An argument with a person in shape = no way to win

12346»

Replies

  • thedarkwombat
    thedarkwombat Posts: 123 Member
    Nutrient timing and or eating breakfast is largely irrelevant for most people especially if your goal is simple weight loss/muscle retention
    Not true.
    In my blog post on 10JUN14 I discussed some studies about weight loss, including these which support the idea that eating a large breakfast and small dinner (most calories by noon) causes people to lose more weight (and improve other health markers more) than the usual American eating habit of a tiny breakfast & large dinner.

    "Breakfast is associated with lower body weight ... "
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24898236

    This study compared eating a small breakfast, medium lunch, and large dinner, [200, 500, 700 cal]
    with eating a large breakfast, medium lunch, and small dinner [700, 500, 200 cal].
    "The [large breakfast] group showed greater weight loss and waist circumference reduction ... fasting glucose, insulin [&] triglycerides ... decreased significantly to a greater extent in the [large breakfast] group."
    In addition, hunger was less and satiety was greater.
    Abstract: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23512957
    Full text:
    http://genetics.doctorsonly.co.il/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Jakubowicz-at-al-Obesity-2013-oby20460.pdf

    "subjects assigned to high caloric intake during breakfast lost significantly more weight than those assigned to high caloric intake during the dinner"
    Abstract: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24467926
    Full text: http://www.tradewindsports.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Nutrient-Timing-and-Obesity-2014.pdf

    "data suggest that a low-calorie Mediterranean diet with a higher amount of calories in the first part of the day could establish a greater reduction in fat mass and improved insulin sensitivity than a typical daily diet."
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24809437
    I don't take financial advice from poor people, either
    O.M.G. - I just did an audio transcript for someone who tries to bill himself as a financial advisor of sorts, as well as a parenting expert... all the while his main source of income is food stamps & tax refunds, his family is on medicaid for "healthcare", etc.
    Oh, and he's caused at least 8 children that I know of, despite his wife having a couple heart conditions (so each pregnancy & delivery risks her life). That doesn't make him a parenting expert, it makes him a "creating babies" expert.
    He has no clue what is will be like when his metabolism slow's in a few years!! I'd like to see how much he know's then
    Irony.
    (Maybe he'll know basic English & the proper use of the apostrophe? Maybe he already does?)

    a calorie is a calorie no matter what time you eat it, you could not eat all day long then eat all of your calories in one big meal right before you go to bed and still lose the exact same amount of weight
    Again, you're mixing your arguments.
    Yes, an inch is an inch and a calorie is a calorie.
    And no, you can't do the "OMAD" eating disorder diet and be healthy.

    http://www.gnolls.org/2181/the-breakfast-myth-part-2-the-art-and-science-of-not-eating-breakfast/

    http://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/2013/08/06/a-beginners-guide-to-intermittent-fasting/
  • vismal
    vismal Posts: 2,463 Member
    Nutrient timing and or eating breakfast is largely irrelevant for most people especially if your goal is simple weight loss/muscle retention
    Not true.
    In my blog post on 10JUN14 I discussed some studies about weight loss, including these which support the idea that eating a large breakfast and small dinner (most calories by noon) causes people to lose more weight (and improve other health markers more) than the usual American eating habit of a tiny breakfast & large dinner.

    "Breakfast is associated with lower body weight ... "
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24898236

    This study compared eating a small breakfast, medium lunch, and large dinner, [200, 500, 700 cal]
    with eating a large breakfast, medium lunch, and small dinner [700, 500, 200 cal].
    "The [large breakfast] group showed greater weight loss and waist circumference reduction ... fasting glucose, insulin [&] triglycerides ... decreased significantly to a greater extent in the [large breakfast] group."
    In addition, hunger was less and satiety was greater.
    Abstract: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23512957
    Full text:
    http://genetics.doctorsonly.co.il/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Jakubowicz-at-al-Obesity-2013-oby20460.pdf

    "subjects assigned to high caloric intake during breakfast lost significantly more weight than those assigned to high caloric intake during the dinner"
    Abstract: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24467926
    Full text: http://www.tradewindsports.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Nutrient-Timing-and-Obesity-2014.pdf

    "data suggest that a low-calorie Mediterranean diet with a higher amount of calories in the first part of the day could establish a greater reduction in fat mass and improved insulin sensitivity than a typical daily diet."
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24809437
    [/quote]
    These studies aren't great in proving your point. Did you actually read the full text of them? The first study didn't control calories which is pretty much worthless to the calorie counting folks of MFP. The 2nd study appears to prove just what you are saying BUT did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to ensure people complied with the parameters of the study. You are simply taking people at their word that they ate exactly what you told them too for the entire duration of the study. Self reported nutritional consumption data is essentially trash. People lie about these things, a lot. They also suck at estimating calories and portion sizes. The 3rd link is an article not really a study and the 4th had no full text so I cannot comment. But all that has been shown is correlation, weak correlation based on self reported data at that. Causation was never proven.
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,982 Member
    While most of what you said was correct, a calorie is not a calorie, the macro nutrients matter ALOT. And while eating that 1000 cals close to bed wont matter for weight loss too much that is 1000 calories less your body has to use throughout the other parts of the day.
    A calorie is a calorie. You can't change the amount of energy a calorie is macro to macro. 1 calorie of protein is equal to 1 calorie of carbs or fat. This ISN'T disputed in the science world.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
  • DanaDark
    DanaDark Posts: 2,187 Member
    Ah, arguing with someone that has the end results but either got there in terrible ways or were always there... annoying.

    Guy I am dating got really skinny by starving himself (2 of 3 meals in the day are 120 calorie protein bars). Told me I need to eat every 2 hours our my body immediately goes into starvation mode and won't burn a single calorie...
    ...
    I didn't want to say anything.
  • Soccermavrick
    Soccermavrick Posts: 405 Member
    While most of what you said was correct, a calorie is not a calorie, the macro nutrients matter ALOT. And while eating that 1000 cals close to bed wont matter for weight loss too much that is 1000 calories less your body has to use throughout the other parts of the day.
    A calorie is a calorie. You can't change the amount of energy a calorie is macro to macro. 1 calorie of protein is equal to 1 calorie of carbs or fat. This ISN'T disputed in the science world.

    So then you are saying that unused, 1 calorie of Carbs is stored and turned to fat just as quickly as 1 calorie of protein???? Um, I can tell you that Science will refute that.
  • RGv2
    RGv2 Posts: 5,789 Member
    Mind you, if you make sweeping statement like "Sugar is the worst thing on the planet for you", you might find people arguing with you.

    From the "sweet tooth's" in the crowd, no doubt.

    Or from the people who understand nutrition.....

    TomsMindBlown.gif
  • vismal
    vismal Posts: 2,463 Member
    While most of what you said was correct, a calorie is not a calorie, the macro nutrients matter ALOT. And while eating that 1000 cals close to bed wont matter for weight loss too much that is 1000 calories less your body has to use throughout the other parts of the day.
    A calorie is a calorie. You can't change the amount of energy a calorie is macro to macro. 1 calorie of protein is equal to 1 calorie of carbs or fat. This ISN'T disputed in the science world.

    So then you are saying that unused, 1 calorie of Carbs is stored and turned to fat just as quickly as 1 calorie of protein???? Um, I can tell you that Science will refute that.
    Strawman argument. He never said the body doesn't treat carbs and protein differently. Of course it does. But a calorie is simply a unit of measurement. Think of it this way, pound of muscle is very different then a pound of fat, but both weigh a pound. The pound doesn't change, it's exactly the same. Sure they will have completely different uses in the body but the fact remains that just like all pounds are pounds, all calories are calories.
  • likitisplit
    likitisplit Posts: 9,420 Member
    Mind you, if you make sweeping statement like "Sugar is the worst thing on the planet for you", you might find people arguing with you.

    From the "sweet tooth's" in the crowd, no doubt.

    I'm more of a "salt and fat" girl myself, which is one of the reasons I disagree that sugar is necessarily addictive.
  • SeptemberLondon
    SeptemberLondon Posts: 151 Member
    A calorie is a calorie. You can't change the amount of energy a calorie is macro to macro. 1 calorie of protein is equal to 1 calorie of carbs or fat. This ISN'T disputed in the science world.

    So then you are saying that unused, 1 calorie of Carbs is stored and turned to fat just as quickly as 1 calorie of protein???? Um, I can tell you that Science will refute that.
    Strawman argument. He never said the body doesn't treat carbs and protein differently. Of course it does. But a calorie is simply a unit of measurement. Think of it this way, pound of muscle is very different then a pound of fat, but both weigh a pound. The pound doesn't change, it's exactly the same. Sure they will have completely different uses in the body but the fact remains that just like all pounds are pounds, all calories are calories.
    Vismal: This is the best explanation I've heard. As usual, you've explained it perfectly. Whether or not it will be received... :ohwell:

    And as for the Strawman argument: If I had a dollar for every one of those I read on these boards daily...!
  • paperpudding
    paperpudding Posts: 9,281 Member
    Mind you, if you make sweeping statement like "Sugar is the worst thing on the planet for you", you might find people arguing with you.

    From the "sweet tooth's" in the crowd, no doubt.

    I am not a great sweet tooth myself but I can still think of lots of things on the planet worse than sugar for you

    Being stung by 1000 bees
    Starvation
    Cancer
    Being stabbed
    Bring shot

    Etcetera

    If that is the sort of statement you make to your co worker I can see why there are arguments

Categories