1200 calories, exercise, but no weight loss!!
Replies
-
I opened up my diary. It is not psychological....I love to eat. That is why I am where I am. I just can't eat like I once was able to eat and I have gained about 10-15 lbs over the last 2 years or so. I have read a ton on this website and that is why I know everyone will tell me to eat more, but i don't want to gain weight!! I began changing my habits about a year ago. I started doing Shaun T's Insanity Fast & Furious 20 minute workout everyday but didn't change any eating habits. It changed my body somewhat and I know some things have shifted for the better, but only a 3 lb loss. I started watching my food intake about 2 months ago and began eating yogurt and granola instead of chips and dip, for example, and thought for sure that with some slight changes such as that along with a double workout everyday of 25 minutes T25 and some pilates/sculpting I would see changes, but nothing!! I would love to eat more, but just can't believe that eating more will aid in weight loss!! Help!!
You have logged for 6 days. How were you tracking food prior to that?
When did you start exercising?
I wrote down what I ate in a journal. I have been exercising religiously for a year. Pilates or sculpting everyday. And cardio or strength every day.
Sorry if I missed the answer, but:
- how long have you been at this intake level?
- do you have any metabolic issues such as hypothyroid or PCOS?
- do you use a digital food scale for non-liquids and measuring cups for liquids?
- what has your weight done over the last 4 and 8 weeks?
I have been eating like this for as long as I can remember, but started paying closer attention a few months ago when the scale wasn't moving even though I was working out. I have been counting calories for over a month. I don't have any issues that I know of, but haven't been checked. I use a scale and measuring cups. I don't weigh much food, I go by what the package says for servings. I measure my chicken with scale. My weight has been consistently around 164.....give or take a lb.
If you are eating the same as you've eaten 'as long as [you] can remember', then you must be expecting to lose on exercise alone. That can work, but it's amazingly slow! That might be the only problem, then, really.
If you've been eating 1000-1200 calories a day as long as you can remember, then you have a very slow metabolism. That can certainly happen, particularly if you eat so little for years and years.
This is the kind of situation where I get stumped. It's hard to get enough nourishment for someone of your height at 1000 calories a day, yet if you've been doing it long enough, it might be too high to lose weight without other changes. You can't just bump it down lower like most folks do to lose weight, or you'll definitely not get enough nutrients, imho. It's certainly a tough one!
I'd suggest definitely checking with a doctor, bringing a full food journal, to see if you might have a medical condition that causes your metabolism to be that low
Sorry! 0 -
*sigh*
Fighting the common misconception of "starvation mode" feels like bailing the titanic w/ a thimble.
That's how it feels trying to help people on MFP.0 -
Hi,
Basically, it doesn't matter if you are 'overweight' or think you have a lot of fat already- if you exercising intensely and not eating enough you are putting a lot of stress and pressure on your body, with not enough to fuel it.
Your body will react to this stress by holding on to your fat stores to preserve itself - this is why you are not losing weight.
I would suggest going to see an exercise professional and getting your measurements done - BMI, BMR, fat % etc. They will help you work out how many calories you need to eat to maintain or lose weight in a healthy way. You should be able to go to your local gym and see if someone will help you with this.
You should not be afraid you are going to put on weight by eating more than 1200 cals - in fact you will be doing your health and body a favour by eating more. You will start to lose weight if you exercise and eat healthily.
But, if the workouts are stressing my body and I am not giving it enough fuel, shouldn't I be feeling HUNGRY?0 -
How much weight have you lost in total and over what period of time?
Over a period of about 2 years I gained 10 lbs. A year ago I decided to start working out and lost 3 lbs between Nov 2012 and Feb 2013. No weight loss since, even though I have increased my workouts!
The only conclusion I can come to is that you have been, and possibly still are, eating much more than you think you are.0 -
Hi,
Basically, it doesn't matter if you are 'overweight' or think you have a lot of fat already- if you exercising intensely and not eating enough you are putting a lot of stress and pressure on your body, with not enough to fuel it.
Your body will react to this stress by holding on to your fat stores to preserve itself - this is why you are not losing weight.
I would suggest going to see an exercise professional and getting your measurements done - BMI, BMR, fat % etc. They will help you work out how many calories you need to eat to maintain or lose weight in a healthy way. You should be able to go to your local gym and see if someone will help you with this.
You should not be afraid you are going to put on weight by eating more than 1200 cals - in fact you will be doing your health and body a favour by eating more. You will start to lose weight if you exercise and eat healthily.
But, if the workouts are stressing my body and I am not giving it enough fuel, shouldn't I be feeling HUNGRY?
Not necessarily. Different factors affect your appetite. Many people with EDs report not having an appetite.0 -
Hi,
Basically, it doesn't matter if you are 'overweight' or think you have a lot of fat already- if you exercising intensely and not eating enough you are putting a lot of stress and pressure on your body, with not enough to fuel it.
Your body will react to this stress by holding on to your fat stores to preserve itself - this is why you are not losing weight.
I would suggest going to see an exercise professional and getting your measurements done - BMI, BMR, fat % etc. They will help you work out how many calories you need to eat to maintain or lose weight in a healthy way. You should be able to go to your local gym and see if someone will help you with this.
You should not be afraid you are going to put on weight by eating more than 1200 cals - in fact you will be doing your health and body a favour by eating more. You will start to lose weight if you exercise and eat healthily.
But, if the workouts are stressing my body and I am not giving it enough fuel, shouldn't I be feeling HUNGRY?
Hunger is a fickle thing. Prolonged calorie restriction and stress tend to suppress hunger.0 -
Hi,
Basically, it doesn't matter if you are 'overweight' or think you have a lot of fat already- if you exercising intensely and not eating enough you are putting a lot of stress and pressure on your body, with not enough to fuel it.
Your body will react to this stress by holding on to your fat stores to preserve itself - this is why you are not losing weight.
I would suggest going to see an exercise professional and getting your measurements done - BMI, BMR, fat % etc. They will help you work out how many calories you need to eat to maintain or lose weight in a healthy way. You should be able to go to your local gym and see if someone will help you with this.
You should not be afraid you are going to put on weight by eating more than 1200 cals - in fact you will be doing your health and body a favour by eating more. You will start to lose weight if you exercise and eat healthily.
But, if the workouts are stressing my body and I am not giving it enough fuel, shouldn't I be feeling HUNGRY?
Not necessarily. A lot of things an affect hunger, including chronic under eating. It is not always a reliable indicator.
To add to the point above about people with ED's not experiencing hunger. On the flip side, there are some people who are overweight who experience constant hunger when they don't need food.0 -
The only conclusion I can come to is that you have been, and possibly still are, eating much more than you think you are.
I agree.
Even if people wanted to argue starvation mode, you would have lost some weight while at your calorie deficit before any of this fat preservation argued began.
The only other possibility I see is a medical condition, in which case you'll have to ask your doctor to run some labs (thyroid, metabolic panel.)0 -
I opened up my diary. It is not psychological....I love to eat. That is why I am where I am. I just can't eat like I once was able to eat and I have gained about 10-15 lbs over the last 2 years or so. I have read a ton on this website and that is why I know everyone will tell me to eat more, but i don't want to gain weight!! I began changing my habits about a year ago. I started doing Shaun T's Insanity Fast & Furious 20 minute workout everyday but didn't change any eating habits. It changed my body somewhat and I know some things have shifted for the better, but only a 3 lb loss. I started watching my food intake about 2 months ago and began eating yogurt and granola instead of chips and dip, for example, and thought for sure that with some slight changes such as that along with a double workout everyday of 25 minutes T25 and some pilates/sculpting I would see changes, but nothing!! I would love to eat more, but just can't believe that eating more will aid in weight loss!! Help!!
You have logged for 6 days. How were you tracking food prior to that?
When did you start exercising?
I wrote down what I ate in a journal. I have been exercising religiously for a year. Pilates or sculpting everyday. And cardio or strength every day.
Sorry if I missed the answer, but:
- how long have you been at this intake level?
- do you have any metabolic issues such as hypothyroid or PCOS?
- do you use a digital food scale for non-liquids and measuring cups for liquids?
- what has your weight done over the last 4 and 8 weeks?
I have been eating like this for as long as I can remember, but started paying closer attention a few months ago when the scale wasn't moving even though I was working out. I have been counting calories for over a month. I don't have any issues that I know of, but haven't been checked. I use a scale and measuring cups. I don't weigh much food, I go by what the package says for servings. I measure my chicken with scale. My weight has been consistently around 164.....give or take a lb.
If you are eating the same as you've eaten 'as long as [you] can remember', then you must be expecting to lose on exercise alone. That can work, but it's amazingly slow! That might be the only problem, then, really.
If you've been eating 1000-1200 calories a day as long as you can remember, then you have a very slow metabolism. That can certainly happen, particularly if you eat so little for years and years.
This is the kind of situation where I get stumped. It's hard to get enough nourishment for someone of your height at 1000 calories a day, yet if you've been doing it long enough, it might be too high to lose weight without other changes. You can't just bump it down lower like most folks do to lose weight, or you'll definitely not get enough nutrients, imho. It's certainly a tough one!
I'd suggest definitely checking with a doctor, bringing a full food journal, to see if you might have a medical condition that causes your metabolism to be that low Sorry!
I guess my answer wasn't exactly accurate. I have made some changes since I started working out. Over the summer and into the fall I have extremely limited my bread intake. I love bread. I barely eat it anymore and when I do it is not the stuff I once ate. I have also limited candy/sugar intake. Not that I ate that much, but I don't at all anymore. I drink a lot more water now. There was a time when I would not drink a drop of water all day....just a cup of coffee in the morning and a diet soda in the afternoon. So, I have made changes.....enough that I expected to see some results by now.0 -
I am disputing that (All who are blanketly saying that eating less can NOT stall your weight) are not correct.
No I can't name the study
We know you can't.
There isn't one.
Try reading the original material and interpreting it yourself instead of relying in some random podcast. If you do, you'll find that the research doesn't say what you think it does.
And I am trying to help the OP by getting actual data from her about her actual intake over time and actual weight. Just tossing out "oh you're in starvation mode, this podcast says so, so you have to eat more or else you won't lose weight" doesn't actually help her.
I can't name the studies (as in plural studies) that cumulatively point to what I wrote about because I can't listen to podcasts here. Taking teeny pieces of information or citing single studies in isolation without any contextual evaluation is what my issue is with the arguments you are putting foward in the first place, all you have done is prove that the only reason you are disregarding a larger amount of evidence is because you are being a pedant about it.
I _have_ read the original material and actually read additional source material which those studies reference, which is why I feel so strongly about it; and am so virulently opposed to your comments and posts which are not really useful, all they are doing are telling others who you believe to be going against your ideas to be incorrect.
Your second and third paragraph are actually paraphrasing exactly what I said in my post - so yeah I agree with you, but I would like to point out that it is what I said in the post you are responding to, so clearly, you have not read it in it's entirety and again you are taking a tiny piece of information, using literal interpretations to try and justify your own belief that there isn't a calorie/exercise combination for anyone that would mean that their weight loss stalls based on it. (eptomising the whole pedantic thing)
You have produced no studies saying this does not happen, so effectively discrediting your own ideas (well done!)
And loads of people plateau when they get nearer and nearer their goals whilst following all the common sense advice - why does this happen - because they are experiencing a stall due to the impact of points number 1-5 from the podcast, which is not actually vague but quite explicit including explaining each point, telling you where the point came from and then summarising said points at the end of the podcast.
For those who don't read or those who don't understand scientific process and for those who may be eating too little or too much, that podcast is a good resource that gives good advice based on a large amount of valid readily available research that can be understood by anyone listening to it. It does not advocate eating in a surplus, and it definitely does not advocate prolonged periods of eating way less calories than your body needs and exercising on top of that.
So it would help anyone with a question in this area of the forum who isn't already comfortable with how all those little factors could impact them. Whether they are over or under logging the same advice would apply.0 -
How much weight have you lost in total and over what period of time?
Over a period of about 2 years I gained 10 lbs. A year ago I decided to start working out and lost 3 lbs between Nov 2012 and Feb 2013. No weight loss since, even though I have increased my workouts!
The only conclusion I can come to is that you have been, and possibly still are, eating much more than you think you are.
That's what I come back to as well.
I know you've been working out for a year, OP, and say you've been eating 'like this' for a long time-- but you only started logging your calories a week ago. If you aren't actually cataloging and counting everything, it's awfully easy to eat too much.0 -
I can't name the studies (as in plural studies) that cumulatively point to what I wrote about because I can't listen to podcasts
I think you're putting a bit too much trust in whatever this person in the podcast is saying. The list of studies cited by the podcast is right there in your link.
Which one of them supports the idea that it's possible to stop losing weight because your caloric deficit is too high?
(Protip: none of them. 'Starvation mode' being the cause of zero weight change has been repeatedly debunked. It's a nonsense idea.)0 -
>> This is nonsense <<
Pretty opinionated for a guy who doesn't know what he's talking about, and offers no proof to the contrary other than his assertion. The fact that protein requires more calories to metabolize is well established:
- http://www.livestrong.com/article/299424-calories-burned-digesting-protein/
- http://www.fitday.com/fitness-articles/fitness/10-fat-burning-foods-you-should-be-eating.html
- http://www.rd.com/health/fitness/5-fitness-myths-you-need-to-forget/
- Feinman RD, Fine EJ. “A calorie is a calorie” violates the second law of thermodynamics. Nutr J. 2004 Jul 28;3:9. PubMed PMID: 15282028; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC506782.
- Halton TL, Hu FB. The effects of high protein diets on thermogenesis, satiety and weight loss: a critical review. J Am Coll Nutr. 2004 Oct;23(5):373-85. Review. PubMed PMID: 15466943.
- Johnston CS, Day CS, Swan PD. Postprandial thermogenesis is increased 100% on a high-protein, low-fat diet versus a high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet in healthy, young women. J Am Coll Nutr. 2002 Feb;21(1):55-61. PubMed PMID: 11838888.
But who are you going to believe, the experts or the guy with a cat on his shoulder?0 -
Given the contributions to this thread so far, I believe jonnythan.
ETA: And that's despite the fact that I don't like cats.0 -
>> This is nonsense <<
Pretty opinionated for a guy who doesn't know what he's talking about, and offers no proof to the contrary other than his assertion. The fact that protein requires more calories to metabolize is well established:
- http://www.livestrong.com/article/299424-calories-burned-digesting-protein/
- http://www.fitday.com/fitness-articles/fitness/10-fat-burning-foods-you-should-be-eating.html
- http://www.rd.com/health/fitness/5-fitness-myths-you-need-to-forget/
- Feinman RD, Fine EJ. “A calorie is a calorie” violates the second law of thermodynamics. Nutr J. 2004 Jul 28;3:9. PubMed PMID: 15282028; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC506782.
- Halton TL, Hu FB. The effects of high protein diets on thermogenesis, satiety and weight loss: a critical review. J Am Coll Nutr. 2004 Oct;23(5):373-85. Review. PubMed PMID: 15466943.
- Johnston CS, Day CS, Swan PD. Postprandial thermogenesis is increased 100% on a high-protein, low-fat diet versus a high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet in healthy, young women. J Am Coll Nutr. 2002 Feb;21(1):55-61. PubMed PMID: 11838888.
But who are you going to believe, the experts or the guy with a cat on his shoulder?
The difference is simply not significant within the confines of a normal diet. If you ate all your calories from protein vs all your calories from carbs, then there would be a measurable difference. But within reasonable, human macronutrient partitions? Not so much.
You won't suddenly start losing weight by maintaining the same calorie intake but getting an extra 10-15% of your calories from protein.0 -
>> This is nonsense <<
Pretty opinionated for a guy who doesn't know what he's talking about, and offers no proof to the contrary other than his assertion. The fact that protein requires more calories to metabolize is well established:
- http://www.livestrong.com/article/299424-calories-burned-digesting-protein/
- http://www.fitday.com/fitness-articles/fitness/10-fat-burning-foods-you-should-be-eating.html
- http://www.rd.com/health/fitness/5-fitness-myths-you-need-to-forget/
- Feinman RD, Fine EJ. “A calorie is a calorie” violates the second law of thermodynamics. Nutr J. 2004 Jul 28;3:9. PubMed PMID: 15282028; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC506782.
- Halton TL, Hu FB. The effects of high protein diets on thermogenesis, satiety and weight loss: a critical review. J Am Coll Nutr. 2004 Oct;23(5):373-85. Review. PubMed PMID: 15466943.
- Johnston CS, Day CS, Swan PD. Postprandial thermogenesis is increased 100% on a high-protein, low-fat diet versus a high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet in healthy, young women. J Am Coll Nutr. 2002 Feb;21(1):55-61. PubMed PMID: 11838888.
But who are you going to believe, the experts or the guy with a cat on his shoulder?
The difference is simply not significant within the confines of a normal diet. If you ate all your calories from protein vs all your calories from carbs, then there would be a measurable difference. But within reasonable, human macronutrient partitions? Not so much.
You won't suddenly start losing weight by maintaining the same calorie intake but getting an extra 10-15% of your calories from protein.
That's not what I suggested. What I did suggest was that more protein, fiber, and complex carbohydrates and fewer high-glycemic carbohydrates could have a positive metabolic effect, and while that's not a guarantee, it's amply backed by scientific research. But you apparently think that, for weight loss, 1200 calories of chocolate donuts is the same thing as 1200 calories of protein, complex carbohydrates and a moderate amount of healthy fat. So, I guess on that point, we agree to disagree.0 -
Don't eat processed foods, gluten or cheese, look how much sodium you have. I weighted 185 now 120 also with a low thyroid. Get you some fresh veggies and good protein!0
-
Don't eat processed foods, gluten or cheese, look how much sodium you have. I weighted 185 now 120 also with a low thyroid. Get you some fresh veggies and good protein!
Strong first post.0 -
>> This is nonsense <<
Pretty opinionated for a guy who doesn't know what he's talking about, and offers no proof to the contrary other than his assertion. The fact that protein requires more calories to metabolize is well established:
- http://www.livestrong.com/article/299424-calories-burned-digesting-protein/
- http://www.fitday.com/fitness-articles/fitness/10-fat-burning-foods-you-should-be-eating.html
- http://www.rd.com/health/fitness/5-fitness-myths-you-need-to-forget/
- Feinman RD, Fine EJ. “A calorie is a calorie” violates the second law of thermodynamics. Nutr J. 2004 Jul 28;3:9. PubMed PMID: 15282028; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC506782.
- Halton TL, Hu FB. The effects of high protein diets on thermogenesis, satiety and weight loss: a critical review. J Am Coll Nutr. 2004 Oct;23(5):373-85. Review. PubMed PMID: 15466943.
- Johnston CS, Day CS, Swan PD. Postprandial thermogenesis is increased 100% on a high-protein, low-fat diet versus a high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet in healthy, young women. J Am Coll Nutr. 2002 Feb;21(1):55-61. PubMed PMID: 11838888.
But who are you going to believe, the experts or the guy with a cat on his shoulder?
The difference is simply not significant within the confines of a normal diet. If you ate all your calories from protein vs all your calories from carbs, then there would be a measurable difference. But within reasonable, human macronutrient partitions? Not so much.
You won't suddenly start losing weight by maintaining the same calorie intake but getting an extra 10-15% of your calories from protein.
That's not what I suggested. What I did suggest was that more protein, fiber, and complex carbohydrates and fewer high-glycemic carbohydrates could have a positive metabolic effect, and while that's not a guarantee, it's amply backed by scientific research. But you apparently think that, for weight loss, 1200 calories of chocolate donuts is the same thing as 1200 calories of protein, complex carbohydrates and a moderate amount of healthy fat. So, I guess on that point, we agree to disagree.
While I do believe that proteins and possibly certain carbohydrates take more energy to digest, I'm not sure of the actual percentage difference to state whether or not it is even worth mentioning.0 -
Aren't all those Advocare meal replacements and supplements you're taking, processed?Don't eat processed foods, gluten or cheese, look how much sodium you have. I weighted 185 now 120 also with a low thyroid. Get you some fresh veggies and good protein!0 -
Aren't all those Advocare meal replacements and supplements you're taking, processed?Don't eat processed foods, gluten or cheese, look how much sodium you have. I weighted 185 now 120 also with a low thyroid. Get you some fresh veggies and good protein!
Processed into something that isn't even recognizable as food anymore. :laugh:0 -
While I do believe that proteins and possibly certain carbohydrates take more energy to digest, I'm not sure of the actual percentage difference to state whether or not it is even worth mentioning.
The numbers I've seen put TEF at ~5% at one extreme (eating nothing but butter and sugar) to 30% (eating nothing but chewable protein). Using a balanced diet as the baseline, the effect of moving to either extreme is lower than the margin of error in estimating the calories contained in the food or burned in exercise.
It's just not going to be a meaningful issue for someone unless they're living their entire life inside a calorimeter.
There are also complications in that TEF won't be constant in a person over an extended period of time.0 -
How much weight have you lost in total and over what period of time?
Over a period of about 2 years I gained 10 lbs. A year ago I decided to start working out and lost 3 lbs between Nov 2012 and Feb 2013. No weight loss since, even though I have increased my workouts!
To clarify:
- You have remained the same weight, give or take a few lbs, for 2 years
- You added exercise and lost 3lbs a year ago, and nothing since
- You weigh your food unless pre-portioned.
- You log everything here, and before 'here' in a written journal
- You have averaged less than 1,200 calories that whole 2 years.0 -
>> This is nonsense <<
Pretty opinionated for a guy who doesn't know what he's talking about, and offers no proof to the contrary other than his assertion. The fact that protein requires more calories to metabolize is well established:
- http://www.livestrong.com/article/299424-calories-burned-digesting-protein/
- http://www.fitday.com/fitness-articles/fitness/10-fat-burning-foods-you-should-be-eating.html
- http://www.rd.com/health/fitness/5-fitness-myths-you-need-to-forget/
- Feinman RD, Fine EJ. “A calorie is a calorie” violates the second law of thermodynamics. Nutr J. 2004 Jul 28;3:9. PubMed PMID: 15282028; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC506782.
- Halton TL, Hu FB. The effects of high protein diets on thermogenesis, satiety and weight loss: a critical review. J Am Coll Nutr. 2004 Oct;23(5):373-85. Review. PubMed PMID: 15466943.
- Johnston CS, Day CS, Swan PD. Postprandial thermogenesis is increased 100% on a high-protein, low-fat diet versus a high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet in healthy, young women. J Am Coll Nutr. 2002 Feb;21(1):55-61. PubMed PMID: 11838888.
But who are you going to believe, the experts or the guy with a cat on his shoulder?
The difference is simply not significant within the confines of a normal diet. If you ate all your calories from protein vs all your calories from carbs, then there would be a measurable difference. But within reasonable, human macronutrient partitions? Not so much.
You won't suddenly start losing weight by maintaining the same calorie intake but getting an extra 10-15% of your calories from protein.
That's not what I suggested. What I did suggest was that more protein, fiber, and complex carbohydrates and fewer high-glycemic carbohydrates could have a positive metabolic effect, and while that's not a guarantee, it's amply backed by scientific research. But you apparently think that, for weight loss, 1200 calories of chocolate donuts is the same thing as 1200 calories of protein, complex carbohydrates and a moderate amount of healthy fat. So, I guess on that point, we agree to disagree.
pretty much all of said responses posted equates to this poster not reading the original post correctly, pedantically taking small pieces of the post out of context and way too literally and then shoving it back as erroneous.
So even though all of the posts people are putting forward could be useful for anyone who is struggling to lose, the only thing that said poster has against them is purportedly that he didn't say it.
I guess the actions could imply a troll.
But the OP is also only cherry picking advice that fits with their stated negativity toward eating in general, so anything else would probably not help.0 -
But you apparently think that, for weight loss, 1200 calories of chocolate donuts is the same thing as 1200 calories of protein, complex carbohydrates and a moderate amount of healthy fat. So, I guess on that point, we agree to disagree.
Strong reading comprehension, as well as a strong sense of what is practical and reasonable.0 -
I'm not going to tell you to eat more. I'm going to tell you to accurately track what you eat. And to be patient.0
-
pretty much all of said responses posted equates to this poster not reading the original post correctly, pedantically taking small pieces of the post out of context and way too literally and then shoving it back as erroneous.
So even though all of the posts people are putting forward could be useful for anyone who is struggling to lose, the only thing that said poster has against them is purportedly that he didn't say it.
I guess the actions could imply a troll.
But the OP is also only cherry picking advice that fits with their stated negativity toward eating in general, so anything else would probably not help.
Someone sounds a little upset that her "starvation mode is the reason you've maintained the same weight all year" theory has been shot down.
Ugh.0 -
>> This is nonsense <<
Pretty opinionated for a guy who doesn't know what he's talking about, and offers no proof to the contrary other than his assertion. The fact that protein requires more calories to metabolize is well established:
- http://www.livestrong.com/article/299424-calories-burned-digesting-protein/
- http://www.fitday.com/fitness-articles/fitness/10-fat-burning-foods-you-should-be-eating.html
- http://www.rd.com/health/fitness/5-fitness-myths-you-need-to-forget/
- Feinman RD, Fine EJ. “A calorie is a calorie” violates the second law of thermodynamics. Nutr J. 2004 Jul 28;3:9. PubMed PMID: 15282028; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC506782.
- Halton TL, Hu FB. The effects of high protein diets on thermogenesis, satiety and weight loss: a critical review. J Am Coll Nutr. 2004 Oct;23(5):373-85. Review. PubMed PMID: 15466943.
- Johnston CS, Day CS, Swan PD. Postprandial thermogenesis is increased 100% on a high-protein, low-fat diet versus a high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet in healthy, young women. J Am Coll Nutr. 2002 Feb;21(1):55-61. PubMed PMID: 11838888.
But who are you going to believe, the experts or the guy with a cat on his shoulder?
The difference is simply not significant within the confines of a normal diet. If you ate all your calories from protein vs all your calories from carbs, then there would be a measurable difference. But within reasonable, human macronutrient partitions? Not so much.
You won't suddenly start losing weight by maintaining the same calorie intake but getting an extra 10-15% of your calories from protein.
That's not what I suggested. What I did suggest was that more protein, fiber, and complex carbohydrates and fewer high-glycemic carbohydrates could have a positive metabolic effect, and while that's not a guarantee, it's amply backed by scientific research. But you apparently think that, for weight loss, 1200 calories of chocolate donuts is the same thing as 1200 calories of protein, complex carbohydrates and a moderate amount of healthy fat. So, I guess on that point, we agree to disagree.
pretty much all of said responses posted equates to this poster not reading the original post correctly, pedantically taking small pieces of the post out of context and way too literally and then shoving it back as erroneous.
So even though all of the posts people are putting forward could be useful for anyone who is struggling to lose, the only thing that said poster has against them is purportedly that he didn't say it.
I guess the actions could imply a troll.
But the OP is also only cherry picking advice that fits with their stated negativity toward eating in general, so anything else would probably not help.
Is there some kind of personal history between you and jonnythan that I don't know about? You've made what seems to me to be a leap in your analysis of him that isn't likely borne out in just the posts of this thread.0 -
Is there some kind of personal history between you and jonnythan that I don't know about? You've made what seems to me to be a leap in your analysis of him that isn't likely borne out in just the posts of this thread.
Not that I'm aware of.0 -
>> This is nonsense <<
Pretty opinionated for a guy who doesn't know what he's talking about, and offers no proof to the contrary other than his assertion. The fact that protein requires more calories to metabolize is well established:
- http://www.livestrong.com/article/299424-calories-burned-digesting-protein/
- http://www.fitday.com/fitness-articles/fitness/10-fat-burning-foods-you-should-be-eating.html
- http://www.rd.com/health/fitness/5-fitness-myths-you-need-to-forget/
- Feinman RD, Fine EJ. “A calorie is a calorie” violates the second law of thermodynamics. Nutr J. 2004 Jul 28;3:9. PubMed PMID: 15282028; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC506782.
- Halton TL, Hu FB. The effects of high protein diets on thermogenesis, satiety and weight loss: a critical review. J Am Coll Nutr. 2004 Oct;23(5):373-85. Review. PubMed PMID: 15466943.
- Johnston CS, Day CS, Swan PD. Postprandial thermogenesis is increased 100% on a high-protein, low-fat diet versus a high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet in healthy, young women. J Am Coll Nutr. 2002 Feb;21(1):55-61. PubMed PMID: 11838888.
But who are you going to believe, the experts or the guy with a cat on his shoulder?
The difference is simply not significant within the confines of a normal diet. If you ate all your calories from protein vs all your calories from carbs, then there would be a measurable difference. But within reasonable, human macronutrient partitions? Not so much.
You won't suddenly start losing weight by maintaining the same calorie intake but getting an extra 10-15% of your calories from protein.
That's not what I suggested. What I did suggest was that more protein, fiber, and complex carbohydrates and fewer high-glycemic carbohydrates could have a positive metabolic effect, and while that's not a guarantee, it's amply backed by scientific research. But you apparently think that, for weight loss, 1200 calories of chocolate donuts is the same thing as 1200 calories of protein, complex carbohydrates and a moderate amount of healthy fat. So, I guess on that point, we agree to disagree.
pretty much all of said responses posted equates to this poster not reading the original post correctly, pedantically taking small pieces of the post out of context and way too literally and then shoving it back as erroneous.
So even though all of the posts people are putting forward could be useful for anyone who is struggling to lose, the only thing that said poster has against them is purportedly that he didn't say it.
I guess the actions could imply a troll.
But the OP is also only cherry picking advice that fits with their stated negativity toward eating in general, so anything else would probably not help.
Well, when discussing science, being pedantic is important. Taking bits of posts and analyzing them is an important part of the process of weight management issues. You can tell someone exactly what to do, but showing them why they need to do it, and subsequently why another thing is wrong or incorrect, is a better method.
And I am pretty sure there has been no trolling in this thread thus far.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions