It’s a simplification, but it’s not an oversimplification. Even less processed foods are going to vary in terms of satiety and calorie density.
Help! I'm Fat - *** Official Exercise and Weight Thread ***
- Thread starter cyclone4L
- Start date
One of the ladies was showing off at assisted living that she could lift her leg enough to put on her socks again. Some dudes thought that was an amazing development. There is some discussion about maybe getting the activities director there to start some simple yoga classes on site. They do pack up a van to go off site to yoga class now. I think our ages range from about 4 to 91. May need a bigger facility.Hey, whatever motivates us to take care of ourselves!
So I can eat exclusively 1500 calories worth of gummy bears everyday and be just fine? My RMR is about 2000 calories so according to the "actually not oversimplified thermo 101" diet I should be healthy as a horse. I'm sure I'd lose weight. But most people and their doctors aren't particularly concerned about gravitational attraction to the center of the earth. They want to be healthier and lower their risk of death. Which means the source of the calories does matter.
First to disagree a bit, the point is that most of the natural triggers and signals to stop eating are pretty effectively bypassed by processed foods.
But realistically pretty much none of us have experienced a time where this wasn’t the case. Almost none of us live in or grew up in an environment where we could rely on the natural triggers due to the incredible presence of highly processed foods. Natural triggers have been overwhelmed with process foods for decades.
But yes, it ultimately comes down to us having to use our brains and say, “I don’t feel full after eating all this ****, but I know it’s bad for me so I should stop.” But that’s been the case for most of our lives. The fact that food 40 years ago was still a bunch of garbage full of cane sugar instead of HFCS doesn’t really matter. Food has been **** in this country for a long time. None of this is new. At least we have some good resources and education now.
On week 4 of T25 Beta (long live DVD's), kicks my ass in a good way and feels good to be back working out. Perfect home workout when you have kids that are 2, 4, 6. Done in 30 minutes and can at least make sure the kids are still alive while doing it.
Now if I could just eat more than 1 combined serving of fruits/veggies a day...
Now if I could just eat more than 1 combined serving of fruits/veggies a day...
If someone doesn't have enough common sense to tell them eating gummy bears exclusively is going to be unhealthy and dangerous, they have bigger problems to address. I would also make the same statement for someone who can't come up with a better argument.
Too many resources imo in a sense of information overkill to a point where even the folks saying the same thing, will have different takes that make it more confusing.
'Calories in, calories out', to me, is saying it doesn't matter what you eat, which is not true.
If I eat a handful or two of whole almonds, cashews etc. and a bunch of bananas my overall health outcome is verly likely going to be better vs. twizzlers and Mt. Dew.
Just a n = 1. But CICO works for me. I'm not going the gummy bear route though (even if there's THC in them). Also, I'm about to find out, but I think anti-depressants make it really hard to care enough to try to lose weight (haven't been able to lose anything in the past 2 years and that matches up with meds).
Not too many bananas though. A favorite story of mine is a kid who had to get a physical to work at Argon. He was probably on the spectrum and ate pretty much only bananas the first week he was there. Once his lab work came back, they RUSHED him to a hospital because his potassium was through the roof.
You're not going to be healthy if your diet consists of 1500 calories of apples either, but you will probably lose weight. Calories in/Calories out is how you lose weight, that's not necessarily the same thing as getting healthier though, although weighing less is better for most people I'd say.
There are healthy ways to lose weight, and unhealthy ones, but the bottom line is still the same, to lose weight you need to eat less than you spend.
"Calories In Calories Out" absolutely will work for weightloss - guaranteed, no argument from me. However, the goal is USUALLY to become healthier which "Calories In Calories Out" alone does not accomplish. So in providing advice to someone, simply saying "Calories In Calories Out" isn't super helpful.
Like I said in my original post. Calories in, Calories out with weighing and measuring your food absolutely will work and will inevitably lead to a healthier lifestyle. A person is usually on a healthier lifestyle goal due to their psychical appearance; being overweight. Their goal is to lose weight and person will not be mentally rewarded with simply eating healthier.
If they use the method I stated, they will lose weight, which seems to be agreed upon here. If they also only eat things they can personally measure and count, that will eliminate most fast food. By doing so they will realize the fallacies they have and what they think is healthy, e.g., eating a healthy salad but throwing 400 calories of salad dressing on it. This will show immediate results and overtime will lead to a healthier lifestyle. They could absolutely go eat at McDonald's but they will learn that it will have to be their only meal of the day and will adjust accordingly and see the cost/benefit
No disagreement.
We need to disconnect weight from health. They are certainly correlated, but weight alone is not an indication of overall health. Any measurement in isolation is incomplete. Like BMI. There are fat people who are healthy, and skinny people who are unhealthy. Fat people could be "healthier" if they lost weight, but if through their weightloss method they also screwed up their cholesterol or BP or any number of other indicators, they could end up skinnier and less healthy.
There is a lot of wiggle room for a person to find their preferred healthy diet. But there are more constraints than JUST "Calories In Calories Out" IF we assume the goal is health rather than just weightloss.
I haven't gone back to the gym since Covid and even then was down to one day a week. Pushed the now 2 yr old for runs this spring/last summer, family hikes with him in the carrier - our 4 yr old is probably fast enough on his bike now that he could bike while I run. Youtube videos and my app program forever now. So much easier to get it done.
I still like to lift so keeping a gym in the fold has been good. I also joined one that has an indoor track which I'm grateful for on days like today with the haze.
I highly recommend the Beach Body on Demand app/subscription. There is a workout in there for anyone plus you can shake things up whenever you want if you feel like your workouts are getting stale. Honestly, going to the gym is the WORST.
This is the best way to go because it also starts teaching your kids the importance of movement for health at a young age. And it is just easier to fit it in with everything else.
