My meeting with a Sports Nutritionist
Replies
-
(If I'm guessing, I suspect he will offer some untruths relevant to your field and ask if you would want them to go unchallenged on myscientistpal.com. That's the kind of parallel *I* would draw...
...if I wasn't so disheartened by the knowledge that actual scientists have no problem with untruths being allowed to stand unchallenged because they dare not cross over from a discussion to an argument.)
Science is full of untruths that are constantly being challenged. Scientist are often more wrong that right. A well written and properly researched article in a peer reviewed journal will almost certainly be proven as an untruth in the future. There is very little right or wrong and to imply that I am against challenging current scientific knowledge is wrong.
No.
Yeah, this is kind of a stunning misunderstanding of the scientific process for someone who claims to have a PhD. Or, at least, worked on one. A lot of people who go into PhD programs don't succeed.
Anyway, good data is good data. It's generally not data itself that's wrong or "proven as an untruth." Interpretations and extrapolations of that data is often proven untrue. This is why it's good to generally ignore the discussion part of the article and focus on the methodology, mathematical analysis, and results. Solid data and analysis does not often get "proven untrue" or whatever.
Precisely.
(I'm going to add good data is always good data - but sometimes it lacks proper controls too!)0 -
While I cannot comment as to whether or not everything that Ms. Clark said is true or not, I was curious. So I looked up Nancy Clark. She has written books and offers courses etc.which can be purchased from her website. Then I looked up pioneer of sports nutrition and ran across a different woman's name, I believe it was Jane Driscoll. So I then wanted to know how you become a sports nutritionist and found out you need to have a four year college degree in anything and pass the test with a 70%. If you don't have the degree, there are other ways of being able to qualify to take the test.
I think we really have to be careful as to whose word we take as being the end all and be all of nutritional information. We also have to know that while we may think that one person has all the answers, someone else is going to be able to counter their information with someone else's findings. As someone once said, when discussing a topic it's important that both people be facing the same direction. Sometimes we just aren't doing that.0 -
(If I'm guessing, I suspect he will offer some untruths relevant to your field and ask if you would want them to go unchallenged on myscientistpal.com. That's the kind of parallel *I* would draw...
...if I wasn't so disheartened by the knowledge that actual scientists have no problem with untruths being allowed to stand unchallenged because they dare not cross over from a discussion to an argument.)
Science is full of untruths that are constantly being challenged. Scientist are often more wrong that right. A well written and properly researched article in a peer reviewed journal will almost certainly be proven as an untruth in the future. There is very little right or wrong and to imply that I am against challenging current scientific knowledge is wrong.
No.
Yeah, this is kind of a stunning misunderstanding of the scientific process for someone who claims to have a PhD. Or, at least, worked on one. A lot of people who go into PhD programs don't succeed.
Anyway, good data is good data. It's generally not data itself that's wrong or "proven as an untruth." Interpretations and extrapolations of that data is often proven untrue. This is why it's good to generally ignore the discussion part of the article and focus on the methodology, mathematical analysis, and results. Solid data and analysis does not often get "proven untrue" or whatever.
Precisely.
(I'm going to add good data is always good data - but sometimes it lacks proper controls too!)
It's almost 3am and i'm going to sleep.
I'm convinced we agree on way more than we disagree on. I have a good understanding of the scientific process and the methodology and ...........blah!
What I lack is the ability to make my point in a clear and concise way - especially at this time of night on an internet forum.
Feel free to continue the argument/discussion/debate and I will make a point of forgetting about it and focusing on more important things...like maintaining my weight loss progress by doing what works for me! I've only recently discovered that posting on a controversial MFP post doesn't.
Goodnight
(reaching for some comforting chocolate to ease my mood!)0 -
I am skeptical of a few of her points...
Like 97% will regain
Must eat breakfast
Need more calories when ovulating
weight themselves regularly then says don't if you are a weight lifter...
eating specific things after a workout...
last but not least only eat when you are hungry even if you have calories to fill...hunger is not the best way to tell what the body needs.
Some are fine tho like eating the same on a rest day as an exercise day, not using the scale only but measurments etc...and yes you can build muslce if you are NEW to lifting...or obese.
Yes! I agree! The problem with nutritionists is that their advice is mostly based off personal experience. But every body, and every person, is different.
That comment is so wrong. Just so wrong. Nutritionist do not base their advice off personal experience - they base it off research studies. It's called "science". MFP trolls base their comments off personal experience.
OP consulted a trained expert, and shared her experience. I thank her for that.0 -
I am LOLing at this thread because now it has become an argument of what is an argument. :laugh: Some people like to be right too much. Same faces, different argument.0
-
I am LOLing at this thread because now it has become an argument of what is an argument. :laugh: Some people like to be right too much. Same faces, different argument.
Right?! I flipped through and saw the same people I always see. Arguing over nothing. It has gotten to be funny.0 -
It's almost 3am and i'm going to sleep.
I'm convinced we agree on way more than we disagree on. I have a good understanding of the scientific process and the methodology and ...........blah!
What I lack is the ability to make my point in a clear and concise way - especially at this time of night on an internet forum.
Feel free to continue the argument/discussion/debate and I will make a point of forgetting about it and focusing on more important things...like maintaining my weight loss progress by doing what works for me! I've only recently discovered that posting on a controversial MFP post doesn't.
Goodnight
(reaching for some comforting chocolate to ease my mood!)
At least this helps me better understand this seemingly irreconcilable sequence of posts:
I agree!
No!Science is full of untruths that are constantly being challenged. Scientist are often more wrong that right. A well written and properly researched article in a peer reviewed journal will almost certainly be proven as an untruth in the future. There is very little right or wrong and to imply that I am against challenging current scientific knowledge is wrong.
where this particular member's posts are the first and third.
edit: to eliminate some redundancy0 -
I am skeptical of a few of her points...
Like 97% will regain
Must eat breakfast
Need more calories when ovulating
weight themselves regularly then says don't if you are a weight lifter...
eating specific things after a workout...
last but not least only eat when you are hungry even if you have calories to fill...hunger is not the best way to tell what the body needs.
Some are fine tho like eating the same on a rest day as an exercise day, not using the scale only but measurments etc...and yes you can build muslce if you are NEW to lifting...or obese.
Yes! I agree! The problem with nutritionists is that their advice is mostly based off personal experience. But every body, and every person, is different.
That comment is so wrong. Just so wrong. Nutritionist do not base their advice off personal experience - they base it off research studies. It's called "science". MFP trolls base their comments off personal experience.
OP consulted a trained expert, and shared her experience. I thank her for that.
lol, the "trained expert" gave her a bunch of bro science….and as someone else pointed out it only take four year degree to be a "nutritionist"0 -
I am LOLing at this thread because now it has become an argument of what is an argument. :laugh: Some people like to be right too much. Same faces, different argument.
Right?! I flipped through and saw the same people I always see. Arguing over nothing. It has gotten to be funny.
oh, you again ..speaking of starting arguments…I believe you have done that in like the past five threads you have been in …but hey, don't let facts get in the way of your uber judging….0 -
Oh no. I've lost a good 130 lbs breaking most of these "rules".
And the lightest I've been my entire adult weight was when I rarely ate breakfast, as I'm typically not a breakfast person. And I maintained that for years.
Wow. What will I ever do now that I've broken so many rules? Perhaps I should regain the lost 130lbs as an act of penance?
Yet...there are those that have followed most of those rules and have lost weight.
It took me time to find what worked for me...such as I went from a non breakfast eater to now eating breakfast keeps me from binging the rest of the day. I do eat most of my calories in the afternoon because that is when I seem to be hungry and eat lighter in the evenings.
I don't think that there is an exact road map to weight loss that will get us all there in the end. I think that they only thing that will apply to most...well...actually all of us...is eating at a deficit.0 -
I am LOLing at this thread because now it has become an argument of what is an argument. :laugh: Some people like to be right too much. Same faces, different argument.
Right?! I flipped through and saw the same people I always see. Arguing over nothing. It has gotten to be funny.
oh, you again ..speaking of starting arguments…I believe you have done that in like the past five threads you have been in …but hey, don't let facts get in the way of your uber judging….
This is one of my favorite phenomenons on MFP...people complaining about other people complaining...or starting arguments accusing other people of starting arguments...and then there's the ever popular, "If you don't like someone's post, just leave and don't make a comment!" Uh, yeah.
Much fun (apparently).0 -
I am LOLing at this thread because now it has become an argument of what is an argument. :laugh: Some people like to be right too much. Same faces, different argument.
Right?! I flipped through and saw the same people I always see. Arguing over nothing. It has gotten to be funny.
oh, you again ..speaking of starting arguments…I believe you have done that in like the past five threads you have been in …but hey, don't let facts get in the way of your uber judging….
See? Not much on facts, just corrections. :laugh:0 -
(If I'm guessing, I suspect he will offer some untruths relevant to your field and ask if you would want them to go unchallenged on myscientistpal.com. That's the kind of parallel *I* would draw...
...if I wasn't so disheartened by the knowledge that actual scientists have no problem with untruths being allowed to stand unchallenged because they dare not cross over from a discussion to an argument.)
Science is full of untruths that are constantly being challenged. Scientist are often more wrong that right. A well written and properly researched article in a peer reviewed journal will almost certainly be proven as an untruth in the future. There is very little right or wrong and to imply that I am against challenging current scientific knowledge is wrong.
No.
Yeah, this is kind of a stunning misunderstanding of the scientific process for someone who claims to have a PhD. Or, at least, worked on one. A lot of people who go into PhD programs don't succeed.
Anyway, good data is good data. It's generally not data itself that's wrong or "proven as an untruth." Interpretations and extrapolations of that data is often proven untrue. This is why it's good to generally ignore the discussion part of the article and focus on the methodology, mathematical analysis, and results. Solid data and analysis does not often get "proven untrue" or whatever.
Precisely.
(I'm going to add good data is always good data - but sometimes it lacks proper controls too!)
It's almost 3am and i'm going to sleep.
I'm convinced we agree on way more than we disagree on. I have a good understanding of the scientific process and the methodology and ...........blah!
What I lack is the ability to make my point in a clear and concise way - especially at this time of night on an internet forum.
Feel free to continue the argument/discussion/debate and I will make a point of forgetting about it and focusing on more important things...like maintaining my weight loss progress by doing what works for me! I've only recently discovered that posting on a controversial MFP post doesn't.
Goodnight
(reaching for some comforting chocolate to ease my mood!)
At least this helps me better understand this seemingly irreconcilable sequence of posts:
I agree!
No!Science is full of untruths that are constantly being challenged. Scientist are often more wrong that right. A well written and properly researched article in a peer reviewed journal will almost certainly be proven as an untruth in the future. There is very little right or wrong and to imply that I am against challenging current scientific knowledge is wrong.
where this particular member's posts are the first and third.
It also highlights why arguing on the internet is pointless.
More than anything though it has discouraged me from posting on MFP. My intent was to contribute positively to a post that had began with good intentions and devolved into an argument. As a result my credentials are being questioned and I feel bludgeoned and bullied.
At no other point this year have I felt the desire to binge more than I do now.0 -
I am LOLing at this thread because now it has become an argument of what is an argument. :laugh: Some people like to be right too much. Same faces, different argument.
Right?! I flipped through and saw the same people I always see. Arguing over nothing. It has gotten to be funny.
Have you ever contributed anything?0 -
I am LOLing at this thread because now it has become an argument of what is an argument. :laugh: Some people like to be right too much. Same faces, different argument.
Right?! I flipped through and saw the same people I always see. Arguing over nothing. It has gotten to be funny.
oh, you again ..speaking of starting arguments…I believe you have done that in like the past five threads you have been in …but hey, don't let facts get in the way of your uber judging….
See? No much on facts, just corrections. :laugh:
i was pointing out the irony about complaining about arguments, when the person posting has in fact started arguments…but I guess that one flew over your head?0 -
(If I'm guessing, I suspect he will offer some untruths relevant to your field and ask if you would want them to go unchallenged on myscientistpal.com. That's the kind of parallel *I* would draw...
...if I wasn't so disheartened by the knowledge that actual scientists have no problem with untruths being allowed to stand unchallenged because they dare not cross over from a discussion to an argument.)
Science is full of untruths that are constantly being challenged. Scientist are often more wrong that right. A well written and properly researched article in a peer reviewed journal will almost certainly be proven as an untruth in the future. There is very little right or wrong and to imply that I am against challenging current scientific knowledge is wrong.
No.
Yeah, this is kind of a stunning misunderstanding of the scientific process for someone who claims to have a PhD. Or, at least, worked on one. A lot of people who go into PhD programs don't succeed.
Anyway, good data is good data. It's generally not data itself that's wrong or "proven as an untruth." Interpretations and extrapolations of that data is often proven untrue. This is why it's good to generally ignore the discussion part of the article and focus on the methodology, mathematical analysis, and results. Solid data and analysis does not often get "proven untrue" or whatever.
Precisely.
(I'm going to add good data is always good data - but sometimes it lacks proper controls too!)
It's almost 3am and i'm going to sleep.
I'm convinced we agree on way more than we disagree on. I have a good understanding of the scientific process and the methodology and ...........blah!
What I lack is the ability to make my point in a clear and concise way - especially at this time of night on an internet forum.
Feel free to continue the argument/discussion/debate and I will make a point of forgetting about it and focusing on more important things...like maintaining my weight loss progress by doing what works for me! I've only recently discovered that posting on a controversial MFP post doesn't.
Goodnight
(reaching for some comforting chocolate to ease my mood!)
At least this helps me better understand this seemingly irreconcilable sequence of posts:
I agree!
No!Science is full of untruths that are constantly being challenged. Scientist are often more wrong that right. A well written and properly researched article in a peer reviewed journal will almost certainly be proven as an untruth in the future. There is very little right or wrong and to imply that I am against challenging current scientific knowledge is wrong.
where this particular member's posts are the first and third.
It also highlights why arguing on the internet is pointless.
More than anything though it has discouraged me from posting on MFP. My intent was to contribute positively to a post that had began with good intentions and devolved into an argument. As a result my credentials are being questioned and I feel bludgeoned and bullied.
At no other point this year have I felt the desire to binge more than I do now.
You agreed with someone who was disagreeing with your own post. I pointed out this seemingly irreconcilable sequence.
And don't put your reaction to having that pointed out on me. That's on you.
And your use of the word "bully" seems remarkably misplaced and is almost certainly offensive to those who have truly been bullied by those with real power over them.0 -
[/quote]
It also highlights why arguing on the internet is pointless.
More than anything though it has discouraged me from posting on MFP. My intent was to contribute positively to a post that had began with good intentions and devolved into an argument. As a result my credentials are being questioned and I feel bludgeoned and bullied.
At no other point this year have I felt the desire to binge more than I do now.
[/quote]
I have no idea if you are serious or being sarcastic...however...if you are serious...
Why would you let strangers on an internet forum derail you from meeting your goals? Are you doing this for yourself or for people that have no impact on your life?
In places such as this...take what you think makes sense for you...evaluate some of the info that you are not sure of...if it sounds like crud...throw it out.0 -
I think you are awesome for sharing! Never mind the negative few "experts".:drinker:0
-
I am skeptical of a few of her points...
Like 97% will regain
Must eat breakfast
Need more calories when ovulating
weight themselves regularly then says don't if you are a weight lifter...
eating specific things after a workout...
last but not least only eat when you are hungry even if you have calories to fill...hunger is not the best way to tell what the body needs.
Some are fine tho like eating the same on a rest day as an exercise day, not using the scale only but measurments etc...and yes you can build muslce if you are NEW to lifting...or obese.
Yes! I agree! The problem with nutritionists is that their advice is mostly based off personal experience. But every body, and every person, is different.
That comment is so wrong. Just so wrong. Nutritionist do not base their advice off personal experience - they base it off research studies. It's called "science". MFP trolls base their comments off personal experience.
OP consulted a trained expert, and shared her experience. I thank her for that.
Nutrient timing:
http://www.jissn.com/content/10/1/5
http://www.lookgreatnaked.com/blog/nutrient-timing-dont-let-confirmation-bias-stand-in-the-way-of-science/
Meal timing:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9155494
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19943985
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17483007
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/meal-frequency-and-energy-balance-research-review.html
Anecdote?
As an FYI, a nutritionists are not the same as RDs. Also, half of what is taught in sports nutrition courses is behind the times and is contradicted by current research.
What a lot of people seem to be missing is that the OP is not directly quoting the words of Nancy Clark, who is a experienced and credentialed sports nutritionist. She posted her understanding of what was discussed. Context can easily be missed and suggestions to help an individual can be misrepresented (not intentionally) 'facts' when trying to absorb a lot of information in one go.0 -
I got really exhausted on about page three and had to stop reading. Thanks for posting your notes, but some of it I disagree with.
- weight loss of more than 1 lb. per week is 97% likely to be regained and lost muscle tissue is replaced by fat when regained- success rates in general have not shown this statistic. I do believe the quicker you lose weight, the harder it is to keep off because quick weight loss indicates a quick fix and not a lifestyle change, but I don't believe that the above numbers are absolute. There are too many factors involved.
- people who KEEP weight off do the following: eat breakfast, don't allow themselves to get overly hungry, eat everything in moderation, exercise, weigh themselves regularly and keep a food journal.- I think doing these things can establish some sustainable habits, but I don't think not doing these things will hinder a person in keeping their weight off. Do research on the success stories and you will find variety in how people lose weight and whether or not they keep it off. As for me, I LOVE breakfast.
- when ovulating, women can need an additional 300-500 calories, so instead of feeling like you have no willpower when you are PMS'ing, you should eat more.....your body needs it-I need a scientific study to believe this one, though I have heard you need around 100 more calories while on your period, but then I don't even believe that one.
- eating protein AND carbs after working out is essential - carbs fuel, protein rebuilds....we need both
- saving all your calories until dinner causes you to gain weight; you are supposed to fuel during the day and lose weight while you are sleeping - so eat the majority of your calories throughout the day and SPOIL YOUR APPETITE for dinner and then just have something light . Nope, this is wrong. The only thing required to lose weight is a calorie deficit, and you can eat any time you want as long as you stay within your calorie goals to lose weight.
- you CAN gain muscle on a deficit for the first 6 months of starting a weightlifting program and then you plateau This is plan silly. You may get some newbie muscle gains while eating at a calorie deficit, but nothing substantial. There is no absolute about when you plateau. In fact, I've lost 40 pounds, reached my goal, and I never plateaued, and I lost weight on anywhere from 1500-2100 calories, depending on what my weight loss goal was at the time. AND, I do heavy weight lifting and run.
- using a scale as the only method to assess your progress is a BAD idea, especially if you are weight training; instead, use your mirror, tape measure, and how your clothes fit. if you see less fat, you are losing fat, even if the scale is not moving much. This is about the best things she's said.
- sustainable weight loss is about managing your intake and NOT allowing yourself to get overly hungry is really important. When you allow yourself to get overly hungry, your body has a physiological response that causes you to overeat, and you ultimately take in more calories than you would have consumed if you had just kept up with your hunger Well, I am one of those people who eats six small meals a day but I don't profess that it's the only way to eat. Everybody is different.
- you should eat when your body is showing signs of hunger - it is a sign that all the energy you gave it has been used up and it needs more fuel to keep going. You should stay in the 4-5 range, where 1 is starving and 10 is stuffed and 5 is content. Most dieters stay in the 3 range, are always hungry, and "blow" their eating because their body rebels eventually and they overeat. That is why managing your hunger is hugely important.This is too technical for me, but I do eat planned out meals throughout the day.
- you need to eat just as many calories on your rest day as your workout days to rebuild your muscles, so go ahead and eat when you are hungry on your off day....it's beneficial- this, in my opinion, is another good piece of advice that has worked for me. I try to eat the same amount of calories each day, which means a bit less on workout days but not enough to matter.
- metabolic damage is a REAL thing, but you have to eat very little to cause it - and you will know it's happening because you will be hungry all the time, day in and day out.....and that is not sustainable. It's not easy to damage your metabolism, and it can happen from eating way too few calories for extremely long periods of time. Just because a person is hungry all the time does not mean their metabolism is damaged.
Most people underestimate the calories they are consuming....for example, my 80 calorie apple I was munching while we met was really 140 calories, she told me!- No kidding, and this is the reason most people gain weight. They eat too much because they don't know portion control or to weigh their food.
- You DO NOT need to eat when you aren't hungry just to meet a calorie goal (unless you are underweight). Your body is the best calorie counter there is, she said. And apparently I am right on track! I'm glad you are right on track, but I disagree that your body is the best calorie tracker there is. If that were true, we would not have an overweight people. I am a true believer in eating when you are hungry and making sure you reach your calorie goals.
The thing that bothers me about what she said is that many of her "tips" sounds like absolutes. The only absolute to lose weight is to eat less calories than you burn. Heck, you don't even have to have good nutrition to lose weight and keep it off, and you don't have to eat certain foods or at certain times of the day.
Thank you for sharing your notes, though, and I wish you the best of luck. 0 -
LOL I would like to see scientific evidence that woman need extra calories when they release a microscopic egg during ovulation. The rest of this is common sense. Hope you didn't pay too much money for this "consultation".
Well, she is a scientist and nutritionist who trained at Mass General, so I do think she is basing this on research, darlin'.....just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it isn't true.
Pregnant women don't even need extra calories until their 3rd trimester, and they are literally building a person. So I doubt a single follicle releasing a microscopic egg is going to necessitate 300-500 extra calories.
Just curious - are you sure you don't mean menstruation instead of ovulation? Or did she mean the entire cycle? I can see a woman needing more food at that point to replace blood and tissue loss?
You don't actually need to replace the lost blood and tissue at the time that you're losing it -- it's nothing that your body was using for its own benefit; it was just preparation in case you got pregnant. In fact, you actually net a little material for your body's own purposes, because you do reabsorb a little of the material from the uterus (most female mammals reabsorb it all). You don't replace it until your body starts rebuilding the lining of the uterus, a little later in your cycle.0 -
- weight loss of more than 1 lb. per week is 97% likely to be regained and lost muscle tissue is replaced by fat when regained
This is meaningless without the corresponding statistic for people who lose weight more slowly. For example, if 98% of people who lose 1 lb or less per week regain it, then you would be better off losing more quickly: your odds of long-term success would be pretty bad in both cases, but slightly less bad at a faster rate.0 -
Her name is Nancy Clark, in case anyone wants to check out her credentials and website. Hope this is helpful. The meeting has changed the way I've been looking at my weight loss, for the better! The diet industry has made all of us afraid to trust ourselves...and they make billions as a result.
But isn't this Nancy Clark making her little piece of the billions by giving out diet advice? Doesn't that make her part of the diet industry that has made us all afraid to trust ourselves?0 -
Thanks for sharing. :flowerforyou:
That the person who told you this is one of the top nutritionists in the country (whichever country you're referring to) is a bit worrying.- saving all your calories until dinner causes you to gain weight; you are supposed to fuel during the day and lose weight while you are sleeping - so eat the majority of your calories throughout the day and SPOIL YOUR APPETITE for dinner and then just have something light
And, no ... I don't want to always be in the "4-5 range" and never really be hungry. That works for some people, doesn't work for me. I prefer to feel real hunger and real satiation. And that's coming from someone who's long been an emotional eater and used to have big problems controlling my intake. I don't feel that hunger should be something to be feared and warded off with snacks at the first sign of it.
The part about people who keep the weight off doing xyz... they're all good suggestions, but as far as I'm aware are based on observed correlations from the National Weight Control Registry. People who keep it off (or at least those that responded)tend to be breakfast eaters, but what does that really mean? I rarely eat breakfast and have been maintaining my loss for over a year. Eating breakfast doesn't suit me. For others, making sure to eat breakfast may be part of an all round healthy lifestyle where they are mindful of what they eat, so it works for them.
And 100% disagree that "your body is the best calorie counter there is". :noway: So, anorexic people never lose their appetites? Over-eaters are never hungry? Hunger is just a simple mechanism based on exactly how many calories you've consumed? Nothing to do with complex hormonal responses?0 -
10/10 for condescension. :drinker:LOL I would like to see scientific evidence that woman need extra calories when they release a microscopic egg during ovulation. The rest of this is common sense. Hope you didn't pay too much money for this "consultation".
Well, she is a scientist and nutritionist who trained at Mass General, so I do think she is basing this on research, darlin'.....just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it isn't true.0 -
Tag0
-
A very good point - a friend did a Human Biology degree. She was so astounded by the, ah, 'simplicity' (presentation and content) of some of the lectures she shared with 'sports science' that she had actually taken a copy of the slides to show to me.I'm actually going to speak to her credentials. She's a sports nutritionist. SPORTS. Not a nutritionist who specializes in weight loss. She does seem to know her stuff when it comes to sports. But knowing about sports does not mean she knows about weight loss.
(Yes, the presentation did look like it was for first year secondary school!) She was, appreciably, sceptical of their knowledge.0 -
bump! Some very useful information, thank you!0
-
Oh no. I've lost a good 130 lbs breaking most of these "rules".
And the lightest I've been my entire adult weight was when I rarely ate breakfast, as I'm typically not a breakfast person. And I maintained that for years.
Wow. What will I ever do now that I've broken so many rules? Perhaps I should regain the lost 130lbs as an act of penance?
Yet...there are those that have followed most of those rules and have lost weight.
It took me time to find what worked for me...such as I went from a non breakfast eater to now eating breakfast keeps me from binging the rest of the day. I do eat most of my calories in the afternoon because that is when I seem to be hungry and eat lighter in the evenings.
I don't think that there is an exact road map to weight loss that will get us all there in the end. I think that they only thing that will apply to most...well...actually all of us...is eating at a deficit.
Yes, but the root of the discord in this thread was the wording the OP used.
Had she come on here and said she met with a top sports nutritionist and then given some helpful tips, the contention in this thread would have likely not existed.
But check the wording:
"weight loss of more than 1 lb. per week is 97% likely to be regained and lost muscle tissue is replaced by fat when regained "
Presented as a fact. This is not a medical fact.
"people who KEEP weight off do the following: eat breakfast, don't allow themselves to get overly hungry, eat everything in moderation, exercise, weigh themselves regularly and keep a food journal. "
Presented as a fact. People who "KEEP weight off" do not all follow one specific road. They do not all have one universal relationship with hunger, they do not all eat the same timed meals, they do not all eat "everything" in moderation, they do not all weigh themselves regularly, and they do not all keep a food journal. Some people who keep weight off take some, maybe even all, of these actions. But presenting it as a universal fact that ALL people do is false.
"saving all your calories until dinner causes you to gain weight; you are supposed to fuel during the day and lose weight while you are sleeping - so eat the majority of your calories throughout the day and SPOIL YOUR APPETITE for dinner and then just have something light "
Presented as a fact. This is not a medical fact.
The OP is not presented as a list of suggested guidelines that might work. It's presented as a list of facts, and later on you'll see that Wonderwoman23 responds snarkily to folks who rebutted these so called "facts".0 -
And, no ... I don't want to always be in the "4-5 range" and never really be hungry. That works for some people, doesn't work for me. I prefer to feel real hunger and real satiation. And that's coming from someone who's long been an emotional eater and used to have big problems controlling my intake. I don't feel that hunger should be something to be feared and warded off with snacks at the first sign of it
Same for me. The best lesson I've ever learned in my long time struggle with weight, bar none, was finally learning that there was nothing wrong with hunger. It's something we're taught to fear and run away from at the first sign. I grew up thinking that. I took me so long to finally face hunger, embrace it, and realize that it's OK to wait. That was freedom for me.
Also we, collectively, in the US and other like nations, are in such a constant state of overfeeding that many of us do not know the difference between true hunger,emotional-hunger, and cravings.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 423 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