Where is the science!
Replies
-
All of the questions you asked can likely be found out through light-moderate intensive research via the internet, in fact i could answer a few of them just from the very light research i myself do
the info is out there, you just have to know where and how to look for it
you are not a child, use your critical thinking skills and learn how to look for these things
i refuse to be the grade school teacher just spoon feeding you information and expecting you to learn from that, not going to happen
i myself lost a decent chunk of weight, and i am dam proud to say that. I am even prouder to say that i didnt have one person telling me what i needed to do and holding my hand through the entire process. i did it by researching the internet as much as i could and occasionally going to a friend or two that are reputable sources for a little help
not trying to come off as a jerk here but you have to understand how annoying it is to see stuff like this where you are basically not making any attempts to find these things out for yourself, you just want them given to you in an envelope titled "magic secrets to weightloss" , i'll be damned if that ever happens
i wish you all the luck in the world in whatever your goals happen to be, but please do not expect it to be easy. it will be a little tough, it will challenge you, but by the end, you will look back and have a huge smile on your face knowing you have come this far
The information isn't for me - I'm at a very fit, healthy weight. There are millions and millions struggling to know what is best for them, struggling to know what to do.
If those questions can be found by moderate research then why are we still debating them? Let me use an example.
Type "will breakfast boost my metabolism?" into google. EVERY answer on the results page says it will. Every one!
Yet here on MFP the consensus amongst the seemingly knowledgable experienced posters say otherwise0 -
It would be fantastic to have a definitive answer to "How to lose weight" given to us by a trusted source.
this answer is everywhere.........eat less calories than you need
that simple answer is always there but gets hidden with gimmicks and convoluted nonsense.
I'm afraid not. My mum did this 50 years ago. She ate less calories than she needed. 500 a day, certainly less than she needed. There are people on here blinkered to see just that pearl of wisdon "eat less calories than you need". They are exercising and eating only hundreds of calories. that isn't the answer as people frantically tell them!
Eat less calories than you need is NOT the simple answer to weight loss0 -
It would be fantastic to have a definitive answer to "How to lose weight" given to us by a trusted source.
this answer is everywhere.........eat less calories than you need
that simple answer is always there but gets hidden with gimmicks and convoluted nonsense.
I'm afraid not. My mum did this 50 years ago. She ate less calories than she needed. 500 a day, certainly less than she needed. There are people on here blinkered to see just that pearl of wisdon "eat less calories than you need". They are exercising and eating only hundreds of calories. that isn't the answer as people frantically tell them!
Eat less calories than you need is NOT the simple answer to weight loss
How about - Eat less than you use, but enough to satisfy your nutritional needs.0 -
Eat less calories than you need is NOT the simple answer to weight loss
actually, yes it is.
but you apparently have made up your mind to stay confused.
have fun with that.0 -
That's why what you eat is as important as how much you eat. By gaining large amounts of weight, we are altering our bodies. Not just our physical outside, but how it works on the inside. It takes a while to "unlearn" bad habits. It takes a long while to lose significant amounts of weight. It takes a while for our bodies to figure out how to run efficiently again. Most don't have the patience to stick this out. That's why there is so much for sell out there to help overweight people.0
-
Actually it is. Scientifically. Conservation of mass and all that. It's physically impossible to burn more than you take in and NOT lose weight.Eat less calories than you need is NOT the simple answer to weight loss0 -
Stop using google for your scientific questions?Type "will breakfast boost my metabolism?" into google. EVERY answer on the results page says it will. Every one!0 -
Eat less calories than you need is NOT the simple answer to weight loss
actually, yes it is.
but you apparently have made up your mind to stay confused.
have fun with that.
Ok - let me re-phrase that as you seem to be being deliberately obtuse
Eat less calories than you need is NOT the simple answer to HEALTHY OPTIMUM weight loss
If it were than a simple 500 calorie a day diet would be the answer - and it's no0 -
Stop using google for your scientific questions?Type "will breakfast boost my metabolism?" into google. EVERY answer on the results page says it will. Every one!
Care to share what you do? How have you arrived at the answer to that question?0 -
Big companies make a lot of money off us being overweight and sick, that is why it is so hard.0
-
I'm afraid not. My mum did this 50 years ago. She ate less calories than she needed. 500 a day, certainly less than she needed. There are people on here blinkered to see just that pearl of wisdon "eat less calories than you need". They are exercising and eating only hundreds of calories. that isn't the answer as people frantically tell them!
Eat less calories than you need is NOT the simple answer to weight loss
How about - Eat less than you use, but enough to satisfy your nutritional needs.
[/quote]
Well ok, I'm not going to dispute that, but if it were really that simple, why doesn't MFP divert every diet question to a page containing that simple line?
"How do I get over my plateau?"
"Why am I not losing weight?"
Have a look through todays questions on General diet and weight loss help - could most be answered by that simple line? Why are there a thousand questions a week?
"0 -
Eat less calories than you need is NOT the simple answer to weight loss
actually, yes it is.
but you apparently have made up your mind to stay confused.
have fun with that.
Ok - let me re-phrase that as you seem to be being deliberately obtuse
Eat less calories than you need is NOT the simple answer to HEALTHY OPTIMUM weight loss
If it were than a simple 500 calorie a day diet would be the answer - and it's no
Of course it's not. I would starve on 500 calories. I would lose weight, but would in turn, be miserable and eventually start overeating again. Healthy optimum weight loss is made of three components. Healthy real foods, reasonable exercise, and eating only what your body needs. Sounds simple. But it works - if you're persistent.0 -
"we need to be told these things once and for all by an impartial, unbiased organisation with the sole agenda of telling the facts!"
Governments, World Health Organisation, United Nations, Universities, National Health Service ....
Actually I think most of these organisation (not sure about the UN) Do have simple to use guidelines on how to lose weight they generally all say eat less cals under 2000 for women and under 2500 for men, eat more healthy fresh food and cut out the processed junk, and do one 30min exercise that leaves you out of breath 3-5 times a week. They do encourage eating breakfast, but mostly because people who don't eat breakfast choose worse foods for mid morning snacks and lunch, rather than because of metabolism boosting.
The only thing they don't do is go through all the myths and truths about faddy diet things like not eating after midnight or you'll turn into an obese gremlin or carbs will make you grow a third foot out of your shoulder blade.
But mostly dieting is just purely common sense, eat less, move more. simple.0 -
The only appropriate answer I could post in the forums is that the actual answer has so many factors and considerations that it would not possibly fit into a forum post.
The reason for that is something you have previously addressed but chose to dismiss as arbitrary: Everyone is different.0 -
Losing weight and being healthy is such an easy principal that so many people struggle to follow they need to make it sound difficult to give excuses as to why they fail rather than accepting they lack motivation and give in to temptation.0
-
Why are all those questions so important to you anyway? Eat less and exercise. Experiment with meal timing and see what works for you. If you don't trust artificial sweeteners, don't use them. Don't make everything so hard.
The questions arent that important to me - only out of interest. But my weight isn't spoiling my life, my weight isn't a big issue. The questions ARE that important to many though - hence the thousands of messages about them. Obese people shouldnt need to experiment to see what works for them, there should be answers, its a science!
Except it's a science with many, many variables and potential combinations of factors. If we were all exactly the same, an authority could tell us all that eating vegan is the best thing for us and we could all eat vegan and be healthy.
But it doesn't work that way. In fact, a quick search will pull up people who did everything "right" by vegan eating and were woefully unhealthy. The same goes for the Primal/Paleo eating, and yes, even just the simple "eat less, exercise more" base.
Why is that? Because people have different levels of various hormones, and react differently to different substances. For example, people with the various syndromes that are associated with insulin resistance often respond well to "low-carb" (or "no-bad-carb") diets, such as Atkins, Primal, or Paleo, and very likely won't thrive on a veg*n diet due to its relatively high-carb nature. Conversely, someone with intolerances to certain compounds in meats, or eggs, probably would do far better on a veg*n diet than on a Primal or Paleo diet.
It's also why only some people are lactose intolerant, or have Celiac, or have Diabetes, and why not every single pack-a-day-for-40-years smoker gets lung cancer. It's also why a friend of mine is allergic to Tylenol, while it isn't effective at all for me.
There are general guidelines that can be followed to form a foundation from which to start:
1. Excercise regularly, including strength training
2. Eat an amount to fuel your body, but not too much that you gain weight (this exact number will differ depending on the individual's size and activity level)
3. Eat whole, unprocessed foods as much as possible
From there, you may have to experiment to get what works for you. For example, there are a number of people on here that simply "eat less", without worrying at all about their macros and have successfully lost weight. However, I did that for six months to no avail (I ate what MFP calculated for me, plus 4-6 days of rather intense exercise), but when I started working on cutting out grains and started even loosely following the Primal guidelines, I dropped nearly 10lbs within the first two weeks.
Science, especially when it comes to biological beings (and especially when it comes to humans), isn't as clean-cut as grade school makes it out to be. Experiments/studies that involve humans are highly regulated, so scientists' hands are tied when it comes to what they can do and what they can control. This also makes them quite expensive to conduct, so they need backed by someone with money. And who usually has the money? Drug companies, large corporations, usually, sometimes governments (or individuals within a government). Most of the studies they fund are aligned with the agendas of these agencies, which nearly always calls the studies' motives into question, even if the studies are unbiased. I've no doubt that several people scoffed when they saw you mention various government agencies as examples of unbiased sources.0 -
"we need to be told these things once and for all by an impartial, unbiased organisation with the sole agenda of telling the facts!"
Governments, World Health Organisation, United Nations, Universities, National Health Service ....
Actually I think most of these organisation (not sure about the UN) Do have simple to use guidelines on how to lose weight they generally all say eat less cals under 2000 for women and under 2500 for men, eat more healthy fresh food and cut out the processed junk, and do one 30min exercise that leaves you out of breath 3-5 times a week. They do encourage eating breakfast, but mostly because people who don't eat breakfast choose worse foods for mid morning snacks and lunch, rather than because of metabolism boosting.
The only thing they don't do is go through all the myths and truths about faddy diet things like not eating after midnight or you'll turn into an obese gremlin or carbs will make you grow a third foot out of your shoulder blade.
But mostly dieting is just purely common sense, eat less, move more. simple.
Yeah I know you're right. It is simple. I can't argue with that.
Yet there are a thousand questions a day on MFP alone. People still don't know what to do. At any one time there will be a question on General diet and weight loss along the lines of "why am I not losing weight?" Just out of interest I'm looking now.....
'Not losing, please help' half way down
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654826-not-losing-please-help0 -
Why are all those questions so important to you anyway? Eat less and exercise. Experiment with meal timing and see what works for you. If you don't trust artificial sweeteners, don't use them. Don't make everything so hard.
The questions arent that important to me - only out of interest. But my weight isn't spoiling my life, my weight isn't a big issue. The questions ARE that important to many though - hence the thousands of messages about them. Obese people shouldnt need to experiment to see what works for them, there should be answers, its a science!
Except it's a science with many, many variables and potential combinations of factors. If we were all exactly the same, an authority could tell us all that eating vegan is the best thing for us and we could all eat vegan and be healthy.
But it doesn't work that way. In fact, a quick search will pull up people who did everything "right" by vegan eating and were woefully unhealthy. The same goes for the Primal/Paleo eating, and yes, even just the simple "eat less, exercise more" base.
Why is that? Because people have different levels of various hormones, and react differently to different substances. For example, people with the various syndromes that are associated with insulin resistance often respond well to "low-carb" (or "no-bad-carb") diets, such as Atkins, Primal, or Paleo, and very likely won't thrive on a veg*n diet due to its relatively high-carb nature. Conversely, someone with intolerances to certain compounds in meats, or eggs, probably would do far better on a veg*n diet than on a Primal or Paleo diet.
It's also why only some people are lactose intolerant, or have Celiac, or have Diabetes, and why not every single pack-a-day-for-40-years smoker gets lung cancer. It's also why a friend of mine is allergic to Tylenol, while it isn't effective at all for me.
There are general guidelines that can be followed to form a foundation from which to start:
1. Excercise regularly, including strength training
2. Eat an amount to fuel your body, but not too much that you gain weight (this exact number will differ depending on the individual's size and activity level)
3. Eat whole, unprocessed foods as much as possible
From there, you may have to experiment to get what works for you. For example, there are a number of people on here that simply "eat less", without worrying at all about their macros and have successfully lost weight. However, I did that for six months to no avail (I ate what MFP calculated for me, plus 4-6 days of rather intense exercise), but when I started working on cutting out grains and started even loosely following the Primal guidelines, I dropped nearly 10lbs within the first two weeks.
Science, especially when it comes to biological beings (and especially when it comes to humans), isn't as clean-cut as grade school makes it out to be. Experiments/studies that involve humans are highly regulated, so scientists' hands are tied when it comes to what they can do and what they can control. This also makes them quite expensive to conduct, so they need backed by someone with money. And who usually has the money? Drug companies, large corporations, usually, sometimes governments (or individuals within a government). Most of the studies they fund are aligned with the agendas of these agencies, which nearly always calls the studies' motives into question, even if the studies are unbiased. I've no doubt that several people scoffed when they saw you mention various government agencies as examples of unbiased sources.
Good, well thought out reply, thank you0 -
I'm afraid not. My mum did this 50 years ago. She ate less calories than she needed. 500 a day, certainly less than she needed. There are people on here blinkered to see just that pearl of wisdon "eat less calories than you need". They are exercising and eating only hundreds of calories. that isn't the answer as people frantically tell them!
Eat less calories than you need is NOT the simple answer to weight loss
How about - Eat less than you use, but enough to satisfy your nutritional needs.
Well ok, I'm not going to dispute that, but if it were really that simple, why doesn't MFP divert every diet question to a page containing that simple line?
"How do I get over my plateau?"
"Why am I not losing weight?"
Have a look through todays questions on General diet and weight loss help - could most be answered by that simple line? Why are there a thousand questions a week?
"
[/quote]
The reason behind the majority of the questions is, "How can I do this faster, still have my binges, still eat fast food, not have to exercise, etc, etc, etc,". In other words, "How can I do this with the least effort on my part." It's not easy.0 -
Lol this post coming from someone who believes sat fats and refined sugars are bad without taking into consideration dosage and context0
-
I think one problem is that new research appears all the time. New research suggests low carbing is bad for you. Well, women. Kinda. http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/329161/Heart-attack-risk-in-dieting
I read this and it is a very weak and flawed study. I wouldnt make any decision based on this.
Interested to know where your concerns are...
Concerns of this study can include:
1. The beginning weight of the patients in the study was never stated.
2. The study was not conducted according to what the Atkins diet teaches-careful consideration of food choices. This study clearly stated that they randomly lowered the carbs eaten and raised the proteins.
3. The study implied that it was conducted on those who were trying to maintain weight, not lose it.
If you want to learn what works and what doesn't for weight loss, start by learning how to read a scientific study and read between the lines. This study isn't worth the cyber space that's housing it.0 -
Science isn't fact. Studies are done to attempt to prove theories, and a good scientist should always do their best to disprove what they think! My point is that we are always learning and something that involves a wide range of people will never be straight forward. People will always fall outside the "normal" ranges so guidelines are just that - a guide not a rule.0
-
The only appropriate answer I could post in the forums is that the actual answer has so many factors and considerations that it would not possibly fit into a forum post.
The reason for that is something you have previously addressed but chose to dismiss as arbitrary: Everyone is different.
I dismissed it as arbitrary because it is not completely relavent to some of these questions. Does having breakfast boost your metabolism? Now I don't know with any great certainty what the answe to that is, however I would bet that the answer is the same for virtually ever one of us so can not be answered by "It will for some but not for others"0 -
Very good point!0
-
Lol this post coming from someone who believes sat fats and refined sugars are bad without taking into consideration dosage and context
Well that completely backs up my entire argument! I am led to believe that as resfined sugars and sat fats are of no nutricianal value then they are not a beneficial element to a diet - hence bad in any dosage, on an escalating scale
If I am wrong then it is because there is no definitive, unbiased piece of information telling me so and I have reached that conclusion bases on rumour, heresay, downright lies or misinformation! - hence my original post!0 -
Lol this post coming from someone who believes sat fats and refined sugars are bad without taking into consideration dosage and context
Well that completely backs up my entire argument! I am led to believe that as resfined sugars and sat fats are of no nutricianal value then they are not a beneficial element to a diet - hence bad in any dosage, on an escalating scale
If I am wrong then it is because there is no definitive, unbiased piece of information telling me so and I have reached that conclusion bases on rumour, heresay, downright lies or misinformation! - hence my original post!
Have fun as a male avoiding sat fats. And don't eat fruit or anything like that since it also contains sugar, eek!0 -
"I guess what baffles me is why it's so hard for some people. You have to eat less (quantity and fewer calorie-dense foods) and get some activity. That's seriously it. If you do those things, you won't be obese. Certain bodies might be more apt to be under or overweight but you won't weigh 350 lbs. after a year of being sensible. " --quoted, cause I hate those big quote boxes
I fall into the category of those who do this consistently with no results. Doc says my blood work is fine. If it is just calories in/calories out, as it really seems by all logic it SHOULD be, then it is bizarre to me how I can run huge calorie deficits, work out like a fiend, drink lots of water, and still lose nothing for weeks and weeks at a time.
Others, doing what I do, will lose 3lbs a week.
So the questions that endlessly pop up are from those of us who seem to be doing the right thing, and get no results for weeks. This is, as many others have mentioned, because we failed at the genetic lotto. Our bodies lurrrve to hold onto our chub, and it is just gonna be different and take three to four times as long as for other people. The realization that all bodies are different is a hard one to accept for most people, myself and the OP included, so we fuss and growl on the forums, wondering what we're doing wrong.
There really is no one answer for what works for everyone. At least, not at the same rate. And that rate differential is probably what causes all the arm-flapping and distress.
At least for me.0 -
I think that if you want to be a healthy weight and live a healthy lifestyle there are no shortcuts.
Cook from scratch. Limit processed/fast food and food high in refined sugar - the availability and cheapness of those foods is a problem. As kids if we were hungry my mum used to give us fruit, carrot sticks or a piece of toast with butter or marmite. And we used to come in from PLAYING OUTSIDE, like running around, being on our bikes, skates, building dens, whatever. So we were genuinely hungry, but we were given things that would fuel our bodies, not just sugar and fat. Chocolate, biscuits and cake were treat foods, not for every day, and McDonalds or equivalent was reserved for kids birthday parties, so you had it a few times a year.
Now I see kids snacking on crisps, chocolate, fizzy drinks and things like cheese and meat sticks, some families here in the UK RELY on takeaways and fast food for family meals, they don't know how to cook, and they're not doing any exercise because the health and safety police have all but banned everything. Kids can't do competitive sports/athletics in case it damages the self esteem of the ones who aren't as good at it, they can't climb trees or play out any more because parents are frightened to death of everything, so they think the kids are safer at home on the Playstation than anywhere else. ]
And if I sound like a grumpy old woman, I'm actually only 30. I've spent a few years as a youth worker and I tell you I can see the changes loud and clear in only 10-15 years or so since I was the same age as those kids. My younger half siblings who are 10 and 12 years younger than me, they were brought up in a different way despite us sharing one parent, because the culture by then was different. I'm not saying the age I was brought up in was perfect, but I think large portions of our Western society has lost all concept of what's healthy/nutritious because we are so bombarded with all these conflicting messages by advertisers. I've worked with kids who think that Cadbury brunch bars are a health food because of how they're marketed but they are full of fat and sugar - they might have a little more fibre and vitamins than a standard chocolate bar but they are still FAT AND SUGAR and if you eat those things a lot and don't exercise, then sure, you're gonna gain weight. If you crash diet and deprive yourself of food then chances are at some point you're going to crack and binge out on the very foods you shouldn't eat a lot of. Food has seriously become the enemy these days for a lot of people. It doesn't need to be that way, it's not rocket science!0 -
I get your point, an the answer is that even the authorities have an agenda. Help the corn industry, tell us to eat that! There isn't an authority in the world worth listening to as a sole answer. You have to be proactive, learn and read what you can and make your own judgments. I'm sorry, but "this is hard because someone won't give me a brief synopsis of all the literature out there" is you being lazy.
Also, we are all different. I went into a real starvation mode (stopped losing weight, lost period, hormonal imbalances, sensitivity to cold, etc) while eating what should have been close to a 1 lb/week (or less!) deficit. Millions of women with body composition close to mine would have been fine and have successfully eaten less, but my body just wanted to shut down. Ironically enough I'm a huge starvation mode denier. I think people here use it in ridiculous situations. You cannot be both obese and starving, body won't allow that! Anyways, that's off topic.
Do the research, draw your own conclusions, self experiment to determine if the conclusions are valid for you.
Then buy my book called "eat less and move more!" think it will sell?0 -
The only appropriate answer I could post in the forums is that the actual answer has so many factors and considerations that it would not possibly fit into a forum post.
The reason for that is something you have previously addressed but chose to dismiss as arbitrary: Everyone is different.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/you-are-not-different.html0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions