Should i Weight Train?

[feeb]

Hey Steve - thanks for responding

I disagree with this notion that you only get one type of calorie, calories can be found in all sorts of food and can be good or bad for you.

Nutrition is vital for sure and being aware of how much iron, calcium and protein your body is getting is (for me) more important than counting calories

i do look at calories - but i also look at the other measurements on food, like how much salt and fat are present... they are important too and i think many people find calorie counting as an 'easy' way to judge what they are eating, when really they should be taking everything into account.

I agree entirely with this

- the larger you are the more food you can eat and still lose weight
- the more active you are the more food you can eat and still lose weight
- once calories are "set," it's important to track rate of weight loss and adjust intake according to how fast or slow you're losing

which is brilliant if you are doing what i am doing and gradually improving your lifestyle to be more healthy

for example just now i got a craving for fish n chips... i ended up getting some hummous, salad and pitta and enjoyed it alot I didnt need to count the calories of it in order to know i was making a healthier decision.

So, you need a certain amount of protein in your diet, its essencial to keep you alive but more than that - its essencial to keep you active and not run down, if you are active, you will burn more calories just by moving around during the day, whereas if you are run down you wont move much and so will not burn any calories

therefore if you eat something high in protein and high in calories, that is better for you than eating something low in protein and calories.

Its not just about feeding your body energy and it responding to it, its about making that body work how you want it to (using diet and also exercise) in order for it to effienciently use ANY foods you put into it.

I dont think i have skirted round the idea of calories, the only think i am unsure of is why a topic about weight-lifting has become a big ole conversation about calories!

Yes calories are a way of measuring (some of the things) food can give us - yes counting calories is ONE way of loosing wieght

But it is not the only way, its not essencial to weight loss, making healthy choices is much nicer and more pleasent (i think)

 

[feeb]

Kara i am well aware of what a logical fallacy is and am shocked you would know such things and then resort to your last sentence to prove your point?!

I havent run crying, i have answered every question that i have been given.

i think that calorie counting is soul destroying, obsessive and a reason why people stay fat

that is a true statment and you will not change my mind, i have witnessed it myself and on paper.

I wished to have a conversation about the benefits of weight-lifting, not about how many calories are in a tuna sandwich or wether i am eating enough under the reccomended allowance in order to get thin

perhaps i eat over the daily allowance, but i excercise loads now and in the last month have lost half a stone, the bags under my eyes and i feel fantastic

I am glad calorie counting works for you (but really sad you use words like PUR-LEASE)

I actually did look up a few of your past posts and one of them said 'i like a debate, some might think thats argumentative' so i had assumed you wouldnt get all defensive when someone had a different view to you. - can i also add that we could have had a decent discussion on this which i am hoping myself and Steve might still continue to have, but if people insist on taking things to heart that probably wont be able to happen

p.s - i would suggest doing some research into nutrition before you continue advising anyone else on diet.

 

[Steve]

Hey Steve - thanks for responding

I disagree with this notion that you only get one type of calorie, calories can be found in all sorts of food and can be good or bad for you.

Again, you are confusing calories for nutrients. They are not one in the same.

What you are saying here can be equated to saying there are "good" and "bad" inches.

You keep referring to foods being good or bad for you and relating that to calories. When in fact calories don't do anything "in the body" beyond provide energy.

Nutrients are what you're referring to.

Nutrition is vital for sure and being aware of how much iron, calcium and protein your body is getting is (for me) more important than counting calories

Right, that makes sense. Health comes before energy. That said, they're both pretty important in my book.

Deficiency of nutrition can cause serious health problems.

Overabundance of energy (calories) can cause serious health problems.

More importantly to the discussion at hand... based on the above quote I'm lost on how you're continually confusing calories for nutrients. You seem to understand the distinction when you say, "Nutrition is vital for sure and being aware...." but then you say things like, "there are different types of calories...." which is incorrect.

i do look at calories - but i also look at the other measurements on food, like how much salt and fat are present... they are important too and i think many people find calorie counting as an 'easy' way to judge what they are eating, when really they should be taking everything into account.

If you spend some time on this forum outside of this thread, especially in the stickies, you'll find that nobody here promotes solely counting calories. The foundational message of this community, which you've obviously missed, is this:

To lose fat you must be in a calorie deficit. This doesn't mean you have to count calories, though you can. You simply need to lead a lifestyle, nutritionally and activity-wise, that leads to more energy being expended than taken in. Once that foundation is in place, or simultaneously if you so desire, the foods (nutrients) that comprise said calories is also vitally important to health and fat loss.

Simply eating less calories than your body needs will always lead to a loss of mass. But that doesn't guarantee health or success.

Calories AND nutrients are vital.

And for the last time, this doesn't mean that either MUST be strictly counted.

So, you need a certain amount of protein in your diet, its essencial to keep you alive but more than that - its essencial to keep you active and not run down, if you are active, you will burn more calories just by moving around during the day, whereas if you are run down you wont move much and so will not burn any calories

Explain to me how protein keeps active.

therefore if you eat something high in protein and high in calories, that is better for you than eating something low in protein and calories.

No. These sorts of either/or, binary statements never work. Nothing applies to everything in fitness and nutrition.

Its not just about feeding your body energy and it responding to it, its about making that body work how you want it to (using diet and also exercise) in order for it to effienciently use ANY foods you put into it.

Have you read anything on this forum? Serious question. You seem to be assuming some ridiculous message is being promoted and it's entirely false. Nobody is suggesting what you're saying.

I dont think i have skirted round the idea of calories, the only think i am unsure of is why a topic about weight-lifting has become a big ole conversation about calories!

That's the way these public discussions go.

A title can say one thing, but based on a few statements in a thread, the topic can totally shift gears. If you would've said, from the beginning, that you'd prefer to keep this thread on original topic and move outside conversations to another thread, I'm sure people would've respected that.

But you fed into the conversation just as much as anyone.

If you'd like to drop the subject, just say the word. I'm only interested in contributing as long as there's people willing and able to critically assess the information being discussed and open to learning.

Yes calories are a way of measuring (some of the things) food can give us - yes counting calories is ONE way of loosing wieght

You're missing this very simplistic concept.

Conservation of mass - Thermodynamics

IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOU CONSUME. WHAT YOU CALL GOOD OR BAD FOOD... IF YOU'RE IN A NET POSITIVE ENERGY BALANCE, MEANING MORE CALORIES ARE COMING IN THE DOOR THAN OUT, YOU'LL NEVER LOSE WEIGHT. THAT'S SCIENCE. VERY BASIC SCIENCE.

Is that all there is to losing weight healthily and reaching physique goals?

Of course not. Nobody is suggesting that.

But it is not the only way, its not essencial to weight loss, making healthy choices is much nicer and more pleasent (i think)

Correlation is not causation.

Healthy foods "work" in terms of weight loss b/c they are less calorically dense than other foods and more satiating. Yes, they also promote health, but again, they work in terms of mass loss b/c of the control of energy.

I can only put the concept in so many different ways. If you're not understanding this, I suggest we simply end the conversation.

 

[Steve]

Feeb, maybe this article I wrote for my last newsletter would clear up where the confusion is coming from. I'll share it... if you want to read it, great. If not, no harm.

I want to keep this article very simple so not to screw with the concise message.

Let’s define the problem: You’re not happy because you have more fat on your body than you’re comfortable with. It’s either negatively impacting your performance on the field or it’s dragging down your confidence when you look in the mirror naked. Either way, you want to get rid of it.

Thinking objectively and critically, an obvious first step would be to determine what’s causing the unsightly reflection in the mirror. Many avoid this step, opting for the subjective, emotional route which leads to rash decisions. This is where you’ll see crash dieting, excessive exercise, belief in fads and gimmicks, and these sorts of tactics enter the picture.
They don’t work.

As hard as it is to be objective in this situation where you’re dealing with your own body image, it’s a must if you’re going to make rational decisions that lead to lasting results.

So what are the causes?

This topic could get very deep once you factor in the physiology of lipogenesis (fat accumulation), psychology of exercise/nutrition/body, genetics, etc. Rather than delving into that level of detail, I’d rather stick to the basic, mile-high view.

Our bodies require an input of energy to fuel its daily operations. Said input comes by way of the foods we eat. The largest building blocks of food, macronutrients, provide us our energy. The macronutrients are protein, fats, carbohydrates and alcohol.

The energy that macronutrients provide us is measured in calories. A calorie is a measurement of heat. Used here we’ll simply think of it as the energy currency our bodies deal with.

*1 gram of protein provides our bodies roughly 4 calories

*1 gram of carbohydrates provides our bodies roughly 4 calories

*1 gram of fats provides our bodies roughly 9 calories

*1 gram of alcohol provides our bodies roughly 7 calories

If these foods provide us the energy input, where are we spending these calories? What is the output? Total calorie expenditure can be summed up by the following equation:

Energy out = BMR + TEA + TEF + NEAT

BMR is Basal Metabolic Rate, TEA is the Thermic Effect of Activity, TEF is the Thermic Effect of food, and NEAT is Non-exercise Activity Thermogenesis.

Without going into each component in detail, suffice is to say BMR is the energy spent while you’re at complete rest. Things like cellular processes, respiration, etc. fall into this category.

TEA is the energy spent on activity. Exercise, yard work, hiking, vacuuming, etc. would fall into this category.

TEF is the energy spent digesting and utilizing the foods we eat.

Lastly, NEAT can be thought of as subconscious activity that leads to energy expenditure. Fidgeting would fall into this category.

Assuming you paid attention in physics class, you might remember a law known as the Conservation of Energy. In its simplest form, it states energy cannot be created or destroyed—it can merely change forms.
This means all energy coming “in the door” must be accounted for and on the flipside, any energy going “out the door” that exceeds input must be made up for.

This accounting pans out by changes in the amounts of various tissues in the body (fat, muscle, etc.) As the amount of tissue fluctuates, so does weight generally speaking. In a roundabout way, we can say:

If energy in = energy out, we have a stable weight.
If energy in > energy out, we have a gain of weight.
If energy in < energy out, we have a loss of weight.

Before the nerds (we certainly have a few who subscribe) read this and get their panties in a bunch, the thermodynamics of the energy balance equation aren’t as clean as it appears on the surface. This is especially true once you take into account all the metabolic/biochemical/digestive inefficiencies on both the energy in and out sides of the equation. It’s just not that important for the purposes of this article and said inefficiencies do not discredit the accuracy of the equation.

Just to highlight the distinction, macronutrients are not calories and calories are not macronutrients. Macronutrients provide our bodies calories during metabolism. While 500 calories is always 500 calories just as an inch is always an inch, 500 calories worth of carbohydrates will have different effects on the body than 500 calories from protein. It’s not the calories that are different in the “body’s mind”… it’s the nutrients.

Invariably we have people who solely focus on calories and others who solely focus on nutrients. In reality, focusing on one without the other is misguided.

Nowadays, it’s all the rave to put the cart before the horse when it comes to nutrition. By that I mean dieters and even various professionals will harp on and on about the finer nuances of nutrition before concerning themselves with the energy balance equation (calories).

Your calories can come entirely from carbohydrates. However, if you’re in calorie balance or in a calorie deficit, you’re not going to have weight gain. Put differently, you can have zero carbs in your diet, yet if you’re in a calorie surplus, you’re going to gain weight.

Clearly, if fat loss is the goal, we need to be in a calorie deficit regardless of what sort of food we’re putting in our mouths.

That said, what foods comprise these calories is obviously critical as well. Having all your calories come from candy, even in a calorie deficit, is obviously going to pan out drastically different than having all your calories come from chicken breast.

Does this mean we’re locked into tracking our calories though?
There are a few schools of thought when it comes to answering this question. Some argue that weighing all their foods using a digital scale and logging them into some sort of nutrition tracking software is their guiding light. This method demands honesty as the truth is in the numbers assuming you’re recording everything you consume.

Others will argue that being anal retentive to the point where you’re recording every morsel of food that crosses your lips is not only unrealistic, but can also drive you toward insanity.

My take?

Do what feels right for you as I truly believe it’s a matter of personal preference. I know individuals who thrive happily tracking their foods and I know others who successfully go about things differently.

An argument could be made for starting out a “diet” or healthy lifestyle change by measuring and logging the foods you eat for 2-4 weeks. I’ve found that many people have a very poor awareness of how many calories comprise foods and serving sizes. By measuring and logging, it provides individuals with a unique insight that can be invaluable going forward.

To summarize, we’ve defined the problem – you’re carrying more body fat than you’re comfortable with. We’ve defined the cause – you’re consuming more calories than your body expends thus leading to storage of fat. So what is the solution?

This is where things get complex. Up to this point, everything universally applies to all of us. If there was one universal solution however, being overweight or obese would be very simple to fix. You might argue, “There is one universal problem – that being more energy in the door than out. So isn’t the universal solution to reduce calorie consumption?”

If it were that simple, all diets would work. You probably know, the vast majority (95%+) of diets fail in the long run for reasons we’re not going to discuss here. The fact is people over-consume calories for a wide variety of reasons. Sometimes it’s a simple matter such as the foods consumed are calorically-dense and lack nutrients that promote satiety. Sometimes it’s a complex matter such as emotional-behavioral issues. Almost always it’s a multifaceted problem. It’s individually unique meaning what causes me to overeat most likely isn’t what’s causing you to overeat.

In the next few editions of Nutrition Corner I want to look at some of the finer nuances of what’s been discussed above. We’ll discuss calorie intake in more detail and ways of controlling it as well as hunger. We’ll take a look at each of the macronutrients in detail and see how they uniquely impact hunger and fat loss. We’ll discuss the various components of energy expenditure (BMR, TEF, TEA, NEAT) in greater detail. We’ll discuss metabolism, in general, in greater detail. And we’ll start building a baseline plan so you can start applying some of this information as seamlessly as possible.

The hope with the next few issues of Nutrition Corner is to help you build a better understanding of the foundational concepts pertaining to dieting and nutrition. Once the foundation is understood, it becomes much more difficult to fall victim to fad marketing and gimmicky products. You’ll be able to benchmark a claim or product against the foundational concepts and realize if something does or doesn’t make sense.

 

[KaraCooks]

p.s - i would suggest doing some research into nutrition before you continue advising anyone else on diet.

I'll tell you what - you learn to differentiate between calories and nutrients and then come bakc and tell me to research nutrition.

We can have a conversation then.

 

[KaraCooks]

I'd also like to point out that no one mentioned calorie counting until YOU brought it up in post #6 of this thread.

Cord mentioned "cut your food intake".
I didn't mention calories at all.

So if you didn't want the conversation to go that way, you shouldn't have brought it up.

 

[Omega]

LOL - it sounds like Feeb laid down a challenge... maybe we should open it all up to a poll across the forum.

Who do you believe has a firmer grasp of healthy nutrition: Feeb or Kara?

 

[Jynus]

p.s - i would suggest doing some research into nutrition before you continue advising anyone else on diet.

says the girl who doesn't understand the difference between a calorie and a nutrient? you can't even grasp the simplest concepts of diet. you're in no position to lecture us.

 

[feeb]

Hey i dont claim to know all there is to know about diet and nutrition or anything like that, what i know is what i have learnt through a few basic lessons in nutrition - but i am not claiming to 'advise' people in diet - which i do find quite scary from someone saying to loose weight you must become calorie deficient which i am sorry but just isnt true

it is perfectly possible to loose weight in a healthy manner whilst still giving your body all the nutrients it needs, your body NEEDS a certain amount of food to survive, if you excercise you are using your body to burn off that energy you have give it

if you are surviving on 1200 or less calories a day, you are setting yourself up for disaster - women should have around 2000 calories a day, if you wish to loose weight then healthy eating and exercise will do that

being calorie deficient doesnt come into it, using those calories you give to your body effectively does come into it.

This is what worries me about these sorts of forums, people think that because they have found a solution that works for them, they can preach to other people about what they must or must not do

when really the only people with any leg to stand on as far as thats concerned are those with a degree in nutrition, something none of us have...

I am not lecturing anyone (not trying to anyway) but if i want advice about my diet, i will speak to a dietician and i am fairly certain they wont be telling me to supply my body with less than my daily dose of calories (which they would work out for me properly, not assume over a web forum)

Once again i came here to ask a question about weight lifting which i have had answered and have taken on board

i thank you for your time and hope you all achieve what you wish to achieve

 

[KaraCooks]

from someone saying to loose weight you must become calorie deficient which i am sorry but just isnt true

Um. Is English your first langauge? And I ask that sincerely, because maybe what's happening here is that you don't understand exactly what's being said.

If you eat less than you need to maintain your weight, you are eating at a deficit. That's exactly what losing weight is - eating at a deficit - i.e. eating less than you need to maintain or grow. It doesn't matter whether you do that by changing *what* you eat, so you're eating less, or by counting calories so you're eating less. Or even if you choose a combination of eating less and exercising to burn more calories ...

Having a calorie deficit is the ONLY thing that will cause weight loss.

it is perfectly possible to loose weight in a healthy manner whilst still giving your body all the nutrients it needs,

Again, you seem to not understand the difference between nutrients and calories.

When you reduce calories, you reduce the units of energy that your body uses - therefore eating at a calorie deficit (see above). That does NOT mean you reduce nutrients. I have said many times that especially when you reduce calories, you must make sure that the calories you DO eat count .. that they are nutritionally dense calories.

That's why a 1500 calorie diet of chips and candy is not going to be nearly as effective as a 1500 calories diet of lean meat, complex grains, veggies and fruits.

To quote you from an earlier post, I would really strongly suggest that you learn more about nutrition - including what a calorie is - before you start making declarative statements about calorie counting and nutrition. Because right now you really really really don't have a clue what you're talking about.

i will speak to a dietician and i am fairly certain they wont be telling me to supply my body with less than my daily dose of calories (which they would work out for me properly, not assume over a web forum)

Yes, please. Go speak to a proper dietician and then come back here and tell us what that person told you. Seriously. If a real, licensed dietician tells you that you can lose weight without being in a calorie deficit, then I will PayPal you $50. It's here in front of witnesses ... I guarantee it. (However I have a suspicion that when you're told by someone who is licensed that you don't know what you're talking about, you won't have the guts to come back here and admit that you just posted a whole bunch of nonsense.)

Oh, and by the way, "working out for you properly" would mean using the Harris-Benedict equation. You tell me your current weight is 15st, (about 210 lbs) which mean you'd need about 2940 calories to maintain your current weight. I weigh 167 lbs which means I need about 2338 calories to maintain my weight. In order to lose, you drop that by about 20% or 30% - which means for you it would be around 2000 calories and for me, 1630 calories.

SEe, not the same number for everyone - but calculated for each person based on their weight and level of activity.

 

[Steve]

Let's keep this very simple.

Explain to me how energy stored is kept constant while the energy coming in the door exceeds that which your body needs.

Where is the excess going? Are you suggesting in simply vanishes? That healthy food has a way of altering the very basic law of conservation of energy?

 

[feeb]

Okies here is what i mean

i need 2000 calories per day to get about and do normal stuff

i exercise on top of eating a healthy diet containing all those calories

and i will loose weight.

I havent had to do any calorie counting to gauge that conclusion, nor have i had to making any changes to how many nutrients my body is recieving in order to put it in a position where i am loosing weight. I have simply used the food in my body more effectively to create the desired affect.

My main issue with these calorie counting thingys is that you are not looking at anything else going into the body to make your conclusions about food, you might for example really NEED a banana because of the other things that it can give you, things that will make you work better, run faster and use the energy in your body more efficiently.

If you are looking at that banana and going 'Oh no i cant eat that because its too high in calories' you are denying what your body really needs, without what your body needs you encounter way way way more problems than just weight loss and infact it will be HARDER to loose weight because you wont have the resources to do it properly, everything will be a slog.

I am sorry this doesnt make sense, it makes perfect sense to me and seems to be working so Hey Ho

 

[KaraCooks]

i need 2000 calories per day to get about and do normal stuff
i exercise on top of eating a healthy diet containing all those calories
and i will loose weight.

So by exercising, you're creating a calorie deficit, therefore you're losing weight.

My main issue with these calorie counting thingys is that you are not looking at anything else going into the body to make your conclusions about food,

Um ... what? Have you read what we've written because it sounds like you're intentionally ignoring every single post where we've said that NUTRITION IS IMPORTANT.

Seriously. Where are you getting this "not looking at anything else going into the body"???

As for the banana example: you're making it an either or. The reality is "should I have this banana for 110 calories or should I have this bag of chips for 110 calories". Hm. The banana would be the healthier use of those calories, so I have to decide if it's worth it to me to waste the calories on chips, which are non-nutritious, or make the healthy choice and eat the banana.

 

[KaraCooks]

My main issue with these calorie counting thingys is that you are not looking at anything else going into the body to make your conclusions about food,

From my post above - something I've said over and over and over and over in this thread and which you keep insisting that I'm not saying (or you're ignoring to make your point)

When you reduce calories, you reduce the units of energy that your body uses - therefore eating at a calorie deficit (see above). That does NOT mean you reduce nutrients. I have said many times that especially when you reduce calories, you must make sure that the calories you DO eat count .. that they are nutritionally dense calories.

 

[Steve]

I'm bailing out of this thread. It seems there's an intent to twist words and not read what's being said and I have no interest in that.

I'm confident that there's enough information here for those who wish to learn, to do so.

Best to you.

 

[feeb]

it is incredibly difficult to give your body the right amount of nutrients when you are eating less calories than what is reccomended - any big diet choices of this kind should be discussed with a dietician so that you are sure you are still recieving what you need from the food you are taking.

 

[KaraCooks]

it is incredibly difficult to give your body the right amount of nutrients when you are eating less calories than what is reccomended

You have no idea what you're talking about ... as has been made extremely clear by every post you've made in this thread. And you're obviously not willing to be educated or to make the effort to learn, as is also very clear by every post you've made in this thread.

I get MORE than the daily recommended requirement of all nutrients eating at 1600 calories per day, because I make sure I eat nutrient rich food. I probably get more nutrition than someone who is eating 3000 calories of crap food.

But you don't actually care about that because it goes against your dogmatic stand.

If you do really actually care, I'd suggest you contact that dietitian or nutritionist you keep referencing and actually learn something about nutrition, calories, food, and weight loss.

BTW, if you're so concerned with the nutritional value of your food, maybe you should look at the value of the "nutty, fruity snack bars" you're eating.
Anyone who thinks those are healthy might rethink giving advice on nutrition and calories and weight loss.

I'm with Steve. I'm out. This conversation has become totally useless.

 

[feeb]

kara not everyone is you - many many people look at calorie counting, eat exactly what they would have (crap) but less of in order to loose weight and end up feeling sluggish, knackered and ill

Which is why its important to have a broader view of nutrition than just 'counting calories'

i am very eager to learn but i am not eager to eat less than i should instead of excersing a bit more - thats just my way of doing things.

I am glad you have found something that works, well done - but unless you know what someone is eating how can you justify suggesting to them that they eat less? Its a part of the equation for sure but its not the only part

I am sorry if that hasnt come across in my posts

 

[KaraCooks]

Which is why its important to have a broader view of nutrition than just 'counting calories'

You're right. You win.

 

[feeb]

how does something like this become about 'winning' or 'loosing'!

i just wanted to talk about weightlifting man <shrug>