When it comes to losing weight, does it matter what you eat if you're within your calorie goal
Replies
-
Poor example actually. There are two gallons, Imperial and US. An imperial gallon is 4.54 litres, whereas a US gallon is 3.8 litres. This is why metric is a much better system. Not many countries outside the US use gallons any more.0 -
This is true, but that's more strongly associated with studies investigating very narrow, specific things, like the effects of specific biochemical compounds. For example, a drug that works on cancer in mice always seems to turn out to be less effective in humans.
Animal studies don't crossover the same as actual results in humans.tiffaninghs wrote: »types of foods ABSOLUTELY matter. when im doing completely raw i lose way more weight even if my calories are the same as when im eating wheat ad junk. the trick is no starches!!!
There could perhaps be some truth to completely raw. It seems that cooking food may perhaps change the way your body metabolizes it. Cooking food perhaps increases the amount of digestible calories. The three basic macros of counting calories seems obsolete. Not saying it doesn't work, but perhaps there is now a better way.
http://www.shape.com/healthy-eating/diet-tips/can-cooking-high-fat-foods-increase-their-calories
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
If we're testing something broader, like, for example "Does eating not very much while exercising a lot result in weight loss", the results using mice as test subjects will be meaningful, as it would be for "is breathing in carbon monoxide bad for you?" and "should you try inhaling water?" They're mammals, like humans, and the similarities in physiology are more significant than the differences, if you see what I mean.
In this case, I think the scenario of cooked food versus raw food is closer to a "is carbon monoxide bad for you" hypothesis than "does this cure cancer?"
Firstly:
We've got some very clear reasoning why cooking could improve nutritional availability. This doesn't propose that anything magic goes on; it's all basically high school biology principles there- heat breaks down proteins, this makes it easier for the digestive system to break it down even further, so less of the food will pass straight through undigested, and so on.
At the risk of lowering the tone, anyone who has ever eaten sweetcorn (or changed a toddler who has been eating sweetcorn) already knows that the human stomach isn't 100% perfect, and it needs you to help it out beforehand. In this case, by chewing, which makes the inside of the kernel accessible. In the match between sweetcorn and the stomach, it's always a score of Unchewed Sweetcorn Kernel Casing 1- 0 Human Digestive Juices.
We also know that in those with Oral Allergy Syndrome, cooking the allergen generally (but not always) sorts it out, because the proteins that cause the reaction are broken down by the heat.
Secondly:
This is a different newspaper article on the same study, which mentions that there has been some investigation into this phenomenon in humans.The Harvard team believes that we have come to depend on cooked food, and this opinion is borne out by a study into the effects of a raw food diet. Even when processing some of their diet, through pounding or blending, strict raw foodists were underweight, and 50% of women under 45 had stopped ovulating. “They were so energy limited,” says Carmody, “that their bodies shut down reproduction and, from an evolutionary biologist’s perspective, this is really mindboggling.”
Link to study: http://agris.fao.org/agris-search/search.do?recordID=US201302916766
From a brief once-over, I can see that there are the standard limitations to the study design (participants were self-selecting, because you're not going to find people who will eat raw food for 2+ years solely for the sake of scientific investigation; results were collated by questionnaire), but I think the results have use.
Anyway, you won't see me giving away my saucepan set any time soon.
2 -
If you stay within your macros you can eat whatever th F ya want
1 -
There is some research showing some minor variations in weight loss for some people for some foods. Ergo the keto folks, the intermittent fasting folks, the raw food folks, the paleo folks, the zone folks, ... The which brings up the universal answer to all questions, "Some do; some don't. The differences aren't very great. It's more complicated than that."
In general, yes, you can eat whatever you want and lose weight based on calories in/calories out. If you try to survive on candy bars, however, you will probably feel lousy and therefore move less so your calories out may decrease. If you try to survive on fast food, you will probably retain more water which make you feel lousy and therefore move less so your calories out may decrease. If you try to follow an eating plan that denies you things you love, you may feel hangry which may make you feel lousy and therefore move less so your calories out may decrease.
The only "diet" that works is the one you, as an individual, can stick to. Freely the Banana Girl may do well on 51 bananas a day but I would be up on a roof with a sub-machine gun picking off passers by (between frequent trips to the bathroom).5 -
paulwatts747 wrote: »
Poor example actually. There are two gallons, Imperial and US. An imperial gallon is 4.54 litres, whereas a US gallon is 3.8 litres. This is why metric is a much better system. Not many countries outside the US use gallons any more.
That's two different units that happen to have the same name though.4 -
stevencloser wrote: »paulwatts747 wrote: »
Poor example actually. There are two gallons, Imperial and US. An imperial gallon is 4.54 litres, whereas a US gallon is 3.8 litres. This is why metric is a much better system. Not many countries outside the US use gallons any more.
That's two different units that happen to have the same name though.
It's like saying a dollar is a dollar. As a Canadian, there are different gallons and dollars. So, a US gallon of anything is still a US gallon 2 -
"Junk food" is quite an arbitrary term. To someone eating paleo, bread might be "junk" (even whole wheat). To a vegan, meat/animal products might fall into the category of "junk food." While these are possibly extreme examples, they illustrate the point.
When I think of "junk food" (which is a term I usually avoid) I think of candy and chips and other things that have high calories and little other nutrient value. You could lose weight eating nothing but these foods and staying under your calorie goal, but you wouldn't feel very good after a while.
Other people think of fast food as "junk food." Or pizza. Or ... whatever. Can you lose weight eating nothing but fast food or pizza and staying in your calorie goal. You'll probably even get a decent macro distribution (especially if you pay attention to it). But with nothing but fast food, it might be harder to get all your micronutrients - depending on the availability of things like vegetables or fruits.
The best option, IMO, is to eat a varied diet of foods that you like. Again, staying under calories will lead to weight loss (that's the key!). Paying attention to your macro and micronutrients will help you feel good and keep your energy up. And variety (including some "junk food" treats, if you want) helps you adhere to the lower calories.2 -
Ugh... what do you think?0
-
It depends how few calories we're talking about. Any adult would lose weight on 500 calories a day, wherever those calories came from. But what usually happens when people eat junk food and stay within their calorie goal is they stay overweight and become malnourished - a real problem here in the US.8
-
It depends how few calories we're talking about. Any adult would lose weight on 500 calories a day, wherever those calories came from. But what usually happens when people eat junk food and stay within their calorie goal is they stay overweight and become malnourished - a real problem here in the US.
Where do you suppose the energy needed to stay overweight would come from?4 -
It depends how few calories we're talking about. Any adult would lose weight on 500 calories a day, wherever those calories came from. But what usually happens when people eat junk food and stay within their calorie goal is they stay overweight and become malnourished - a real problem here in the US.
If someone is at the correct calorie deficit for their weight loss goals then they'll lose weight, regardless of what they're eating. I lost 50lbs eating all sorts of 'junk' food, I also improved all my health markers as well. The only thing I did was start being at the correct calorie deficit for my weight loss goals. It really was as simple as that.
eta: look up the Twinkie diet guy. Or watch Fat Head-where a comedian lost weight and improved his health markers by only eating McDonalds.
eta: here's an article about the Twinkie guy-he's a nutrition professor who lost weight and improved his health markers while eating a diet consisting of mostly Hostess goobily gop
He lost the weight because he started eating at a calorie deficit.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html0 -
livingleanlivingclean wrote: »I watched an interesting documentary called "The Sugar Film", he challenges the idea that calories are calories and surmises that calories from sugar work differently in the body... it's an interesting theory and one that I think is far from being proven, but it ... makes some sense to me.
That film is the worst "science experiment" of all time. He ate like *kitten*, let's be honest, and also has no idea how many calories he consumed before, during or after.
You're right. I don't claim to be any sort of an expert, and I realized watching it that there was no science to the whole thing. But, it was an interesting theory and really motivated me personally to cut out sugar as much as possible. Something I haven't been motivated to do in 37 years.
0 -
It depends how few calories we're talking about. Any adult would lose weight on 500 calories a day, wherever those calories came from. But what usually happens when people eat junk food and stay within their calorie goal is they stay overweight and become malnourished - a real problem here in the US.
I don't call food "junk" or label food good or bad. But I eat what lots of people would consider "junk" food every day. I reached my goal last July by eating foods I liked and staying at my calorie goal. Not only did I not stay overweight, I have lost an additional 13 pounds since then. And I am not malnourished. Because even though I eat a lot of "junk" food, I eat even more healthy food. So it is certainly possible to lose weight and eat "junk" food.1 -
For me, yes! It matters. As a person with a damaged metabolism and extreme insulin resistance from PCOS, I have to maintain extremely low carb. I was high protein and moderate fat and have lost 139 lbs in 8 years. I recently switched to keto to reach a fat loss goal. The key, however for me, is being active. 12-15 hours per week of working out. A mix of Barre, Kettlebells, and Zumba. I take the stairs whenever possible. I park out in parking lots and walk inside. I go and walk with friends instead of lunch with friends. When my mindset changed, everything changed. If I want cheesecake, I will have a few bites. More than that will make me sick. I drink water and unsweet tea and rarely drink sodas. So, to answer your question, it depends on your body....0
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
- 232.5K 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