I was just wondering about all of your opinions about this... Do you think you are less likely to gain if your calories are, say, liquid?
Or, eating the same amount of calories,are you more likely to gain if most of those calories are coming from fat?
What about the theories about the time of day you eat??
Or the thoughts about protein and carbs being a weight gain guaranteeing combination?
I would like to believe a calorie is a calorie no matter where it comes from, and that any diet that reduces a certain type of food, or telling you to combine certain foods will work because it is, essentially, reducing calories, not because of the combination of foods...
But I have a friend who decided to test out the "liquid calorie" theory.. She liquidised all her food for two weeks and drank everything througha straw (she decided if it couldn't be drank though a straw, it wasn't liquid). She lost 12 pounds, drinking about 2000 liquid calories a day.. She is now eating 1300 solid calories a day ( and has been doing so for a long time), and not losing so much as a pound... Has she just reached a plateau? Was it a fluke? (she was never obese by the way)
Here are my observations/opinions (and I am by no means an expert):
A calorie is a calorie, whether liquid, solid, fat, carb, or protein.
Your friend may actually just lose better at a higher calorie amount. If you cut your calories too low, it may not be the correct level for your body to burn efficiently. I know it's crazy that too low of calories may cause your weight loss to stop, but it is definitely a possibility. Hard to know without knowing your friend's weight and activity level.
Also, if she'd been taking in 1300 calories a day for a long ime, then spiked to 2000, then went back down to 1300, those weeks at 2000 she may have lost weight simply because it was different. Our bodies settle into patterns pretty easily, so just changing her calorie amount may have waken her up a bit.
I also agree with you that diets that cut out certain types of foods (low-carb or low-fat diets) are effective because they essentially lower your calories.
I think another factor to take into consideration is how highly-processed your calories are. I mean, if the liquid calories are 100% juice, milk, vegetable juice, and whatnot, there's likely a lot less chemicals, additives, and overall junk going into the body, whereas if you're eating 1300 calories of highly-processed/prepared foods, your body likely won't process them as efficiently, and you may not have the same results. Even diet shakes are usually fortified with lots of vitamins and minerals to replace those you would get from a healthy solid diet, but if the solids you eat don't have those nutrients in the first place, then it's not a fair comparison.
There's a lot to it other than JUST calories. Of course, it can't be simple!
In my opinion, a calorie IS a calorie. However, if you eat all your calories from fat, you will not be able to eat a large volume because fat is calorie-dense. Consider the volume of salad you'd be eating to reach 250 calories--it would be a huge bowl! But a typical candy bar is about 250 calories. Yummy, but hardly something that would fill you up.
I don't know what to think about your friend's strategy. Was it possible she was eating less than 2,000 calories afterall? And people tend to lose the most weight when they start a diet. I'd say it was a fluke, but that sort of thing would need further study!
However, I also believe that not all calorie "packages" are equal. You can eat something with 100 calories and little nutrition which will not satisfy your body and probably make you crave and eat more. Or you can eat something with 100 calories that is full of vitamins and minerals, great taste and pleasing texture and therefore satisfy your body.
My first thought was "Ewwwwwww...". What a dismal way to voluntarily live for 2 weeks.
Sorry for the hijack, back to the original point of the thread .
I was thinking the same thing! :0
I had orthodontal surgery when I was a teenager and had to drink out of a straw for a little more than 6 weeks. I had to put everything in a blender. It was the most unappetizing situation.. I was so desperate for flavor and texture I remember putting some of the strangest things in the blender. But who would do this on purpose when they didn't have to?
That's me too. I broke mine in the early '70's and I was desperate for something to chew for weeks! :lol I did lose weight, but back then I didn't need to.
This was one of two brief times in my life when I was not obese. I was overweight though..
I lost 20 pounds but I desperately tried not to as the doctor recommended I do anything and everything to eat healthy. I think if it weren't for the Ensure he insisted I drink .. was it twice a day? 3 times a day? .. I am sure I would have gotten quite ill..
There is no way I would ever want to live that way permanently. Maybe that is why I never tried weightloss meal replacement shakes.
While technically a calorie is a calorie, in my opinion there is a HUGE difference in the effect they have on your body. 200 calories of junk does NOT equal 200 calories of fresh yummy veggies in my opinion. My body processes the natural calories so much faster and easier. No I can't back it up with facts and statistics LOL... but I eat far more calories than the typical "diet" (which I'm not on) and am losing weight... because most of them are genuine nutrition and not loaded with fat, preservatives, unknown addictive substances and chemicals, etc.
Well, you know what they say - it's not WHAT you eat, but how much. I believe it's both.
While fatty foods are still just 'calories', they're also bad for your heart and they clog your arteries. And raise your cholesterol, and make you feel sluggish and a host of other stuff that I personally don't want. My diet is very low in fat.
Is a calorie a calorie... Wherever it comes from?
