Calorie Prioritization - Yes, a calorie is a calorie….

Options
2456714

Replies

  • senecarr
    senecarr Posts: 5,377 Member
    Options
    JoshLibby wrote: »
    It's funny that you think you're getting all your nutritional needs when most of the time you're getting upwards to 1000 calories from alcohol and food with high sugar. Hard to take what you say serious when you don't practice what you preach at all. Nice journal.

    Yeah, if a pilot told me the laws of gravity, I couldn't take them seriously as they regularly go up without falling back to Earth.
    See the fallacious thinking in judging statements based on who says them rather than the statements themselves?
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,404 MFP Moderator
    Options
    JoshLibby wrote: »
    It's funny that you think you're getting all your nutritional needs when most of the time you're getting upwards to 1000 calories from alcohol and food with high sugar. Hard to take what you say serious when you don't practice what you preach at all. Nice journal.

    So you judge a persons diary while keep yours closed. Would you like to evaluate mine next, I would love your input.
  • senecarr
    senecarr Posts: 5,377 Member
    Options
    psulemon wrote: »
    JoshLibby wrote: »
    It's funny that you think you're getting all your nutritional needs when most of the time you're getting upwards to 1000 calories from alcohol and food with high sugar. Hard to take what you say serious when you don't practice what you preach at all. Nice journal.

    So you judge a persons diary while keep yours closed. Would you like to evaluate mine next, I would love your input.

    I'll evaluate yours.
    Clearly needs more tacos, but that's true of everyone's diary.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,404 MFP Moderator
    edited November 2015
    Options
    senecarr wrote: »
    psulemon wrote: »
    JoshLibby wrote: »
    It's funny that you think you're getting all your nutritional needs when most of the time you're getting upwards to 1000 calories from alcohol and food with high sugar. Hard to take what you say serious when you don't practice what you preach at all. Nice journal.

    So you judge a persons diary while keep yours closed. Would you like to evaluate mine next, I would love your input.

    I'll evaluate yours.
    Clearly needs more tacos, but that's true of everyone's diary.

    Bro, do you even Taco Tuesday?

    And besides, it's margarita monday!
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    Options
    bump
  • zoeysasha37
    zoeysasha37 Posts: 7,088 Member
    Options
    Great thread @ndj1979
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    Options
    thorsmom01 wrote: »
    Great thread @ndj1979

    thx
  • Serah87
    Serah87 Posts: 5,481 Member
    Options
    Agree!! :)
  • snickerscharlie
    snickerscharlie Posts: 8,578 Member
    Options
    This thread needs a big chocolate cake with a file in it. <nods>
  • snickerscharlie
    snickerscharlie Posts: 8,578 Member
    Options
    thorsmom01 wrote: »
    Great thread @ndj1979
    +1
  • CJsf1t
    CJsf1t Posts: 414 Member
    Options
    I am glad I read this! Thanks for posting this, it holds true for everyone! Basic,solid advice :) Thumbs up.

    P.s: I think you should paste this in every forum! People ,esp newcomers, need to see this.
  • amitkatz0
    amitkatz0 Posts: 61 Member
    Options
    I'm just curious why you say that vegetables are a calorie dense food. Most of them are just water and indigestible fiber. Cucumbers and tomatoes for example are less than 1 Cal/gram usually.
  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    edited December 2015
    Options
    JoshLibby wrote: »
    It's funny that you think you're getting all your nutritional needs when most of the time you're getting upwards to 1000 calories from alcohol and food with high sugar. Hard to take what you say serious when you don't practice what you preach at all. Nice journal.

    It would be nice if you would actually evaluate the content of his post rather than using what he eats as justification to disregard the post.

    What he eats has nothing to do with the words he just put on the screen.

    Do you disregard Lyle's material because he doesn't look like he lifts?




  • auddii
    auddii Posts: 15,357 Member
    Options
    amitkatz0 wrote: »
    I'm just curious why you say that vegetables are a calorie dense food. Most of them are just water and indigestible fiber. Cucumbers and tomatoes for example are less than 1 Cal/gram usually.

    You need to reread the post. He said that vegetables are nutrient dense, they have lots of nutrients. The vitamin content of them is very high in proportion to the amount of calories in them as opposed to calorie dense foods that have fewer nutrients but more calories.
  • senecarr
    senecarr Posts: 5,377 Member
    Options
    SideSteel wrote: »
    JoshLibby wrote: »
    It's funny that you think you're getting all your nutritional needs when most of the time you're getting upwards to 1000 calories from alcohol and food with high sugar. Hard to take what you say serious when you don't practice what you preach at all. Nice journal.

    It would be nice if you would actually evaluate the content of his post rather than using what he eats as justification to disregard the post.

    What he eats has nothing to do with the words he just put on the screen.

    Do you disregard Lyle's material because he doesn't look like he lifts?
    Funny, Lyle does actually get that a lot... until someone who looks like he lifts too much says "Lyle knows his stuff, who are you?"
    Both the complaint at NDJ and Lyle are good example of an actual ad hominem fallacy instead of how the term is thrown out every time someone insults them.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    Options
    amitkatz0 wrote: »
    I'm just curious why you say that vegetables are a calorie dense food. Most of them are just water and indigestible fiber. Cucumbers and tomatoes for example are less than 1 Cal/gram usually.

    can you go back and check my OP? I think that I said "nutritionally dense" but there may be a typo....
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    Options
    senecarr wrote: »
    SideSteel wrote: »
    JoshLibby wrote: »
    It's funny that you think you're getting all your nutritional needs when most of the time you're getting upwards to 1000 calories from alcohol and food with high sugar. Hard to take what you say serious when you don't practice what you preach at all. Nice journal.

    It would be nice if you would actually evaluate the content of his post rather than using what he eats as justification to disregard the post.

    What he eats has nothing to do with the words he just put on the screen.

    Do you disregard Lyle's material because he doesn't look like he lifts?
    Funny, Lyle does actually get that a lot... until someone who looks like he lifts too much says "Lyle knows his stuff, who are you?"
    Both the complaint at NDJ and Lyle are good example of an actual ad hominem fallacy instead of how the term is thrown out every time someone insults them.

    besides the fact that he cherry picked one day over Thanksgiving weekend...LOL
  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    Options
    senecarr wrote: »
    SideSteel wrote: »
    JoshLibby wrote: »
    It's funny that you think you're getting all your nutritional needs when most of the time you're getting upwards to 1000 calories from alcohol and food with high sugar. Hard to take what you say serious when you don't practice what you preach at all. Nice journal.

    It would be nice if you would actually evaluate the content of his post rather than using what he eats as justification to disregard the post.

    What he eats has nothing to do with the words he just put on the screen.

    Do you disregard Lyle's material because he doesn't look like he lifts?
    Funny, Lyle does actually get that a lot... until someone who looks like he lifts too much says "Lyle knows his stuff, who are you?"
    Both the complaint at NDJ and Lyle are good example of an actual ad hominem fallacy instead of how the term is thrown out every time someone insults them.

    Lyle's a pretty good example for that fallacy. He's one of the smartest guys in the business (as far as his information goes) and he doesn't look like he lifts. So it's pretty suitable =)
  • JoshLibby
    JoshLibby Posts: 214 Member
    edited December 2015
    Options
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    senecarr wrote: »
    SideSteel wrote: »
    JoshLibby wrote: »
    It's funny that you think you're getting all your nutritional needs when most of the time you're getting upwards to 1000 calories from alcohol and food with high sugar. Hard to take what you say serious when you don't practice what you preach at all. Nice journal.

    It would be nice if you would actually evaluate the content of his post rather than using what he eats as justification to disregard the post.

    What he eats has nothing to do with the words he just put on the screen.

    Do you disregard Lyle's material because he doesn't look like he lifts?
    Funny, Lyle does actually get that a lot... until someone who looks like he lifts too much says "Lyle knows his stuff, who are you?"
    Both the complaint at NDJ and Lyle are good example of an actual ad hominem fallacy instead of how the term is thrown out every time someone insults them.

    besides the fact that he cherry picked one day over Thanksgiving weekend...LOL

    It was more than a weekend you did it for like 14 days, the journal does not lie, plus it was even before that particular weekend started.


    The idea of a bulk is to gain as much as muscle with little fat as possible. Why bulk with high caloric dense foods that do nothing for you to build muscle? Do you really believe alcohol calories upwards to 600 will help you, plus the 400 calories from cookies that was seen daily for totals to 600-1000 bulk calories...

    How does getting more empty, non nutritious calories build muscle? I would ask for an explanation but this whole topic becomes more opinion and then people start yelling BRO SCIENCE and it's just not worth anything.


    Back to the OP's topic, CICO, which basically states obesity is simply a matter of eating too many calories is a very flawed argument Not all the food is the same, and not everyone is the same, and reaction is where the calories matter anyways.

    I just don't get the idea that as long as it's calories I will gain muscle, because I lift whatever amount of weight the person is lifting.

    Stop grabbing straws, i'm sure someone will say that and has. I'll just look around at the world and see obesity going up and up, and think they are all fat because they ate too much. Then I will realize counting calories has been here forever, and that is surely working for us.


    Calories are energy for sure, which is the definition of the calorie, but to the standpoint of what the food it is not = biologically and if it's not it makes them not the same and a calorie not a calorie. I can even link this and it will not help but I still will, because the evidence is growing that what we eat matters more than what is the calorie amount, and what we eat is how we get the calories in the first place!

    http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2012/06/when-a-calorie-is-not-just-a-calorie/

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7838668.stm

    I know people want the simplest way to get their goals, but for majority it's not simple as just eat less to lose weight, or eat more to gain weight. It varies and really bad advice to recommend someone who has never been "fat" to eat more junk to reach a number as long as they hit their macros. Or the opposite to someone who was "fat" to keep eating the junk because now they are under a number, the number is a tool not the answer. I thought Fitness was health related? Guess it only matters number wise...

    Moderation/ sanity will come up next, if you need a cookie and some ice cream have it, i'll never say keep that out of your diet, but don't rely on those in large amounts to hit that darn number again, for a goal you took serious enough to start. Common sense.


    Someone will bring up the Laws of Thermodynamics in their favor too. But here is the smoking gun. The second law of thermodynamics applies to closed/isolated systems. The human body is not a closed/isolated system.



  • jmule24
    jmule24 Posts: 1,382 Member
    Options
    JoshLibby wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    senecarr wrote: »
    SideSteel wrote: »
    JoshLibby wrote: »
    It's funny that you think you're getting all your nutritional needs when most of the time you're getting upwards to 1000 calories from alcohol and food with high sugar. Hard to take what you say serious when you don't practice what you preach at all. Nice journal.

    It would be nice if you would actually evaluate the content of his post rather than using what he eats as justification to disregard the post.

    What he eats has nothing to do with the words he just put on the screen.

    Do you disregard Lyle's material because he doesn't look like he lifts?
    Funny, Lyle does actually get that a lot... until someone who looks like he lifts too much says "Lyle knows his stuff, who are you?"
    Both the complaint at NDJ and Lyle are good example of an actual ad hominem fallacy instead of how the term is thrown out every time someone insults them.

    besides the fact that he cherry picked one day over Thanksgiving weekend...LOL

    It was more than a weekend you did it for like 14 days, the journal does not lie, plus it was even before that particular weekend started.


    The idea of a bulk is to gain as much as muscle with little fat as possible. Why bulk with high caloric dense foods that do nothing for you to build muscle? Do you really believe alcohol calories upwards to 600 will help you, plus the 400 calories from cookies that was seen daily for totals to 600-1000 bulk calories...

    How does getting more empty, non nutritious calories build muscle? I would ask for an explanation but this whole topic becomes more opinion and then people start yelling BRO SCIENCE and it's just not worth anything.


    Back to the OP's topic, CICO, which basically states obesity is simply a matter of eating too many calories is a very flawed argument Not all the food is the same, and not everyone is the same, and reaction is where the calories matter anyways.

    I just don't get the idea that as long as it's calories I will gain muscle, because I lift whatever amount of weight the person is lifting.

    Stop grabbing straws, i'm sure someone will say that and has. I'll just look around at the world and see obesity going up and up, and think they are all fat because they ate too much. Then I will realize counting calories has been here forever, and that is surely working for us.


    Calories are energy for sure, which is the definition of the calorie, but to the standpoint of what the food it is not = biologically and if it's not it makes them not the same and a calorie not a calorie. I can even link this and it will not help but I still will, because the evidence is growing that what we eat matters more than what is the calorie amount, and what we eat is how we get the calories in the first place!

    http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2012/06/when-a-calorie-is-not-just-a-calorie/

    I know people want the simplest way to get their goals, but for majority it's not simple as just eat less to lose weight, or eat more to gain weight. It varies and really bad advice to recommend someone who has never been "fat" to eat more junk to reach a number as long as they hit their macros. Or the opposite to someone who was "fat" to keep eating the junk because now they are under a number, the number is a tool not the answer. I thought Fitness was health related? Guess it only matters number wise...

    Moderation/ sanity will come up next, if you need a cookie and some ice cream have it, i'll never say keep that out of your diet, but don't rely on those in large amounts to hit a number for a goal you took serious enough to start. Common sense.


    Someone will bring up the Laws of Thermodynamics in their favor too. But here is the smoking gun. The second law of thermodynamics applies to closed/isolated systems. The human body is not a closed/isolated system.


    I don't see how this relates at all to OP quality information he has shared. It clearly comes across as you "shaming" OP for their own choices.

    Great information for those interested in bulking.