161–170 of 238 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, not eating protein will mean you lose more muscle mass.
>'world of difference' Say 100g compared to 200g for a 75kg 10% male, assuming identical AA profile. How is there a 'world of difference'?
There really isn't that much science to it. On paper its really really simple. To loose weight, you must expend more energy than you absorb. However, conversely to get fit, you will need to eat a balanced diet, with enough calories to replace damaged muscles. However on the weight loss front here are the golden rules: Some people exercise (exercise expends energy) Some people reduce energy consumption (eat less, or e…
Assuming that by "4:2" you are talking about intermittent fasting, does anyone believe otherwise? Alternate-day fasting can help people lose weight not because there's any magical effect, but because a faster is unlikely to double their calorie intake the day after fasting - having fast days is just a simple/easy way to reduce overall calorie intake. Besides, the main benefits of alternate-day fasting are meant to be…
Also muscles burn energy while you are sitting on your sofa. Increasing your muscles mass by weightlifting means you will burn more energy all the time. I think weightlifting is strongly overlooked for weight loss and especially for loosing fat when combined with intermittent fasting.
The problem here seems that discussions about this are sooo littered with personal biases. "Bro science" is just one aspect of this, far more common is expecting that one's personal achievement is universally reproducible. Yes, person A may eat all the burgers and twinkies, because he's going to the gym all the time and swimming laps like there's no tomorrow. But as a general rule to combat obesity, that's probably n…
> Yes, person A may eat all the burgers and twinkies, because he's going to the gym all the time One major problem with the standard BMI definitions is that any athlete in a sport that vaguely requires muscles will be classed as 'overweight' or 'obese'. Although there may be some justification for this categorisation, these are people we normally consider at the peak of fitness. One of the best things you can do for…
The limitations of BMI are well known; if doctors and nutrition professionals keep on using BMI as an indicator, that's because it's an useful one.
We shouldn't assume other professionals are "dumb"; we shouldn't assume that we are a brilliant bunch, capable of seeing beyond an indicator, while doctors and nutrition professionals use them blindly.
There really isn't that much science to it. On paper its really really simple. To loose weight, you must expend more energy than you absorb. However, conversely to get fit, you will need to eat a balanced diet, with enough calories to replace damaged muscles. However on the weight loss front here are the golden rules: Some people exercise (exercise expends energy) Some people reduce energy consumption (eat less, or e…
Assuming that by "4:2" you are talking about intermittent fasting, does anyone believe otherwise? Alternate-day fasting can help people lose weight not because there's any magical effect, but because a faster is unlikely to double their calorie intake the day after fasting - having fast days is just a simple/easy way to reduce overall calorie intake. Besides, the main benefits of alternate-day fasting are meant to be…
however its based on the idea that if you have a reduced calorie intake you'll live longer. However:
a) its yet to be proved in humans (worms, flies and lemurs, yes.)[1]
b) to get the benefit we're talking about ~1800 calories a day. Having accidental done something like that for almost a year, I cannot stress how terrible your quality of life is.
[1] http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v430/n7000/abs/nature02...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>'world of difference' Say 100g compared to 200g for a 75kg 10% male, assuming identical AA profile. How is there a 'world of difference'?
By "world of difference" I was talking about mental state; blood sugar crashes, crap food making you feel crap, etc.
I agree with those points, I was referencing this above. Especially the last sentence.
For myself at least its always been quite simple... If you want to lose weight and be healthy - eat little and eat healthy. If you want to lose weight and don't care too much for your health - eat little. If you want to be healthy - eat healthy. If you just don't care - eat whatever you like.
I was simplifying of it as: Calories --> Weight Food quality & exercise --> health
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Assuming that by "4:2" you are talking about intermittent fasting, does anyone believe otherwise? Alternate-day fasting can help people lose weight not because there's any magical effect, but because a faster is unlikely to double their calorie intake the day after fasting - having fast days is just a simple/easy way to reduce overall calorie intake. Besides, the main benefits of alternate-day fasting are meant to be…
Intermittent fasting combined with weightlifting means you are more likely to loose fat and not muscles while fasting. The weightlifting will tell the body that the muscles are needed and it will then have less of a tendency to metabolize them for energy. Also muscles burn energy while you are sitting on your sofa. Increasing your muscles mass by weightlifting means you will burn more energy all the time. I think wei…
First, I'm talking about actual weight loss, not fat loss. They are two different goals.
Weightlifting causes muscle damage that needs repairing. This requires energy.
Intermittent fasting will cause longer repair times and if done incorrectly will cause muscle loss. (muscle bulk I assume is your end goal, as opposed to a specific need for a sport)
However the common way to gain muscles is to take protein powder laced with hormones, natural or otherwise. As a strategy for weight loss it is useless unless you exercise enough to burn off the extra calories consumed. This requires time and effort, both of which are difficult.
Loosing fat is not in its self weight loss.
My Weight Loss Story 40kg in 40 Weeks Without Exercise where I went from 120kg to 80kg (79.6kg) / 265lb to 175lb.
This book was born out of the constant positive feedback and requests I received that my story needed to be shared with a wider audience.
EDIT 1: I wanted to do this as a Show HN when I published, but I've been a longtime lurker without commenting and without an account with my real name.
EDIT 2: I've read the article and the points raised are the same as what I noted when I lost my weight. Exercise can help, but you can lose the weight with diet alone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You do your math. Exercise isn't just about how many calories you burn during it. Add a kilo of muscle and it will be burning energy 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.
You urged to do your math, but didn't present any of yours. Muscle burns an inconsequential amount of energy -- 6-10 per pound depending on sources. So if you were somehow to gain 10 pounds of pure muscle, you'd have enough calories for a small apple per day (60 cal). How fast can you gain 10 pounds of muscle? In an 18-week weight training programme, a group of men gained 4.6 pounds of muscle: http://jap.physiology.o…