Random stuff that stops me getting fat... and makes you fat

pg3ibew

I read the first and last page of this thread.

I can't believe how hard some of you are jumping on the Thread Starter. He is simply stating his opinion. I happen to agree with most, if not all, of what he is saying.

I think we like to use EXCUSES as to why we are fat. That is how I read this thread. Alot of EXCUSES as to why we aren't losing.

Sidesteal

Cheat days defeat the fact you are changing your eating lifestyle for life - you should not be forcing yourself to do something you don't want to - therefore a cheat day shouldn't be needed or wanted if you have done things properly.

It can still be beneficial provided the user is aware of his or her net deficit over time, be it a week, for example. I'm not saying that cheat days are arbitrarily good OR bad -- they are a tool that can be used for some people quite effectively. Your results may vary, but to label them arbitrarily bad is silly.

Actually MOST people do have the same metabolisms. I think we could probably frame this one as the all time number one excuse !?

Some people have disorders, but I would agree, that's an excuse used frequently.

People aren't generally less active nowadays (compared to 50s to 70s) portions are bigger.

People are generally WAY less active. Portions are also bigger.

It also doesn't come as a surprise that it is often the larger person (judging from profile statistics) who doesn't like this kind of post.

I am in respectable shape and I didn't agree with some of it. I thought some of it was spot on.

tigersword

People aren't generally less active nowadays (compared to 50s to 70s) portions are bigger.

People are generally WAY less active. Portions are also bigger.

Between automation of factories, the decrease of farming, and the fact that 80% of the US population currently work in offices, yes, activity has decreased severely.

150 years ago 90% of the US population were farmers. Today, it's less than 2%.

Add to that the average American increasing food intake by 600 calories over the past 50 years, and the causes are pretty easy to figure out.

noirnatural

"If you are still a bit saggy you aint lost enough"

How is that plausible? My skin is saggy because I was large before.
I was nice and tight when I was heavy. LOL.

Cute..:laugh:

Sidesteal

People aren't generally less active nowadays (compared to 50s to 70s) portions are bigger.

People are generally WAY less active. Portions are also bigger.

Between automation of factories, the decrease of farming, and the fact that 80% of the US population currently work in offices, yes, activity has decreased severely.

150 years ago 90% of the US population were farmers. Today, it's less than 2%.

Add to that the average American increasing food intake by 600 calories over the past 50 years, and the causes are pretty easy to figure out.

Absolutely agree with you, as usual.

And I would imagine the same trend in children via video games/etc.

tigersword

I wouldn't even blame video games, so many parents refuse to let their kids play outside nowadays.

m60kaf

People aren't generally less active nowadays (compared to 50s to 70s) portions are bigger.

People are generally WAY less active. Portions are also bigger.

I often believed this without question. However I have seen recent reports that suggest otherwise

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jun/11/why-our-food-is-making-us-fat

It is easy to assume what we are told, however, when I think about it. I am more active than say my Gran was 50 years ago. But not my granddad who was a dry stone waller and ran a gym.

The way I look at it - there are two sides to every argument, most will try to believe the one they have no control over. I can't change my lazy lifestyle that society has burdened me with. My portions are to big I can cut down... I don't want to believe that one

CoderGal

I don't think the man was preaching perfectionism at all. Simply stating some cold hard truths that most of us write off with excuses. I think the point of his post is to tell folks to dig deep and be honest with yourself. Sure, everyone screws up or makes a choice they wish they hadn't that slows them down or leads to another problem. The point here is to not make excuses for your failures, but to be honest and learn from them. After all, if you're not being honest about what you eat, what you do, how you think about food, etc, you're not doing yourself ANY favors.

It started off that way, but then the post went waaaayyyy south. Having fat friends doesn't keep/make you fat. He spent an entire post talking about owning your choices and then threw in that bomb that was so fat-phobic it was unreal. My fat friends have absolutely ZERO influence on my food choices. Sometimes, it's my "healthy" friends who want to order pizza or eat a bag of chips. It isn't just the eeeevil fatties who make poor choices.

Also, fat people CAN be happy. I don't wallow in depression because I'm fat. I'm losing weight because I want to be more healthy, not because I hate myself. I have a billion other things that comprise who I am. My weight is only a percentage of what makes me ME. Yet another thing that shows how much he loathes and detests fat people.

The OP makes me sick. I hope to god he never ends up with some disease, stuck in a wheelchair, because then he might become the thing he detests most.

I really enjoyed reading this. And the post you made after that as well. Is it weird that I get excited when people show signs of sense and humanity? Lol

Sidesteal

People aren't generally less active nowadays (compared to 50s to 70s) portions are bigger.

People are generally WAY less active. Portions are also bigger.

I often believed this without question. However I have seen recent reports that suggest otherwise

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jun/11/why-our-food-is-making-us-fat

I've actually seen this article before and while I don't disagree with all of it, it's using Taubes and Lustig as references. That doesn't immediately make the points invalid by themselves, but the previously mentioned gentlemen are both alarmists that tend to blame obesity on a singular entity, and it's not calories.

See here, and note the differences in reported activity in this article:
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/

It is easy to assume what we are told

Agreed.

The way I look at it - there are two sides to every argument, most will try to believe the one they have no control over. I can't change my lazy lifestyle that society has burdened me with. My portions are to big I can cut down... I don't want to believe that one

Not sure I get where you're coming from here. People need to control their energy balance. Whether or not that means increasing activity or reducing intake, both are cumulatively effecting them getting and staying fat. Both need to change.

Jflowwers

Piging out once a week as a treat - you will fail (calories)

Fast food makes you want more food (sugar)

You don't need to cut down on fast food (Burgers, Pizzas, fried food) you should NEVER eat them - people did just fine for millions of years without burgers

Thats right - look at fast food ads on the TV like they are asking you to lick the urinal at your local bar

Since the 70s people are fatter - back in those days you couldn't buy much fast food or food outside working hours - think about it!

When you see bad food, don't crave think to how sick and fatty you will feel after you have eaten it - I love battered fish and chips - never eat it because I think how greased up I will feel after

It is NOTexpensive to eat healthy

Muscle is more imortant than cardio - muscle eats fat for breakfast

You are not happy fat

Your metabolism is no slower than the next guys or gals

You never need to eat chocolate or crisps, etc.

Healthy people don't eat much (compared to you)

Fat people encourage people to be fat. Correct weight people are good to be around

Feel free to add......

Eating bad one day? Not gonna derail everything you did the other six. I promise.

Fast food? Nothing in it makes you crave more. There is no secret chemical to make us addicted. We want more sometimes because it tastes good. And it is ok to eat food we like to eat. Really really.

The only unhealthy food is one eaten in excess. Like something? Love something? Eat it. Just not as much as you used to.

Do I need to eat chocolate or chips? Nope. But I do. And I can.

Cardio? Yeah. Getting your heart and lungs and circulatory system healthy sucks. Good call.

Metabolism? Yup. They are all different. Sorry.

And you're right. Hanging around overweight people? Lame.

Healthy people don't eat much? Well, I'd say the healthiest people often eat more - it's a result of having to refuel after all that stupid cardio they do.

Sugar? Long as you don't have a medical reason to stay away or limit ... it isn't the devil. I don't even track it. I promise, sugar is fine. (So is sodium, by the way.)

HIGH FIVE. :flowerforyou:

angelalf1979

I get what you're trying to prove, but mostly you come off as a stereotypical jerk.

Agreed.

UpEarly

Some of this advice is solid, but more of it elicits a big 'meh' from me. I've been successful, and my list would be really different than the OP's.

angelalf1979

Piging out once a week as a treat - you will fail (calories)

Fast food makes you want more food (sugar)

You don't need to cut down on fast food (Burgers, Pizzas, fried food) you should NEVER eat them - people did just fine for millions of years without burgers

Thats right - look at fast food ads on the TV like they are asking you to lick the urinal at your local bar

Since the 70s people are fatter - back in those days you couldn't buy much fast food or food outside working hours - think about it!

When you see bad food, don't crave think to how sick and fatty you will feel after you have eaten it - I love battered fish and chips - never eat it because I think how greased up I will feel after

It is NOTexpensive to eat healthy

Muscle is more imortant than cardio - muscle eats fat for breakfast

You are not happy fat

Your metabolism is no slower than the next guys or gals

You never need to eat chocolate or crisps, etc.

Healthy people don't eat much (compared to you)

Fat people encourage people to be fat. Correct weight people are good to be around

Feel free to add......

Eating bad one day? Not gonna derail everything you did the other six. I promise.

Fast food? Nothing in it makes you crave more. There is no secret chemical to make us addicted. We want more sometimes because it tastes good. And it is ok to eat food we like to eat. Really really.

The only unhealthy food is one eaten in excess. Like something? Love something? Eat it. Just not as much as you used to.

Do I need to eat chocolate or chips? Nope. But I do. And I can.

Cardio? Yeah. Getting your heart and lungs and circulatory system healthy sucks. Good call.

Metabolism? Yup. They are all different. Sorry.

And you're right. Hanging around overweight people? Lame.

Healthy people don't eat much? Well, I'd say the healthiest people often eat more - it's a result of having to refuel after all that stupid cardio they do.

Sugar? Long as you don't have a medical reason to stay away or limit ... it isn't the devil. I don't even track it. I promise, sugar is fine. (So is sodium, by the way.)

HIGH FIVE. :flowerforyou:

DOUBLE HIGH FIVE!!

Jflowwers

It also doesn't come as a surprise that it is often the larger person (judging from profile statistics) who doesn't like this kind of post. .

You took the time to look at who didnt like your jerkey tone, to see if they were large or not? Lame-o.

tigersword

The way I look at it - there are two sides to every argument, most will try to believe the one they have no control over. I can't change my lazy lifestyle that society has burdened me with. My portions are to big I can cut down... I don't want to believe that one

Not sure I get where you're coming from here. People need to control their energy balance. Whether or not that means increasing activity or reducing intake, both are cumulatively effecting them getting and staying fat. Both need to change.

Both can change easily. Whereas 100 years ago, we were able to remain physically active just due to day to day life (moving hay bales, planting/harvesting crops, building by hand, etc.,) even though our day to day life has become more sedentary, we have access to more types of physical activity than ever, between gyms, boating, hiking, cycling, sports, plus the higher amount of leisure time we humans have nowadays, compared to how much time was spent working in the past (average work week in the US in the late 1800's was around 70 hours, now the average is 37 hours.)

PandaCustard

I don't think the whole lack of activity at the workplace is the reason for weight gain for everyone. In my case, it's actually been the exact opposite. Through college I was a waitress, constantly running around and on my feet, but because I was so exhausted from work (not to mention it was constantly aggravating a weight-lifting injury to my hip and not allowing it to heal), I never worked out. I just didn't have the energy at the end of the day. Sure, I was active at work, but my heartrate wasn't up enough to contribute to exercise. Added to the exhaustion was the fact that I was so hungry after work from running around all day, so I ate more.

Now I work in an office and I have the energy to work out 30 min-1 hour and sometimes more every day. I'm sedentary at work so I don't get as hungry and therefore don't eat as much. The new job doesn't aggravate my hip and yoga and pilates has downright healed it, so I can run and work my lower body again.

I think that's honestly the case with everything. Weight loss differs from person to person.

cordianet

So at first, I frankly was ticked off about this post and was tempted to reply in a pretty nasty way. the original poster really came off as a jerk in my opinion and I see from some of the comments, I was not alone in feeling this way.

Discretion got the better of me and I let it slide. Now that the thread has been revived, I thought I'd take the time to reply in a more thoughtful way to every point made by the OP:

If you record calories you have to record everything including drinks... everything!

I think in general I agree, but I think you can take it too far as well. Remember that the calorie numbers here are estimates. If I eat something that's labeled as 150 calories, it could be 150, or 135, or 170. So with that in mind, am I really going to take the time to record the 5 calorie crystal light drink packet I added to my water, or the piece of sugar free gum I chewed after lunch?

You can't cheat calories - just the way you can't cheat your bank balance, consume to much you will end up broke

Agreed. I'm pretty sure everyone knows this. You can't get around the laws of physics. That said, if weight loss were as simple as "eat less than you burn each day", there would not be an epidemic of obesity! It's the whole reason MFP exists, so we can get a better idea just how much we actually are consuming. Knowledge is power.

Portion control - You are probably eating too much... way too much - get some scales and weigh things. You know when you finish your cereal and theres a bit left over at the end .. that's a full portion.

Yes, portion control is important, we've all been taught this and generally know when it happens. It's not knowledge of this that's lacking, instead for many, it's the willpower to stop. Help people to learn to put the fork down and then you'd be on to something.

Diets are designed not to be sustainable - this keeps the company in business. You have to make lifetime changes

Depending on what you mean by "diets" this is actually in direct opposition to what you've said above about counting calories and portion control. After all, counting calories and portion control are "diet" strategies. Perhaps you mean "fad diets? (Which one could argue is just a word for diets that you disagree with.)

All fad diets are calorie control and don't fix your eating issues

Okay, now I'm really confused. Above you rant on the importance of calorie control and now you imply calorie control is not the answer? Which is it?

If you are losing weight on a fad diet - it is working for you because it is controling your calories- there isn't some macro magic bullet

Agreed. I've done many "fad diets" myself (low carb, low fat, juice fast, nutri-system, weight watchers, etc.), and the problem I've always had is what happens when I go back to eating normally? For me, restricting certain classes of food is not the answer. I'm finding that the better plan is to take it slow and steady. Make healthier choices, watch my overall caloric intake with MFP, and slowly add in more and more exercise to become healthier. I didn't get fat overnight, I shouldn't expect to lose the weight, or completely change my diet overnight either.

You can eat too little - It's a hard one to take in - but a biggie ... but dont use it as an excuse to eat too much.

I agree with this on principle. There are times when starvation mode can kick in and it can stall weight loss. I think this is mostly a problem for those with a relatively small % of body fat to lose and that are also trying to lose it too quickly. At the other end of the scale, the morbidly obese really don't have to worry much about this happening.

Piging out once a week as a treat - you will fail (calories)

Here's one I'll disagree with, depending on what you mean by "pigging out". Can I go crazy and consume 10,000 calories in one day and still lose weight? No. Can I have a cheat meal now and again and still lose weight? Yes. Let me give you an example. If MFP shows me 200 calories on average under all week, then on Saturday I go and eat a couple of slices of pizza and have a few beers with the guys, I'm not going to fail, because I'm actually still at/under goal for the week. There's nothing magical about daily (or weekly for that matter), calorie goals. As you said before, it's all about calories in vs. calories out. Another thing to consider here is that an occasional cheat meal can keep me from really binging later if I feel "deprived". Further, there is some indication that varying caloric intake can bust through plateaus. e.g. periodic fasts followed by a few feasts. Our bodies were designed to work this way, not to eat exactly the same number of calories every day, day in and day out.

My final word on this subject is actually the advice of one of the fittest people I know: One of my friends is a regular marathon and triathlon competitor that 6 years ago used to be 50 pounds overweight. He said having cheat meals once in a while helped him stay sane and without it, he never would have lost the weight to begin with. Since he's not only my friend, but my mentor and weight loss coach, I believe I'll follow his advice.

Fast food makes you want more food (sugar)

You don't need to cut down on fast food (Burgers, Pizzas, fried food) you should NEVER eat them - people did just fine for millions of years without burgers

Thats right - look at fast food ads on the TV like they are asking you to lick the urinal at your local bar

This seems counter-intuitive to me on a couple of points. Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating fast food, it generally has too many calories to fit in a weight loss plan. What confuses me is that the stuff I used to get at the fast food joints was not sugar laden, but fat laden. So if it's the sugar, you'd think all I need to do is avoid fruits and I'd be set, because they are generally tons higher in sugar than say, a hamburger. Also, as I mentioned before, eliminating certain categories of food never worked for me before and in my book avoiding food "A" in favor of food "B" is the definition of a "fad diet". You know, that thing that you raved before was so bad for us? Simply put, I subscribe to the "everything in moderation" idea. I don't think anything is inherently bad for me, but some things have to be a "once in a blue moon" thing, instead of an every day thing.

Since the 70s people are fatter - back in those days you couldn't buy much fast food or food outside working hours - think about it!

There are many factors that contribute to the obesity epidemic today. Blaming it all on fast food is akin to blaming your mother for the fact that you were a being a jerk when you posted this thread. You've got to take some personal responsibility for the situation yourself. In my book, it really goes back to 2 things. Ready access to an abundance of food (this was never the case historically until the modern age), and a significant decrease in activity level due to modernization. If we all had to do physical labor to live as was reality in the past, we would not be nearly as fat as we are.

When you see bad food, don't crave think to how sick and fatty you will feel after you have eaten it - I love battered fish and chips - never eat it because I think how greased up I will feel after

Seems like a good tip, I use a similar strategy, though I've found a way to add in the "battered fish and chips" to my overall plan.

It is NOTexpensive to eat healthy

This is disingenuous. Tell that to the welfare mother that HAS to buy the processed junk because that's what's approved. Just look at the cost of organic fruits and veg vs. non organic and tell me again how it's not more expensive to eat healthy? Not that I'm advocating eating junk, but one of the main reasons that obesity is more prevalent in poor populations instead of richer ones has little to with their activity level and tons to do with what food they can afford.

Make food yourself from base ingriedients. Ready meals .. I refer you back to how to think about fast food

Good plan if you know how to cook and have the time. One of the reasons many people are here is because they lack one or both of those. One strategy I use it to make my own "freezer meals" ahead of time: A marathon cooking session for a few hours on a weekend can yield surprising results. This way I can make portion controlled healthier alternatives that can be ready to eat in minutes if needed.

Muscle is more imortant than cardio - muscle eats fat for breakfast

I assume you mean strength training (not muscle), is more important than cardio for weight loss? No argument here, though both have their place for overall health.

You are not happy fat

I'm not even sure what this means, though if you are suggesting that someone can't be happy and fat at the same time, that's pretty presumptuous on your part. Maybe you were unable to be happy and fat at the same time, and for many, excess weight and depression are correlated. Still, that does not mean that someone can't be fat and happy. For most of us, the two just are not that closely intertwined.

Your metabolism is no slower than the next guys or gals

This seems to be a direct contradiction of your point earlier that strength training "eats fat", or as I assume you meant, boosts metabolism. Which is it? Either metabolism can be changed, or not. You can't have it both ways to suit your mood.

You never need to eat chocolate or crisps, etc.

Need to? No. No one also never needs to eat Lima beans or salads either, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't. As I mentioned, I prescribe to the everything in moderation ideal, not the "only eat these specific foods" concept.

There isn't a ripped muscly person underneath all your fat - muscle takes years to build, toned people aint lucky - they work their *kitten*' off

Actually, the largest percentage of obese people do have significantly more muscle as well as fat than the average person has. There are numerous studies that prove this if you care to look. All that extra muscle is needed to carry the extra weight around. When dieting, the trick would be to keep the muscle while only losing fat, which is virtually impossible long term. I do agree that toned people do work hard to maintain that build. Do remember however, that some people are gifted genetically and others aren't. For some it's just going to be easier than for others. That's life and we just have to accept it and move on.

Likewise if you are female do not be afraid of weight training - you are not going to turn into a hulk overnight

I agree 100%. Unless using steroids, a female will never get bulky muscles, no matter how hard she lifts. Female body builders should not be used as an example of what hard training will to to your body. Instead, take a look at fitness models that train hard, but just look toned and strong, while still maintaining a more feminine appearance.

If you are still a bit saggy you aint lost enough

This is a situation that depends on the circumstances. Morbidly obese people sometimes end up "looking saggy" as you put it even after losing a lot of weight because of excess skin. No amount of fat loss is going to change that. Some will recover in time, but it can take years, if at all.

BMI is rubbish for many justifiable technical reasons - but in your case it's probably spot on

I have no clue how how to interpret that one. Are you saying you don't like BMI as a guideline it, or that you do like it? How about posting some references about what you do or don't like?

Sex is awesome when you aint fat.

And this is news?

Healthy people don't eat much (compared to you)

This seems in contradiction you one of your first points that it's all about calories in vs. calories out. If so (and I agree with the calories in vs. calories out idea), then someone trying to maintain their weight that works out regularly (the definition I'm using of a healthy person), should be eating significantly more calories than I am now.

3 or 4 hours exercise a week makes a massive difference - Anyone can spare 3 or 4 hours a week

Yes, no one's denying that exercise is important, but much as some of your other comments alluded to, weight loss is won or lost at the dinner table, not the gym. Two scenarios to prove the point: Individual one does no exercise, but eats at a deficit. This person will still lose weight. Individual two exercises 8-10 hours a week, but consumes 5000 to 6000 cals a day. This person will gain weight. Obviously both are extreme examples. The better idea is to both eat at a deficit, and work out regularly. A simpler way to put this: Diet to lose weight, exercise to be healthy.

Fat people encourage people to be fat. Correct weight people are good to be around

A gross oversimplification and poor advise overall, because "correct weight" people as you put it aren't always encouraging. to the obese. Simply put, hang around people that support you, regardless of their weight. Don't hang around people that want to: a:) put you down for being fat (kinda like the original poster), or b:) encourage you to stay fat.

Food does not make you happy or cure all your problems. Stop whining, we all have problems, sort out your problems directly - not with food

Good advice. I'd add that people that are further on their journey to wellness such as the OP should also not whine about people that still struggle with weight loss issues and need our help and sympathy. Everyone is at a different place on this journey and some struggle with deeper issues that the OP may never have dealt with.

If you have a positive relationship with food and work on it a lot you aren't obsessed - trust me to be fat, that is obsession

I agree with the positive relationship to an extent, but in general I'd rather not be overly obsessed with every bit of food that goes in my mouth either. I see this like a pendulum that can swing too far either way. Ask an anorexic or bulimic what it's like to be at that end of things. It sucks too.

Best of luck to all on their journey.

chrishgt4

It's quite interesting that of the negative posts, around half are just arbitrarily calling the OP a jerk for his tone (which I think ultimately reflects on those commenters for reading it that way. It was just a list and so not fluffed out with pretty words to make the sensitive amongst us feel better).

The other half seemed to disagree because they had misinterpreted the OP's point or were taking certain things totally literally.

Just to make a few points that seem to have been repeatedly misunderstood: (I am aware the OP has addressed some of these)

The section regarding diets - diet should refer to the whole gambit of what one eats. However, nowadays it refers to a set of rules given that you have to stick by. Calorie counting is not a 'diet'. It is a method for making you aware of what you eat and to enable you to make your own informed choices.

Anything that poses itself as a diet where you cut this out or cut that out, do this, do that...it is a calorie controlled diet in disguise. eg. Atkins has you cut out carbs. Well most food that has a high proportion of calories compared to how full it will make you tend to be high in carbs (pizza, burgers, doughnuts, etc).

"Fast food makes you want more (sugar)" - that is not that sugar makes you want more - it is that fast food makes you crave sugar.

Pigging out once a week refers to the point that if you are having to force yourself so hard not to eat, that you need that release to eat loads, then your mindset still needs some work and you will struggle until you sort that. Also, I think it is in the sense that people (I know people like this) tend to believe they have eaten well all week and so can have that curry with starter and sides and a few beers and pudding on the weekend. Not realising that not only have they just negated and deficit, but they have actually swung the balance the other way.

I think people are reading too much into the line about people doing fine without burgers for millions of years; saying that burgers can be healthy. Well this is true - but if you have to argue the minutiae of a point then your argument is lacking. 'Burgers' is meant to represent junk food in general.

Some people commenting that the OP is being too harsh if they deny themselves the fish and chips that they crave - totally missing the point. The point is that the OP doesn't think how nice they taste, but instead the fact that afterwards his mouth will feel full of grease. Therefore there is no denial, it is just food he doesn't want.

Healthy food - people countering with the prices of organic food. Organic isn't the only way to go healthy (in fact there are arguments that organic might actually be less healthy but that is for another time). I buy massive 200g chicken breasts for £1.10 each from my local farm shop. They aren't pumped with water or anything else and they work out at about 3 times the value of my local supermarket. Shop around people. I love the post about growing your own veg - I know you can't get cheaper than free!

Lumping arguments about weights/cardio/metabolism into one... Metabolisms are virtually the same person to person. Some people have illness, we all know this, but most people don't. Sure they are different person to person - but not by the sort of degree that people like to pretend. As you get more muscle, your body needs more energy to keep going, therefore you have to eat more. These are the things that change your metabolism in the 99%, not unlucky genes. Doing cardio is great for improving your cardio and no doubting it helps towards fat loss, but weights is much better for fat loss and also body shaping. No doubt that some people won't want the body that weights will give them, and that's fine, but I think people aren't aware of what lifting heavy weights is capable of in terms or body re-composition and shaping.

"If you are still a bit saggy you aint lost enough" - This is one of the unfortunate side effects of having been fat. Your skin is now stretched and therefore looser, so it takes less weight of fat to drag it down and make it look droopy. This means that you will have to be at a lower fat %age than that of someone who has never been fat in order to get rid of that saggy skin. But rest assured that it will go away, it just takes time and hard work.

BMI gets a hard rap. Now we all know that it is crap. There are people who are clearly in shape that are classified as unhealthy by BMI standards and it doesn't test general health. However, for most of the population it is correct. The point is - if you are the sort of person that is an anomaly then you probably don't need to be worrying about BMI. Unless you are physically fit BMI is probably a good reference.

Everyone has a story about their skinny friend who eats whatever they wants and never gains a pound. Well the fact is they don't eat as much as you think. I know this because I used to be that skinny guy. Everyone remembered the times I had a cheeseburger and chips as a starter to my 12" pizza. No one knew about the evenings I would go without a meal or even the entire weekends with only a couple of slices of toast. When I started logging years ago - guess what, sub 2000 cals a day average.

One last thing - I'm pretty sure when he said "feel free to add" he was referring to points to the list, not fishing for friend requests .

placebomonkey

I agree with most of these.

However, muscle doesn't burn that many calories at rest, and cardio burns far more calories than strength training or a muscled person resting.

Also, metabolisms have a significant and thus far unaccounted for variance. Organs account for most of RMR, and non-organ lean mass and fat mass account for another small chunk, but there is a good bit of variance remaining that isn't explained yet.

This is why you are on my friends list

placebomonkey

It's quite interesting that of the negative posts, around half are just arbitrarily calling the OP a jerk for his tone (which I think ultimately reflects on those commenters for reading it that way. It was just a list and so not fluffed out with pretty words to make the sensitive amongst us feel better).

The other half seemed to disagree because they had misinterpreted the OP's point or were taking certain things totally literally.

Just to make a few points that seem to have been repeatedly misunderstood: (I am aware the OP has addressed some of these)

The section regarding diets - diet should refer to the whole gambit of what one eats. However, nowadays it refers to a set of rules given that you have to stick by. Calorie counting is not a 'diet'. It is a method for making you aware of what you eat and to enable you to make your own informed choices.

Anything that poses itself as a diet where you cut this out or cut that out, do this, do that...it is a calorie controlled diet in disguise. eg. Atkins has you cut out carbs. Well most food that has a high proportion of calories compared to how full it will make you tend to be high in carbs (pizza, burgers, doughnuts, etc).

"Fast food makes you want more (sugar)" - that is not that sugar makes you want more - it is that fast food makes you crave sugar.

Pigging out once a week refers to the point that if you are having to force yourself so hard not to eat, that you need that release to eat loads, then your mindset still needs some work and you will struggle until you sort that. Also, I think it is in the sense that people (I know people like this) tend to believe they have eaten well all week and so can have that curry with starter and sides and a few beers and pudding on the weekend. Not realising that not only have they just negated and deficit, but they have actually swung the balance the other way.

I think people are reading too much into the line about people doing fine without burgers for millions of years; saying that burgers can be healthy. Well this is true - but if you have to argue the minutiae of a point then your argument is lacking. 'Burgers' is meant to represent junk food in general.

Some people commenting that the OP is being too harsh if they deny themselves the fish and chips that they crave - totally missing the point. The point is that the OP doesn't think how nice they taste, but instead the fact that afterwards his mouth will feel full of grease. Therefore there is no denial, it is just food he doesn't want.

Healthy food - people countering with the prices of organic food. Organic isn't the only way to go healthy (in fact there are arguments that organic might actually be less healthy but that is for another time). I buy massive 200g chicken breasts for £1.10 each from my local farm shop. They aren't pumped with water or anything else and they work out at about 3 times the value of my local supermarket. Shop around people. I love the post about growing your own veg - I know you can't get cheaper than free!

Lumping arguments about weights/cardio/metabolism into one... Metabolisms are virtually the same person to person. Some people have illness, we all know this, but most people don't. Sure they are different person to person - but not by the sort of degree that people like to pretend. As you get more muscle, your body needs more energy to keep going, therefore you have to eat more. These are the things that change your metabolism in the 99%, not unlucky genes. Doing cardio is great for improving your cardio and no doubting it helps towards fat loss, but weights is much better for fat loss and also body shaping. No doubt that some people won't want the body that weights will give them, and that's fine, but I think people aren't aware of what lifting heavy weights is capable of in terms or body re-composition and shaping.

"If you are still a bit saggy you aint lost enough" - This is one of the unfortunate side effects of having been fat. Your skin is now stretched and therefore looser, so it takes less weight of fat to drag it down and make it look droopy. This means that you will have to be at a lower fat %age than that of someone who has never been fat in order to get rid of that saggy skin. But rest assured that it will go away, it just takes time and hard work.

BMI gets a hard rap. Now we all know that it is crap. There are people who are clearly in shape that are classified as unhealthy by BMI standards and it doesn't test general health. However, for most of the population it is correct. The point is - if you are the sort of person that is an anomaly then you probably don't need to be worrying about BMI. Unless you are physically fit BMI is probably a good reference.

Everyone has a story about their skinny friend who eats whatever they wants and never gains a pound. Well the fact is they don't eat as much as you think. I know this because I used to be that skinny guy. Everyone remembered the times I had a cheeseburger and chips as a starter to my 12" pizza. No one knew about the evenings I would go without a meal or even the entire weekends with only a couple of slices of toast. When I started logging years ago - guess what, sub 2000 cals a day average.

One last thing - I'm pretty sure when he said "feel free to add" he was referring to points to the list, not fishing for friend requests .

Great post