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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Thermodynamics and Metabolic Advantage of Weight Loss Diets
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 04:59:24 +1000, Wozza wrote:
Very interesting. Everyone seems to know about "calories consumed", but how about "calorires excreted". You could define, say: calories burned = calories consumed - calories excreted eating "octane ratio" = calories burned/calories consumed * 100 Rarely mentioned in this whole "counting cals" lunacy is that what goes in your mouth is not necessarily even close to what is "pulled" into (use) in your system. Think corn kernels and your poop. So, you start with a cal counting "handbook", you mix in the fact that the handbook is a guesstimate, then you don't weigh your food to know whether that steak is 4 or 5.1 ounces, much less the veggies and deserts, add food that passes through the gut relatively untouched (and never subtracted from the cals intake) and you have about as useless a system as one can imagine. Of course, you get the "privilege" of wasting your time writing down this mess of inaccuracies to boot. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Chris Braun wrote:
Well, I've lost 127 lbs. with this useless, inaccurate lunacy. (And maintained it for over 6 months so far.) How did we ever do it?! It must have been *magic*! Who knew counting calories wouldn't work? Do we need to start over? Return our little jeans? I think not ;-) -- Snowshoeing! Laurie in Maine 207/110 60 inches of attitude! Start: 2/02 Maintained since 2/03 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 14:39:12 -0500, MU wrote:
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 04:59:24 +1000, Wozza wrote: Very interesting. Everyone seems to know about "calories consumed", but how about "calorires excreted". You could define, say: calories burned = calories consumed - calories excreted eating "octane ratio" = calories burned/calories consumed * 100 Rarely mentioned in this whole "counting cals" lunacy is that what goes in your mouth is not necessarily even close to what is "pulled" into (use) in your system. Think corn kernels and your poop. So, you start with a cal counting "handbook", you mix in the fact that the handbook is a guesstimate, then you don't weigh your food to know whether that steak is 4 or 5.1 ounces, much less the veggies and deserts, add food that passes through the gut relatively untouched (and never subtracted from the cals intake) and you have about as useless a system as one can imagine. Of course, you get the "privilege" of wasting your time writing down this mess of inaccuracies to boot. Who the hell knows, I mean really? What seems to hold true for one person doesn't work at all for another. I have read on this ng (alt.support.diet), reports of people who essentially eat the same diet and yet lose weight by increasing their exercise level. For me, I can kill myself exercising and eating the same diet and *nothing* happens, I'm sure that there are people who experience the same thing with calorie restriction. Judging from this group, of the umteem jillion obese people in the world, there are a relative few who have figured out what works. Em ----- When in trouble or in doubt, Run in circles, scream and shout. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Auntie Em wrote:
I have read on this ng (alt.support.diet), reports of people who essentially eat the same diet and yet lose weight by increasing their exercise level. For me, I can kill myself exercising and eating the same diet and *nothing* happens, I'm sure that there are people who experience the same thing with calorie restriction. There was a very good medical study published in the past couple months that proved that while many people do, in fact, lose weight with exercise, there are quite a few others, who have some kind of genetic difference in how their muscle metabolisms work, do not. I know I'm one of those in the latter category and always have been. Exercise will make my muscles look nicer but does not make me lose weight. --Jenny Type 2 diabetes since 1998. Hba1c 5.7% Low Carbing for 5 years. 140 lbs (goal) Cut the "carbs" to respond to my email address. ----------------------------------------------------- What they Don't Tell You About Diabetes Web Site http://www.geocities.com/lottadata4u/ Jenny's Low Carb Diet Facts & Figures site http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean/ Looking for help controlling your blood sugar? Visit http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/...0Diagnosed.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------- |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Mu:
"Rarely mentioned in this whole "counting cals" lunacy is that what goes in your mouth is not necessarily even close to what is "pulled" into (use) in your system. Think corn kernels and your poop." It's not mentioned in counting cals, but it is indeed focused on in Atkins, where fiber gets subtracted from the carb count. Seems Atkins was right! |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"There was a very good medical study published in the past couple
months that proved that while many people do, in fact, lose weight with exercise, there are quite a few others, who have some kind of genetic difference in how their muscle metabolisms work, do not." I can see how this could be true for modest amounts of excercise. But if you increase excercise a lot and maintain the same diet, it's hard to see how this is possible. The extra energy burned has to come from somewhere. Some of the weight will be converted to muscle, but it's hard to figure out how they could not lose some weight in the process. Do you have a link to the study? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"I have read on this ng (alt.support.diet), reports of people who
essentially eat the same diet and yet lose weight by increasing their exercise level. For me, I can kill myself exercising and eating the same diet and *nothing* happens, I'm sure that there are people who experience the same thing with calorie restriction. Judging from this group, of the umteem jillion obese people in the world, there are a relative few who have figured out what works." Calories work. Exercise uses fairly few calories per sey if one consults the charts showing activity and calories per hour. Exercise primes the body for more weight loss because the effect which is using calories during exercise continues up to 48 hours after the exercise stops,ie. the body is in a greater calorie using mode. Calories work, there were no obese people to survive the camps in europe. The way each of our bodies is set up to react to fewer calories differes and most people lose weight when a few hundred calories less per day are eaten over time. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Ignoramus31471" wrote in message ... On 31 Dec 2004 16:35:54 GMT, wrote: "I have read on this ng (alt.support.diet), reports of people who essentially eat the same diet and yet lose weight by increasing their exercise level. For me, I can kill myself exercising and eating the same diet and *nothing* happens, I'm sure that there are people who experience the same thing with calorie restriction. Judging from this group, of the umteem jillion obese people in the world, there are a relative few who have figured out what works." Calories work. Exercise uses fairly few calories per sey if one consults the charts showing activity and calories per hour. Exercise primes the body for more weight loss because the effect which is using calories during exercise continues up to 48 hours after the exercise stops,ie. the body is in a greater calorie using mode "up to 48 hours" is not true for many forms of exercise, namely those that don't drive HR up. .. Calories work, there were no obese people to survive the camps in europe. The way each of our bodies is set up to react to fewer calories differes and most people lose weight when a few hundred calories less per day are eaten over time. You are forgetting that a person who exercises may conceivably be hungrier and eat more. Again. Exercise helps some people to lose weight and it does not help other people. Also, some people's fitness is not improved by exercise, as strange as it sounds. the number of people who don't benefit from exericse are far and few between. And below you only list one article...there is great risk in assuming it is the last word on whether exercise is not beneficial for even a small number of people. There could be many issue at play that produced those results. Exercise is not a cure all and it is not always helpful for everyone. Perhaps. If you are one of the lucky people who do benefit from exercise, count your blessings. The vast majority fall into this group, even according to that article. I am also one of those lucky people. I am slim and fit, and exercise, so please do not construe my message as though i am making some sort of an excuse for not exercising or staying fat. ================================================== ==================== Some people are 'immune' to exercise 10:45 02 December 04 http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996735 Exclusive from New Scientist Print Edition. Public-health campaigns regularly plug exercise as a sure-fire way to avoid an early grave. But that message may be too simplistic. For an unhappy few, even quite strenuous exercise may have no effect on their fitness or their risk of developing diseases like diabetes. "There is astounding variation in the response to exercise. The vast majority will benefit in some way, but there will be a minority who will not benefit at all," says Claude Bouchard of Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge, US. At the Australian Health and Medical Research Congress in Sydney, Australia, last week Bouchard reported the results of a study assessing the role of genes in fitness and health changes in response to exercise. In the study, 742 people from 213 families were put through a strict 20-week endurance training programme. The volunteers had not taken regular physical activity for the previous six months. Exercise on stationary bikes was gradually increased so that by the last six weeks the volunteers were exercising for 50 minutes three times a week at 75% of the maximum output they were capable of before the study. Previous reports indicated that there are huge variations in "trainability" between subjects. For example, the team found that training improved maximum oxygen consumption, a measure of a person's ability to perform work, by 17% on average. But the most trainable volunteers gained over 40%, and the least trainable showed no improvement at all. Similar patterns were seen with cardiac output, blood pressure, heart rate and other markers of fitness. Weblinks Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University Australian Health and Medical Research Congress Institute of Neuromuscular Research, Children's Hospital, Westmead School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University Bouchard reported that the impact of training on insulin sensitivity - a marker of risk for diabetes and heart disease - also varied. It improved in 58% of the volunteers following exercise, but in 42% it showed no improvement or, in a few cases, may have got worse. "It's negative, but it's true. Some people slog away and don't get any improvement," says Kathryn North of the Institute of Neuromuscular Research at the Children's Hospital at Westmead in Sydney, Australia. In the eight volunteers who showed the largest improvement in insulin sensitivity, 51 genes were expressed in muscles at double the levels of the eight people who showed the least improvement, and 74 genes were expressed at half the level. Many of these genes were a surprise to the researchers because they have not previously been linked to exercise. "We need to recognise that although on average exercise may have clear benefits, it may not work for everyone," says Mark Hargreaves of Deakin University in Melbourne, Australia. "Some people may do better to change their diet." Rachel Nowak, Sydney -- ............................... Keepsake gift for young girls. Unique and personal one-of-a-kind. Builds strong minds 12 ways. Guaranteed satisfaction - courteous money back - keep bonus gifts http://www.alicebook.com -- 223/172.3/180 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Roger Zoul" wrote in message ... "Ignoramus31471" wrote in message ... On 31 Dec 2004 16:35:54 GMT, wrote: "I have read on this ng (alt.support.diet), reports of people who essentially eat the same diet and yet lose weight by increasing their exercise level. For me, I can kill myself exercising and eating the same diet and *nothing* happens, I'm sure that there are people who experience the same thing with calorie restriction. Judging from this group, of the umteem jillion obese people in the world, there are a relative few who have figured out what works." Calories work. Exercise uses fairly few calories per sey if one consults the charts showing activity and calories per hour. Exercise primes the body for more weight loss because the effect which is using calories during exercise continues up to 48 hours after the exercise stops,ie. the body is in a greater calorie using mode "up to 48 hours" is not true for many forms of exercise, namely those that don't drive HR up. . Calories work, there were no obese people to survive the camps in europe. The way each of our bodies is set up to react to fewer calories differes and most people lose weight when a few hundred calories less per day are eaten over time. You are forgetting that a person who exercises may conceivably be hungrier and eat more. Again. Exercise helps some people to lose weight and it does not help other people. Also, some people's fitness is not improved by exercise, as strange as it sounds. the number of people who don't benefit from exericse are far and few between. And below you only list one article...there is great risk in assuming it is the last word on whether exercise is not beneficial for even a small number of people. There could be many issue at play that produced those results. I have noticed that some people's perception of effort seems to be warped, which would cause them to believe that exercise does not help them. I saw a woman in the gym once that was arm curling with small pink 2lb weights and leg pressing with 20lbs on the machine. She appeared to be getting a serious workout by looking at her facial expressions. In reality, an average grocery shopping trip would be more strenuous. 10 bags weighing 5lbs each, carried up a flight of stairs would be more of an effort than the weights she was using. In order to build muscle, a person has to stress them by lifting more than they normally do. Genetic factors would of course limit the amount of muscle that could be obtained. Exercise is not a cure all and it is not always helpful for everyone. Perhaps. If you are one of the lucky people who do benefit from exercise, count your blessings. The vast majority fall into this group, even according to that article. I am also one of those lucky people. I am slim and fit, and exercise, so please do not construe my message as though i am making some sort of an excuse for not exercising or staying fat. ================================================== ==================== Some people are 'immune' to exercise 10:45 02 December 04 http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996735 Exclusive from New Scientist Print Edition. Public-health campaigns regularly plug exercise as a sure-fire way to avoid an early grave. But that message may be too simplistic. For an unhappy few, even quite strenuous exercise may have no effect on their fitness or their risk of developing diseases like diabetes. "There is astounding variation in the response to exercise. The vast majority will benefit in some way, but there will be a minority who will not benefit at all," says Claude Bouchard of Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge, US. At the Australian Health and Medical Research Congress in Sydney, Australia, last week Bouchard reported the results of a study assessing the role of genes in fitness and health changes in response to exercise. In the study, 742 people from 213 families were put through a strict 20-week endurance training programme. The volunteers had not taken regular physical activity for the previous six months. Exercise on stationary bikes was gradually increased so that by the last six weeks the volunteers were exercising for 50 minutes three times a week at 75% of the maximum output they were capable of before the study. Previous reports indicated that there are huge variations in "trainability" between subjects. For example, the team found that training improved maximum oxygen consumption, a measure of a person's ability to perform work, by 17% on average. But the most trainable volunteers gained over 40%, and the least trainable showed no improvement at all. Similar patterns were seen with cardiac output, blood pressure, heart rate and other markers of fitness. Weblinks Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University Australian Health and Medical Research Congress Institute of Neuromuscular Research, Children's Hospital, Westmead School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University Bouchard reported that the impact of training on insulin sensitivity - a marker of risk for diabetes and heart disease - also varied. It improved in 58% of the volunteers following exercise, but in 42% it showed no improvement or, in a few cases, may have got worse. "It's negative, but it's true. Some people slog away and don't get any improvement," says Kathryn North of the Institute of Neuromuscular Research at the Children's Hospital at Westmead in Sydney, Australia. In the eight volunteers who showed the largest improvement in insulin sensitivity, 51 genes were expressed in muscles at double the levels of the eight people who showed the least improvement, and 74 genes were expressed at half the level. Many of these genes were a surprise to the researchers because they have not previously been linked to exercise. "We need to recognise that although on average exercise may have clear benefits, it may not work for everyone," says Mark Hargreaves of Deakin University in Melbourne, Australia. "Some people may do better to change their diet." Rachel Nowak, Sydney -- ............................... Keepsake gift for young girls. Unique and personal one-of-a-kind. Builds strong minds 12 ways. Guaranteed satisfaction - courteous money back - keep bonus gifts http://www.alicebook.com -- 223/172.3/180 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
wrote:
I can see how this could be true for modest amounts of excercise. But if you increase excercise a lot and maintain the same diet, it's hard to see how this is possible. The extra energy burned has to come from somewhere. Some of the weight will be converted to muscle, but it's hard to figure out how they could not lose some weight in the process. Do you have a link to the study? Here's the link to the article, from the Dec. 2004 New Scientist, entitled "Some People are Immune to Exercise". http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6735 Here is a portion of that article: In the study, 742 people from 213 families were put through a strict 20-week endurance training programme. The volunteers had not taken regular physical activity for the previous six months. Exercise on stationary bikes was gradually increased so that by the last six weeks the volunteers were exercising for 50 minutes three times a week at 75% of the maximum output they were capable of before the study. snip But the most trainable volunteers gained over 40%, and the least trainable showed no improvement at all. Similar patterns were seen with cardiac output, blood pressure, heart rate and other markers of fitness. Slogging away Bouchard reported that the impact of training on insulin sensitivity – a marker of risk for diabetes and heart disease – also varied. It improved in 58% of the volunteers following exercise, but in 42% it showed no improvement or, in a few cases, may have got worse. “It’s negative, but it’s true. Some people slog away and don’t get any improvement,” says Kathryn North of the Institute of Neuromuscular Research at the Children’s Hospital at Westmead in Sydney, Australia. In the eight volunteers who showed the largest improvement in insulin sensitivity, 51 genes were expressed in muscles at double the levels of the eight people who showed the least improvement, and 74 genes were expressed at half the level. Many of these genes were a surprise to the researchers because they have not previously been linked to exercise. “We need to recognise that although on average exercise may have clear benefits, it may not work for everyone,” says Mark Hargreaves of Deakin University in Melbourne, Australia. “Some people may do better to change their diet.” --Jenny Type 2 diabetes since 1998. Hba1c 5.7% Low Carbing for 5 years. 140 lbs (goal) Cut the "carbs" to respond to my email address. ----------------------------------------------------- What they Don't Tell You About Diabetes Web Site http://www.geocities.com/lottadata4u/ Jenny's Low Carb Diet Facts & Figures site http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean/ Looking for help controlling your blood sugar? Visit http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/...0Diagnosed.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Does fat matter? | Gregg Davis | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 35 | June 7th, 2004 06:46 PM |
Two Keys to Weight Loss | ta | General Discussion | 57 | June 7th, 2004 01:17 AM |
Two Keys to Weight Loss | [email protected] | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | June 3rd, 2004 08:26 PM |
Two Keys to Weight Loss | [email protected] | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 1 | June 3rd, 2004 03:24 AM |
Low-Carb Diets Are Working, Study Says | [email protected] | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 1 | October 14th, 2003 04:07 AM |