Are you fit?

[drhowarddrfine]

Therefore increased straining from lifting heavy weights can more easily cause a loss in hearing for me.

That's a good one. I think I'll use that.

Simply put, if you are not fit, it is because you eat wrong foods.

Definitely. What you eat, and how much, goes far more toward you losing/gaining weight than exercise. Exercise does good things to the organs in you body and makes sure they're fed properly. Trying to run off that doughnut takes far longer than just not eating it.

The reason I started seeing George Turner (mentioned earlier) was cause my one son is an actor and his photographer told him he needed to tone up a bit. My other son is a gamer and had gotten 105 pounds overweight. That was the same time I started my web dev business and doing a lot of coding and gained 60 pounds myself. So since I had to drive my son to see George and sit there for an hour, I figured I might as well work out, too.

My son lost 100 pounds in nine months. I lost 75 pounds in six months. Here's the stuff I learned:

1. You have to lose some of the weight to be able to do things like situps.
2. High protein, low carbohydrate diets make the weight fall off you.
3. Your veins are like plumbing and cholesterol can't stick to plumbing that's flexing from working out.
4. George says he knows more about nutrition than most doctors cause they only get one class in it. They know next to nothing.
5. The only thing fruit is good for is that it putrifies in the stomach (don't know what that meant).
6. Nutrients in salad must be transported to the body on fat. So chicken salads are far better for you than just plain salads.

When I quit working out, I gained 15 pounds cause I was still just sitting around. I have to really watch what I eat cause I'll gain it back easily.

So what was George's diet? I'd have to look it up but, iirc:

Breakfast: two pork chops, 3 eggs and half a grapefruit
Lunch: 1/3 pound hamburger with tomatoes or tuna
Dinner: a large salad

One thing, though. When my son complained about how hungry he was at times, in his ex-Marine DI voice he'd yell at him, "Then EAT!!!". His point was, that if your body says it's hungry, then it will store fat, and the only way to stop that is to feed it, so feed it protein, meaning, eating another hamburger or small steak or tuna or chicken.

 

[mix_room]

Definitely. What you eat, and how much, goes far more toward you losing/gaining weight than exercise. Exercise does good things to the organs in you body and makes sure they're fed properly. Trying to run off that doughnut takes far longer than just not eating it.

If you actually move around you can eat a lot more. Losing weight through 'dieting', aka just not eating, will likely also lead to a loss of muscle tone and fitness in general.
You will end up 'skinny-fat', basically being a thin person without any definition. This can't really be the target people have.

1) You have to lose some of the weight to be able to do things like situps.

Agree. But then again situps are not really a great exercise for anything. You cannot point-burn fat. Your body decides where to store it, and the only way to lose fat in one place is to lose it everywhere.

2) High protein, low carbohydrate diets make the weight fall off you.

So does a high fat, low protein, high sugar diet. If you eat less than you expend. Energy physics is the reason you gained weight, and in the end it will be the reason you lose it.
(Congratulations on the weight loss)

5) The only thing fruit is good for is that it putrifies in the stomach (don't know what that meant).

To decay? Fruit has a lot of other benefits - the main one being that it often tastes good.
Sorry but that guy sounds just as bad as all the other people pushing diets depending on leaving a single food group out of your diet without realizing that energy is not magically created or destroyed. You can lose weight by drinking only Coke, at the same time you can gain weight by only eating chicken breast or apple. You will have to eat A LOT of apples.

Energy that you eat has to go somewhere. Choices are: burn it or store it! If you don't believe in this then you are delusional and don't believe in the first law of thermodynamics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics. Hence you shouldn't be allowed to drive a car or use a computer as they all depend on this principle in the end.

When I quit working out, I gained 15 pounds cause I was still just sitting around. I have to really watch what I eat cause I'll gain it back easily.

Then move more! That is the reason you gain it back easily.

So what was George's diet? I'd have to look it up but, iirc:

Breakfast: two pork chops, 3 eggs and half a grapefruit
Lunch: 1/3 pound hamburger with tomatoes or tuna
Dinner: a large salad

Discounting the fruit and veg, and guessing at the sizes of the pork chops, and assuming that the meat is 100% protein (which is an oversimplification) you end up with:

2 * 150g * 4kcal/g = 1200 kcal
+
3 * 100 kcal = 300 kcal
+
1 * 150g * 4kcal/g = 600 kcal
SUM = 2100 kcal

Seeing as a 6 foot, 200 pound 30 year old man has a BMR of about 2050 kcal/day you were just eating less than you were consuming. THAT is the reason you were losing weight. If a proper body builder was eating that, it was probably before competition when the target is to loose an extreme amount of fat without the muscle loss. If you have a grossly reduced calorie intake, maintaining a sufficient protein intake will be difficult. That is definately not a diet that should be recommended to normal people.

One thing, though. When my son complained about how hungry he was at times, in his ex-Marine DI voice he'd yell at him, "Then EAT!!!". His point was, that if your body says it's hungry, then it will store fat, and the only way to stop that is to feed it, so feed it protein, meaning, eating another hamburger or small steak or tuna or chicken.

If you body says that it is hungry, then it will burn fat. If it is hungry it needs energy and it will take what energy it has. Glycogen or fat.

It might be difficult to lose weight or get in shape, but it is not complicated. The physics are simple. Like that old Nike commercial says: just do it!

 

[kr651129]

I'm pretty fit, I'm a marathon runner. I run around 20 miles or more a week. I workout over lunch at work and lift weights. I have a 225lbs bench press and I curl 30lbs

 

[sk8harddiefast]

Four hours of skating every day. I smoke but not too much, I don't drink, I don't eat junk food, I am sleeping well (7 hours-11 hours). Two months ago I went to the doctor to check my lungs. They are just fine after eight years of smoking and three of them I was smoking really a lot! Now I smoke just normal. 20g of rolling tobacco in 3 days. Doctor told me that skating saves me . I am 24 years old, ~1,75 height and 70kg and maybe the only bad thing I do is that I smoke. But still I can keep my breath under water over one minute and I still run

 

[drhowarddrfine]

Sorry but that guy sounds just as bad as all the other people pushing diets...

George was never good at always explaining his reasoning but he was not one who pushed diets. His plan was more for during training and weight loss, not as an ongoing thing. He did hold lectures at the local teaching university for doctors.

As an aside, here's a bet I would probably lose but, walk into any gym wherever you are in the world. Ask the owner, or someone who's really into body building, who's a little older. Ask them if they've heard of George Turner. If they say, no, then tell them to ask their friends and check back in a couple of days. My bet is, someone will say they've heard of him or know who he is.

 

[sossego]

We interrupt this post for a public announcement.

Now, we return to our normally scheduled thread.

 

[bbzz]

I'm pretty fit, I'm a marathon runner. I run around 20 miles or more a week. I workout over lunch at work and lift weights. I have a 225lbs bench press and I curl 30lbs

Ironically, marathon runners are not exactly considered healthy. It has been shown that so much running in fact damages heart. Not just heart but joints, muscles, bones, etc. There are far less time consuming and far superior ways to stay fit and healthy. But if you do it for kicks then that's up to you. Just saying.

 

[bbzz]

4 hours skate every day. I smoke but not too much, i don't drink, i don't eat junk food, i am sleeping good (7 hours the less 11 hours the most). Before 2 months i went to the doctor to check my lungs. They are just fine after 8 years of smoking and 3 of them i was smoking really a lot! Now I smoke just normal. 20g of rolling tobacco in 3 days. Doctor told me that skate saves me . I am 24 years old, ~1,75 height and 70kg and maybe the only bad thing i do is that I smoke. But still I can keep my breath under water over 1 minute and I still run

And what you'll die from is most likely going to be determined by genetics anyway.

 

[bbzz]

So does a high fat, low protein, high sugar diet. If you eat less than you expend. Energy physics is the reason you gained weight, and in the end it will be the reason you lose it.

That's correct, mathematically speaking; but there's a good reason why eating high protein/high-fat/low-carb (that's all in one) diet allows you to loose more weight over time compared to other regime, and it has to do with metabolism. I won't go over this but you need to shift your body to burning fat for fuel. This is where high intensity interval training and EPOC comes in.

And, insulin control, of course.

 

[hitest]

I am 24 years old, ~1,75 height and 70kg and maybe the only bad thing I do is that I smoke. But still I can keep my breath under water over one minute and I still run

You sound like an incredibly fit person. My only concern is that you are smoking; I suggest that you consider giving up smoking as the health risks are extreme. I will get off my soap box now.
I am continuing with my walking program.

 

[Zare]

I smoke ~ 7 grams of rolling tobbaco per day, and ~ 1.5g of the other thing. I need to drop few winter-accumulated kilos, which won't be hard since swimming takes care of that in a matter of month. 1.90m, 92kg currently. Football (cageball) every week + walking minimum 5 kilometers a day + bicycle + occasional running. Which I don't do because of health, but because of sport. I eat / do / live the way I like, and so far (28 yrs) haven't had any health problems related to lifestyle. If / when something arises, I'll adapt accordingly.

When talking about "fitness", I place more accent on stress control than on nutrition or habits. Stress is the silent assassin.

 

[sossego]

I smoke ~ 7 grams of rolling tobbaco per day, and ~ 1.5g of the other thing.

Stonerobics!

 

[mix_room]

George was never good at always explaining his reasoning but he was not one who pushed diets. His plan was more for during training and weight loss, not as an ongoing thing.

The last part there is quite important. It works in the short term, but is not sustainable. Thus it shouldn't, in my opinion, be propagated as a way of losing weight for most people. Most people need to change their habits in addition to losing weight. That is the reason so many fail to maintain their reduced weight.

My bet is, someone will say they've heard of him or know who he is.

Google knows him.

That's correct, mathematically speaking]

So you are basically saying that by eating fat I tune by body to burn fat? And if I eat sugar I tell my body to make fat? Irrespective of the amount of food I eat? How do you explain that sub-saharan africa, where the predominant stable food is carbohydrates, are not fat? The _only_ reason is amount. You will get fat with any food-stuff, and any food can make you thin.
The reason high-protein,high-fat,low-carb works is by reducing one variable withtout increasing the rest. People increase their protein intake by less than they reduce their carb intake. Thus weight loss.
If carbohydrates are so dangerous - Why are there not loads of fat vegans and vegetarians?

And, insulin control, of course.

I still wonder why all the people who are professional endurance athletes, and thus live on a very high carbohydrate diet, have no difficulty losing weight during the season. If insulin were so bad for you these people should have a much higher fat percentage than they do.

 

[bbzz]

So you are basically saying that by eating fat I tune by body to burn fat?

That is one part of the formula. And by fat I mean good quality mono and polyunsaturated fat.

And if I eat sugar I tell my body to make fat?

Everytime you eat anything, your body responds to rising sugar levels with insulin release. However, eating simple sugars will easily skyrocket your insulin levels (a person with average genetics). Insulin is a key to building muscle, and storing excess glucose and amino-acids into fat. This is why it is very hard to build muscle and loose fat at the same time. Key to loosing fat is insulin level control.

How do you explain that sub-saharan africa, where the predominant stable food is carbohydrates, are not fat?

There are a few reasons, but the main one is genetics. For the same reason why Indian people are extremely carb intolerant, or why Nordic people have smallest amount of lactose intolerant people. Also they do carry a fair amount of fat with them but they certainly are not obese, and there are also quite good reasons for that too.

The _only_ reason is amount. You will get fat with any food-stuff, and any food can make you thin.

No. A meal consisting of 20 grams of protein and 10 grams of polyunsaturated fat, that is not the same as eating 40 grams of simple sugars. Counting calories its about the same, but the mechanisms involved to digest and process this in your body will give two different outcomes. The metabolism reaction is very different.

The reason high-protein,high-fat,low-carb works is by reducing one variable withtout increasing the rest. People increase their protein intake by less than they reduce their carb intake. Thus weight loss.

Wrong. If you have two same persons and they want to loose weight, and say they need to eat 2000 calories in addition to hitting the gym. One's diet is mostly simple sugars, other's mostly protein and quality fat, by the end of the season you'll have them both loose weight but the ratio of what's muscle and what's fat will be quite different (excluding all the health risks associated with high carb diet).

I still wonder why all the people who are professional endurance athletes, and thus live on a very high carbohydrate diet, have no difficulty losing weight during the season. If insulin were so bad for you these people should have a much higher fat percentage than they do.

That's why. The more calories you burn overall the more sloppy you can get in your diet. A professional swimmer who burns 8000 calories during intensive training can afford to eat more than average Joe who hits the gym weights 3 times per week and wants to keep fat bellow 10%.

Also, for the record, a sprinter of 100m has more muscle AND lower body fat % than endurance runner. Want to take a guess why?

To recap, a calorie is not just a calorie.

 

[Bobbla]

Energy that you eat has to go somewhere. Choices are: burn it or store it! If you don't believe in this then you are delusional and don't believe in the first law of thermodynamics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics. Hence you shouldn't be allowed to drive a car or use a computer as they all depend on this principle in the end.

I did go tl;dr but saw the wiki link and got interested in what it said.

I would say that when you eat something you use some, you store some and you keep the sewer occupied with the rest. That being said, I am no expert on thermodynamics but I think it has very little to do with this discussion.


That being said, I do feel a little puzzled about what I read here, not sure if people are trolling some or not, but taking health tips from "computer experts" (go stereotypes) does not seem like the most legit thing to do in the first place.

 

[hitest]

That being said, I do feel a little puzzled about what I read here, not sure if people are trolling some or not, but taking health tips from "computer experts" (go stereotypes) does not seem like the most legit thing to do in the first place.

I don't know. Isn't it a bit prejudicial to characterize "computer experts" as being unable to give health advice? I take everything with a grain of salt. I have found this thread to be helpful for me. Thanks for the reply.
My biggest downfall is snacking too much in the evening. I am into a good rhythm with my walking program.

 

[Crivens]

That being said, I do feel a little puzzled about what I read here, not sure if people are trolling some or not, but taking health tips from "computer experts" (go stereotypes) does not seem like the most legit thing to do in the first place.

The impression that some are trolling might be attributed to that most "computer experts" are good at troubleshooting things that do not work, but since they work with a (sometimes rather sketchy) model of what is really going on, they arrive at conclusions which may work for them but are seen as totally voodoo by others. Most M.D. I met had a much better model of what is going on in some parts of the body, but even when not sketchy this was sometimes rather Dali. Also, they mostly suck at troubleshooting when there is no right&ready entry in the database.

And I beg to differ with your statement about thermodynamics. It has everything to do with this discussion.

All that being said, I find no problem in taking advice from people who share the same problem and came up with good solutions for it. Our main problem is that we mostly are what is called "desk drivers", sitting around either in a car or at work, getting little exercise from that and due to some other wetware mechanics we tend to snack too much.

That needs training of the mind to overcome.

And you can, with a bit of planning, add a lot of PT into your daily schedule (minus the Drill Instructor yelling at you, which is a bonus IMHO).

• pushups
  Playing with junior, he also likes it. Also, as kids grow, so does your training weight
  He also likes curls.
• squats
  Can be done when brushing your teeth.
• running
  Skip the elevator and run up those stairs.
• lunges
  When moving around your own rooms, you can do them. Looks like the ministry of silly walks, but who cares?
• ...

Since I simply no longer have the time for 3-4h of sports a day, sadly this has to do.

 

[mix_room]

Everytime you eat anything, your body responds to rising sugar levels with insulin release. However, eating simple sugars will easily skyrocket your insulin levels (a person with average genetics).

And these increased insulin levels magically cause everything you eat to be changed into fat on your belly? There is no place this excess energy can come from if it is not added. If you take in 1 kcal, need 1kcal to survive. There is 0kcal to make into fat. If you however need 1kcal and eat 2kcal, then there is 1kcal to make into fat. Which the body will do in order to survive - evolutionary truth. If you then need 2kcal and only eat 1kcal, you need to get that extra 1kcal from somewhere. Either you can magically create it, or your body takes it from storage.

This is why it is very hard to build muscle and loose fat at the same time. Key to loosing fat is insulin level control.

No. The reason why it is difficult to lose fat and build muscle simultaneously is that one of them requires an energy deficit while the other requires an energy surplus. If insulin level control were so important do you not think that professional body builders, while not healthy in any way nor natural, would not bother with the whole bulking-cutting cycles? In order to gain muscle you need to provide your body with protein, which is the building block of muscle. Insulin does not build muscle. The body can not synthesise protein from insulin.

For the same reason why Indian people are extremely carb intolerant, or why Nordic people have smallest amount of lactose intolerant people.

Indian people who typically have an almost vegitarian diet with a relatively low portion of protein, are intolerant to carbs? Why do they eat what they are intolerant to?
The reason why nordic people are not lactose intolerant is that they keep drinking milk even when they grow up.

Wrong. If you have two same persons and they want to loose weight, and say they need to eat 2000 calories in addition to hitting the gym. One's diet is mostly simple sugars, other's mostly protein and quality fat, by the end of the season you'll have them both loose weight but the ratio of what's muscle and what's fat will be quite different (excluding all the health risks associated with high carb diet).

Assuming you allow the one who is on the 'sugar-diet' to get the protein they require to gain the muscle they can - else it would be an unfair test - the excessive protein will not help.

What health risks associated with carbs? Apart from sugar being bad for your teeth.

That's why. The more calories you burn overall the more sloppy you can get in your diet. A professional swimmer who burns 8000 calories during intensive training can afford to eat more than average Joe who hits the gym weights 3 times per week and wants to keep fat bellow 10%.

So suddenly the mechanics change? You argument is inconsistent. Someone who burns 8 Mcal per day NEEDS to eat more than someone who goes through 2 Mcal. BUT if the first person eats 10 Mcal per day then they will gain weight, just as does the second if they eat 4 Mcal. There is no magical change in the body which hinders gaining weight because you are an athlete.
Do you not realize that you are using two different explanations. In the one case (normal people) they are fat because they eat carbohydrates and not because they have an excess energy intake. In the other case people who eat carbohydrates are thin because they expend alot of energy.

Also, for the record, a sprinter of 100m has more muscle AND lower body fat % than endurance runner. Want to take a guess why?

More muscle - because it helps the sprinter and is a hindrance to the endurance runner. Less body fat - I have never seen an endurance runner who has a particularly high body fat percentage. All that I have seen are extremely thin, consisting in essence of muscle.

To recap, a calorie is not just a calorie.

So thermodynamics is wrong, and you have found a way to increase the energy content in certain foods. Congratulations! You have solved the worlds energy problems for all future.

I would say that when you eat something you use some, you store some and you keep the sewer occupied with the rest. That being said, I am no expert on thermodynamics but I think it has very little to do with this discussion.

True. Some of the material you eat might not be properly digested. I also agree that eating plant material will probably cause more 'sewage' than eating processed sugar.

That being said, I do feel a little puzzled about what I read here, not sure if people are trolling some or not, but taking health tips from "computer experts" (go stereotypes) does not seem like the most legit thing to do in the first place.

Who would you take health tips from? People who are in shape? People who are overweight? People who have read medical studies on the topic? People who have a 'diploma' in 'nutrition' (which can be bought almost as easily as a master of mumbojumbo)? I prefer to make up my own mind on the topic. I will listen to peoples reasoning and then decide what seems reasonable. If people propagate that I should not eat carbohydrates because they make me fat, and I see people who live of carbohydrates without being fat (like endurance athletes or vegetarians) then I tend not to believe in these things. Simple scientific process. The results don't match the hypothesis.
In the end the same interest which made people "computer experts" can also drive them to become "exercise experts" or something else.

 

[expl]

A good diet has to have good diversity and quality of the products thats all a regular person needs to know to be healthy.

People can argue all they want about the proportions of different types of food in the diet and calorie burning, but its going to be fruitless as everyone is different and their bodies will require different diets at different times in their life. Unless you are a professional athlete you should not bother with the details in the diet as the body will sort out what it needs as long as you provide good enough diversity and eat when you are hungry. You should never starve or eat what you don't like to get thin, if you are not losing weight it just means that there is something wrong with the quality of the food or the quality of your exercising (or indicate a bad health condition of hearth or digestion in that case seek a doctor). Simple as that.

 

[bbzz]

I consider myself fairly qualified to answer these, but I don't want to go into details of why this is so. Especially since I feel the conversation will deteriorate quickly. Whatever you take from this is up to you.

And these increased insulin levels magically cause everything you eat to be changed into fat on your belly? There is no place this excess energy can come from if it is not added. If you take in 1 kcal, need 1kcal to survive. There is 0kcal to make into fat. If you however need 1kcal and eat 2kcal, then there is 1kcal to make into fat. Which the body will do in order to survive - evolutionary truth. If you then need 2kcal and only eat 1kcal, you need to get that extra 1kcal from somewhere. Either you can magically create it, or your body takes it from storage.

You are not begin fair. You don't need to explain law of energy conversion and math behind it, it's understood. What isn't so simple is how and where energy you burn comes from when you eat it. If you eat a sandwich of 200cal, and then go to run, and you burn 200cal, will those 200cal come directly from your sandwich? No. The way energy is used and where it comes from is what matters. We aren't talking about simple loosing weight, but about loosing fat. I don't think you'll find anyone willing to drop 20 lbs only to go from 15 to 18% body fat.

No. The reason why it is difficult to lose fat and build muscle simultaneously is that one of them requires an energy deficit while the other requires an energy surplus.

Again, there is a distinction between loosing fat and loosing weight. It is possible to build muscle and loose fat, for several reasons, but it is hard to loose total weight while maintaining muscle.

If insulin level control were so important do you not think that professional body builders, while not healthy in any way nor natural, would not bother with the whole bulking-cutting cycles?

First of all, for a sake of any serious argument, don't look at professional builders as they tend to overdo it with illicit substances, and using them as an example rather than an exception is wrong.

In order to gain muscle you need to provide your body with protein, which is the building block of muscle. Insulin does not build muscle. The body can not synthesise protein from insulin.

Of course...
But you need insulin to transfer nutrients into the muscle. Those who constantly have low levels of insulin will have an incredible hard time gaining muscle. Sorry but I'm not into mood to give you scientific reason why.

 

[mix_room]

What isn't so simple is how and where energy you burn comes from when you eat it. If you eat a sandwich of 200cal, and then go to run, and you burn 200cal, will those 200cal come directly from your sandwich?

You will most likely not be burning the energy that was in the sandwich if you just ate it. Digestion obviously takes time. What you will be burning is the glycogen stored in your muscles and kidney. These will then, in time, be replenished with 'sandwich energy'.

No. The way energy is used and where it comes from is what matters. We aren't talking about simple loosing weight, but about loosing fat. I don't think you'll find anyone willing to drop 20 lbs only to go from 15 to 18% body fat.

So you are seriously saying that there are different forms of energy that have different 'value' to the body. Somehow the body is supposed to differentiate from a calorie of protein derived glycogen is different from a calorie of carbohydrate derived glycogen when they are both stored in the muscle?

Again, there is a distinction between loosing fat and loosing weight. It is possible to build muscle and loose fat, for several reasons, but it is hard to loose total weight while maintaining muscle.

Your argument is that it is relatively easy to loose fat at the same time as building muscle, but that it is difficult to loose fat while not building muscle. In the first case you would be turning fat into muscle, which simply does not happen.

First of all, for a sake of any serious argument, don't look at professional builders as they tend to overdo it with illicit substances, and using them as an example rather than an exception is wrong.

But they clearly are very good at gaining muscle, albeit with the use of certain chemicals, and they are generally adept at achieving exceedingly low levels of body fat. In the end the additional benefits of doping do not give you magical properties, but rather increase the properties which the body already has. Steroids don't give you 'magic muscles', they help muscles grow and recover faster. The process in body builders is the same as it is in normal people. If someone who makes a living out of building muscle, who is probably extremely dedicated and genetically predisposed to this, and on top of that also 'cheats', sees the need to cut and bulk, why should this not apply to normal people?

But you need insulin to transfer nutrients into the muscle. Those who constantly have low levels of insulin will have an incredible hard time gaining muscle. Sorry but I'm not into mood to give you scientific reason why.

People with constantly low levels of insulin are either sick or do not eat properly. You do not seem to be able to make up your mind about if insulin is good or bad. You argue that insulin is bad because it causes the body to store fat, thus a low insulin level would be beneficial for fat loss. But then you also argue that low insulin is bad because you can not feed your muscles - thus you can not burn the energy needed to lose fat. Your argument is not consistent.

Just because the western world has gotten fat by eating carbohydrates (in excess), this does not mean that carbohydrates make you fat! Carbohydrates are essential. Were are all the fat chinese and japanese people. Their dependence on carbohydrate, rice or pasta, with a low protein amount, should drive them to obesity.

If people drink sweet drinks, which can not be sweetened with fat or protein, they will increase energy intake. The same time if the eat an extra stick of butter, or an extra stick of protein, they will gain weight. What works is simple: energy in vs. energy out. Carbohydrates are much cheaper than protein. The reason low carb - high fat diets work is because people stop eating sugar, thus reducing their energy intake. This is the same reason why not eating in the evening, taking part in 'Kohlsuppendiät' (cabbage soup diet) work. You eat less. Eat anything, but not everything. Reduce you portion size and you will lose weight. The human has been designed to be an omnivour. If we were designed to eat meat - we would have other teeth. If we were designed to eat only vegetables - we would have a different digestive tract. Moderation in selection and amount will lead to a healthy and probably more important, a happier life.


Cutting down on sugar will help you lose weight. But not by some magical method. You can not trump thermodynamics!

 

[Crivens]

I feel some SCNR creeping up...

Were are all the fat chinese and japanese people.

In SUMO, making HUGE $$$!

... and I quietly sneak away back to the dojo.

 

[anomie]

My biggest downfall is snacking too much in the evening.

That's an astute observation. Understanding the problem is often the trickiest part of the battle. Now attack it like you'd attack an out-of-control process on your production FreeBSD system.

I'll share something of (questionable, anecdotal) value, that may interest you: I have been weight training for over a decade, and my BMI* steadily remained at 24.5 for years. I had a lot of muscle on a 6'5" frame, but I also had a small but stubborn "gut". My wife (who is a nurse in a busy oncology office) constantly reminds me about the dangers of carrying extra weight in one's midsection. I ultimately started scrutinizing every bit of crap I put into my mouth, asking "Is eating this worth increasing my cancer risk?"

• Over a period of months, I eliminated beef, pork, most sweets, and lots of processed, high-shelf-life food from my diet.
• I stuff myself with a humungous salad daily, which, oddly, I've now become addicted to.
• I eat fruits all day long.
• Everything I enjoyed in the past, I eat significatly less of. When we do go out to eat, I'm always taking a lot of food home with me. Many restaurants serve absurd portion sizes.

My BMI now stays around 22.1, and my gut is gone.

Point of this story is: you can do all the right things with weight training and cardio, but your diet can (and will) screw you if you don't exert massive control over it.

[Where] are all the fat chinese and japanese people. Their dependence on carbohydrate, rice or pasta, with a low protein amount, should drive them to obesity.

Either by cultural influence, instinct, or lack of supply, they observe portion control.

----------

* Yes, I know BMI is imperfect. Without tracking body fat % and/or body measurements, it doesn't tell the whole story.

 

[drhowarddrfine]

This is really interesting but you guys are driving me nuts. Losing is spelled l-o-s-i-n-g and lose is spelled l-o-s-e!!!

 

[DutchDaemon]

(I gave up)