3 day Military Diet
Options
Replies
-
Zmanning89 wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »Remember over time its about CICO Calories in , Calories Out, but remember not all "weight" is equal ... for example I could eat twinkes and Junk and still lose "Weight" but that "weight" would most of the time be my muscle and bones wasting away. While Fat would not be burning.
Any professional case studies to support this claim?
Which Claim exactly ? I'm not really making a "Claim" just explaining that the goal is not to lose "weight" but rather "body fat" , as "Weight" can mean anything, like Muscle , Bone Density etc, heck I can lose weight by cutting of my leg, but most people when they say they want to lose weight they are asserting they want to lose body fat, while adding lean toned muscle.
What I want to know is how these foods know how to cut fat over muscle.
Do you need to eat protein to maintain muscle? That seems to be the concept here on MFP. Or is that bro-science? Even the Guide or Sexypants says to eat 0.8g/LBM (don't quote me here I didn't actually read it again) protein daily.
By that logic, a Twinkly only diet (and yep, I realize no one actually means eat only Twinklies) which may not have much protein could result in muscle loss.... so if a food doesn't know how to cut fat over muscle, how does a different food know how to retain muscle over fat?
(I realize I said "Twinkly" and "Twinklies" but I decided it was too cute a mistake to fix).
Protein is an essential macro, and yes, that gram to LBM ratio is recommended. What I was challenging was the original post saying that junk food consumption will lead to bone/muscle loss, rather than fat loss, which is not the case. Calories are calories. I can have a cheeseburger from McDonald's (regularly classified as "junk food") and stay within my fat and calories for the day, while getting 15g boost of protein from that sandwich.
Also, I agree that mistake is cute, and I agree with your decision not to fix it.
Edit: I will also add that maintenance and/or calorie surpluses are needed for gains. One won't build muscle in a deficit, so one goal should be to minimize LBM loss during weight loss. Making sure one is eating enough and getting a reasonable amount of protein in per day for their activity level is important. But bodies can't distinguish "junk" protein/calories from "healthy" protein/calories.
Also " One won't build muscle in a deficit" is false, you can build lean muscle while burning Fat, in a calorie defect. I'm gaining muscle and losing fat at the same time, and most day I'm in a Deficit, but yet my muscles keep getting bigger
but you need resistance training and also adequate protein and fat (support normal hormone levels)
I like your passion, but calories are not equal, for example a Big Mac, and a grass fed steak and salad, lets say they had the same Protein , Fat, and Carbs (as example) the Calories you get the Grass Fed steak and salad are much better for the body than processed crap, like a big mac, even though you could still lose weight and body fat % it would not be as healthy of an option.
A calorie is a unit of measurement . 1 calorie = 1 calorie just as 1 inch= 1 inch. The nutritional panels are different and someone may choose a different food based on the macro break down.....
Your correct, but That not what I ment,, a Calorie as a "measurement" is the same, but not all Calories are equal in terms of quality, for example 1 gram of processed pepperoni, has a different amino acid profile , than a natural chicken breast or a Grass Fed steak, they all have different Amino acids that build up these proteins, not all proteins are of the same quality is what I'm saying.
But again.. 100 calories of pepperoni is equal to 100 calories of chicken breast. It's the difference in macro/ micro breakdown
I agree and have not asserted the opposite, you said exactly what I've been saying, whats with the argumentative tone, this post started out toward the OP, but turned into some weird argumentative on nutrition 101 , is this how MFP is all the time
You keep saying you agree... but then go to go on and say that they calories are not created equal. Which why I have responded the way that I have.like your passion, but calories are not equal, for example a Big Mac, and a grass fed steak and salad, lets say they had the same Protein , Fat, and Carbs (as example) the Calories you get the Grass Fed steak and salad are much better for the body than processed crap, like a big mac, even though you could still lose weight and body fat % it would not be as healthy of an option.but not all Calories are equal in terms of quality, for example 1 gram of processed pepperoni, has a different amino acid profile , than a natural chicken breast or a Grass Fed steak, they all have different Amino acids that build up these proteins, not all proteins are of the same quality is what I'm saying.
^^ your quotes. Again. A calorie is a calorie. A unit of measurement. The nutritional spread of foods are different and are chosen accordingly to help someone reach their goals.
One more time, a Calorie as a UNIT of measurement is the same regardless, but 1g of protein from say processed Lunch meat will have a "different" amino acid profile as 1g of Protein from a grass fed steak, it would have a different amino acid profile than "whey" protein" or 1g of Collagen protein for example.
So from a Calorie stand point, it would "Burn" in a "fire" the same , but your body would use those two grams (with different amino acid profiles) in different ways. Is my point
Do you have any studies that show your body would use it differently?0 -
Zmanning89 wrote: »Remember over time its about CICO Calories in , Calories Out, but remember not all "weight" is equal ... for example I could eat twinkes and Junk and still lose "Weight" but that "weight" would most of the time be my muscle and bones wasting away. While Fat would not be burning.
Any professional case studies to support this claim?
Which Claim exactly ? I'm not really making a "Claim" just explaining that the goal is not to lose "weight" but rather "body fat" , as "Weight" can mean anything, like Muscle , Bone Density etc, heck I can lose weight by cutting of my leg, but most people when they say they want to lose weight they are asserting they want to lose body fat, while adding lean toned muscle. [/quote]
What I want to know is how these foods know how to cut fat over muscle. [/quote]
Do you need to eat protein to maintain muscle? That seems to be the concept here on MFP. Or is that bro-science? Even the Guide or Sexypants says to eat 0.8g/LBM (don't quote me here I didn't actually read it again) protein daily.
By that logic, a Twinkly only diet (and yep, I realize no one actually means eat only Twinklies) which may not have much protein could result in muscle loss.... so if a food doesn't know how to cut fat over muscle, how does a different food know how to retain muscle over fat?
(I realize I said "Twinkly" and "Twinklies" but I decided it was too cute a mistake to fix).[/quote]
Protein is an essential macro, and yes, that gram to LBM ratio is recommended. What I was challenging was the original post saying that junk food consumption will lead to bone/muscle loss, rather than fat loss, which is not the case. Calories are calories. I can have a cheeseburger from McDonald's (regularly classified as "junk food") and stay within my fat and calories for the day, while getting 15g boost of protein from that sandwich.
Also, I agree that mistake is cute, and I agree with your decision not to fix it.
Edit: I will also add that maintenance and/or calorie surpluses are needed for gains. One won't build muscle in a deficit, so one goal should be to minimize LBM loss during weight loss. Making sure one is eating enough and getting a reasonable amount of protein in per day for their activity level is important. But bodies can't distinguish "junk" protein/calories from "healthy" protein/calories.[/quote]
Also " One won't build muscle in a deficit" is false, you can build lean muscle while burning Fat, in a calorie defect. I'm gaining muscle and losing fat at the same time, and most day I'm in a Deficit, but yet my muscles keep getting bigger but you need resistance training and also adequate protein and fat (support normal hormone levels)
I like your passion, but calories are not equal, for example a Big Mac, and a grass fed steak and salad, lets say they had the same Protein , Fat, and Carbs (as example) the Calories you get the Grass Fed steak and salad are much better for the body than processed crap, like a big mac, even though you could still lose weight and body fat % it would not be as healthy of an option.
[/quote]
A calorie is a unit of measurement . 1 calorie = 1 calorie just as 1 inch= 1 inch. The nutritional panels are different and someone may choose a different food based on the macro break down.....[/quote]
Your correct, but That not what I ment,, a Calorie as a "measurement" is the same, but not all Calories are equal in terms of quality, for example 1 gram of processed pepperoni, has a different amino acid profile , than a natural chicken breast or a Grass Fed steak, they all have different Amino acids that build up these proteins, not all proteins are of the same quality is what I'm saying.
[/quote]
But again.. 100 calories of pepperoni is equal to 100 calories of chicken breast. It's the difference in macro/ micro breakdown[/quote]
I agree and have not asserted the opposite, you said exactly what I've been saying, whats with the argumentative tone, this post started out toward the OP, but turned into some weird argumentative on nutrition 101 , is this how MFP is all the time [/quote]
You originally gave the OP problematic advice regarding nutrition and bones/muscle being lost through consuming "twinkies and junk", which is why I posted in response to you.
[/quote]
Problematic advice lol did you even read what I said to her, please read what I wrote, I did not give the OP problematic advice. Why so Hostile [/quote]
Here is what you wrote:Zmanning89 wrote: »Remember over time its about CICO Calories in , Calories Out, but remember not all "weight" is equal ... for example I could eat twinkes and Junk and still lose "Weight" but that "weight" would most of the time be my muscle and bones wasting away. While Fat would not be burning.
You were challenged to back up your statement that if you eat twinkies and junk, you will not burn fat. That is the problematic advice.
You responded by questioning the basic scientific knowledge of those who challenged you.
You continued to try to backpedal and show off your nutritional know how with statements that you can indeed gain muscle mass in a caloric deficit and talking about the amino acid structure of pepperoni.
All the while asking "why so hostile" and using smileys.
Seriously buddy. You may want to sit back and get to know a forum before jumping in and questioning some of the most experienced, successful members of the community...[/quote]
"You were challenged to back up your statement that if you eat twinkies and junk, you will not burn fat. That is the problematic advice."
I never said you "Will not Burn Fat" I said you would burn more / lose more muscle over fat in that situation. I'm not jumping in or back peddling. I told the OP to focus on losing Body Fat % rather than focus on losing "weight" since "weight" could mean muscle mass. I used a very basic example with twinkies to example how losing weight may not mean losing "body fat"
Also I'm not questioning any of the "experts" here, I'm just helping to clarify what I was saying to the original poster. Also if the "experts" think 1 gram of protein (regardless of the source) is the same (not in calories measurement but as in the way your body would use / break it down), than I would question their "expertise" if you will.
- Cheers0 -
I found a really helpful website is www.iifym.com You can use thier calculator to figure would what you should be eating as far as calories and micros go 0
-
Holy quote fail.never said you "Will not Burn Fat" I said you would burn more / lose more muscle over fat in that situation. I'm not jumping in or back peddling. I told the OP to focus on losing Body Fat % rather than focus on losing "weight" since "weight" could mean muscle mass. I used a very basic example with twinkies to example how losing weight may not mean losing "body fat"
You may not have meant it, but it's what you said. The words you chose:for example I could eat twinkes and Junk and still lose "Weight" but that "weight" would most of the time be my muscle and bones wasting away. While Fat would not be burning.
We were just pointing out that those words are not correct. You now admit that you can burn fat while eating foods that you term "junk". If you believe that, why did you type the sentence "while fat would not be burning"?0 -
@Zmanning89 are you now saying that you agree a calorie is just a calorie from an energy perspective, but contending that 15 grams of protein will be processed differently by the body if it comes from lean grass fed beef than if it comes from a Big Mac?
I just want to make sure I am understanding what you are saying because the quoted posts have gotten kind of mixed up (my fault on the quotes).0 -
Zmanning89 wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »Remember over time its about CICO Calories in , Calories Out, but remember not all "weight" is equal ... for example I could eat twinkes and Junk and still lose "Weight" but that "weight" would most of the time be my muscle and bones wasting away. While Fat would not be burning.
Any professional case studies to support this claim?
Which Claim exactly ? I'm not really making a "Claim" just explaining that the goal is not to lose "weight" but rather "body fat" , as "Weight" can mean anything, like Muscle , Bone Density etc, heck I can lose weight by cutting of my leg, but most people when they say they want to lose weight they are asserting they want to lose body fat, while adding lean toned muscle.
What I want to know is how these foods know how to cut fat over muscle.
Do you need to eat protein to maintain muscle? That seems to be the concept here on MFP. Or is that bro-science? Even the Guide or Sexypants says to eat 0.8g/LBM (don't quote me here I didn't actually read it again) protein daily.
By that logic, a Twinkly only diet (and yep, I realize no one actually means eat only Twinklies) which may not have much protein could result in muscle loss.... so if a food doesn't know how to cut fat over muscle, how does a different food know how to retain muscle over fat?
(I realize I said "Twinkly" and "Twinklies" but I decided it was too cute a mistake to fix).
Protein is an essential macro, and yes, that gram to LBM ratio is recommended. What I was challenging was the original post saying that junk food consumption will lead to bone/muscle loss, rather than fat loss, which is not the case. Calories are calories. I can have a cheeseburger from McDonald's (regularly classified as "junk food") and stay within my fat and calories for the day, while getting 15g boost of protein from that sandwich.
Also, I agree that mistake is cute, and I agree with your decision not to fix it.
Edit: I will also add that maintenance and/or calorie surpluses are needed for gains. One won't build muscle in a deficit, so one goal should be to minimize LBM loss during weight loss. Making sure one is eating enough and getting a reasonable amount of protein in per day for their activity level is important. But bodies can't distinguish "junk" protein/calories from "healthy" protein/calories.
Also " One won't build muscle in a deficit" is false, you can build lean muscle while burning Fat, in a calorie defect. I'm gaining muscle and losing fat at the same time, and most day I'm in a Deficit, but yet my muscles keep getting bigger but you need resistance training and also adequate protein and fat (support normal hormone levels)
I like your passion, but calories are not equal, for example a Big Mac, and a grass fed steak and salad, lets say they had the same Protein , Fat, and Carbs (as example) the Calories you get the Grass Fed steak and salad are much better for the body than processed crap, like a big mac, even though you could still lose weight and body fat % it would not be as healthy of an option.
A calorie is a unit of measurement . 1 calorie = 1 calorie just as 1 inch= 1 inch. The nutritional panels are different and someone may choose a different food based on the macro break down.....
Your correct, but That not what I ment,, a Calorie as a "measurement" is the same, but not all Calories are equal in terms of quality, for example 1 gram of processed pepperoni, has a different amino acid profile , than a natural chicken breast or a Grass Fed steak, they all have different Amino acids that build up these proteins, not all proteins are of the same quality is what I'm saying.
But again.. 100 calories of pepperoni is equal to 100 calories of chicken breast. It's the difference in macro/ micro breakdown
I agree and have not asserted the opposite, you said exactly what I've been saying, whats with the argumentative tone, this post started out toward the OP, but turned into some weird argumentative on nutrition 101 , is this how MFP is all the time
You keep saying you agree... but then go to go on and say that they calories are not created equal. Which why I have responded the way that I have.like your passion, but calories are not equal, for example a Big Mac, and a grass fed steak and salad, lets say they had the same Protein , Fat, and Carbs (as example) the Calories you get the Grass Fed steak and salad are much better for the body than processed crap, like a big mac, even though you could still lose weight and body fat % it would not be as healthy of an option.but not all Calories are equal in terms of quality, for example 1 gram of processed pepperoni, has a different amino acid profile , than a natural chicken breast or a Grass Fed steak, they all have different Amino acids that build up these proteins, not all proteins are of the same quality is what I'm saying.
^^ your quotes. Again. A calorie is a calorie. A unit of measurement. The nutritional spread of foods are different and are chosen accordingly to help someone reach their goals.
One more time, a Calorie as a UNIT of measurement is the same regardless, but 1g of protein from say processed Lunch meat will have a "different" amino acid profile as 1g of Protein from a grass fed steak, it would have a different amino acid profile than "whey" protein" or 1g of Collagen protein for example.
So from a Calorie stand point, it would "Burn" in a "fire" the same , but your body would use those two grams (with different amino acid profiles) in different ways. Is my point
Do you have any studies that show your body would use it differently?
Not sure if your trolling or being serious.
But for example Eat Spider Venom, its made of Protein, (you would die from it) but your body would not use it the same as say , protein from Beef Flesh.. If you search Pub Med you can find many studies on different proteins and the effects they have on the body. (casein protein was shown in rats for example to increase their cancer risk, while other proteins did not have this effect) This is one example of many.
Your body can build muscle with crap protein don't get me wrong, you "can" build muslce, but our bodies break down protein into amino acids, and proteins of all kinds have different amino acid profiles.0 -
Zmanning89 wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »Remember over time its about CICO Calories in , Calories Out, but remember not all "weight" is equal ... for example I could eat twinkes and Junk and still lose "Weight" but that "weight" would most of the time be my muscle and bones wasting away. While Fat would not be burning.
Any professional case studies to support this claim?
Which Claim exactly ? I'm not really making a "Claim" just explaining that the goal is not to lose "weight" but rather "body fat" , as "Weight" can mean anything, like Muscle , Bone Density etc, heck I can lose weight by cutting of my leg, but most people when they say they want to lose weight they are asserting they want to lose body fat, while adding lean toned muscle.
What I want to know is how these foods know how to cut fat over muscle.
Do you need to eat protein to maintain muscle? That seems to be the concept here on MFP. Or is that bro-science? Even the Guide or Sexypants says to eat 0.8g/LBM (don't quote me here I didn't actually read it again) protein daily.
By that logic, a Twinkly only diet (and yep, I realize no one actually means eat only Twinklies) which may not have much protein could result in muscle loss.... so if a food doesn't know how to cut fat over muscle, how does a different food know how to retain muscle over fat?
(I realize I said "Twinkly" and "Twinklies" but I decided it was too cute a mistake to fix).
Protein is an essential macro, and yes, that gram to LBM ratio is recommended. What I was challenging was the original post saying that junk food consumption will lead to bone/muscle loss, rather than fat loss, which is not the case. Calories are calories. I can have a cheeseburger from McDonald's (regularly classified as "junk food") and stay within my fat and calories for the day, while getting 15g boost of protein from that sandwich.
Also, I agree that mistake is cute, and I agree with your decision not to fix it.
Edit: I will also add that maintenance and/or calorie surpluses are needed for gains. One won't build muscle in a deficit, so one goal should be to minimize LBM loss during weight loss. Making sure one is eating enough and getting a reasonable amount of protein in per day for their activity level is important. But bodies can't distinguish "junk" protein/calories from "healthy" protein/calories.
Also " One won't build muscle in a deficit" is false, you can build lean muscle while burning Fat, in a calorie defect. I'm gaining muscle and losing fat at the same time, and most day I'm in a Deficit, but yet my muscles keep getting bigger but you need resistance training and also adequate protein and fat (support normal hormone levels)
I like your passion, but calories are not equal, for example a Big Mac, and a grass fed steak and salad, lets say they had the same Protein , Fat, and Carbs (as example) the Calories you get the Grass Fed steak and salad are much better for the body than processed crap, like a big mac, even though you could still lose weight and body fat % it would not be as healthy of an option.
A calorie is a unit of measurement . 1 calorie = 1 calorie just as 1 inch= 1 inch. The nutritional panels are different and someone may choose a different food based on the macro break down.....
Your correct, but That not what I ment,, a Calorie as a "measurement" is the same, but not all Calories are equal in terms of quality, for example 1 gram of processed pepperoni, has a different amino acid profile , than a natural chicken breast or a Grass Fed steak, they all have different Amino acids that build up these proteins, not all proteins are of the same quality is what I'm saying.
But again.. 100 calories of pepperoni is equal to 100 calories of chicken breast. It's the difference in macro/ micro breakdown
I agree and have not asserted the opposite, you said exactly what I've been saying, whats with the argumentative tone, this post started out toward the OP, but turned into some weird argumentative on nutrition 101 , is this how MFP is all the time
You keep saying you agree... but then go to go on and say that they calories are not created equal. Which why I have responded the way that I have.like your passion, but calories are not equal, for example a Big Mac, and a grass fed steak and salad, lets say they had the same Protein , Fat, and Carbs (as example) the Calories you get the Grass Fed steak and salad are much better for the body than processed crap, like a big mac, even though you could still lose weight and body fat % it would not be as healthy of an option.but not all Calories are equal in terms of quality, for example 1 gram of processed pepperoni, has a different amino acid profile , than a natural chicken breast or a Grass Fed steak, they all have different Amino acids that build up these proteins, not all proteins are of the same quality is what I'm saying.
^^ your quotes. Again. A calorie is a calorie. A unit of measurement. The nutritional spread of foods are different and are chosen accordingly to help someone reach their goals.
One more time, a Calorie as a UNIT of measurement is the same regardless, but 1g of protein from say processed Lunch meat will have a "different" amino acid profile as 1g of Protein from a grass fed steak, it would have a different amino acid profile than "whey" protein" or 1g of Collagen protein for example.
So from a Calorie stand point, it would "Burn" in a "fire" the same , but your body would use those two grams (with different amino acid profiles) in different ways. Is my point
Do you have any studies that show your body would use it differently?
Not sure if your trolling or being serious.
But for example Eat Spider Venom, its made of Protein, (you would die from it) but your body would not use it the same as say , protein from Beef Flesh.. If you search Pub Med you can find many studies on different proteins and the effects they have on the body. (casein protein was shown in rats for example to increase their cancer risk, while other proteins did not have this effect) This is one example of many.
Your body can build muscle with crap protein don't get me wrong, you "can" build muslce, but our bodies break down protein into amino acids, and proteins of all kinds have different amino acid profiles.
I'm not trolling and being serious. I'm not going to go search for studies. You had made the claim, I asked for information.0 -
Zmanning89 wrote: »
You stated that you cannot burn fat while eating twinkies. Really?Zmanning89 wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »Remember over time its about CICO Calories in , Calories Out, but remember not all "weight" is equal ... for example I could eat twinkes and Junk and still lose "Weight" but that "weight" would most of the time be my muscle and bones wasting away. While Fat would not be burning.
Any professional case studies to support this claim?
Which Claim exactly ? I'm not really making a "Claim" just explaining that the goal is not to lose "weight" but rather "body fat" , as "Weight" can mean anything, like Muscle , Bone Density etc, heck I can lose weight by cutting of my leg, but most people when they say they want to lose weight they are asserting they want to lose body fat, while adding lean toned muscle.
What I want to know is how these foods know how to cut fat over muscle.
Please read what I wrote, I'm not sure which foods you are talking about ? Please elaborate on what your trying to assert. Your not making any sense.or example I could eat twinkes and Junk and still lose "Weight" but that "weight" would most of the time be my muscle and bones wasting away. While Fat would not be burning.
You can burn Fat, of course, just that your body in this state would break down more muscle than fat, due to no having enough protein to support protein synthesis. I was making an simple example to not just focus on weight, and focus more in Body Fat %
Whats with all the hostility
Seriously?!?!! Now I've heard it all!!!
Didn't you know that when you lost your weight (wasn't it over 100lbs), you only lost muscle and no fat because you ate sugar while losing?!
Yep....121 pounds!! Planning on eating poptart tonight, the chocolate peanut butter one.
ETA: Weight lifting tonight, also.0 -
Zmanning89 wrote: »
You stated that you cannot burn fat while eating twinkies. Really?Zmanning89 wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »Remember over time its about CICO Calories in , Calories Out, but remember not all "weight" is equal ... for example I could eat twinkes and Junk and still lose "Weight" but that "weight" would most of the time be my muscle and bones wasting away. While Fat would not be burning.
Any professional case studies to support this claim?
Which Claim exactly ? I'm not really making a "Claim" just explaining that the goal is not to lose "weight" but rather "body fat" , as "Weight" can mean anything, like Muscle , Bone Density etc, heck I can lose weight by cutting of my leg, but most people when they say they want to lose weight they are asserting they want to lose body fat, while adding lean toned muscle.
What I want to know is how these foods know how to cut fat over muscle. Please read what I wrote, I'm not sure which foods you are talking about ? Please elaborate on what your trying to assert. Your not making any sense.or example I could eat twinkes and Junk and still lose "Weight" but that "weight" would most of the time be my muscle and bones wasting away. While Fat would not be burning.
You can burn Fat, of course, just that your body in this state would break down more muscle than fat, due to no having enough protein to support protein synthesis. I was making an simple example to not just focus on weight, and focus more in Body Fat %
Whats with all the hostility
Seriously?!?!! Now I've heard it all!!!
Didn't you know that when you lost your weight (wasn't it over 100lbs), you only lost muscle and no fat because you ate sugar while losing?!
Yep....121 pounds!! Planning on eating poptart tonight, the chocolate peanut butter one.
Ooh, sounds delish. You know, I've been over eating like crazy lately, and I've still never tried a poptart ice cream sandwich. Actually trying to get back on the wagon, so I guess it will still have to wait...0 -
Zmanning89 wrote: »
You stated that you cannot burn fat while eating twinkies. Really?Zmanning89 wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »Remember over time its about CICO Calories in , Calories Out, but remember not all "weight" is equal ... for example I could eat twinkes and Junk and still lose "Weight" but that "weight" would most of the time be my muscle and bones wasting away. While Fat would not be burning.
Any professional case studies to support this claim?
Which Claim exactly ? I'm not really making a "Claim" just explaining that the goal is not to lose "weight" but rather "body fat" , as "Weight" can mean anything, like Muscle , Bone Density etc, heck I can lose weight by cutting of my leg, but most people when they say they want to lose weight they are asserting they want to lose body fat, while adding lean toned muscle.
What I want to know is how these foods know how to cut fat over muscle. Please read what I wrote, I'm not sure which foods you are talking about ? Please elaborate on what your trying to assert. Your not making any sense.or example I could eat twinkes and Junk and still lose "Weight" but that "weight" would most of the time be my muscle and bones wasting away. While Fat would not be burning.
You can burn Fat, of course, just that your body in this state would break down more muscle than fat, due to no having enough protein to support protein synthesis. I was making an simple example to not just focus on weight, and focus more in Body Fat %
Whats with all the hostility
Seriously?!?!! Now I've heard it all!!!
Didn't you know that when you lost your weight (wasn't it over 100lbs), you only lost muscle and no fat because you ate sugar while losing?!
Yep....121 pounds!! Planning on eating poptart tonight, the chocolate peanut butter one.
121 pounds is amazing! The chocolate peanut butter ones are really good. I still have some red velvet ones still floating around.0 -
@Zmanning89 are you now saying that you agree a calorie is just a calorie from an energy perspective, but contending that 15 grams of protein will be processed differently by the body if it comes from lean grass fed beef than if it comes from a Big Mac?
I just want to make sure I am understanding what you are saying because the quoted posts have gotten kind of mixed up (my fault on the quotes).
A calorie is a measurement of how much heat is produced when you "burn" or ignite that substance. A calorie is a unit of measurement, from an energy perspective.
But not all Sources of the "Calories" are equal in terms of Health is my point I was making.
For example Poison Spider Venom is made of Protein, our bodies would break down this protein like other sources of protein into amino acids, but this source of protein will kill us. Compared to Beef or some other source of protein, I'm saying that all Protein, or Macro nutrients for that matter are not equal on how your body would use them or the effects they have on the body.
0 -
Zmanning89 wrote: »
You stated that you cannot burn fat while eating twinkies. Really?Zmanning89 wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »Remember over time its about CICO Calories in , Calories Out, but remember not all "weight" is equal ... for example I could eat twinkes and Junk and still lose "Weight" but that "weight" would most of the time be my muscle and bones wasting away. While Fat would not be burning.
Any professional case studies to support this claim?
Which Claim exactly ? I'm not really making a "Claim" just explaining that the goal is not to lose "weight" but rather "body fat" , as "Weight" can mean anything, like Muscle , Bone Density etc, heck I can lose weight by cutting of my leg, but most people when they say they want to lose weight they are asserting they want to lose body fat, while adding lean toned muscle.
What I want to know is how these foods know how to cut fat over muscle. Please read what I wrote, I'm not sure which foods you are talking about ? Please elaborate on what your trying to assert. Your not making any sense.or example I could eat twinkes and Junk and still lose "Weight" but that "weight" would most of the time be my muscle and bones wasting away. While Fat would not be burning.
You can burn Fat, of course, just that your body in this state would break down more muscle than fat, due to no having enough protein to support protein synthesis. I was making an simple example to not just focus on weight, and focus more in Body Fat %
Whats with all the hostility
Seriously?!?!! Now I've heard it all!!!
Didn't you know that when you lost your weight (wasn't it over 100lbs), you only lost muscle and no fat because you ate sugar while losing?!
Yep....121 pounds!! Planning on eating poptart tonight, the chocolate peanut butter one.
Ooh, sounds delish. You know, I've been over eating like crazy lately, and I've still never tried a poptart ice cream sandwich. Actually trying to get back on the wagon, so I guess it will still have to wait...
Haven't tried the poptart ice cream sandwich yet.0 -
-
missiontofitness wrote: »johannalovely wrote: »Really, the good thing is it has helped me start. I just couldn't get motivated and now I'm feeling good. Can you recommend a got plan to follow.
A reasonable calorie deficit and not eating 800 calories per day. Quick weight loss has you motivated, but it's going to come back once you come off this diet, because you've lost water weight. It wasn't actually fat loss. Sustainable long term changes will keep you motivated, and that starts with moving more, and eating at a deficit. Women should not be netting less than 1,200 calories per day, and that's the bare minimum. I was eating 1,600 when I started, and lost weight steadily. [/quraelynnsmama52512 wrote: »
I can't even. I just can't.
☺0 -
johannalovely wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »johannalovely wrote: »Really, the good thing is it has helped me start. I just couldn't get motivated and now I'm feeling good. Can you recommend a got plan to follow.
A reasonable calorie deficit and not eating 800 calories per day. Quick weight loss has you motivated, but it's going to come back once you come off this diet, because you've lost water weight. It wasn't actually fat loss. Sustainable long term changes will keep you motivated, and that starts with moving more, and eating at a deficit. Women should not be netting less than 1,200 calories per day, and that's the bare minimum. I was eating 1,600 when I started, and lost weight steadily.
☺
Sorry your post got a bit hijacked for a few pages, but we wanted to correct some misinformation directed your way. Hopefully you got some good feedback, and can create a plan that works for you! Please keep asking questions; people are here to help, and to clarify any misinformation to help you learn and make sustainable choices. 0 -
Back to op - wow! That is amazing/really quick. I have to say im pretty taken aback at how quick you lost the weight (I dont know the details of this diet) and others have commented on water loss and muscle loss which I know to be true. I am 1000% certain Ive lost muscle (Ive only just joined this) due to being very inactive/mostly bedbound due to illness. I was surprised how quickly this can happen - weeks although Ive had this illness 15 years
The bone loss hadnt quite clocked with me but now it does - although I had read online to get a good calcium supplement to prevent this it has never been explained to me.
anyway, its food its motivated you and a good start even if the weight loss slows down (which it inevitably does/will).0 -
Zmanning89 wrote: »missiontofitness wrote: »Zmanning89 wrote: »Remember over time its about CICO Calories in , Calories Out, but remember not all "weight" is equal ... for example I could eat twinkes and Junk and still lose "Weight" but that "weight" would most of the time be my muscle and bones wasting away. While Fat would not be burning.
Any professional case studies to support this claim?
Why does cico always boil down to eating twinkies all day. No one advocates this.
Nor did I advocate this either lol read what I said, I'm saying that losing "weight" is not always a good thing, it depends on what your body is losing (IE Body Fat, or Muscle Tissue, Bone Density etc)
I said for Example if I ate Twinkes all day , I could lose "weight" if I was in a calorie deficit, but most of the weight lost would be Water, and Muscle, and than some fat, I'm not advocating this, I'm saying to not look at it only as in CICO and "Weight" going down, but rather what type of weight is going down
- Cheers
You would lose muscle eating just broccoli all day, too.
0 -
Zmanning89 wrote: »
For example Poison Spider Venom is made of Protein, our bodies would break down this protein like other sources of protein into amino acids, but this source of protein will kill us. Compared to Beef or some other source of protein, I'm saying that all Protein, or Macro nutrients for that matter are not equal on how your body would use them or the effects they have on the body.
I can't have twinkies OR big macs OR spider venom!? I give up. 250, here I come!
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 404 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 987 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions