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

The grandmaster diet: How to lose weight while barely moving

espn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 359 posts

Re: The grandmaster diet: How to lose weight while barely moving

#141

Post by dpark »

taurath wrote: post #115
RandallBrown wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you eat 500 calories and burn 600 calories, the energy has to come from somewhere . So in a sense it is actually a pretty simple physics problem. It gets tricky because calculating calorie consumption is really hard (how much of what you ate was actually turned into energy) and calculating calorie expenditure is probably even harder.

Your bodies absorbsion of nutrients and yes calories is not a system in a vacuum. Nor it’s decision to store excess calories as fat. There’s a wide range of how much different types of foods affect different people. I had a friend who would eat (we counted) 4000 calories a day and couldn’t get over 120lb. Turns out they had a soy allergy and their bodies didn’t absorb the food. Simplifying it to calories in calories…

So your friend was unable to digest at least a thousand calories a day, likely more, and didn’t see fit to mention the endless diarrhea they must have been experiencing? If you’re spewing a thousand undigested calories out of your ass every day, you should know something isn’t right.

Also this is still calories in, calories out.

Re: The grandmaster diet: How to lose weight while barely moving

#142

Post by marknadal »

I lost 35 pounds in about 45 days without working out (coding all day) by fasting for 3 to 5 days at a time.

I got a lot of keto flu tho, and would always eat after that, or try to minimize it by drinking a ton of (no sugar) vitamin water and/or 1 egg.

Re: The grandmaster diet: How to lose weight while barely moving

#143

Post by [deleted] »

zaroth wrote: post #40
jfengel wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also doubt it, though it's not quite 2x. The number they cite is "6,000 calories a day", which presumably includes the ~2,000 calories one burns just by staying alive. A marathon runner burns ~2,600 calories on the race itself, totalling ~4,600 for the day. So it's about 1.3x rather than 2x. The numbers all have very wide error bars, so it puts 1.3 in the range closer to 1 than to 2. Still hard to believe, but I'd…

If you’re going to be pedantic, you subtract out the baseline, and the alleged caloric burn from chess would be 1.5x the measured burn from running a marathon. But in any case it still astounds me the human body can run that far on just 2,000 calories (2.3kWh).

[deleted]

Re: The grandmaster diet: How to lose weight while barely moving

#144

Post by scarface74 »

__jal wrote: post #125
omginternets wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Losing weight and gaining weight is simple physics I assume you're referring to the "energy in" vs "energy out" meme in weight-loss. The body is not a closed system. While you _do_ have to balance your chemical equations for glucose catabolysis (or whatever), weight loss is far from a "simple physics" problem.

Some[1] will never drop the "simple physics" line because they don't care about learning about the biology of body weight, but rather reaffirming their aesthetic judgement that people they decide are overweight are also morally weak. [1] Emphatically not judging anyone posting here; that's not my goal. I'm simply bluntly stating what has become painfully clear after having this discussion multiple times.

It’s not about aesthetic judgement. If you won the genetics lottery and have a high metabolism, you will have more calories out. If you won the genetic lottery and grow to be 7 feet as oppose to be 5 foot 5, you will burn more calories and find it easier to be slim.

I didn’t win the height genetic lottery or the higher than average metabolism genetic lottery, but I did win the mesomorph one. I naturally look muscular whether I lift or not and I pack on muscle quickly. That isn’t due to any moral strength.

Re: The grandmaster diet: How to lose weight while barely moving

#145

Post by VladimirIvanov »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #70
partialrecall wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "The chess players are forgetting to eat. " This surprises me. I find that being hungry dulls my edge and makes me noticeably less clever. It's easy for me to forget to eat if I'm doing something mindless, but when I'm actively problem solving I find that I become more aware of my hunger (and other forms of general discomfort.)

Elsethread another poster was downvoted for saying it[0], but amphetamines make it much easier to get so focused on a task you forget to eat. I experimented with it for a while and even I, a food addict, forgot to eat if I was truly engaged in something. [0] Probably because his tone was accusational, though anyone who thinks chess grandmasters are any less willing to use performance drugs than any other high-end ath…

Chess players are drug tested by WADA for major tournaments. Amphetamines would not necessarily help those without ADHD because they would slow down their thought process. Time management is an important part of the game and simply remaining focused is not difficult for top players.

Also amphetamines don't "make you so focused that you forget to eat." Amphetamines directly inhibit appetite.

Re: The grandmaster diet: How to lose weight while barely moving

#146

Post by mindgam3 »

The "wealthy friend" referenced in the first sentence would have to be Rex Sinquefield, aka the billionaire patron of American chess, based in Saint Louis. I wonder why Sinquefield would want to remain anonymous for this article. He goes out of his way to plaster his name on everything, not just his chess championships ("Sinquefield Cup") but apparently professorships ("Sinquefield Professor of Economics") [0].

[0] https://unewsonline.com/2018/09/06/sinquefield-donation-caus...

Re: The grandmaster diet: How to lose weight while barely moving

#147

Post by berdon »

scarface74 wrote: post #133
berdon wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how I could have made that any clearer. I included (show correlation) specifically for that very reason.

But not causation and still didn’t explain whether that could be explained by the standard CICO equation.

You might try clicking the link I provided. The Wikipedia page details the virus and provides links to other sources one of which was conducted on chickens where they measure input/output and still saw positive weight gain.

Re: The grandmaster diet: How to lose weight while barely moving

#148

Post by mattsfrey »

hoschicz wrote: post #136
scarface74 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate to be blunt. But this is as much pseudoscience as the anti vaxers. Losing weight and gaining weight is simple physics. There is also a big difference between losing weight based on water weight and losing real body mass. I sweat like a pig anytime I work out. I use to teach two hour fitness classes and even now after the end of a workout, I’ve “lost 5 pounds” but that’s pure water weight. I’m burning around 10…

This is a common misconception, let me explain. > Losing weight and gaining weight is simple physics. > you are losing weight because you are consuming less calories. This is only true in the first up to 6 months of a calorie-restriction diet. Then, body adjusts its metabolism (lower body temperature, making you feel more lethargic to keep you from exercising, etc) and your weight begins to slowly climb back up, sans…

This is absolutely false. Having lost 160 lbs over the course of two years I can say it is absolutely possible to continue losing weight from calorie restriction. Does it get harder to lose the same amount of weight? Absolutely. You are getting lighter and your base metabolic rate diminishes. You have to eat less food or do more exercise to maintain the same deficit. In reality, your burn rate just goes down. I was initially losing 3.5 lbs a week not even trying, in the end it was down to maybe half a pound a week in the final weeks. Your body doesn't enter some magical mode at 6 mos though, of course if you don't change what you're doing you will plateau in line with your decreasing BMR, but it just means you have to keep tweaking the formula of energy in vs out or accept a slower rate of fat loss. The exercise in itself though is pretty much entirely psychological.

Re: The grandmaster diet: How to lose weight while barely moving

#149

Post by scarface74 »

hoschicz wrote: post #136
scarface74 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate to be blunt. But this is as much pseudoscience as the anti vaxers. Losing weight and gaining weight is simple physics. There is also a big difference between losing weight based on water weight and losing real body mass. I sweat like a pig anytime I work out. I use to teach two hour fitness classes and even now after the end of a workout, I’ve “lost 5 pounds” but that’s pure water weight. I’m burning around 10…

This is a common misconception, let me explain. > Losing weight and gaining weight is simple physics. > you are losing weight because you are consuming less calories. This is only true in the first up to 6 months of a calorie-restriction diet. Then, body adjusts its metabolism (lower body temperature, making you feel more lethargic to keep you from exercising, etc) and your weight begins to slowly climb back up, sans…

The same thing happens if you force someone to overeat even if they're not hungry. They will gain weight -- for up to 6 months. Then, the body increases its base metabolic rate and adjusts to the new food intake level.

There is an existence proof that this isn’t true - watch “My 600lb Life”.

Re: The grandmaster diet: How to lose weight while barely moving

#150

Post by Touche »

bluthru wrote: post #95
Touche wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Change what you eat, not how often you eat. A yogurt and some fruit is fine for breakfast.

Not if you want to limit your eating window, which is a great way to make your body burn its fat reserves.

If you have the willpower to ignore your body telling you its hungry, then yeah fasting will work for you. Most people can do this for only a little while though, and then revert to what they used to do.
Post reply on HN