Why does cheese halt weight loss/make one gain but Whey and yogurt do not? page 2

[Graycat]

I have heard cheese causes constipation for some.

I agree, it's about it being calorie dense and too easy to overeat. Kindof like nuts.

[ChocoTaco369]

Hey Choco dude. I pour fat on my breakfast every morning, a 1/4C full, and it doesn't make me gain weight. When I don't do this, I crave food all day long, and *then* I gain weight.

Then you simply have a total daily energy expenditure greater than the amount of calories you are eating with the added fat, and not doing so makes you overeat other things of high caloric density/lower satiety. When you don't "pour fat" on your breakfast every morning, you consume more calories. The fat is clearly having a high satiety effect on you.

Calories aren't the whole story.

For overall health, wellness, and body composition quality of calories mean the most. For weight loss, only calories matter. Quality is basically useless. A 1,000 calorie surplus of steak and eggs will have the same effect on weight as 1,000 calories of pizza and ice cream. Though the steak and eggs may yield a different muscle:fat ratio. That's where quality matters, but weight will remain the same.

[Leida]

I made a pretty good paneer cheese last week because I had 2L of skim organic milk about to go bad. I loved it. I am weird though, most people probably would find it very bland. But the texture was cheese, and flavor grew on me. Perfect with green apple.

[MamaGrok]

I made paneer with my raw milk once. Delicious.

Then you simply have a total daily energy expenditure greater than the amount of calories you are eating with the added fat, and not doing so makes you overeat other things of high caloric density/lower satiety. When you don't "pour fat" on your breakfast every morning, you consume more calories. The fat is clearly having a high satiety effect on you.

Yes, dear, that's quite what I said.

For overall health, wellness, and body composition quality of calories mean the most. For weight loss, only calories matter. Quality is basically useless. A 1,000 calorie surplus of steak and eggs will have the same effect on weight as 1,000 calories of pizza and ice cream. Though the steak and eggs may yield a different muscle:fat ratio. That's where quality matters, but weight will remain the same.

No, and repeating it ad nauseam will not make it so.

More fat & protein calories, even if it's more than the calories I eat without as much fat & protein, lead me to weight loss, not gain (although typically, as mentioned before, more f/p will lead me to *decrease* calories b/c of satiety; however, I have done specific experimentation with way overeating fat & protein calories and still didn't gain weight at that time). You simply are not taking into account the fact that if you body is working correctly, it reads "Ate too many calories today" as "Compel body to move more." If your body is screwed up, it reads "Ate too many calories today" as "but I'm still starving (b/c I can't read my leptin status or b/c my adiposity bacterial ratio is off or b/c my NPY is upregulated due to low Calcium absorption cofactors) so it's time to compel body to sit more, and store calories as fat."

The bottom line equation *is* calories-in, calories-out, but there are significant processes going on inside that affect that equation so that an increase in calorie intake does *not* necessarily end up with an increase in weight, nor will a decrease necessarily end up with a decrease in weight.

I'm not worried; you'll get it some day.

[Him]

could this be the start of a series of "cheese hack" threads? Eat MOAR cheese? Let's hope not. My addiction to the stuff is already bad enough!

Not by my hand.

For life reasons (work schedule, lack of time to cook, etc.) I was buying a block of cheese (about a pound), or pre-cooked sausages, or the like every day. I just went by the total package calories, aiming for 2000 kcal or so, and ate the whole package in a day. I also had some vegetables, oil, etc. but well under 1000 kcal. The cheese was good stuff, Manchego and the like. 70% fat, 30% protein, 0% carbs. I added a dish of mustard greens cooked in EVOO or a big pile of brussel sprouts at the end of the day and I figure I was OK nutritionally, given the constraints.

[Leida]

I lost my puberty fat I acquired when I was 16 yo on cheese and tomato sort of diet. We were in an expedition after earthquake, cooking was atrocious, so we ate a lot of local cheese and tomatoes. We also run around the mountains all day long and I cooked the said atrocious meals for like 2 dozen people (my job was a cook ha-ha) in a tent with no air conditioning (think +50 degrees C) and my mom watched everything that came close to my lips... but yeah, cheese, tomatoes and some weird mandarin orange jam was what we ate.

Cheese and tomatoes, mmgh.

[RichMahogany]

The bottom line equation *is* calories-in, calories-out, but there are significant processes going on inside that affect that equation so that an increase in calorie intake does *not* necessarily end up with an increase in weight, nor will a decrease necessarily end up with a decrease in weight.

I'm not worried; you'll get it some day.

This is all facty and truthous. Also a little funny.

[ChocoTaco369]

More fat & protein calories, even if it's more than the calories I eat without as much fat & protein, lead me to weight loss, not gain (although typically, as mentioned before, more f/p will lead me to *decrease* calories b/c of satiety; however, I have done specific experimentation with way overeating fat & protein calories and still didn't gain weight at that time). You simply are not taking into account the fact that if you body is working correctly, it reads "Ate too many calories today" as "Compel body to move more." If your body is screwed up, it reads "Ate too many calories today" as "but I'm still starving (b/c I can't read my leptin status or b/c my adiposity bacterial ratio is off or b/c my NPY is upregulated due to low Calcium absorption cofactors) so it's time to compel body to sit more, and store calories as fat."

The bottom line equation *is* calories-in, calories-out, but there are significant processes going on inside that affect that equation so that an increase in calorie intake does *not* necessarily end up with an increase in weight, nor will a decrease necessarily end up with a decrease in weight.

I'm not worried; you'll get it some day.

Did you read anything I posted? Or are you just trying to pick a fight for no reason? I'm curious because it's like you wrote that without reading a single line of what a wrote and you're just trying to derail this thread.

What I said is that CICO is all that matters for weight loss, but if you aren't tracking calories and want to lose the most weight, you need to eat the foods that keep you fullest on the least amount of calories. That may be fat and protein for you.

So, again, why are you yelling?

[foodiegoneprimal]

For overall health, wellness, and body composition quality of calories mean the most. For weight loss, only calories matter. Quality is basically useless. A 1,000 calories of steak and eggs will have the same effect on weight as 1,000 calories of pizza and ice cream. Though the steak and eggs may yield a different muscle:fat ratio. That's where quality matters, but weight will remain the same.

This has not proven true for me. I was eating 1200-1400 calories per day on the Mediterranean diet in the first 6mo I lost 20lbs the second 6mo I went up and down the same 2lbs. The scale was stuck and I wasnt losing inches either. After 6 weeks primal I am down 9lbs and i have been averaging 1400-1600 calories per day sometimes as much as 1850. There has been no change in my activity level either.

[j3nn]

There are many factors that influence weight gain and loss, pure fat loss is another story, which is why CICO is fundamentally true and undeniable, but the variables (hormones and genetics and lean body mass and cooked vs. raw food and grass-fed vs. grain-fed and your daily activity included) are what change your actual TDEE and absorption. So when someone argues that CICO is not true, I think they really mean the average recommended CICO for losing/maintaining does not apply to all and you need to find what your individual CICO threshold is, but it doesn't change the fact that CICO is how it works. Now, 500 calories of steak is more metabolically expensive than 500 calories of chocolate cake, but it's not the calories that have changed, it's your processing that has altered the bioavailability and energy expenditure of the same amount of calories, as well as retaining some extra water molecules with the cake carbs. We likely won't absorb every calorie from a steak, especially if it's not well-done; it will be lost in evacuation, but we will absorb most calories available from cake.