101–110 of 256 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Convincing men at basically peak testosterone production to permanently impair their natural ability to produce it. It's awful. Not to mention the side effects of taking exogenous hormones e.g. damage to your liver...
Peak? We're talking about 30 year olds. For some it's not really convincing. They look at it like doctor perscribed steroids.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Over my life I’ve been close to a small handful of perpetually skinny people who thought they had high metabolisms. In every case, when I watched them closely, I realized they barely ate anything. My ex-gf was one of these people and would routinely tell people about how she could eat anything and not gain weight. But when I would go on a severely calorie-restricted diet I was still eating more than she did on a norm…
> In every case, when I watched them closely, I realized they barely ate anything I know people (mainly Asian guys that are trying to build muscle) that seriously struggle to eat at a calorie surplus. So maybe it's not "metabolism" (which there are significant differences between humans) but also differing levels of hunger.
My little brother is about 50lbs lighter than me at the same height and we have very different builds and all his attempts to bulk fail for the same reason: no appetite. Meanwhile I’m overshooting my bulks and have to cut harder because I love eating too much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Multiply that by 15-20 years and you’re looking at a solid extra 200lbs you have. Naturally every 40 or so makes you look in the mirror, make some minor changes that last a year or maybe a bit more and it’s back to getting out from under the gelatin we’re packing onto ourselves. In order to really, truly, get a handle on your weight - you need to increase muscle mass, operate at a slight caloric deficit, eliminate ex…
Then why do so many people go to the gym, do 10k steps/day, intervals, etc. yet do not lose weight? Americans are arguably more active and health conscious than ever before as evidenced by the huge popularity of fitness content on YouTube, record number of gym memberships and attendance, the huge popularity of fitness apps, awareness of GMOs, food tracking apps, etc. yet fatter than ever too.
Food tracking is completely useless unless you also have a food scale, which, for whatever reason, is not terribly common in American kitchens. At least I never had one growing up and my Mother fancied herself a serious baker. Volume measurements are terrible if you are trying to track caloric consumption.
And I have not used a food tracking app but they appear to depend on honest inputs. I can just imagine someone telling their friends, "I don't know why I'm gaining weight $FOOD_APP says I'm only eating 1400 calories a day", somehow forgetting to put the 3 glasses of wine they are consuming into the app.
So totally IME but the best way to lose or maintain a healthy weight (whatever that means to you - the world really doesn't care) is to have an honest, internal drive to get it done. No one, no app, is going to do it for you. Do the cookies in the break room look good? They sure do, but I like my body far more than those cookies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's good evidence that metabolic rate does vary, but not significantly. https://examine.com/articles/does-metabolism-vary-between-tw...
The article states the difference is small, but also notes “ The majority of the population exists in a range of 200-300kcal from each other”. All things being even 200kcal difference per day is about 20lbs per year attributed purely to metabolic difference. Now you can say to just eat 200kcal less per day, but those little differences on a daily basis add up.
As you gain weight, you burn more energy, even just being idle, so 200kcal doesn't means 20lbs per year (obviously so, as otherwise you'd gain 600lbs in 30 years).
An extra 200kcals per day implies gaining extra weight until the extra energy you burn cancels it out, and then stabilizing there. IIRC the rule of thumb is ~25kcal/day/kg so you'd just naturally balance out to being 8kg heavier than the baseline.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is likely down to the type of "food" that you are eating. Or you are eating more than is necessary. A diet that contains a high nutritional content will prevent you from over-eating due to satiety signals (unless you have a hormone issue) rather than eating to the point of feeling "stuffed" - if someone is eating to the point of feeling "stuffed" then it would suggest that they are not eating food with a high nu…
A diet that contains a high nutritional content will prevent you from over-eating due to satiety signals (unless you have a hormone issue) rather than eating to the point of feeling "stuffed" - if someone is eating to the point of feeling "stuffed" then it would suggest that they are not eating food with a high nutritional content, or that they have some disorder that is interfering with their normal eating process.…
A better example would be something like sprouted whole grain bread, like Ezequiel brand, which is hard to eat plain. If everyone replaced their wonderbread with whole grains I would absolutely expect better body weight outcomes.
Muscle burns more energy than fat. As people age, their muscle mass declines without sufficient exercise, so we'd naturally expect the average person's metabolism to decline via this even if "metabolism per kg muscle" didn't change.
A lot of skinny people have high metabolism, how do you explain that?
Their mitochondria use UCP1 [1][2] to generate more heat when producing ATP, thus wasting energy that would otherwise be converted to fat.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fidgeting.
Then why can't someone just make an exercise program that replicates this fidgeting. How is fidgeting more potent than 10,000+ steps/day , which a lot of people do but still stay fat.
Often those who fidget a lot will fidget less on days where they have used significant energy intentionally. Or will fidget less if they are restricting calories.
It would be hard to purposefully fidget a significant amount, but I suppose it could be trained with the right monitoring and stimulus. It would probably be better to train some other behavior though.
Anecdotally: I havent changed diet one bit, actually I eat way healthier than when I was younger. And still weigh much more than when younger.
If you are eating 3000 calories of healthy food and you used to eat 2400 calories of junk food, why would you weigh less now?
Muscle burns more energy than fat. As people age, their muscle mass declines without sufficient exercise, so we'd naturally expect the average person's metabolism to decline via this even if "metabolism per kg muscle" didn't change.
Therefore all their data is based only on fat-free mass, i.e. total body mass minus fat mass.
So all their conclusions are not influenced by the amount of fat vs. muscle.
Super useful outcome, especially given I find that people think that after reaching even young ages 24, 25 even begin thinking that metabolism has some extreme drop off right after reaching young adulthood
Anecdata: I ate 3500-4000 calories a day of mostly junk in high school and college. I lifted weights some. I (barely) “had a six-pack”. No sports, only incidental cardio. Around age 21 or so, I decided to try to drop a couple pounds and make it a really cut six-pack. I ate a strict 1400 calorie diet (packaged food to make it easy, no cheating at all) for about three months. I started running a couple times a week. I’…
Those are the figures people always estimate. Always the same story: 4000 calories when they were skinny, and now they can't lose weight on 1500 calories when their maintenance intake is 2600.
Then you make them log their food for a week and they are eating 3000 calories when they swore they ate no more than 2000. In my 20s I worked at a personal trainer in a gym that made people log their food and 100% of people said the same thing you just did.
If you couldn't lose weight on 1400 calories then where exactly was the energy coming from? Cue the "starvation mode" meme where people claim their body becomes so efficient that it only needs 1400 calories to maintain their 270lb body.