I guess I am a little confused, but why did the Twinkie diet work if it wasn't just calories in and calories out?
It still very much is, and always will be calories in and calories out, we're just learning that it isn't always easy (or often even possible) to precisely measure those calories.
The Twinkie diet worked because the guy ate less than he burned, but he probably would have lost MORE, and felt fuller and physically healthier if he had made healthier choices for the same calorie count (using current calorie counting resources which overestimate the calorie content in many healthy foods).
The new research only suggests that our current math is not entirely accurate, not that math itself is useless.
You don't have to calorie count correctly or at all to lose weight. The scale will tell you if you're cutting calories enough to lose.
The real takeaway here is that choosing the healthiest, most wholesome, whole, natural foods for your calorie dollar will generally result in the best weight loss.
And, as an added bonus, you'll get a higher volume of more filling, more nutritious food (even if you use the current, unadjusted calorie counts).
It still very much is, and always will be calories in and calories out, we're just learning that it isn't always easy (or often even possible) to precisely measure those calories.
The Twinkie diet worked because the guy ate less than he burned, but he probably would have lost MORE, and felt fuller and physically healthier if he had made healthier choices for the same calorie count (using current calorie counting resources which overestimate the calorie content in many healthy foods).
The new research only suggests that our current math is not entirely accurate, not that math itself is useless.
You don't have to calorie count correctly or at all to lose weight. The scale will tell you if you're cutting calories enough to lose.
The real takeaway here is that choosing the healthiest, most wholesome, whole, natural foods for your calorie dollar will generally result in the best weight loss.
And, as an added bonus, you'll get a higher volume of more filling, more nutritious food (even if you use the current, unadjusted calorie counts).
Oh I see! Thank you for explaining that! I misunderstood what it meant when I read about the twinkie diet.
I think I can easily eat a lot of volume even of the healthy stuff which is why counting is so important to me (it also eases my mind knowing that I'm calculating everything)
Every time I think I found something long term, I reach a bump in the road, but I agree that incorporating healthy foods is something I need to be better at! My fear is that I eat healthier, but weight loss doesn't follow if that makes sense?
The Twinkie diet worked because he ate fewer calories than he burned. In a person with no confounding health issues, fewer calories in than out will pretty much always work, no matter whether the calories are healthy or not, processed or not.
The question is whether the standard measure of a calorie in a laboratory is an accurate representation of how the body can use those calories. For example, an ounce of nuts may have 180 calories in the laboratory, but your body can only access 120. Other foods, such as meat and high-protein dairy and foods high in fiber, are the same -- the scientific calorie count is more than your body can extract.
If your diet is heavy in these types of foods, your body cannot access all the calories you are consuming. Based on labels, you may have calculated 1500 calories in your day, but if your body can only access 1250, or 1300, or 1350 of them, you are in a greater deficit than you think!
FWIW, I'm not sure that people 30 or 40 years ago moved all that much more than we do now. I was a child in the 1960s and remember the food/movement environment quite well.
Yes, we didn't have computers and we did play outside after school. I do think that was a bit more movement.
Adults? No, I don't think they did move more. It is common now for adults to purposefully exercise. We run or we walk or lift weights or go to a Zumba class or do an exercise video. I don't know any adults who did those things back in the 1906s. My parents occasionally (not often) went water skiing. That was about it. Exercise was not something that most adults did. It is true my parents didn't have a dishwasher, but I don't think washing dishes (most of which I did) burned all that many calories.
The real difference between then and now was the food environment. Fast food was just starting to appear. Servings were small. My parents allowed me to have a Coke on most days -- usually a 6 1/2 oz. Coke, occasionally a 10 oz. King size. We didn't eat a lot of junk food and there wasn't much processed foods in the stores (well, there were canned vegetables). You didn't have the very sophisticated advertising that you now see from the food industry. If you went to a restaurant (rare in my family) you ordered a drink and you didn't get free refills. And, it was in a small glass.
What has changed in the wide array of highly processed foods, the huge serving sizes in restaurants and fast food, and the advertising of food in a much more sophisticated manner.
Koshka, there has been a lot of talk about NEAT in the past decade and it is just general movement that plays a part in the calories that we burn by doing every day things. NEAT has gone down a lot. And as far as exercise, even those that recognize they have a low amount of daily movement struggle to exercise. Sure you can say more people purposefully exercise these days but are those people that purposefully exercise regularly the ones most likely struggling with obesity?
My grandparents built their house in the 1950s and my grandmas washroom has a scrub board. She used to wash a lot more clothes by hand. Also, I know my mom talks about how they used to not have a car and would have to walk or take the bus everywhere (but you still have to walk to the bus stop). And again, I know there has been a lot of talk about how office work has even changed so that people are more apt to stay at their desk. Beyond that, as someone who was born in the mid 70s, I do remember a lot more daily activity but also partly because up until the mid 90s, we didn't have a clothes dryer so we hung all our clothes outside and although my parents got a dishwasher in the mid 90s, they never used it (my parents moved to a house with a dryer and dishwasher). A lot of daily movements like that do effect overall calorie burn.
I do agree that serving sizes also play a factor because people not only eat large portions when they eat out but then serve the same size portions at home. And sure there are a lot of calorie dense foods that are readily available which doesn't help either
I think that although food is the major factor of obesity, lifestyle does play a role. Those small calories that you burn doing household chores add up big time. They used to have to get up to change the channel in past years. Lawn mowers were of the push kind, not the sit kind. Cloth diapers had to be hand washed. These are very small things but they do add up.
We did get outside a lot more as kids but my grandparents generation were hardly exercising like we're trying to do today to stay thin. I wish I could lose from housework, I'd be 120p by now. Sure house work and such helps but they all stayed thin and I think it's because 99% of meals were eaten at home. Also, being Italians their meals were VERY carb heavy with wine as well. They were poor too, but nowadays poor usually means buying cheap processed or fast food. I run like a maniac for months and stay at maintenance. Granted I admit I eat too much at times which is counter-productive but there's things in the food that wasn't there 40 years ago.. I'm not talking about GMO's but the antibiotics, additives, hormones, flavor enhancers..etc. It's hard to avoid and organic is expensive.
This reminds me of an episode from Mad Men, season 1 or 2 I think. The Draper's new neighbor was a single divorced mom and all the women in the neighborhood would gossip about her presumably because it was unusual to see a divorced single mom in their social circle. One of the things they were gossiping about was that this woman would walk around the neighborhood, going nowhere in particular (i.e. exercising).
I think I can easily eat a lot of volume even of the healthy stuff which is why counting is so important to me (it also eases my mind knowing that I'm calculating everything)
Every time I think I found something long term, I reach a bump in the road, but I agree that incorporating healthy foods is something I need to be better at! My fear is that I eat healthier, but weight loss doesn't follow if that makes sense?
I actually think I end up eating less volume if I eat something which fills me up quickly and keeps me feeling sated longer by not pinging my blood sugar. And the calculating thing is exactly why the answer of calories in, calories out will always be debated. For you, it's soothing. For others, like me, it's soul killing and plays with my head. So I really have no idea calorie wise what I usually eat.
I believe, but have no empirical proof, that eating healthier will translate to the body finding an equilibrium of a healthy weight. Now, it may not be the weight we WANT; but most of us are usually guilty of wanting a too-slim shape anyway. I am still trying to prove this, though, as I still have a bit too much actual fat. I keep saying I need to tone -- and one of these days I will -- which is probably what will eventually do it for me as I have stopped losing and can't seem to jumpstart it again quite yet.
My GM died at 39 around 1945. She was a large lady and had huge legs swollen from edema. She looked uncomfortable and I am almost sure this woman never sat down a moment in her life. My GF was a very slight man. Obviously he would eat the same things she did that she cooked for them.
I actually think I end up eating less volume if I eat something which fills me up quickly and keeps me feeling sated longer by not pinging my blood sugar. And the calculating thing is exactly why the answer of calories in, calories out will always be debated. For you, it's soothing. For others, like me, it's soul killing and plays with my head. So I really have no idea calorie wise what I usually eat.
I believe, but have no empirical proof, that eating healthier will translate to the body finding an equilibrium of a healthy weight. Now, it may not be the weight we WANT; but most of us are usually guilty of wanting a too-slim shape anyway. I am still trying to prove this, though, as I still have a bit too much actual fat. I keep saying I need to tone -- and one of these days I will -- which is probably what will eventually do it for me as I have stopped losing and can't seem to jumpstart it again quite yet.
You may be surprised to find out that the intuitive eating methods would agree with this theory
I guess I am a little confused, but why did the Twinkie diet work if it wasn't just calories in and calories out?
I always gain when I eat more processed food of the same calories but I always figured it was because of the high salt and carbs which hold onto water. I always thought this was true, but literally my friends at the gym literally just convinced me of calories in vs calories out and I feel like I just wrapped my head around that, but apparently it isn't true anymore?
I guess I'm just feeling out of it because I started cooking on my own recently and I eat fairly clean but my weight has been going up and it's a little depressing! I felt like my lean cuisine and diet soda worked a lot better but I know it isn't the ideal situation at all, blah.
If you lost more w/ diet sodas & Lean Cuisines it was probably because you had less calorie "play." When you cook your own meals, it's much more difficult to calculate the calories, and the temptation is there to eat more. If you eat pre-packaged meals, your portion is your portion, so there's less of a temptation to pick, taste, add a second helping to your plate, etc.
I am not a proponent of pre-packaged meals, but I can see why people use them, and to be honest, if someone is obese and needs to get some weight off quickly, it's better for them to go the pre-packaged route initially than to keep the weight on, IMHO.
