- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Weight loss: What actual percentage is Diet/Exercise?
Posted on 2/8/17 at 10:53 am to goldennugget
Posted on 2/8/17 at 10:53 am to goldennugget
quote:Yes, they are. Your body has no actual biological need for non-fibrous carbs.
Carbs are not the poison that ketotards say they are
quote:I don't follow your logic. Carbs can provide energy. It's what's going on inside where the poisoning is evident. Have you any idea of if you are trending towards insulin resistance or not? Have you any idea if you are suffering from inflammation throughout your CV system? Have you any idea of the potential cellular damage you are inflicting on yourself? The answers to these questions could very well turn up for you over the next several decades with shockingly negative answers for your health.
I'm bulking now so i eat 450g of carbs on workout days. If they were poison i wouldnt be making strength gains and would not be in control of my weight gain. I'm gaining weight at a steady 0.8 pounds a week. I eat rice, beans, sweet potatoes, regular potatoes, oatmeal, fruits and veggies. All of those are carbs. None are poison.
quote:You simply could not have it more backwards. Eating a diet that is high (60-70% of calories) in fat is what causes fat to be burned. Eating carbs (especially at your shocking level) is what causes the nonstop insulin response which orders cells to store fat instead of burn fat.
Avoiding carbs means your body has to burn fat for energy right off the bat. However any excess fat(caloric surplus) you eat will be stored as fat, hence why it onlt works eating at a deficit, just like any other diet
1
Posted on 2/8/17 at 10:54 am to Hester Carries
Just want to shed pounds? 80/20
Want to look good naked? 50/50
Want to look good naked? 50/50
Posted on 2/8/17 at 10:54 am to lsupride87
quote:
Running 3 miles burns about 450 calories.
A big mac has 536 calories
you're wrong. a 150lb person will burn 70 calories an hour or more doing nothing so subtract that from the 450 above if you're looking for what exercise does OVER AND ABOVE doing nothing.
Posted on 2/8/17 at 10:55 am to CAD703X
quote:
anyone can take 5 minutes and do the math and realize with horror that exercise, outside of being good for your heart & muscles, has almost ZERO impact on weight loss.
its laughable people still think if they are in pain from exercising they're getting lean.
You can't exercise your way to weight loss, but it can really help the process. Doing HIIT will really increase your metabolism.
Of course, the people that start and want these types of threads aren't going to do HIIT cause its really hard.
Posted on 2/8/17 at 10:56 am to CAD703X
quote:No, I am not
you're wrong
quote:Correct.
a 150lb person will burn 70 calories an hour or more doing nothing so subtract that from the 450 above if you're looking for what exercise does OVER AND ABOVE doing nothing.
Posted on 2/8/17 at 10:56 am to mattgr1983
quote:
Want to look good naked? 50/50
you can develop abs in as little as 2 weeks if you don't have a layer of fat covering them.
you can literally NOT EXERCISE AT ALL and get your body fat percentage into single digits, then go all out for 2 weeks and look amazing.
not saying thats a great idea, but pointing out its not hard to look 'cut' if you don't have a fat shell around your body.
Posted on 2/8/17 at 10:58 am to Big Scrub TX
quote:
You simply could not have it more backwards. Eating a diet that is high (60-70% of calories) in fat is what causes fat to be burned. Eating carbs (especially at your shocking level) is what causes the nonstop insulin response which orders cells to store fat instead of burn fat.
Anothrr brainwashed keto drone
I get my nutrition info straight from Lyle McDonald and Martin Berkhan. Lyle explains the dynamics of fat storage. 100% of fat surpluses are stored as fat.
Posted on 2/8/17 at 11:00 am to goldennugget
quote:I don't know who that is, but it's demonstrable science that the insulin response is for the literal purposes I described.
Anothrr brainwashed keto drone
I get my nutrition info straight from Lyle McDonald and Martin Berkhan. Lyle explains the dynamics of fat storage. 100% of fat surpluses are stored as fat.
Posted on 2/8/17 at 11:03 am to Tarik One
weight loss and weight gain are a simple equation
for weight loss your net caloric count should be negative
for weight gain your net caloric count should be positive
net caloric count = calories in - calories expended
for weight loss your net caloric count should be negative
for weight gain your net caloric count should be positive
net caloric count = calories in - calories expended
Posted on 2/8/17 at 11:09 am to Tarik One
metabolism rates are not fixed and that's a flaw in most of the calorie math that's done. it fluctuates just like blood pressure given the type of food, loads, stress, etc to reach a state of homeostasis in the body. There are studies that show eating more (quality foods) can boost the metabolic rate in the body and cause weight loss. If it was fixed or genetic in theory you could eat 3500 cals over your metabolic rate every day until you weighted 5000lbs. This doesn't happen because even in fatties the basal metabolic rate will increase to reach homeostasis.
To net it out. It's a lifestyle change that needs to be made not a diet. Only eat high quality foods and eat all you want of them (read - zero sugar, sweeteners, starches and and fruits with high glycemic loads).
While, I'm on a rant for you fat people who say your big boned...show me a fat skeleton.
To net it out. It's a lifestyle change that needs to be made not a diet. Only eat high quality foods and eat all you want of them (read - zero sugar, sweeteners, starches and and fruits with high glycemic loads).
While, I'm on a rant for you fat people who say your big boned...show me a fat skeleton.
Posted on 2/8/17 at 11:20 am to Bleeding purple
you nailed it. 
BMR >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BMI
if you learn your basal metabolic rate, then all you need to do is consume under that over a 24hr period = loss. consume > BMR = gain.
the only tricky part is a fatass may have a BMR of 2500 calories but after losing a significant amount of weight (say 75-100 pounds) it could drop to 2000 or less meaning they have to ensure their daily caloric intake stays under that adjusted threshold if they want to continue to lose.
BMR >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BMI
if you learn your basal metabolic rate, then all you need to do is consume under that over a 24hr period = loss. consume > BMR = gain.
the only tricky part is a fatass may have a BMR of 2500 calories but after losing a significant amount of weight (say 75-100 pounds) it could drop to 2000 or less meaning they have to ensure their daily caloric intake stays under that adjusted threshold if they want to continue to lose.
This post was edited on 2/8/17 at 11:21 am
Posted on 2/8/17 at 11:29 am to CAD703X
quote:
i had no problem being competitive and moving up the ranks and getting on the podium with a low carb diet.
last years TDF winner also was a low-carb nut (the british guy) but dont let those facts change your thinking.
Were you low carb during your actual race? I know a lot of people strive to train without relying on carbs. Try to stay in that "fat burning" metabolic zone to provide the long lasting energy source for an endurance event. I pretty much never need food for a 60 mile bike, or a half marathon run in training. But in competition, when you are pushing into those higher metabolic zones, you are going to need come glycogen. I bet those guys are taking in carbs on their bike during a race more than they do in their day to day "low carb" diets.
Also, I just flat out don't agree that exercise has 0 effect on weight loss. It may be easier for most people to cut calories from their diet. But the simple fact is, one can burn calories in exercise, therefore, one can lose weight from it.
Say 2500 calories a day sustains your weight. You continue to eat 2500 calories a day, but burn 500 additional due to activity. Every 7 days, you stand to lose a pound under those current conditions. Sure, your bodies caloric needs will change and you will need less than 2500 calories to sustain, but you reach a equilibrium at some point that will be at a lower weight than you currently are.
I have never cut calories as my intention has never been to lose a lot of weight. But I do lose weight without changing my diet AT ALL. I do burn a shite ton of calories when I'm training though. Burned 964 according to garmin yesterday. 50 minute easy swim and hour on the bike after my son went to bed. Honestly wasn't even difficult. If I do that workload 4 days a week. Then throw in a 60 mile bike on the weekend, I'll burn 5k calories a week. I will start losing weight and can eat pizza every night.
ETA: Now, I 100% realize that a healthy diet alone could easily allow you to lose weight. And a mixture of the two would be ideal for health and faster weight loss. I'm just pointing out that exercise alone could make you lose weight all other things held constant.
This post was edited on 2/8/17 at 11:54 am
Posted on 2/8/17 at 11:33 am to Tarik One
From my experience it's somewhere around 25% gym and 75% diet
but to expand on the diet it's 60% hitting your daily calories and macro nutrients and 15% vitamins and minerals.
Moral? Hit your daily minimums of protein and fats...fill the rest with carbs and you're good to go.
but to expand on the diet it's 60% hitting your daily calories and macro nutrients and 15% vitamins and minerals.
Moral? Hit your daily minimums of protein and fats...fill the rest with carbs and you're good to go.
Posted on 2/8/17 at 11:45 am to KG6
quote:
Were you low carb during your actual race? I know a lot of people strive to train without relying on carbs. Try to stay in that "fat burning" metabolic zone to provide the long lasting energy source for an endurance event.
i would literally keep one margarita shotblok with me and if i was lucky enough to still be in the front group 3-4 miles from the finishing sprint i'd eat it to help with the sprint.
Posted on 2/8/17 at 11:48 am to Big Scrub TX
You realize your insulin levels spike from drinking a protein shake, right?
"But muh insulin"
My lord. People are so brainwashed on nutrition
"But muh insulin"
My lord. People are so brainwashed on nutrition
Posted on 2/8/17 at 12:02 pm to KG6
quote:All you're really saying is that sugar has the capacity to be a performance enhancing drug at the outer margin of physical exertion. I don't dispute that.
Were you low carb during your actual race? I know a lot of people strive to train without relying on carbs. Try to stay in that "fat burning" metabolic zone to provide the long lasting energy source for an endurance event. I pretty much never need food for a 60 mile bike, or a half marathon run in training. But in competition, when you are pushing into those higher metabolic zones, you are going to need come glycogen. I bet those guys are taking in carbs on their bike during a race more than they do in their day to day "low carb" diets.
Posted on 2/8/17 at 12:03 pm to rocket31
quote:Too much protein can spike insulin, yes. That's why fat should be your biggest macro-nutrient and protein should be 2nd. You do understand it's possible to consume lots of fat away from protein, right? Also, protein shakes are a sub-optimal way to consume protein. It should be consumed in food.
You realize your insulin levels spike from drinking a protein shake, right?
"But muh insulin"
My lord. People are so brainwashed on nutrition
Posted on 2/8/17 at 12:12 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
That's why fat should be your biggest macro-nutrient and protein should be 2nd.
You're advocating people should intake more fats than protein? I'd have to disagree on this one...
Posted on 2/8/17 at 12:21 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
All you're really saying is that sugar has the capacity to be a performance enhancing drug at the outer margin of physical exertion. I don't dispute that.
Not necessarily the "outer exertion". At least in the sense that it's not like a certain distance or time requires carbs. It's more intensity. And it's highly individual. At 10 min per mile, I can run for days. At 8 min per mile, I'm depleting my glycogen stores and will need to replenish carbs during the workout/race. Plenty of better fit individuals are still in the fat burning zone at sub 8 min/mile and won't require carbs.
Plenty of peoples standard exercise routines are going to kick them higher than a standard aerobic heart rate. I've never done crossfit, but I assume it would get most people there. An hour long workout with low glycogen stores would leave an individual pretty drained I would assume, and therefore not performing to their peak ability during the end of the workout.
This post was edited on 2/8/17 at 12:24 pm
Posted on 2/8/17 at 12:23 pm to Tarik One
Purely for weight loss? 100/0 will get it done if all you care about are the numbers on the scale.
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News