I never said you couldnt?
Care to elaborate on your last sentence with a specific example?
Sport All sugar diet
- Thread starter HarleyNinja
- Start date
Sport Fitness
I never said you couldnt?
Care to elaborate on your last sentence with a specific example?
L
Leigh P
Guest
Fo sure, I will make sure to restrict all comments to Bro motivations and rocking inspirations that aren't at all based in science of on going reseach
\m/
\m/
I never said you couldnt?
Care to elaborate on your last sentence with a specific example?
I know you never said one couldnt, I understood your type of wording, completely.
Why should an example be necessary. Its common sense that fast foods, donuts, and other items like this are in fact not necessarily healthy (LOL), but its also common sense that if one is healthy, (especially not dieting before and the body accustomed to rather high calorie intake, as an example), that if a deficit is then introduced that the body can react rather strongly to a deficit in this type of situation.
Therefore, if one were to eat at Mcdonalds, and say this person ate 1800c (and MT Line is 2800) and all of it was McDonald's fast food, this person is going to drop tissue weight over a period of time assuming the person keeps these deficits. Common dietary basics of weight loss. I am not adding in some complications that can come up with long term dieters and persons with low body fat, though the energy balance is STILL King, one has to manipulate some logistics for additional improvement in these situations, sometimes.
Best regards,
Chillen
Last edited:
Sorry for any confusion.
But i read your last statement as meaning that there are circumstances where if a person is in a defecit, over time this person (unhealthy) will still be gaining weight. Usually a vague claim is backed up by at least one example.
Buit i might have interpreted you wrong just interested
But i read your last statement as meaning that there are circumstances where if a person is in a defecit, over time this person (unhealthy) will still be gaining weight. Usually a vague claim is backed up by at least one example.
Buit i might have interpreted you wrong
just interested I make this statement because it is TRUE. This statement assumes a healthy individual. I make this statement even knowing that the body can be an extraordinary adapting-to-its-evironment-mechanic. I make this statement knowing that as body fat drops to certain levels (dependent), it can be more difficult to lose fat tissue, but one still messes with the energy balance (calorie v activity ratio) and its design adaptability when deficient in macronutrients (say manipulating macronutrients). It is the base in which all else one attempts to make optimal comes from, and this is the bottom line.
Best wishes,
Chillen
Sorry for any confusion.
But i read your last statement as meaning that there are circumstances where if a person is in a defecit, over time this person (unhealthy) will still be gaining weight. Usually a vague claim is backed up by at least one example.
Buit i might have interpreted you wrong
I never once said that. But it is commone sense that dependent the health problem with the individual, approach on diet is going to be different than one that is healthy........isnt this strictly just mere common sense? Lets say a diabetic. I think its safe to assume diet approach can be different; however, energy balance is still KING. This is splitting hairs on my original post and moves it away from its "intended purpose".
How have you been, Matt? How is your training going?
Best wishes to all!
Chillen
Last edited:
oh ok i see haha
Im not bad, still on holidays thats why im on here quite a bit. My training? in case anybody wanted to know..sara? Im no a trainy junky i work out 2/3 times a week just to keep fit. Weight training is probably one of my least favourite fields of health, doesnt really appeal to me.
Im not bad, still on holidays thats why im on here quite a bit. My training? in case anybody wanted to know..sara?
Im no a trainy junky i work out 2/3 times a week just to keep fit. Weight training is probably one of my least favourite fields of health, doesnt really appeal to me.oh ok i see haha
Im not bad, still on holidays thats why im on here quite a bit. My training? in case anybody wanted to know..sara?
I have a genuine concern for the forum members, and I never really read anything on your diet approach and training (that I can currently remember).
Sounds as if you are happy and fit with what you are doing then. Wish you the best in what you are doing.
Was does staying fit mean to you and your goals?
Good to hear.
Diet wise - Im tall young and have a fast metabolism (some say i look like b. pitt, havnt had that mentioned for a long time though lol). I can eat anything and not get fat therefore i guess my goals are long term. Im a health conciouscess person and continually continue to improve my diet.
Weights - like i said 2 to 4 times a week, just about an hours worth at home nothing major. When im back at uni obviously less time for it.
Staying fit means obtaining my best possible health, with optimal functioning of the body.
Diet wise - Im tall young and have a fast metabolism (some say i look like b. pitt, havnt had that mentioned for a long time though lol). I can eat anything and not get fat therefore i guess my goals are long term. Im a health conciouscess person and continually continue to improve my diet.
Weights - like i said 2 to 4 times a week, just about an hours worth at home nothing major. When im back at uni obviously less time for it.
Staying fit means obtaining my best possible health, with optimal functioning of the body.
What I have highlighted is the wrong statement to make considering the direction the subject matter of the thread
You want a lean, mean, and optimal functioning machine! GREAT! Just fantastic!
ROCK ON, my friend!
Chillen
Last edited:
wanker!
Why do act that way towards Chillen? All he is doing is offering advice and expertise, there was no need for you to say that. He was just saying calorie deficit=tissue loss, just as eating your bmp will cause you to neither gain nor lose weight, no matter what the food is
Calories in vs calories out is not an absolute science. For example, if today I ate nothing, ran 5 miles, did weight lifts, etc I would probably burn more than 3000 calories. Will I lose any weight today? No. You body doesn't work like that. It isn't going to suddenly start using all the resources within - hence losing weight - when it doesn't have a short run supply of food. If it was this simple, our cave brothers and sisters would have died and probably half of our population wouldn't exist. The fact remains, our ancestors probably didn't find food as quickly as one can today; your body begins to utilize the food already given. History proven one thing, most people die from lack of water than lack of food; that is why the connection between food and weight has never been fully established until recent times.
After much thought, I figured weight management has more to do with your diet over time, and not your diet in a finite timeframe. For example, if I were to eat only donuts everyday, I would indeed lose weight due to the lack of calories in those food. But after that timeframe, when I finally eat my regular food, I would gain the weight back. Therefore, I do not think of it as a "calories in vs calories out" rule simply because I would quickly regain the weight. What’s more important is the calories input within the timeframe afterwards that matters. If I were to fill up a bucket with water halfway today, and tomorrow I filled the rest with water, does it mean the bucket is still half full?
You calories input over an extended period is what matters, not the short run. Too many different factors come into play - genetics, body composition, energy use - when you just look at "calories in vs calories out." A healthy individual can get away with over eating in a day or two. However, if a healthy person ate donuts only for the next year, weight gain would be a huge possibility even though the calories input is not there. Again, it has more to do with diet over time, and not to do with diet on the short run. Eating one donut in the morning, while the rest of the day has “healthy” food isn't going to cause weight gain; your body burns the bad stuff in donuts, while the good stuff from the "healthy" food keeps your body in full function. But eating donuts all day, everyday, will increase the possibility of weight gain (depending on your body composition, genetics, age, etc) as well as the possibility of other health problems even though the calories is less - over time, you body thinks that food is the only available food so it begins to adjust and utilize the donuts and over time, your body is adjusted for donut usage and therefore, the system is now able to correctly break down and store material - ie. fat, muscle, etc - hence weight gain can be achieved.
After much thought, I figured weight management has more to do with your diet over time, and not your diet in a finite timeframe. For example, if I were to eat only donuts everyday, I would indeed lose weight due to the lack of calories in those food. But after that timeframe, when I finally eat my regular food, I would gain the weight back. Therefore, I do not think of it as a "calories in vs calories out" rule simply because I would quickly regain the weight. What’s more important is the calories input within the timeframe afterwards that matters. If I were to fill up a bucket with water halfway today, and tomorrow I filled the rest with water, does it mean the bucket is still half full?
You calories input over an extended period is what matters, not the short run. Too many different factors come into play - genetics, body composition, energy use - when you just look at "calories in vs calories out." A healthy individual can get away with over eating in a day or two. However, if a healthy person ate donuts only for the next year, weight gain would be a huge possibility even though the calories input is not there. Again, it has more to do with diet over time, and not to do with diet on the short run. Eating one donut in the morning, while the rest of the day has “healthy” food isn't going to cause weight gain; your body burns the bad stuff in donuts, while the good stuff from the "healthy" food keeps your body in full function. But eating donuts all day, everyday, will increase the possibility of weight gain (depending on your body composition, genetics, age, etc) as well as the possibility of other health problems even though the calories is less - over time, you body thinks that food is the only available food so it begins to adjust and utilize the donuts and over time, your body is adjusted for donut usage and therefore, the system is now able to correctly break down and store material - ie. fat, muscle, etc - hence weight gain can be achieved.
Last edited:
Because thats just how things work around here
Sure the post may have gone off the main topic at hand a little, but it was informative and very relevant to the subject matter.
And I would be willing to accept when Chillen, or anyone else for that matter, is wrong/off topic. I just don't think this was one of those situations.
Because thats just how things work around here
Sure the post may have gone off the main topic at hand a little, but it was informative and very relevant to the subject matter.
And I would be willing to accept when Chillen, or anyone else for that matter, is wrong/off topic. I just don't think this was one of those situations.
It wasnt. Its all good though. Persons are entitled to their own personal perceptions. I accept this as a fact of life.
How is going Patriotplayer! Sup? How is life treating you?
How is diet and fitness life treating you?
Chillen
Hoss
1
Let's step back and look at this. Everyone is so caught up with the calories in = calories out thing. REALIZE you have calories stored in all areas of your body, anything that took an anabolic process to make, TOOK IN & STORED calories. Including, but not limited to, your fat and muscle. So while you're taking in solely carbohydrates and simple sugars your body could very easily breakdown some muscle (always happening) and not rebuild it because of the 0 protein intake.
I hear the crowd now.. 'Why would your body break down muscle when it's getting energy from sugar?!?!' Your body doesn't only breakdown muscle for energy, your body needs protein. Just to pull a factoid out of my bum, your body uses 4g of protein DAILY solely to make the IgA antibody which is secreted!! That means you never get it back, and since you're not taking any in, guess where it comes from? Tah dah, revelation. And IgA isn't the only antibody, much less the only need for protein.
Now let's explain the main point, by catabolizing the bonds in the muscle to make simple aminoacids for the many things (ie. Iga) you're letting off energy (most heat into environment, but some NADH/ATP/FADH2/NADPH). So you're losing weight in muscle to get the aminoacids and you end up with extra energy. Extra energy normally comes from extra calories, but obviously isn't exclusive.
I hear the crowd now.. 'Why would your body break down muscle when it's getting energy from sugar?!?!' Your body doesn't only breakdown muscle for energy, your body needs protein. Just to pull a factoid out of my bum, your body uses 4g of protein DAILY solely to make the IgA antibody which is secreted!! That means you never get it back, and since you're not taking any in, guess where it comes from? Tah dah, revelation. And IgA isn't the only antibody, much less the only need for protein.
Now let's explain the main point, by catabolizing the bonds in the muscle to make simple aminoacids for the many things (ie. Iga) you're letting off energy (most heat into environment, but some NADH/ATP/FADH2/NADPH). So you're losing weight in muscle to get the aminoacids and you end up with extra energy. Extra energy normally comes from extra calories, but obviously isn't exclusive.
Oh Damn I get so turned-on & excited when Mreik talks technical!!!! :luxlove:
But seriously, that is some darn good schtuff to read & now understand!!!! Thanks! It's all so fascinating.
Could you please evaluate the concept of "Fat burns in a carbohyrate flame"....the notion being that you will burn more fat during your excercise if you consume a bit of carbs before/during the exercise (more calories from fat burned then if you had not eaten any carbs prior/during). Is there any validity to this....or is it another myth or misinterpretted concept? Thanks!
Oh, and being that this is the COL, ROCK ON!
But seriously, that is some darn good schtuff to read & now understand!!!! Thanks! It's all so fascinating.
Could you please evaluate the concept of "Fat burns in a carbohyrate flame"....the notion being that you will burn more fat during your excercise if you consume a bit of carbs before/during the exercise (more calories from fat burned then if you had not eaten any carbs prior/during). Is there any validity to this....or is it another myth or misinterpretted concept? Thanks!
Oh, and being that this is the COL, ROCK ON!