eating more frequently (EO) and in larger portion sizes (PO). Not really a surprise that we have an obesity problem.
Yes, of course, that's true. Of course we are eating too much to account for our energy expenditure, that the whole point! But the question is "WHY?" Why are we overeating to such a great extent? Why is leptin not doing it's job? The answer is hugely multi-factorial, far more complicated than just "It's your fault you're fat. Stop eating so much and move more."
If those overweight individuals begin eating below their TDEE, making better food choices, and increasing their activity, do they lose weight? That alone would indicate that the problem is largely one of lifestyle and choices, not a biological one.0 -
aqsylvester wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »
If is was that simple, what's going in in America since 1985? Obesity rates have absolutely sky-rocketed. About 30% of us are obese. Have our eating and movement habits really changed THAT much?
Yes they have. Here is a study (from a peer reviewed journal, not an opinion piece):
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1001050
Here's a summary:
"Competing theories attempt to explain changes in total energy (TE) intake; however, a rigorous, comprehensive examination of these explanations has not been undertaken. Our objective was to examine the relative contribution of energy density (ED), portion size (PS), and the number of eating/drinking occasions (EOs) to changes in daily TE.
While all three components have contributed to some extent to 30-y changes in TE, changes in EO and PS have accounted for most of the change. These findings suggest a new focus for efforts to reduce energy imbalances in US adults."
Basically we are eating more frequently (EO) and in larger portion sizes (PO). Not really a surprise that we have an obesity problem.
Yes, of course, that's true. Of course we are eating too much to account for our energy expenditure, that the whole point! But the question is "WHY?" Why are we overeating to such a great extent? Why is leptin not doing it's job? The answer is hugely multi-factorial, far more complicated than just "It's your fault you're fat. Stop eating so much and move more."
If those overweight individuals begin eating below their TDEE, making better food choices, and increasing their activity, do they lose weight? That alone would indicate that the problem is largely one of lifestyle and choices, not a biological one.
0 -
aqsylvester wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »
If is was that simple, what's going in in America since 1985? Obesity rates have absolutely sky-rocketed. About 30% of us are obese. Have our eating and movement habits really changed THAT much?
Yes they have. Here is a study (from a peer reviewed journal, not an opinion piece):
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1001050
Here's a summary:
"Competing theories attempt to explain changes in total energy (TE) intake; however, a rigorous, comprehensive examination of these explanations has not been undertaken. Our objective was to examine the relative contribution of energy density (ED), portion size (PS), and the number of eating/drinking occasions (EOs) to changes in daily TE.
While all three components have contributed to some extent to 30-y changes in TE, changes in EO and PS have accounted for most of the change. These findings suggest a new focus for efforts to reduce energy imbalances in US adults."
Basically we are eating more frequently (EO) and in larger portion sizes (PO). Not really a surprise that we have an obesity problem.
Yes, of course, that's true. Of course we are eating too much to account for our energy expenditure, that the whole point! But the question is "WHY?" Why are we overeating to such a great extent? Why is leptin not doing it's job? The answer is hugely multi-factorial, far more complicated than just "It's your fault you're fat. Stop eating so much and move more."
If those overweight individuals begin eating below their TDEE, making better food choices, and increasing their activity, do they lose weight? That alone would indicate that the problem is largely one of lifestyle and choices, not a biological one.
No, it's only illuminates one part of problem--that people are overeating. Even the individuals who manage to buckle down and get some weight off are still far more likely to gain it back than to keep it off... why is that? The problem is far more complicated.
Industry is doing it's hardest to have us maintain the myth that it's simply a matter of calories in/calories out so that we'll keep buying their processed, sugar-laden products. It's culturally pervasive, and there's no way my words will make a difference to you in one day.
Here's an example for you:
Most people think diamonds are valuable, don't they? It's a culturally pervasive myth intentionally and deceitfully propagated by the industry. The facts are out there, but people still hold onto false beliefs. This mass deceit was first devised in 1948, no less, when the extensive diamond mines in Africa were discovered. Yet, even today, I still can't convince my friend to forgo a silly diamond engagement ring and save her fiance some money!
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you-ever-tried-to-sell-a-diamond/304575/
It's best not to believe things just because you heard it somewhere. Of course, it is easier, and that's the rub.0 -
aqsylvester wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »
If is was that simple, what's going in in America since 1985? Obesity rates have absolutely sky-rocketed. About 30% of us are obese. Have our eating and movement habits really changed THAT much?
Yes they have. Here is a study (from a peer reviewed journal, not an opinion piece):
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1001050
Here's a summary:
"Competing theories attempt to explain changes in total energy (TE) intake; however, a rigorous, comprehensive examination of these explanations has not been undertaken. Our objective was to examine the relative contribution of energy density (ED), portion size (PS), and the number of eating/drinking occasions (EOs) to changes in daily TE.
While all three components have contributed to some extent to 30-y changes in TE, changes in EO and PS have accounted for most of the change. These findings suggest a new focus for efforts to reduce energy imbalances in US adults."
Basically we are eating more frequently (EO) and in larger portion sizes (PO). Not really a surprise that we have an obesity problem.
Yes, of course, that's true. Of course we are eating too much to account for our energy expenditure, that the whole point! But the question is "WHY?" Why are we overeating to such a great extent? Why is leptin not doing it's job? The answer is hugely multi-factorial, far more complicated than just "It's your fault you're fat. Stop eating so much and move more."
If those overweight individuals begin eating below their TDEE, making better food choices, and increasing their activity, do they lose weight? That alone would indicate that the problem is largely one of lifestyle and choices, not a biological one.
No, it's only illuminates one part of problem--that people are overeating. Even the individuals who manage to buckle down and get some weight off are still far more likely to gain it back than to keep it off... why is that? The problem is far more complicated.
Industry is doing it's hardest to have us maintain the myth that it's simply a matter of calories in/calories out so that we'll keep buying their processed, sugar-laden products. It's culturally pervasive, and there's no way my words will make a difference to you in one day.
Here's an example for you:
Most people think diamonds are valuable, don't they? It's a culturally pervasive myth intentionally and deceitfully propagated by the industry. The facts are out there, but people still hold onto false beliefs. This mass deceit was first devised in 1948, no less, when the extensive diamond mines in Africa were discovered. Yet, even today, I still can't convince my friend to forgo a silly diamond engagement ring and save her fiance some money!
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you-ever-tried-to-sell-a-diamond/304575/
It's best not to believe things just because you heard it somewhere. Of course, it is easier, and that's the rub.
They gain the weight back because they go back to their old habits of overeating and moving less. It's really not complicated.
It really is calories in vs calories out. There are members of this site who have eaten a Paleo diet (read: no processed, sugar laden products) and bulked to increase muscle mass. Because they ate more calories than they burned. Your words aren't going to make a difference to me, because they aren't backed by science.
And perhaps you should leave your friend alone and let her choose her own engagement ring, seeing as how it is her ring and her relationship, not yours.0 -
aqsylvester wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »
If is was that simple, what's going in in America since 1985? Obesity rates have absolutely sky-rocketed. About 30% of us are obese. Have our eating and movement habits really changed THAT much?
Yes they have. Here is a study (from a peer reviewed journal, not an opinion piece):
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1001050
Here's a summary:
"Competing theories attempt to explain changes in total energy (TE) intake; however, a rigorous, comprehensive examination of these explanations has not been undertaken. Our objective was to examine the relative contribution of energy density (ED), portion size (PS), and the number of eating/drinking occasions (EOs) to changes in daily TE.
While all three components have contributed to some extent to 30-y changes in TE, changes in EO and PS have accounted for most of the change. These findings suggest a new focus for efforts to reduce energy imbalances in US adults."
Basically we are eating more frequently (EO) and in larger portion sizes (PO). Not really a surprise that we have an obesity problem.
Yes, of course, that's true. Of course we are eating too much to account for our energy expenditure, that the whole point! But the question is "WHY?" Why are we overeating to such a great extent? Why is leptin not doing it's job? The answer is hugely multi-factorial, far more complicated than just "It's your fault you're fat. Stop eating so much and move more."
If those overweight individuals begin eating below their TDEE, making better food choices, and increasing their activity, do they lose weight? That alone would indicate that the problem is largely one of lifestyle and choices, not a biological one.
No, it's only illuminates one part of problem--that people are overeating. Even the individuals who manage to buckle down and get some weight off are still far more likely to gain it back than to keep it off... why is that? The problem is far more complicated.
Industry is doing it's hardest to have us maintain the myth that it's simply a matter of calories in/calories out so that we'll keep buying their processed, sugar-laden products. It's culturally pervasive, and there's no way my words will make a difference to you in one day.
Here's an example for you:
Most people think diamonds are valuable, don't they? It's a culturally pervasive myth intentionally and deceitfully propagated by the industry. The facts are out there, but people still hold onto false beliefs. This mass deceit was first devised in 1948, no less, when the extensive diamond mines in Africa were discovered. Yet, even today, I still can't convince my friend to forgo a silly diamond engagement ring and save her fiance some money!
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you-ever-tried-to-sell-a-diamond/304575/
It's best not to believe things just because you heard it somewhere. Of course, it is easier, and that's the rub.
They gain the weight back because they go back to their old habits of overeating and moving less. It's really not complicated.
It really is calories in vs calories out. There are members of this site who have eaten a Paleo diet (read: no processed, sugar laden products) and bulked to increase muscle mass. Because they ate more calories than they burned. Your words aren't going to make a difference to me, because they aren't backed by science.
And perhaps you should leave your friend alone and let her choose her own engagement ring, seeing as how it is her ring and her relationship, not yours.
exactly... "It's really not complicated." I don't pretend to have it figured out--you do. Lucky for me, lots of dedicated scientists and researchers are still at work on understanding this serious health epidemic.0 -
aqsylvester wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »
If is was that simple, what's going in in America since 1985? Obesity rates have absolutely sky-rocketed. About 30% of us are obese. Have our eating and movement habits really changed THAT much?
Yes they have. Here is a study (from a peer reviewed journal, not an opinion piece):
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1001050
Here's a summary:
"Competing theories attempt to explain changes in total energy (TE) intake; however, a rigorous, comprehensive examination of these explanations has not been undertaken. Our objective was to examine the relative contribution of energy density (ED), portion size (PS), and the number of eating/drinking occasions (EOs) to changes in daily TE.
While all three components have contributed to some extent to 30-y changes in TE, changes in EO and PS have accounted for most of the change. These findings suggest a new focus for efforts to reduce energy imbalances in US adults."
Basically we are eating more frequently (EO) and in larger portion sizes (PO). Not really a surprise that we have an obesity problem.
Yes, of course, that's true. Of course we are eating too much to account for our energy expenditure, that the whole point! But the question is "WHY?" Why are we overeating to such a great extent? Why is leptin not doing it's job? The answer is hugely multi-factorial, far more complicated than just "It's your fault you're fat. Stop eating so much and move more."
If those overweight individuals begin eating below their TDEE, making better food choices, and increasing their activity, do they lose weight? That alone would indicate that the problem is largely one of lifestyle and choices, not a biological one.
No, it's only illuminates one part of problem--that people are overeating. Even the individuals who manage to buckle down and get some weight off are still far more likely to gain it back than to keep it off... why is that? The problem is far more complicated.
Industry is doing it's hardest to have us maintain the myth that it's simply a matter of calories in/calories out so that we'll keep buying their processed, sugar-laden products. It's culturally pervasive, and there's no way my words will make a difference to you in one day.
Here's an example for you:
Most people think diamonds are valuable, don't they? It's a culturally pervasive myth intentionally and deceitfully propagated by the industry. The facts are out there, but people still hold onto false beliefs. This mass deceit was first devised in 1948, no less, when the extensive diamond mines in Africa were discovered. Yet, even today, I still can't convince my friend to forgo a silly diamond engagement ring and save her fiance some money!
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you-ever-tried-to-sell-a-diamond/304575/
It's best not to believe things just because you heard it somewhere. Of course, it is easier, and that's the rub.
They gain the weight back because they go back to their old habits of overeating and moving less. It's really not complicated.
It really is calories in vs calories out. There are members of this site who have eaten a Paleo diet (read: no processed, sugar laden products) and bulked to increase muscle mass. Because they ate more calories than they burned. Your words aren't going to make a difference to me, because they aren't backed by science.
And perhaps you should leave your friend alone and let her choose her own engagement ring, seeing as how it is her ring and her relationship, not yours.
This so much! It's not the industries fault if someone overeats sugary, processed, or any other food that is high in calories. It is as simple as calories in/ calories out, does it mean someone will be healthy if all they eat is chips and drink soda? Probably not. Doesn't mean you couldn't loses weight if you ate those things below what you burn. I feel people that blame companies for their overweight problems because it's easier then admitting that they weren't more careful with what they were eating.0 -
I got lost when I read that our lives haven't changed much since 1985. We can probably come up with hundreds of variables impacting the weight loss equation but the ones that has the strongest correlation are calorie deficits and active movement.
For practical purposes, focus on the 80% rule, if it does not work there, then each person has to dig a little deeper0 -
aqsylvester wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »aqsylvester wrote: »
If is was that simple, what's going in in America since 1985? Obesity rates have absolutely sky-rocketed. About 30% of us are obese. Have our eating and movement habits really changed THAT much?
Yes they have. Here is a study (from a peer reviewed journal, not an opinion piece):
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1001050
Here's a summary:
"Competing theories attempt to explain changes in total energy (TE) intake; however, a rigorous, comprehensive examination of these explanations has not been undertaken. Our objective was to examine the relative contribution of energy density (ED), portion size (PS), and the number of eating/drinking occasions (EOs) to changes in daily TE.
While all three components have contributed to some extent to 30-y changes in TE, changes in EO and PS have accounted for most of the change. These findings suggest a new focus for efforts to reduce energy imbalances in US adults."
Basically we are eating more frequently (EO) and in larger portion sizes (PO). Not really a surprise that we have an obesity problem.
Yes, of course, that's true. Of course we are eating too much to account for our energy expenditure, that the whole point! But the question is "WHY?" Why are we overeating to such a great extent? Why is leptin not doing it's job? The answer is hugely multi-factorial, far more complicated than just "It's your fault you're fat. Stop eating so much and move more."
If those overweight individuals begin eating below their TDEE, making better food choices, and increasing their activity, do they lose weight? That alone would indicate that the problem is largely one of lifestyle and choices, not a biological one.
No, it's only illuminates one part of problem--that people are overeating. Even the individuals who manage to buckle down and get some weight off are still far more likely to gain it back than to keep it off... why is that? The problem is far more complicated.
Industry is doing it's hardest to have us maintain the myth that it's simply a matter of calories in/calories out so that we'll keep buying their processed, sugar-laden products. It's culturally pervasive, and there's no way my words will make a difference to you in one day.
Here's an example for you:
Most people think diamonds are valuable, don't they? It's a culturally pervasive myth intentionally and deceitfully propagated by the industry. The facts are out there, but people still hold onto false beliefs. This mass deceit was first devised in 1948, no less, when the extensive diamond mines in Africa were discovered. Yet, even today, I still can't convince my friend to forgo a silly diamond engagement ring and save her fiance some money!
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you-ever-tried-to-sell-a-diamond/304575/
It's best not to believe things just because you heard it somewhere. Of course, it is easier, and that's the rub.
They gain the weight back because they go back to their old habits of overeating and moving less. It's really not complicated.
It really is calories in vs calories out. There are members of this site who have eaten a Paleo diet (read: no processed, sugar laden products) and bulked to increase muscle mass. Because they ate more calories than they burned. Your words aren't going to make a difference to me, because they aren't backed by science.
And perhaps you should leave your friend alone and let her choose her own engagement ring, seeing as how it is her ring and her relationship, not yours.
exactly... "It's really not complicated." I don't pretend to have it figured out--you do. Lucky for me, lots of dedicated scientists and researchers are still at work on understanding this serious health epidemic.
I'm not pretending.
0 -
OP - sorry your thread got hijacked.
My opinion, I am 45 now and really wish I would have had these people giving me such great advice.
You are at the perfect age to put on muscle mass that will benefit you the rest of your life. A few years of having some extra fat is not going to hurt you as you work on creating a good muscle base.
Start a good program like Strong Lifts 5 x 5, Starting Strength, or Wendlers 5/3/1. I am currently doing 5/3/1 and having a lot of success and that is while eating at a deficit. You can eat at maintenance or a little above and let the muscle start piling on. Unless you have a medical issue, it is all pretty straight forward.
Some posters who shall not be named are trying to over complicate it. Stick to the basics, there is no magic to this.
0 -
BusyRaeNOTBusty wrote: »taylorblade wrote: »
Here is some images of me forgive me for posting selfies lol but this is my belly fat percent and how much muscle I have. But can somebody please tell me about how much belly % fat does it look like I have.
OP. You are a good looking young man. Nice muscle development in your chest, shoulders and arms. Based on your pictures I'd advise you to continue eating about 3000 calories (which seems to be maintenance for you), aim for 130-150 grams of protein per day and get a solid lifting program (Starting Strength, Stronglifts 5x5 for examples). Given that you are a 18 year old man who is pretty new to lifting, you should be able to accomplish a "body re-composition" easier than most. I know you have more fat than you want right now, and you don't want to do a bulk, so re-comp is what you want.
What is it about lifting that you do not like?[/quote
Because see the thing about it is I never seem to progress in weight lifting. Also people say when you stop lifting weights your muscles begin to sag on you and I don't wont that. I wont to have a perfect body for the rest of my life.0 -
taylorblade wrote: »
Because see the thing about it is I never seem to progress in weight lifting. Also people say when you stop lifting weights your muscles begin to sag on you and I don't wont that. I wont to have a perfect body for the rest of my life.BusyRaeNOTBusty wrote: »taylorblade wrote: »
Here is some images of me forgive me for posting selfies lol but this is my belly fat percent and how much muscle I have. But can somebody please tell me about how much belly % fat does it look like I have.
OP. You are a good looking young man. Nice muscle development in your chest, shoulders and arms. Based on your pictures I'd advise you to continue eating about 3000 calories (which seems to be maintenance for you), aim for 130-150 grams of protein per day and get a solid lifting program (Starting Strength, Stronglifts 5x5 for examples). Given that you are a 18 year old man who is pretty new to lifting, you should be able to accomplish a "body re-composition" easier than most. I know you have more fat than you want right now, and you don't want to do a bulk, so re-comp is what you want.
What is it about lifting that you do not like?
Well dear, you are NOT going to have the perfect body for the rest of your life. No one is perfect, plus we all age. BUT no, your muscles will not "sag" if you stop lifting weights. However, if you really enjoy it, why stop? You could lift weights your entire life. Maintain muscle, strength, bone density, healthy, bad-*kitten*-ness, be able to eat more, for the rest of your life? Sounds good to me.
What do you mean by progress? Increase weights, or improve your body composition? I'm guessing you didn't give yourself enough time to do either (since you are 18 and well, how much time could your really give it since you've only been alive 18 years?). It could take you a year to get the progress you want. If you do Starting Strength or Stronglifts you increase weight pretty much every time, so you WILL progress with weight and maybe, just getting stronger will be motivation to stick with it and will help you to not focus so much on actual appearance (but seriously, you already look good).0 -
I can't tell from your pictures, but is it possible some of what you are calling 'belly fat' is just loose skin from when you were 60+ pounds heavier?0
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