Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Sitting For Long Periods Affects Your Metabolism

theglobeandmail.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–38 of 38 posts

Re: How Sitting For Long Periods Affects Your Metabolism

#31

Post by Darmani »

anjc wrote: post #14
glastra wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not OP, but [0]: > If the data do not contradict the null hypothesis, then only a weak conclusion can be made: namely, that the observed data set provides no strong evidence against the null hypothesis. In this case, because the null hypothesis could be true or false, in some contexts this is interpreted as meaning that the data give insufficient evidence to make any conclusion; in other contexts it is interpreted as…

Ah thanks, I understand this aspect. As I say, they simply failed to rejected the null hypothesis, and their approach here seems perfectly valid. The authors did overreach in their interpretation of the result. But OP said ANOVA is wrong, and that the alpha value is wrong. I don't understand how they can say this without understanding this domain, the intervention, and knowing what effect size could be expected. Mayb…

Hi, actual OP here.

I said that failing to show a statistically significant difference is not the same as showing equivalence with statistical significance. Tests designed for the former cannot do the latter with any amount of data. You need a different test for that, or at least the same underlying statistical test used in a different manner. Can you explain what about this implies that "ANOVA and the alpha value are wrong?"

I'll confess to having never really learned ANOVA, but it sounds like it's a family of models generalizing the t-test. You can indeed perform equivalence and non-inferiority testing with the t-test, as I did in my OOPSLA 2018 paper. You just have to use it in a different way than it sounds like they did here.

Re: How Sitting For Long Periods Affects Your Metabolism

#32

Post by anjc »

Darmani wrote: post #31
anjc wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah thanks, I understand this aspect. As I say, they simply failed to rejected the null hypothesis, and their approach here seems perfectly valid. The authors did overreach in their interpretation of the result. But OP said ANOVA is wrong, and that the alpha value is wrong. I don't understand how they can say this without understanding this domain, the intervention, and knowing what effect size could be expected. Mayb…

Hi, actual OP here. I said that failing to show a statistically significant difference is not the same as showing equivalence with statistical significance. Tests designed for the former cannot do the latter with any amount of data. You need a different test for that, or at least the same underlying statistical test used in a different manner. Can you explain what about this implies that "ANOVA and the alpha value ar…

Thanks for reply. Regarding alpha value: you seem to say that with a small sample size, it'd be possible to see no effect between groups. I think you were implying that they should've been testing p<0.0001 or something? But I'm not sure how to choose this value, without knowing the difference between means that you expect for the medical intervention.

Re: How Sitting For Long Periods Affects Your Metabolism

#33

Post by bootsz »

radar wrote: post #29
magnamerc wrote: post #22

Exercise should only be for cardiovascular health. If you have an unfavorable energy imbalance, i.e. you're gaining weight, then you need to eat less by extending your time between meals. It's as 'simple' as that. Not easy, but simple. The 'easiest' solution is to go through periods of intermittent fasting. Either skip breakfast+lunch most days, or take a few days off eating entirely. People need to stop dieting, and…

Depending on your present calorie consumption you can start reducing calories by really concentrating on the fats you're including in your everyday diet. I'm not saying fats are bad, but that there is double the calories per unit of fat versus carbs and protein. Start concentrating on replacing some of those fats with purer protein and high fiber foods. This way you've already reduced calories, but not how much you'r…

My opinion, from my own experience: Sure, that definitely works. But the choice of cutting fat is kind of arbitrary. You can do the same with sugar & carbs and get basically the same result w.r.t weight loss. I think this illuminates the real underlying issue with modern diets which is not that we eat "too much of X", but rather "too much of everything, too frequently". Approaches like this work not because "fat is bad" or "carbs are bad", but because they provide a simple, concrete framework for diet choices that ends up reducing overall calorie consumption.

Re: How Sitting For Long Periods Affects Your Metabolism

#34

Post by radar »

bootsz wrote: post #33
radar wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depending on your present calorie consumption you can start reducing calories by really concentrating on the fats you're including in your everyday diet. I'm not saying fats are bad, but that there is double the calories per unit of fat versus carbs and protein. Start concentrating on replacing some of those fats with purer protein and high fiber foods. This way you've already reduced calories, but not how much you'r…

My opinion, from my own experience: Sure, that definitely works. But the choice of cutting fat is kind of arbitrary. You can do the same with sugar & carbs and get basically the same result w.r.t weight loss. I think this illuminates the real underlying issue with modern diets which is not that we eat "too much of X", but rather "too much of everything, too frequently". Approaches like this work not because "fat is b…

It's just way easier to rack up calories if the thing you're eating is higher in fats. Remember that fats have no fiber (neither does protein, but that's another conversation), so you won't 'feel' as full, which can easily lead to a much higher calorie ingestion rate that you're body won't be able to keep up with.

Another big thing is portion control! You hit on the nose with eating too much of everything. Something else I've done is making myself smaller plates, but also taking much smaller bites and taking a much longer time to finish the plate. I make it take as long as possible. That way by the end of the plate I have a more accurate sense of how hungry I still am or not.

It's tough to summarize all of points of my current regimen since I've pulled bits and pieces from lots of different sources and put some personal experience into the mix.

Re: How Sitting For Long Periods Affects Your Metabolism

#35

Post by bootsz »

radar wrote: post #34
bootsz wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My opinion, from my own experience: Sure, that definitely works. But the choice of cutting fat is kind of arbitrary. You can do the same with sugar & carbs and get basically the same result w.r.t weight loss. I think this illuminates the real underlying issue with modern diets which is not that we eat "too much of X", but rather "too much of everything, too frequently". Approaches like this work not because "fat is b…

It's just way easier to rack up calories if the thing you're eating is higher in fats. Remember that fats have no fiber (neither does protein, but that's another conversation), so you won't 'feel' as full, which can easily lead to a much higher calorie ingestion rate that you're body won't be able to keep up with. Another big thing is portion control! You hit on the nose with eating too much of everything. Something…

Heh... What's interesting is I personally feel the opposite. I can eat thousands of calories of carbs/sugar no problem, but I fill up on fat pretty quick. I did the keto diet for about 4 months and almost never went over my daily calorie budget, basically without even trying that hard. Most days I had to remind myself to eat more because I was way under.

I wonder if this is a case for emphasizing that "one size fits all" doesn't work in dieting, either. It seems likely that satiety for various food sources might vary based on biology and lifestyle too.

Re: How Sitting For Long Periods Affects Your Metabolism

#36

Post by Darmani »

anjc wrote: post #32
Darmani wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, actual OP here. I said that failing to show a statistically significant difference is not the same as showing equivalence with statistical significance. Tests designed for the former cannot do the latter with any amount of data. You need a different test for that, or at least the same underlying statistical test used in a different manner. Can you explain what about this implies that "ANOVA and the alpha value ar…

Thanks for reply. Regarding alpha value: you seem to say that with a small sample size, it'd be possible to see no effect between groups. I think you were implying that they should've been testing p<0.0001 or something? But I'm not sure how to choose this value, without knowing the difference between means that you expect for the medical intervention.

So, as I understand it: how do you pick a P such that, if you fail to prove there is a difference with pIf you compute the power of your test, you can do this, so long as you know the expected difference of your means. Like you implied, that is not realistic. Do you do something else entirely: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_test

Re: How Sitting For Long Periods Affects Your Metabolism

#37

Post by nradov »

magnamerc wrote: post #22

Exercise should only be for cardiovascular health. If you have an unfavorable energy imbalance, i.e. you're gaining weight, then you need to eat less by extending your time between meals. It's as 'simple' as that. Not easy, but simple. The 'easiest' solution is to go through periods of intermittent fasting. Either skip breakfast+lunch most days, or take a few days off eating entirely. People need to stop dieting, and…

Exercise has a multitude of benefits beyond cardiovascular health. And exercise absolutely does impact your energy balance, if you hit it hard enough. Timing of meals is largely unimportant; some people find it easier to limit intake by consuming fewer larger meals, others have the opposite experience.

Re: How Sitting For Long Periods Affects Your Metabolism

#38

Post by magnamerc »

nradov wrote: post #37
magnamerc wrote: post #22

Exercise should only be for cardiovascular health. If you have an unfavorable energy imbalance, i.e. you're gaining weight, then you need to eat less by extending your time between meals. It's as 'simple' as that. Not easy, but simple. The 'easiest' solution is to go through periods of intermittent fasting. Either skip breakfast+lunch most days, or take a few days off eating entirely. People need to stop dieting, and…

Exercise has a multitude of benefits beyond cardiovascular health. And exercise absolutely does impact your energy balance, if you hit it hard enough. Timing of meals is largely unimportant; some people find it easier to limit intake by consuming fewer larger meals, others have the opposite experience.

Yes, there are also neuroprotective effects of cardio. And I'm not talking about meal timing, I'm talking about skipping meals entirely.
Post reply on HN