Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Wed, May-23-18, 15:25
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 10,397
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default Nina Teicholz on Calories

Nina writing another LA Times Op-Ed:

Counting calories won't reduce obesity. So why are we requiring restaurants to post them?

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-e...0520-story.html
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Wed, May-23-18, 21:12
mike_d's Avatar
mike_d mike_d is offline
Grease is the word!
Posts: 8,310
 
Plan: PSMF/IF
Stats: 236/181/180 Male 72 inches
BF:disappearing!
Progress: 98%
Location: Alamo city, Texas
Default

Quote:
a person's metabolic rate slows down to accommodate semi-starvation, but it doesn't bounce back, resulting in a stubbornly depressed metabolism. To maintain that weight loss, it appears a person must restrict calories for life a state of deprivation that, as it turns out, few humans can sustain.
I, for one don't believe it, and you can ramp up metabolism ~14% by fasting along with HGH and other hormones like Testosterone.

A good, to the point article in a respected media source

"Cut out one soda a week and you could lose three pounds by the end of the year?"

No, it does not work like that! LOL

Last edited by mike_d : Wed, May-23-18 at 21:20.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Wed, May-23-18, 22:31
Zei Zei is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,341
 
Plan: Carb reduction in general
Stats: 230/213/180 Female 5 ft 9 in
BF:
Progress: 34%
Location: Texas
Default

Calorie chart for an ice cream treat I was buying someone made it quick to identify the stuff with the highest fat content so they wouldn't get a sorry dose of nothing but fat-free sugar hitting their system all at once. That's the only time I've had one of those calorie charts be useful.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Thu, May-24-18, 08:19
dcc0455 dcc0455 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 153
 
Plan: Low Carb
Stats: 230/165/160 Male 67
BF:
Progress: 93%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JEY100
Counting calories won't reduce obesity. So why are we requiring restaurants to post them?


I think part of the issue with these arguments is conflating counting with restricting. Clearly, if you eat 10,000 calories a day, then counting them won't make a difference, but it is easy to underestimate how many calories you are eating. Counting calories is really no different than keeping track of your finances. It may or may not result in spending less, but you can't really get a handle on it until you understand where your money (or calories) is going. I just watched a video by Dr. Westman where he says the data is in that the main cause of losing weight on low carb is that it results in eating less calories. In general, eating low carb should curb appetite, and not require counting, but we don't all get the same results.

P.S. I am not in favor of requiring calorie counts.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Thu, May-24-18, 09:51
Pashta's Avatar
Pashta Pashta is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 55
 
Plan: SB Delivery now Carnivore
Stats: 265/249/190 Female 5'5"
BF:
Progress: 21%
Location: Montana
Default

If you watch this video with Jason Fung, MD, you will understand exactly why calories don't really matter. Of course, I also read all of Gary Taubes' books, which also helped me to understand. Plus I know that calories are created by literally BURNING food in a lab, and since our bodies don't burn food in a fire, it's common sense to figure that we wouldn't absorb them in the same way.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Mon, May-28-18, 21:59
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,432
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

Calories as the basis for weight gain/loss is genuinely absurd. It's based on a naive interpretation of First and Second Laws. A much more appropriate unit of measure would be something like a dose-to-mass cause/effect ratio of a particular substance. We have ample precedent for such a unit of measure with a multitude of drugs and other substances which have a direct effect on body mass (both fat and lean mass) independently of food intake and physical activity.

Consider growth hormone for example. Compared to food, the total mass of HGH is insignificant (therefore the total caloric content of HGH), yet its effect on both fat and lean mass is several orders of magnitude greater. In this case, dose-to-mass cause/effect ratio as a unit of measure is a no brainer. If there's still any doubt about the validity of comparing HGH to food with regards to caloric content, consider that HGH is a peptide hormone - it's a protein. In spite of HGH being a protein, in spite of protein being a calorific macronutrient, nowhere on this planet do any of us consider the caloric content of HGH for any purpose whatsoever ever. The same argument can be made for insulin, testosterone, estrogen, T3/T4, you name it.

Based on the above, and based on the unarguable fact that different macronutrients have different effects on fat and lean mass, the same unit of measure for something like dose-to-mass cause/effect ratio is also a no brainer.

Once we've determined an appropriate scale for various foods and meals and such, then putting up that unit of measure on restaurant meals becomes genuinely useful. Otherwise, the calorie is a total waste of grey matter.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Mon, May-28-18, 22:28
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,432
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

Another idea just came to mind. For Joe Public and everyday use, a simpler scale can be devised - low/mid/high. An easy guide would be devised where Joe just compares what he's about to eat in a good-enough fashion. Imagine something like My Plate or a food guide, but so much simpler and purely for the purpose of growing fatter or leaner.

For more tech oriented people, imagine a food database linking this scale through the bar code. Scan it with your smart phone (take a picture, there's an app, yada yada), decide, done.

This idea can be extended to include nutrition information and so forth, but just the fatter/leaner thing sounds mighty useful to me.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Thu, May-31-18, 17:34
BillyHW's Avatar
BillyHW BillyHW is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 378
 
Plan: Keto + IF
Stats: 260/300/165 Male 5' 6"
BF:
Progress: -42%
Location: Alberta, Canada
Default

I don't care about calories. I care about carbs and ingredients.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:19.


Copyright © 2000-2018 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.