31–40 of 219 posts
carbohydrate = 4 kilocalories protein = 4 kilocalories fat = 9 kilocalories alcohol = 7 kilocalories
It seems difficult to quantify this accurately without fully understanding human metabolism and how it utilizes energy sources.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't really disagree with you, but. These suggestions ignore the (soft) limitations of human agency. The degree of difficulty in (not) eating an additional (something) has never been really quantified in sufficiently broad spectrum of situations, to my knowledge. A generally helpful and encouraging life can lead to many positive changes, weight loss not least among them. Maybe instead of telling fat people to lose…
Why would removing disincentives for being fat reduce the number of fat people? Should we also make smoking cool to reduce the # of smokers?
Not.
Gut bacteria are a big confounder among a bunch of other things. Different types can do a lot of things differently, like extract more calories from the same food. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-09/ci-gbi091012.... They can even mess with your mind to make you crave junk food. http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2014/08/116526/do-gut-bacteria-rule... Transplanting them from a thin human to an obese mice slimmed the…
"Why is it warmer in the summer than the winter?"
"Because your hemisphere took in more calories than it gave off."
True! And anyone who denies it is just arguing with thermodynamics.
It's calories in, calories out, only if you stick to specific foods. It's well proven that raw foods, despite being slightly higher calorie content than their cooked version, contribute significantly less calories because FAR less is digested and absorbed. And it's equally well proven that weight gain is significantly due to the consumption of processed sugars (most carbohydrates that people eat these days), as they…
> And it's equally well proven that weight gain is significantly due to the consumption of processed sugars (most carbohydrates that people eat these days), as they contribute far more sugar far quicker to the blood (and hence kick off an insulin reaction to lower the blood sugar by storing the sugar as fat). 1000 calories of white rice will contribute far more to weight gain than 1000 calories of, say, plain chicken…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And it's equally well proven that weight gain is significantly due to the consumption of processed sugars (most carbohydrates that people eat these days), as they contribute far more sugar far quicker to the blood (and hence kick off an insulin reaction to lower the blood sugar by storing the sugar as fat). 1000 calories of white rice will contribute far more to weight gain than 1000 calories of, say, plain chicken…
Thermodynamics have nothing to do with it. Human bodies can vary when it comes to efficiency of converting food to energy. It may also depend on hormonal situation or genetics or w/e else. It may also well be that "calorie out" part depends to some extent of what is eaten. It's not like human bodies are perfect 100% efficient engines of converting food to energy and that rest of the body doesn't take into account wha…
The efficacy of metabolism is in my opinion very much the big question mark here, and why I think relying on one-size-fits-all concepts like "a carbohydrate translates to 4 kilocalories" is simplistic and in all likelihood flawed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had great success starting from a strict calories in vs. calories out diet, and then iterating on what I ate to make myself the most satiated per calorie eaten. Turns out that the diet that solves for satiation ends up being a lot of plain chicken and meat, beans, roasted veggies, modest amounts of starch, and no sugar. (Eating a handful of jelly beans would make be starving 30 minutes later). The other thing I fou…
That's actually a great point, and something I've told friends in a "broscience" fashion: There is nearly nothing in nature that combines fats and carbs. It's almost like you need to choose one or the other - balance is how you get into trouble, because then you think everything is legal. Take, for instance, potato chips -- and not the low-fat Baked Lay's or Quest Chips kind. If you're on a "balanced diet", they're l…
My recommendation to dieters is to not do it halfheartedly. Go all in, read reddit fitness, geek out on dieting, count calories, come up with new recipes, set a complete routine around cooking the right food, etc. That way you won't be tempted to make exceptions and you will know with 100% certainty that you will get results.
Gut bacteria are a big confounder among a bunch of other things. Different types can do a lot of things differently, like extract more calories from the same food. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-09/ci-gbi091012.... They can even mess with your mind to make you crave junk food. http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2014/08/116526/do-gut-bacteria-rule... Transplanting them from a thin human to an obese mice slimmed the…
> A calorie = a calorie is as true and as useless as answering the question "Why are there so many people inside the Super Bowl stadium during the game" by saying "Because more people entered it than who left, if only people didn't get in, it would be empty". "Why is it warmer in the summer than the winter?" "Because your hemisphere took in more calories than it gave off." True! And anyone who denies it is just argui…
Gary Taubes has written a lot about it.
This has been a very hot topic on HN in the past, so I suspect the comments section will soon blow up. I've always though of the "calories in vs calories out" technique for weight loss to be the starting point for the majority of people trying to lose weight. Reign in how many calories you're eating, start burning a few more (even just walking a block or two for most people is a great start) and you'll see significan…
We deal with this all the time when recommending diet supplements at my startup. When it comes to losing weight , yes, calories in vs. calories out is the most important step to start with. Sure, protein has a higher TEF (thermic effect of food), and yadda yadda yadda there are some other minor things involved, but they're just not enough for you to discredit the calorie situation. However, when it comes to burning f…
I had great success starting from a strict calories in vs. calories out diet, and then iterating on what I ate to make myself the most satiated per calorie eaten. Turns out that the diet that solves for satiation ends up being a lot of plain chicken and meat, beans, roasted veggies, modest amounts of starch, and no sugar. (Eating a handful of jelly beans would make be starving 30 minutes later). The other thing I fou…
One way I've managed to make dieting more sustainable (which is the most important part, making sure you find a healthy diet you can stick to in the long run) are cheat days/meals. This allows you to program in "tasty" meals without the psychological guilt and adverse health affects from these typically unhealthy treats. Most nutritionists will agree that if you adhere to your diet 90% of the time, you're going to be successful. That means in a typical 3 meal/day diet, you've got roughly 2 meals / week where you can cheat and eat whatever without it affecting your health or body composition.
My approach, which has allowed me to increase my strength without increasing my body weight, has been through a cyclical ketogenic diet. As always, YMMV, but I have determined through my own empirical research that I am not well carb-adapted, and staying low carb (What's important here is that you plan for the cheat, and that allows you to still enjoy life and food without it negatively affecting your health and body composition.