The science of weight loss and why it's unhelpful

Options
2456

Replies

  • Protranser
    Protranser Posts: 517 Member
    Options
    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.
  • robs_ready
    robs_ready Posts: 1,488 Member
    edited January 2016
    Options
    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!
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    Options
    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
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    Options
    These assertions about how much better off our ancestors were? What period are we looking at ?

  • robs_ready
    robs_ready Posts: 1,488 Member
    Options
    rabbitjb 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.
  • sunman00
    sunman00 Posts: 872 Member
    Options
    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!!
  • robs_ready
    robs_ready Posts: 1,488 Member
    Options
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    These assertions about how much better off our ancestors were? What period are we looking at ?

    You still don't get my point,

    Obesity is a modern crisis, I'm not talking about better/worse off in in terms of other health factors.
  • Alatariel75
    Alatariel75 Posts: 17,959 Member
    Options
    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?


  • robs_ready
    robs_ready Posts: 1,488 Member
    Options
    sunman00 wrote: »
    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?
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    Options
    roblloyd89 wrote: »
    rabbitjb 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?
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    Options
    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.

    I don't think anyone wants to replicate scarcity of food and warmth.
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 13,940 Member
    Options
    We have an obesity epidemic because we have time and labour saving devices, no need to forage for food, and can acquire excellently tasting food in vast quantities for less money than you can shake a stick at.

    Point out to me the ancestor who day in/day our could find 5000 calories to gobble for less than a half hour's worth of effort.

    Because we can and DO!
  • robs_ready
    robs_ready Posts: 1,488 Member
    Options
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    roblloyd89 wrote: »
    rabbitjb 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?

    Because I believe the varying degrees in diets, fitness plans and opinions to confuse us when we could just apply ockams razor were applicable.

    Education is key but but the average person doesn't need complex information
  • robs_ready
    robs_ready Posts: 1,488 Member
    Options
    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?


    Why does the the average person need to understand beyond CICO?
  • robs_ready
    robs_ready Posts: 1,488 Member
    Options
    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.

    I don't think anyone wants to replicate scarcity of food and warmth.

    Obviously not! I didn't say that!
  • robs_ready
    robs_ready Posts: 1,488 Member
    Options
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    We have an obesity epidemic because we have time and labour saving devices, no need to forage for food, and can acquire excellently tasting food in vast quantities for less money than you can shake a stick at.

    Point out to me the ancestor who day in/day our could find 5000 calories to gobble for less than a half hour's worth of effort.

    Because we can and DO!

    Is that true?

    Nothing to do potentially with being insulin resistance from unnatural levels of sugar we eat?

  • Alatariel75
    Alatariel75 Posts: 17,959 Member
    Options
    roblloyd89 wrote: »
    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?


    Why does the the average person need to understand beyond CICO?

    Because in the day and age of a glut of choice, CICO equals weight loss but health and nutrition go beyond that? Because people should strive for knowledge? Because ignorance is only bliss while it works in your favour? And what you've argued above is far different to CICO, so i fail to see your point.
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    Options
    roblloyd89 wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    These assertions about how much better off our ancestors were? What period are we looking at ?

    You still don't get my point,

    Obesity is a modern crisis, I'm not talking about better/worse off in in terms of other health factors.

    Yes obesity is modern. Do you know what our ancestors had? Starvation. They were not these super healthy super humans you think they are. They were often starving, sick, many died as children because of it or because of a cold.

    And btw. our bodies are "designed" to digest pretty much everything that is even remotely edible. That's how we're so good at surviving despite having had many times of famine.
  • Protranser
    Protranser Posts: 517 Member
    Options
    roblloyd89 wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    roblloyd89 wrote: »
    rabbitjb 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?

    Because I believe the varying degrees in diets, fitness plans and opinions to confuse us when we could just apply ockams razor were applicable.

    Education is key but but the average person doesn't need complex information



    I agree, the extra information can be a little daunting for someone who just needs to focus on losing weight at a healthy rate (1% of body weight per week, source unavailable) The macro information is helpful when people are evaluating satiety, it seems. So in that way, it's helpful that MFP is tracking that, but I don't get the impression it ever enforces new users to choose a ratio. Maybe I skimmed over that, though...
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    Options
    roblloyd89 wrote: »
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    We have an obesity epidemic because we have time and labour saving devices, no need to forage for food, and can acquire excellently tasting food in vast quantities for less money than you can shake a stick at.

    Point out to me the ancestor who day in/day our could find 5000 calories to gobble for less than a half hour's worth of effort.

    Because we can and DO!

    Is that true?

    Nothing to do potentially with being insulin resistance from unnatural levels of sugar we eat?

    No. Calories make you obese. We can get a lot of calories without doing much.
    You know, occam's razor.