31–40 of 55 posts
These guys are fantastic if you want to change your lifestyle. In the past, I've done something like this program and I lost about 70 pounds (meanwhile becoming relatively buff and, if I might say so myself, rather sexy). I like this program because it's a laid back version of most ketogenic diets mixed with a whole food mentality (read: it's sustainable for life).
It's great a calorie counting approach works for this guy, but it has a horrible clinical track record. Dozens of studies conclusively show it does not work in the long run absent focus on the composition of the calories. Even in clinical studies where they control everything the subjects eat it doesn't work. There is good empirical data on how to eat and exercise to get and stay thin. There's no reason to rely on ou…
I've since stopped counting and have stayed the same weight. Maybe calorie counting doesn't work for everyone, but it's certainly simple and easy.
(p.s. Where did I say I still lived on junk fast food? I eat a ton of fresh fruit and vegetables - my diet is all over the place. That just happens to include cheez-its sometimes. :))
"If you vigorously lifted weights for an hour, you’d only burn ~400 calories, less than a single cheeseburger! You’d have to keep that up every single day without increasing your diet to lose a less than a pound per week. I decided it’s easier to simply eat less." What he is missing here is that lifting weights is anabolic and re-building damaged muscles from weight lifting takes lots of calories. Therefore, your met…
It's great a calorie counting approach works for this guy, but it has a horrible clinical track record. Dozens of studies conclusively show it does not work in the long run absent focus on the composition of the calories. Even in clinical studies where they control everything the subjects eat it doesn't work. There is good empirical data on how to eat and exercise to get and stay thin. There's no reason to rely on ou…
I lost 60lbs in 40 weeks using this diet, and only felt healthier as I went along.
before: http://photos-e.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-ak-snc1/v274/234/41/1171...
after (contains puppy): http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1171451781&v=phot...
I didn't get headaches, and caffeine is an indirect appetite suppressant in that it makes me more interested in what I'm doing and less distracted by hunger.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The empirical data that I've read and used was to... - count calories, and ensure that I maintain a calorie deficit (which is the only way to burn body fat). - eat frequently, to reduce hunger and maintain an optimum metabolic rate. - brief bouts of difficult exercise (3x30 minutes of anaerobic and 3x30 minutes of aerobic exercise a week) (the on an empty stomach part isn't very helpful). - but, first and foremost, s…
> eat frequently The human body is made to run off a gas tank of fat reserves, not to be tethered to an extension cord of continuous eating. Eating every couple hours is historically impossible, and just on that basis one can reason it's likely maladaptive. You eat a proper meal, insulin levels spike to put the energy in fat and glycogen, insulin levels drop, then you switch over to running on the fat and glycogen. Y…
My change from 'three squares' to 4-5 smaller meals a day has had quite a positive impact on my health and my lifestyle. As such, I'm not about to give it up. I really like never being really hungry. (note that I define a meal as 'eating something', even if that something is simply a banana.)
> Notice how you never hear from people who have stayed thin for years by counting calories.
No, I didn't notice. In fact, a lot of the people I know that have stayed fit for years have used calorie counting as part of their tool-set. The author of the book linked in my above comment is one of those people. However, that's just my experience.
Like the author of the original author stated, counting calories is used more as an educational tool than a micro-management tool. It helps people understand their own personal energy (im)balance. That may well be the crux of your point though.
I find it interesting that the research indicates something doesn't work that I have seen work with much success. I've always thought that calorie counting makes sense, since "you can't manage what you don't measure."
How about counting how many calories you buy ? I understand people eat out a lot, but the grocery store is a place where you can make it both precise and effortless. That’s a business idea for you, or Kroger...
I've been going out running for about 30-40 minutes 2 out of every 3 days, and have pretty much stopped eating crap.
The phone really didn't have that much to do with it, though having an app that tracked my time and distance has made it something of a game to see if I can improve my time.
I got fed up with my gradually increasing weight, and started looking into what I was eating and the calorie cost. Granola will make you roly-poly! Who knew? Clearly I had some bad ideas on what to eat.
I'm really bad at tracking calories or keeping regular regular records of stuff. For me it's simpler to just not have something around to eat at all rather than try to limit consumption. Luckily, I have something of a short food memory so I can eat the same thing most days (oatmeal with blueberries for breakfast; raw vegetables with Wasa crackers for lunch) and not get sick of it.
A key factor was seeing real progress. I hate making myself get dressed and go out first thing in the morning, but losing belly fat and feeling (and looking) lots better makes me want to keep it up.
I still eat junk now and then, and don't go crazy over it, since I know that on average I'm still getting fitter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Calorie counting always works - when you want to lose a lot of weight and lose it quickly. For maintaining long term you can't stick with it though, so you most likely want to make lifestyle changes, including exercise. Exercise is fundamentally hard for weight loss. It takes a lot of time exercising in order to make a difference. Eating 600 calories less is not that hard - but from a bit of googling it looks like it…
A few points about exercise: Some of the point I have heard is to change the metabolism, so that while you are doing other things, you are burning more calories. The other issue is that simply eating less will cause you to lose muscle, not necessarily fat. Lifting will let you keep the muscle.
So, maybe not an 2 hours of aerobics each day, but 30 minutes of something, for your heart and bones.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Calorie counting always works - when you want to lose a lot of weight and lose it quickly. For maintaining long term you can't stick with it though, so you most likely want to make lifestyle changes, including exercise. Exercise is fundamentally hard for weight loss. It takes a lot of time exercising in order to make a difference. Eating 600 calories less is not that hard - but from a bit of googling it looks like it…
Calorie counting doesn't even work well in the short term. Metabolism drops dramatically at the cellular level on restricted calories. Insulin levels are the key to fat catabolism/anabolism. Calories are secondary. You can get fatter in caloric deficit if you're just eating sugar, or injecting loads of insulin. The value of exercise for weight loss has little to do with burning calories. It's about hormones. Brief, i…
