Weight Loss
Moderators: Mollybygolly, coach_k, spoiled_candy, devilish_patsy, nycgirl


Debunking Conventional Wisdom's calories in equals calories out?


Quote  |  Reply

I'm hoping that mainsteam is finally realizing that WHAT we eat is more important than HOW MUCH we eat when it comes to weight management and health.

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/ancient-wisdom -confirmed-by-modern-science/#more-30376

This is not a "fad" diet or "quick fix".  Eating healthy "real" food is the basis for primal/paleo eating. When you do this, your diet is naturally lower in carbs and healthier for your body.  Eating for health is not "cutting out food groups" or "depriving yourself" of anything except metabolic syndrome and a whole host of medical issues down the road.

 

18 Replies (last)

I disagree completely.

 

How much you eat is as important as what you eat.

Wait, are you decrying "cutting out food groups" and then promoting the Paleo diet?  That might be the biggest contradiction I've heard on this board.

For the record, I'm not opposed to cutting out certain foods or even food groups.  White carbs and I do not get along, for instance.  The best thing I ever did was say goodbye to white flour.  But Paleo is exactly the kind of highly limiting diet many people can't sustain for long periods.  And honestly, the amount you eat IS important.  Go ahead - eat a pound of grass-fed beef and see if your body doesn't protest.

Original Post by armandounc:

I disagree completely.

 

How much you eat is as important as what you eat.

This is how I feel too. I admit I am guilty of sometimes eating at a deficit with bad foods or maintenance/surplus of good foods (and could get some type of results, not always favorable (losing more weight than inches or maintaining instead of losing)). Best results for me is optimal 'amount' (at a deficit) and 'type' (healthier) of foods (losing weight at a decent 'weight loss:inch loss' ratio).

Though I do agree with the statement: Eating for health is not "cutting out food groups"  or "depriving yourself". And that if one eats healthier they could probably without calorie counting maintain just as well as someone calorie counting to maintain but eat less healthily. In terms of weight loss though again I think both are key for optimal weight loss but I think this article is leaning more towards maintaining and not as much for weight loss.

My p's and q's :)

No dairy, no legumes, no potatoes, no grains, no smashley23.  I could do w/o grains, and probably w/o legumes, but no more milk, or greek yogurt, or fries.  

Depending on your body's reactions, dairy is a personal choice.  Potatoes are a starchy tuber and totally healthy as well, maybe more limited to active days.  Fries would be ok IF they weren't cooked in vegetable oil, which is bad for your health anyway.  No, I am not saying go out and eat unlimited amounts of these foods, I am saying that it's not ONLY cals in, cals out for a lot of people when it comes to weight management.  HOW your body deals with nutrients makes a big difference from person to person and considering that over 95% of people regain weight they lost, me included in the past, I would say Conventional Wisdom's "eat less, move more" does not work.

armandounc- you obviously can eat as many carbs as you want with your active livestyle and "get away" with it.  The majority of people that struggle with their weight, can't.

I knew when I posted this I would get many differing opinions but if only a few people see something here that might work for them when nothing else has, it's worth it to get the word out.  I have no problem giving up grains, legumes and most dairy.   I get plenty of fiber, vitamins and minerals from fruits and vegetable so really the only thing I am "cutting out" are grains/legumes and I dont' "need" them for health anyway.

'Food for thought' for sure though :)

Original Post by seanchaigirl:

Wait, are you decrying "cutting out food groups" and then promoting the Paleo diet?  That might be the biggest contradiction I've heard on this board.

No, I said if eating for health means not eating grains, I don't consider that a deprivation or cutting out a food group that isn't necessary anyway.

How much have you really researched this way of eating?  Frankly I'm more satisfied with my meals, don't crave sugar, actually eat less overall than when I did high carb, low fat.  I feel better, my health is better as shown by my bloodwork then it ever was when I ate high carb, low fat.

Original Post by tina0367:

Depending on your body's reactions, dairy is a personal choice.  Potatoes are a starchy tuber and totally healthy as well, maybe more limited to active days.  Fries would be ok IF they weren't cooked in vegetable oil, which is bad for your health anyway.  No, I am not saying go out and eat unlimited amounts of these foods, I am saying that it's not ONLY cals in, cals out for a lot of people when it comes to weight management.  HOW your body deals with nutrients makes a big difference from person to person and considering that over 95% of people regain weight they lost, me included in the past, I would say Conventional Wisdom's "eat less, move more" does not work.

armandounc- you obviously can eat as many carbs as you want with your active livestyle and "get away" with it.  The majority of people that struggle with their weight, can't.

I knew when I posted this I would get many differing opinions but if only a few people see something here that might work for them when nothing else has, it's worth it to get the word out.  I have no problem giving up grains, legumes and most dairy.   I get plenty of fiber, vitamins and minerals from fruits and vegetable so really the only thing I am "cutting out" are grains/legumes and I dont' "need" them for health anyway.

Quick question about this (if you know), I gained due to medication mostly and/or extenuating circumstances. Besides that I am have usually been about mid healthy BMI. Is that statement universal or to those who have long term lived at their gained weight?  

Original Post by hollowness:

Original Post by tina0367:

Depending on your body's reactions, dairy is a personal choice.  Potatoes are a starchy tuber and totally healthy as well, maybe more limited to active days.  Fries would be ok IF they weren't cooked in vegetable oil, which is bad for your health anyway.  No, I am not saying go out and eat unlimited amounts of these foods, I am saying that it's not ONLY cals in, cals out for a lot of people when it comes to weight management.  HOW your body deals with nutrients makes a big difference from person to person and considering that over 95% of people regain weight they lost, me included in the past, I would say Conventional Wisdom's "eat less, move more" does not work.

armandounc- you obviously can eat as many carbs as you want with your active livestyle and "get away" with it.  The majority of people that struggle with their weight, can't.

I knew when I posted this I would get many differing opinions but if only a few people see something here that might work for them when nothing else has, it's worth it to get the word out.  I have no problem giving up grains, legumes and most dairy.   I get plenty of fiber, vitamins and minerals from fruits and vegetable so really the only thing I am "cutting out" are grains/legumes and I dont' "need" them for health anyway.

Quick question about this (if you know), I gained due to medication mostly and/or extenuating circumstances. Besides that I am have usually been about mid healthy BMI. Is that statement universal or to those who have long term lived at their gained weight?  

I would say that if you gained weight due to medication and didn't have that much trouble returning to your "natural weight" that this may not apply to you.  Time may tell depending on how weight maintenance goes when you get there. Every person is different and must find what works for them.

I eat paleo and I disagree.

If I ate how ever much I wanted in paleo foods, I would still gain.

 

So yah no.

Original Post by tina0367:

I would say that if you gained weight due to medication and didn't have that much trouble returning to your "natural weight" that this may not apply to you.  Time may tell depending on how weight maintenance goes when you get there. Every person is different and must find what works for them.

Yeah, I am curious cause in the end time will  ;only tell. And it is something I worry about and plan to be wary on. I was curious on your opinion too, so thanks :)

Original Post by zombers:

I eat paleo and I disagree.

If I ate how ever much I wanted in paleo foods, I would still gain.

 

So yah no.

My point is that people don't pay enough attention to WHAT they are eating.  They are told "just eat less than you burn" no matter what junk it is, and you will lose weight.  Things in the human body are not so simple and the nutrients we get from our food play a key role in our health and how our body deals with that energy.

If you read my statement closely, it says that "what is more important than how much", I didn't say "how much" was irrelevant.  They recently did a study that showed that people that eat a lower carb diet can maintain their weight loss on up to 300 more cals per day.  This is pretty significant over time when you are talking weight maintenance after a loss, the hardest part.

What you eat is important, however people become overweight by eating too much, regardless of what they ate.  Most overweight people eat crap.  If people aren't paying attention to how much they are eating, they probably aren't paying to how much they eat either.

When people decide to lose weight, the most important thing is to get them to eat less.  As time goes on, it's important to improve the quality of the food, but if people try to change too much too fast, they will likely fail.  Retraining people takes a while.  

thhq
Jul 19 2012 21:28
Member posts
Send message
#14  
Quote  |  Reply
Ho hum. More conventional BS from the apple guy.

People have been linking that site from calorie count for years. Do the conventional thing. Buy his book (PHD?) and his fish oil.

Just don't have any illusions about what he's doing being unconventional. Same old boring cr#p about eating a buttload of fat and one apple a day.

When you get fat, sick and nearly dead because you accidentally ate two apples come back here. Eating skew pattern diets like his wrecks your gut flora to eat a normal omnivore's diet.

tina - It may come as a surprise to the majority of Americans (and, arguably, people world-wide), but humans, as all other animals, are meant to be active.

If people didn't sit on their ass all day the world would be a much healthier place. There seems to be a world-wide aversion to exercise. People will do anything to not exercise. Spend money on pills, supplements, DVDs, diets, etc. The list goes on.

Why can't people just be active? Except for very few animals (koalas come to mind), the majority are extremely active. Heck, if I'm not mistaken, marine animals don't ever stop moving. Dolphins shut off one hemisphere of their brain at a time to "sleep"

I spent years eating garbage. I would eat 6,000 calories worth of greasy, nasty food. I'd go to McDonald's and order 6 burgers. But I also burned a ton of calories - so I got away with it.

Granted, not everyone has to exercise for 5 hours a day; but people just need to stop being so freaking lazy. Humans are not meant to sit around all day. It's a good thing more and more studies are coming out that show just how bad sitting around is for the body.

If you want to stop worrying about what you eat for the sake of your weight just up your activity.

Even better - if you're active enough you can eat whatever you and and however much of it you want.

It gets to the point where eating so much is a hassle. It gets expensive and time consuming. I spent 2x as much on money than most people I know. But I would never want to be as lazy as them.

 

Original Post by tina0367:

Original Post by zombers:

I eat paleo and I disagree.

If I ate how ever much I wanted in paleo foods, I would still gain.

 

So yah no.

My point is that people don't pay enough attention to WHAT they are eating.  They are told "just eat less than you burn" no matter what junk it is, and you will lose weight.  Things in the human body are not so simple and the nutrients we get from our food play a key role in our health and how our body deals with that energy.

If you read my statement closely, it says that "what is more important than how much", I didn't say "how much" was irrelevant.  They recently did a study that showed that people that eat a lower carb diet can maintain their weight loss on up to 300 more cals per day.  This is pretty significant over time when you are talking weight maintenance after a loss, the hardest part.

Citation please. What study? 

Do you mean this study? http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?arti cleid=1199154

If so, the low-carb diet had a total energy expenditure that was about 150 (not 300) calories a day higher than the low glycemic index group.

But, this study has some real limitations. See these 2 links for more info.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/10/health/nutr ition/q-and-a-are-high-protein-low-carb-diets -effective.html?_r=2

http://countdowntofitandfabulous.blogspot.com /2012/06/jama-paper.html

The authors compare 3 diets: low-carb, low-fat and low-glycemic index. But, conclude that the low glycemic index diet is the best.

"The low–glycemic index diet appears to have qualitatively similar, although smaller, metabolic benefits to the very low-carbohydrate diet, possibly without the deleterious effects on physiological stress and chronic inflammation. These findings suggest that a strategy to reduce glycemic load rather than dietary fat may be advantageous for weight-loss maintenance and cardiovascular disease prevention." 

With that being said. I agree that what you eat is as important as how much. What you eat has major health ramifications, and eating junk can leave you hungry and likely to overeat.

 

thhq
Jul 19 2012 23:00
Member posts
Send message
#17  
Quote  |  Reply

armandounc don't forget about sloths.

All of the paleo diet's food avoidance is so much hypocrisy unless it's accompanied by paleo behavior.  Human life is supposed to be a continual search for something to digest, not a trip down a Las Vegas-style meat buffet, with fish oil on the dessert table.

I'm not going to touch the Paleo stuff because people already have, but I will respond to your other comment.

100% of the reason I am overweight is portions. 

I've been eating healthy for years.  Fruits, vegetables, natural whole grains.  I've been making sure that I don't put processed crap into my body for a very long time.  And yet still, I've always been mildly overweight (BMI of 27).  When I started calorie count a month ago I didn't change a damn thing about what I ate, all I changed was how much.   I'm losing a pound a week. 

 

18 Replies
Advertisement
Advertisement
Allergy Remedies
Is It Possible to Go Natural?
The side effects of allergy medications keep some people from using them. Natural remedies can be a great alternative, but some are more effective than others.