Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Scared at what I am reading
Options
Replies
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »People that tend to fit with the "diet term" often are those that bulk and cut over and over spinning their wheels, looking good only half a year. They have short term goals like gaining 5 pounds losing 5 pounds, and may sign up at a gym for a New Year resolution!
You seem to be talking about people who yo yo diet, not people who bulk and cut (who normally look fine all the time, IME, but of course it depends on the person). I associate bulking and cutting with the opposite of someone who signs up for the gym as a New Years resolution or is just focused on gaining and losing the same 5 lbs.Individuals with long term goals really don't fit the "diet wording". (of course, there are exemptions as not everything is black or white but we're talking in generic terms.)
Again, diet means "the way a person or group of people eat." For example, the traditional Okinawan diet or the Med diet or the (sigh) western pattern diet.
It also means cutting calories, and, as such, is something we need to do only short term in that at some time you will get to a goal. No, you should not then go back to eating in a way that would lead to weight gain, but using the term diet has nothing to do with whether you will or not.
As I said above, I have been maintaining. I'd like to lose another 5-10 lbs as I think it would help me run faster and I'd look better in certain clothes I want to wear (yeah, vanity lbs). Why would it make sense to describe this as a "lifestyle change." It's a diet. (Or, if I want to sound cooler, I suppose, I'm cutting.)This is for those that follow a plan and follow it forever. Adapting is possible but they stick to basic principles of their plan. The vast majority of these individuals rarely "YOYO" with weight, although they may go 1-2 bulks or cuts settling in for the long haul.
Nice theory, but I suspect not actually true. I'm cynical, because I did this before and then stuff happened. (No biggie, I eventually knew how to get back on track.) That you approach something as a lifestyle change doesn't protect you against weight gain. It would be pretty to think so, and it probably is helpful to have a long-term plan, no argument. I actually agree it's about adopting and maintaining health habits and fitness goals and so on, not thinking of it as something with an endpoint. But a particular cut (or diet) may have an endpoint when you choose to focus on other fitness goals besides weight loss. Or, hey, maybe you just keep going until it stops at a weight you like (that's what I did the one other time I lost weight), but that's not necessarily the only approach that works.
So again, agree about long-term approach being important. Don't agree that it's harmful to use the term diet (and don't care a whit about headlines in magazines I don't read). Don't agree that "lifestyle change" is a better term -- it rubs me the wrong way and plenty of people doing fad diets and yo yoing refer to their "journey" or "lifestyle change." It probably happens on MFP every day!
No one said the word diet is harmful, and thanks for always ongoing opinion.
"Diet" related to fitness doesn't just mean what a person eats. If you believe that you would not be able to use the sentence like this as it would make no sense. "How long do you diet for?" How long do you eat for, that won't work.
The rest of what you wrote is just opinion, doesn't make it wrong or right just opinion and everyone has one.
Lastly the dictionary doesn't determine how people use slang, and how things change like the word gay has changed over the years. Cool is another one. Things change. Official definitions are not what we are talking about, we are talking about how it's used when achieving a goal as in this situation.
The flagrant misuse/abuse of jibber-jabber attempting to pose as logical thought makes me want to curl up under my desk in a fetal position and weep. Please make it stop.1 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »ominousdusk wrote: »Just eat enough that you are nourished. Be active, rest and repeat this.
Wow thank you for your insight. i didn't know how easy it was!! Someone call the media this man has found the solution to weight loss for every single person in the world! To those like me who don't overeat, are active, and still overweight. you must not be trying hard enough I guess.
If you're gaining weight you have been overeating above what your body needs, sorry to say. Laws of physics can't be circumvented, 1 pound of fat contains 3500 calories and those have to have gotten in there somehow.
True. But when you have certain health conditions, "above what your body needs" sometimes means more than 500 calories a day. So ... what do you suggest to those of use in that boat? Because for many years, if I eat more than that -- regardless of how much exercise I do -- I gain weight. Or at best, I maintain.
Yes, I use a food scale and measuring cups and spoons. I can lose weight if I starve myself. I can't lose weight if I don't. It isn't sustainable to eat below 1,000 calories a day. Please advise, master.
There is no medical condition able to make your calorie needs go down to 500 a day. That's newborn baby amounts.
Yes, dear. Yes, there is. I have one of them. But you're all-knowing so I bow to you. You know more than my endocrinologist, apparently.
I don't understand how it's physically possible (and I really mean "not possible because physics") for a human body to maintain essential organ function for 24 hours with just 500 calories. That's a BMR of 21 calories per hour. That simply defies my (admittedly basic) understanding of physics to a level where I'm comfortable saying that your numbers must be incorrect.
And if not, your numbers are so anomalous that they are irrelevant to 99.999999% of others...(and I'm fairly certain I'm at least another six 9's short in that too).6 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »ominousdusk wrote: »Just eat enough that you are nourished. Be active, rest and repeat this.
Wow thank you for your insight. i didn't know how easy it was!! Someone call the media this man has found the solution to weight loss for every single person in the world! To those like me who don't overeat, are active, and still overweight. you must not be trying hard enough I guess.
If you're gaining weight you have been overeating above what your body needs, sorry to say. Laws of physics can't be circumvented, 1 pound of fat contains 3500 calories and those have to have gotten in there somehow.
True. But when you have certain health conditions, "above what your body needs" sometimes means more than 500 calories a day. So ... what do you suggest to those of use in that boat? Because for many years, if I eat more than that -- regardless of how much exercise I do -- I gain weight. Or at best, I maintain.
Yes, I use a food scale and measuring cups and spoons. I can lose weight if I starve myself. I can't lose weight if I don't. It isn't sustainable to eat below 1,000 calories a day. Please advise, master.
There is no medical condition able to make your calorie needs go down to 500 a day. That's newborn baby amounts.
Yes, dear. Yes, there is. I have one of them. But you're all-knowing so I bow to you. You know more than my endocrinologist, apparently.
Okay, how is your brain able to form coherent sentences, being half dead and all.1 -
jofjltncb6 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »ominousdusk wrote: »Just eat enough that you are nourished. Be active, rest and repeat this.
Wow thank you for your insight. i didn't know how easy it was!! Someone call the media this man has found the solution to weight loss for every single person in the world! To those like me who don't overeat, are active, and still overweight. you must not be trying hard enough I guess.
If you're gaining weight you have been overeating above what your body needs, sorry to say. Laws of physics can't be circumvented, 1 pound of fat contains 3500 calories and those have to have gotten in there somehow.
True. But when you have certain health conditions, "above what your body needs" sometimes means more than 500 calories a day. So ... what do you suggest to those of use in that boat? Because for many years, if I eat more than that -- regardless of how much exercise I do -- I gain weight. Or at best, I maintain.
Yes, I use a food scale and measuring cups and spoons. I can lose weight if I starve myself. I can't lose weight if I don't. It isn't sustainable to eat below 1,000 calories a day. Please advise, master.
There is no medical condition able to make your calorie needs go down to 500 a day. That's newborn baby amounts.
Yes, dear. Yes, there is. I have one of them. But you're all-knowing so I bow to you. You know more than my endocrinologist, apparently.
I don't understand how it's physically possible (and I really mean "not possible because physics") for a human body to maintain essential organ function for 24 hours with just 500 calories. That's a BMR of 21 calories per hour. That simply defies my (admittedly basic) understanding of physics to a level where I'm comfortable saying that your numbers must be incorrect.
And if not, your numbers are so anomalous that they are irrelevant to 99.999999% of others...(and I'm fairly certain I'm at least another six 9's short in that too).
Physics don't matter when you've got [insert unnamed medical condition here].4 -
BreezeDoveal wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »ominousdusk wrote: »Just eat enough that you are nourished. Be active, rest and repeat this.
Wow thank you for your insight. i didn't know how easy it was!! Someone call the media this man has found the solution to weight loss for every single person in the world! To those like me who don't overeat, are active, and still overweight. you must not be trying hard enough I guess.
If you're gaining weight you have been overeating above what your body needs, sorry to say. Laws of physics can't be circumvented, 1 pound of fat contains 3500 calories and those have to have gotten in there somehow.
True. But when you have certain health conditions, "above what your body needs" sometimes means more than 500 calories a day. So ... what do you suggest to those of use in that boat? Because for many years, if I eat more than that -- regardless of how much exercise I do -- I gain weight. Or at best, I maintain.
Yes, I use a food scale and measuring cups and spoons. I can lose weight if I starve myself. I can't lose weight if I don't. It isn't sustainable to eat below 1,000 calories a day. Please advise, master.
There is no medical condition able to make your calorie needs go down to 500 a day. That's newborn baby amounts.
Yes, dear. Yes, there is. I have one of them. But you're all-knowing so I bow to you. You know more than my endocrinologist, apparently.
Do you have permanent starvation mode? I know so many people end up having issues because they enter starvation mode, but I think usually whole foods can fix that.
What is "starvation mode"?0 -
-
I think many of us, we use the word diet because it describes what we are doing - restricting ourselves, plus that is what we've always been told to call it when you are trying to lose weight. It's a difficult habit to break. When watching commercials they all say, no counting calories, no measuring just great tasting food but they are still restricting you to what? Their diet.
I was on WW for a little while and although I loved it, what I didn't love was feeling like all I wanted to do was hoard my points. Which meant I was restricting what I was eating so I could have that cheat day or weekend. Then you have the exercise programs on tv that promise you fast results and all you have to do is walk or dance but no one mentions about food intake, and I've heard about losing weight falls under the 80/20 rule. 80% food intake and 20% movement - not sure how much of that is true either.
So you'll have to forgive us for saying diet because everything you see is about restriction and not about enjoying your food.
I did read somewhere where an author said if we would stop using the word diet and start saying, " I would love to have some but I'd rather not" how much more progress we'd make. He stated much like you are - that when we hear the word diet - we immediately think of unable to eat, restrictions. But if we just say, I'd rather not, we are taking back the power over the food we think we can't eat.
I'm in no way thin, skinny but am full figured and yes I would love to slim down by 80 pounds. I think I tend to let a lot of factors contribute to my slow weight loss. In particular, stress and emotions control when and how I eat - those are the two biggies. And yes, I have a bad habit of using the word diet. I try to use the words weight management but to me, that is just another word for diet. Either way, I'm determining what I can and can't eat. I'm not thinking of it in the way of am I full?
I appreciate your honesty.1 -
jofjltncb6 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »ominousdusk wrote: »Just eat enough that you are nourished. Be active, rest and repeat this.
Wow thank you for your insight. i didn't know how easy it was!! Someone call the media this man has found the solution to weight loss for every single person in the world! To those like me who don't overeat, are active, and still overweight. you must not be trying hard enough I guess.
If you're gaining weight you have been overeating above what your body needs, sorry to say. Laws of physics can't be circumvented, 1 pound of fat contains 3500 calories and those have to have gotten in there somehow.
True. But when you have certain health conditions, "above what your body needs" sometimes means more than 500 calories a day. So ... what do you suggest to those of use in that boat? Because for many years, if I eat more than that -- regardless of how much exercise I do -- I gain weight. Or at best, I maintain.
Yes, I use a food scale and measuring cups and spoons. I can lose weight if I starve myself. I can't lose weight if I don't. It isn't sustainable to eat below 1,000 calories a day. Please advise, master.
There is no medical condition able to make your calorie needs go down to 500 a day. That's newborn baby amounts.
Yes, dear. Yes, there is. I have one of them. But you're all-knowing so I bow to you. You know more than my endocrinologist, apparently.
I don't understand how it's physically possible (and I really mean "not possible because physics") for a human body to maintain essential organ function for 24 hours with just 500 calories. That's a BMR of 21 calories per hour. That simply defies my (admittedly basic) understanding of physics to a level where I'm comfortable saying that your numbers must be incorrect.
And if not, your numbers are so anomalous that they are irrelevant to 99.999999% of others...(and I'm fairly certain I'm at least another six 9's short in that too).
content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2013137,00.html
These 33 guys made it 17 days on a lot less than 500 calories daily. People have done 40 day water fasts.
It just is not healthy on many levels. The body has many sub systems that come on line to try and keep itself alive. Prisoner camps of the past is another example.
After 40 years of yo yo diets in Oct 2014 I decided never to 'diet' again because it had about killed me. By accident (cold turkey stopped sugar and all grains to try and manage joint pain) I found a macro that would let me eat all that I wanted to eat yet lose fat and gain muscle. While later I learned it was LCHF it might HCLF macro that works for another.1 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »jofjltncb6 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »ominousdusk wrote: »Just eat enough that you are nourished. Be active, rest and repeat this.
Wow thank you for your insight. i didn't know how easy it was!! Someone call the media this man has found the solution to weight loss for every single person in the world! To those like me who don't overeat, are active, and still overweight. you must not be trying hard enough I guess.
If you're gaining weight you have been overeating above what your body needs, sorry to say. Laws of physics can't be circumvented, 1 pound of fat contains 3500 calories and those have to have gotten in there somehow.
True. But when you have certain health conditions, "above what your body needs" sometimes means more than 500 calories a day. So ... what do you suggest to those of use in that boat? Because for many years, if I eat more than that -- regardless of how much exercise I do -- I gain weight. Or at best, I maintain.
Yes, I use a food scale and measuring cups and spoons. I can lose weight if I starve myself. I can't lose weight if I don't. It isn't sustainable to eat below 1,000 calories a day. Please advise, master.
There is no medical condition able to make your calorie needs go down to 500 a day. That's newborn baby amounts.
Yes, dear. Yes, there is. I have one of them. But you're all-knowing so I bow to you. You know more than my endocrinologist, apparently.
I don't understand how it's physically possible (and I really mean "not possible because physics") for a human body to maintain essential organ function for 24 hours with just 500 calories. That's a BMR of 21 calories per hour. That simply defies my (admittedly basic) understanding of physics to a level where I'm comfortable saying that your numbers must be incorrect.
And if not, your numbers are so anomalous that they are irrelevant to 99.999999% of others...(and I'm fairly certain I'm at least another six 9's short in that too).
content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2013137,00.html
These 33 guys made it 17 days on a lot less than 500 calories daily. People have done 40 day water fasts.
It just is not healthy on many levels. The body has many sub systems that come on line to try and keep itself alive. Prisoner camps of the past is another example.
After 40 years of yo yo diets in Oct 2014 I decided never to 'diet' again because it had about killed me. By accident (cold turkey stopped sugar and all grains to try and manage joint pain) I found a macro that would let me eat all that I wanted to eat yet lose fat and gain muscle. While later I learned it was LCHF it might HCLF macro that works for another.
There is a huge difference between "making it 17 days" and having caloric needs of 500 calories. If someone's TDEE is 500 calories. They could eat 500 calories every day for the next 13505 days and not lose one pound.
Really?4 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »jofjltncb6 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »ominousdusk wrote: »Just eat enough that you are nourished. Be active, rest and repeat this.
Wow thank you for your insight. i didn't know how easy it was!! Someone call the media this man has found the solution to weight loss for every single person in the world! To those like me who don't overeat, are active, and still overweight. you must not be trying hard enough I guess.
If you're gaining weight you have been overeating above what your body needs, sorry to say. Laws of physics can't be circumvented, 1 pound of fat contains 3500 calories and those have to have gotten in there somehow.
True. But when you have certain health conditions, "above what your body needs" sometimes means more than 500 calories a day. So ... what do you suggest to those of use in that boat? Because for many years, if I eat more than that -- regardless of how much exercise I do -- I gain weight. Or at best, I maintain.
Yes, I use a food scale and measuring cups and spoons. I can lose weight if I starve myself. I can't lose weight if I don't. It isn't sustainable to eat below 1,000 calories a day. Please advise, master.
There is no medical condition able to make your calorie needs go down to 500 a day. That's newborn baby amounts.
Yes, dear. Yes, there is. I have one of them. But you're all-knowing so I bow to you. You know more than my endocrinologist, apparently.
I don't understand how it's physically possible (and I really mean "not possible because physics") for a human body to maintain essential organ function for 24 hours with just 500 calories. That's a BMR of 21 calories per hour. That simply defies my (admittedly basic) understanding of physics to a level where I'm comfortable saying that your numbers must be incorrect.
And if not, your numbers are so anomalous that they are irrelevant to 99.999999% of others...(and I'm fairly certain I'm at least another six 9's short in that too).
content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2013137,00.html
These 33 guys made it 17 days on a lot less than 500 calories daily. People have done 40 day water fasts.
It just is not healthy on many levels. The body has many sub systems that come on line to try and keep itself alive. Prisoner camps of the past is another example.
After 40 years of yo yo diets in Oct 2014 I decided never to 'diet' again because it had about killed me. By accident (cold turkey stopped sugar and all grains to try and manage joint pain) I found a macro that would let me eat all that I wanted to eat yet lose fat and gain muscle. While later I learned it was LCHF it might HCLF macro that works for another.
There is a huge difference between "making it 17 days" and having caloric needs of 500 calories. If someone's TDEE is 500 calories. They could eat 500 calories every day for the next 13505 days and not lose one pound.
Really?
Sorry but I was responding to @jofjltncb6 post.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »jofjltncb6 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »ominousdusk wrote: »Just eat enough that you are nourished. Be active, rest and repeat this.
Wow thank you for your insight. i didn't know how easy it was!! Someone call the media this man has found the solution to weight loss for every single person in the world! To those like me who don't overeat, are active, and still overweight. you must not be trying hard enough I guess.
If you're gaining weight you have been overeating above what your body needs, sorry to say. Laws of physics can't be circumvented, 1 pound of fat contains 3500 calories and those have to have gotten in there somehow.
True. But when you have certain health conditions, "above what your body needs" sometimes means more than 500 calories a day. So ... what do you suggest to those of use in that boat? Because for many years, if I eat more than that -- regardless of how much exercise I do -- I gain weight. Or at best, I maintain.
Yes, I use a food scale and measuring cups and spoons. I can lose weight if I starve myself. I can't lose weight if I don't. It isn't sustainable to eat below 1,000 calories a day. Please advise, master.
There is no medical condition able to make your calorie needs go down to 500 a day. That's newborn baby amounts.
Yes, dear. Yes, there is. I have one of them. But you're all-knowing so I bow to you. You know more than my endocrinologist, apparently.
I don't understand how it's physically possible (and I really mean "not possible because physics") for a human body to maintain essential organ function for 24 hours with just 500 calories. That's a BMR of 21 calories per hour. That simply defies my (admittedly basic) understanding of physics to a level where I'm comfortable saying that your numbers must be incorrect.
And if not, your numbers are so anomalous that they are irrelevant to 99.999999% of others...(and I'm fairly certain I'm at least another six 9's short in that too).
content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2013137,00.html
These 33 guys made it 17 days on a lot less than 500 calories daily. People have done 40 day water fasts.
It just is not healthy on many levels. The body has many sub systems that come on line to try and keep itself alive. Prisoner camps of the past is another example.
After 40 years of yo yo diets in Oct 2014 I decided never to 'diet' again because it had about killed me. By accident (cold turkey stopped sugar and all grains to try and manage joint pain) I found a macro that would let me eat all that I wanted to eat yet lose fat and gain muscle. While later I learned it was LCHF it might HCLF macro that works for another.
There is a huge difference between "making it 17 days" and having caloric needs of 500 calories. If someone's TDEE is 500 calories. They could eat 500 calories every day for the next 13505 days and not lose one pound.
Really?
Sorry but I was responding to @jofjltncb6 post.
And you misunderstood him.4 -
No one said the word diet is harmful, and thanks for always ongoing opinion.
Why argue that people shouldn't use the term or that it leads to regaining then? That sounds like you are claiming it's detrimental (which I think=harmful)."Diet" related to fitness doesn't just mean what a person eats. If you believe that you would not be able to use the sentence like this as it would make no sense. "How long do you diet for?" How long do you eat for, that won't work.
No, of course not. It has multiple meanings. It means "the way a person or people eat" and "eating fewer calories than maintenance in order to lose weight." Neither implies what the OP seems to have assumed (or that the person is a yo yo dieter or New Years resolutioner only).The rest of what you wrote is just opinion, doesn't make it wrong or right just opinion and everyone has one.
Not sure what you think you are adding to the discussion with this, but yes, we are all sharing our opinions. I'm not the one who claimed that if you "diet" you are more likely to regain.Lastly the dictionary doesn't determine how people use slang, and how things change like the word gay has changed over the years.
It doesn't "determine" it, no. It does describe it. But we aren't talking about slang. We are talking about a word that has two meanings, neither, on its own being "starvation diet" or "fad diet" or "yo yo dieter" or the like. That's why you need those adjectives!
What's the point of claiming that when people use the term "diet" they mean certain things that quite frequently they do not mean? I'm not saying you should use the term (I hate "journey" and wouldn't use it to mean "losing weight," but if that floats someone else's boat, well, cool!). All I'm saying is that it's not accurate to claim that the difference between using "lifestyle change" and "diet" is not success vs. failure.3 -
stevencloser wrote: »ominousdusk wrote: »Just eat enough that you are nourished. Be active, rest and repeat this.
Wow thank you for your insight. i didn't know how easy it was!! Someone call the media this man has found the solution to weight loss for every single person in the world! To those like me who don't overeat, are active, and still overweight. you must not be trying hard enough I guess.
If you're gaining weight you have been overeating above what your body needs, sorry to say. Laws of physics can't be circumvented, 1 pound of fat contains 3500 calories and those have to have gotten in there somehow.
Bubble baths. <nods>8 -
BreezeDoveal wrote: »
When you eat so little that your fat cells defend themselves against further loses and lower your metabolism. I think the scientific term adoptive thermogenetics because your body adopts the thermo genetics of people who are used to living near starvation, and therefore produces less hormones to burn fat, and even causes fat gain on a deficit.jofjltncb6 wrote: »BreezeDoveal wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »ominousdusk wrote: »Just eat enough that you are nourished. Be active, rest and repeat this.
Wow thank you for your insight. i didn't know how easy it was!! Someone call the media this man has found the solution to weight loss for every single person in the world! To those like me who don't overeat, are active, and still overweight. you must not be trying hard enough I guess.
If you're gaining weight you have been overeating above what your body needs, sorry to say. Laws of physics can't be circumvented, 1 pound of fat contains 3500 calories and those have to have gotten in there somehow.
True. But when you have certain health conditions, "above what your body needs" sometimes means more than 500 calories a day. So ... what do you suggest to those of use in that boat? Because for many years, if I eat more than that -- regardless of how much exercise I do -- I gain weight. Or at best, I maintain.
Yes, I use a food scale and measuring cups and spoons. I can lose weight if I starve myself. I can't lose weight if I don't. It isn't sustainable to eat below 1,000 calories a day. Please advise, master.
There is no medical condition able to make your calorie needs go down to 500 a day. That's newborn baby amounts.
Yes, dear. Yes, there is. I have one of them. But you're all-knowing so I bow to you. You know more than my endocrinologist, apparently.
Do you have permanent starvation mode? I know so many people end up having issues because they enter starvation mode, but I think usually whole foods can fix that.
What is "starvation mode"?
They studied it around WWI with the Milwaukee Starvation Experiment.
in the minnesota starvation experiment they did not gain fat and they were not really starved so to speak they were given less than 1800 calories(according to one article another sites less than 1500,but they were burning at least 1000 calories so if its the former thats 800 calories-very low calorie), if you look at the pics there is no fat on these people. and adoptive thermogenesis is a whole lot different than what you mentioned. people in 3rd world countries dont retain fat or gain it. starvation does not work that way,once your body is not getting enough food it turns to fat and muscle. their protruding bellies(like those in Ethiopia) is caused from being malnourished and other deficiencies.2 -
People that tend to fit with the "diet term" often are those that bulk and cut over and over spinning their wheels, looking good only half a year. They have short term goals like gaining 5 pounds losing 5 pounds, and may sign up at a gym for a New Year resolution!
I don't that term means what you think it means.
Bulking and cutting isn't gaining and losing 5 pounds and it sure as heck isn't something by someone who signs up for the gym as a New Year Resolution. Bulking and cutting is a method used by people who follow progressive lifting routines day after day, week after week, year after year. It's a method to add lean mass and if someone who bulks and cuts only looks good half the year they're doing it wrong.
Just because someone says they're bulking doesn't mean they are using the term correctly.6 -
People that tend to fit with the "diet term" often are those that bulk and cut over and over spinning their wheels, looking good only half a year. They have short term goals like gaining 5 pounds losing 5 pounds, and may sign up at a gym for a New Year resolution!
I don't that term means what you think it means.
Bulking and cutting isn't gaining and losing 5 pounds and it sure as heck isn't something by someone who signs up for the gym as a New Year Resolution. Bulking and cutting is a method used by people who follow progressive lifting routines day after day, week after week, year after year. It's a method to add lean mass and if someone who bulks and cuts only looks good half the year they're doing it wrong.
Just because someone says they're bulking doesn't mean they are using the term correctly.
More like yo-yoing!1 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »jofjltncb6 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »ominousdusk wrote: »Just eat enough that you are nourished. Be active, rest and repeat this.
Wow thank you for your insight. i didn't know how easy it was!! Someone call the media this man has found the solution to weight loss for every single person in the world! To those like me who don't overeat, are active, and still overweight. you must not be trying hard enough I guess.
If you're gaining weight you have been overeating above what your body needs, sorry to say. Laws of physics can't be circumvented, 1 pound of fat contains 3500 calories and those have to have gotten in there somehow.
True. But when you have certain health conditions, "above what your body needs" sometimes means more than 500 calories a day. So ... what do you suggest to those of use in that boat? Because for many years, if I eat more than that -- regardless of how much exercise I do -- I gain weight. Or at best, I maintain.
Yes, I use a food scale and measuring cups and spoons. I can lose weight if I starve myself. I can't lose weight if I don't. It isn't sustainable to eat below 1,000 calories a day. Please advise, master.
There is no medical condition able to make your calorie needs go down to 500 a day. That's newborn baby amounts.
Yes, dear. Yes, there is. I have one of them. But you're all-knowing so I bow to you. You know more than my endocrinologist, apparently.
I don't understand how it's physically possible (and I really mean "not possible because physics") for a human body to maintain essential organ function for 24 hours with just 500 calories. That's a BMR of 21 calories per hour. That simply defies my (admittedly basic) understanding of physics to a level where I'm comfortable saying that your numbers must be incorrect.
And if not, your numbers are so anomalous that they are irrelevant to 99.999999% of others...(and I'm fairly certain I'm at least another six 9's short in that too).
content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2013137,00.html
These 33 guys made it 17 days on a lot less than 500 calories daily. People have done 40 day water fasts.
It just is not healthy on many levels. The body has many sub systems that come on line to try and keep itself alive. Prisoner camps of the past is another example.
After 40 years of yo yo diets in Oct 2014 I decided never to 'diet' again because it had about killed me. By accident (cold turkey stopped sugar and all grains to try and manage joint pain) I found a macro that would let me eat all that I wanted to eat yet lose fat and gain muscle. While later I learned it was LCHF it might HCLF macro that works for another.
And those guys lost a lot of weight. They didn't maintain an overweight state on 500 daily calories. Because it's impossible.
If I eat 300 calories one day but the scale says I didn't gain or lose any weight in that same 24 hour period, I can't claim that I maintain at 300 calorie TDEE. That isn't how this works.
Or said another way:
"There is a huge difference between "making it 17 days" and having caloric needs of 500 calories. If someone's TDEE is 500 calories. They could eat 500 calories every day for the next 13505 days and not lose one pound.
Really?"2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 391 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions