Calories in/calories out yes what if....?
Replies
-
I can't quote so many replies to address them so all I will say is wow. Just. Wow.0
-
Well it doesn't matter what your macros are in terms of weight loss only, but it has been shown that more attention paid to macros set specifically to a persons requirements do aid in more effective and efficient weight loss..
In the end, it comes to that calories in vs calories out, I for one notice a difference when fiddling with my macros - but I am into bodybuilding, so it is more important for me.0 -
ugh, there always has to be one
No its not what?Well you'll learn very quickly after logging in each day what foods you're eating that are loaded with empty calories, but overall since most of us eat a variety of protein, fat and carbs in day anyway, I don't see any difference per definition of a calorie in macros.
IOW a calorie is a calorie regardless if it comes from carrots or cookies, protein, fat or carbs, unless of course your daily calorie consumption comes a package of Oreo cookies and nothing else.
Lol ... no. It's not. Good try though ...
A calorie is not a calorie. All calories are not created equal. Big difference between a calorie from a cookie and a calorie from saturated fat or protein.
But I will quote this. Irony at its best.0 -
I get the concept of to lose weight consume less than you burn, but I was wondering lately after I read comments on the forums if what macros your calories come from matter
Does it matter how many carbs/fats/protein I eat in terms of weight loss?
Also, does it matter in certain medical conditions? I am not diabetic but I do have increased insulin in my blood and I do take metformin for that
Since we've gotten off track of helping the original question, I'll try and get it back on track. Although you're not diabetic, you have a similar situation to someone who does. Diabetics initially start out with having their bodies pump out too much insulin (due to higher carb diet, lack of using the carbs ingested, etc.) which is similar to what is going on with your body now. Diabetics will eventually over time become insulin resistant which it sounds like you will not be because you aren't diabetic (unless you are PRE-diabetic which is almost to the diabetic stages). Then the body doesn't efficiently break down the sugars and wants to get rid of it the only way it knows how which is to pee it out and it irreparably damages the kidneys. Since you DO have something different going on medically, a calorie is not a calorie.
So going back to the whole macro issue, since you have increased insulin in the blood, it sounds like a higher carb diet (whether healthier carbs or not) would make your body react similarly to a diabetic or more likely a pre-diabetic person. The function of insulin is to break down sugars and turn it into fat. You have an ample amount in your blood available to turn carbs into fat.
So if your body is reacting like a diabetic person, you may want to keep your simple sugars to only healthy ones (from fruit and veggies), no refined sugars or limited, and keep a reasonable amount of carbs (not the 50% of daily calories like MFP suggests). The safest option is to keep to a well rounded diet of 33% of fats, proteins, and carbs. If you want to lose weight faster, go on the lower carb diet which restricts your carbs even faster. I've seen as low as 40g of carbs per day. I personally can't do this lower carb thing and I'm pre-diabetic.
Hope this helps!0 -
Well if your posting history dictates how you might respond, then wow is probably the best response anyway......good job so far. j/kI can't quote so many replies to address them so all I will say is wow. Just. Wow.0 -
Well if your posting history dictates how you might respond, then wow is probably the best response anyway......good job so far. j/kI can't quote so many replies to address them so all I will say is wow. Just. Wow.
I agree. Wow is the best response. For me. Total time saver.0 -
I get the concept of to lose weight consume less than you burn, but I was wondering lately after I read comments on the forums if what macros your calories come from matter
Does it matter how many carbs/fats/protein I eat in terms of weight loss?
Also, does it matter in certain medical conditions? I am not diabetic but I do have increased insulin in my blood and I do take metformin for that
Since we've gotten off track of helping the original question, I'll try and get it back on track.
So going back to the whole macro issue, since you have increased insulin in the blood, it sounds like a higher carb diet (whether healthier carbs or not) would make your body react similarly to a diabetic or more likely a pre-diabetic person. The function of insulin is to break down sugars and turn it into fat. You have an ample amount in your blood available to turn carbs into fat.
So if your body is reacting like a diabetic person, you may want to keep your simple sugars to only healthy ones (from fruit and veggies), no refined sugars or limited, and keep a reasonable amount of carbs (not the 50% of daily calories like MFP suggests). The safest option is to keep to a well rounded diet of 33% of fats, proteins, and carbs. If you want to lose weight faster, go on the lower carb diet which restricts your carbs even faster. I've seen as low as 40g of carbs per day. I personally can't do this lower carb thing and I'm pre-diabetic.
Hope this helps!
Than you, it helps tremendously and is right to the point of my question :laugh:0 -
Also, does it matter in certain medical conditions?
No. There are no "what ifs". CICO works under all circumstances, for all people.
There are medical conditions that can, to a relatively small degree, affect the CO side of things. But that is a *validation* of the CICO model, not an example of an exception.
This does not mean that different people don't have different macro preferences for achieving their CI goals. Humans have evolved to have a wide variety of dietary preferences, as that is way to ensure at least some of us can survive under more conditions. There is no one size fits all diet that is "best" for everyone.0 -
I get the concept of to lose weight consume less than you burn, but I was wondering lately after I read comments on the forums if what macros your calories come from matter
Does it matter how many carbs/fats/protein I eat in terms of weight loss?
Also, does it matter in certain medical conditions? I am not diabetic but I do have increased insulin in my blood and I do take metformin for that
Since we've gotten off track of helping the original question, I'll try and get it back on track.
So going back to the whole macro issue, since you have increased insulin in the blood, it sounds like a higher carb diet (whether healthier carbs or not) would make your body react similarly to a diabetic or more likely a pre-diabetic person. The function of insulin is to break down sugars and turn it into fat. You have an ample amount in your blood available to turn carbs into fat.
So if your body is reacting like a diabetic person, you may want to keep your simple sugars to only healthy ones (from fruit and veggies), no refined sugars or limited, and keep a reasonable amount of carbs (not the 50% of daily calories like MFP suggests). The safest option is to keep to a well rounded diet of 33% of fats, proteins, and carbs. If you want to lose weight faster, go on the lower carb diet which restricts your carbs even faster. I've seen as low as 40g of carbs per day. I personally can't do this lower carb thing and I'm pre-diabetic.
Hope this helps!
Than you, it helps tremendously and is right to the point of my question :laugh:
That is a relatively helpful response because of one extremely important fact - you must absolutely keep rigorous control of your insulin levels. That goes for those who do not want to be diabetic and those who are already diabetic. Strength training is another important part of the formula because muscle is the most insulin sensitive tissue.0 -
A calorie is not a calorie. All calories are not created equal. Big difference between a calorie from a cookie and a calorie from saturated fat or protein.
I think it is more accurate to say that different food items have different bioavailability of calories which aren't really well reflected in current labelling.
So, while a cookie may be listed as having the same calories as a piece of fruit it is likely that more of the calories from the cookie will be absorbed (and therefore increase the likelihood of fat storage as calories are more likely exceed energy expenditure) than from the fruit. Therefore a "2000" calorie diet made up of fresh veg and fruit actually delivers less calories than a "2000" calorie diet made up of processed / heavily refined foods and therefore less chance of weight gain.
I'm sorry, why would the human body absorb more calories from the cookie than the fruit? Could you explain the science behind that claim?
To the OP: If you have insulin issues and are Metformin, you may find keeping your carbs lower or following a low carb diet to be beneficial, however you will still need a calorie deficit for weight loss to occur. There are a few groups on this site for low carb, do a search of the groups to find them. They'll be able to give you information on low carb and insulin issues and how to do a low carb diet properly if you think that would be beneficial to you. However, if you are losing steadily with the Metformin, going low carb probably wouldn't be necessary.0 -
.A calorie is not a calorie. All calories are not created equal. Big difference between a calorie from a cookie and a calorie from saturated fat or protein.
I think it is more accurate to say that different food items have different bioavailability of calories which aren't really well reflected in current labelling.
So, while a cookie may be listed as having the same calories as a piece of fruit it is likely that more of the calories from the cookie will be absorbed (and therefore increase the likelihood of fat storage as calories are more likely exceed energy expenditure) than from the fruit. Therefore a "2000" calorie diet made up of fresh veg and fruit actually delivers less calories than a "2000" calorie diet made up of processed / heavily refined foods and therefore less chance of weight gain.
I'm sorry, why would the human body absorb more calories from the cookie than the fruit? Could you explain the science behind that claim?
To the OP: If you have insulin issues and are Metformin, you may find keeping your carbs lower or following a low carb diet to be beneficial, however you will still need a calorie deficit for weight loss to occur. There are a few groups on this site for low carb, do a search of the groups to find them. They'll be able to give you information on low carb and insulin issues and how to do a low carb diet properly if you think that would be beneficial to you. However, if you are losing steadily with the Metformin, going low carb probably wouldn't be necessary.
Forget calories. There is a much bigger picture. The average cookie would be higher glycemic than most fruit. Plus, that cookie most likely contains a whole bunch of other garbage if it's sold in a package. Fruits at least contain micronutrients and antioxidants. But loading on fruits isn't the answer either b/c they are also relatively higher glycemic compared to veggies, meats and fats.
Diabetes is NOT a static condition. If on an oral medication like Metformin, it actually can be reversed by reducing/eliminating insulin spikes to prevent further progression of insulin resistance. If strength training is in the picture, insulin sensitivity increases. That's correct, diabetes can be reversed with a primal diet/lifestyle because of its iron grip on insulin. If the standard "eat whatever you want in moderation" American health mantra is employed, the same glycemic scenario exists, and there is invariable progression down the spectrum of diabetes where the patient becomes insulin dependent. It can be too late by then. It is often not too late if the patient is only dependent on oral medications.
Virtually EVERYONE is on this spectrum, with the more genetically predisposed actually becoming diabetic faster than someone with lucky genes who eats a comparable glycemic diet. That's why minding your insulin levels is NOT just for diabetics!! Yes, some people are luckier than others if they can keep eating high glycemic carbs and don't yet have diabetes. But achieving or getting closer to diabetes is inevitable.0 -
.A calorie is not a calorie. All calories are not created equal. Big difference between a calorie from a cookie and a calorie from saturated fat or protein.
I think it is more accurate to say that different food items have different bioavailability of calories which aren't really well reflected in current labelling.
So, while a cookie may be listed as having the same calories as a piece of fruit it is likely that more of the calories from the cookie will be absorbed (and therefore increase the likelihood of fat storage as calories are more likely exceed energy expenditure) than from the fruit. Therefore a "2000" calorie diet made up of fresh veg and fruit actually delivers less calories than a "2000" calorie diet made up of processed / heavily refined foods and therefore less chance of weight gain.
I'm sorry, why would the human body absorb more calories from the cookie than the fruit? Could you explain the science behind that claim?
To the OP: If you have insulin issues and are Metformin, you may find keeping your carbs lower or following a low carb diet to be beneficial, however you will still need a calorie deficit for weight loss to occur. There are a few groups on this site for low carb, do a search of the groups to find them. They'll be able to give you information on low carb and insulin issues and how to do a low carb diet properly if you think that would be beneficial to you. However, if you are losing steadily with the Metformin, going low carb probably wouldn't be necessary.
Forget calories. There is a much bigger picture. The average cookie would be higher glycemic than most fruit. Plus, that cookie most likely contains a whole bunch of other garbage if it's sold in a package. Fruits at least contain micronutrients and antioxidants. But loading on fruits isn't the answer either b/c they are also relatively higher glycemic compared to veggies, meats and fats.
Diabetes is NOT a static condition. If on an oral medication like Metformin, it actually can be reversed by reducing/eliminating insulin spikes to prevent further progression of insulin resistance. If strength training is in the picture, insulin sensitivity increases. That's correct, diabetes can be reversed with a primal diet/lifestyle of the effect on insulin. If the standard "eat whatever you want in moderation" American health mantra is employed, the same glycemic scenario exists, and there is invariable progression down the spectrum of diabetes where the patient becomes insulin dependent. It can be too late by then. It is often not too late if the patient is only dependent on oral medications.
Um, yeah, ok, the person I quoted claims that the human body absorbs more calories from cookies than fruits and vegetables, and that 2000 calories of both foods would somehow result in the body absorbing fewer than 2000 calories from the fruits and vegetables. There was no mention of diabetes in that post, and when it comes to weight loss, calories are what really matters, so I'm going to wait this one out and see if the person comes back with an explanation for their claim.0 -
.A calorie is not a calorie. All calories are not created equal. Big difference between a calorie from a cookie and a calorie from saturated fat or protein.
I think it is more accurate to say that different food items have different bioavailability of calories which aren't really well reflected in current labelling.
So, while a cookie may be listed as having the same calories as a piece of fruit it is likely that more of the calories from the cookie will be absorbed (and therefore increase the likelihood of fat storage as calories are more likely exceed energy expenditure) than from the fruit. Therefore a "2000" calorie diet made up of fresh veg and fruit actually delivers less calories than a "2000" calorie diet made up of processed / heavily refined foods and therefore less chance of weight gain.
I'm sorry, why would the human body absorb more calories from the cookie than the fruit? Could you explain the science behind that claim?
To the OP: If you have insulin issues and are Metformin, you may find keeping your carbs lower or following a low carb diet to be beneficial, however you will still need a calorie deficit for weight loss to occur. There are a few groups on this site for low carb, do a search of the groups to find them. They'll be able to give you information on low carb and insulin issues and how to do a low carb diet properly if you think that would be beneficial to you. However, if you are losing steadily with the Metformin, going low carb probably wouldn't be necessary.
Forget calories. There is a much bigger picture. The average cookie would be higher glycemic than most fruit. Plus, that cookie most likely contains a whole bunch of other garbage if it's sold in a package. Fruits at least contain micronutrients and antioxidants. But loading on fruits isn't the answer either b/c they are also relatively higher glycemic compared to veggies, meats and fats.
Diabetes is NOT a static condition. If on an oral medication like Metformin, it actually can be reversed by reducing/eliminating insulin spikes to prevent further progression of insulin resistance. If strength training is in the picture, insulin sensitivity increases. That's correct, diabetes can be reversed with a primal diet/lifestyle of the effect on insulin. If the standard "eat whatever you want in moderation" American health mantra is employed, the same glycemic scenario exists, and there is invariable progression down the spectrum of diabetes where the patient becomes insulin dependent. It can be too late by then. It is often not too late if the patient is only dependent on oral medications.
Um, yeah, ok, the person I quoted claims that the human body absorbs more calories from cookies than fruits and vegetables, and that 2000 calories of both foods would somehow result in the body absorbing fewer than 2000 calories from the fruits and vegetables. There was no mention of diabetes in that post, and when it comes to weight loss, calories are what really matters, so I'm going to wait this one out and see if the person comes back with an explanation for their claim.
Fair enough. I just wanted to expand into diabetes for benefit of readers. I wasn't directing most of the info towards you personally. And you're right, I didn't read all of the posts on the thread... no time.
Agreed: A calorie is a calorie from an academic standpoint.
I'm just saying focusing on calories is extremely oversimplistic and doesn't even come close to looking at the whole story for health and permanent weight loss.0 -
.A calorie is not a calorie. All calories are not created equal. Big difference between a calorie from a cookie and a calorie from saturated fat or protein.
I think it is more accurate to say that different food items have different bioavailability of calories which aren't really well reflected in current labelling.
So, while a cookie may be listed as having the same calories as a piece of fruit it is likely that more of the calories from the cookie will be absorbed (and therefore increase the likelihood of fat storage as calories are more likely exceed energy expenditure) than from the fruit. Therefore a "2000" calorie diet made up of fresh veg and fruit actually delivers less calories than a "2000" calorie diet made up of processed / heavily refined foods and therefore less chance of weight gain.
I'm sorry, why would the human body absorb more calories from the cookie than the fruit? Could you explain the science behind that claim?
To the OP: If you have insulin issues and are Metformin, you may find keeping your carbs lower or following a low carb diet to be beneficial, however you will still need a calorie deficit for weight loss to occur. There are a few groups on this site for low carb, do a search of the groups to find them. They'll be able to give you information on low carb and insulin issues and how to do a low carb diet properly if you think that would be beneficial to you. However, if you are losing steadily with the Metformin, going low carb probably wouldn't be necessary.
Forget calories. There is a much bigger picture. The average cookie would be higher glycemic than most fruit. Plus, that cookie most likely contains a whole bunch of other garbage if it's sold in a package. Fruits at least contain micronutrients and antioxidants. But loading on fruits isn't the answer either b/c they are also relatively higher glycemic compared to veggies, meats and fats.
Diabetes is NOT a static condition. If on an oral medication like Metformin, it actually can be reversed by reducing/eliminating insulin spikes to prevent further progression of insulin resistance. If strength training is in the picture, insulin sensitivity increases. That's correct, diabetes can be reversed with a primal diet/lifestyle of the effect on insulin. If the standard "eat whatever you want in moderation" American health mantra is employed, the same glycemic scenario exists, and there is invariable progression down the spectrum of diabetes where the patient becomes insulin dependent. It can be too late by then. It is often not too late if the patient is only dependent on oral medications.
Um, yeah, ok, the person I quoted claims that the human body absorbs more calories from cookies than fruits and vegetables, and that 2000 calories of both foods would somehow result in the body absorbing fewer than 2000 calories from the fruits and vegetables. There was no mention of diabetes in that post, and when it comes to weight loss, calories are what really matters, so I'm going to wait this one out and see if the person comes back with an explanation for their claim.
Fair enough. I just wanted to expand into diabetes for benefit of readers. I wasn't directing most of the info towards you personally. And you're right, I didn't read all of the posts on the thread... no time.
Agreed: A calorie is a calorie from an academic standpoint.
I'm just saying focusing on calories is extremely oversimplistic and doesn't even come close to looking at the whole story for health and permanent weight loss.
The question was more specific than that, and yet lots of us did answer by talking about health and related issues.
Glycemic index is oversimplistic, as it assumes the food is eaten in isolation, and generally it is not. For example, a potato.0 -
Yes macro calories mean a ton. A normal fat shredder diet a person should consume 50% protein 30% carbs and 20% fat.0
-
Thank you all, I really appreciate the information, things are making a lot more sense now0
-
Fair enough. I just wanted to expand into diabetes for benefit of readers. I wasn't directing most of the info towards you personally. And you're right, I didn't read all of the posts on the thread... no time.
Agreed: A calorie is a calorie from an academic standpoint.
I'm just saying focusing on calories is extremely oversimplistic and doesn't even come close to looking at the whole story for health and permanent weight loss.
um- no. it's a calorie as a unit of measurement from a scientific standpoint.Yes macro calories mean a ton. A normal fat shredder diet a person should consume 50% protein 30% carbs and 20% fat.
lol wut?
50% at 40% i'm aiming for like 150 calories- I'm happy with any amount over 100- but 50% is excessive out side of situational conditions. There is no NEED for that.0 -
I get the concept of to lose weight consume less than you burn, but I was wondering lately after I read comments on the forums if what macros your calories come from matter
Does it matter how many carbs/fats/protein I eat in terms of weight loss?
Also, does it matter in certain medical conditions? I am not diabetic but I do have increased insulin in my blood and I do take metformin for that
I see a lot of knowledgeable people here, hopefully someone can help
A calorie is simply a unit of energy...from that standpoint, the math is easy. Medical conditions, insulin sensitivities, allergies, hormonal imbalances, etc can have an adverse effect on the formula however. Someone with insulin sensitivities for example is going to benefit from a lower carbohydrate intake when trying to lose weight...for me though (no sensitivities) it really didn't matter.
Barring the aforementioned medical conditions, etc macros are largely irrelevant to actual weight loss...but very important where nutrition is concerned and also where body composition is concerned.0 -
A calorie is not a calorie. All calories are not created equal. Big difference between a calorie from a cookie and a calorie from saturated fat or protein.
:huh: :huh: :huh:
a calorie is a unit of energy....how is one different than another?0 -
It will matter in the sense of what your goals are....I mean obviously most people who desire to lose weight, also desire to look a little bit better....than just smaller versions of their current selves...
Does it matter how many carbs/fats/protein I eat in terms of weight loss?
Not to mention that certain macros will trigger hormone responses......
Which you want those hormone responses.
Also, does it matter in certain medical conditions?
Yes.0 -
"um- no. it's a calorie as a unit of measurement from a scientific standpoint"
Yes, kcal and J are units of energy. Its significance to human health is academic. (is how I should have said it). Human physiology however is erroneously assumed by most on MFP to function as a linear thermodynamic system (aka black box). It's just calories in calories out!!! If the human body were that simple, you guys would all be doctors.
The principles of CICO is how our governing bodies have taught the public for decades. And people love simple concepts and expressions. So it is going to be very hard to change people's minds because the simplicity of CICO is too engaging.
It also makes it very easy to introduce ANYTHING into the food market. Because hey. We can eat anything we want in moderation. Because the most important thing is the calories. Not what it actually is. We have been grandfathered for a few generations to focus on calorie content.... irrespective of the vast variable effects on metabolism, digestion, endocrine function, inflammation and metaplasia.0 -
your trainer is right. getting carbs from veggie sources (specifically, cruciferous veggies that have a low glycemic impact) is important when you're working with people who have problems with insulin resistance and/or are diabetic. if you eat foods that don't go spiking your blood sugar, but instead keep it steady with gradual, small increases and decreases, then your reliance on medication to fix the insulin problem for you can be drastically reduced.If you're just trying to lose pounds, no it doesn't matter. Plenty of people lose consistently and maintain eating what they want within their goals. If you have a more specified body recomp goal (looking to build muscle for ex) I think you need to pay more attention.
And obviously you need all your nutrients and whatnot and if you don't get them even under calories, you won't be healthy. Certain things fill you up and satiate you better as well.
This is a very hot button topic on these boards, as it is pretty much everywhere. The first thing you have to think about is what's realistic and sustainable for you? And what are your goals? Go from that point, I would think.
My goal is fat loss while maintaining the muscle mass I have, I eat at a 20% deficit of my TDEE and I don't eat processed foods anymore
Now you raise a good point about sustainability, my trainer wants me to only include carbs from veggies and his reasoning was something about maintaining a steady level of insulin in the blood ( i am on medication for that though).
I don't know how long I can keep with carbs just from veggies, I'm not looking to eat junk, I would like to have some kind of bread, rice, quinoa and oats
i know several people (myself included) who were pre-diabetic and fixed themselves just by switching to low carb foods. i have 2 close friends who completely got themselves off metformin by changing their diet and losing weight.
as far as finding replacements, there are hundreds of recipes out there for low-carb and low-glycemic bread options, made with almond meal, ground flax, hemp seeds, or coconut flour. eventually you'll learn to re-incorporate grains back into your diet, but it won't be in nearly the quantities that most people eat... you'll also realize that that's not a bad thing, either.0 -
your trainer is right. getting carbs from veggie sources (specifically, cruciferous veggies that have a low glycemic impact) is important when you're working with people who have problems with insulin resistance and/or are diabetic. if you eat foods that don't go spiking your blood sugar, but instead keep it steady with gradual, small increases and decreases, then your reliance on medication to fix the insulin problem for you can be drastically reduced.If you're just trying to lose pounds, no it doesn't matter. Plenty of people lose consistently and maintain eating what they want within their goals. If you have a more specified body recomp goal (looking to build muscle for ex) I think you need to pay more attention.
And obviously you need all your nutrients and whatnot and if you don't get them even under calories, you won't be healthy. Certain things fill you up and satiate you better as well.
This is a very hot button topic on these boards, as it is pretty much everywhere. The first thing you have to think about is what's realistic and sustainable for you? And what are your goals? Go from that point, I would think.
My goal is fat loss while maintaining the muscle mass I have, I eat at a 20% deficit of my TDEE and I don't eat processed foods anymore
Now you raise a good point about sustainability, my trainer wants me to only include carbs from veggies and his reasoning was something about maintaining a steady level of insulin in the blood ( i am on medication for that though).
I don't know how long I can keep with carbs just from veggies, I'm not looking to eat junk, I would like to have some kind of bread, rice, quinoa and oats
i know several people (myself included) who were pre-diabetic and fixed themselves just by switching to low carb foods. i have 2 close friends who completely got themselves off metformin by changing their diet and losing weight.
as far as finding replacements, there are hundreds of recipes out there for low-carb and low-glycemic bread options, made with almond meal, ground flax, hemp seeds, or coconut flour. eventually you'll learn to re-incorporate grains back into your diet, but it won't be in nearly the quantities that most people eat... you'll also realize that that's not a bad thing, either.
Regular exercise is an important component to this as well.0 -
no one taught that to me- or macros or micros- I learned all of that as a grown adult in my 20's.
The principles of CICO is how our governing bodies have taught the public for decades. And people love simple concepts and expressions. So it is going to be very hard to change people's minds because the simplicity of CICO is too engaging.
People actually love over-complicating it and making things seem harder than they are. - If they really could latch on to CICO- then we wouldn't have the problems we are having- they are to busy blaming sugar calories to realize they are just eating to much damn food.It also makes it very easy to introduce ANYTHING into the food market. Because hey. We can eat anything we want in moderation. Because the most important thing is the calories. Not what it actually is. We have been grandfathered for a few generations to focus on calorie content.... irrespective of the vast variable effects on metabolism, digestion, endocrine function, inflammation and metaplasia.
except we can eat anything we want in moderation- you just have to apply some common sense to it and realize that if you mean "anything = all butter" you're probably not going to make it.
Any diet of extremes - health or unhealth will not survive.
I eat ALL the things- ALL the time. I have never done cheat days- and I have never truly committed to obscene ridiculous diets (I had a 2-3 week period my friend tried to talk me into weight watchers- and a 3 week stint where I deiced eating carrots and celery only was a good idea- but neither of those lasted even month)
otherwise I've consumed cakes, ice creams, pizzas, steaks, potatoes, veggies, more veggies and butters, and popcorns and all sorts of bacons- and I have never- at any point in my life been obese- and even at the point when the Army said I was 20 pounds over weight- I was scoring over 300 points on their PT test (meaning getting over 100%) and benching my own body weight in the gym- and running a sub 10 min mile.
You CAN eat all the things- you just need to regulate HOW you do that in order to make it sustainable- and it's never a fixed point- some days I sacrifice moderate eating for a really aggressive IF diet- why- because I want to stay on track and I know I'm going to all you can eat Brazilian- so I'm hungry most of the day then go ham at night- I don't do it ever day- but I have flexibility and wiggle room. It's not hard and fast- it's using some effing common sense.
People like to over complicated it. seriously- it's just not that hard.0 -
No its not what?Well you'll learn very quickly after logging in each day what foods you're eating that are loaded with empty calories, but overall since most of us eat a variety of protein, fat and carbs in day anyway, I don't see any difference per definition of a calorie in macros.
IOW a calorie is a calorie regardless if it comes from carrots or cookies, protein, fat or carbs, unless of course your daily calorie consumption comes a package of Oreo cookies and nothing else.
Lol ... no. It's not. Good try though ...
A calorie is not a calorie. All calories are not created equal. Big difference between a calorie from a cookie and a calorie from saturated fat or protein.
**buzzer** Try again. A calorie is a unit of energy. No one unit of energy is different than another unit of energy. They are all the same.0 -
No its not what?Well you'll learn very quickly after logging in each day what foods you're eating that are loaded with empty calories, but overall since most of us eat a variety of protein, fat and carbs in day anyway, I don't see any difference per definition of a calorie in macros.
IOW a calorie is a calorie regardless if it comes from carrots or cookies, protein, fat or carbs, unless of course your daily calorie consumption comes a package of Oreo cookies and nothing else.
Lol ... no. It's not. Good try though ...
A calorie is not a calorie. All calories are not created equal. Big difference between a calorie from a cookie and a calorie from saturated fat or protein.
**buzzer** Try again. A calorie is a unit of energy. No one unit of energy is different than another unit of energy. They are all the same.
you're only addressing half of what was said. yes, a calorie is a unit of energy. but the source of the calories makes a much bigger impact than just the calories alone.
if calories were the only things that mattered, humans would be able to eat, digest, and derive energy from any substance that was capable of burning.0 -
no one taught that to me- or macros or micros- I learned all of that as a grown adult in my 20's.
The principles of CICO is how our governing bodies have taught the public for decades. And people love simple concepts and expressions. So it is going to be very hard to change people's minds because the simplicity of CICO is too engaging.
People actually love over-complicating it and making things seem harder than they are. - If they really could latch on to CICO- then we wouldn't have the problems we are having- they are to busy blaming sugar calories to realize they are just eating to much damn food.It also makes it very easy to introduce ANYTHING into the food market. Because hey. We can eat anything we want in moderation. Because the most important thing is the calories. Not what it actually is. We have been grandfathered for a few generations to focus on calorie content.... irrespective of the vast variable effects on metabolism, digestion, endocrine function, inflammation and metaplasia.
except we can eat anything we want in moderation- you just have to apply some common sense to it and realize that if you mean "anything = all butter" you're probably not going to make it.
Any diet of extremes - health or unhealth will not survive.
I eat ALL the things- ALL the time. I have never done cheat days- and I have never truly committed to obscene ridiculous diets (I had a 2-3 week period my friend tried to talk me into weight watchers- and a 3 week stint where I deiced eating carrots and celery only was a good idea- but neither of those lasted even month)
otherwise I've consumed cakes, ice creams, pizzas, steaks, potatoes, veggies, more veggies and butters, and popcorns and all sorts of bacons- and I have never- at any point in my life been obese- and even at the point when the Army said I was 20 pounds over weight- I was scoring over 300 points on their PT test (meaning getting over 100%) and benching my own body weight in the gym- and running a sub 10 min mile.
You CAN eat all the things- you just need to regulate HOW you do that in order to make it sustainable- and it's never a fixed point- some days I sacrifice moderate eating for a really aggressive IF diet- why- because I want to stay on track and I know I'm going to all you can eat Brazilian- so I'm hungry most of the day then go ham at night- I don't do it ever day- but I have flexibility and wiggle room. It's not hard and fast- it's using some effing common sense.
People like to over complicated it. seriously- it's just not that hard.
Case. In. Point.0 -
.A calorie is not a calorie. All calories are not created equal. Big difference between a calorie from a cookie and a calorie from saturated fat or protein.
I think it is more accurate to say that different food items have different bioavailability of calories which aren't really well reflected in current labelling.
So, while a cookie may be listed as having the same calories as a piece of fruit it is likely that more of the calories from the cookie will be absorbed (and therefore increase the likelihood of fat storage as calories are more likely exceed energy expenditure) than from the fruit. Therefore a "2000" calorie diet made up of fresh veg and fruit actually delivers less calories than a "2000" calorie diet made up of processed / heavily refined foods and therefore less chance of weight gain.
I'm sorry, why would the human body absorb more calories from the cookie than the fruit? Could you explain the science behind that claim?
To the OP: If you have insulin issues and are Metformin, you may find keeping your carbs lower or following a low carb diet to be beneficial, however you will still need a calorie deficit for weight loss to occur. There are a few groups on this site for low carb, do a search of the groups to find them. They'll be able to give you information on low carb and insulin issues and how to do a low carb diet properly if you think that would be beneficial to you. However, if you are losing steadily with the Metformin, going low carb probably wouldn't be necessary.
Forget calories. There is a much bigger picture. The average cookie would be higher glycemic than most fruit. Plus, that cookie most likely contains a whole bunch of other garbage if it's sold in a package. Fruits at least contain micronutrients and antioxidants. But loading on fruits isn't the answer either b/c they are also relatively higher glycemic compared to veggies, meats and fats.
Diabetes is NOT a static condition. If on an oral medication like Metformin, it actually can be reversed by reducing/eliminating insulin spikes to prevent further progression of insulin resistance. If strength training is in the picture, insulin sensitivity increases. That's correct, diabetes can be reversed with a primal diet/lifestyle of the effect on insulin. If the standard "eat whatever you want in moderation" American health mantra is employed, the same glycemic scenario exists, and there is invariable progression down the spectrum of diabetes where the patient becomes insulin dependent. It can be too late by then. It is often not too late if the patient is only dependent on oral medications.
Um, yeah, ok, the person I quoted claims that the human body absorbs more calories from cookies than fruits and vegetables, and that 2000 calories of both foods would somehow result in the body absorbing fewer than 2000 calories from the fruits and vegetables. There was no mention of diabetes in that post, and when it comes to weight loss, calories are what really matters, so I'm going to wait this one out and see if the person comes back with an explanation for their claim.
Fiber is counted as carbs in nutrition labels. But it's not absorbed and doesn't add energy taken in by body.
100 calories carbs (25g) in a cookie with no fiber and 100 carbs in a fruit with say 20 fiber (5g) will result in different amount actually absorbed.
100 to 80.
Do that through the whole day with food items types, it can add up. Perhaps not a huge amount, but it is a difference.
Further up this topic was a post that said calories was measured as to what the body took in - that is incorrect.
Calories isn't based at all on what the body does with it. In fact there is disagreement about how food labels are handled in that regard since it's known fact the processing of different macros takes different amounts of energy, let alone the fiber fact.
Calorie is determined merely by burning the item, to see how much potential energy is in it.0 -
No its not what?Well you'll learn very quickly after logging in each day what foods you're eating that are loaded with empty calories, but overall since most of us eat a variety of protein, fat and carbs in day anyway, I don't see any difference per definition of a calorie in macros.
IOW a calorie is a calorie regardless if it comes from carrots or cookies, protein, fat or carbs, unless of course your daily calorie consumption comes a package of Oreo cookies and nothing else.
Lol ... no. It's not. Good try though ...
A calorie is not a calorie. All calories are not created equal. Big difference between a calorie from a cookie and a calorie from saturated fat or protein.
**buzzer** Try again. A calorie is a unit of energy. No one unit of energy is different than another unit of energy. They are all the same.
you're only addressing half of what was said. yes, a calorie is a unit of energy. but the source of the calories makes a much bigger impact than just the calories alone.
if calories were the only things that mattered, humans would be able to eat, digest, and derive energy from any substance that was capable of burning.
I'm not arguing that point, because obviously macros and micros DO matter in relation to overall health. But for weight loss, a calorie is a calorie, given that person is consuming at a reasonable deficit.0 -
no one taught that to me- or macros or micros- I learned all of that as a grown adult in my 20's.
The principles of CICO is how our governing bodies have taught the public for decades. And people love simple concepts and expressions. So it is going to be very hard to change people's minds because the simplicity of CICO is too engaging.
People actually love over-complicating it and making things seem harder than they are. - If they really could latch on to CICO- then we wouldn't have the problems we are having- they are to busy blaming sugar calories to realize they are just eating to much damn food.It also makes it very easy to introduce ANYTHING into the food market. Because hey. We can eat anything we want in moderation. Because the most important thing is the calories. Not what it actually is. We have been grandfathered for a few generations to focus on calorie content.... irrespective of the vast variable effects on metabolism, digestion, endocrine function, inflammation and metaplasia.
except we can eat anything we want in moderation- you just have to apply some common sense to it and realize that if you mean "anything = all butter" you're probably not going to make it.
Any diet of extremes - health or unhealth will not survive.
I eat ALL the things- ALL the time. I have never done cheat days- and I have never truly committed to obscene ridiculous diets (I had a 2-3 week period my friend tried to talk me into weight watchers- and a 3 week stint where I deiced eating carrots and celery only was a good idea- but neither of those lasted even month)
otherwise I've consumed cakes, ice creams, pizzas, steaks, potatoes, veggies, more veggies and butters, and popcorns and all sorts of bacons- and I have never- at any point in my life been obese- and even at the point when the Army said I was 20 pounds over weight- I was scoring over 300 points on their PT test (meaning getting over 100%) and benching my own body weight in the gym- and running a sub 10 min mile.
You CAN eat all the things- you just need to regulate HOW you do that in order to make it sustainable- and it's never a fixed point- some days I sacrifice moderate eating for a really aggressive IF diet- why- because I want to stay on track and I know I'm going to all you can eat Brazilian- so I'm hungry most of the day then go ham at night- I don't do it ever day- but I have flexibility and wiggle room. It's not hard and fast- it's using some effing common sense.
People like to over complicated it. seriously- it's just not that hard.
Even though you are right 90% of the time, the OP has a medical problem which overly complicates things with this theory. Once you throw medical and hormonal issues into the mix, your CICO theory goes out the window or at least needs to be tweaked.
If the CICO equation worked 100% of the time, why are there so many threads about people over exercising and not losing weight or recommendations to up the calories...because of the body's complex coping mechanisms (i.e. cortisol). In a diabetic's case the insulin is throwing the monkey wrench into things. Insulin overproduction and resistance make breaking down sugars into a complex issue so they need to either take in less sugars or eat healthier sugars so that the body has to work for it to utilize and break down the sugars. The key is to utilize most of the sugars that are taken into the body so that the insulin doesn't get spiked in order to get rid of the excess available blood sugars (again, this would go to another response about taking a look at Glycemic Index of foods). This is where the working out is beneficial. Weight training (developing lean muscle mass) is key so that at rest you will still utilize more of the available sugars without being active.
Bottom line, this OP should treat him or herself like a diabetic for the sake of losing and maintaining weight whereas most people would not need to.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.4K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 437 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions