151–160 of 396 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's wrong with chicken nuggets?
Perhaps a poorly picked example but generally they're not considered a healthy food item as they exist in the category of both fast and fried food. The implication being that they're more processed resulting in less good fasts and are higher in calorie per gram. Like most foods the dose determines the poison I suppose.
Unsurprisingly, the title is sensationalist and not representative of the study. The study compares energy expenditure across different economic groups i.e. western people sitting in offices versus hunter-gatherers in Africa, and found that difference in energy expenditure does not account for differences in obesity, so points to consumption as the likely reason. The sample dataset explicitly excluded 'athletes', so…
> The sample dataset explicitly excluded 'athletes', so would exclude people that _are_ outrunning a bad diet. You can't outrun a bad diet. This is such a myth and I have no idea where it's coming from. Perhaps it's a nice lie one can tell himself to continue eating junk and not feel guilty about it. Athletes, especially body builders require a lot of calories but their diet is surprisingly healthy. They eat plenty o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The sample dataset explicitly excluded 'athletes', so would exclude people that _are_ outrunning a bad diet. You can't outrun a bad diet. This is such a myth and I have no idea where it's coming from. Perhaps it's a nice lie one can tell himself to continue eating junk and not feel guilty about it. Athletes, especially body builders require a lot of calories but their diet is surprisingly healthy. They eat plenty o…
I once worked a night shift stocking job just after college. I was in phenomenal shape without hitting the gym. I was at my lowest weight with a ton of lean muscle as a result of moving heavy loads and stocking paint every night. I also did the math at one point, and given the size of the warehouse I was probably walking quickly 8 miles during my shift. It became a chore to eat enough calories every day. Somewhere ar…
In an 8 hour shift, I likely walked ~15 miles, with half of that time pushing up to a dozen karts. For lunch, I'd go to the McDonald's and get a Super Size (Since this was when that still existed) Double Quarter Pounder meal with a Coke. I'd chug the whole coke and then refill it. This meal was easily 3,000 calories, and I'd eat it 3 times a week.
After about two months on the job, I'd STILL lost about 5 lbs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Counterpoint: that the kind of exercise most people engage in with a goal of weight loss isn't going to work, but the kind of dieting would do might work, is perfectly reasonably expressed with the phrase "You can't outrun a bad diet". I'm aware a more pedantic and literal reading gives lie to the phrase, but that is true of almost every single English true statement ever written.
Intensity of the workout matters. When I go wakeboarding with my wife I build up a nice big appetite. When I go to muay thai I get pretty severe appetite suppression and sometimes have to force myself to eat. The other thing is that if you track >>performance Nothing keeps me honest about my diet like performance
If you workout harder than your baseline, you will burn more calories than your baseline.
But if you do that workout often enough, for various reasons you will return to baseline calorie expenditure.
This means that if you want to lose weight consistently, working out is useless in that sense. You might see benefits for 1 month or 3 months or 6 months, but eventually your body adjusts.
Working out is great for a plethora of reasons. And this calorie budget rebalancing is one of them, since it means inflammation or auto-immune responses get downregulated.
Losing weight is not one of those benefits. Whereas it is often held up as such which leads to intense disappointment and relapse with overweight people, because they think "oh, if I just go for six intense two-hour jogs a week, I can keep eating sumptuously."
In other words, for 95% of people doing activity, they shouldn't eat any surplus if their goal is to maintain or lose weight.
It's actually best to do most of your activity undernourished, as it helps develop true intuitive nutrition feedback sensation. You'll start to sense how every macro and salt feels when you ingest it. Loss of this sensation is a major obesity driver. A numbness for nutrients.
I’ve been thinking about writing a book on this topic: “No overweight person eats well”. By very definition of a person is overweight, they got there by eating poorly, and are continuing to do so. They have eaten more energy than they use, this energy storage in fat.
> They have eaten... Notice the past tense there?
If they were currently eating well, they would lose weight and not be overweight
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps a poorly picked example but generally they're not considered a healthy food item as they exist in the category of both fast and fried food. The implication being that they're more processed resulting in less good fasts and are higher in calorie per gram. Like most foods the dose determines the poison I suppose.
But nutritionally they are about the same as non lean chicken?
-- https://www.mcdonalds.com/ca/en-ca/product/4-chicken-mcnugge...
For most people, a 1 hour moderate run is only about 1-2 cookies worth (and only half a Crumbl cookie). Even a marathon run might only burn 2000 calories . a chipotle burrito is 1600 . In other words, for 95% of people doing activity, they shouldn't eat any surplus if their goal is to maintain or lose weight. It's actually best to do most of your activity undernourished, as it helps develop true intuitive nutrition f…
I always welcome hunger knowing that I live in a society of calorie abundance. I generally tend to feel annoyed when people that are hungry start treating like an emergency.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Counterpoint: that the kind of exercise most people engage in with a goal of weight loss isn't going to work, but the kind of dieting would do might work, is perfectly reasonably expressed with the phrase "You can't outrun a bad diet". I'm aware a more pedantic and literal reading gives lie to the phrase, but that is true of almost every single English true statement ever written.
Totally agree with you here. The phrase "rounds to true". Caveats for the pedantic: If you've found yourself overweight and sedentary, you are unlikely to adopt a level of exercise needed to outrun your bad diet. All else being equal, the person with the better diet will have a better body comp (or achieve a goal body comp easier).
I found this https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3339766/
TL;DR; in that study of 4k people:
"A substantial proportion of obese U.S. adults who attempted to lose weight reported weight loss, at least in the short term. Obese adults were more likely to report achieving meaningful weight loss if they ate less fat, exercised more, used prescription weight loss medications, or participated in commercial weight loss programs."
Also somewhat interesting that eating diet products negatively correlated with weight loss
One could read that as exercising more or eating less both work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A good diet only helps so much. Of course with enough self control, a caloric deficit will make you lose weight, but you need to make yourself perpetually hungry. Eating clean without measuring and limiting portions is not enough for people whose appetite is naturally higher. Ozempic was the only thing that actually solved my hunger. I would eat healthy, do exercise, but without ozempic my appetite was unstoppable an…
Aren't you worried at all about side effects from ozempic and what happens when you stop taking it?