Is more calories a good idea?

19 Nov 2009

So Kryps...
Are you seriously saying that obesity now has nothing to do with what people eat, or how little excersise they do?
Of course people are different and you can have a skinny kid who eats anything, plays on his computer all the time and never gets fat but.....that is the exception to the rule.
I see obese kids everyday of the week, ya wanna pop into your local supermarket and see them. They a lot of the time are with obese parents too.
I do not give a monkeys really as I am one of those lucky ones who has always been able to eat what they want, when they want.
For my own opinions I think obesity IS brought about by people eating too much, maybe the wrong sort of food, and add that to slouching around all day, and there lies the problem.
Any Doctor at your local GP clinic will advise overweight people to cut down on what they eat, and take plenty of excersise.
Now I would trust a GP who has taken 9 years minimum to get to that position, over any report, either saying one thing or another.
Now where's that choclate bar gone. wink

19 Nov 2009

Quote by kentswingers777
So Kryps...
Are you seriously saying that obesity now has nothing to do with what people eat, or how little excersise they do?
Of course people are different and you can have a skinny kid who eats anything, plays on his computer all the time and never gets fat but.....that is the exception to the rule.
I see obese kids everyday of the week, ya wanna pop into your local supermarket and see them. They a lot of the time are with obese parents too.
I do not give a monkeys really as I am one of those lucky ones who has always been able to eat what they want, when they want.
For my own opinions I think obesity IS brought about by people eating too much, maybe the wrong sort of food, and add that to slouching around all day, and there lies the problem.
Any Doctor at your local GP clinic will advise overweight people to cut down on what they eat, and take plenty of excersise.
Now I would trust a GP who has taken 9 years minimum to get to that position, over any report, either saying one thing or another.
Now where's that choclate bar gone.

obesity has everything to with what people eat, what I'm saying is the calorie idea is an over simplification of quite a complicated process and to bracket everybody as exactly the same and all should have the same number of calories is very very misleading.
you say yourself, you can eat what you want when you want and stay skinny, while somebody else who ate exactly the same as you would get fat and somebody else would lose weight. Jaq is exactly the same, she stuffs herself all the time and i think her last execise was a game of netball 15 years ago, and you know how slender she is.
what does matter is in what form them calories are and how your body deals with it, that is where all the advice is going wrong. If your daily intake was 2000 calories worth of fish, you'd stay slim. if on the other hand it was 2000 calories of dougnuts you'd get fat. which kind of throws the calorie equation out the window. It's all about undestanding the interaction between the digestive system and the endocrine system, what is stored in fat cells and why and how it gets there.

19 Nov 2009

I always thought calories were calories?
But can see where you are coming from with the doughnuts.
It is toooo complicated for me to understand all this, as I have never had to bother with it.
But can understand people's confusion IF they are obese or need to lose weight.
All I do know is the weightwatchers classes of this world make an absolute fortune.
But surely excersise along with your diet, helps you to lose weight?
Which means there are a lot of kids who either eat rubbish, or who just plonk themselves down in front of the telly everyday.
It is funny and have seen this many times....when we go shopping on a Saturday, there is a family where I would say they are all well overweight. The kids are a boy of about 12 and the girl about 9. She is huge and always heads straight for the cake counter, and one of her parents buys her two large cakes. It does baffle me that one. blink

19 Nov 2009

Mrs Hot is a big fan of the Atkins diet and she can lose a few pounds very quickly by cutting carbs from her diet. It amazes me to see her tucking into meat and cheese at breakfast and watching the weight drop off her.
There is something in that logic because i think that my biggest success in losing weight was because I just removed bread, root veg and potato's from my diet.
Having said that, i still think it is a complicated way of looking at things and the easiest and simplest is to eat less and exercise more.
I watched my calorie intake and made sure I burned 700 - 1,000 a day at the gym on top of my daily living and it worked for me.

19 Nov 2009

Quote by kentswingers777
I always thought calories were calories?
But can see where you are coming from with the doughnuts.
It is toooo complicated for me to understand all this, as I have never had to bother with it.
But can understand people's confusion IF they are obese or need to lose weight.
All I do know is the weightwatchers classes of this world make an absolute fortune.
But surely excersise along with your diet, helps you to lose weight?
Which means there are a lot of kids who either eat rubbish, or who just plonk themselves down in front of the telly everyday.
It is funny and have seen this many times....when we go shopping on a Saturday, there is a family where I would say they are all well overweight. The kids are a boy of about 12 and the girl about 9. She is huge and always heads straight for the cake counter, and one of her parents buys her two large cakes. It does baffle me that one.

how much jogging do you do then kenty

19 Nov 2009

Tons kryps....
Plus I run to me car of a morning and IF it is raining I run into work as well. wink

19 Nov 2009

Saying you can eat another 400 calories is about as bad advice as this artical.

Both opposite ends of the weight scale, but still influencial in their remarks all the same.
And the sad thing is...there will be people who will act on either remark.

19 Nov 2009

Can you trust these people?
Press release today suggests that you can safely drink a bottle of wine a day to maintain a healthy lifestyle.
released by the Bordeaux Wine Growers Association

19 Nov 2009

Quote by GnV
Can you trust these people?
Press release today suggests that you can safely drink a bottle of wine a day to maintain a healthy lifestyle.
released by the Bordeaux Wine Growers Association

:laughabove::laughabove::laughabove:

19 Nov 2009

Never trust anything the French say ;-)

19 Nov 2009

Quote by Steve
Never trust anything the French say ;-)

Tell that to GNV. innocent

19 Nov 2009

Quote by john469

obesity has everything to with what people eat, what I'm saying is the calorie idea is an over simplification of quite a complicated process and to bracket everybody as exactly the same and all should have the same number of calories is very very misleading.
you say yourself, you can eat what you want when you want and stay skinny, while somebody else who ate exactly the same as you would get fat and somebody else would lose weight. Jaq is exactly the same, she stuffs herself all the time and i think her last execise was a game of netball 15 years ago, and you know how slender she is.
what does matter is in what form them calories are and how your body deals with it, that is where all the advice is going wrong. If your daily intake was 2000 calories worth of fish, you'd stay slim. if on the other hand it was 2000 calories of dougnuts you'd get fat. which kind of throws the calorie equation out the window. It's all about undestanding the interaction between the digestive system and the endocrine system, what is stored in fat cells and why and how it gets there.

Yeah, because insulin sensitivity - and moreso insulin resistance - has nothing to do with OBESITY, now does it?
Just incase you missed that, why not tell us the major cause of insulin resistance again? Yeah, its obesisty!

Doh, own goal for messers Kryps-Jaq!!
Now folks, you might be asking why I have brought up insulin sensitivity?
Well, I'll explain (bend over again Kryps-Jaq) to wit:
Insulin is one of many compounds involved with something called 'nutrient partitioning' (the process involved in converting the food you eat/partitioning the food you eat into the tissue it ends up as ie: fat, muscle, bone etc)

Thus when you have knackered insulin sensitivity/hyperinsulinemia brought on from overdosing carbs (or moreso refined carbs such as fructose syrup or sucrose over the last 50 years) you will reduce your ability to handle carbs/sugar as efficiently as a healthy human.
Insulin resistance occurs as a result of the body attempting to 'defend itself' from the sugar intake (the intake of which would lead to the obese person becomming even fatter) in an effort to slow the increasing fat gain (when dieting, Insulin resistance is actually a good thing)
Unfortunately, due to the raft of modern day refined sugars available to consumers, this 'defensive insulin resistance' is thwarted by way of the aforementioned modern day refiend sugars that allow an obese, insulin resitant person to continue bombarding their system with calorie dense, nutritionally/metabolically perverse shite, of which, in the insulin resistant physiological environment will give rise to hyperinsulinemia, after which you are as close to fucked as you can get!
Not long after Hyperinsulinemia, the obese person will meet eyesight problems and heart issues amongst other maladies; but hey, who gives a fuck because 'all major studies show thats not the case' LOL

To further make the point about nutrient partitioning, a similar model can be shown for those males with declining testosterone levels.
As these guys age and their test levels drop, their bodies will not be able to 'partition' energy from food as effectively into muscle mass, which is one of the pathways responsible for us becomming flabbier and less muscular as we age.
Oh and Kryps, re: your little 'donuts vs fish' bon mot, ITS UTTER BULLSHIT!
You have just revealed your ABSOLUTE ignorance re: de novo lipogenesis; what it is and how it works in the human model.
If a persons total energy expenditure (TEE) is 2000 calories, then they can eat those doughnuts all day long and wont get fat. As I have shown, DNL just does NOT happen in humans unless gross overfeeding occurs.
However, if a person is sat on their ass all day and eats that fish, then yes, they will get fatter.
You cannot explain to us just how your model occurs, you CANNOT thus WILL NOT prove your point, why? because its a bullshit point! you simply sit there and spew nonsense.
Oh and please, since you enjoy couching rather condescending rhetoric re: asking folks - in patronizing fashion - if they 'know how food is turned into fat in the body' lets take the debate into the biochemical pathways for storing said fat, if ya want?
I will seriously enjoy making you look quite the fool; so please, lets get onto the paracrine activity of leptin not to mention fat metabolism vis a vis HSL, ASP, insulin, carnitine palmityl transferase and the Krebs cycle <<< small clue, that little lot forms part of the machinery surrounding the 'how' food energy is metabolised to and from fat/muscle/other tissue, you clown!
Failing that, I URGE anyone here who might believe what you are saying (which thankfully from the above replies doesnt appear to be that many) to visit any one of the many big physiology forums around and post up the claims you have made, then come back here and tell us how many times they were torn a new asshole.
Honestly, if what you are saying had zero impact for potentially affecting the quality of life of many whom might be reading, that would be fine, but some of the notions you are advocating are so absurd that I feel somewhat of a need to see them refuted for the bullshit they are.
i'll come back to this tomorrow
but as a diabetic I think I've studied this long and hard enough

19 Nov 2009

Too complicated for me to follow this one.
Most people would just say....eat too many cakes and sit on ya arse all day, and you will get fat.
That is a simple logic that even I can understand.

19 Nov 2009

Quote by Kryps-jaq

obesity has everything to with what people eat, what I'm saying is the calorie idea is an over simplification of quite a complicated process and to bracket everybody as exactly the same and all should have the same number of calories is very very misleading.
you say yourself, you can eat what you want when you want and stay skinny, while somebody else who ate exactly the same as you would get fat and somebody else would lose weight. Jaq is exactly the same, she stuffs herself all the time and i think her last execise was a game of netball 15 years ago, and you know how slender she is.
what does matter is in what form them calories are and how your body deals with it, that is where all the advice is going wrong. If your daily intake was 2000 calories worth of fish, you'd stay slim. if on the other hand it was 2000 calories of dougnuts you'd get fat. which kind of throws the calorie equation out the window. It's all about undestanding the interaction between the digestive system and the endocrine system, what is stored in fat cells and why and how it gets there.

Yeah, because insulin sensitivity - and moreso insulin resistance - has nothing to do with OBESITY, now does it?
Just incase you missed that, why not tell us the major cause of insulin resistance again? Yeah, its obesisty!
nopes, it's the other way round, insulin resistance is the cause of obesity

Doh, own goal for messers Kryps-Jaq!!
Now folks, you might be asking why I have brought up insulin sensitivity?
Well, I'll explain (bend over again Kryps-Jaq) to wit:
Insulin is one of many compounds involved with something called 'nutrient partitioning' (the process involved in converting the food you eat/partitioning the food you eat into the tissue it ends up as ie: fat, muscle, bone etc)

Thus when you have knackered insulin sensitivity/hyperinsulinemia brought on from overdosing carbs (or moreso refined carbs such as fructose syrup or sucrose over the last 50 years) you will reduce your ability to handle carbs/sugar as efficiently as a healthy human.
Insulin resistance occurs as a result of the body attempting to 'defend itself' from the sugar intake (the intake of which would lead to the obese person becomming even fatter) in an effort to slow the increasing fat gain (when dieting, Insulin resistance is actually a good thing)
Unfortunately, due to the raft of modern day refined sugars available to consumers, this 'defensive insulin resistance' is thwarted by way of the aforementioned modern day refiend sugars that allow an obese, insulin resitant person to continue bombarding their system with calorie dense, nutritionally/metabolically perverse shite, of which, in the insulin resistant physiological environment will give rise to hyperinsulinemia, after which you are as close to fucked as you can get!
Not long after Hyperinsulinemia, the obese person will meet eyesight problems and heart issues amongst other maladies; but hey, who gives a fuck because 'all major studies show thats not the case' LOL

To further make the point about nutrient partitioning, a similar model can be shown for those males with declining testosterone levels.
As these guys age and their test levels drop, their bodies will not be able to 'partition' energy from food as effectively into muscle mass, which is one of the pathways responsible for us becomming flabbier and less muscular as we age.
Oh and Kryps, re: your little 'donuts vs fish' bon mot, ITS UTTER BULLSHIT!
You have just revealed your ABSOLUTE ignorance re: de novo lipogenesis; what it is and how it works in the human model.
If a persons total energy expenditure (TEE) is 2000 calories, then they can eat those doughnuts all day long and wont get fat. As I have shown, DNL just does NOT happen in humans unless gross overfeeding occurs.
However, if a person is sat on their ass all day and eats that fish, then yes, they will get fatter.
You cannot explain to us just how your model occurs, you CANNOT thus WILL NOT prove your point, why? because its a bullshit point! you simply sit there and spew nonsense.
Oh and please, since you enjoy couching rather condescending rhetoric re: asking folks - in patronizing fashion - if they 'know how food is turned into fat in the body' lets take the debate into the biochemical pathways for storing said fat, if ya want?
I will seriously enjoy making you look quite the fool; so please, lets get onto the paracrine activity of leptin not to mention fat metabolism vis a vis HSL, ASP, insulin, carnitine palmityl transferase and the Krebs cycle <<< small clue, that little lot forms part of the machinery surrounding the 'how' food energy is metabolised to and from fat/muscle/other tissue, you clown!
Failing that, I URGE anyone here who might believe what you are saying (which thankfully from the above replies doesnt appear to be that many) to visit any one of the many big physiology forums around and post up the claims you have made, then come back here and tell us how many times they were torn a new asshole.
Honestly, if what you are saying had zero impact for potentially affecting the quality of life of many whom might be reading, that would be fine, but some of the notions you are advocating are so absurd that I feel somewhat of a need to see them refuted for the bullshit they are.
i'll come back to this tomorrow
but as a diabetic I think I've studied this long and hard enough

20 Nov 2009

This article makes much more sense to me, as hopefully it will to others.

20 Nov 2009

So John as you seem to know what you are talking about here....two questions.
Firstly is the " new " calorie intake of an additional 400 good advice?
Secondly is our obese problem caused by either wrong food, or too much food, or the wrong kind of food, and coupled with little or no excersise, the main reasons for our obesity problems?
Because whatever the reasons we did not have this problem in the 60's and the 70's, so I can only presume it is peoples eating habits that have changed.
Obese people are everywhere now and my business partner is about 4 stone overweight, and he openly admits his lifestyle is the reason for it. He certainly eats too many pies...and crisps....and all the other rubbish he knows he should not eat, plus he would not know excesise if it appeared out of his arse. lol

20 Nov 2009

Sod this, I'm a fat git who used to be dead skinny. I prefer being fat! smile

20 Nov 2009

Cheers John, I think I now understand.

21 Nov 2009

Quote by john469
So John as you seem to know what you are talking about here....two questions.
Firstly is the " new " calorie intake of an additional 400 good advice?

I would say that most folks were not eating the 2000cals (or lower) previously recommended, so in effect this new advice is pretty must lost on them LOL
Either way, I would say that as the info is based on the average person, 2400cals is fine for them, although at that calorie level, the protein must be kept up; I'll explain in a bit.

Secondly is our obese problem caused by either wrong food, or too much food, or the wrong kind of food, and coupled with little or no excersise, the main reasons for our obesity problems?

I would say wrong food is the modern day man made refined sugars and adulterated fats type of shite. These are metabolic perversions that it is thought affect folks bodies like triggers activating all manner of molecular mechanisms involved with various deleterious conditions; trust me, in 20 years time or sooner, we will see a class action against the makers of corn syrups and other similar shite ingredients by a whole legion of diabetic fatties in the same way we have seen ex smokers suing the tobacco firms. But right now the manufacturers of these things - especially the corn derived foods - practically run government, especially in the US.
As far as wrong 'kind' of food, I would suggest that the diets of most folks are way too slanted toward majority carbohydrates content, with some/low protein and moderate fat, a typical western diet ie: 60-70% carbs.
Ironic really since NOBODY actually needs to eat carbs to live LOL. Our bodies preferred/evolved mechanism for glucose synthesis is via something called gluconeogenesis (thats where the body turns some of its protein intake to glucose in the liver)
Telling someone to eat 2400 calories when it only contains 15% protein is a fucking joke. Most folks at that level of calories should keep protein at 35% of total calories.
Protein is metabolically costly (thats good) its great, but hey, bumping up protein (which normally comes from expensive groceries like meat etc) would mean most folks dent their fags and booze budget.

Because whatever the reasons we did not have this problem in the 60's and the 70's, so I can only presume it is peoples eating habits that have changed.

Yep. refind foods, of which have created the EXACT same health issues for domestic pets that have been fed the same shit!

Obese people are everywhere now and my business partner is about 4 stone overweight, and he openly admits his lifestyle is the reason for it. He certainly eats too many pies...and crisps....and all the other rubbish he knows he should not eat, plus he would not know excesise if it appeared out of his arse.

If he is happy, then fair do's, at least he is honest about it I guess, although lets see how happy is is at 45 when mr diabetes comes asking for the pipers fee; I guess he might be one of the many in twenty years looking to sue the makers of the refined crap stuffed into snack foods?
isn't it funny, you're saying exactly the same as I was, it's not the calories, it's in what form. but then again the reserve of the internet forum bully is to belittle and call names when you disagree, then google whatever website will reinforce whatever you believe in to prove you're right.
where we do agree is that it is the highly processed starchy carbohydrate food is the cause, but you try telling people, things like pasta and fruit juices and high energy drinks are not actually that good for them, or that tv dinners especially the "low fat ones" are just full of chemical crap and laden with carbs and it's just as quick to cook a steak if not quicker.
but even that is a simplification. it doesn't explain 2 people on the same diet with no exercise why one gets fat and the other stays slim. It doesn't explain why lots of obese people don't get diabetes and people like steve redgrave do, or why some professional sportsmen get fat while still in training and some sofa settler stays slim. and a whole host of other medical problems including strokes and heart attacks which are all linked to what you eat. If only it was as simple as saying everybody should eat X ammount of calories, pity it isn't.
as for your weblinks, you do realise that in areas they are very contradictory, but then again we live in an agenda driven science world and each of them links have their own prejudice built in. In lots of areas of research, not only diet, the outcome is predetermined by the sponsor, and evidence that doesn't fit in with the desired result is omitted. Hence the last few studies of low carb diets were conducted on rabbits and mice to prove that it was bad for humans. why do you think they use herbivores to prove that meat and fat is bad for humans if it's not to fit a certain agenda. They could of used dogs, but they wouldn't be able to prove what they wanted.
so back to what I've been saying, it's in what form those calories are not the number.

21 Nov 2009

o by the way, here's a link. now i prefer to believe a 75 year old qualified doctor who is also a type 1 diabetic with these qualifications than an amateur internet googler who wants to bully his own ideas.

21 Nov 2009

Oh and, as irony isnt your strong suit, I suggest you google for 'ad hominem' followed swiftly with 'hoisted by ones own petard'; honestly, you are coming across as a bitter toolbag!

I do so love that phrase. Firstly, it's (yet another) that's nautical in origins.
Secondly, it reminds me of how big a numpty my OH is. He once said that I'd been "hoisted by my own epitaph" bless. lol

Witchy. Who's arse is too big due to a complex variety of reasons.
But mainly the red wine.

21 Nov 2009

Pretty sad a debate has had to be reduced to personal insults being thrown.
This thread is one I have been reading because I know nothing about and it looked at one point I was going to get two people with opposing views tell me something that I would find interesting and lead me to do background reading about their views.
Instead I am losing interest quickly because it is getting childish. Shame really.
Dave_Notts

21 Nov 2009

Quote by Dave__Notts
Pretty sad a debate has had to be reduced to personal insults being thrown.
This thread is one I have been reading because I know nothing about and it looked at one point I was going to get two people with opposing views tell me something that I would find interesting and lead me to do background reading about their views.
Instead I am losing interest quickly because it is getting childish. Shame really.
Dave_Notts

Agreed Davey...
I have found a heck of a lot out about this, more than I ever thought when I started the thread.
For that I am grateful.

21 Nov 2009

see it's back to name caling again.

21 Nov 2009

WTF?
John - why are you being so aggressive?

21 Nov 2009

where am I?
lp

21 Nov 2009

Quote by Cherrytree
WTF?
John - why are you being so aggressive?

Sort of wondering about that myself Cherry - I don't get it. If you take out the crap personal stuff that suddenly appeared...what a great debate.

23 Nov 2009

far from evidence. read it again.
same energy intake, but low carb lost more weight than low fat.
conclussion, low fat lot were lying, sorry, underreporting of food consumption

23 Nov 2009

I do not understand a word that is being said here, but it ain't half entertaining stuff. lol