When it comes to losing weight, does it matter what you eat if you're within your calorie goal
Options
Replies
-
All calories are not the same. Sugar and refined grains and processed foods are toxic for your body and make you store fat. Some people flip their lids when I say that, but it Is true. All calories are not dealt with equally by our bodies.
In terms of weight loss all calories are the same, as a calorie is a unit of energy. And no, sugar/refined grains/processed foods are NOT toxic, nor do they make you store fat unless you are in a calorie surplus.8 -
types of foods ABSOLUTELY matter. when im doing completely raw i lose way more weight even if my calories are the same as when im eating wheat ad junk. the trick is no starches!!!24
-
Nope. Types of food do not matter. CICO.5
-
tiffaninghs wrote: »types of foods ABSOLUTELY matter. when im doing completely raw i lose way more weight even if my calories are the same as when im eating wheat ad junk. the trick is no starches!!!
There could perhaps be some truth to completely raw. It seems that cooking food may perhaps change the way your body metabolizes it. Cooking food perhaps increases the amount of digestible calories. The three basic macros of counting calories seems obsolete. Not saying it doesn't work, but perhaps there is now a better way.
http://www.shape.com/healthy-eating/diet-tips/can-cooking-high-fat-foods-increase-their-calories11 -
-
Woo. A calorie is a unit of measurement. Saying all calories are not the same is like saying all kilometers are not kilometers. Or a gallon isn't a gallon. You can have a gallon of milk or a gallon of water. The MEASUREMENT is still a gallon.All calories are not the same.
Over consumption is how one stores fat. Almost every industrialized nation has the same access to processed foods, sugar and grains. Why don't they have the same obesity levels as the US? Because they eat less than the average American does. And really, if something was toxic and consumed in large amounts, that person would be in the hospital with 24 hours for POISONING. Quit making up stories.Sugar and refined grains and processed foods are toxic for your body and make you store fat.
Flip their lids, no. Call you out on BS with NO EVIDENCE TO BACK IT, yes.Some people flip their lids when I say that, but it Is true.
No all MACRONUTRIENTS are dealt with differently. Again a calorie is a unit of energy. Whether from a carb, protein or fat, a calorie is a calorie. Thanks for playing though.All calories are not dealt with equally by our bodies.
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
15 -
How eventual are you speaking? Like a month, a week a year? Because if you've ever been to a penitentiary, they serve inmates the lowest quality food, with a lot of it processed foods. And for some reason, inmates serving 10 year or longer sentences aren't dying off from health issues while eating it 3 times a day.haroldrios1692 wrote: »Yes you will lose weight if you eat junk food as long as you're in a calorie deficit, how will you feel though?? like death. Youll pretty much feel like your on a roller coaster ride. And Im not a doctor but eating high sugar and processed foods can eventually lead to serious health issues.
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
6 -
Anecdotes aren't evidence.tiffaninghs wrote: »types of foods ABSOLUTELY matter. when im doing completely raw i lose way more weight even if my calories are the same as when im eating wheat ad junk. the trick is no starches!!!
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
6 -
Animal studies don't crossover the same as actual results in humans.tiffaninghs wrote: »types of foods ABSOLUTELY matter. when im doing completely raw i lose way more weight even if my calories are the same as when im eating wheat ad junk. the trick is no starches!!!
There could perhaps be some truth to completely raw. It seems that cooking food may perhaps change the way your body metabolizes it. Cooking food perhaps increases the amount of digestible calories. The three basic macros of counting calories seems obsolete. Not saying it doesn't work, but perhaps there is now a better way.
http://www.shape.com/healthy-eating/diet-tips/can-cooking-high-fat-foods-increase-their-calories
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
3 -
Ninerbuff I am new to the site. Reading different replies and I like the way you put things out there.
I'm here like most need to get some pounds off.
Would you mind sending some guidance?1 -
Poor example actually. There are two gallons, Imperial and US. An imperial gallon is 4.54 litres, whereas a US gallon is 3.8 litres. This is why metric is a much better system. Not many countries outside the US use gallons any more.0 -
This is true, but that's more strongly associated with studies investigating very narrow, specific things, like the effects of specific biochemical compounds. For example, a drug that works on cancer in mice always seems to turn out to be less effective in humans.
Animal studies don't crossover the same as actual results in humans.tiffaninghs wrote: »types of foods ABSOLUTELY matter. when im doing completely raw i lose way more weight even if my calories are the same as when im eating wheat ad junk. the trick is no starches!!!
There could perhaps be some truth to completely raw. It seems that cooking food may perhaps change the way your body metabolizes it. Cooking food perhaps increases the amount of digestible calories. The three basic macros of counting calories seems obsolete. Not saying it doesn't work, but perhaps there is now a better way.
http://www.shape.com/healthy-eating/diet-tips/can-cooking-high-fat-foods-increase-their-calories
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
If we're testing something broader, like, for example "Does eating not very much while exercising a lot result in weight loss", the results using mice as test subjects will be meaningful, as it would be for "is breathing in carbon monoxide bad for you?" and "should you try inhaling water?" They're mammals, like humans, and the similarities in physiology are more significant than the differences, if you see what I mean.
In this case, I think the scenario of cooked food versus raw food is closer to a "is carbon monoxide bad for you" hypothesis than "does this cure cancer?"
Firstly:
We've got some very clear reasoning why cooking could improve nutritional availability. This doesn't propose that anything magic goes on; it's all basically high school biology principles there- heat breaks down proteins, this makes it easier for the digestive system to break it down even further, so less of the food will pass straight through undigested, and so on.
At the risk of lowering the tone, anyone who has ever eaten sweetcorn (or changed a toddler who has been eating sweetcorn) already knows that the human stomach isn't 100% perfect, and it needs you to help it out beforehand. In this case, by chewing, which makes the inside of the kernel accessible. In the match between sweetcorn and the stomach, it's always a score of Unchewed Sweetcorn Kernel Casing 1- 0 Human Digestive Juices.
We also know that in those with Oral Allergy Syndrome, cooking the allergen generally (but not always) sorts it out, because the proteins that cause the reaction are broken down by the heat.
Secondly:
This is a different newspaper article on the same study, which mentions that there has been some investigation into this phenomenon in humans.The Harvard team believes that we have come to depend on cooked food, and this opinion is borne out by a study into the effects of a raw food diet. Even when processing some of their diet, through pounding or blending, strict raw foodists were underweight, and 50% of women under 45 had stopped ovulating. “They were so energy limited,” says Carmody, “that their bodies shut down reproduction and, from an evolutionary biologist’s perspective, this is really mindboggling.”
Link to study: http://agris.fao.org/agris-search/search.do?recordID=US201302916766
From a brief once-over, I can see that there are the standard limitations to the study design (participants were self-selecting, because you're not going to find people who will eat raw food for 2+ years solely for the sake of scientific investigation; results were collated by questionnaire), but I think the results have use.
Anyway, you won't see me giving away my saucepan set any time soon.
2 -
If you stay within your macros you can eat whatever th F ya want
1 -
There is some research showing some minor variations in weight loss for some people for some foods. Ergo the keto folks, the intermittent fasting folks, the raw food folks, the paleo folks, the zone folks, ... The which brings up the universal answer to all questions, "Some do; some don't. The differences aren't very great. It's more complicated than that."
In general, yes, you can eat whatever you want and lose weight based on calories in/calories out. If you try to survive on candy bars, however, you will probably feel lousy and therefore move less so your calories out may decrease. If you try to survive on fast food, you will probably retain more water which make you feel lousy and therefore move less so your calories out may decrease. If you try to follow an eating plan that denies you things you love, you may feel hangry which may make you feel lousy and therefore move less so your calories out may decrease.
The only "diet" that works is the one you, as an individual, can stick to. Freely the Banana Girl may do well on 51 bananas a day but I would be up on a roof with a sub-machine gun picking off passers by (between frequent trips to the bathroom).5 -
paulwatts747 wrote: »
Poor example actually. There are two gallons, Imperial and US. An imperial gallon is 4.54 litres, whereas a US gallon is 3.8 litres. This is why metric is a much better system. Not many countries outside the US use gallons any more.
That's two different units that happen to have the same name though.4 -
stevencloser wrote: »paulwatts747 wrote: »
Poor example actually. There are two gallons, Imperial and US. An imperial gallon is 4.54 litres, whereas a US gallon is 3.8 litres. This is why metric is a much better system. Not many countries outside the US use gallons any more.
That's two different units that happen to have the same name though.
It's like saying a dollar is a dollar. As a Canadian, there are different gallons and dollars. So, a US gallon of anything is still a US gallon 2 -
"Junk food" is quite an arbitrary term. To someone eating paleo, bread might be "junk" (even whole wheat). To a vegan, meat/animal products might fall into the category of "junk food." While these are possibly extreme examples, they illustrate the point.
When I think of "junk food" (which is a term I usually avoid) I think of candy and chips and other things that have high calories and little other nutrient value. You could lose weight eating nothing but these foods and staying under your calorie goal, but you wouldn't feel very good after a while.
Other people think of fast food as "junk food." Or pizza. Or ... whatever. Can you lose weight eating nothing but fast food or pizza and staying in your calorie goal. You'll probably even get a decent macro distribution (especially if you pay attention to it). But with nothing but fast food, it might be harder to get all your micronutrients - depending on the availability of things like vegetables or fruits.
The best option, IMO, is to eat a varied diet of foods that you like. Again, staying under calories will lead to weight loss (that's the key!). Paying attention to your macro and micronutrients will help you feel good and keep your energy up. And variety (including some "junk food" treats, if you want) helps you adhere to the lower calories.2 -
Ugh... what do you think?0
-
It depends how few calories we're talking about. Any adult would lose weight on 500 calories a day, wherever those calories came from. But what usually happens when people eat junk food and stay within their calorie goal is they stay overweight and become malnourished - a real problem here in the US.8
-
It depends how few calories we're talking about. Any adult would lose weight on 500 calories a day, wherever those calories came from. But what usually happens when people eat junk food and stay within their calorie goal is they stay overweight and become malnourished - a real problem here in the US.
Where do you suppose the energy needed to stay overweight would come from?4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 391 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
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions