http://gamingtrend.com
April 20, 2014, 03:43:22 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: [Lifestyle] Breaking my addiction to white powders (sugar, flour).  (Read 5786 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Eightball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1387


View Profile
« Reply #160 on: September 10, 2011, 05:10:05 PM »

Quote from: Crux on September 10, 2011, 04:19:34 PM

I find it interesting the study you linked listed significantly increased plasma phenylalanine concentrations as a result of ingested aspartame, and then conclude that it has no effects, when elevated pp levels have been associated with mood swings.

No sweat; if what you had said was true, that would have to be taken into account by my industry (my company makes insulin).  Also, if you read the abstract, that's not quite what it said.  The study apparently had an endpoint measuring neuropsychologic outputs, and the authors found that even though plasma phenylalanine levels increased, there was no concomitant increase in the neuropsychologic endpoint.  So while there may be a correlation with pp found elsewhere, it was not found in this study (and it's always better to try to prove something in one study than take the output from one and apply it to the output of a separate study...as there are differences in study design, population inclusion/exclusion criteria, etc.)

Also, talking about the 3500 calorie day, I was flipping through the Calorie King book (highly recommended for anyone concerned about carb counts, such as a diabetic, or an anti-carbite).  Looking at the restaurant section, it's pretty easy to see how someone could eat 3500 calories in a day.  There are single dishes that range up to 2500 calories by themselves (a pasta dish at Cheesecake Factory, the Cajun Jambalaya Pasta), and desserts that range even higher (I found one piece of cake that sat at 340 grams of carbs).  Add in appetizers, side dishes, drinks, and dessert, and you could conceivably hit 3500 in one meal.  Hell, a 6" subway sub, by itself, ranged about 600 calories (though one sat at 1,000 calories); add in chips and soda to that 600 calorie sub, and you're looking at 1,000 calories for what's generally regarded as one "healthy" meal.
Logged
ravenvii
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2012



View Profile
« Reply #161 on: September 10, 2011, 06:51:28 PM »

Quote from: Eightball on September 10, 2011, 05:10:05 PM

Also, talking about the 3500 calorie day, I was flipping through the Calorie King book (highly recommended for anyone concerned about carb counts, such as a diabetic, or an anti-carbite).  Looking at the restaurant section, it's pretty easy to see how someone could eat 3500 calories in a day.  There are single dishes that range up to 2500 calories by themselves (a pasta dish at Cheesecake Factory, the Cajun Jambalaya Pasta), and desserts that range even higher (I found one piece of cake that sat at 340 grams of carbs).  Add in appetizers, side dishes, drinks, and dessert, and you could conceivably hit 3500 in one meal.

Yeah, well, being served all that, and actually eating it are two wholly different things.
Logged
ericb
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1647



View Profile
« Reply #162 on: September 10, 2011, 08:33:26 PM »

Quote from: ravenvii on September 10, 2011, 06:51:28 PM

Quote from: Eightball on September 10, 2011, 05:10:05 PM

Also, talking about the 3500 calorie day, I was flipping through the Calorie King book (highly recommended for anyone concerned about carb counts, such as a diabetic, or an anti-carbite).  Looking at the restaurant section, it's pretty easy to see how someone could eat 3500 calories in a day.  There are single dishes that range up to 2500 calories by themselves (a pasta dish at Cheesecake Factory, the Cajun Jambalaya Pasta), and desserts that range even higher (I found one piece of cake that sat at 340 grams of carbs).  Add in appetizers, side dishes, drinks, and dessert, and you could conceivably hit 3500 in one meal.

Yeah, well, being served all that, and actually eating it are two wholly different things.

If that was actually a problem for most people we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Logged
rshetts2
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2420



View Profile
« Reply #163 on: September 13, 2011, 05:05:41 AM »

after reading this thread, Im kind of interested in giving the Paleo thing a try.    I thought Id check out the Primal Blueprint Cook Book and wondered if I could get by with that or if I needed The Primal Blueprint book as well.  I actually tried the southbeach diet a few years ago and it worked well but the food was bland and repetitive and once I dropped it, I gained everything back ( and then some )  anyways, I was curious where I should start and if just getting the cookbook would be enough.
Logged

Can you see the real me? Can ya, CAN YA?
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #164 on: September 13, 2011, 01:34:21 PM »

Quote from: pr0ner on September 10, 2011, 02:44:01 PM

Quote from: Purge on September 10, 2011, 04:51:27 AM

Quote from: pr0ner on September 10, 2011, 04:21:18 AM

Meh.

thumbsup

You're still wrong - I just don't care enough to spell it out.

So you mean to say that your body absorbs all calories put into you (calorie being a measurement of POTENTIAL energy), and that all things are equal and that what we excrete is devoid of any nutrients or caloric value? We are simply a machine that breaks down everything to its simplest form, and we then push out the husks?

Explain, in your physicist experience, how it is that someone with genetic lipodystrophy can be both fat and thin at the same time?

If overeating is the cause of obesity, then undereating is the cause of undereating. If the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation - aka : calories in, calories out) rules the process of fat accumulation and reduction, then perhaps a person who is gaunt from the waist up, but has fat deposits below needs to start loading the fatty lunchmeats on the top of their sammiches and put the veggies on the bottom?

Of course that is ridiculous. The body and its hormones determine adipose tissue, and overeating is required to gain weight and/or a lack of caloric use. But the fact remains that this doesn't even BEGIN to explain why some of us "overeat" or why some people have low energy. Stating that overeating will cause the body to gain weight is just restating the same thing in different words - the difference is that when people say it, they say it as if that is an explanation as to WHY.

My brother has a lot of energy and climbs trees as part of his living (arborist, not professional monkey, CeeKay Tongue). He doesn't TRY to move more. He simply does. There is no conscious effort for him to do so. He also eats more than me, and I'm a good 75lbs heavier at the moment.

I go to the gym, cycle to work, and have very little energy left at the end of the day. I have put effort into these things, but I have noted that my caloric consumption goes up, and hunger eventually wins (no matter what you want to say about willpower) so it stands to reason that we're fighting our own bodies' attempt to regulate our weight.

Why is that? That is what Gary Taubes' book(s) attempt to answer.  I've now listened to the audio book twice and I'm finding it hard to believe that he's astray in his observations.

Perhaps you should take a look - listen or read his words, and perhaps it might help you in adopting a less challenging method of keeping yourself healthy and stop undermining your body in its attempts to naturally regulate your own adipose tissue.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
wonderpug
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10993


hmm...


View Profile
« Reply #165 on: September 13, 2011, 02:13:18 PM »

omg
Logged
pr0ner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5349


Go Flames go!


View Profile
« Reply #166 on: September 13, 2011, 02:29:40 PM »

Quote from: wonderpug on September 13, 2011, 02:13:18 PM

omg

Srsly.
Logged

XBox Live Gamertag: Pr0ner
hepcat
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8839


I'M the one that knocks! Now...burp me!


View Profile
« Reply #167 on: September 13, 2011, 02:36:13 PM »

Quote from: Eightball on September 10, 2011, 05:10:05 PM



Also, talking about the 3500 calorie day, I was flipping through the Calorie King book (highly recommended for anyone concerned about carb counts, such as a diabetic, or an anti-carbite).  


...and another sale for amazon.  this thread is helping my wallet to lose weight at least.

Quote from: Purge on September 13, 2011, 01:34:21 PM

My brother has a lot of energy and climbs trees as part of his living

I sure hope Canada eventually develops a post Agrarian society and makes that leap to Industrial!
« Last Edit: September 13, 2011, 02:43:28 PM by hepcat » Logged

Warning:  You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #168 on: September 13, 2011, 02:48:20 PM »

Quote from: pr0ner on September 13, 2011, 02:29:40 PM

Quote from: wonderpug on September 13, 2011, 02:13:18 PM

omg

Srsly.

Quote from: pr0ner on September 13, 2011, 02:29:40 PM

Quote from: wonderpug on September 13, 2011, 02:13:18 PM

omg

Srsly.

Yeah, seriously. As in seriously pissing me off. You bring nothing to your argument, having not even looked at the content - show me WHY overeating occurs. Can you? What do you have to show for this?

Perhaps you lose weight naturally from the altitude- you and your horse must both be high.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #169 on: September 13, 2011, 02:51:46 PM »

Quote from: hepcat on September 13, 2011, 02:36:13 PM

I sure hope Canada eventually develops a post Agrarian society and makes that leap to Industrial!

I'm pretty sure our percentage is a little better than yours in terms of population %. Tongue

Birchbark may be versatile for both starting fires and underwear lining, but it sucks as a WiFi router. Tongue
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
pr0ner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5349


Go Flames go!


View Profile
« Reply #170 on: September 13, 2011, 02:56:03 PM »

Quote from: Purge on September 13, 2011, 02:48:20 PM

Perhaps you lose weight naturally from the altitude- you and your horse must both be high.

And that, right there, is where the "I don't care" comes in.
Logged

XBox Live Gamertag: Pr0ner
hepcat
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8839


I'M the one that knocks! Now...burp me!


View Profile
« Reply #171 on: September 13, 2011, 03:53:03 PM »

Quote from: Purge on September 13, 2011, 02:51:46 PM

Quote from: hepcat on September 13, 2011, 02:36:13 PM

I sure hope Canada eventually develops a post Agrarian society and makes that leap to Industrial!

I'm pretty sure our percentage is a little better than yours in terms of population %. Tongue

Birchbark may be versatile for both starting fires and underwear lining, but it sucks as a WiFi router. Tongue


Listen pal, we let canada exist for one reason and one reason only:  to keep Bryan Adams in check.  you stick to your end of the deal and we'll let you exist in peace.
Logged

Warning:  You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.
Alefroth
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 668



View Profile
« Reply #172 on: September 13, 2011, 04:05:15 PM »

Quote from: hepcat on September 13, 2011, 03:53:03 PM

Quote from: Purge on September 13, 2011, 02:51:46 PM

Quote from: hepcat on September 13, 2011, 02:36:13 PM

I sure hope Canada eventually develops a post Agrarian society and makes that leap to Industrial!

I'm pretty sure our percentage is a little better than yours in terms of population %. Tongue

Birchbark may be versatile for both starting fires and underwear lining, but it sucks as a WiFi router. Tongue



Listen pal, we let canada exist for one reason and one reason only:  to keep Bryan Adams in check.  you stick to your end of the deal and we'll let you exist in peace.

Didn't they already break the deal?

Ale
Logged
hepcat
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8839


I'M the one that knocks! Now...burp me!


View Profile
« Reply #173 on: September 13, 2011, 04:12:19 PM »

Quote from: Alefroth on September 13, 2011, 04:05:15 PM

Quote from: hepcat on September 13, 2011, 03:53:03 PM

Quote from: Purge on September 13, 2011, 02:51:46 PM

Quote from: hepcat on September 13, 2011, 02:36:13 PM

I sure hope Canada eventually develops a post Agrarian society and makes that leap to Industrial!

I'm pretty sure our percentage is a little better than yours in terms of population %. Tongue

Birchbark may be versatile for both starting fires and underwear lining, but it sucks as a WiFi router. Tongue



Listen pal, we let canada exist for one reason and one reason only:  to keep Bryan Adams in check.  you stick to your end of the deal and we'll let you exist in peace.

Didn't they already break the deal?

Ale

yeah, and they also forgot to monitor Celine Dion's whereabouts.  but after a recent summit in which they promised to take back "The Maple Christ Child" Justin Bieber by 2012, we let it slide.
Logged

Warning:  You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.
rshetts2
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2420



View Profile
« Reply #174 on: September 13, 2011, 04:12:31 PM »

Quote from: Alefroth on September 13, 2011, 04:05:15 PM

Quote from: hepcat on September 13, 2011, 03:53:03 PM

Quote from: Purge on September 13, 2011, 02:51:46 PM

Quote from: hepcat on September 13, 2011, 02:36:13 PM

I sure hope Canada eventually develops a post Agrarian society and makes that leap to Industrial!

I'm pretty sure our percentage is a little better than yours in terms of population %. Tongue

Birchbark may be versatile for both starting fires and underwear lining, but it sucks as a WiFi router. Tongue



Listen pal, we let canada exist for one reason and one reason only:  to keep Bryan Adams in check.  you stick to your end of the deal and we'll let you exist in peace.

Didn't they already break the deal?

Ale

Yeah but we forgive them because theyve tried really, really hard with Celine Dion.
Logged

Can you see the real me? Can ya, CAN YA?
hepcat
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8839


I'M the one that knocks! Now...burp me!


View Profile
« Reply #175 on: September 13, 2011, 04:13:27 PM »

rshetts2 beat me to the punch on dion.  i would like to add that confining her to Vegas was a canadian joint effort, so you have that at least.
Logged

Warning:  You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.
rshetts2
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2420



View Profile
« Reply #176 on: September 13, 2011, 04:14:57 PM »

oh and can everyone please quit fighting and answer my question about the primal diet, or Im gonna start slappin people around!  icon_wink
Logged

Can you see the real me? Can ya, CAN YA?
wonderpug
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10993


hmm...


View Profile
« Reply #177 on: September 13, 2011, 04:31:58 PM »

Quote from: rshetts2 on September 13, 2011, 05:05:41 AM

after reading this thread, Im kind of interested in giving the Paleo thing a try.    I thought Id check out the Primal Blueprint Cook Book and wondered if I could get by with that or if I needed The Primal Blueprint book as well.  I actually tried the southbeach diet a few years ago and it worked well but the food was bland and repetitive and once I dropped it, I gained everything back ( and then some )  anyways, I was curious where I should start and if just getting the cookbook would be enough.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Purge would probably suggest you also check out Gary Taubes's book.  icon_wink
Logged
Crux
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1536



View Profile
« Reply #178 on: September 13, 2011, 04:42:47 PM »

Quote from: rshetts2 on September 13, 2011, 04:14:57 PM

oh and can everyone please quit fighting and answer my question about the primal diet, or Im gonna start slappin people around!  icon_wink

Start on the primal diet. The primal blueprint I wouldn't consider a necessity. It will probably make you generally feel better, but if you're more focused on weight loss, then that is a good starting point for you.
Logged
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


View Profile
« Reply #179 on: September 13, 2011, 04:51:02 PM »

Quote from: rshetts2 on September 13, 2011, 04:14:57 PM

oh and can everyone please quit fighting and answer my question about the primal diet, or Im gonna start slappin people around!  icon_wink

You kind of answered your own question, though.
Quote
Im kind of interested in giving the Paleo thing a try.    I thought Id check out the Primal Blueprint Cook Book and wondered if I could get by with that or if I needed The Primal Blueprint book as well.  I actually tried the southbeach diet a few years ago and it worked well but the food was bland and repetitive and once I dropped it, I gained everything back ( and then some )

The paleo diet is just that: a diet. It limits the food you can eat, thus there's going to be some repetition there as well. Just like South Beach and just about every other diet, it will work well but once you drop it, you will gain everything back if you go back to your old way of eating/(not) exercising. And you will fall off the paleo bandwagon, because you're not going to stay on a paleo diet the rest of your life.

That's why I advocate for a change into an active lifestyle and for education about what food does to you. At that point you'll have the tools you need to regulate your body weight at will and won't need to follow a strict diet with limits on what you can eat.
Logged
Crux
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1536



View Profile
« Reply #180 on: September 13, 2011, 05:03:26 PM »

Quote from: cheeba on September 13, 2011, 04:51:02 PM



The paleo diet is just that: a diet. It limits the food you can eat, thus there's going to be some repetition there as well. Just like South Beach and just about every other diet, it will work well but once you drop it, you will gain everything back if you go back to your old way of eating/(not) exercising.

True words.

Quote
And you will fall off the paleo bandwagon, because you're not going to stay on a paleo diet the rest of your life.

Bullshit. Plenty of people do it. You follow this with what you advocate for - but he is just as liable to 'fall off the active lifestyle' bandwagon as he is a paleo diet. It's a choice, and telling him he will fail with something that many, many, many people succeed very well with isn't cool.

Quote
That's why I advocate for a change into an active lifestyle and for education about what food does to you. At that point you'll have the tools you need to regulate your body weight at will and won't need to follow a strict diet with limits on what you can eat.

To be fair cheeba, you aren't yet at a genuinely healthy weight. Until you get there, and maintain it for an extended period, you cannot tell him this is the only way to do things. You're projecting success you haven't even had yet onto other people, and telling him not to pursue avenues that other people have sustained success with.
Logged
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #181 on: September 13, 2011, 07:46:53 PM »

Quote from: pr0ner on September 13, 2011, 02:56:03 PM

Quote from: Purge on September 13, 2011, 02:48:20 PM

Perhaps you lose weight naturally from the altitude- you and your horse must both be high.

And that, right there, is where the "I don't care" comes in.

Quote from: pr0ner on September 13, 2011, 02:56:03 PM

Quote from: Purge on September 13, 2011, 02:48:20 PM

Perhaps you lose weight naturally from the altitude- you and your horse must both be high.

And that, right there, is where the "I don't care" comes in.

Yes, because my comment somehow preceded your "Meh". Roll Eyes

If you had something to contribute besides "No, this thing you speak of is wrong even though I haven't read it and CLEARLY cal in|cal out is true because I'm a physicist and UR not!" and not ignored the point of the OP, but instead decided to push your opinion in without considering the other side, I suppose I would have been out of line.

The question of fat is not HOW, it is WHY. And the consumption of the types of calories is just as important as how many, since your body processes them differently. If it does not - show how. If it is unimportant the types of nutrients you consume, then why?

If we ate nothing but gruel and bread and meats, as the diet of sailors would suggest, we can develop scurvy which has been defined as a result of a deficiency of Vitamin C to break down collagen (protein found in mammals' connective tissues).

Quote from: Wikipedia "Scurvy"
20th century

At the time Robert Falcon Scott made his two expeditions (1903 and 1911) to the Antarctic in the early 20th century, the prevailing theory was that scurvy was caused by "tainted" meat, particularly tinned meat.[32] Accordingly, Scott's expeditions suffered from scurvy, though he initially did not record this in his notes on his 1903 expedition, due to stigma associated with scurvy.[15]

Vilhjalmur Stefansson, an arctic explorer who lived among the Eskimos, proved that the all meat diet they consumed did not lead to vitamin deficiencies. He participated in a study in New York's Bellevue Hospital in 1935, where he and a companion ate nothing but meat for a year while under close medical observation, yet remained in good health.[33] Some Antarctic expeditions, such as Scott's two expeditions and Shackleton's Ross Sea party, suffered from scurvy, mainly during inland sledge journeys when the men had access to very limited range of food, virtually none of it fresh. Scurvy was rare or absent when they had access to a wider range of stored food or relied on seal meat.[32][34][35]

In 1907, the needed biological-assay model to isolate and identify the antiscorbutic factor was discovered. Axel Holst and Theodor Frølich, two Norwegian physicians studying shipboard beriberi contracted aboard ship's crews in the Norwegian Fishing Fleet, wanted a small test mammal to substitute for the pigeons then used in beriberi research. They fed guinea pigs their test diet of grains and flour, which had earlier produced beriberi in their pigeons, and were surprised when classic scurvy resulted instead. This was a serendipitous choice of model. Until that time, scurvy had not been observed in any organism apart from humans, and had been considered an exclusively human disease. (Some birds are susceptable to scurvy, but pigeons, as seed-eating birds, were later found to be unsusceptable to scurvy, as they produce vitamin C.) Holst and Frølich found they could cure scurvy in guinea pigs with the addition of various fresh foods and extracts. This discovery of a "clean" (reliable) animal experimental model for scurvy, which was made even before the essential idea of "vitamins" in foods had been put forward, has been called the single most important piece of vitamin C research.[36]

In 1927, Hungarian biochemist Szent-Györgyi (who won the 1937 Nobel Prize for Medicine) for his studies in the biological functions of the compound "hexuronic acid" while working with antioxidant compounds in the adrenal cortex.[37] Szent-Györgyi suspected hexuronic acid, which he had isolated from adrenal glands, might be the antiscorbutic agent, but could not prove it without an animal-deficiency model.

It was not until 1932 that the connection between hexuronic acid and scurvy was finally proven by American researcher Charles Glen King of the University of Pittsburgh.[38] King's laboratory was given some hexuronic acid by Szent-Györgyi and soon established that it was "vitamin C". In honor of its antiscorbutic properties, hexuronic acid was named "ascorbic acid" by Szent-Györgyi.

Taubes' findings covers the Vitamin C argument, BTW. I am not entirely sure whether you even want to try and engage in this, but there is some fairly insightful views in his work and perhaps it is cognitive dissonance that has you so repelled by the idea that this could be right.

[I had forgot to hit Post before real work interrupted this morning]

FYI: the info contained in this post wasn't just for Pr0ner, who doesn't care (so what). I'm not going to accept a derisive response without at least clarifying the point I was trying to make. This book is not a diet book - it is a book about the last 100+ years of obesity research and finding an answer to WHY we get fat.

Rshetts, go ahead and go paleo or whatever. The point of the science is that low-fat=bad since dietary fat has never had any compelling evidence showing that it contributes to heart disease or obesity, and that low-carb=good since you reduce insulin response which is what triggers (among other things) fat storage in LPL receptors (which are located on many different tissues in your body - from muscle and organs to adipose tissue (fat storage).

There's a lot more to it than that and well worth the read. The diet cookbooks are just going to help you make measured meals and deal with variety and taste.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
wonderpug
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10993


hmm...


View Profile
« Reply #182 on: September 13, 2011, 08:00:53 PM »

Who exactly are you arguing against?  Has anyone said that for proper nutrition you need to look at nothing but calorie count? 
Logged
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


View Profile
« Reply #183 on: September 13, 2011, 08:08:17 PM »

Quote from: Crux on September 13, 2011, 05:03:26 PM

To be fair cheeba, you aren't yet at a genuinely healthy weight. Until you get there, and maintain it for an extended period, you cannot tell him this is the only way to do things. You're projecting success you haven't even had yet onto other people, and telling him not to pursue avenues that other people have sustained success with.

No I'm not at a healthy weight yet, but I'm getting there. And you haven't come anywhere close to the realm of losing weight like I have. So according to your logic, you shouldn't be advising people on how to lose weight.

And for the love of all that is holy, I haven't said "this is the only way to do things." I've been one of the few that have said right from the start that what may work for me may not work for you.
Logged
Crux
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1536



View Profile
« Reply #184 on: September 13, 2011, 08:47:14 PM »

Quote from: cheeba on September 13, 2011, 08:08:17 PM

Quote from: Crux on September 13, 2011, 05:03:26 PM

To be fair cheeba, you aren't yet at a genuinely healthy weight. Until you get there, and maintain it for an extended period, you cannot tell him this is the only way to do things. You're projecting success you haven't even had yet onto other people, and telling him not to pursue avenues that other people have sustained success with.

No I'm not at a healthy weight yet, but I'm getting there. And you haven't come anywhere close to the realm of losing weight like I have. So according to your logic, you shouldn't be advising people on how to lose weight.

And for the love of all that is holy, I haven't said "this is the only way to do things." I've been one of the few that have said right from the start that what may work for me may not work for you.

Right, all I've done is maintain a healthy body weight my entire adult life. And deal with nutrition and diet as a part of my job. Clearly I know nothing about it  Roll Eyes You know, when you're obese, you can lose weight by living a lifestyle that will sustain you at being simply overweight. You can talk all you want about what an expert you are because you've managed to go from being obese to being overweight, but the truth is for you to advise someone on how to maintain a healthy weight right now is absurd. You don't actually even know if your personal system will even do that for you, let alone another person.

Meanwhile, if you are overweight and live a lifestyle that will sustain a healthy weight, you will end up stabilizing at... a healthy weight. So in truth even if I didn't know half of what I did about nutrition and diet, simply telling someone to live my lifestyle would work for the vast, vast majority of the population as both a weight loss, and weight maintenance system.

And for the love of all that is holy, in your last post you just essentially told the man 'don't do paleo because you won't be able to sustain it. But do it my way because it will work.'

EDIT: Person and personal are not the same word.
Logged
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


View Profile
« Reply #185 on: September 13, 2011, 09:29:07 PM »

So, what you are saying is you are an expert in weight loss, even though you've never had to lose any real weight, and you are an expert in maintaining weight loss, because, even though you've never actually had to maintain weight loss, you've maintained a healthy weight. What's more, people shouldn't listen to the guy who has probably lost more weight than anyone on this forum, because "eat right and exercise" is hard stuff that takes the genius mind of you to solve!

And can you name a single person on this forum who has stuck with Paleo for more than a year, other than yourself?
Logged
wonderpug
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10993


hmm...


View Profile
« Reply #186 on: September 13, 2011, 10:02:01 PM »

I think you've got an uphill battle trying to prove that only people who have lost a lot of weight can be knowledgeable about health & nutrition.
Logged
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #187 on: September 13, 2011, 10:06:28 PM »

Quote from: wonderpug on September 13, 2011, 08:00:53 PM

Who exactly are you arguing against?  Has anyone said that for proper nutrition you need to look at nothing but calorie count?  

In not exactly those words, yes:

Quote from: pr0ner on September 09, 2011, 07:12:30 PM

Quote from: Purge on September 09, 2011, 06:48:50 PM

Quote from: pr0ner on September 09, 2011, 02:33:11 PM

Quote from: Purge on September 08, 2011, 05:40:05 PM

Keep in mind that while the "calories in, calories out" method is a misapplied law of thermodynamics,

 retard

Way to contribute.

I'm going to take the high road and perhaps an extrapolation will help you out of your ": retard :" thinking. The idea behind the statement is that not all calories are equal, nor do their sources impact your system the same way.

If I were to drop a ton on you from 100ft in the air, would you like it in bricks or feathers? Which has more impact?

Also, did you bother to read / listen / check out the coles notes on the ideas presented in the book?

Arguing physics principles with a physicist is a losing proposition, Purge.

Calories are a measure of energy(1).  An empty calorie provides the same amount of energy as any other calorie(2).  Ergo, there is no misapplied law of thermodynamics, as from an energy point of view, all calories are created equal.(3)

As for your other question, the answer is neither, as both objects would both have the same "impact" due to their equal mass.(4)

In conclusion, your little extrapolation has failed.  Sorry.

Emphasis mine - and here are the incorrect points which Pr0ner, the physicist, failed to address.

(1) not just energy, POTENTIAL energy.
(2) calorie, yes. Food calorie? No. It's actually a kilo-calorie (kcal).
(3) We are not talking about creation of calories - hell, the law of thermodynamics states that they aren't even created - simply changed. Secondly, the point was calorie consumed and processed. Somehow Pr0ner believes that fat or carbs stimulate the exact same responses in our digestive system, and that the absorption rate of all calories is 1:1.
(4) This point was already addressed by Crux, but I suppose it should be pointed out. Impact, or force, is calculated as Force=mass*velocity. Newtons second law, if my grade 10-12 physics holds up. Since velocity is calculated based on acceleration vs drag, the feathers would not create the impact the bricks would. I think it's silly that somehow pr0ner thought that he had correctly answered that question. I didn't ask which weighed more.

That is the crux (sorry!) of this tangent. The belief that caloric impact is a method of control VS understanding the differences in impact to your body is important. Consider hypothermia - if one were to simply warm up the extremities of a victim, conceivably you would then save them, right? Wrong. In attempting to warm their extremities, you impact their system by encouraging blood-flow of cold blood back into the critical core area, thusly impacting the circulatory system negatively. Instead, you maintain core temperature and allow the entire body to warm slowly with gradual increase.

Our bodies aren't simple math, and to think that such a complex system is nothing but cal in|cal out and that the cause of obesity is sloth or gluttony needs compelling scientific proof.

"Oh, well, I believe in a balanced diet." Why? What elements need to be balanced? Is there something in the human handbook that I've missed? Why aren't we taking in toxic red berries as part of our diet?

"Exercise is important for weight loss." Really? Show me the studies on it. "Exercise is part of a healthy life-style." Really? Because it would seem like we're in the midst of an obesity epidemic, and the fitness industry has exploded since the 60's. Obesity wasn't invented with McDonalds either, so if we've had these problems for a long time, perhaps we should look at the science of the human body and look for the answer as to why, rather than re-affirming that overeating can lead to weight gain. (duh!)
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


View Profile
« Reply #188 on: September 13, 2011, 10:08:13 PM »

Quote from: wonderpug on September 13, 2011, 10:02:01 PM

I think you've got an uphill battle trying to prove that only people who have lost a lot of weight can be knowledgeable about health & nutrition.

That's not my point at all. I'm only using Crux' logic against him. I think anyone can be knowledgeable about health & nutrition. A chicken breast is healthy, eating half a cheesecake factory cheesecake is not. Those truths don't change, no matter how much you weigh now or in the past. It ain't rocket science here.
Logged
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #189 on: September 13, 2011, 10:12:24 PM »

That link from a few pages ago re: grain and its components was an interesting read. There are people who will tell you that you shouldn't eat the skin or fat of the chicken. Are they right?
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


View Profile
« Reply #190 on: September 13, 2011, 10:14:16 PM »

Quote from: Purge on September 13, 2011, 10:12:24 PM

There are people who will tell you that you shouldn't eat the skin or fat of the chicken. Are they right?

When the chicken is alive or dead? Because I'm against eating the skin off a live chicken.
Logged
wonderpug
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10993


hmm...


View Profile
« Reply #191 on: September 13, 2011, 10:41:13 PM »

Quote from: Purge on September 13, 2011, 10:06:28 PM

Quote from: wonderpug on September 13, 2011, 08:00:53 PM

Who exactly are you arguing against?  Has anyone said that for proper nutrition you need to look at nothing but calorie count?  

In not exactly those words, yes:
No, he's just saying that your "misapplied law of thermodynamics" line doesn't make any sense.  Bringing in the rate of descent for objects of equal mass but different density didn't exactly help your case because, well, nobody really knew where you were going with that one.  Proner answered that a ton of bricks and a ton of feathers would have the same "impact" because in many scenarios they would fall in the same way, and physicists are used to more clearly defined problems than what you laid out. 

Now, if you were just attempting to say that "health and nutrition is more complicated than just the amount of calories you consume and expend," then, well, yeah.  I don't think anyone disagrees with that.  If you eat precisely 2000 calories of bacon every day, you are probably not going to do so well, nor will you be protected against scurvy. (?!) 

The calories in/calories out idea also doesn't touch on the psychological aspects of it, like how certain diet structures all but set people up to binge on their forbidden food treats, or the more complex physiological aspects of it, like how eating vegetables can help you feel full faster.

All "calories in/calories out" means is that the human body is a system like any other.  Our energy comes from the food we eat, and the food we eat, at some point down the line, got its energy from the sun.  We expend energy through maintaining our bodily functions, and by doing things.  If those expenditures don't match our caloric intake, our bodies stores the energy for later in the form of fat rather than just pooping it down the chute.  Why put that hard-earned energy to waste?

So yes, of course the big picture is more complicated than that.  The hows and whys around actually eating that appropriate amount are very complex, and there are also curveballs that can affect just how much of the calories we put into our mouths actually get digested and converted into energy.  But, overall, it does really just boil down to calories in, calories out.
Logged
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #192 on: September 14, 2011, 12:02:54 AM »

Quote from: cheeba on September 13, 2011, 10:14:16 PM

Quote from: Purge on September 13, 2011, 10:12:24 PM

There are people who will tell you that you shouldn't eat the skin or fat of the chicken. Are they right?

When the chicken is alive or dead? Because I'm against eating the skin off a live chicken.

Wuss.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #193 on: September 14, 2011, 12:27:59 AM »

Pug,

I asked him which he would prefer I drop on him. No mention of vacuum, inert gasses or ultra-dense titanium feathers. Come on - he was wrong on BOTH counts.

My point is real-life impact. The measured difference in what affects us, not some theoretical "what if Yoda fought Superman" logic. Food is a chemical compound, and our bodies process the components differently (fibre from page 3, for instance). So while we have people saying cal in|cal out, it isn't remotely that simple. Given that logic, we could eat 1700 kcal of glucose and lose weight. The body processes it the same, right?

It just doesn't work that way, and taking a scientific law of energy consumption and slapping it on the human condition is incorrect. Yes, eating more calories *can* lead to weight gain. But WHY do some people simply metabolize that energy and not add to their energy stores (which is the entire function of adipose tissue) while others gain weight instead? What causes us to overeat beyond our needs? Abundance, or are we doing something to screw up our energy system?

Also, if it is simply a caloric overabundance that we eat, then why do fat people plateau instead of getting fatter every day?

As for fixing the issue, the answer given is calorie restriction - either one or both of the forms available (food restriction, or higher energy use). There is a word for reducing food intake.... starvation. Moderate to extreme - all have been tested and thus far proven to be ineffective for long term weight loss. Long term starvation is both a bad idea and, for most people, an insurmountable task. This is that "willpower" that we tell people they lack when they can't attain said "balance" in their life.

I've already commented on exercise above. We do it more now, and the obesity is still getting worse and worse. Sad thing is, people think that it's something that started with fast food when really it has been going on for many years before that.

Dietary fat has been stricken off our diet (general food consumption) for what, 30 years or more? We face heart attacks and yet fat is hard to find. Go look for it. Seriously. Go find products with high dietary fat and little-to-no-carbs. You get what, meats and nuts? These are the things we're avoiding?

Cheeba brought up chicken breast, for instance - the leanest cut off the bird. It was mentioned above that it is healthier than cheesecake. Sure, since cheesecake has glucose added to it, and likely has a graham wafer bottom. Is the cheese good for us? Well, it does have nutrient value including proteins and fats and some carbs. The problem is, in combination with the rest of the ingredients it will hit your insulin panic button like a ton of feathers (LOL).

Starvation isn't a "lifestyle choice", it's anorexia ( regardless of whether you get thin or not, it's ultimately the same goal). If overeating is the CAUSE (rather than a symptom), then we're all doomed and it's a wonder mankind ever survived long enough to discover the bathroom scale.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
PeteRock
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6798


Fabulous is a state of being. For me, anyways.


View Profile
« Reply #194 on: September 14, 2011, 12:54:51 AM »

Quote from: Purge on September 13, 2011, 10:06:28 PM

"Exercise is important for weight loss." Really? Show me the studies on it. "Exercise is part of a healthy life-style." Really? Because it would seem like we're in the midst of an obesity epidemic, and the fitness industry has exploded since the 60's. Obesity wasn't invented with McDonalds either, so if we've had these problems for a long time, perhaps we should look at the science of the human body and look for the answer as to why, rather than re-affirming that overeating can lead to weight gain. (duh!)

Are you seriously arguing against exercise as an important part of a healthy lifestyle?  You would be one of the first.

Studies on exercise and weight loss?  A quick google search found this one:

Quote
Conclusions: Weight loss induced by increased daily physical activity without caloric restriction substantially reduces obesity (particularly abdominal obesity) and insulin resistance in men. Exercise without weight loss reduces abdominal fat and prevents further weight gain.


Emphasis mine.

And this one:

Quote
Significant decreases in percent overweight were observed at 0 to 2 months and then at 2 to 6 months for the children who were exercising, whereas percent overweight in children in the diet-alone group decreased only from 0 to 2 months. In addition, a significant improvement in fitness was observed only for children in the diet plus exercise group.

Feel free to support the paleo diet with fervor, but it's ridiculous to suggest that exercise is not part of a healthy lifestyle.  Perhaps you should be tasked with proving such a claim as the research connecting exercise with better health already exists.  I'm curious if research proving otherwise exists.
Logged

Beauty is only skin deep.  Which is why I take very good care of my skin.
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


View Profile
« Reply #195 on: September 14, 2011, 12:57:38 AM »

Quote from: Purge on September 14, 2011, 12:27:59 AM

Also, if it is simply a caloric overabundance that we eat, then why do fat people plateau instead of getting fatter every day?

Well, some fat people do just get fatter every day. But mostly this is because the fatter you are, the more energy (calories burned) is required to move. Since most people don't turn into a bed-ridden vegetable, their movement means they reach a point of equilibrium where calories taken in is similar to calories burnt

Quote
I've already commented on exercise above. We do it more now, and the obesity is still getting worse and worse.

Portion sizes have gone through the roof in that time. Mostly gone are the times of home-cooked meals, replaced by the convenience of processed foods. There's a whole bunch of complex issues here to look at, and saying "we're exercising more but obesity is increasing" is an oversimplification.

Quote
Dietary fat has been stricken off our diet (general food consumption) for what, 30 years or more? We face heart attacks and yet fat is hard to find. Go look for it. Seriously. Go find products with high dietary fat and little-to-no-carbs. You get what, meats and nuts? These are the things we're avoiding?

It's not hard to find. We get plenty of fat. I'm kind of with you that fat does not make you fat and too much importance is placed on low fat dieting, but we get fat in meat, dairy (unless you're paleo, then no dairy for you!), peanut butter (again unless you're paleo), olive oil, etc.

Quote
Cheeba brought up chicken breast, for instance - the leanest cut off the bird.

The most protein per calories, as well.
Logged
Zarkon
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4848


View Profile WWW
« Reply #196 on: September 14, 2011, 01:11:46 AM »

Signal to noise ratio....slipping...
Logged
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #197 on: September 14, 2011, 01:20:13 AM »

Quote from: PeteRock on September 14, 2011, 12:54:51 AM

Quote from: Purge on September 13, 2011, 10:06:28 PM

"Exercise is important for weight loss." Really? Show me the studies on it. "Exercise is part of a healthy life-style." Really? Because it would seem like we're in the midst of an obesity epidemic, and the fitness industry has exploded since the 60's. Obesity wasn't invented with McDonalds either, so if we've had these problems for a long time, perhaps we should look at the science of the human body and look for the answer as to why, rather than re-affirming that overeating can lead to weight gain. (duh!)

Are you seriously arguing against exercise as an important part of a healthy lifestyle?  You would be one of the first.

Pay attention. I said weight loss (sustained, not just immediate). I also am not critiquing a "healthy lifestyle" - this is about long term weight loss and giving the human body its correct energy.

Quote
Studies on exercise and weight loss?  A quick google search found this one:

Quote
Conclusions: Weight loss induced by increased daily physical activity without caloric restriction substantially reduces obesity (particularly abdominal obesity) and insulin resistance in men. Exercise without weight loss reduces abdominal fat and prevents further weight gain.


Emphasis mine.


Three month study, no followup on patients after returning to life to see if the weight came back.
See below.
Quote
Background: The independent effects of diet- or exercise-induced weight loss on the reduction of obesity and related comorbid conditions are not known. The effects of exercise without weight loss on fat distribution and other risk factors are also unclear.

Objective: To determine the effects of equivalent diet- or exercise-induced weight loss and exercise without weight loss on subcutaneous fat, visceral fat, skeletal muscle mass, and insulin sensitivity in obese men.

Design: Randomized, controlled trial.

Setting: University research center.

Participants: 52 obese men (mean body mass index [±SD], 31.3 ± 2.0 kg/m2) with a mean waist circumference of 110.1 ± 5.8 cm.

Intervention: Participants were randomly assigned to one of four study groups (
diet-induced weight loss,
exercise-induced weight loss,
exercise without weight loss,
and control)

and were observed for 3 months.

Measurements: Change in total, subcutaneous, and visceral fat; skeletal muscle mass; cardiovascular fitness; glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity.

Results: Body weight decreased by 7.5 kg (8%) in both weight loss groups and did not change in the exercise without weight loss and control groups.

Compared with controls, cardiovascular fitness (peak oxygen uptake) in the exercise groups improved by approximately 16% (P < 0.01). Although total fat decreased in both weight loss groups (P < 0.001), the average reduction was 1.3 kg (95% CI, 0.3 to 2.3 kg) greater in the exercise-induced weight loss group than in the diet-induced weight loss group (P = 0.03). Similar reductions in abdominal subcutaneous, visceral, and visceral fat–to–subcutaneous fat ratios were observed in the weight loss groups (P < 0.001). Abdominal and visceral fat also decreased in the exercise without weight loss group (P = 0.001). Plasma glucose and insulin values (fasting and oral glucose challenge) did not change in the treatment groups compared with controls (P = 0.10 for all comparisons). Average improvement in glucose disposal was similar in the diet-induced weight loss group (5.6 mg/kg skeletal muscle per minute) and in the exercise-induced weight loss group (7.2 mg/kg skeletal muscle per minute) (P > 0.2). However, these values were significantly greater than those in the control and exercise without weight loss groups (P < 0.001).

Conclusions: Weight loss induced by increased daily physical activity without caloric restriction substantially reduces obesity (particularly abdominal obesity) and insulin resistance in men. Exercise without weight loss reduces abdominal fat and prevents further weight gain. [this begs the question - there is no evidence provided]

Quote
And this one:

Quote
Significant decreases in percent overweight were observed at 0 to 2 months and then at 2 to 6 months for the children who were exercising, whereas percent overweight in children in the diet-alone group decreased only from 0 to 2 months. In addition, a significant improvement in fitness was observed only for children in the diet plus exercise group.

Feel free to support the paleo diet with fervor, but it's ridiculous to suggest that exercise is not part of a healthy lifestyle.  Perhaps you should be tasked with proving such a claim as the research connecting exercise with better health already exists.  I'm curious if research proving otherwise exists.

YES IT DOES. READ THE DAMNED BOOK. Tongue I'm not paleo - but there are lessons to be learned from non-grain dependent diets.

I never ONCE said exercise isn't a healthy thing to do, but I don't believe sedentary life that CAUSES obesity. Also, there are a number of reasons why rigorous exercise can be damaging to your body. It also tends to "work up an appetite", thus creating a further demand for more calories and SMS'd to your hunger response.

smile
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
Crux
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1536



View Profile
« Reply #198 on: September 14, 2011, 01:21:47 AM »

Quote from: cheeba on September 13, 2011, 09:29:07 PM

So, what you are saying is you are an expert in weight loss, even though you've never had to lose any real weight, and you are an expert in maintaining weight loss, because, even though you've never actually had to maintain weight loss, you've maintained a healthy weight. What's more, people shouldn't listen to the guy who has probably lost more weight than anyone on this forum, because "eat right and exercise" is hard stuff that takes the genius mind of you to solve!

And can you name a single person on this forum who has stuck with Paleo for more than a year, other than yourself?

News flash cheeba - the fatter you are the easier it is to lose weight. Dropping from your prior state of obesity to your current state doesn't make you an expert in any way, shape or form. Your 'losing more weight than anyone on this forum' was largely because you had more weight to lose than almost anyone on this forum. I'm not an expert on this because I've managed to maintain a healthy and stable body weight for my entire adult life. In fact, I wouldn't call myself an expert on this at all. But I do know a hell of a lot more than the vast, vast majority of the population both from a theoretical perspective, and from hands-on experience. Not only have I been receiving education on nutrition and diet from since I was 10 or so due to my athletic performance and ties, but it has been a both a part of my job and a personal interest of mine completely separate from that. I've actively helped people lose weight and keep it off. I've managed to maintain my stable, healthy body weight for 15 years as an adult through the use of many different 'diets' and 'lifestyles'.

The big difference between you and I, is that I've done it successfully your way, and I've also done it successfully other ways too. And I've helped other people in 'real life' I have actual face-to-face interactions with do the same. So when I talk about this, it's with actual knowledge. You continue to criticize and argue against paleo without any personal experience of it. And yet you also continue to pretend like you don't argue against it, when I could go back and find post after post where you do so. Heck earlier this page:

Quote
The paleo diet is just that: a diet. It limits the food you can eat, thus there's going to be some repetition there as well. Just like South Beach and just about every other diet, it will work well but once you drop it, you will gain everything back if you go back to your old way of eating/(not) exercising. And you will fall off the paleo bandwagon, because you're not going to stay on a paleo diet the rest of your life.

That's why I advocate for a change into an active lifestyle and for education about what food does to you. At that point you'll have the tools you need to regulate your body weight at will and won't need to follow a strict diet with limits on what you can eat.

The short of it is anyone who is overweight can lose weight. Ironically the much harder part is maintaining a stable, healthy body weight. You point to yourself as this great example. Your weight loss to date is great, and I wish you the best of luck with it. But you're not even yet at a healthy body weight, let alone achieved some modicum of stability there. Until you have done so, you simply cannot tell people that what you are currently doing is a superior way to accomplish a stable long-term lifestyle when you haven't even accomplished it yourself yet. And then you continue to argue against people following another course that you haven't even tried in favor of this method you're using that you haven't yet achieved ultimate success. In reality it's comical that we're even having this argument given the reality of the situation.

Eating in moderation and exercising is a great path to a healthy lifestyle if done correctly. It can work. I've just consistently found paleo to be the most effective dietary/lifestyle 'tool' I've found or seen to date at both attaining a healthy weight and sustaining it. As an easy example, the girl I started working with at the end of last year/beginning of this year. She lost 45 lbs in 4 months. Her weight has fluctuated across a 5 lb span in the intervening 5 months. She's been mostly paleo, with some cheat meals, including some times where she completely lost the plot for an entire day or two.
Logged
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #199 on: September 14, 2011, 01:32:33 AM »

Quote from: cheeba on September 14, 2011, 12:57:38 AM

Well, some fat people do just get fatter every day. But mostly this is because the fatter you are, the more energy (calories burned) is required to move. Since most people don't turn into a bed-ridden vegetable, their movement means they reach a point of equilibrium where calories taken in is similar to calories burnt

Ah, but people who drastically overeat are not necessarily proportionally fatter. I had a friend who would eat four bowls of cereal in the morning. Four. Skinny as a rail.

Quote
Portion sizes have gone through the roof in that time. Mostly gone are the times of home-cooked meals, replaced by the convenience of processed foods. There's a whole bunch of complex issues here to look at, and saying "we're exercising more but obesity is increasing" is an oversimplification.

I agree it isn't cut-and-dried. Exercise isn't bad, but it isn't the lack of motion that causes the epidemic. The 2% dropped (in the US from 1955 to 2005) doesn't match the rise of obesity by any stretch of the imagination. That was my point.

Quote
It's not hard to find. We get plenty of fat. I'm kind of with you that fat does not make you fat and too much importance is placed on low fat dieting, but we get fat in meat, dairy (unless you're paleo, then no dairy for you!), peanut butter (again unless you're paleo), olive oil, etc.

If you see "Fat" on a container, it's a "low fat" or "no fat". Pick your food, there it is. Some places only carry lean ground beef and very lean. There is no "ground beef" anymore. Tongue

Quote
The most protein per calories, as well.

Overloading your system with protein can be toxic and has risks associated. Fats play an important part in satiating your hunger, but also in fueling your body. I have no problems with chicken breast - but dark meat tastes better, is juicier, and has both a better texture and more flavor. (IMHO) I eat both.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.296 seconds with 103 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.105s, 2q)