Your wife is the exception. MOST people decide what to eat and if/when to workout, myself included. They don't have the same problems as she does and have too many calories while being lazy. I try to counter my compulsive eating by buying healthy food that I have no choice to snack on.
Your wife is the exception. MOST people decide what to eat and if/when to workout, myself included. They don't have the same problems as she does and have too many calories while being lazy. I try to counter my compulsive eating by buying healthy food that I have no choice to snack on.
InflatableBuddha
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2007
- 7,416
- 1
- 0
JTsyo
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2007
- 12,038
- 1,135
- 126
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
It's simple math.
Calories consumed - calories burned = weight gain (or loss)
You CANNOT gain weight without consuming more calories than your body metabolizes. That would be a scientific impossibility.
It is completely cumulative however. Days, weeks, months, years -- your body doesn't care.
The rule of thumb is that 3600 surplus calories results in 1 pound of weight gain. So if you were to eat 100 calories more each day than your body metabolizes, then you'll gain 10 pounds in a year.
Most people tend to eat at a small surplus rate, or eat the same amount even as they get older, and that's why you'll hear some middle-aged-to-older people say that it is "inevitable" that you will gain 1 pound each year as you get older. Not so. What is "inevitable" is that your metabolism gradually slows as you get older, so you will see some gradual weight gain IF you continue to consume calories at the same rate over the years.
Quick disclaimer though: not all foods are equal. Your body is nowhere near 100% efficient at metabolizing calories consumed, and it is much less efficient at some foods (like veggies) than others (like carbs).
Calories consumed - calories burned = weight gain (or loss)
You CANNOT gain weight without consuming more calories than your body metabolizes. That would be a scientific impossibility.
It is completely cumulative however. Days, weeks, months, years -- your body doesn't care.
The rule of thumb is that 3600 surplus calories results in 1 pound of weight gain. So if you were to eat 100 calories more each day than your body metabolizes, then you'll gain 10 pounds in a year.
Most people tend to eat at a small surplus rate, or eat the same amount even as they get older, and that's why you'll hear some middle-aged-to-older people say that it is "inevitable" that you will gain 1 pound each year as you get older. Not so. What is "inevitable" is that your metabolism gradually slows as you get older, so you will see some gradual weight gain IF you continue to consume calories at the same rate over the years.
Quick disclaimer though: not all foods are equal. Your body is nowhere near 100% efficient at metabolizing calories consumed, and it is much less efficient at some foods (like veggies) than others (like carbs).
TallBill
Lifer
- Apr 29, 2001
- 46,017
- 62
- 91
Uhh.. we're all curious as to how the weight-gain occurs. Mass doesn't just appear out of thin air and 1g sized pills. Nobody is doubting Electric Amish, but instead curious as to where the weight gain comes from. You cant gain muscle or fat without more calories entering the body then the body is using.
InflatableBuddha
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2007
- 7,416
- 1
- 0
I see. LOL, I thought you guys were calling bullshit for a minute there. I guess the medications cause a chemical reaction, but I'm not a chemist so I wouldn't know the specifics.
That's what we don't understand. She drinks a lot of water, but some days she doesn't even get out of bed so exercise is a minimum.
Most of her nutrition comes in the form of sugars/sweets because they are easier on her stomach.
I believe that her body is just in starvation mode and is stock-piling energy.
Everybody (doctors especially) thinks she eats tons, but I rarely ever see her eat more than 1/4 of ANY meal we sit down too, assuming she's actually eating a "meal" and not just having a granola bar.
Sorry to say but the statement is wrong.
If being fat is a choice then no one(maybe a few) should be fat. Because who would want to choose it? Being fat is for the most part a unfortunate result to an unhealthy lifestyle(of which that lifestyle was the actual choice).
If being fat is a choice then no one(maybe a few) should be fat. Because who would want to choose it? Being fat is for the most part a unfortunate result to an unhealthy lifestyle(of which that lifestyle was the actual choice).
This is definitely true. My buddy only used the BLACK population of houston as the example because the disparity in weight between similarly (almost exact?) genetic people is immense. It wasn't meant to be racially charged.
You raise an interesting point. However, something like 25% of america is obese (or maybe its obese or overweight, I dont remember). Something like only 9% of america lives below "the poverty line." And I challenge even then that there are plenty of rich, obese people, and plenty of below the poverty line thin people.
Indeed, processed high calorie food is cheaper and more filling, but what you put in your mouth (unless you're a bum) is always a choice, and I'd say at most 5% of the US population can't make that choice.
Whether its genetic as my buddy pointed out, is still up for debate.
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
I don't think anyone would argue that being fat is a conscious choice. But if you choose to live an unhealthy lifestyle that involves overeating and lack of exercise, then becoming fat is a clear consequence of that choice.
Sugars and refined flours are rapidly and efficiently consumed by the body. The best analogy would be a fire. If you add paper to a fire, it will burn hot, bright, and quickly. And you'll have to keep adding paper all the time.
A lot of the obesity problems in America stem from the low fat craze of the 90s. Not all, of course, as you can't get fat in the first place without an overabundance of food to eat, but the idea that you could eat as much as you want as long as it was low in fat was the nutritional mistake of the century. Especially as the usual substitute for fat in those "low fat" foods was simple carbs.
Sure, 100 years ago. These days the economy is such that even many poor people (and nations) can "afford" to be fat.
That doesn't mean that we should be.
Plus, look at Luxembourg, Switzerland, etc...not nearly as fat, and they're even wealthier.
Just because it's a choice doesn't mean that you can roll out of bed one day, decide not to be fat, and poof! All the pounds fall off.
It's a choice, all right, but it's a choice that involves many aspects of your life. You have to choose to eat unhealthy food. You have to choose to eat a lot of it. You have to choose not to budget any time for exercise. You have to choose to continue on this path even while you're gaining weight and feeling like crap.
It's easier for some people than others, and some people have a much more difficult time and require much more willpower to keep their weight in check, but it's still a choice for the vast majority of people. Just because it's a difficult choice doesn't make it beyond one's control.
The deterministic mindset of so many people these days frightens me. Free choice is scary, yes, but it's also wildly powerful. But it seems that some people simply don't understand the meaning of the word "choice", as if every "choice" is a light switch which we can flip on and off at our leisure. Some choices are HARD, and you have to slog through them day in and day out. I guess it's easier to just blame external factors and claim that we have no say in what happens to us.
/edit: And I should add that there are some people for which it is NOT a choice. It's a sliding scale as to how hard it is for a given individual to stay healthy--some people can do it effortlessly, some people require enormous willpower to stay healthy (and as such, many simply don't bother), and for some the effort is simply beyond all human capabilities. But these are a tiny minority of cases.
purplehippo
Elite Member
- Oct 22, 2000
- 45,626
- 12
- 81
Why take it to such extreme? Just look at Europe vs. the U.S. A lot of fatties here; obsessed with super sizing, eating a lot = considered manly, larger portions in general, lots of fatty food, etc.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter