Eat more to loose fat.
Options
Replies
-
one time i lost 15 pounds in 3 weeks by drinking more alcohol....whtas the science behind that? I think i should do that more often, when i drink i get happy, which means it probably gives me endorphins....just like exercise....plus it makes me shake my tail feather....so maybe we should all go on a vodka diet? Personally i can't understand all those abbreviations and acronyms, but everyone is different. I've lost weight while eating mcdonalds EVERYDAY.....ive also lost weight by eating low carbs, high carbs, low fat high fat.....when it comes down to it i think it really needs to be about portion control to stay at a good calories range. My dad has ate the angus burger, large fries and large soda a few days a week and lost weight also....and that was the only meal he would eat. Everyones body works better off different things.0
-
Wow....please go write your own article. your right. you don't have to eat 5-6 meals a day to loose weight. but it does work. It really comes down to calorie intake vs calorie burn. All of this was for you to bash on what. Your idea. Great. Thanks for sharing your idea. Next time write your own post. I eat all day I feel great and....I AM NEVER HUNGRY. YOU KNOW MY RESULTS THAT MIGHT.....MIGHT BE OFF BY A HAIR. WOW PEOPLE ......WOW.
That is why I said that it is very important to pay for a test. I did say it. I said that knowing how much you burn in a day will tell you how much you can eat in a day.A tiny little thing? According to your bogus claim, I should be eating over 5,000kcal/day. Of course I know better, but anyone else who doesn't, might mistake your bogus claim as sound advice then go and eat 5,000kcal/day or more based on your suggestion. And you feel that is a "tiny little thing"?
Now. You keep saying that 5-6 meals a day are bogus. your word exactly. Why does P90X have you eating 5-6 meals a day. Oh....it's a gimmick. NOT. Proven over and over and over and over and over.....look dude....your searching for a little flaw to prove my inaccuracy. Your reaching.
5-6 meals a day isn't NECESARRY to lose weight. I'll give you a prime example. My buddy was locked up for 6 months. He went in over 230 lbs obese. He came out 185 lbs ripped. Did he have the luxury of eating 5-6 times a day, nope. How did he do it? With 3 meals a day, and doing burpees.0 -
Eating more is not about just eating. You have to eat the right foods. Your body needs amino acids, fatty acids, carbohydrates and water. Your body burns so many calories in a 24 hr period. If you eat what your body burns equally you stay the same weight. My body burns 2,100 calories or cals without me leaving my bed. It's my metabolism. Muscle mass burns 50 cals per 1lb per day. Then there are the rest of my organs that need a certain amount of energy to function. A proper body functions on A/F/C and water in the proper amounts. The better your eating habits the more micronutrients/vitamins your body uses. Your organs functioning properly and in unison will help your fat loss and muscle growth. I eat great meals that keep me full and give me proper fuel for the task ahead.
Ex: Whopper w. cheese and med fries. 1,100 cals. I can fit 2-3 meals in that. I "eat more" of the right foods that give me the nutrients the body needs to function properly. Fill half of your plate with vegetables (prefer green leafy). I eat one dark green salad a day with anything but salad dressing. Make your own low cal dressing. Vegetables will give your the organ boost that your body needs to convert the fat into fuel. Potassium is an electrolyte. You need 3500mg a day. Do you know how much you’re getting? You need every other type also. I personally would rather eat my vitamins.
Moreover you need to eat your exercise calories to give your body the strength and nutrients it needs to convert fat to energy and expel the toxins in your fat. Keep your cals -750 to -500 in the beginning. If you’re making poor food choices you will be hungry. Eat the right foods you will keep full and turn on the furnace and burn fat. If you eat the right foods you will find eating all of your cals a challenge. I know I do.
I thought this was going to be really good when I started reading it and then it went down hill from there. Your body needs Carbs, fat and PROTEIN! And your daily macros depending on what you are trying to achieve. Protein feeds muscle! It is true to say that carbs also do this but in a much smaller way because if you overeat carbs it will turn to sugar and then turn to fat, as we all know. I couldn't agree more about the right foods, mostly for the reason that you eat all day and feel full, I also struggle to eat my calories as I am not hungry, most days I don't reach them, which makes me cross as I do not want to shed more than 3 pounds per week. But it's the last paragraph that I was most concerned with, encouraging people to start with 500-750 cals is just irresponsible (sorry but true) it is exceptionally dangerous to have that low an intake for reasons we've all discussed before. You will not just burn fat! You will burn fat and muscle! This is not good at all. Most people losing weight I believe would also like to be lean and firm, doing this will turn you into a smaller but flabbier version of yourself. When very big people go to these lengths the result is skin excess surgery. Not to mention the fact that quick weight loss most often leads to increased weight gain once normal eating is resumed. No one should recommend an eating plan of less than 1200 cals regardless!
Although I agree with eating right it has been proven now that people can achieve their goals without doing this, it is the eat clean Vs eat anything debate that has been around for years. It really much depends on what you would like to achieve, it is also true that if you want to be ripped you don't have to follow a clean eating plan, but most competition standard bodybuilders do and this is because it helps maintain and feed muscle when you can't go to the gym for whatever reason. I know I see better results because of the way I eat, and I fall in the middle somewhere I basically eat clean but periodically have something that isn't, I am lucky in respect that I like good healthy food. I don't eat egg white on it's own because i don't like it as an example. There is no point even trying this if you don't like the food, or you can't bear life without burgers and cake, people just have to find what works for them and then stick to that, the change needs to be something achievable. Keeping a healthy calorie intake.
Without wanting to come down on either side of this debate. I just thought the OP deserved a bit of credit you aren't giving him. Firstly, he said in his opening paragraph you need AMINO ACIDS. That IS protein.
Secondly, he hasn't said anywhere you should start eating 500-750 cals. He said you should start with a -500 or -750 cal deficit.
No point picking him to bits for something he didn't even say.0 -
Without wanting to come down on either side of this debate. I just thought the OP deserved a bit of credit you aren't giving him. Firstly, he said in his opening paragraph you need AMINO ACIDS. That IS protein.
Secondly, he hasn't said anywhere you should start eating 500-750 cals. He said you should start with a -500 or -750 cal deficit.
No point picking him to bits for something he didn't even say.
Nobody is trying to take away credit for the OP's weight loss success. I know he means a 500-700 deficit, but for some people, even a 500kcal deficit/day is too much. A safe deficit to start off with is 15% of your maintenance. So for example, do you see the problem with recommending a small women with a daily maintenance of only 1,600 kcal to drop 500-700 kcal?0 -
Without wanting to come down on either side of this debate. I just thought the OP deserved a bit of credit you aren't giving him. Firstly, he said in his opening paragraph you need AMINO ACIDS. That IS protein.
Secondly, he hasn't said anywhere you should start eating 500-750 cals. He said you should start with a -500 or -750 cal deficit.
No point picking him to bits for something he didn't even say.
Nobody is trying to take away credit for the OP's weight loss success. I know he means a 500-700 deficit, but for some people, even a 500kcal deficit/day is too much. A safe deficit to start off with is 15% of your maintenance. So for example, do you see the problem with recommending a small women with a daily maintenance of only 1,600 kcal to drop 500-700 kcal?
I know, I was just pointing out that the things the poster was picking on specifically in the OP weren't actually things he had said.
I AM one of those small women, MFP has never let me lose more than 0.6 lbs a week pre-exercise, as that is all it takes to get me down to 1200 cals.0 -
Without wanting to come down on either side of this debate. I just thought the OP deserved a bit of credit you aren't giving him. Firstly, he said in his opening paragraph you need AMINO ACIDS. That IS protein.
Secondly, he hasn't said anywhere you should start eating 500-750 cals. He said you should start with a -500 or -750 cal deficit.
No point picking him to bits for something he didn't even say.
he also says you NEED CHO, which is not true, everyone on keto diets and preforming fine would disagree with him and so would people with backgrounds in nutrition and biology. it's one thing to tell people what you did, and other to start making baseless claims why something worked0 -
Wow....please go write your own article. your right. you don't have to eat 5-6 meals a day to loose weight. but it does work. It really comes down to calorie intake vs calorie burn. All of this was for you to bash on what. Your idea. Great. Thanks for sharing your idea. Next time write your own post. I eat all day I feel great and....I AM NEVER HUNGRY. YOU KNOW MY RESULTS THAT MIGHT.....MIGHT BE OFF BY A HAIR. WOW PEOPLE ......WOW.
You're finally starting to get it, you were wrong on at least 2 of your claims. 5-6 meals is recommended by P90x and other workout plans because they know that for some people who lack discipline and will power, eating 5-6 times a day can reduce TOTAL CALORIC INTAKE (which is the real key) by maintaining levels of satiety and preventing one from binge eat over their maintenance, it has nothing to do with boosting metabolism like you've been claiming.0 -
NOW YOUR JUST SOUNDING SILLY. REACHING AND CONJECTURING. WHAT IS THE AMOUNT OF CALORIES YOUR MUSCLES USE IN A 24 HOUR PERIOD. ANSWER THAT, AND YOU WILL PROVE ME WRONG. UNTIL THEN. YOU HAVE PROVED NOTHING. I GUARENTEE THAT PEOPLE ARE SEEING YOU AS AN EXTREMIST EXCEPT FOR THE ANAL RETENTIVE BIOCHEMICAL ENGEENEERS LIKE YOURSELF. THIS WEBSITE IS A BEGINNER WEBSITE. DO YOU GET IT NOW. MOST PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO BECOME A SCIENTIST TO LOOSE WEIGHT. THEY WANT A PROGRAM TO FOLLOW. MY RESEARCH HAS HAD DRAMATIC RESULTS WITH A 2 LB VIARIABLE. MY MEAN IS RIGHT ON.Wow....please go write your own article. your right. you don't have to eat 5-6 meals a day to loose weight. but it does work. It really comes down to calorie intake vs calorie burn. All of this was for you to bash on what. Your idea. Great. Thanks for sharing your idea. Next time write your own post. I eat all day I feel great and....I AM NEVER HUNGRY. YOU KNOW MY RESULTS THAT MIGHT.....MIGHT BE OFF BY A HAIR. WOW PEOPLE ......WOW.
You're finally starting to get it, you were wrong on at least 2 of your claims. 5-6 meals is recommended by P90x and other workout plans because they know that for some people who lack discipline and will power, eating 5-6 times a day can reduce TOTAL CALORIC INTAKE (which is the real key) by maintaining levels of satiety and preventing one from binge eat over their maintenance, it has nothing to do with boosting metabolism like you've been claiming.
STOP THIS REDICULOUS NIT PICKING. IF AND ONLY IF YOU PROVE ME WRONG ON THE MUSCLE TO CAL BURN..THAT'S ALL YOU WILL HAVE DONE IS FIND A SLIGHT DIFFERENCE IN ONE OF MY SENTENCES. THIS IS NOT EXACT SCIENCE IT IS A METHOD OF SUCCESS. THE MAJORITY BEGGINNERS DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOUR MICRON ALGORITHMIC SCIENCE.0 -
NOW YOUR JUST SOUNDING SILLY. REACHING AND CONJECTURING. WHAT IS THE AMOUNT OF CALORIES YOUR MUSCLES USE IN A 24 HOUR PERIOD. ANSWER THAT, AND YOU WILL PROVE ME WRONG. UNTIL THEN. YOU HAVE PROVED NOTHING. I GUARENTEE THAT PEOPLE ARE SEEING YOU AS AN EXTREMIST EXCEPT FOR THE ANAL RETENTIVE BIOCHEMICAL ENGEENEERS LIKE YOURSELF. THIS WEBSITE IS A BEGINNER WEBSITE. DO YOU GET IT NOW. MOST PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO BECOME A SCIENTIST TO LOOSE WEIGHT. THEY WANT A PROGRAM TO FOLLOW. MY RESEARCH HAS HAD DRAMATIC RESULTS WITH A 2 LB VIARIABLE. MY MEAN IS RIGHT ON.
STOP THIS REDICULOUS NIT PICKING. IF AND ONLY IF YOU PROVE ME WRONG ON THE MUSCLE TO CAL BURN..THAT'S ALL YOU WILL HAVE DONE IS FIND A SLIGHT DIFFERENCE IN ONE OF MY SENTENCES. THIS IS NOT EXACT SCIENCE IT IS A METHOD OF SUCCESS. THE MAJORITY BEGGINNERS DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOUR MICRON ALGORITHMIC SCIENCE.
no need to prove you wrong, you already proved yourself wrong, unless your bodybugg/mody media has a MOE of over 350%, when i believe the stated MOE is +/- 10-20%0 -
Without wanting to come down on either side of this debate. I just thought the OP deserved a bit of credit you aren't giving him. Firstly, he said in his opening paragraph you need AMINO ACIDS. That IS protein.
Secondly, he hasn't said anywhere you should start eating 500-750 cals. He said you should start with a -500 or -750 cal deficit.
No point picking him to bits for something he didn't even say.
[/quote]
Just to clarify there are non-protein amino acids that are needed by the body which is probably why he chose to use the term, for me it important to be clear that the protein base is more important when discussing food intake and then you discuss amino acids when sorting out you macs because the two are in fact different things.
Secondly fair enough on the cal deficit, I read that wrong, again however if Imade that mistake others may to so maybe being a little clearer than putting - in front of it would have been helpful. However apologies for this mistake.
This was not to take away from the op's success I agree with an other poster who has said this already, but it's a shame he didn't tell his story, from a this is what I did and here are my results stand point. rather than a preachy don't do this at your peril stand point. However like I said in my previous post I did agree with a lot of what the op said.0 -
YOUVE LOST IT MAN.....NO ONE CARES ABOUT YOUR EXACT SIENCE HERE. MAYBE A FEW.NOW YOUR JUST SOUNDING SILLY. REACHING AND CONJECTURING. WHAT IS THE AMOUNT OF CALORIES YOUR MUSCLES USE IN A 24 HOUR PERIOD. ANSWER THAT, AND YOU WILL PROVE ME WRONG. UNTIL THEN. YOU HAVE PROVED NOTHING. I GUARENTEE THAT PEOPLE ARE SEEING YOU AS AN EXTREMIST EXCEPT FOR THE ANAL RETENTIVE BIOCHEMICAL ENGEENEERS LIKE YOURSELF. THIS WEBSITE IS A BEGINNER WEBSITE. DO YOU GET IT NOW. MOST PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO BECOME A SCIENTIST TO LOOSE WEIGHT. THEY WANT A PROGRAM TO FOLLOW. MY RESEARCH HAS HAD DRAMATIC RESULTS WITH A 2 LB VIARIABLE. MY MEAN IS RIGHT ON.
STOP THIS REDICULOUS NIT PICKING. IF AND ONLY IF YOU PROVE ME WRONG ON THE MUSCLE TO CAL BURN..THAT'S ALL YOU WILL HAVE DONE IS FIND A SLIGHT DIFFERENCE IN ONE OF MY SENTENCES. THIS IS NOT EXACT SCIENCE IT IS A METHOD OF SUCCESS. THE MAJORITY BEGGINNERS DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOUR MICRON ALGORITHMIC SCIENCE.
no need to prove you wrong, you already proved yourself wrong, unless your bodybugg/mody media has a MOE of over 350%, when i believe the stated MOE is +/- 10-20%0 -
YOUVE LOST IT MAN.....NO ONE CARES ABOUT YOUR EXACT SIENCE HERE. MAYBE A FEW.NOW YOUR JUST SOUNDING SILLY. REACHING AND CONJECTURING. WHAT IS THE AMOUNT OF CALORIES YOUR MUSCLES USE IN A 24 HOUR PERIOD. ANSWER THAT, AND YOU WILL PROVE ME WRONG. UNTIL THEN. YOU HAVE PROVED NOTHING. I GUARENTEE THAT PEOPLE ARE SEEING YOU AS AN EXTREMIST EXCEPT FOR THE ANAL RETENTIVE BIOCHEMICAL ENGEENEERS LIKE YOURSELF. THIS WEBSITE IS A BEGINNER WEBSITE. DO YOU GET IT NOW. MOST PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO BECOME A SCIENTIST TO LOOSE WEIGHT. THEY WANT A PROGRAM TO FOLLOW. MY RESEARCH HAS HAD DRAMATIC RESULTS WITH A 2 LB VIARIABLE. MY MEAN IS RIGHT ON.
STOP THIS REDICULOUS NIT PICKING. IF AND ONLY IF YOU PROVE ME WRONG ON THE MUSCLE TO CAL BURN..THAT'S ALL YOU WILL HAVE DONE IS FIND A SLIGHT DIFFERENCE IN ONE OF MY SENTENCES. THIS IS NOT EXACT SCIENCE IT IS A METHOD OF SUCCESS. THE MAJORITY BEGGINNERS DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOUR MICRON ALGORITHMIC SCIENCE.
no need to prove you wrong, you already proved yourself wrong, unless your bodybugg/mody media has a MOE of over 350%, when i believe the stated MOE is +/- 10-20%
you come off as someone who is intimidated by someone who you perceive as more intelligent as you. you don't think it's silly that you contradict yourself in your own article and in the same paragraph? in the real world it is the the onus of the original claim maker to substantiate his claims if they are called into question, not sure why you take such great offense to that and what your beef is with science and knowledge0 -
Without wanting to come down on either side of this debate. I just thought the OP deserved a bit of credit you aren't giving him. Firstly, he said in his opening paragraph you need AMINO ACIDS. That IS protein.
Secondly, he hasn't said anywhere you should start eating 500-750 cals. He said you should start with a -500 or -750 cal deficit.
No point picking him to bits for something he didn't even say.
he also says you NEED CHO, which is not true, everyone on keto diets and preforming fine would disagree with him and so would people with backgrounds in nutrition and biology. it's one thing to tell people what you did, and other to start making baseless claims why something worked
I know! He said several things I don't agree with, and some I do. I'm just saying, pick holes in the stuff he DID say, not the words someone else is putting in his mouth!0 -
http://www.google.com/m?hl=en&gl=us&client=ms-android-sprint-us&source=android-launcher-search&q=what+percentage+of+body+fat+to+show+abs. This is a Google link to the BF% needed for abs. The first link is 11.7% BF and the guys description is exactly like mine. Every other link says something totally different than your 15%-12%. Your a scientific contradiction. Just stop. Oh ya....your right and I'm wrong.
YOUVE LOST IT MAN.....NO ONE CARES ABOUT YOUR EXACT SIENCE HERE. MAYBE A FEW.NOW YOUR JUST SOUNDING SILLY. REACHING AND CONJECTURING. WHAT IS THE AMOUNT OF CALORIES YOUR MUSCLES USE IN A 24 HOUR PERIOD. ANSWER THAT, AND YOU WILL PROVE ME WRONG. UNTIL THEN. YOU HAVE PROVED NOTHING. I GUARENTEE THAT PEOPLE ARE SEEING YOU AS AN EXTREMIST EXCEPT FOR THE ANAL RETENTIVE BIOCHEMICAL ENGEENEERS LIKE YOURSELF. THIS WEBSITE IS A BEGINNER WEBSITE. DO YOU GET IT NOW. MOST PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO BECOME A SCIENTIST TO LOOSE WEIGHT. THEY WANT A PROGRAM TO FOLLOW. MY RESEARCH HAS HAD DRAMATIC RESULTS WITH A 2 LB VIARIABLE. MY MEAN IS RIGHT ON.
STOP THIS REDICULOUS NIT PICKING. IF AND ONLY IF YOU PROVE ME WRONG ON THE MUSCLE TO CAL BURN..THAT'S ALL YOU WILL HAVE DONE IS FIND A SLIGHT DIFFERENCE IN ONE OF MY SENTENCES. THIS IS NOT EXACT SCIENCE IT IS A METHOD OF SUCCESS. THE MAJORITY BEGGINNERS DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOUR MICRON ALGORITHMIC SCIENCE.
no need to prove you wrong, you already proved yourself wrong, unless your bodybugg/mody media has a MOE of over 350%, when i believe the stated MOE is +/- 10-20%
you come off as someone who is intimidated by someone who you perceive as more intelligent as you. you don't think it's silly that you contradict yourself in your own article and in the same paragraph? in the real world it is the the onus of the original claim maker to substantiate his claims if they are called into question, not sure why you take such great offense to that and what your beef is with science and knowledge0 -
"Eat the right foods you will keep full and turn on the furnace and burn fat."
assuming identical macronutrient composition, eating the right bs wrong foods whatever that means will have no difference in terms of body composition
I would have to agree with the original poster on this one. I was just today reading Brendan Brazier's Thrive Foods book and he talks about this very thing. "Highly processed, refined, denatured 'food' [read: McDonald's] requires significantly more digestive energy be spent to break it down in the process of transferring its caloric energy to us..."
If we go back to that awesome visual that someone posted, this comes back to the age-old maternal wisdom of eating your fruits and veggies. The McDonald's meal could never have the amount of vitamins and minerals that the second picture of whole, colorful foods had. Vitamins and minerals are essential to your body functioning at its optimum potential! Isn't that what this is all about?
NutritionMD has a great quote:
"In general, populations eating greater amounts of phytochemical–containing foods (e.g., fruits, vegetables, and whole grains) have a significantly lower risk of certain diseases, such as heart disease, cancer, diabetes, hypertension, and arthritis."
http://www.nutritionmd.org/consumers/general_nutrition/micronutrients_antioxidants.html0 -
NOW YOUR JUST SOUNDING SILLY. REACHING AND CONJECTURING. WHAT IS THE AMOUNT OF CALORIES YOUR MUSCLES USE IN A 24 HOUR PERIOD. ANSWER THAT, AND YOU WILL PROVE ME WRONG. UNTIL THEN. YOU HAVE PROVED NOTHING. I GUARENTEE THAT PEOPLE ARE SEEING YOU AS AN EXTREMIST EXCEPT FOR THE ANAL RETENTIVE BIOCHEMICAL ENGEENEERS LIKE YOURSELF. THIS WEBSITE IS A BEGINNER WEBSITE. DO YOU GET IT NOW. MOST PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO BECOME A SCIENTIST TO LOOSE WEIGHT. THEY WANT A PROGRAM TO FOLLOW. MY RESEARCH HAS HAD DRAMATIC RESULTS WITH A 2 LB VIARIABLE. MY MEAN IS RIGHT ON.
You're finally starting to get it, you were wrong on at least 2 of your claims. 5-6 meals is recommended by P90x and other workout plans because they know that for some people who lack discipline and will power, eating 5-6 times a day can reduce TOTAL CALORIC INTAKE (which is the real key) by maintaining levels of satiety and preventing one from binge eat over their maintenance, it has nothing to do with boosting metabolism like you've been claiming.
STOP THIS REDICULOUS NIT PICKING. IF AND ONLY IF YOU PROVE ME WRONG ON THE MUSCLE TO CAL BURN..THAT'S ALL YOU WILL HAVE DONE IS FIND A SLIGHT DIFFERENCE IN ONE OF MY SENTENCES. THIS IS NOT EXACT SCIENCE IT IS A METHOD OF SUCCESS. THE MAJORITY BEGGINNERS DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOUR MICRON ALGORITHMIC SCIENCE.
You call it ridiculous nit picking, I call it being precise and accurate. I don't like to be given false equations when I'm calculating how many calories I should be eating and I'm sure others wouldn't appreciate it either if they followed your advice of 50kcal/lb/day and gained weight. Your claim that muscle burns 50kcal/lb/day is nearly 8x greater than reality which is 5-7kcal/lb/day. So if any uneducated person were to follow your bogus claim, they would be consuming a HUGE surplus of calories. Look at your own stats and calculate your caloric expenditure based of your claim and tell me what you come up with. Let me go ahead and say it for you so that you don't have to say it again, you lost 25 lbs of fat and gained 4 lbs of muscle.0 -
blah. Blah. blah. 1 typo and you go nuts.
NOW YOUR JUST SOUNDING SILLY. REACHING AND CONJECTURING. WHAT IS THE AMOUNT OF CALORIES YOUR MUSCLES USE IN A 24 HOUR PERIOD. ANSWER THAT, AND YOU WILL PROVE ME WRONG. UNTIL THEN. YOU HAVE PROVED NOTHING. I GUARENTEE THAT PEOPLE ARE SEEING YOU AS AN EXTREMIST EXCEPT FOR THE ANAL RETENTIVE BIOCHEMICAL ENGEENEERS LIKE YOURSELF. THIS WEBSITE IS A BEGINNER WEBSITE. DO YOU GET IT NOW. MOST PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO BECOME A SCIENTIST TO LOOSE WEIGHT. THEY WANT A PROGRAM TO FOLLOW. MY RESEARCH HAS HAD DRAMATIC RESULTS WITH A 2 LB VIARIABLE. MY MEAN IS RIGHT ON.
You're finally starting to get it, you were wrong on at least 2 of your claims. 5-6 meals is recommended by P90x and other workout plans because they know that for some people who lack discipline and will power, eating 5-6 times a day can reduce TOTAL CALORIC INTAKE (which is the real key) by maintaining levels of satiety and preventing one from binge eat over their maintenance, it has nothing to do with boosting metabolism like you've been claiming.
STOP THIS REDICULOUS NIT PICKING. IF AND ONLY IF YOU PROVE ME WRONG ON THE MUSCLE TO CAL BURN..THAT'S ALL YOU WILL HAVE DONE IS FIND A SLIGHT DIFFERENCE IN ONE OF MY SENTENCES. THIS IS NOT EXACT SCIENCE IT IS A METHOD OF SUCCESS. THE MAJORITY BEGGINNERS DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOUR MICRON ALGORITHMIC SCIENCE.
You call it ridiculous nit picking, I call it being precise and accurate. I don't like to be given false equations when I'm calculating how many calories I should be eating and I'm sure others wouldn't appreciate it either if they followed your advice of 50kcal/lb/day and gained weight. Your claim that muscle burns 50kcal/lb/day is nearly 8x greater than reality which is 5-7kcal/lb/day. So if any uneducated person were to follow your bogus claim, they would be consuming a HUGE surplus of calories. Look at your own stats and calculate your caloric expenditure based of your claim and tell me what you come up with. Let me go ahead and say it for you so that you don't have to say it again, you lost 25 lbs of fat and gained 4 lbs of muscle.0 -
I would have to agree with the original poster on this one. I was just today reading Brendan Brazier's Thrive Foods book and he talks about this very thing. "Highly processed, refined, denatured 'food' [read: McDonald's] requires significantly more digestive energy be spent to break it down in the process of transferring its caloric energy to us..."
If we go back to that awesome visual that someone posted, this comes back to the age-old maternal wisdom of eating your fruits and veggies. The McDonald's meal could never have the amount of vitamins and minerals that the second picture of whole, colorful foods had. Vitamins and minerals are essential to your body functioning at its optimum potential! Isn't that what this is all about?
NutritionMD has a great quote:
"In general, populations eating greater amounts of phytochemical–containing foods (e.g., fruits, vegetables, and whole grains) have a significantly lower risk of certain diseases, such as heart disease, cancer, diabetes, hypertension, and arthritis."
http://www.nutritionmd.org/consumers/general_nutrition/micronutrients_antioxidants.html
not sure what the nutrtionMD quote has to do with it, as that is talking about health and health =/= as body composition
and here is an interesting study that was done
Bray GA et. al. Hormonal Responses to a Fast-Food Meal Compared with Nutritionally Comparable Meals of Different Composition. Ann Nutr Metab. 2007 May 29;51(2):163-171 [Epub ahead of print]
Background: Fast food is consumed in large quantities each day. Whether there are differences in the acute metabolic response to these meals as compared to ‘healthy’ meals with similar composition is unknown. Design: Three-way crossover. Methods: Six overweight men were given a standard breakfast at 8:00 a.m. on each of 3 occasions, followed by 1 of 3 lunches at noon. The 3 lunches included: (1) a fast-food meal consisting of a burger, French fries and root beer sweetened with high fructose corn syrup; (2) an organic beef meal prepared with organic foods and a root beer containing sucrose, and (3) a turkey meal consisting of a turkey sandwich and granola made with organic foods and an organic orange juice. Glucose, insulin, free fatty acids, ghrelin, leptin, triglycerides, LDL-cholesterol and HDL-cholesterol were measured at 30-min intervals over 6 h. Salivary cortisol was measured after lunch. Results: Total fat, protein and energy content were similar in the 3 meals, but the fatty acid content differed. The fast-food meal had more myristic (C14:0), palmitic (C16:0), stearic (C18:0) and trans fatty acids (C18:1) than the other 2 meals. The pattern of nutrient and hormonal response was similar for a given subject to each of the 3 meals. The only statistically significant acute difference observed was a decrease in the AUC of LDL cholesterol after the organic beef meal relative to that for the other two meals. Other metabolic responses were not different. Conclusion: LDL-cholesterol decreased more with the organic beef meal which had lesser amounts of saturated and trans fatty acids than in the fast-food beef meal.0 -
blah. Blah. blah. 1 typo and you go nuts.
You typed 50 cause you actually believe it 50kcal/lb/day cause that's what all the uninformed websites say. You had no idea the actual expenditure is 5-7kcal so quit acting like it was a type and you had a clue to begin with in the first place.0 -
Great post! I totally agree with you. As for spacing the calories out through the day, I tell people to imagine you have a pile of firewood that has to get you through the entire day and it's cold out. Isn't it better to throw a few logs on the fire frequently throughout the day and keep a steady burn going. Simple, but true.
Take good care0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 999 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions