What do you think of people who are naturally slim?
Options
Replies
-
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »There is no such thing as naturally thin people.
Well I was one until I was 25. Ate like a horse, did not exercise, could not gain weight. Just short of 6' 1", and was under 150 lbs. Both my parents were bean-poles in their 20's, as was my uncle, and my first cousins. To flat-out state that there are not naturally skinny people flies in the face of reality.
Oh, and as we all got older, we all got heavier. And it wasn't because we were eating more and exercising less. Guess there is this thing called metabolism.
CICO We get heavier because we don't move as much and are still eating the same amount of food or more. CICO my friend.3 -
queenliz99 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »There is no such thing as naturally thin people.
Well I was one until I was 25. Ate like a horse, did not exercise, could not gain weight. Just short of 6' 1", and was under 150 lbs. Both my parents were bean-poles in their 20's, as was my uncle, and my first cousins. To flat-out state that there are not naturally skinny people flies in the face of reality.
Oh, and as we all got older, we all got heavier. And it wasn't because we were eating more and exercising less. Guess there is this thing called metabolism.
CICO We get heavier because we don't move as much and are still eating the same amount of food or more. CICO my friend.
From the day my track team ended senior year in HS, I essentially stopped doing anything physical. So I didn't move any less at age 30 than I did at age 19. And I did not eat more at 30 than I did at 19.
It's very simple. My metabolism slowed. There is no other reason. Certainly you are aware of the concept of metabolism. I could not eat the same number of calories at 30 that I ate at 19.1 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »There is no such thing as naturally thin people.
Well I was one until I was 25. Ate like a horse, did not exercise, could not gain weight. Just short of 6' 1", and was under 150 lbs. Both my parents were bean-poles in their 20's, as was my uncle, and my first cousins. To flat-out state that there are not naturally skinny people flies in the face of reality.
Oh, and as we all got older, we all got heavier. And it wasn't because we were eating more and exercising less. Guess there is this thing called metabolism.
CICO We get heavier because we don't move as much and are still eating the same amount of food or more. CICO my friend.
From the day my track team ended senior year in HS, I essentially stopped doing anything physical. So I didn't move any less at age 30 than I did at age 19. And I did not eat more at 30 than I did at 19.
It's very simple. My metabolism slowed. There is no other reason. Certainly you are aware of the concept of metabolism. I could not eat the same number of calories at 30 that I ate at 19.
You should start back by reading the stickied threads in the beginning of these forums . You clearly have missed the whole calories in calories out thing. .....5 -
zoeysasha37 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »There is no such thing as naturally thin people.
Well I was one until I was 25. Ate like a horse, did not exercise, could not gain weight. Just short of 6' 1", and was under 150 lbs. Both my parents were bean-poles in their 20's, as was my uncle, and my first cousins. To flat-out state that there are not naturally skinny people flies in the face of reality.
Oh, and as we all got older, we all got heavier. And it wasn't because we were eating more and exercising less. Guess there is this thing called metabolism.
CICO We get heavier because we don't move as much and are still eating the same amount of food or more. CICO my friend.
From the day my track team ended senior year in HS, I essentially stopped doing anything physical. So I didn't move any less at age 30 than I did at age 19. And I did not eat more at 30 than I did at 19.
It's very simple. My metabolism slowed. There is no other reason. Certainly you are aware of the concept of metabolism. I could not eat the same number of calories at 30 that I ate at 19.
You should start back by reading the stickied threads in the beginning of these forums . You clearly have missed the whole calories in calories out thing. .....
I found this article. Any thoughts?
http://www.caloriegate.com/calories-in-calories-out/11-experts-demolish-the-calories-in-calories-out-cico-model-of-obesity0 -
GirlonBliss wrote: »I used to think they were just genetically blessed whereas I would have to work at it for the rest of my life. What about you?
There is no such thing.
0 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »zoeysasha37 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »There is no such thing as naturally thin people.
Well I was one until I was 25. Ate like a horse, did not exercise, could not gain weight. Just short of 6' 1", and was under 150 lbs. Both my parents were bean-poles in their 20's, as was my uncle, and my first cousins. To flat-out state that there are not naturally skinny people flies in the face of reality.
Oh, and as we all got older, we all got heavier. And it wasn't because we were eating more and exercising less. Guess there is this thing called metabolism.
CICO We get heavier because we don't move as much and are still eating the same amount of food or more. CICO my friend.
From the day my track team ended senior year in HS, I essentially stopped doing anything physical. So I didn't move any less at age 30 than I did at age 19. And I did not eat more at 30 than I did at 19.
It's very simple. My metabolism slowed. There is no other reason. Certainly you are aware of the concept of metabolism. I could not eat the same number of calories at 30 that I ate at 19.
You should start back by reading the stickied threads in the beginning of these forums . You clearly have missed the whole calories in calories out thing. .....
I found this article. Any thoughts?
http://www.caloriegate.com/calories-in-calories-out/11-experts-demolish-the-calories-in-calories-out-cico-model-of-obesity
I knew it would be something laughable when I read the word "demolish" in the title. I'm glad I clicked. I wasn't wrong and it was very amusing.9 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »zoeysasha37 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »There is no such thing as naturally thin people.
Well I was one until I was 25. Ate like a horse, did not exercise, could not gain weight. Just short of 6' 1", and was under 150 lbs. Both my parents were bean-poles in their 20's, as was my uncle, and my first cousins. To flat-out state that there are not naturally skinny people flies in the face of reality.
Oh, and as we all got older, we all got heavier. And it wasn't because we were eating more and exercising less. Guess there is this thing called metabolism.
CICO We get heavier because we don't move as much and are still eating the same amount of food or more. CICO my friend.
From the day my track team ended senior year in HS, I essentially stopped doing anything physical. So I didn't move any less at age 30 than I did at age 19. And I did not eat more at 30 than I did at 19.
It's very simple. My metabolism slowed. There is no other reason. Certainly you are aware of the concept of metabolism. I could not eat the same number of calories at 30 that I ate at 19.
You should start back by reading the stickied threads in the beginning of these forums . You clearly have missed the whole calories in calories out thing. .....
I found this article. Any thoughts?
http://www.caloriegate.com/calories-in-calories-out/11-experts-demolish-the-calories-in-calories-out-cico-model-of-obesity
Wow. That was painful to read. It's like an army of Don Quijotes fighting imaginary monsters and strawmen and red herrings that anyone with a basic understanding of how CICO actually works can see right through.
Honestly - painful.8 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »zoeysasha37 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »There is no such thing as naturally thin people.
Well I was one until I was 25. Ate like a horse, did not exercise, could not gain weight. Just short of 6' 1", and was under 150 lbs. Both my parents were bean-poles in their 20's, as was my uncle, and my first cousins. To flat-out state that there are not naturally skinny people flies in the face of reality.
Oh, and as we all got older, we all got heavier. And it wasn't because we were eating more and exercising less. Guess there is this thing called metabolism.
CICO We get heavier because we don't move as much and are still eating the same amount of food or more. CICO my friend.
From the day my track team ended senior year in HS, I essentially stopped doing anything physical. So I didn't move any less at age 30 than I did at age 19. And I did not eat more at 30 than I did at 19.
It's very simple. My metabolism slowed. There is no other reason. Certainly you are aware of the concept of metabolism. I could not eat the same number of calories at 30 that I ate at 19.
You should start back by reading the stickied threads in the beginning of these forums . You clearly have missed the whole calories in calories out thing. .....
I found this article. Any thoughts?
http://www.caloriegate.com/calories-in-calories-out/11-experts-demolish-the-calories-in-calories-out-cico-model-of-obesity
Lol2 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »zoeysasha37 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »There is no such thing as naturally thin people.
Well I was one until I was 25. Ate like a horse, did not exercise, could not gain weight. Just short of 6' 1", and was under 150 lbs. Both my parents were bean-poles in their 20's, as was my uncle, and my first cousins. To flat-out state that there are not naturally skinny people flies in the face of reality.
Oh, and as we all got older, we all got heavier. And it wasn't because we were eating more and exercising less. Guess there is this thing called metabolism.
CICO We get heavier because we don't move as much and are still eating the same amount of food or more. CICO my friend.
From the day my track team ended senior year in HS, I essentially stopped doing anything physical. So I didn't move any less at age 30 than I did at age 19. And I did not eat more at 30 than I did at 19.
It's very simple. My metabolism slowed. There is no other reason. Certainly you are aware of the concept of metabolism. I could not eat the same number of calories at 30 that I ate at 19.
You should start back by reading the stickied threads in the beginning of these forums . You clearly have missed the whole calories in calories out thing. .....
I found this article. Any thoughts?
http://www.caloriegate.com/calories-in-calories-out/11-experts-demolish-the-calories-in-calories-out-cico-model-of-obesity
I knew it would be something laughable when I read the word "demolish" in the title. I'm glad I clicked. I wasn't wrong and it was very amusing.
There are many who are much more in the know than I am who do not believe the CICO theory as it applies to the human body (it applies in a lab with a bunsen burner). I don't have an opinion one way or the other. But I do have an open mind.1 -
GirlonBliss wrote: »I used to think they were just genetically blessed whereas I would have to work at it for the rest of my life. What about you?
So ... after all that ... now what do you think?
1 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »zoeysasha37 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »There is no such thing as naturally thin people.
Well I was one until I was 25. Ate like a horse, did not exercise, could not gain weight. Just short of 6' 1", and was under 150 lbs. Both my parents were bean-poles in their 20's, as was my uncle, and my first cousins. To flat-out state that there are not naturally skinny people flies in the face of reality.
Oh, and as we all got older, we all got heavier. And it wasn't because we were eating more and exercising less. Guess there is this thing called metabolism.
CICO We get heavier because we don't move as much and are still eating the same amount of food or more. CICO my friend.
From the day my track team ended senior year in HS, I essentially stopped doing anything physical. So I didn't move any less at age 30 than I did at age 19. And I did not eat more at 30 than I did at 19.
It's very simple. My metabolism slowed. There is no other reason. Certainly you are aware of the concept of metabolism. I could not eat the same number of calories at 30 that I ate at 19.
You should start back by reading the stickied threads in the beginning of these forums . You clearly have missed the whole calories in calories out thing. .....
I found this article. Any thoughts?
http://www.caloriegate.com/calories-in-calories-out/11-experts-demolish-the-calories-in-calories-out-cico-model-of-obesity
I knew it would be something laughable when I read the word "demolish" in the title. I'm glad I clicked. I wasn't wrong and it was very amusing.
There are many who are much more in the know than I am who do not believe the CICO theory as it applies to the human body (it applies in a lab with a bunsen burner). I don't have an opinion one way or the other. But I do have an open mind.
Your comment brought this to my mind:14 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »zoeysasha37 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »There is no such thing as naturally thin people.
Well I was one until I was 25. Ate like a horse, did not exercise, could not gain weight. Just short of 6' 1", and was under 150 lbs. Both my parents were bean-poles in their 20's, as was my uncle, and my first cousins. To flat-out state that there are not naturally skinny people flies in the face of reality.
Oh, and as we all got older, we all got heavier. And it wasn't because we were eating more and exercising less. Guess there is this thing called metabolism.
CICO We get heavier because we don't move as much and are still eating the same amount of food or more. CICO my friend.
From the day my track team ended senior year in HS, I essentially stopped doing anything physical. So I didn't move any less at age 30 than I did at age 19. And I did not eat more at 30 than I did at 19.
It's very simple. My metabolism slowed. There is no other reason. Certainly you are aware of the concept of metabolism. I could not eat the same number of calories at 30 that I ate at 19.
You should start back by reading the stickied threads in the beginning of these forums . You clearly have missed the whole calories in calories out thing. .....
I found this article. Any thoughts?
http://www.caloriegate.com/calories-in-calories-out/11-experts-demolish-the-calories-in-calories-out-cico-model-of-obesity
I knew it would be something laughable when I read the word "demolish" in the title. I'm glad I clicked. I wasn't wrong and it was very amusing.
There are many who are much more in the know than I am who do not believe the CICO theory as it applies to the human body (it applies in a lab with a bunsen burner). I don't have an opinion one way or the other. But I do have an open mind.
If you look at the people quoted, every single one of them is benefitting from selling "information". They might not believe what they are saying themselves. It's just that "you've been doing it wrong" and "what they don't want you to know" are attractive concepts that sell well.
If the calorie hypothesis was "demolished" you wouldn't see it used constantly in the vast majority of scientific papers that deal with weight, because although it can't always be calculated perfectly, it's the most accurate most predictable thing we know. Sure, there are certain processes involved that affect how much you eat and how much you burn, but the basic principle always holds true: medical conditions aside, if you are gaining, you are eating more calories than your body burns for whatever reason, be it by knowingly overeating or by a nonconscious decrease in activity. A 19 year old has more spring to their step, move around more even when they are sitting, walk around more even if it doesn't feel like they are active...etc.4 -
I think they are mainly a product of their decisions and to a teensy weensy degree, their genetics.0
-
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »There is no such thing as naturally thin people.
Well I was one until I was 25. Ate like a horse, did not exercise, could not gain weight. Just short of 6' 1", and was under 150 lbs. Both my parents were bean-poles in their 20's, as was my uncle, and my first cousins. To flat-out state that there are not naturally skinny people flies in the face of reality.
Oh, and as we all got older, we all got heavier. And it wasn't because we were eating more and exercising less. Guess there is this thing called metabolism.
CICO We get heavier because we don't move as much and are still eating the same amount of food or more. CICO my friend.
From the day my track team ended senior year in HS, I essentially stopped doing anything physical. So I didn't move any less at age 30 than I did at age 19. And I did not eat more at 30 than I did at 19.
It's very simple. My metabolism slowed. There is no other reason. Certainly you are aware of the concept of metabolism. I could not eat the same number of calories at 30 that I ate at 19.
Were you at your full height by the end of HS? Seems you could have been in the middle of a last growth spurt during that time. So you got done with HS and track and for example, all your activity was to drive to a sedentary job and then come back home and sit down and read a book or watch TV? Same meals, quantity, snacking, drinking, same everything? Same person cooking, too, no moving out in that time frame?1 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »There is no such thing as naturally thin people.
Well I was one until I was 25. Ate like a horse, did not exercise, could not gain weight. Just short of 6' 1", and was under 150 lbs. Both my parents were bean-poles in their 20's, as was my uncle, and my first cousins. To flat-out state that there are not naturally skinny people flies in the face of reality.
Oh, and as we all got older, we all got heavier. And it wasn't because we were eating more and exercising less. Guess there is this thing called metabolism.
CICO We get heavier because we don't move as much and are still eating the same amount of food or more. CICO my friend.
From the day my track team ended senior year in HS, I essentially stopped doing anything physical. So I didn't move any less at age 30 than I did at age 19. And I did not eat more at 30 than I did at 19.
It's very simple. My metabolism slowed. There is no other reason. Certainly you are aware of the concept of metabolism. I could not eat the same number of calories at 30 that I ate at 19.
And you've just given a very good example of an adjustment to the CO side of CICO. You haven't refuted anything, you've actually acknowledged it.
The formula itself is a simple-to-understand concept, what comprises the CO side is what can be complex. Changes in metabolism, hormonal issues, activity levels, age, illnesses, body composition......but it's still about CICO.7 -
GirlonBliss wrote: »I used to think they were just genetically blessed whereas I would have to work at it for the rest of my life. What about you?
So ... after all that ... now what do you think?
Now, I know that having jealousy over slim people was just holding myself back from making positive changes.
I'm slim now and eat whatever whenever - my tastes have changed and relationship with food has changed. One thing I hadn't noticed about my friends who seemed to eat whatever they want without gaining weight is that they were just as likely to eat an orange for a snack if they craved it as they were to have a cookie if they craved that. For me, I would have had a cookie no matter what just for the sake of it being my one and only treat, lol.
I also think that regardless of if you have weight issues or not, everyone should learn how to eat for health. Not something you really learn in school.2 -
If they aren't getting buff, it's because they aren't consuming the calories needed to do it. And while many may have a higher metabolic rate, math still applies. Eat more than your TDEE consistently and you'll gain weight.Depends. People who struggle to keep weight on have a struggle, too. Different, but not easy. It's especially hard for small men who have trouble getting buff when that's what they really want.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Or it's because they're short guys who are small-boned and will just never be tall or very muscular. It shouldn't matter to them, IMO, but it does. Small people might get fat, but they'll never be big people. That's life.
Believe it or not, it is difficult for some people to keep their weight up. Maybe you studied that when studying nutrition? It's usually included.
5'9''.0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »zoeysasha37 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »There is no such thing as naturally thin people.
Well I was one until I was 25. Ate like a horse, did not exercise, could not gain weight. Just short of 6' 1", and was under 150 lbs. Both my parents were bean-poles in their 20's, as was my uncle, and my first cousins. To flat-out state that there are not naturally skinny people flies in the face of reality.
Oh, and as we all got older, we all got heavier. And it wasn't because we were eating more and exercising less. Guess there is this thing called metabolism.
CICO We get heavier because we don't move as much and are still eating the same amount of food or more. CICO my friend.
From the day my track team ended senior year in HS, I essentially stopped doing anything physical. So I didn't move any less at age 30 than I did at age 19. And I did not eat more at 30 than I did at 19.
It's very simple. My metabolism slowed. There is no other reason. Certainly you are aware of the concept of metabolism. I could not eat the same number of calories at 30 that I ate at 19.
You should start back by reading the stickied threads in the beginning of these forums . You clearly have missed the whole calories in calories out thing. .....
I found this article. Any thoughts?
http://www.caloriegate.com/calories-in-calories-out/11-experts-demolish-the-calories-in-calories-out-cico-model-of-obesity
I knew it would be something laughable when I read the word "demolish" in the title. I'm glad I clicked. I wasn't wrong and it was very amusing.
There are many who are much more in the know than I am who do not believe the CICO theory as it applies to the human body (it applies in a lab with a bunsen burner). I don't have an opinion one way or the other. But I do have an open mind.
If you look at the people quoted, every single one of them is benefitting from selling "information". They might not believe what they are saying themselves. It's just that "you've been doing it wrong" and "what they don't want you to know" are attractive concepts that sell well.
If the calorie hypothesis was "demolished" you wouldn't see it used constantly in the vast majority of scientific papers that deal with weight, because although it can't always be calculated perfectly, it's the most accurate most predictable thing we know. Sure, there are certain processes involved that affect how much you eat and how much you burn, but the basic principle always holds true: medical conditions aside, if you are gaining, you are eating more calories than your body burns for whatever reason, be it by knowingly overeating or by a nonconscious decrease in activity. A 19 year old has more spring to their step, move around more even when they are sitting, walk around more even if it doesn't feel like they are active...etc.
No, I don't think people are selling information. I am not saying the concept of CICO is incorrect. I am saying that people who know a hell of a lot more about nutrition than I do are saying it is incorrect. One of hundreds:
"Feinman has looked at calories from the perspective of thermodynamics—or the laws that govern heat and energy. Like Ludwig, he says the idea that calories from different macronutrient sources would have the same effect on your body is silly. Put simply, it doesn’t make sense that “a calorie is a calorie” because your body uses the energy from different foods in a variety of ways, Feinman explains."
http://time.com/2988142/you-asked-are-all-calories-created-equal/0 -
Protein takes the most energy to digest, so a gram of protein doesn't yield the same amount of energy as a gram of carbohydrate. This just highlights how complex a "simple" concept like CICO is. Also, BMR varies from person to person. A 25 y.o. male bodybuilder with a lot of muscle mass might expend as much energy in an hour of sedentary activity as I do doing an hour of brisk walking. I do believe in CICO. But I don't believe in reductionist thinking that attempts to simplify it to a "one size fits all" formula...and it is trial and error for most of us to find that balance. Fortunately, most of the CICO adherents on MFP know that it is a complex issue, despite some of them saying things like, "It's all about CICO" which is not very helpful - that sort of statement is tempting to say (I have said it) but it's really just a slogan that summarizes a complicated issue that a group of people have come to understand for their own unique situation.
I prefer a LCHF diet, I do count calories, and I try to lead an active lifestyle by puttering about rather than sitting, plus I am doing resistance training to increase muscle mass to boost calories out. I do cardio for my heart & lungs. I use the usda database usually, and I log exercise, but I take it all with a grain of salt because I know these are not exact kcal but are inexact aids to help me customize my own program.
Sorry I know this may be a little off topic, I hope not too much so.2 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »zoeysasha37 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »There is no such thing as naturally thin people.
Well I was one until I was 25. Ate like a horse, did not exercise, could not gain weight. Just short of 6' 1", and was under 150 lbs. Both my parents were bean-poles in their 20's, as was my uncle, and my first cousins. To flat-out state that there are not naturally skinny people flies in the face of reality.
Oh, and as we all got older, we all got heavier. And it wasn't because we were eating more and exercising less. Guess there is this thing called metabolism.
CICO We get heavier because we don't move as much and are still eating the same amount of food or more. CICO my friend.
From the day my track team ended senior year in HS, I essentially stopped doing anything physical. So I didn't move any less at age 30 than I did at age 19. And I did not eat more at 30 than I did at 19.
It's very simple. My metabolism slowed. There is no other reason. Certainly you are aware of the concept of metabolism. I could not eat the same number of calories at 30 that I ate at 19.
You should start back by reading the stickied threads in the beginning of these forums . You clearly have missed the whole calories in calories out thing. .....
I found this article. Any thoughts?
http://www.caloriegate.com/calories-in-calories-out/11-experts-demolish-the-calories-in-calories-out-cico-model-of-obesity
I knew it would be something laughable when I read the word "demolish" in the title. I'm glad I clicked. I wasn't wrong and it was very amusing.
There are many who are much more in the know than I am who do not believe the CICO theory as it applies to the human body (it applies in a lab with a bunsen burner). I don't have an opinion one way or the other. But I do have an open mind.
If you look at the people quoted, every single one of them is benefitting from selling "information". They might not believe what they are saying themselves. It's just that "you've been doing it wrong" and "what they don't want you to know" are attractive concepts that sell well.
If the calorie hypothesis was "demolished" you wouldn't see it used constantly in the vast majority of scientific papers that deal with weight, because although it can't always be calculated perfectly, it's the most accurate most predictable thing we know. Sure, there are certain processes involved that affect how much you eat and how much you burn, but the basic principle always holds true: medical conditions aside, if you are gaining, you are eating more calories than your body burns for whatever reason, be it by knowingly overeating or by a nonconscious decrease in activity. A 19 year old has more spring to their step, move around more even when they are sitting, walk around more even if it doesn't feel like they are active...etc.
No, I don't think people are selling information. I am not saying the concept of CICO is incorrect. I am saying that people who know a hell of a lot more about nutrition than I do are saying it is incorrect. One of hundreds:
"Feinman has looked at calories from the perspective of thermodynamics—or the laws that govern heat and energy. Like Ludwig, he says the idea that calories from different macronutrient sources would have the same effect on your body is silly. Put simply, it doesn’t make sense that “a calorie is a calorie” because your body uses the energy from different foods in a variety of ways, Feinman explains."
http://time.com/2988142/you-asked-are-all-calories-created-equal/
And he is absolutely wrong in that regard.
Once they're calories, they're indistinguishable. They're all ATP, regardless which nutrient they were originally. Your body can't use those "differently" depending where they came from. It's gonna use them however it sees fit.
NUTRIENTS are different, CALORIES are not.
The amount of NUTRIENTS your body needs for various things outside of plain energy generation are close to each other for every human depending on their size and weight and still count towards your energy expenditure.
If you eat more fat than your body needs? Converted to energy.
If you eat more protein than your body needs? Converted to energy.
Your body does not say "Oh, I'm gonna need more energy if I want to keep going at this rate, but there's just protein here, guess I'll just keel over." Your body doesn't waste energy. It can't create energy out of thin air either. Pretending it's overly complicated and something silly like a few grams more or less of one nutrient are going to have a huge impact is an insult towards the extend of our evolution as a species that went for the most efficient form possible.8
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 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
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 913 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions