Is fat loss a science ?

13

Replies

  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    Verdenal wrote: »
    becess96 wrote: »
    So, a lot of people say fat loss is only about calories, and it doesn't matter if you eat 2000 calories of sugar or salad, or if you eat 3 times a day or 6, if you are trying to lose a pound you just need to burn 3500 calories. Is this the truth or does this 3 meals/6 meals thing with the blood sugar and insulin levels spike and all of that matter or it's just a myth ? Or like if you don't eat frequently (and you do intermittent fasting for example) your body goes into starvation mode and you burn muscle instead of fat ?Any help would be appreciated. I wish everyone a great day !:)

    It's an oversimplification to say that a calorie is a calorie. Different foods are metabolized differently by the body and these processes are not fully understood. Still, looking at calories is a good shorthand method for the ordinary person. If you generally eat healthy foods and create a calorie deficit, you will lose weight. If you are close to your goal weight and have special needs, such as reducing fat as much as possible, that will be the time to look into a more specialized diet.

    The current science holds that it doesn't matter when you eat or how many times you eat. I do IF frequently and it works for me. You have to consider your psychology: If after giving the various forms of IF a good try, do you prefer eating several meals? Fine. Just don't overeat. BTW, even with IF you have to count calories if you're unaware of the calorie content of the food you're eating.

    I am finding IF dieting does work for me as well since I prefer to eat at maintenance most of the time.

  • MoiAussi93
    MoiAussi93 Posts: 1,948 Member
    herrspoons wrote: »
    Macronutrient and calorie intake should be strongly geared to occupation. Some occupations will need a lot of carbs.
    I think a different mix can work for different people. But there are even marathoners who don't eat high carb diets, so I don't think it is necessary for anybody. If they want to and that's what works best for them, that's fine though.

  • MoiAussi93
    MoiAussi93 Posts: 1,948 Member
    Verdenal wrote: »
    The current science holds that it doesn't matter when you eat or how many times you eat. I do IF frequently and it works for me. You have to consider your psychology: If after giving the various forms of IF a good try, do you prefer eating several meals? Fine. Just don't overeat. BTW, even with IF you have to count calories if you're unaware of the calorie content of the food you're eating.
    I agree with this....especially the psychology part. I don't do IF, but I do a bit of calorie cycling...mainly for the psychological effect. Some days I just don't feel like eating as much, and on other days I want to eat a little more. Compared to forcing myself to eat when not hungry and feeling deprived when I want a little extra, cycling is much better for me. Whether it has any metabolism benefits? I don't know. The research seems mixed. But it certainly does no harm and makes it easy to maintain a healthy lifestyle.

  • jahuntley27
    jahuntley27 Posts: 17
    My 2 cents is it is a combination of art and science, thou I did really enjoy that TEDtalk. We can likely all agree a caloric deficit is required. For example, the famous twinkie diet that showed weight can be lost at a caloric deficit even if the only source of calories is twinkes - not saying it is healthy, just that it is possible to lose weight even with the extremes of refined sugar and fluctuating hormone levels.

    So, if that isn't question, then the 2nd part of the puzzle is the effect of timing of food ingestion and source of caloric intake. I've read interesting views on the idea of having many small meals a day and I've read about intermittent fasting (IF). My body has a very hard time dealing with the tail end of the fasted state periods; however, I do believe it can lead to enhanced results for a person that is already in a caloric deficit. IMHO, do whatever works for you.
  • ellisboyd1
    ellisboyd1 Posts: 67 Member
    for me it was calories in vs calories out, BUT the calories in need to be low in refined sugars.

    I've no science to this, I've just found that if my 'calories in' are high in refined sugars like those in cakes, chocolate and certain yogurts I will lose weight but look truly awful. i lose lots of muscle and people ask me if im ill.

    so yeah it's calories in vs out, but I eat real strawberries not a strawberry yogurt. Once I kicked the unnatural, added sugars, weightloss was easy.

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited January 2015
    Verdenal wrote: »
    If you are close to your goal weight and have special needs, such as reducing fat as much as possible, that will be the time to look into a more specialized diet.

    Why would reducing fat as much as possible (assuming you mean dietary fat here) be a good idea if close to goal?

  • FromHereOnOut
    FromHereOnOut Posts: 3,237 Member
    edited January 2015
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Verdenal wrote: »
    If you are close to your goal weight and have special needs, such as reducing fat as much as possible, that will be the time to look into a more specialized diet.

    Why would reducing fat as much as possible (assuming you mean dietary fat here) be a good idea if close to goal?

    I'm guessing competition prep and he meant body fat
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited January 2015
    Okay, I suppose that would make sense.

Categories