Re: Too Much Spaghetti
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JJones75</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: timelinex</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
If your worried about this for weight reasons, then unless your trying to cut below 10% BF your efforts might be misguided as well. <span style="color: #FF0000">At the end of the day, most weight can be lost and regulated just by consuming less calories then you expend. Thats it. Doesnt matter if its sugar/carbs/protien/mcdonalds or organic. </span>
Sorry for the rant, but I sometimes get a bit irritated seeing all the 'must haves' being throw around and eaten up by people that just haven't done enough research to know the truth. These days every person who has talked to their local gym's juicehead is an internet expert.
</div></div>
so you mean to tell me that if your basic calorie needs for a day it 3000 calories that if you eat only 2500 cals a day or anything then you will lose weight? that would be a 500 cal a day deficte , 7 days a week is 3500 cals a week , that what one pound of fat has , so in your theory you should lose a pound of fat a day??
that is total and complete bullshit !!!
i know for a fact i can give a subject a daily calorie intake less than that of what they expend with ZERO carbs , just protein and fat and with proper training that subject will GAIN weight which is muscle and reduce body fat
i guarn-damn-tee that if you eat 500 cals under your daily cal needs in blue bell ice cream you are going to end up a fat ass. </div></div>
Well actually yes that is what I'm saying. I have ate 'junk' for a week or two before because of outside influences and actually LOST weight by making sure to moderate intake. Ive also ate strictly healthy and gained weight because of overeating. Arguing against the energy in vs energy out theory is arguing against the fundamentals of physics. If you use more energy than you consume, it has to come from somewhere. The calorie in vs calorie out is a FACT. The waters get muddied in that your body does adapt and change based on food intake. For example, your metabolism will slow down after a large calorie deficit over time. But calories in vs calories out still applies, its just your calories out are now less and in have to be compensated. This is why this isn't the only thing to consider when your trying to lose that last bit of fat, thats when food composition matters. I said that this applies to <span style="font-weight: bold">most</span> people that are just trying to lose a little bit of weight because they are fat or overweight.
On the other hand, what you may be inferring to is that different diets might change your basal metabolism or your overall energy consumption... So you lowering your energy out and that isn't disagreeing with what I said about energy in vs. energy out.
No the weight loss will NOT come only from fat, and I dont think I said that anywhere. Part of it will always be fat and part will be muscle. Depending on the consistency of your diet it will vary what percent of each, but it remind me of another popular trainer myth. The "fat burning zone", that was a huge fad that everyone jumped on the bandwagon to. If you don't know what it is, its the heart rate % that is supposedly the best to run at to burn the most fat. Which in the end gave lazy people an excuse to not push themselves and complain they aren't getting results. The reality of it is that its a mixed truth. At that max heart rate %, it is true that most the burned calories come from fat... What they don't tell you is it burns 1/4 the calories.(ratios aren't accurate but are around something like that,going off the top of my head) So in that same 5 minute run, running closer to your max aerobic heart rate in reality you would burn 3 times the fat calories than in the fat zone. The 'fat burning zone' is a great strategy if your built trying to shred those last bits of fat while minimizing muscle gain. But it really doesn't apply to most people that are just trying to lose weight and get in shape.. They would be better off in the higher heart rate zone burning alot more calories per minute. But the trainers have to have something new and inside information to tell their clients and big companies need to have a reason for you to buy their heart rate monitors.
Anyways this is all off topic from the OP's original concern so as I said before, thats my 2c take it or leave it. You might fully disagree or know your opinion is right and thats great. Different strokes for different folks I suppose.
, that anyone reach into the "market" for naloxone!!
