The science of weight loss and why it's unhelpful
robs_ready
Posts: 1,488 Member
Do you think our ancestors gave a damn about macros?
We are designed to live in a world where the only stress we have is worrying about predators, scarcity of food and warmth.
I appreciate we can't go back to these times unfortunately, but replicate as best we can our natural requirements, exercise, weight training and natural food, and stick as best you can to your your calorie requirements.
It's that simple, for most people, everything outside of this is jargon, designed to confuse and adds little benefit.
We are designed to live in a world where the only stress we have is worrying about predators, scarcity of food and warmth.
I appreciate we can't go back to these times unfortunately, but replicate as best we can our natural requirements, exercise, weight training and natural food, and stick as best you can to your your calorie requirements.
It's that simple, for most people, everything outside of this is jargon, designed to confuse and adds little benefit.
0
Replies
-
We were designed ? Exercise and weight training are 20th century artefacts surely, before that we had work and living.0
-
Yep . I wish. I thought about getting a fitbit, hrm or whatever. I didn't. Come on, one decade ago nobody had those and people managed to stay fit and not keel over during their workouts. Still in some societies today being fat is actually a measure of being well off
Well, I don't walk miles to fetch water and tend my field. Can't replicate these day to day activities. While my food is fairly unprocessed (well... I process it myself), I still eat a fair bit of packaged foods. I think people make too much of a big deal labelling their diets and tracking data. Selection bias OP. If you want "natural" trackers, get out of MFP. Otherwise, Welcome to 20160 -
-
Yep . I wish. I thought about getting a fitbit, hrm or whatever. I didn't. Come on, one decade ago nobody had those and people managed to stay fit and not keel over during their workouts. Still in some societies today being fat is actually a measure of being well off
Well, I don't walk miles to fetch water and tend my field. Can't replicate these day to day activities. While my food is fairly unprocessed (well... I process it myself), I still eat a fair bit of packaged foods. I think people make too much of a big deal labelling their diets and tracking data. Selection bias OP. If you want "natural" trackers, get out of MFP. Otherwise, Welcome to 2016
Agreed, I like data (I'm a a marketing manager) so I like using mfp for that ad motivating others.0 -
roblloyd89 wrote: »
maybe I missed yours - I rephrased it -
I appreciate we can't go back to these times unfortunately, but perhaps we should replicate as best we can our natural requirements by using exercise, weight training and natural food, and stick as best you can to your your calorie requirements.
0 -
roblloyd89 wrote: »
maybe I missed yours - I rephrased it -
I appreciate we can't go back to these times unfortunately, but perhaps we should replicate as best we can our natural requirements by using exercise, weight training and natural food, and stick as best you can to your your calorie requirements.
We are now now on the same wavelength my friend!0 -
Where's the science? Did I miss it somewhere? You have an opinion. That's fine, but don't be confusing that with science because it's not.0
-
punkrockgoth wrote: »Where's the science? Did I miss it somewhere? You have an opinion. That's fine, but don't be confusing that with science because it's not.
Lol what?
Did you Even bother to read the thread?
You've completely missed the point.0 -
Nah, I like the accomplishments of modern people.
Exactly none of the things we eat today are the 'natural' things we used to eat in the mythical days of yonder, where we were super healthy, muscular and all six feet tall because we ate so well.0 -
Nah, I like the accomplishments of modern people.
Exactly none of the things we eat today are the 'natural' things we used to eat in the mythical days of yonder, where we were super healthy, muscular and all six feet tall because we ate so well.
So do I, but our bodies are not designed for modern food.
0 -
roblloyd89 wrote: »punkrockgoth wrote: »Where's the science? Did I miss it somewhere? You have an opinion. That's fine, but don't be confusing that with science because it's not.
Lol what?
Did you Even bother to read the thread?
You've completely missed the point.
Yup. Did read the thread. I see you have an opinion. I don't see your point and I don't see the science. You said something about we can't go back to how things were a long time ago. You say something about the fitness industry just trying to confuse things, which again, isn't science. So I'm not sure what you're trying to advocate here. Again, none of this is science. The name of the thread is "the science of weight loss and why it's unhelpful".0 -
punkrockgoth wrote: »roblloyd89 wrote: »punkrockgoth wrote: »Where's the science? Did I miss it somewhere? You have an opinion. That's fine, but don't be confusing that with science because it's not.
Lol what?
Did you Even bother to read the thread?
You've completely missed the point.
Yup. Did read the thread. I see you have an opinion. I don't see your point and I don't see the science. You said something about we can't go back to how things were a long time ago. You say something about the fitness industry just trying to confuse things, which again, isn't science. So I'm not sure what you're trying to advocate here. Again, none of this is science. The name of the thread is "the science of weight loss and why it's unhelpful".
No, I didnt say half of what you mention.
Dont worry, if you don't get it now, no point explaining.
Okhams razor, let's leave it at that.0 -
roblloyd89 wrote: »
So do I, but our bodies are not designed for modern food.
Our bodies aren't designed by anyone for anything.
0 -
roblloyd89 wrote: »
So do I, but our bodies are not designed for modern food.
Our bodies aren't designed by anyone for anything.
Defeatest, bad attitude mate0 -
roblloyd89 wrote: »
Defeatest, bad attitude mate
Alright, man, you go back to eating all those natural foods you for sure know made our ancestors super healthy.
(pssst, there are none anymore. We bred them all to be better than that lousy stuff we used to eat.)0 -
Well I'd rather eat organic food than twinkies, cos as my thread pointed out, going back to the natural way AS BEST WE CAN, man0
-
You're right. Let's give up on trying to improve or understand anything with science. It's all pointless. I'll be in my cave, drawing in the walls if you need me.
ETA: You know what helps when something has changed so much it is basically impossible to replicate without help? Education and science.0 -
I loved and enjoyed every one of my 405 Twinkie calories yesterday.0
-
Alatariel75 wrote: »You're right. Let's give up on trying to improve or understand anything with science. It's all pointless. I'll be in my cave, drawing in the walls if you need me.
Sigh. ..
Because digesting proper food and maintaining our bodies from an evolutionary perspective is anti-science?
Way to go at completely missing the point.0 -
-
Things are a little more challenging with the abundance of food (depending on circumstance) and the effort required to survive in our modern wilderness (nowhere near the amount of effort required to heat our homes with chopped wood, for example) but yes, I agree, there may not be a huge benefit to macro monitoring for the average person.
I am beginning to notice I stay full a little longer if I have all 3 (protein, fats and carbs) in the same meal. if not in the same meal, then all eaten fairly close to one another as multiple courses.0 -
Protranser wrote: »Things are a little more challenging with the abundance of food (depending on circumstance) and the effort required to survive in our modern wilderness (nowhere near the amount of effort required to heat our homes with chopped wood, for example) but yes, I agree, there may not be a huge benefit to macro monitoring for the average person.
I am beginning to notice I stay full a little longer if I have all 3 (protein, fats and carbs) in the same meal. if not in the same meal, then all eaten fairly close to one another as multiple courses.
Finally someone that understands.
Agreed fully!0 -
roblloyd89 wrote: »Do you think our ancestors gave a damn about macros?
We are designed to live in a world where the only stress we have is worrying about predators, scarcity of food and warmth.
I appreciate we can't go back to these times unfortunately, but replicate as best we can our natural requirements, exercise, weight training and natural food, and stick as best you can to your your calorie requirements.
It's that simple, for most people, everything outside of this is jargon, designed to confuse and adds little benefit.
Did your ancestors have your life expectancy and health markers or even your dental health?
I find this a weird contention Rob0 -
These assertions about how much better off our ancestors were? What period are we looking at ?
0 -
roblloyd89 wrote: »Do you think our ancestors gave a damn about macros?
We are designed to live in a world where the only stress we have is worrying about predators, scarcity of food and warmth.
I appreciate we can't go back to these times unfortunately, but replicate as best we can our natural requirements, exercise, weight training and natural food, and stick as best you can to your your calorie requirements.
It's that simple, for most people, everything outside of this is jargon, designed to confuse and adds little benefit.
Did your ancestors have your life expectancy and health markers or even your dental health?
I find this a weird contention Rob
No they didn't, modern science took care of that, I'm not anti science! !
We have an obesity epidemic, I'm not talking about other areas of science.0 -
500 years ago life expectancy was 35-40 years, 100 years ago it had risen to the heady heights of 48 years, I'm 56 & these days life expectancy has risen to 75 years; for you 'youngsters' it'll be closer to 100,
we're living longer because of modern medicine, (think that counts as science), I much prefer the thought of being above ground than below it, science rocks!!0 -
-
So rather than understanding weightloss to the greatest degree in order to provide people with the best information and options to suit them, you think the science is pointless and everyone should just do exactly what you do instead?
0 -
500 years ago life expectancy was 35-40 years, 100 years ago it had risen to the heady heights of 48 years, I'm 56 & these days life expectancy has risen to 75 years; for you 'youngsters' it'll be closer to 100,
we're living longer because of modern medicine, (think that counts as science), I much prefer the thought of being above ground than below it, science rocks!!
Me too, but we have an obesity crisis, could looking after our bodies as they intend to be, maybe be the best answer without confusing people?0 -
roblloyd89 wrote: »roblloyd89 wrote: »Do you think our ancestors gave a damn about macros?
We are designed to live in a world where the only stress we have is worrying about predators, scarcity of food and warmth.
I appreciate we can't go back to these times unfortunately, but replicate as best we can our natural requirements, exercise, weight training and natural food, and stick as best you can to your your calorie requirements.
It's that simple, for most people, everything outside of this is jargon, designed to confuse and adds little benefit.
Did your ancestors have your life expectancy and health markers or even your dental health?
I find this a weird contention Rob
No they didn't, modern science took care of that, I'm not anti science! !
We have an obesity epidemic, I'm not talking about other areas of science.
So your issue is with the proliferation of highly palatable, easily accessed food and the sedentary lifestyle we have developed as there is no longer any need to catch, grow, prepare our own foodstuffs hence our activity levels are far lower naturally
Our physiology certainly developed to move a heck of a lot more than we do and eat a heck of a lot less
And science is unhelpful with this complete change in circumstance because?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions