What if....

[MAR1984]

I simply mean if a fat calorie is the same or equal to a protein calorie then why do they have different energy outputs? Why doesn't carbs, fats, and proteins all have the same calories?

They do. 10 calories of fat provides the same amount of energy as 10 calories of carbs. 1 pound of steel weighs the same as 1 pound of feathers.

Now, 1 cubic foot of feathers weighs a ton less than 1 cubic foot of steel, but that is density, not weight. Just as 1g of fat having more calories than 1g of carbos is an energy density thing, not total energy. That means I can eat 2g of carbs roughly for the same energy as 1g of fat, and get the same energy. Thats all that has been mentioned - the same amount of calories, not the same amount in volume or weight.

Without getting extremely technical it is known science that during food absorption the conversion of carbohydrates or protein into fat is 10 times less efficient than simply storing fat in a fat cell, but the body can do it. If you have 100 extra calories in fat (about 11 grams) floating in your bloodstream, fat cells can store it using only 2.5 calories of energy. On the other hand, if you have 100 extra calories in glucose (about 25 grams) floating in your bloodstream, it takes 23 calories of energy to convert the glucose into fat and then store it. Given a choice, a fat cell will grab the fat and store it rather than the carbohydrates because fat is so much easier to store. So what happens when I sit down and absorb 300 calories of fat? Or for that matter what if I consume my entire days calories in nothing but fat? From the posts I have read I will be challenged I am sure to provide some study or medical report to this, however I don't have that much time on my hands so I will challenge those particular people to prove my statement incorrect rather.

Even if I accpet this entire paragraph as truth, I don't see anything that says anything to do with the topic - i.e. macros matter more than calories. First thing I guess we need to get straight is whether or not you believe in the concept of a BMR, or a set number of calories that the body burns in a day, regardless of what they are.

Then, assuming someone needs 2000 calories to maintain, and they ate 1500 calories, do you believe its possible to store fat? And similarly, if another person needs the same 2000 calories, would it be possible for that person to eat 2500 calories and NOT gain fat if they were eating some special combination of macros?

And the reality is, its an obvious exaggeration when it is said that you could eat candy bars and lose weight if you eat less calories than maintenance (even if its true), because its not healthy and no sane person would do it. The body needs fats, carbs, and proteins, and for anybody eating a balanced diet, it really is easy to simplify it to calories in < calories out. If its not working, then you've got one side of the equation wrong.

Besides who the heck wants to calorie count for the rest of their lives?

Nobody. Hopefully, I'll get to the point where I don't have to count anymore, that I'll have a good idea of what I'm taking in and what my body needs. Then it should be as easy as watching the scale and making small adjustments to food. And if I ever start gaining or losing more than what I want, back to counting again. When trying to lose (or gain muscle), thats when its important to really monitor your intake, if you want to make progress. Otherwise, you're not going to be making progress as efficiently as possible.

 

[Kayshiz]

This is a cow:


Cow get fat eating grass:


I know that cows are not humans, and I don't care. The principal is still the same. If you eat to much of something, ANYTHING, you will get fat.

I don't understand how you wouldn't want to count calories because it can be tedious and over complicated for weight loss, but have no problem hanging on to the idea that losing weight is more difficult then calories in vs/ calories out. I would much rather count the calories is a nutritious balanced diet then spend ridiculous amounts of time deciding that if I "eat these 3 grams of almonds my body will take 1/2 a day and only use 2 calories to process them and then they will be stored directly as fat" or whatever it is your worrying about.

 

[Kayshiz]

I simply mean if a fat calorie is the same or equal to a protein calorie then why do they have different energy outputs? Why doesn't carbs, fats, and proteins all have the same calories?

I was going to grab a link and actually explain to you why what you said makes absolutely no sense, but you know what? If you can't take the time to actually learn something about food science and how your body works, why should I?

 

[5KFreak]

This is a cow:


Cow get fat eating grass:


I know that cows are not humans, and I don't care. The principal is still the same. If you eat to much of something, ANYTHING, you will get fat.

Thank goodness! I was going to say that you should learn a bit more about cows!

 

[5KFreak]

I was going to grab a link and actually explain to you why what you said makes absolutely no sense, but you know what? If you can't take the time to actually learn something about food science and how your body works, why should I?

Kayshiz,
I may dig into this a big deeper depending on the time I have, however I am not going to get into science fights on this forum! You should go back and read exactly the points I made. Also I have been studying "food science" and nutrition for over 8 years! Seems to me you just started your journey "once and for all" in Feb of this year! What were all this issues before then? If you knew all the answers to weight loss then why were you unsuccessful? Was it your vast knowledge in food science or "grabbing links"? Since Feb, have you been able to fit into that little dress yet?

Let me be clear, I am not hear to argue science or start fights with people. My medical journals, books, and research are gathering dust on my bookshelf and they will continue to do so. I will not take them down, and scan them to this site for everyone's pleasure nor will I quote and reference them on this site. That would be a complete waste of time. I simply know what works for me, has worked for me, and will continue to work for me, and I will share that knowledge, and if people want to test it out to see if it works for them then I am here to help out with that!


I have been my own research subject for quite some time.

Can you give me and other people on this website insight on what HAS worked for you?

 

[Kayshiz]

I have been studying "food science" and nutrition for over 8 years!

I simply mean if a fat calorie is the same or equal to a protein calorie then why do they have different energy outputs? Why doesn't carbs, fats, and proteins all have the same calories?

You have been studying food science for 8 years and you posted that?

Really?

If you really didn't expect anyone to call that into question, we must all be diet peons to you and your studies.

Mar1984 actually did take the time to answer your question by the way (which is what you asked, a question) so I hope you take the same amount of time to read it.

 

[Kayshiz]

Since Feb, have you been able to fit into that little dress yet?

By the by, if your going to use sarcasm to try and insult me, maybe you should have actually read my posts rather then just scan them furiously looking for things to make me look silly. I'm all for sarcasm, but that was just full of fail.

 

[allcdnboy1]

depends on your goals and motivation. the ideal way (healthy way) to count calories is to also be aware of the % of protein, fat, & carbs you eat

If you are only interested in losing weight and don't care about what goes into your body, then ignore the makeup of your food. If you eat carbs all day and no protein, you will be hungry all day. Eating straight fat generally has no nutritional value ... but it's your body.

 

[MAR1984]

Why is it the so called nutrition "experts" always have to result to personal attacks when they can't support there position? Its always, "I'm fit and you're fat so you're wrong and I'm right nyah nyah nyah "

I lost overe 150lbs doing it my way, and I wasn't even always doing it the right way. I had the gall bladder removal surgery to prove it.

I guess we can all just keep doing what works for us then..

 

[allcdnboy1]

there are literally millions of ways to lose weight and each one works for different people. Successful methods fit the persons personality and lifestyle ... but, in the end, it's simply eating and exercising right ... the details only matter if it's not done safely.

 

[5KFreak]

Why is it the so called nutrition "experts" always have to result to personal attacks when they can't support there position? Its always, "I'm fit and you're fat so you're wrong and I'm right nyah nyah nyah "

I lost overe 150lbs doing it my way, and I wasn't even always doing it the right way. I had the gall bladder removal surgery to prove it.

I guess we can all just keep doing what works for us then..

I wasn't trying to convey personal attacks on anyone! I apologize if I came off that way! Kayshiz decided to be rude in posting sarcastic photos and then posted rudely again to insinuate that I am not going to take to the time to learn anything so why should she post a link!

ANYWAY, that is water under the bridge

MAR, please read back at what I said! I do think the amount of calories in vs the amount out IS an important equation! I did say that, however what my point is that it is much more complicated than that, and when you tell someone the way to lose weight is to eat less than you burn, they take that to think they eat their daily allotment in pizza, beer, and nachos and still lose weight! You will lose weight in the beginning however, you will stall or not meet your goal.

You have done a tremendous job at losing the weight! That's awesome! Keep doing what works for you, however I hope you are also thinking about the future of when you lose allyour weight. I mean in order to keep from relapsing.


P.S. I never said anyone was WRONG and I was RIGHT!

 

[5KFreak]

I know that cows are not humans, and I don't care. The principal is still the same. If you eat to much of something, ANYTHING, you will get fat.

Just to hit back on this, you are absolutely right, and I never said that calories in vs calories out are important. If you DO eat too much and don't exercise enough then you will gain weight. The issue is knowing that "magic" number! It's impossible to know exactly what your body burns during exercise and what you body burns at rest! Every single person is different so the stupid formulas that give you what your daily caloric intake is and then the heart rate monitors that sell for $300 a pop, they are WRONG! There is NO way to get that correct number, and even if you get a round about idea your body changes on a DAY TO DAY basis! It is so off the scale to even be able to begin to comprehend just how effecient our bodies are. When you get that magic number of 1500 calories a day and your heart rate monitor or the machine says you have burned 500 calories, you think "hell yea! I am on my way" well you will lose a little bit of weight in the beginning but sooner than later you will stall or gain because your body has ADAPTED and it has changed that "magic" number on you!

 

[MAR1984]

MAR, please read back at what I said! I do think the amount of calories in vs the amount out IS an important equation! I did say that, however what my point is that it is much more complicated than that, and when you tell someone the way to lose weight is to eat less than you burn, they take that to think they eat their daily allotment in pizza, beer, and nachos and still lose weight! You will lose weight in the beginning however, you will stall or not meet your goal.

You have done a tremendous job at losing the weight! That's awesome! Keep doing what works for you, however I hope you are also thinking about the future of when you lose allyour weight. I mean in order to keep from relapsing.

eh, I would argue its more that its easy to passively overconsume when all you're eating is beer and pizza and nachos - you just don't know how many calories you're getting.

Thanks for the compliment on my weight loss, I still have a long ways to go. I should let you know, the reason I'm doing things the way I'm doing them now is precisely because I'm thinking about the future. In the past, I've regained weight after getting burned out from 7 days a week of cardio and practically starving myself on a too restrictive diet. I never learned how to eat. I did it the wrong way, and it caused other health problems - gall stones. Now that I'm eating properly, when I get to a point where I don't want to lose anymore or even possibly try to gain muscle, I know all I have to do is keep eating what I'm eating, just eat more of it in a controlled manner.

I hope you don't get the idea that any of us are advocating the "pizza a nachos diet". My position is that it doesn't have to be off limits, just moderated. You can substitute pizza for dinner occasionally, or have a donut now and then, or snack on some chips from time to time, and as long as you're under or at maintenance calories, you're not going to gain fat or stall your progress. Thats all I'm saying. Most people I tell that they can eat whatever they want as long as they are under their maintenance calories are the people that are trying to get by on celery, cereal bars, crackers, and diet shakes. And then spend 3 hours a day in the gym on top of that. They don't need to starve themselves, they don't need to be restrictive. Its unlikely they'll have long term sustainable success with a diet like that.

I personally advocate a balanced diet of 30% healthy fats, 30% healthy carbs, and 30% proteins, from healthy sources. Then, the last 10% of your daily calories is for whatever you want to fill it with. In practice, I usually und up with my fats a bit low, my carbs a bit high, and my protein right about on mark, but I'd like them higher for me because I really want to make sure I hold onto my muscle while losing weight. But for the mojority of people on this site looking for advice, it doesn't have to be any more complicated than, eat a balanced diet of fats, carbs, and proteins, and count calories to eat under maintenance, don't restrict anything you like, just control the intake and count the calories, to see progress. To be honest, I've never came across someone who has claimed to be counting calories and staying under maintenance, and not seeing progress. Usually, its explained by a mis-count of calories. Sometimes, stalls can be explained by, "well, you've lost 30 lbs and haven't changed your defecit or recalculated your new BMR yet, so you're not in the defecit you think you are. Sometimes, its eating too little, or body adaptions that stall weight loss. Sometimes, its calculating BMR incorrectly to start with - the activity multiplier is a fudge factor really, so how do you know which one to use for sure? Thats why you pick a calorie intake you think is close to the defecit you need, and you adjust up or down from there based on the results you see. And then, you constantly have to readjust based on your loss, your body adaptions, and your weekly activity. Its awfully hard to make adustments when you don't have a baseline.

Best Regards,
Matt

 

[MAR1984]

Just to hit back on this, you are absolutely right, and I never said that calories in vs calories out are important. If you DO eat too much and don't exercise enough then you will gain weight. The issue is knowing that "magic" number! It's impossible to know exactly what your body burns during exercise and what you body burns at rest! Every single person is different so the stupid formulas that give you what your daily caloric intake is and then the heart rate monitors that sell for $300 a pop, they are WRONG! There is NO way to get that correct number, and even if you get a round about idea your body changes on a DAY TO DAY basis! It is so off the scale to even be able to begin to comprehend just how effecient our bodies are. When you get that magic number of 1500 calories a day and your heart rate monitor or the machine says you have burned 500 calories, you think "hell yea! I am on my way" well you will lose a little bit of weight in the beginning but sooner than later you will stall or gain because your body has ADAPTED and it has changed that "magic" number on you!

Exactly the point I was just making in my last post. To eat in a way to never see stalls, you either have to A) adapt your eating along with your body changes, or B) starve yourself.

Just because someone ate 1500 calories a day for 3 months then stalled does not mean the method is wrong, it means its time to adapt.

You can pretty much know your own personal BMR perfectly, just maybe you don't get it just right the first time. If your goal was to maintain weight, pick a number based on forumals you think is close. If you lose or gain, its the wrong number. Adjust, and try again for the next week. Maybe within 2 weeks, you'll zero in on the perfect calorie number to maintain weight, if you're accurately counting. If you're not accurately counting or in some way metering your food, you can't accurately adjust.

 

[Kayshiz]

Kayshiz decided to be rude in posting sarcastic photos

First off, I didn't thread bomb you, I posted a picture of a cow, and it related to the discussion.

The issue is knowing that "magic" number! It's impossible to know exactly what your body burns during exercise and what you body burns at rest! Every single person is different so the stupid formulas that give you what your daily caloric intake is and then the heart rate monitors that sell for $300 a pop, they are WRONG! There is NO way to get that correct number, and even if you get a round about idea your body changes on a DAY TO DAY basis!

I don't think anyone argued the point that the formulas are going to be 100% perfect for everyone, but they are close enough that if you watch your intake (and don't have a thyroid, or other medical issue) you will lose weight. Maybe you wont get a perfect pound every week by dropping 500 calories a day from the formulas, but like Mar said, long term you should be able to adjust and recalculate for your own specific needs.

To call them stupid and basically throw them out as worthless simply by the fact that they will never be decimal to decimal correct is crazy. Nothing in life is ever perfect, that doesn't mean it's not valid.

 

[ChefChiTown]

I don't *believe* in it for two reasons:

1. A calorie is a measure of energy - not a measurement of the value of the food. You can consume 100 cals of fat, or sugar, or protein and it's still 100 cals, but what your body can do with that fuel, and how, will vary and affect how your body functions. This will, either directly or indirectly, affect weight positively or negatively; and

I understand what you are trying to say, but (and no offense)...you're wrong.

100 calories from fat is still 100 calories.
100 calories from protein is still 100 calories.
100 calories from sugar is still 100 calories.
100 calories from carbohydrates is still 100 calories.

Whether you get your calories from eating lettuce, chicken, yogurt, bananas or horse shit - 100 calories is still 100 calories. No matter how healthy or unhealthy your food may be, you aren't going to lose weight unless you burn more calories than you consume. I don't know why you choose to not "believe" in it, because it's completely undeniable and unarguable. But, to each their own.

 

[MustangSwtie69]

I want to just say something here.

back a year 1.5 ago I started the weight watchers plan, I had 32points per day (about 14/15,000 cals). I wasnt fully into it so I ate Applebee's and high fat foods, but I exercised and used more "points" through exercise over what I ate. I lost 20lbs in 2.5 months doing it that way. I don't think I ate one healthy thing, I just ate the right amount of "points", despite it being all high fat. high fat = big points. big points = big no-no!

I felt like total crap, but the weight came off at a steady pace. I then switched over to eating good foods and still exercising and kept losing at a steady pace, I just felt better.

but it is fully possible to eat total crap yet stay within a calorie range and lose weight by exercise.

 

[dsquared]

J

I understand what you are trying to say, but (and no offense)...you're wrong.

100 calories from fat is still 100 calories.
100 calories from protein is still 100 calories.
100 calories from sugar is still 100 calories.
100 calories from carbohydrates is still 100 calories.

Whether you get your calories from eating lettuce, chicken, yogurt, bananas or horse shit - 100 calories is still 100 calories. No matter how healthy or unhealthy your food may be, you aren't going to lose weight unless you burn more calories than you consume. I don't know why you choose to not "believe" in it, because it's completely undeniable and unarguable. But, to each their own.

Do you really believe if I ate 100 calories of lettuce and 100 calories of horse poo my body would react the same physiologically?

This is one of the biggest myths of weight loss, and it is keeping millions of people unnecessarilly overweight.

Every food has what's called a glycemic load and glycemic index. This is a measure of how fast the energy in the food is released into your bloodstream. If you eat foods that release energy into your bloodstream quickly...and you do not use that excess energy...you will convert it to fat...and feel hungry constantly.

If you eat foods that release energy more slowly into your system..you will feel full longer...not crave food as quickly...and you will lose weight faster.

Weight loss is not about calorie control. Its about energy control.

 

[Kayshiz]

JDo you really believe if I ate 100 calories of lettuce and 100 calories of horse poo my body would react the same physiologically?

In every physiological way? No (not unless your body is just really into eating poop) but in a weight loss capacity? Yes.

This is one of the biggest myths of weight loss, and it is keeping millions of people unnecessarilly overweight.

Are you sure??

Every food has what's called a glycemic load and glycemic index. This is a measure of how fast the energy in the food is released into your bloodstream. If you eat foods that release energy into your bloodstream quickly...and you do not use that excess energy...you will convert it to fat.

Are you sure that's not the biggest myth in weight loss?

You know, considering that almost everyone in the medical/scientific community agree that calorie in vs. calorie out does work, and any studies based on the glycemic index on mixed at best? Even Nutrisystem, which is a "GI diet", you only consume about 12-1500 calories a day. That's why nutrisystem works, its the same low calorie diet for everyone, not because they are "magic foods".

 

[MAR1984]

Weight loss is not about calorie control. Its about energy control.

Thats a silly comment. a calorie is a unit of energy. 1 calorie = 4.18400 joules. joules in another unit of energy. Controlling calories is controlling energy.

Its like saying, getting skinny is not about losing pounds. Its about losing weight.

Every food has what's called a glycemic load and glycemic index. This is a measure of how fast the energy in the food is released into your bloodstream. If you eat foods that release energy into your bloodstream quickly...and you do not use that excess energy...you will convert it to fat...and feel hungry constantly.

Even if what you're saying is true, I still don't see how it makes you fat. Lets say that my body needs 100 calories in an hour, and it burns those calories evenly throughout the hour. At the start of the hour, I eat 100 calories of a candy bar really high on the glycemic index. Lets suppose for the sake of argument, that my body absorbes those 100 calories instantly. But within the first minute, my body only needs 1 or 2 calories, so the other 98 calories are quickly stored in the body. (I'm not saying thats what really happens, just taking it to the extreme to make a point).

So, what happens the other 59 minutes in the hour? Well, my body still needs to use 100 calories in the hour... so, where does it get those calories now? Well, it starts pulling energy back out of my body's stored energy. So, if I got 2 calories directly from the candy bar, and 98 calories were stored, then to get the rest of my calories I would need to pull 98 more calories out of the stores. The net result is, 100 calories in, 100 calories out, net of 0 stored.

Or, I can eat 100 calories of some food that my body absorbs at a rate exactly equal to the rate at which my body needs energy, and get the same 100cals in, 100cals out, 0 stored.