A calorie is a calorie, but not always the same.

AeolianHarp

You probably have what they call a protein bodytype, meaning you need less carbs but more protein to lose weight.

While I have seen evidence of low-fat and high-fat phenotypes, I don't think I have ever seen anything particularly convincing for someone being a protein type. Studies have shown almost double (1.5g/kg) the RDA intake of protein is excellent in terms of body composition. This is pretty much true for most people. Some studies (rare ones, mind you, and ones that don't necessarily hold a lot of weight) have shown improvements up to 3.0g/kg but, again, most people are getting these benefits, so I don't think it's necessarily being a "type" (namely protein).

dntworribhappi

Nice though provoking thread. I guess the point is we are all different and each one of us has to find what works best for us. So we are all a little like snowflakes! I liked the snowflake comment, it cracked me up!

joejccva71

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/you-are-not-different.html

d2footballJRC

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/you-are-not-different.html

Would of been valuable but even this line goes with what I was saying.. from your article: "The research, however, is very clear: not everybody has it as easy as some folks do. Some people’s bodies are, in fact, demonstrably more resistant to weight loss (or gain) than others. Not that they can’t lose (or gain) weight but it comes off or on more slowly. More accurately, their bodies fight back harder."

chrisdavey

I'm a big fan of self experimentation with nutrition and exercise and definitely think that people should mix up their macros a bit to see what works for them.

I still think cals in vs out is what matters most for weight loss/gain but you also have to take into account things like energy, mood, gym performance. That is where the self experimentation can really help IMO.

Glucocorticoid

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/you-are-not-different.html

Would of been valuable but even this line goes with what I was saying.. from your article: "The research, however, is very clear: not everybody has it as easy as some folks do. Some people’s bodies are, in fact, demonstrably more resistant to weight loss (or gain) than others. Not that they can’t lose (or gain) weight but it comes off or on more slowly. More accurately, their bodies fight back harder."

For this thread, an even more relevant article from the same author would be:
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/is-a-calorie-a-calorie.html

To quote a part of his summary:

So is a calorie a calorie? Yes and no. Based on the data, my general feeling is this:
A sufficient protein intake will always beat out an insufficient protein intake, no matter what you do. Since all of the diets described in this book are based around sufficient protein, this is a non-issue.
Assuming caloric intake can be controlled (and protein is adequate of course), shuffling of carbs and fats tends to have a minor, approaching negligble effect.
There might be exceptions at the extremes (folks going to single digit bodyfat or extreme obesity) but that doesn’t apply to the majority of folks.

Lyle has a unique way of cutting through the BS.

ccnjc4e

Thanks for posting!! I am in the process of figuring out where I need to be:)

L_mills

How Can I figure out my body type?

MoreBean13

Good Thread!



A calorie is a calorie is a calorie- it is the measure of how much energy is stored in a particular item. That is 100% percent true. It's also a gross oversimplification of the hormone and enzyme soup going on in out bodies. I do not believe that anyone has a "protein body type" being as how we are all humans and 99.999999% (i don't actually know how many 9's that should go to) the same. BUT people have different hormonal responses to food and it behaves differently in different bodies. Look for example at insulin and diabetics- no sane person would advise feeding a diabetic pixy stix vs. a chicken breast and spinach salad for the same calorie amount.

Personally, it is my opinion that most people that are overweight or obese need to start somewhere, and any diet/healthy eating plan that you can tolerate (or even like!) is going to be a good jumping off point. Sticking with any diet is going to be a huge step forward. Then, every person's diet is going to eventually need tweaking, and the goals are always 1)moving toward your goal and 2) feeling better. I love the people on here that have posted "I can't lose weight unless my carbs are under XXX or my protein is above YYY" Because everyone had to figure out those set points themselves, empirically. There is no magical number that works for one person that universally applies to others. I wish diet book authors would stop pretending there was. A program like MFP is WONDERFUL for aiding people in figuring out those trends!

Now, about carbohydrates. I think Glycemic Index should be everyone's #1 tool for carbohydrates. But what I rarely see mentioned about carbs is how F***ing easy they are to overeat! Maybe someone more knowledgeable than me can fill in the gap, but I don't think carbs trigger the hormonal "full" feeling, so you can keep munching and munching without a thought about it, even though you're way beyond how many calories of a fatty or protein rich food would give you. For me, that is the true danger of carbohydrates. But I love them anyway....So now I weigh/measure bread and rice etc. and make sure to only eat what I have planned.

Knowledge is power.

chrisdavey

L-mills: you experiment.

MoreBean13: re GI maybe not so much
http://www.alanaragon.com/elements-challenging-the-validity-of-the-glycemic-index.html


Some sorts of carbs are very easy to overeat but I can tell you I REALLY struggle to put down more than about 150g of oats at a time

AeolianHarp

"protein body type"

To reiterate, I have not seen evidence of a protein type but only a low-fat and high-fat phenotype. Almost all people who increase protein on a caloric deficit have shown far superior body composition than their lower counterparts. Increasing protein regardless will improve body composition assuming it's low to begin with. Just because you did better by increasing protein does not mean you're a protein type. It just fortifies the idea that protein becomes more important on a deficit, especially for leaner individuals.

MoreBean13

Chrisdavey: I actually agree with everything presented in that article, but I don't think there is a better measure available than the GI for determining whether a food is a "good" choice (low GI) or poor choice (high GI). Certainly I agree with some examples of foods that break the ranks, such as carrots, potatoes and watermelon. I think it would be really hard to wreck your diet with watermelon or carrots and potatoes- if they're measured and properly fit are probably OK. (I'm biased about potatoes- I've been a vegetarian for 20 yrs and the first year or maybe 2 all I ate was potatoes because they're all I knew how to cook myself- so now I think since I don't like them anymore nobody should...)

I don't think the GI is perfect, but to someone who is trying to learn how to healthfully incorporate carbohydrates in to their diet I think it is the best measure available.

I also agree about oats- but they're in the low-GI "good carb" range. I guess what I really meant was like white bread and pretzels and popcorn and sugary (low fat) foods like gummy bears or something. And there are limits to that too- If you've ever carb-loaded for an event (1/2 marathons in my case) you'll know that there comes a point where you feel about ripe to explode from JUST carbs.

jennimben

I am enjoying this post and all of the back and forth! I am glad you posted it, great stuff to think about. The last couple of posts spoke about how easy it is to over-consume carbs - yes, it is! Sorry if you're not a believer in this one- but I have been going for acupuncture treatment for a few things (hot flashes, sciatica, depression) and was recently treated for "cravings". I mentioned that when I start on carbs I can really go overboard. I have had two treatments and have really noticed a difference. Just saying. It is helping me and I've had more success in the past two weeks than the past two years.

wackyfunster

The protein stuff isn't magical either. Protein has a 30+% TEF, so it's really around 3 usable calories per gram. If you go from 50g protein a day to 200g protein per day and maintain the same nominal calorie intake, you have created a 150 calorie deficit in terms of usable calories relative to your previous diet.

For reference, TEF on carbs is 10% or less. Fat is basically 0%.

This is the real reason behind things people often explain with voodoo.

chrisdavey

Chrisdavey: I actually agree with everything presented in that article, but I don't think there is a better measure available than the GI for determining whether a food is a "good" choice (low GI) or poor choice (high GI). Certainly I agree with some examples of foods that break the ranks, such as carrots, potatoes and watermelon. I think it would be really hard to wreck your diet with watermelon or carrots and potatoes- if they're measured and properly fit are probably OK. (I'm biased about potatoes- I've been a vegetarian for 20 yrs and the first year or maybe 2 all I ate was potatoes because they're all I knew how to cook myself- so now I think since I don't like them anymore nobody should...)

I don't think the GI is perfect, but to someone who is trying to learn how to healthfully incorporate carbohydrates in to their diet I think it is the best measure available.

I also agree about oats- but they're in the low-GI "good carb" range. I guess what I really meant was like white bread and pretzels and popcorn and sugary (low fat) foods like gummy bears or something. And there are limits to that too- If you've ever carb-loaded for an event (1/2 marathons in my case) you'll know that there comes a point where you feel about ripe to explode from JUST carbs.

Agreed. Stick to complex carbs for the majority of you're diet where possible and save the simple ones for treats. (And I personally try to have these around workout time but that's just me)

And yep, I had a carb refeed last week that was 800g in a day. THAT was intense!

MoreBean13

The protein stuff isn't magical either. Protein has a 30+% TEF, so it's really around 3 usable calories per gram. If you go from 50g protein a day to 200g protein per day and maintain the same nominal calorie intake, you have created a 150 calorie deficit in terms of usable calories relative to your previous diet.

For reference, TEF on carbs is 10% or less. Fat is basically 0%.

This is the real reason behind things people often explain with voodoo.

I'm not really familiar with TEF- if protein has a 30% TEF does that mean that it takes 30% of it's own calories to digest the protein? So, 200g protein * 4cal/g * 0.7 = 560 usable calories
vs
50 g protein * 4 cal * 0.7 = 140 usable calories


Obviously my math doesn't make sense here so I must not understand TEF correctly. Please explain.

MoreBean13

And yep, I had a carb refeed last week that was 800g in a day. THAT was intense!

Vomit. I bet you felt like the michelin man.

Glucocorticoid

The protein stuff isn't magical either. Protein has a 30+% TEF, so it's really around 3 usable calories per gram. If you go from 50g protein a day to 200g protein per day and maintain the same nominal calorie intake, you have created a 150 calorie deficit in terms of usable calories relative to your previous diet.

For reference, TEF on carbs is 10% or less. Fat is basically 0%.

This is the real reason behind things people often explain with voodoo.

I'm not really familiar with TEF- if protein has a 30% TEF does that mean that it takes 30% of it's own calories to digest the protein? So, 200g protein * 4cal/g * 0.7 = 560 usable calories
vs
50 g protein * 4 cal * 0.7 = 140 usable calories


Obviously my math doesn't make sense here so I must not understand TEF correctly. Please explain.

Read this:
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/the-energy-balance-equation.html

chrisdavey

And yep, I had a carb refeed last week that was 800g in a day. THAT was intense!

Vomit. I bet you felt like the michelin man.

uhuh. And I eat massive meals regularly but that was just insane. (required though )

wackyfunster

The protein stuff isn't magical either. Protein has a 30+% TEF, so it's really around 3 usable calories per gram. If you go from 50g protein a day to 200g protein per day and maintain the same nominal calorie intake, you have created a 150 calorie deficit in terms of usable calories relative to your previous diet.

For reference, TEF on carbs is 10% or less. Fat is basically 0%.

This is the real reason behind things people often explain with voodoo.

I'm not really familiar with TEF- if protein has a 30% TEF does that mean that it takes 30% of it's own calories to digest the protein? So, 200g protein * 4cal/g * 0.7 = 560 usable calories
vs
50 g protein * 4 cal * 0.7 = 140 usable calories


Obviously my math doesn't make sense here so I must not understand TEF correctly. Please explain.
[/quote]

You're right on... TEF=thermic effect of food, and it means exactly what you said: roughly 30% of protein calories are consumed in the process of converting it to usable energy.

Where it is relevant is:
200g of carbs = 200 *4 * 0.9 = 720 usable calories (carbs actually vary a lot. Whole grains are a little over 10%, while e. g. Corn syrup is closer to 0.
89g of fat = 89 * 9 = 800 usable calories
200g of protein = 200 * 4 * 0.7 = 560 usable calories.

However, according to the FDA and thus food labels. All 3 are considered to have identical caloric value.

Those are not exact, but give an idea of why this is a relevant concept (and one that is typically not controlled for in fitness studies)

Typed from phone, pardon typos.