Carbs did not "make me" fat, but I am more sensitive to carbs than protein or fat. For me, carbs, especially highly processed carbs (sugar and flour) trigger a dramatic increase in hunger intensity. If I want to control my hunger, I have to control my carbs. I'm also insulin resistant, which according to my doctor makes the carb-hunger response more likely, and that reducing carbs seems to be the more effective method of weight loss for insulin resistant folks.
In my food journaling, I've also found that a calorie is not a calorie for me. On 1800 calories of carb-rich eating, I am starving all of the time, and lose weight relatively slowly, even if I am religiously (and uncomfortably) following my food plan.
However, on 1800 calories of relatively low carb (especially low GI carb), my hunger is dramatically reduced and the weight comes off more quickly. Some of this is very obviously water weight, but to such an advantage, that if I notice that I am severely retaining water, a few days of reducing carbs further than I normally do seems to relieve the water retention in a couple of days, much more quickly than on a high carb eating plan.
I wouldn't recommend low carb diets, especially very low carb diets to everyone. Or to anyone as a first option, but I've definitely learned that lower carb eating is not always an unwise choice.
Muscle does burn more calories than fat. (6 calories per pound a day instead of 2) BUT! it doesn't mean that you can just beef up and lay on your duff for the rest of your life eating cookies.
The thing is that fat doesn't burn calories It's not an organ, it's a storage system. It hold calories in it's happy little squishy mass. Those two calories spent a day are for the minimal metabolic processes that keep the fat from dying and rotting away inside of you. Muscle on the other hand, at rest it requires those 6 calories to continue living (i.e. sleeping). We don't take into account though, the energy required to live day to day. You're burning small amounts of calories (derived from daily meals) walking around and going to the bathroom. When your body runs out of sugar and other insta-energy, it heads for your fat. But most daily activity can be sustained on our diet (on 3fc we've overcompensated just a tad :/). You don't use fat to walk, or sit up straight (yes, that's right, it takes muscle to sit).
Ok, so I'm rambling . Any way, you're kind of right ndnguy85. Muscles don't burn enough calories on their own to facilitate weight loss. But they do burn more than fat.
Not entirely myths. I think just posting this and walking away from it is a bit of a disservice ... no better than articles that promote the opposite w/out explanation.
Quote:
muscle burns crazy amount of calories
Compared to the same volume of fat, muscle *does* burn crazy amounts of calories. But you have to keep it in perspective. Will you lose 10lbs by building muscle? No, but you will raise your metabolism enough so that your diet will be more effective. Someone who is skinny w/out muscle will have to drop their calories a lot more to lose weight than someone who is skinny-lean with muscle.
Quote:
carbs make you fat
Carbs *can* make some people fat. For some people carbs are trigger items. For some people like kaplods, carbs are metabolised differently.
And a statement that "carbs make you fat" is false is kind of disingenuous. Fat doesn't make you fat either. Eating too much fat makes you fat. Carbs don't make you fat. Eating too many carbs makes you fat. Calories don't make you fat. Eating too many calories make you fat. And so on.
Quote:
working out on an empty stomach is better
Working out on a full stomach is probably not a great idea. Eating a small amount of food (carbs, and some protein) is a better option. But it's all very personal. For some people any food in their stomachs is a bad idea and will make them feel ill while they're working out. For some people working out on an empty stomach makes them feel ill. There is no "right or wrong" answer here. There is just what is better for each person.
Aahahahaha!!!!! This one especially makes me laugh, "low fat makes anything healthy". I see "Low Fat" listed on boxes and bags of sugar laden candy. Like just because it's low fat will make it good for you, or less bad for you. Give me a break.
I see "Low Fat" listed on boxes and bags of sugar laden candy.
I HATE the whole labelling thing that allows companies to get away with crap like that.
My SIL and I had an interesting discussion several years ago. We often make ranch dip with a packet of ranch dressing mix and a container of sour cream - pretty standard.
Well about 3 or 4 years ago Hidden Valley started putting "Fat Free" on their packets of ranch dip mix.
My SIL (who is sweet but a little naive) pointed this out one afternoon - that our dip was fat free. I had to sit there and blink for a while before I could answer. Finally I did explain that yes the DIP MIX is fat free. But when you mix it with 16 oz of full fat sour cream, the DIP is not fat free.
She sat there for a minute and then rolled her eyes and facepalmed.
.
Last edited by PhotoChick; 10-04-2008 at 10:49 AM.
Muscle does burn more calories than fat. (6 calories per pound a day instead of 2) BUT! it doesn't mean that you can just beef up and lay on your duff for the rest of your life eating cookies.
The thing is that fat doesn't burn calories It's not an organ, it's a storage system. It hold calories in it's happy little squishy mass. Those two calories spent a day are for the minimal metabolic processes that keep the fat from dying and rotting away inside of you. Muscle on the other hand, at rest it requires those 6 calories to continue living (i.e. sleeping). We don't take into account though, the energy required to live day to day. You're burning small amounts of calories (derived from daily meals) walking around and going to the bathroom. When your body runs out of sugar and other insta-energy, it heads for your fat. But most daily activity can be sustained on our diet (on 3fc we've overcompensated just a tad :/). You don't use fat to walk, or sit up straight (yes, that's right, it takes muscle to sit).
Ok, so I'm rambling . Any way, you're kind of right ndnguy85. Muscles don't burn enough calories on their own to facilitate weight loss. But they do burn more than fat.
the reason i said that is because a lot of people think you can build muscle while losing fat. maybe a tad bit..but not the amount people are thinking of. putting on muscle is a very hard process. energy surplus + adequate amount of protein/fat/carbs + proper weight training routine = 0.5lbs a week at the most for most guys. imagine how much less is that for girls.
Not entirely myths. I think just posting this and walking away from it is a bit of a disservice ... no better than articles that promote the opposite w/out explanation.
Compared to the same volume of fat, muscle *does* burn crazy amounts of calories. But you have to keep it in perspective. Will you lose 10lbs by building muscle? No, but you will raise your metabolism enough so that your diet will be more effective. Someone who is skinny w/out muscle will have to drop their calories a lot more to lose weight than someone who is skinny-lean with muscle.
Carbs *can* make some people fat. For some people carbs are trigger items. For some people like kaplods, carbs are metabolised differently.
And a statement that "carbs make you fat" is false is kind of disingenuous. Fat doesn't make you fat either. Eating too much fat makes you fat. Carbs don't make you fat. Eating too many carbs makes you fat. Calories don't make you fat. Eating too many calories make you fat. And so on.
Working out on a full stomach is probably not a great idea. Eating a small amount of food (carbs, and some protein) is a better option. But it's all very personal. For some people any food in their stomachs is a bad idea and will make them feel ill while they're working out. For some people working out on an empty stomach makes them feel ill. There is no "right or wrong" answer here. There is just what is better for each person.
.
i never said lower carb wasnt a good idea. i was just going by this anti carb idea that people have in their head these days. similar to the low fat junk started in the 70s. and nothing applies to all people.
also i never said anyone should work out on a full stomach. i sure dont. my point was proper nutrtion prior to workout is even more important than nutrition afterwards. i dont see how eating some low gi carbs and protein 60-90mins before a workout is going to make anyone sick. i mean if you are stuffing your face, which no one should be doing, right before you hit the gym..ya it will make you sick. it also defeats the purpose of eatin that meal because you never gave a chance for your body to metabolize it.
what are you talking about me walking away from this thread?
I think it's really easy for humans to oversimplify without thinking. Just like PhotoChick's SIL's slap-head moment. So if a myth is busted, it's very easy to assume the opposite must be true. Even otherwise very intelligent people, sometimes do this.
Most myths start with a grain of truth that someone has twisted. Attempting to debunk a myth without discussion, often creates a new myth of its own.
Like when I've told various people that my mother nearly died of water intoxication by following popular dieting water myths, and sometimes I get a response of dissmissal (the myths are true) or of fear (OMG, water is dangerous).
So if a myth is busted, it's very easy to assume the opposite must be true. Even otherwise very intelligent people, sometimes do this.
Most myths start with a grain of truth that someone has twisted. Attempting to debunk a myth without discussion, often creates a new myth of its own.
Exactly. And that's what I meant by "walking away" from the thread. When you post a bunch of one-liners and then say: "if you are participating in any of these myths..please stop. haha. if you need me to explain more in some of these..just ask." you're not inviting conversation or questions really. You're just replacing one-liner myth with one-liner myth.
I agree that the "one-liner" statements of, or denial of "fact" that are so popular, not only when individuals give advice, but in magazine articles and such as well, provide more misinformation than information. It's too easy to misinterpret the statement - in this case, what isn't true about the statements? What makes them untrue? What is the truth? What makes it the truth? Who says so? How did they come to this conclusion?
A one-liner, whether it's a statement of "fact" or a statement denying the "fact" just doesn't give enough information to be truly useful.
It seems like any company can stick "low fat" on their boxes of junk food these days to make sales. Or they divide their food into 1 gram portions and try to fool you with the calorie count. I'm glad you mentioned the low fat myth!
Some weight loss myths
It's not an organ, it's a storage system. It hold calories in it's happy little squishy mass. Those two calories spent a day are for the minimal metabolic processes that keep the fat from dying and rotting away inside of you. Muscle on the other hand, at rest it requires those 6 calories to continue living (i.e. sleeping). We don't take into account though, the energy required to live day to day. You're burning small amounts of calories (derived from daily meals) walking around and going to the bathroom. When your body runs out of sugar and other insta-energy, it heads for your fat. But most daily activity can be sustained on our diet (on 3fc we've overcompensated just a tad :/). You don't use fat to walk, or sit up straight (yes, that's right, it takes muscle to sit).
