All calories may not be equal
earthakin66
Posts: 49 Member
Has anyone else read the book "Always Hungry"? It really explains everything that I have always felt intuitively. What if he is right about not all calories being equal? That different foods (and therefore calories) biologically impact us in different ways?
I highly recommend the book, here is the website: http://drdavidludwig.com
No counting calories, eat until satisfied, cut way down on refined carbohydrates and eat plenty of fat. Countless health benefits including weight loss and best of all, no hunger.
Anyone want to join me on a 6 month experiment? Send a friend request.
I highly recommend the book, here is the website: http://drdavidludwig.com
No counting calories, eat until satisfied, cut way down on refined carbohydrates and eat plenty of fat. Countless health benefits including weight loss and best of all, no hunger.
Anyone want to join me on a 6 month experiment? Send a friend request.
6
Replies
-
I don't think you'll get many takers here. We've all been conned by such " diet without dieting " books. (Generally written by stick insects with a
a rather partial grasp of medical knowledge.)
I'm firmly of the view that most of us need the discipline of calorie counting and recording our weight, especially those of us who've become overweight. It rather implies that we don't recognise satiety and that we've forgotten what hunger feels like.
If you are one of the exceptions, then good luck with your experiment.
And by the way all calories ARE equal - but some fill you up for longer. The issue is that we need to eat the filling ones and the not so filling in order to enjoy a balanced diet.
Whatever you do, don't cut out the basic food groups which are: Protein, carbs, veg, dairy and fruit.49 -
All calories ARE equal because a calorie is just a unit of energy.
Different macros certainly do pay different roles in the body. But in terms of weight calories are the only thing that matter, to say otherwise is just plain wrong, misleading and uneducated.
If you lose weight following that it is because you are eating less calories than you burn, whether you count them or not calories are the weightloss factor.35 -
I spent the first 40 years of my life trying to eat intuitively until I was satisfied, not eat so many carbs, make "healthier" choices, eat the right foods. Then I came here, started counting calories, lost the weight and changed my life.53
-
According to Ludwig - "Until we address the underlying drivers of weight gain – which are fat cells stuck in calorie storage overdrive – we are going to be in a battle between mind and metabolism that we just can’t win. Cutting back on calories won’t do it. That doesn’t change biology. To change biology, you have to change the kinds of foods you’re eating."
And - "Simply cutting back on calories as we’ve been told actually makes the situation worse. When we cut back on calories, our body responds by increasing hunger and slowing metabolism. It responds in an effort to save calories. And that makes weight loss progressively more and more difficult on a standard low calorie diet. It creates a battle between mind and metabolism that we’re doomed to lose."
Bottom line - if you are counting calories, weighing, measuring and logging religiously, and cannot lose weight (a common complaint on this site), try this approach. Why not? And why would you continue doing something that is not working?6 -
So I'm looking for people who have read the book and are interested in discussing that, no point in discussing the book with people who haven't read it. There is plenty of science to back it up (written by a doctor, by the way, not a stick insect- was that a typo?).6
-
i guess im a special snowflake then.
to think ive lost 80 some pounds in the past 2 years (and really, most of that was within the first year, this year ive not been focusing on it as much) all while eating the same things i always have, simply much LESS of it.
i still get drunk with my boyfriend (yup - definitely gotta make room for those cals), still eat chocolate, still eat out - and what i want to eat, not necessarily off the 'light' menu, still eat burgers and pizza and bread.
im special.
yup.
all that said, yes, in terms of weight loss, a calorie IS a calorie. In terms of nutrition, and satiety, they can definitely differ. I can eat 1400cals in chocolate and beer or 1400 cals in protein, veg, some fat and carbs, and one definitely is BETTER for me nutritionally, as well as keeping me fuller, longer.33 -
I'm not saying that everyone should stop counting calories. Go ahead and count them and eat whatever you want! I'm looking for someone who has read the book who might be interested in keeping in touch while we follow the guidelines.
8 -
earthakin66 wrote: »So I'm looking for people who have read the book and are interested in discussing that, no point in discussing the book with people who haven't read it. There is plenty of science to back it up (written by a doctor, by the way, not a stick insect- was that a typo?).
You will not find many people here. Calories In, Calories Out (CICO) is the mantra. Doesn't matter where the calories come from.
Obviously nobody is recommending it (repeat, nobody is recommending it), but in theory, they believe you could eat 2,000 calories of donuts every day for a couple of years, or eat 2,000 calories of a healthy diet for a couple of years, and your weight would be EXACTLY the same.
Like what you eat has no impact on your metabolism or fat storage. Nothing. Your body is a bunsen burner. Calories In, Calories Out.
Not buying it. However, there are people here who have been very successful with CICO. I am happy for them.12 -
earthakin66 wrote: »So I'm looking for people who have read the book and are interested in discussing that, no point in discussing the book with people who haven't read it. There is plenty of science to back it up (written by a doctor, by the way, not a stick insect- was that a typo?).
I'm familiar with Ludwig's work.You just appear to not be happy with people calling out the BS.
Just because he is a doctor does not make him right. Especially when bias and money are involved. He makes money selling this "information". That ought to make you wary of anything he says. Only peer reviewed scientific articles and meta studies that have as little bias as possible are good sources of scientific information in my book.22 -
'tgonetothedogs19 wrote: »Bottom line - if you are counting calories, weighing, measuring and logging religiously, and cannot lose weight (a common complaint on this site), try this approach. Why not? And why would you continue doing something that is not working?
Its just impossible to not lose weight when you are in a deficit. So the common complaint on this site is 100% the cause of mistakes in counting. Its that simple. Don't spin it towards something else19 -
SophieSmall95 wrote: »earthakin66 wrote: »So I'm looking for people who have read the book and are interested in discussing that, no point in discussing the book with people who haven't read it. There is plenty of science to back it up (written by a doctor, by the way, not a stick insect- was that a typo?).
I'm familiar with Ludwig's work.You just appear to not be happy with people calling out the BS.
Just because he is a doctor does not make him right. Especially when bias and money are involved. He makes money selling this "information". That ought to make you wary of anything he says. Only peer reviewed scientific articles and meta studies that have as little bias as possible are good sources of scientific information in my book.
In other words, anyone who writes a book and makes money is a crook?
The man is a professor of nutrition at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Perhaps he knows something? Perhaps he wants to spread a message that could reduce our obesity and diabetes epidemic.12 -
earthakin66 wrote: »There is plenty of science to back it up (written by a doctor, by the way, not a stick insect- was that a typo?).
"The goal in Phase 1 is to calm down fat cells and take the body out of starvation mode."
That line I pasted is directly from the website you linked.
That is not science.
Your cells are simply cells, they don't need to be calmed. And starvation mode is not a thing. Not exactly a good start when he's spouting fake-science all over the place.27 -
Why isn't it science? Isn't chronic inflammation real?6
-
hjlourenshj wrote: »
'tgonetothedogs19 wrote: »Bottom line - if you are counting calories, weighing, measuring and logging religiously, and cannot lose weight (a common complaint on this site), try this approach. Why not? And why would you continue doing something that is not working?
Its just impossible to not lose weight when you are in a deficit. So the common complaint on this site is 100% the cause of mistakes in counting. Its that simple. Don't spin it towards something else
How hard is it to count calories? One ounce of cereal with skim milk (the amount is stated on the cereal box) for breakfast. Two cans of tuna fish and whatever the portion of mayonnaise is on the label for lunch. 100-calorie pre-packaged snack. A couple of pre-made burgers on a bun for dinner with a salad and a low-cal dressing.
This is not exactly rocket science.2 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »SophieSmall95 wrote: »earthakin66 wrote: »So I'm looking for people who have read the book and are interested in discussing that, no point in discussing the book with people who haven't read it. There is plenty of science to back it up (written by a doctor, by the way, not a stick insect- was that a typo?).
I'm familiar with Ludwig's work.You just appear to not be happy with people calling out the BS.
Just because he is a doctor does not make him right. Especially when bias and money are involved. He makes money selling this "information". That ought to make you wary of anything he says. Only peer reviewed scientific articles and meta studies that have as little bias as possible are good sources of scientific information in my book.
In other words, anyone who writes a book and makes money is a crook?
The man is a professor of nutrition at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Perhaps he knows something? Perhaps he wants to spread a message that could reduce our obesity and diabetes epidemic.
I see you like to put words into people's mouths.
Having read some of his work he is selling lies and things which do not align with science.
As @daniip_la said he is spouting fake science and selling it "The goal in Phase 1 is to calm down fat cells and take the body out of starvation mode." That is incorrect and not how the body works. You cannot train your cells to do anything it is complete nonsense.
This is not to say the man isn't educated. But that does not mean he is being honest is the work he sells personally away form the university and his job. To blindly trust just because he is a doctor is frankly...not smart.16 -
earthakin66 wrote: »I'm not saying that everyone should stop counting calories. Go ahead and count them and eat whatever you want! I'm looking for someone who has read the book who might be interested in keeping in touch while we follow the guidelines.
There are plenty of low carb/clean eating/Ludwig fan groups in the groups section if you don't want to hear any of the criticism. But you are going to get a lot of criticism in this forum.3 -
I don't mind hearing criticism, I just wonder why everyone feels the need to offer that. Thanks for the tip, I'll look over in groups.
8 -
SophieSmall95 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »SophieSmall95 wrote: »earthakin66 wrote: »So I'm looking for people who have read the book and are interested in discussing that, no point in discussing the book with people who haven't read it. There is plenty of science to back it up (written by a doctor, by the way, not a stick insect- was that a typo?).
I'm familiar with Ludwig's work.You just appear to not be happy with people calling out the BS.
Just because he is a doctor does not make him right. Especially when bias and money are involved. He makes money selling this "information". That ought to make you wary of anything he says. Only peer reviewed scientific articles and meta studies that have as little bias as possible are good sources of scientific information in my book.
In other words, anyone who writes a book and makes money is a crook?
The man is a professor of nutrition at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Perhaps he knows something? Perhaps he wants to spread a message that could reduce our obesity and diabetes epidemic.
I see you like to put words into people's mouths.
Having read some of his work he is selling lies and things which do not align with science.
As @daniip_la said he is spouting fake science and selling it "The goal in Phase 1 is to calm down fat cells and take the body out of starvation mode." That is incorrect and not how the body works. You cannot train your cells to do anything it is complete nonsense.
This is not to say the man isn't educated. But that does not mean he is being honest is the work he sells personally away form the university and his job. To blindly trust just because he is a doctor is frankly...not smart.
You sound like the vegans who think you will get heart disease if you eat a few eggs every now and then or have a piece of fish. Like the vegans, you are totally set in your ways (CICO), and anything that challenges your belief is "fake science."
The fact is that many people post here that are not losing weight counting calories. And the retort is they are not counting correctly.
Really, how hard is it to count calories if you simplify your meals and purchase products where there can be no doubt? (like a cup of cereal with the posted portion of skim milk, or anything that comes in a package).6 -
earthakin66 wrote: »Has anyone else read the book "Always Hungry"? It really explains everything that I have always felt intuitively. What if he is right about not all calories being equal? That different foods (and therefore calories) biologically impact us in different ways?
I highly recommend the book, here is the website: http://drdavidludwig.com
No counting calories, eat until satisfied, cut way down on refined carbohydrates and eat plenty of fat. Countless health benefits including weight loss and best of all, no hunger.
Anyone want to join me on a 6 month experiment? Send a friend request.
While I haven't read the book, I do agree with your premise. Sadly as you are seeing, it's not a very accepted way of thinking around here. While I believe there are few universal solutions, I do think a LOT more people who are struggling, would be far better served trying to eat this way rather than attempting to squeeze a myriad of processed foods into their calorie limit.19 -
earthakin66 wrote: »I don't mind hearing criticism, I just wonder why everyone feels the need to offer that. Thanks for the tip, I'll look over in groups.
Because the underlying mechanism of this diet, and all diets is that you are cutting down on Calories IN.10 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »SophieSmall95 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »SophieSmall95 wrote: »earthakin66 wrote: »So I'm looking for people who have read the book and are interested in discussing that, no point in discussing the book with people who haven't read it. There is plenty of science to back it up (written by a doctor, by the way, not a stick insect- was that a typo?).
I'm familiar with Ludwig's work.You just appear to not be happy with people calling out the BS.
Just because he is a doctor does not make him right. Especially when bias and money are involved. He makes money selling this "information". That ought to make you wary of anything he says. Only peer reviewed scientific articles and meta studies that have as little bias as possible are good sources of scientific information in my book.
In other words, anyone who writes a book and makes money is a crook?
The man is a professor of nutrition at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Perhaps he knows something? Perhaps he wants to spread a message that could reduce our obesity and diabetes epidemic.
I see you like to put words into people's mouths.
Having read some of his work he is selling lies and things which do not align with science.
As @daniip_la said he is spouting fake science and selling it "The goal in Phase 1 is to calm down fat cells and take the body out of starvation mode." That is incorrect and not how the body works. You cannot train your cells to do anything it is complete nonsense.
This is not to say the man isn't educated. But that does not mean he is being honest is the work he sells personally away form the university and his job. To blindly trust just because he is a doctor is frankly...not smart.
You sound like the vegans who think you will get heart disease if you eat a few eggs every now and then or have a piece of fish. Like the vegans, you are totally set in your ways (CICO), and anything that challenges your belief is "fake science."
The fact is that many people post here that are not losing weight counting calories. And the retort is they are not counting correctly.
Really, how hard is it to count calories if you simplify your meals and purchase products where there can be no doubt? (like a cup of cereal with the posted portion of skim milk, or anything that comes in a package).
No. I just rely on peer reviewed scientific studies and meta analyses for my information. And if those sources showed CICO to be wrong tomorrow I'd immediately change my views. But as of yet not a single scientific study can back up CICO not being the key to weight, and trust me I have looked and read hundreds of studies.
Because they either are not counting calorie correctly or have an diagnosed medical condition causing lack of weight loss. It is physically impossible not to lose weight at a calorie deficit. You can choose to be as uneducated as you like. Doesn't change the facts.
It's not hard to count calories. But a lot of people don't do it properly (weighing, measuring, forgetting to log things here and there etc) which is why they are inaccurate. And you should still weigh packaged products. There is variation within packets, depending on the product it can make a big difference in calories.20 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »SophieSmall95 wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »SophieSmall95 wrote: »earthakin66 wrote: »So I'm looking for people who have read the book and are interested in discussing that, no point in discussing the book with people who haven't read it. There is plenty of science to back it up (written by a doctor, by the way, not a stick insect- was that a typo?).
I'm familiar with Ludwig's work.You just appear to not be happy with people calling out the BS.
Just because he is a doctor does not make him right. Especially when bias and money are involved. He makes money selling this "information". That ought to make you wary of anything he says. Only peer reviewed scientific articles and meta studies that have as little bias as possible are good sources of scientific information in my book.
In other words, anyone who writes a book and makes money is a crook?
The man is a professor of nutrition at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Perhaps he knows something? Perhaps he wants to spread a message that could reduce our obesity and diabetes epidemic.
I see you like to put words into people's mouths.
Having read some of his work he is selling lies and things which do not align with science.
As @daniip_la said he is spouting fake science and selling it "The goal in Phase 1 is to calm down fat cells and take the body out of starvation mode." That is incorrect and not how the body works. You cannot train your cells to do anything it is complete nonsense.
This is not to say the man isn't educated. But that does not mean he is being honest is the work he sells personally away form the university and his job. To blindly trust just because he is a doctor is frankly...not smart.
You sound like the vegans who think you will get heart disease if you eat a few eggs every now and then or have a piece of fish. Like the vegans, you are totally set in your ways (CICO), and anything that challenges your belief is "fake science."
The fact is that many people post here that are not losing weight counting calories. And the retort is they are not counting correctly.
Really, how hard is it to count calories if you simplify your meals and purchase products where there can be no doubt? (like a cup of cereal with the posted portion of skim milk, or anything that comes in a package).
I have extensive knowledge in the chemistry field. I know that the laws of thermodynamics exist, and that mass cannot be created from nothing. Eating less than your body burns can not, without violating the laws of physics, cause you to gain weight. A claim violating that principle is fake science.
If you've looked at the threads where people aren't losing weight while counting calories, you've no doubt seen that most people don't properly measure their intake, or miscalculate their output. Do they measure that cereal and milk? How? Was it weighed? Measuring cups can be quite inconsistent, which leads to a calorie intake error.
And if they are being 100% accurate with calories in, who's to say that their bodies burn what the calculators think they do? I lose faster than expected and I log as close to 100% accurate as I can. Some people may lose slower than expected because their bodies simply don't burn as many calories as others do.19 -
earthakin66 wrote: »Why isn't it science? Isn't chronic inflammation real?
If you think you have a high level of systemic inflammation, you can get a blood test that measures your C-reactive protein levels, but you'll also then need to look for the underlying cause (things like autoimmune disease, not just "eating too many toxins" or other such woo). Your body isn't just inflamed for no reason.15 -
Here is a link to a somewhat critical review (with references) of the book by a neurobiologist:
wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2016/01/always-hungry-its-probably-not-your.html3 -
I haven't read the book, but I am a fitness trainer and all calories are not the same. While trying to loose weight if you eat too many carbs you will still loose weight but you will be loosing muscle and not look as flattering if you loosed the fat. However, not all carbs are bad - stay away from simple carbs (in moderation)5
-
This content has been removed.
-
carlenbowie wrote: »I haven't read the book, but I am a fitness trainer and all calories are not the same. While trying to loose weight if you eat too many carbs you will still loose weight but you will be loosing muscle and not look as flattering if you loosed the fat. However, not all carbs are bad - stay away from simple carbs (in moderation)
Not really, you are saying it wrong. To many carbs is not the same as LOW protein.5 -
It just seems obvious to me that 200 calories in almonds vs. 200 calories in a doughnut will not have the same result in your body. It actually seems like people here agree on that so I don't really know what the issue is. Part of the idea is that if we eat 1400 calories worth of nutritionally dense, higher fat foods then we will be less hungry than if we ate 1400 calories of processed, low fat foods.
I read the review, interesting points.
I dont trust doctors blindly, just was pointing out that he isn't a stick insect.10 -
earthakin66 wrote: »I don't mind hearing criticism, I just wonder why everyone feels the need to offer that. Thanks for the tip, I'll look over in groups.
Because people with little experience with CICO and the lifestyle changes which often need to accompany weight-loss and maintenance of the loss might read this and think he's credible. Dr. Oz is a doctor and his weight-loss tips/ideas (raspberry ketones, garcina cambogia, etc.) are not effective nor credible. There's a professor with a Ph.D. who denies the massacre at Sandyhook occurred. Even demanded the parents of one of the dead children provide proof their child died. He taught Communication and Media Studies at FAU and was convinced the journalists didn't uncover the truth about what happened, because to him the massacre was faked to gain emotional momentum to pass gun control legislation.
Education doesn't make a person "right." (Or, apparently a decent human being in the case of the Sandyhook denier.) It makes them informed. Research and the body of studies which support or confound theories is important in discerning what information is accurate.
Then they think they have to stick with his program and if they can't they think there's no hope and they quit trying. If it works for you--awesome! But personally, I don't want to let information that's not researched and shown to be valid and reliable to stand without challenge.7 -
Just a thought on my previous post.
If there are newbies who want to start counting calories, it should be strongly suggested to them, at least for the first month or so, that they only purchase foods where there can be no possible way of screwing up the calorie count.
A can of tuna fish, two eggs, pre-packaged frozen burgers on a bun, a can of soup, an ice cream bar (as opposed to scooping ice cream from a container), a pre-packaged burrito, etc. Just about anything where you can "leave your brain at home" when counting.
I have never read ANYBODY suggest this incredible simplification of the process.2
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions