The real reason why you can't lose weight
Quote:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-...nt-lose-weight/ |
Good article, hardly revolutionary for those who've made lifestyle changes with nutrition as core.
Quote:
Yes, it was starvation and torture to get these poor people to move and limit what they could eat. Quote:
So, the main question here is who is going to take the lead in informing the public which foods are healthy and how to eat? Not a simple question. Taxes? Who will determine which foods get taxed based on what knowledge. This is kind of a "knee-jerk" political response intending to take action with little knowledge that can back correct decisions. Food pyramid, anyone? |
Quote:
Rob, I think you've hit on the right message. Yes, everyone wants "quick and easy" but I think all of us realize that will not work. :agree: I ran into trouble at puberty, began lowcarbing in 2003, and LAST YEAR I really got a handle on it. Well worth it, but don't tell people that... they will reach for the junk food :lol: :lol: :lol: |
My gut feel is that he's being a bit oversimplistic, too.
He is basically claiming that the total energy expenditure, and hence caloric needs, of all humans falls within a narrow range and it doesn't matter how much or how little physical activity you do. But that flies very much in the face of the reality that people from all walks of life that are in high-activity roles for any amount of time, be it athletes or special ops soldiers, (can and need to) consume a lot more calories than those same people can when they stop being active. From a personal standpoint I can attest to that. When I was in shape and very physically active I didn't have to watch what I ate at all and kept my weight in the 180 lb to 200 lb range. But as soon as I stopped doing most of those activities, my weight exploded on a fraction of the caloric intake. It doesn't surprise me that those natives have metabolisms that are nice and efficient enabling them to do a lot of work on the same caloric intake we do. But what about those natives that consume that same intake and, for whatever reason, are no more active than we are? |
It's important to note that the Hazda doesn't have grains as part of their diet.
|
I'm currently enrolled in a medical weight loss program (hey, it had some free perks!) that tracks calories eaten and estimates supposed calories burned through activities/exercise as a part of the program. I'd give the calories in portion a lot more likely accuracy rating than the activities part. I believe the results this researcher discovered comparing the hunter-gatherers with more sedentary people all having a cap on activity calories they can metabolically afford to expend, as my own experience mirrors this. The program will say I burned thousands and thousands of calories doing lots of activities I enjoy, but if I really did I'd be as thin as a toothpick and probably pretty sick from lack of energy by now and I'm not either of those. I don't know how the body pulls it off, but it really does prevent spending too much energy on activity somehow (while still allowing me to do the activity) because the body is smart and designed to not run out of energy and die from doing too much. I have noticed that on a keto diet I have a lot more energy/endurance than other players around me eating typical SAD diets, although people's various fitness levels might also be at play.
|
I believe that, with rare exceptions, at any given time our body has a set point of a weight it is trying to maintain. That set point is not fixed -- it can move and things that we do, intentionally or unintentionally cause it to move. But if we are above that setpoint and consume more calories that we need, the body will not just pack every last one of them into fat cells, it will dump a lot of them straight through our digestive track. Some people have set points so rigidly fixed that they can eat pretty much what they want and not gain weight. It's not because they have a high metabolism -- those same people can cut their intake back substantially and not lose weight. Other people, like me, have bodies that allow our set points to move up too easily. Both bodies have advantages and disadvantages from an evolutionary standpoint.
For a very long time my setpoint was at 377 lb. If I gained more than just a couple pounds above that I could count on it returning to that weight within few days without me doing anything. By the same token, if I lost a few pounds either because of lowered consumption or being really active, I could count on it popping right back to that weight. The problem was that every time I would force my weight down through traditional diet and exercise attempts, when they failed my set point would get notched up another ten to fifteen points in the process. That happened from the time I was about 240 lb until I got up to 377 lb, which seemed to be where my body decided enough was enough. At one point I got up to 408 lb (I don't recall the circumstances), but when I decided to do something about it and trimmed back my eating and started going out for walks my weight dropped almost immediately (in well under a month) to, you guessed it, 377 lb and then the weight loss stopped. I gave up before I could get it to move lower. |
Dr fung addresses set points for BW. And the use of fasting to lower that set point.
I miss his old website. A treasure trove of blogging gone. Sure wish I had printed out his writing. |
Quote:
Gone? I wonder what happened. Pressure from his publisher? |
Quote:
Didn't he hook up with the Diet Doctors? I really miss his 21 page info on fasting. Very detailed. I read it for support, like a Bible. Perhaps he put it all in his book..... So maybe it was his publisher. |
|
Glutamates
[QUOTE=Demi]https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-...nt-lose-weight/
Hi Demi :wave: :daizy: :rheart: As Pontzer writes: “Public health strategies stubbornly cling to the simplistic armchair engineer’s view of metabolism, hurting efforts to combat obesity, diabetes, heart disease, cancer and the other diseases that are most likely to kill us.” “What particularly is it about the food? Is it sugar? No. Is it fats? No. It’s the fact we engineer our foods in labs and focus group test them to make sure you eat too much. That’s literally the point of these big industries: to make sure you buy as much as you can. That’s how they make money. Obesity has come up right alongside the availability and engineering of processed foods.” :idea: Btw. Why do some threads get moved? |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 15:04. |
Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.