I'm ****ing Sick of This (Weight Loss Topic)

1. Boards
2. GameFAQs Contests
3. I'm ****ing Sick of This (Weight Loss Topic)

User Info: C7D

C7D
3 months ago#41
Corrik posted...
It says you are 22lbs overweight, but that also is not exact due to muscle. It could be less.

Your bmr is 1870.78. This is what you burn just to be alive every day with breathing.

Your Harris Benedict Equation with estimating you at "moderate" has you at 2899.71.

This is the amount of calories you burn normally with every day life.

3500 calories = 1lb.

You need to have a 3500 calorie deficit to lose a lb. If you have a 3500 calorie surplus, you gain a pound.

You are estimating 3-5k calories a day.

Meaning you need to be burning probably 3.5-5.5k calories a day accordingly to be losing a lb a week. Or you need to cut your calorie intake lower.

Hope that helps.

38 lbs/1.5 years * 3500 Cal/lb /365 days/year is approximately 250 extra calories a day.

2900 Cal TDEE + 250 Cal extra = 3150 Cal/ day or just about what you think you have been eating. Nothing is wrong with your metabolism. You are eating too much.
Polite fiction is still fictitious even when no one is offended.

User Info: KingButz

KingButz
3 months ago#42
Re: water

You aren't drinking too much of it. All the water you drink gets eliminated through various mechanisms, minus retained water which amount is (in the long term) completely unrelated to the volume of water you are drinking.

no

User Info: OliviaTremor

OliviaTremor
3 months ago#43
EmoCombeeDancin posted...
Also calorie counting has about as much scientific merit as astrology (except astrology sometimes can sync up with results) but no one ever listens when I say this so I suggest doing some independent nutrition study on your own, and for now just stop eating nothing but sugar

I initially deleted my response to this because it was incredibly mean but I do need to call out how insanely ludicrous of a statement this is. If you provide a source I would be happy to tell you everything wrong with the methodology, conclusions, etc while providing peer reviewed journal sources stating the actual science which is quite simple.
Notyou
(edited 3 months ago)

User Info: SantaRPidgey

SantaRPidgey
3 months ago#44
Sure, Gary Taubes' Good Calories Bad Calories is the go to nutrition book everyone should be reading.

If you want an anecdotal source, you can look at board 8's weight loss topic lol
werd

User Info: azuarc

azuarc
3 months ago#45
OliviaTremor posted...
EmoCombeeDancin posted...
Also calorie counting has about as much scientific merit as astrology (except astrology sometimes can sync up with results) but no one ever listens when I say this so I suggest doing some independent nutrition study on your own, and for now just stop eating nothing but sugar

I initially deleted my response to this because it was incredibly mean but I do need to call out how insanely ludicrous of a statement this is. If you provide a source I would be happy to tell you everything wrong with the methodology, conclusions, etc while providing peer reviewed journal sources stating the actual science which is quite simple.

Calorie counting has more scientific merit than astrology, but it is severely overrated as the end-all be-all of weight loss and gain. You cannot just follow the law of conservation of energy and assume that the chemical bonds in your food has to match the chemical energy your body burns, because your body responds to the calorie intake. Someone who eats a steady 2500 per day will gain less weight than a yoyo dieter who alternates between 3000 and 2000. Cutting calories does not automatically lead to fat burn.
Video Game Music Contest 12: Now in progress!

User Info: KingButz

KingButz
3 months ago#46
The other factor is nutrition. If you fill the body with "empty" calories like refined sugar or whatever you will remain hungry even when you have met your calorie needs. The body will want more food so it can have the proper materials to stay healthy.

On the same principle, the most nutrient rich foods (such as fruits, vegetables, and lean meats) are also very satisfying(edit: reduce cravings) because they provide both energy (calories) and micronutrients (vitamins, minerals, etc.).
no
(edited 3 months ago)

User Info: Corrik

Corrik
3 months ago#47
KingButz posted...
The other factor is nutrition. If you fill the body with "empty" calories like refined sugar or whatever you will remain hungry even when you have met your calorie needs. The body will want more food so it can have the proper materials to stay healthy.

On the same principle, the most nutrient rich foods (such as fruits, vegetables, and lean meats) are also very satisfying because they provide both energy (calories) and micronutrients (vitamins, minerals, etc.).

We agree empty calories makes you hungry and want to eat more. But, if you eat just those empty calories and do not succumb to hunger, you will lose weight due to the calorie loss. It just makes it so much harder.
LoL ID = imajericho
XBL GT = Corrik

User Info: KingButz

KingButz
3 months ago#48
You will lose weight, but it won't be healthy. You can be a normal weight and also vulnerable to similar health issues caused by obesity.

Athletes call that "skinny-fat."
no

User Info: OliviaTremor

OliviaTremor
3 months ago#49
SantaRPidgey posted...
Sure, Gary Taubes' Good Calories Bad Calories is the go to nutrition book everyone should be reading.

If you want an anecdotal source, you can look at board 8's weight loss topic lol

I'm glad you provided a source that's actually primary literature. It's 640 pages so I'm not going to be able to read it all any time soon. That being said, I agree with the general principle that seems to be applied that 'not all calories are the same'. That's true. Here's an article from Science kind of elaborating on that in lay terms

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2013/02/have-we-been-miscounting-calories

The article ends, however, with the assertion that 'if you want to lose weight you have to cut back on the calories'. I see what you are saying, it can be inaccurate and I apologize for jumping on the 'what the f***' response immediately, but cutting calories is absolutely crucial to losing weight. If you go from 4000 calories a day to 2500, you will absolutely see a decrease. If you are burning more calories than you intake, you'll lose weight. But you are right, not all calories are the same.
Notyou

User Info: Corrik

Corrik
3 months ago#50
KingButz posted...
You will lose weight, but it won't be healthy. You can be a normal weight and also vulnerable to similar health issues caused by obesity.

Athletes call that "skinny-fat."

His argument was you could eat anything as long as it is healthy you will lose weight and you eat barely anything but if it is bad you will gain weight. He said calorie counting and being an effect was a hoax basically. That's entirely bs.
LoL ID = imajericho
XBL GT = Corrik
1. Boards
2. GameFAQs Contests
3. I'm ****ing Sick of This (Weight Loss Topic)