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
|
|||
|
|||
The shifting Calories Theory
I'm not spaming you guys. I just want to know your opinion on that
theory. I don't know about weight-loss, but I think it's basically a good idea to avoid overeating. Days you don't feel to eat, you eat let's say 500 calories. For the next two day you're more hungry, and you eat 2000 calories, and on the fourth day you don't feel to eat, and you eat only 600 calories. Let's see the calorie intake for those four day. 1000+2000+2000+1000= 6000/4= 1500 calories a day which is like a low-calorie diet. This is taken from Fatlossforidiots.com. I put the link not to attract you there, but for copyrights reasons. http://www.fatloss4idiots.com/?hop=wgabie The Shifting Calories Theory... Your metabolism doesn't know how much food you'll eat tomorrow or the next day because those days have not happened yet. Therefore, your metabolism always burns calories based on your eating habits during the past few days -- because it assumes that you'll continue to eat in the same general way. Guess what? You're about to shock your metabolism by doing something you've never tried before -- you're going to do the OPPOSITE of what it expects you to do. You're going to NOT continue eating the same types of calories and meals for more than a couple days at a time, and you're going to lose a lot of weight by doing this. To make this work you need to SHIFT the types of calories eaten as shown in our diet on the next page, and if you do this then your metabolism will burn all of the calories eaten. Then, when it finishes burning those calories it will find the nearest available fat tissue on your body and burn that too... |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The shifting Calories Theory
" wrote:
I'm not spaming you guys. I just want to know your opinion on that theory. I don't know about weight-loss, but I think it's basically a good idea to avoid overeating. Days you don't feel to eat, you eat let's say 500 calories. For the next two day you're more hungry, and you eat 2000 calories, and on the fourth day you don't feel to eat, and you eat only 600 calories. Let's see the calorie intake for those four day. 1000+2000+2000+1000= 6000/4= *1500 calories a day which is like a low-calorie diet. I don't know of any good data on the topic but it very much looks like the average calories eaten in the last week matters more than the calories eaten in the last day. That and changes in cal/carb/fat levels either direction tend to trigger loss. Also folks who stay at fixed levels of cal/carb/fat seem to stall more often than folks who bounce them around but I sure wish I had better data to know if this is something I pulled from anecdotal evidence or something that is a traceable trend. There are low carb studies that show that T3 thyroid output drops two weeks into staying extremely low in carbs. It's why popular low carb plans start moving up in week 3, but it works just as well to say that constant change works well as long as the time scale is under 2 weeks. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The shifting Calories Theory
wrote in message ... I'm not spaming you guys. I just want to know your opinion on that theory. I don't know about weight-loss, but I think it's basically a good idea to avoid overeating. Days you don't feel to eat, you eat let's say 500 calories. For the next two day you're more hungry, and you eat 2000 calories, and on the fourth day you don't feel to eat, and you eat only 600 calories. Let's see the calorie intake for those four day. 1000+2000+2000+1000= 6000/4= 1500 calories a day which is like a low-calorie diet. This is taken from Fatlossforidiots.com. I put the link not to attract you there, but for copyrights reasons. http://www.fatloss4idiots.com/?hop=wgabie The Shifting Calories Theory... Your metabolism doesn't know how much food you'll eat tomorrow or the next day because those days have not happened yet. Therefore, your metabolism always burns calories based on your eating habits during the past few days -- because it assumes that you'll continue to eat in the same general way. Guess what? You're about to shock your metabolism by doing something you've never tried before -- you're going to do the OPPOSITE of what it expects you to do. You're going to NOT continue eating the same types of calories and meals for more than a couple days at a time, and you're going to lose a lot of weight by doing this. To make this work you need to SHIFT the types of calories eaten as shown in our diet on the next page, and if you do this then your metabolism will burn all of the calories eaten. Then, when it finishes burning those calories it will find the nearest available fat tissue on your body and burn that too... Except your body has no conciousness nor awareness, so all this trickyness is in vain. One could argue that one's bodies hormone and so on levels adapt to ones diets so that inefficiencies could be induced by switching. I would have to see actual evidence rather than a hand waving argument. An interesting question to me is how it is that gastric bypass surgery seems to produce results that are superior in various ways to just restricting food intake to the same level. This superiority includes such things as the effect on Diabetes T2 as well as weight loss. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The shifting Calories Theory
On 24 avr, 23:15, Cynthia P wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:06:39 -0500, Del Cecchi wrote: wrote in message ... I'm not spaming you guys. I just want to know your opinion on that theory. I don't know about weight-loss, but I think it's basically a good idea to avoid overeating. Days you don't feel to eat, you eat let's say 500 calories. For the next two day you're more hungry, and you eat 2000 calories, and on the fourth day you don't feel to eat, and you eat only 600 calories. Let's see the calorie intake for those four day. 1000+2000+2000+1000= 6000/4= *1500 calories a day which is like a low-calorie diet. This is taken from Fatlossforidiots.com. I put the link not to attract you there, but for copyrights reasons. http://www.fatloss4idiots.com/?hop=wgabie The Shifting Calories Theory... Your metabolism doesn't know how much food you'll eat tomorrow or the next day because those days have not happened yet. Therefore, your metabolism always burns calories based on your eating habits during the past few days -- because it assumes that you'll continue to eat in the same general way. Guess what? *You're about to shock your metabolism by doing something you've never tried before -- you're going to do the OPPOSITE of what it expects you to do. * You're going to NOT continue eating the same types of calories and meals for more than a couple days at a time, and you're going to lose a lot of weight by doing this. To make this work you need to SHIFT the types of calories eaten as shown in our diet on the next page, and if you do this then your metabolism will burn all of the calories eaten. *Then, when it finishes burning those calories it will find the nearest available fat tissue on your body and burn that too... Except your body has no conciousness nor awareness, so all this trickyness is in vain. *One could argue that one's bodies hormone and so on levels adapt to ones diets so that inefficiencies could be induced by switching. *I would have to see actual evidence rather than a hand waving argument. An interesting question to me is how it is that gastric bypass surgery seems to produce results that are superior in various ways to just restricting food intake to the same level. *This superiority includes such things as the effect on Diabetes T2 as well as weight loss. Superiority is all relative. My sister had a friend who had gastric bypass... and yes, the friend lost loads of weight after the surgery. Today... all that weight is back again. Sister-in-law also did gastric bypass surgery. Took her a year to feel herself again and she was in and out of the hospital much of the year. Last time I saw her, she had certainly lost a nice percentage of her weight, but was complaining about how her fingernails were now brittle and chipping all the time. (Lack of sufficient nutrition, maybe?) Now, having regained some of the lost weight, she's back doing low-carb. Fortunately, she is at least doing something about her regain before it gets serious. Nevertheless... I think unless she starts to add exercise and rebuild some of her lost muscle mass, she may have a hard time keeping the weight off. The moral is that weight loss is not the same thing as maintained weight loss. And the proponents of the surgery rarely tell about the folks who have NOT been a long term success. As for calorie cycling... old news. It does work for many. So does changing up exercise as the body adapts. However, if one is doing something and getting steady reasonable progress, then there's really no reason not to keep doing it until a plateau is reached. At which point, shifting things around to break the plateau is not a bad idea, whether it's calories, macros or exercise. -- Cynthia 262/222.0/150- Masquer le texte des messages précédents - - Afficher le texte des messages précédents - It was not my intention in my original message to promote the theory that calorie shifting throws off the body. The only intention I had was to enlight the idea that this calorie shifting is great for avoiding overeating. Let's take a look at a different scenario. Let's say I'm not hungry on the first day, but force myself to eat because I'm told I HAVE to eat minimum 1500 calories a day. On the second day, I'm more hungry and eat 2000 calories. On the third day I'm hungry again and eat 2000 calories. And finally, I don't feel to eat that day, but force myself to eat again 1500. Let's see the average for the four days: 1500+2000+2000+1500= 7000/4= 1750. So an average of 1750 compared to 1500 in the first scenario. Is 250 calories a big difference? I'm wondering! |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
The shifting Calories Theory
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:06:39 -0500, Del Cecchi wrote:
wrote in message ... I'm not spaming you guys. I just want to know your opinion on that theory. I don't know about weight-loss, but I think it's basically a good idea to avoid overeating. Days you don't feel to eat, you eat let's say 500 calories. For the next two day you're more hungry, and you eat 2000 calories, and on the fourth day you don't feel to eat, and you eat only 600 calories. Let's see the calorie intake for those four day. 1000+2000+2000+1000= 6000/4= 1500 calories a day which is like a low-calorie diet. This is taken from Fatlossforidiots.com. I put the link not to attract you there, but for copyrights reasons. http://www.fatloss4idiots.com/?hop=wgabie The Shifting Calories Theory... Your metabolism doesn't know how much food you'll eat tomorrow or the next day because those days have not happened yet. Therefore, your metabolism always burns calories based on your eating habits during the past few days -- because it assumes that you'll continue to eat in the same general way. Guess what? You're about to shock your metabolism by doing something you've never tried before -- you're going to do the OPPOSITE of what it expects you to do. You're going to NOT continue eating the same types of calories and meals for more than a couple days at a time, and you're going to lose a lot of weight by doing this. To make this work you need to SHIFT the types of calories eaten as shown in our diet on the next page, and if you do this then your metabolism will burn all of the calories eaten. Then, when it finishes burning those calories it will find the nearest available fat tissue on your body and burn that too... Except your body has no conciousness nor awareness, so all this trickyness is in vain. One could argue that one's bodies hormone and so on levels adapt to ones diets so that inefficiencies could be induced by switching. I would have to see actual evidence rather than a hand waving argument. An interesting question to me is how it is that gastric bypass surgery seems to produce results that are superior in various ways to just restricting food intake to the same level. This superiority includes such things as the effect on Diabetes T2 as well as weight loss. Superiority is all relative. My sister had a friend who had gastric bypass... and yes, the friend lost loads of weight after the surgery. Today... all that weight is back again. Sister-in-law also did gastric bypass surgery. Took her a year to feel herself again and she was in and out of the hospital much of the year. Last time I saw her, she had certainly lost a nice percentage of her weight, but was complaining about how her fingernails were now brittle and chipping all the time. (Lack of sufficient nutrition, maybe?) Now, having regained some of the lost weight, she's back doing low-carb. Fortunately, she is at least doing something about her regain before it gets serious. Nevertheless... I think unless she starts to add exercise and rebuild some of her lost muscle mass, she may have a hard time keeping the weight off. The moral is that weight loss is not the same thing as maintained weight loss. And the proponents of the surgery rarely tell about the folks who have NOT been a long term success. As for calorie cycling... old news. It does work for many. So does changing up exercise as the body adapts. However, if one is doing something and getting steady reasonable progress, then there's really no reason not to keep doing it until a plateau is reached. At which point, shifting things around to break the plateau is not a bad idea, whether it's calories, macros or exercise. -- Cynthia 262/222.0/150 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
The shifting Calories Theory
wrote in message ... On 24 avr, 23:15, Cynthia P wrote: On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:06:39 -0500, Del Cecchi wrote: wrote in message ... I'm not spaming you guys. I just want to know your opinion on that theory. I don't know about weight-loss, but I think it's basically a good idea to avoid overeating. Days you don't feel to eat, you eat let's say 500 calories. For the next two day you're more hungry, and you eat 2000 calories, and on the fourth day you don't feel to eat, and you eat only 600 calories. Let's see the calorie intake for those four day. 1000+2000+2000+1000= 6000/4= 1500 calories a day which is like a low-calorie diet. This is taken from Fatlossforidiots.com. I put the link not to attract you there, but for copyrights reasons. http://www.fatloss4idiots.com/?hop=wgabie The Shifting Calories Theory... Your metabolism doesn't know how much food you'll eat tomorrow or the next day because those days have not happened yet. Therefore, your metabolism always burns calories based on your eating habits during the past few days -- because it assumes that you'll continue to eat in the same general way. Guess what? You're about to shock your metabolism by doing something you've never tried before -- you're going to do the OPPOSITE of what it expects you to do. You're going to NOT continue eating the same types of calories and meals for more than a couple days at a time, and you're going to lose a lot of weight by doing this. To make this work you need to SHIFT the types of calories eaten as shown in our diet on the next page, and if you do this then your metabolism will burn all of the calories eaten. Then, when it finishes burning those calories it will find the nearest available fat tissue on your body and burn that too... Except your body has no conciousness nor awareness, so all this trickyness is in vain. One could argue that one's bodies hormone and so on levels adapt to ones diets so that inefficiencies could be induced by switching. I would have to see actual evidence rather than a hand waving argument. An interesting question to me is how it is that gastric bypass surgery seems to produce results that are superior in various ways to just restricting food intake to the same level. This superiority includes such things as the effect on Diabetes T2 as well as weight loss. Superiority is all relative. My sister had a friend who had gastric bypass... and yes, the friend lost loads of weight after the surgery. Today... all that weight is back again. Sister-in-law also did gastric bypass surgery. Took her a year to feel herself again and she was in and out of the hospital much of the year. Last time I saw her, she had certainly lost a nice percentage of her weight, but was complaining about how her fingernails were now brittle and chipping all the time. (Lack of sufficient nutrition, maybe?) Now, having regained some of the lost weight, she's back doing low-carb. Fortunately, she is at least doing something about her regain before it gets serious. Nevertheless... I think unless she starts to add exercise and rebuild some of her lost muscle mass, she may have a hard time keeping the weight off. The moral is that weight loss is not the same thing as maintained weight loss. And the proponents of the surgery rarely tell about the folks who have NOT been a long term success. As for calorie cycling... old news. It does work for many. So does changing up exercise as the body adapts. However, if one is doing something and getting steady reasonable progress, then there's really no reason not to keep doing it until a plateau is reached. At which point, shifting things around to break the plateau is not a bad idea, whether it's calories, macros or exercise. -- Cynthia 262/222.0/150- Masquer le texte des messages précédents - - Afficher le texte des messages précédents - It was not my intention in my original message to promote the theory that calorie shifting throws off the body. The only intention I had was to enlight the idea that this calorie shifting is great for avoiding overeating. Let's take a look at a different scenario. Let's say I'm not hungry on the first day, but force myself to eat because I'm told I HAVE to eat minimum 1500 calories a day. On the second day, I'm more hungry and eat 2000 calories. On the third day I'm hungry again and eat 2000 calories. And finally, I don't feel to eat that day, but force myself to eat again 1500. Let's see the average for the four days: 1500+2000+2000+1500= 7000/4= 1750. So an average of 1750 compared to 1500 in the first scenario. Is 250 calories a big difference? I'm wondering! -------------------- By all means, if you are not hungry don't eat. That is my opinion. And bypass type surgery does seem to have benefits beyond the obvious caloric restriction. However they are certainly not universal, and there are downsides as well. But it is puzzling what is going on. del |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
The shifting Calories Theory
On Apr 27, 6:50 pm, Cynthia P wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 18:47:46 -0700 (PDT), wrote: It was not my intention in my original message to promote the theory that calorie shifting throws off the body. The only intention I had was to enlight the idea that this calorie shifting is great for avoiding overeating. Let's take a look at a different scenario. Let's say I'm not hungry on the first day, but force myself to eat because I'm told I HAVE to eat minimum 1500 calories a day. On the second day, I'm more hungry and eat 2000 calories. On the third day I'm hungry again and eat 2000 calories. And finally, I don't feel to eat that day, but force myself to eat again 1500. Let's see the average for the four days: 1500+2000+2000+1500= 7000/4= 1750. So an average of 1750 compared to 1500 in the first scenario. Is 250 calories a big difference? I'm wondering! Hey, don't get me wrong, I'm perfectly fine with shifting calories about if you are getting the results you want. I tend to be less hungry on rest days and eat less. Major workout days I tend to be more hungry and eat more. It does average out. -- Cynthia 262/222.0/150http://www.garbagethatgoo.com(my weight loss blog) Fatloss4idiots is a scam They set up fitness focused blogs, steal content from other sites and offer "unbiased" first hand knowledge of how great the program is. Marketing to the desperate - nice (please note the sarchasm) |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
The shifting Calories Theory
On Apr 28, 3:28 pm, DR wrote:
On Apr 27, 6:50 pm, Cynthia P wrote: On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 18:47:46 -0700 (PDT), wrote: It was not my intention in my original message to promote the theory that calorie shifting throws off the body. The only intention I had was to enlight the idea that this calorie shifting is great for avoiding overeating. Let's take a look at a different scenario. Let's say I'm not hungry on the first day, but force myself to eat because I'm told I HAVE to eat minimum 1500 calories a day. On the second day, I'm more hungry and eat 2000 calories. On the third day I'm hungry again and eat 2000 calories. And finally, I don't feel to eat that day, but force myself to eat again 1500. Let's see the average for the four days: 1500+2000+2000+1500= 7000/4= 1750. So an average of 1750 compared to 1500 in the first scenario. Is 250 calories a big difference? I'm wondering! Hey, don't get me wrong, I'm perfectly fine with shifting calories about if you are getting the results you want. I tend to be less hungry on rest days and eat less. Major workout days I tend to be more hungry and eat more. It does average out. -- Cynthia 262/222.0/150http://www.garbagethatgoo.com(myweight loss blog) Fatloss4idiots is a scam They set up fitness focused blogs, steal content from other sites and offer "unbiased" first hand knowledge of how great the program is. Marketing to the desperate - nice (please note the sarchasm) The only problem with your "scam" claim is that they have a system which works. I have not seen an on-line Diet Generator anywhere else (now where could they have stolen that from???). Have you tried it? I have. www.DietGenerator.homestead.com Georges. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
The shifting Calories Theory
On Apr 30, 6:03 am, wrote:
On Apr 28, 3:28 pm, DR wrote: On Apr 27, 6:50 pm, Cynthia P wrote: On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 18:47:46 -0700 (PDT), wrote: It was not my intention in my original message to promote the theory that calorie shifting throws off the body. The only intention I had was to enlight the idea that this calorie shifting is great for avoiding overeating. Let's take a look at a different scenario. Let's say I'm not hungry on the first day, but force myself to eat because I'm told I HAVE to eat minimum 1500 calories a day. On the second day, I'm more hungry and eat 2000 calories. On the third day I'm hungry again and eat 2000 calories. And finally, I don't feel to eat that day, but force myself to eat again 1500. Let's see the average for the four days: 1500+2000+2000+1500= 7000/4= 1750. So an average of 1750 compared to 1500 in the first scenario. Is 250 calories a big difference? I'm wondering! Hey, don't get me wrong, I'm perfectly fine with shifting calories about if you are getting the results you want. I tend to be less hungry on rest days and eat less. Major workout days I tend to be more hungry and eat more. It does average out. -- Cynthia 262/222.0/150http://www.garbagethatgoo.com(myweightloss blog) Fatloss4idiots is a scam They set up fitness focused blogs, steal content from other sites and offer "unbiased" first hand knowledge of how great the program is. Marketing to the desperate - nice (please note the sarchasm) The only problem with your "scam" claim is that they have a system which works. I have not seen an on-line Diet Generator anywhere else (now where could they have stolen that from???). Have you tried it? I have.www.DietGenerator.homestead.com Georges. If you have not seen a Diet Generator online, you obviously haven't looked. There's significant overlap between the Open Source community and the Obesity community. Plenty of free ways to track your weight and design diet plans. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Calorie Shifting Meal Plan - How Is It Different? | [email protected] | Low Calorie | 0 | February 1st, 2008 10:35 AM |
Calorie Shifting Diet - How Does It Work? | [email protected] | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 3 | November 13th, 2007 02:41 PM |
Has anyone heard this theory before? | Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD | General Discussion | 7 | August 22nd, 2006 11:43 AM |
Has anyone heard this theory before? | [email protected] | General Discussion | 1 | August 21st, 2006 06:05 PM |
I have this theory. | Qaiphyx | Low Fat Diets | 0 | February 25th, 2005 09:25 AM |