My Response To Common Weight Loss Myths

Options
2456

Replies

  • Linda_Darlene
    Linda_Darlene Posts: 453 Member
    Options
    Thank you for your post. Personally, I found it useful!
  • hallie_b
    hallie_b Posts: 181
    Options
    Bump.
  • skaskankerbr
    Options
    I understand your desire for privacy, but you shouldn't leave out your credentials and later prompt people to ask you for advice. This seems rather foolish, in my opinion. If you're going to hand out advice, be sure to establish your credibility, and a course in biology and o-chem does not make you an expert.
    Never said i was. If you read i said take it for what you want. I never once represented myself as an expert. I even said i was a undergraduate student. I do however have considerably higher access to resources because of the university.
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    Options
    Thanks a lot.
    Something I didn't understand though: what percentage of your BMR should you eat in order to lose weight as fast as possible without decreasing your metabolism? (I know this question has been asked and answered over and over again but all the answers I find vary so much). My BMR is of 1475.
    Any calorie reduction appears to generate a metabolic slowdown, so there isn't a magic number above which you should stay in order to maximise weight loss.

    Very large deficits may be counter-productive or less than optimum for weight loss, but the available evidence is inconclusive.
  • Pspetal
    Pspetal Posts: 426 Member
    Options
    As someone who has studied biochemistry, physiology and pathology, I know that all the info the op provided is correct and can be found on google easily. I have also read this information multiple times in applied science type articles/papers/studies in peer reviewed journals....
  • therealangd
    therealangd Posts: 1,861 Member
    Options
    As someone who has studied biochemistry, physiology and pathology, I know that all the info the op provided is correct and can be found on google easily. I have also read this information multiple times in applied science type articles/papers/studies in peer reviewed journals....

    It's too bad that it's so hard to read.
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    Thanks for the post. All opinions should be welcomed. I am not a scientist either but sometimes have ideas to help others based on my own experience.

    Kinda hard to read an article that simply starts with the TDEE explanation, and continues with
    Table SALT IS AN IONIC COMPOUND it is comprised of Na Sodium, Cl Chloride. “A Salt” is a compound formed from a neutralization reaction involving an Acid and a Base. Table salt can be made by adding HCL hydrochloric acid to NaOH sodium hydroxide in a double replacement neutralization reaction. NAOH+HCL----> NaCl + H2O

    Agreed - except for the fact that TDEE was not defined (explained with no mention of that is what it was) - just BMR.

    OP: Sorry to be a b*itch here, but the intro indicated that you would provide credible scientific research - without citations it is not credible.

    Also - the first line of the second page has "Like the author says" - what author? Was some of this copy posted? If so, it would be appropriate to cite the source.

    You state in your title - "My Response To Common Weight Loss Myths" - I did not see much discussion of weight loss myths apart from salt = water weight =/= 'real' weight - not exactly a myth.

    You mention that people can google information but then indicate how hard it is to research informtion - providing articles and studies from where you got the information would make the post more credible.

    While I appreciate you trying to help, the discussion was dis-jointed, hard to read and lacked any supporting evidentiary materials.
  • skaskankerbr
    Options
    Thanks for the post. All opinions should be welcomed. I am not a scientist either but sometimes have ideas to help others based on my own experience.

    Kinda hard to read an article that simply starts with the TDEE explanation, and continues with
    Table SALT IS AN IONIC COMPOUND it is comprised of Na Sodium, Cl Chloride. “A Salt” is a compound formed from a neutralization reaction involving an Acid and a Base. Table salt can be made by adding HCL hydrochloric acid to NaOH sodium hydroxide in a double replacement neutralization reaction. NAOH+HCL----> NaCl + H2O

    Agreed - except for the fact that TDEE was not defined (explained with no mention of that is what it was) - just BMR.

    OP: Sorry to be a b*itch here, but the intro indicated that you would provide credible scientific research - without citations it is not credible.

    Also - the first line of the second page has "Like the author says" - what author? Was some of this copy posted? If so, it would be appropriate to cite the source.

    You state in your title - "My Response To Common Weight Loss Myths" - I did not see much discussion of weight loss myths apart from salt = water weight =/= 'real' weight - not exactly a myth.

    You mention that people can google information but then indicate how hard it is to research informtion - providing articles and studies from where you got the information would make the post more credible.

    While I appreciate you trying to help, the discussion was dis-jointed, hard to read and lacked any supporting evidentiary materials.
    It's very simple. If you don't like it. There is no need to complain. It helped some people and that is all that counts. It didn't need supporting evidence this isn't magic hokus pokus. It is information you learn in first and second year Biology. But many people aren't biology majors. I am not a Doctor. I am not getting paid to do this. I just don't see why you people feel the need to trash something for such nitpicky reasons. Saying something isn't credible without providing any A) alternative of your own. Or B) any logical retort or discussion is simply whining. If you feel I am misleading in ANY, I MEAN ANY of what I said PLEASE FIND SOMETHING TO PROVE ME WRONG! Also I did quote where i was getting most of this, my Biology TextBook ISBN 0-8053-6844-2. http://www.amazon.com/Biology-8th-Edition-Neil-Campbell/dp/0805368442/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1338315598&sr=8-1
    Feel free to buy a copy and read the chapters.
  • tripod271
    tripod271 Posts: 112 Member
    Options
    bump for later reading
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    Thanks for the post. All opinions should be welcomed. I am not a scientist either but sometimes have ideas to help others based on my own experience.

    Kinda hard to read an article that simply starts with the TDEE explanation, and continues with
    Table SALT IS AN IONIC COMPOUND it is comprised of Na Sodium, Cl Chloride. “A Salt” is a compound formed from a neutralization reaction involving an Acid and a Base. Table salt can be made by adding HCL hydrochloric acid to NaOH sodium hydroxide in a double replacement neutralization reaction. NAOH+HCL----> NaCl + H2O

    Agreed - except for the fact that TDEE was not defined (explained with no mention of that is what it was) - just BMR.

    OP: Sorry to be a b*itch here, but the intro indicated that you would provide credible scientific research - without citations it is not credible.

    Also - the first line of the second page has "Like the author says" - what author? Was some of this copy posted? If so, it would be appropriate to cite the source.

    You state in your title - "My Response To Common Weight Loss Myths" - I did not see much discussion of weight loss myths apart from salt = water weight =/= 'real' weight - not exactly a myth.

    You mention that people can google information but then indicate how hard it is to research informtion - providing articles and studies from where you got the information would make the post more credible.

    While I appreciate you trying to help, the discussion was dis-jointed, hard to read and lacked any supporting evidentiary materials.
    It's very simple. If you don't like it. There is no need to complain. It helped some people and that is all that counts. It didn't need supporting evidence this isn't magic hokus pokus. It is information you learn in first and second year Biology. But many people aren't biology majors. I am not a Doctor. I am not getting paid to do this. I just don't see why you people feel the need to trash something for such nitpicky reasons. Saying something isn't credible without providing any A) alternative of your own. Or B) any logical retort or discussion is simply whining. If you feel I am misleading in ANY, I MEAN ANY of what I said PLEASE FIND SOMETHING TO PROVE ME WRONG! Also I did quote where i was getting most of this, my Biology TextBook ISBN 0-8053-6844-2. http://www.amazon.com/Biology-8th-Edition-Neil-Campbell/dp/0805368442/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1338315598&sr=8-1
    Feel free to buy a copy and read the chapters.

    Calm down.

    I do not need to buy the textbook as I already knew the information from actual studies rather than text books I am not saying there is actually anything wrong - but that is not saying too much as the write up does not actually say that much anyway. Do not write an article that you try to make out all 'scienctific research based' without the actual scientic research quoted unless you want to get called on it.
  • skaskankerbr
    Options
    Thanks a lot.
    Something I didn't understand though: what percentage of your BMR should you eat in order to lose weight as fast as possible without decreasing your metabolism? (I know this question has been asked and answered over and over again but all the answers I find vary so much). My BMR is of 1475.
    Any calorie reduction appears to generate a metabolic slowdown, so there isn't a magic number above which you should stay in order to maximise weight loss.

    Very large deficits may be counter-productive or less than optimum for weight loss, but the available evidence is inconclusive.
    In fact their is an optimal range of eating to maximize metabolism, but of course this is extremely costly to test for each individual patient. However, in order to accomplish this scientists used averages which are now common place. (most of this was done long ago) Going below this number (usually around 2000 calories) can result in a decreased metabolism for some, but not everyone. This can also be seen for people who consume on the upper spectrum of the curve. To simply say this is your number is nonsensical like you said. However, it is equally incorrect to say that an optimal range for weight loss doesn't exist. To many factors go into the body to simply say either way without experimenting with your own weight loss progress. A good way to start is with the calculated BMR as an absolute minimum intake. The preferable range can only be estimated based on activity level though. All of this is guessing based on averages, but its better than nothing and much safer.

    Also, The body does indeed have a Starvation mode. Not what it is normally linked too , but it does exist. Their is a reason why humans can survive 3 weeks without food. The body does exactly what it does in extreme cold. First it starts regulated unneeded tasks. Such as expelling waste frequently. To not only conserve water, but also further digest foods. At this same time it breaks down stored fat tissues. With an end result of cells producing enzymes that break down muscle tissues for ATP. And last absolute last cash scenario right before death is the body starts consuming the internal organs. By this time the damage might be too far though.
    Simply put if the BMR of humans didn't adapt to the environment humans wouldn't exist today.
  • BullDozier
    BullDozier Posts: 237 Member
    Options
    Thanks for the post. All opinions should be welcomed. I am not a scientist either but sometimes have ideas to help others based on my own experience.

    Kinda hard to read an article that simply starts with the TDEE explanation, and continues with
    Table SALT IS AN IONIC COMPOUND it is comprised of Na Sodium, Cl Chloride. “A Salt” is a compound formed from a neutralization reaction involving an Acid and a Base. Table salt can be made by adding HCL hydrochloric acid to NaOH sodium hydroxide in a double replacement neutralization reaction. NAOH+HCL----> NaCl + H2O

    Agreed - except for the fact that TDEE was not defined (explained with no mention of that is what it was) - just BMR.

    OP: Sorry to be a b*itch here, but the intro indicated that you would provide credible scientific research - without citations it is not credible.

    Also - the first line of the second page has "Like the author says" - what author? Was some of this copy posted? If so, it would be appropriate to cite the source.

    You state in your title - "My Response To Common Weight Loss Myths" - I did not see much discussion of weight loss myths apart from salt = water weight =/= 'real' weight - not exactly a myth.

    You mention that people can google information but then indicate how hard it is to research informtion - providing articles and studies from where you got the information would make the post more credible.

    While I appreciate you trying to help, the discussion was dis-jointed, hard to read and lacked any supporting evidentiary materials.
    It's very simple. If you don't like it. There is no need to complain. It helped some people and that is all that counts. It didn't need supporting evidence this isn't magic hokus pokus. It is information you learn in first and second year Biology. But many people aren't biology majors. I am not a Doctor. I am not getting paid to do this. I just don't see why you people feel the need to trash something for such nitpicky reasons. Saying something isn't credible without providing any A) alternative of your own. Or B) any logical retort or discussion is simply whining. If you feel I am misleading in ANY, I MEAN ANY of what I said PLEASE FIND SOMETHING TO PROVE ME WRONG! Also I did quote where i was getting most of this, my Biology TextBook ISBN 0-8053-6844-2. http://www.amazon.com/Biology-8th-Edition-Neil-Campbell/dp/0805368442/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1338315598&sr=8-1
    Feel free to buy a copy and read the chapters.
    You might want to re-think the way you response to legitimate criticism of your writing. If you are actually going to be published in a peer reviewed publication as you claim, you're going to be challenged on your ideas. People in the scientific community, as I am sure you know, don't just read articles and immediately adopt the ideas presented. You're going to called out a lot, and you might want to come up with a different way of responding (ie, something other than ALL CAPS AND GO LOOK ON GOOGLE AND PROVE ME WRONG) if you want to be taken seriously. Just a suggestion.
  • ladyraven68
    ladyraven68 Posts: 2,003 Member
    Options
    Thanks for the post. All opinions should be welcomed. I am not a scientist either but sometimes have ideas to help others based on my own experience.

    Kinda hard to read an article that simply starts with the TDEE explanation, and continues with
    Table SALT IS AN IONIC COMPOUND it is comprised of Na Sodium, Cl Chloride. “A Salt” is a compound formed from a neutralization reaction involving an Acid and a Base. Table salt can be made by adding HCL hydrochloric acid to NaOH sodium hydroxide in a double replacement neutralization reaction. NAOH+HCL----> NaCl + H2O

    Agreed - except for the fact that TDEE was not defined (explained with no mention of that is what it was) - just BMR.

    OP: Sorry to be a b*itch here, but the intro indicated that you would provide credible scientific research - without citations it is not credible.

    Also - the first line of the second page has "Like the author says" - what author? Was some of this copy posted? If so, it would be appropriate to cite the source.

    You state in your title - "My Response To Common Weight Loss Myths" - I did not see much discussion of weight loss myths apart from salt = water weight =/= 'real' weight - not exactly a myth.

    You mention that people can google information but then indicate how hard it is to research informtion - providing articles and studies from where you got the information would make the post more credible.

    While I appreciate you trying to help, the discussion was dis-jointed, hard to read and lacked any supporting evidentiary materials.
    It's very simple. If you don't like it. There is no need to complain. It helped some people and that is all that counts. It didn't need supporting evidence this isn't magic hokus pokus. It is information you learn in first and second year Biology. But many people aren't biology majors. I am not a Doctor. I am not getting paid to do this. I just don't see why you people feel the need to trash something for such nitpicky reasons. Saying something isn't credible without providing any A) alternative of your own. Or B) any logical retort or discussion is simply whining. If you feel I am misleading in ANY, I MEAN ANY of what I said PLEASE FIND SOMETHING TO PROVE ME WRONG! Also I did quote where i was getting most of this, my Biology TextBook ISBN 0-8053-6844-2. http://www.amazon.com/Biology-8th-Edition-Neil-Campbell/dp/0805368442/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1338315598&sr=8-1
    Feel free to buy a copy and read the chapters.

    Don't take it so personally. You aren't the first person to post this sort of thing, and I can guarantee you that the others also got asked for citations too. There are many nutritional experts on here, and many who just think they are, but when you make statements as fact, you are going to be asked to back it up, as we have no idea who you are and what your credential s are.

    Without the credential and evidence you are no different to the posters who insist eating 6 small meals a day boosts metabolism, or everything you eat after 6pm turns to fat etc.

    You are on a site where many people have done a lot of research into all this, so they are quite knowledgeable, but you are treating them like your the adult and they are children. Just expecting people to believe everything you post is a bit unrealistic. I could post the world was flat. Yes, we know it's not, but there is still nothing stopping me posting it.

    I know you mean well, but you need to rethink your responses.

    Good luck with your publications.
  • PercivalHackworth
    PercivalHackworth Posts: 1,437 Member
    Options
    Ok, I took the time to read. It was hard without any real punctuation.

    Also your soliloque seems like a big container into which you mix different levels of informations ; who do you target by writing such documents : people new to fitness ?

    It contains many mistakes such as :
    The recommended amount of water for the average person is 8-10 cups each day.
    I am sorry this is your fault unless you have pre-existing medical condition such as thyroid disease
    Because if you are wrong by just 200 calories each day it can devastate your diet
    ou could be completely destroying all your work by cheating yourself by not rounding up. I personally round every number up and even add 10-100 calories over what I think I ate just to be sure! Those 100-200 calories each day you are rounding up can make a huge difference to you outcome.

    It supposes every single human possesses the exact same genotype, as the methods for calculating your BMR is a flawless method. (Of course not to mention the margin errors everywhere when it comes to put into equation the human metabolism. If it was the case we would be all living as a happy family in wonderful land.
    If you want to know how many calories you have lost and therefore how many calories in pure fat you have lost. DO THE CALCULATION! Add up each day’s negative calories and divide by 3500. You should be amazed at the results.

    Assuming the ATP being produced comes from the oxidation of the FFA every single time there is a movement involved, etc....

    Gosh I have already hit one page and I am not even close to being done…..

    I am, there are too much mistakes and lack of references to even consider it as a serious post, sorry man
  • PercivalHackworth
    PercivalHackworth Posts: 1,437 Member
    Options
    As someone who has studied biochemistry, physiology and pathology, I know that all the info the op provided is correct and can be found on google easily. I have also read this information multiple times in applied science type articles/papers/studies in peer reviewed journals....

    Seriously ?
  • skaskankerbr
    Options
    Trolls on a fitness forum... i guess they are everywhere. w.e
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    Trolls on a fitness forum... i guess they are everywhere. w.e

    Sorry to use wikipedia here but a troll is defined as:

    In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

    Did not see any trolling at all - nothing inflammatory, extraneous or off topic.


    See, I quoted the source.
  • skaskankerbr
    Options
    Trolls on a fitness forum... i guess they are everywhere. w.e

    Sorry to use wikipedia here but a troll is defined as:

    In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

    Did not see any trolling at all - nothing inflammatory, extraneous or off topic.


    See, I quoted the source.
    Wikipedia as well as .com , .net, and .org are not valid sources in the first place. The simple fact that your posting ridiculous stuff like that. Is trolling. It has nothing to do with the thread title. Therefore it is spam.....
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    Trolls on a fitness forum... i guess they are everywhere. w.e

    Sorry to use wikipedia here but a troll is defined as:

    In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

    Did not see any trolling at all - nothing inflammatory, extraneous or off topic.


    See, I quoted the source.
    Wikipedia as well as .com , .net, and .org are not valid sources in the first place. The simple fact that your posting ridiculous stuff like that. Is trolling. It has nothing to do with the thread title. Therefore it is spam.....


    Really? - you are arguing me about using wikipedia for the definition of internet slang? Good grief.

    ETA: but it was related to the post I quoted so your arguement is invalid.
  • Polly758
    Polly758 Posts: 623 Member
    Options
    It didn't need supporting evidence this isn't magic hokus pokus. It is information you learn in first and second year Biology.

    When do they teach you how to cite your sources? And the importance of doing so?

    You can be a scientific researcher or another dewd with an opinion on the internet. Which will it be?