Persistent belly

how.gareth

Hey folks after reading the comments on the latest bread thread it got me thinking about my persistent belly I’m struggling to get rid of, I’m a six foot bloke and have lost over 2 stone and now weigh 70kgs. I don’t think I need to lose any more weight so am trying to figure out how to lose the bit of a belly, I eat 4 slices of whole grain bread 5 days a week for lunch in work, no butter and just some very low sugar raspberry preserve on them, is this amount of bread causing the belly or do I just need to exercise more? Thanks

AllForIt

Men keep their excess weight on their belly predominately unlike women who store it more around their hips. This is a know genetic fact. That's why you don't tend to see women with 'beer bellies' in the same way overweight men have them.

If you want to loose the belly you simply have to diet more till its gone. Weight that is caused by fat is of no benefit to you whatsoever so there it's of no concern that your weight goes down as a result of loosing that last remaining fat on your belly.

As you loose weight which you have done it's gets harder and harder so that last bit of belly fat is the hardest to shift because that's where it accumulated first. If you wan't to get rid of it as I said you have to keep dieting till it's gone.

Bread has nothing to do with it. It all about your total calorific intake and wherever those calories come from is irrelevant. You have to continue on a calorie deficit to get to where you want to be and how you do that is up to you. Edit: Bread of course is a starchy crab which is difficult to resist so if you did cut out the bread you'd reduce your caloric intake easily by that one restriction. You have to go that extra mile to get really lean.

how.gareth

Thanks a lot that’s actually the answer I was hoping for! I’m a fussy eater so finding an alternative to the bread for lunch is a nightmare but upping the exercise or cutting back on a few more calories elsewhere is a lot easier

bladespin

What's your exercise program like? If you're getting close to 'normal' weight this will be a major factor in how you look.

how.gareth

bladespin wrote: »

What's your exercise program like? If you're getting close to 'normal' weight this will be a major factor in how you look.

I’m starting exercise classes Monday morning, circuit training type things, I’m hoping to do 4/5 a week and see if that will tone up the belly. It’s a very small bit of a belly but I’m going on holidays in 4 weeks and really want it gone by then
Edit; I have an active job that keeps me fairly fit and that combined with eating healthier dinners has seen the 2 stone fall off so I just need this last push to get the dream flat belly!

bladespin

I'd suggest weight training in the mix, it will help burn cals wile building your frame and improving posture, helps overcome the skinny fat look.
Btw, not suggesting body building just improvement.

how.gareth

bladespin wrote: »

I'd suggest weight training in the mix, it will help burn cals wile building your frame and improving posture, helps overcome the skinny fat look.
Btw, not suggesting body building just improvement.

Yeah I’m up for whatever will do the trick, I’m calling into the guy today to have a chat and see what he recommends

silverharp

As a poster above said it gets more difficult the closer you get so you need more tools at your disposal. Outside of food and exercise look at things like stress and sleep, they can hamper your goals in this area.

how.gareth

how.gareth wrote: »

Thanks a lot that’s actually the answer I was hoping for! I’m a fussy eater so finding an alternative to the bread for lunch is a nightmare but upping the exercise or cutting back on a few more calories elsewhere is a lot easier

Just eat a bit of your dinner leftovers or something if you can do thay

how.gareth

I’m booked in for a strength and conditioning class in the morning so fingers crossed this will be the final kick I need to get where I want to be. I’m hoping to do 5 classes a week

mockingjay

This was an interesting article published in the indo this week, within the article the dietician says "There’s a myth that bread is full of sugar and full of fat, but there’s no sugar in bread and there’s no fat in bread. People mistakenly make the wrong food swaps when losing weight"

I also have difficulty with my belly only, and like to have bread at lunchtime, never feel full without it, the article isn't only about the wine, but a few nice pieces of advice.

https://www.independent.ie/life/health-wellbeing/health-features/i-see-women-who-want-to-lose-weight-yet-theyre-skulling-into-their-wine-regularly-irish-dietitian-on-food-myths-37013256.html

silverharp

mockingjay wrote: »

This was an interesting article published in the indo this week, within the article the dietician says "There’s a myth that bread is full of sugar and full of fat, but there’s no sugar in bread and there’s no fat in bread. People mistakenly make the wrong food swaps when losing weight"

I also have difficulty with my belly only, and like to have bread at lunchtime, never feel full without it, the article isn't only about the wine, but a few nice pieces of advice.

https://www.independent.ie/life/health-wellbeing/health-features/i-see-women-who-want-to-lose-weight-yet-theyre-skulling-into-their-wine-regularly-irish-dietitian-on-food-myths-37013256.html

For someone that uses the appeal to authority argument she comes across as closed minded and some of her points are questionable.
She said people have been eating bread for thousands of years, great but it wasn't anything remotely like Mr Brennan's.
She said you need bread for energy? What's that all about, I'm on holidays at the moment and decided to eat clean so as not to come back with a silly weight gain. My last 3 meals have been a chicken and avocado salad, a steak meal and a hotel cooked breakfast sans toast, just back from a 2 hour workout in the gym and will be going out for a 2 hr walk later. I'm not hangry and I feel more pumped than when I woke up.
I was listening to a podcast and they mentioned that most dieticians based on some study tend to be "moderators" meaning they can eat everything in moderation, my wife is like that, she could open a pack of doritos, leave it in the counter and half the pack would be there a week later. That wouldn't work for me at all :-) That bread or alpen would be a late evening "snack" if I'd been eating a lot of carbs prior to it and that's exactly the stuff that will not be burned.

theblacknight

Just to add to this - Don't drink your calories!

One switch that can make a huge difference is drink only water (or black coffee if you're a coffee drinker). Some drinks have an obscene amount of calories and they don't provide any satiety. Limit beer and wine too - try go alcohol free for a couple of months and check out the difference.

Also worth noting that as you build muscle you will need to consume more calories to maintain that mass, meaning it will be easier for you to have a calorie deficit without feeling hungry all the time (less of the glucose in your blood will be converted to and stored as fat because the muscle will store it as glycogen).

One thing I have found really effective for getting a bit leaner (< 15% body fat) if fasting. I know it's a big fad at the moment, but you are essentially training your body to be more efficient at switching to consuming fat for energy. I'd recommend everyone try if for a week (16 hours of fasting and and 8 hour eating window) so you can learn what hunger really feels like and stop confusing insulin crashes for real hunger. Your body can survive up to 30 days without food... you should be able to manage a few hours.

crunchie1

silverharp wrote: »

For someone that uses the appeal to authority argument she comes across as closed minded and some of her points are questionable.
She said people have been eating bread for thousands of years, great but it wasn't anything remotely like Mr Brennan's.
She said you need bread for energy? What's that all about, I'm on holidays at the moment and decided to eat clean so as not to come back with a silly weight gain. My last 3 meals have been a chicken and avocado salad, a steak meal and a hotel cooked breakfast sans toast, just back from a 2 hour workout in the gym and will be going out for a 2 hr walk later. I'm not hangry and I feel more pumped than when I woke up.
I was listening to a podcast and they mentioned that most dieticians based on some study tend to be "moderators" meaning they can eat everything in moderation, my wife is like that, she could open a pack of doritos, leave it in the counter and half the pack would be there a week later. That wouldn't work for me at all :-) That bread or alpen would be a late evening "snack" if I'd been eating a lot of carbs prior to it and that's exactly the stuff that will not be burned.

Do you mind me asking what podcast you listen to want to download some interesting ones on food and fitness.. Thanks

lawred2

how.gareth wrote: »

Hey folks after reading the comments on the latest bread thread it got me thinking about my persistent belly I’m struggling to get rid of, I’m a six foot bloke and have lost over 2 stone and now weigh 70kgs. I don’t think I need to lose any more weight so am trying to figure out how to lose the bit of a belly, I eat 4 slices of whole grain bread 5 days a week for lunch in work, no butter and just some very low sugar raspberry preserve on them, is this amount of bread causing the belly or do I just need to exercise more? Thanks

That's almost an entire slice pan with jam every week. For one person that sounds a lot to me. I doubt it's very nutritious or varied either.

You should try to improve your lunch time diet.

At 70kgs for your height - it could be argued that you're actually marginally underweight. It's not slimming that you need but a more healthy varied diet with less refined carbs and sugars but more natural fats.

C3PO

Four slices of bread and jam for lunch every day ... doesn't sound like a "healthy option" to me! Over the last 10 years I have lost in excess of 4 stone through a combination of changed diet and (loads of) exercise but the one change that made the most significant difference for me was trying to completely remove bread and sweets from my diet - basically cutting back sugar wherever possible! While one school of thought is that "calories are calories" there is another one that believes that sugar converts more easily to fat! Plenty of articles/books about it - worth a read!

Cavey

Ditch the bread and carbs entirely. Bread of nearly any type tells your body to release high amounts of insulin. Only a small percentage of this will get used for energy, the rest will get stored as fat.

This video explains how food and the body works extremely well.

https://youtu.be/SShMh0Ga5-0

Check this one after too

https://youtu.be/qJPJ3p1zwyQ

I've yet to read that book Fat Head Kids but I'd bet it's an excellent read.

Alf Veedersane

Cavey wrote: »

Ditch the bread and carbs entirely. Bread of nearly any type tells your body to release high amounts of insulin. Only a small percentage of this will get used for energy, the rest will get stored as fat.

That really depends on the level of calorie intake compared with maintenance. That stored fat isn't protected in order to accumulate fat. If you need that energy, you tap into it.

Pugzilla

AllForIt wrote: »

Weight that is caused by fat is of no benefit to you whatsoever

Not entirely true. You need some level of fat for protection of certain organs such as the kidneys and for insulation. Fat is also important as an energy reserve in the event of a disaster resulting in a food shortage. Rarely a problem in a country like Ireland though.

bladespin

Cavey wrote:

Ditch the bread and carbs entirely.

You'll feel like sh1t and have no energy for exercise, carbs are not a bad thing and depending on your training intensity could be vital for your goal, moderation is the key, as in all things.

The key to abs or just a flat tummy is first to cut the fat, cut your calories, particularly from sugary and carb dense food, then train your abs and core.

Cavey

bladespin wrote: »

You'll feel like sh1t and have no energy for exercise, carbs are not a bad thing and depending on your training intensity could be vital for your goal, moderation is the key, as in all things.

The key to abs or just a flat tummy is first to cut the fat, cut your calories, particularly from sugary and carb dense food, then train your abs and core.

Can't speak for the entire low carb community here but in my own experience over the last three years of LCHF (low carb high fat) living, my energy levels are just fine and I have absolutely no problems working out. In fact, my strength and stamina increased once I was properly adapted to this way of eating which took about 1 month.

Once you keep your carb intake below 50g a day, your body will enter into nutritional ketosis. This is when your body switches over to burning fats as your primary fuel instead of glycogen.

If you're a very high level athlete, it is true that the body will process carbs better but for the vast majority of us there simply is no need. The benefits of going low carb/high fat are not just reserved for weight loss, you get sustained energy levels throughout the day, significantly reduced hunger pangs (carbs interfere with the apestat - part of the brain that regulates hunger. Also high fat foods are very satiating which is why OMAD & IF go so well with LCHF diets).

Taking your advice of cutting fat and calories is not going to work for weight loss, have a watch of the two videos I linked to understand why. Cutting fat and calories will just leave you with less energy and your metabolism will slow down because your body isn't getting the energy it needs.

Visible abs has so little to do with exercise, it is like 90% diet. If you want a strong core, then by all means yes, you absolutely should do ab exercises. If your body fat % is too high, all the ab workouts in the world will not make them visible. Once your body fat % is low enough, ab exercises will help them look better. Easiest way to drop body fat % is limiting carbs as much as possible and doing some sort of fasting. As they say, abs are made in the kitchen.

Fabio_1988

Cavey wrote: »

Can't speak for the entire low carb community here but in my own experience over the last three years of LCHF (low carb high fat) living, my energy levels are just fine and I have absolutely no problems working out. In fact, my strength and stamina increased once I was properly adapted to this way of eating which took about 1 month.

Once you keep your carb intake below 50g a day, your body will enter into nutritional ketosis. This is when your body switches over to burning fats as your primary fuel instead of glycogen.

If you're a very high level athlete, it is true that the body will process carbs better but for the vast majority of us there simply is no need. The benefits of going low carb/high fat are not just reserved for weight loss, you get sustained energy levels throughout the day, significantly reduced hunger pangs (carbs interfere with the apestat - part of the brain that regulates hunger. Also high fat foods are very satiating which is why OMAD & IF go so well with LCHF diets).

Taking your advice of cutting fat and calories is not going to work for weight loss, have a watch of the two videos I linked to understand why. Cutting fat and calories will just leave you with less energy and your metabolism will slow down because your body isn't getting the energy it needs.

Visible abs has so little to do with exercise, it is like 90% diet. If you want a strong core, then by all means yes, you absolutely should do ab exercises. If your body fat % is too high, all the ab workouts in the world will not make them visible. Once your body fat % is low enough, ab exercises will help them look better. Easiest way to drop body fat % is limiting carbs as much as possible and doing some sort of fasting. As they say, abs are made in the kitchen.

Can I ask how man grams of Protein/Fat you’d recommend if you’re keeping carbs to 50grams a day?

I’m 80kg and 5 11”. I workout 4 days a week but do little to no cardio.

bladespin

Cavey wrote:

Taking your advice of cutting fat and calories is not going to work for weight loss, have a watch of the two videos I linked to understand why. Cutting fat and calories will just leave you with less energy and your metabolism will slow down because your body isn't getting the energy it needs.

Cutting OP's fat, not their intake lol, cutting (as in eating below maintenance).

Fat, protein and carbs are fine as I said, all in moderation.

Metabolism does not slow based on what you eat, you need a set amount of calories to maintain, below that you loose weight.

Cavey

Fabio_1988 wrote: »

Can I ask how man grams of Protein/Fat you’d recommend if you’re keeping carbs to 50grams a day?

I’m 80kg and 5 11”. I workout 4 days a week but do little to no cardio.

Well the general consensus on LCHF diets is to split your daily macros up as such; 5% carbs, 20% protein, 75% fats.

There is a keto calculator more geared towards athletes on reddit.com/r/ketogains. Here is a direct link so you can plug in your numbers and see what it recommends for you.

https://ketogains.com/wp-content/cache/page_enhanced/ketogains.com//ketogains-calculator//_index.html_gzip

It is worth noting too that your protein intake shouldn't be too high. Excess protein only gets converted to glycogen!

bladespin wrote: »

Metabolism does not slow based on what you eat, you need a set amount of calories to maintain, below that you loose weight.

Yeah that just isn't true. Our bodies are far more complex than the simple math of calories in versus calories out. Did you get a chance to watch the videos I linked above? They give some good insight towards this.

There is a fitness youtuber called jason wittrock who does a LCHF diet, he bumped his daily calories from 2000 to 4000 for 30 days. Gained no scale weight and his body fat % stayed the same.

Cake Man

Cavey wrote: »

There is a fitness youtuber called jason wittrock who does a LCHF diet, he bumped his daily calories from 2000 to 4000 for 30 days. Gained no scale weight and his body fat % stayed the same.

So he either exercised or conducted some activity to offset that huge additional calorie intake, maybe 2000cals was his cut number and maintenance for him was 3000+ so burning off that extra few hundred could’ve been achieved through exercise.

Either that or he defied the laws of physics because whether you like it or not, nobody is exempt from CICO (calories in v calories out).

Cavey

Cake Man wrote: »

So he either exercised or conducted some activity to offset that huge additional calorie intake, maybe 2000cals was his cut number and maintenance for him was 3000+ so burning off that extra few hundred could’ve been achieved through exercise.

Either that or he defied the laws of physics because whether you like it or not, nobody is exempt from CICO (calories in v calories out).

Pretty sure his usual daily calories is about 2,000. His exercise regime remained the exact same during this experiment. He did note at some point during the experiment that he had a lot more energy (which I suppose you would expect if you doubled your calories) so he may have trained with more intensity.

Again, this is not about defying the laws of physics. Our bodies are complex, biological machines that react to chemical signals we send it through the foods we eat. I've maintained 13% body fat for maybe 3 years now with absolutely no effort. Some days I will completely pig out and eat 3 or 4 thousand calories but these extra calories will predominately be coming from fats and to a lesser extent, protein. I am also pretty sedentary in lifestyle right now. I do a good bit of walking but I only train bodyweight exercises maybe once a week currently. Still kept a lot of muscle too as when your body is in a ketogenic state, there is a muscle sparing effect which preserves lean mass and sheds those unwanted pounds.

Pugzilla

Broscience at its best.

bladespin

Cavey wrote:

Yeah that just isn't true. Our bodies are far more complex than the simple math of calories in versus calories out. Did you get a chance to watch the videos I linked above? They give some good insight towards this.

Yes, it really is, medical fact vs broscience fiction, cals in vs cals out, it is that simple.
How you make those calories is your own choice, keto or carbs but metabolic rate doesn't alter based on your food choice.

how.gareth

Some seriously interesting and varied opinions and advice and it’s all very much appreciated and also confusing! I know the 4 slices of bread isn’t ideal but I’m such a fussy eater I honestly don’t know what else I could eat everyday. Just to add some info I’m 42 and on the road all day. I’ve just started fitness classes this week doing 45mins before work every morning. It’s circuit training and really hard and also really enjoyable. I’m hoping it might shift the belly as other than the bread for lunch and a few diet ciders on the weekend I’m eating fairly healthy dinners every day and avoiding crisps and chocolate

bladespin

I was you a few years back.

Cavey

I'm just not prepared to start arguing about these things. There is always conflicting views in nutrition. I'm a personal trainer myself and I know plenty of personal trainers that disagree with me on this subject and I know plenty who do agree. I know teachers, dieticians, nutritionists, parents and doctors all with opposing views. I'll just say this works really well for me and has worked really well for everyone I know who follows it correctly.

To the original poster, I will just advise you pick up this book

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Art-Science-Low-Carbohydrate-Living/dp/0983490708/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1529609700&sr=8-1&keywords=the+art+%26+science+of+low+carbohydrate+living

Give it a read at your leisure. This is probably the best book I've read on LCHF diets and its all very easy to understand. I frequently recommend it to anyone looking to fix their nutrition once and for all.

There is also some great documentaries on the subject too; Fat Head (on youtube), Cereal Killers, Cereal Killers 2, The Big Fat Fix and The Magic Pill(on netflix).

Alf Veedersane

For the general population, keto, LCHF, paleo, etc etc etc work is because they manage caloric intake. Some people find some work better than others and whatever works for someone is what counts.

Just don't tart any of them up as something more than they are (for the general population).

silverharp

Its more than just calories though, it gives a framework for saying I ought not be eating doughnuts because its fake food as opposed to i can eat a doughnut because I just did a workout

Alf Veedersane

silverharp wrote: »

Its more than just calories though, it gives a framework for saying I ought not be eating doughnuts because its fake food as opposed to i can eat a doughnut because I just did a workout

If you're eating doughnuts after every workout, then the issue isn't a diet protocol. Besides, most people's workouts burn fewer calories than are in a doughnut so there's a general lack of awareness at play there anyway.

Some protocols demonise certain food types that don't need to be demonised. Carbs aren't bad. You can eat a balanced diet with all of the macronutrients in it and be perfectly fit and healthy and not overweight.

silverharp

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

silverharp wrote: »

Its more than just calories though, it gives a framework for saying I ought not be eating doughnuts because its fake food as opposed to i can eat a doughnut because I just did a workout

If you're eating doughnuts after every workout, then the issue isn't a diet protocol. Besides, most people's workouts burn fewer calories than are in a doughnut so there's a general lack of awareness at play there anyway.

Some protocols demonise certain food types that don't need to be demonised. Carbs aren't bad. You can eat a balanced diet with all of the macronutrients in it and be perfectly fit and healthy and not overweight.

I didn't say carbs were bad, if someone was following a paleo type diet it would be one way of following a whole foods diet . any kind of whole food diet is going to be a simple enough way to follow a balanced diet. Clearly more people need to be switching out processed food for whole foods. Its why there is an obesity epidemic.
I was on a treadmill the other day and it said I burned 700 calories, that's got to be at least 2 doughnuts . I assume a lot of people do miscalculate though :-)

Pugzilla

Humans aren't meant to have such easy access to this much high calorie food.

silverharp

Cake Man wrote: »

Either that or he defied the laws of physics because whether you like it or not, nobody is exempt from CICO (calories in v calories out).

It can be reconciled though, if calories aren't stored its mass is breathed out as co2 and water if I remember correctly. If someone is burning ketones instead of sugar then there are ketones that are being excreted or breathed into the environment. That is essentially the body dumping calories. Calories still matter but so do where they come from

Alf Veedersane

silverharp wrote: »

I didn't say carbs were bad, if someone was following a paleo type diet it would be one way of following a whole foods diet . any kind of whole food diet is going to be a simple enough way to follow a balanced diet. Clearly more people need to be switching out processed food for whole foods. Its why there is an obesity epidemic.
I was on a treadmill the other day and it said I burned 700 calories, that's got to be at least 2 doughnuts . I assume a lot of people do miscalculate though :-)

Im not saying you said it. Its more a general point. I think when people get a handle on calorie consumption, they tend to appreciate the value of whole, unprocessed foods and food quality should improve.

So while calorie balance is the primary driver of fat loss, improving your food quality will help make it easier to be in maintenance/a deficit.

I think we probably agree a lot more than we disagree and I have no issue with anyone following LCHF, keto, paleo etc. If they work, brilliant.

But I just have an issue with people suggesting any of those are a silver bullet.

Treadmills vastly overestimate calorie burn.

silverharp

Pugzilla wrote: »

Humans aren't meant to have such easy access to this much high calorie food.

Its also modern food, its designed to override normal satiety signals. You probably couldn't eat 2000 calories of salmon or beef, but you could eat 2000 calories of junk food , you just know you shouldnt

waffleman

It can be hard to find what works for you. Ive tried many menus but it takes time to find what does the trick. I dont like the word diet or counting calories - to me the word diet implies something temporary - i think making it a habit to eat certain foods is easier to stick to in the long run.

For me it was following a few simple rules. No sugar, diary or meat except for 2 meals a week. Whether thats eating out, getting a takeaway or going to someones house for a steak dinner - twice a week is the rule.

Then its running 5k/10k twice a week and 1 session of weights plus some core work.

Another thing that helped was a breville smoothie maker. A large smoothie in the morning with oats, peanut butter, water and frozen fruit.

I dont believe a calorie is a calorie. Elminating sugar calories from my diet has definitely made it easier to keep fat off my waste.

Gonad

Stop eating gluten. I have stopped the past 3 months and my belly is gone

Pugzilla

This gluten free diet is a load of sh'te. No reason to do it unless you've genuinely got coeliac disease.

Gonad

Pugzilla wrote: »

This gluten free diet is a load of sh'te. No reason to do it unless you've genuinely got coeliac disease.

.

I don’t have Coeliac disease but I have given it up and noticed huge difference . My belly has gone down and more energy too.

Also my missus has started it the past few weeks because she noticed how well i liked it and now she is also staying away from it too. It definitely is something I would recommend everyone try for a few weeks because even if you are not coeliac gluten can have a negative effect on you and your belly too .

Welsh Megaman

Persistent Belly?

Didn’t they record a session for John Peel in 1981?

:cool:

Pugzilla

Gonad wrote: »

.

I don’t have Coeliac disease but I have given it up and noticed huge difference . My belly has gone down and more energy too.

Also my missus has started it the past few weeks because she noticed how well i liked it and now she is also staying away from it too. It definitely is something I would recommend everyone try for a few weeks because even if you are not coeliac gluten can have a negative effect on you and your belly too .

Tell me the scientific basis for this please. Placebo effect unless proven otherwise.

silverharp

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

silverharp wrote: »

I didn't say carbs were bad, if someone was following a paleo type diet it would be one way of following a whole foods diet . any kind of whole food diet is going to be a simple enough way to follow a balanced diet. Clearly more people need to be switching out processed food for whole foods. Its why there is an obesity epidemic.
I was on a treadmill the other day and it said I burned 700 calories, that's got to be at least 2 doughnuts . I assume a lot of people do miscalculate though :-)

Im not saying you said it. Its more a general point. I think when people get a handle on calorie consumption, they tend to appreciate the value of whole, unprocessed foods and food quality should improve.

So while calorie balance is the primary driver of fat loss, improving your food quality will help make it easier to be in maintenance/a deficit.

I think we probably agree a lot more than we disagree and I have no issue with anyone following LCHF, keto, paleo etc. If they work, brilliant.

But I just have an issue with people suggesting any of those are a silver bullet.

Treadmills vastly overestimate calorie burn.

I'd sum up my position as don't eat a diet that causes or the increases insulin resistance, weight would just be a secondary concern, people can be "skinny fat" so the scales wouldn't even suggest they have an issue.
More broadly if the adverts are anything to go by "low fat" is still the rule of thumb this needs to change and probably is at margin.

silverharp

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

silverharp wrote: »

I didn't say carbs were bad, if someone was following a paleo type diet it would be one way of following a whole foods diet . any kind of whole food diet is going to be a simple enough way to follow a balanced diet. Clearly more people need to be switching out processed food for whole foods. Its why there is an obesity epidemic.
I was on a treadmill the other day and it said I burned 700 calories, that's got to be at least 2 doughnuts . I assume a lot of people do miscalculate though :-)

Im not saying you said it. Its more a general point. I think when people get a handle on calorie consumption, they tend to appreciate the value of whole, unprocessed foods and food quality should improve.

So while calorie balance is the primary driver of fat loss, improving your food quality will help make it easier to be in maintenance/a deficit.

I think we probably agree a lot more than we disagree and I have no issue with anyone following LCHF, keto, paleo etc. If they work, brilliant.

But I just have an issue with people suggesting any of those are a silver bullet.

Treadmills vastly overestimate calorie burn.

I'd some up my position as don't eat a diet consisting of anything which causes or increases insulin resistance , as such weight would be secondary. I'd suggest at a minimum foods containing processed sugar should be demonized, going by the adverts "low fat" is the rule of thumb which high geared bad eating since the 70's.

silverharp

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

silverharp wrote: »

I didn't say carbs were bad, if someone was following a paleo type diet it would be one way of following a whole foods diet . any kind of whole food diet is going to be a simple enough way to follow a balanced diet. Clearly more people need to be switching out processed food for whole foods. Its why there is an obesity epidemic.
I was on a treadmill the other day and it said I burned 700 calories, that's got to be at least 2 doughnuts . I assume a lot of people do miscalculate though :-)

Im not saying you said it. Its more a general point. I think when people get a handle on calorie consumption, they tend to appreciate the value of whole, unprocessed foods and food quality should improve.

So while calorie balance is the primary driver of fat loss, improving your food quality will help make it easier to be in maintenance/a deficit.

I think we probably agree a lot more than we disagree and I have no issue with anyone following LCHF, keto, paleo etc. If they work, brilliant.

But I just have an issue with people suggesting any of those are a silver bullet.

Treadmills vastly overestimate calorie burn.

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

silverharp wrote: »

Its more than just calories though, it gives a framework for saying I ought not be eating doughnuts because its fake food as opposed to i can eat a doughnut because I just did a workout

If you're eating doughnuts after every workout, then the issue isn't a diet protocol. Besides, most people's workouts burn fewer calories than are in a doughnut so there's a general lack of awareness at play there anyway.

Some protocols demonise certain food types that don't need to be demonised. Carbs aren't bad. You can eat a balanced diet with all of the macronutrients in it and be perfectly fit and healthy and not overweight.

I didn't say carbs were bad, if someone was following a paleo type diet it would be one way of following a whole foods diet . any kind of whole food diet is going to be a simple enough way to follow a balanced diet. Clearly more people need to be switching out processed food for whole foods. Its why there is an obesity epidemic.
I was on a treadmill the other day and it said I burned 700 calories, that's got to be at least 2 doughnuts . I assume a lot of people do miscalculate though :-)

bladespin

Pugzilla wrote:

Humans aren't meant to have such easy access to this much high calorie food.

This is very true, modern cheap food has become very calorie dense, it's very easy to eat your entire daily allowance in one sitting without even realising.
Best advice is to track, eat natural and avoid heavily processed crap.

silverharp

@ alf. , Id sum up my position as don't eat a diet which causes insulin resistance , weight would largely fall in behind that, how you get there should be as personalised as the time you willing to put into it. Going by packaging and adverts "low fat" is still the public rule of thumb , this needs to change.

bladespin

Pugzilla wrote:

Tell me the scientific basis for this please. Placebo effect unless proven otherwise.

Could be an unknown intolerance, think it's common enough, a lot of people clain to feel better after reducing.