OATS = THIN

wrevhn

these...

http://www.livestrong.com/article/303850-oat-milk-protein/
which leads me to ...

http://www.ajcn.org/content/87/1/79.abstract



also interesting....

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/health-gains-from-whole-grains/

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/carbohydrates-full-story/

http://www.elements4health.com/oats.html

http://articles.latimes.com/1990-05-03/food/fo-54_1_oat-bran


hope some of those might help.

joejccva71

I'm here.

OP- Those links you provided aren't studies or scientific research backing up your statements.

Could you please cite some studies proving that Oats cause you to lose weight and burn fat?

Thanks.

Now, now joe. Studies don't "prove" things. Not even a point.

You mean even the ones you try to post with a harvard-science tag on it, Bcatts? Now now. Let's not start juggling pots and kettles.

I absolutely do mean those. Scientific medical studies provide evidence on the subject matter. But not proof. That evidence would need to be weighed against evidence from many other studies to even begin to hint at "proof". Any good reseacher would never say "prove", they would say "most evidence leads us to believe" or some similar language.

What does it take to prove something Bcatts? If I watched 100 men and women eat a calorie surplus and they all gained weight...does that prove that eating a calorie surplus causes people to gain weight?

ONE03

i think anything that's healthy and doesn't cause unhealthy cravings should make ya thin. be it oats, broccoli, etc.... unfortunately, rice (any kind), gives me serious uncontrollable cravings. so i've cut that out.

isn't it straight forward? cals in < cals expended = weightloss?

bcattoes

I'm here.

OP- Those links you provided aren't studies or scientific research backing up your statements.

Could you please cite some studies proving that Oats cause you to lose weight and burn fat?

Thanks.

Now, now joe. Studies don't "prove" things. Not even a point.

You mean even the ones you try to post with a harvard-science tag on it, Bcatts? Now now. Let's not start juggling pots and kettles.

I absolutely do mean those. Scientific medical studies provide evidence on the subject matter. But not proof. That evidence would need to be weighed against evidence from many other studies to even begin to hint at "proof". Any good reseacher would never say "prove", they would say "most evidence leads us to believe" or some similar language.

What does it take to prove something Bcatts? If I watched 100 men and women eat a calorie surplus and they all gained weight...does that prove that eating a calorie surplus causes people to gain weight?

No. What other factors were involved? yadda, yadda, yadda. I don't know what the criteria for "proof" are, but I would think there are very few things health related that are assumed "proven".

joejccva71

these...

http://www.livestrong.com/article/303850-oat-milk-protein/
which leads me to ...

http://www.ajcn.org/content/87/1/79.abstract



also interesting....

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/health-gains-from-whole-grains/

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/carbohydrates-full-story/

http://www.elements4health.com/oats.html

http://articles.latimes.com/1990-05-03/food/fo-54_1_oat-bran


hope some of those might help.

In the AJCN study it concludes this:

Conclusions: Both hypocaloric diets were effective means of improving CVD risk factors with moderate weight loss. There were significantly (P < 0.05) greater decreases in CRP and percentage body fat in the abdominal region in participants consuming whole grains than in those consuming refined grains.

It does not state what the rest of their diet was. The person eating whole grains versus refined grains was probably fuller longer so ate less.

I can guarantee you that if I ate whole grains and went over my TDEE and ate a calorie surplus, I would get fat.

Gigi_licious

I am truly enjoying my popcorn and just sitting this one out.

May I have some popcorn while I watch?

*sits down with popcorn*

Me too....extra butter please.

killagb

these...

http://www.livestrong.com/article/303850-oat-milk-protein/
which leads me to ...

http://www.ajcn.org/content/87/1/79.abstract



also interesting....

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/health-gains-from-whole-grains/

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/carbohydrates-full-story/

http://www.elements4health.com/oats.html

http://articles.latimes.com/1990-05-03/food/fo-54_1_oat-bran


hope some of those might help.

It seems as though you're grasping at straws now. I'm not thinking you've read much of this as it has little(ok, nothing) to do with burning more fat. It talks about choloesterol and heart health...and how those improve with weight loss...and how complex carbs are good for you(the one that Joe mentioned above also mentions a hypocaloric diet....gee...calorie deficit...lose weight? go figure). But eating oats causes you to burn more fat? No.

joejccva71

I'm here.

OP- Those links you provided aren't studies or scientific research backing up your statements.

Could you please cite some studies proving that Oats cause you to lose weight and burn fat?

Thanks.

Now, now joe. Studies don't "prove" things. Not even a point.

You mean even the ones you try to post with a harvard-science tag on it, Bcatts? Now now. Let's not start juggling pots and kettles.

I absolutely do mean those. Scientific medical studies provide evidence on the subject matter. But not proof. That evidence would need to be weighed against evidence from many other studies to even begin to hint at "proof". Any good reseacher would never say "prove", they would say "most evidence leads us to believe" or some similar language.

What does it take to prove something Bcatts? If I watched 100 men and women eat a calorie surplus and they all gained weight...does that prove that eating a calorie surplus causes people to gain weight?

No. What other factors were involved? yadda, yadda, yadda. I don't know what the criteria for "proof" are, but I would think there are very few things health related that are assumed "proven".

Would you say that it's proven if someone base jumped off a 300 story building, fell and hit the concrete that he would die? Or would he bounce off like in The Matrix.

madsxx

so glad i read this! havent had oats in a while and i love them!

killagb

so glad i read this! havent had oats in a while and i love them!

Try reading the facts rather than just the OP lol

bcattoes

so glad i read this! havent had oats in a while and i love them!

Try reading the facts rather than just the OP lol

Oats may not burn fat, but eating them is unlikely to hurt you. They are still a healthy food.

ilookthetype

I am truly enjoying my popcorn and just sitting this one out.

May I have some popcorn while I watch?

*sits down with popcorn*

Me too....extra butter please.

I only have vegan "butter" that cool? It's soy free!

bcattoes

I'm here.

OP- Those links you provided aren't studies or scientific research backing up your statements.

Could you please cite some studies proving that Oats cause you to lose weight and burn fat?

Thanks.

Now, now joe. Studies don't "prove" things. Not even a point.

You mean even the ones you try to post with a harvard-science tag on it, Bcatts? Now now. Let's not start juggling pots and kettles.

I absolutely do mean those. Scientific medical studies provide evidence on the subject matter. But not proof. That evidence would need to be weighed against evidence from many other studies to even begin to hint at "proof". Any good reseacher would never say "prove", they would say "most evidence leads us to believe" or some similar language.

What does it take to prove something Bcatts? If I watched 100 men and women eat a calorie surplus and they all gained weight...does that prove that eating a calorie surplus causes people to gain weight?

No. What other factors were involved? yadda, yadda, yadda. I don't know what the criteria for "proof" are, but I would think there are very few things health related that are assumed "proven".

Would you say that it's proven if someone base jumped off a 300 story building, fell and hit the concrete that he would die? Or would he bounce off like in The Matrix.

I read of a women who jumped from a plane and her parachute failed to open, yet she lived. I don't think she landed on concrete but .... just sayin.

joejccva71

so glad i read this! havent had oats in a while and i love them!

Try reading the facts rather than just the OP lol

Oats may not burn fat, but eating them is unlikely to hurt you. They are still a healthy food.

I could so go somewhere with this, but I won't.

wrevhn

i don't think this is about oats anymore.


do we need to take bets on the winner?

"i want a good clean fight. nothing below the belt"


*ding*

killagb

so glad i read this! havent had oats in a while and i love them!

Try reading the facts rather than just the OP lol

Oats may not burn fat, but eating them is unlikely to hurt you. They are still a healthy food.

I could so go somewhere with this, but I won't.

Do eeeet!

neanderthin

Certain foods can take longer to digest and is generally referred to as the "Thermic Effect of Food" which basically means the body takes longer to digest these certain foods, and longer means more energy, more energy more calories burned.

If someone was to compare 2 diets; one with foods that have a low thermic effect to the other with a high termic effect, it can translate into more calories burned based on a calorie for calorie comparison. In that regard whole grain will have a higher thermic effect than refined grain which can translate into greater weight loss.

killagb

Certain foods can take longer to digest and is generally referred to as the "Thermic Effect of Food" which basically means the body takes longer to digest these certain foods, and longer means more energy, more energy more calories burned.

If someone was to compare 2 diets; one with foods that have a low thermic effect to the other with a high termic effect, it can translate into more calories burned based on a calorie for calorie comparison. In that regard whole grain will have a higher thermic effect than refined grain which can translate into greater weight loss.

Let me guess....you buy into the whole 'negative calorie food' idea.

Nataliejones5730

I'm new here, but my thoughts exactly lol

Popcorn would be so great right about now.

neanderthin

Certain foods can take longer to digest and is generally referred to as the "Thermic Effect of Food" which basically means the body takes longer to digest these certain foods, and longer means more energy, more energy more calories burned.

If someone was to compare 2 diets; one with foods that have a low thermic effect to the other with a high termic effect, it can translate into more calories burned based on a calorie for calorie comparison. In that regard whole grain will have a higher thermic effect than refined grain which can translate into greater weight loss.

Let me guess....you buy into the whole 'negative calorie food' idea.

Er, no. why would you say that?

kennethmgreen

sigh........ can't someone share what's working for them without a put down anymore? She mentioned it's working for her... it was her opinion, we all have one and are entitled to one on here. Or as least I thought so..

We all have different methods that work for each of us.. one method may not work for another that works great for someone else. It's wonderful to have choices in life!:flowerforyou:

I see this sentiment a lot. It does sound good, but misses something really important. This is a health and fitness community. I think that statements about health and fitness should be backed up with some evidence. Asking for evidence isn't attacking. It isn't a put down. Heck, it's not even disagreeing. It is simply asking for evidence.

I'm all for the idea of different things working for different people. Example: I believe that meal frequency is a preference (has no direct effect on weight loss) and one large meal a day may work great for some people. But for me, it wouldn't work. Just not how I like to eat, and I get way too grumpy going more than a few hours without calories. But see the difference? I'm not challenging the science. I'm simply stating what works for me.

Here's the really funny part. Asking for evidence actually *promotes* a healthy "do what works for you" attitude. It allows people to make an EDUCATED choice about their diet and fitness.

Of course, that is all my opinion. Which you are welcome to dismiss.

killagb

Certain foods can take longer to digest and is generally referred to as the "Thermic Effect of Food" which basically means the body takes longer to digest these certain foods, and longer means more energy, more energy more calories burned.

If someone was to compare 2 diets; one with foods that have a low thermic effect to the other with a high termic effect, it can translate into more calories burned based on a calorie for calorie comparison. In that regard whole grain will have a higher thermic effect than refined grain which can translate into greater weight loss.

Let me guess....you buy into the whole 'negative calorie food' idea.

Er, no. why would you say that?

Because that's based on the idea that something takes more energy to digest than it contains calories, so the digestive process is burning more than the food 'costs'. Sounds a lot like what you're explaining.

kennethmgreen

Certain foods can take longer to digest and is generally referred to as the "Thermic Effect of Food" which basically means the body takes longer to digest these certain foods, and longer means more energy, more energy more calories burned.

If someone was to compare 2 diets; one with foods that have a low thermic effect to the other with a high termic effect, it can translate into more calories burned based on a calorie for calorie comparison. In that regard whole grain will have a higher thermic effect than refined grain which can translate into greater weight loss.

How many calories difference are you talking about?

neanderthin

Because that's based on the idea that something takes more energy to digest than it contains calories, so the digestive process is burning more than the food 'costs'. Sounds a lot like what you're explaining.

No that isn't what it means.

Sublog

I'm here.

OP- Those links you provided aren't studies or scientific research backing up your statements.

Could you please cite some studies proving that Oats cause you to lose weight and burn fat?

Thanks.

Now, now joe. Studies don't "prove" things. Not even a point.

They are the closest thing to proof we can come up with. If you have a better method of "proving" things, please enlighten us with your wisdom.

TDGee

Somebody call for a Joe?

neanderthin

Certain foods can take longer to digest and is generally referred to as the "Thermic Effect of Food" which basically means the body takes longer to digest these certain foods, and longer means more energy, more energy more calories burned.

If someone was to compare 2 diets; one with foods that have a low thermic effect to the other with a high termic effect, it can translate into more calories burned based on a calorie for calorie comparison. In that regard whole grain will have a higher thermic effect than refined grain which can translate into greater weight loss.

Let me guess....you buy into the whole 'negative calorie food' idea.

Er, no. why would you say that?

Because that's based on the idea that something takes more energy to digest than it contains calories, so the digestive process is burning more than the food 'costs'. Sounds a lot like what you're explaining.

Depends on the diet someone is currently consuming. For example protein in general can account for 20-30% of it's caloric value to be used in the digestion process. Fats on the other hand is pretty much 0, and refined carbs are in the 2-3% area, or at least that is what most people in that field attribute those value to be. Basically a highly processed carb diet compared to one high in protein, veg and whole grain can and will have a higher thermic effect than the later, which translates into more calories burned through TEF. TEF is part of the energy out side of the equation.

joejccva71

TEF (Thermic effect of feeding): The calorie expenditure associated with eating. REGARDLESS of what myths you have been told - this is NOT dependent on MEAL FREQUENCY. It is a % of TOTAL CALORIES CONSUMED (and 15% of 3 x 600 cal meals is the same as 15% of 6 x 300 cal meals). It varies according to MACRONUTRIENT content and FIBER content. For most mixed diets, it is something around 15%. Protein is higher (up to 25%), carbs are variable (between 5-25%), and fats are low (usually less than 5%). So -> More protein and more carbs and more fiber = HIGHER TEF. More FAT = LOWER TEF.

vim_n_vigor

sigh........ can't someone share what's working for them without a put down anymore? She mentioned it's working for her... it was her opinion, we all have one and are entitled to one on here. Or as least I thought so..

We all have different methods that work for each of us.. one method may not work for another that works great for someone else. It's wonderful to have choices in life!:flowerforyou:

I see this sentiment a lot. It does sound good, but misses something really important. This is a health and fitness community. I think that statements about health and fitness should be backed up with some evidence. Asking for evidence isn't attacking. It isn't a put down. Heck, it's not even disagreeing. It is simply asking for evidence.

I'm all for the idea of different things working for different people. Example: I believe that meal frequency is a preference (has no direct effect on weight loss) and one large meal a day may work great for some people. But for me, it wouldn't work. Just not how I like to eat, and I get way too grumpy going more than a few hours without calories. But see the difference? I'm not challenging the science. I'm simply stating what works for me.

Here's the really funny part. Asking for evidence actually *promotes* a healthy "do what works for you" attitude. It allows people to make an EDUCATED choice about their diet and fitness.

Of course, that is all my opinion. Which you are welcome to dismiss.

I agree totally on this one. If I am stating something as a fact, I expect to get challenged on it. If I state something that should be questioned as far as it being harmful or unhealthy, I expect to get challenged on it. If the OP had commented that eating oats every day has helped her with her weight loss, the rest of this discussion would never have happened.

joejccva71

Somebody call for a Joe?

That actually was me about 20 years ago.

(no I wasnt a plastic toy)