This Obesity Thing

What would happen if only ate Bananas and Cheese then?

What would happen if only ate Bananas and Cheese then?

Why not give it a try?

Sounds OK to me.

Walking is dull and salad tastes like crap.

Walking is a useful means of getting from one place to another, and salad tastes lovely.

The calories listed on packaging are a measure of the energy available if the food is dried right out and then blown up in a bomb calorimeter

and the resulting figures then adjusted to take into consideration the efficiency of digestion and absorption using the Atwater system. The raw calorific value of a substance is NOT the same as it’s food energy, even though both are given in the same unit of measurement.

So how even at simplistic level can people say if calories in is more than calories consumed then the laws of physics say you put on weight?

Calories into the body not calories passing through the body

Ps if i ate paper I would be full of shit wouldn’t I 😉

There is a simple solution to this and other problems surrounding obesity, the benefit system, energy costs and the NHS..

Human Power Generating stations.

Bicycles and or treadmills, attached to dynamo’s.

Need benefits? Go down the Power station and earn them.

Obese? Go down and walk it off in a treadmill.

Disabled? Use the rowing machine.

Simple, pay nobody anything and make them earn it whilst generating power, sort of a modern workhouse.

Every town should have one, attached to the local hospital.

Oh and in the cases of extreme obesity? Jail the feeders, some of those seriously fat types would die (or rapidly lose weight) if they had to feed themselves.

Oh and whilst I’m in full rant. – Air travel, people should be charged by their all up weight, thereby facilitating those of us that work on keeping their weight in check, more baggage allowance for sporting equipment.
/Rant

the resulting figures then adjusted to take into consideration the efficiency of digestion and absorption using the Atwater system. The raw calorific value of a substance is NOT the same as it’s food energy, even though both are given in the same unit of measurement.

Atwater derived weighted values for the gross heat of combustion of the protein, fat and carbohydrate in the typical mixed diet of his time. It has been argued that these weighted values are invalid for individual foods and for diets whose composition in terms of foodstuffs is different from those eaten in the USA in the early 20th century.

IANOFS* but there seems to be an assumption that we get 85% of the combustible energy, assuming we eat a ‘mixed diet’, as used by Atwater? What if this figure has changed, because of changes in gut flora as a result of antibiotic use? What if we’re eating a very different diet now?

*I am not a food scientist

Oh and whilst I’m in full rant. – Air travel, people should be charged by their all up weight, thereby facilitating those of us that work on keeping their weight in check, more baggage allowance for sporting equipment.

I’m 6’2″, and you can piss off, cause my ticket will never cost the same as someone 5’2″.

so the atwater system is a guesstimate of how burning correlates to food absorbtion?

so for instance, does it adjust the calorific value of burning, for processed sugar – which it probably shouldn’t

IANOFS* but there seems to be an assumption that we get 85% of the combustible energy, assuming we eat a ‘mixed diet’, as used by Atwater? What if this figure has changed, because of changes in gut flora as a result of antibiotic use? What if we’re eating a very different diet now?

Yes, quite possible that this will have changed a bit, but not that much. Certainly not to the extent that you can get 5000 calories of food energy from eating paper. Nor to the extent that you could reduce your calorific intake and put on weight, as MikeWW is suggesting above.

*Me neither.

TLDR the whole thread, only the last two pages.

My sister in law sees a lot of overweight and obese people. She reckons that they all tell her they hardly touch as much as a lettuce leaf yet still put on masses of weight.

Part of her task is to make them accept they are living in denial, failing to admit that they actually spend all day eating. Once they accept they are in fact their own worst enemies, and start to restrict their food intake, as if by magic, they begin to lose weight and their general health improves.

This sort of backs up the oft quoted relationship between weight loss and food input.

But there again…what do I know?

Part of her task is to make them accept they are living in denial, failing to admit that they actually spend all day eating.

Does she yell “put down the pies fatty!” at them?

To turn the ELMM thing on it’s head, how would you go about putting on weight?

Would you go running three times a week and restrict your calorific intake, or would you sit down a lot and eat lots of pies?

ELMM; you’re not trying hard enough.

Grum you keep saying it is a straw man but I have yet to read your explanation of how the fundamental laws of physics are broken- in fact i am yet to read you even attempt to refute it you just say its a straw man

It’s a straw man because I’ve never claimed the fundamental laws of physics are broken, and I’m not sure anyone else has either. I’ve just argued that ELMM is an oversimplification and is unhelpful for many people – I certainly find it far easier to lose weight by focussing on eating the right foods rather than on the quantity (or exercise).

People keep suggesting that I/others are claiming theres no relationship between calories in/out then slagging it off as a position – classic straw man.

It’s also a bit of a shame that so many people completely ignored sugarnaut’s heartrending post – luckily no-one had the gall to call him weak and pathetic (despite that being exactly what they’ve said elsewhere in the thread about people in his/her situation).

Would you go running three times a week and restrict your calorific intake, or would you sit down a lot and eat lots of pies?

I can’t/don’t put on weight.

I can’t/don’t put on weight.

I suspect that you are as to pie consumption as binners is to salads.

She sees a lot of overweight and obese people in her clinic.

Her clients are not necessarily average members of society though. More likely extreme cases. What do you know? Not enough apparently 🙂

@molgrips….true on both counts! 🙂

mrmonkfinger – Member
Oh and whilst I’m in full rant. – Air travel, people should be charged by their all up weight, thereby facilitating those of us that work on keeping their weight in check, more baggage allowance for sporting equipment.
I’m 6’2″, and you can piss off, cause my ticket will never cost the same as someone 5’2″.

Well it does at the moment, and then you come, sit next to me, all your flab rolls into my side, I have to be polite, let you have the arm rests, ignore your sweaty armpits and you constantly breaking wind…

some sort of

She reckons

This sort of

Got any more of this hard data to offer up? 🙂

I suspect that you are as to pie consumption as binners is to salads.

93 mince pies in December. Reduced exercise. No weight gain.

I can switch my usual salad* lunches for pizza and chips from the student common room. No weight gain. I feel worse, but I’m not heavier.

*may contain sausage

Maybe your TDEE is higher than you’d estimated then.

grum I was being vague on purpose.

Must agree though it doesn’t sound too convincing does it?

Maybe your TDEE is higher than you’d estimated then.

I’ve not estimated or counted calories; I Ate More and Moved Less.

Strava says I burn 1000 calories per week riding to work and back. A website calculator says my BMR is 1634 calories. So, I should be eating 1776 a day to maintain constant weight?

As for the laws of physics – I know a bloke, 5’11 9 stone, he can’t put weight on no matter what he eats or does, even though he really wants to.

If the ‘laws of physics’ arguments held true, how could that be possible?

” I know a bloke, 5’11 9 stone, he can’t put weight on no matter what he eats “

Ineffective digestion

Personally, I found the most effective way to control my weight has been to:

* substitute exercise time for snacking/tv/home time where possible

* have considerably smaller evening meals, mainly by avoiding cooking as cooking which tends to create too much food which I then feel the urge to consume. Very expensive, small gourmet ready-meals have been a godsend.

I still stuff my gob with cakes, crisps, chocolate, beer etc at other times. But they amount of calories they represent is small compared with meals so my output and input seem to balance. I’ve stuck at ~12st for a year now.

If the ‘laws of physics’ arguments held true, how could that be possible?

Either the ‘laws of physics’ are wrong, or you are.

I know where my money is.

Presumably the production of Foie gras is constantly interrupted by farmers who cannot understand why some geese do not respond?

I’ve just argued that ELMM is an oversimplification and is unhelpful for many people – I certainly find it far easier to lose weight by focussing on eating the right foods rather than on the quantity (or exercise).

Fine but what you are doing is consuming less energy than you use but calling it the “right foods”

So finally we all accept that to lose weight you have to have an energy imbalance/ eat the “right foods”

If the ‘laws of physics’ arguments held true, how could that be possible?

He’s probably not eating enough.

So finally we all accept that to lose weight you have to have an energy imbalance

Nobody has ever argued otherwise (apart from possibly molgrips but he’s special). 😕

We are all special and god’s children Grum even the deniers

High basal metabolic rate. Inefficient digestion…

But if he ate more, he’d gain weight, regardless of his BMR or digestion efficiency? Unless his digestive system has a cap on the calories it can absorb?

Logging into MyFitnessPal for the first time in ages has reminded me what an awful system it is for anyone who actually cooks food.

As for the laws of physics – I know a bloke, 5’11 9 stone, he can’t put weight on no matter what he eats or does, even though he really wants to.

If the ‘laws of physics’ arguments held true, how could that be possible?

Not lifting heavy enough/not eating enough calories or protein to help put on muscle?

Sorry, not read most of the thread, just skipped to the end.

Logging into MyFitnessPal for the first time in ages has reminded me what an awful system it is for anyone who actually cooks food.

For someone who cooks different food, anyway. If you make dinners from a smallish repertoire then it’s an arseache when you’ve got to go “how many calories are in an onion” at first, but that goes away once you’ve worked out your staple dishes.

Either that or you just guess, of course, but that seems to me to defeat the object.

I tend to find it tricky to gain weight (which I wanted to do, to help weightlifting efforts).

High basal rate and inefficient digestion.

I also get sweaty-hot after eating a big meal.

And then my appetite goes out the window for a good long while (which tends to me I’d naturally not eat any more calories, and end up balancing my input anyway).

If I force feed myself, I gain weight.

Phew, physics not broken.

But, a few things that make it difficult. Or, for fans of the expression ELMM, “it’s complicated”.