Are there really fat burning foods?
prettysoul1908
Posts: 200 Member
Hi guys. I've seen a lot of claims that seem unbiased (no company is pushing it for profit... It seems) about foods that help burn fat and calories. Cayenne pepper being one. Think I've read celery.
Since joining MFP (and perusing this board in particular), I understand that it's all about calorie deficit but are there foods they give you an edge? Or sabotage? Are certain foods like white rice more likely to store as fat?
Or is it all about the deficit?
Since joining MFP (and perusing this board in particular), I understand that it's all about calorie deficit but are there foods they give you an edge? Or sabotage? Are certain foods like white rice more likely to store as fat?
Or is it all about the deficit?
0
Replies
-
It is all about the deficit.0
-
No. It's all about the deficit. If you ate over your daily allowance of Cayenne pepper, (Could you imagine? I mean, I like spicy food but...) you would gain weight.0
-
I've come to believe it's all about the deficit, although I do still linger over magazine articles that talk about fat burning food and so on. It's a nice story, but yeah, I don't think it's true.
Because if any food had been scientifically proven to have fat burning qualities ... we'd all be eating it!0 -
Your body stores excess food energy as fat and makes up a deficit in food energy from that fat. That's really all there is to it. The point of body fat in an animal like a deer, for example, is to let them store up food energy during the spring, summer and fall, when food is abundant. Then when the winter comes and you're only getting a little bark here and there (or digging up my garden for the Brussels sprouts I didn't harvest) you can stay alive by falling back on that body fat.
We are no different, but technology and society have removed the feast/famine cycle and replaced it with entirely feast, but our bodies haven't gotten the memo.
You will read this, that and the other thing that will tell you grapefruit melts fat, and coconut oil etc etc etc, but its entirely 100% about the deficit.
That said, a deficit is sometimes easier to maintain if you consume certain things or have certain behavior, and THAT'S where you have to figure out for yourself what works.
If you have a bowl of cereal for breakfast and find yourself hungry and eyeing the vending machine by 10am, then maybe have something different.. bacon and eggs, or cheese toast, or even nothing. I don't eat breakfast until I'm hungry, which doesn't happen most mornings until around 10:30.
If more fat in your diet makes you fuller longer, then eat more fat. If more protein, eat more protein.
There's no "one weird trick" that works for everyone. Being in deficit works for everyone, but being there is harder for some than others. Willpower alone won't work because sooner or later willpower fails. Find something that lets you NOT have to be constantly in an epic battle with your urges. Maybe that's running, maybe it's more water.
My point is that there's a million and one things that can give you an edge to staying in deficit, but being in deficit is all that will help you lose weight.0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »It is all about the deficit.
+1
If there were any food that burns fat, we would not be here at MFP eating at a deficit to lose body weight, nor there would be obese people.
Lean protein, vegetables and fruits helps your overall nutrition since they carry essential nutrients for your body. However, if you eat healthy and more calories than you burn, your body weight will increase. Eating healthy does not mean losing body weight.
Exercise is for fitness and health. Exercise also helps with burning some additional calories. Same caveat, if you eat more than you burn, your body weight will increase. You can not out exercise excessive calorie eating.
Good luck in your healthy journey0 -
There is some preliminary research out there on capsaicin (the hot stuff in peppers) and weight loss but it is preliminary and the work is often with combinations of other things. Non of it is about eating more peppers or adding cayenne to you food.0
-
There are foods that are very low in calories, and there are foods that in theory you burn more calories processing than they actually contain....but in practical terms you would never find a healthy diet where these foods make up a significant portion of your required nutrients. Most of these 'foods' are spices, watery vegetables, and the like.
I once read that sucking on ice cubes burns more calories that the water contains (0) because energy is used warm up the water. I was having a hard time eating a bag of ice everyday to see any weight loss however
eat food you enjoy! stay in deficit.
0 -
I've come to believe it's all about the deficit, although I do still linger over magazine articles that talk about fat burning food and so on. It's a nice story, but yeah, I don't think it's true.
Because if any food had been scientifically proven to have fat burning qualities ... we'd all be eating it!
It's mostly about the deficit.
Sure a few foods do have minor influence on metabolism or fat utilisation (and scientific support) but they are useless unless you've got the deficit right. There are no short cuts.
It's like trying to run a 5 miles race.
Those shoes, those super sleek clothes aren't going to make you win the race if you haven't done the hours of training.
For example, there is strong evidence that coffee (caffeine) is a fat-burner via most likely the increase in adrenaline (but most likely only affects people that are not habituated...). Green Tea, Yerba mate, BCAA, Capsaicin... etc. all have different levels of scientific evidence of their efficacy.
None will be effective if we stuff our faces. Deficit overrules these minor factors.
0 -
If there was fat burning food, could you imagine how much of it one would have to eat in order to see progress?0
-
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »I've come to believe it's all about the deficit, although I do still linger over magazine articles that talk about fat burning food and so on. It's a nice story, but yeah, I don't think it's true.
Because if any food had been scientifically proven to have fat burning qualities ... we'd all be eating it!
It's mostly about the deficit.
Sure a few foods do have minor influence on metabolism or fat utilisation (and scientific support) but they are useless unless you've got the deficit right. There are no short cuts.
It's like trying to run a 5 miles race.
Those shoes, those super sleek clothes aren't going to make you win the race if you haven't done the hours of training.
For example, there is strong evidence that coffee (caffeine) is a fat-burner via most likely the increase in adrenaline (but most likely only affects people that are not habituated...). Green Tea, Yerba mate, BCAA, Capsaicin... etc. all have different levels of scientific evidence of their efficacy.
None will be effective if we stuff our faces. Deficit overrules these minor factors.
What is interesting with with you said, is this.. there is a show called super skinny vs supersize.
and they have a lot of people who are extremely under weight and they all consume 12 cups of coffee, or 12 cups of tea for two meals.0 -
I have heard that capsaicin helps with digestion, and I know it makes a good liniment for sore muscles, but actually BURNING fat? Nope.0
-
Commander_Keen wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »I've come to believe it's all about the deficit, although I do still linger over magazine articles that talk about fat burning food and so on. It's a nice story, but yeah, I don't think it's true.
Because if any food had been scientifically proven to have fat burning qualities ... we'd all be eating it!
It's mostly about the deficit.
Sure a few foods do have minor influence on metabolism or fat utilisation (and scientific support) but they are useless unless you've got the deficit right. There are no short cuts.
It's like trying to run a 5 miles race.
Those shoes, those super sleek clothes aren't going to make you win the race if you haven't done the hours of training.
For example, there is strong evidence that coffee (caffeine) is a fat-burner via most likely the increase in adrenaline (but most likely only affects people that are not habituated...). Green Tea, Yerba mate, BCAA, Capsaicin... etc. all have different levels of scientific evidence of their efficacy.
None will be effective if we stuff our faces. Deficit overrules these minor factors.
What is interesting with with you said, is this.. there is a show called super skinny vs supersize.
and they have a lot of people who are extremely under weight and they all consume 12 cups of coffee, or 12 cups of tea for two meals.
They're probably drinking the coffee instead of eating.0 -
Thanks for the responses! And I too still linger over those articles. Before mfp I was trying to build a diet around it. Lol. And was wondering why the scale wasn't dropping.
I still feel a little weird when I am eating certain foods that were once considered forbidden. I find myself wondering... Am I sabotaging myself by eating this white rice instead of quinoa?
Trying to undo these years of diet misconceptions is serious work. Lol.0 -
prettysoul1908 wrote: »Thanks for the responses! And I too still linger over those articles. Before mfp I was trying to build a diet around it. Lol. And was wondering why the scale wasn't dropping.
I still feel a little weird when I am eating certain foods that were once considered forbidden. I find myself wondering... Am I sabotaging myself by eating this white rice instead of quinoa?
Trying to undo these years of diet misconceptions is serious work. Lol.
It sounds like you are educating yourself, OP. Awesome! I have a little chocolate or ice cream every night and am steadily losing. It truly is as simple as less calories in than calories out. You got this!0 -
prettysoul1908 wrote: »Thanks for the responses! And I too still linger over those articles. Before mfp I was trying to build a diet around it. Lol. And was wondering why the scale wasn't dropping.
I still feel a little weird when I am eating certain foods that were once considered forbidden. I find myself wondering... Am I sabotaging myself by eating this white rice instead of quinoa?
Trying to undo these years of diet misconceptions is serious work. Lol.
Yeah, imagine some of us who have been dieting off and on since the 70's! It took me a long time to get over my fear of fat. Every time I wanted to put a teaspoon of butter on my toast all I could see was Susan Powter with her 80's buzzcut yelling "It's fat . . . you're fat. STOP THE INSANITY!".
I am now in a happy place with eating all things in moderation (macros are 35% protein, 35% carbs, and 30% fat). It works (even as a T2Dm)
ps: no you are not sabotaging yourself by eating white rice instead of quinoa. On the other hand, variety is a good thing so have either one, depending on your mood.0 -
I eat white rice often. I just don't eat a lot (usually no more than 1 cup a day).prettysoul1908 wrote: »Thanks for the responses! And I too still linger over those articles. Before mfp I was trying to build a diet around it. Lol. And was wondering why the scale wasn't dropping.
I still feel a little weird when I am eating certain foods that were once considered forbidden. I find myself wondering... Am I sabotaging myself by eating this white rice instead of quinoa?
Trying to undo these years of diet misconceptions is serious work. Lol.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
There are things that make little differences, like how much of a food's calories get actually absorbed/utilized by the body, how much the body works to digest certain foods vs. others. And yes, some things slightly elevate your metabolism for a short period of time.
In the end though? It really is all about the deficit.
Just plan a diet of foods you enjoy and find satiating, and most importantly, make your food plan one you find easy to live with. It's really that simple. There are no short cuts, and dieting is much easier when you're eating in a way you enjoy.0 -
riffraff2112 wrote: »There are foods that are very low in calories, and there are foods that in theory you burn more calories processing than they actually contain....but in practical terms you would never find a healthy diet where these foods make up a significant portion of your required nutrients. Most of these 'foods' are spices, watery vegetables, and the like.
I once read that sucking on ice cubes burns more calories that the water contains (0) because energy is used warm up the water. I was having a hard time eating a bag of ice everyday to see any weight loss however
eat food you enjoy! stay in deficit.
The 'theory' about "negative calorie foods" is a falsehood. What they're talking about is the Thermic Effect of Feeding (TEF), which is a percentage of the various macronutrients that the body burns to digest/process them. Estimates vary from study to study, but even protein, which has the highest TEF, is around 15%-25%; carbs are in the neighborhood of 3% - 6% and fats even less (0% - 3%). So unless you could somehow come up with a TEF of over 100% (which is physically impossible), any food will result in a positive calorie intake. There are very low calorie foods, but absolutely no such thing as "negative calorie foods".
Celery, for example, is one often cited as a negative calorie food. The caloric value for one medium celery stalk is around 6 calories and it consists of carbs/fiber and water. Even using the high end 6% TEF value for carbs, the TEF associated with eating a celery stalk would be about 0.36 calories - therefore, the net intake would be 5.64 calories instead of 6.0 -
1. There are a few things that could be called negative calorie - for example, if you drank one liter of ice water, you'd burn about 35 calories because your body has to warm it up to body temperature. Still, the effect is quite small and you couldn't drink enough water (without dying of hyponatremia) to make a meaningful difference.
2. If there actually was a food that gave a significant effect on metabolism, it would be very toxic. There was a now-banned diet drug that legitimately did cause your body's metabolism to be less efficient, so you needed to burn more calories for the same amount of cellular energy usage. However, the problem here is energy balance. The excess calories of energy don't just disappear, they become heat, and people can and did die from hyperthermia as their body produced heat faster than they could shed it into the environment, even when they were given carefully controlled dosages administered by doctors.
Capsaicin has the same general kind of effect as the latter, but much, much weaker. It may help a very little bit, but the effect is not going to be huge - if it had a huge effect, it would be equally deadly.
You might get a few dozens of "extra calories" by things like this, but it's not going to be a game changer.0 -
0
-
brianpperkins wrote: »It is all about the deficit.
This. It's not even about diet type, it's all about finding what works for you to stay in a calorie deficit.0 -
socioseguro wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »It is all about the deficit.
+1
If there were any food that burns fat, we would not be here at MFP eating at a deficit to lose body weight, nor there would be obese people.
Lean protein, vegetables and fruits helps your overall nutrition since they carry essential nutrients for your body. However, if you eat healthy and more calories than you burn, your body weight will increase. Eating healthy does not mean losing body weight.
Exercise is for fitness and health. Exercise also helps with burning some additional calories. Same caveat, if you eat more than you burn, your body weight will increase. You can not out exercise excessive calorie eating.
Good luck in your healthy journey
That's is pretty much the whole enchilada
0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »It is all about the deficit.
this is not entirely correct. Protein sources cause more of a thermogenic effect than other types. About 1/3 of the intake from a protein source is used up in a thermogenic process. Resulting in less total calories being stored yet they have been ingested in the same manner.
Where you get your food matters a lot.
If anyone has any questions feel free to add me and ask. : )
0 -
rankinsect wrote: »1. There are a few things that could be called negative calorie - for example, if you drank one liter of ice water, you'd burn about 35 calories because your body has to warm it up to body temperature. Still, the effect is quite small and you couldn't drink enough water (without dying of hyponatremia) to make a meaningful difference.
2. If there actually was a food that gave a significant effect on metabolism, it would be very toxic. There was a now-banned diet drug that legitimately did cause your body's metabolism to be less efficient, so you needed to burn more calories for the same amount of cellular energy usage. However, the problem here is energy balance. The excess calories of energy don't just disappear, they become heat, and people can and did die from hyperthermia as their body produced heat faster than they could shed it into the environment, even when they were given carefully controlled dosages administered by doctors.
Capsaicin has the same general kind of effect as the latter, but much, much weaker. It may help a very little bit, but the effect is not going to be huge - if it had a huge effect, it would be equally deadly.
You might get a few dozens of "extra calories" by things like this, but it's not going to be a game changer.
I think I know what you're talking about. That stuff is dangerous.0 -
If weight loss is all about calorie deficit, then it can't be about anything else, well can it.0
-
teamknoxdiscus wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »It is all about the deficit.
this is not entirely correct. Protein sources cause more of a thermogenic effect than other types. About 1/3 of the intake from a protein source is used up in a thermogenic process. Resulting in less total calories being stored yet they have been ingested in the same manner.
That's true, but that's only considering the direct effect. There are indirect effects that reduce this effect. Those 1/3 of the calories produce heat, and since your body is carefully regulating its core temperature, this excess heat produced in digestion means your body can produce less heat elsewhere (for example, reducing brown fat thermogenesis). Those other thermogenic processes consume calories, so while you get less usable energy out of the protein, you also burn less energy in other parts of the body which reduces the strength of the effect.
The effect is real, but it's not hugely significant - again, a few dozens of calories.0 -
teamknoxdiscus wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »It is all about the deficit.
this is not entirely correct. Protein sources cause more of a thermogenic effect than other types. About 1/3 of the intake from a protein source is used up in a thermogenic process. Resulting in less total calories being stored yet they have been ingested in the same manner.
Where you get your food matters a lot.
If anyone has any questions feel free to add me and ask. : )
The bottom line is you have to eat less calories than you burn to lose weight.
Macro balance and food type are for nutrition. Anybody will lose weight on a deficit no matter the foods they choose, but somebody on a healthy diet who eats at a surplus will gain weight.0 -
MommyL2015 wrote: »No. It's all about the deficit. If you ate over your daily allowance of Cayenne pepper, (Could you imagine? I mean, I like spicy food but...) you would gain weight.
HAHAHA "The could you imagine" made me lol.
You'd end up with a fiery mouth and a burning stomach XD0 -
teamknoxdiscus wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »It is all about the deficit.
this is not entirely correct. Protein sources cause more of a thermogenic effect than other types. About 1/3 of the intake from a protein source is used up in a thermogenic process. Resulting in less total calories being stored yet they have been ingested in the same manner.
Where you get your food matters a lot.
If anyone has any questions feel free to add me and ask. : )
That's true I think - Chris Pratt said that for his weight loss he was eating crazy amounts of turkey and he wouldn't have protein shakes as they don't provide the same thermogenic effect as actually eating the meat.0 -
teamknoxdiscus wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »It is all about the deficit.
this is not entirely correct. Protein sources cause more of a thermogenic effect than other types. About 1/3 of the intake from a protein source is used up in a thermogenic process. Resulting in less total calories being stored yet they have been ingested in the same manner.
Where you get your food matters a lot.
If anyone has any questions feel free to add me and ask. : )
That's true I think - Chris Pratt said that for his weight loss he was eating crazy amounts of turkey and he wouldn't have protein shakes as they don't provide the same thermogenic effect as actually eating the meat.
Well if Chris Pratt says so, it must be true.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions