calories in calories out true or not

according to science, it is actually just calories in/calories out.

obviously, if you want nutrition and health as part of the equation, you have to look at every aspect of what you are eating.

It IS calories in calories out, but if you put the RIGHT calories in, then you will be able to keep that weight off. If you just lose the weight because of the deficit and don't really change WHAT you are eating, then as soon as you go off the diet, you will pile the weight right back on. So the calorie deficit is important, but make sure that you are eating the right foods and getting proper nutrients. If you do, you will be so much more fit and healthy and thin than the person on the twinkie diet. And so much happier, too.

...have been avoiding protein cause i want my carbs instead...

Granted, I love my carbs too, but I sure as hell wouldn't skip out on steak, chicken, pork, turkey, fish or any meat to have a piece of bread instead. That's just me though.

I think the important thing to keep in mind is that weight loss doesn't always equal health. Yes, if you eat 1200 calories worth of twinkies a day and that's it, you would probably have a deficit large enough to loose weight, but you wouldn't be getting enough protein to build muscle, you probably wouldn't be getting any vitamins at all, and the sugar spike you get at every meal would probably give you diabetes regardless of what the scale says is healthy. The exact same thing would happen if all you ate was celery all day - no sugar spike, but no protein, not enough carbs to sustain energy for any long period of time. Once again, you'd loose weight, but your body would be deteriorating.

So yes, if all you care about is weight loss, the twinkie diet would probably do it, but if you actually care about your body and your health, getting a balanced diet is the way to go. I've never even had a twinkie but I can imagine eating nothing but snack cakes would make you feel sluggish (and probably really constipated).

[Your body will start reacting terribly as well, because of the lack of nutrients. Your hair is going to lose it's shine, your skin is going to look horrible, your breath will eventually start to reek no matter how much you brush your teeth.....]

I will admit to having some very poor dietary habits, I did a banasa split diet when I was about 16 (eatting disorder as well). But in order for me to get said banana split it was a 4 mile round trip run, both directions. Then I did the grapefruit diet, (did I say I at 5'3" weight 85 lbs soaking wet?( I got a nice ulcer from that one. Now I am 48, I have been avg. 600 to 800 calories a day, Until MFP.
If you look up annorexia, it tells you someone with this ailment tends to eat right between, those numbers.

However; I dont lose weight if I stay in those numbers, I actually gain. All the nah sayers about starvation mode, can leave now. It is because of starvation mode I gained so much weight. I try to keep them now between 1200 min. and 1400 flexbile. If I can continue to reat the correct calories, then I loose the weight. You should also know I eat lots for fruits and veggies. Can not wait for the farmers market to come.

So yes it is calories in calories out, IF YOU ARE EATTING ENOUGH TO START. I had recently doubled my protien, thinking this will help my knee heal.

Good luck, and weigh to go.

then why doesn't it work for some people...

Because they are dishonest or not accurately measuring calorie intake or expenditure.

There was actually a very good post by a person on the forums a few days ago regarding the difference of how protein calories and carb calories are utilized in the body and thus result in a net difference in over all energy intake. He had a great article he posted that I wish I could link to, but I can not seem to find it. I guess I am getting old and can not remember things very well anymore. However, Lyle McDonald's article is good and explains it well so I will post that instead:

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/is-a-calorie-a-calorie.html

The question basically boils down to this: Is eating 400 calories of protein the same as eating 400 calories of carbs? The simple answer is NO because it takes the body more energy to break down protein (and fat) than it does carbs.

SO while they may have the same amount of energy "coming into the body" they are not metabolized the same way once in the digestive system and so their ending net energy is over all different after digestion.

Fat storage from protein intake is much more difficult than carb intake because of the amount of energy required to digest protein. It puts the whole discussion in perspective when you ask, do I want to consume 400 calories of Twinkies, Ding-Dongs or what ever sugar laced carb or do I want to consume 400 calories of a steak.? Yes the choice is yours and you should be in an energy deficit but in the end eating carbs is going to cause more fat storage issues than protein ever will.

Also protein with adequate fat and fiber satisfies hunger and controls blood sugar spikes (the reason most people have cravings and hunger cue issues) For many people choosing a diet high in protein and fiber gives them more control over their eating. Very important to STAYING IN a calorie deficit

YES losing weight is done by an energy deficit. But you do choose how to make that energy deficit, and there are tricks to making it easier to maintain. For me I like to exercise so I can enjoy the foods I like, many of which are carb based. But as a rule I eat 3:2 protein to carbs because I know that it take more energy to digest protein and it satisfies me more than just eating a lot carbs alone...helping to ensure I don't eat more later.

then why doesn't it work for some people...

Some have hormonal issues, some are carb sensitive, sodium sensitive. If we're just speaking of general population without any health or hormone issues, then it's calorie in/calories out as the norm.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

I'll just say from my personal experience.... take it or leave it.

I have been pretty much overweight since I was... oh... 12 years old. When I was 17, my dad started truck driving, and the rest of us at home didn't have transportation (other than our 2 feet).

Okay, my mother never cooked, I was only taught a little by my grandmother when I was younger, so I didn't cook, and well... the other person at home... was too lazy...

So, pretty much everyday, we went to the grocery store and bought things that you can pop in the oven or microwave. OCCASIONALLY we would get stuff for things like nachos and tacos, that sort of thing...

The route to took to the store form our home was about a mile there and back. Doesn't sound much until you consider the hills that are involved. I live in Missouri, we have LOTS of hills. Hills are good for traveling both up and down.

We'd also go to Walmart, and (I want a gag a little as I type the next place..) McDonald's... Yeah, I used to enjoy eating at McDonald's.

Needless to say, I didn't have a proper diet. But guess what...

In one Summer, I lost 40lbs. I went from 150lbs to 110lbs!!!

Another thing though, is we really only ate ONE "real" meal once a day, but we snacked on bad foods the whole day (my mother wasn't a good role model, obviously). I also was drinking "Diet Lipton Lemon Iced Tea" then too. That was REALLY good, and "at the time" was better than soda.

There you have it... IF you are active enough, yes, you can pretty much eat anything you want and lose weight. But perhaps ages must factor in...

My Dad when was a teenager could eat a large Godfather's pizza with a 2 liter of soda (not diet), plus eat other things when he went home, and never gain an ounce. But he worked a lot, and he weight trained...

Calories in/Calories out. Yes it works. BUT, there are multiple variables at play that affect weight loss including accuracy of measurements (most people get a little heavy handed and generous with measurements), and endogenous hormones in the body ie INSULIN, growth factors, testosterone, estrogen, THYROID HORMONE, etc. ALL of these play a critical role in weight maintenance. An imbalance in one or more of these factors can drastically alter any desired results. So yes, there is more to it.

Great Question....

I like this answer best. There is no simple answer. We are all designed different. There are basic rules but what works for one person will not work for everyone. All the variables must be know before someone could answer your question. Be smart. Eat healthy. Buy a scale and measure your food correctly. He is right. Most people do not know measure their food correctly. Give it a fair chance before giving up and just eating twinkles ......jk. I know that was just an example.

It's a nice theory but in terms of weight loss, those things don't matter too much. In the worst case scenerio, someone has a suppressed metabolism. Lets says a TDEE calculator tells them their TDEE is 2,500, but it's really 2,000 calories. They still have to eat under their TDEE to lose body fat, regardless of hormonal circumstances. Energy can't be created or destroyed.

....O your THAT guy.

When I was in high school, I had a friend who would did an 'ice cream diet'!!!

It consisted of only eating paddle pop ice cream bars, a chocolate ice cream on a stick, at about 100 calories per bar.

She would eat up to 10 per day, and only be consuming around 1000 calories.

She lost weight!

Not the healthiest option by any means, but low intake of calories!

You need to have protein, your body can't manufacture that. You need protein for the amino acids to make well, new cells, enzymes and all those important things. You also need vitamins/minerals these things go into making cells/enzymes - that well keep you going as well as making the enzymes that make the whole digestion, metabolising and cellular respiration tick along nicely.

The twinkie diet bloke - if you read the whole thing, was having a protein shake, and a vitamin pill every day.

We are just biological machines, we need fuel we can burn - luckily that is a wide range of things - but we also need the stuff to keep our engines functional. Putting petrol in a car with no oil or transmission fluid is not going to get you far up the street to actually burn the fuel.

It really makes my brain hurt, when people still think the where what comes from magically makes a difference.

Way back when in science, they thought "organic" things had a special "life force" that you couldn't just replicate (Vitalism). This was disproved by the bloke (Wöhler) who synthesised urea with Silver Cyanate and Ammonium Chloride - that was back in the early 1800s.

What goes in to make the blocks we are built from is not important, just that all the stuff does. You can happily get concentrated forms of all this stuff, put together (still most often from plant extractions because it is cheaper that way) by a bunch of people in white coats in a lab (well, mass produced in a factory doing the same thing on a larger scale) or you can try and eat a varied enough diet of fruit and vegetables, nuts, meat, seeds etc. which have very minute amounts of the important stuff and hope you manage to get enough of each. Even if you opt for the latter method, chances are you may be missing some things, and taking a vitamin pill provided you have functional liver/kidneys is not going to hurt you, you will simply pee out all the extra stuff. It's easy to have a good idea when you are enough of the micro-nutrients as people seem to call them, after a vitamin pill your pee will have a different colour/smell than usual.

Assuming you aren't consuming more fuel (energy) than you actually need per day, excess protein can and will be turned into energy, so will fat. Fat/oil is needed for among other things to a lesser degree, building cell walls (bi-lipid layer) but if you are trying to lose weight you probably have some spares of this hanging around as well - excess fat will get turned into energy. Carbs however complex are pretty much just for fuel, and historically (like before we got into agriculture and grinding up grains with rocks) relatively difficult to come across. From a biological point of view that's why we love them, to get sugars the fairly simple types, you'd be picking a zillion berries, sucking on flowers and fighting off bees to try and get their honey.

Junk food isn't just rubbish, it is highly concentrated, and far more so than most modern lifestyles require. It isn't a huge battle to get in the car and head through the drive through and get a single meal that contains all the energy you'll probably need for the day. That's fine if you take your vitamin pill, maybe some fibre and protein supplements and that's all you have. That's where portions come in - since you don't have to track and animal for miles over rough terrain and kill it with your bare hands to get that same amount of energy, it is as easy as pie(sweet or savoury) to get well more fuel that you need.

Healthy is getting enough of all the different fuels you need and not an excess of any of them. Too much salt, vitamins or minerals will work your insides harder to get rid of them so they don't build up and poison you - too much energy will make you chunky. It's ok to have some spares, but not more than you were going to burn in the next 6 months if all the food vanished.

What I have found amusing since I have lost weight is people comment I look healthy as a euphemism I suspect, as some ask me if I have been ill to have dropped weight. Seems odd that a side effect of sickness (weight loss) would be something that would be considered healthier. Biologically, our bodies never want to lose weight, our bodies expect food might stop anytime, best to stock up while you can!

Once upon a time (though still in some places where food is scarce) being bigger was a sign of success, the ability to get more than enough food. In the modern first world where food is so freely available it is seen as a sign of indulgence and laziness.

then why doesn't it work for some people...

Because the numbers they provide are not accurate. I am not saying they are all lying; they are often providing numbers they really believe are correct. And if the wrong number is calories burned, sometimes (very rarely) that is something beyond their control that they are unaware of. There are also a few people who are way too impatient and are complaining about water weight (start their diet the day after a binge that included alcohol and start with a weight from they were dehydrated, for example). And there are a few trolls that like to stir up long discussions.

But there is an elephant in the room. Most of them are not being entirely honest and they know it.