Personal trainer says no carbs til dinner
Options
Replies
-
stevencloser wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »As to relevance to OP, you will note that the discussion was about why the PT would suggest restricting carbs until later in the day.
And also remember that OP said her goal was simply losing fat.During that discussion, someone said "you can only burn so much fat at a time." My response was that, by becoming fat adapted, you can increase how much fat you can burn over the same time period. It sounds like OP's PT is suggesting she burns fat throughout most of the day (and protein).
Why would OP care (or her PT think she cared) about burning more total fat if bodyfat loss was the same? Usually people push the burn more fat thing because they somehow believe that that results in burning more bodyfat, which it does not.
How much fat I burn is going to depend on how much fat I eat. It adjusts accordingly.
This is exactly the point I made that everyone wants to argue about. I think we all agree, just that some may not realize it.
Like you when you say in one post that this leads you to burn more bodyfat but in another you say you don't.
Not more body fat, just burn fat (from all sources) faster.0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Serious question here... how would one know that they even burn body fat faster than most? Is there a truly reliable method of testing this?
The FASTER study looked into it for elite endurance athletes. Those who elite athletes who were fat adapted burned an astonishing amount of fat.
http://www.vespapower.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Volek-Metabolism-FASTER-2015-Final.pdf
It sort of makes sense. We carry around tens of thousands of calories of fat to use and only a couple thousand calories of glycogen. Fat adapted individuals will tap into those fat stores faster and easier than those who eat high or moderate carbs. Those who use carb timing or back loading probably won't be fat adapted, I would imagine. And those of us who are fat adapted and not exercising will not reap the same benefits as these elite athetes either.
Not just elite, but ultra endurance. We're talking people who do up to 100 mile races (if you can call that a race) here. Outside of those very specific circumstances, i.e. if higher intensity is required, well...
http://www.mysportscience.com/single-post/2016/12/01/Ketogenic-diets-for-athletes3 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »As to relevance to OP, you will note that the discussion was about why the PT would suggest restricting carbs until later in the day.
And also remember that OP said her goal was simply losing fat.During that discussion, someone said "you can only burn so much fat at a time." My response was that, by becoming fat adapted, you can increase how much fat you can burn over the same time period. It sounds like OP's PT is suggesting she burns fat throughout most of the day (and protein).
Why would OP care (or her PT think she cared) about burning more total fat if bodyfat loss was the same? Usually people push the burn more fat thing because they somehow believe that that results in burning more bodyfat, which it does not.
How much fat I burn is going to depend on how much fat I eat. It adjusts accordingly.
This is exactly the point I made that everyone wants to argue about. I think we all agree, just that some may not realize it.
Like you when you say in one post that this leads you to burn more bodyfat but in another you say you don't.
Not more body fat, just burn fat (from all sources) faster.
From all sources, including bodyfat (your own words).3 -
stevencloser wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Serious question here... how would one know that they even burn body fat faster than most? Is there a truly reliable method of testing this?
The FASTER study looked into it for elite endurance athletes. Those who elite athletes who were fat adapted burned an astonishing amount of fat.
http://www.vespapower.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Volek-Metabolism-FASTER-2015-Final.pdf
It sort of makes sense. We carry around tens of thousands of calories of fat to use and only a couple thousand calories of glycogen. Fat adapted individuals will tap into those fat stores faster and easier than those who eat high or moderate carbs. Those who use carb timing or back loading probably won't be fat adapted, I would imagine. And those of us who are fat adapted and not exercising will not reap the same benefits as these elite athetes either.
Not just elite, but ultra endurance. We're talking people who do up to 100 mile races (if you can call that a race) here. Outside of those very specific circumstances, i.e. if higher intensity is required, well...
http://www.mysportscience.com/single-post/2016/12/01/Ketogenic-diets-for-athletes
Interesting site. I found this one to be quite informative as well:
http://www.mysportscience.com/single-post/2015/06/16/A-problem-with-the-reporting-of-effects-of-ketogenic-diet2 -
stevencloser wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »As to relevance to OP, you will note that the discussion was about why the PT would suggest restricting carbs until later in the day.
And also remember that OP said her goal was simply losing fat.During that discussion, someone said "you can only burn so much fat at a time." My response was that, by becoming fat adapted, you can increase how much fat you can burn over the same time period. It sounds like OP's PT is suggesting she burns fat throughout most of the day (and protein).
Why would OP care (or her PT think she cared) about burning more total fat if bodyfat loss was the same? Usually people push the burn more fat thing because they somehow believe that that results in burning more bodyfat, which it does not.
How much fat I burn is going to depend on how much fat I eat. It adjusts accordingly.
This is exactly the point I made that everyone wants to argue about. I think we all agree, just that some may not realize it.
Like you when you say in one post that this leads you to burn more bodyfat but in another you say you don't.
Not more body fat, just burn fat (from all sources) faster.
From all sources, including bodyfat (your own words).
Yes, I burn fat faster. Not sure how you go from "burn fat faster" to "greater quantity" (more) and "body fat" (ignoring dietary fat).
Are you arguing that I burn fat slower under my circumstances? I'm not clear on your point.0 -
I going to ask the question again... okay, so lets go with this whole silly idea that you're burning dietary and body fat faster. Great. What's happening with your weight compared to a person who is eating the same amount of calories eating a different macro ratio?
Does any of this matter?
Given that studies show that over time, any form of diet performs pretty much the same as any other, does this really matter for anyone who isn't doing special sorts of training?4 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I going to ask the question again... okay, so lets go with this whole silly idea that you're burning dietary and body fat faster. Great. What's happening with your weight compared to a person who is eating the same amount of calories eating a different macro ratio?
Does any of this matter?
Given that studies show that over time, any form of diet performs pretty much the same as any other, does this really matter for anyone who isn't doing special sorts of training?
All of those questions have already been answered.0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Serious question here... how would one know that they even burn body fat faster than most? Is there a truly reliable method of testing this?
The FASTER study looked into it for elite endurance athletes. Those who elite athletes who were fat adapted burned an astonishing amount of fat.
http://www.vespapower.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Volek-Metabolism-FASTER-2015-Final.pdf
It sort of makes sense. We carry around tens of thousands of calories of fat to use and only a couple thousand calories of glycogen. Fat adapted individuals will tap into those fat stores faster and easier than those who eat high or moderate carbs. Those who use carb timing or back loading probably won't be fat adapted, I would imagine. And those of us who are fat adapted and not exercising will not reap the same benefits as these elite athetes either.
Whats also being lost is that those who eat more fat store more fat. Body fat % or fat mass will not be accelerated when compared to two isocaloric diets where protein is constant.
2 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I going to ask the question again... okay, so lets go with this whole silly idea that you're burning dietary and body fat faster. Great. What's happening with your weight compared to a person who is eating the same amount of calories eating a different macro ratio?
Does any of this matter?
Given that studies show that over time, any form of diet performs pretty much the same as any other, does this really matter for anyone who isn't doing special sorts of training?
All of those questions have already been answered.
11 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I going to ask the question again... okay, so lets go with this whole silly idea that you're burning dietary and body fat faster. Great. What's happening with your weight compared to a person who is eating the same amount of calories eating a different macro ratio?
Does any of this matter?
Given that studies show that over time, any form of diet performs pretty much the same as any other, does this really matter for anyone who isn't doing special sorts of training?
All of those questions have already been answered.
No, they have not. Really. I've asked a couple of times, and I honestly cannot recall a post of mine where I ask being quoted and directly answered.
The only thing I do remember you saying is that you weren't losing fat. So I don't know what this whole ish about burning fat has to do with anything since I doubt the OP cares. She has stated her trainer told her one thing, and that her preference is another. That seems to be what she cares about.
If you have answers to the other two questions I asked, can you do me a favor and pull the quotes where you've answered them?Does any of this matter?
Given that studies show that over time, any form of diet performs pretty much the same as any other, does this really matter for anyone who isn't doing special sorts of training?0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I going to ask the question again... okay, so lets go with this whole silly idea that you're burning dietary and body fat faster. Great. What's happening with your weight compared to a person who is eating the same amount of calories eating a different macro ratio?
Does any of this matter?
Given that studies show that over time, any form of diet performs pretty much the same as any other, does this really matter for anyone who isn't doing special sorts of training?
All of those questions have already been answered.
No, they have not. Really. I've asked a couple of times, and I honestly cannot recall a post of mine where I ask being quoted and directly answered.
The only thing I do remember you saying is that you weren't losing fat. So I don't know what this whole ish about burning fat has to do with anything since I doubt the OP cares. She has stated her trainer told her one thing, and that her preference is another. That seems to be what she cares about.
If you have answers to the other two questions I asked, can you do me a favor and pull the quotes where you've answered them?Does any of this matter?
Given that studies show that over time, any form of diet performs pretty much the same as any other, does this really matter for anyone who isn't doing special sorts of training?
No, I didn’t say that I wasn’t losing fat. I said I wouldn’t lose body fat faster.
Here you go:
And again:midwesterner85 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »Are we confusing/conflating dietary fat with body fat here? Because when and how the body uses fats for energy as opposed to carbs is kind of irrelevant to body fat loss no? You're not magically "burning" more stored body fat just by virtue of not having eaten any carbs that meal.
Are you responding to me? My point about burning fat is that those of us who are fat adapted are capable of using fat for energy at a higher rate than those who are not fat adapted. Of course that also means that the other person, who is physiologically the same otherwise, not fat adapted is going to utilize other energy sources instead (glucose, glycogen) at higher rates than the fat adapted person. In a long endurance competition (ultra-marathon, for example), that non fat adapted person is going to see a performance reduction if they don't fuel... usually with carbs. That's the whole point of GU packs for such athletes.... carbs for fuel because that is what they need. Fat adapted athletes will either eat fat or use body fat at a higher rate and can avoid the need for constant carb introduction.
For the fat adapted person who is not participating in an endurance competition, they still burn more fat (not necessarily body fat because it depends on if they recently consumed fat) than the non-fat adapted person in a similar circumstance. It isn't magic. It's just that a person who consumes carbs regularly and has excess glucose from recent carb consumption is going to use carbs for energy first. The fat adapted person who doesn't have excess glucose because they didn't recently consume carbs is going to use something else for energy first... the fat adapted person who recently at fat is using that.
Notice how I haven't said that any of this negates calories? It's a question of how those calories are used and when they are used based on which macros make those calories up, the ability (adaptation) of a person to use different energy sources (glucose, glycogen, protein, and fat - protein and fat potentially coming from diet and potentially coming from our body), and their energy needs (someone competing in an endurance competition vs. a daily desk job). My point was in response to:you can only burn so much fat at a time.
My point was that this discussion isn't about being fat adapted in a dietary sense and was a general point about this whole thread degenerating into that discussion. It's confusing fat loss with fat usage.
OP was told not to eat carbs before a certain time. People piped up about more fat being used blah blah blah which os of total irrelevance to body fat loss, the concern of the OP.
The discussion was about macro timing, not calories. The discussion ponders why the PT might have suggested such macro timing to help OP achieve her goals (including body fat loss). Fat usage, fat loss, and macro timing are absolutely relevant to the question of why a certain macro timing was suggested to achieve body fat loss. I don't understand how you can't see that.midwesterner85 wrote: »Yes, the studies cited use athletes for test subjects, but the application for fat adaptation applies to others as well. We just aren't going to put out the same level of energy for the same period of time, but that doesn't mean the energy we do use isn't affected by macro intake. The difference is that endurance athletes have the capability to be tested while they complete endurance athletic events; while the person who is not an endurance athlete cannot be tested while completing endurance athletic events because they aren't. Just like you would never be able to test my oxygen uptake while I'm piloting an aircraft... because I don't pilot aircraft.
As to relevance to OP, you will note that the discussion was about why the PT would suggest restricting carbs until later in the day. During that discussion, someone said "you can only burn so much fat at a time." My response was that, by becoming fat adapted, you can increase how much fat you can burn over the same time period. It sounds like OP's PT is suggesting she burns fat throughout most of the day (and protein).0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Serious question here... how would one know that they even burn body fat faster than most? Is there a truly reliable method of testing this?
Fat adapted people burn fat faster. All fat. Dietary and body fat. The source isn't the focus, so fat use doesn't change the source of fat. Of course if I had eaten fat recently, there will be dietary fat burned.
I really don't understand why this is so difficult to understand or why you are adding extra words to my explanation.
Adding what words? You said:Yes, I said I burn fat faster than most. I do.As explained, I burn fat faster - both body fat and dietary fat.
What is the mechanism by which fat adapted people burn fat "faster" is there some demand for this to happen? If your weight is stable vis a vis energy balance are you then, as stevencloser asked, storing it faster?
I don't get why you took a swipe at my understanding here. You're making claims without backing them up, and yes, The source is the focus given that I'm sure OP cares about it here. I'd take it you'd want to give advice geared towards that.
The word you are adding: body
I am so confused right now. Where is anyone adding body? You have claimed several times to burn body fat faster than non-fat adapted people. Is that not what you are saying?
I can see that you are confused. That is not exactly what I am saying, as it is taken out of context by separating body fat from dietary fat. I'm saying I burn all fat faster, from all sources. Does that include body fat? Yes. Does that include dietary fat? Yes. The implication GottaBurn is making is that I'm suggesting I ONLY burn body fat faster. In fact, the source of the fat is irrelevant to the point that I use fat faster. I've linked to scientific articles to explain that faster use.
The word you're adding: Only3 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Serious question here... how would one know that they even burn body fat faster than most? Is there a truly reliable method of testing this?
Fat adapted people burn fat faster. All fat. Dietary and body fat. The source isn't the focus, so fat use doesn't change the source of fat. Of course if I had eaten fat recently, there will be dietary fat burned.
I really don't understand why this is so difficult to understand or why you are adding extra words to my explanation.
Adding what words? You said:Yes, I said I burn fat faster than most. I do.As explained, I burn fat faster - both body fat and dietary fat.
What is the mechanism by which fat adapted people burn fat "faster" is there some demand for this to happen? If your weight is stable vis a vis energy balance are you then, as stevencloser asked, storing it faster?
I don't get why you took a swipe at my understanding here. You're making claims without backing them up, and yes, The source is the focus given that I'm sure OP cares about it here. I'd take it you'd want to give advice geared towards that.
The word you are adding: body
I am so confused right now. Where is anyone adding body? You have claimed several times to burn body fat faster than non-fat adapted people. Is that not what you are saying?
I can see that you are confused. That is not exactly what I am saying, as it is taken out of context by separating body fat from dietary fat. I'm saying I burn all fat faster, from all sources. Does that include body fat? Yes. Does that include dietary fat? Yes. The implication GottaBurn is making is that I'm suggesting I ONLY burn body fat faster. In fact, the source of the fat is irrelevant to the point that I use fat faster. I've linked to scientific articles to explain that faster use.
The word you're adding: Only
And implication.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I going to ask the question again... okay, so lets go with this whole silly idea that you're burning dietary and body fat faster. Great. What's happening with your weight compared to a person who is eating the same amount of calories eating a different macro ratio?
Does any of this matter?
Given that studies show that over time, any form of diet performs pretty much the same as any other, does this really matter for anyone who isn't doing special sorts of training?
All of those questions have already been answered.
No, they have not. Really. I've asked a couple of times, and I honestly cannot recall a post of mine where I ask being quoted and directly answered.
The only thing I do remember you saying is that you weren't losing fat. So I don't know what this whole ish about burning fat has to do with anything since I doubt the OP cares. She has stated her trainer told her one thing, and that her preference is another. That seems to be what she cares about.
If you have answers to the other two questions I asked, can you do me a favor and pull the quotes where you've answered them?Does any of this matter?
Given that studies show that over time, any form of diet performs pretty much the same as any other, does this really matter for anyone who isn't doing special sorts of training?
No, I didn’t say that I wasn’t losing fat. I said I wouldn’t lose body fat faster.
Here you go:
And again:midwesterner85 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »Are we confusing/conflating dietary fat with body fat here? Because when and how the body uses fats for energy as opposed to carbs is kind of irrelevant to body fat loss no? You're not magically "burning" more stored body fat just by virtue of not having eaten any carbs that meal.
Are you responding to me? My point about burning fat is that those of us who are fat adapted are capable of using fat for energy at a higher rate than those who are not fat adapted. Of course that also means that the other person, who is physiologically the same otherwise, not fat adapted is going to utilize other energy sources instead (glucose, glycogen) at higher rates than the fat adapted person. In a long endurance competition (ultra-marathon, for example), that non fat adapted person is going to see a performance reduction if they don't fuel... usually with carbs. That's the whole point of GU packs for such athletes.... carbs for fuel because that is what they need. Fat adapted athletes will either eat fat or use body fat at a higher rate and can avoid the need for constant carb introduction.
For the fat adapted person who is not participating in an endurance competition, they still burn more fat (not necessarily body fat because it depends on if they recently consumed fat) than the non-fat adapted person in a similar circumstance. It isn't magic. It's just that a person who consumes carbs regularly and has excess glucose from recent carb consumption is going to use carbs for energy first. The fat adapted person who doesn't have excess glucose because they didn't recently consume carbs is going to use something else for energy first... the fat adapted person who recently at fat is using that.
Notice how I haven't said that any of this negates calories? It's a question of how those calories are used and when they are used based on which macros make those calories up, the ability (adaptation) of a person to use different energy sources (glucose, glycogen, protein, and fat - protein and fat potentially coming from diet and potentially coming from our body), and their energy needs (someone competing in an endurance competition vs. a daily desk job). My point was in response to:you can only burn so much fat at a time.
My point was that this discussion isn't about being fat adapted in a dietary sense and was a general point about this whole thread degenerating into that discussion. It's confusing fat loss with fat usage.
OP was told not to eat carbs before a certain time. People piped up about more fat being used blah blah blah which os of total irrelevance to body fat loss, the concern of the OP.
The discussion was about macro timing, not calories. The discussion ponders why the PT might have suggested such macro timing to help OP achieve her goals (including body fat loss). Fat usage, fat loss, and macro timing are absolutely relevant to the question of why a certain macro timing was suggested to achieve body fat loss. I don't understand how you can't see that.midwesterner85 wrote: »Yes, the studies cited use athletes for test subjects, but the application for fat adaptation applies to others as well. We just aren't going to put out the same level of energy for the same period of time, but that doesn't mean the energy we do use isn't affected by macro intake. The difference is that endurance athletes have the capability to be tested while they complete endurance athletic events; while the person who is not an endurance athlete cannot be tested while completing endurance athletic events because they aren't. Just like you would never be able to test my oxygen uptake while I'm piloting an aircraft... because I don't pilot aircraft.
As to relevance to OP, you will note that the discussion was about why the PT would suggest restricting carbs until later in the day. During that discussion, someone said "you can only burn so much fat at a time." My response was that, by becoming fat adapted, you can increase how much fat you can burn over the same time period. It sounds like OP's PT is suggesting she burns fat throughout most of the day (and protein).
You misunderstood my questions.
I'm asking about body fat loss. I thought that was clearly implied given that I asked about what happened to your weight.
Given that I also asked the question:Given that studies show that over time, any form of diet performs pretty much the same as any other, does this really matter for anyone who isn't doing special sorts of training?
I thought it was also clear that I was talking about fat loss, not burning.
It should also be noted that what was referred to in the statement as "you can only burn so much fat at a time" is an issue with semantics and was referring to fat loss, not oxidation. It refers to the theoretical maximum potential of 31 calories per pound of bodyfat loss per day:
Citation, it's just an article by Lyle McDonald, but he talks about his source: http://mindandmuscle.net/articles/determining-the-maximum-dietary-deficit-for-fat-loss/
So all of this back and forth has been pointless.
You are talking about oxidation, other people are talking about fat loss.
OP only cares about the trainer's advice because it doesn't align with her preferences.
Now can you clarify what point you're trying to make and why?2 -
Nah man. Carbs are fine. Next time he tells you that ask to see his certification as a nutritionist.4
-
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I going to ask the question again... okay, so lets go with this whole silly idea that you're burning dietary and body fat faster. Great. What's happening with your weight compared to a person who is eating the same amount of calories eating a different macro ratio?
Does any of this matter?
Given that studies show that over time, any form of diet performs pretty much the same as any other, does this really matter for anyone who isn't doing special sorts of training?
All of those questions have already been answered.
No, they have not. Really. I've asked a couple of times, and I honestly cannot recall a post of mine where I ask being quoted and directly answered.
The only thing I do remember you saying is that you weren't losing fat. So I don't know what this whole ish about burning fat has to do with anything since I doubt the OP cares. She has stated her trainer told her one thing, and that her preference is another. That seems to be what she cares about.
If you have answers to the other two questions I asked, can you do me a favor and pull the quotes where you've answered them?Does any of this matter?
Given that studies show that over time, any form of diet performs pretty much the same as any other, does this really matter for anyone who isn't doing special sorts of training?
No, I didn’t say that I wasn’t losing fat. I said I wouldn’t lose body fat faster.
Here you go:
And again:midwesterner85 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »Are we confusing/conflating dietary fat with body fat here? Because when and how the body uses fats for energy as opposed to carbs is kind of irrelevant to body fat loss no? You're not magically "burning" more stored body fat just by virtue of not having eaten any carbs that meal.
Are you responding to me? My point about burning fat is that those of us who are fat adapted are capable of using fat for energy at a higher rate than those who are not fat adapted. Of course that also means that the other person, who is physiologically the same otherwise, not fat adapted is going to utilize other energy sources instead (glucose, glycogen) at higher rates than the fat adapted person. In a long endurance competition (ultra-marathon, for example), that non fat adapted person is going to see a performance reduction if they don't fuel... usually with carbs. That's the whole point of GU packs for such athletes.... carbs for fuel because that is what they need. Fat adapted athletes will either eat fat or use body fat at a higher rate and can avoid the need for constant carb introduction.
For the fat adapted person who is not participating in an endurance competition, they still burn more fat (not necessarily body fat because it depends on if they recently consumed fat) than the non-fat adapted person in a similar circumstance. It isn't magic. It's just that a person who consumes carbs regularly and has excess glucose from recent carb consumption is going to use carbs for energy first. The fat adapted person who doesn't have excess glucose because they didn't recently consume carbs is going to use something else for energy first... the fat adapted person who recently at fat is using that.
Notice how I haven't said that any of this negates calories? It's a question of how those calories are used and when they are used based on which macros make those calories up, the ability (adaptation) of a person to use different energy sources (glucose, glycogen, protein, and fat - protein and fat potentially coming from diet and potentially coming from our body), and their energy needs (someone competing in an endurance competition vs. a daily desk job). My point was in response to:you can only burn so much fat at a time.
My point was that this discussion isn't about being fat adapted in a dietary sense and was a general point about this whole thread degenerating into that discussion. It's confusing fat loss with fat usage.
OP was told not to eat carbs before a certain time. People piped up about more fat being used blah blah blah which os of total irrelevance to body fat loss, the concern of the OP.
The discussion was about macro timing, not calories. The discussion ponders why the PT might have suggested such macro timing to help OP achieve her goals (including body fat loss). Fat usage, fat loss, and macro timing are absolutely relevant to the question of why a certain macro timing was suggested to achieve body fat loss. I don't understand how you can't see that.midwesterner85 wrote: »Yes, the studies cited use athletes for test subjects, but the application for fat adaptation applies to others as well. We just aren't going to put out the same level of energy for the same period of time, but that doesn't mean the energy we do use isn't affected by macro intake. The difference is that endurance athletes have the capability to be tested while they complete endurance athletic events; while the person who is not an endurance athlete cannot be tested while completing endurance athletic events because they aren't. Just like you would never be able to test my oxygen uptake while I'm piloting an aircraft... because I don't pilot aircraft.
As to relevance to OP, you will note that the discussion was about why the PT would suggest restricting carbs until later in the day. During that discussion, someone said "you can only burn so much fat at a time." My response was that, by becoming fat adapted, you can increase how much fat you can burn over the same time period. It sounds like OP's PT is suggesting she burns fat throughout most of the day (and protein).
You misunderstood my questions.
I'm asking about body fat loss. I thought that was clearly implied given that I asked about what happened to your weight.
Given that I also asked the question:Given that studies show that over time, any form of diet performs pretty much the same as any other, does this really matter for anyone who isn't doing special sorts of training?
I thought it was also clear that I was talking about fat loss, not burning.
It should also be noted that what was referred to in the statement as "you can only burn so much fat at a time" is an issue with semantics and was referring to fat loss, not oxidation. It refers to the theoretical maximum potential of 31 calories per pound of bodyfat loss per day:
Citation, it's just an article by Lyle McDonald, but he talks about his source: http://mindandmuscle.net/articles/determining-the-maximum-dietary-deficit-for-fat-loss/
So all of this back and forth has been pointless.
You are talking about oxidation, other people are talking about fat loss.
OP only cares about the trainer's advice because it doesn't align with her preferences.
Now can you clarify what point you're trying to make and why?
First off, it looks like you are misquoting me, but I can guess that is an error.
"you can only burn so much fat at a time" clearly is about use (burn) of fat, not body fat loss. If that isn't the case, then it was very poorly worded.
I agree that the back and forth has been pointless. As I've pointed out in more than 1 post, I don't think we actually disagree. You just keep reading something that I'm not actually writing, and then disagreeing with what you think I'm writing. I keep on correcting that mistake, at which point you then argue about whether or not you actually misread.
The original point I was making is that "you can only burn so much fat at a time" is not something we are stuck with. We can increase how much fat we are able to burn over a given time period. I've already explained how, why, and the relevance to OP's question about macro timing.0 -
They were referring to the concept that the body's fat cells can only release so much fat per minute. Not how efficient you are at oxidizing fat.midwesterner85 wrote: »Yes, the studies cited use athletes for test subjects, but the application for fat adaptation applies to others as well. We just aren't going to put out the same level of energy for the same period of time, but that doesn't mean the energy we do use isn't affected by macro intake. The difference is that endurance athletes have the capability to be tested while they complete endurance athletic events; while the person who is not an endurance athlete cannot be tested while completing endurance athletic events because they aren't. Just like you would never be able to test my oxygen uptake while I'm piloting an aircraft... because I don't pilot aircraft.
As to relevance to OP, you will note that the discussion was about why the PT would suggest restricting carbs until later in the day. During that discussion, someone said "you can only burn so much fat at a time." My response was that, by becoming fat adapted, you can increase how much fat you can burn over the same time period. It sounds like OP's PT is suggesting she burns fat throughout most of the day (and protein).midwesterner85 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »As to relevance to OP, you will note that the discussion was about why the PT would suggest restricting carbs until later in the day.
And also remember that OP said her goal was simply losing fat.During that discussion, someone said "you can only burn so much fat at a time." My response was that, by becoming fat adapted, you can increase how much fat you can burn over the same time period. It sounds like OP's PT is suggesting she burns fat throughout most of the day (and protein).
Why would OP care (or her PT think she cared) about burning more total fat if bodyfat loss was the same? Usually people push the burn more fat thing because they somehow believe that that results in burning more bodyfat, which it does not.
How much fat I burn is going to depend on how much fat I eat. It adjusts accordingly.
This is exactly the point I made that everyone wants to argue about. I think we all agree, just that some may not realize it.
Like you when you say in one post that this leads you to burn more bodyfat but in another you say you don't.
Not more body fat, just burn fat (from all sources) faster.
From all sources, including bodyfat (your own words).
Yes, I burn fat faster. Not sure how you go from "burn fat faster" to "greater quantity" (more) and "body fat" (ignoring dietary fat).
Are you arguing that I burn fat slower under my circumstances? I'm not clear on your point.
Let's math a little. Basic stuff. Concepts. I won't even use numbers.
Say you can burn more fat in an hour than I can (your claim). If we both burn fat for an hour, you burned more fat than me. THUS, one of two things happens. Either you lose more fat than I do (which you say does not occur) or you are also storing more fat than I am to make up the difference (which is what @StevenCloser keeps trying to explain to you).
In other words, if you are not losing fat faster even though you burn more of it in a given period than someone else, either they are burning it for a longer period of time to catch up (which is contrary to your elite athlete example) or you are storing more than them.
If you are burning more than they are in the same time period and those time periods are equal, you burned more fat (greater quantity).
Not sure how you don't go from "burn fat faster" to greater quantity. If I run faster than you for the same amount of time I go further. If I run faster but we go the same distance, either I didn't run as long or I backed up at some point.6 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I going to ask the question again... okay, so lets go with this whole silly idea that you're burning dietary and body fat faster. Great. What's happening with your weight compared to a person who is eating the same amount of calories eating a different macro ratio?
Does any of this matter?
Given that studies show that over time, any form of diet performs pretty much the same as any other, does this really matter for anyone who isn't doing special sorts of training?
All of those questions have already been answered.
No, they have not. Really. I've asked a couple of times, and I honestly cannot recall a post of mine where I ask being quoted and directly answered.
The only thing I do remember you saying is that you weren't losing fat. So I don't know what this whole ish about burning fat has to do with anything since I doubt the OP cares. She has stated her trainer told her one thing, and that her preference is another. That seems to be what she cares about.
If you have answers to the other two questions I asked, can you do me a favor and pull the quotes where you've answered them?Does any of this matter?
Given that studies show that over time, any form of diet performs pretty much the same as any other, does this really matter for anyone who isn't doing special sorts of training?
No, I didn’t say that I wasn’t losing fat. I said I wouldn’t lose body fat faster.
Here you go:
And again:midwesterner85 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »Are we confusing/conflating dietary fat with body fat here? Because when and how the body uses fats for energy as opposed to carbs is kind of irrelevant to body fat loss no? You're not magically "burning" more stored body fat just by virtue of not having eaten any carbs that meal.
Are you responding to me? My point about burning fat is that those of us who are fat adapted are capable of using fat for energy at a higher rate than those who are not fat adapted. Of course that also means that the other person, who is physiologically the same otherwise, not fat adapted is going to utilize other energy sources instead (glucose, glycogen) at higher rates than the fat adapted person. In a long endurance competition (ultra-marathon, for example), that non fat adapted person is going to see a performance reduction if they don't fuel... usually with carbs. That's the whole point of GU packs for such athletes.... carbs for fuel because that is what they need. Fat adapted athletes will either eat fat or use body fat at a higher rate and can avoid the need for constant carb introduction.
For the fat adapted person who is not participating in an endurance competition, they still burn more fat (not necessarily body fat because it depends on if they recently consumed fat) than the non-fat adapted person in a similar circumstance. It isn't magic. It's just that a person who consumes carbs regularly and has excess glucose from recent carb consumption is going to use carbs for energy first. The fat adapted person who doesn't have excess glucose because they didn't recently consume carbs is going to use something else for energy first... the fat adapted person who recently at fat is using that.
Notice how I haven't said that any of this negates calories? It's a question of how those calories are used and when they are used based on which macros make those calories up, the ability (adaptation) of a person to use different energy sources (glucose, glycogen, protein, and fat - protein and fat potentially coming from diet and potentially coming from our body), and their energy needs (someone competing in an endurance competition vs. a daily desk job). My point was in response to:you can only burn so much fat at a time.
My point was that this discussion isn't about being fat adapted in a dietary sense and was a general point about this whole thread degenerating into that discussion. It's confusing fat loss with fat usage.
OP was told not to eat carbs before a certain time. People piped up about more fat being used blah blah blah which os of total irrelevance to body fat loss, the concern of the OP.
The discussion was about macro timing, not calories. The discussion ponders why the PT might have suggested such macro timing to help OP achieve her goals (including body fat loss). Fat usage, fat loss, and macro timing are absolutely relevant to the question of why a certain macro timing was suggested to achieve body fat loss. I don't understand how you can't see that.midwesterner85 wrote: »Yes, the studies cited use athletes for test subjects, but the application for fat adaptation applies to others as well. We just aren't going to put out the same level of energy for the same period of time, but that doesn't mean the energy we do use isn't affected by macro intake. The difference is that endurance athletes have the capability to be tested while they complete endurance athletic events; while the person who is not an endurance athlete cannot be tested while completing endurance athletic events because they aren't. Just like you would never be able to test my oxygen uptake while I'm piloting an aircraft... because I don't pilot aircraft.
As to relevance to OP, you will note that the discussion was about why the PT would suggest restricting carbs until later in the day. During that discussion, someone said "you can only burn so much fat at a time." My response was that, by becoming fat adapted, you can increase how much fat you can burn over the same time period. It sounds like OP's PT is suggesting she burns fat throughout most of the day (and protein).
You misunderstood my questions.
I'm asking about body fat loss. I thought that was clearly implied given that I asked about what happened to your weight.
Given that I also asked the question:Given that studies show that over time, any form of diet performs pretty much the same as any other, does this really matter for anyone who isn't doing special sorts of training?
I thought it was also clear that I was talking about fat loss, not burning.
It should also be noted that what was referred to in the statement as "you can only burn so much fat at a time" is an issue with semantics and was referring to fat loss, not oxidation. It refers to the theoretical maximum potential of 31 calories per pound of bodyfat loss per day:
Citation, it's just an article by Lyle McDonald, but he talks about his source: http://mindandmuscle.net/articles/determining-the-maximum-dietary-deficit-for-fat-loss/
So all of this back and forth has been pointless.
You are talking about oxidation, other people are talking about fat loss.
OP only cares about the trainer's advice because it doesn't align with her preferences.
Now can you clarify what point you're trying to make and why?
First off, it looks like you are misquoting me, but I can guess that is an error.
"you can only burn so much fat at a time" clearly is about use (burn) of fat, not body fat loss. If that isn't the case, then it was very poorly worded.
I agree that the back and forth has been pointless. As I've pointed out in more than 1 post, I don't think we actually disagree. You just keep reading something that I'm not actually writing, and then disagreeing with what you think I'm writing. I keep on correcting that mistake, at which point you then argue about whether or not you actually misread.
The original point I was making is that "you can only burn so much fat at a time" is not something we are stuck with. We can increase how much fat we are able to burn over a given time period. I've already explained how, why, and the relevance to OP's question about macro timing.
You keep saying I misunderstand you.
You misunderstand me.
The other thing is that you are hung up on precise wording and I am explaining to you how colloquialism works in the general fitness environment.
I can tell you, in spite of what the actual words parse out to say, that the poster who said "you can only burn so much fat at a time" is referring to fat LOSS not oxidation, because Lyle's 31 calorie rule and maximum deficit amount has been bandied about plenty on this forum. Also, "burning" and "losing" are often used interchangeably.
Now, back to my questions.
It is clear that you are making that point that you can maximize fat oxidation over a given time period. Since you've also made it clear that doing so doesn't increase fat loss, I asked...
Does it matter?0 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »
They were referring to the concept that the body's fat cells can only release so much fat per minute. Not how efficient you are at oxidizing fat.midwesterner85 wrote: »Yes, the studies cited use athletes for test subjects, but the application for fat adaptation applies to others as well. We just aren't going to put out the same level of energy for the same period of time, but that doesn't mean the energy we do use isn't affected by macro intake. The difference is that endurance athletes have the capability to be tested while they complete endurance athletic events; while the person who is not an endurance athlete cannot be tested while completing endurance athletic events because they aren't. Just like you would never be able to test my oxygen uptake while I'm piloting an aircraft... because I don't pilot aircraft.
As to relevance to OP, you will note that the discussion was about why the PT would suggest restricting carbs until later in the day. During that discussion, someone said "you can only burn so much fat at a time." My response was that, by becoming fat adapted, you can increase how much fat you can burn over the same time period. It sounds like OP's PT is suggesting she burns fat throughout most of the day (and protein).
That isn't what they said.Carlos_421 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »As to relevance to OP, you will note that the discussion was about why the PT would suggest restricting carbs until later in the day.
And also remember that OP said her goal was simply losing fat.During that discussion, someone said "you can only burn so much fat at a time." My response was that, by becoming fat adapted, you can increase how much fat you can burn over the same time period. It sounds like OP's PT is suggesting she burns fat throughout most of the day (and protein).
Why would OP care (or her PT think she cared) about burning more total fat if bodyfat loss was the same? Usually people push the burn more fat thing because they somehow believe that that results in burning more bodyfat, which it does not.
How much fat I burn is going to depend on how much fat I eat. It adjusts accordingly.
This is exactly the point I made that everyone wants to argue about. I think we all agree, just that some may not realize it.
Like you when you say in one post that this leads you to burn more bodyfat but in another you say you don't.
Not more body fat, just burn fat (from all sources) faster.
From all sources, including bodyfat (your own words).
Yes, I burn fat faster. Not sure how you go from "burn fat faster" to "greater quantity" (more) and "body fat" (ignoring dietary fat).
Are you arguing that I burn fat slower under my circumstances? I'm not clear on your point.
Let's math a little. Basic stuff. Concepts. I won't even use numbers.
Say you can burn more fat in an hour than I can (your claim). If we both burn fat for an hour, you burned more fat than me. THUS, one of two things happens. Either you lose more fat than I do (which you say does not occur) or you are also storing more fat than I am to make up the difference (which is what @StevenCloser keeps trying to explain to you).
In other words, if you are not losing fat faster even though you burn more of it in a given period than someone else, either they are burning it for a longer period of time to catch up (which is contrary to your elite athlete example) or you are storing more than them.
If you are burning more than they are in the same time period and those time periods are equal, you burned more fat (greater quantity).
As explained earlier, I'm eating more fat and fewer carbs. I'm burning more fat for energy while the alternative person eating a lot of carbs is using glucose instead.Carlos_421 wrote: »Not sure how you don't go from "burn fat faster" to greater quantity.
I didn't.Carlos_421 wrote: »If I run faster than you for the same amount of time I go further. If I run faster but we go the same distance, either I didn't run as long or I backed up at some point.
As pointed out earlier, burning fat faster does not suggest I burn more body fat.0 -
thelovelyLIZ wrote: »Nah man. Carbs are fine. Next time he tells you that ask to see his certification as a nutritionist Dietitian.
FIFY!
4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 395 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 960 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions