We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!

Calories are NOT the enemy!

1235

Replies

  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    So what's a "good" calorie and what's a "bad" calorie?

    Explain how the twinkie diet worked (I would assume that would be all bad calories).

    Personally I would commend someone who looked at the menu at the golden arches and upon seeing that their big mac combo is about a zillion calories made a more sensible choice.

    Please don't cite the Twinkie Diet.

    This was based on ONE professor, who was on Coca Cola's payroll, who was not monitored or supervised. He gave hundreds of interview and never mentioned the Coca Cola funding. Sadly for him, he was outed and embarrassed several years later.

    He lost 27 lbs. in eight weeks(!), which is considered unhealthy by most posters here.

    And he had this incredible weight loss not by going from 2,500 calories to 1,200 calories, but by going from 2,500 calories to 1,800 calories. Just a little suspicious I would say.

    And does anyone really believe someone can eat Twinkies (supplemented reportedly by Doritos and Oreos) for eight weeks straight?

    Adios, Twinkie Diet.

    As people have told you before, if 1,800 is a deficit for someone, they'll lose weight on it. Not sure why you find that suspicious, it's how weight loss happens.

    Because there are many posters here who make much more drastic calorie cuts than that, and lose very little weight.

    The entire story just stinks. Eight weeks of Twinkies. Sure.

    So again, I and others have asked you in several threads today, what is your recommendation then for people who want to lose weight. In some posts you have said that you agree that CI<CO will result in weight loss, but you've challenged the long term sustainability of counting calories. Any time the twinkie diet is mentioned, you vehemently proclaim that it is a hoax and reference posters on this site who claim to be on a calorie deficit and not losing. I'm not sure what those two things have to do with each other, but what would your advice to those people be?

    He also believes Staci of the New Powerlifting Hero article is a hoax. I don't believe he's arguing anything in good faith and is ignoring questions and articles in favor of looking for a loose thread he can pull that will stir up reactions.

    Wait, you mean, like someone who is intentionally derailing a thread, flamebaiting, or trolling if you will? I can't possibly believe that is the case!
  • GottaBurnEmAll
    GottaBurnEmAll Posts: 7,722 Member
    Haub wasn't losing at a faster than expected rate. His goal was to eat LESS THAN 1800 calories.

    He did.

    http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/2010/11/16/the-twinkie-diet/
  • 3bambi3
    3bambi3 Posts: 1,650 Member
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    So what's a "good" calorie and what's a "bad" calorie?

    Explain how the twinkie diet worked (I would assume that would be all bad calories).

    Personally I would commend someone who looked at the menu at the golden arches and upon seeing that their big mac combo is about a zillion calories made a more sensible choice.

    Please don't cite the Twinkie Diet.

    This was based on ONE professor, who was on Coca Cola's payroll, who was not monitored or supervised. He gave hundreds of interview and never mentioned the Coca Cola funding. Sadly for him, he was outed and embarrassed several years later.

    He lost 27 lbs. in eight weeks(!), which is considered unhealthy by most posters here.

    And he had this incredible weight loss not by going from 2,500 calories to 1,200 calories, but by going from 2,500 calories to 1,800 calories. Just a little suspicious I would say.

    And does anyone really believe someone can eat Twinkies (supplemented reportedly by Doritos and Oreos) for eight weeks straight?

    Adios, Twinkie Diet.

    As people have told you before, if 1,800 is a deficit for someone, they'll lose weight on it. Not sure why you find that suspicious, it's how weight loss happens.

    Because there are many posters here who make much more drastic calorie cuts than that, and lose very little weight.

    The entire story just stinks. Eight weeks of Twinkies. Sure.

    So again, I and others have asked you in several threads today, what is your recommendation then for people who want to lose weight. In some posts you have said that you agree that CI<CO will result in weight loss, but you've challenged the long term sustainability of counting calories. Any time the twinkie diet is mentioned, you vehemently proclaim that it is a hoax and reference posters on this site who claim to be on a calorie deficit and not losing. I'm not sure what those two things have to do with each other, but what would your advice to those people be?

    He also believes Staci of the New Powerlifting Hero article is a hoax. I don't believe he's arguing anything in good faith and is ignoring questions and articles in favor of looking for a loose thread he can pull that will stir up reactions.

    What is supposed to be fake about Staci?
  • 3bambi3
    3bambi3 Posts: 1,650 Member
    edited September 2017
    double post
  • SueSueDio
    SueSueDio Posts: 4,796 Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    SueSueDio wrote: »
    The name of his diet was totally misleading. That's all.

    So's the "Military Diet".

    You mean they don't eat exclusively militaries?!???!

    I know! Shocking, ain't it?
  • emailmehere1122
    emailmehere1122 Posts: 140 Member
    Has anybody ever had a pumpkin spice donut...that sounds awesome
  • SueSueDio
    SueSueDio Posts: 4,796 Member
    mamadon wrote: »
    oilphins wrote: »
    3bambi3 wrote: »
    oilphins wrote: »
    Okay so if you eat 2000 calories a day with 300 grams of sugar included then it's the same as 2,000 calories a day with no sugar? Sugar doesn't make you fat? That's the first time I've ever heard that.

    Really? You've only ever heard that sugar makes a person fat? So, hypothetically, if I eat 5,000 calories of tuna a day, I won't gain any weight even though my maintenance calories are around 2,000...because no sugar? Doesn't make much sense, does it.

    Your hypothetically comment is ridiculous. I'm trying to make the point that added sugar is not good for you and it's a fact that too much sugar can cause weight gain. So mfp tells me on a 1800 calorie a day diet that I should only eat 100 grams MAXIMUM of sugar a day. So if I don't exercise or workout at all, eat only say 1500 calories a day but ingest 400 grams of sugar in my diet every day staying under my calories, I won't gain weight? I can't wait to go tell my two daughter's to drink all the pepsi, sunnyd and apple juice as much as they want because sugar won't make them fat. (lol) You should try googling and doing your research about sugar because it will make you gain weight if you have too much.

    I lost a ton of weight without ever paying one bit of attention to how much sugar I was consuming. I did however pay attention to my calories. Sugar does not make you fat.

    I was curious so I checked my reports - sure enough, over the past 90 days there have only been a handful of days where I ate less than 60g of sugar. (I don't even track it, replaced it with fibre in my diary.) I presume that my level of sugar consumption has been pretty much the same throughout my journey, so yeah - I'm gonna say that calories are what was most important to losing 66lbs.

    @oilphins I do have to applaud you, though, on your willingness to examine the evidence and change your point of view, especially considering how firmly you held to it at the start! Too many people are not prepared to do that, so I admire you for it. :)
  • This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    SueSueDio wrote: »
    The name of his diet was totally misleading. That's all.

    So's the "Military Diet".

    Care to stop dodging @GottaBurnEmAll 's point?

    The Military Diet can mean anything. What does it mean?

    I'm not dodging anything. The only point I am making is you can't call something a Twinkie Diet when it's not close to being a Twinkie Diet. The only possible reason for calling it a Twinkie Diet was to help his patron, the Coca Cola company.

    It's like claiming you lost weight on a vegan diet, except you ate lamb chops on October 5th, and Eggs Benedict on October 8th.

    Why would Coca-Cola want to help promote Twinkies? Corporate altruism?

    And please, don't drag veganism into this again.
This discussion has been closed.