Theoretically it makes no difference. You lose weight by burning more calories than you put in. Period. That being said, nutritionally and health-wise 1800 calories of candy may not be a good idea, but you will hear/read hundreds of "what's best" for health.
If you could force yourself to do it, the actual weight loss would be the same. Different types of food affect water weight, so your total weight loss on the scale could be more or less depending on what you eat (it would even out, eventually). But in terms of actual bodily tissues loss, it wouldn't be more or less.
In terms of macronutrients, protein is the most thermogenic. Meaning, it takes the most calories to digest protein (then carbs, then fat). But it's really a negligible difference.
And obviously, over the longer term, your body has a requirement for essential amino acids, fats, vitamins, and minerals, without which you'd get really sick. Especially with the amino acids, because your body would have to catabolize muscle or organ tissue to make that up. So what you eat can affect what you're actually losing, as well (fat vs muscle).
But in terms of a real world diet with all the normal variables, what you eat effects the way you feel. Which in turn effects how likely you are to stay on that diet. So in that sense, it does matter what you're eating.
Didn't a man lose a lot of weight on the Twinkie Diet where he ate nothing but junk food for 2 months? He lost weight and some parts of his body improved due to the weightloss but I can't imagine he felt very good with no real food or fresh food. But yes, technically you can lose weight that way. Calories in, calories out----it's that simple!
Ooops, it's that article above that amandie referenced that has the Twinkie Diet info in it. I read so much about weightloss, I forget where I find the info. Sorry about that!
Last edited by elvislover324; 01-27-2013 at 04:54 PM.
yea you can lose weight eating whatever as long as you're at a deficit.
Now what your body composition changes and how you will look (especially naked) depends on WHAT you eat (and exercise)
yea the man who ate nothing but twinkies lost weight. Now tell me how his physique looked
When I did weight watchers a few years ago (basically a calorie counting diet) my aunt was doing it as well. While I could eat meat, veggies, a small amount of pasta and 1 cookie or sweet treat a day and always feel satisfied and was losing at a good rate, my aunt was eating 2 cans of green beans and then all the sweets she could fit into the rest of her points a day.
While I lost and lasted on that way of eating for a year, she lasted only a couple months. I felt great, she was always tired and didn't feel well but according to her "she could eat whatever she wanted as long as it was in her points".
It can be done, but shouldn't. You would lose weight, but wouldn't have the same health gains.
You will lose weight as long as you make a calorie deficient, it doesn't matter what the calories come from. However, you will be healthier and have more energy if the calories are from good foods and a balanced diet.
yea you can lose weight eating whatever as long as you're at a deficit.
Now what your body composition changes and how you will look (especially naked) depends on WHAT you eat (and exercise)
yea the man who ate nothing but twinkies lost weight. Now tell me how his physique looked
I mostly agree with the other responses. However, I do think there may be some exceptions. I think there are some people that are sensitive to carbs and lose more when they're on a reduced carb diet. In fact, there was a study done that showed that people who ate a reduced carb diet only two days out of every seven lost more weight overall than those who just counted calories. It's here. I haven't read the entire article. In fact, if kaplods still posts here, perhaps she'll pop in to share her experience; I remember her writing that she could eat more calories if she went lighter on the carbs.
In terms of macronutrients, protein is the most thermogenic. Meaning, it takes the most calories to digest protein (then carbs, then fat). But it's really a negligible difference.
I disagree. I saw someplace that each gram of protein takes 4 calories to burn while fat and carbs are like one. That could make a major difference. If you look at most diet plans they are very high in protien. There has to be a reason for that other than making you full.
Does it matter what foods we eat to lose
