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

Britain's Fat Fight

bulkbiker said:
Except when your metabolism is screwed and doesn't work like it should maybe...and when fewer calories leads to BMR slowdown making it even harder to lose weight.
Click to expand...

I'm making the same generalisations that I'd assume the program's making, you obviously know what you need to do but it doesn't alter the fact that for most people moving about more, eating less and unprocessed foods as a healthy diet is the key to weight loss.

Repeat ad infinitum....
 

More the conservation of energy isn't it?

Or perhaps the 2nd law of thermodynamics
 
kev-w said:
More the conservation of energy isn't it?

Or perhaps the 2nd law of thermodynamics
Click to expand...

I am an outlier.

After a decade wheelchair bound, by the law of CICO I should be the size of a small African nation. Yet I have never been overweight and after almost a year on LCHF I now struggle to keep my weight up.

Jason Fung explains it well as does Zoe Harcombe.
 
The human body is not an exception to the First Law of Thermodynamics which concerns the conservation of energy. However, critically, the law states that it applies to an isolated system. So unless you are in a vacuum with all inputs and outputs measured it is clearly inaccurate to measure your net energy gain just by subtracting a guess of your energy output from the calories in the food you eat.
 

Any guess is an inaccurate basis for any calculation, but it's near enough for the point to remain, and the point I was making originally was that moving more and eating less is a good base for most people to start weight loss with.
 
While this debate has been brewing, I've just been on a bike ride and a walk. When I left the house I was fat, and I've just got back and I'm fat. Where is science now? I feel cheated. I'm not sure what to believe and I'm feeling a little dizzy. I'm 99% certain I'm about to put the kettle on however.
 
At less than 38 mins Dr. Jason Fung dispels the CICO myth. Directed at those with metabolic syndrome and in laymans terms but nontheless the short presentation applies to everyone.

 
Round Two starts in just over half an hour! I'm so excited I'm quivering. I'll be watching it in real-time tonight.

Not sure it will help me get through a mini 'fast' I'm doing, because no doubt there will be indecent images of all my favourite junk foods, but I will do my best to remain strong.
 

Yup I’m poised, dinner eaten and cleared away, installed on the sofa with a coffee, ready and waiting
 
Tory Party conference sponsored by Tate & Lyle! You couldn’t make it up!
 
Rachox said:
Tory Party conference sponsored by Tate & Lyle! You couldn’t make it up!
Click to expand...

Yes, pretty spectacular. Good, in a way, that it really adds fuel to the message of just how wrong things are at the moment.

My main takeaway from Round 2 was that HFW really suited the big bushy 'tash.

Well there were actually a few things that stood out but as usual I've forgotten them as soon as it's over, plus not having eaten since lunch isn't helping, so I'm going to bed and look forward to seeing what other people made of it tomorrow.
 
Just watched on iplayer. I enjoyed this episode more than last week's and was pleased to see that Johnny's GP had given him some good advice on sugar content and spuds etc.
 
I have to be honest, I was not going to watch but I thought that if I didn't watch how then would I be able to discuss or form an opinion?

So, I enjoyed ep2 far more than ep1. Kelloggs will, it seems, take a lot more to bring into line but with the kind of doggedness HFW is applying and the bad publicity then they may decide to make changes. It would happen overnight if the government changed the legislation or if people used the power of the purse/will of the wallet and hit Kelloggs where they feel it most, in their profit margin.

I hope Johnny joins the forum and joins with the moniker of Johnny-the-Bus. He did well to finish that 5k in under 40.

The drinks bit was good (I had no idea the Coca Cola owns Innocent) and as I have said a few times before on the forum, the teaspoons of sugar shown in real terms really makes people think.

Good stuff.

Edited because I mispelt Coca Cola! Freudian slip or perhaps I am just not brainwashed enough.
 
Last edited:
I caught 5 minutes of this, where they were talking about Kellogs not doing something with that pointless label on the front of packets, I use the table on the back for nutritional information, mostly for carbs, and of which sugars, but fats, protein & salt too, and have never looked at the one on the front as I can't carb count from it.....
 
One of the most interesting things for me tonight was a serving of juice is 150ml but all of the bottles contained so much more which were marketed to look like single servings. This was especially pertinent to children. There is so much that could be improved.
 
Ours has closed down. Not enough chocolate discount. He he
 
I was a bit alarmed by the fact that Johnny the bus driver was told to look at the sugar content of foods and was unaware that all the carbs are turned to sugar in the body, even more alarming was that Hugh the self appointed expert was also ignorant of this fact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…