I tried out-training my diet for 18 months(medium.com)
medium.com
I tried out-training my diet for 18 months
https://medium.com/beingwell/you-cant-out-train-your-diet-believe-me-e7edd948b613
109 comments
> I don't understand why Weight Watchers even exists. Just cut out the sugar, move around, and eat more plants.
That's like asking a chain smoker to just stop buying cigarettes and have an apple instead.
We have to get to terms with the fact that obesity is an epidemic that has to be treated the same way tobacco has.
Stop putting so damn much sugar and salt into processed food. More physical education in schools and pre-schools/kindergarten (it's appalling how much the motor skills of children have deteriorated compared to previous generations). School gardens for every school so children can learn from an early age what food even is, how its grown and what it actually tastes like.
It's a bunch of measures that need to be taken and while it might be simple for some people (like you for example) to change their lifestyle, it's really hard for most.
> Just cut out the sugar
This is a great example for why it's so hard: most processed food (and even bread) contains tons of added sugar without the consumer even realising it. It's not necessarily the donuts, the chocolate, or candy bars. It's the sodas, fast food, bread, parfait, fruit drinks, the canteen food, etc. The practise varies from country to country, but some (e.g. Mexico) had to pull the emergency brake already and limit the amount of added sugar by law.
Since sugar is highly addictive, it's hard to let go of these products, especially since most of us are conditioned to primarily consume highly processed junk basically from birth.
That's like asking a chain smoker to just stop buying cigarettes and have an apple instead.
We have to get to terms with the fact that obesity is an epidemic that has to be treated the same way tobacco has.
Stop putting so damn much sugar and salt into processed food. More physical education in schools and pre-schools/kindergarten (it's appalling how much the motor skills of children have deteriorated compared to previous generations). School gardens for every school so children can learn from an early age what food even is, how its grown and what it actually tastes like.
It's a bunch of measures that need to be taken and while it might be simple for some people (like you for example) to change their lifestyle, it's really hard for most.
> Just cut out the sugar
This is a great example for why it's so hard: most processed food (and even bread) contains tons of added sugar without the consumer even realising it. It's not necessarily the donuts, the chocolate, or candy bars. It's the sodas, fast food, bread, parfait, fruit drinks, the canteen food, etc. The practise varies from country to country, but some (e.g. Mexico) had to pull the emergency brake already and limit the amount of added sugar by law.
Since sugar is highly addictive, it's hard to let go of these products, especially since most of us are conditioned to primarily consume highly processed junk basically from birth.
> Stop putting so damn much sugar and salt into processed food
I can't express how discouraging this is, at least in the United States. The high school I graduated from had a well meaning principal that believed milk was good for you and soft drinks were bad for you. By her reasoning, chocolate milk would at least encourage the students to drink milk, and the benefits of milk would outweigh the costs of having a ton of sugar. All of the soft drinks were taken out of the vending machines and replaced with "Vitamin Water". So our cafeteria was stocked with chocolate milk, orange juice, and vitamin water. The general public seems to be completely ignorant to why this is a problem. People I care deeply about are having health problems that I can't help but feel would be alleviated if they stopped drinking diet caffeine-free soft drinks as if it were an acceptable substitute for water.
I can't express how discouraging this is, at least in the United States. The high school I graduated from had a well meaning principal that believed milk was good for you and soft drinks were bad for you. By her reasoning, chocolate milk would at least encourage the students to drink milk, and the benefits of milk would outweigh the costs of having a ton of sugar. All of the soft drinks were taken out of the vending machines and replaced with "Vitamin Water". So our cafeteria was stocked with chocolate milk, orange juice, and vitamin water. The general public seems to be completely ignorant to why this is a problem. People I care deeply about are having health problems that I can't help but feel would be alleviated if they stopped drinking diet caffeine-free soft drinks as if it were an acceptable substitute for water.
The scary thing is that there is significant evidence that being overweight as a toddler dramatically increases risk to be obese as an adult. So really we need to start way before school, parent education is really important.
> That's it. It's simple.
It is, but it's really REALLY not. I'd bet that most everyone knows what they should be eating and doing to lose weight / be healthy. It's probably obvious to most adults. Some people just have conditions where they can NOT lose weight. And then there's the rest of us. We know it's that simple. We know we should not eat a bag of Doritos for dinner. We know a pint of ice cream is not a snack. But it's what our bodies crave, and fighting that takes energy and focus. And today we had a bad day at work. Today when we got home we had to fight with the kids to do homework. This weekend there's a big party and we're not ready. Next week there's a huge project due at work. Are we going fight the urge to eat a bag of cheese balls before bed? Nope, we just don't have the energy. We'll start next week, when there's not so much going on.
As simple as it seems to you, it's not at all simple for many MANY people. They need help, and they need support. And that's why Weight Watchers exists. Losing weight is somehow simultaneously very easy and nearly impossibly hard for most of us.
It is, but it's really REALLY not. I'd bet that most everyone knows what they should be eating and doing to lose weight / be healthy. It's probably obvious to most adults. Some people just have conditions where they can NOT lose weight. And then there's the rest of us. We know it's that simple. We know we should not eat a bag of Doritos for dinner. We know a pint of ice cream is not a snack. But it's what our bodies crave, and fighting that takes energy and focus. And today we had a bad day at work. Today when we got home we had to fight with the kids to do homework. This weekend there's a big party and we're not ready. Next week there's a huge project due at work. Are we going fight the urge to eat a bag of cheese balls before bed? Nope, we just don't have the energy. We'll start next week, when there's not so much going on.
As simple as it seems to you, it's not at all simple for many MANY people. They need help, and they need support. And that's why Weight Watchers exists. Losing weight is somehow simultaneously very easy and nearly impossibly hard for most of us.
Simple is not the same as easy. Weight loss is one of the most extreme examples of “dead simple, but mind-meltingly difficult” there is.
> We know we should not eat a bag of Doritos for dinner. We know a pint of ice cream is not a snack. But it's what our bodies crave, and fighting that takes energy and focus.
Why does it take so much energy to decline to buy bad things that we 'know' are bad?
Why does it take so much energy to decline to buy bad things that we 'know' are bad?
Good question, one of many that if we had answers for I bet people would be much happier. Some of us don't control what comes into the house for various reasons, I know that's one answer.
> Some people just have conditions where they can NOT lose weight.
Of course the laws of thermodynamics say that is impossible. You will lose weight if you don't eat. You may not lose weight if you eat moderately, while another person will.
Of course the laws of thermodynamics say that is impossible. You will lose weight if you don't eat. You may not lose weight if you eat moderately, while another person will.
Doesn't your third sentence contradict your second sentence?
If you believe it's "impossible" for people to have conditions where they can't lose weight (in other words: different people experience different difficulty levels in modifying their body composition), then why would you go on to claim that "you may not lose weight if you eat moderately, while another person will"?
If you believe it's "impossible" for people to have conditions where they can't lose weight (in other words: different people experience different difficulty levels in modifying their body composition), then why would you go on to claim that "you may not lose weight if you eat moderately, while another person will"?
It does not contradict, no. I can lose weight eating moderately but you may not. You may need to eat bordering on starvation to lose weight, which in my book is not "moderate".
Basically, my point is, some people have to suffer more to lose weight. But all people will lose weight regardless if they stop eating, because physics.
Basically, my point is, some people have to suffer more to lose weight. But all people will lose weight regardless if they stop eating, because physics.
This tired tendency to reduce weight control to physics is patently counterproductive. It's about as helpful as pointing out to a smoker that they'd quit smoking regardless of how addicted they are, if only they could smoke progressively fewer cigarettes, because logic and definitions. Technically correct, but misses the point entirely.
Agreed, it’s also about progressively moving the diet.
I lost 9kg down from 97 to 88 not changing much. Still want to go down more to 85, then ill be below bmi 25. :)
I strive to still eat three full meals a day.
- stop eating after dinner, just drink tea (this took about 4 months to get comfortable with. Dropped 6 kg using this technique. Over the course of 6 months.
My weight plateaued for two months, so I changed the following.
- cut out the afternoon snack and changed breakfast to one egg and a bowl of oatmeal. I’m now losing approximately 1 kg a month again.
My weight loss is quite slow and varies day by day +/- 2kg, only over multiple months do I see results on the scale. Recently I’ve also started seeing changes to my gut and shape.
Maybe this will help other people in their weight loss journey. It’s not easy losing weight, but small changes over time can have results. I enjoy using the iPhone health app and then the year view as it averages out the daily variations. I log my weight every morning when I get out of bed.
I lost 9kg down from 97 to 88 not changing much. Still want to go down more to 85, then ill be below bmi 25. :)
I strive to still eat three full meals a day.
- stop eating after dinner, just drink tea (this took about 4 months to get comfortable with. Dropped 6 kg using this technique. Over the course of 6 months.
My weight plateaued for two months, so I changed the following.
- cut out the afternoon snack and changed breakfast to one egg and a bowl of oatmeal. I’m now losing approximately 1 kg a month again.
My weight loss is quite slow and varies day by day +/- 2kg, only over multiple months do I see results on the scale. Recently I’ve also started seeing changes to my gut and shape.
Maybe this will help other people in their weight loss journey. It’s not easy losing weight, but small changes over time can have results. I enjoy using the iPhone health app and then the year view as it averages out the daily variations. I log my weight every morning when I get out of bed.
"I don't understand why Weight Watchers even exists. Just cut out the sugar, move around, and eat more plants. "
Too many people are still in thrall of the calories in - calories out principle.
It seems to appeal especially to nerds, the idea of reducing something as complex as metabolism into a simple accounting trick is just too attractive, and so is the idea that only "unused, extra energy" gets converted to body fat and that everything is question of raw willpower.
It is not so simple, if you live in a state of chronic hyperinsulinemia, you won't be able to mobilize stored fat, it is just biochemically impossible, adipose cells just will not release any stored fat if insulin is high. Of course, then you start to be hungry, then you eat some 'extra' calories even though you have ample fat reserves.
But the core of the problem isn't willpower. It is inability of the human body to burn its own fat for consumption if insulin levels are chronically high.
Of course, that leads to weight gain. And one of the main culprits is sugar. Excessive amounts of sugar will mess with your insulin secretion and sensitivity.
Too many people are still in thrall of the calories in - calories out principle.
It seems to appeal especially to nerds, the idea of reducing something as complex as metabolism into a simple accounting trick is just too attractive, and so is the idea that only "unused, extra energy" gets converted to body fat and that everything is question of raw willpower.
It is not so simple, if you live in a state of chronic hyperinsulinemia, you won't be able to mobilize stored fat, it is just biochemically impossible, adipose cells just will not release any stored fat if insulin is high. Of course, then you start to be hungry, then you eat some 'extra' calories even though you have ample fat reserves.
But the core of the problem isn't willpower. It is inability of the human body to burn its own fat for consumption if insulin levels are chronically high.
Of course, that leads to weight gain. And one of the main culprits is sugar. Excessive amounts of sugar will mess with your insulin secretion and sensitivity.
Yeah, but you’re usually only hyperinsulinemic if you’re obese or diabetic. Calories-in, calories out works perfectly for everybody else (including obese people before they get obese).
Willpower certainly is the problem for most people.
Willpower certainly is the problem for most people.
"Willpower certainly is the problem for most people. "
Why was this not a problem prior to 1980? It is not as if we switched from hunter and gatherer society straight into postmodern world in 1980. People back then drove cars and ate in restaurants, and look at the photos: they looked far healthier. The fattest US state of 1980 was still much less fat than the fittest US state of 2020.
Why the same people who have a willpower problem can tolerate their bratty teenagers, rise up at 5 am to go to work, pull through arduous work etc.? After all, you would expect them to lack willpower generally, not in just one specific domain.
Humans are the same as they were. What changed is the amount of processed food and especially sugar in our diets. A lot.
Why was this not a problem prior to 1980? It is not as if we switched from hunter and gatherer society straight into postmodern world in 1980. People back then drove cars and ate in restaurants, and look at the photos: they looked far healthier. The fattest US state of 1980 was still much less fat than the fittest US state of 2020.
Why the same people who have a willpower problem can tolerate their bratty teenagers, rise up at 5 am to go to work, pull through arduous work etc.? After all, you would expect them to lack willpower generally, not in just one specific domain.
Humans are the same as they were. What changed is the amount of processed food and especially sugar in our diets. A lot.
> People back then drove cars and ate in restaurants, and look at the photos: they looked far healthier.
They looked thinner, but afaik we are healthier all in all. Thin and healthy are not synonyms.
They looked thinner, but afaik we are healthier all in all. Thin and healthy are not synonyms.
We got much better in managing chronic diseases, and we smoke a lot less. So far, so good.
But diabetes 2nd type or chronic non-alcoholic steatosis were much, much rarer than today in < 50 population. Orders of magnitude rarer.
This is a significant disease load.
But diabetes 2nd type or chronic non-alcoholic steatosis were much, much rarer than today in < 50 population. Orders of magnitude rarer.
This is a significant disease load.
People are less active today than in 1980. They work, and recreate, sitting still in front of a screen far more than people did in 1980. Even in professional jobs there was more walking around because there was no email, chat, etc.
People take in more calories today than in 1980, primarily through prepared foods. The guy in this blog post said he eats out for every meal. Basically no one but the super rich did that in 1980. Prepared food prices have fallen a lot since 1980.
Calories in/calories out is the only way that the human body can change mass, short of excision. However, it’s very hard to accurately keep track of calories.
People take in more calories today than in 1980, primarily through prepared foods. The guy in this blog post said he eats out for every meal. Basically no one but the super rich did that in 1980. Prepared food prices have fallen a lot since 1980.
Calories in/calories out is the only way that the human body can change mass, short of excision. However, it’s very hard to accurately keep track of calories.
There are some chicken-and-egg problems buried in there.
Are people more fat today because they are less active, or are they less active because they are fatter? After all, it is no joy to move around with 30 or 50 lbs of extra fat. There seems to be a vicious cycle at work.
"Calories in/calories out is the only way that the human body can change mass"
True, but unproductive when it comes to understanding the phenomenon of rising obesity. WHY people consume more calories? What drives them? This is not a trivial question and without being fairly sure about the answer, we will not solve the situation.
An analogy: the only way that humans become alcoholics is by drinking a lot of alcohol. But that does not explain root causes of alcoholism, it is only a relatively trivial observation of the proximate cause. The reasons why some people can't keep their alcohol intake within harmless amounts and slide all the way to the bottom are anything but trivial.
Are people more fat today because they are less active, or are they less active because they are fatter? After all, it is no joy to move around with 30 or 50 lbs of extra fat. There seems to be a vicious cycle at work.
"Calories in/calories out is the only way that the human body can change mass"
True, but unproductive when it comes to understanding the phenomenon of rising obesity. WHY people consume more calories? What drives them? This is not a trivial question and without being fairly sure about the answer, we will not solve the situation.
An analogy: the only way that humans become alcoholics is by drinking a lot of alcohol. But that does not explain root causes of alcoholism, it is only a relatively trivial observation of the proximate cause. The reasons why some people can't keep their alcohol intake within harmless amounts and slide all the way to the bottom are anything but trivial.
> Calories-in, calories out works perfectly for everybody else (including obese people before they get obese). [...] Willpower certainly is the problem for most people.
It just does not. If you focus on that only, it leads to diet that makes you feel like crap all the time. It makes you low energy, so you struggle or flat cant maintain performance and precision in work. It makes you irritable and it makes it much harder for you to handle normal stresses - meaning your kids and wife and coworkers basically suffer.
And what it does is that people eventually decide it is not worth it.
It just does not. If you focus on that only, it leads to diet that makes you feel like crap all the time. It makes you low energy, so you struggle or flat cant maintain performance and precision in work. It makes you irritable and it makes it much harder for you to handle normal stresses - meaning your kids and wife and coworkers basically suffer.
And what it does is that people eventually decide it is not worth it.
"you’re usually only hyperinsulinemic if you’re obese or diabetic."
Is that true or just an artifact of screening? Hyperinsulinemia is not really well researched in "normal" population, because measurement of insulin in blood is not trivial; there are no simple devices similar to glucometers that could easily and affordably measure your current insulin level.
Eating a modern diet laced with hidden sugar is a surefire way to increase your total insulin level.
It is not as if a healthy pancreas has a choice. It automatically releases insulin as a response to certain stimuli, including sugar, but also interestingly protein. Only pure fat is "invisible" to pancreas AFAIK.
Is that true or just an artifact of screening? Hyperinsulinemia is not really well researched in "normal" population, because measurement of insulin in blood is not trivial; there are no simple devices similar to glucometers that could easily and affordably measure your current insulin level.
Eating a modern diet laced with hidden sugar is a surefire way to increase your total insulin level.
It is not as if a healthy pancreas has a choice. It automatically releases insulin as a response to certain stimuli, including sugar, but also interestingly protein. Only pure fat is "invisible" to pancreas AFAIK.
A relative recently lost about 25kg(55lbs) from about 100kg. While what he did feels a bit extreme to me, he only completely removed carbs and sugar from his diet. And he didn't even go to the gym. I am not sure I will be able to survive without carbs though.
> That's it. It's simple.
It's not because something is simple that it is easy. Glad it worked for you, but let's not assume too much about an entire population based on your own experience.
It's not because something is simple that it is easy. Glad it worked for you, but let's not assume too much about an entire population based on your own experience.
> Just cut out the sugar,
This massively depends on how much sugar your diet have. I mean, plenty of us have issue with eating too much bacon.
This massively depends on how much sugar your diet have. I mean, plenty of us have issue with eating too much bacon.
Can you expand on the starch thing? I’ve never heard that.
Also any tips for tennis elbow? I’ve been resting it for weeks and no improvement!
Also any tips for tennis elbow? I’ve been resting it for weeks and no improvement!
Likely referring to resistant starch- "Resistant starches are carbohydrates that resist digestion in the small intestine and move to the large intestine where they get fermented. Meaning, the fibers from resistant starches when broken down via fermentation can provide gut benefits in the large intestine."
From: https://camillathyme.com/2019/09/22/the-simple-potato-salad-...
From: https://camillathyme.com/2019/09/22/the-simple-potato-salad-...
Thanks. Seems like potato salad still boils the potatoes though. Is he saying some of the resistant starch returns when it’s chilled?
I’m now racking my brain trying to think of ways to eat potatoes and corn without cooking! No luck yet.
I’m now racking my brain trying to think of ways to eat potatoes and corn without cooking! No luck yet.
The wiki article has some more info. This sentence does seem to indicate that the smaller glucose chains reassemble into larger starches in a crystallization process. "The glucose chains can reassociate into short crystalline structures, which typically involves rapid recrystallization of amylose molecules followed by a slow recrystallization of amylopectin molecules in a process called retrogradation."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistant_starch
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistant_starch
[deleted]
Do you mean apart from strong prescription anti inflammatory medication?
Awesome! I also don't own a vehicle on purpose these days--it forces me to walk for miles almost every day, which I've grown to love.
I haven't heard about that starch foods being okay when cold thing, care to elaborate?
I haven't heard about that starch foods being okay when cold thing, care to elaborate?
Don't believe it. It's simply portion sizes. Just look at McDonalds meals. It's shocking how much they've grown. It's been a while since I looked it up, but a normal meal in the 50s was what is today a kid's meal. Hamburger (1), small (!) fries (that might not even be sold anymore), and a small drink (250ml).
Want to eat pancakes? Eat a small amount. With butter. It's fine. Don't eat a stack that is shown in ads.
Want fries? Eat two normal potatoes fried in beef fat. Not potatoes the size of a human head.
It is conscious work to retrain your stomach, but it is possible. I'm saying this as somebody who just ate 2 slices of bread (1 sandwich) and now feels like I can't move, where before I'd easily eat 6 slices. That was my breakfast (at lunch), I haven't even had an earlier meal.
No bodily exhaustion, no pain, no excessive time commitments, no money (you even save money!), no feeling the need to punish and taking revenge on yourself, just being conscious.
Works well with alcohol consumption, too. Ask me how I know how those big red wine glasses which fit 25% of the bottle are bullshit, same as pints. Those are two portions, easily. Look at old photographs: The glasses are tiny.
Want to eat pancakes? Eat a small amount. With butter. It's fine. Don't eat a stack that is shown in ads.
Want fries? Eat two normal potatoes fried in beef fat. Not potatoes the size of a human head.
It is conscious work to retrain your stomach, but it is possible. I'm saying this as somebody who just ate 2 slices of bread (1 sandwich) and now feels like I can't move, where before I'd easily eat 6 slices. That was my breakfast (at lunch), I haven't even had an earlier meal.
No bodily exhaustion, no pain, no excessive time commitments, no money (you even save money!), no feeling the need to punish and taking revenge on yourself, just being conscious.
Works well with alcohol consumption, too. Ask me how I know how those big red wine glasses which fit 25% of the bottle are bullshit, same as pints. Those are two portions, easily. Look at old photographs: The glasses are tiny.
You can reduce the portion overall or you can use the 80/20 pareto principle to reduce the worst offenders. The second approach seems like a better plan and easier. The first is a hard habit to maintain, the second is much easier to maintain.
It isn't just portion sizes as your other replier has mentioned.
Like I said in the previous comment, I applied a lot of energy studying nutrition in order to simplify it for myself and I have other take aways I didn't post and there is more complexity than I let on, but I try not to make people understand 99% of an issue with 10x the text when they could understand 90% of the issue and remember it.
But since you asked, there are different types of starches. Some of them, like the ones that come from potatoes, are fine if they are either uncooked or cooked then cooled. The reason potatoes taste so good is that they are extremely nutritious in every other way other than starch. They're a super food with an achilles heel.
You can research resistant starch and where it's found and under what circumstance on your own, but here is a starting point:
https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/resistant-starch-101#ty...
Also, since you seem to like the details, I also found that other than fibre, my natural Torontonian diet was pretty deficient in potassium, which makes recovery from working out take longer. So I went out of my way to eat more of it and I was able to make much better gains working out. It also felt less painful to work out while I was working out. Try not to eat it at the same time as salt, since IIRC the uptake pathways compete with each other. And note that the lowly banana is only a good source of potassium per calorie not in general. Eating one per day does very little, which surprised me.
Like I said in the previous comment, I applied a lot of energy studying nutrition in order to simplify it for myself and I have other take aways I didn't post and there is more complexity than I let on, but I try not to make people understand 99% of an issue with 10x the text when they could understand 90% of the issue and remember it.
But since you asked, there are different types of starches. Some of them, like the ones that come from potatoes, are fine if they are either uncooked or cooked then cooled. The reason potatoes taste so good is that they are extremely nutritious in every other way other than starch. They're a super food with an achilles heel.
You can research resistant starch and where it's found and under what circumstance on your own, but here is a starting point:
https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/resistant-starch-101#ty...
Also, since you seem to like the details, I also found that other than fibre, my natural Torontonian diet was pretty deficient in potassium, which makes recovery from working out take longer. So I went out of my way to eat more of it and I was able to make much better gains working out. It also felt less painful to work out while I was working out. Try not to eat it at the same time as salt, since IIRC the uptake pathways compete with each other. And note that the lowly banana is only a good source of potassium per calorie not in general. Eating one per day does very little, which surprised me.
This article’s title is a little misleading, because the whole thesis seems to be “you can’t build enough muscle to compensate for a bad diet.”
This is probably true, however you absolutely can out-train all but the worst diets, if you’re crazy/fit enough. It would mostly happen through cardio, HIIT, and sports however, not pure weightlifting.
If you were to play two hours of full court basketball a day (with intensity, not walking up and down the court), and combine that with a weightlifting routine, you could probably eat whatever you want without gaining much weight. The problem is most people’s bodies would break down with that kind of activity level.
This is probably true, however you absolutely can out-train all but the worst diets, if you’re crazy/fit enough. It would mostly happen through cardio, HIIT, and sports however, not pure weightlifting.
If you were to play two hours of full court basketball a day (with intensity, not walking up and down the court), and combine that with a weightlifting routine, you could probably eat whatever you want without gaining much weight. The problem is most people’s bodies would break down with that kind of activity level.
I've run multiple marathons in my life. When training and running > 20 miles / week, I could eat anything I wanted and still lose weight. I usually stayed around 170/lbs - about optimal for my frame. It didn't matter what I ate, and I've heard stories of people who just ate cheesecake or some such due to the calorie load.
Unfortunately I can no longer run and have since ballooned up to 200lbs.
You can definitely out-train a diet, it's sustaining it that's hard.
Unfortunately I can no longer run and have since ballooned up to 200lbs.
You can definitely out-train a diet, it's sustaining it that's hard.
Yeah, when I was regularly running long distance I seemed to naturally maintain a balanced caloric intake.
Then I injured myself so badly that I needed to stop running for 5 months. Never fully got back to my ritual and then I gained 40lbs. A few years have passed and my attempts to restart my running all end with me taking a break nursing weird muscle and tendon pains that last for weeks.
So I guess my point is: yes, it actually is possible to out-train your diet, but that's only a good plan as long as you never hurt yourself.
Then I injured myself so badly that I needed to stop running for 5 months. Never fully got back to my ritual and then I gained 40lbs. A few years have passed and my attempts to restart my running all end with me taking a break nursing weird muscle and tendon pains that last for weeks.
So I guess my point is: yes, it actually is possible to out-train your diet, but that's only a good plan as long as you never hurt yourself.
> if you’re crazy/fit enough
Here's where you hit the crux of the matter.
Yes, it is possible to burn a lot of calories. No, it isn't possible for most overweight people. When people are overweight, they also can't play two hours of basketball, or do HIIT, or something else intensive.
Most of them need to start with basic walking and build up from there, and it takes a looongg time for them to build up to a point where the calorie burn becomes sufficiently significant.
Here's where you hit the crux of the matter.
Yes, it is possible to burn a lot of calories. No, it isn't possible for most overweight people. When people are overweight, they also can't play two hours of basketball, or do HIIT, or something else intensive.
Most of them need to start with basic walking and build up from there, and it takes a looongg time for them to build up to a point where the calorie burn becomes sufficiently significant.
If you look at diet of construction workers (outside a lot of physical activity) they eat absurdly lot compared with office workers. And they are not all that fat as office worker would.
We have a lot of construction around our office and they eat in same places. They eat a lot.
We have a lot of construction around our office and they eat in same places. They eat a lot.
Oh yeah, I only spent several days as a construction worker back in my youth (like a week), but on those few days, I turned into a bottomless pit at the dining table. The burnt energy is real.
> And they are not all that fat as office worker would.
Should check out the machine operators. Overweight (yet strong/having lots of endurance) construction workers aren't all that rare.
Should check out the machine operators. Overweight (yet strong/having lots of endurance) construction workers aren't all that rare.
Yes, there are no fat guys in special forces units even though they probably eat 10k calories every day (I'm speaking of the 'intensive' training phase).
It'snot the calories that count - it's the kind of nutrition you get from them.
You can easily starve yourself to death by only consuming "empty" calories - you'd get fat and fatter but eventually die from undernourishment.
You can easily starve yourself to death by only consuming "empty" calories - you'd get fat and fatter but eventually die from undernourishment.
You can also kill yourself by not consuming enough fat (aka Rabbit Starvation/Protein Poisoning). Nutrition isn't a simple thing.
Not everything is about weight gain. Bad diet causes a lot of other, less visible damage. Like excess of urea leading to gout or effects of trans fats on arteries.
Also, people who train too much (like long-distance runners), seem to be vulnerable to heart disease. [0] The theory behind this is that heart, just like other muscles, needs rest to heal microdamage resulting from vigorous exercise. If you do not let it heal and press on the next day, the damage accumulates to potentially lethal levels.
[0] https://bcmj.org/articles/impact-excessive-endurance-exercis...
Also, people who train too much (like long-distance runners), seem to be vulnerable to heart disease. [0] The theory behind this is that heart, just like other muscles, needs rest to heal microdamage resulting from vigorous exercise. If you do not let it heal and press on the next day, the damage accumulates to potentially lethal levels.
[0] https://bcmj.org/articles/impact-excessive-endurance-exercis...
In 50 years of yo-yo dieting I've tried most things, including large quantities of exercise. Many worked for a while. I've lost > 100 pounds four times ... before gaining it back.
Now I'm trying something new that's working quiet well so far, 30 pounds down in 2.5 months. The real difference is that eating this way transforms me into a non-fat person behavioraly: I now stop eating when I'm full, which was a magic act only other people could do before. And now I just eat once or twice per day, not out of willpower, but because now that's all I want.
You may not want to hear about the food that does this for me. I sure didn't. As desperate as I've been, until recently I just closed my ears to it. It's a bad fit for me culturally, by taste (previously), training, and experience. But now I love it, and not just because it's working so well:
Meat. And organs. Mostly beef. High fat. I went carnivore. It seemed gross and impossible back when I was a raw vegan. Now here I am. And it's not just the weight. It has cleared up multiple digestive and inflammatory issues. It started as a one month cleanse but I'm not tempted to stop.
Many times a diet has worked for me because I was coming to it from a bad diet, and anything that got me off of junk food would have worked. Not this time. I had been on a clean very low carb diet for years, and managed to gain lots of weight on it after a large initial loss. Carnivore seeems to be reversing that, fingers crossed.
Now I'm trying something new that's working quiet well so far, 30 pounds down in 2.5 months. The real difference is that eating this way transforms me into a non-fat person behavioraly: I now stop eating when I'm full, which was a magic act only other people could do before. And now I just eat once or twice per day, not out of willpower, but because now that's all I want.
You may not want to hear about the food that does this for me. I sure didn't. As desperate as I've been, until recently I just closed my ears to it. It's a bad fit for me culturally, by taste (previously), training, and experience. But now I love it, and not just because it's working so well:
Meat. And organs. Mostly beef. High fat. I went carnivore. It seemed gross and impossible back when I was a raw vegan. Now here I am. And it's not just the weight. It has cleared up multiple digestive and inflammatory issues. It started as a one month cleanse but I'm not tempted to stop.
Many times a diet has worked for me because I was coming to it from a bad diet, and anything that got me off of junk food would have worked. Not this time. I had been on a clean very low carb diet for years, and managed to gain lots of weight on it after a large initial loss. Carnivore seeems to be reversing that, fingers crossed.
> There’s been a misnomer floating around the bodybuilding bro-science industry for ages:
>> 1 lb of extra muscle = 50 extra calories burned per day
[..]
> But in reality — those 50 calories are a myth. Studies estimate muscle burns only around 4.5 to 7.0 calories per pound per day.
This was new to me, I always heard that building muscle is key to permanent weight loss and that increased metabolic rate from muscle mass is the main reason.
>> 1 lb of extra muscle = 50 extra calories burned per day
[..]
> But in reality — those 50 calories are a myth. Studies estimate muscle burns only around 4.5 to 7.0 calories per pound per day.
This was new to me, I always heard that building muscle is key to permanent weight loss and that increased metabolic rate from muscle mass is the main reason.
Maybe it is because maintaining muscle requires not being very sedentary, not the actual metabolic impact.
Permanent weight loss is all about diet.
Use a smaller plate, order smaller portions etc. Less foods that contain a lot of fat or sugar
edit: and a big thing on how to stay on good diet is fixing behaviour, remove situations where you do bad choices on diet.
Use a smaller plate, order smaller portions etc. Less foods that contain a lot of fat or sugar
edit: and a big thing on how to stay on good diet is fixing behaviour, remove situations where you do bad choices on diet.
It certainly helps, just much less than is usually promoted. (7 calories vs 50). Thanks for reading!
I used to be a lightweight rower when young and that seriously screwed up my eating habits for a long time. The thing is we used to eat almost nothing before competitions (I once lost 8kg in 2 weeks leading up to the nationals, from already 8% bodyfat), and once the season was over we would binge eat (still not gaining much weight though because we continued training).
For a long time I did not have a being saturated feeling and could eat until vomiting. It's a bit better now, however I still need to do sports (road cycling mainly) 3-5 times a week as otherwise I gain weight because I eat too much (and I generally don't eat crappy food, just a lot). The upside is, if I had a period where I gained weight because I was not training enough, I will quickly loose it again when getting on a training regime.
However, weight trainingdefinitely do not burn enough calories, I notice that when in winter when I go to the gym much more. I think the whole weights training for loosing weight has been pushed by the gym industry largely. Do cardio and HIT and you will burn calories much more quickly.
For a long time I did not have a being saturated feeling and could eat until vomiting. It's a bit better now, however I still need to do sports (road cycling mainly) 3-5 times a week as otherwise I gain weight because I eat too much (and I generally don't eat crappy food, just a lot). The upside is, if I had a period where I gained weight because I was not training enough, I will quickly loose it again when getting on a training regime.
However, weight trainingdefinitely do not burn enough calories, I notice that when in winter when I go to the gym much more. I think the whole weights training for loosing weight has been pushed by the gym industry largely. Do cardio and HIT and you will burn calories much more quickly.
Just to clarify. In general it's still the best to control both your diet and activity level and the balance of how much increase in activity and reduction in calories intake works best is I suspect highly individual. For me, due to my history I find increasing my activity level much easier. It also improves my psychological well-being as I know that how good I feel is strongly dependent on doing enough sport.
I had a similar experience. In 2014 I was up + 40 lbs, started exercising and lifting heavy 4 to 5 times a week. I did clean my diet just a tiny bit and did loose 15 lbs or so. But amount of work was insane. Now in 2019 I started fasting and biking for fun and BAM! 25 lbs down with so little effort. I always struggled to do this. I always was amazed how people can eat clean and smaller portions constantly. For me not eliminating but minimizing sugar and carbs to some extent helped with cravings. Also just skipping a meal is so much easier now if I am not all carbed out! Also mentally fasting fits better for me. Life happens, I will eat cake :-) But after feast, there will be fast.
What kind of fasting do you play around with? I've tested out a bunch and even did intermittent fasting for more than half a year -- I enjoyed it but I'm pretty sure it started screwing with my sleep schedule. Great to hear your results, awesome stuff.
Thank you. I took it really slow and first few months I did IF and skipped breakfast. Then one time a week started skipping all meals in 24h period. Finally I got to the point were skipping meals for 48h was possible with water and bone broth if I am really hungry. All of this seemed impossible if I had something carby or sweet day before. For some reason it’s much easier if I have veggies/unsaturated fat and some protein. In terms of sleep I experienced same issue. I was so energetic and could not sleep as long. It went away 3ish weeks in.
The meals that some athletes eat are outrageous, so there has got to be something to maintaining a high metabolism. You'll never do it with just walking and weight lifting though. When I was way skinnier I had hobbies and habits that had me doing high intensity cardio multiple times a day. As those went away I gained weight, even though my diet has not changed much. I'm sure getting older is a big part of it too.
I have no answers though, I was sure not drinking, and being on chemo therapy all year would help me lose weight, but somehow I gained.
I have no answers though, I was sure not drinking, and being on chemo therapy all year would help me lose weight, but somehow I gained.
High levels of activity burn lots of calories.
The author of this blog post made a simple mistake: he thought that if he had big muscles, he would burn a lot of calories even when sitting still. That doesn’t happen.
The only way to burn a lot of calories is to do a lot of physical activity.
Edit to add: controlling diet is more effective than adding activity for most people in rich western societies because most of those people do not have the time, inclination, or opportunity to do a lot of hard physical activity every day.
The author of this blog post made a simple mistake: he thought that if he had big muscles, he would burn a lot of calories even when sitting still. That doesn’t happen.
The only way to burn a lot of calories is to do a lot of physical activity.
Edit to add: controlling diet is more effective than adding activity for most people in rich western societies because most of those people do not have the time, inclination, or opportunity to do a lot of hard physical activity every day.
> As those went away I gained weight, even though my diet has not changed much.
I'm not sure if this is your point, but if your "calories in" stayed the same, and "calories out" significantly decreased, it's expected that you would continually gain bodyfat until you reach a new equilibrium point. That seems to have been what's happened.
If the amount of exercise changes, your diet should optimally change with it - but perfectly managing your habits in this way is hard.
I'm not sure if this is your point, but if your "calories in" stayed the same, and "calories out" significantly decreased, it's expected that you would continually gain bodyfat until you reach a new equilibrium point. That seems to have been what's happened.
If the amount of exercise changes, your diet should optimally change with it - but perfectly managing your habits in this way is hard.
Endurance athletes train for hours per day. Skill athletes spend hours per day doing what we call "exercise" but which they think of as low-intensity skill work, separate from their physical training. But even then, their physiques are a reflection of professionalism. Look at the NFL: the linemen must burn more calories than the receivers, but the linemen are chubby and the receivers are lean. So while they're all eating a lot compared to a regular person, they're not eating some random huge amount; they're eating the right diet to support the physique they need for competition, with the support of doctors and nutritional professionals.
You absolutely can maintain a high TDEE with just walking alone.
For example, if you walk for 8+ hours per day, as people do when thru hiking, you will struggle to maintain bodyweight. Hikers spend a lot of time thinking about the most energy dense foods they can take with them to fuel their activity, which is low intensity but sufficiently high in volume that it drastically increases their energy expenditure due to activity.
The description of your own experience is most simply explained by your usual diet putting you into a caloric surplus at your current activity levels, whereas when you were more active it was just enough to maintain or put you into a small deficit regularly.
For example, if you walk for 8+ hours per day, as people do when thru hiking, you will struggle to maintain bodyweight. Hikers spend a lot of time thinking about the most energy dense foods they can take with them to fuel their activity, which is low intensity but sufficiently high in volume that it drastically increases their energy expenditure due to activity.
The description of your own experience is most simply explained by your usual diet putting you into a caloric surplus at your current activity levels, whereas when you were more active it was just enough to maintain or put you into a small deficit regularly.
I had similar experience. I had not done high intensity activity tho, I walked a lot multiple times a day and had trained non competitive sport 3 times a week.
I'm much more a believer in diet is 90% of the results these days, I just need to tinker until I find one that I can stick to more easily.
And definitely agree about the athlete diets--I was skinny all my life until I stopped playing sports 3-4 times a week. Oh, I also met my wonderful friend called beer, which certainly didn't help. Good luck with your own journey!
And definitely agree about the athlete diets--I was skinny all my life until I stopped playing sports 3-4 times a week. Oh, I also met my wonderful friend called beer, which certainly didn't help. Good luck with your own journey!
Training and diet is a frickel thing.
You can train away 1000kcal in an hour, which can be 1/3 to 1/3 of your daily requirement. This is relatively much. You wanna lose 1kg? Just train 7h. At 2kg a month you don't even need 1h of training a day.
Problem is, food can be very calorie dense, two cookies can have as much calories as a whole meal. Also, I read somewhere that there isn't really a sane upper limit of calories the body can ingest per day, something around 50k - 60k kcal IIRC.
This means, your diet can catch up no problem with any amount of training you do.
You can train away 1000kcal in an hour, which can be 1/3 to 1/3 of your daily requirement. This is relatively much. You wanna lose 1kg? Just train 7h. At 2kg a month you don't even need 1h of training a day.
Problem is, food can be very calorie dense, two cookies can have as much calories as a whole meal. Also, I read somewhere that there isn't really a sane upper limit of calories the body can ingest per day, something around 50k - 60k kcal IIRC.
This means, your diet can catch up no problem with any amount of training you do.
Thanks for sharing. I enjoyed the read. In a similar boat myself, my fondness for beer, pizza and dark chocolate Hobnobs kind of undoes the occasional bit of running and weight training :-)
If you want an unsolicited bit of internet feedback I'd suggest your writing would be even better without the puns - it's engaging enough without them - but that's purely a personal opinion.
If you want an unsolicited bit of internet feedback I'd suggest your writing would be even better without the puns - it's engaging enough without them - but that's purely a personal opinion.
Thanks for the feedback, I'm always playing around with different styles to see what people enjoy more or less. Replies like this go a huge way in helping me fine-tune. Thanks for reading--and good luck with the pizza battles.
somehow I’ve completely cured my bing eating habit. But unfortunately I’m not sure which change did it. Here are some of my best guesses?
Fixing my vitamin d deficiency
Multiple day fasts every few weeks
Probiotics
Sleeping better and getting enough sleep
Not having any time alone to be bored
Fixing my vitamin d deficiency
Multiple day fasts every few weeks
Probiotics
Sleeping better and getting enough sleep
Not having any time alone to be bored
Boredom is a really overlooked one.
If I’m outside and doing something all day, or I’m really involved in reading a book or painting something, over half a day will pass before I realize I forgot to eat breakfast.
But if I’m relaxing, wasting time on the internet, or not really doing much, I get an urge to grab a snack or have a glass of milk that’ll hit me once an hour.
If I’m outside and doing something all day, or I’m really involved in reading a book or painting something, over half a day will pass before I realize I forgot to eat breakfast.
But if I’m relaxing, wasting time on the internet, or not really doing much, I get an urge to grab a snack or have a glass of milk that’ll hit me once an hour.
"Dopamine boredom" is a thing. There's a pasticular qualia associated with my ADHD meds wearing off that feels not unlike a combination of tired and hungry, even after I've eaten. What clued me in was my go-to binge in this state: chocolate (xanthines, fat a sugar). I wonder how easily others can learn "I'm not hungry, I'm understimulated"
> Multiple day fasts every few weeks
Beware: I did it for a few years, but it burned all my motivation. I can't even fast a day now.
Beware: I did it for a few years, but it burned all my motivation. I can't even fast a day now.
Can you expand on that? r/fasting is a good resource if you want to get back into it.
Electrolytes seem to be key. Plus keeping distracted.
Electrolytes seem to be key. Plus keeping distracted.
A couple years ago I did multiple days fast for about a year then I did a 15 days fast.
My stomach wasn't hungry but my brain wanted to eat. This experience burned my motivation to basically starve myself and now I can't even do a one day fast, the mood isn't just there.
> keeping distracted
This is probably the key. I was bored to death and was watching YT cooking videos.
My stomach wasn't hungry but my brain wanted to eat. This experience burned my motivation to basically starve myself and now I can't even do a one day fast, the mood isn't just there.
> keeping distracted
This is probably the key. I was bored to death and was watching YT cooking videos.
What did you do for the sleep? From everything I've been reading lately that surely must've helped a lot.
Absolutely, that’s a big one. I remember when the kids wouldn’t sleep through the night I would randomly grab four or five donuts in the morning and I could completely override any thoughts that it was a bad idea.
I guess for me, improving sleep involved lots of small changes:
Consistent bed time.
More exercise and sun exposure during the day.
Black out blinds at night.
The kids started sleeping in more so I can wake up naturally.
Cutting back on caffeine.
I guess for me, improving sleep involved lots of small changes:
Consistent bed time.
More exercise and sun exposure during the day.
Black out blinds at night.
The kids started sleeping in more so I can wake up naturally.
Cutting back on caffeine.
I'm 45, 5'9 and have a 30-inch waist. How? I subsist on oatmeal, eggs, milk, fruits & veggies, peanut butter, cheese in moderation, TONS OF BLACK BEANS AND LENTILS, rice, bread and pasta. Boring stuff.
No meat. No soda. No fast food. Sweets and booze only on rare occasions.
Black beans are good for your brain and leave you full & satiated for longer than most food. Their notorious side-effects -- to those around you -- are somewhat exaggerated. Fats and sweets make me feel lazy. I like to stay active (weights, hoops, doing things outside) but can slack for weeks at a time w/out consequence.
I don't give myself credit for being disciplined -- just have good habits and decent genes. What I am proud of is that in spite of not being the most mentally healthy person, instead of turning to food or drugs to comfort myself, I use exercise, good food and a sense of humor to lift my spirits.
No meat. No soda. No fast food. Sweets and booze only on rare occasions.
Black beans are good for your brain and leave you full & satiated for longer than most food. Their notorious side-effects -- to those around you -- are somewhat exaggerated. Fats and sweets make me feel lazy. I like to stay active (weights, hoops, doing things outside) but can slack for weeks at a time w/out consequence.
I don't give myself credit for being disciplined -- just have good habits and decent genes. What I am proud of is that in spite of not being the most mentally healthy person, instead of turning to food or drugs to comfort myself, I use exercise, good food and a sense of humor to lift my spirits.
Loved the piece. Diet is a part of it but so are hormones.
I've been overweight (90kg/200lb at 1,8m/6ft) since going to college and tried dieting but never managed to be lean. In my 20s I would diet and lose 20lb but then gain it again. Over time I convinced myself "that wasn't a big deal".
I went to an endocrinologist last month and I feel like the scales have fallen from my eyes. Suddenly all that resistance to losing weight wasn't because I suck at dieting. It's because my hormones and my fat keep me from losing weight. The medicine I'm taking even drove away the binge factor. Even though I'm still at the start of my weight loss journey just lifting that burden from my shoulders.
I've been overweight (90kg/200lb at 1,8m/6ft) since going to college and tried dieting but never managed to be lean. In my 20s I would diet and lose 20lb but then gain it again. Over time I convinced myself "that wasn't a big deal".
I went to an endocrinologist last month and I feel like the scales have fallen from my eyes. Suddenly all that resistance to losing weight wasn't because I suck at dieting. It's because my hormones and my fat keep me from losing weight. The medicine I'm taking even drove away the binge factor. Even though I'm still at the start of my weight loss journey just lifting that burden from my shoulders.
Can you be specific about what specific hormone was affecting you and/or what medication is used to treat it?
Read The Obesity Code: Unlocking the Secrets of Weight Loss by Dr. Jason Fung to understand how hormones affect body weight. https://amzn.com/1771641258
Hi!
I'm already ate 25% of the book. Great read, thank you!
I'm already ate 25% of the book. Great read, thank you!
If you have diabetes, you can read the other famous book by Dr. Fung: The Diabetes Code: Prevent and Reverse Type 2 Diabetes Naturally. https://amzn.com/1771642653
Mainly insuline.
I'm taking semaglutide (brand name ozempic) once a week and it raises your insulin secretion, reducing hunger and fat storage.
My visceral fat was high even though I don't appear fat. This fat is bad for pretty much all metabolic functions.
I'm taking semaglutide (brand name ozempic) once a week and it raises your insulin secretion, reducing hunger and fat storage.
My visceral fat was high even though I don't appear fat. This fat is bad for pretty much all metabolic functions.
You had me at "To keep reading this story, get the free app or log in." gripping read.
Outline's version: https://outline.com/bLuVKB
I’ve found that it’s not easy to lose weight and maintain it by cutting calories. It requires serious and disciplined changes in the total portions of food (which is one factor) over a lifetime. Even with discipline, I lost a few but gained almost all of it back with just a few days of slippage. That was disappointing.
Working out to compensate for a piece of cake or some other food is a total non-starter. You calculate and compare the calories (between food and exercise) and realize that intake control is the only place you can (as an average person) work on for decent results. This is all the more so if your genetic or bodily makeup is such that it’s easier to gain weight than lose it.
Working out to compensate for a piece of cake or some other food is a total non-starter. You calculate and compare the calories (between food and exercise) and realize that intake control is the only place you can (as an average person) work on for decent results. This is all the more so if your genetic or bodily makeup is such that it’s easier to gain weight than lose it.
It's well-documented that your weight fluctuates quite a bit from day to day. Mine goes up and down a pound or two. It has to do with the amount of water your body is retaining at any given time. Starting a new exercise routine will make your weight spike temporarily. Cutting your caloric consumption will sometimes dramatically decrease your weight, then you'll gain a little bit back, then it'll gradually go down again if you stick to a deficit.
There are folks that exercise AT THE GYM for 2 to 3 hours DAILY just to out-train their diet. That's dedication.
> I would walk 500 miles — around 15,000 to 20,000 steps a day
Obvious typo here.
Obvious typo here.
I think he was referencing a song as a pun. It’s around ~3-4 miles actually right?
A mile is 1500-2500 steps, depending on your stride length, so that would be at least 10 miles.
I'm glad someone got it lol. Really need to work on my humor...
It's a joke, Joyce.
Just eat less. It's not hard
The "it's just" crowd entirely miss what really needs to be addressed by the targets of their pithiness: the satiation mechanism. For everyone who gets upset at the "it's simple...", "it's just..." (CICO, eat less, stay out of the kitchen, etc.) tone-deaf preachiness, remember that their satiation mechanism works very different from yours.
Figure out how to hack your satiation (it is very different for different people), and you have started to unwind the stack on how to address your intake challenges. Start your rabbit hole research with the search string "long term induced satiety" (but without the quotes), and branch off from there. That starts you off with physical and chemically-constrained satiety, but there are cultural, mental, social, financial, and many other factors at play as well that might be dominant in your particular situation so go in those directions if it makes sense to you. YMMV.
Figure out how to hack your satiation (it is very different for different people), and you have started to unwind the stack on how to address your intake challenges. Start your rabbit hole research with the search string "long term induced satiety" (but without the quotes), and branch off from there. That starts you off with physical and chemically-constrained satiety, but there are cultural, mental, social, financial, and many other factors at play as well that might be dominant in your particular situation so go in those directions if it makes sense to you. YMMV.
Eat less calories, or even better: less calories that you actually absorb.
You intestine cannot extract every calorie, especially those in unprocessed (fiberous) plant cells get excreted.
I find eating more helps me: eat more volume/weight, of less calorie dense foods. Diets like WFPB and raw mornings-and-or-afternoons do that for me.
You intestine cannot extract every calorie, especially those in unprocessed (fiberous) plant cells get excreted.
I find eating more helps me: eat more volume/weight, of less calorie dense foods. Diets like WFPB and raw mornings-and-or-afternoons do that for me.
I forgot where I read it but a cool rule of thumb is aim for foods with 1 calorie per gram or less and you’ll naturally lose weight.
Good luck finding many foods like that or enjoying them though.
Good luck finding many foods like that or enjoying them though.
During my raw fruity mornings and lunches I actually look for calories: which I mostly find in tropical fruits.
Also: not trying to lose weight, more trying to build some :)
Also: not trying to lose weight, more trying to build some :)
I guess obesity and obesity-related disease being a major cause of death would contract that it's "not hard".
It took some serious lifestyle changes for me to become and stay in shape - and habits _are_ a hard thing to change. ;-)
It took some serious lifestyle changes for me to become and stay in shape - and habits _are_ a hard thing to change. ;-)
Eating less is a simple concept, but not necessarily easy. The author specifically mentions struggling with binge eating.
It is incredibly easy to diet yourself to nutritional deficiency of some sorts. While still gaining weight.
A well-balanced diet will certainly make you healthier and feel better! If you are eating more energy than you're expending, you will gain weight. If you are eating less energy than you're expending, you will lose weight. This is well-researched.
I think, from my experience and from the experiences I've read of people who have lost weight and kept it off, the key is finding a sustainable diet. One that your future, goal-weight self can be trusted to follow even after you're done losing the weight. People tend to get to that point and then go back to eating like they did when they were overweight, which reverses all the hard work they did.
I think, from my experience and from the experiences I've read of people who have lost weight and kept it off, the key is finding a sustainable diet. One that your future, goal-weight self can be trusted to follow even after you're done losing the weight. People tend to get to that point and then go back to eating like they did when they were overweight, which reverses all the hard work they did.
You do know that when you eat less, the amount hungrier you get is greater than the amount you’re eating less, right? You do know that it’s been proven again and again that willpower doesn’t work?
Telling someone to eat less to lose weight is technically correct, but in reality is useless advice. And no, it really is hard.
Maybe if you got lucky with a great metabolism it might be easy, but a lot of people don’t have that and will struggle.
It’s not about eating less and more about eating correct.
Telling someone to eat less to lose weight is technically correct, but in reality is useless advice. And no, it really is hard.
Maybe if you got lucky with a great metabolism it might be easy, but a lot of people don’t have that and will struggle.
It’s not about eating less and more about eating correct.
Personally (I'm not that fat) I tried eating less to get a nicer body, but whenever I do so I feel tired or dizzy when exercising. Yes, I lose some weight, but it also feels that my powers are gone. I now eat whenever I am hungry as much as I want, but exercise more. I no longer have the dizzy problems.
[deleted]
You should write a book.
1. Self-propelled motion to get around. Ski, bike, run, or even walk. Don't own a car. My friend sold his and bought a huge bike that his kids and groceries fit into. Yes it is possible. I've biked in -30C weather. It's not that bad.
2. Fiber, protein are your best friends. Some fats are kinda friends too, especially from veggies or fish. Sugar is the enemy. All other carbs treat like acquaintances, except for starch which can be safely eaten if it is cold where it acts like a fibre. Potato salad with bacon bits and green onions: Yes. Hashbrowns with pancakes: No.
3. Body weight workouts at least once a week. They're a bit fanatical over at https://www.reddit.com/r/bodyweightfitness/ but the program is good. Follow it but don't push your self too hard. I got wicked tennis elbow when I was approaching a muscle up and had to take a year off.
That's it. It's simple. I don't understand why Weight Watchers even exists. Just cut out the sugar, move around, and eat more plants.