All calories may not be equal

11819212324

Replies

  • SusanMFindlay
    SusanMFindlay Posts: 1,804 Member
    Fine, I'll explain it to you since you can't follow.
    DNA is like a recipe
    5 free range omega-3 eggs
    3 cups of gluten free non-GMO flour
    1 cup of pure fair trade can sugar
    1 pan
    1 oven
    Heat @400 for 2 hours
    Yields 1 cake, 40 oz

    Now, if I can never change that sequence as you put it, I can never make more than 1 cake. By your logic, people can't get fat because no matter how many ingredients (food) you have, you can't make more than one 40 oz cake (weight). Now, clearly, if you give someone more food or different food, you get different outputs, so clearly, the recipe can change, it isn't that rigid set of things above. It is your silly version where a person can't gain weight with more food because the recipe (DNA) is fixed exactly, and can't use more ingredients.

    DNA is not a recipe. It's an enormous recipe book including instructions for building the whole kitchen. If you insist on using that type of analogy.
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 49,026 Member
    rosebette wrote: »
    I've read Ludwig's book and my husband and I have been following his program. I'm a normal weight person and have been maintaining using Mfp to travel calories and exercise. I experienced no weight loss but decrease in hunger between breakfast and lunch due to increased satiety. I basically follow the program pretty loosely now because I need more carbs to support my workouts. However, my husband, who is significantly overweight and type 2 diabetic, has lost 35 lbs since April. He's really the poster child for the kind of individual Ludwig writes about. Part of Ludwig's theory is that the low fat craze led to an industry that produced high carb, nutritionally empty foods that were unsatisfying, creating a population like my husband. For my hub, eating full fat products and increased protein significantly decreased his cravings for carbs. After eating a typical Ludwig breakfast, he's able to pass up donuts and pizza at the office. The answer is yes, my spouse is probably eating fewer calories because he is satisfied and too full to crave foods he ate before. He's also eating more nutrient dense foods.

    And that is the problem with those who advocate calorie counting. Your husband has reduced calorie intake simply by changing what he eats. If he were just counting calories, but eating the crappy low-fat diet the USDA recommended for 30 years (they finally apologized this year), he probably would have failed because of the lack of satiety.
    And you know this for sure? I've dealt with over 500 type II diabetics in my profession and the majority of them didn't need to cut carbs of existence in their diet to lose weight. REDUCE yes. And not down to 50g or less either. Many were well over 100g a day.

    And of course if you greatly reduce consumption of grains and sugar, you can reduce complications from T2 diabetes, and sometimes reverse it. You can't if you are eating bagels and low-fat cream cheese for breakfast, pizza for lunch, and pasta for dinner.
    Tell that to the many of type II clients I've had that didn't have to cut out "bad" foods and because of just significant weight loss, they were able to do the same.
    Can someone do it on Ludwig's program? Sure. Do they NEED to? NOPE.

    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

    9285851.png
  • md523083
    md523083 Posts: 37 Member
    protein has a thermic effect of up to 30%. Other than that, all calories are created equal.
  • queenliz99
    queenliz99 Posts: 15,317 Member
    I see lumpia!!
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 49,026 Member
    psulemon wrote: »
    rosebette wrote: »
    I've read Ludwig's book and my husband and I have been following his program. I'm a normal weight person and have been maintaining using Mfp to travel calories and exercise. I experienced no weight loss but decrease in hunger between breakfast and lunch due to increased satiety. I basically follow the program pretty loosely now because I need more carbs to support my workouts. However, my husband, who is significantly overweight and type 2 diabetic, has lost 35 lbs since April. He's really the poster child for the kind of individual Ludwig writes about. Part of Ludwig's theory is that the low fat craze led to an industry that produced high carb, nutritionally empty foods that were unsatisfying, creating a population like my husband. For my hub, eating full fat products and increased protein significantly decreased his cravings for carbs. After eating a typical Ludwig breakfast, he's able to pass up donuts and pizza at the office. The answer is yes, my spouse is probably eating fewer calories because he is satisfied and too full to crave foods he ate before. He's also eating more nutrient dense foods.

    And that is the problem with those who advocate calorie counting. Your husband has reduced calorie intake simply by changing what he eats. If he were just counting calories, but eating the crappy low-fat diet the USDA recommended for 30 years (they finally apologized this year), he probably would have failed because of the lack of satiety.

    And of course if you greatly reduce consumption of grains and sugar, you can reduce complications from T2 diabetes, and sometimes reverse it. You can't if you are eating bagels and low-fat cream cheese for breakfast, pizza for lunch, and pasta for dinner.

    Non sense. Low fat does not =/= low satiety. Protein + fiber have the greatest satiety, and then starches. Going from eating junk food to eating whole quality food is what made the difference. The person husband stopped eating highly calorie, high carb, high fat, high sodium foods and something more reasonable. It's the quality of food that change, which drove a reduction in calories. Many of us do the same thing with whole grains, oats, quinoa and bunch of other carb items.


    "Protein + fiber "
    Sounds like your a whole-food vegan. Good for you. But her husband (and 98% of Americans) will never be vegans. So you do the alternative healthy option for many (not all) because of satiety - high fat, low sugar, low grain.

    Yup, sounds right.
    Lol, both wrong. I could have told you psulemon wasn't a vegan. Many of his past posts reflect it. I dedicate this to him. I'm making some for party this weekend.

    http://i682.photobucket.com/albums/vv185/jlweemspics/IMG_3122.jpg

    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

    9285851.png

  • annaskiski
    annaskiski Posts: 1,212 Member
    ninerbuff wrote: »

    9285851.png


    Cousin!!! I'm coming to reunion my long lost family!
    Send me the address.....
  • RGv2
    RGv2 Posts: 5,789 Member
    queenliz99 wrote: »
    I see lumpia!!

    Lumpia must be different in different regions. The Lumpia I get from our neighbors isn't in that picture, or I'm blind. Both of which are completely possible.
  • hamilton8560
    hamilton8560 Posts: 61 Member
    Calories in and calories out is a limited tool to describe how foods are affecting your body. Understanding the endocrine system and how foods impact it at different times of the day is the next level.
  • rabe99199
    rabe99199 Posts: 12 Member
    Ill start by saying that i have never read the book but agree with the concept your putting forth. While everyone else is right to lose weight you need to be in a defficiency. I do however beleive that what you consume contributes to a overall better body composition. Its pretty obvious to me and i assume most people that say you eat 1500 cals a day all in cheeseburgers you will not be as successful as if your eating natural nourishing foods. I do agree that you can lose weight by eating at close to maintenance and still gain muscle which a majority of people say is not possible. Im always trying to do what your suggesting but that is the same problem with most people not being able to control their urges. Lose weight fast eating all clean but eventually something pulls me off the wagon.
  • This content has been removed.
  • queenliz99
    queenliz99 Posts: 15,317 Member
    RGv2 wrote: »
    queenliz99 wrote: »
    I see lumpia!!

    Lumpia must be different in different regions. The Lumpia I get from our neighbors isn't in that picture, or I'm blind. Both of which are completely possible.

    In the rectangular tray, on the right, above the noodle dish?
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    ...in otherwords, if you find a "calorie" that is not equivalent to another "calorie" its because you measured wrong, not because somehow calories don't equal calories.

    Its literally like someone saying hey this 7 inch thing is longer than this other 7 inch thing. First thing that should come into your mind is "I guess one of them was measured incorrectly" not "sounds scientific to me"

    Once again, stating that if you eat 2,000 calories of donuts everyday for several years, you would weigh exactly the same if you ate a healthy well-balanced diet (which includes donuts now and then) of 2,000 calories for several years. Please.

    In this example is one person eating only 2000 of donuts? If so, I'd bet weight would not be the same.
  • gonetothedogs19
    gonetothedogs19 Posts: 325 Member
    edited August 2016
    .
  • gonetothedogs19
    gonetothedogs19 Posts: 325 Member
    edited August 2016
    psulemon wrote: »
    rosebette wrote: »
    I've read Ludwig's book and my husband and I have been following his program. I'm a normal weight person and have been maintaining using Mfp to travel calories and exercise. I experienced no weight loss but decrease in hunger between breakfast and lunch due to increased satiety. I basically follow the program pretty loosely now because I need more carbs to support my workouts. However, my husband, who is significantly overweight and type 2 diabetic, has lost 35 lbs since April. He's really the poster child for the kind of individual Ludwig writes about. Part of Ludwig's theory is that the low fat craze led to an industry that produced high carb, nutritionally empty foods that were unsatisfying, creating a population like my husband. For my hub, eating full fat products and increased protein significantly decreased his cravings for carbs. After eating a typical Ludwig breakfast, he's able to pass up donuts and pizza at the office. The answer is yes, my spouse is probably eating fewer calories because he is satisfied and too full to crave foods he ate before. He's also eating more nutrient dense foods.

    And that is the problem with those who advocate calorie counting. Your husband has reduced calorie intake simply by changing what he eats. If he were just counting calories, but eating the crappy low-fat diet the USDA recommended for 30 years (they finally apologized this year), he probably would have failed because of the lack of satiety.

    And of course if you greatly reduce consumption of grains and sugar, you can reduce complications from T2 diabetes, and sometimes reverse it. You can't if you are eating bagels and low-fat cream cheese for breakfast, pizza for lunch, and pasta for dinner.

    Non sense. Low fat does not =/= low satiety. Protein + fiber have the greatest satiety, and then starches. Going from eating junk food to eating whole quality food is what made the difference. The person husband stopped eating highly calorie, high carb, high fat, high sodium foods and something more reasonable. It's the quality of food that change, which drove a reduction in calories. Many of us do the same thing with whole grains, oats, quinoa and bunch of other carb items.


    "Protein + fiber "
    Sounds like your a whole-food vegan. Good for you. But her husband (and 98% of Americans) will never be vegans. So you do the alternative healthy option for many (not all) because of satiety - high fat, low sugar, low grain.

    Yup, sounds right.

    Never understood the vegan thing. I do understand not wanting to kill animals for food and have no problem with that philosophy.

    But if you won't eat an egg from your neighbor's happy and healthy backyard chickens just a few times a year, it becomes a religion. And please vegans, don't give me a cholesterol lecture.

    My decision to avoid eggs from backyard chickens has nothing to do with religion -- it's a consistent position on animal exploitation. Backyard chickens actually form a significant part of the rescue chicken population and many of them are killed when the people who own them are no longer able to care for them. Even if one does make a commitment to care for chickens for their entire life (that is, not killing them when their production rate declines), there are no sources for chicks of which I am aware that don't participate in practices to which I am opposed (chick culling, using chickens for meat, and selling chicks to people who prioritize profit over the welfare of the chickens) so I wouldn't want to be a part of that process by eating eggs from backyard chickens.

    Even happy and healthy backyard chickens were treated as product at some point in their life -- although the person who is presently caring for them may have their welfare as a primary concern, I avoid eggs as part of an objection to the overall chick/chicken industry.

    If you don't understand why someone does something, sometimes asking will help you to find out. It may be easier to dismiss something as a religion before seeking to understand it, but it doesn't lead to greater clarity. This is my choice of what I feel comfortable supporting with my own actions, I realize other people may feel differently.

    My neighbor treats her chickens like I treat my dog. And look at her chickens as chicken rescues, just like my dog was a rescue.

    There is no moral reason not to eat eggs from neighbor's chickens who are treated like family pets. None.
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 49,026 Member
    annaskiski wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »

    9285851.png


    Cousin!!! I'm coming to reunion my long lost family!
    Send me the address.....
    I'll be in Yosemite this weekend! Just look for the 8 bedroom cabin with a bunch of shoes at the front door. :D

    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

    9285851.png

  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 49,026 Member
    RGv2 wrote: »
    queenliz99 wrote: »
    I see lumpia!!

    Lumpia must be different in different regions. The Lumpia I get from our neighbors isn't in that picture, or I'm blind. Both of which are completely possible.
    It is. Some are fresh, some are small (Shanghai style) and some are like regular size eggrolls. And they are filled differently too.

    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

    9285851.png

  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 49,026 Member
    Calories in and calories out is a limited tool to describe how foods are affecting your body. Understanding the endocrine system and how foods impact it at different times of the day is the next level.
    Majoring in the minors. It's been said 1,000,000 times in many threads on MFP.

    To lose weight you eat less calories than you burn. To gain weight you eat more than you burn. To maintain weight you eat the same amount you burn.

    If you're an athlete or sports competitor, then you go to the next level. Other than that, stick to the basics.

    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

    9285851.png
  • Mentali
    Mentali Posts: 352 Member
    psulemon wrote: »
    rosebette wrote: »
    I've read Ludwig's book and my husband and I have been following his program. I'm a normal weight person and have been maintaining using Mfp to travel calories and exercise. I experienced no weight loss but decrease in hunger between breakfast and lunch due to increased satiety. I basically follow the program pretty loosely now because I need more carbs to support my workouts. However, my husband, who is significantly overweight and type 2 diabetic, has lost 35 lbs since April. He's really the poster child for the kind of individual Ludwig writes about. Part of Ludwig's theory is that the low fat craze led to an industry that produced high carb, nutritionally empty foods that were unsatisfying, creating a population like my husband. For my hub, eating full fat products and increased protein significantly decreased his cravings for carbs. After eating a typical Ludwig breakfast, he's able to pass up donuts and pizza at the office. The answer is yes, my spouse is probably eating fewer calories because he is satisfied and too full to crave foods he ate before. He's also eating more nutrient dense foods.

    And that is the problem with those who advocate calorie counting. Your husband has reduced calorie intake simply by changing what he eats. If he were just counting calories, but eating the crappy low-fat diet the USDA recommended for 30 years (they finally apologized this year), he probably would have failed because of the lack of satiety.

    And of course if you greatly reduce consumption of grains and sugar, you can reduce complications from T2 diabetes, and sometimes reverse it. You can't if you are eating bagels and low-fat cream cheese for breakfast, pizza for lunch, and pasta for dinner.

    Non sense. Low fat does not =/= low satiety. Protein + fiber have the greatest satiety, and then starches. Going from eating junk food to eating whole quality food is what made the difference. The person husband stopped eating highly calorie, high carb, high fat, high sodium foods and something more reasonable. It's the quality of food that change, which drove a reduction in calories. Many of us do the same thing with whole grains, oats, quinoa and bunch of other carb items.


    "Protein + fiber "
    Sounds like your a whole-food vegan. Good for you. But her husband (and 98% of Americans) will never be vegans. So you do the alternative healthy option for many (not all) because of satiety - high fat, low sugar, low grain.

    Yup, sounds right.

    Never understood the vegan thing. I do understand not wanting to kill animals for food and have no problem with that philosophy.

    But if you won't eat an egg from your neighbor's happy and healthy backyard chickens just a few times a year, it becomes a religion. And please vegans, don't give me a cholesterol lecture.

    My decision to avoid eggs from backyard chickens has nothing to do with religion -- it's a consistent position on animal exploitation. Backyard chickens actually form a significant part of the rescue chicken population and many of them are killed when the people who own them are no longer able to care for them. Even if one does make a commitment to care for chickens for their entire life (that is, not killing them when their production rate declines), there are no sources for chicks of which I am aware that don't participate in practices to which I am opposed (chick culling, using chickens for meat, and selling chicks to people who prioritize profit over the welfare of the chickens) so I wouldn't want to be a part of that process by eating eggs from backyard chickens.

    Even happy and healthy backyard chickens were treated as product at some point in their life -- although the person who is presently caring for them may have their welfare as a primary concern, I avoid eggs as part of an objection to the overall chick/chicken industry.

    If you don't understand why someone does something, sometimes asking will help you to find out. It may be easier to dismiss something as a religion before seeking to understand it, but it doesn't lead to greater clarity. This is my choice of what I feel comfortable supporting with my own actions, I realize other people may feel differently.

    My neighbor treats her chickens like I treat my dog. And look at her chickens as chicken rescues, just like my dog was a rescue.

    There is no moral reason not to eat eggs from neighbor's chickens who are treated like family pets. None.

    Did she adopt them from a chicken rescue?
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 49,026 Member
    queenliz99 wrote: »
    RGv2 wrote: »
    queenliz99 wrote: »
    I see lumpia!!

    Lumpia must be different in different regions. The Lumpia I get from our neighbors isn't in that picture, or I'm blind. Both of which are completely possible.

    In the rectangular tray, on the right, above the noodle dish?
    Yes. That one has shrimp in it.

    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

    9285851.png

  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 49,026 Member
    edited August 2016
    .
    YES! Tongue tied now.

    So how about the answer to your 2000 donut and 2000 natural food question with Stevie Starr? 23 years of eating junk and not overweight or obese. Teeth could use some work though.

    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

    9285851.png

  • auddii
    auddii Posts: 15,357 Member
    Calories in and calories out is a limited tool to describe how foods are affecting your body. Understanding the endocrine system and how foods impact it at different times of the day is the next level.

    And I would say the vast majority of people on this site don't actually need to be at that level. It's called majoring in the minors. People who have mostly achieved their goal of weight loss but are looking for elite levels of body sculpting need to look at the minor details. The average person wanting to lose 50-100lbs to not be classified as obese any more doe not.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    edited August 2016
    psulemon wrote: »
    rosebette wrote: »
    I've read Ludwig's book and my husband and I have been following his program. I'm a normal weight person and have been maintaining using Mfp to travel calories and exercise. I experienced no weight loss but decrease in hunger between breakfast and lunch due to increased satiety. I basically follow the program pretty loosely now because I need more carbs to support my workouts. However, my husband, who is significantly overweight and type 2 diabetic, has lost 35 lbs since April. He's really the poster child for the kind of individual Ludwig writes about. Part of Ludwig's theory is that the low fat craze led to an industry that produced high carb, nutritionally empty foods that were unsatisfying, creating a population like my husband. For my hub, eating full fat products and increased protein significantly decreased his cravings for carbs. After eating a typical Ludwig breakfast, he's able to pass up donuts and pizza at the office. The answer is yes, my spouse is probably eating fewer calories because he is satisfied and too full to crave foods he ate before. He's also eating more nutrient dense foods.

    And that is the problem with those who advocate calorie counting. Your husband has reduced calorie intake simply by changing what he eats. If he were just counting calories, but eating the crappy low-fat diet the USDA recommended for 30 years (they finally apologized this year), he probably would have failed because of the lack of satiety.

    And of course if you greatly reduce consumption of grains and sugar, you can reduce complications from T2 diabetes, and sometimes reverse it. You can't if you are eating bagels and low-fat cream cheese for breakfast, pizza for lunch, and pasta for dinner.

    Non sense. Low fat does not =/= low satiety. Protein + fiber have the greatest satiety, and then starches. Going from eating junk food to eating whole quality food is what made the difference. The person husband stopped eating highly calorie, high carb, high fat, high sodium foods and something more reasonable. It's the quality of food that change, which drove a reduction in calories. Many of us do the same thing with whole grains, oats, quinoa and bunch of other carb items.


    "Protein + fiber "
    Sounds like your a whole-food vegan. Good for you. But her husband (and 98% of Americans) will never be vegans. So you do the alternative healthy option for many (not all) because of satiety - high fat, low sugar, low grain.

    Yup, sounds right.

    Never understood the vegan thing. I do understand not wanting to kill animals for food and have no problem with that philosophy.

    But if you won't eat an egg from your neighbor's happy and healthy backyard chickens just a few times a year, it becomes a religion. And please vegans, don't give me a cholesterol lecture.

    My decision to avoid eggs from backyard chickens has nothing to do with religion -- it's a consistent position on animal exploitation. Backyard chickens actually form a significant part of the rescue chicken population and many of them are killed when the people who own them are no longer able to care for them. Even if one does make a commitment to care for chickens for their entire life (that is, not killing them when their production rate declines), there are no sources for chicks of which I am aware that don't participate in practices to which I am opposed (chick culling, using chickens for meat, and selling chicks to people who prioritize profit over the welfare of the chickens) so I wouldn't want to be a part of that process by eating eggs from backyard chickens.

    Even happy and healthy backyard chickens were treated as product at some point in their life -- although the person who is presently caring for them may have their welfare as a primary concern, I avoid eggs as part of an objection to the overall chick/chicken industry.

    If you don't understand why someone does something, sometimes asking will help you to find out. It may be easier to dismiss something as a religion before seeking to understand it, but it doesn't lead to greater clarity. This is my choice of what I feel comfortable supporting with my own actions, I realize other people may feel differently.

    My neighbor treats her chickens like I treat my dog. And look at her chickens as chicken rescues, just like my dog was a rescue.

    There is no moral reason not to eat eggs from neighbor's chickens who are treated like family pets. None.

    Been down that road on these forums before. The reasoning made no sense to me (I shouldn't raise chickens because someone else is killing a baby rooster or some such nonsense).

    But I would proffer that there is no reason not to eat eggs from any chicken that is treated humanely*. They don't have be in a backyard or treated as a pet. But I do think they should not be mistreated.

    *Edited: other than personal preference, of course. ;)
  • RGv2
    RGv2 Posts: 5,789 Member
    RGv2 wrote: »
    queenliz99 wrote: »
    I see lumpia!!

    Lumpia must be different in different regions. The Lumpia I get from our neighbors isn't in that picture, or I'm blind. Both of which are completely possible.

    Maybe... The ones that we get from the neighbor are usually long and skinny.
  • This content has been removed.
This discussion has been closed.