Where might I be going wrong?

riveratom · 05-11-2013 09:37AM

sea_monkey wrote: »

your BMR is 1500

you exercise lightly approx 3 times a week so using the harris benedict equation we get 1500*1.375= 2062 calories.

-500 would be 1500 calories.

riveratom read the stickies for this forum. the stickys should be taken for granted knowledge for everyone posting here in my opinion.

Haha, the stickies. You do realise for the umpteenth time that it's not as simple as calories in, calories out?! You sound like you're just reciting the stickies!

It's so funny as even with the OP saying cutting calories HAS NOT WORKED, you're still clinging on to your equations.

Do you also realise that it is extremely difficult to ensure you are under your calorie limit each day, and that getting it even slightly wrong can cause you to put weight on instead?

riveratom · 05-11-2013 09:42AM

Mellor wrote: »

I generally advocate reducing carb intake as its generally where people make the biggest mess of their diet, however some of the 'facts' of this thread are off.

That doesn't actually happen in any realistic situation.

You spent the last couple of posts talking about how calories don't matter, and yet here you listing reduce calories as a benefit of a high protein. It's contradictory.

If you were both being so dogmatic and wound it back a bit you'd be saying the same thing;
Eat 500 below maintenance, made up of real food, enough protein

Eat high protein and low carbs, that way you'll be full and eat less calories

OP, keep aiming for 1300 cals a day. That way if you overshoot a bit you'll still be around 1500.
Try to you get 140g of protein a day. Use the remaining calories on real food.
Meals should be built around a protein source with vegetables. Flavour food with herbs, spices, coconut cream/milk, soy or a light sauce and not a jars of sugary premade stuff. Veg based sauces like tomato pasta sauce are fine.
Avoid carb/energy dense sides like pasta/rice/bread.
Don't be afraid to take in healthy fats.
Limit sugars and processed foods

Mellor, do you actually believe your first statement that excess glucose does not lead to fat gain?

It's also not contradictory, eating a high protein diet can result in lower calories taken in overall, but as I said, there are other factors at play which vastly reduce the importance of the calories in, calories out argument.

Gin77 · 05-11-2013 09:56AM

WrigleysExtra wrote: »

Wow so much nonsense in one post. Impressive.

You must be allergic opinions other that your own.
I read your post (lied only the first 2 lines) yawn..., going to sleep now.
You know if boardies knew that commenting on a post they don't like is actually bumping my post. I'm not sure they would leave stupid comments with zero imput.
Thats my post take it or leave it, don't want anyones opinion.

WrigleysExtra · 05-11-2013 10:14AM

Gin77 wrote: »

You must be allergic opinions other that your own.
I read your post yawn..., going to sleep now.

Do you expect people to take you seriously by saying not to eat carbs after midday? Come on do you really believe that?

sea_monkey · 05-11-2013 11:02AM

riveratom wrote: »

Mellor, do you actually believe your first statement that excess glucose does not lead to fat gain?

It's also not contradictory, eating a high protein diet can result in lower calories taken in overall, but as I said, there are other factors at play which vastly reduce the importance of the calories in, calories out argument.

ok im just going to take you as a troll

@wrigleys extra, she weighs 145lbs, goal is 135

riveratom · 05-11-2013 11:09AM

sea_monkey wrote: »

ok im just going to take you as a troll

@wrigleys extra, she weighs 145lbs, goal is 135

You'd be taking me up wrong so. Do you take the stickies as gospel?

Do you disagree that a high-protein, low carb diet is effective for fat loss, and that you can achieve fat loss without counting calories and doing complex sums?

dor843088 · 05-11-2013 11:16AM

Strong bull**** in this thread!

Iv come to the realisation that you can never win an argument with a no carb nazi but for the record I will make this statement.

Weight loss is 99% dependant on net calorie intake. It doesnt matter where those calories come from . Avoiding any macronutrient is terrible advice.

Op should be consuming something like 130g protein 40g fat and the rest in carbs in my humble opinion and make adjustments to carbs and cardio as necessary.

sea_monkey · 05-11-2013 11:16AM

riveratom wrote: »

You'd be taking me up wrong so. Do you take the stickies as gospel?

Do you disagree that a high-protein, low carb diet is effective for fat loss, and that you can achieve fat loss without counting calories and doing complex sums?

youre setting people up for failure.
counting calories and your protein intake is important so that undereating doesnt occur, which can lead to overtraining.

complex sums? the calculators for them are all widely available online.
Fat loss is achieved through a caloric deficit and minimising muscle loss.

i think thats the third time i said that now.

and yes i do take the stickys as "gospel" because they are right.

05-11-2013 11:19AM

Gin77 wrote: »

I'm no expert but I lived in France for many years and maybe I picked up some different advise to what I usually heard at home in Ireland.

1) Don't eat bananas if you want to lose weight, they're really high in sugar.
2) Don't drink water before or during your meal, reduces the effectiveness of the acid in the stomach.
3) If you want to "brule les graisse" Burn the fat/grease. Cardio exercise up to 45min only burns the sugars in the body. Everything after 45min burns actual fat. Try hill walking or Nordic walking it doesn't need to be intense excersise (slow burn).
4) No carbs after midday lunch, just have white meat/fish (easier to breakdown) and veg.
5) Limit alcohol.
6) Do the weights before the cardio.

Not saying any of this is right but the french are a pretty fit bunch.

Em ok

riveratom · 05-11-2013 11:22AM

sea_monkey wrote: »

youre setting people up for failure.
counting calories and your protein intake is important so that undereating doesnt occur, which can lead to overtraining.

complex sums? the calculators for them are all widely available online.
Fat loss is achieved through a caloric deficit and minimising muscle loss.

i think thats the third time i said that now.

and yes i do take the stickys as "gospel" because they are right.

How does under-eating lead to over-training? Sorry but that doesn't make any sense. I take it English is maybe not your first language, which is cool.

The simple fact that a calorie is not just a calorie. If you don't get why that is the case, then you have no option but to hold on tight to your calories-in, calories-out argument, which has been shown to be flawed.

riveratom · 05-11-2013 11:25AM

dor843088 wrote: »

Strong bull**** in this thread!

Iv come to the realisation that you can never win an argument with a no carb nazi but for the record I will make this statement.

Weight loss is 99% dependant on net calorie intake. It doesnt matter where those calories come from . Avoiding any macronutrient is terrible advice.

Op should be consuming something like 130g protein 40g fat and the rest in carbs in my humble opinion and make adjustments to carbs and cardio as necessary.

'It doesn't matter where calories comes from' = BS. Sorry but you have a limited understanding of nutrition and physiology. I also made that mistake, I do not know it all, but I know I was wrong just as you are also wrong.

Here's one for you. If it doesn't matter where calories come from, will I lose more weight on 2,500 calories worth of chocolate, or 2,500 calories of lean meat?

If you are prepared to stand by your assertion that it doesn't matter where calories come from, then you must be also prepared to say that it doesn't matter which food you choose in the above example?

sea_monkey · 05-11-2013 11:26AM

riveratom wrote: »

How does under-eating lead to over-training? Sorry but that doesn't make any sense. I take it English is maybe not your first language, which is cool.

The simple fact that a calorie is not just a calorie. If you don't get why that is the case, then you have no option but to hold on tight to your calories-in, calories-out argument, which has been shown to be flawed.

between exercise sessions recovery is the the thing which will dictate how your body reacts to the actual workout.
nutrtion is one of the principles of recovery.
if you undereat you will not be recovered enough and the next exercise session will lead to greater fatigue and a greater recovery time needed which is why getting what you need is important.
tracking your diet is what will do this for you.

this thread was supposed to help this person and instead you have gone against what the sickies say and gone against current research to completely derail this thread and leave them confused.

riveratom · 05-11-2013 11:28AM

sea_monkey wrote: »

between exercise sessions recovery is the the thing which will dictate how your body reacts to the actual workout.
nutrtion is one of the principles of recovery.
if you undereat you will not be recovered enough and the next exercise session will lead to greater fatigue and a greater recovery time needed which is why getting what you need is important.
tracking your diet is what will do this for you.

this thread was supposed to help this person and instead you have gone against what the sickies say and gone against current research to completely derail this thread and leave them confused.

Where is this current research? Do you realise that the current research is actually showing the traditional approach to be flawed? If not, then I recommend some reading..

Alf Veedersane · 05-11-2013 11:30AM

tattykitty · 05-11-2013 11:45AM

There's a lot of conflicting and incorrect info on this thread (along with a wee bit of trolling and a lot of bickering) - no wonder the poor OP is baffled!

Where's Stench Blossoms when you need her...

OP, I'm not going to advise too much on your diet, because I'm not an expert. I will say that my own dietary habits have improved thanks to some of the advice on this forum, but perhaps try not to get too hung up on obsessive calorie counting, because it does take all the joy out of eating. I found that initially weighing my food (porridge, lentils etc.) helped me a lot, because I was underestimating what I was eating.

May I suggest swapping the bread for a 25g portion of unsalted nuts (almonds, for example) or a teaspoon of good-quality nut butter? More filling and better for you. Something like a slice of good ham or a matchbox-sized square of cheese (or a scoop of cottage cheese) would be preferable to bread and jam.

Also, as others have said: eggs, eggs, eggs. Try scrambling two with chopped spinach and serving with some ham...Green Eggs and Ham! Yum.

Good luck

another question · 05-11-2013 11:49AM

My two cents after reading all the posts is:

1) Way too may carbs in your diet and not enough fruit and veg

2) Cut out things like jam and soy sauce, they are full of sugar

3) You have a sedentary job, you should be able to manage longer than 35 minutes in the gym

4) I don't know how heavy the weights are that you are lifting, but if you are only burning 300 calories in a gym session there is something wrong somewhere, I'd burn more than that when I'm asleep!

5) You say you go every other day, is that 3 or 4 days a week? If you went 5 days a week and did all weights one day, cardio & core the next and vice versa, I think you would notice the difference with 3 really good weight days a week

6) Protein shakes are calorie dense, they are for people who lift serious weights and need to replenish their muscles or who are muscle building, that's not you, you're just trying to tone up and lose a few pounds, drop it, you don't need it.

Theresalwaysone · 05-11-2013 12:21PM

Jesus Christ there is some amount of utter crap being spouted in this thread. No wonder people get confused and lose hope.

riveratom · 05-11-2013 12:25PM

The fundamental problem is that all of the 'cut 500 calories per day' / 'go 15% under your BMR', etc, etc all fails to take account of the glaring fact that not all calories are created equal. Food has different effects depending on what it is, and it also affects people differently.

Refer back to my chocolate vs lean meat argument above..

Also, why is it that everyone knows at least one or two people who can eat WHATEVER they want and not put on a pound in weight? One of my friends is tall and thin and can eat chocolate and ice cream from one end of the week to another and not put on an ounce. He has looked the exact same for years on end.

So how come he can do that and I can't? How come he can eat the same amount of calories as I do, but I get fat and he doesn't?

sea_monkey · 05-11-2013 12:28PM

a calorie is a calorie

its a unit of measurement.

it measures energy.

energy is energy.

if you want to debate this then make a new thread stop ruining this posters one.

riveratom · 05-11-2013 12:29PM

sea_monkey wrote: »

a calorie is a calorie

its a unit of measurement.

it measures energy.

energy is energy.

if you want to debate this then make a new thread stop ruining this posters one.

Except energy is not just energy?

What is your response to my chocolate vs lean meat argument, sea-monkey?

Also, you don't get to tell me where to post on Boards.

runawaybishop · 05-11-2013 12:32PM

riveratom wrote: »

The fundamental problem is that all of the 'cut 500 calories per day' / 'go 15% under your BMR', etc, etc all fails to take account of the glaring fact that not all calories are created equal. Food has different effects depending on what it is, and it also affects people differently.

Refer back to my chocolate vs lean meat argument above..

Also, why is it that everyone knows at least one or two people who can eat WHATEVER they want and not put on a pound in weight? One of my friends is tall and thin and can eat chocolate and ice cream from one end of the week to another and not put on an ounce. He has looked the exact same for years on end.

So how come he can do that and I can't? How come he can eat the same amount of calories as I do, but I get fat and he doesn't?

Would you get out with the anecdotal evidence

The diet you are espousing is a ketogenic diet, not a low carb diet per se. If you are advocating such a diet you shoudl be explaining the basis of it properly to the op with regards to refuelling, time to convert and side effects.

Strayze · 05-11-2013 12:33PM

another question wrote: »

My two cents after reading all the posts is:

1) Way too may carbs in your diet and not enough fruit and veg

2) Cut out things like jam and soy sauce, they are full of sugar

3) You have a sedentary job, you should be able to manage longer than 35 minutes in the gym

4) I don't know how heavy the weights are that you are lifting, but if you are only burning 300 calories in a gym session there is something wrong somewhere, I'd burn more than that when I'm asleep!

5) You say you go every other day, is that 3 or 4 days a week? If you went 5 days a week and did all weights one day, cardio & core the next and vice versa, I think you would notice the difference with 3 really good weight days a week

6) Protein shakes are calorie dense, they are for people who lift serious weights and need to replenish their muscles or who are muscle building, that's not you, you're just trying to tone up and lose a few pounds, drop it, you don't need it.

1) may be true but now people are saying to cut out the banana I eat and I love bananas! I'll try sub more in

2) soy sauce is one of those things I can't live without, love it. Can I just ask what's wrong with a little sugar if there is no junk in my diet? Genuine question.

3) like I said I started out really poorly I admit, I could barely do 3 minutes on the bike. I think I'm at that stage now where I would like to be incorporating more weights so I might see if I can get my programme looked at.

4) the 300 calories is just in the cardio. I'm not sure how many calories weights account for so I just don't include them. Where do you find that info?

5) I'll definitely look into that. I'm trying to build up to going 5 or 6 days a week but I find that my muscles can be very sore and tired if I go two days in a row. Maybe there's something I can do to prevent that?

6) the protein shake is 119 calories. Which I wouldn't have thought was too bad in fairness. It was my boyfriends idea to increase protein in my diet and has actually worked a little I think. (Judging from myfitnesspal my carb content went from 55 to 45% recently) Obviously I'm no body builder but I couldn't see the harm. Plus - tasty chocolate!

I can reply to everyone but what I'm gathering from the general trend of the thread is that maybe I should cut down on the amount of carbs in my diet, while remaining in the calorie deficit.

There's a lot of other contradictory stuff going on about doing more than 45 mins of cardio a day and doing no cardio at all. So I'm not sure.

sea_monkey · 05-11-2013 12:33PM

riveratom wrote: »

Except energy is not just energy?

What is your response to my chocolate vs lean meat argument, sea-monkey?

Also, you don't get to tell me where to post on Boards.

my response would be that 2500calories of chocolate and 2500 calories of lean meat would produce the same weight loss if everything else in the persons life remained equal.

nutritional side of things i wouldnt recommend either diet as the lack of other macronutrients would be terrible. all in all its a bit of a silly, unrealistic scenario which is why i didnt respond to it.

Alf Veedersane · 05-11-2013 12:35PM

sea_monkey wrote: »

if you want to debate this then make a new thread stop ruining this posters one.

Too late.

The thread has been ruined.

dor843088 · 05-11-2013 12:38PM

riveratom wrote: »

'It doesn't matter where calories comes from' = BS. Sorry but you have a limited understanding of nutrition and physiology. I also made that mistake, I do not know it all, but I know I was wrong just as you are also wrong.

Here's one for you. If it doesn't matter where calories come from, will I lose more weight on 2,500 calories worth of chocolate, or 2,500 calories of lean meat?

If you are prepared to stand by your assertion that it doesn't matter where calories come from, then you must be also prepared to say that it doesn't matter which food you choose in the above example?

I said net calorie intake didnt I .

riveratom · 05-11-2013 12:39PM

sea_monkey wrote: »

my response would be that 2500calories of chocolate and 2500 calories of lean meat would produce the same weight loss if everything else in the persons life remained equal.

Then you'd be wrong, and any advice you have given or will give in this thread is now invalid, since you've shown that you don't have a grasp of the fundamentals here.

sea_monkey wrote: »

nutritional side of things i wouldnt recommend either diet as the lack of other macronutrients would be terrible. all in all its a bit of a silly, unrealistic scenario which is why i didnt respond to it.

Of course it wouldn't be recommended, it was clearly just used to illustrate the point.

riveratom · 05-11-2013 12:41PM

runawaybishop wrote: »

Would you get out with the anecdotal evidence

The diet you are espousing is a ketogenic diet, not a low carb diet per se. If you are advocating such a diet you shoudl be explaining the basis of it properly to the op with regards to refuelling, time to convert and side effects.

Fair point there. It is a ketogenic diet, but I did also mention Paleo and Primal, and that the OP that she should do some reading up on all of this.

OP, I would suggest some reading on the topic, in particular Lyle McDonald and Paleo / Crossfit.

riveratom · 05-11-2013 12:42PM

Strayze wrote: »

1) may be true but now people are saying to cut out the banana I eat and I love bananas! I'll try sub more in

2) soy sauce is one of those things I can't live without, love it. Can I just ask what's wrong with a little sugar if there is no junk in my diet? Genuine question.

3) like I said I started out really poorly I admit, I could barely do 3 minutes on the bike. I think I'm at that stage now where I would like to be incorporating more weights so I might see if I can get my programme looked at.

4) the 300 calories is just in the cardio. I'm not sure how many calories weights account for so I just don't include them. Where do you find that info?

5) I'll definitely look into that. I'm trying to build up to going 5 or 6 days a week but I find that my muscles can be very sore and tired if I go two days in a row. Maybe there's something I can do to prevent that?

6) the protein shake is 119 calories. Which I wouldn't have thought was too bad in fairness. It was my boyfriends idea to increase protein in my diet and has actually worked a little I think. (Judging from myfitnesspal my carb content went from 55 to 45% recently) Obviously I'm no body builder but I couldn't see the harm. Plus - tasty chocolate!

I can reply to everyone but what I'm gathering from the general trend of the thread is that maybe I should cut down on the amount of carbs in my diet, while remaining in the calorie deficit.

There's a lot of other contradictory stuff going on about doing more than 45 mins of cardio a day and doing no cardio at all. So I'm not sure.

OP, I would start by gradually reducing the amount of starchy carbs in your diet, cut out all liquid calories as mentioned, and also do some reading up on high-protein diets, how they work and their effects.

Alf Veedersane · 05-11-2013 12:44PM

And read the stickies, OP.

They've been put together by people more knowledgeable than most. Even more knowledgeable than riveratom.

riveratom · 05-11-2013 12:45PM

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

And read the stickies, OP.

They've been put together by people more knowledgeable than most. Even more knowledgeable than riveratom.

You might be right there, or you might not be!

Where might I be going wrong?

Comments