Clean eating- does it matter?
Replies
-
It definitely matters, it matters in sooooo many ways. Not every calorie is equal number one, eating "junk" is not going to be burned as fast as healthy whole foods that are easily digested and metabolized for the body to use.
Also macros are great but micro nutrients are also very important not to mention timing your macros to get the most effecient use of both micro and macro nutrients.
"Clean" eating and "junk" eating aren't arbitrary terms.. eating clean is eating food that is grown in the ground or had a life at some point, junk eating is processed foods, foods filled with garbage and preservatives... these things have a substantial role in weight loss, weight gain, muscle building etc. Regardless what your goals are its always better to eat clean whole foods,but with that said its also ok to indulge from time to time in moderation this doesn't mean every day or even every week. Results are primarily from nutrition and rest, exercise is the smallest part of the equation
I have a question: when McDonald's makes an Egg McMuffin, do they go through each ingredient with a special tool to strip the nutrients off? Why is a homemade egg in butter on a muffin with canadian bacon and cheese nutritious and clean but Egg McMuffin isn't? Taste preferences aside, it's basically the same thing.8 -
It definitely matters, it matters in sooooo many ways. Not every calorie is equal number one, eating "junk" is not going to be burned as fast as healthy whole foods that are easily digested and metabolized for the body to use.
Also macros are great but micro nutrients are also very important not to mention timing your macros to get the most effecient use of both micro and macro nutrients.
"Clean" eating and "junk" eating aren't arbitrary terms.. eating clean is eating food that is grown in the ground or had a life at some point, junk eating is processed foods, foods filled with garbage and preservatives... these things have a substantial role in weight loss, weight gain, muscle building etc. Regardless what your goals are its always better to eat clean whole foods,but with that said its also ok to indulge from time to time in moderation this doesn't mean every day or even every week. Results are primarily from nutrition and rest, exercise is the smallest part of the equation
Oh dear.
After the whole discussion you still post that.
And, yes it is ok to indulge every day - as long as it is with your calorie allowance for weight loss purposes and within the context of an overall nutritionally balanced diet for health purposes.
6 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »It definitely matters, it matters in sooooo many ways. Not every calorie is equal number one, eating "junk" is not going to be burned as fast as healthy whole foods that are easily digested and metabolized for the body to use.
Also macros are great but micro nutrients are also very important not to mention timing your macros to get the most effecient use of both micro and macro nutrients.
"Clean" eating and "junk" eating aren't arbitrary terms.. eating clean is eating food that is grown in the ground or had a life at some point, junk eating is processed foods, foods filled with garbage and preservatives... these things have a substantial role in weight loss, weight gain, muscle building etc. Regardless what your goals are its always better to eat clean whole foods,but with that said its also ok to indulge from time to time in moderation this doesn't mean every day or even every week. Results are primarily from nutrition and rest, exercise is the smallest part of the equation
I have a question: when McDonald's makes an Egg McMuffin, do they go through each ingredient with a special tool to strip the nutrients off? Why is a homemade egg in butter on a muffin with canadian bacon and cheese nutritious and clean but Egg McMuffin isn't? Taste preferences aside, it's basically the same thing.
Preservatives number one just to be brief.... think about what a preservative is, its function.. now tell me do you think your body is going to break that down and digest it then metabolize it as fast as food without preservatives? Definitely wont, we weren't made to process those added chemicals so our bodies take longer to utilize those types of foods as fuel which is all food is. Which is why there's carbs that are better than others, meats that are better than others so on and so forth, some foods are more effecient than others.
Example - Simple carbs are amazing after a workout because of their effect on your body when its in that state, simple carbs otherwise are no good and will more than likely be stored as energy (fat)0 -
Excess calories will be stored as fat.
Doesn't matter if they are from simple carbs or any other food group or whether they are consumed before or after a work out.8 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »It definitely matters, it matters in sooooo many ways. Not every calorie is equal number one, eating "junk" is not going to be burned as fast as healthy whole foods that are easily digested and metabolized for the body to use.
Also macros are great but micro nutrients are also very important not to mention timing your macros to get the most effecient use of both micro and macro nutrients.
"Clean" eating and "junk" eating aren't arbitrary terms.. eating clean is eating food that is grown in the ground or had a life at some point, junk eating is processed foods, foods filled with garbage and preservatives... these things have a substantial role in weight loss, weight gain, muscle building etc. Regardless what your goals are its always better to eat clean whole foods,but with that said its also ok to indulge from time to time in moderation this doesn't mean every day or even every week. Results are primarily from nutrition and rest, exercise is the smallest part of the equation
I have a question: when McDonald's makes an Egg McMuffin, do they go through each ingredient with a special tool to strip the nutrients off? Why is a homemade egg in butter on a muffin with canadian bacon and cheese nutritious and clean but Egg McMuffin isn't? Taste preferences aside, it's basically the same thing.
Preservatives number one just to be brief.... think about what a preservative is, its function.. now tell me do you think your body is going to break that down and digest it then metabolize it as fast as food without preservatives? Definitely wont, we weren't made to process those added chemicals so our bodies take longer to utilize those types of foods as fuel which is all food is. Which is why there's carbs that are better than others, meats that are better than others so on and so forth, some foods are more effecient than others.
Example - Simple carbs are amazing after a workout because of their effect on your body when its in that state, simple carbs otherwise are no good and will more than likely be stored as energy (fat)
Okay, this is a rabbit hole I'm not willing to jump into. Changing the goalposts, first it was the nutrients and now it's the preservatives with a pinch of simple carbs being magically stored as fat in a deficit. Read the previous pages.6 -
paperpudding wrote: »Excess calories will be stored as fat.
Doesn't matter if they are from simple carbs or any other food group or whether they are consumed before or after a work out.
Simple carbs consumed after a workout restore glycogen to the muscles as well as release insulin and igf1 the bodies most anabolic hormone this prevents your body from going into a catabolic state from cortisol release, its not about excess calories and more about timing your macro nutrients to be effective. I only mentioned this as an example of how some foods are more effecient than others and also how timing is important to the types of foods we eat1 -
This thread is Groundhog Day incarnate.7
-
paperpudding wrote: »Excess calories will be stored as fat.
Doesn't matter if they are from simple carbs or any other food group or whether they are consumed before or after a work out.
Simple carbs consumed after a workout restore glycogen to the muscles as well as release insulin and igf1 the bodies most anabolic hormone this prevents your body from going into a catabolic state from cortisol release, its not about excess calories and more about timing your macro nutrients to be effective. I only mentioned this as an example of how some foods are more effecient than others and also how timing is important to the types of foods we eat
It doesn't matter, or at least matters so minimally as to be totally insignificant, from a weight loss point of view.
4 -
This content has been removed.
-
amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »It definitely matters, it matters in sooooo many ways. Not every calorie is equal number one, eating "junk" is not going to be burned as fast as healthy whole foods that are easily digested and metabolized for the body to use.
Also macros are great but micro nutrients are also very important not to mention timing your macros to get the most effecient use of both micro and macro nutrients.
"Clean" eating and "junk" eating aren't arbitrary terms.. eating clean is eating food that is grown in the ground or had a life at some point, junk eating is processed foods, foods filled with garbage and preservatives... these things have a substantial role in weight loss, weight gain, muscle building etc. Regardless what your goals are its always better to eat clean whole foods,but with that said its also ok to indulge from time to time in moderation this doesn't mean every day or even every week. Results are primarily from nutrition and rest, exercise is the smallest part of the equation
I have a question: when McDonald's makes an Egg McMuffin, do they go through each ingredient with a special tool to strip the nutrients off? Why is a homemade egg in butter on a muffin with canadian bacon and cheese nutritious and clean but Egg McMuffin isn't? Taste preferences aside, it's basically the same thing.
Preservatives number one just to be brief.... think about what a preservative is, its function.. now tell me do you think your body is going to break that down and digest it then metabolize it as fast as food without preservatives? Definitely wont, we weren't made to process those added chemicals so our bodies take longer to utilize those types of foods as fuel which is all food is. Which is why there's carbs that are better than others, meats that are better than others so on and so forth, some foods are more effecient than others.
Example - Simple carbs are amazing after a workout because of their effect on your body when its in that state, simple carbs otherwise are no good and will more than likely be stored as energy (fat)
Okay, this is a rabbit hole I'm not willing to jump into. Changing the goalposts, first it was the nutrients and now it's the preservatives with a pinch of simple carbs being magically stored as fat in a deficit. Read the previous pages.
I've read the previous pages, and again there's a major difference in clean and junk eating as well as timing, there's no magic in simple carbs being stored its science. even if one is in a deficit that doesn't mean the body will utilize it first as an energy source, the body uses the best energy source for its current state, what isn't used is stored for later. Nutrients are important and the source in which you aquire those nutrients makes a huge difference....2 -
Sigh.
Nobody has said nutrients are not important.
But for weight loss, if you eat in a calorie deficit you lose weight, regardless of source of calories.4 -
paperpudding wrote: »Sigh.
Nobody has said nutrients are not important.
But for weight loss, if you eat in a calorie deficit you lose weight, regardless of source of calories.
True in the APPROPRIATE deficit you will lose weight, but if you don't manage the minute details you cannot be in control of what type of weight you're losing, are you losing only fat? Is it mostly water? Are you losing muscle? .... losing weight is great and I'm not going to knock anyone for their goals but until people fully grasp how weight loss works they'll always struggle with their weight, calories in vs calories out is a great starting point but it goes so much deeper than that, what happens when someone gets to their goal weight and isn't happy because they are just skinny fat now? Now what? Whats the next step? So to see someone telling another person its ok to eat garbage food as long as it fits your macros and calorie goals is kind of unsettling because its not good advice, yeah you'll lose some weight but its not healthy and is only going to set you up for issues down the road, depending on your goals0 -
*Double Sigh*
Nevermind. Not worth it.2 -
I disagree.
If your macros and calorie goals are met, you are probably eating a nutritionally sound diet.
No need to stress about the minutiae of it or to deny yourself any treats for weeks on end, as you suggested in your previous post.
As many of us long timers have found ourselves - I lost weight to my goal in 2013 and have maintained it ever since.
And stayed healthy
Many other long timers likewise.5 -
paperpudding wrote: »I disagree.
If your macros and calorie goals are met, you are probably eating a nutritionally sound diet.
No need to stress about the minutiae of it or to deny yourself any treats for weeks on end, as you suggested in your previous post.
As many of us long timers have found ourselves - I lost weight to my goal in 2013 and have maintained it ever since.
And stayed healthy
Many other long timers likewise.
I commend you on achieving your goals as well as maintaining them so long, others struggle though and its mainly because of bad habits and eating bad foods, my goals are probably much different than most peoples as a bodybuilder so the minutia is very important, cutting bodyfat is a large part of my program as well as building muscle and maintaining a certain aesthetic, I've lost a good amount of weight myself and when my goal was to lose weight i was very strict and i acheived my goal, now my goal has changed and i have a greater insight in nutrition and hiw the body works and responds to certain foods and how that minutia is very important to acheiving these goals, and although my goals may be different thats not to say the path to acheiving my goal is any different when it comes to cutting body fat. It's a different approach to what some may be used to but no less effective and i know there are men and women in these forums who are like me, same goals, they focus on those little details others may see as minimal and won't make much of a difference, and its for a reason ... all I'm saying is there are many ways to approach weight loss, its not linear and isn't as simple as calories in vs calories out all the time some ways are more effective than other and I'm simply just trying to share one with you .... take it or leave it,
I've dropped from 18% body fat to 11% as per dexa scan and am almost 30lbs heavier than my goal weight but have dropped 3 pants sizes since hitting my goal weight, something I'm doing has to be working and its definitely not just calories in vs calories out thats for sure1 -
I'd post the studies RE: "sugar gets stored as fat", "junk food doens't get metabolized as well as clean" and "nutrient timing is super important" but really, I can't be assed.6
-
paperpudding wrote: »I disagree.
If your macros and calorie goals are met, you are probably eating a nutritionally sound diet.
No need to stress about the minutiae of it or to deny yourself any treats for weeks on end, as you suggested in your previous post.
As many of us long timers have found ourselves - I lost weight to my goal in 2013 and have maintained it ever since.
And stayed healthy
Many other long timers likewise.
I commend you on achieving your goals as well as maintaining them so long, others struggle though and its mainly because of bad habits and eating bad foods, my goals are probably much different than most peoples as a bodybuilder so the minutia is very important, cutting bodyfat is a large part of my program as well as building muscle and maintaining a certain aesthetic, I've lost a good amount of weight myself and when my goal was to lose weight i was very strict and i acheived my goal, now my goal has changed and i have a greater insight in nutrition and hiw the body works and responds to certain foods and how that minutia is very important to acheiving these goals, and although my goals may be different thats not to say the path to acheiving my goal is any different when it comes to cutting body fat. It's a different approach to what some may be used to but no less effective and i know there are men and women in these forums who are like me, same goals, they focus on those little details others may see as minimal and won't make much of a difference, and its for a reason ... all I'm saying is there are many ways to approach weight loss, its not linear and isn't as simple as calories in vs calories out all the time some ways are more effective than other and I'm simply just trying to share one with you .... take it or leave it,
I've dropped from 18% body fat to 11% as per dexa scan and am almost 30lbs heavier than my goal weight but have dropped 3 pants sizes since hitting my goal weight, something I'm doing has to be working and its definitely not just calories in vs calories out thats for sure
Wrong. For weight loss. Strictly weight loss, not health, not nutrition, not body fat percentages, etc, but strictly and ONLY weight loss, it absolutely is as simple as calories in vs calories out. I will never understand why people insist on confusing the goals. We can't be any clearer. Yes, nutrition is important, and is more complicated, but stop saying that "weight loss isn't as simple as calories in vs calories out" when strictly weight loss isn't what you are actually discussing.3 -
Wynterbourne wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »I disagree.
If your macros and calorie goals are met, you are probably eating a nutritionally sound diet.
No need to stress about the minutiae of it or to deny yourself any treats for weeks on end, as you suggested in your previous post.
As many of us long timers have found ourselves - I lost weight to my goal in 2013 and have maintained it ever since.
And stayed healthy
Many other long timers likewise.
I commend you on achieving your goals as well as maintaining them so long, others struggle though and its mainly because of bad habits and eating bad foods, my goals are probably much different than most peoples as a bodybuilder so the minutia is very important, cutting bodyfat is a large part of my program as well as building muscle and maintaining a certain aesthetic, I've lost a good amount of weight myself and when my goal was to lose weight i was very strict and i acheived my goal, now my goal has changed and i have a greater insight in nutrition and hiw the body works and responds to certain foods and how that minutia is very important to acheiving these goals, and although my goals may be different thats not to say the path to acheiving my goal is any different when it comes to cutting body fat. It's a different approach to what some may be used to but no less effective and i know there are men and women in these forums who are like me, same goals, they focus on those little details others may see as minimal and won't make much of a difference, and its for a reason ... all I'm saying is there are many ways to approach weight loss, its not linear and isn't as simple as calories in vs calories out all the time some ways are more effective than other and I'm simply just trying to share one with you .... take it or leave it,
I've dropped from 18% body fat to 11% as per dexa scan and am almost 30lbs heavier than my goal weight but have dropped 3 pants sizes since hitting my goal weight, something I'm doing has to be working and its definitely not just calories in vs calories out thats for sure
Wrong. For weight loss. Strictly weight loss, not health, not nutrition, not body fat percentages, etc, but strictly and ONLY weight loss, it absolutely is as simple as calories in vs calories out. I will never understand why people insist on confusing the goals. We can't be any clearer. Yes, nutrition is important, and is more complicated, but stop saying that "weight loss isn't as simple as calories in vs calories out" when strictly weight loss isn't what you are actually discussing.
Agreed. It's like saying "In making a carving, the type of chisel matters" when you're talking about doing the fine detail work, and other people are just looking to reduce the size of the piece of wood.2 -
paperpudding wrote: »I disagree.
If your macros and calorie goals are met, you are probably eating a nutritionally sound diet.
No need to stress about the minutiae of it or to deny yourself any treats for weeks on end, as you suggested in your previous post.
As many of us long timers have found ourselves - I lost weight to my goal in 2013 and have maintained it ever since.
And stayed healthy
Many other long timers likewise.
I commend you on achieving your goals as well as maintaining them so long, others struggle though and its mainly because of bad habits and eating bad foods, my goals are probably much different than most peoples as a bodybuilder so the minutia is very important, cutting bodyfat is a large part of my program as well as building muscle and maintaining a certain aesthetic, I've lost a good amount of weight myself and when my goal was to lose weight i was very strict and i acheived my goal, now my goal has changed and i have a greater insight in nutrition and hiw the body works and responds to certain foods and how that minutia is very important to acheiving these goals, and although my goals may be different thats not to say the path to acheiving my goal is any different when it comes to cutting body fat. It's a different approach to what some may be used to but no less effective and i know there are men and women in these forums who are like me, same goals, they focus on those little details others may see as minimal and won't make much of a difference, and its for a reason ... all I'm saying is there are many ways to approach weight loss, its not linear and isn't as simple as calories in vs calories out all the time some ways are more effective than other and I'm simply just trying to share one with you .... take it or leave it,
I've dropped from 18% body fat to 11% as per dexa scan and am almost 30lbs heavier than my goal weight but have dropped 3 pants sizes since hitting my goal weight, something I'm doing has to be working and its definitely not just calories in vs calories out thats for sure
The weight loss part of it IS just calories in, calories out.
Nobody said what else you are doing isn't working.
Nobody said weight loss is linear.
Nobody said there aren't different approaches to weight loss
And, no, you weren't just trying to share one way with me - ( what would be point of that, I didn't ask for anyone to share their individual approach
) you were making statements disputing that calorie deficit is what causes weight loss. 3 -
The type of food you eat determines the bodies energy expenditure, how that food is metabolized and used... energy expenditure is a real thing and regardless if one is at a caloric deficit the type of food you eat determines weight loss, the human body processes and uses energy efficiently if it needs to use more energy to process whats coming in just to use that for energy it will find an easier source to use. Jusy because you're eating something it doesn't mean it will be used the way you may think it will, timing is important, underatanding how the body works is important and is far more complicated than calories in vs out of course someone will negate any studies or articles i post as this must be broscience because god forbid anyone make their weight loss journey harder, maybe i should have just lied and did what most of the other people did and supported bad habits and made an excuse as to why its ok to eat *kitten* food and get subpar results
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3302369/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK53531/
I'm sure you all know how to google but this should help get you started ...1 -
TEF accounts for 7 calories per 10% of protein of total calories eaten instead of carbs or fat per 1000 calories ingested. Or as an example, if you're eating at maintenance 2500 calories and eat 30% protein (188 grams, more than enough even for a bodybuilder) instead of 10% (63 grams, bare minimum recommendation for a normal weight adult) you burn an extra 7 * 2 * 2.5 = 35 calories. That's the extent to which the food you eat influences your energy expenditure. It's background noise, completely irrelevant.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/5/899S.full12 -
stevencloser wrote: »TEF accounts for 7 calories per 10% of protein of total calories eaten instead of carbs or fat per 1000 calories ingested. Or as an example, if you're eating at maintenance 2500 calories and eat 30% protein (188 grams, more than enough even for a bodybuilder) instead of 10% (63 grams, bare minimum recommendation for a normal weight adult) you burn an extra 7 * 2 * 2.5 = 35 calories. That's the extent to which the food you eat influences your energy expenditure. It's background noise, completely irrelevant.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/5/899S.full
Not at all irrelevant, and thats all dependant on how fast the food you eat is digested and metabolized, how quickly that energy is readily available for the body to use. Quality of food determines this. You know as well as I that the body will use the most effecient and readily available source of energy, the energy that is not being used is being stored. Quality of food again, determines this. Eating 188 grams of protein from beef isnt the same as 188 grams from an easier digested source such as white fish, the proteins from the fish will be available quicker than the beef because it takes the body longer to process the beef. This may not seem important to some people but if the debate is "clean" eating vs "dirty" there is a difference and over time the difference is significant0 -
It definitely matters, it matters in sooooo many ways. Not every calorie is equal number one, eating "junk" is not going to be burned as fast as healthy whole foods that are easily digested and metabolized for the body to use.
Also macros are great but micro nutrients are also very important not to mention timing your macros to get the most effecient use of both micro and macro nutrients.
"Clean" eating and "junk" eating aren't arbitrary terms.. eating clean is eating food that is grown in the ground or had a life at some point, junk eating is processed foods, foods filled with garbage and preservatives... these things have a substantial role in weight loss, weight gain, muscle building etc. Regardless what your goals are its always better to eat clean whole foods,but with that said its also ok to indulge from time to time in moderation this doesn't mean every day or even every week. Results are primarily from nutrition and rest, exercise is the smallest part of the equation
Darn it, I lost 50lbs and improved all my health markers the wrong way!
8 -
paperpudding wrote: »Sigh.
Nobody has said nutrients are not important.
But for weight loss, if you eat in a calorie deficit you lose weight, regardless of source of calories.
True in the APPROPRIATE deficit you will lose weight, but if you don't manage the minute details you cannot be in control of what type of weight you're losing, are you losing only fat? Is it mostly water? Are you losing muscle? .... losing weight is great and I'm not going to knock anyone for their goals but until people fully grasp how weight loss works they'll always struggle with their weight, calories in vs calories out is a great starting point but it goes so much deeper than that, what happens when someone gets to their goal weight and isn't happy because they are just skinny fat now? Now what? Whats the next step? So to see someone telling another person its ok to eat garbage food as long as it fits your macros and calorie goals is kind of unsettling because its not good advice, yeah you'll lose some weight but its not healthy and is only going to set you up for issues down the road, depending on your goals
I don't care what I lost 50lbs of, having whatever it was gone improved all my blood tests/health markers-including normalizing a high glucose number. As for grasping how weight loss actually works-I'm 4 years into successful maintenance, which means I'm a statistical outlier and special freak snowflake. Pretty sure I've got this figured out, and no I don't eat 'clean'
8 -
stevencloser wrote: »TEF accounts for 7 calories per 10% of protein of total calories eaten instead of carbs or fat per 1000 calories ingested. Or as an example, if you're eating at maintenance 2500 calories and eat 30% protein (188 grams, more than enough even for a bodybuilder) instead of 10% (63 grams, bare minimum recommendation for a normal weight adult) you burn an extra 7 * 2 * 2.5 = 35 calories. That's the extent to which the food you eat influences your energy expenditure. It's background noise, completely irrelevant.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/5/899S.full
Not at all irrelevant, and thats all dependant on how fast the food you eat is digested and metabolized, how quickly that energy is readily available for the body to use. Quality of food determines this. You know as well as I that the body will use the most effecient and readily available source of energy, the energy that is not being used is being stored. Quality of food again, determines this. Eating 188 grams of protein from beef isnt the same as 188 grams from an easier digested source such as white fish, the proteins from the fish will be available quicker than the beef because it takes the body longer to process the beef. This may not seem important to some people but if the debate is "clean" eating vs "dirty" there is a difference and over time the difference is significant
TEF is "how many calories are needed to digest this". This is an irrelevantly small number as evidenced above. How fast you digest it is completely irrelevant to your energy usage. It is entirely irrelevant to your overall gain or loss just as much as me depositiing 1000 dollars into my bank account all at once or in single 1 dollar transactions.5 -
crazyycatlady1 wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »Sigh.
Nobody has said nutrients are not important.
But for weight loss, if you eat in a calorie deficit you lose weight, regardless of source of calories.
True in the APPROPRIATE deficit you will lose weight, but if you don't manage the minute details you cannot be in control of what type of weight you're losing, are you losing only fat? Is it mostly water? Are you losing muscle? .... losing weight is great and I'm not going to knock anyone for their goals but until people fully grasp how weight loss works they'll always struggle with their weight, calories in vs calories out is a great starting point but it goes so much deeper than that, what happens when someone gets to their goal weight and isn't happy because they are just skinny fat now? Now what? Whats the next step? So to see someone telling another person its ok to eat garbage food as long as it fits your macros and calorie goals is kind of unsettling because its not good advice, yeah you'll lose some weight but its not healthy and is only going to set you up for issues down the road, depending on your goals
I don't care what I lost 50lbs of, having whatever it was gone improved all my blood tests/health markers-including normalizing a high glucose number. As for grasping how weight loss actually works-I'm 4 years into successful maintenance, which means I'm a statistical outlier and special freak snowflake. Pretty sure I've got this figured out, and no I don't eat 'clean'
Almost like as long as you create a calorie deficit you're bound to lose mostly fat because your body isn't stupid but a highly evolved machine that enabled us to be the successful species we are. Imagine if our ancestors had to take care of those "minute details", we'd have died out 5 mass famines ago.5 -
[/quote]
If you can go the rest of your life without eating a cupcake, um... good for you, but I sure can't - and won't.[/quote]
^This.2 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »TEF accounts for 7 calories per 10% of protein of total calories eaten instead of carbs or fat per 1000 calories ingested. Or as an example, if you're eating at maintenance 2500 calories and eat 30% protein (188 grams, more than enough even for a bodybuilder) instead of 10% (63 grams, bare minimum recommendation for a normal weight adult) you burn an extra 7 * 2 * 2.5 = 35 calories. That's the extent to which the food you eat influences your energy expenditure. It's background noise, completely irrelevant.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/5/899S.full
Not at all irrelevant, and thats all dependant on how fast the food you eat is digested and metabolized, how quickly that energy is readily available for the body to use. Quality of food determines this. You know as well as I that the body will use the most effecient and readily available source of energy, the energy that is not being used is being stored. Quality of food again, determines this. Eating 188 grams of protein from beef isnt the same as 188 grams from an easier digested source such as white fish, the proteins from the fish will be available quicker than the beef because it takes the body longer to process the beef. This may not seem important to some people but if the debate is "clean" eating vs "dirty" there is a difference and over time the difference is significant
TEF is "how many calories are needed to digest this". This is an irrelevantly small number as evidenced above. How fast you digest it is completely irrelevant to your energy usage. It is entirely irrelevant to your overall gain or loss just as much as me depositiing 1000 dollars into my bank account all at once or in single 1 dollar transactions.
I understand that, what I'm talking about is the bioavailability of the nutrients we eat, if it takes more energy to make one source bioavailable than it does another than the body will choose the easier source, this can mean not everything you're eating is being utilized the way some might think it is and may be getting stored. Of course there will always be an "easier" source but that's when the quality of food comes into play, if you're primarily eating "dirty" regardless of caloric deficit or macros there's a higher chance that food being stored.. I'm not talking about in a day but over time . I read the article you posted but there have been studies since then that show that all calories are not created equally, I'll need to find one again and I'll share with you ... I'm more concerned with losing weight im the most effecient way possible, weight loss that is sustained and not temporary.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »crazyycatlady1 wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »Sigh.
Nobody has said nutrients are not important.
But for weight loss, if you eat in a calorie deficit you lose weight, regardless of source of calories.
True in the APPROPRIATE deficit you will lose weight, but if you don't manage the minute details you cannot be in control of what type of weight you're losing, are you losing only fat? Is it mostly water? Are you losing muscle? .... losing weight is great and I'm not going to knock anyone for their goals but until people fully grasp how weight loss works they'll always struggle with their weight, calories in vs calories out is a great starting point but it goes so much deeper than that, what happens when someone gets to their goal weight and isn't happy because they are just skinny fat now? Now what? Whats the next step? So to see someone telling another person its ok to eat garbage food as long as it fits your macros and calorie goals is kind of unsettling because its not good advice, yeah you'll lose some weight but its not healthy and is only going to set you up for issues down the road, depending on your goals
I don't care what I lost 50lbs of, having whatever it was gone improved all my blood tests/health markers-including normalizing a high glucose number. As for grasping how weight loss actually works-I'm 4 years into successful maintenance, which means I'm a statistical outlier and special freak snowflake. Pretty sure I've got this figured out, and no I don't eat 'clean'
Almost like as long as you create a calorie deficit you're bound to lose mostly fat because your body isn't stupid but a highly evolved machine that enabled us to be the successful species we are. Imagine if our ancestors had to take care of those "minute details", we'd have died out 5 mass famines ago.
Cmon man thats survival and not health and fitness, thats such an unfair example.... the minute details are what gets someone to a fairly small body fat percentage and aesthetic that most strive for ... everyone's goals are different but losing weight doesn't always mean getting healthy or looking good.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »
About half of Americans are now craft brew snobs. Which, to many, just means they'll get all excited about some grapefruit-flavored IPA. Me, I just like good beer.Tacklewasher wrote: »prattiger65 wrote: »So, are you gonna have a beer or are you gonna have a Guinness?? You can't have both.
Sorry. Forgot this was mostly an American site.
Guess I gonna have me a Bud Light!
Tried my first fruity beer a good 10 years ago. Nope.
I'm more of a pale ale sort of gal.
And what is it with the proliferation of Bud Light!? I even saw it in a supermarket here (UK) and wondered who the fudge is buying it!?
Maybe it's the weird hipsters drinking bad beer ironically thing.
I thought the ironic bad beer or choice for hipsters was PBR, but maybe they've moved on.
Mostly, but I've seen it be Old Style around here. Could be Bud Lite in the UK. ;-)0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions