I have a nutrition theory. What do you think?

twinketta

I am apple and when I first started on MFP I ate a really heavy protein diet, not atkins, just I ate meat/eggs all the time.

The last 5 months or more I have become vegetarian, probably because I overloaded on meat and the thought of eating meat turns my stomach.

With the protein and now the carbs I always keep within my calorie goals.

It has not made one jot of difference to my apple shape.

I am still apple but with a lower bf%

My belief is that your shape is determined by genetics. My mother and maternal grandmother, great grandmother were all apple shaped

MGwasp

True

twinketta

Let me add on to my previous post..if you have a parent with...let us say large ears/small nose/under eye bags

Let us just call them distinguishing features, then, they are most likely going to be passed down genetically.

You can not `diet` those features away.

If you are apple/pear/hourglass etc then it is most likely that you have inherent genes and all you can do is work with them the best you can.

If you become overweight then those problem areas will become more apparent.

jonnythan

It is just that and is just observational and not scientifically proven. I believe that apples will lose faster on a low carb diet due to the fact they they are more prone to having a higher insulin response to food.

Yeah. No.

walleymama

I, too, have been thinking a lot about the conflicting advice and evidence around weight loss. I enjoyed reading your theory and thought it made some sense on its face.

Unfortunately, it doesn't ring true with my own experience. I easily lost 20 lbs on a paleo-type diet, when I was doing very little exercise and I was definitely eating a high calorie diet. I'm a pear. My husband is an apple and while he initially lost over 65 lbs doing paleo he stalled out and is now going with calorie restriction although still low-carb.

I'm now experimenting with calorie counting and looking for a calorie deficit approach so I can eat the foods I love (in moderation). I'm curious to see how it compares with the paleo experience. While the paleo experience is a proven system for me, the truth is I was not happy with the foods I needed to eat (or, more specifically, what I couldn't eat) and my regaining the weight is proof that, for me at least, it's not a diet I can stick with for life. I'm hoping perhaps calorie tracking will be sustainable for me.

I know it seems to be "common sense" that weight loss is as simple as maintaining a caloric deficit, but obviously it is not that simple or we wouldn't have an epidemic of overweight people. Blaming it on willpower and character strength is an easy moral judgement, and discards the vastly complex systems in our body that are involved in regulating body weight.

Yes, it is true that you can starve yourself into thinness and spend half your life at the gym, but really who wants that and who can live a life where they are hungry all the time? If you are going hungry you will not last on any diet for a lifetime, and yo-yo-ing is worse for you than just being fat, so some studies say.

The Black Swan principle states that it is very hard to prove all swans are white, but as soon as you find one black swan you have disproven the theory. It is easy to state that low calories are the cure for all overweight people, but the black swans are already out there. You can eat a higher calorie diet and lose more weight faster than a lower calorie diet. I myself am living proof of that.

Calories in = calories out is a huge oversimplification of a complex biochemical system whose main priority is homeostasis. The body has many redundant systems whose job it is to reset things to the status quo. This is why many people stall out, etc. Things change as you change your eating and exercise habits. In some ways, your body is working against you. In other ways, we sabotage our bodies by introducing high carb intake and refined sugars to a body that never evolved to handle such a diet.

I've come to believe there is no one theory that is going to work for everybody and be a realistic solution to weight loss. But I do feel there is a solution for a healthy weight for each person, they just need to see what works best for them.

chubaway

It's possible. Anyone who outright dismisses it is closed-minded.

jonnythan

It's possible. Anyone who outright dismisses it is closed-minded.

Or it's just something someone pulled out of thin air with zero evidence.

It's not a "theory." It's an idea. At best it's a hypothesis. But it's not a theory.

jadedone

Well I am pear to hourglass. And I personally find that if my carbs are too low, I am both cranky and insatiably hungry. There is also a too high number where I don't lose weight.

So I shoot for about 45-50% carbs, and protein at 25% and fat at 30%. Seems pretty easy to pay stick with (in range) and it mostly works. Well I have some other issues that impact the scale. I am off by a percentage or few, but typically managed to stay under 50% carbs. At below 40% carbs, I am super cranky. And some of my carbs need to come from starches. They can't all be fruits and veggies. Legumes are OK though.

But anyway, my blood sugar, blood pressure and cholesterol are all excellent. Even at an elevated weight, so I'll stick with it. Let's put it this way, my weight isn't even on the radar as a concern from my doctor, as my numbers are generally very good. Even at my heaviest.

chubaway

It's possible. Anyone who outright dismisses it is closed-minded.

Or it's just something someone pulled out of thin air with zero evidence.

It's not a "theory." It's an idea. At best it's a hypothesis. But it's not a theory.

Perhaps "conjecture" is the word you're looking for?

SideSteel

I disagree with your theory. I also don't believe the duration of your experience verifies your theory as one can easily fluctuate from week to week due to hormones, time of month for females, fluid weight, and not to mention the losses in the beginning will tend to be large anyways.

I would suspect that given you are indeed tracking correctly, your losses would have likely continued after that initial stall/gain even without the macronutrient modifications.

Regardless of me disagreeing with your theory, I'm happy you are having success. Congrats.

FitForeverAgain

There is no one size fits all on weight loss.

The human body is a machine and there are so many factors involved in keeping that machine well oiled as well as properly fueled, it is difficult to say.

The whole "eat less, move more" doesn't work for some people... especially those with digestive diseases, like Celiac Disease. Don't get me wrong... it works for the majority of people. But if someone with Celiac is trying to lose weight (because there are a lot of overweight celiacs who struggle to take it off) and they are already gluten free, low glycemic, exercise... but have a pantothenic acid deficiency (which is normal for celiacs who sometimes cannot absorb b vitamins properly) they WILL NOT lose weight.

Pantothenic Acid (vitamin b5) is the vitamin precursor to the fat burning enzyme lipase, as well as the precursor to coenzyme A, which feeds the liver and gives the liver the proper capability to burn off toxins. If the machine that is the human body does not have the fuel, nor the proper catalyzing enzyme, that body will not burn fat, even at a 500 calorie a day diet. It will burn muscle instead.

Those with insulin resistance could benefit from pantothenic acid as well.

I think your theory is valid, but may be lacking in depth of "why" they are apple/pear/hourglass in the first place, which generally leads to a nutritional problem, like you mentioned.

And if this is the case, these folks should be seeing a specialist for their nutritional plan, not seeking advice on a fitness website. I would qualify all posts with that. If you are the outlier, then get specialized advice. If you're in the norm, eat less, workout more.

oawalden

Or. You could eat less and move more.

SideSteel

I know it seems to be "common sense" that weight loss is as simple as maintaining a caloric deficit, but obviously it is not that simple or we wouldn't have an epidemic of overweight people. Blaming it on willpower and character strength is an easy moral judgement, and discards the vastly complex systems in our body that are involved in regulating body weight.

Yes, it is true that you can starve yourself into thinness and spend half your life at the gym, but really who wants that and who can live a life where they are hungry all the time? If you are going hungry you will not last on any diet for a lifetime, and yo-yo-ing is worse for you than just being fat, so some studies say.

The Black Swan principle states that it is very hard to prove all swans are white, but as soon as you find one black swan you have disproven the theory. It is easy to state that low calories are the cure for all overweight people, but the black swans are already out there. You can eat a higher calorie diet and lose more weight faster than a lower calorie diet. I myself am living proof of that..

The issue is not in the calorie model, the issue is finding a way to get the individual to maintain an energy deficit continuously/consistently. In tightly controlled settings we know that energy deficits cause weight loss and energy surpluses cause weight gain over time. The issue is maintaining the energy deficit.

IronSmasher

You don't appear to know what a theory is.


I'd like to hear more from the poster that thinks human beings are not subject to the laws of thermodynamics. How can we have world hunger or an energy crisis if this is so?

MGwasp

A theory is an idea that has some observational basis but has not been proven or disproven. I love the debate and some of the points have really made me think. Perhaps I had those results because I am nearing 50 and my hormone levels are changing. Perhaps, although my thyroid levels are considered normal with medication, my hypothyroidism is partly the cause. I did see the same results though as a teenager when I had normal thyroid function. Maybe my body is just very efficiently trying to defend the weight to prevent starvation and the lack of a food group slows my metabolism. So many variables could be in play. I know though, that I have found a recipe for success so I will continue to believe that it is right for me. With as many varied people out there, I am certain of only one thing..... One size does not fir all.

Achrya

There is no one size fits all on weight loss.

The human body is a machine and there are so many factors involved in keeping that machine well oiled as well as properly fueled, it is difficult to say.

The whole "eat less, move more" doesn't work for some people... especially those with digestive diseases, like Celiac Disease. Don't get me wrong... it works for the majority of people. But if someone with Celiac is trying to lose weight (because there are a lot of overweight celiacs who struggle to take it off) and they are already gluten free, low glycemic, exercise... but have a pantothenic acid deficiency (which is normal for celiacs who sometimes cannot absorb b vitamins properly) they WILL NOT lose weight.

Pantothenic Acid (vitamin b5) is the vitamin precursor to the fat burning enzyme lipase, as well as the precursor to coenzyme A, which feeds the liver and gives the liver the proper capability to burn off toxins. If the machine that is the human body does not have the fuel, nor the proper catalyzing enzyme, that body will not burn fat, even at a 500 calorie a day diet. It will burn muscle instead.

Those with insulin resistance could benefit from pantothenic acid as well.

I think your theory is valid, but may be lacking in depth of "why" they are apple/pear/hourglass in the first place, which generally leads to a nutritional problem, like you mentioned.

Sorry, I didn't realize I had to to specify what seemed obvious.

Eat less, move more is once size fits all, barring some kind of way medical issues and even then when those issues are corrected/controlled it still comes down to burning more than you take in.

Lyadeia

Don't overcomplicate something simple.

Eat well. Get moving. Be consistent. Be patient. See progress.

This.

I used to be pear shape. Used to be...as in, I lost weight eating a sensible diet with moderate deficit without cutting out ANYTHING or demonizing foods, added exercise to include cardio and weight training, had patience, and didn't change a thing (just keep going until you get to the destination). Now I am not a pear shape anymore. 35-27-36 measurements with size 5 US clothing. Still losing fat doing nothing special, just hard work.

Don't overthink things. Just do the work.

SideSteel

There is no one size fits all on weight loss.

The human body is a machine and there are so many factors involved in keeping that machine well oiled as well as properly fueled, it is difficult to say.

The whole "eat less, move more" doesn't work for some people... especially those with digestive diseases, like Celiac Disease. Don't get me wrong... it works for the majority of people. But if someone with Celiac is trying to lose weight (because there are a lot of overweight celiacs who struggle to take it off) and they are already gluten free, low glycemic, exercise... but have a pantothenic acid deficiency (which is normal for celiacs who sometimes cannot absorb b vitamins properly) they WILL NOT lose weight.

Pantothenic Acid (vitamin b5) is the vitamin precursor to the fat burning enzyme lipase, as well as the precursor to coenzyme A, which feeds the liver and gives the liver the proper capability to burn off toxins. If the machine that is the human body does not have the fuel, nor the proper catalyzing enzyme, that body will not burn fat, even at a 500 calorie a day diet. It will burn muscle instead.

Those with insulin resistance could benefit from pantothenic acid as well.

I think your theory is valid, but may be lacking in depth of "why" they are apple/pear/hourglass in the first place, which generally leads to a nutritional problem, like you mentioned.

Are you claiming that if you took an obese person with pantothenic acid deficiency and gave them only water for weeks on end, they would oxidize no fat, and only lose lean tissue exclusively? Or do you agree with this scenario?

Lupercalia

I think you should just find a way of eating that is healthy and sustainable for you and exercise a bit.

The "theories" can distract one from the tasks at hand, often resulting in what is known as "paralysis by analysis".

Seems best to keep things simple, as many others have suggested.

chubaway

.