• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

16 (and Counting) Nutrition Lies

alphabeta said:
Watch the calories? Why is it a lie? I don't understand
Click to expand...
Because 90% of people who undertake a calorie controlled diet end up the same or heavier afterwards.
The Calories In Calories Out (CICO) theory has been shown to be way too simplistic for the human body's mechanisms. It simply doesn't work for the vast majority. Hormones , metabolism, quality of nutrition input are far more important in the science of weight gain and loss.
 
alphabeta said:
Watch the calories? Why is it a lie? I don't understand
Click to expand...
Calories came from the food and slimming marketing camp and are essentially irrelevant in the context of what you eat. It's bad science as the body isn't a test furnace. Forget them and focus on controlling carbs and then the other main food groups. Fat has twice the calorific value than carbs but has far less effect on weight gain and BS than carbs
 
Calories do matter.....to those whose markets rely on them. A traditional calorie controlled diet can reduce insulin resistance and improve diabetes; however there is a big BUT. Your "set" point is lowered, which in simplistic terms means that if you maintained weight eating 2000 calories prior to the calorie restriction, once the weight is lost you must likely will have to drop the same meals prior eaten to around 1800 - 1850 calories to maintain the weight loss - usually the individuals metabolic rate drops, and this gets worst the more diets are attempted. There is a potential further complication in that calorie restricted diets tend to be low fat and high carb, which for many means hunger

On the low calorie Newcastle diet, Professor Taylor says that a less food is to be consumed (from memory about 75% of the original), alongside exercise to maintain weights loss and blood glucose control. LCHF relies on the fat and adequate protein to fill you up in place of starchy carbs which ultimately increase hunger.
 
Mbaker said:
Calories do matter.....to those whose markets rely on them. A traditional calorie controlled diet can reduce insulin resistance and improve diabetes; however there is a big BUT. Your "set" point is lowered, which in simplistic terms means that if you maintained weight eating 2000 calories prior to the calorie restriction, once the weight is lost you must likely will have to drop the same meals prior eaten to around 1800 - 1850 calories to maintain the weight loss - usually the individuals metabolic rate drops, and this gets worst the more diets are attempted. There is a potential further complication in that calorie restricted diets tend to be low fat and high carb, which for many means hunger

On the low calorie Newcastle diet, Professor Taylor says that a less food is to be consumed (from memory about 75% of the original), alongside exercise to maintain weights loss and blood glucose control. LCHF relies on the fat and adequate protein to fill you up in place of starchy carbs which ultimately increase hunger.
Click to expand...
I think its 2/3 from memory on ND sounds like a recipe for long term hunger to me.
 
bulkbiker said:
I think its 2/3 from memory on ND sounds like a recipe for long term hunger to me.
Click to expand...
Happy to be corrected, I knew it was significant, but that is worse. I will give Professor Taylor props as he has been upfront about this and the need to exercise. When I found out about the ND diet I was all in, until the requirement to eat less and the MBR slow down, so this became something in the arsenal (for others), but for me, well behind LCHF/ Keto / Fasting and exercise.
 
I agree with it all except the calories matter, - they do at least to me, I have to watch the calories- I maybe a freak but it's true for me, BUT if you eat good natural food cooked from scratch you can get a hell of a lot of food for 1200 calories- including plenty of fat.
 
lovinglife said:
I agree with it all except the calories matter, - they do at least to me, I have to watch the calories- I maybe a freak but it's true for me, BUT if you eat good natural food cooked from scratch you can get a hell of a lot of food for 1200 calories- including plenty of fat.
Click to expand...
Once you get to a "certain age" calories count (blast it).
 
Calories seem to matter to me - but only if they are carb calories.
Protein and fat calories are Freeeeeeeeee (so long as I don't mix them with those dratted carbs)
 
Brunneria said:
Calories seem to matter to me - but only if they are carb calories.
Protein and fat calories are Freeeeeeeeee (so long as I don't mix them with those dratted carbs)
Click to expand...
It's pretty much turned out that way for me in maintenance. It was a huge step putting the scale away and trusting my appetite to tell me what to do. Surprisingly it seems to work, even when I did my double usual intake of saturated fat for the Cholesterol Code experiment. My body seems to have found its "sweet spot" and I'm sooooo grateful for that :D
 
I've taken a screenshot of that. Good to be reminded now and again. I agree btw with every last thing on the list.
 
I keep an eye on calories but not obsessive. Am much more watchful re carbs and try hard to really limit myself. Sadly, even milk in my tea or coffee has a significant effect on bg. Tedious...
 
I like Gary Taubes' analogy with global warming; nobody would deny that if we stopped pumping heat energy into the atmosphere it would help global warming but the more interesting question is why does this energy get trapped there in the first place? If you are obese, you have a .fat trapping' problem If your fat cells then can't store any further energy that glucose remains in your blood stream and you have full blown type 2.
 
Back
Top