Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: neverdem

The ONLY scientific weight formula proven countless times (and disproven only for a few extraordinary cases) is:

(lower Calories )+ (exercise) =weight loss

The more you increase the variables on the left the more you get results on the right.

Everything else is wishful thinking.

And I am working on the left but I don’t hold out any visions of anything affecting my weight except hard work and discipline.


5 posted on 12/14/2012 6:50:24 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Here comes bama claus here comes bama claus left down bama claus lane!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: freedumb2003

I’m not overweight, I’m just too short so I’ve decided next year I shall grow another 5 or 6 inches taller.


6 posted on 12/14/2012 6:54:13 PM PST by Grams A (The Sun will rise in the East in the morning and God is still on his throne.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: freedumb2003
What kind of calories? Carbohydrates? Fats? The body treats them differently.

Your equation doesn't include those of use that consume a lot of calories, and don't spend a lot of time exersizing, and stay rail thin.

As a food service professional, I care about this issue. I'm glad they are doing the test. I look forward to the results.

/johnny

7 posted on 12/14/2012 6:56:44 PM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: freedumb2003

Simply not true. You can eat unlimited calories and do no excercise on the Atkins diet, and lose weight. It’s all about carbs, especially “bad carbs”.

Very few people can stay on the Atkins diet for long though.


10 posted on 12/14/2012 7:02:34 PM PST by Hugin ("Most times a man'll tell you his bad intentions, if you listen and let yourself hear."---Open Range)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: freedumb2003
The ONLY scientific weight formula proven countless times (and disproven only for a few extraordinary cases) is:

(lower Calories )+ (exercise) =weight loss


Really?

Abstract

During very low carbohydrate intake, the regulated and controlled production of ketone bodies causes a harmless physiological state known as dietary ketosis. Ketone bodies flow from the liver to extra-hepatic tissues (e.g., brain) for use as a fuel; this spares glucose metabolism via a mechanism similar to the sparing of glucose by oxidation of fatty acids as an alternative fuel. In comparison with glucose, the ketone bodies are actually a very good respiratory fuel. Indeed, there is no clear requirement for dietary carbohydrates for human adults. Interestingly, the effects of ketone body metabolism suggest that mild ketosis may offer therapeutic potential in a variety of different common and rare disease states. Also, the recent landmark study showed that a very-low-carbohydrate diet resulted in a significant reduction in fat mass and a concomitant increase in lean body mass in normal-weight men. Contrary to popular belief, insulin is not needed for glucose uptake and utilization in man. Finally, both muscle fat and carbohydrate burn in an amino acid flame.

19 posted on 12/14/2012 7:29:54 PM PST by PA Engineer (Liberate America from the Occupation Media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: freedumb2003
Good luck controlling the constant hunger that follows. ( Hunger and satiety are hormone driven,)
24 posted on 12/14/2012 7:43:04 PM PST by wintertime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: freedumb2003

“(lower Calories )+ (exercise) =weight loss”

Works every time its tried!

Today I’m having bacon, eggs and cheese biscuits. I’ll ride 25 miles to burn it off!


47 posted on 12/15/2012 5:20:22 AM PST by poobear (Socialism, in the minds of the elites, is a con-game for the serfs, nothing more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: freedumb2003
You do realize that such an attitude is an exact illustration of the point the original article was making, don't you?

My opinion is that there are a few too many variables for a simple "formula" or heuristic to be universally applicable.

Including, for example:

Age of person
Gender of person
Body fat percentage of person
Time-dependent mapping (to childhood) of body-fat percentage of person
Time-dependent mapping (to childhood) of exercise history of person
Past diet of person (chronic sweet tooth different from healthy eater)
Type, duration, and frequency of exercise protocol
Toxic load, including lyme disease, mold, solvents
Calories consumed currently
Composition of diet currently (carb%, protein%, fat%)
Types of carbs consumed
Timing and size of meals, absolute and in relation to exercise

I think it will be found that one's profile of exercise vs. food (timing, duration, frequency of both) will have a LOT to do with epigenetics which determine how one handles food; and that it will be found that *drastic* but consistent changes to one's exercise and diet can re-set the epigenetics from "fatty" to "lean mean fighting machine" over time: requiring only titanium willpower and consistency; but that, as with so much else, "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" and eating healthy with a history of exercise throughout childhood and adolescence will make it MUCH harder to gain weight later in life.

Cheers!

57 posted on 12/15/2012 7:53:33 AM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: freedumb2003

No, that is no longer true. Limit your carbs. Eat more healthy fats: coconut oil, meat and butter from healthy animals (no feedlot animals are healthy - go as organic and grassfed as you can), some olive oil if you don’t heat it. You will lose weight.

Try only 20 g of carbs a day. No fake sugars. Forget the exercise - it’s good, get out there and do whatever you like, use your body - but for weight loss, your diet is 80-90%.


64 posted on 12/15/2012 9:53:40 AM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: freedumb2003

This is the over simplified concept the author is saying needs to be challenged.

A couple of summers ago I started riding my my bike to work, 13.5 miles each way and 1000 of elevation gain.

That was 2.5 hours a day. At my peak, I did a 6 week stretch without missing a day. Do you know how much weight I lost in that period. 1 pound.

Then with your absolute 100% proven theory, you would say, well you must have eaten more food.

Believe me I did not eat an extra 2500 calories a day.

If it was as simple as you say, 94% of people who lose significant weight would not regain it. They obviously knew how to lose it.


65 posted on 12/15/2012 9:58:55 AM PST by djwright (2012 The White House Gets Another Coat Of Shellac)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson