249 foods that'll help you lose weight fast

taso42

And remember, black coffee with every meal to help you bust belly fat fast!

/notsrs

I believe you have to rub that coffee in a clockwise motion on the exterior of the offending area though, don't you?

Sorry, no. Common misconception. It's anti-clockwise.
Rubbing it clockwise is a totally different thing. That's for curing baldness.

AddA2UDE

There are no foods that magically help you lose weight fast.

It's how much you eat of those foods, and in what macronutrient combinations, and to what maximum daily caloric intake, that counts.

Yep! "Magic Foods" and "Magic Exercises" are hyped by professional marketers so they can become rich(er) off of those who "want" their magic. The truth of the matter is what several others have alluded to above. It really is as simple as calories in/calories out. Granted, trying to consume the correct amount calories by eating grapes alone may be interesting to say the least but nevertheless, 1,700 calories of grapes is 1,700 calories of cake is 1,700 calories of steak..........It's all a 1,700 calorie animal. The cool thing is that MFP is chock-full of people like the posters above who have been there/done that in regards to what the rest of us are trying to do. They aren't making one red cent of spinning out any hype to you. Sooooooo, here you just get the real deal. Nothing more, nothing less. Their only motivation is help others learn what they have already learned. No monetary gains involved. BIG difference!

AddA2UDE

And remember, black coffee with every meal to help you bust belly fat fast!

/notsrs

I believe you have to rub that coffee in a clockwise motion on the exterior of the offending area though, don't you?

Sorry, no. Common misconception. It's anti-clockwise.
Rubbing it clockwise is a totally different thing. That's for curing baldness.

Doh! No wonder I'm all forehead! :bigsmile:

hollyberry2012

of a pound of feathers and a pound of bricks, which one takes up more space.

in other words, am I gonna get gassy or not. LMAO

tigersword

Im no expert..but the list looks very close to what I read to eat in a Clean Eating book. The book stated that you didn't even need to count calories if you cut all processed foods and sugars from your diet and stuck to the list-there is a formula of what percentages of each to eat in a meal and how many meals to eat a day. Supposedly your body doesn't have to work to process these foods like it does 'dirty' foods, so it doesn't hold on to them the same and your body is working as it is meant to-Although as with anything else...moderation is key-As much as I would like to believe that and I am trying really hard to follow it-I am still counting my calories-because I don't trust myself if I don't honestly-lol.

You're smart to count your calories. Your body digests any and all foods in the exact same way, and utilizes the calories from said foods in the exact same way. Besides, if your body really had to work "harder" to digest processed foods, that would mean you would burn more calories, which would then make the processed foods better for weight loss. It's a bunch of garbage to feel a book, quite honestly.

seansquared

Your body digests any and all foods in the exact same way

Not entirely correct; it is also untrue to state "a calorie is a calorie is a calorie", which you didn't do, but I'm throwing it in for good measure.

Carbohydrate digestion, for example, kicks off insulin production. Hence why the fitness greats, such as Jamie Eason, are always saying that it's not so much 'what you eat" as "the combination of foods you eat in a meal" that's actually important.

Eating a nice big green salad is great. Adding a bunch of chicken and cheese can still be great (for those on Keto, Atkins, Paleo, etc). Add a big cup of croutons and poof - the carb digestion tells the body to produce insulin and all that chicken goes right to your *kitten*.

eddieharrisjr

As a nutritionist, I can say that the old adage remains true, "everything in moderation", there truly is not a magic food, pill, or anything else that beats eating the right types of food and exercise. Its like with 100 calorie packs; they're fine if you're eating just one or two in a day but if you eat the whole box, that's a different ball game. And contrary to popular belief, a calorie truly is a calorie, the issue however, is; the source of those calories. Also pay attention to the serving size on packaged foods. For example, a box of Cheez-It, reduced fat, contains 150 calories...but that's for the 29 cracker serving size, not the 300 crackers that come in a box.

jheartj95

bfeusner, Thanks for posting the link:)

RunHardBeStrong

But how do these foods help you lose weight fast? There's nothing special or magical about any one of these, and all of them, if eaten in excess, will cause weight gain... (just like any other food)

My thoughts exactly. Thank you to the OP for taking the time to make a list to help mix things up but with a headline like "249 that will help you lose fast" it is a bit misleading. Still have to count and eat appropiate portions. There's nothing fast in successful weight loss.

tigersword

Your body digests any and all foods in the exact same way

Not entirely correct; it is also untrue to state "a calorie is a calorie is a calorie", which you didn't do, but I'm throwing it in for good measure.

Carbohydrate digestion, for example, kicks off insulin production. Hence why the fitness greats, such as Jamie Eason, are always saying that it's not so much 'what you eat" as "the combination of foods you eat in a meal" that's actually important.

Eating a nice big green salad is great. Adding a bunch of chicken and cheese can still be great (for those on Keto, Atkins, Paleo, etc). Add a big cup of croutons and poof - the carb digestion tells the body to produce insulin and all that chicken goes right to your *kitten*.

Actually, protein spikes insulin even more than carbs in some cases. Even eating pure fat will cause an insulin response. Not only that, insulin does not immediately cause you to store fat, that's an incredibly short sighted, and honestly uneducated view point. It's also responsible for nutrient uptake in muscle and organ tissue, as well as dozens of other biological functions. The whole anti-carb argument is pretty silly, it's the exact same argument, and exact same reasoning, as the anti-fat movement from the last 30 years. Carbs aren't processed any differently than any other food.

seansquared

Actually, protein spikes insulin even more than carbs in some cases. Even eating pure fat will cause an insulin response. Not only that, insulin does not immediately cause you to store fat, that's an incredibly short sighted, and honestly uneducated view point. It's also responsible for nutrient uptake in muscle and organ tissue, as well as dozens of other biological functions. The whole anti-carb argument is pretty silly, it's the exact same argument, and exact same reasoning, as the anti-fat movement from the last 30 years. Carbs aren't processed any differently than any other food.

You should probably read more on what Insulin actually does and the protein spike/glucagon balancing act before saying that the anti-carb argument is "silly".

tigersword

Actually, protein spikes insulin even more than carbs in some cases. Even eating pure fat will cause an insulin response. Not only that, insulin does not immediately cause you to store fat, that's an incredibly short sighted, and honestly uneducated view point. It's also responsible for nutrient uptake in muscle and organ tissue, as well as dozens of other biological functions. The whole anti-carb argument is pretty silly, it's the exact same argument, and exact same reasoning, as the anti-fat movement from the last 30 years. Carbs aren't processed any differently than any other food.

You should probably read more on what Insulin actually does and the protein spike/glucagon balancing act before saying that the anti-carb argument is "silly".

Glucagon has nothing really to do with it. Glucagon is the opposite of insulin, when insulin drops, and blood sugar gets too low, glucagon is released to initiate fat burning in order to bring blood sugar back up to normal levels. Not relevant to insulin spikes. Glucagon is what keeps blood sugar steady during fasting. Which has nothing to do with insulin levels and blood sugar being spiked from eating food. Remember, when protein spikes insulin, in the absence of carbs, the body converts the protein to glucose to keep blood sugar levels steady. In other words, protein can, and often does, act exactly the same way as carbs do.

And like I said, the anti-carb argument is almost weird for word exactly the same as the anti-fat argument from the 80's. Once research came out showing that fat wasn't as bad as they were trumpeting, suddenly all the things that were blamed on fat were blamed on carbs instead, even though there still isn't real scientific evidence to back it up.

joe7880

Thanks! (BUMP)