Can I still lose weight by drinking fizzy drinks

Alf Veedersane · 28-04-2014 09:32PM

Bacchus wrote: »

Fair enough, I'm just advising caution jumping into supplements when simple changes to diet can achieve the same results. We've seen 1 sample day from the OP. Not a lot to go on. Supplements would be down the list in priorities IMO.

I'm not disagreeing.

Lisbeth Salander · 28-04-2014 09:55PM

Your diet is not good at all. I'm not criticising you but you need to educate yourself on nutrition. Calories are not the be all and end all, it depends on where your calories come from too.

A few small points:

White bread, white pasta, potatoes, they are quick release carbohydrates, meaning you get a burst of energy, a hike in insulin levels followed by a crash. This is havoc on your body. You need to switch to whole grains, brown bread, brown pasta, brown rice, this will provide slow release carbs, slowly releasing energy in a constant rate, it will also provide more fibre. You will not work out using simple carbs, you will burn out.

You need good carbs for a workout, you need good sources of protein to repair after your workout, chicken is good so long as its not cooked in grease and its skinless.

Loosing weight is 80% diet and 20% gym. Its all about educating yourself on good nutrition.

From what you listed, your lunch is quiet small. You need some good carbs in there to keep you energised.

Cheddar cheese, not the greatest, cottage cheese would be a better option, a ton of protein and low in fat.

You need to watch your saturated fat intake too. Read your food labels.

Gym work, begin with a full body workout 3 times a week, one resistance exercise for each body part, starting with one set, 12 reps, gradually building up to 3 sets. 20 mins of cardio too, one day of rest between resistance traiining days. So Mon wed Fri, weights and cardio, if your up for it you can do a bit of cardio in between those days too, but one day of complete rest is needed.

Weighing scales is not the best way to track progress, it is OK but if your gym has a body analysis scales you should get someone in the gym to check your body fat percentage, this is the most ideal way to track your progress.

son.of.jimi · 28-04-2014 10:00PM

Stop drinking Coke (and fizzy drinks) - I did, the weight starts to fall off. Started at 25 stone - now 19 stone - 2 stone away from goal.

Only kicker is the caffeine withdrawal you will go through.

kingtubby · 28-04-2014 10:09PM

bluewolf wrote: »

Full fat is about the main thing he got right

Out of interest what is the advantage of full fat over low fat product? More nutritional value or what? Purely looking at counting calories they would surely be disadvantageous.

Oryx · 28-04-2014 10:28PM

kingtubby wrote: »

Out of interest what is the advantage of full fat over low fat product? More nutritional value or what? Purely looking at counting calories they would surely be disadvantageous.

In a lot of products, they compensate for the lost fat by adding sugar.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar · 28-04-2014 10:30PM

plus fat is filling so removing it leaves you feeling less full after eating and then the added sugar leaves you with a sugar crash shortly after which makes you crave more sugar, gets you coming and going

Dermighty · 28-04-2014 10:35PM

Fizzy Sulphuric acid will make you lose weight rapidly. I wouldn't recommend it.

ger664 · 29-04-2014 01:26AM

As others have said MyFitness Pal works as regards diet. However I have found it does over estimate calories burned during Exercise.

OP estimates his Calorie Requirement is 2796 with 3-5 days activity. I suspect its nearer 2400-2500. I run 60 miles over 7 days some gym and swim thrown in. From working with myfitness pal my actual calorie requirement is ~3000 a Day. This was got by trial and error and use of my HRM with correct data. Most calculators overestimate cals from exercise by about 10% and don't take into consideration that you burn 70-90 cals/hr just by sitting down watching TV so this needs to be subtracted as well. Again this is trial and error but once you get a base line its about small reductions in diet and small increases in exercise which will lead to small but consistent weight loss.

whirlpool · 29-04-2014 03:15AM

kingtubby wrote: »

Out of interest what is the advantage of full fat over low fat product? More nutritional value or what? Purely looking at counting calories they would surely be disadvantageous.

Oryx wrote: »

In a lot of products, they compensate for the lost fat by adding sugar.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

plus fat is filling so removing it leaves you feeling less full after eating and then the added sugar leaves you with a sugar crash shortly after which makes you crave more sugar, gets you coming and going

Plus your body needs fat.

Blacktie. · 29-04-2014 05:49AM

whirlpool wrote: »

Plus your body needs fat.

This. Fat regulates hormones. That's why people who go on low fat diets feel like crap the whole time. Looking for some sh!tty testorone levels? Try a low fat diet!

Dravokivich · 29-04-2014 09:43AM

kingtubby wrote: »

Out of interest what is the advantage of full fat over low fat product? More nutritional value or what? Purely looking at counting calories they would surely be disadvantageous.

I wouldn't say "more nutritional value," but its just marketing spiel, because people who are overweight are described as fat, creates the idea that the less fat one consumes, the less fat they'll be. Where as body fat is not made up solely of the fat content of your diet. It's also been shown that people tend to over eat "low fat food," because they think it's healthier and you can't get fat off something that is supposed to be good for you.

There is no advantage to low fat food. There is no disadvantage with full fat food. Particularly when you look at the portions of milk people will have with their tea or butter on their toast. By switching to "low fat" most people are taking out sweet fúck all fat from your diet.

Blacktie. · 29-04-2014 09:50AM

Dravokivich wrote: »

I wouldn't say "more nutritional value," but its just marketing spiel, because people who are overweight are described as fat, creates the idea that the less fat one consumes, the less fat they'll be. Where as body fat is not made up solely of the fat content of your diet. It's also been shown that people tend to over eat "low fat food," because they think it's healthier and you can't get fat off something that is supposed to be good for you.

There is no advantage to low fat food. There is no disadvantage with full fat food. Particularly when you look at the portions of milk people will have with their tea or butter on their toast. By switching to "low fat" most people are taking out sweet fúck all fat from your diet.

Full fat has the advantage of being the building blocks for proper hormone regulation. That's pretty big if you ask me. Also less sugar.

jane82 · 29-04-2014 09:59AM

Look at nutritional value in sugar. No fat.
When they take the fat out of food it tastes crap. People wont eat it, it wasnt selling.
A great chap came up with the idea to add sugar. Loads of it. Sure theres no fat in sugar.
Sugar is addictive supposedly.
So by my estimations its an addictive food masqueradeing as a healthy food.
The silent killer.

LeinsterDub · 29-04-2014 10:18AM

Haven't seen it asked , Do you drink OP? If so how much and of what ?

Dravokivich · 29-04-2014 10:21AM

Blacktie. wrote: »

Full fat has the advantage of being the building blocks for proper hormone regulation. That's pretty big if you ask me. Also less sugar.

No real point getting technical to people who are going by the label printed on the packet. Which is why I clearly said no advantage in low fat, no disadvantage in full fat.

Luft Ballon · 29-04-2014 10:23AM

Brian2011 wrote: »

But as other posters have pointed out , calorie intake less than calorie requirement equals weight loss.

Different foods affect what your body does with the calories.

Look at this study:
princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S26/91/22K07/

They gave rats an equal amount of calories either from High Fructose Corn Syrus or Sugar. The rats given HFCS gained more weight than the ones fed sugar.

runawaybishop · 29-04-2014 10:28AM

Bacchus wrote: »

That is just wrong. The grain used to make white bread is stripped of all nutritional value.

I'm no expert but the first thing I noticed on your diet is the white bread in the morning and again in the evening. At least try switching to a healthier bread.

By extension of that, your breakfast is poor. I'd say you get quite hungry soon after that. The cheese is about the only thing of value going in to you in the morning. If you are serious, you need to move on to porridge. It's got a great slow release of energy and will satisfy you far longer than a slice of white bread with cheese.

With regards to the gym side of things. My understanding is that muscle burns calories. More muscle equals more efficient burning of calories. Hit the weights and you will see better results. You should try talk to the staff in your gym about putting a plan together for you.

EDIT: in response to the poster above's comment on using whey. Be careful here. Whey supplements are also used to put on mass. I would get your basics right before trying out supplements.

The modern white and brown sliced pan are virtually identical. Even the wholemeal versions you'll see in the shops are 95% the same as a sliced white pan. White bread isn't stripped of all its value though, not sure why you'd claim that.

Whey supplements don't put on mass.

runawaybishop · 29-04-2014 10:30AM

Luft Ballon wrote: »

Different foods affect what your body does with the calories.

Look at this study:
princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S26/91/22K07/

They gave rats an equal amount of calories either from High Fructose Corn Syrus or Sugar. The rats given HFCS gained more weight than the ones fed sugar.

We aren't rats.

Blacktie. · 29-04-2014 10:32AM

Dravokivich wrote: »

No real point getting technical to people who are going by the label printed on the packet. Which is why I clearly said no advantage in low fat, no disadvantage in full fat.

I wouldn't consider what I said technical.

mulbot · 29-04-2014 10:33AM

runawaybishop wrote: »

We aren't rats.

same principle-calories,from protein,fat,carb etc are different and the body uses them differently

Blacktie. · 29-04-2014 10:39AM

mulbot wrote: »

same principle-calories,from protein,fat,carb etc are different and the body uses them differently

It might use them differently but it doesn't just magic up some calories. The only difference that might have an effect is the thermic effect of food. Mainly just that protein is about 25% making it 3 calories per gram rather than 4.

jane82 · 29-04-2014 10:39AM

mulbot wrote: »

same principle-calories,from protein,fat,carb etc are different and the body uses them differently

Sheep eat grass all day meat would probably have crazy effects on them.

mulbot · 29-04-2014 10:44AM

Blacktie. wrote: »

It might use them differently but it doesn't just magic up some calories. The only difference that might have an effect is the thermic effect of food. Mainly just that protein is about 25% making it 3 calories per gram rather than 4.

i thin k the point being that if you got all the calories from say,carbs then the body will have more fat than a body that has calories from mostly protein

Bacchus · 29-04-2014 10:45AM

runawaybishop wrote: »

The modern white and brown sliced pan are virtually identical. Even the wholemeal versions you'll see in the shops are 95% the same as a sliced white pan. White bread isn't stripped of all its value though, not sure why you'd claim that.

Whey supplements don't put on mass.

I agree that a lot of brown sliced pan options out there are not much better than sliced white but that's doesn't mean one can't get good breads instead of eating white bread, which offers very little nutritional value. Ok, white isn't stripped of "all" value but it is striped of a lot. There are better breads (and other foods) to be eating first thing in the morning.

Ok, whey supplement help people put on mass in the form of muscle. Often they are loaded with other stuff too to make them taste better. All I'm saying to the OP w.r.t. whey supplements is to be careful and try to sort the basics of your diet first before even considering supplements.

Getting back the OP (this thread seems to have forgotten about him, debating low fat vs full fat), I'd be cutting out the toasted sandwiches in the evening (night?). After your dinner, you shouldn't really be eating that late. Of course, I don't know what time you eat your dinner at so it depends on that too.

runawaybishop · 29-04-2014 10:47AM

mulbot wrote: »

same principle-calories,from protein,fat,carb etc are different and the body uses them differently

Its not the same principle though. Our systems are vastly different and the way we process food is also different and has different effects. There is some validity in animal studies alright but it is not directly comparable to the effects on humans.

Blacktie. · 29-04-2014 10:48AM

mulbot wrote: »

i thin k the point being that if you got all the calories from say,carbs then the body will have more fat than a body that has calories from mostly protein

Yeah and it's not right if you account for what I mentioned.

Blacktie. · 29-04-2014 10:49AM

Bacchus wrote: »

you shouldn't really be eating that late. Of course, I don't know what time you eat your dinner at so it depends on that too.

Why?

Bacchus · 29-04-2014 10:52AM

Blacktie. wrote: »

Why?

Do you think an intake of calories before you go to sleep is a good idea?

Blacktie. · 29-04-2014 10:53AM

Bacchus wrote: »

Do you think an intake of calories before you go to sleep is a good idea?

I think it makes no difference and do it regularly due to work. A decent amount of calories sometimes too.

mulbot · 29-04-2014 10:55AM

Blacktie. wrote: »

Yeah and it's not right if you account for what I mentioned.

so would you say then,all calories no matter the source are the same and the body makes no difference in its use?

Can I still lose weight by drinking fizzy drinks

Comments