[bhakti]

Touche!  wushuliu hits another homer!

It's not calories, it's nutrition!

[wushuliu]

Touche!  wushuliu hits another homer!

It's not calories, it's nutrition!

Well Tyson and the other guys are doing the heavy lifting. They have a lot more patience than I do.

[werd]

The weight loss was a side effect of me changing my diet to try to get my heart disease under control.  Cut out the sugar and grains, basically.  I walk every day, but that's a lot less strenuous than the running I used to do. 

Basically I focused on changing WHAT I ate, not so much on "how much" I ate.  Because my goal was not weight loss, it was to get my lipids looking good.  Weight loss was just a very nice side benefit, in my case.

That's exactly what I am saying. Everyone has a different formula and that formula changes as you move forward.  You used walking and it worked. Being on the treadmill steady is good for breathing but may not work for weight loss for many. Walking can be an alternative. It worked and now you know it does.

That's all I was saying. Find the food that works in moderation and the right exercise. Everyone is different and all It takes is paying to attention to your own body.  Running sheds weight off me fast. It works really well but I can only do it so much before it starts working against me. Stop running and start heavy lifing for a change up and I get more fat off with more weight gain.

It took me years to find that out about myself. I can't drink milk either but I can eat pasta in moderation for weight loss. Milk makes me look fat at any scale weight I am at.... I love it though. My old work out buddy could drink milk by the carton and yet still keep at around 10 percent body fat. I was never under 15 percent and I could barely keep it at 20 percent only be cause of my dairy intake.

I don't want to talk about what I am at now..

[wushuliu]

In other news, truth is always stranger than fiction:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jun/25/mcdonalds-london-olympic-games-restaurant

'...healthy options including new iced fruit smoothies and new fruit drink Fruitizz...'

'Sustainable'? 'Continuing evolution of our menu'? 

[Tyson]

werd,
Hell, I used to be able to eat pasta by the plateful and dairy by the gallon and never gain any fat at all.  And I wanted to "get big", and did all sorts of crazy powerlifting to get there.  At one point I was doing 20 rep squats with close to 300lbs and deadlifting more than that.  But I just could not put on size, no matter what I did.  I had a strong metabolism.

Nowadays, I cannot do anything even remotely like that, because I have a low metabolism.  But my question is WHY?  Why did I go from a high metabolism to a low metabolism.  Most people will say it just part of getting older.  But I don't buy that, because in the old days, getting older did NOT mean getting fat.  Most of the pictures I see of my grandparent's generation does not have much in the way of fat people, young or old.  Nowadays I see obese 6 year old kids at the zoo (where my wife works part time). 

I'd say the wrong formula is this - "Eat less and move more", the correct formula should be "Avoid toxic food and move more". 

[gprro]

As to why, maybe it is aging, but here's some possible info why. Maybe mildly controversial site, but he (dr crisler) is one of the cutting edge hormone docs. I'd take away info on keeping natural resting metabolic rate as high as possible, and see some reasons why it starts dropping. Maybe some hormone tests for those that want to dig into it, and try to reverse or prolong damage. Idealy don't do the things that wreck those systems, keep stress low, good diet, low bad carbs. They mention you pretty much screw yourself early in life with the high gi diets most of us under 40 ate as kids. Look for the section elsewete on the site on restoring metabolic rates. Curious what everyone here will think about the site...
http://www.musclechatroom.com/forum/content.php?117-hormone-modulation-therapy-101

[werd]

werd,
Hell, I used to be able to eat pasta by the plateful and dairy by the gallon and never gain any fat at all.  And I wanted to "get big", and did all sorts of crazy powerlifting to get there.  At one point I was doing 20 rep squats with close to 300lbs and deadlifting more than that.  But I just could not put on size, no matter what I did.  I had a strong metabolism.

Nowadays, I cannot do anything even remotely like that, because I have a low metabolism.  But my question is WHY?  Why did I go from a high metabolism to a low metabolism.  Most people will say it just part of getting older.  But I don't buy that, because in the old days, getting older did NOT mean getting fat.  Most of the pictures I see of my grandparent's generation does not have much in the way of fat people, young or old.  Nowadays I see obese 6 year old kids at the zoo (where my wife works part time). 

I'd say the wrong formula is this - "Eat less and move more", the correct formula should be "Avoid toxic food and move more".

Your testosterone is low. Not to mention you are eating a lot of toxic food....lol.
It happens and that's just the way it is. So is mine. Liquid milk thistle is good for testosterone as it moves bile into your system digestion for better metabolism. It expensive but legal.

There is no getting around toxic chemicals in food and the reason why we need to cut out calorie intake to stop the build up. Wendy Mesley, reporter  from our CBC  (a cancer survivor herself)got the head of The Canadian Cancer Society to admit that there is nothing we can do about avoiding cancer causing toxins in our food. Short of not smoking or not living next to a melted reactor are the only things we can do to actively to stop toxins building in our body. Eating clean is over but you can eat healthier and less of it.

[geezer]

Losing weight isn't the point. The point is health. If you eat only nutritious foods and stay away from junk you'll feel good and you will be able to eat as much as you want without gaining weight, and if you're too heavy, you will automatically get down to your best weight without even trying.

At least that's what happened to me.

[John Casler]

werd,
Hell, I used to be able to eat pasta by the plateful and dairy by the gallon and never gain any fat at all.  And I wanted to "get big", and did all sorts of crazy powerlifting to get there.  At one point I was doing 20 rep squats with close to 300lbs and deadlifting more than that.  But I just could not put on size, no matter what I did.  I had a strong metabolism.

Nowadays, I cannot do anything even remotely like that, because I have a low metabolism.  But my question is WHY?  Why did I go from a high metabolism to a low metabolism.  Most people will say it just part of getting older.  But I don't buy that, because in the old days, getting older did NOT mean getting fat.  Most of the pictures I see of my grandparent's generation does not have much in the way of fat people, young or old.  Nowadays I see obese 6 year old kids at the zoo (where my wife works part time). 

I'd say the wrong formula is this - "Eat less and move more", the correct formula should be "Avoid toxic food and move more".

Been following this thread for a while and find it great that so many are looking for answers.

Tyson, most of your metabolic transition is due to natural aging factors occurring.  As you know, that doesn't mean you cannot make efforts to slow that process.  Here are some reasons why your body adjusted your metabolism.

1) As Werd said you produce less testosterone.  However that is not the "only" thing that occurs.  While producing less, you "aromatize" more into estrogen    It is this increased estrogen that give women curves, and gives us "spare tires" (metabolic syndrome) 

2) Cellular Sensitivities change and generally downregulate.  That is, the cells not only become insulin reisistant, but also resistant to Testosterone and less sensitive to other hormones and hormone products.

3) You produce less HGH which means your lean body mass will reduce so it is like putting a VW engine in a Corvette   Great mileage for every calorie, but your fuel tanks (fat cells) expand.

4) You don't sleep as well due to a reduced production of melatonin, and what sleep you do get is not as restorative as when younger causing you to age faster.

5) You are subject to "sarcopenia" which is a reduction in Muscle Fibers (especially TYPE II or what is called FAST TWITCH) which again reduces your lean body mass (which reduces your calorie burning furnace)

6) Your whole endocrine system slows and changes.  This system in addition to test, insulin, HGH and such also produces thyroid hormones, IGF-1, and all the hormones that interact to balance your immune system.  When the production and function of this system slows, you need more sleep and recovery for the same activity, yet can't sleep soundly because of the down-regulating hormones.  Your immune system is weak and inflammation is more prevalent.

This is only the tip of the iceberg, and all who are suggesting high quality and natural foods are on the better path.  All who realize that "REGULAR" exercise is the second key have it correct.  The metabolic aging issues I mentioned above will all be "improved" with the right kind, volume and intensity of physical activity.  That doesn't mean just a stroll around the block each night after work if you want to be serious about it.

The right "lifestyle" adjustments can add several decades of healthy life, but it will not occur exclusively from either performed alone.  They amplify each other when used together.

Sounds like most of you all are on that path or moving to it.

[OzarkTom]

Losing weight isn't the point. The point is health. If you eat only nutritious foods and stay away from junk you'll feel good and you will be able to eat as much as you want without gaining weight, and if you're too heavy, you will automatically get down to your best weight without even trying.

At least that's what happened to me.

Geezer is right, eat healthy and you will never get overweight.

The 122 year old French woman, Mme Jeanne Calment, said her secret to a long life were walks and never eating any junk food. That was on top that she had been a smoker since an ealy age.

For those that believe that eating junk food in moderation is OK, is just in denial. The junk food will lead to an early death. If I had this easy internet info 30 years ago, I would have never became diabetic. Now that I am on a high fat, low carb diet, my diabetes never gives me any problems.

[DaveC113]

Geezer is right, eat healthy and you will never get overweight.

Many people still need to regulate their portion sizes regardless of whether it is "healthy" or not. You can still get fat by eating more calories than you use.

[OzarkTom]

Many people still need to regulate their portion sizes regardless of whether it is "healthy" or not. You can still get fat by eating more calories than you use.

Read the books "Good Calories, Bad Calories" by Gary Taubes and "Neanderthin" by Ray Audette. You willl find out that that is just a myth.

Gary Taubes also did this aticle for New York Times, "what if it is all a big fat lie".

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/07/magazine/what-if-it-s-all-been-a-big-fat-lie.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

[2bigears]

    good Lord we have grown food crazy....  CALORIES IN = CALORIES OUT ....
    If that's not simple enough for you ,, read more books.. the human body was meant for feast or famine. it's a perfect storage device....   things do go wrong of course,but eat proper and not too much,walk every day or the likes and you should stay healthy.....   everything in balance

[geezer]

   good Lord we have grown food crazy....  CALORIES IN = CALORIES OUT ....
    If that's not simple enough for you ,, read more books.. the human body was meant for feast or famine. it's a perfect storage device....   things do go wrong of course,but eat proper and not too much,walk every day or the likes and you should stay healthy.....   everything in balance

That is just not the case. It's not just the calories. A thousand calories worth of unprocessed spinach, onions, broccoli, carrots, yams, walnuts, and salmon, for example, has a very different effect on the body than a thousand calories worth of pizza and jelly doughnuts. There is a huge difference in the nutrient content and a huge difference in what happens in every cell in the body.

[2bigears]

   an energy unit .....  if it's not worked off,,,, it stays attached ????   

[dwk]

  an energy unit .....  if it's not worked off,,,, it stays attached ????   

The human body is significantly more complex than that. Calories don't occur in a vacuum - overall system state plays a significant role in how they're managed. In other words, calories aren't always fungible.  They matter, but it's far from the whole story.

Having said that, a couple points.
-  Taubes definitely dramatically overstates his case, and most in the paleo/primal community don't accept his simplistic take that carbs automatically and unavoidably lead to weight gain. There are lots of folks out there that manage to stay slim on a high carb diet.
- It most certainly is possible to gain weight on a LC diet. If you could manage to chow down a pound of butter every morning, you'd pack on the pounds. This generally doesn't happen though, since appetitie regulation appears to be much much easier for most people on a LC diet rather than on a HC diet.

[wushuliu]

The human body is significantly more complex than that. Calories don't occur in a vacuum - overall system state plays a significant role in how they're managed. In other words, calories aren't always fungible.  They matter, but it's far from the whole story.

Having said that, a couple points.
-  Taubes definitely dramatically overstates his case, and most in the paleo/primal community don't accept his simplistic take that carbs automatically and unavoidably lead to weight gain. There are lots of folks out there that manage to stay slim on a high carb diet.
- It most certainly is possible to gain weight on a LC diet. If you could manage to chow down a pound of butter every morning, you'd pack on the pounds. This generally doesn't happen though, since appetitie regulation appears to be much much easier for most people on a LC diet rather than on a HC diet.

'Dramatic' and 'simplistic' are interesting words to describe 'Good Calories, Bad Calories'. I'd hate to read your idea of pedantic.

[DaveC113]

Read the books "Good Calories, Bad Calories" by Gary Taubes and "Neanderthin" by Ray Audette. You willl find out that that is just a myth.

Gary Taubes also did this aticle for New York Times, "what if it is all a big fat lie".

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/07/magazine/what-if-it-s-all-been-a-big-fat-lie.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

A quote from Taubes' article:

If these trends are correct, then the obesity epidemic can certainly be explained by Americans' eating more calories than ever -- excess calories, after all, are what causes us to gain weight -- and, specifically, more carbohydrates.

I certainly didn't say or mean that "a calorie is a calorie", that's obviously not true. But IMO, it is true that enlarged portion sizes are part of the reason people get fat.

[Tyson]

Calories in and calories out CAN work for people that are insulin sensitive.  But it won't work for people that are insulin resistant.  The reason is that for IR people, their bodies don't "see" all the calories their body has stored as fat.  So if you are IR and try to cut calories, you body just goes into starvation mode and slows down your metabolism, which results in weight gain EVEN ON VERY LOW CALORIC INTAKE.

bigears - if your body cannot SEE the fat that is stored, it cannot BURN it, no matter how much you cut calories and exercise.  First, you have to get your body able to "see" and use that stored fat.  Anything else will just result in failure to lose, or even worse, re-gain of weight afterward.

If you are insulin sensitive, by all means, cut the calories and up the exercise.  It will work, as it always has.  But if you are IR, then cut the grains and sugar (permanently), and reduce the starchy carbs (temporarily). 

AND, exercise everyday.  Remember that for re-establishing insulin sensitivity, consistency is more important than intensity.  That means a daily walk is more effective than running for 3x per week.  If and when you feel like it, you can add some resistance training 2x per week to speed things along.


Once you are within 20 lbs of your ideal weight, you are likely to be insulin sensitive again and you can add back some of the potatoes, rice, fruit, etc...  At this point it becomes all about the calories again, since you body is working right. 

[TRADERXFAN]

Read the books "Good Calories, Bad Calories" by Gary Taubes and "Neanderthin" by Ray Audette. You willl find out that that is just a myth.

Gary Taubes also did this aticle for New York Times, "what if it is all a big fat lie".

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/07/magazine/what-if-it-s-all-been-a-big-fat-lie.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

Thanks for this article. TOTALLY makes sense. I can see the politicization of the issue and stigma reject the fundamental basis of a diet like the atkins with prejudice and lead to this. Very good article.