Modern nutrition: Forget all you ever knew about diets

[loic2003]

If calories out (used) > calories in -> person loses weight.

**IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE **

Nothing to do with food groups or whatever, it's about calories. Yes, some foods make you feel less full (eg. proteins: Atkins diet) so you feel like eating less, but it's still about calories. It's not your glands/genetics/some other bullsh!t excuse: you're a tubby fvcker because you eat too much and drink sugar water (cola) all day, but you don't move your fat ass at all therefore your body piles on the pounds.

/threads about diets
/threads about people asking about losing weight

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: loic2003
If calories out (used) > calories in -> person loses weight.

**IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE **

Actually rocket science would say:

If Mass out > Mass in -> person loses weight.

Mass balance, not energy balance, is what is important dear loic2003.

 

[skace]

If that was true, nutritionalists wouldn't have jobs. EAT LESS LAWL.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: Tick
Someone says this every 6 months. It's never been proven.

Actually, a new study was just released yesterday or the day before disproving low-fat diets are of much help. I'll see if I can't find the article.

 

[mercanucaribe]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: loic2003
If calories out (used) > calories in -> person loses weight.

**IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE **

Actually rocket science would say:

If Mass out > Mass in -> person loses weight.

Mass balance, not energy balance, is what is important dear loic2003.

Did you just take high school physics or something? The unused portion of food is lost to poop, and what we use ends up leaving through respiration.

 

[EmperorIQ]

Originally posted by: CadetLee
I need to eat more..was told 3500-4000 calories a day.

But I'm not average. Meh. 😛

there was a point in my life where i wanted to gain a lot of muscle, so that i can eat 5000 calories a day just to maintain it. All that food must be awesome! Then i realized that it'll take me 3-5 years to build up to that point. so i stick with 3000 - 3500 now.

 

[mercanucaribe]

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe

Originally posted by: Hacp
3 apples are better than one medium order of fries or a big mac.

Apples have very little nutritional value.

http://nutritiondata.com/facts-B00001-01c20TB.html

The vitamins and minerals are all about 0-3%, except for vitamin C, which is still only 10%.

:roll:

It's still better for you than just about any processed or packaged food. Also, realize there's more to food than vitamins and minerals. Try scrolling down on the page.

Note that it doesen't say what type of apple. Each breed is different(granny smith, golden delicious, etc).

Yeah, there's carbohydrates, which apples have a lot of... and air. Apples are mostly air for goodness sake.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
Did you just take high school physics or something? The unused portion of food is lost to poop, and what we use ends up leaving through respiration.

LOL!

I'm sure your intestines and the bacteria in them know exactly how much work you will do in the next day, so that they can exactly match the amount of food to digest to what you will be doing. Because, sure, they know how much poop to produce. 😉

It really happens in the opposite order. You digest the food, then you use it. The unused food doesn't go back into the poop.

 

[EmperorIQ]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
Want to lose weight.........try this diet out (very cheap too):

Breakfast: Bowl of cereal, banana or apple, and protein shake
Brunch: oats, chicken, veggies
Lunch: Turkey Sandwich on wheat bread (NO MAYO), 1 carrot, 1 apple
Lunner: ??? flax seed oil, brown rice, veggies, chicken
Dinner: Piece of chicken(preferably grilled), brown some rice, and steamed veggies.

Don't snack at all during the day, drink plenty of water, and exercise at least a few times a week.

fixed! Of course, the size of your meats depends on your current work out routine, the type of work out for that day, etc.

 

[JohnCU]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: loic2003
If calories out (used) > calories in -> person loses weight.

**IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE **

Actually rocket science would say:

If Mass out > Mass in -> person loses weight.

Mass balance, not energy balance, is what is important dear loic2003.

it's about the calorie density of foods, not the mass. a banana weighs more than an oreo, but has a ton less calories.

 

[torpid]

Portion control is more or less proven to help lose weight in terms of helping control appetite. The body takes something like 20 minutes to "notice" that it is full. Eating smaller portions helps the body catch up.

Apples are good because of the fiber content, which increases the feeling of fullness. But they may have a high glycemic index compared to pears or melons.

Yes, calories in and calories out and all that. But if you still feel hungry all the time then you can do things to help with that part of it.

 

[ggnl]

Originally posted by: loic2003
If calories out (used) > calories in -> person loses weight.

**IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE **

Nothing to do with food groups or whatever, it's about calories. Yes, some foods make you feel less full (eg. proteins: Atkins diet) so you feel like eating less, but it's still about calories. It's not your glands/genetics/some other bullsh!t excuse: you're a tubby fvcker because you eat too much and drink sugar water (cola) all day, but you don't move your fat ass at all therefore your body piles on the pounds.

/threads about diets
/threads about people asking about losing weight

It's a little more complicated than that. You're not taking in to accout factors such as high glycemic index foods that cause raised blood insulin levels than cause your body to covert excess glucose to fat.

Also, weight loss (or maintenance) isn't the the only goal of keeping a healthy diet. There are other factors such as cholesterol levels or blood pressure that are heavily influenced by diet.

You make it sound like I could simply eat 2,000 calories worth of potato chips a day and still lose weight as long as I exercise.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: JohnCU
it's about the calorie density of foods, not the mass. a banana weighs more than an oreo, but has a ton less calories.

A banana has far more water weight, which just gets pissed out. So, again, mass in - mass out wins (the banana is better to eat than a handfull of oreos). In a way, we are saying the same thing (digestible mass has calories, thus eating less digestible mass means eating less calories). Just psycologically and scientifically, your method is horribly wrong.