If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"WT Brooks" wrote in message
. .. I've always been kind of a math nut, and I was just sitting down to do some basic calculations about my dieting history. At age 18, I was finished growing and pretty much had my adult body in place. I weighed 160 lbs. then. This past year, 16 years later, I was up to 220 lbs. My weight gain was pretty steady and even the whole way, and an extra 60 lbs. over 16 years amounts to a gain of 3.75 lbs./year. Not much, huh? I went further, using the standard figure that gaining or losing 1 lb. amounts to 3500 total calories in either direction. Multiplying 3.75 by 3500 shows that I overate by 13,125 calories per year on average. 13,125 divided by 365.25 (accounting for leap year) gives me a daily overage of about 36 calories. I had to redo it 3 times to convince myself that was right. What I thought was 16 years of pigging out really amounts to overeating by the amount of a plain rice cake every day. I know this is all oversimplifying to some extent, and there are different things to take into account involving how many daily calories you need based on your current weight, but it has to make you think. What if I could do it all over and just eat a little less every day? Just skip that extra helping of mashed potatoes, have a few less Doritos, get the burger without cheese. Just one thing like that every day could have kept me at a normal weight, possibly. Is it all really this simple, or does anyone see any big holes in this theory? William 210/205/160 Nice post, and good job with the numbers (despite what the quibblers say)! FWIW, I've seen a similar calculation on various weight-related web sites, and yours agrees with it. Apparently, the average American woman gains about 1 lb per year during the 20 years following high school. Running the numbers like you did, this works out to a surplus of a mere 10 calories per day (equal to 2/3rds of a teaspoon of sugar)! The good news is that even small calorie deficits, if maintained over time, can result in substantial weight loss. Unfortunately, too many people think they can go on some "secret diet", or pop some "revolutionary all-natural fat-burning pill", and lose 20 lbs in 30 days. -- GG http://www.WeightWare.com Your Weight and Health Diary |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"WT Brooks" wrote in message
. .. I've always been kind of a math nut, and I was just sitting down to do some basic calculations about my dieting history. At age 18, I was finished growing and pretty much had my adult body in place. I weighed 160 lbs. then. This past year, 16 years later, I was up to 220 lbs. My weight gain was pretty steady and even the whole way, and an extra 60 lbs. over 16 years amounts to a gain of 3.75 lbs./year. Not much, huh? I went further, using the standard figure that gaining or losing 1 lb. amounts to 3500 total calories in either direction. Multiplying 3.75 by 3500 shows that I overate by 13,125 calories per year on average. 13,125 divided by 365.25 (accounting for leap year) gives me a daily overage of about 36 calories. I had to redo it 3 times to convince myself that was right. What I thought was 16 years of pigging out really amounts to overeating by the amount of a plain rice cake every day. I know this is all oversimplifying to some extent, and there are different things to take into account involving how many daily calories you need based on your current weight, but it has to make you think. What if I could do it all over and just eat a little less every day? Just skip that extra helping of mashed potatoes, have a few less Doritos, get the burger without cheese. Just one thing like that every day could have kept me at a normal weight, possibly. Is it all really this simple, or does anyone see any big holes in this theory? William 210/205/160 Nice post, and good job with the numbers (despite what the quibblers say)! FWIW, I've seen a similar calculation on various weight-related web sites, and yours agrees with it. Apparently, the average American woman gains about 1 lb per year during the 20 years following high school. Running the numbers like you did, this works out to a surplus of a mere 10 calories per day (equal to 2/3rds of a teaspoon of sugar)! The good news is that even small calorie deficits, if maintained over time, can result in substantial weight loss. Unfortunately, too many people think they can go on some "secret diet", or pop some "revolutionary all-natural fat-burning pill", and lose 20 lbs in 30 days. -- GG http://www.WeightWare.com Your Weight and Health Diary |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"WT Brooks" wrote in message
. .. I've always been kind of a math nut, and I was just sitting down to do some basic calculations about my dieting history. At age 18, I was finished growing and pretty much had my adult body in place. I weighed 160 lbs. then. This past year, 16 years later, I was up to 220 lbs. My weight gain was pretty steady and even the whole way, and an extra 60 lbs. over 16 years amounts to a gain of 3.75 lbs./year. Not much, huh? I went further, using the standard figure that gaining or losing 1 lb. amounts to 3500 total calories in either direction. Multiplying 3.75 by 3500 shows that I overate by 13,125 calories per year on average. 13,125 divided by 365.25 (accounting for leap year) gives me a daily overage of about 36 calories. I had to redo it 3 times to convince myself that was right. What I thought was 16 years of pigging out really amounts to overeating by the amount of a plain rice cake every day. I know this is all oversimplifying to some extent, and there are different things to take into account involving how many daily calories you need based on your current weight, but it has to make you think. What if I could do it all over and just eat a little less every day? Just skip that extra helping of mashed potatoes, have a few less Doritos, get the burger without cheese. Just one thing like that every day could have kept me at a normal weight, possibly. Is it all really this simple, or does anyone see any big holes in this theory? William 210/205/160 Nice post, and good job with the numbers (despite what the quibblers say)! FWIW, I've seen a similar calculation on various weight-related web sites, and yours agrees with it. Apparently, the average American woman gains about 1 lb per year during the 20 years following high school. Running the numbers like you did, this works out to a surplus of a mere 10 calories per day (equal to 2/3rds of a teaspoon of sugar)! The good news is that even small calorie deficits, if maintained over time, can result in substantial weight loss. Unfortunately, too many people think they can go on some "secret diet", or pop some "revolutionary all-natural fat-burning pill", and lose 20 lbs in 30 days. -- GG http://www.WeightWare.com Your Weight and Health Diary |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"WT Brooks" wrote in message ...
I've always been kind of a math nut, and I was just sitting down to do some basic calculations about my dieting history. I've done the same calculations (excel is my sandbox), and calculated my gain from 200 - 236.5 from 2000 to 2002 was an average of 146kcal/day, ie if I had just substituted water instead of Mt Dew when eating out I wouldn't have gained at all. d'oh! could have kept me at a normal weight, possibly. Is it all really this simple, or does anyone see any big holes in this theory? Basically calories are stored if they're not used, so gorging late at night may result in more fat gains than eating more regularly throughout the day. Plus there's some theory that the fructose in high-fructose corn syrup gets changed into fats by the liver differently, and thus becomes belly / organ fat more easily, than other calories. I've read that the first 50g/day of fructose can be metabolized into glucose, but after that the fructose becomes triglycerides (fat). |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"WT Brooks" wrote in message ...
I've always been kind of a math nut, and I was just sitting down to do some basic calculations about my dieting history. I've done the same calculations (excel is my sandbox), and calculated my gain from 200 - 236.5 from 2000 to 2002 was an average of 146kcal/day, ie if I had just substituted water instead of Mt Dew when eating out I wouldn't have gained at all. d'oh! could have kept me at a normal weight, possibly. Is it all really this simple, or does anyone see any big holes in this theory? Basically calories are stored if they're not used, so gorging late at night may result in more fat gains than eating more regularly throughout the day. Plus there's some theory that the fructose in high-fructose corn syrup gets changed into fats by the liver differently, and thus becomes belly / organ fat more easily, than other calories. I've read that the first 50g/day of fructose can be metabolized into glucose, but after that the fructose becomes triglycerides (fat). |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Metabolic Advantage - my test results | Doug Lerner | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 37 | April 16th, 2004 04:49 PM |
Blood test results | Joyce | Weightwatchers | 9 | March 14th, 2004 11:57 AM |
Do the Math - Low-Carb Fast Foods May Not Be the Healthiest Choice | Ken Kubos | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 3 | January 23rd, 2004 10:20 PM |
High saturated fat, starch avoidance weight loss diet offers good preliminary results | Diarmid Logan | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 2 | November 12th, 2003 02:24 PM |
Surprising Cholesterol/Tryglycerides Results. | Douglass D. Benson | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 2 | October 17th, 2003 11:15 PM |