Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The True Definition of Calories i.e. "Why what you believe is extremist BS"

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • So that is a doughnut, with egg, cheese product, ham and is the bottom layer pre-formed chicken patty?

    http://maggiesfeast.wordpress.com/
    Check out my blog. Hope to share lots of great recipes and ideas!

    Comment


    • It also seems really odd that it's in fashion to declare "I'm not paleo anymore. I hate paleo." If that's what people want to do that's fine, but I love paleo. I love the food, I love how it makes me feel, I love the positive health results I've had, I love the simplicity of cooking, I love that my food doesn't sit in a pantry growing moth larva. I love that when I'm hiking in the mountains the food I see is greens, mushrooms and moose and when I go home and open my fridge I see greens, mushrooms and meat.
      I wish I was more like you. I abandoned paleo, but I love paleo. I wish I had the chops to eat just meat and vegetables and be happy. I readily admit that it is me who is flawed, not paleo.

      So that is a doughnut, with egg, cheese product, ham and is the bottom layer pre-formed chicken patty?
      Eww.
      My Journal: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread57916.html
      When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Lawyerchick12 View Post
        okay, there is a loooot of different arguments happening on this thread that are marked deviations from what the OP was about.

        People are talking about health effects, mental effects, performance effects and sustainability effects. I believe that the main argument that was being purported by Choco was that for MOST people from a PURE WEIGHT LOSS PERSPECTIVE the determinative factor IS calories in vs. calories out. Not, performance, health, mental etc, just from a pure weight loss perspective. Anyone who is NOT losing weight with the CICO paradigm is because they have not yet discovered the amount of calories needed for their TDEE or are using some arbitrary online calculator.
        Exactly. If it were possible to be more than 100% correct, you would have achieved that. CICO is infallible. You MUST have an energy deficit to lose "weight." It's the methods of calculating calories that fail. Our foods aren't measured properly, the equations are imperfect and have big variances just between each other, people don't track properly, hormonal imbalances can make your maintenance calories massively higher or lower than what the equations show...this is where self-experimentation comes in. However, CICO is fact.

        Originally posted by Lawyerchick12 View Post
        I was wondering how alcohol might affect this CICO paradigm. Will drinking 500 calories of alcohol and then eating 500 calories have the same weight loss effects than eating just 1000 calories? or does alcohol infact impair whatever metabolic advantage there is, if any?
        I hate to do this to you, but you should read this link:

        The truth about alcohol, fat loss and muscle growth | Intermittent fasting diet for fat loss, muscle gain and health

        Alcohol doesn't really fit into the paradigm because the body lacks an efficient metabolic pathway to store acetates as fat, according to Martin Berkhan anyway. So, essentially, if you're drinking pure alcohol (say 100% agave tequila and club soda), you're only drinking alcohol calories. The theory is that if you've only eaten protein throughout the day in a quantity that will not exceed your body's ability to outpace muscle tissue synthesis (~2g/lbm for heavy lifters and ~1g/lbm for sedentary people) and you don't consume more carbohydrate than would exhaust your glycogen storage, you wouldn't store fat. However, if you eclipse glycogen storage from carbs or eat ANY dietary fat alongside the alcohol, you're not going to get fat drinking. So basically...

        If you're fairly glycogen depleted and you're hammering vodka and cranberries, you won't store any fat as the cranberry juice is being partitioned to empty glycogen stores and the alcohol can't really be converted into fat efficiently. If you're eating a burger with alcohol, then you're storing all that fat and your fat metabolism is put on hold until you burn the acetates in the alcohol. Similarly, if you're glycogen replete and eating bread or drinking sugary mixers, you'll convert those excess carbs into fat as well. If you absolutely "need" to eat while you're drinking (and c'mon we've all had the drunk munchies before), stick to a high protein meal that's low to moderate in carbs and very, very low fat. I'm not sure that's feasible, but something like chicken breast, white rice and veggies would be ideal.

        Yea, you're getting wings and ice cream I know. But it's interesting to know that if you're pretty well fasted all day and you consume zero calories from protein/carbs/fats along with the alcohol, you can pretty much session drink without "getting fat." You'll just completely shut down your fat metabolism and stall.
        Last edited by ChocoTaco369; 07-31-2012, 08:51 AM.
        Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by magnolia1973 View Post
          So that is a doughnut, with egg, cheese product, ham and is the bottom layer pre-formed chicken patty?
          Yes. You forgot the lunchmeat ham.
          Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
            Exactly. If it were possible to be more than 100% correct, you would have achieved that. CICO is infallible. You MUST have an energy deficit to lose "weight." It's the methods of calculating calories that fail. Our foods aren't measured properly, the equations are imperfect and have big variances just between each other, people don't track properly, hormonal imbalances can make your maintenance calories massively higher or lower than what the equations show...this is where self-experimentation comes in. However, CICO is fact.
            Hence why I found this thread completely useless....maybe frustrating is a better word.

            Everyone on here who thought you could eat more than what you expend and lose weight raise your hand (I see no hands).

            Now everyone who believes that the make up of your diet effects hormonal changes that could make weight loss easier and/or can contribute to helping preserve lean mass and selectively burn fat raise your hand (I'm guessing we got some takers here). And this is where interesting things are actually still being debated and learned.

            Anyone who thinks that being thin/ripped via just CICO and exercise automatically makes you healthy raise your hand (there is stackingplates waving in the back....probably not many others though).

            My neighbor lives on Mountain Dew and cigarettes....dude is ultra ripped since thats about all he ingests. So if weight loss is the end goal I highly recommend his diet.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by sbhikes View Post
              I'm sorry but those still look like bagels to me. I know there's a krispy kreme shop somewhere around here because sometimes they turn up at office meetings, but I have never actually been to a krispy kreme shop myself so I guess I'm just not familiar with donuts that look like bagels.

              By the way, real American cheese is really good. If you can find it.

              Oh, and long ago before I adopted this diet I read Carb Sane's website because I didn't believe eating meat and fat and avoiding grains and going low carb was healthy. After reading her whole site I concluded she was a total nut case. She's disgruntled because she didn't get the weight loss she wanted. It really seems odd that so many people now just love her. It also seems really odd that it's in fashion to declare "I'm not paleo anymore. I hate paleo." If that's what people want to do that's fine, but I love paleo. I love the food, I love how it makes me feel, I love the positive health results I've had, I love the simplicity of cooking, I love that my food doesn't sit in a pantry growing moth larva. I love that when I'm hiking in the mountains the food I see is greens, mushrooms and moose and when I go home and open my fridge I see greens, mushrooms and meat. I have no intention of following the trend to love Carb Sane and that other Richard guy and the once reasonable now completely angry wack-job Dr. Harris. That's all popularity contest bull-shit. The science hasn't changed.
              And LOL....I agree with simply ALL of this.

              Comment


              • My neighbor lives on Mountain Dew and cigarettes....dude is ultra ripped since thats about all he ingests. So if weight loss is the end goal I highly recommend his diet.
                I considered smoking for weight loss once, when I was desperate at about age 16, I believe. The trouble is that I think fat people who smoke stay fat. Thin smokers are those who has developed a habit of smoking instead of eating. I think they would actually be neurotically thin even if they do not smoke. (Sigh).

                I am trying breathing exercises and various meditation techniques now to combat wanting to eat, but no matter what I do food always wins.
                My Journal: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread57916.html
                When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
                  Hence why I found this thread completely useless....maybe frustrating is a better word.

                  Everyone on here who thought you could eat more than what you expend and lose weight raise your hand (I see no hands).

                  Now everyone who believes that the make up of your diet effects hormonal changes that could make weight loss easier and/or can contribute to helping preserve lean mass and selectively burn fat raise your hand (I'm guessing we got some takers here). And this is where interesting things are actually still being debated and learned.

                  Anyone who thinks that being thin/ripped via just CICO and exercise automatically makes you healthy raise your hand (there is stackingplates waving in the back....probably not many others though).

                  My neighbor lives on Mountain Dew and cigarettes....dude is ultra ripped since thats about all he ingests. So if weight loss is the end goal I highly recommend his diet.
                  Many people believe that calories don't matter when restricting carbohydrate because insulin is kept low and you can't store fat without insulin. This was the belief popular for years on this forum, and this is what I was told when I joined a year and a half ago. The most given solution around here to increase weight loss was to "eat more fat." Read and understand that - the solution to break through plateaus was to eat more. Maybe you are too new to the forum to recall how things used to be, but elements of that mindset still hang til today. YOU believe calories count. A year ago, most did not. Some still hold onto this belief currently. This may be frustrating to YOU, but for others this is new information.
                  Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Leida View Post
                    I considered smoking for weight loss once, when I was desperate at about age 16, I believe. The trouble is that I think fat people who smoke stay fat. Thin smokers are those who has developed a habit of smoking instead of eating. I think they would actually be neurotically thin even if they do not smoke. (Sigh).

                    I am trying breathing exercises and various meditation techniques now to combat wanting to eat, but no matter what I do food always wins.
                    Because you are constantly starving yourself Leida. Can you remember the last time you haven't been on a "diet"? You can't seem to lose weight because your metabolism is probably so downregulated from a lifetime of dieting your TDEE is probably half of what it should be. You probably need to reverse-diet for an entire year. You would probably be a prime candidate for the "Ray Peat Protocol." Lots of red meat, coconut fat, milk and lots and lots of fruit. You could probably use 300g of carbs a day every single day in the form of fruit sugar with plenty of salt. And the last thing you should do is IF.
                    Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

                    Comment


                    • Yeah, I was not dieting at all since I was sick in Moscow. So far, I gained 5 or so lbs, got the first high blood sugar alert yesterday by getting a dizzy light-headed episode, and look like shit and at least regained the ability to control food intake somewhat, though I am not counting. Sugar is not something I should be consuming, even in fruit, but added sugar should be a huge no-no, or I am likely to end up diabetic. Gonna do blood sugar as a part of the yearly blood-work after I am back next week. Keeping fingers crossed I did not do lasting damage with all the ice-cream, fruit and candy of the last two weeks.
                      My Journal: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread57916.html
                      When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
                        Hence why I found this thread completely useless....maybe frustrating is a better word.

                        Everyone on here who thought you could eat more than what you expend and lose weight raise your hand (I see no hands).

                        Now everyone who believes that the make up of your diet effects hormonal changes that could make weight loss easier and/or can contribute to helping preserve lean mass and selectively burn fat raise your hand (I'm guessing we got some takers here). And this is where interesting things are actually still being debated and learned.

                        Anyone who thinks that being thin/ripped via just CICO and exercise automatically makes you healthy raise your hand (there is stackingplates waving in the back....probably not many others though).

                        My neighbor lives on Mountain Dew and cigarettes....dude is ultra ripped since thats about all he ingests. So if weight loss is the end goal I highly recommend his diet.
                        Round, dammit. The earth is round. You're all misguided idiots to continue insisting on it being flat.
                        The Champagne of Beards

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Leida View Post
                          Yeah, I was not dieting at all since I was sick in Moscow. So far, I gained 5 or so lbs, got the first high blood sugar alert yesterday by getting a dizzy light-headed episode, and look like shit and at least regained the ability to control food intake somewhat, though I am not counting. Sugar is not something I should be consuming, even in fruit, but added sugar should be a huge no-no, or I am likely to end up diabetic. Gonna do blood sugar as a part of the yearly blood-work after I am back next week. Keeping fingers crossed I did not do lasting damage with all the ice-cream, fruit and candy of the last two weeks.
                          Why would fruit make you diabetic? There's no evidence supporting that. Grains and PUFA's I'll agree with you, but that's due to toxins and the hormone dysregulation that comes from a high PUFA diet loaded with inflammatory lectins.

                          I strongly doubt what you have is blood sugar related from eating too much carbohydrate. What you're experiencing is probably from too low sodium intake and ensuing dehydration or from chronically undereating from years of serial dieting that has made you hypothyroid. Get your T3/T4/rT3/TSH checked. I would bet anything you're hypothyroid, in which case a high fruit diet rich in iodized salt is exactly what you need.

                          I average twice as much carbohydrate now as I did when I started Primal a year and a half ago. My fasting blood glucose has fallen from 80 (low carb constantly) to 73.
                          Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                            Then you're in agreement with me - when it comes to "weight" loss, it pretty much comes down to the energy deficit. The Primal Blueprint has an advantage for weight loss not because of some magical metabolic advantage that doesn't let your body store whole foods as fat, but because whole foods will provide better satiety and more nutrition per calorie, typically making a caloric deficit easier to handle from a sustainability standpoint.

                            However, that doesn't mean there "is absolutely nothing wrong with consuming them." There is a whole lot wrong with them. Health and body composition are two very, very different things. There are plenty of boneheads out there eating shit food and just tracking their macros because they don't care about their health or they're completely ignorant to health. If you want a diet of protein powder, pseudo cheesecake, egg substitute, gluten and rancid oil, that's your call. I would rather have a higher body fat and be healthier. Look at the facts: body builders are typically NOT healthy. They do not have long lifespans. People that live the longest, healthiest lives are almost always of average body composition.
                            I'm almost in total agreement with you. Your energy deficit theories are sound, this we agree upon. Where we still disagree is that eating some of those example foods is wrong assuming person is meeting their macro/micro/caloric goals. You are giving examples of "boneheads" who you make it sound like all they eat is the example foods listed in the post I've quoted. This is quite a strawman because I've never once came into this thread with the position that this is either realistic, sustainable, or healthy. If folks like this exist, they will not be hitting macro and micro goals and so the example is invalid. Your comments on bodybuilders and "average compositions" living the longest is another rat hole but we don't have to get into that because I agree with the theme of this thread and don't want it derailed any more than it is already. Thanks again for posting this thread.

                            Originally posted by Neckhammer
                            Anyone who thinks that being thin/ripped via just CICO and exercise automatically makes you healthy raise your hand (there is stackingplates waving in the back....probably not many others though).
                            Why single me out here, kind Sir? Please aware me of any posts I've made in this thread where I haven't clearly said caloric, micro, and macro needs must be met? If these goals are met while still eating what you (assuming) consider junk then how is this "unhealthy"?
                            Last edited by StackingPlates; 07-31-2012, 10:02 AM.
                            http://stackingplates.com/

                            Comment


                            • [U]
                              Originally posted by StackingPlates View Post
                              Why single me out here, kind Sir? Please aware me of any posts I've made in this thread where I haven't clearly said caloric, micro, and macro needs must be met? If these goals are met while still eating what you (assuming) consider junk then how is this "unhealthy"?
                              Well the reason I single you out is your are one of maybe three people on the Primal forum who has no interest in eating Primal....but beyond that let me see if I understand your philosophy correctly.

                              You do make that "micro and macro" statement......So, if I'm following you right and we are assuming a 2000 calorie diet...we can eat very nutritious foods to the tune of say 1000 calories meeting all of our micro and macro needs. Then whatever the other 1000 calories are made up of does not matter as long as we are still at our maintenance level? This is healthy. No repercussions on health since your not going above maintenance levels. There is no need to eat "clean" cause that is just a fad. Is this about correct?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                                "What am I doing wrong?"

                                "I can't lose weight no matter what I do!"

                                "I couldn't lose weight on 1,200 calories a day but now can on 3,000 calories a day!"

                                "I ate carbs and gained 5 lbs!"

                                "Calories don't matter! It's all about insulin/leptin/insert hormone here."


                                How many of these sensational, emotion-driven and completely ridiculous statements and thread titles do we see here on MDA on a daily basis? So much of what is sold in the health and fitness community is complete bullshit. People take extremist stances to play on people's emotions and capitalize on these emotions by telling people what they want to hear. The cornerstone of American society is becoming not taking responsibility for your own actions and blaming someone else. This is the mindset bloggers, gurus and authorities take advantage of. There are 10,000 different stories on this website alone where people were on 1,000 calorie a day deficits and couldn't lose weight but now eat whatever they want and lose as long as the foods are "Primal-approved."

                                In short, people hate the word "calorie." A calorie suggests that people get fat by eating too much and not exercising enough - it basically says people who are overweight are lazy and gluttonous. Yea, it's not nice, but sugar-coating isn't approved on The Primal Blueprint, so deal with it. This is the weakness in people that the so-called "gurus" exploit to take your hard-earned money. Funny how people are so resistant to personal criticism yet have no problem being taken advantage of financially.

                                Alas, this is where "context" comes in. I strongly suggest EVERYONE read this. Why? Because it's absolutely brilliant.

                                The Sensible Middle Part 1 In Defence of Calories | Core Concepts Wellness

                                I'd love to hear people's thoughts.
                                This was a terrific article. Thanks for the link, Choco.

                                I've found, after much experimentation, that if I don't log what I'm eating (for me, via LoseIt, which logs the calories and exercise, etc.), then I usually overeat -- whether primal, paleo, SAD, or what have you. For me, logging/calorie counting keeps me honest. That, combined with primal/paleo, seems to work best for me. At least for now, while I have weight/fat that I would prefer to lose. I'd like to get to a point when I can trust my body's reactions and know when I've eaten enough/if I'm really hungry/what have you, but I know I'm not there yet.

                                And now, to read the 35+ pages of comments...
                                F, 44 years old, 111.8 lbs, 4 feet 11.5 inches (yes, that half inch matters!)

                                **1st place sparring, AAU TKD regional qualifier, 2/15/15 - It's damn good to hit like a girl!**

                                **First-ever 5K race 11/28/13: 37 minutes, 18+ seconds, no stopping**

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X