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

People with low BMI aren't more active, they are just less hungry, 'run hotter'

sciencedaily.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 350 posts

Re: People with low BMI aren't more active, they are just less hungry, 'run hotter'

#321

Post by bilsbie »

convexfunction wrote: post #156
csours wrote: post #77

Hunger is mediated by a bunch of hormones and you can test for some of those, but there is no test for the feeling of hunger. As a comparison, it is famously very hard for doctors to understand pain; it is also difficult for patients to communicate about pain. The feeling of hunger is not comparable between people. Hunger is driven by multiple sensations (blood sugar, stomach stretch, hormone levels) and by cognitive…

> losing body fat means that you must continuously make choices that decrease your comfort in some way - eating fewer highly rewarding foods, maintaining a state of hunger, increasing activity level Not necessarily! I've successfully lost a lot of body fat (~50 pounds over the last 18 months) by deliberately changing my diet to eat more foods (that I like) that are lower in energy density than what I was eating befor…

Can you recommend a few of the foods you switched to?

Re: People with low BMI aren't more active, they are just less hungry, 'run hotter'

#322

Post by Gigachad »

yamazakiwi wrote: post #269
Zircom wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you not consider an entire cup of ice cream a lot? I call it quits at one scoop personally.

One scoop of icecream is so little, why even bother eating icecream at all.

High end ice cream is something you would normally only eat about a scoop of. But yes most people just get the cheap 4L tubs and shovel a bowl full out.

Re: People with low BMI aren't more active, they are just less hungry, 'run hotter'

#323

Post by giantg2 »

Zircom wrote: post #256
giantg2 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alcohol and ice cream before bed will help you gain weight. Doesn't even have to be a lot - like one drink and 1/2-1 cup of ice cream.

Do you not consider an entire cup of ice cream a lot? I call it quits at one scoop personally.

Depends on the scoop. I would guess an actual ice cream scoop is around 1/2-2/3 cup since that's the serving size for many brands. My point was that they don't need to eat a sundae, or pig out completely. A cup is on the larger side, but probably still fairly normal (medium size at a shop, or 2 scoops).

Re: People with low BMI aren't more active, they are just less hungry, 'run hotter'

#324

Post by helij »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #232
convexfunction wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some fruits and vegetables and lean meats (which absolutely includes "leaner cuts of steak with the fat trimmed off") that I quite sincerely like as much as junk food, if not more. Two pan-fried salmon fillets and a big bowl of brussels sprouts with butter beats the pants off even a pretty good burger-and-fries, the main downside being the prep (and, well, the cost for most people). A pound of fresh strawbe…

I agree that a salmon filet is tasty. I don't often eat a pound of strawberries though. Both of those are too expensive to eat regularly, and like you said a salmon filet is a lot of effort compared to a burger. > I'll have the cheesecake if I really feel like it. That tells me the writing on the wall, and let me be clear about this, the writing is what needs to be written and what people need to read - you're making…

How are 2 egg size potatos and salmon fillet in an over a lot of effort?

Re: People with low BMI aren't more active, they are just less hungry, 'run hotter'

#325

Post by dilap »

FollowingTheDao wrote: post #297
dilap wrote: post #78

There's a really interesting study they did with pigs. They fed pigs four different diets that had the same amount of calories, but varying ratios of n3/n6 fats. The pigs with high n6/n3 ratio ended up much fatter and less muscular than the pigs eating a 1-1 ratio diet. It's a very neat demonstration that "all that matters is calories" is not true; your metabolism, and thus how you use the calories, is influenced by…

Yesssss! So my diet is usually very strict. I will mostly only eat salmon, mackerel, oysters and mussels, and a lot of berries with some breads and rice. No plant oils at all and very low carb, but not no carb. I only resorted to this diet because I had a series of metabolic disorders in my self and in my family and I also know my genetics. I have the changes to FADS1, FADS2, and CPT1A which make me much more sensiti…

Super interesting stuff!

(FWIW, Dave Feldman (cholesterolcode.com) has me pretty convinced that high LDL is not bad in all contexts. High HDL does always seem to be good, though.)

Re: People with low BMI aren't more active, they are just less hungry, 'run hotter'

#326

Post by syockit »

gilmore606 wrote: post #280
SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The McRib is 550 cals. I'm now wondering if one could do a weight maintenance program by simply eating 3 McRib's a day whenever they come back on the menu.

When I'm cutting (like right now) I will sometimes eat 3 McDoubles as my nutrition for the whole day. The macros are excellent.

Eating sometimes is okay, I guess. Don't forget to take supplements for the micros you're missing. Eating the same thing every day though, requires discipline. I'd get fed up eating the same thing again and again even if it's some kind of a gorgeous meal.

Re: People with low BMI aren't more active, they are just less hungry, 'run hotter'

#327

Post by syockit »

dilap wrote: post #78

There's a really interesting study they did with pigs. They fed pigs four different diets that had the same amount of calories, but varying ratios of n3/n6 fats. The pigs with high n6/n3 ratio ended up much fatter and less muscular than the pigs eating a 1-1 ratio diet. It's a very neat demonstration that "all that matters is calories" is not true; your metabolism, and thus how you use the calories, is influenced by…

Now, if only the food packaging shows the ratio of n3:n6 fats... Is it expensive/difficult to determine them?

Re: People with low BMI aren't more active, they are just less hungry, 'run hotter'

#328

Post by wutbrodo »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #241
wutbrodo wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you're making the decision to NOT have cheesecake when you only kind of feel like it. Chiming in as someone whom the GP comment resonates with: the point here is that you literally come to enjoy it less. The natural amount that you would eat isn't constrained entirely by health choices. I find finishing a single slice of cheesecake to be overwhelming: a second one would be actively unpleasant. If you were following…

> I ate like you That's a weird judgement to throw in the midst. I haven't laid claim to my eating habits. I've had great success in losing weight in the past as well as recently by changing my eating habits for the positive. I just wanted people to realize that it's not always just a matter of learning to love yummy veggies and forgetting about icky cheesecake. > if your preferences are aligned with healthy eating,…

> That's a weird judgement to throw in the midst.

Sorry, I wasn't implying anything by this. Just absent-minded phrasing.

> people have to accept that their preferences aren't always and possibly not ever going to align with healthy eating.

Sure, I think it's possible some people can't make it through the transition to healthier preferences. That doesn't suggest that the original claim in the thread is correct.

The comment you originally responded to claimed that convexfunction was "restating" the claim that weight loss is pure effortful discomfort (from the top of the thread). Your response was that you doubt that healthy food can taste as good as junk food[1]. In the comment I responded directly to, you say that having cheesecake occasionally is evidence that a healthy person eating less cheesecake comes from conscious healthy effort.

These claims are what I'm pushing back against. I use way less willpower on food now than when I was a junkier eater[2].

[1] Note that the issue here might be that your definition of weight-loss-promoting foods is askew. Steak is a pretty reasonable part of a weight-loss diet, as long as you're not mindless about the quantity. As with the cheesecake example, eating the right amount of steak is a way more pleasant experience than eating too much.

[2] though thankfully never as bad as the avg US upper-middle-class diet

Re: People with low BMI aren't more active, they are just less hungry, 'run hotter'

#329

Post by philipkglass »

matthewdgreen wrote: post #270
chrchr wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not messed up. It’s just maladapted to our food environment where there is high calorie, highly rewarding, cheap food available to us at all times. Countries where traditional diets predominate don’t have widespread obesity, and we can see obesity rise in developing nations as they adopt Western diets. Some people, including the Chinese-resident subjects of this study, have hunger responses that are not suscepti…

> It’s just maladapted to our food environment where there is high calorie, highly rewarding, cheap food available to us at all times. I visited China and they seemed to have plenty of access to high-calorie, highly-rewarding food. What's special about the temptations of our food system?

It's possible that as China transitions to a post-food-scarcity environment like the West it will see high obesity like in the West:

"The unparalleled rise of obesity in China: a call to action"

International Journal of Obesity volume 45, pages 921–922 (2021)

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41366-021-00774-w

Re: People with low BMI aren't more active, they are just less hungry, 'run hotter'

#330

Post by wutbrodo »

convexfunction wrote: post #281
wutbrodo wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you're making the decision to NOT have cheesecake when you only kind of feel like it. Chiming in as someone whom the GP comment resonates with: the point here is that you literally come to enjoy it less. The natural amount that you would eat isn't constrained entirely by health choices. I find finishing a single slice of cheesecake to be overwhelming: a second one would be actively unpleasant. If you were following…

For whatever it's worth, I don't feel like I actually had to adapt my tastes at all in order to eat healthier. The main hurdle was figuring out how to prep in a way that's easy enough that I'll actually bother.

I wouldn't describe myself as actively adapting my tastes: I just ate better and eventually noticed my preferences shifting. I assume it's some combination of my brain getting more sensitive to the stimulus (of eg sugar), my gut changing, and my better diet reducing cravings.
Post reply on HN