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

171–180 of 359 posts

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

#171

Post by hoschicz »

scarface74 wrote: post #149
hoschicz wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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”.

See overeating studies led by Ethan Sims in the 1960s.

How does the existence of a TV show that put subjects under calorie restriction prove that this doesn't work?

P.S. from skimming the wikipedia page I'd expect that the participants were subject to further calorie restriction beyond the first one

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

#172

Post by jacques_chester »

brandonmenc wrote: post #7

> Robert Sapolsky, who studies stress in primates at Stanford University, says a chess player can burn up to 6,000 calories a day while playing in a tournament Citation, please. I see him making this claim in a number of articles and talks, but am having trouble finding an experiment verifying this.

It's a nonsensical number, comparing to measurements of Tour de France cyclists or ultramarathoners running 100kms per day, who can expect to hit that kind of figure.

The highest recorded expenditure is around 11,000kcals / day. Under truly absurd conditions: manhauling sleds weighing hundreds of kilos across ice so cold that it doesn't create a lubricating layer, from 60M above sea level to 3,000M above sea level, over 10 days[0].

Show me an isotape-labelled water measurement or a CO2 measurement and maybe I'll believe it.

Edit: found it.

The chess study does use a CO2 measurement[1]. The maximum figure given was 2.2kcals/minute. I don't know how you get from that to 6,000-7,000kcals, however, unless people are playing 40-50 hour matches.

[0] https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f842/ecabb86a55a1a8577fcee7...

[1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23455094_The_stress...

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

#173

Post by throw0101a »

hoschicz wrote: post #153

I first wrote this as a reply in this thread and now I'm looking at it, I think it's relevant to the article as a whole -- sugar, insulin, calorie reduction, stress, fitness in general. I believe that the "diet" mentioned in the article is in effect a calorie-restriction one. > Losing weight and gaining weight is simple physics. > you are losing weight because you are consuming less calories. This is only true in the…

> 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 any further calorie restriction.

We're also learning more about genetics:

> Schmidt’s latest study found an enormous difference in weight gain between two test groups: conventional mice and mice whose RAGE ["receptor for advanced glycation end"] pathway had been deleted. The latter group gained 70 percent less weight than conventional mice, had lower glucose levels, and expended more energy while eating the same high-fat diet and doing the same amount of physical activity.

* https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/07/weight-lo...

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

#174

Post by berdon »

dpark wrote: post #168
berdon wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I lost 100lb from calorie restriction over the course a year. Eating the exact same things just less of it. There is no panacea for weight loss - everyone is different. A book is not a source. Providing a book and then cavalierly saying people should read it because it's backed by science is pretty rude.

> There is no panacea for weight loss - everyone is different. You described the panacea: Eat less. If you eat less than you burn, you will lose weight. This effect is so predictable and reliable that taken to its logical conclusion it results in death. We call this starvation. And everyone really isn’t different. The only thing different for most people is what sort of diet they find more tolerable. The fundamentals…

Everyone really is different. Vastly different gut flora, vastly different neural connections in the brain, vastly different neural connections in the gut. In fact, the only things that are similar across bodies are their macroscopic qualities and those are arguably the least important.

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

#175

Post by scarface74 »

hoschicz wrote: post #171
scarface74 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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”.

See overeating studies led by Ethan Sims in the 1960s. How does the existence of a TV show that put subjects under calorie restriction prove that this doesn't work? P.S. from skimming the wikipedia page I'd expect that the participants were subject to further calorie restriction beyond the first one

They didn’t gain 600 pounds plus by overeating up to six months. They have spent years overeating and gaining weight.

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

#176

Post by hoschicz »

mattsfrey wrote: post #148
hoschicz wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 i…

> This is absolutely false.

I'm not saying it's impossible to keep losing weight by calorie restriction beyond 6 months, I'm saying that _sans further calorie restriction_ you don't lose weight.

> Yes, it gets harder to continuously lose weight

This is your body adjusting its basal metabolic rate and you having to implement further calorie restriction to achieve the same benefit.

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

#177

Post by hoschicz »

scarface74 wrote: post #175
hoschicz wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See overeating studies led by Ethan Sims in the 1960s. How does the existence of a TV show that put subjects under calorie restriction prove that this doesn't work? P.S. from skimming the wikipedia page I'd expect that the participants were subject to further calorie restriction beyond the first one

They didn’t gain 600 pounds plus by overeating up to six months. They have spent years overeating and gaining weight.

They way to look at this from a insulin resistance perspective is that years overeating caused them to develop insulin resistance, which in turn caused them to become obese.

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

#178

Post by EamonnMR »

brandonmenc wrote: post #7

> Robert Sapolsky, who studies stress in primates at Stanford University, says a chess player can burn up to 6,000 calories a day while playing in a tournament Citation, please. I see him making this claim in a number of articles and talks, but am having trouble finding an experiment verifying this.

This would lead to difficulties with heat dissipation.

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

#179

Post by dpark »

RobertRoberts wrote: post #9

I did tests for weight loss. I found that you don't lose weight until you sleep. (stay up all night and weigh your self repeatedly, in the morning, no loss, but after you sleep and wake, your weight goes back to "morning weight") I found that if you don't sleep well, you don't lose as much. If you eat too late before going to bed, you don't lose as much. If you adjust your diet (however you want is my experience) to…

> I did tests for weight loss. I found that you don't lose weight until you sleep.

Your test lacked any semblance of science. Aside from your unblinded sample of 1, you obviously didn’t run a control.

Weigh yourself. Now don’t eat or drink anything for 8 hours. Now weigh yourself again. I bet the scale moves whether you’re sleeping for those 8 hours or not.

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

#180

Post by kerkeslager »

RobertRoberts wrote: post #137
kerkeslager wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to try to reiterate more clearly what your parent comment was saying: Your experimental methodology is flawed because it fails to control for water loss. This isn't negligible: in the summer when it's hot and I sweat a lot, I can easily drink a 1 liter Nalgene bottle in the morning, about 2 pounds of water. It's likely that what you've measured is simply the slow loss of water through perspiration and exhal…

>Your experimental methodology is flawed because it fails to control for water loss. I absolutely tested for water loss. What I found was that some extra (?) water retained until we sleep. And that something happens with fat or other processing that occurs during sleep. Again, I charted my weight carefully multiple times a day over a month. Carefully testing when weight loss occured. I Recorded my diet as well as my…

> I absolutely tested for water loss.

No, you didn't. How do you think you tested for water loss?

Briefly, you'd need to separate out the water for your urine, weigh that, then separate out the water from your feces, and weigh that, and spend all your time in a sealed chamber and monitor the humidity of that chamber to see how much water you're exhaling and sweating out. I'm guessing you did exactly none of this.

Oh and after all that, there's the confounding fact that a small part of fat's mass is metabolized into water, so even measuring all your water excretion doesn't actually allow you to separate how much of that water is water you took in, and how much of that water is the result of fat metabolism.

> And it's not through excrement, it's through urine.

Given urine is mostly water and you didn't control for water loss, your result is exactly what I'd expect from water loss and not fat loss.

Look, do you really think you're the first person to research this? There's a whole subfield of biochemistry devoted to this, with more brains, equipment, and funding than you have. You're right that weight mostly doesn't come out through excrement: most of the mass of burned fat is exhaled as CO2[1][2][3].

[1] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/12/141216212047.h...

[2] https://www.bbc.com/news/health-30494009

[3] https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families...

Post reply on HN