I'm confused

"Jim Bard" writes:
Excess carbs are stored in the body as fat, for future fuel.

And glycogen and protein too.

If you eat fewer carbs than your body requires, you will lose
weight.

No. If you eat fewer CALORIES than your body USES, you will lose
weight. You can still gain weight on low carb.

The energy provided by carbs, or fat and protein, translate into
calories.

No, it's *measured* in calories. Calories isn't a "thing" you can
translate something into.

You will lose interest in high-carb foods

Maybe, maybe not. Not for me.

and likely lose interest in foods that supply your body with a lot
of calories and a lot of food.

Not always. Certainly not for me.

"Jim Bard" writes:
Excess carbs are stored in the body as fat, for future fuel.

And glycogen and protein too.

If you eat fewer carbs than your body requires, you will lose
weight.

No. If you eat fewer CALORIES than your body USES, you will lose
weight. You can still gain weight on low carb.

The energy provided by carbs, or fat and protein, translate into
calories.

No, it's *measured* in calories. Calories isn't a "thing" you can
translate something into.

You will lose interest in high-carb foods

Maybe, maybe not. Not for me.

and likely lose interest in foods that supply your body with a lot
of calories and a lot of food.

Not always. Certainly not for me.

"DJ Delorie" wrote in message
...

"Jim Bard" writes:
Excess carbs are stored in the body as fat, for future fuel.

And glycogen and protein too.

The glycogen thing seems to be documented. Eating protein, well, that's
protein.

If you eat fewer carbs than your body requires, you will lose
weight.

No. If you eat fewer CALORIES than your body USES, you will lose
weight. You can still gain weight on low carb.

No argument there!


The energy provided by carbs, or fat and protein, translate into
calories.

No, it's *measured* in calories. Calories isn't a "thing" you can
translate something into.

Are you mincing words with me? Food intake, regardless of the form, has
calories. A calorie is a measure of heat, actually. The human body takes in
food and handles it in the most efficient way it is designed.

You will lose interest in high-carb foods

Maybe, maybe not. Not for me.

You would benefit from staying away from the higher carb foods. Most people
do lose interest in them if they follow a low-carb diet properly.

and likely lose interest in foods that supply your body with a lot
of calories and a lot of food.

Not always. Certainly not for me.

I guess each person's experience is different. I'm sorry it doesn't work
for you the way it does for most of us.

I am slow at losing weight, but I love the lifestyle. I briefly quit, and
gained a few pounds. It's a matter of sticking with it.

Rusty wrote:
My body requires X amount of calories (per lean body weight) to carry on
daily functions.

Simplified for confused people...


Your body has a basic minimum calorific need (your basal metabolic rate
or BMR). This is the rate that your metabolism functions at when at
rest. Any exertion above that resting state increases calorific need.
Heavier exertion, i.e., exercise in any form, requires more calories to
maintain the status quo. If you exercise and don't increase calories,
your body will burn stored calories. Fat is the storage tank that most
people are concerned with, but the body is basically lazy and will look
for easier options first. If you remove or reduce those options, i.e.,
remove non-essential carbs from your diet, then the body only has fat
left to meet demands.

So, in a way you are right. If you don't reduce calories in your diet,
you can get a similar effect by burning them. The hidden advantage of
burning calories through exercise is that you will build muscle and
raise your basal rate, thus burning even more calories on a permanent,
twenty-four hour basis. If you reduce calories in your diet, as well as
do regular exercise, you will do both and reduce weight faster. Doing it
this way gives you two advantages over simple calorie restriction
dieting. Your increased metabolic rate will allow you to eat a much
higher number of calories before you begin re-gaining weight, you can
enjoy eating food and satisfy your appetite, and you will also be much
healthier because of your increased fitness.

Losing weight is easy, anyone can do it. Keeping weight off is harder,
most recent reports claim that only around ten percent of people can
manage to remain at their new weight. If you exercise, regularly, you
will find it much easier to be among that ten percent.

It is like a huge, overloaded V8 car that has slowed through lack of
maintenance until it is only struggling along on three or four
cylinders. The fuel tank doesn't need filling as often, in fact it is
easy to overfill it, but it is struggling to function, even small hills
almost stop it. It is not making efficient use of the small amount of
fuel that it is allowed. Exercise and you have a big, thirsty V8
churning up fuel again, it will use every drop it can get, none is left
over. The hell with OPEC and the Arabs, this is my story ... g




If I add exercise, this creates a calorie deficiency.
As long as the calorie deficiency isn't so severe that it shocks my
body, the end result should be a loss of weight over time.

If this is true, what of the theory that if my exercise burns 100
calories, 10% being from fat, and I replace the 90% with carbohydrates
there is no calorie deficiency yet I still lose weight.

I have no idea what you are saying/asking here. You can't replace ten
percent with ninety percent. It won't fit, not even if you use a very
big hammer.

You are confused. Have you heard about osmosis? Perhaps you should keep
your distance around blondes. g



There are just too many different diet and exercise plans. It's all very
confusing.

Regards

David


--

To reply, please include the letters DNF anywhere in the subject line.

All other mail is automatically deleted.

Rusty wrote:
My body requires X amount of calories (per lean body weight) to carry on
daily functions.

Simplified for confused people...


Your body has a basic minimum calorific need (your basal metabolic rate
or BMR). This is the rate that your metabolism functions at when at
rest. Any exertion above that resting state increases calorific need.
Heavier exertion, i.e., exercise in any form, requires more calories to
maintain the status quo. If you exercise and don't increase calories,
your body will burn stored calories. Fat is the storage tank that most
people are concerned with, but the body is basically lazy and will look
for easier options first. If you remove or reduce those options, i.e.,
remove non-essential carbs from your diet, then the body only has fat
left to meet demands.

So, in a way you are right. If you don't reduce calories in your diet,
you can get a similar effect by burning them. The hidden advantage of
burning calories through exercise is that you will build muscle and
raise your basal rate, thus burning even more calories on a permanent,
twenty-four hour basis. If you reduce calories in your diet, as well as
do regular exercise, you will do both and reduce weight faster. Doing it
this way gives you two advantages over simple calorie restriction
dieting. Your increased metabolic rate will allow you to eat a much
higher number of calories before you begin re-gaining weight, you can
enjoy eating food and satisfy your appetite, and you will also be much
healthier because of your increased fitness.

Losing weight is easy, anyone can do it. Keeping weight off is harder,
most recent reports claim that only around ten percent of people can
manage to remain at their new weight. If you exercise, regularly, you
will find it much easier to be among that ten percent.

It is like a huge, overloaded V8 car that has slowed through lack of
maintenance until it is only struggling along on three or four
cylinders. The fuel tank doesn't need filling as often, in fact it is
easy to overfill it, but it is struggling to function, even small hills
almost stop it. It is not making efficient use of the small amount of
fuel that it is allowed. Exercise and you have a big, thirsty V8
churning up fuel again, it will use every drop it can get, none is left
over. The hell with OPEC and the Arabs, this is my story ... g




If I add exercise, this creates a calorie deficiency.
As long as the calorie deficiency isn't so severe that it shocks my
body, the end result should be a loss of weight over time.

If this is true, what of the theory that if my exercise burns 100
calories, 10% being from fat, and I replace the 90% with carbohydrates
there is no calorie deficiency yet I still lose weight.

I have no idea what you are saying/asking here. You can't replace ten
percent with ninety percent. It won't fit, not even if you use a very
big hammer.

You are confused. Have you heard about osmosis? Perhaps you should keep
your distance around blondes. g



There are just too many different diet and exercise plans. It's all very
confusing.

Regards

David


--

To reply, please include the letters DNF anywhere in the subject line.

All other mail is automatically deleted.

Jim Bard wrote:

"DJ Delorie" wrote in message
...

"Jim Bard" writes:

Excess carbs are stored in the body as fat, for future fuel.

And glycogen and protein too.

The glycogen thing seems to be documented. Eating protein, well, that's
protein.

Um, no. Adding muscle is storing protein. Replacing cells is storing
it as protein.

If you eat fewer carbs than your body requires, you will lose
weight.

No. If you eat fewer CALORIES than your body USES, you will lose
weight. You can still gain weight on low carb.

No argument there!

The energy provided by carbs, or fat and protein, translate into
calories.

No, it's *measured* in calories. Calories isn't a "thing" you can
translate something into.

Are you mincing words with me? Food intake, regardless of the form, has
calories. A calorie is a measure of heat, actually. The human body takes in
food and handles it in the most efficient way it is designed.

Too vague. Energy=calories. No translation necessary. The human body
uses the caloric content of food as it does. Efficiency is variable
and subjective.

You will lose interest in high-carb foods

Maybe, maybe not. Not for me.

You would benefit from staying away from the higher carb foods. Most people
do lose interest in them if they follow a low-carb diet properly.

Nah. Most people can't be spoken for here. This is one forum and
hardly representative of the universe of folks trying it. My
experience isn't like this. I miss breads and pasta and pastries.

and likely lose interest in foods that supply your body with a lot
of calories and a lot of food.

Not always. Certainly not for me.

I guess each person's experience is different. I'm sorry it doesn't work
for you the way it does for most of us.

Please don't try to speak for a crowd. We've read too many stories
here that don't bear this viewpoint out.

I am slow at losing weight, but I love the lifestyle. I briefly quit, and
gained a few pounds. It's a matter of sticking with it.

Like all programs that work while we use them.

Pastorio

Jim Bard wrote:

"DJ Delorie" wrote in message
...

"Jim Bard" writes:

Excess carbs are stored in the body as fat, for future fuel.

And glycogen and protein too.

The glycogen thing seems to be documented. Eating protein, well, that's
protein.

Um, no. Adding muscle is storing protein. Replacing cells is storing
it as protein.

If you eat fewer carbs than your body requires, you will lose
weight.

No. If you eat fewer CALORIES than your body USES, you will lose
weight. You can still gain weight on low carb.

No argument there!

The energy provided by carbs, or fat and protein, translate into
calories.

No, it's *measured* in calories. Calories isn't a "thing" you can
translate something into.

Are you mincing words with me? Food intake, regardless of the form, has
calories. A calorie is a measure of heat, actually. The human body takes in
food and handles it in the most efficient way it is designed.

Too vague. Energy=calories. No translation necessary. The human body
uses the caloric content of food as it does. Efficiency is variable
and subjective.

You will lose interest in high-carb foods

Maybe, maybe not. Not for me.

You would benefit from staying away from the higher carb foods. Most people
do lose interest in them if they follow a low-carb diet properly.

Nah. Most people can't be spoken for here. This is one forum and
hardly representative of the universe of folks trying it. My
experience isn't like this. I miss breads and pasta and pastries.

and likely lose interest in foods that supply your body with a lot
of calories and a lot of food.

Not always. Certainly not for me.

I guess each person's experience is different. I'm sorry it doesn't work
for you the way it does for most of us.

Please don't try to speak for a crowd. We've read too many stories
here that don't bear this viewpoint out.

I am slow at losing weight, but I love the lifestyle. I briefly quit, and
gained a few pounds. It's a matter of sticking with it.

Like all programs that work while we use them.

Pastorio

"Jim Bard" writes:
Eating protein, well, that's protein.

A sample human[1] stores about 13 lbs of muscle protein, representing
about 24,000 kcal of available fuel[2][3].

[1] 150 lb male 22%bf

[2] "The Ketogenic Diet," Lyle McDonald, p19.

[3] "Textbook of Biochemistry with Clinical Correlations 4th Ed",
Ed. Thomas M. Devlin, Wiley-Liss, 1997.

There, now that's documented too.

"Jim Bard" writes:
Eating protein, well, that's protein.

A sample human[1] stores about 13 lbs of muscle protein, representing
about 24,000 kcal of available fuel[2][3].

[1] 150 lb male 22%bf

[2] "The Ketogenic Diet," Lyle McDonald, p19.

[3] "Textbook of Biochemistry with Clinical Correlations 4th Ed",
Ed. Thomas M. Devlin, Wiley-Liss, 1997.

There, now that's documented too.