3 Fat Chicks on a Diet Weight Loss Community  

Go Back   3 Fat Chicks on a Diet Weight Loss Community > Diet Central > Weight Loss News and Current Events

Weight Loss News and Current Events Discuss the latest weight loss news headlines and major events.

Why calorie counting doesn't work for most, presentation by Jonathan Bailor

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-13-2014, 11:18 AM   #31
diamondgeog
 
Posts: n/a

Default

Archeological records. Grains are only 12K years old. Sugar by itself in quantity only since 1850s.

I really am shocked by this comment. Do you really think humans weren't high fat for virtually all of human history? What do you think they were eating?

And there are still or were until recently many traditional societies thriving on high fat. Great teeth, look up Weston Price, very little heart disease,obesity, super healthy.

Plains Indians basically had bison to eat. And then pemiccan, they were extraordinarily healthy. Their descendants on sugar have deteriorated swiftly.
 
Old 04-13-2014, 11:23 AM   #32
diamondgeog
 
Posts: n/a

Default

Both her and the presenter say that people moving more eating less not losing weight happened over and over and over and over and over.

So they had two options. Assume all these patients were lying or ask why. They choose to ask why.

You think the cut calories don't lose weight is rare? Or it is rare people can't stick on it? Must be living on a different planet than me and not seeing the rates of obesity I see with my own eyes.
 
Old 04-13-2014, 11:24 AM   #33
it's always something
 
Suzanne 3FC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 14,814

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondgeog View Post
BTW I think losing and regaining half is a perfect example of what the presenter and the people I follow in the whole food no grains community would say happens often.
She asked what defines success. If it works while you do it, then is that how you define success? If she stopped calorie counting and regained, wasn't calorie counting still successful while she did it? If you start eating grains and find that you regain weight, does that not mean that going grain free was still successful while you did it? It's the same thing. No matter what method you choose to lose weight, you can't just switch it off when you reach goal.

I know many people that have successfully lost weight and kept it off while following portion controlled diets that included grains and everything else. My own mother is a Weight Watchers success story and has never regained a pound, and she's old-school and eats grains with every meal. She also still goes to her meetings every week, and she does it because she loves it.

Check our maintainers forum. You'll be surprised how many of our maintainers lost weight while calorie counting and included whole grains

You know that I don't eat grains, even though my diet plan is very different from yours and is not low carb. I lost over 100 pounds and feel better. Do I think that everyone who would follow my diet would lose weight and be healthier? Yep. Do I think my diet is right for everyone? Nope. Of course not.

You have to find what works for you and stick with it. By 'works for you' I mean that your food and activity choices need to fit your personal tastes, budget, lifestyle, and health goals. We're all different
__________________
...
Suzanne 3FC is offline  
Old 04-13-2014, 11:44 AM   #34
Maria
 
Marniadec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Greece
Posts: 428

S/C/G: 253/140/130

Height: 5' 6"

Default

Carbs are not poison. Vegans say the same thing about meat with the same conviction and with the research to back it up. Does that mean they're right? People use the same statistics you're using to prove that nobody can lose weight ever. Are they right?

A weight loss method is to blame for the regain. People who go Paleo also hit plateaus and even gain weight back if they eat too many calories. Every weight loss method is more suitable for some than it is for others. And some times, it's not the method, it's the person applying it.

We can't afford to lose weight and then slip back into old habits any more than former alcoholics can afford to start drinking occasionally. If you can gain 100 extra pounds once, you can do it twice, so you have to be careful. That's what I get from those statistics.

You can advertise what works for you all you want. We all do that. But, in my opinion, trying to convince people that calories don't matter is like trying to convince us that the sun shines at night.

And going on and on about how what you do is the absolute best can get old really fat. I kept trying to go from 154 to 130 by eating a healthy balanced diet and I kept giving up. This time I managed to go from 253 to 145 because I allowed myself to eat junk. Should I go around insisting that people eat junk food or they won't lose weight? That's what worked for me, so it must be the one true method, right? Come on now.
__________________
I started on 05/30/10 at 253. After almost 4 years and many, many breaks, I reached 152 on 03/19/14. Now I'm trying to reach 130.

Marniadec is offline  
Old 04-13-2014, 11:53 AM   #35
diamondgeog
 
Posts: n/a

Default

I do forget Mars that in our society fat is bad and low carb is a fad are drummed into us...by everyone. Government, vast majority of doctors, American heart association, American diabetes assoc.

So I know very well a Dr. Can mean nothing.

All carbs are not bad. The heart of my diet and Paleo and Primal are non-starchy vegetables.

However. People have carb thresholds. They do differ. People can choose to believe this or not. Go over yours and weight loss will be neigh impossible. And you are putting yourself at risk for diabetes, heart disease, cancer, dementia, arthritis, etc.

For some a couple pieces of fruit a day are fine. For others it would put them in ill health and cause them to gain weight.
 
Old 04-13-2014, 11:59 AM   #36
diamondgeog
 
Posts: n/a

Default

My argument is focusing on calories first until you get your macros right, insulin right, and fat burning in your body right is a losing battle for most people.

And well look up Sam Feltham. He did 5,700 calories a day of high fat for 28 days. I think he gained like 3-4 pounds but lost inches on his waist. He did same amount of calories on high carb. He gained 16 lbs and 3 or 4 inches on his waist.

Even with the high calories, the high fat was 'instructing' his body to burn fat. Btw if you just did calories in calories out the results make no sense. But his body was doing different things with them. Does anyone here believe our bodies treat every calorie the same? If so why do must people fear fat? I totally completely admit I fear sugar and non-veg carbs. But then again I don't believe all calories and food are the same.

You guys do what you want, just presenting the info, many more people read than post. Sam is at SmashtheFat.

Last edited by diamondgeog : 04-13-2014 at 12:03 PM.
 
Old 04-13-2014, 12:11 PM   #37
maintaining since 9/2013
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 1,252

S/C/G: 244/148/145

Height: 5'4.5"

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondgeog View Post
I do forget Mars that in our society fat is bad and low carb is a fad are drummed into us...by everyone. Government, vast majority of doctors, American heart association, American diabetes assoc.

So I know very well a Dr. Can mean nothing.

All carbs are not bad. The heart of my diet and Paleo and Primal are non-starchy vegetables.

However. People have carb thresholds. They do differ. People can choose to believe this or not. Go over yours and weight loss will be neigh impossible. And you are putting yourself at risk for diabetes, heart disease, cancer, dementia, arthritis, etc.

For some a couple pieces of fruit a day are fine. For others it would put them in ill health and cause them to gain weight.
diamondgeog: I basically eat as you do, re grain free and low carb, but stick to fairly low fat and avoid processed foods as much as possible. I found it by a lot of trial and error. As above folks have posted, different things work for different people. Any of us don't know if we will gain back, or if we end up with disease. That's for the numbers crunchers. Mostly, sharing our individual experiences allows others to try out what resonates.

When I asked you for evidence, maybe I should have been more clear. By evidence, I mean a link to the your source so that I can read and decide for myself if I buy it. That's a very basic & standard expectation when someone is advocating a health practice such as diet.

Remember the diet pyramid? It was concocted in response to growing rates of obesity, just like low carb. I would stick with repeatable studies that are published in peer-reviewed journals before telling anyone what will work for them.

Now I'm really going to yoga. May I not tip over in shoulder stand!

Last edited by mars735 : 04-13-2014 at 12:12 PM.
mars735 is offline  
Old 04-13-2014, 12:19 PM   #38
diamondgeog
 
Posts: n/a

Default

Seriously? There was no obesity or diabetes crisis UNTIL the food pyramid came in. The food pyramid was to sell grains and vegetable oils from grains. Excellent new book called Death by Food Pyramid explains this. Recommended diet is just what makes livestock fat and sick. I prefer not to be fed like sick, fat, and dying livestock.

Where is your evidence for anything you post Mars? I post links frequently. Did you listen to the hour long podcast? The two interview posts?

Here is a shorter post with lots of links to studies. I do point out the first study the countries with less heart disease are generally wealthier so it doesn't prove anything.

Enjoy yoga. I already did my three mile run. It felt awesome.

http://authoritynutrition.com/6-grap...was-a-mistake/

Last edited by diamondgeog : 04-13-2014 at 12:29 PM.
 
Old 04-13-2014, 12:48 PM   #39
it's always something
 
Suzanne 3FC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 14,814

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondgeog View Post
The fad diet comment, oh boy. There has been one time in human history that we have gone low fat high carbs. The last 50 years. How's that working out for us? Let's see. People dropping like flies from diabetes, heart disease, cancer. Dementia soaring. The low fat diet is the fad.

We actually have data for millennium on high fat¦ what happened? nonexistent or rare type 2, cancer, heart disease. The Inuit, very healthy when they eat their traditional diet. Did you know in the early 1900s graduating doctors were told never go into cardiovascular medicine¦ too few patients.
With all due respect, doctors probably didn't go into cardiovascular medicine because it was such a new field and the technology barely existed. There were many fields of medicine that were just beginning and only advanced later, as our knowledge and technology advanced. You need to think about the type of access people had to doctors back then, or had money for doctors, and how diagnoses were made without medical tests. I'm pretty sure that a lot of people went to their barbers for medical advice - and dental work

Also, the average life span in the early 1900s was about 48 to 50. I'm sure you are aware that the symptoms of heart disease and many other diseases usually don't appear until later in life, especially now that we have the technology to diagnose them. Now that we are living longer, we are living long enough to see the effects of our diets and lifestyles. We can afford medical tests. How many people in the early 1900s were having their arteries scanned?

I agree that we are eating things that we should not put in our bodies, such as highly processed foods. And we eat to excess, like everything else in modern life. But I don't believe that reasonable amounts of whole grains caused the type of influx in disease that you seem to insist happened. There are a lot of populations in the world that have eaten grains for centuries, and lived long and healthy lives. Healthier than the Inuits. Even Inuits that had access to plant foods lived longer than Inuits who didn't.
__________________
...
Suzanne 3FC is offline  
Old 04-13-2014, 12:52 PM   #40
it's always something
 
Suzanne 3FC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 14,814

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondgeog View Post
Seriously? There was no obesity or diabetes crisis UNTIL the food pyramid came in. The food pyramid was to sell grains and vegetable oils from grains.
I don't think she was promoting the pyramid. Please read her post again

But on that note, did anyone ever really follow the pyramid? Other than pushing cheap meals in school lunches, I don't think I've ever seen anyone really follow it
Suzanne 3FC is offline  
Old 04-13-2014, 01:00 PM   #41
Senior Member
 
kaplods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Wausau, WI
Posts: 13,311

S/C/G: SW:394/310/180

Height: 5'6"

Default

To get at the truth, you have to look at all the evidence without filtering it through your own assumptions. That's nearly impossible to do without formal training and not much easier with formal training. The distinction between drawing conclusions and jumping to conclusions is a fine one.

Once people "pick a side," they tend to dismiss, ignore, and refute all and any evidence to the contrary.

The challenge is in looking at all the evidence, new and old, with an open eye and most people, even the experts in the field, are unable or unwilling to do that.

In general, materials aimed at the general public are nearly worthless as a source of unbiased information. They're predominantly persuasive pieces, and only evidence that advances the author's theory and agenda is presented. Evidence that doesn't fit gets eliminated.

It's getting harder and harder for me to respect and trust the modern paleo, anti-grain authors, because of the amount of b.s. that is being passed along as factual information is on a steep increase.

What frustrates me most, is the accusation that I am pro-grain, anti-paleo, anti-low carb. I am not (quite the opposite). I just believe that a lot more solid research needs to be done to convince me that everyone needs to give up grains or be on a high fat, low-carb diet (even as there's growing evidence that I need to).

Facts have become unimportant, and anyone who questions even the most implausible arguments or for a moment considers the merits of conflicting evidence, is seen as an ignorant naysayer, refusing to see the obvious truth.

Saying "Tigers are not venomous," does not mean I advocate keeping big cats as pets. And a lot of people saying, "tigers are venomous" doesn't make it true.

There's a lot of "venomous tigers" in the mainstream sources of anti-grain and low-carb literature. Anyone who claims to have lost weight or improved their health with such a diet is considered an "expert" just for writing a book or blog.

Demanding accurate and unbiased information shouldn't be seen as a radical act.
__________________
My Etsy shop (currently closed for the summer)

http://www.dreamstormdesigns.etsy.com
etsy link by permission from 3fc! Want to add yours? Ask them!
kaplods is offline  
Old 04-13-2014, 01:17 PM   #42
Senior Member
 
yoyoma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New England
Posts: 1,779

S/C/G: 180/ticker/139

Height: 5'6.5"

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondgeog View Post
Seriously? There was no obesity or diabetes crisis UNTIL the food pyramid came in...
http://authoritynutrition.com/6-grap...was-a-mistake/
I believe you misunderstood Mars' post. I believe her use of the word "concocted" was intended to indicate that the folks who came up with that had their hearts in the right place, but came up with poor one-size-fits-all advice on the basis of insufficient evidence (Mars, correct me if I'm wrong!).

Regarding how many links people post, if people are just sharing their experience, there's no need for them to post a link.

Early humans did need to dramatically increase their calorie intake (over the amount required by proto-humans) to develop and fuel their large energy-intensive brains. More humans began hunting and some sub-populations ate high amounts of animal products but but others ate high carb (e.g. wild yams and other tubers) and some switched depending upon availability. The amount of animal-derived calories that was fat vs protein also probably varied (those eating more snail and mussels as their animal sources not getting much fat from them). In addition to adding more animal products to their diets (relative to pre-human predecessors), some ancient humans also employed cooking and pre-agricultural plant management to increase available calories.

Here's a stat regarding modern hunter-gatherers, which people used as a proxy for ancient diets:
"According to recent analyses by Loren Cordain of Colorado State University, contemporary hunter-gatherers derive, on average, 40 to 60 percent of their dietary energy from animal foods (meat, milk and other products)." (from: http://docencia.med.uchile.cl/evoluc...sciamdieta.pdf).

40 -60% is an average, and includes both fat and protein. I'm sure that even today there are hunter-gatherer cultures that fall far outside that range, particularly for periods of time. There would also be some additional fat in the non-animal sources, but I see no reason to think that all early humans ate a high fat diet.

Here's a quote about what was known about Middle Eastern diet just before the advent of the agricultural revolution:
"Foods known to be gathered during the Mesolithic period in the Middle East were root vegetables, wild pulses (peas, beans, etc.), nuts such as almonds, pistachios, and hazelnuts, as well as fruits such as apples. Seafoods such as fish, crabs, molluscs, and snails also became common during this time.[60]"
(From: http://www.beyondveg.com/nicholson-w...erview1c.shtml, this isn't a research paper, but at least it provides a source reference.)
__________________
Deborah: Hoping to earn the user name NoYoyoMa (maintenance start: 6/30/2014)



Last edited by yoyoma : 04-13-2014 at 01:19 PM.
yoyoma is offline  
Old 04-13-2014, 01:25 PM   #43
Tai
Senior Member
 
Tai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,361

S/C/G: 272/136/maintaining

Height: 5'4"

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heather View Post
Let's play nice and not get a flame war going, peeps. Remember it's not just what you say, it's mostly how you say it.


If there is a statistic that only 5% of people are successful at calorie counting I'd want to know two things:
1) What defines success? Does it include a time frame? Amount of weight kept off?

2) Using the same criteria and methods, what % of people are successful on low carb programs? I suspect it might be equally low for a variety of reasons. Among them, lots of people try different weight loss method and leave the ones that don't work for them. Many try calorie counting and it doesn't work for them. Many try low carb and it doesn't work for them. Another reason has to do with how our hormones change once we become obese and seems to make it easier for us to regain later. A third reason would be that keeping up with ANY method of eating over time is difficult at best.

For full disclosure, I lost 125 pounds calorie counting 9 years ago, but have regained more than 1/2 of it. Is that a success or not?

I also believe in a plurality of weight loss methods. And I do know that when I cut sugar out my cravings are reduced, but I haven't been able to keep it up indefinitely.

Heather, it's so good to see you again! Of course you're a success.
Tai is offline  
Old 04-13-2014, 01:25 PM   #44
diamondgeog
 
Posts: n/a

Default

The ironic thing is this: has anyone ever 'proven' grains are healthy? That the nutrients in whole grains improve nutrient profiles in people?

There are high rates of diabetes in most Asian countries.

I guess I find the research view of anti-grain folk amusing for the following reason. The anti-grain high fat people had to go against entrenched dogma. I find these communities full of research. Mark Sisson for one and Chris Kesller for another question everything. And even do many posts where they say I was wrong.

These 'movements' are by far the most research, science, based movements I've ever come across in nutrition. By far.

And Suzanne I think there is evidence but so far back in time hard to tell for sure but human health has declined since grains.

Also your argument on age is flawed. The pool of people the percent was smaller living to 70 or 80 or 90. But they existed and were not getting heart disease.

Last edited by diamondgeog : 04-13-2014 at 01:28 PM.
 
Old 04-13-2014, 01:43 PM   #45
Tai
Senior Member
 
Tai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,361

S/C/G: 272/136/maintaining

Height: 5'4"

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondgeog View Post
Seriously? There was no obesity or diabetes crisis UNTIL the food pyramid came in. The food pyramid was to sell grains and vegetable oils from grains. Excellent new book called Death by Food Pyramid explains this. Recommended diet is just what makes livestock fat and sick. I prefer not to be fed like sick, fat, and dying livestock.

Where is your evidence for anything you post Mars? I post links frequently. Did you listen to the hour long podcast? The two interview posts?

Here is a shorter post with lots of links to studies. I do point out the first study the countries with less heart disease are generally wealthier so it doesn't prove anything.

Enjoy yoga. I already did my three mile run. It felt awesome.

http://authoritynutrition.com/6-grap...was-a-mistake/
This is only my personal experience but obesity and diabetes have been around much longer than the food pyramid in my family. My grandmother's and many cousins were obese and a few diabetic. They were born in the late 1800's!
Tai is offline  
Closed Thread
Posts by members, moderators and admins are not considered medical advice
and no guarantee is made against accuracy.


Thread Tools

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
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:46 AM.






Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.3.2