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

Calories in, calories out

possiblywrong.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 219 posts

Re: Calories in, calories out

#111

Post by [deleted] »

ghshephard wrote: post #100
iopq wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh please. I was 230+ lbs six years ago (30% bf or so), and now I'm 194lbs at around 15% bf. I lost 15% of my weight and kept it off. It's not that hard. It's not punishing myself, it's going to the gym and taking protein supplements. The "diet that works" is eating a lot of protein because it's the most filling.

Note, going to the Gym is also a great way to put on weight, so, I wouldn't correlate "going to the gym" and adding/losing weight. There's good research that shows even high-metabolic activity like running 5 miles/day isn't correlated with losing weight (though it is well correlated with increased aerobic capacity). Basically, any diet whatsoever will result in you losing weight. Just measuring/charting your weight i…

[deleted]

Re: Calories in, calories out

#112

Post by ghshephard »

iopq wrote: post #104
ghshephard wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note, going to the Gym is also a great way to put on weight, so, I wouldn't correlate "going to the gym" and adding/losing weight. There's good research that shows even high-metabolic activity like running 5 miles/day isn't correlated with losing weight (though it is well correlated with increased aerobic capacity). Basically, any diet whatsoever will result in you losing weight. Just measuring/charting your weight i…

I put on less than ten pounds of muscle, it hasn't been a good way to put on weight even when I tried to bulk and eat a surplus. When I did eat a surplus I gained fat, and some muscle, but mostly fat. I then cut and lost the fat, but retained very little muscle. People have a very unrealistic expectation from how much muscle they can gain going to the gym. Some can do better than others, but as for me, I have a very…

Different results for different people I guess - also your particular workout regime. Doing a lot of heavy lifting (Starting Strength) over nine months resulted in a about 20 pounds of muscle/fat gain for me (but more fat than muscle). This wasn't unexpected, and given my principal objectives were to lift heavy things, I wasn't too concerned. There is a certain amount of satisfaction associated with a 300 pound low bar back squat.

Re: Calories in, calories out

#113

Post by eitally »

tfgg wrote: post #99
beloch wrote: post #67

"I learned that it is really hard to accurately measure calories consumed, even if you are trying. " I'd just like to highlight this, because it is profoundly true. There are probably very few people who have the patience to log everything they eat, diet or no diet, unless they have some kind of payoff close at hand! Even if you do log everything you eat, it's still not easy. Here are just a few reasons why: 1. The b…

> One other thing worth pointing out is that weighing yourself daily and plotting it on a graph like this is a fantastic way to observe progress and stay motivated to stick to your new routine. This is absolutely the most important "diet" that I've done - having a mobile phone app, I use "Libra" on Android, that prompts me every morning for my weight and shows the trend curve. I can easily see now that my weight cons…

Agreed 100%. I don't use it to track weight, but being "Fitbit shamed" when I don't hit 10,000 steps per day is a strong motivator. More athletically speaking, so is missing workouts and thereby kudos from my friends & followers on Strava & Garmin Connect. On days when I really just don't feel like running, this makes the difference between getting out of the house and wasting more time on the innerweb.

Re: Calories in, calories out

#114

Post by sgift »

hspak wrote: post #37
jdminhbg wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

There's been work and research that state gaining weight is not a simple matter of calorie in = calorie out. Gary Taubes has written a lot about it.

calorie in/out is true, BUT we have no way to measure what we put in and out. That's the problem with most peoples simple assumptions "you have eaten so and so many calorie, therefore .." - it is completely unimportant what you eat. It is important what is usable by your body. And there the "calorie in != calorie out?" research starts ..

Re: Calories in, calories out

#115

Post by iopq »

nl wrote: post #106
iopq wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think you're being clever, but you're really not. Your body measures the calories you've consumed, not quantity.

This, is true. But some foods make you feel less hungry for the same quantity consumed . I linked to studies[1] showing this, but judging from the downvotes it seems to be unexpectedly controversial. The science is well established. It makes a lot of sense: people agree the glycemic index of food is important, and the satiety index builds on that look at the number of calories a food contains as well as how quickly i…

This is a little bit misleading because it's measuring up to 2 hours after the food was eaten, while some foods take longer than that to digest and to affect satiety. For example, an apple is very satisfying for two hours (high fiber and water content), but not so much after that. A food high in casein like yogurt (unsweetened) is actually going to satisfy you for up to 8 hours because of how long it takes to digest casein.

Re: Calories in, calories out

#116

Post by Evgeny »

nl wrote: post #61

I find this discussion very weird. Of course calories in/calories out explains your weight loss/gain. I haven't seen a single study that shows anything except this. But of course that isn't the whole story. The big issue with using calorie restriction for weight loss is that it take significant self control for long periods of time (months). People take that as a moral judgement of people who don't lose weight: they…

I haven't seen a single study that shows anything except this.

Actually, there is one.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1038/oby.2011.48/full

The experimental group was prescribed a standard low-calorie diet (20% protein, 30–35% fat, 45–50% carbohydrates, 1,300–1,500 kcal) providing carbohydrates mostly at dinner, whereas the control group received a standard low-calorie diet (20% protein, 30–35% fat, 45–50% carbohydrates, 1,300–1,500 kcal), providing carbohydrates throughout the day

So they were isocaloric.

Anthropometric changes after 6 months are presented in Table 3. Significant weight loss, BMI, abdominal circumference, and body fat percentage reductions were found in both groups. Significantly greater weight loss was observed in the experimental group vs. the control group at the end of the study (11.6 vs. 9.06 kg, P = 0.024).

But the weight loss was different.

It looks like did not live in a ward though.

Participants, who did not attend meetings with the dietitian, did not adhere to the diet or exceeded the caloric range of 1,300–1,500 kcal/day, were excluded from the study.

But I'm not sure how they found out that a person exceeded his caloric range.

Re: Calories in, calories out

#117

Post by nl »

iopq wrote: post #115
nl wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This, is true. But some foods make you feel less hungry for the same quantity consumed . I linked to studies[1] showing this, but judging from the downvotes it seems to be unexpectedly controversial. The science is well established. It makes a lot of sense: people agree the glycemic index of food is important, and the satiety index builds on that look at the number of calories a food contains as well as how quickly i…

This is a little bit misleading because it's measuring up to 2 hours after the food was eaten, while some foods take longer than that to digest and to affect satiety. For example, an apple is very satisfying for two hours (high fiber and water content), but not so much after that. A food high in casein like yogurt (unsweetened) is actually going to satisfy you for up to 8 hours because of how long it takes to digest…

Yeah, that's a fair point. But to me all that shows is that we need more measurements like the satiety index, as well as raw measurements like calorie count.

Re: Calories in, calories out

#118

Post by iopq »

ghshephard wrote: post #112
iopq wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I put on less than ten pounds of muscle, it hasn't been a good way to put on weight even when I tried to bulk and eat a surplus. When I did eat a surplus I gained fat, and some muscle, but mostly fat. I then cut and lost the fat, but retained very little muscle. People have a very unrealistic expectation from how much muscle they can gain going to the gym. Some can do better than others, but as for me, I have a very…

Different results for different people I guess - also your particular workout regime. Doing a lot of heavy lifting (Starting Strength) over nine months resulted in a about 20 pounds of muscle/fat gain for me (but more fat than muscle). This wasn't unexpected, and given my principal objectives were to lift heavy things, I wasn't too concerned. There is a certain amount of satisfaction associated with a 300 pound low b…

I did SS for 7 months, but the last few months my gains slowed. I gained some muscle and fat, but they changed the scale at the gym and I don't know how much weight I ACTUALLY gained because the old one was off by like 10 pounds and they changed it half way through so it had me confused. I probably gained 15 lbs, half of which being muscle. Didn't gain much more after that, even though I continued working out, nothing has been very effective after the initial five months or so.

My stats after 7 months: https://imgur.com/Pmnmkc8

Two years later, they barely improved: https://imgur.com/P7qGI5n

Re: Calories in, calories out

#119

Post by randomsearch »

thomaskcr wrote: post #28
jaredsohn wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it probably takes a lot of work to get there (not sure how many pounds of muscle that is offhand.) Also, to actually build the muscle (rather than improve your CNS) you will need to bulk for awhile. I personally (when I lost as much as 60 pounds and started lifting for the first time in almost a decade) found lifting to be very helpful from a motivational standpoint, but it was controlling my diet and running tha…

You're totally right, and even over some long period of time your losses from extra muscle will be dwarfed your losses due to lifestyle changes. My philosophy is that if you don't enjoy your health regime, whether its a diet, running, lifting, crossfit (I know, booooo) or some combination -- you're going to give it up as soon as possible. Lifting is something that I think a lot of people find enjoyable because it rea…

> crossfit (I know, booooo)

Why the "boo"? Just interested to know. I don't do crossfit!

Re: Calories in, calories out

#120

Post by nanoman »

beloch wrote: post #67

"I learned that it is really hard to accurately measure calories consumed, even if you are trying. " I'd just like to highlight this, because it is profoundly true. There are probably very few people who have the patience to log everything they eat, diet or no diet, unless they have some kind of payoff close at hand! Even if you do log everything you eat, it's still not easy. Here are just a few reasons why: 1. The b…

> There are probably very few people who have the patience to log everything they eat, diet or no diet, unless they have some kind of payoff close at hand!

After trying a few apps, I have found MyFitnessPal and tracking what I eat has become my daily routine. The app makes it very easy, has a great database of foods and in my case, I can almost always choose from my food history with 1 tap.

I'm in the 9th week of my diet, which simply means burning 1000 kcal more a day than I consume. My results are similar to the one in the blog post - spare 7000kcal a week and lose 1 kg.

Sure, measuring calories is imprecise at best, but my results speak another language.

The fitbit app sucks, it isn't well thought out and has numerous UI bugs. I had the fitbit one step tracker for a while until I lost it. Now I'm using my iPhone as step tracker, as I'm almost always carrying it in my pocket.

Post reply on HN