calories in calories out...are you sure?
Options
Replies
-
For those who aren't totally sold on the calories-in/calories-out idea of weight loss, there is an interesting read by Gary Taubes called Why We Get Fat. He makes a very interesting case for how our bodies work and why calories-in/calories-out is a misapplication of the laws of physics. Basically the idea is that carbs cause and insulin response, which leads to other hormonal changes which cause our bodies to store the calories we take in as fat, rather than to leave them in our system for us to use up. As a result, we are more hungry, more lethargic, and more fat. Cutting carbs limits the insulin response so that the calories we put in our bodies are efficiently used as fuel and not prematurely stored away as fat.
I know I could not wrap my mind around weight loss not being just an issue of in vs out, and this book has helped me to see that there is a lot more at play than that. This is why some people can eat whatever they want and stay lean, and others rarely indulge and have trouble dropping pounds. I trule believe if it was just as simple as eating less than you burn, we would not have the huge obesity problem that we have.
Anyway, just my 2 cents. The more I learn about nutrition the more I recognize just how little any of us (the experts included!) truly understand about the way our bodies work.0 -
For those who aren't totally sold on the calories-in/calories-out idea of weight loss, there is an interesting read by Gary Taubes called Why We Get Fat. He makes a very interesting case for how our bodies work and why calories-in/calories-out is a misapplication of the laws of physics. Basically the idea is that carbs cause and insulin response, which leads to other hormonal changes which cause our bodies to store the calories we take in as fat, rather than to leave them in our system for us to use up. As a result, we are more hungry, more lethargic, and more fat. Cutting carbs limits the insulin response so that the calories we put in our bodies are efficiently used as fuel and not prematurely stored away as fat.
I know I could not wrap my mind around weight loss not being just an issue of in vs out, and this book has helped me to see that there is a lot more at play than that. This is why some people can eat whatever they want and stay lean, and others rarely indulge and have trouble dropping pounds. I trule believe if it was just as simple as eating less than you burn, we would not have the huge obesity problem that we have.
Anyway, just my 2 cents. The more I learn about nutrition the more I recognize just how little any of us (the experts included!) truly understand about the way our bodies work.
Taubes is an idiot trying to sell books by making carbs the Demon Nutrient Of The Month. He's not a scientist and does not publish peer-reviewed research. He's just a writer.0 -
I get SO confused with this. So carbs are stored as glycogen & water as food, in the muscles? W hat about when fat is burned, doesn't that get turned into glycogen & water, too? Also - what happens with the water thing when you hit maintenance - do you go up 3lb when you start eating your maintenance calories?
Sorry for the hijack, OP!
no worries, it's a great question...now you've got me curious about it!!!
Fat is already stored energy...when you eat at a surplus, your body will first build up glycogen stores for immediate energy and then whatever is left over gets stored as fat for "backup" energy...it is not converted into glycogen or water, it is oxidized. If you eat at maintenance, you maintain a stable glycogen store and energy to perform your day to day, etc...you cannot gain fat as there is no excess energy.
And yes, when you go to maintenance you will gain a little water weight back due to having complete glycogen stores (immediately available energy...this is your rocket fuel)...it is not a bad thing and one of the numerous reasons that you have to look at a lot more than some arbitrary number on the scale.
Your maintenance also will not be static due to natural body weight fluctuations...I'm currently maintaining and I fluctuate between about 180 - 185 Lbs day to day throughout any given week for the last 6 months or so...if I average the numbers out as a general trend, I'm about 182ish.0 -
The "instant" drop when you lowered your carbs is water.
But keep in mind that "calories out" isn't necessarily constant.
Your body burns fuel (food, fat, usually some muscle while you're losing weight) for energy. Not just energy for exercise, but energy for everything. For sitting, standing, maintaining your body temperature, thinking, repairing injuries, keeping your heart beating. Everything your body does requires energy. That's why you have to eat.
So if you're feeling good, sitting up, moving around, etc, you'll probably be burning more calories than if you're feeling crummy and sluggish. (Unless you're feeling crummy and sluggish because you're sick, in which case your body is expending more energy than usual trying to fight off infection.)
"Calories in, Calories out" is technically completely true. But I keep seeing it repeated as a mantra with a strange assumption that "calories out" is something totally consistent and predictable that doesn't depend on anything besides your body weight and exercise level, and isn't affected by any of the specifics of what you eat. Some people are more quickly and dramatically affected by exactly what/when they're eating than others, too. The human body is not simple.0 -
Taubes is an idiot trying to sell books by making carbs the Demon Nutrient Of The Month. He's not a scientist and does not publish peer-reviewed research. He's just a writer.
I certainly have some questions regarding a lot of the research he cites in the book, but its given me some persepective. I don't think we understand things as well as we think we do, and the book makes some interesting points. Have you read it?0 -
Taubes is an idiot trying to sell books by making carbs the Demon Nutrient Of The Month. He's not a scientist and does not publish peer-reviewed research. He's just a writer.
I certainly have some questions regarding a lot of the research he cites in the book, but its given me some persepective. I don't think we understand things as well as we think we do, and the book makes some interesting points. Have you read it?
I have never read anything by Taubes, I don't think.....
But I would compare what he says with the writings if Lyle McDonald and Alan Aragon.......
See how they pan out.0 -
Calories in vs. Calories out is barring any health issues. Carbs do store a bit of water so that could be what you saw in which case it will stop soon, you may have a body that is slightly quirky and it is a bit over zealous about processing carbs.
Calories into body and calories out of body always works.
Or maybe you are just moving more. Even figitting burns calories.0 -
Taubes is an idiot trying to sell books by making carbs the Demon Nutrient Of The Month. He's not a scientist and does not publish peer-reviewed research. He's just a writer.
I certainly have some questions regarding a lot of the research he cites in the book, but its given me some persepective. I don't think we understand things as well as we think we do, and the book makes some interesting points. Have you read it?
I have. I read/watch everything that is mentioned here on MFP in order to give myself perspective, know where other people are coming from, and never fall into those "you probably haven't read it and seen the light!" traps. Now, that said from someone who read it critically and with Google open to check/double check claims made:Taubes is an idiot trying to sell books by making carbs the Demon Nutrient Of The Month. He's not a scientist and does not publish peer-reviewed research. He's just a writer.0 -
For those who aren't totally sold on the calories-in/calories-out idea of weight loss, there is an interesting read by Gary Taubes called Why We Get Fat. He makes a very interesting case for how our bodies work and why calories-in/calories-out is a misapplication of the laws of physics. Basically the idea is that carbs cause and insulin response, which leads to other hormonal changes which cause our bodies to store the calories we take in as fat, rather than to leave them in our system for us to use up. As a result, we are more hungry, more lethargic, and more fat. Cutting carbs limits the insulin response so that the calories we put in our bodies are efficiently used as fuel and not prematurely stored away as fat.
I know I could not wrap my mind around weight loss not being just an issue of in vs out, and this book has helped me to see that there is a lot more at play than that. This is why some people can eat whatever they want and stay lean, and others rarely indulge and have trouble dropping pounds. I trule believe if it was just as simple as eating less than you burn, we would not have the huge obesity problem that we have.
Anyway, just my 2 cents. The more I learn about nutrition the more I recognize just how little any of us (the experts included!) truly understand about the way our bodies work.
If you are reading Taubes, you haven't learned anything about nutrition.0 -
Taubes is an idiot trying to sell books by making carbs the Demon Nutrient Of The Month. He's not a scientist and does not publish peer-reviewed research. He's just a writer.
I certainly have some questions regarding a lot of the research he cites in the book, but its given me some persepective. I don't think we understand things as well as we think we do, and the book makes some interesting points. Have you read it?
Haven't read it and don't really understand a lot of the science here, but all the evidence on MFP of people losing weight while still eating Taco Bell and McDonalds is enough for me to believe it's as simple as calories in < calories out.0 -
Taubes is an idiot trying to sell books by making carbs the Demon Nutrient Of The Month. He's not a scientist and does not publish peer-reviewed research. He's just a writer.
I certainly have some questions regarding a lot of the research he cites in the book, but its given me some persepective. I don't think we understand things as well as we think we do, and the book makes some interesting points. Have you read it?
Haven't read it and don't really understand a lot of the science here, but all the evidence on MFP of people losing weight while still eating Taco Bell and McDonalds is enough for me to believe it's as simple as calories in < calories out.
You are correct and Taubes "science" isn't really science at all. He cherry picks and omits data to "prove" his point. Google James Krieger's review of Taubes' book. For the record, Krieger holds multiple degrees in nutrition and Taubes does not. In fact Taubes is an Engineer turned journalist. You also may be able to find this info on Krieger's website weightology.com.0 -
You are correct and Taubes "science" isn't really science at all. He cherry picks and omits data to "prove" his point. Google James Krieger's review of Taubes' book. For the record, Krieger holds multiple degrees in nutrition and Taubes does not. In fact Taubes is an Engineer turned journalist. You also may be able to find this info on Krieger's website weightology.com.
Thank you for the tip on Krieger, I will definitely check it out. I haven't finished Why We Get Fat yet, but my plan was to read some critical reviews of it once I was done.
Also, to whoever stated that reading Taubes means I know nothing about nutrition...well I certainly don't claim to be an expert by any stretch of the imagination, but its awfully rude of you to talk down to someone who is making an honest effort to understand their body and fuel it in the best way possible.
EDIT: I'm at work right now so I so shouldn't be reading all of this, but I'm hooked. The Krieger stuff is great and calls into question many of the things I had problems with in the book, namely why doesn't he use any current research?0 -
I thought it was pretty accepted science that insulin sensitivity issues can change the metabolism of many (not all) carbs enough to cause weight gain? Is it not, really?
It doesn't mean that everyone will have the problem. People with insulin issues are the people with insulin-issue weight gain
There is currently tons of research on metabolic syndrome, so the hormonal aspects of it are being examined left and right.
We have huge rates of diabetes in this country, and it's not surprising (is it?) that lots of people are 'pre-diabetic' as some folks call the years before getting full-blown diabetes.
If someone wants to watch their carbs like a diabetic, that's probably not a bad plan if they notice that carbs do seem different for them. Losing weight also helps. I don't think it's a good idea to say as a blanket statement that carbs don't differ from fats or protein on a metabolic level. You have to assume a textbook normal metabolism to know that that is true, imho.
Most people are probably fine, if that helps any Many aren't and don't always know it until full diabetes develops. We don't really test for the 'pre' conditions (although some docs do, particularly with PCOS or a strong family history of diabetes). 0 -
Thanks for this a good wake up call for me. Too bad so many are so mean sounding and negative about it.
Then again so many are supportive and nice about it.
Represents the general population. There are a lot of people you wouldn`t spend time with in the world because of their attitudes. Are they the same on line? Or worse?
To those of you who are nice well, thank you for empathizing with others.0 -
I sometimes wonder about the "science' of weight loss. Seems so simple and yet our bodies are so complicated. I have found that my body lets go of weight more easily if I eat more protein and it is sluggish if my calories are mainly vegetable,salad-type stuff, fruit calories or other carbs, that being said, I also do well eating whole grain pastas...So for me, I think that this is not an exact science as most people here believe. If I had any doubts, I would fool around with the types of food I am eating, not varying the calories per se, but just what type of calories are you consuming.
Please don't flame me. This is my opinion and my experience. I am a successful "loser" having lost 54 pounds and kept it off for almost 6 years with just a few small ups and downs.0 -
I sometimes wonder about the "science' of weight loss. Seems so simple and yet our bodies are so complicated. I have found that my body lets go of weight more easily if I eat more protein and it is sluggish if my calories are mainly vegetable,salad-type stuff, fruit calories or other carbs, that being said, I also do well eating whole grain pastas...So for me, I think that this is not an exact science as most people here believe. If I had any doubts, I would fool around with the types of food I am eating, not varying the calories per se, but just what type of calories are you consuming.
Please don't flame me. This is my opinion and my experience. I am a successful "loser" having lost 54 pounds and kept it off for almost 6 years with just a few small ups and downs.
Nothing about weightloss is an exact science (at least not for the average person). It's all estimates and trial and error. That doesn't mean certain truths don't exist though. OP if you prefer a low carb diet, go for it. But cutting carbs alone will not help you continue to lose weight, and if the only movement you're seeing is when you count carbs, then chances are you need to lower your calorie intake in general, whether you choose low carb or not.0 -
I should probably cite at least one source, lol.
Long, but covers a lot: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1323303/0 -
The "instant" drop when you lowered your carbs is water.
But keep in mind that "calories out" isn't necessarily constant.
Your body burns fuel (food, fat, usually some muscle while you're losing weight) for energy. Not just energy for exercise, but energy for everything. For sitting, standing, maintaining your body temperature, thinking, repairing injuries, keeping your heart beating. Everything your body does requires energy. That's why you have to eat.
So if you're feeling good, sitting up, moving around, etc, you'll probably be burning more calories than if you're feeling crummy and sluggish. (Unless you're feeling crummy and sluggish because you're sick, in which case your body is expending more energy than usual trying to fight off infection.)
"Calories in, Calories out" is technically completely true. But I keep seeing it repeated as a mantra with a strange assumption that "calories out" is something totally consistent and predictable that doesn't depend on anything besides your body weight and exercise level, and isn't affected by any of the specifics of what you eat. Some people are more quickly and dramatically affected by exactly what/when they're eating than others, too. The human body is not simple.
I understand the whole it's just water thing, but what about people who go "low carb" and they lose like 100 lbs.. is that 100 lbs of "just water" b/c I've seen people who eat high calories but low carbs and lose tons of weight. Although it's not what I am trying to do, the whole "it's just water thing" confuses the heck out of me!0 -
I sometimes wonder about the "science' of weight loss. Seems so simple and yet our bodies are so complicated. I have found that my body lets go of weight more easily if I eat more protein and it is sluggish if my calories are mainly vegetable,salad-type stuff, fruit calories or other carbs, that being said, I also do well eating whole grain pastas...So for me, I think that this is not an exact science as most people here believe. If I had any doubts, I would fool around with the types of food I am eating, not varying the calories per se, but just what type of calories are you consuming.
Please don't flame me. This is my opinion and my experience. I am a successful "loser" having lost 54 pounds and kept it off for almost 6 years with just a few small ups and downs.
Nothing about weightloss is an exact science (at least not for the average person). It's all estimates and trial and error. That doesn't mean certain truths don't exist though. OP if you prefer a low carb diet, go for it. But cutting carbs alone will not help you continue to lose weight, and if the only movement you're seeing is when you count carbs, then chances are you need to lower your calorie intake in general, whether you choose low carb or not.
oh no, Low carb isn't for me! I love my carbs too much. i just notice I am sensitive to carbs... and when I lower them it causes me to lose weight.. water or not... that's the case. when I eat carbs I hold on to weight, feel sick and bloated but will not give them up! 0 -
I've seen people who eat high calories but low carbs and lose tons of weight. Although it's not what I am trying to do, the whole "it's just water thing" confuses the heck out of me!
Nope. If you're losing body mass, you're either eating fewer calories than you burn or you're getting it physically removed by liposuction/amputation.
Those people you think are eating "high calorie" are not. Ask to look at their detailed daily food and exercise logs.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 394 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 941 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions