Chuckw40 Member

From what I understand HRM's are only accurate when you are actually doing exercise.

In a controlled environment... Which is what is required if we are to truly compare the weight of 2 substances. These people would have you believe that nothing could ever weigh more than anything else, it would just take up a different amount of volume. As if volume itself is not part of the formula to determine weight.…

Scary

The worst part is the implication that there are a large number of people who don't now that a pound of anything is equal to a pound of anything else. The OP and many others in this thread seem to think this is a widespread problem.

I was going to type out a long explanation as to why you are wrong but it is obvious that you are not being serious.

And what exactly is the truth that people won't accept? Your example proves nothing, in fact it leads me to believe that you don't know the definition of Mass.

Why do I have to keep reading posts like this? Muscle does weigh more than fat based on MATH. Ready? Weight = Mass * Gravity Mass = Density * Volume Because the gravity on Earth is relatively constant we are left with 2 variables, Density and Volume. In order to compare 2 substances we need to eliminate as many variables…

I love your post but I can't help but correct you. It was McDonalds, not Burger King :tongue:

I have been trying to follow the Primal Blueprint but I am really lousy at avoiding rice! Other than that I was keeping my carbs below 100 and for the first few weeks I was losing fast. Then I hit a wall and haven't been able to drop an ounce in the past 2 weeks. I admit that I have been feeling really bummed so I have…

I agree, but it is at the very least a good place to start.

I'm just saying if I need help with something or advice I will go to the person with the most education and experience in that subject.

It sounds like you are saying that 100% of the calories I burn while sleeping will be from Glycogen and 0% is ever taken from your lean muscle tissue. Is that right?

Ok, let's see. Here is an example, simplified of course. Tell me if this is wrong. I have slept all night after loading up with a ton of carbs the night before so my glyogen should be pretty full. I decide to eat all my calories for breakfast and eat 1600 calories of pure table sugar. The sugar is quickly enters my…

But why is an appeal to authority so wrong? It seems like a logical way to go about things really.

Ya know, we can't all spend large amounts of our time becomming experts at every field. i personally have to keep up with Telecommunications and Networking. My users count on my knowing what I am talking about so they can concentrate on their jobs. It's not different here, I don't want to go to college and study nutrician…

I may have not remembered correctly but I thought I heard it was 1200 calories. Either way what you are saying about carbs rarely getting stored as fat seems crazy to me I must admit. I was under the impression that all carbs which exceed your glycogen storage level are stored as fat.

Isn't true though that only about 1200 calories worth of carbs are stored as glyogen? And only if the current stores have been used up?

Lol, I thought that was a strange statement for someone like you to make. Anyway, I totaly agree with you about everything you just said. Except for the part about Alan Aragon because I have not read any of his work yet. I plan to do so when I am not slacking off at work by posting on this forum :noway:

I am going to have to ask for some proof to back up that statement.

This is the perfect example of what i am talking about. Anytime the results are not what they expected they automatically blame it on the people in the study. " Hey Tom, these results are not at all what we expected and don't follow our theory on how all this stuff works" "No problem Joe, I'm sure we are still completely…

I watched her videos and can't believe you would trust a certified clinical nutricianist over some anonymous guy on the internet.

The flatbread actually has more calories and the same amount of carbs as the plain Italian bread.

This is interesting since the prevailing theory is that you can't gain muscle while eating at a caloric deficit.

I can't believe you are still arguing with this person, you can NEVER win. The evidence he requires is nearly impossible to produce because you can't control all the variables. People lie, make mistakes, cheat, etc... Mynameisuntz, right or wrong, it seems to me your only motivation for being on this site is to tell people…

And don't even think about mentioning Paleo/Primal or you will be eviscerated!

I think you misunderstand what I am saying. I don't think there is anything wrong with eating the foods you enjoy in moderation. Just as I don't think there is anything wrong with not eating foods you enjoy in moderation.

The article was talking about people who don't eat things that are essential for life because they think they are unhealthy. This is vastly different than someone deciding to stop eating candy because it it totally unnecessary to staying alive and perhaps may have a negative effect on their health. By the way, I was only…

What I am saying is there is nothing wrong with not putting something in your body that is not only unnecessary but in fact potentially harmful.

I laugh at the idea of everything in moderation because it is stupid. Should I start smoking again, moderately? Should I drink a moderate amount of draino once in a while? As far as the article goes, OCD and eating disorders are real and can be devastating but that is vastly different than someone deciding to stop eating…

Of course anyone who does their own investigation and dares to post their conclusion will be summarily roasted for it. Anything short of a peer reviewed double blind lifetime study of human guinea pigs will be insufficient. Such evidence will probably never happen because even if you can monitor and control a large group…