21 day 5000 calorie challenge: debunking the calorie myth?
Replies
-
So if you're saying eating a large amount of calories in healthy clean food won't make you put on weight, then how does healthy weight gain happen? You know for people who are underweight and want to put on some flesh in a healthy way?
By weight lifting
Here is my article on this topic
http://cdnutritionandfitness.com/clean-vs-dirty-bulking/0 -
Good for this guy. Testing his argument out on his own body.0
-
bump0
-
Ok let's see here guys...
I'm 6'4, 194. I have calculated my BMR from the Harris-Benedict equation and applied the most rigorous category of "Very Heavy Exercise", resulting in a daily calorie expenditure of 3,876.
I will now eat 12,000 calories per day.
I should gain 16 pounds per week. But for some reason I don't, and I won 22 Olympic medals. So obviously eating fried eggs, pancakes with syrup, pasta, ham sandwiches with mayo, and entire pepperoni pizzas while ignoring calories is the way to go.0 -
Very interesting I notice that he is eating a lot of coconut oil and also walnuts both of these foods increase metabolism so could in theory prevent him form gaining weight. If he has a high metabolism he may well be able to eat 5000cals a day and not put on weight. Where as me who has been blessed with a slow metabolism would get fat just looking at his menu. a case in point is this lady and she doesn't eat clean.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/woman/4660129/Ive-had-five-kids-eat-5000-calories-of-junk-food-a-day-and-size-6.html
Certain foods increase metabolism? Do you have a list of these amazing super foods?0 -
Arguing against the first law of thermodynamics?
Ambitious to put it nicely.
WHy to folks assume the human body is nothing more than a furnace?
Not the law of furnaces, you goof. Thermodynamics. It says you can't make something from nothing. It doesn't rule out not gaining fat because certain foods don't get stored, but it DOES say you can't make fat without a calorie surplus.The first law of thermodynamics is a version of the law of conservation of energy, adapted for thermodynamic systems. The internal energy of an isolated system is constant and energy can be transformed from one form to another, but cannot be created or destroyed. The first law is often formulated by stating that the change in the internal energy of a closed system is equal to the amount of heat supplied to the system, minus the amount of work done by the system on its surroundings.
Are we back to the argument that excess protein calories are magically eliminated from the body again (and only excess carb and fat calories can be stored as fat)?0 -
Idk what his maintenance calories are but there's a chance he could maintain. One of my gym bros is a bodybuilder and >200lbs with 5% body fat and he told me he maintains at 4,000 calories. If this dude upped his activity/exercise he could potentially maintain on 5,000. I just don't understand why anyone would want to eat that much.Arguing against the first law of thermodynamics?
Ambitious to put it nicely.
OK, so he proves that he can burn 5000kcal a day. good for him.
But as I understand he is trying to disprove the "Calorie Myth" and the Calories in = Calories Out "Theory". See the original Post.
These are no myths or theories its a law of physics.
His experiment is therefor not based in Science which makes it objectively worthless.
It is painfully obvious you, and most here, did not bother to go to the link and read. Try it, you'll like it.
Oh, i read it, had a good laugh, and felt a bit sorry for the people he sold his BS to.
I too read it, chatted to him on twitter and concluded that his"experiment" is flawed and biased from the start.
Vanity experiment proves nothing except to people who know nothing about science. :noway:0 -
I've struggled to lose weight for some time. I'm in the gym doing weight training and cardio 5 days a week. I'm 48 so my metabolism is not what is used to be. A co-worker who is training to be in a fitness competition mentioned MFP and told me to give it a try. Over the past week I cut out processed food, starches and alcohol in addition to using MFP to watch my overall carbs, sugar and calories. I take in about 1700 calories a day and only eat fresh food and a protein shake after working out. By no means am I starving. In one week I went from 181 to 177 and did not increase my exercise. The food prep takes a lot of planning but it seems to be working.
I can cut out the processed food. ..........but, starches and alcohol too??!! :huh:
Cmon, you gotta have something to enjoy.
:drinker:0 -
I too read it, chatted to him on twitter and concluded that his"experiment" is flawed and biased from the start.
Vanity experiment proves nothing except to people who know nothing about science. :noway:
Flawed in what way? Did he use the wrong measure to calculate is calorie expenditure? Perhaps he used the wrong measure to calculate his calorie intake? Tell us how it is flawed, just saying so does not make it so.
Back to science, how about the science that told us, Stars cannot be bigger than 150 solar masses? The point is, scientific "facts" change all the time. To conclude that the law of thermodynamics is the only law governing caloric expenditure, and that "you" have all the answers is foolish. Anyone that would make a blanket statement such as you have and others here have is,,,,, well any thinking person would know you are full of the BS that was claimed by another poster.0 -
It doesn't rule out not gaining fat because certain foods don't get stored,
Well according to a few here it does0 -
Idk what his maintenance calories are but there's a chance he could maintain. One of my gym bros is a bodybuilder and >200lbs with 5% body fat and he told me he maintains at 4,000 calories. If this dude upped his activity/exercise he could potentially maintain on 5,000. I just don't understand why anyone would want to eat that much.Arguing against the first law of thermodynamics?
Ambitious to put it nicely.
OK, so he proves that he can burn 5000kcal a day. good for him.
But as I understand he is trying to disprove the "Calorie Myth" and the Calories in = Calories Out "Theory". See the original Post.
These are no myths or theories its a law of physics.
His experiment is therefor not based in Science which makes it objectively worthless.
It is painfully obvious you, and most here, did not bother to go to the link and read. Try it, you'll like it.
Oh, i read it, had a good laugh, and felt a bit sorry for the people he sold his BS to.
If you had read it, you would know by his calculations he is not burning 5000 cals a day. Again try reading it's fun, to know what you are talking about.0 -
bump0
-
I've struggled to lose weight for some time. I'm in the gym doing weight training and cardio 5 days a week. I'm 48 so my metabolism is not what is used to be. A co-worker who is training to be in a fitness competition mentioned MFP and told me to give it a try. Over the past week I cut out processed food, starches and alcohol in addition to using MFP to watch my overall carbs, sugar and calories. I take in about 1700 calories a day and only eat fresh food and a protein shake after working out. By no means am I starving. In one week I went from 181 to 177 and did not increase my exercise. The food prep takes a lot of planning but it seems to be working.
I can cut out the processed food. ..........but, starches and alcohol too??!! :huh:
Cmon, you gotta have something to enjoy.
:drinker:
I enjoy being fit much more than drinking.0 -
I think people often forget the vegan fatties out there.
They're out there.
Agree. I know a girl who is fanatically vegan and she is heavy.0 -
I've struggled to lose weight for some time. I'm in the gym doing weight training and cardio 5 days a week. I'm 48 so my metabolism is not what is used to be. A co-worker who is training to be in a fitness competition mentioned MFP and told me to give it a try. Over the past week I cut out processed food, starches and alcohol in addition to using MFP to watch my overall carbs, sugar and calories. I take in about 1700 calories a day and only eat fresh food and a protein shake after working out. By no means am I starving. In one week I went from 181 to 177 and did not increase my exercise. The food prep takes a lot of planning but it seems to be working.
I can cut out the processed food. ..........but, starches and alcohol too??!! :huh:
Cmon, you gotta have something to enjoy.
:drinker:
I enjoy being fit much more than drinking.
Funny. I'm able to do both.0 -
Shrug if he wants think I am happy eating well and exercising why over complicate it0
-
I was fine on the Atkins diet and doing really well until I started counting calories.(Lost 26KG) Then I started putting the weight on again. Put on 3kg. Tomorrow I go back to the Atkins diet. I am really curiou:laugh: s to see what is the outcome of the experiment.0
-
It doesn't rule out not gaining fat because certain foods don't get stored,
Well according to a few here it does
what are these magical foods you speak of?0 -
I've seen plenty of people here arguing that calories don't matter, it's the kinds of food you eat.
I just never see any of them with a success thread.
I just see them keep arguing the point over and over while their ticker stays the same.0 -
Idk what his maintenance calories are but there's a chance he could maintain. One of my gym bros is a bodybuilder and >200lbs with 5% body fat and he told me he maintains at 4,000 calories. If this dude upped his activity/exercise he could potentially maintain on 5,000. I just don't understand why anyone would want to eat that much.Arguing against the first law of thermodynamics?
Ambitious to put it nicely.
OK, so he proves that he can burn 5000kcal a day. good for him.
But as I understand he is trying to disprove the "Calorie Myth" and the Calories in = Calories Out "Theory". See the original Post.
These are no myths or theories its a law of physics.
His experiment is therefor not based in Science which makes it objectively worthless.
It is painfully obvious you, and most here, did not bother to go to the link and read. Try it, you'll like it.
Oh, i read it, had a good laugh, and felt a bit sorry for the people he sold his BS to.
If you had read it, you would know by his calculations he is not burning 5000 cals a day. Again try reading it's fun, to know what you are talking about.
Again. I've read it. He's implying that he lost weight despite a caloric surplus due to a low carb diet or ketosis.
so he's a magician making things disappear. the food he's eating and money out of people's pockets.
this is an advertisement and not an experiment and therefor not to be taken seriously.0 -
Calories in vs. calories out isn't a myth. However there are complications because we don't always get the same number of calories from the same food, or use calories with the same efficiency as the hypothetical model suggests.
Bingo.
I used to argue the toss on MFP about calories and how there are many factors that mean counting is flawed. The body isn't just a furnace! Look at the hormones! Think about the digestive system! We haven't always counted calories, why should we now? Homeostasis ferchissakes! The Smarter Fracking Science Of Slim! Zoe Harcombe, she is on the money!
I did the low carb thang, I read Taubes, I read Wheat Belly, I went keto, I 'ate clean', I went Paleoish, I chugged coconut oil.
I saw macros, I focussed on the ratios. I optimised my fat burning beast.
Recently I have made great strides.
I made some subtle adjustments.
I am eating everything, but less of it, and exercising more.
Whodathunk that?
There are no shortcuts, for most people sloth and overconsumption got them fat and hard fracking work and a bit less grub will get them back on track. For most people, there are obviously metabolic exceptions, medical issues, etc.0 -
Idk what his maintenance calories are but there's a chance he could maintain. One of my gym bros is a bodybuilder and >200lbs with 5% body fat and he told me he maintains at 4,000 calories. If this dude upped his activity/exercise he could potentially maintain on 5,000. I just don't understand why anyone would want to eat that much.Arguing against the first law of thermodynamics?
Ambitious to put it nicely.
OK, so he proves that he can burn 5000kcal a day. good for him.
But as I understand he is trying to disprove the "Calorie Myth" and the Calories in = Calories Out "Theory". See the original Post.
These are no myths or theories its a law of physics.
His experiment is therefor not based in Science which makes it objectively worthless.
It is painfully obvious you, and most here, did not bother to go to the link and read. Try it, you'll like it.
Oh, i read it, had a good laugh, and felt a bit sorry for the people he sold his BS to.
If you had read it, you would know by his calculations he is not burning 5000 cals a day. Again try reading it's fun, to know what you are talking about.
Again. I've read it. He's implying that he lost weight despite a caloric surplus due to a low carb diet or ketosis.
so he's a magician making things disappear. the food he's eating and money out of people's pockets.
this is an advertisement and not an experiment and therefor not to be taken seriously.
Then don't take it seriously, but again saying it's so, or not so, does not make it be. You can say it's magic, and that he is lying, he may be for all I know, but for anyone to take YOU serious maybe you should try providing a reason he is wrong, tell us where his mistake is. All this is a bit premature, until his 21 day trial is up we really don't know if he will gain, lose or stay the same.0 -
It doesn't rule out not gaining fat because certain foods don't get stored,
Well according to a few here it does
what are these magical foods you speak of?
nothing magical about corn syrup being easier to digest than broccoli0 -
maybe you should try providing a reason he is wrong
remember the law of thermodynamics?
but i don't have to prove anything when he's the one going against proven and acknowledged scientific facts.0 -
Yeah, like he's the first person ever to try eating well over his maintenance level "clean".
The world of bodybuilding must be shrouded in mystery to the experimenter.
Monster intakes of "clean" foods is absolutely nothing new. Been tried lots and lots of times. The fat gain while bulking is no difference whether you eat clean or not. Though 5K "clean" calories will prompt some hefty throne time.0 -
It doesn't rule out not gaining fat because certain foods don't get stored,
Well according to a few here it does
what are these magical foods you speak of?
nothing magical about corn syrup being easier to digest than broccoli
So is the argument that broccoli (compared to corn syrup) results in fewer net calories available to the body because 1) the calories that are required to break it down for use, or 2) it is passed without all of the calories having been extracted? Or some third possibility I haven't considered?0 -
Yeah, like he's the first person ever to try eating well over his maintenance level "clean".
The world of bodybuilding must be shrouded in mystery to the experimenter.
Monster intakes of "clean" foods is absolutely nothing new. Been tried lots and lots of times. The fat gain while bulking is no difference whether you eat clean or not. Though 5K "clean" calories will prompt some hefty throne time.
LOL so true. Maybe that is how he plans to keep from gaining.0 -
Just asked him if he was eating at this ratio of macros before the challenge - it is a good point that if he wasn't then he should drop some water weigh which will alter the results.
Also 21 days isn't long enough - I would have said a minimum of 6 weeks as that is how long it take the body (generally) to adjust to a change in diet.
I was right - his regular macros were 30 carbs 40 fat 30 protein - so he has actually changed more than one variable. This could well account for the initial weight loss.
Plus weight gain and loss is not linear.
This is a vanity experiment with no real basis in science.
Thirty percent carbs? Carbs hold the most water in the body and is what pro boxers and wrestlers cut out before weight-in so his results would be skewed.0 -
I've seen plenty of people here arguing that calories don't matter, it's the kinds of food you eat.
I just never see any of them with a success thread.
I just see them keep arguing the point over and over while their ticker stays the same.
LOL. So this!!!
cracked me up. cuz it is so true0 -
Arguing against the first law of thermodynamics?
Ambitious to put it nicely.
It's a little more complicated than that. What the research that I've been reading seems to show is that both count. Calories count, but not all calories are equal. The law of themodynamics would work perfectly for the calories-in-calories-out thoeyr except that they're finding our bodies aren't calorimeters. They burn some foods more completely than others, and it takes more "effort" to burn some calories than others. Also glycemic index and glycemic load play a role. We're complicated little machines.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304458604577490943279845790.html
I'm not advocating one way or another way. Just saying the research indicates that type of calories does count, though it's not the be-all-end-all.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions