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.
Is counting calories all wrong?
Replies
-
rfrenkel77 wrote: »azzeazsaleh5429 wrote: »What counting calories has taught me so far, I lost touch with proper portions sizes to a point when I calculate calories I need to cut back a lot of food off my plate or else I will mess up my daily calorie intake. For example, just had some of our family favorite pizza, its 424 calories a slice before mfp I easily would eat 4 slices now I counted calories I only can eat 2 slices. So its a whole new ball game when portioning food for my new ideal weight that is what I am trying to acquire. Not to mention how all the macros get screwed up with all the wrong types of food. My protein for the day is way too low eating bad food.
This is valuable lesson of course. That’s you are eating crap all day, in large amounts, and still missing a macronutrient. When you not getting it your body craves more food, so you are still hungry after 4 slices. But back to you original question, is dr Fung a quack? Find one from low carb vale where he shows studies of calorie reduction vs fasting. That’s the real gem. Systemic calorie reduction reduces metabolism. So you become less and less efficient at burning your fat stores. So how to optimize your fat burn to the max? You eat nothing! According to studies, there is a totally different hormone response to lowered calorie intake vs 0 calorie intake. With 0 calorie intake the fat stores are opened. So you achieve an efficient fat burning effect without lowering metabolism. On days you eat you don’t reduce calories. You don’t overeat of course , because that will put more fat in storage. Anyway that’s what I took away from his video and I’m experimenting with fasting myself, to try and get same effect as the studies.rfrenkel77 wrote: »Posting my own numbers and making no claims, here is every weight in point from aria2 Fitbit scale.
I dont know, I'd consider those to be claims...5 -
It still amazes me how people eating zero calories periodically on a regular basis think they're somehow not reducing their overall caloric intake.
Fung would make PT Barnum proud with how many people he's hoodwinked with this sales pitch.23 -
rfrenkel77 wrote: »Posting my own numbers and making no claims, here is every weight in point from aria2 Fitbit scale. In the study dr Fung shows in low carb vale, people fasted every other day for 30 days. Exactly what I am doing. Don’t sense anything unhealthy about it.
No claims in here, then?rfrenkel77 wrote: »azzeazsaleh5429 wrote: »What counting calories has taught me so far, I lost touch with proper portions sizes to a point when I calculate calories I need to cut back a lot of food off my plate or else I will mess up my daily calorie intake. For example, just had some of our family favorite pizza, its 424 calories a slice before mfp I easily would eat 4 slices now I counted calories I only can eat 2 slices. So its a whole new ball game when portioning food for my new ideal weight that is what I am trying to acquire. Not to mention how all the macros get screwed up with all the wrong types of food. My protein for the day is way too low eating bad food.
This is valuable lesson of course. That’s you are eating crap all day, in large amounts, and still missing a macronutrient. When you not getting it your body craves more food, so you are still hungry after 4 slices. But back to you original question, is dr Fung a quack? Find one from low carb vale where he shows studies of calorie reduction vs fasting. That’s the real gem. Systemic calorie reduction reduces metabolism. So you become less and less efficient at burning your fat stores. So how to optimize your fat burn to the max? You eat nothing! According to studies, there is a totally different hormone response to lowered calorie intake vs 0 calorie intake. With 0 calorie intake the fat stores are opened. So you achieve an efficient fat burning effect without lowering metabolism. On days you eat you don’t reduce calories. You don’t overeat of course , because that will put more fat in storage. Anyway that’s what I took away from his video and I’m experimenting with fasting myself, to try and get same effect as the studies.
You wouldn't just be "siting" the video that began this thread, I hope?
Here is an interval of simple calorie restriction (below), from the better part of a year that looks the same. I'm not seeing the lack of fat burning effect. (As an aside, this is my data, and I did lose unhealthfully fast for a time, accidentally, because MFP underestimates my calorie needs, even with accurate inputs. I don't recommend losing very fast, based simply on personal experience.)
4 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »It still amazes me how people eating zero calories periodically on a regular basis think they're somehow not reducing their overall caloric intake.
Fung would make PT Barnum proud with how many people he's hoodwinked with this sales pitch.
Yes of course there is a calorie reduction, but without overall metabolic slowdown. Supposedly! I think you missed the whole point of intermittent fasting. I’m testing it on myself and will let you know how it goes.
17 -
rfrenkel77 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »It still amazes me how people eating zero calories periodically on a regular basis think they're somehow not reducing their overall caloric intake.
Fung would make PT Barnum proud with how many people he's hoodwinked with this sales pitch.
Yes of course there is a calorie reduction, but without overall metabolic slowdown. Supposedly! I think you missed the whole point of intermittent fasting. I’m testing it on myself and will let you know how it goes.
A bit of reading... As far as I'm concerned, IF and just plain energy restriction without restricting eating window provide the same results... If IF suits your lifestyle, then great. If it doesn't (as in my case) then there is no reason to force myself to a way of eating that makes me miserable.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30470804
No statistical difference found for weight loss, body composition, and cardiometabolic risk factors between intermittent fasting and continuous energy restriction.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30475957
Intermittent fasting may be equivalent to but not superior to continuous energy restriction for weight reduction and prevention of metabolic diseases
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29778565
Both intermittent and continuous energy restriction resulted in similar weight loss, maintenance and improvements in cardiovascular risk factors after one year. However, feelings of hunger may be more pronounced during intermittent energy restriction.12 -
rfrenkel77 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »It still amazes me how people eating zero calories periodically on a regular basis think they're somehow not reducing their overall caloric intake.
Fung would make PT Barnum proud with how many people he's hoodwinked with this sales pitch.
Yes of course there is a calorie reduction, but without overall metabolic slowdown. Supposedly! I think you missed the whole point of intermittent fasting. I’m testing it on myself and will let you know how it goes.
Oh, and BTW: I'm the one who posted the "calorie restriction weight loss" chart above, with my daily weights from Libra.
Currently, in maintenance, I burn 20%-30% more net calories daily than most calorie-needs "calculators" (so called) estimate for my size, age, and activity level. That's based on bodyweight/food-log data from most of a year that it took to lose 50ish pounds, and nearly 3 years since then of maintaining a healthy weight.
So I'm not seeing that metabolic damage you're warning us about. I'm not saying other things don't happen to other people; but I'm not seeing the dire consequences of simple calorie restriction personally.
But everybody's different, I guess.11 -
Funnily enough, this turned up in my inbox yesterday: https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/metabolic-damage/
Metabolic damage isn't really everything I thought it was...6 -
rfrenkel77 wrote: »ladyreva78 wrote: »How much weight lost is that? My attempt at calculating it out comes to around 8lbs... In 9 days? That seems insane and far from healthy.
Flag on the play: Requesting site for platitude, after making extraordinary claims on thread, without offering cites in support.
Politeness is nice, but penalty stands. Play resumes at previous post.
Bwahahaha Now I have to clean my keyboard of coffee-spit......
4 -
rfrenkel77 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »It still amazes me how people eating zero calories periodically on a regular basis think they're somehow not reducing their overall caloric intake.
Fung would make PT Barnum proud with how many people he's hoodwinked with this sales pitch.
Yes of course there is a calorie reduction, but without overall metabolic slowdown. Supposedly! I think you missed the whole point of intermittent fasting. I’m testing it on myself and will let you know how it goes.
I did IF for around 6 years. My weight changes/maintenance weight was consistent with my calorie intake. Nothing extra happened from the IF aspect. I also have around 7 years of twice-a-year blood work panels/health evals and there was no noticeable differences between my tests while doing IF, and my tests during my non-IF times.
I enjoyed IF for a time and there's nothing wrong with experimenting with it, just realize it doesn't do anything magical5 -
estherdragonbat wrote: »Funnily enough, this turned up in my inbox yesterday: https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/metabolic-damage/
Metabolic damage isn't really everything I thought it was...
Thanks for posting that link, it's a good read for a lay-person like me.
So metabolic "damage" isn't damage at all, just the bodies natural adjustments to weight changes/age etc.
I like how the author states continually that there's nothing to fix because it isn't broken.3 -
rfrenkel77 wrote: »FitFamilyGuy wrote: »I found that I didn't make progress over that winter because of the absence of protein. This winter I am just as lean but feeling stronger and gaining muscle. That is my experience. I won't go back to Intermittent fasting.
Not sure why you are blaming IF for lack of protein. You can eat as much protein as you body weight requires. . As far as I understand at least IF is not a bodybuilding tactic, it’s a body burning tactic.
I AGREE! The key being, "body burning tactic"... I am not a bodybuilder, I'm a fit middle aged husband and dad. To keep this fit I value my metabolism and muscle. I don't want to burn my body, I want to build it up, feel strong and be a fat burning machine! It is about Fat Loss, not Weight Loss for me.
I'm 175 lbs, wear a medium sized t-shirt, look rather healthy in a shirt yet a little more bodybuilderish or athletic with it off. I'll take the bodybuilder comment as a compliment kind of like when someone asks if I am on steroids or if I am a millennial... that happened last year at age 40. As I passed age 40 and then 41, I started to really see the benefits of my lifestyle and exercise regime compared to many of my peers. Too bad more people didn't have as clear of a path to being fit and healthy.
Also, I did eat enough protein each day but it is my opinion that 16 hours without protein being ingested resulted in my body using my hard earned muscle as a source (Intermittent Fasting, "body burning tactic").
Fat Loss, not Weight Loss. In my opinion Intermittent Fasting was sacrificing my muscle, which hurts my metabolism and ability to burn fat. Lean and strong middle aged family guy, not bodybuilder.2 -
rfrenkel77 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »It still amazes me how people eating zero calories periodically on a regular basis think they're somehow not reducing their overall caloric intake.
Fung would make PT Barnum proud with how many people he's hoodwinked with this sales pitch.
Yes of course there is a calorie reduction, but without overall metabolic slowdown. Supposedly! I think you missed the whole point of intermittent fasting. I’m testing it on myself and will let you know how it goes.
I've lost all my weight and kept it off using just calorie restriction, so I'm good. Thanks.7 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »FitFamilyGuy wrote: »rfrenkel77 wrote: »azzeazsaleh5429 wrote: »What counting calories has taught me so far, I lost touch with proper portions sizes to a point when I calculate calories I need to cut back a lot of food off my plate or else I will mess up my daily calorie intake. For example, just had some of our family favorite pizza, its 424 calories a slice before mfp I easily would eat 4 slices now I counted calories I only can eat 2 slices. So its a whole new ball game when portioning food for my new ideal weight that is what I am trying to acquire. Not to mention how all the macros get screwed up with all the wrong types of food. My protein for the day is way too low eating bad food.
This is valuable lesson of course. That’s you are eating crap all day, in large amounts, and still missing a macronutrient. When you not getting it your body craves more food, so you are still hungry after 4 slices. But back to you original question, is dr Fung a quack? Find one from low carb vale where he shows studies of calorie reduction vs fasting. That’s the real gem. Systemic calorie reduction reduces metabolism. So you become less and less efficient at burning your fat stores. So how to optimize your fat burn to the max? You eat nothing! According to studies, there is a totally different hormone response to lowered calorie intake vs 0 calorie intake. With 0 calorie intake the fat stores are opened. So you achieve an efficient fat burning effect without lowering metabolism. On days you eat you don’t reduce calories. You don’t overeat of course , because that will put more fat in storage. Anyway that’s what I took away from his video and I’m experimenting with fasting myself, to try and get same effect as the studies.
Last winter I did intermittent fasting. I had a "feeding window" for about 8-10 hours and I fasted overnight for 14-16 hours. I found that because I was going so long without protein my body was breaking down the muscle I made to feed the muscle I worked. I found that I didn't make progress over that winter because of the absence of protein. This winter I am just as lean but feeling stronger and gaining muscle. That is my experience. I won't go back to Intermittent fasting.
I think you might have felt you weren't progressing or performing as well, which is a fine enough claim to make, but I fail to see how you can know the bolded statement without some lab tests.
It seems kind of unlikely that, at the the same level of protein, your body is just just letting protein pass through the gut or go who knows where and instead using protein already in muscles.
Thanks for the reply. I would have to first say that I am stating some opinions based on my experiences. Next, I'd like to clarify that I personally have things pretty dialed in when it comes to my fitness.
I hate to constantly bring up my background but it makes it hard to add credibility without putting some context to the posts. My last post went into it a bit... the basics.... I've been at this for over 26 years, I've more or less had the build in my profile picture at age 41 since I was 15.
I can tell how my body responds to changes. I know when I make a major change to my decades of habits like my diet and how my body responds. I have not really changed my training style for 26 years... honestly. I certainly have experimented year after year but generally speaking my experiments are temporary and my basic style has been rather consistent. I know what I was doing at the gym all winter long yet my anabolic, muscle building growth and power just did not feel the same when I was intermittent fasting.
This winter I am back to my old nutrition style, not intermittent fasting and I feel like my old self again... Powerful, growing, lean and strong at 41.2 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »It still amazes me how people eating zero calories periodically on a regular basis think they're somehow not reducing their overall caloric intake.
Fung would make PT Barnum proud with how many people he's hoodwinked with this sales pitch.
I thought that the entire point of IF was that it was a method to reduce calorie intake for people who found occasional fasting suited them better than eating less, moving more every day!
I haven't watched any videos on it and clearly I'm missing a lot here.0 -
HeliumIsNoble wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »It still amazes me how people eating zero calories periodically on a regular basis think they're somehow not reducing their overall caloric intake.
Fung would make PT Barnum proud with how many people he's hoodwinked with this sales pitch.
I thought that the entire point of IF was that it was a method to reduce calorie intake for people who found occasional fasting suited them better than eating less, moving more every day!
I haven't watched any videos on it and clearly I'm missing a lot here.
Fung is totally against continuous calorie restriction (i.e. a daily deficit) because in his words 'it cause metabolic damage and adaptation' and all sorts of other nasty problems... and also causes people to not buy his BS (says my snarky self).9 -
I have been doing IF daily 18/6 since Dec 2018 , except for a couple of weeks off during festive frenzy I've stuck to it, I've dropped 19 lbs BUT this is I believe is because of my calorie deficit, I initially found eating all my calories difficult but added tasty fat ( butter , avocado etc ) during my feeding window, I don't believe IF is a magic bullet for weight loss but as a nearly 55yr old woman i was interested in the health benefits fasting may have for me - anecdotally I sleep better, feel cognitively on the ball , brain fog has lifted & my mood is definitely better, I also find not having to think about breakfast & lunch really freeing . I haven't actively cut carbs or sugar either though do find I desire them less. I try to keep 200 Cals for a treat each day - usually salted popcorn or a bar of chocolate . I do not feel like I'm missing out like I did when I was following WW & SW , For the first time in my adult dieting life I feel I've found something that fits in with my family life. my work life and my crazy post menopausal body- eating less and eating this all in in a shorter window1
-
https://youtu.be/iatPAjf5I_Y
This is a good long lecture. Muscle burn is not a thing during fasting according to study’s. Why would body break down muscle protein for energy when there is fat ready to burn? I’ll think about it as I’m eating dinner tonight14 -
HeliumIsNoble wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »It still amazes me how people eating zero calories periodically on a regular basis think they're somehow not reducing their overall caloric intake.
Fung would make PT Barnum proud with how many people he's hoodwinked with this sales pitch.
I thought that the entire point of IF was that it was a method to reduce calorie intake for people who found occasional fasting suited them better than eating less, moving more every day!
I haven't watched any videos on it and clearly I'm missing a lot here.
Fung is totally against continuous calorie restriction (i.e. a daily deficit) because in his words 'it cause metabolic damage and adaptation' and all sorts of other nasty problems... and also causes people to not buy his BS (says my snarky self).
Funny thing about that "metabolic adaptation". I've been at this for four years. I'm working on vanity weight now.
I'm a 56 year old woman who is only 5'1" tall. I'm also very active. I am losing that vanity weight on an average of 1950 calories a day.
I'm looking for this "metabolic damage" and just can't seem to find it.
Also? I used to practice IF (or skip breakfast as well old people called it back before it was a thing). Did it while I was fat, gained weight on it, lost weight on it. It was just my eating pattern. I also didn't eat late at night. Nothing more than some tea. Again, just my eating pattern. Worked fine for me.
Then it stopped working. I need to eat in the morning now. I'm still losing weight just fine.
9 -
Posting a video of Dr. Fung talking about the marvels of Dr. Fung's snake oil doesn't prove much other than that he thinks his snake oil is fantastic. Peer reviewed science is needed to lend credence to his position. I think you'll be hard-pressed to find much, if any.20
-
FitFamilyGuy wrote: »Keto_Vampire wrote: »FitFamilyGuy wrote: »IF eating regularly tells my body to store those calories as fat and my body is not being told by my frequent eating to burn fat then:
How do I stay muscular and lean?
Steroids? No... never did them even once.
Youth? No... I'm 41 years old.
Dieting for summer? No... I'm lean year round.
Fasting? No... don't fast except during my 8 hour sleep.
Low carb? No... love carbs. I eat them all of the time.
No sugar? No... my post workout involves low fat ice-cream... daily.
Only 3 meals per day? NO WAY... I'm constantly eating.
Cardio? No... I've never enjoyed or stuck to cardio longer than a few weeks. Boring!
Temporary Good Luck? No... I've been doing this for 26 years.
Fitness Obsession? No... I have a family & only lift weights about 45 minutes a day with few working sets.
Athlete? No... just a regular old family guy.
How is this possible? According to the principles of the video, how do I burn fat? This isn't just theoretical. I would like an honest answer.
But, were you able to OBJECTIVELY figure kcals-in vs. kcals out (TDEE) over said 26 years...? Or even just estimate/at least come close/ballpark?
I'm not exactly sure if I understand your point but I will try to answer anyway.
For about 22 years I used 90/10 rules like conscious food choices to keep my diet in check. I was always lean, strong and similar in build to my current build. (although just 135 lbs at the start of grade 10 at the very beginning)
Over the past 4 or 5 years but especially the last 2 years I took it up a notch by counting calories. I don't need to count calories but I like to. I like the precision control/results and flexibility of counting calories. For me, when I count calories, cutting out some fat with little loss of muscle or adding some muscle with very little fat is as easy as making the decision to do it.
Are you for or against counting calories? To answer your question, yes I know my average calorie burn rate per day and I get in the ballpark each week to gain muscle or lose fat at will. In the middle of winter I'm currently getting stronger, hitting new personal bests (26 years in) I still have abs. I can provide proof you wish.
I'd still like to know how the principles in the video would explain why I stay lean and constantly eat through the entire day.
Thanks for the reply.
Firm believer in kcals-in, kcals-out as being the overwhelming factor for determining weight changes. I am not saying there is no impact from hormones but rather that the stated impact from hormonal regulation is grossly over-exaggerated/does not contribute nearly as greatly as figuring out TDEE, measuring kcal intake, accounting for NEAT, activity, etc. Similar to the "afterburn" effect of HIIT (objectively/by the #s just over-exaggerated).
Some people are just fine eating by intuition & there are many regulation systems @ play in which overtime he/she will simply undulate back & forth slightly above & slightly below maintenance without actively logging # kcals consumed each day (end up @ maintenance overall without realizing it).2 -
born_of_fire74 wrote: »Posting a video of Dr. Fung talking about the marvels of Dr. Fung's snake oil doesn't prove much other than that he thinks his snake oil is fantastic. Peer reviewed science is needed to lend credence to his position. I think you'll be hard-pressed to find much, if any.
He is not selling you any pills. Fasting saves money, so don’t get twisted over it.
18 -
rfrenkel77 wrote: »born_of_fire74 wrote: »Posting a video of Dr. Fung talking about the marvels of Dr. Fung's snake oil doesn't prove much other than that he thinks his snake oil is fantastic. Peer reviewed science is needed to lend credence to his position. I think you'll be hard-pressed to find much, if any.
He is not selling you any pills. Fasting saves money, so don’t get twisted over it.
Ideas can be products too under Capitalism, Comrade.15 -
rfrenkel77 wrote: »born_of_fire74 wrote: »Posting a video of Dr. Fung talking about the marvels of Dr. Fung's snake oil doesn't prove much other than that he thinks his snake oil is fantastic. Peer reviewed science is needed to lend credence to his position. I think you'll be hard-pressed to find much, if any.
He is not selling you any pills. Fasting saves money, so don’t get twisted over it.
He is however selling paid memberships on his site, which costs $39 a month. If you want 'personal' coaching that starts at $787 for 12 Group sessions, 30 minutes one-on-one will run you $175.
Without fail every single one of these diet 'experts' are trying to sell something. If it's not supplements it's retreats, or conferences, or memberships, or 'exclusive' benefits etc etc.
eta: interesting to note that there's no guarantee you'll actually get to interact with Fung paying these fees. Instead there's several 'nutritional counselors' listed-however there's no information on their education/medical backgrounds.11 -
[/quote]
He is however selling paid memberships on his site, which costs $39 a month. If you want 'personal' coaching that starts at $787 for 12 Group sessions, 30 minutes one-on-one will run you $175.
Without fail every single one of these diet 'experts' are trying to sell something. If it's not supplements it's retreats, or conferences, or memberships, or 'exclusive' benefits etc etc.
eta: interesting to note that there's no guarantee you'll actually get to interact with Fung paying these fees. Instead there's several 'nutritional counselors' listed-however there's no information on their education/medical backgrounds. [/quote]
Let me restate that. His ideas are not costing ME any money. That stated, how much is the dieobesity costing the world in money and lives
8 -
rfrenkel77 wrote: »
He is however selling paid memberships on his site, which costs $39 a month. If you want 'personal' coaching that starts at $787 for 12 Group sessions, 30 minutes one-on-one will run you $175.
Without fail every single one of these diet 'experts' are trying to sell something. If it's not supplements it's retreats, or conferences, or memberships, or 'exclusive' benefits etc etc.
eta: interesting to note that there's no guarantee you'll actually get to interact with Fung paying these fees. Instead there's several 'nutritional counselors' listed-however there's no information on their education/medical backgrounds. [/quote]
Let me restate that. His ideas are not costing ME any money. That stated, how much is the dieobesity costing the world in money and lives
[/quote]
Sounds like a tu quo que. So let's say dieobesity costs infinity billion dollars a second. Does it follow that Fung is allowed to make stuff up with little to no actual empirical study, even if all of it only costs the time of those that fall for it?14 -
rfrenkel77 wrote: »
<video snipped, for length>
This is a good long lecture. Muscle burn is not a thing during fasting according to study’s. Why would body break down muscle protein for energy when there is fat ready to burn? I’ll think about it as I’m eating dinner tonightrfrenkel77 wrote: »
He is however selling paid memberships on his site, which costs $39 a month. If you want 'personal' coaching that starts at $787 for 12 Group sessions, 30 minutes one-on-one will run you $175.
Without fail every single one of these diet 'experts' are trying to sell something. If it's not supplements it's retreats, or conferences, or memberships, or 'exclusive' benefits etc etc.
eta: interesting to note that there's no guarantee you'll actually get to interact with Fung paying these fees. Instead there's several 'nutritional counselors' listed-however there's no information on their education/medical backgrounds.
Let me restate that. His ideas are not costing ME any money. That stated, how much is the dieobesity costing the world in money and lives
I'm not going to watch a long lecture explaining something I have no plan to do, no need to do, and no desire to do. (This is not the same thing as saying I don't have any idea what Fung is saying. I've been here for a while. ).
Here's the thing: No one is telling you (I think) that you shouldn't do IF, if you want to. It helps some people stick to a calorie goal, which is great (and it's what's needful to lose weight). Several people have said that explicitly.
You also have several people on the thread who've said IF isn't for them, for various reasons of personal preference or habit or the like.
Ladyreva has posted several research studies saying that IF results are comparable to results from other diets that limit calories. Several people have posted anecdotes or evidence that for their personal n=1 cases, IF was not necessary for weight loss, or not sufficient for weight loss, or didn't result in losing more weight than their calorie intake would've predicted; and didn't necessarily appear to have a deleterious effect on their metabolism or muscle tissue, even though they lost or are losing material amounts of weight. (These anecdotes seem consistent with the research posted, BTW.)
Much of this would justify believing, at minimum, that what Fung says is not universally essential for weight loss, or for maintaining a reasonably healthy metabolism. Might that not begin raising some questions about what he says concerning how human metabolism works?
And, even though you have no plans to pay Fung, it's pretty clear that he has put in place a structure that will allow him to make money from promoting his ideas. Might that not raise some questions about his reasons for proposing these theories as to how weight loss needs to be done in order to remain healthy?
If IF works for you, super cool: I love to see people succeed in their weight management goals. I hope you'll be very successful. I'd suggest maybe being a little cautious about proselytizing for Fung based simply what he and his disciples advance as truth, especially as your personal n=1 experiment is just beginning.
P.S. You ask: "Why would the body break down muscle protein for energy when there is fat to burn?", which I understand in context of the sub-discussion with FitFamilyGuy about his n=1 experience. But if you read estherdragonbat's informative link, you would have learned at least one answer for that question, and picked up some other interesting thoughts about metabolism and its role in weight management.
You further ask: "That stated, how much is the dieobesity costing the world in money and lives". One possible answer could be: "More than it would be if Fung didn't charge people for questionably-accurate weight loss advice," especially in a context where there are a free alternatives (one of which is, of course, doing IF without paying Fung, as you've pointed out).10 -
[[/quote]
Sounds like a tu quo que. So let's say dieobesity costs infinity billion dollars a second. Does it follow that Fung is allowed to make stuff up with little to no actual empirical study, even if all of it only costs the time of those that fall for it?[/quote]
Whatever he he made up is working.
2 -
There is some truth to what he says about the body burning glycogen. It is true that the more glycogen builds up in your system is because your body has to produce enormous amounts of insulin to break it down (burn). When the body can't break it all down, it gets stored as fat. As we age our body has a much harder time producing enough insulin to break the blood sugars down because of (usually) poor eating habits.
Cutting simple carbs/sugars is the first thing you are told to do when you are diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes.
If you can curb your carb intake before your body becomes insulin resistant then you start burning blood sugar more efficiently. This is the concept behind Keto diets...no carbs means your body has to burn fat stores for energy because there are no carbs present or not enough.
Try it. I went keto for 7 days (1050 calories a day) and lost a whopping 10lbs. I won't do it again though because I've been able to adjust my intake to a healthier level and have added more exercise.
FIFY
5 -
rfrenkel77 wrote: »[
Sounds like a tu quo que. So let's say dieobesity costs infinity billion dollars a second. Does it follow that Fung is allowed to make stuff up with little to no actual empirical study, even if all of it only costs the time of those that fall for it?[/quote]
Whatever he he made up is working.
[/quote]
Always fascinates me when people are so keen to give all the credit for their success to someone like Fung or whatever fad diet trend (ahem ACV) they think was responsible for their weight loss.
You are losing weight and that’s great. You are doing it because YOU created a calorie deficit.
Are you reading at all or trying to take on board some of the info that people are sharing about why there is nothing magical about IF? That doesn’t mean people think you need to stop doing it, just that they want you to have an objective, unbiased understanding of what is ultimately responsible for your weight loss.18 -
A week and a half is not long enough to draw a general trend or determine the efficacy of a diet. Water weight easily masks fat loss in the short term. I have a 5 lb range.
I've changed the way I eat over the course of 8 years of food logging, with activity levels and exercise regiments ranging from sedentary, to lifting weights, to 60+ MPW of running over that time. I followed different macro nutrient mixes and calorie goals over that time according to what my goals were as I went through a bulk/cut while trying to build strength to cutting down my weight to my running race weight. The only constant thing I've done in that time is meticulously and honestly track my food and exercise and use a food scale to be honest with my portions. My weight has tracked right along with my calorie intake.
13
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