Slashdot Mirror


Hacking Weight Loss: What I Learned Losing 30 Pounds

reifman writes The CDC reports that 69% of adult Americans are overweight or obese. Techies like us are at increased risk because of our sedentary lifestyles. Perhaps you even scoffed at Neilsen's recent finding that some Americans spend only 11 hours daily of screen time. Over the last nine months, I've lost 30 pounds and learned a lot about hacking weight loss and I did it without fad diets, step trackers, running or going paleo. No such discussion is complete without a link to the Hacker Diet.

496 comments

  1. eliminate extra sugar by i.r.id10t · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I did it by eliminating extra sugar. Doc warned me I was pushing hte pre-diabetic stage with my morning blood sugar.

    No more sweet tea, coke, or adding sugar to my coffee. Sucked for about a week, after that, no problems, and I've dropped 30lbs with no real effort other than breaking the sugar habit in that first week.

    Quit smoking 2 weeks ago, we'll see how that part goes and if I end up gaining weight back ('cause food will taste better, supposedly, or maybe just noshing as a replacement for having a smoke ... so far hasn't happened)

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    1. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get a thing of those toothpick/floss combo packs. It helped me with the hand-to-mouth physical part of breaking the habit, with the added bonus of helping keep your pearly whites pearly and white.

    2. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Nemesisghost · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Keep off the sugar by replacing your cigarettes with veggie sticks, like carrot or celery. Sugar free gum works too.

    3. Re:eliminate extra sugar by fermion · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Eating concentrated calories that do not fill you up is the problem. All simple carbohydrates, chips, white bread, wheat tortillas, fried potatoes are an issue. An 8 oz steak is 25% of the calories most us need for a day. A Chippendale carnitas burrito is half.

      So there is also an issue of food availability. When I was young I split all entrees at restaurants with the person I was with. I don't do that anymore and it has become an increasing issue. Also, one does not burn off calories and fat as easily when one gets older

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    4. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I used to have 2 sugars in my tea or coffee. After I quit smoking, I found it disgusting because my taste buds started working again. Now I have tea with no sugar, and coffee with half a sugar.

      I believe my experience isn't the norm, however.

    5. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My experience, and some careful reading shows that the weight gain from quitting smoking is from the harm that you did to your insulin system. Smoking messes with pancreatic production.

      I think, when you quit smoking, the insulin system is out of wack and take a while to stabalize. Regular exercise, super healthy food and no extra sugar should take care of most of the extra weight you _will_ gain.

    6. Re:eliminate extra sugar by amalcolm · · Score: 1

      Not in the office please. I had a colleague who used those across the desk from me, and the noise was infuriating.

      --
      Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
    7. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Worry beads also help. I used to have a hand mouth habit, but kept getting sick. Substituted worry beads (something to fiddle with) and I stopped getting sick. Do not underestimate the power of keeping your fingers away from your mouth.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    8. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Mattsson · · Score: 1

      By not eating or drinking a lot of sugar or sweeteners all the time, you will also rather quickly remove your "resistance" to sweetness, so you'll automatically start to avoid a lot of food simply because it tastes horrible due to being way to sweet.

      --
      /.Mattsson - My native language is not English, so please don't whine over linguistic errors. (That's lame anyway...)
    9. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is where cutting out coke comes in.

      GP: adding sugar to my coffee

      That has more of an effect than you'd think - a teaspoon of sugar in each cup every day if not burnt off adds up to about 3 litres of fat build up in 1 year. I think that's about a stone in weight. Obviously things are more complex than that (you're carrying it around so exerting more effort, and your individual metabolism might burn it off) but still it shows how a small amount regularly can add up.

    10. Re:eliminate extra sugar by jabuzz · · Score: 2

      Think of sugar as "teeth rotting granules", because that is what it is and it should be easier to cut out.

    11. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anal beads also help. I used to have a hand mouth habit, but kept getting sick. Substituted anal beads (something to fiddle with) and I stopped getting sick. Do not underestimate the power of keeping your fingers away from your mouth.

      We all know that is what you really meant.

    12. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      I've dropped 30lbs with no real effort

      So all that really means is that you're still a flabby fuck.

      Do some sit-ups, push-ups. ffs, go hop on a bike for a half-hour.

      Start off slow. Before you know it, you will be pushing yourself.

      Take if from a former flabby fuck.

    13. Re:eliminate extra sugar by erp_consultant · · Score: 2

      First off - congrats on losing the weight. 30lbs is nothing to scoff at.

      Here's my take on it....

      There are three pilers to good health - nutrition, exercise and rest. A lot of people forget about the rest part but it's important. Exercise will make you feel better, and probably look better.

      For me nutrition is the most important factor. It's the fuel your body uses and the first line of defense on disease prevention. Eating the right foods can prevent things like high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, even some cancers.

      So what to eat? Supermarkets are full of unhealthy products with little or no nutritional value. I try to stay away from the "white stuff" - white sugar, white flour, white rice, white bread, etc. and substitute whole wheat where possible. Whole wheat has a lot of fiber in it and that is essential for weight loss. Fiber sort of expands in your stomach so that you feel more full eating less food. It's also good for your digestive track.

      More fruits and vegetables are always good. If you're not big on that then get a juice machine.

      Here's my recipe for a morning smoothie:

      1 banana (organic if you can get it)
      3-4 strawberries
      A hand full of Kale (that dark leafy green vegetable. it's full of Omega-3 - great stuff)
      1 egg (or egg white if you are more health conscious. eggs are one of the best sources of protein you can get)
      1 teaspoon of ground flax seed (excellent source of fiber)
      1 cup of water ( substitute juice if you like)

      It's filling and really good for you. If you drink one of those a day it will contain all the fruits and vegetables you need.

      Keep up the good work!

    14. Re:eliminate extra sugar by slaughts · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      You have to love autocorrect. This made me picture a bunch of Chippendale dancers eating burritos...

    15. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      I did it by eliminating extra sugar.

      I cut way down on sugar, and it made absolutely zero difference on my weight. It may have other benefits, but not weight.

      Then again, everybody is different. What works for your body may not work for another.

      There probably is no magic bullet, other than working your sweaty ass off on a farm or building pyramids (or a machine that simulates such), which is what we are evolved to be doing. The only chubby people used to the royal families, which is like 0.00001% of the population, not enough for evolution to "care" about.

      Diets are like software engineering fads: promise a Grand New Way of doing things, but in the end there is no substitute for experience, skill, patience, listening to users, and discipline. "Have you tried the new Node-Jay-Ass diet?"

      I would note that the guy who dies at 65 with a Bic Mac in hand appears to be happier than the guy who dies at 82 on a treadmill sweating his bloody ass off.

    16. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      All simple carbohydrates, chips, white bread, wheat tortillas, fried potatoes are an issue

      Hogwash! I used to eat more whole-grains, nuts, and protein, but had to cut back due to kidney stones such that I had to go back to "starchy" foods. My weight changed NONE: still plump.

      But again, every body is different. Extrapolation of one experience needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Pun intended.

    17. Re:eliminate extra sugar by cayenne8 · · Score: 3, Informative
      Reading the article I saw this:

      It helps greatly if you are willing to eat similar foods day to day that are easy to track

      THIS is my problem. I tend to rarely eat pre-packaged processed food, or simple things. I cook from scratch, large batches of things, to eat as leftovers for most of the week.

      Let's say since greens are in season now, I cook a HUGE 6-7QT pot of greens, Basically the only fat in the thing is 1lb of Andouille sausage. This pot will easily be 6-10 portions/meals. Granted this is a simple dish with few ingredients, but what about the same size pot of mushroom chili? Or something else that is complex and has a lot of ingredients and I don't really know how many meals will come put of it, or maybe it is something I'd combine with other leftovers into a different dish, for example I might grill out a bunch of eggplant, onions and zucchini...I might eat some in a salad, or maybe some as a wrap with yogurt sauce..etc.

      The thing is...I rarely cook anything simple with an easy to find and read ingredients list, It would take forever to figure what the calories and all were from what I cook since so much of it is fresh vegetable and meat based, etc.

      I dunno what a portion would be in so many cases...although it is largely healthy food.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    18. Re:eliminate extra sugar by losfromla · · Score: 2

      It's not that hard, just weigh everything as you are putting it in. Chances are you are using the same ingredients over and over and all you need is a list of the calories, fat, carbs in those ingredients and with how much is in a pot and how much you consume, it should not be hard to figure out. This is slashdot so I assume we can all do basic math.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    19. Re:eliminate extra sugar by losfromla · · Score: 1

      whole grains are starchy bud so I am not sure what you changed other than probably cut down protein. The only difference between a whole grain and a refined one is a bit of fiber and some vitamins and minerals. Still a boatload of starch, thus your continued plumpness.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    20. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup. And it's the exact same for salt and fat. Past a few weeks of some effort (which can be diverted in many ways, with good food alternatives, and enough -but not too much- activity to not think too much about it), you really just taste how many industrial food stuffs contain far too much sugar, salt, and fat. They just taste disgusting, and it is thus easier and easier to avoid them completely, without feeling you're missing on anything good.

    21. Re:eliminate extra sugar by losfromla · · Score: 1

      A banana has 14 grams of sugar, 10 non-sugar carbs
      3 Strawberries have 2 grams of sugar

      A teaspoon of sugar weighs 4 grams.

      This means that your "nutritious" smoothie has the equivalent of 4 teaspoons of sugar, so I am not sure that you have a full grasp on the nutrition aspect. But I do think your heart is in the right place so kudos for that. I would replace the banana with two oz of olive oil which would give you about 500 calories of long lasting energy, not the quick to bonk rush that sugar does. Any natural oil should work (avocado, coconut, walnut, etc).

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    22. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Copid · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It also recenters your brain's assumptions about what is "sweet enough" in other foods. If you've been drinking soda regularly to the point where a good apple tastes like cardboard, the calories from the sweet drinks has become only part of the problem. I know people who knocked off the zero-calorie diet sodas and suddenly found their overall eating habits improved because they didn't crave as much sweetness in other foods.

      --
      An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
    23. Re:eliminate extra sugar by losfromla · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would note that the guy who dies at 65 with a Bic Mac in hand appears to be happier than the guy who dies at 82 on a treadmill sweating his bloody ass off.

      Really? Some fat guy with high cholesterol, a non-functioning penis, out of breath from walking from his car to McDonalds looks happier than the 82 year old who has a fully functioning body and still wears out his old lady? Besides, he's likely to die instead while running outside on a bright sunshiny day or harvesting in his garden. Even if he is in the gym, he died while doing what he wanted to do and outlived the 65 year old fattie by almost 20 years, win!

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    24. Re:eliminate extra sugar by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

      Oh my ... and oure starge is digested and pulled into the blood stream and likely already on the way to be converted into fat after how many minutes?
      How does the same question look for unrefined whole grain?

      Why do people who have no clue about nutrition and are likely fat themselves try to give advice to other fat people?

      How much starch does a pound refined grain contain? How much starch does a pound of whole grain contain? Oh? You did not think there was a difference?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    25. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Calories generally come from one of these three: carbohydrates, fats/oils, and protein. If one eats less carbs overall, then they have to increase the other two (to feel satiated).

      Increasing protein is out for reasons already given. That leaves only fats/oils to increase.

      Your calorie "math" seems off.

    26. Re:eliminate extra sugar by asliarun · · Score: 1

      I did it by eliminating extra sugar.

      I cut way down on sugar, and it made absolutely zero difference on my weight. It may have other benefits, but not weight.

      Then again, everybody is different. What works for your body may not work for another.

      There probably is no magic bullet, other than working your sweaty ass off on a farm or building pyramids (or a machine that simulates such), which is what we are evolved to be doing. The only chubby people used to the royal families, which is like 0.00001% of the population, not enough for evolution to "care" about.

      Diets are like software engineering fads: promise a Grand New Way of doing things, but in the end there is no substitute for experience, skill, patience, listening to users, and discipline. "Have you tried the new Node-Jay-Ass diet?"

      I would note that the guy who dies at 65 with a Bic Mac in hand appears to be happier than the guy who dies at 82 on a treadmill sweating his bloody ass off.

      I beg to differ. Unless you go to extreme levels, exercise is for building a healthy body. Diet control is for losing excess weight. While exercise certainly helps in losing weight and in boosting metabolism, it only has a marginal contribution in losing weight.

      The other thing: You say you cut down sugar and it didn't make a difference. I don't know exactly what you meant, but personally, I see sugar in different forms. There's pure granulated sugar which is only a small part of our diets. The much bigger thing to eliminate is "hidden sugar" - sugar in processed foods (even canned or tetrapacked foods). There's sugar from fruits too. I remember reading about a school that replaced the coke vending machine and forced kids to drink fruit juice. Obesity actually skyrocketed. Kids were chugging half gallon fruit juice containers for lunch every day!

      I am not a "paleo" person but I do believe that during our hunter gatherer days, fruits were a very seasonal treat. A few months in a year, and it was easy picking and full of nutrition and packed with energy (sugar) so all of us developed a really sweet tooth. But those fruits were only available for a couple of months a year and then, our lifestyle was drastically different too. We were energy starved, not energy overloaded.

      Finally, I also see carbs as sugar. Both are broken down by the body to produce energy, and excess converted by our body into fat (energy storage for the starvation days).

      So, to me, eliminating sugar means eliminating pure sugar, processed foods, fruits, and carbs. I find it difficult to imagine how doing this cannot possibly result in significant weight loss. I am fairly overweight (not obese though), and to me, following this is the best way to start the process of becoming healthy and fit again. I would rather lose 15-20 pounds and then start exercising - than doing all at once.

      I feel that making this a package deal is only raising the bar much higher and giving us more chances to fail early on. If I mentally think that I have to exercise AND control my diet - chances are that after a week, due to work pressure or some other excuse, I will skip gymming. Then I give myself an excuse to start slacking off on my diet as well. Instead, I want to put myself in a position where I can succeed early on, and let that reinforce my belief system that I can "do it". I would much rather start with a simple rule of thumb - i.e. eliminate sugar from my diet.

      Just my personal thoughts, please don't crucify me if I have been factually wrong on some of my notions.

    27. Re:eliminate extra sugar by NotDrWho · · Score: 4, Informative

      First off - congrats on losing the weight. 30lbs is nothing to scoff at.

      Not to be too much of a dick about it, but I never congratulate someone for losing weight. If pushed, I'll tell them I'll congratulate them in 5 years, if they've managed to KEEP it off.

      Losing weight is actually not that hard. Some of us have done it many, many, many times. It's keeping it off in the years that follow that's really tough.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    28. Re:eliminate extra sugar by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I would suggest to simply forget the myth that "working out" makes you lose weight.

      You as a software developer are simlly not capable to do any energy intensive work outprogram that helps younlosing weight unless you start now with triathlon or similar stuff and are satisfied that the weight loss might, or migt not, start in six to 9 months.

      Sorry, the human body is much to efficient to lose weight by simly doing sports, regardless what sport and especially the modern 'gym' stuff is probably the lowest energy consuming sport anyway.

      Do everything combined, by cycling to work, have 3 times a week a 90 minutes jogging or martial arts session, or swimming ... and change eating habits, then the sport has an effect. 2 times a week 45 Mins in Gym has: zero effect, absolutely zero. The body does not even start to touch your fat reserves unless you work out longer than 45 mins ... so regardless what you do: the first 45 mins have absolutely no effect on your fat/weight.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    29. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Reading the article I saw this:

      It helps greatly if you are willing to eat similar foods day to day that are easy to track

      THIS is my problem. I tend to rarely eat pre-packaged processed food, or simple things. I cook from scratch, large batches of things, to eat as leftovers for most of the week.

      No, your problem is not realizing that eating the same large batch of food as leftovers for most of the week IS eating similar foods day to day that are easy to track.

      The fact that you can't figure out the nutritional content of raw ingredients without a label is your problem. Try starting here: http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/

    30. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is one of the easiest (in my opinion) ways to lose a large amount of weight for the average American. Cut out the extra sugar. It can be hard to cut out all the sugar in the packaged foods in the store, but removing sugar in drinks alone can have a huge effect. I cut out all coke and other sodas, no sweet tea or sugar in coffee. I stick to water and unsweetened tea. It may sound boring, but you get used to it, and I lose over 20 pounds without doing anything else at all.

      If our results are typical, I'm not surprised that Coca-Cola as a company is in trouble with declining profits. It's only a matter of time before people rise up against the sugary food industry.

    31. Re:eliminate extra sugar by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      It's not that hard, just weigh everything as you are putting it in. Chances are you are using the same ingredients over and over and all you need is a list of the calories, fat, carbs in those ingredients and with how much is in a pot and how much you consume, it should not be hard to figure out. This is slashdot so I assume we can all do basic math.

      That's the thing, I really do NOT use the same ingredients over and over.

      I get a weekly CSA box of whatever local veggies are in season delivered to my house each Sunday. I also look in the weekly grocery store ads to see what's on sale, and drive around Sat or Sun morning to 2-4 stores to get the sale items and make up what I'm gonna cook with them on the fly.

      I rarely consult a cooking book and taste and adjust dishes as I am cooking them.

      Stopping and weighing everything, whew..that would sure slow down and stop the creative cooking process. I've cooked so long all these years, I can make things up on the fly pretty much....and rarely does my same dish (even something simple like chili) come out exactly the same twice in a row.

      Sure I could figure it out...but that would sure take up a lot of cooking time. I try to do most of my grocery shopping for the week and cooking on Sundays....so I shop (sometimes on Sat instead)..but I cook 2-3 different main dishes and maybe 2-3 different side dishes or ingredients for side dishes (say a bunch of grilled mixed veggies I find while at the store)...and will put those in to various dishes I whip up quickly during the weekdays.

      Sure it can be done..but there is no quick convenient way for me to actually know what I'm eating per portion or what a portion should be. I just eat till I'm full as it is....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    32. Re:eliminate extra sugar by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

      Yeah you make a fair point. Keeping it off is the main reason that these fad diets don't work long term. They all deprive you of something that, in the short term, will allow you to drop pounds but it's not sustainable for most people. That's why I think it's so important to eat healthy when we can. I think it puts our bodies in better balance and better able to regulate weight at a healthy level over a sustained period of time. Just my 2 cents.

    33. Re:eliminate extra sugar by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the tip. I'll try that.

    34. Re:eliminate extra sugar by losfromla · · Score: 1

      According to this chart, not a lot of difference my rotund friend:
      https://www.usaemergencysupply...

      Here are some more comparisons, not a lot of difference between whole wheat bread and refined as you will notice. Like I said, some extra nutrients but still all the carbs:
      http://www.health.harvard.edu/...
      From your oh-so-trustworthy friends at the grain council
      http://wholegrainscouncil.org/...

      Nutrition is only a hobby for me. I happen to be quite non-fat thank you very much.
      The bottom line is that eating carbs is eating carbs whether they are whole grain or refined they still metabolize into sugars and you will bonk when eating them, you maybe will just experience a more refined rush from whole grains. Since you seem to think you have your stuff together, how come it hasn't worked for you?

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    35. Re:eliminate extra sugar by losfromla · · Score: 1

      I agree with you that fats/oils should be increased, of course they have to be the healthy oils not things like corn, rice, canola oils. What part of my calorie "math" did you disagree with?

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    36. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it isn't so much sugar that needs to be cut out, but empty calories. basically anything that has calories but no other nutritional value. usually these things are loaded with carbs and are sweet. such as soda, candy, or junk food.

      fruit juice typically also is just pure sugar. equivalent to soda. they generally have taken out all the fiber which can help with the digestion and anything else of nutritional value that was in the fruit and leave only the sugar.

      you can still have some of these items, you just need to greatly restrict your portions and and how often you have them. often it is easier not to have them around at all so you aren't even tempted to begin with.

    37. Re:eliminate extra sugar by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      Which is where cutting out coke comes in.

      really? I thought you took more to lose weight!

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    38. Re:eliminate extra sugar by boristdog · · Score: 1

      Holy heck this is as true as it gets. I was a 2 to 3 soda per day man for most of my life. A couple years back I cut out all sodas, regular or diet.

      Now I can taste food properly. Sodas taste too sweet to drink, most fast or packaged food tastes WAY too sweet or salty. Healthy foods taste GOOD, like they should without that salt and sugar overload that I used to live with. I feel healthier at 50 than I did at 40.

      Cut out the sodas, kids, even the diet ones. After a few weeks you'll feel much better.

    39. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Kind of like the cigarettes being cancer sticks, or coffin nails?
      (2 months free...)

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    40. Re:eliminate extra sugar by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Either you did not read the links, or you do not comprehend them.

      Second link (http://www.health.harvard.edu/healthy-eating/glycemic_index_and_glycemic_load_for_100_foods)

      100% Whole Grained bread (Natural Ovens) 51 30 7
      Pumpernickel bread 56 30 7
      50% cracked wheat kernel bread 58 30 12
      Coarse barley bread, 75-80% kernels, average 34 30 7

      The three above are full / whole grain breads.
      Now the "white flour breads"

      Wonderà bread, average 73 30 10
      Whole wheat bread, average 71 30 9

      Relevant is the first number, glycemic index. It determines if it triggers a high insulin level and transport of fat into fat cells and transformation of carbs into fat.

      The bottom line is that eating carbs is eating carbs whether they are whole grain or refined they still metabolize into sugars and you will bonk when eating them
      That is nonsense, while I eat not much carb, I still eat carb ... e.g. beer has lots of crabs.

      As long as you have no intolerance and eat healthy it bottom line does not matter what you eat.

      For the average fat american (or for that matter european) however it is easier to lose weight on a low carb diet ... but that basically also implies a ZERO carb diet, in the limited sense as this is possible.

      Since you seem to think you have your stuff together, how come it hasn't worked for you? Don't know what you mean. Nutrition works fine for me, and all people I taught lost weight and are now healthy :D

      (Want me to explain the other links to you, too?)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    41. Re:eliminate extra sugar by danlip · · Score: 1

      Note that "sugar free" does not mean "calorie free". Sorbitol or xylitol are usually used in sugar-free gum and they do have calories.

    42. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And just to reiterate... that's veggie sticks, not death sticks.

    43. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I eat about 50-100g of sugar a day. Not fat or overweight or out of shape at all. I love carbs too and eschew most vegetables. I sit about 8 hours a day with frequent breaks and lots of fidgeting.

      Am I not eating enough sugar to gain weight? Not sitting enough? What is keeping me so thin? I don't exercise either, what is it? And why does medical science not have a clue or even give a tenth of a crap about anyone like me?

    44. Re:eliminate extra sugar by losfromla · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Glycemic index is the immediate response, glycemic load is how much sugar you took in. Sorry, I confused your responses with Tablizer's who mentioned he was still plump.

      Yes, beer does contain carbs and should also be eliminated. Your tone makes it sound as if eliminating that is out of the question or beyond the pale.

      I am pretty close to zero carbs, it is not impossible but it does require work and discipline, like anything that is worth doing in life. Any extra calories from carbs that are not needed immediately need to be cleared as they are digested as you know. Since most of us lead sedentary lives, that means most of them will need to be cleared(stored) as they are digested. Fat on the other hand can happily float about without causing the body to panic and cause an insulin response. This is why eating fat is much healthier, the body doesn't feel a compelling need to shove it into storage to maintain a healthy/low blood sugar level. I think we agree more than we disagree as I also believe that losing weight on a low carb diet is the best way to do it. That some people are too weak to do it is another matter.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    45. Re:eliminate extra sugar by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I do to much sports to live on a extreme low/zero carb diet
      As I have no diet problems, I see no point in it anyway ...

      It is an error to assume you can eat as much fat as you want if you live on a low/zero carb diet.

      The fat is not stored as quickly as if carbs are involved, however surplus fat is nevertheless stored if the body can manage it (which depends on a lot of factors, e.g. amount of fat cells)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    46. Re:eliminate extra sugar by FatAlb3rt · · Score: 1

      MyFitnessPal - if you're really cooking big portions, you just enter the recipe as you made it, then figure out how many servings it will make for you. You only have to figure it out once per batch. You should be able to knock it out in 5 minutes. Works for me. Next time I make that batch of chili, I just enter the ingredients again since mine are never the same each time either.

    47. Re:eliminate extra sugar by losfromla · · Score: 1

      I will have to investigate that aspect of the lifestyle when I start to engage in sports again. I too can eat carbs without packing on weight but have chosen to go keto anyway. The main benefit I notice from abandoning carbs is that I now get zero dandruff where I used to have a significant issue with it. I think I lost some fat too but I was already pretty lean before going keto.

      I have not done keto for weight loss but I think that for some hard cases, counting calories would be needed, at least in the beginning while good habits are being established.

      The thing with fat is that it really fills you up so it is easier not to overeat when eating high fat meals. Yes, excess dietary fat will be stored but it takes a lot more for that to happen unlike with carbs where the body works with urgency to get them out of the bloodstream now.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    48. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I eat fast food every day for all meals - because it is easy to track - and I am skinny / "normal weight" - AND healthy

    49. Re:eliminate extra sugar by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      unlike with carbs where the body works with urgency to get them out of the bloodstream now.
      That is not the problem of carbs.
      The problem is that insuline (high glycemic index) also triggers fat storage in(to) fat cells.
      So high carb + low fat = not necessarily a negative effect.
      High carb + high fat level, dependin gon the ampunt of fat, lots of fat is stored, depending on the amount of carbs, thye are converted into fat, too (but that again depends on availbale fat acids and plenty of other circumstances)

      No fat at all medium carb diets have no fat storing effects ...

      I understand that keto is a new buzzword in dietry, but naming a diet by the waste product it produces is a bit wiered imho :)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    50. Re:eliminate extra sugar by praxis · · Score: 1

      There is no quick and easy solution, that is true. If you overeat then there are only one way to validate you are eating less: measure.

      We too use a variety of ingredients and we too cook from scratch without using recipes. We weigh our ingredients before putting them in the dish. I takes maybe 5 seconds longer, per ingredient. We write down the weight for each no a piece of paper that's always by the scale. Then, while we wait for the dish to finish (or some other time later), we calculate how many calories went into the dish total. Most of the time, we don't eat left overs but cook fresh every day, but sometimes we do make two-days worth. Either way, we know how much is in the entire batch and can portion: whether its two portions, four or six, it's more or less the same math.

      It does take effort and time, but it's well worth it in our case. Over time, we got good enough at guessing, even with new ingredients we've not used before but could compare to others, at how many calories we're putting into our food, to within 10% error. That's not great, but we can now often guess how much food we didn't cook has just by looking at it.

      Last night I worked late and the company bought us pizza. I felt the weight of the slices and guessed 250-300 per slice. I then looked it up online when I got home and the restaurant that made the pizza lists it at 280. Now, of course it's an estimate but it's a starting point.

      The more you do it, the easier it gets.

    51. Re: eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, I'll trade you flosser guy for the guy here who clips his nails, lets the clippings fly onto the floor and onto chairs, and doesn't clean up afterwards.

      I actually gag when I hear him start his clipping.

    52. Re:eliminate extra sugar by onkelonkel · · Score: 1

      Your previous method - chop a pile of onions - throw them in the pot - go to the next ingredient. New method - chop a pile of onions - weigh them - throw them in the pot - go to the next ingredient.
       
      Is it really that much more difficult?
       
      Chopping a pile of onions takes 5 or 10 minutes; weighing them takes 15 seconds.
       
      The meat you throw in probably has the weight on the package.
       
      If you _don't_want_to_ figure out how many calories you are taking in, and just eat as much as you want, then go right ahead. Just don't pretend that it can't be done.

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    53. Re: eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol what, I drop off 3-4% bf every spring when I start cycling 160-200mi/ wk again as it takes me awhile to add 11,000 kcal per week to my diet to make up the massive calorie imbalance. Wtf are you smoking. Fairly easy to just hop on a bike and burn a pound of fat. I guess unless you are a fat so who can't bike...

    54. Re:eliminate extra sugar by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      Don't get too cute, sugar is a perfectly cromulent part of your diet; a very small part, but a part.

      Sugar doesn't rot your teeth. Sugar stimulates the growth of mouth flora, many of these critters exude waste substances that lower your mouth's pH, your teeth erode in an acidic environment, particularly if you don't have fluorine ions in your enamel.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    55. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A packet of sugar is about 15 calories. That is nothing compared to the calories in a soda (150), cup of milk 2% (120).

      Sweetened tea is more like soda.. highly sweetened.

      I like a packet of sugar or two in my hot tea.. and I dont feel bad about it at all.

      Now if I could just cut down on the whole milk Vente Mochas with whipped cream.. like 450 calories each. =]

    56. Re:eliminate extra sugar by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Let's say since greens are in season now, I cook a HUGE 6-7QT pot of greens, Basically the only fat in the thing is 1lb of Andouille sausage. This pot will easily be 6-10 portions/meals. Granted this is a simple dish with few ingredients, but what about the same size pot of mushroom chili?

      If you're serious, the nerd answer is that you go download the sr27 nutrient content of foods database, stuff it into a database, and then come up with some way to query it. I downloaded the ascii, used phpmyadmin to stuff it into mysql, then I used the Views Database Connector and Views Field View modules (along with Views, of course) to query those database tables. That way it works when the 'net is down. You can always just go to the website but it seemed so retarded to have to look up everything across the internets every time. The database will tell you that x volume is approximately y mass and has approximately z amount of total carbs, fiber, fat, etc — down to all the known micronutrients.

      The thing is...I rarely cook anything simple with an easy to find and read ingredients list, It would take forever to figure what the calories and all were from what I cook since so much of it is fresh vegetable and meat based, etc.

      You have to mix your food on or across a scale. It's an added step, but it's not impossible. I made Atkins baking mix from their publicly available recipe, with some tweaks to include coconut flour. I put a bowl on a scale and measured the amounts in grams, and then I was able to figure out that a low-carb waffle has about 20g of net carbs (less fiber) if I make it with a non-nutritive sweetener, e.g. a mix of monk fruit and stevia extracts, based on 1-1/4c of mix and one egg.

      Yeah, it's extra work. But let's not pretend that it can't be done.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    57. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Magius_AR · · Score: 1

      This means that your "nutritious" smoothie has the equivalent of 4 teaspoons of sugar, so I am not sure that you have a full grasp on the nutrition aspect.

      To be fair, that smoothie is loaded with fiber, particularly from the banana. Sugar aside, having a stomach full of fiber goes a long way towards staving off hunger and ultimately cutting calories.

    58. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Besides, he's likely to die instead while running outside on a bright sunshiny day or harvesting in his garden.

      So, in other words, "hell on earth".

      I'll do what it takes not to die of diabetes and obesity, but I'd rather just be dead that be miserable like you describe here.

    59. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Kjella · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The thing is, you don't really need to all OCD on the calories, just get it ballpark right.

      Veggies and fruit? Mostly <50 kcal/100g
      Lean food? 100 kcal/100g.
      Average food? 200 kcal/100g.
      Fatty food? 300 kcal/100g
      Sweets? 400 kcal/100g
      Snacks? 500 kcal/100g

      Oh and beer 200kcal/0.5L... partying is hard on your weight :/ particularly since it makes me hungry for late night supersized junk food too, which is as stupid as it gets. Volume is also a big thing, when I wanted to binge I could make myself 300 grams of pasta, add 400 grams of sausage and pour a glass of 500 ml sauce over it. That's a 3*350 (uncooked, ~100 cooked)+4*200+5*40 = 2000 kcal dish. I knew it was too much, but I guess I just didn't want to know how much. These days I make about 40% of that and it's still a slightly oversized dinner. So I'd say weighing it is the main thing, you can mostly ballpark how healthy it is.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    60. Re:eliminate extra sugar by miller701 · · Score: 2

      I've cut down to 12 oz of pop a day (from the 40-50 oz) and it was tough the first week and I've pretty much stuck to it.It's about changing habits and like in the like he did some changes then some more than some more. It's working well so far.

    61. Re:eliminate extra sugar by losfromla · · Score: 1

      Ketone is not a waste product, read the first paragraph here:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K...

      High carb + higher carb is what is happening in the American diet and high carbs are the problem.

      High carb + high carb + low fat is also a problem, see?

      High healthy fats + high healthy fats = not easy to overeat because you feel so damned full. I did this just a couple of days ago and man did I feel full on a very low volume of food, maybe a cupful of cabbage and an ounce of broccoli with four ounces of fatty rib meat and maybe four more ounces fat and oil. So probably about 2500 calories but I could probably have gone all day on that meal, except it was dinner so I just went to sleep. No acid reflux, no bad dreams, no digestive problems...

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    62. Re:eliminate extra sugar by losfromla · · Score: 2

      Fiber provides zero nutrition so it does not stave off hunger, bloated is not the same as energized. 4 teaspoons of sugar is four teaspoons of sugar.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    63. Re: eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Posting anonymous because I'm gay.

    64. Re: eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flatulence wars. KimChi then Vindaloo then hard boiled eggs and cheap beer till 1 am. The trick is letting the eggs sit in the fridge raw for about 2 months. Cook on the 'sell by date'.

      One of the PHBs thought it was a gas leak. Cleared the building (well almost). Went looking for the nearest gas service.

    65. Re:eliminate extra sugar by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      An 8 oz steak is 25% of the calories most us need for a day.

      Two pounds of steak a day it is. Glad to see I was doing it right all along.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    66. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It helps to regulate the uptake of the sugar. Also, fiber helps clean the pipes.

    67. Re:eliminate extra sugar by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      How much of the wine went into the pot and how much into the cook?

      Weigh the cook before and after the meal is cooked. Don't let them pee.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    68. Re:eliminate extra sugar by ILongForDarkness · · Score: 1

      Not perfect but I go by gut literally. I know when I've had a big meal or not. I also tend to eat fairly lean though. Anyways, if I feel that I've eaten a bit much lately then I exercise a bit more if not then whatever I feel like. I'm big to begin with but I've lost 15 pounds and probably put on 20lbs muscle in the process (245lb bodybuilder frame with a bit of a beer belly). Working my way through the beer belly. But getting stronger in the process (benching 350, shoulder press 270). And no it isn't genetics that got me to put on the muscle/strength: I was 170lb at 6'3" till 2nd year of university (so naturally a fairly small frame) and put on all the way up to 260 and started at 125lb press, all the extra weight was pretty much fat before hitting the weights again.

      Anyways I don't worry too much about weighing my food. I guess it depends how hard at time you have losing/maintaining while gaining muscle. If after two weeks MY weight isn't going in the right direction I mix it up: extra 30 min of cardio, cut the beer out for the week etc.Makes life a hell of a lot easier not having to weigh everything I eat and I'm single/cooking for one. I can't imagine having to try to weight things out then account for stupid things like my spouse eat mostly turnip but I ate mostly the sweet potato or whatever.

      Oh and another thing that helps, I guess roughly weighing but not getting all heil Hitler with it: get a favorite couple pieces of tupperware and pack your lunches in that. You can tell when your lunch bag is a bit heavy versus yesterday and plan your day accordingly, in my case since I workout 3-5 days a week that usually translates into working out that day even if I don't feel like it or got up a bit late. Even if that means only doing 3 sets of a couple exercises just to get the blood flowing it helps.

    69. Re:eliminate extra sugar by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

      See, this is why nobody listens to health nuts. Eliminate beer? It certainly is beyond the pale, for ordinary mortals. It is a great joy in life, and worth whatever temporary price must be paid. Only a highly motivated fanatic would voluntarily eliminate such a pleasure. What differences are there between you and ISIS? Not flaming, for real.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    70. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This worked for me too. I watched the documentary Fed Up and it freaked me out about sugar (and fruit juice, which is the same as soda, metabolically). Sugar is added to a lot of foods (at least in the US) and it's basically poison. I agree, the first week I was noticing cravings, but since then I've felt generally better, had more energy, and slimmed down a bit without much effort.

      If you want to lose weight, watch that documentary. It will scare you into doing it.

    71. Re:eliminate extra sugar by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Does not stave off hunger?

      You do realize that at least some "feeling full" is literally physically filling your stomach, right?

      While yes, different foods fill one up differently, a can of soup that has only 160 calories in it can fill me up for a while.

    72. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think anybody puts so much sugar in their coffee that it matters. A sugar cube has just 12 calories, so it's not going to do anything unless you're drinking a dozen cups a day. Soda on the other hand is chock-full of the stuff, and so are fruit juice and canned tea - typically around 150 calories or more! So just one can of soda is the equivalent of a dozen sugar-sweetened cups of coffee.

    73. Re:eliminate extra sugar by _DangerousDwarf · · Score: 1

      Citation required. There is nothing wrong with sugar. Period. Go put down your Good Calories, Bad Calories book. Nothing wrong with sugar is even more true when it comes from fruit, and is still in its fruit form (aka not processed to something). There is no credible science that says you have to cut out all sugar.

    74. Re: eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try this, take a shot of avocado or coconut oil, take another, take two more. Tell me if your stomach feels full and how that relates to your satiety. I follow a keto diet and often feel completely sated with a very low volume of food. This happens because the food I eat is very calorie-rich.

    75. Re: eliminate extra sugar by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      By that argument then, a candy bar should make you sated. But it doesn't (despite Snickers' commercials), I'd say at least partially due to the small volume component.

    76. Re:eliminate extra sugar by swamp_ig · · Score: 1

      I have the same problem, plus my wife does all the cooking at home and wouldn't ever track ingredients.

      I've managed to lose 8kg (back to my goal weight now).

      It's pretty easy - just don't eat as much, cut your serving size down and make sure you end the meal feeling a little bit hungry, not full.

    77. Re:eliminate extra sugar by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

      It does stave off hunger. Think of your stomach as a big balloon. It can only hold a given volume. Fiber expands when it mixes with the liquids in your stomach, thus filling you up sooner. There are receptors on the inside of the stomach wall that send signals to your brain telling it when you are full. Basically, when you think you're full, you're full.

      In my example above I noted that I use Flaxseed as my source of fiber. To claim that this has no nutritional value is flatly false. The fiber in it will help to regulate your insulin levels which helps to control how quickly energies are burned up, with sugars being the quickest. It's also good for your digestive system. The flaxseed itself contains a lot of Omega-3 which helps you in a variety of ways: lowers blood pressure, lowers LDL cholesterol levels, helps reduce arterial plaque. It contains something called Lignans which contain antioxidant properties.

      Flaxseed is one of the healthiest things you can consume.

    78. Re:eliminate extra sugar by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      What do you use for a scale?

      I got one...but isn't really suited for weighing larger foods, etc....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    79. Re:eliminate extra sugar by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Your previous method - chop a pile of onions - throw them in the pot - go to the next ingredient. New method - chop a pile of onions - weigh them - throw them in the pot - go to the next ingredient.

      Is it really that much more difficult?

      Do you have a suggestion for a scale that is handy to use and read, and can handle large amounts, or large items, etc?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    80. Re:eliminate extra sugar by greg1104 · · Score: 1

      There's minimal evidence that healthy eating alone lowers your long-term body weight. That's part of the point really. Any diet change, be it fad dieting or more sustainable health eating choices, they are all capable of short-term weight loss. Keeping that weight off on the long-term is is a so much harder problem, it's barely related to what works for losing a large amount of weight in the first place.

      If you read studies about people who lose and keep weight off, like Long-term weight loss maintenance, the common factors that always show up are both very low calorie counts and constant feedback. Basically, chart your weight all the time, and cut your calories if it ever goes up. That is brutally difficult to sustain for years at a time. If you follow any sort of hunger-driven diet, with healthy foods or not, you will probably go back to whatever weight your body likes over time. That's how hunger works.

    81. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Strangely+Familiar · · Score: 1
      "4 teaspoons of sugar is four teaspoons of sugar"

      It is this kind of simplistic outlook that really misleads people, yourself included. There is a difference between 12 grams of sugar in strawberries and a banana, and 12 grams of sugar mixed into water. First, the body metabolizes different sugars using different organs. Second, it is notoriously old and well known that natural sugars in fruits enter the bloodstream more slowly than, e.g. refined cane sugar or high fructose corn syrup mixed into flavored water. That makes a difference in how the body processes it. If the sugar is coming too fast to be dumped into the bloodstream all at once, it may be stored as fat. If it metabolizes more slowly, more of it can be burned as needed. Third you completely MISSED the fact that the guy is consuming these calories in the morning. WHEN someone eats could matter even more that what they eat. http://www.sciencedaily.com/re... The morning is probably the best possible time to eat some fruits, especially if they are mixed with protein. Really, you should limit your daily output of reductionist tripe. Nutrition and metabolism are incredibly complex. Don't over-simplify.

      --
      Join the IParty!
    82. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Strangely+Familiar · · Score: 1

      Except for at least one aspect. "Flaxseed can act like the hormone estrogen." http://www.webmd.com/vitamins-...

      --
      Join the IParty!
    83. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would replace the banana with two oz of olive oil which would give you about 500 calories of long lasting energy, not the quick to bonk rush that sugar does

      And that kills it for me. The banana ties the whole thing together. Not to mention that you're talking about removing 135 calories and a dozen nutrients and replacing it with a smaller volume with almost 4x the number of calories that supplies: omegas, vitamin E, and vitamin K.

      From your other posts, the way you live would make life pointless to me. I'm glad that it satisfies you, but obsessing over the contents of what I eat, microplanning everything out....not worth it. Not even remotely.

    84. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fibre does however, help increase the absorbtion of other foods, and will help slow digestion. So in conjunction with a balanced diet, fibre will help stave off hunger.

    85. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody wants to wear out an 82 year old woman, especially not an 82 year old man.

    86. Re:eliminate extra sugar by master_kaos · · Score: 1

      But it is difficult, the thing is you dont know how much calories are in food. You also have no idea how much calories you burn (sure you can use a TDEE calculator to give a rough idea, but again you have no clue how accurate that is)

      Ok so you get a 12 ounce ribeye from the butcher. How much of it is water content, how much of it is actual protein, does it contain a 1/8 layer of fat on the edge or 1/4 inch? How marbled is it. All these factors could easily change the calorie content of the steak by hundreds of calories!

      You go to grocery store to buy a boneless skinless chicken breast. Now it is common that they pump those things full of water to make it look more plump/add weight. You weigh it raw. Now you could be eating less protein/calories than you thought you were.
      Now good luck if someone else is doing the cooking, or you decide to go to a restuarant.
      I have lost 60lbs in past 6 months and I eat out 3x per week.

    87. Re:eliminate extra sugar by master_kaos · · Score: 1

      I have been eating keto diet, and it helps so much. Figure out how much protein you need to eat. Meet this goal. Set max net carbs to 20-30g (or if doing low carb instead, maybe 100g). This is a max, so you don't need to actually hit it. The rest is filled with fats.
      This keto diet has been a life saver for me, as pure calorie counting was too hard (always hungry).

    88. Re:eliminate extra sugar by master_kaos · · Score: 1

      I think it depends. I started off 345lbs 6 months ago. Now I am 287. I compared pictures to what I am now, to what I was. I know I will never ever go back to the way I was. I think starting off so obese actually does give me an advantage as I see how much better I fit in clothes, and even though I am still very obese, I already notice people treating me better, since I am not quite as disgusting.

      I have been doing a "diet" very low carb, and I don't plan on sticking to it if I dont have to. But I have learned self control, moderation, and more importantly, the importance of nutrition.

      That's not to say once I hit my goal weight I wont maybe gain back a few lbs. But I have also been going to the gym for weightlifting and actually enjoy it. It is something I will continue doing. Just started C25K and right now I hate it (as I did weightlifting when I started) but I know once I start seeing significant improvements with my running where it doesn't feel like my lungs are exploding after 45 seconds of jogging that I will enjoy it to.
      Also when other people who don't know I was focusing on weight loss see me and congratulate me it is such a motivation booster as well.

      The only comments I do hate is people saying "oh you're thin!" when clearly I am not since I am still 287lbs.

    89. Re:eliminate extra sugar by master_kaos · · Score: 1

      Just cutting out sugar is not some magic that makes you lose weight, if you still eat too much you will not lose weight.

      The advantage of cutting out carbs is that protein and fat is a lot more satiating than simple carbs. So you can feel full by eating less. But if you still in the mindset where you eat even if you aren't hungry... well you still won't lose weight.

      You also cannot out exercise a bad diet. You can be in the gym 2 hours every day, but if you eating an extra 2000 calories it isn't going to do squat for weightloss.

      Some other benefits I noticed by cutting out carbs (mind you some of it may be attributed to weight loss as well) --
      Lower heart rate
      Blood Cholesterol levels way down (HDL up)
      Blood Glucose levels way down.
      I have WAY more energy when I wake up. -- I used to want to just stay sleeping even though I had 8 hours of sleep, brain would be foggy, now I can get up after 5 or 6 hours of sleep with almost full energy, and fully alert.

    90. Re:eliminate extra sugar by losfromla · · Score: 1

      I agree, you aren't going to get too exact, so I think you have to use judgment and eyeball the fat content and calculate accordingly. You'll be off a bit but you will be closer than by not doing any estimation and math at all. I stick to vegetables that have negligible net carbs so those don't count for anything, fats and oils I weigh, I treat fatty proteins as proteins because I probably eat more protein that I need given my weight and sedentary lifestyle so for me it is pretty simple. If I were more concerned about protein intake due to a bodybuilding hobby/addiction, I would probably just compensate fatty proteins by adding more protein. I am not very strict as you can tell but my methods work fine for my needs.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    91. Re:eliminate extra sugar by onkelonkel · · Score: 1

      I have an old Salton spring scale, and i just put a big plastic bowl on top, zero the scale, and off I go. It reads up to 10 kg. There are any number of fancy electronic kitchen scales that will do the same thing. I do some German cooking,and a lot of the old recipes are by weight

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    92. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Deagol · · Score: 1

      Fine, he can use chia seeds. Or wheat bran. Whatever.

      I'm a keto dude, and I add chia seeds to damned near everything.

      The point is, a good bit of fiber in a meal helps you feel full, keeps traffic flowing nicely, and smooths out the sugar/insulin response spikes.

    93. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First, the body metabolizes different sugars using different organs.

      Monosaccharides are absorbed into the bloodstream in the small intestine, no matter what their source. Glucose can be used directly by cells, fructose and galactose are metabolized in the liver.

      Second, it is notoriously old and well known that natural sugars in fruits enter the bloodstream more slowly than, e.g. refined cane sugar or high fructose corn syrup mixed into flavored water. That makes a difference in how the body processes it.

      No, it doesn't. Natural sugars, table sugar and HFCS are all broken down into monosaccharides in the stomach. There is no difference in how the body processes them-- NONE.

    94. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could ofler encouragement alongside that acknowledgement, you know. If you were interested in helping.

    95. Re:eliminate extra sugar by praxis · · Score: 1

      I use an OXO one with 11lb capacity and pull out panel so that you can still see the readout even when larger items are placed on it.

      We've never used more than a few pounds of any ingredient as we cook for no more than 8 portions or so.

    96. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sugar is added to a lot of foods (at least in the US) and it's basically poison.

      Sugar is not poison. I wish people would just stop the scaremongering. There's nothing wrong with a reasonable amount of sugar intake as part of a balanced diet. Even if processed foods contain added sugar, they're not harmful in moderation.

    97. Re:eliminate extra sugar by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      No more sweet tea, coke, or adding sugar to my coffee. Sucked for about a week, after that, no problems, and I've dropped 30lbs with no real effort other than breaking the sugar habit in that first week.

      Anedote time. Same here. I quit having soad in the fridge and switched to unsweetened tea and water and ten pounds disappeared pretty quick without any work. I started using dumbbells for some simple weight lifting, built up my upper body strength, and another ten pounds (besides the muscle built up) disappeared. However, I tried cardio, and while I felt great and could run for an hour on a eliptical at what was supposed to be heavy exercise mode several times a week, it didn't affect my weight at all.

    98. Re: eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For 95% of obese people there is no "hack". You eat less than you burn off you lose weight. My doctor pointed out to me that I was eating all the right foods. Just twice as much as I needed. I gradually cutback while exercising more. In a year I went from 265lbs to 185lbs and for my 6 foot frame I am still considered slightly overweight. The only trick is to track the food intake and exercise with a free app like Myfitnespal. It replaces the notebook some people carry.

    99. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      I would suggest to simply forget the myth that "working out" makes you lose weight.

      Actually, it can work. Get a treadmill desktop and walk 12-15 kilometers on it every day (it's easy enough). That's about 700-800kcal, more than enough to create enough caloric deficit for significant weight loss.

      And then there's an advantage of increased basal rate.

    100. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Along these lines, I have been able to completely walk away from diet cola, because my local grocery store has a zero-calorie unsweetened lemon (and also raspberry) flavored fizzy water. Here's a link to the brand. I hope you can find something similar where you are.

      http://www.ah.nl/producten/product/wi196022/bar-le-duc-mineraalwater-met-citroen

      Here's a link to the actual brand page, but there's server is borked:
      http://www.bar-le-duc.nl/assortiment/mineraalwater-plus

      posted as AC, because I've got mod points.

    101. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, the 82 year old guy might be a cradle-robber and have a 65 year old woman. Mmm, GILFs.

      There are limits. GILFs are mainstream, but GGILFs are a bit edgy of a fetish, though: "I haven't been fucked like that since Truman was president!"

    102. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reading the article I saw this:

      It helps greatly if you are willing to eat similar foods day to day that are easy to track

      THIS is my problem. I tend to rarely eat pre-packaged processed food, or simple things. I cook from scratch, large batches of things, to eat as leftovers for most of the week.

      Let's say since greens are in season now, I cook a HUGE 6-7QT pot of greens, Basically the only fat in the thing is 1lb of Andouille sausage. This pot will easily be 6-10 portions/meals. Granted this is a simple dish with few ingredients, but what about the same size pot of mushroom chili? Or something else that is complex and has a lot of ingredients and I don't really know how many meals will come put of it, or maybe it is something I'd combine with other leftovers into a different dish, for example I might grill out a bunch of eggplant, onions and zucchini...I might eat some in a salad, or maybe some as a wrap with yogurt sauce..etc.

      The thing is...I rarely cook anything simple with an easy to find and read ingredients list, It would take forever to figure what the calories and all were from what I cook since so much of it is fresh vegetable and meat based, etc.

      I dunno what a portion would be in so many cases...although it is largely healthy food.

      Ok, I think you're being a bit hyperbolic as to how difficult this is. It's not like all the nutrition information you need is hidden in books you'd have to go to the library to access, all the information is on the web and at your fingertips. Portions are easy to figure out if you have a postal scale that goes up to five pounds of max weight. Take your plate and place it on the scale. Zero it out to the plate weight then put each part of your meal on the plate and note the weight (meat, sides, salad, etc.). Once you have the general information and the weight of the food consumed you can easily get a good approximation of how many calories and what the nutritional value is for everything you're eating. The most it will cost you is the price of a decent postal scale, if you don't already have one or can borrow one. Even if you're using meat from the grocery store, it's sold by unit of mass and has to be clearly labeled, so you should at least know what the precooked weight is of your meat. If you're using venison or other game meat, use the scale and weight it before you cook it.

      Once you've done this a few times (doesn't have to be every meal, but do this for meals or food you cook and eat often), even without being crazy about tracking you can get a pretty good idea of whether or not you're eating healthy. It's not rocket surgery, but it does require a little effort up front. Once you know it that info doesn't go away the next time you cook that meal, so it's not like you have to do this ALL the time. People brush stuff off that could help them live longer because it seems too difficult to do, although they've never tried to do it. Silly behavior, really, for a rational person.

    103. Re:eliminate extra sugar by wept · · Score: 1

      Wow, so simpo! Why didn't OP think of thaaaaaat!

    104. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Strangely+Familiar · · Score: 1

      Wow. I guess with your reductionist theory, the evidence you presented, and ALL CAPS emphasis, I will have to concede. I guess this study from Princeton, and others like it, must be flawed, because it contradicts your theory http://www.princeton.edu/main/... . You win. Keep drinking your soda. I won't stop you.

      --
      Join the IParty!
    105. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That study has been repeatedly discredited as poorly designed.

      Chemically, HFCS-55 (most used in soft drinks) is pretty much indistinguishable from "natural" honey as far as sugar content goes. Your body can't tell the difference.

      HFCS is like sucrose that has already been calved into glucose and fructose. Your intestine does not - CANNOT (more caps) - absorb sucrose whole. The enzyme responsible for the calving, sucrase, does its job for a typical serving of sugar in a few minutes.

      There are issues with drinking sugared drinks (juice, soda, sweetened tea etc.) in isolation, without food, but it makes no difference whether the sugar is "natural" or not.

    106. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Strangely+Familiar · · Score: 1

      With your credentials, again, how can I argue? Oh wait. The blogs you cite to rebut the peer reviewed study were rife with mischaracterizations, selectively read data, and inaccurate statements about the study. I'm sure you read and ignored the response from the study's authors, pointing out the errors in the blogs. Don't bother finding the comments and taking quotes out of context. It won't work. Unfortunately, the HFCS producers have muddied the debate by paying shills to attempt to discredit peer reviewed science making the link between obesity and metabolic syndrome and HFCS. Their campaign is straight out of the tobacco industry playbook. I can't tell whether you are genuinely misguided, or part of this disinformation campaign. You seem too well informed to be genuinely misguided. You are posting anonymously, which means you don't get e-mail notifications of my responses. That means you are going back into the article just to see if anyone responded. You seem *especially* motivated to win this argument, almost like some one was paying you....

      --
      Join the IParty!
    107. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Strangely+Familiar · · Score: 1

      Again, your arguments are reductionist. I have seen several plausible explanations for why there is a difference between HFCS, sucrose, and sugars in various fruits, berries, and vegetables. I don't think you want to hear them. You seem very emphatic, close minded and certain about the subject. You say without qualification that it makes no difference whether the sugar is "natural" or not in a way that seems designed to mislead people. The actual foods people eat are more complex than the molecules you are focusing on in your reductionist fashion. HFCS is not one pure molecule. It contains enzymes from the manufacturing process, and other saccharides besides glucose and fructose. The best way to really know what the differences are is by testing real foods on living organisms, not with some theory about why the two different things are exactly the same. That's why the Princeton study matters. And, predictably, you ignored it, and insisted your cartoonish medical understanding of metabolism trumped empirical studies.

      --
      Join the IParty!
    108. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like I said, prove me wrong. I'm always happy to hear when science learns something new, but in this case it's smoke and mirrors. What I don't like (and what motivates me to argue) is when people spread disinformation as if it is fact. This is ONE study, and there are many other factors that could have caused the rats' weight gain. The Princeton group failed to control for the ONLY difference being sucrose vs. HFCS, case closed.

      HFCS is just the latest bogeyman in the food conspiracy theorist canon. "It's not my fault I'm fat; it's because company X fed me ingredient Y to make more money!" Give me a break. It wouldn't have anything to do with Thickburgers and Big Gulps now, would it?

    109. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Strangely+Familiar · · Score: 1
      How did you see that comment and reply in 20 minutes?

      .

      A nice try, calling the studies on the effects of food on living organisms "the food conspiracy theorist canon". If you are in fact a shill, the irony would be pretty thick. Because it is no conspiracy theory to say that the HFCS producers have lobbyists and public relations campaign which runn commercials and tried to change the name to "corn sugar". Facts. And you seem to be motivated to spread disinformation, citing blogs by people with no training against peer reviewed studies. And it is not only ONE study. I also read a similar study coming out of Ireland, but unfortunately I can't find the cite for that. But seriously. You bemoan ONE study when you have mere blogs, and who knows who is backing them. And you seem quick to close the case, without citing a contradictory peer reviewed study not backed by the HFCS producers.

      --
      Join the IParty!
    110. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, I'm not a shill; I just recognize bullshit when I see it. HFCS is NOT that different from "natural" sugar. The reason food producers use it is because it's cheaper than cane or beet sugar, and the corn producers do have a vested interest in pushing their product. Politics are involved, but the chemistry is not in question.

      The thing is, people are eating more and exercising less, and suddenly they find themselves overweight so they point to the label and say, "HFCS - my God, it's in everything! That's why I'm fat!" This despite study after study showing that it's basically the same as other sugars and digested similarly. Consuming too much of any sugar will affect your health.

      "The bottom line is that there is no valid reason for HFCS to be any different than sucrose in the way that it affects your body." http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/?page_id=19
      "Because the composition of HFCS and sucrose is so similar, particularly on absorption by the body, it appears unlikely that HFCS contributes more to obesity or other conditions than sucrose does" http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20516261
      "The hypothesis that HFCS is a unique cause of obesity is not supportable in the United States or elsewhere" http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/88/6/1716S.full
      "Sucrose and HFCS do not have substantially different short-term endocrine/metabolic effects." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18469239

      I really don't know why you think it's strange that I can browse comments and see the newest ones first. It's called sorting.

    111. Re:eliminate extra sugar by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      If you only eat like 2100 - 2400 kcal, depending on your "brain usage", yes. But most people who want to lose weight eat far more than that. Up to 4000 kcal.
      So they first need to cut minimum 1500 kcal, then they have to "work out" to burn another 800. So you easy see: the prime focus is the cutting of intake. And: a more "healthy" diet, like eating stuff that gives the nutritions without also pulling in to much calories.

      Point is: in the above (not unreasonable) example, cutting down on intake is already twice as effective as walking 12-15km (I did not check if that even burns so much kcals).

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    112. Re:eliminate extra sugar by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Well, if the americans want to call this "Ketonic Diet" when it is simply a fat burning diet, then it is no wonder that no one really understands nutrition there.

      I frankly don't get what you mean with "High carb + higher carb" and "High carb + high carb + low fat" and this "High healthy fats + high healthy fats" ...

      The question if you might have or might not have problems with a diet that has very high fat levels is your heart, circulation system and most of all: gall/bile.

      Regarding typical american diet: it is simply to much of everything. To much sugar/carbs, to much fat AND to much proteins. And on top of that to much "no fat" diet food, "no sugar" sugar replacement stuff like diet cokes. If one mainly eats carbs, for what ever reason, then he simply should focus on not combining it with fat and trying to eat carbs with a so called "low glycemic index".

      And a simple thing is to simply get rid of any kind of sweet soda, regardless if it contains sugar or artificial sweetener.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    113. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      I've lost 15kg (from 95-97kg down to 80-82kg) in about 8 months by doing treadmill + mild diet.

      It turned out that my basal rate was about 1900kcal (measured in a lab by exhaled CO2 concentration) and getting food intake down to 1200-1300kcal to get a decent 500kcal caloric deficit for noticeable weight loss was not trivial. I tried it and it's discouraging.

      However, by walking 3-4 hours a day on a treadmill I gradually increased my basal rate to about 2100kcal (more muscle mass, yay!) and it burns around 500kcal directly. So I get a 700kcal deficit without following a strenuous diet.

      And don't forget other perks - it's easy to get a cardio workout (just increase treadmill speed), you feel much healthier and can easily walk large distances when doing 'touristy' things on holidays/vacations.

      Of course, if you're used to eating 4000kcal then nothing is going to help you until you decrease your caloric intake.

    114. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess it depends on personal preference, for some people food is the most important aspect of life and it has become a lifestyle and foundation for socialisation. Thanks to the marketing strategy of restaurants nowadays. I also realize that deciding to start eating healthy would eventually leading to being alienated by these social circles. They hang out every week trying different new restaurants and always insist on ordering desert, makes it awkward if you are the only one not eating as much.

    115. Re:eliminate extra sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fiber doesn't provide nutrition, but it does help you think you're full. That's not a bad thing if you are trying to cut down on calories, which is a good idea if you're trying to lose weight. Also, any "unnatural" oil should work in terms of calories and lasting energy; it might not give the same health benefits with regards to different omega fats, but recently people are starting to think that's been overblown a bit.

  2. Move more, eat less by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Another thing is to eat slower. Put your knife and fork down between mouthfulls.

    1. Re:Move more, eat less by NatasRevol · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not sure why you're down voted, but this is how I reduced my caloric intake. A drink between every single bite. Slows down intake, makes you feel fuller, satiety sets in sooner.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    2. Re:Move more, eat less by kuhnto · · Score: 1

      sorry, accidental mod

      --
      "A 'person' is smart. 'People' are dumb, panicky animals and you know that."
    3. Re:Move more, eat less by Tx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unless you have more on your plate than you need (in which case there's a better obvious solution to the problem), I don't see where this gets you in terms of calorific intake; eating slowly doesn't change the number of calories on the plate. It might make a difference to the rate of increase of blood glucose, which has its own benefits, but I doubt it will make much difference to that, because its the rate of digestion that's going to determine blood glucose levels.

      --
      Oh no... it's the future.
    4. Re:Move more, eat less by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I was just quoting Dr Karl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Kruszelnicki) for the subject.

      Very good podcast btw.

    5. Re:Move more, eat less by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I think the point is that there's a delay between your stomach telling you it's full and the eating itself. If you slow down, you'll consume less by the time your body tells us to stop.

      It's true that smaller portions are better but you'd still be hungry afterwards if you've shovelled it down. More likely to eat some more i.e. over-eat.

    6. Re:Move more, eat less by NatasRevol · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not everyone puts the *exact* right amount of calories on their plate. Apparently that's not obvious to you.

      This helps you feel fuller before all the food is gone & not finish everything on your plate.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    7. Re:Move more, eat less by itzly · · Score: 2

      It takes a while for the body to feel full. If you eat slowly, there's more chance you'll actually feel full at the end of the plate/meal, and not go back for seconds.

    8. Re:Move more, eat less by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As far as I'm concerned this is the real problem. Most meals come with way, way more calories than you should have, particularly if you're eating any form of take-out. To the point where you may be eating two days of food in one sitting, and not really even realize it. I looked at one meal at a restaurant my wife likes, and calculated 4500 calories. We like to laugh at the imgur photos with the fat person and 5 buckets of KFC, but this particular meal did not look nearly so gluttonous.

      Eat slowly, take drinks, but if you clean your plate like mom asked then you just ate 2 days worth of food in one sitting and probably didn't even realize it (and will be hungry in a few hours, depending on how starchy it all was). I've lost 50 lbs by just packing my own food 19/21 meals a week (and actually eating 3x a day, which goes to OPs point about spacing things out a bit, which does help). Not only does it save a ton of money, it takes the pounds off.

      Take-out has a dilemma, in that labor and rent is a high cost to them, so they tend to give you too much food which is relatively cheap in the US to make you feel like you got your money's worth. But what we really need is half that amount of food, spaced better through the day.

    9. Re:Move more, eat less by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > Not everyone puts the *exact* right amount of calories on their plate. Apparently that's not obvious to you.

      I think it's pretty obvious, it's the main reason so many people are overweight. They simply don't accurately monitor how many calories they take in.

      Forget fad diets and acai berries, meal planning is the most basic skill you need in controlling your weight!

    10. Re:Move more, eat less by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Not disagreeing, but acknowledging that it's the issue & coming up with solutions to address it is way better than 'just eat the right amount'. And most people don't have any idea of what that is anyway.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    11. Re:Move more, eat less by pscottdv · · Score: 1

      Eating slowly helps with putting down the knife and fork while some of the calories are still on the plate.

      --

      this signature has been removed due to a DMCA takedown notice

    12. Re:Move more, eat less by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      For those in the UK,

      http://www.channel4.com/progra...

      Basically confirmed what I always thought, 99.99% of obese people eat too much. Worse than that when asked to keep an accurate food diary of everything they eat, they don't. Diary typically says 2000 calories, they are actually eating 5000+ calories. The other people eat the same as me and are not over weight is total nonsense.

    13. Re:Move more, eat less by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Unless you have more on your plate than you need

      Throw out your big 12" dinner plates, and replace them with 6" plates.
      Throw out your big spoons and forks, and replace them with teaspoons and chopsticks.
      Eat a fatty/oily snack about 30 minutes before a big meal, to suppress your appetite.
      Occasionally take more than you want to eat and then THROW IT OUT, to retrain your brain that you don't have to eat something just because it is on your plate.
      Keep tempting snacks in a time lock box, that only opens at set times, to avoid impulsive eating.

    14. Re:Move more, eat less by Falos · · Score: 1

      Echoing on the drink. Water is more than a physical filler; being hydrated helps you feel sated, you're closer to "taken care of", while being thirsty causes increased appeal towards food. It's probably safe to ignore those 8cups people, but water is worth remembering as a mindhack. Exploit it before/during meals as you see fit.

    15. Re:Move more, eat less by hey! · · Score: 1

      Sage advice. What you need to hack is not your nutritional energy budget, but your automatic habitual behavior. If you can control that you can control your body's consumption and use of energy. If you can't hack your behavior you can't hack anything which depends on that behavior -- not for long anyway.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    16. Re:Move more, eat less by GTRacer · · Score: 2

      Occasionally take more than you want to eat and then THROW IT OUT

      I... I cannot do this. I joke with my family that I have a food-waste neurosis. It is incredibly difficult for me to toss out viable food. I used "viable" specifically because I eat a lot of leftovers and will eat food that's bordering on expired rather than throw it out.

      The upside is that for places that pack in two meals' worth in one order I get two meals out of it (usually dinner the day I ordered and lunch at work the next). I also have an amazingly-tolerant tummy in terms of food quality - I rarely get sick from eating whatever, whenever. I have some hardy flora in there. Maybe some fauna too.

      The downside is that I have occasionally crossed the "expired" line and wind up with no lunch at all...

      More context: I'm early 40s, cut out sugary sodas about 5 years ago and dropped about 45 pounds off that alone (I take about 5 sodas a day). Got to a good weight years ago and maintained it for a long time until this past November when I had some major life events stressing me out, which led to stress-eating and the gain of about one stone over 4 months. Got most of the stress sorted and am actively trying to regain control of my eating...

      --
      Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
    17. Re:Move more, eat less by dr_canak · · Score: 1

      It works because there is a lag in the time you are satiated to the time your stomach tells your brain you are satiated.

      People consume far more calories than they really need, very early in a meal. Many, if not most people, will eat to a feeling of "fullness". That feeling is a somatic feeling.

      The nerve signal to your brain, saying you have enough calories for energy now, can arrive to your brain some 15-20 minutes after you begin to eat, even if you've consumed more than enough calories to get through.

      Eating slowly gives your brain time to catch up to your gut, and hence when you arrive at your caloric needs, your brain can tell you that you have had enough. This feeling of "fullness" is nervous system fullness, not the somatic "fullness" people think about when they think of feeling "full".

      Drinking water doesn't help with calories per se, but it does give the person the "feeling" of being full (somatic), and can help slow eating down until the brain catches up. Same thing with eating slow, and putting your utensils down between bites.

    18. Re:Move more, eat less by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > I joke with my family that I have a food-waste neurosis. It is incredibly difficult for me to toss out viable food.

      But isn't eating more than you need just another way of "wasting food"? :)

    19. Re:Move more, eat less by Larryish · · Score: 1

      The funniest thing I see at Wal-Mart is land whales in the beep-beep buggy riding around with a basket full of little debbie cakes and soda.

    20. Re:Move more, eat less by Tx · · Score: 1

      Must have been obvious, since I dealt with it in the first line of my reply. You seem to be resistant to the idea that piling way too much food on your plate is a good way to get fat; I'd suggest that's a problem right there. It's not necessary to know exactly the right amount you need. At home, I tend to take very conservative portions. After I've finished my portion, I can take a moment, see how I feel, whether I want to eat more, and what I want to eat more of. I'd suggest this is a better strategy than piling way too much food on your plate in the first place, and then trying to stop yourself from eating it all.

      --
      Oh no... it's the future.
    21. Re:Move more, eat less by GTRacer · · Score: 1

      It would be if I were deliberately eating more than a sane portion. I eat so many leftovers and such because I break up servings. Or when we cook at home I pack the leftovers up for myself and my wife and spread them out that way. My ideal is that we buy food / ingredients economically and use a high percentage of them, avoiding waste and reducing the number of purchased meals. Doesn't always work out but hey...

      There are definitely times when I eat waaay too much, and I usually suffer for it. But I try not to by spreading a meal out or by snacking rather than eating another meal.

      --
      Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
    22. Re:Move more, eat less by nealric · · Score: 2

      I can't find something like that funny. But it is instructive. When I see a morbidly obese person roll up to the checkout counter, their food choices are awful. EVERY SINGLE TIME. They are buying nothing but soda by the case, prepackaged meals, and bags of candy. I've literally never seen someone who was 100lbs or more overweight come to the checkout counter with a significant amount of fresh produce. The correlation is so strong I can estimate someone's BMI pretty accurately just by looking at their unattended shopping cart.

    23. Re:Move more, eat less by orgelspieler · · Score: 2

      I'm the same way. I hate throwing away something that hasn't completely turned into slime mold. Easy solution that doesn't involve throwing anything away: Bring reusable leftover containers to dinner. Cut meal in half. Put one half in container. Eat the other half. Bring container to work the next day for lunch. As long as you're not eating super-bad-for-you food all the time, this should help you lose a good 15-20 lbs. If you find that you haven't eaten the leftovers in a couple of days, put them in the freezer (since throwing them out will make you twitch). Plus you don't end up throwing away as much Styrofoam as you would using restaurant to-go boxes.

    24. Re:Move more, eat less by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      I agree -- this is a big part of the problem. Another thing that can be done to aid getting back on track is to follow the "don't eat what you can't carry home" rule -- meaning that you try (at least for a while) to actually walk to where you get your food, buy it (whether fast food or groceries), and carry it home before eating it.

      You'll find that fast food tastes pretty bad after waiting until you've walked home, groceries taste much better but are heavier.

      A side benefit is that you get some weight-bearing exercise before your meal :)

    25. Re:Move more, eat less by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      I'm not resistant at all that putting too much food on your plate is a good way to eat.

      I'm just more realistic that most people don't actually know what that amount is.

      And drinking between each bite slows down their intake so that the satiation can kick in & they end up eating less.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    26. Re:Move more, eat less by Copid · · Score: 1

      But isn't eating more than you need just another way of "wasting food"? :)

      This is a really excellent phrasing that I've never heard before. I'm stealing that and spreading it far and wide.

      I've seen plenty of people who are stuffed to the gills eat a little more food to keep it from "going to waste." Hell, I've done it myself. But you don't need the nutrition and you clearly derive no pleasure from it, so how is that any less wasteful than smearing it all over your face or throwing it into a lake? It achieved nothing good. The only thing you can say about it is that the food is gone. At that point, you're just using your body as a waste receptacle.

      I guess the major lesson from this is that you waste food when you make or take too much food. Once that's done, it's waste no matter what you do with it, so solve the waste problem at the front-end.

      --
      An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
    27. Re:Move more, eat less by jimbobborg · · Score: 2

      No one is forcing you or anyone else to eat the whole plate full of food at a restaurant. Split the meal in half, eat one side and take home the rest. It's not that hard, folks.

    28. Re:Move more, eat less by losfromla · · Score: 1

      I also don't find it funny, I find it sad though and wish I could offer to help without them offering to separate my head from my body.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    29. Re:Move more, eat less by losfromla · · Score: 1

      The problem with drinking between each bite is that it lowers the strength of your digestive juices by diluting them. It is best to not drink for about a half hour before eating and about three hours after. See the books by Dr. Batmangelidj for explanation of this and other benefits of water.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    30. Re:Move more, eat less by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Forgive me if I don't see books by this guy.

      From the first page of google results:
      "In his book, “Your bodies many cries for water”, Dr.Batmangelidj describes the cure of many chronic conditions just with water!"

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    31. Re: Move more, eat less by NCG_Mike · · Score: 1

      OP for this thread here again but I'm bothering to log in :-) Speaking from personal experience I got the put the utensils down from a TV show her in the uk. I decided to use it and after a while I got used the practice. Got to say I eat less than I did as I'm not shovelling food. Now if only I could cut the beer down...

    32. Re:Move more, eat less by losfromla · · Score: 1

      That's him, and that is one of his books, you could search amazon or B&N for purchasing or borrow from your library. He discusses how to take water, when to take it, the conditions he feels lack of it cause. I think he's mostly right and specifically differentiates water from liquids made primarily of water, they are not the same.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    33. Re:Move more, eat less by labnet · · Score: 1

      I was told by an Amercian, that you tend not to use knives; ie that many of you only use a fork at the dinner table? Is that true?

      --
      46137
    34. Re:Move more, eat less by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you misinterpreted my subtle 'This guy is a quack'.

      But then you talk about how water is different...

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    35. Re:Move more, eat less by Pope · · Score: 1

      Keep tempting snacks in a time lock box, that only opens at set times, to avoid impulsive eating.

      Or just don't buy them. I stopped eating a lot of crap like chips, etc. just by not buying them in the first place. If I want something crunch, nuts, carrots, or celery will do just fine.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    36. Re:Move more, eat less by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This.

      We're taught it's rude not to clear your plate, and to not waste food. The rude part is bull, and it's true we shouldn't waste food, but you need to take care of you, so that means if you need to throw away 300 calories of unnecessary food from your plate, then don't be afraid to do it.

      I'm changing to a healthier lifestyle (Started doing a Couch to 5K program two weeks ago, and now I actually look forward to the feeling I get from running) Its the little things that make the difference. Cut calories wherever possible...I've started replacing sugar with Stevia, and it takes some getting used to, but once you make the adjustment, it's barely noticeable. (I know, someone will say something about sugar substitutes, but if you want to cut calories, and keep the sweet taste, thats one of the best ways to do so)

      I use MyFitnessPal on my phone. Anything I buy at the store, i can scan the barcode and it will log the portion in the app for me. It will give you approximate calorie burn for different types of exercising (From running to lifting to doing housework, or shopping while carrying a small child)

    37. Re:Move more, eat less by losfromla · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, I do agree that he is a bit over-exuberant on the purported benefits of water but there are good points that he makes. One of which is the aforementioned benefit of taking water away from meals. Do you disagree with the notion of not diluting digestive juices by drinking water with meals?

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    38. Re:Move more, eat less by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      I do disagree. Your body produces more digestive juices if there's more food/fluids that require it.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    39. Re: Move more, eat less by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course non quac scientists also recommend minimizing drinking while eating. I love how you offer a disagreeable opinion based on nothing though,

    40. Re:Move more, eat less by antdude · · Score: 1

      I don't eat everything that I order. It's too much. I just take the left overs home. Usually, they last me two/2 meals. Once in a while, three/3!

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    41. Re:Move more, eat less by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I was told by an Amercian, that you tend not to use knives; ie that many of you only use a fork at the dinner table? Is that true?

      If any cutting your food requires can be done with the edge of your fork, why would you want a knife? Perhaps for pushing food onto the fork, but in many cuisines and dishes there's some sort of bread for that purpose.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    42. Re:Move more, eat less by losfromla · · Score: 1

      The point here LoverSatan is that you try to minimize the load on the stomach, it does have limits you see. I agree with the AC, you've not produced any facts to back your disagreeable opinion.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    43. Re:Move more, eat less by Rinikusu · · Score: 1

      I eat with my hands, you insensitive clod!

      --
      If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
    44. Re: Move more, eat less by NCG_Mike · · Score: 1

      I'm the OP for the thread. I use a knife and fork as I'm a Brit. I did live in Florida and most people seem to cut with a knife, put the knife down, switch hand with the fork and then eat the food. One thing I did notice in Delray Beach/Boca Raton was over sized portions. A large delivery pizza only fits in an American fridge diagonally. After a day you have to chunk it out. Large cokes are like a small bucket and I noticed lots of, in particular, teen girls wandering around the Boca mall with buckets of Pepsi/coke. I asked people about it and they said that people consider quantity good value for money. Makes sense of course but it's not helpful. Living by the beach in Delray there're extremes... Joggers who are toned and, frankly, lard buckets. Most people don't seem bigger than the uk average in relative size to be honest.

    45. Re:Move more, eat less by SomeoneFromBelgium · · Score: 1

      This seems a bit extreme to me. I think the execise part is the poster story is actually the most important part.
      After all: you live years taking in more calories than you need without growing fat. So clearly your body has a mechanism to regulate how much of the intake is converted to fat. It seems that exercise and a healty lifestyle keep this mechanism healty too.

      So, I wouldn't go too extreme on the food part and just make sure you live, eat and sport healthyly.

      Just my 2 cents....

    46. Re:Move more, eat less by bjb · · Score: 1
      Eat slower?

      Since pizza seems to be a common "geek food", here's something I've been doing for years that helps a lot with pizza: use a knife and fork.

      Though people in NY give you strange looks, you'll probably eat 1 less slice this way since your stomach will indicate it is full before you've shoveled that 4th folded slice into your mouth.

      --
      Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
    47. Re:Move more, eat less by master_kaos · · Score: 1

      I think that is the major problem. People think just because it is on your plate you need to eat it. As soon as you are satiated (NOT FULL) just stop. Who cares if it is half left or a couple bites, just set it aside for later.

      People like to think in units. Most people wont eat 1/2 an apple, they will eat until gone. This doesn't matter if it is a really small apple or a huge apple. "no leaving the table until your plate is empty!" was engrained while growing up.

    48. Re:Move more, eat less by master_kaos · · Score: 1

      If you do want to eat a lot. Put a lb of brocolli on your plate. Whats that, like 150 calories? and you sure as hell will feel full.
      Also drinking more water helps a lot. Most people probably drink 1 litre per day. Up that to at least 3L if not 4L (1 gallon) and that will help cravings a lot.

    49. Re: Move more, eat less by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Many non-quack scientists recommend drinking wine while eating. Your body is tuned to control the ph of your stomach acid.

      Does Batmangelidj (the quack) also recommend not eating any alkali foods? Those weaken your digestive juices much more then plain water.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  3. It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    More lean meats and proteins (fish, chicken breast, etc). Cut back on the carbs, cut back on the sugars. More fiber in your diet. Drink more water and less soda.

  4. Common sense by sadness203 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Eat well.
    Exercice

    Everything else is plain wishful thinking.

    1. Re:Common sense by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      True, some ways of eating well are easier than others, though.

      Personally, I have had some success recently by simply going with healthier starches. I could probably eat a pound of potatoes in a sitting, my body just loves that stuff, so for weeknight meals we do things like barley instead. Sub black or brown rice for white rice, etc...

    2. Re:Common sense by gatkinso · · Score: 4, Funny

      Don't eat anything that wasn't alive.

      For instance, there is not a creature called a "Dorito"

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    3. Re:Common sense by Graydyn+Young · · Score: 1

      In every thread about fitness we always see a lot of posts like this. "Just eat well", or "Use common sense". And that's great for people that are already in OK shape. But for those who have gotten themselves into a serious situation, it's not very useful. People who need badly to lose weight, or just want to get into really excellent shape, should consider working out their total daily energy expenditure and starting some macro counting. It's difficult, but reliable.

    4. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You can do it without either of those, I dropped from 215 pounds to 170 pounds and have held it off for years with almost no exercise and a pretty poor diet. I really didn't change what I ate at all, I just strictly regulated how much of it I did. Smaller portions for everything to keep myself averaging around 1,500 kcal a day.

    5. Re:Common sense by danbob999 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Neither was one called "Salad" or "Tofu".

    6. Re:Common sense by Thanshin · · Score: 1

      Don't eat anything that wasn't alive.

      For instance, there is not a creature called a "Dorito"

      Because your body can make more fat with 200kcal of Doritos than with 200kcal of chicken. By the powers of fat summoning from Dorito dimension.

    7. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plants having feelings too!

    8. Re:Common sense by jedidiah · · Score: 2

      "Don't anythng that wasn't alive" is a poor way of putting it.

      It's more like, don't buy anything ready made. Buy only agricultural commodities. Buy only components.

      You avoid most of the junk that way.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    9. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Protein triggers satiety in people. You'll eat 200kcal each way, but you'll be less likely to reach for a second 200kcal helping of chicken than another bag of Doritos.

    10. Re:Common sense by wiggles · · Score: 1

      But there was a Tofudebeest...

    11. Re:Common sense by nikhilhs · · Score: 2

      Tofu is processed soy, so I'm not a fan of it. But salad is just a bowl of lettuce, tomato, cucumber, etc., all of which were alive.

    12. Re:Common sense by Anubis+IV · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ayup. If there's one thing I've learned from hearing all of the success stories from real people (as opposed to people selling a product or service), it's that it always boils down to eating well and exercising, and that those two things look different for different people.

      Whether it means engaging in better portion control*, cutting back on specific food groups that your gut metabolizes better than the majority of the population, or simply exercising more so that you burn more calories, the only constant between everyone I've talked to who lost the weight and kept it off is that they found the right balance of eating well and exercising that worked for them.

      * I saw an article a few months ago that was talking about how doctors have been seeing a disturbing number of people coming in complaining of abdominal pain. Upon further investigation, it's turning out that these people are suffering from nothing more than hunger pangs because they've forgotten how they feel. That's when I realized it was time for me to do better portion control, since I couldn't remember having had a hunger pang in at least six months. That plus a budget that I needed to tighten led to less junk food in the house and less eating out. End result? I dunno, but I've been consistently losing weight (about 20 lbs. so far) at a slow but steady rate that's producing visible improvements, without making any other changes to my lifestyle. It won't work for everyone, but it is working for me.

    13. Re:Common sense by CaptainDork · · Score: 2

      Why is this modded at zero?

      The answer to weight loss is consuming fewer calories.

      Exercise is beneficial for reasons other than weight loss.

      I can choose to walk on a treadmill for an hour and burn 140 calories or simply decline to eat two (2) slices of bread.

      Leave the remark at 2, for crying out loud.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    14. Re:Common sense by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Doritos are mostly made from wheat...which was alive.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    15. Re:Common sense by itzly · · Score: 2

      And sugar is just processed sugar cane (or sugar beets), which was also alive.

    16. Re:Common sense by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Exercise is also an appetite suppressant, so it helps with the eating less. Plus if you do a little bit more intense exercise than strolling, it's a little more of a factor. I burn around 1000 calories for an hour of running. That's about 40% of the daily recommended intake.

      Diet is certainly the easiest thing for most people to change though.

    17. Re:Common sense by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      That is what I love about cooking: it allows me to change components to my liking and compile my own meal. Contrast that to a Dorito chip which is a bloated monolithic blob.

    18. Re:Common sense by dmaul99 · · Score: 1

      Disagree. Exercise is of course fantastic for keeping your heart and muscles fit, as well as for your mind, but it makes zero difference to me when the goal is weight loss, only what I eat.

      If you start counting calories like "ok, 30 mins on the treadmill will burn off that scoop of ice cream I had last night" nope doesn't work that way. Have to stop eating ice cream, period. Have to eat smaller portions, low fat low carb, just basically reduce calories and make the ones you do consume worthwhile. That's it.

      I know this because I've been ~30-40 lbs overweight all my adult life and I've tried the exercise approach, the no carb thing, etc. Nope. It took having an ulcer where I could not eat much without feeling sick for like 6 months to lose 40 lbs with no change in my non-existent exercise regimen. Kind of happy about the body image change (yes, I'm a victim of the culture and what endless torment by my school peers ingrained in me), but pretty darn worried about where this all going.

    19. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Technically the veggies are still alive when in your salad bowl, so the test passes with flying colours.

    20. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Don't eat anything that wasn't alive.
      > For instance, there is not a creature called a "Dorito"

      Close.
      Don't eat anything you didn't prepare yourself immediately before eating.

      That makes it self-limiting because you only have so much time. Processed foods are right out. If you are in a rush, you are basically limited to raw vegetables and fruits.

    21. Re:Common sense by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Contrast that to a Dorito chip which is a bloated monolithic blob

      OMG, just because they all come in the same bag doesn't mean it's monolithic! The chips are separate! If you want to take out one Dorito chip and replace it with a Pringles, you totally can (after using another Dorito chip to grind it down into the right shape).

    22. Re:Common sense by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Less reliable than they say, in my case.

      Having been in one of those "serious situations," my TDE, according to the common formula I found from just about every resource, was in the high 2000s. My first target was 1800 kcal, and I still either maintained or gained weight. It wasn't after dropping it to 1000 for a month (up to 12 for five months after that) that I started having any weight loss.

      Not that I particularly recommend that approach. I lost weight, yes, but I spent six months feeling like a bear with a tranq in my ass.

    23. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is this modded at zero?

      The answer to weight loss is consuming fewer calories.

      Exercise is beneficial for reasons other than weight loss.

      I can choose to walk on a treadmill for an hour and burn 140 calories or simply decline to eat two (2) slices of bread.

      Leave the remark at 2, for crying out loud.

      Except that when you reduce calories, your body immediately detects it and compensates. That's why you can lose weight for the first several weeks, but then you stall out. Many people will simply start to use food more efficiently. it's an ugly cycle that many overweight people have experienced. The sad part is that it can be so discouraging that you stop dieting and go back to you old habits, but now with a body that thinks it might not have a chance to get food and does a better job of storing fat.

      The only diet I've found that works is a low carb diet. Specifically a ketogenic diet.

    24. Re:Common sense by orgelspieler · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one thinking of Milla Jovovich right now? Chee-kin!!

    25. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't eat anything that wasn't alive.

      For instance, there is not a creature called a "Dorito"

      Don't eat anything that has a television commercial...

    26. Re:Common sense by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      Eat well. Exercise

      "Eat, drink, and be merry" is somehow more catchy, though.

    27. Re:Common sense by Convector · · Score: 1

      So, no water, no salt.

    28. Re:Common sense by Copid · · Score: 1

      I've found that exercise changes what I want to eat far more than the amount I want to eat. The amount probably follows from what I'm eating. If my body is screaming out for celery and I'm eating celery, it's unlikely that I'll eat the equivalent of "one bag of Doritos" in celery. It's celery. I eat it until I've had enough celery and I'll stop. If my body isn't screaming out for celery and I pick up a bag of Doritos, I may eat the whole bag without even noticing it.

      I'm guessing that if I were to eat the same food whether I was exercising or not, I would probably not be inclined to eat less. It's just that when I'm working out, my brain starts to see food as fuel, so I acquire the fuel and move on instead of engaging in whatever habitual behaviors normally drove my eating patterns.

      --
      An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
    29. Re:Common sense by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Unless you are either badly overweight, or naturally a muscular heavy build and/or running incredible fast/far, you never ever will burn 1000kcal in an hour, sorry.
      Perhaps 650 ... perhaps! More likely 500 or less.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    30. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that the plants in a salad and the soy beans that were used to make Tofu were once alive. In fact, the corn that goes into dorrito's were also once alive. Gatkinso's rule needs to be adjusted or else he's basically saying don't eat rocks.

    31. Re:Common sense by losfromla · · Score: 1

      Fat triggers satiety like nothing else does, trust me. There are times when I have so much fat in my bowl that it takes me half an hour to finish the last three spoonfuls of mostly fat/oil with a smattering of veggies. I should probably stop eating at that point but I make up for it by going to bed later.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    32. Re:Common sense by suutar · · Score: 1

      and a dorito is (heavily) processed grains. If you're willing to consider "processed" a boundary, then it may work for you. If not, you'll have to find some other rule of thumb.

    33. Re:Common sense by suutar · · Score: 1

      It can certainly feel hungrier after eating 200kcal of doritos than 200kcal of chicken, making it more likely that at the end of the day you've consumed 3000kcal instead of 2000. I speak from personal experience on this one (though admittedly my most recent "experiment" used cheetos).

    34. Re:Common sense by losfromla · · Score: 1

      So you're putting in ten miles a day? That is pretty awesome running.
      http://calorielab.com/burned/?...

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    35. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And testically, Doritos are made out of corn, so the test passes with flying colors.

    36. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Eat well.
      >Exercice
      And learn to spell.

    37. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think I've had any in 20 years, but doritos are mostly flavored corn chips.

    38. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems to me the 'hacker' missed the one important lesson: you shouldn't have put on the extra weight in the first place.

      You don't need to eat well, you don't need to exercise either - both are healthy for sure, but neither are a necessity in avoiding becoming fat. All you need to do is to stop putting the frigging food in your mouth when you've had enough.

    39. Re:Common sense by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      I'm glad you posted that because vigorous activity makes me hungry and I have never heard that exercise suppresses appetite.

      Now that I'm older stress does not have as dramatic an effect on my weight but when I was younger it would cause me to loose weight. It annoys my wife but I am the guy that can eat way more than you think he should and still not gain weight.

    40. Re:Common sense by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      naturally a muscular heavy build

      Or, you know, if you lift, bro.

    41. Re:Common sense by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I don't weigh 150 lbs, and I didn't say per day.

    42. Re:Common sense by _DangerousDwarf · · Score: 1

      I highly doubt you burn 1000 cals/hour running. I run sub 8 minute miles for three hours and will burn 2500 cals.

    43. Re:Common sense by _DangerousDwarf · · Score: 1

      I also call bs on that burn rate. I am a Boston Qualifier, and I don't burn that many calories an hour while running. That is a very fast pace.

    44. Re:Common sense by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      So you burn over 800 calories an hour running? Why is it you think I don't? I bet we're using the same calculators and you weigh a bit less than I do.

      I think I struck a Slashdot nerve. You're the third person so far to reply with a weirdly aggressive and poorly researched message.

    45. Re:Common sense by losfromla · · Score: 1

      Perhaps not but you strongly implied it by tying it to "40% of the daily recommended intake". So it is 1000 calories over a week? A month? A year? You were implying that you burn off almost half of your recommended daily intake by running that many calories off in a day. So, which is it? How much are you exercising away per day? Enquiring minds want to know.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    46. Re:Common sense by _DangerousDwarf · · Score: 1

      In fact, it is likely not 2500 cals in 3 hours either. If I used a HRM strap, it would likely be lower then 800/hr, and HRM would still likely overestimate. But mostly I responded as "Plus if you do a little bit more intense exercise than strolling, it's a little more of a factor. I burn around 1000 calories for an hour of running." seemed extremely flippant. There is a pretty large distance between strolling and 16 cal/min exertion which is really only attainable by the highly trained endurance athletes, especially to hold for full hour. That is a pretty small segment of the population.

    47. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously, don't eat processed foods, rather than being a pedantic dipshit about it.

    48. Re:Common sense by jblues · · Score: 1

      But the kind of processing is pretty low-tech. We're not talking gasoline induced sub-atomic ion exchange of Monsato People's-Gruel (R). Just the addition of an ingredient that will encourage the right kind of "live" bacteria, yeasts, moulds that are good for people. In fact fermentation is one of the oldest food processing techniques. Lacto fermentation is great, not just for dairy foods but for vegetables as well. In fact a (correctly) fermented cabbage is *more* nutritious than the original raw cabbage. I recently discovered "live" Kim-Chi (fermented cabbage) at the super market. Now I'm hyped to do my own home fermentation. I'm looking at something like Pickl-it jars, which should give predictable results and, since I don't need to do a whole winter's worth (I live in a tropical climate) will be more convenient on a modern schedule than burying buckets of cabbage. Apparently traditionally fermented vegetables go through a few stages (yeasts, aerobic bacteria, etc) before the anaerobic lacto-bacillus strains set in. This gives some good flavors, but is easy to mess up. Pickl-it jars apparently encourage going straight to the anaerobic lacto-baciluss stage.

      --
      If it acquires resources on instantiation like a duck, then its a shared_ptr<Duck>
    49. Re:Common sense by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      I am not sure ...

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    50. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eat Well (no sugar!)
      Eat quantity you need
      Exercise

    51. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yep. People love to act like this is all cut-and-dried and that laziness is the only way to fail. These discussions basically take it for granted that we can usefully pretend that metabolism is basically constant and uniform with the exceptions of teeny tiny transients induced by eating and exercise and the occasional weirdo with a vanishingly rare medical condition. In reality, metabolism is an enormously dynamic system with many input variables, genetic variation related to metabolism is widespread and complex, and medical conditions with considerable metabolic consequences are -- in aggregate -- probably more common than not*. The old joke about physicists goes "we have a solution, but it only works for a spherical cow in a vacuum"; self-styled health coaches have "we have a solution, but it only works for a perfectly healthy twentysomething whose metabolism matches up exactly with all the calorie reference charts".

      *: People have a hard time believing this, because we implicitly equate "healthy" with "normal" all over the place. The CDC has consistently found that about 20% of the US population has an officially-classifiable disability. That number mostly counts fairly major stuff like cancer, heart problems, severe mental illness, rheumatoid arthritis, diabetes, lung diseases, and chronic back/spine problems. In addition to those, there are other not-vanishingly-rare conditions that are not routinely classified as disabilities, such as hypothyroidism, PCOS, sleep disorders, and a whole raft of other things that will throw your system out of whack in various ways. The kicker is that the medical establishment kind of sucks at catching these conditions unless/until they become severe, because diagnosis is based more on stereotypes than on science.

    52. Re:Common sense by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Where are you buying wheat Doritos? They are made of corn.

    53. Re:Common sense by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      I'm just puzzled that I actually ate a downmod for that post. It's amazing what people take personally on the internet these days.

    54. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And sugar is just processed sugar cane (or sugar beets), which was also alive.

      The key word was processed.

    55. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't eat anything that wasn't alive.

      For instance, there is not a creature called a "Dorito"

      Careful with that poorly conceived analogy. Doritos are made of corn, and corn was certainly alive. Bacon was also alive and has a much higher chance of killing you than Doritos. Basically, there are a lot of living things that are nutritionally bad for you. Yes, processed foods are generally bad, but they're not the only ones by a long shot.

    56. Re:Common sense by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

      Actually, this is not true.

      Exercise is good for the body and all, but if you want to lose weight, you should not increase your exercise. This is because exercise will increase your appetite and you will, statistically speaking, wind up eating more in extra food than you would burn off through the increased exercise.

      If you want to improve your physical fitness, then by all means exercise. But weight loss does not happen in the gym in the real world. It happens in the kitchen.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    57. Re:Common sense by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Weight lifting is one of the lowest energy burning activities you can do as "sports". Or any other kind of "gym" exercises.

      Sorry ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    58. Re:Common sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More muscle mass means you burn more calories even while resting. It's no secret that bodybuilders burn calories like crazy, that's why they can eat so much.

  5. Eat less than you burn by Thanshin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How fricking complicated is it to eat less than you burn?

    Calories and Macros

    Basic Terminology
    1/ BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate): The amount of calories you need to consume to maintain if you were comatose (base level).
    2/ NEAT (Non-Exercise Associated Thermogenesis): The calorie of daily activity that is NOT exercise (eg: washing, walking, talking, shopping, working). ie: INCIDENTAL EXERCISE! It is something that everyone has a good amount of control over.
    3/ EAT (Exercise Associated Thermogenesis): The calorie requirements associated with planned exercise. Unless someone is doing a whole heap of exercise (eg: two or more hrs training a day) it usually doesn't add a stack of calories to your requirements (30 minutes of 'elliptical training' isn't going to burn 6000 cals)
    4/ TEF (Thermic effect of feeding): The calorie expenditure associated with eating. This is NOT dependent on MEAL FREQUENCY. It is a % of TOTAL CALORIES CONSUMED (and 15% of 3 x 600 cal meals is the same as 15% of 6 x 300 cal meals). It varies according to MACRONUTRIENT and FIBER content. For most mixed diets, it is something around 15%. Protein is higher (up to 25%), carbs are variable (between 5-25%), and fats are low (usually less than 5%). So more protein, more carbs, and more fiber = HIGHER TEF. More FAT = LOWER TEF.
    5/ TEE (Total Energy Expenditure): The total calories you require. It = sum of the above (BMR + NEAT + EAT + TEF).
    To make things simple, NEAT + EAT + TEF is often just calculated through a daily ACTIVITY FACTOR.

    How much do I Need?
    A multitude of things impact MAINTENANCE calorie needs.
    - Age & sex (males generally need > females)
    - Total weight & lean mass (more lean mass = more needed)
    - Physiological status (eg: sick or injured, pregnant, growth')
    - Hormones
    - Exercise level (more activity = more needed)
    - Daily activity level (more activity = more needed)
    - Diet (that is - macronutrient intake)

    In order to calculate your requirements the most accurate measure is Calorimetry [the measure of 'chemical reactions' in your body & the heat produced by these reactions], either directly (via a calorimeter where the heat you produce is measured) or indirectly (eg: HOOD studies where they monitor how much oxygen you use/ carbon dioxide and nitrogen you excrete over a given time). But these are completely impractical for most people & we rely on pre-set formula to calculate our needs.

    Estimating Requirements
    The simplest method uses a standard 'calories per unit weight (usually kgs)'. They calculate a TOTAL CAL REQUIREMENT (TEE). That means you DO NOT need to x by an ACTIVITY FACTOR. They are:
    - 26 to 30 kcals/kg/day for normal, healthy individuals with sedentary lifestyles doing little physical activity [12.0-14 kcal/pound]
    - 31 to 37 kcal/kg/day for those involved in light to moderate activity 3-5 x a week with moderately active lifestyles [14-16 kcal/ pound]
    - 38 to 40 kcals/kg/day for those involved in vigorous activity and highly active jobs [16-18 kcal/ pound].
    For those involved in HEAVY training (eg: athletes) - the demand is greater:
    - 41 to 50 kcals/kg/day for those involved in moderate to heavy training (for example: 15-20 hrs/ week training) [18.5-22 kcal/ pound]
    - 50 or above kcals/kg/day for those involved in heavy to extreme training [> 22 kcal/ pound]

    THEN - There are also other formula which calculate BMR. For these you then ADD AN ACTIVITY FACTOR TO REACH TEE. These are:
    1/ Harris-Benedict formula: Very inaccurate & derived from studies on LEAN, YOUNG, ACTIVE males in 1919. Notorious for OVERESTIMATING requirements, especially in the overweight. DON'T USE IT!
    MEN: BMR = 66 + [13.7 x weight (kg)] + [5 x height (cm)] - [6.76 x age (years)]
    WOMEN: BMR = 655 + [9.6 x weight (kg)] + [1.8 x height (cm)] - [4.7 x age (years)]

    2/Mifflin-St Jeor: Developed in the 1990s and more realistic in todays settings. Still doesn't cons

    1. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      "How fricking complicated is it to eat less than you burn?"

      Followed by a huge, complicated, wall of text.

      I suppose it's THAT complicated!

      Here's an easier alternative:
      1. Eliminate all sugar (read labels... do not eat anything over 2g of sugar)
      2. Eat vegetables (brussel sprouts, celery, broccoli, peppers, onions)
      3. Eat fish
      4. Eat nuts
      5. Eat salad
      6. Eggs and bacon for breakfast
      7. Drink lots of water, and eat salt as you crave it

      Fat is good, protein is good, carbs should be avoided, but if you must eat carbs, eat fresh potatoes.

    2. Re:Eat less than you burn by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 2

      How fricking complicated is it to eat less than you burn?

      Like I stated above, having an office job and not exercising, one would only need ~1300 calories for equilibrium. Eating under that, let alone 300-500 calories less than that to start shedding fat is not only HARD, it may be damn well impossible for some people

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    3. Re:Eat less than you burn by itzly · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How fricking complicated is it to eat less than you burn?

      It's not complicated, just hard.

    4. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How fricking complicated is it to eat less than you burn?
       
      Obviously it is more involved or you wouldn't have felt the need to go into a damn-near novel length dissertation that included (GASP!) numbers and talk about such concepts as protein intake...
       
      Seriously, if you think you have it all figured out with a simple sentence then good on you. Some of us know that it's not as simple as taking in less than you expel. The point isn't just to lose weight but to do it in a controlled fashion that also provides good nutrition. If it was as simple as taking in less and putting out more then most people would just lose weight by drinking water and eating celery. Any lunkhead knows that isn't going to work. So, no, it's not that simple and you know that.
       
      Now stop being a snide, rude jackass about it.

    5. Re:Eat less than you burn by Thanshin · · Score: 0, Troll

      "How fricking complicated is it to eat less than you burn?"

      Followed by a huge, complicated, wall of text.

      I suppose it's THAT complicated!

      You do know this is Slashdot, right?

      If ten minutes of reading, or simple formula, scare you, ... Well, I guess, yeah, eliminate all sugar and eat salt as you crave it. Good luck.

    6. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Carbs are bad?

      White rice is good! The average Asian eats 25lbs of white rice a month. Most Asian's are slim even with that huge intake of carbs.

      Personally, I am eating 9lbs a rice a month and have lost over 100lbs. So, white rice is great!

    7. Re:Eat less than you burn by kamapuaa · · Score: 1

      So you weigh only like 45 kg/100 lbs? Do you even lift, bro?

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    8. Re:Eat less than you burn by jones_supa · · Score: 2

      Just put a quick summary in the beginning. :) There's so much information surrounding us these days that it's hard to judge whether reading all of your text is worth it.

    9. Re:Eat less than you burn by avandesande · · Score: 2

      I've been on low carb for more than two years now and lost 40# without having to count calories. I am not going to say it would work for anyone but as I got older my blood sugar would swing wildly after eat starch or sugar- now I don't have to worry about it.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    10. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you just ignore this wall of shit and use your fucking brain, like every other animal on the planet does.

    11. Re:Eat less than you burn by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 2

      Ugh, one of the things that I hate about BMR calculations is that they always seem to think that you're going to have an active job AND be an athlete when you get to high activity levels. I've got a sedentary job, but I'm an active competitive swimmer.

      And then not all exercise is created equal. I burn more calories training 6 hours a week as a swimmer than I did training 10-12 hours a week as a cyclist. Part of it is just biomechanical efficiency--bikes make everything easier--but there's actually an effect of being in cold water 6 hours a week that's not insignificant. Not to mention I have more muscles being active while swimming than when I'm cycling.

      But I guess at this point, I'm actually beyond using these estimators. I've got good direct estimates of power and calories while I'm on the bike, and my swimming is just more than that. Now I just eat to keep up and stop feeling hungry.

    12. Re:Eat less than you burn by blue9steel · · Score: 1

      How fricking complicated is it to eat less than you burn?

      Somewhat complicated, for most people this involves calorie tracking. Additionally, if all you do is pure calorie restriction you're going to end up with metabolic syndrome and fail.

    13. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You do know this is Slashdot, right?

      If ten minutes of reading, or simple formula, scare you, ...
       
      Oh Please... Stop acting like Slashdot is a bastion of scientific knowledge. Most dopes around here wouldn't know the answer to a door bell and damn few have any ability to justify their endless inane memes and knee jerk replies based on any amount of hard science knowledge.

    14. Re:Eat less than you burn by Thanshin · · Score: 1

      Like I stated above, having an office job and not exercising, one would only need ~1300 calories for equilibrium.

      Let's see:
      1300 = 370 + (21.6 x LBM) Where LBM = [total weight (kg) x (100 - bodyfat %)]/100

      With an average BF% of about 25%, this gets us :
      (1300 -370) / 21.6 = total weight (kg) x 0.75

      So, you're talking about the "average" 57kg American?

      And, even if that was true, a person that small would need 57~85g of protein and ~57g fat per day, which is 741 kcal per day to which that person could perfectly well add 300 kcal of carbs, some vitamins and minerals.

    15. Re:Eat less than you burn by jedidiah · · Score: 2

      Yup. That's why you need to EXERCISE. Excercise will increase your metabolic rate for about 18 hours afterwards. This will help counteract your body's tendency to go into panic shutdown mode due to lack of food.

      Diet and exercise.

      They go together like a horse and carriage.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    16. Re:Eat less than you burn by CaptainDork · · Score: 2

      Goddam ...

      Tl;dr

      It's way to fucking complicated.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    17. Re:Eat less than you burn by Thanshin · · Score: 1

      It usually isn't so bad, unless you lower the filters to read ACs.

    18. Re:Eat less than you burn by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      I used to eat carbs but the goddam gasoline aftertaste was just too much.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    19. Re:Eat less than you burn by Thanshin · · Score: 1

      In case you are interested, I'll summarize for you.

      A - Calculate daily kcal expenditure [via a formula, for example].
      B - Count how much you must eat :
        B1 - ~1.5g proteins/day * 4kcal per gram of protein.
        B2 - ~1g of fat/day * 9kcal per gram of fat
      C - Decide how much to eat. e.g. : daily expenditure - 500 to lose weight at 500g/week speed.
      D - Calculate carbs by dividing remaining daily kcals/4
      E - Eat those grams of protein, fat and carbs every day.

      Everything else is either details for pro athletes or voodoo shenanigans.

    20. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your wall of text, 12 formulae involving 50 acronyms and contingent on a dozen lifestyle factors is making me hungry.

      Nobody said it was complicated, but your original post is making it so.

      Just because it isn't complicated, doesn't mean its easy.

    21. Re:Eat less than you burn by ripvlan · · Score: 1

      You forgot to carry the "psychology" in the 3rd equation. We all know the basic formula - Less In, More Out.

      I have to run - that bag of potato chips is talking to me and I need to eat them to shut them up.

    22. Re:Eat less than you burn by fuzzyf · · Score: 1

      Actually it is much much more complicated than that.

      I agree that for the most part, the information you wrote is enough.
      But there really are a lot more to metabolism than these simple rules.

      A few simple examples:
      Ketones kan leave the body through breath or bio (wc)
      Insulin can, if not regulated correctly by the body, convert energy to fat, before the body can make use of that energy.
      Thyroxin can prevent energy for being used by muscles.

      And also; are calories really an exact measurment for energy available to the body?
      The answer is no.
      Calories where originaly calculated by burning material and measuring how much heat it produced. Now they just use the amount of fat, carbs and protein and multiply by a set factor for each. With a few adjustments.
      The problem is that the body doesn't actually burn anything, and amount of potential energy in something is not the same as what the body will absorb. We also need a quite a few fatty acids. The body will probably not just convert these neccesary fatty acids as "fuel". Even though they count quite high in calories.

      Things are more complicated than we think, and we have really just scratched the surface on how the body actually work.

      But your advice is still sound.

    23. Re:Eat less than you burn by njnnja · · Score: 2

      Every other animal on this planet eats about as much as it can, whenever it can get it, because it doesn't know when the next meal will come by.

      We evolved to do that too and so our brain (or at least the lizard part of it) is screaming at us to "EAT THAT ALL NOW!!!" and that is the problem.

    24. Re:Eat less than you burn by blue9steel · · Score: 1

      Agreed, though I'd have to specify that it be hypertrophy inducing exercise or you're just making the problem worse.

    25. Re:Eat less than you burn by dywolf · · Score: 1

      Especially if the food is delicious....

      pastrami on rye with sauerkraut, mustard, and swiss.....mmmm
      fettuccini alfredo...
      fresh peaches...

      or my favorite: homemade biscuits
      -Oven at 425
      -2 cups flour
      -1/2 cup butter (stick, chilled/frozen, and cut into small pieces; I actually a cheese grater on the frozen stick, and then re-chill it a few minutes after grating it)
      -1/2 cup Crisco (I use both fats to get the best of both worlds)
      -1 cup milk
      -1 tablespoon sugar
      -1 tablespoon baking powder
      -1 teaspoon salt
      -Mix the dry ingredients (flour, salt, powder, and sugar) together. Add the remaining ingredients (Crisco butter and milk), but mix gently and not too much (work it too hard or long and the butter melts during mixing instead of during baking; you want it to melt during baking as it gives off steam and helps make the biscuits more flaky/airy).
      -Put in oven until tops start browning (the traditional toothpick test works too), which is about 15 minutes in my oven.
      -Higher yields are gotten from straight linear increase of all materials.

      Personally I prefer them in muffin tin format (as opposed to Drop (drop globs of dough on coking tin), or Cut (the traditional round cylinder made by rolling and cutting dough)), and so use a greased muffin tin (brushed Crisco instead of cooking spray), and I gently smoosh dough into each cup almost to the top. Makes 7-8 biscuits this way. I also get a little extra texture/flavor from keeping my fingers covered in flour as I do the smooshing, so the tops get a little extra flakiness from the flour on my fingers.

      Gonna have to make more tonight.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    26. Re:Eat less than you burn by dywolf · · Score: 1

      (why share? because biscuits are a delicious and simple recipe everyone should know, even if you're just feeding yourself)

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    27. Re:Eat less than you burn by rhazz · · Score: 2

      Have to agree with this. One of the biggest difficulties is becoming educated on what (enjoyable) foods you can still eat are. My wife chose to lose 30 lbs prior to having kids, and found a free app that enabled her to know her daily intake just by tracking content and serving sizes and setting goals - it was essentially a free competitor to the Weight Watchers app. The app had a large online database of specific food products along with their exact serving sizes, the only additional thing she needed was a food weight scale (~$30). Everything had a point scale and you were allotted X points per day, with an additional Y points per week if you choose to go out during the week.

      It was frankly amazing to us how much caloric content is in very small amounts of food. One week my wife had done well and still had weekly points, so we decide to get a slice of Pizza Pizza. Of course the pizza slice had a high point cost, but the shocker was that a single serving of the garlic dipping sauce was almost as many points as the slice itself.

      Overall, it worked out for my wife mainly because she enjoyed a variety of raw vegetables and fruits with low calories. Finding low calorie food that you enjoy is probably a significant hurdle for many. It also requires support from those you live with - I personally have a great metabolism and have a terribly high caloric intake which caused many temptations for my wife until I made concessions.

    28. Re:Eat less than you burn by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      I've been on "don't eat convenience foods more than once a week - eat foods where you can identify the food source" for decades, and haven't had weight issues or energy issues. I agree -- as I've aged, my blood sugar reacts more and more to things like icing or pastries, and my body tells me pretty quickly when I'm going out of bounds.

    29. Re:Eat less than you burn by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Wrong type of carbs. You should switch to carborundum.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    30. Re:Eat less than you burn by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 0

      But you do realize that this scheme is only good enough to hold your weight, not to lose any?
      And it does not take into account many modern problems like fiber splitting gut bacteria.
      To lose weight you need a trick to convince your body to start burning your body fat ... calories alone don't do that trick, nor the lack their-off.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    31. Re:Eat less than you burn by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Any effect of excercising beyond repairing damaged muscles and perhaps increasing muscle growth is gone 15 minutes after you stopped excercising.

      No idea where you those ifiotic ideas from ...

      If your body has tendencies towards 'panic shutdown' I suggest a serious health check. Probably a mental one even.

      The idea that something like this even exists is ridiculous.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    32. Re:Eat less than you burn by raynet · · Score: 1

      I've been on low carb diet for just under a year and lost 112lbs and haven't had to do anything else yet, just avoid sugars and carbs. Just get results from the lab and all the tests they took look fine, so the diet is fine that way too. I don't think there is anything that special about eating low carb, it just is fairly difficult to get too many calories per day without carbs.

      --
      - Raynet --> .
    33. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everything but the bacon. It may taste amazing but I don't think bacon is good for anybody.

      The thing about carbs is what always gets me. Carbs should be avoided if you are blood type O or B. A and AB blood types don't benefit from carb reduction. I'm an A and I lost over 80 pounds over two years eating a high-carb diet with moderate exercise. I could have lost it faster but I didn't think it would be healthy. My 80 pound net loss was probably 100 pounds of fat lost and 20 pounds of muscle gained. I'm not just slimmer, I'm healthier and stronger because I'm eating food that agrees with my body. My nutritionist gave me a list of foods to eat/avoid; many of the recommended foods included carbs and I never felt better. I tried low-carb diets twice before seeing a nutritionist and they did nothing for me other than make my blood sugar unstable.

      O and B tend to do better when they consume red meat. A and AB should avoid red meat, and should avoid protein consumption at night. Lemons and black coffee are an A's best friend due to lack of acid in the stomach (as an A, my saliva is pH neutral every time I test it), and they should drink strong lemon water with every meal - especially any with red meat (otherwise it basically rots in the digestive tract). For this reason A and AB do better eating multiple small portions over the course of the day rather than large meals (which require more acid to digest). O and B often have stomach problems due to high acid (which helps them digest red meat). Coffee and anything tomato-based should be avoided by O's and B's.

      A and AB tend to do better with gentle/moderate exercise (walking, yoga), whereas O and B tend to do better with vigorous exercise (crossfit, sprinting). This is the reason O blood type athletes dominate professional sports. I tried a number of intense workouts over the years and I always felt miserable afterwards (even when I was in good shape). My sister is O and she always feels great after doing vigorous exercise (and she responds very well to low-carb diets). If you get a personal trainer, try to find one who shares your blood type - their recommendations will likely end up being more suitable for you.

      I think this is part of the problem with many diets and exercise programs. Most of them seem to be tailored to O and B blood types, and those simply don't work for everyone else. Some of the stuff I hear would work good for A, but it is usually mixed up with stuff that would work for an O or B, so taken together it ends up hardly working at all. Of course, O's are usually outspoken (A's are more often introverts), so I think that's why we hear about the low-carb thing working so much. And yes, blood type affects personality; eastern medicine realized this long ago, which is why job applications in Japan often require that you divulge your blood type.

      Of course calories matter. But what makes up those calories and how the food responds to the enzymes in your blood does make a difference. I didn't believe it until I tried it, and it helped me considerably. I'm at my optimum weight/body fat, my daily headaches and weekly migraines are gone, and I just feel good.

    34. Re:Eat less than you burn by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How fricking complicated is it to eat less than you burn?

      It's way more complicated than you make it out to be. You're offering the very best advice 1983 had to offer.

      Until you factor in the rates of digestion, the enzyme production rate of the individual, the hormone response of the individual, and the freaking liver and pancreas, not to mention the brain which mediates the whole thing, the very best you can offer is an order-of-magnitude estimate. There aren't seven billion different metabolisms out there, but there is at least an n-by-m matrix of them for every variability in the human metabolic system.

      This is why so many people fail even at strict calorie-counting diets. Humans are NOT bomb calorimeters! Say it again and again until it sinks in.

      For Pete's sake, there are leptin-resistent people who can put weight on at 500 calories a day.

      Until we have mastered DNA analysis on this to genotype individuals, cutting out simple and refined carbohydrates is at least a way to claw back the worst of the modern diet, and avoid big swings in the leptin/ghrelin/insulin feedback systems - most people eat because they are hungry.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    35. Re:Eat less than you burn by shemyazaz · · Score: 1

      Also, completely the wrong way to look at it. I'm down 80lbs without significantly lowering my caloric intake. What you eat makes all the difference.

    36. Re:Eat less than you burn by _DangerousDwarf · · Score: 1

      Thank you for bring up some good ol' broscience.

    37. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seen a bunch of fucktards get modded +5 Insightful around here. It is that bad.

    38. Re:Eat less than you burn by onkelonkel · · Score: 1

      "Every other animal" - I don't think so. If you dump a 20 lb bag of dog food on the floor and leave for a week, your dog will eat till it cant move 3 days in a row and then starve for 4 days.

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    39. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to be able to know how to cook those things before you can eat them. And that can be hard to figure out. Everything is easy when you have the right information. Without it, things can be hard.

    40. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Until we have mastered DNA analysis on this to genotype individuals,

      And it's even more complicated than that: humans have a lot of bacteria that help with digestion but don't show up in their DNA. Any meaningful analysis of diet would have to include analyzing them as well.

    41. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly.

      1. No more easy, prepared meals. No more eating out of a box or a bag. No more once a month trips to the grocery store.
      2. Eating vegetables requires washing, cutting, and then cooking them. They also go bad quickly and require weekly trips to the store.
      3. Fish needs to be thawed then cooked, which takes some time, and is expensive.
      4. Which nuts? The ones soaked in oils and covered salt (and sometimes sugar)? Unshelled nuts are a pain to eat and it's getting harder and harder to find naked nuts in the store (yeah, make a joke, I double dare you).
      5. Salad takes time to make (washing and cutting lots of veggies), but you can buy pre-made salads. But watch out for the dressing.
      6. Eggs and bacon? Yum. Hard-boiled scrambled eggs are the best (though a real pain to peel).
      7. Yup, water is good. Water is best. Drink it from different sources to get different tastes.

    42. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Eliminate all sugar (read labels... do not eat anything over 2g of sugar)

      No more milk?

    43. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just FYI, the protein requirement for a sedentary-to-moderately-active individual is 0,8 to 1,0 grams per day per kg. Hence 46-57 grams for the example. Your numbers are on the high side.

      Also, the WHO recommendation for protein intake is between 10 and 20 per cent of energy intake. Most western countries end up at 16-18 % IIRC.

      46 - 57 grams of protein would then mean 1150 - 1430 kcal a day at 18 %.

    44. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > For Pete's sake, there are leptin-resistent people who can put weight on at 500 calories a day.

      That's not quite how leptin works - it's not a magic energy-from-nowhere substance.

      To lose weight, it is a necessary condition that you consume less than you burn / excrete. It's that simple.

      What is complicated is achieving that. Some people find this very difficult. People enjoy varying degrees of effectiveness of different diets. Some people have leptin resistance, which makes them feel hungry when they shouldn't be.

      But to lose weight, you still have to have less in than goes out. Or surgery.

    45. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "How fricking complicated is it to eat less than you burn?"

      Followed by a huge, complicated, wall of text.

      I suppose it's THAT complicated!

      Here's an easier alternative:
      1. Eliminate all sugar (read labels... do not eat anything over 2g of sugar)
      2. Eat vegetables (brussel sprouts, celery, broccoli, peppers, onions)
      3. Eat fish
      4. Eat nuts
      5. Eat salad
      6. Eggs and bacon for breakfast
      7. Drink lots of water, and eat salt as you crave it

      Fat is good, protein is good, carbs should be avoided, but if you must eat carbs, eat fresh potatoes.

      Yours is too complicated. It's comes down to this: Calories IN and Calories Out. EAT WHATEVERY YOU FUCKING WANT TO!
      I lost 30lbs but still drank beer and ate ice cream every night with no exercise. Just kept my calories below 2000/day. Simple.

    46. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For Pete's sake, there are leptin-resistent people who can put weight on at 500 calories a day.

      Are you an idoit? leptin-resistent means you are constatntly hungry and cant stop eating. It is humanly biologically impossible to put on weight with only 500 calories a day.

    47. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All those things you mentioned could be summed up to a vector that maybe influences the overall picture maybe 2-5%. The food equivalent of a handful of crackers per day. Practically noise. Sure there are some statistical outliers but they're more medical curiosities than anything else.

      Humans are the apex of billions of years of evolution where THE primary selection pressure was energy intake. We're extremely efficient as digesting, then storing food energy (Something like 95% - Which is fucking amazing)

      You can whinge all day about optimizing your diet but for 99.99% of people in 99.99% of circumstances a basic calories in calories out diet/exercise regime over a long period of time is the only way to bring meaningful results. (Any diet not committed to for less than 12 months effectively meaningless. Every study ever conducted shows this)

      It's not more complicated than you think. Evolution will make a fool out of you every time if you think otherwise.

    48. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3. Eat fish

      WHOA BRAKES!!!

      That one needs some expansion unless you want mercury poisoning. Eat more freshwater fish, or fish known to be low in mercury content. Mercury poisoning is on the rise in many countries because of the rise in people eating "healthier" by eating more fish.

      EPA Mercury and Fish/Shellfish page

    49. Re:Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For Pete's sake, there are leptin-resistent people who can put weight on at 500 calories a day.

      Citation needed.

    50. Re:Eat less than you burn by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

      By "Fresh potatoes" do you mean raw potatoes? I thought raw potatoes would not taste good, but I guess I've never tried them.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    51. Re: Eat less than you burn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah the land of slashdot where Many people computer skills imply general intelligence so sophisticated background training and theory in other fields is not required to run your mouth

  6. Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by QuietLagoon · · Score: 5, Insightful
    If you "go on a diet" you are defeated before you even start.

    .
    If you want to lose weight, you have to go into the process with the goal of changing your lifestyle permanently, otherwise the weight will return when you finish the diet.

    Go into the weight loss process with the right mindset - a permanent change of what and how you eat, along with any changes in your activity regimen.

    The reason most people regain the wieght they lose on a diet is that they view a diet as something temporary, which it is.

    Don't go on a diet (Hacker's Diet or otherwise), but do make a permanent change to your lifestyle.

    1. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by itzly · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't go on a diet (Hacker's Diet or otherwise), but do make a permanent change to your lifestyle.

      In other words: go on a diet, but never quit.

    2. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by dave562 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is spot on and should be modded up.

      Enter personal anecdote...

      About fifteen years ago I was starting to struggle with sciatic nerve pain due to years spent driving a car with a heavy racing clutch in traffic, and a lack of exercise. I considered my options and decided to start practicing tai chi. I caught a bit of a break and found a legitimate sifu. After a couple years of tai chi, I started training kung fu as well. It has been over a decade and I train on a daily basis. I can eat whatever I want because I burn it off.

      None the less, it is a struggle. Despite all of the benefits, there are plenty of days when I would rather go home after work and play video games instead of heading over to the temple to train or teach classes. I still have not overcome the "exercise sucks" mentality. Sure, the endorphins are great and being able to defend myself is great, and have a strong and healthy body is great... but it is still work for me, not fun.

    3. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

      Yup, go on a diet and never go off that diet, i.e., change your lifestyle. :)

    4. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then put a bullet in your head when you realize you'll have to avoid eating the things you love for the rest of your life, just to have the slim, ripped abs that chicks dig.

    5. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would add that even going into it with the goal of "lose weight" is a recipe for it to fail in the long term. It's better to aim to improve your overall health and accept your body for what it is. Then, weight loss is likely to follow as a natural consequence. Even if you don't lose weight, then you probably still reaped some of the health benefits, whereas if you're only in it for the weight loss, you might even harm your health by going about it the wrong way, or lose faith when it doesn't go to plan. Too many people approach weight loss as a way to improve their appearance, or as "health" in and of itself, when really it's just a symptom of more fundamental healthiness.

      Aim for health, nothing more, nothing less.

    6. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      About fifteen years ago I was starting to struggle with sciatic nerve pain due to years spent driving a car with a heavy racing clutch in traffic, and a lack of exercise.

      Wow, nice to hear someone in a similar situation. I also have sciatic pain (thankly no slipped discs or serious stuff like that) due to too much sitting on my ass. However it's now getting better thanks to increased exercise.

      I surely have walked and bicycled aplenty, but my abs and back muscles are garbage.

    7. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by rhazz · · Score: 1

      So much this. When my wife started her diet her weight was stable at ideal + 30lbs. Since her weight was stable in her current lifestyle she thought that after the weight loss she could go back what to her usual intake was and be stable there. This seemed an obvious error to me but I was at a loss to explain it.

    8. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by jdavidb · · Score: 1

      Don't go on a diet (Hacker's Diet or otherwise), but do make a permanent change to your lifestyle.

      The Hacker's Diet is a permanent change in lifestyle. People don't always use the word "diet" to mean a temporary change. There are many diets that are permanent changes in lifestyle, and the word "diet" also has a technical definition in which it means what an organism eats - in that sense, everyone has a diet.

      For those of us who do not always use the word "diet" to mean a temporary change, it is annoying to try to talk about a permanent change in diet and be corrected and contradicted by those who use the word diet to mean only a temporary change.

    9. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      not really: diet implies that you're eating specific groups of foods and avoiding others. What's really needed is a lifestyle change that changes the way you approach your day -- when you eat, how you move around, what the default kinds of foods are you choose, how you prepare them.

      Sometimes all that's really needed to help you lose weight is to start the day with a heavy breakfast full of slow-burning carbs. Or for others, it might be to go with a light fruit and veg breakfast and a regularly scheduled large lunch, and increase your water intake throughout the day.

      Take the time to debug your lifestyle and see what changes work. Just fixing one element doesn't mean that your entire lifestyle is going to improve, just like fixing one software bug doesn't mean the program is suddenly going to work perfectly. Iterate and improve :)

    10. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      The difference is between "diet" and "a diet". But I think the point that changing your diet misses is that changing your diet without changing your lifestyle to match won't work -- unless it's just a case that your diet needs to adjust to fit the rest of your lifestyle.

      But with those of us who spend 12+ hours seated each day, changing diet isn't going to be enough to improve health.

    11. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by dave562 · · Score: 1

      Mine still flairs up from time to time, but only when I slack off and stop exercising. It is definitely manageable.

      I tried the whole "rest and pain killers" routine and that just made it worse. I am fully convinced that the only way to deal with sciatic nerve pain is with exercise / stretching.

    12. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you're lucky in one regard—I also have still not overcome the "exercise sucks" mentality (though like you, I do it), but unlike you, I have never felt... whatever it is people feel from endorphins. Whenever I hear people talk about the "runner's high," or a "workout high," I just get downright jealous.

    13. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by AttillaTheNun · · Score: 1

      A lifestyle hack, essentially

    14. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I still have not overcome the "exercise sucks" mentality.

      What is your goal?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    15. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by dave562 · · Score: 1

      Right now I do not have a well formed goal in mind. My initial goal was to relieve the sciatic nerve pain. Then it was to learn kung fu. I have pretty much plateaued and am trying to get over the hump, but lack the motivation or goal to do so. Right now I am on auto-pilot, just training seven to eight hours a week and working to refine the techniques and skills that I have. Teaching a few classes a week helps too because I enjoy helping others, but I am definitely stuck in a rut with my own training.

    16. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Right now I do not have a well formed goal in mind.

      Work on this, the goal will give you focus. Try to find something you can work towards. For example, I was kind of running every once in a while, making vague attempts to get better, faster. Then I decided, "my goal is to be able to run to the gym instead of drive there." Suddenly it was like turbo-charging my desire to go run....because I actually had a reason to do it. Progress went so much faster.

      btw it sounds like you've already done amazing things, getting rid of your sciatic nerve pain and learning kung fu.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    17. Re:Not a diet, but a lifestyle change by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Your basal metabolic weight is higher the more you weigh. She was at equilibrium at ideal + 30lbs. It takes energy expenditure to keep even fat cells alive (somewhere around 5-10 calories per lb of body fat). So once you lose those 30lbs., your BMR has decreased by 150-300 calories per day. Eating more than your BMR, of course means you gain weight. Eating less than the BMR will lose weight.

  7. missed that by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    "Techies like us are at increased risk because of our sedentary lifestyles."
    Um, which demographic plays Dance Dance Revolution again? Slight oversight there. That's why I'm still so skinny.

    1. Re:missed that by godrik · · Score: 1

      That's right, I forgot dance dance revolution. There used to be a mode of the game that counts the number of calories that you burn.

      Thought, you have to play a lot of DDR before it makes a difference.

  8. 30lb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that is only 13.61kg, that is almost nothing.

  9. Amazing post by kamapuaa · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wow! The guy ate less calories, and he lost weight!

    --
    Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    1. Re:Amazing post by nucrash · · Score: 1

      Apparently you missed the part where he worked out as well.

      I think the thing that many of us have trouble with is wanting to change the overall processes to how we live. Sure, I can live without a computer for a day, but that second day I am going to want to have a all day gaming session.

      Strangely enough, I seem to be open to some of these changes now that I am older. I don't care to game as much anymore and I do enjoy going for a walk every night when the weather doesn't completely suck.

      --
      Place something witty here
    2. Re:Amazing post by kamapuaa · · Score: 2

      True, I was simplifying. But basically he just said he ate less and exercised. Why would this be a hack? It's just common sense. A hack implies some kind of clever nerdy invention.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    3. Re:Amazing post by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      "Working out" really burns very little in terms of energy unless you are overdoing it like Arnold Schwarzenneger. You aren't going to get a sufficient calorie deficit just from exercise.

      The main value of exercise is sabotaging your body's starvation response.

      Otherwise, your body will just adapt to the famine. That's what it is designed to do.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    4. Re:Amazing post by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Working out is beneficial for muscle toning and strengthening the heart and increasing oxygen intake, but it's not effecient at all for losing weight.

      In fact, heavy exercise can have the opposite effect. Most of us work up an appetite and gorge shortly after a hard workout.

      The body says, "Yo ... if you gonna be working this hard, let's get some fuel."

      Weight loss is a matter of eating fewer calories. That's all.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    5. Re:Amazing post by nealric · · Score: 1

      Yes and no. If you get very little exercise, it's going to be extremely difficult to have the self control required to eat few enough calories to not be overweight. Most people will be hungry all the time doing that, even with a high fiber/protein diet. On top of that, the end result of trying to lose weight by diet alone will be someone who is "skinny fat" with very little muscle mass. Once you build significant muscle mass, it becomes a lot easier to keep away body fat, as your basal metabolic rate is higher and you can eat many more calories without consuming a surplus.

    6. Re:Amazing post by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Citation, please.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    7. Re:Amazing post by jabuzz · · Score: 2

      Show me the obese Tour de France cyclist? These guys consume around 10,000 calories a day. The only and I repeat ONLY way these guys are not obese is because they are exercising. Sure this is an extreme example but the point is that even at 10,000 calories a day sufficient exercise will burn it all off, and myths about exercise and weight loss are proved false.

      The exercising does nothing for weight loss is an excuse for lazy obese people not to exercise.

    8. Re:Amazing post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You aren't going to get a sufficient calorie deficit just from exercise.
       
      I agree that weight loss shouldn't be the primary goal of exercise and I also agree that creating a caloric deficit by exercise alone isn't going to cut it for most people who have real weight issues. That aside, to act like knowing and using the burn rate from normal exercise isn't an issue is plainly wrong. Someone who's putting on weight at a rate of 2-3 pounds a month can easily halt or even reverse this trend through a half an hour of moderate cardio a day with some basic resistance exercises twice a week.
       
      You don't need to train for a marathon to offset a bit of excess.

    9. Re:Amazing post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Composite lifts (dead lift, squat, bench) done properly will do wonders thermogetically. Most of the calories you will burn is from the recovery during the 47 hours per two days you're not lifting. Building muscle will make you burn fat with a decent diet. You probably will even increase your food intake and still lose weight

      Check out Starting Strength by Mark Rippetoe for using weights effectively.

    10. Re:Amazing post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this is how fat people rationalize not working out

    11. Re:Amazing post by CaptainDork · · Score: 0

      Reach much?

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    12. Re:Amazing post by nealric · · Score: 1

      Here's an NIH funded study that touches on the topic: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu...

      But there is a metric TON of bad diet and fitness research out there. It's mind boggling how many studies use slow walking as "exercise" and think "weight training" involves nothing more than a leg lift machine. It also seems like the vast majority work with "sedentary" subjects and follow them for a few weeks before pronouncing the study "done". Here's a critique of one such study that compared cardio to strength training: http://www.builtlean.com/2013/...

    13. Re:Amazing post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Citation, please.

      Ask any US Olympic athlete. Here is one link of many

      http://www.bustle.com/articles/13183-these-6-olympic-athletes-share-their-diet-exercise-and-relaxation-regimens

    14. Re:Amazing post by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Those guys are not "excercising" they are doing 12h a day heavy work.

      What is so difficult to grasp? They burn 10.000 kcal? So, how much is that per hour 'training' or 'work'? Tgey are profis, you know?

      They burn 833kcal per hour.

      So, mate, if you want to do burn an extra 1kcal per day, or to make it easier to calculate: ~1600kcal, you need to excercise like a Tour de France cyclist for two hours: every day

      And that does not even mean you burn 1600 of yoir own fat. On top of that you are not in the mental / health / shape situation to even come close to burn that much: because you are NOT a Tour de France cyclist If YOU try to excersise as hard as you can (right now, considering your shape) you would not even manage to burn 500kcal per hour. In other words: if you would work as hard as physically possible for you 16h a day, you would perhaps burn 4000kcal, perhaps 4500 ...

      The exercising does nothing for weight loss is an excuse for lazy obese people not to exercise. Quite the contrary. Posts like yours show that you have not the simplest of the math skills (doing a rough divison in your mind, or pulling out a pocket calculator) to even comprehend what nonsense you write.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    15. Re:Amazing post by beanpoppa · · Score: 1

      It's not a myth. The problem is someone who is consuming 2500-3000 calories a day will be on a slow weight gain trend with no exercise. When they start exercising, and are now burning 500 calories a day, they would otherwise start to lose weight. But often, the mentality is that they want to reward themselves for their exercise, and have a an extra helping at dinner, and/or a nice desert, and that extra beer. And now they've compensated or exceeded that 500 calories that they burned, and wonder why they haven't lost any weight.

      I lost 40 pounds a few years ago simply by cutting my calories. I consumed half of what I would normally eat. If I would normally have a bagel at breakfast, I ate half a bagel. If I was going to have pizza for dinner, I would have 1 slice, instead of the 2 or 3 slices that I would normally eat. It took 3 months, but I lost the weight with no exercise. After I took the weight off, I decided I wanted to eat again because I like it, so now I run 20 miles a week, and have gone back (mostly) to the same level of eating I was at before.

    16. Re:Amazing post by Kjella · · Score: 2

      That they need to eat 10,000 calories a day to sustain them doesn't mean they could eat 2000 kcal and net a -8000 loss. The most strenuous one day event I've done burns 5-6000 kcal, anything less than 3-4000 kcal in and you're likely to run into a proverbial brick wall. It's common to try overdoing it on exercise while cutting the intake and the result is a body with no power at all, that engine needs fuel to work and pure body fat won't do.

      But over to the obese people, when I started out I could do maybe 350-400 kcal/hour and I'd probably not last the full hour. And the body feels like total shit afterwards, it's real easy to end up with excessive strain due to weight on muscles and joints that aren't used to it. It's almost like a U-curve, if you're fat and don't strain your body you're pretty comfy. If you're healthy and exercise you're comfy. But in the middle is a rather ugly place. So you come home, feel bloody miserable but hey you exercised and did good so you can give yourself a little bonus right? Turns out the kind of bonus you need on your high-sugar, high-fat diet pretty much negates any calorie benefit.

      If you don't start with your intake you'll never get anywhere. Exercise is a nice accelerator, but it's really, really hard to counteract a +500 kcal intake with exercise. And that's not particularly much soda, snacks, sweets and junk food.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    17. Re:Amazing post by _DangerousDwarf · · Score: 1

      Bull. There is very little difference between the calories to maintain a pound of fat, and a calorie to maintain a pound of muscle. I forget the exact amount, but is is somewhere around 7 calories a day difference. So losing 10 pounds of body fat, and gaining 10 pounds of muscle might give you a BMR difference of 40 cals a day. Big whoop (in terms of bmr) Please don't quote the 50 cals/day value to me.

    18. Re:Amazing post by _DangerousDwarf · · Score: 1

      To quote on a post you made below, citation please.

    19. Re:Amazing post by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Why didn't you at least look?

      The key to weight loss is to consume fewer calories than you burn. For most people, it's possible to lower their calorie intake to a greater degree than it is to burn more calories through increased exercise. That's why cutting calories through dieting is generally more effective for weight loss. But doing both — cutting calories and exercising — can help give you the weight-loss edge. Exercise can help burn even more calories than just dieting.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    20. Re:Amazing post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Working out" really burns very little in terms of energy unless you are overdoing it like Arnold Schwarzenneger. You aren't going to get a sufficient calorie deficit just from exercise.

      The main value of exercise is sabotaging your body's starvation response.

      Otherwise, your body will just adapt to the famine. That's what it is designed to do.

      Not true. If you have a gym nearby (or space in your non-urban home) you can use a stationary bike. Hit it hard* for an hour and you'll burn 500-1000 calories, less if you are in terrible shape to start, but a few weeks of daily exercise should let you get from ~10mph up to 13-15 mph on average for the whole hour.

      If you are 200#, that burns ~600cals an hour. Do it six days a week and that's a pound a week, 50#/year, with no other diet changes. Not coincidentally, that's what I lose a week when I stick to it, so long as I don't "reward" myself with 4k cal meals.

      * hard as in you are dripping sweaty, drinking water and just barely able to keep up the pace.

    21. Re:Amazing post by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Show me the obese Tour de France cyclist? These guys consume around 10,000 calories a day.

      I'd rather not take the drugs that they do, even if it let me eat more.

    22. Re:Amazing post by _DangerousDwarf · · Score: 1

      I was referring to your assertion that exercise makes _most_ people hungry.

    23. Re:Amazing post by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      I am puzzled that you are using the Internet and have to get other people to do this for you.

      Google is a search engine (there are others, but the thinking process is similar), and here's how I do it.

      I'm thinking:

      - mayo clinic (they know medical stuff)
      - exercise (that's the scope we want)
      - makes people hungry (what we are talking about)

      Click on the first link:

      Exercise, hunger and weight loss - Mayo Clinic

      I think you're just trolling, but that's how it's done and stuff.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    24. Re:Amazing post by nealric · · Score: 1

      Even accepting your figures at face value, there's more to it than that. Gaining lean muscle mass also includes the calories required to build and maintain that mass (training requires regeneration of damaged tissues). Your muscle gains will go away if you don't train, but the fat stays there if you just keep eating. Here's a helpful calorie counter based on scientific research (it even lets you choose which research model you use): http://scoobysworkshop.com/cal...

  10. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 4, Insightful

    East less calories? Gotcha.

    The problem isn't so much "too many calories" consumed, but that the sedimentary lifestyle people are accustomed doesn't require even close to the 2000 calorie "standard diet". If you drive to work, sit behind a desk all day, go home and even do mundane, unimpactful chores, like vacuuming and wiping things down, and average person would be lucky to need maybe 1200-1300 calories as their TDEE (Total Daily Energy Expenditure). Even drinking nothing but water, and consuming mostly calorie empty foods like lettuce/salad, you still need your macronutrients, which when adding carbs and fat now will take you to your quite low TDEE with very little food/effort.

    --

    "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
  11. dyson mod by xombo · · Score: 4, Funny

    Was I the only one who went to his site hoping for an Arduino mod for my dyson that will turn it into a liposuction machine?

  12. Re:On the front page now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Proper exercise can give you much more brain power to deal with all sorts of cool nerd stuff that requires deep thinking. You will just be able to think more clearly.

  13. Hack your coffee cup ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    ... by heating it in hot water before pressing the Brew button on your Keurig 2.0.

    Cold cups suck the heat out of your Sumatra dark roast just like TFS/TFA sucks time out of your day..

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    1. Re:Hack your coffee cup ... by CastrTroy · · Score: 2

      Stop using Keurig. I had one, and while I really liked the ease with which I could make a coffee, I decided it was too expensive for the quality of coffee produced. Also, I'm not a big fan of the amount of waste it produces. I got an Aeropress and I'm very happy with my coffee now. It's cheap, tastes good, and produces no garbage. I can use any coffee I want. Clean up is a little more time consuming than with Keurig, but it doesn't really take that much effort.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:Hack your coffee cup ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Clean up is a little more time consuming ...

      So it has the added benefit of exercise.

      Well played.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  14. Here's the scientific evidence by nbauman · · Score: 5, Informative

    I realize that randomized, controlled trials in peer-reviewed journals may not be the whole, final truth, but this is a nice catalog of everything that you can argue over.

    http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/1...
    Myths, Presumptions, and Facts about Obesity
    Krista Casazza, Kevin R. Fontaine, Arne Astrup, et al.
    N Engl J Med 2013; 368:446-454. January 31, 2013. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMsa1208051 [FREE]

    Results. We identified seven obesity-related myths concerning the effects of small sustained increases in energy intake or expenditure, establishment of realistic goals for weight loss, rapid weight loss, weight-loss readiness, physical-education classes, breast-feeding, and energy expended during sexual activity. We also identified six presumptions about the purported effects of regularly eating breakfast, early childhood experiences, eating fruits and vegetables, weight cycling, snacking, and the built (i.e., human-made) environment. Finally, we identified nine evidence-supported facts that are relevant for the formulation of sound public health, policy, or clinical recommendations.

  15. Brain Over Brawn by blindbat · · Score: 1

    Don't forget to read the excellent Brain Over Brawn from brainoverbrawn.com. It's free and you will learn a lot.

    1. Re:Brain Over Brawn by kamapuaa · · Score: 1

      The bro-science book that says you should eat 6 meals a day? It has some good ideas on lifting at home if you are poor and can't afford weights or a gym membership, but that's about it. Later, the author went to jail for transporting loaded assault rifles across state lines.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    2. Re:Brain Over Brawn by itzly · · Score: 1

      You can lose weight on 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6+ meals a day. Whatever you feel comfortable with.

  16. Eat less, move more. by Kenja · · Score: 1

    That's it really...

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  17. Losing weight is simple by DrXym · · Score: 1

    Stop eating so much and exercise more. And at a societal level stop normalizing obesity.

  18. hertosexual diet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Before each meal suck a dick. You'll loose weight or find out something about yourself and gain weight.

  19. Just eat well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Just eat WHOLE, unprocessed foods. Tons of veggies and fruit (you can't really over do these, seriously people this is where we get our nutrients). Nuts and seeds and other healthy fats, avocados and some meat protein. It really is that simple. STOP EATING PROCESSED "food". Start with completely cutting out junk, no cookies, cake, donuts, candy, nothing from a box. Eat only bread that is made using WHOLE ingredients, which means 99.99% of the bread in the grocery store is off limits and if you're in the mid-west/south probably 100% of the bread is off limits. Eat as much organic food and ingredients as possible. Yes people the GMO'd and herbicide and pesticides are actually bad. The science isn't there to support it because the money isn't there to do the research. Monsanto has seen to that. Stick with what nature actually intended and we as a whole will become a healthier population and see diseases drop, cancer drop, autism drop, and people will be happier.

    THIS IS NOT A DIET to lose weight, it's a diet in the sense of what you eat for living, permanently for the rest of your life.

    STOP EATING OUT!!!!!

    60 years ago families rarely ate out, now few kids have ever sat at a dinner table, let alone had a real meal that wasn't McDonald's or mac-n-cheese or some other microwave, heat up frozen "food" bullshit.

    1. Re:Just eat well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      STOP EATING PROCESSED "food". Start with completely cutting out junk, no cookies, cake, donuts, candy, nothing from a box.

      You should eat right anyway for good health, but if your goal is simply to lose weight, you don't have to give up processed junk food.

      "No such discussion is complete without a link to the Twinkie Diet."

      There really is no such thing as a "bad food," it's all about getting the essential nutrients and keeping calories in check. Read Dr. Saltman's University of California San Diego Nutrition Book, it cuts through the misconceptions and mythology and covers the science behind each essential nutrient from knowledge gained by developing total parenteral nutrition (intravenous feeding).

    2. Re:Just eat well by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      You're mostly on target, except for one bit: GMO isn't an evil thing; some GMO'd food is worthless; other GMO'd food is just fine. It all depends on how it's been modified and to what purpose. Veggies that have been modified to be resistant to something are generally OK; veggies that are modified to be bigger and brighter with fewer bruises? Well, that bigger fruit/veggie is going to have fewer accessible nutrients than its smaller brethren that bruise/spoil.

      And you don't have to completely cut out the junk either; you just have to not depend on it. Make your core eating times center around whole foods where you can identify all the sources that went into the food (chemical refineries don't count). If you have to skip eating something in a day for some reason, make that something be the junk. If you don't have time for a good meal, skip the meal and make a healthy snack later. Or keep some smoothies on hand.

      Basically, when you eat, eat well, and your body will sort a lot of the problems out. Also, make sure to drink enough water (any time you eat food, drink water -- and have a few extra glasses throughout the day too; coffee and energy drinks don't count).

    3. Re:Just eat well by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      There really is no such thing as a "bad food,"

      Somehow, a diet of tequila shooters supplemented with enough quality nutrition to meet the RDAs does not lift the balance out of the "bad food" category. The alcohol will damage your brain and liver, the lemon will eat away your teeth.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    4. Re:Just eat well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would constitute a "bad diet," not a bad food, but moderation is good and variation is essential.

      Have a look at this article to see what Saltman meant by that.

  20. Cut Calories and Increase Exercise. My god! by lordmage · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My Fitness Pay is a great "Food log" which was told I should use 25 years ago when I first started noticing the "behind the desk" effect. I still play sports constantly but the weight gain was huge.

    I lost 50+ lbs on MyfitnessPal. I didn't need to eat the crappy "whey" and other tasteless stuff. I chose to eat a bowl of cereal in the morning, low cal lunch (100-200 cals from a frozen quick meal) and I would eat a big dinner. Big dinner? Steak and Potato with a Salad at Outback. All that under the calorie limit to sit sedentary and lose 1.5 lbs a week.

    When I stopped Myfitnesspal, I gained weight. Its a simple equation: Get a real Food Diary and use it.

    Now, to get that my fitness pal back on track.

    Oh, and avoid Diet Drinks. This guy mentions he ate high protein to make sure he burned FAT but diet drinks just make you crave food. I really think high protein foods = less sugar = less cravings. Thus the steaks are much better than burgers effect for losing weight. They stay in you longer and are half the calories.

    --
    I can program myself out of a Hello World Contest!!
  21. Hacking? by jdharm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You didn't hack crap. You just acted like a reasonable person and not a mindless sedentary eating machine. That's like walking and saying you "hacked sitting" to get you from point A to point B.

    1. Re:Hacking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hacked your internet to make these words appear on your screen.

  22. Gym = Hacking weight loss?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From article: "I was typically at the gym four to six days a week" uhhh... yeah I think we can all agree going to the gym 4 to 6 days per week is a good way to lose weight. I'm not sure how that is news to anyone or constitutes "Hacking Weight Loss" (insert rolleyes smile here). In another nugget of wisdom that no one has ever thought of before, article recommends reducing calorie intake. Who would have thought?!?

  23. Keep track of what you eat by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2

    The best way to lose weight is to burn more calories than you consume. One problem is that it is really easy in our society to consume calories. You just ate a plate of whole wheat pasta with veggies. Healthy right? No, because you likely had about 3 servings of pasta.

    I used MyFitnessPal to help me track my calorie intake. One helpful feature is the bar code scanner. You can scan almost any product and get the nutritional information right into your mobile device. I dropped about 20 pounds while using that.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    1. Re:Keep track of what you eat by Strider- · · Score: 2

      One helpful feature is the bar code scanner. You can scan almost any product and get the nutritional information right into your mobile device.

      And there's the problem... Good food doesn't have a barcode. Very little of what I bring home from the grocery store has barcodes on it, and what does usually just has the internal store code on it (meat), or is a bulk package (20lb bag of flour, etc...). All these food tracking/diary apps are really built for tracking packaged/prepared foods, and are a pain to use when you make stuff from scratch. As such, unless you're going to weigh and add all the ingredients manually (I'm way too lazy for that), you're left with generic estimates of what you're eating "Plate of pasta" or "Steak Dinner" or whatever, which can be wildly inaccurate if you're like me and tend to invent as you go and/or substitute ingredients based on what you have.

      --
      ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
    2. Re:Keep track of what you eat by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      It had entries for non-barcoded food too. I could eat a banana, enter "banana" and know just how many calories (plus fat, fiber, etc) that banana contained. I could also set up custom entries for when I cooked dinner (which is more frequent than me eating food prepared for me). If I made a taco salad, I could figure out how much one serving was and enter that. Then, all subsequent taco salad meals could use that.

      I used the barcode recognition more with ingredients. Add cheese to the dish. Scan barcode, figure out how much per serving we're eating. Add pasta to the dish, scan barcode, figure out how much per serving we're eating. Add frozen veggies to the dish (which I tend to use more than fresh since they don't go bad as quickly), scan barcode, figure out how much per serving we're using. Etc.

      Even if you just use estimates, you can still benefit from meal tracking. What I've found tracking apps like this cut down on is mindless snacking. The "I'll just have a handful of these... and maybe a few of those... and a couple of those..." situations that result in people wondering why they can't lose weight.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    3. Re:Keep track of what you eat by zaft · · Score: 1
      You can enter your own recipes in MyFitnessPal. All you have to do is figure it out once and save it.

      For example I have a bleu cheese salad that I make a couple of times a week. Figure out the ingredients and weigh them (I bought a cheap food scale at NewEgg) and it's not that hard. It also has the side effect of making you aware of where your calories are coming from.

      I guess I'm a little surprised that someone who is patient enough to actually cook from scratch would then be too lazy to weigh a few items.

    4. Re:Keep track of what you eat by praxis · · Score: 1

      I tried the app as well and dropped because they measure most of their ingredients by volume, not weight. It's so much easier to use a scale when cooking than to measure volume of every ingredient.

  24. Not difficult.... by mseeger · · Score: 2

    To (miss)quote Mark Twain: Nothing is easier than loosing 70 pounds, I've done it several times ;-).

    Original quote: http://www.goodreads.com/quote...

    Loosing weight is always easy, not picking it up again is the hard part.

    1. Re:Not difficult.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure Mark Twain knew the difference between the word "lose" and "loose".

    2. Re:Not difficult.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He probably knew the difference between missquote and misquote, as well.

    3. Re:Not difficult.... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1
      Maybe he "loosed" it when he let out his belt ??

      A waist is a terrible thing to mind.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  25. It's all about the carbs!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Want to change your life for the good? Watch Fathead the movie below to learn how we have been eating all wrong for a long time. Then watch the followup below to the original 2009 movie for important updates.
    Since the movie came out 5 years ago, the government has changed its guidance against high saturated fat/high cholesterol diets, saying there is no link to cardiovascular disease. The real cause of cardio-vascular disease is diets of high processed carbs/sugars and wheat. Change to a diet of high natural fats from animals, nuts and vegetables, and you will be happier, healthier and slimmer.

    I've lost 20 pounds in 1 month by cutting the sugar/starch, high carbs and wheat. No more pasta, rice, cereal, bread, potatoes, sodas,fast food, etc. Instead, I eat natural fat from grass fed animals, nuts, and vegetables like broccoli, kale, cauliflower, asparagus, and spinach. My very low testosterone I've had for the past 8 years is now back to normal and no more insulin spikes. My blood sugar is low and steady. I'm not sick and tired anymore. I am full of energy all day long. No more acne, etc, the list goes on.

    Original movie:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evcNPfZlrZs
    Update to movie:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRkcSI9P1_I&feature=youtu.be

    1. Re:It's all about the carbs!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've lost 20 pounds in 1 month

      things_that_didnt_happen.txt

    2. Re:It's all about the carbs!!! by avandesande · · Score: 1

      You might think that but when your blood sugar is high you retain quite a bit more fluid, so it isn't surprising to see this much immediate loss due to water retention. After switching to low carb 2 years ago I retain much less fluid and also drink less (and am hardly ever thirsty).

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    3. Re:It's all about the carbs!!! by jrock321 · · Score: 1

      Sure did. Went to Dr. end of January and weighed 205 lbs. Started Low carb/high fat (Keto) diet Feb.6. Went back to Dr. on March 10 and weighed 185 on same scale.

  26. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1

    The problem isn't so much "too many calories" consumed, but that the sedimentary lifestyle people are accustomed

    Yeah, sediment doesn't digest too well. No wonder people are fat.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  27. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by jedidiah · · Score: 1

    You need very little fat. You can cut most of it out and not have any problems (besides hunger). You can cut most of the carbs too. The real problem is protein rather than fat or carbs.

    Carbs and fat are for energy. They're pretty much what you need less of.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  28. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

    Dunno about that. I would think being stuck in the mud would cause you to expend all sorts of calories in an attempt to get out.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  29. talk to me when you lose 100 and keep it off by mr_mischief · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "Whee! 30 pounds! I'm a weight loss wonder story fit for the front page!" It's a good start. Maybe it was all you needed to lose. I know several people (myself included) down by a hundred or more. None of us claim to be experts.

    1. Re:talk to me when you lose 100 and keep it off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      of course, that requires you to have 100 lb to lose ... that guy going from 200 to 100 probably wouldn't be a good idea.

      I never understood why people thought the biggest loser people were heroes, they were just so fucking lazy they became that big to begin with. Good fucking work. The hero is the guy that's kept weight off his whole life.

      Good work on the weight loss but don't be a dick other people didn't become as fat as you to begin with.

    2. Re:talk to me when you lose 100 and keep it off by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it takes someone incredibly lazy to work 80 hours a week and suffer injuries that keep one from working out properly. Incredibly lazy. Nobody's everyone's hero for their fitness level. They might be their own personal hero, or a hero to a friend or family member, but they aren't public heroes like people who save someone stranger's life. It's something that lots of people do. Doing it doesn't make any of us an expert in it. A weight loss expert is someone who knows how to help a lot of other people overcome their specific situations to lose weight. It's someone who can actually give advice based on a deep understanding of the various issues. It's not someone who says "this is what worked for me so it's definitely going to work for everyone on Slashdot."

    3. Re:talk to me when you lose 100 and keep it off by _DangerousDwarf · · Score: 1

      I lost 110 pounds during 2012. I have kept it off since then. Its possible.

    4. Re:talk to me when you lose 100 and keep it off by germansausage · · Score: 1

      What kind of injuries? Curious to know what would prevent you from doing any sort of exercise. When my feet were f-ed up with plantar fascitis I couldn't run, but I could still do a rowing machine. When I broke my wrist I stopped biking for a few months and used an elliptical instead.

    5. Re:talk to me when you lose 100 and keep it off by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      My back was so screwed up from an auto accident I could barely walk upright for months. When you can't get from the bed to the car or the car to your desk without wincing the whole way, a bike or elliptical is a pretty big challenge. That sort of thing can get better, and I lost the weight later. It can take some time, though, especially when still working crazy amounts of hours.

    6. Re:talk to me when you lose 100 and keep it off by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      What kind of injuries? Curious to know what would prevent you from doing any sort of exercise.

      I've now got two prosthetic discs in my back; prior to the disc replacement I could not move head, arms, torso or legs without pain. I could not turn/twist my neck, wrists or torso. I could not not even take in huge breaths (increased the pressure in my chest and caused pain that made me pass out). Merely making a fist was painful.

      And that was only two discs; someone else in the ward with me in hospital was there to get four discs replaced. Do not underestimate how even a small wound to the back prevents all your limbs from working.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
  30. extreme narcissim by peter303 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Among young people with all this attention to detailed fitness numbers and the gadgets that generate them.

    1. Re:extreme narcissim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Applying science to yourself in an act of self improvement is not narcissism, it is proof that you explicitly do not like what you are.

      Of course complaining on the internet using incomplete sentences, forcing thousands of potential readers to suffer through it is narcissism.

    2. Re:extreme narcissim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Detailed numbers is precisely the thing that has helped me stick to a fitness plan. In the past, I always lost faith before I lost weight. I gave up when it seemed that all I'm doing is not letting myself enjoy food and perform just as poorly when exercising as before. Making the most precise measurements that I can, however, enabled me to see the tiny changes that I don't see in the mirror. I realize that I'm making progress and all I need is more patience, I'm moving towards my goal.

      Counting calories is even more important. It helps me realize when I have eaten enough (especially helpful in my case since an adverse effect of an anticonvulsant medication I must take is increased appetite), i.e. I can distinguish if I really have reason to be hungry or do I just feel like eating without actually needing more food to get my blood sugar up. Furthermore, I can plan ahead by e.g. putting the food I'm still permitted to eat each day on a table at home so that I can ration it appropriately during the remainder of the day and avoid going to bed hungry. Finally precise counting also makes it easier for me to choose what to eat, i.e. if I'm hungry and e.g. feel both like eating X and Y, I know I can eat one but not the other and also that if I eat Y I can also eat Z later but not if I eat X.

  31. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by blue9steel · · Score: 2

    You need very little fat. You can cut most of it out and not have any problems (besides hunger).

    Well aside from rabbit starvation if you go too low and the fact that your testosterone production will drop through the floor, but hey who needs to feel good anyways?

  32. What is Subby's Height? by nucrash · · Score: 1

    I know I am obese, and way a far bit more than Jeff does, but what what was his initial height because that does factor into weight loss.

    --
    Place something witty here
    1. Re:What is Subby's Height? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He answers this in the comments: 5'9". Which means he's still overweight at 170 pounds, with a BMI of 25.1.

  33. Simple to say, hard to do by blue9steel · · Score: 1

    Eat right, Exercise Properly, Manage your hormones.

  34. There are a couple Apps for that by Desperado · · Score: 1

    I too had problems losing weight and keeping it off. 2 1/2 years ago I tried loseit.com and lost a pound a week (roughly) for a year and have kept it off. I went from 210 lbs. to 160 lbs. and my knees don't hurt anymore and I don't take glucosamine any longer.

    Lose It! is a simple free app that runs in a browser and on IOS and Android devices.

    There is also MyFitnessPal.com which is similar.

    Either one will get you the weight loss you want if you are serious enough to stick with a weight loss and exercise program.

    --
    If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
  35. Without going paleo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The summary brags they didn't go paleo? What is that brag-worthy? I'm on paleo, and easily lost 10 lbs.

    1. Re:Without going paleo? by codeAlDente · · Score: 1

      That's to make you appreciate all the hard work involved in keeping with the diet - counting calories, reducing caloric intake month after month, huddling with a nutritionist, extra exercise and lots of yoga. Also there is stigma involved - some people have a very negative view of crossfit, and hate paleo by association. Some people just think that only an idiot would remove entire classes of food from their diet. Vegans avoid paleo because it involves eating animals or animal products.

      --
      He once inserted random mutations into his code, just so he could have the experience of debugging.
  36. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by jedidiah · · Score: 1

    ANY effective weight loss is going to be counter to your instincts. You will have to fight your inner animal. It won't be easy. It WILL be unpleasant.

    STARVING is never fun.

    Your inner animal is basically holding it's breath for the duration.

    If it were easy, anyone could do it and it wouldn't be such a problem.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  37. Re:On the front page now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Proper exercise can give you much more brain power

    It better, because reducing the number of calories I eat makes my brain stop, and that is more painful than all the downsides of my weight combined.

  38. Sigh by ledow · · Score: 2

    Eat less.

    Not losing weight?

    Eat less.

    Still not losing weight.

    Eat less.

    Granted, you still want to be having a mix of foods and not just less "burgers and only burgers 24/7", but it's a pretty simple rule to follow.

    So long as you're eating a mix, you won't veer into malnutrition like this unless you ACTUALLY have a medical problem that requires constant treatment.

    Of every person I ever see who diets, or who over-exercises in order to compensate, etc. I'm always just shocked that - rather than follow some faddy diet that's complicated and expensive and has all sorts of problems with it - they don't think to weigh what they eat over the course of a week and eat less the next week.

    1. Re:Sigh by itzly · · Score: 2

      I'm always just shocked that they don't think to weigh what they eat over the course of a week and eat less the next week.

      I'm equally shocked that smokers don't count the cigarettes they smoke in a week, and smoke less the next week.

    2. Re:Sigh by uniquegeek · · Score: 1

      That's great way to work yourself into a starve and binge cycle that becomes a full-blown eating disorder and kills your metabolism.

      People should talk to a medical professional such as a doctor and certified nutritionist, and take advice from them.

    3. Re:Sigh by ledow · · Score: 1

      If you were trying to quit, is this not exactly how you'd start?

      No, with diets, NOBODY starts this way. They all jump on calorie counting and weird systems and "don't eat random food group X" junk FIRST.

      Eat less if you want to lose weight.
      Smoke less if you want to give up smoking.

      If you can do neither, you're not going to lose weight, or give up smoking.

    4. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hah

      Eat less rolls off the tongue so easily :D
      While the amount you're eating is part of the equation, WHAT you're eating is another ( big ) part of it as well.
      Your age will also impact this. You can eat anything when you're 20. Not so when you're 40+. Your metabolism
      isn't the same and you'll find this out as the years go by.

      Ever heard the expression that "Healthy food is expensive ?" It's true. Go to the grocery store and buy nothing
      but healthy food and compare your bill with one that isn't quite so restrictive. It's an eye opener. May not be a big
      deal for you making X per year, but is a HUGE deal for those who make far less.

      It sounds simple enough for those who have never had to do it. Much more difficult when you're in those shoes.
      A book I'll recommend titled Fit2Fat2Fit explains it fairly well. The synopsis is where a health nut personal trainer decides
      to forgo all exercise and dietary restrictions for six months to gain weight ( he packs on about 75 pounds ), then experiences
      what it takes to get back into shape. Gives some insight as to what those who are overweight go through.

      You should give it a read. Is rather interesting.

      My own experiences recall the hunger, but nothing compares to the headaches when you first start denying your body
      the sugar ( sugar is in EVERYTHING ), carbs and / or caffeine it has come to expect. Do you realize how little 500 calories
      truly is ? Try that sometime as well and remember what you think of it afterwards.

    5. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you were trying to quit, is this not exactly how you'd start?

      Sure it is. It's also exactly how you'd fail to quit smoking like most people that try it this way. Mostly because smoking is a horribly addicting thing that your body will notice when it is being cut out.

      Surprise, surprise, some people are probably also horribly addicted to the foods that they eat.

    6. Re:Sigh by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      People should talk to a medical professional such as a doctor and certified nutritionist, and take advice from them.

      That's a different category, "How to lose money".

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    7. Re:Sigh by onkelonkel · · Score: 1

      That's how I got off the ciggies. Got the idea from a "how to quit" book.First I switched to a brand that was about 10% lower nicotine than my regular smokes. Just made sure not to smoke any more for a few weeks. Then I started to figure out when I would smoke and cut out habitual smokes that were close (in time) to other habitual smokes. One before I got on the bus and one after became half a cig before and half a cig after. Then after a few weeks of that I switched brands again another 10% lower nicotine. Ran the cycle about 3 or 4 times. I started out at half a deck of Players Light a day and finished at 4 Matinee Slims (yeah I know) a day at which point I said Screw It and just quit.

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    8. Re:Sigh by shemyazaz · · Score: 1

      Except that your doctor or nutritionist barely knows anything about it. The doctor took a couple crappy classes to satisfy his credit requirements, then never looked at nutrition again. Your nutritionist was fed a bunch of government bullshit classes that push big agro-business interests. Seriously. Diabetic? The government warns that you not miss your seven servings of grain...and don't forget the fruit! Pay attention to the doctors who are actually interested, and doing real research. Stephen Phinny PhD is a good place to start.

    9. Re:Sigh by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      Your advice is horrible. In addition to killing your metabolism, you're wrong about what causes weight gain. You can eat as many vegetables as you want and never gain a pound of weight.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    10. Re:Sigh by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      500 calories a day? They'll be so hungry they'll be eating their toothpaste !

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    11. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Your advice is horrible. In addition to killing your metabolism, you're wrong about what causes weight gain.

      No, he's not. Weight gain is caused by taking in too many calories, period. Not all sources have the same impact, but the net effect is excess calories are convered to fat.

      > You can eat as many vegetables as you want and never gain a pound of weight.

      So, do you think that vegetables don't contain any calories? Many of them are mostly water and fiber, but do you think they somehow "don't count" toward your energy intake?

  39. I lost weight too, but for some it's hard by shoor · · Score: 1

    I've gone through the drill of losing weight by dieting, then gradually putting it back on again a few times.

    I'm in my late 60s now. In my early 60s I was overweight by about 20 pounds. In my last go at it, I lost the weight slowly over a period of years, and I've kept it off for a couple of years now, without ever 'suffering' (much). Mostly all I did was think before I ate something, asking myself do I really want this food? Since my metabolism has apparently slowed down, I can't go by old habits. I've learned not to eat meals at night, just something very light (some nuts, or a slice of toast with olive oil, something like that) at night if I'm really bothered by an empty stomach.

    I don't know what's different this time that I'm keeping it off, except maybe practice makes perfect. Also, I'm old enough now that I get serious feedback (backpain, hard to sleep at night, sciatica) if I don't take care of myself. I see other people my age who are out of shape and I don't know how they can stand it. Maybe they are actually tougher than me intrinsically and that's why they can endure it. I don't consider it to be a question of will power or character on my part.

    --
    In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
  40. what do you have against a paleo lifestyle? by e3m4n · · Score: 1, Informative

    you make it sound like its hard to maintain. Not to belittle a 30lb loss in 9mos, but after 9mos of my lifestyle change (including a shift to paleo nutrition) I had lost ALL of my excess body fat. That turned out to be about 100lb from my heaviest. But, had I been heavier, I have no doubt I still would have shed every bit of excess weight, whatever that number has been. I often encourage people to take up the paleo diet because its fairly simple to maintain (avoid grains, starchy foods, legumes, and the oils derived from them for the most part) and, due to the nature of protein having a high satiation effect, effectively also reduces your consumption of food in general. If someone wants to burn fat they first have to train their body to actually USE fat. That's never going to happen if you continue to eat a lot of carbs. Carbs are the low hanging fruit of fuel for your body. As long as there is plenty of that sort of fuel laying around your body is going to use it and never use fat. In an absence of glycogen, your body will begin converting a 9cal fat gram into a 7cal ketone; which, once converted, cannot be re-absorbed as fat. You either use it or piss it away. So before you've made any other lifestyle change, you're already getting a 25% bonus to your BMR out of basic inefficiencies.

      Compound this by training your muscles to burn more fat for fuel instead of carbs and you accelerate the weight loss significantly. White, fast-twitch, muscle fibers burn glucose and cannot oxidize during use, resulting in tired sore muscles after a short stent of activity. Whereas red muscle fibers of both fast and slow twitch burn fat directly and can self-oxidize during use. The calves of an Olympic sprinter are majority white muscle fibers, whereas a Olympic marathon runner re quite the opposite where 80% of the muscles in their calves are red fibers. This can be achieved by structuring your workouts to focus more on endurance and increasing workout times than trying to first increase resistance. Enough resistance to keep your HR within the cardio/peak ranges, but once there, focus on endurance building.

  41. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by itzly · · Score: 2

    Different kinds of fatty acids also also needed as essential building blocks for all kinds of stuff the body needs. Carbs are just for energy.

  42. Re:Cut Calories and Increase Exercise. My god! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Same story here. I lost 37 pounds in 3 months using a calorie counting app (Lose It).

    For the first two months, I made sure that I didn't do any extra exercise (which tends to make me uncontrollably hungry).

    It's been over a year now and I haven't gained any of it back, though I am exercising more now.

  43. doctor says I need to gain weight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    slightly off topic but my doctor says that I am almost anorexic. Sucks. Need to gain weight. Braces aren't helping. The commenter who said that eating slowly helps you to loose weight might be correct: I need to eat slowly because I have braces. Sometimes my gum hurts when I bite down. I think bread makes me gain weight. I can't eat bread though.

    really off topic but I keep typing "wait" instead of "weight". Grr, silly hands.

  44. Hacking weight loss my ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He didn't hack anything. He had surgery and couldn't exercise for 2 years, and put on 30 pounds. Then he exercised, and the 30 pounds came off again. This has got fuck all to do with people who have weight problems that aren't caused by obvious and easily remedied causes.

  45. How I lost weight by EdMcMan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've lost over 45 pounds and kept it off for over three years so far. And best of all, I didn't do it by starving myself.

    I've considered myself overweight for most of my adult and childhood life. Oddly enough, I had always been fairly athletic, and exercised regularly throughout my life. I had strong willpower. But I just couldn't seem to keep weight off.

    I lost my weight by signing up for weight watchers online. Weight watchers online is a program that allows you to conveniently keep track of the food you eat. All of it. I don't think weight watchers is magic; instead, I think the process of making eating a deliberate and measured action is what helped me. I like numbers. I can do numbers.

    What I found by recording everything I ate is that a small number of foods accounted for a large amount of calories. Beef, fries, bread, snacks. I've largely eliminated these foods from my diet. It's not that I can't eat them, I just don't feel that the value is high enough for the calories to eat them a lot. I was able to decrease the number of calories I ate without starving myself by eating smart. The other benefit of recording food is that there are some replacement foods that are significantly healthier. For me, I started snacking more on pretzels, which I found a lot more filling, but contained less calories than many of the other snacks I ate.

    After about a year, I stopped using weight watchers. I had internalized most of the good behaviors, and no longer needed to record everything I ate. I continued to lose weight, slowly but steadily. Eventually I stopped at a healthy weight, and I feel great. Over time, even though I was never starving myself, I started eating higher calorie foods and exercising more regularly to offset it. On that note, for burning calories, exercising longer and with lower intensity is better than short, intense workouts. I like to use the elliptical; I can exercise for 90 minutes without killing myself, and burn over 1000 calories. I've found that playing video games at the same time really distracts me from the act of exercising, and even makes it enjoyable.

    If you're skeptical, and think you know enough about dieting to not record everything, think again. There are simply too many surprises. Go to your favorite restuarant's website and look at the nutrition information. I used to go to Chili's quite often. I haven't been there for a long time. I don't know how they cook their food, but it's insanely high in calories. Even seemingly safe foods like salad can be high in calories depending on the dressing. The opposite is true as well. Some fast food, like KFC, can be very low in calories (although probably bad for other reasons). Over time, you'll learn what fills you up and doesn't have a ton of calories. If you just start "eating less" without any data, you'll still be eating the same inefficient foods, and you'll probably gain your weight back after you can't take it anymore.

    1. Re:How I lost weight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is because exercising itself doesn't actually burn that many calories over your base metabolic rate. I think it's a sad fraud that every single piece of fitness equipment and every single HR monitor:
      1. misleads that HR alone (+gender, weight, etc) can accurately determine the calories burned for an individual
      2. and misleads by showing the total caloric burn, and not the burn -over- base rate.

      If you calculated you're base rate, I think you'd be dissappointed to see how much that 90 min on an elliptical was actually doing.

    2. Re:How I lost weight by dyslexicbunny · · Score: 1

      The real problem is going out to eat has netted massive serving sizes. If you eat the whole plate, you'd generally eaten more than a day's worth of food. Usually two. Now most of the time when I eat out, I generally cut the meal in half and take the rest home. Now I get two meals out of one (so it was more cost efficient for a broke student) but it's also healthier. Sometimes I could even eat leftovers over two meals too for things like Chinese or Mexican. It's not perfect but works pretty well.

      I also dumped sweets from my diet almost exclusively (not soda but the amount is down). The thing is that I saw it as competition between sweets and alcohol in terms of empty calories and I wasn't planning giving up booze. If I did, I'd probably see even more weight loss.

  46. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

    Carbs aren't crap. In fact, they're essential to having a well run body.

    --
    There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  47. Only 11 hours of screen time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gees, no wonder you Americans are so fat if you "spend only 11 hours daily of screen time". We Europeans spend upwards of 20 hours a day in front of screens. Does wonders for the waistline and posture! (When I were a lad, we 'ad to spend 15 hours a day in front of screen at work, one two-minute rest break every five hours, and eat packaged pasta salad for lunch without once leaving our desks. If we needed toilet, we 'ad to take phone or tablet with us and it would track our gaze to make sure we didn't look away. Then, we 'ad to go home and watch YouTube for five hours.)

  48. Not affected by synaptic · · Score: 1

    I'm sitting at a computer for 12+ hours a day yet I have normal BMI and I am healthy.

    Some of you seem to have a switch that tells you to store fat. Study my DNA and make a cure.

    1. Re: Not affected by e3m4n · · Score: 1

      Not perhaps by weight. I am sure sitting 12+ hours a day has or will eventually lead to other 'sitting disease' disorders. Throwing a DVT into your heart or lungs one day is just one example.

  49. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by blue9steel · · Score: 1

    It won't be easy. It WILL be unpleasant.

    Of course, but that's no reason to make it harder than necessary by doing it stupidly.

  50. There is no magic way to do it... by cjjjer · · Score: 1

    I lost 110lbs by watching my portions, better food choices and getting 60 min of cardio a day. 30 in the morning and 30 in the evening. That was 10 years ago and I still do 30min of cardio a day and it keeps in the 190 range (plus minus 5lbs).

  51. Weight is only one indicator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Weight is only one number, and there are many other important things to consider when one has decided to improve the body. The 'after' picture in TFA is still somewhat far from what I consider a healthy-looking figure — he seems to have as much muscle mass as a 12-year old girl. Kudos to him for dropping 30 pounds, but 100 grams of protein daily(too low) and next to no strength training have made their effect known.

    180 pounds with some strength and decent athletic ability > 170 pounds with chicken legs
    (not for a guy who's 5-foot-7)

    Also:
    "I was taking naturopathic supplements..." (oh boy)
    "As I lowered my calorie count to 1,600 and then 1,500..." (approaching starvation here, methinks)

    How the frack is this "hacking"?

    1. Re:Weight is only one indicator by gunner_von_diamond · · Score: 1

      You also forgot to mention that he saw a nutritionalist, which could cost anywhere between $100-$200/hour where I live. Seeking professional advice (and paying for it) is hardly hacking. Also, body fat percentage and muscle mass, IMO, are much more important indicators than weight. I'd rather be over weight than under muscle. Extra weight vs. not being able to life/carry heavy things, etc.

  52. Did it the hard way by spaceyhackerlady · · Score: 1

    I lost 160 pounds a few years ago, and I too did it the hard way. Count calories, exercise. If you're not eating that much you have to eat well, and I'm now so healthy it's slightly stupid. I like it.

    I didn't gain it overnight, and I couldn't expect to lose it overnight. It took a year and a half. No major skin sagging issues except for a residual flab roll, eliminated with a tummy tuck.

    People often ask me what my secret was, and I tell them it's motivation: you have to have a reason. For me it was wanting to learn to fly, but I couldn't get the seatbelt around me.

    ...laura

  53. No surprise by dhasenan · · Score: 1

    Person with horrible diet practices who was moderately overweight lost that weight by changing their diet practices in obvious ways. Meanwhile I'm sitting here with fewer obvious changes to make and appreciably more weight than the person in the article.

  54. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by _UnderTow_ · · Score: 1

    I think your numbers are a bit off, unless you think the average person weighs a little over 100 pounds. I'm 6'3", and weigh about 250ish. If I eat 1700 calories per day, I lose 2 pounds a week, like clockwork. If I eat ~2400 calories per day, my weight does not change, and I lead a pretty sedentary lifestyle. I sit at a desk all day, drive home, take the dog for a walk and sporadically go to the gym.

  55. There's not one answer by Fished · · Score: 1

    My dentist once told me that I obviously have viking blood. (He was right; I'm essentially half Scot and half Russian.) I am also a diabetic. I'm not alone. Roughly a third of Americans at this point are either diabetic or on the road to diabetes. If I ate the kind of carbs this guy eats, I'd have to load up on hundreds of units of insulin, and I'd never lose a pound. That's not speculation, I've tried that sort of diet. (Was a vegetarian for years, and couldn't lose weight on a 1200 Calorie vegetarian diet. And I was ravenously hungry and depressed all the time.)

    Instead, the diet that has worked for me (very successfully) has been cutting the carbs. Most of my calories come from meat. I eat 4 or more eggs and bacon for breakfast. I quickly learned, by following my blood sugar meter, that I simply could not tolerate the 200+ grams of carbs that the government recommends. Since making the decision to follow my blood sugar 100% and ignore studies that, at best, present an average of what worked for someone else, I've lost well over 100 lbs. while increasing my lean body mass. My trigclycerides, once over 1000, have plunged. My HDL is high, my LDL is low, and most importantly my last A1c (a measure of blood sugar over time) was normal for a non-diabetic at 4.9%.

    I'm glad his diet worked for him. It wouldn't work for me. No doubt, my diet wouldn't work for him. And that's ok. The notion that there's one perfect diet for everyone is virtually idiotic. And, most importantly, it doesn't work. That's not to say that there aren't some useful general principles, some patterns that are more likely to work for you. But at the end of the day it's your health; take the time to figure out what will work for you.

    --
    "He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
  56. Sedintary is correct by sjbe · · Score: 1

    Um, which demographic plays Dance Dance Revolution again?

    That would be young people, mostly still high school age or younger.

    The guy said "techies like us are at increased risk because of our sedentary lifestyles" which is true for lots of techies. Increased risk != destiny. You may be the exception but people who largely sit at their desks and type all day are not as a general rule considered active.

  57. Consider the alternative question by Average · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The flip side of the question is "Why are skinny people not fat?".

    It's a more interesting question than you may think. One bit of semi-famous research is the 1970s Vermont 'prisoner overfeeding study' (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5Rv8JnFgw4). Like bits of Nazi science, this is probably irreproducible, as it'd *never* get past a human subject review committee today.

    A number of lifetime-normal-weight prisoners were fed substantially over their basal metabolic needs for an extended period. Their input was rigorously controlled (being prisoners), and their exercise regimen was pretty easy to monitor and control. Most of them gained weight, but almost none of them nearly as much as the standard "3500 kCal is a pound of fat" Standard Model would predict. Several plateaued on weight gain, and a few lucky (?) prisoners were *never* able gain 10% of their body weight when eating nearly 10,000 Calories a day. Simply couldn't do it.

    A lot of people are overeating in the western culture. A lot more that, by the numbers, should be in the 300-pound range. And while there are no shortage of very-very-fat people, they're not nearly as common as they should be if you study individual diet patterns. This is part of the problem. People look at their skinny friends' diets, and some of those skinny friends are like the luckier Vermont prisoners.

    1. Re:Consider the alternative question by gunner_von_diamond · · Score: 1

      Great point(s). This guy (an easy weight gainer) is marrying a gal that simply doesn't put on weight like I do, no matter how much she eats. That's a win for me!

    2. Re:Consider the alternative question by Average · · Score: 1

      Is it, though? It was infinitely easier to carefully (okay, obsessively) portion out the 1700 kCal per day I could eat and maintain just-under-obese status when I was single and nearly a hermit. Married (to a gal with better metabolism than me), there's simply endless, "hey, I made cookies" or "hey, I'm just springing on you that we're going out with friends for fish-n-chips tonight" temptations.

    3. Re:Consider the alternative question by Twinbee · · Score: 1

      And then we come to the subject of stomach bacteria.

      Have the right kind of bacteria (for example, via a rectal transplant), and usually fat people can be thin easily too.

      --
      Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
    4. Re:Consider the alternative question by dhasenan · · Score: 1

      The person who posted the article claims to have habitually eaten an entire medium pizza in one sitting and only weighed 200 pounds. That's not "an easy weight gainer". If that were me, I'd be fifty pounds lighter.

    5. Re:Consider the alternative question by wienerschnizzel · · Score: 1

      Not sure how you can make this conclusion based on the Vermont study. I haven't seen the video but looked at the study itself - here it is.

      The study was never designed to determine how much calorie intake is going to result in a fixed amount of weight gain or to determine whether there is a limit to weight gain. It didn't do appropriate controls in order to research that (such as control the anxiety levels, activity etc.). It was designed to study the mechanisms in by which the body stores new weight and also how it gets rid of excess weight (their weight loss was controlled as well.)

      Their input was rigorously controlled (being prisoners), and their exercise regimen was pretty easy to monitor and control. Most of them gained weight, but almost none of them nearly as much as the standard "3500 kCal is a pound of fat" Standard Model would predict. Several plateaued on weight gain, and a few lucky (?) prisoners were *never* able gain 10% of their body weight when eating nearly 10,000 Calories a day. Simply couldn't do it.

      Wrong! Pretty much all of what you write here:
      - all 5 subjects gained weight just fine as expected
      - the amount of weight gain per calorie intake was never measured
      - nobody "plateaud"

      Go read the study for yourself!

  58. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

    Carbs aren't crap. In fact, they're essential to having a well run body.

    No, they aren't. Your body will get along quite well on zero carbohydrate. The metabolic pathways that process protein and fat into energy will kick in and you'll feel less hunger during the day. You may have to urinate more often as you start to produce ketones (byproduct of using protein for energy), but that's a minor annoyance.

    What you WON'T get are massive blood sugar spikes as you ingest and digest carbs directly into glucose (or overload your system with HFCS), and then your insulin kicks in and your levels plummet.

    I've been doing it for years. I've watched the spikes when I eat carbs, and I've watched the "not spikes" when I don't.

  59. Extra sugar vs age by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    When I was about 36 I stopped drinking all pop and juices and reduced as much sugar as I could. I lost 20 LB in about 4 months. 41 now and have been attempting the same thing with 0 weight loss results. At this time in my life looks like burning more calories than I intake need to be done along with the sugar reduction.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  60. Weight Loss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I lost 80 pounds from September of 2012 to December of 2013, and have managed to keep it off for the last 15 months
    through daily exercise and sensible eating (I've kept a food journal for 2 years now). If I want to eat junk, I'll eat it, etc.

    Diets simply don't work (there has to be at least 600-800 of ;em these days) and if they did there would not be a
    single person overweight or obese in this country. I also had type II diabetes and hypertension, both of which
    vanished when I went from 245 lbs and a 44 inch waist to 170 lbs and a 31/32 inch waist. I tested my blood
    pressure this morning, it was 116/78 with a pulse of 68 (and that was after walking at least 8 miles this morning).

    Weight loss is mostly about common sense exercise (I know, the dreaded "E" word) and proper eating...

  61. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by nealric · · Score: 1

    Personally, I prefer an igneous lifestyle.

  62. So this is "hacking" weight loss? by ninjagin · · Score: 1

    Maybe I'm the only one, but I read TFA and I don't see any hacking going on, here. What I saw instead was a pretty sound approach to health and wellness through dietary changes and continued moderate exercise. I don't see what's been "hacked", here. The "eat less and exercise" approach, wonder of wonders, seems to have worked again!

    Honestly, I like hearing about experiences like this, because it gives me hope that I can make my own similar lifestyle changes, but there was no "hack" involved here -- no shortcut, no fast-track, no way to get it done without the work and self discipline. When I get a good checkup at the dentist, am I "hacking" dental hygiene? I think not.

    --
    .. pa-ra-bo-la, pa-ra-bo-la, 2 pi R, 2 pi R, where's your latus rectum, where's your latus rectum, 2 pi R
  63. Weight Watchers worked for me by nbender · · Score: 1

    No connection just a happy customer. You don't need to go to meeting or buy there food or any other BS. Just follow the program (and there is an app for that).

    The biggest thing for me was that whenever I would diet I wouldn't eat enough. In that case your body goes into starvation mode and you can actually gain weight while dieting - very frustrating. WW takes into account the amount you eat and the amount you exercise and keeps them balanced. I lost 20% or my weight over a couple rounds and will probably go another round this summer.

    Worth a shot, especially if other approaches aren't working.

  64. Emotional Bandwidth (or strength) by Deffexor · · Score: 1

    To summarize the article, it comes down to 2 keys: Diet and Exercise. What is never talked about (sometimes hinted at or briefly touched on) is the 3rd Key:

    Emotional Bandwidth (or perhaps, emotional strength or support.)

    The author did say that at 1 or 2 points that weightloss certainly requires discipline, but that doesn't really explain it fully.

    In order to be truly successful at achieving a healthy weight on a long term basis, one needs a good deal of emotional support/strength/will-power/whathaveyou. This is why when you're part of a Weight Watchers group or are part of a team that trains regularly or you have a personal trainer, things tend to go well.

    When life is not going so well, many of us compensate by stopping the hard workouts and eating more (both of which make us feel better in the short term.) Then once we get used to the extra feeling of more food and sitting around, it becomes habit.

    More needs to be said about how to bolster Emotional Bandwidth (strength, support, discipline, etc.)

  65. Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hate to sound like a dick, but this is hardly a "hack"... it's a highly regimented diet, nothing more. Serious kudos to the OP for doing it and sticking to it but most people aren't going to be able to do this. Also, jeez this trend toward calling everything a friggin hack when all it is, is common sense gets irritating....

  66. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by jones_supa · · Score: 1

    Doesn't a diet like that eventually cause heart and circulatory system problems?

  67. I'm "Overweight" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    69% of Adult Americans are overweight or obese, but the standards for overweight and obese are fucking asinine.

    Case in point.

    I'm 5'11
    I weigh 185lbs
    That places my BMI at just over 25, which is the line for "overweight"

    I am 4% bodyfat.

    I am a competitive cyclist.

    I ride my bike approximately 12,000 miles every year.

    I lift weights to maintain an upper body (I refuse to look like one of those T-Rex pro guys with giant legs and no arms).

    The government includes me in the statistic of "overweight or obese" Americans.

    Yeah, it's like that.

  68. Re: It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone who blames carbs for everything and who thinks that they react significantly differently to HFCS than to sucrose is unlikely to engage in useful science-based debate. Just let their kidneys quietly shut down while the Ketosis makes them stink, and worry about helping the smart people instead.

  69. Where's the "hack" by courteaudotbiz · · Score: 1

    I thought there was really something we didn't know about, cause hacking something is like doing something cool by twisting the rules in ways most people wouldn't think about. In his case, he lost 30lbs doing nothing more than what a nutritionist and a gym coach told him to do. I personnaly lost 100lbs over 5 years doing all that by myself, cutting the crap and exercising more. I didn't "hack" anything, I went by the rules: less calories input, more calories output.

    Hacking would have been like: I changed nothing to my habits but took (whatever pill/electrode/juice/miracle crap) and BAM, I lost 30 pounds in a month. These things don't work, and reading the title and summary, it's like the guy found some crap that actually works at losing weight without efforts with no side effects.

  70. bacteria reward cycle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    > "How fricking complicated is it to eat less than you burn?"

    Given the recent study that many of our guts are colonized with bacteria who can manipulate our food choices:

    http://www.medicaldaily.com/gut-bacteria-control-our-minds-get-food-they-want-how-countering-can-fight-obesity-298394

    Pretty complicated.

    1. Re:bacteria reward cycle by courteaudotbiz · · Score: 2

      Well, at least, changing the bacterial flora to make him crave for healthy foods would have been a hack. What the guy did is not a hack in any way.

  71. Re: It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The body cannot get along perfectly well on zero carbs. The body eventually slips into ketosis and starts having health issues over a period of time on zero carbs. This is what bodybuilders do to cut down and get that tight appearance before a bodybuilding competition. Eat the right carbs, the complex ones that break down the slowest and small portions.. 200 calorie meals are great and not enough to make the liver start wanting to save and store excess calories into fat cells. Drink tons of water and keep urine clear, water is required in the metabolic process to release energy from fat cells.

  72. Re:Cut Calories and Increase Exercise. My god! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I gained 30 lbs in one month by eating at Outback. Same meal as you, but swap out the salad for some broccoli.

    And add a cup of melted butter for the broccoli.
    And another cup of solid butter for the baked potato.
    And 4 Fosters tallboys.

    Okay, so maybe it was a bit more than your meal :P

  73. different take by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Initially i thought this was an ingress post, since ive been hacking ive lost 40 pounds....

  74. naturopathic medicine? by Verdatum · · Score: 1

    Anyone else notice this? You kinda loose a bit of geek-cred when you mention that you buy into treatments that are not based on evidence...

  75. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

    That's not gneiss.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  76. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by Copid · · Score: 1

    And at your size, any exercise at all ramps that number up pretty quickly. My wife was always jealous that when I started exercising at or near her exercise schedule, I burned a ton more calories than she did. The analogy I used was, "You're a Toyota Prius cruising along on electric half the time. I'm one of those Hummers with the tattered American flag rumbling down the freeway." I'm not as big as you are, but I was surprised at how quickly I dropped weight just by doing yoga, which isn't exactly high on the list of calorie burning exercises. There's a world of difference between what it takes to do some of those movements when you weigh 115 pounds vs 205.

    --
    An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
  77. Not going paleo? No step trackers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So TFA mentions you had a calorie tracker (IMHO worse than a step tracker), and the diet you followed seems like taken form a paleo diet. Maybe you didn't explicitly follow it, but in the end all diets that don't make you fat are one variation or another of paleo. Or low carb high fat, if you prefer (though there are differences).

  78. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

    Doesn't a diet like that eventually cause heart and circulatory system problems?

    I have yet to have any doctor tell me that.

    The fact that Dr. Atkins died from something related to a heart issue is a wonderful correlation but not scientific evidence. He could have died from being run over by a bus and it wouldn't mean that people using the Atkins diet are more likely to be run over by a bus.

  79. Intermittent Fasting by Moridineas · · Score: 1

    Since we're talking about hacking your diet, this is something that has worked incredibly well for me. I fast on Mondays (most Mondays, not all)--I don't consume anything with calories. I drink water, and that's it. I usually end up eating dinner Sunday night and then the next meal I eat will be lunch or dinner on Tuesday.

    The strangest thing to me is that I end up feeling really good on Tuesdays! It's somewhat difficult to describe, but when I wake up, I just feel good (and not particularly hungry). The best description I can think of is an extreme opposite of that feeling of "I ate too much!" Mondays are sometimes hard in the evenings when I do get hungry, though I don't get headaches (sometimes people report getting headaches when fasting). I do think that fasting is somewhat addictive, and I can see why pretty much every culture and religion around the world incorporates some form of fasting.

    If you have never tried fasting for an extended period, I would give it a try. It's an interesting experience, and for me, not at all unpleasant.

    I started fasting because I wanted to try it as an exercise of personal discipline, but I have ended up loosing around 30 lbs over the course of the first year (and keeping it off for 2 more years). I don't calorie count on other days, but I do--and did before fasting--eat reasonably healthily.

  80. Me too by arekusu · · Score: 1

    I had a very similar experience last year, gradually dropping 40 lbs over 8 months.
    Very simple habit changes: exercise slightly more, eat slightly less.

    Like the TFA, I found it very useful to weigh myself EVERY DAY (I used the Wii Fit.)
    Checking your weight is easy; subconscious reactions to this knowledge made of lot of difference for me.

  81. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by losfromla · · Score: 1

    Friend Jedidiah, I am disappointed at this statement. Fat is what you need, it is your lifesource, we are not made to pull energy from weeds and carbs are not that healthy for us. We also can't take a diet heavy in protein as our digestive system isn't built for that either (see rabbit starvation). Thus we are left with fat as our most valuable and viable energy source. Protein is needed as a building block and some veggies are probably good too. We definitely don't need sugar in the diet as we can create our own through gluconeogenesis.

    --
    Only I can judge you.
  82. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by losfromla · · Score: 1

    No, it does not, heart and circulatory issues arise due to inflammation which is now believed to be caused by inflammation. Many people are intolerant to grains, so the culprit is likely to be grains and carbs.

    --
    Only I can judge you.
  83. Re: It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by losfromla · · Score: 1

    You misread Obfuscant's statement, he was stating they are equivalent.

    --
    Only I can judge you.
  84. Re: It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by fwarren · · Score: 1

    First of all a nutritional ketogenic diet is high in fat, moderate in protein and low in carbohydrates. If you eat to little protein you start breaking down muscle. If you eat way to much protein then excess protein is converted to sugar. As a generic range, lets say 75% fat, 20% protein and 5% carbohydrates (primarily from vegetables)

    It has been shown that people who already have kidney damage can do more harm on a high protein diet. However this is not the case for people with healthy kidneys. Which is all still academic, sine a well formulated nutritional ketosis style diet is moderate in protein, not high in protein.

    I also would not blame carbohydrates for all evils in the world. However, the combination of your genetics, diet and exercise can lead you to a place where your body does not do well with a carbohydrate rich diet. I am talking about people who are diabetic or pre-diabetic. A very low carb diet for them can be incredibly beneficial.

    A good source for information about a ketogenic/very low carb diet, both how to do it and debunking common myths would be http://reddit.com/r/keto

    --
    vi + /etc over regedit any day of the week.
  85. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by fwarren · · Score: 2

    Dr Atkins died because he slipped on an icy sidewalk outside of his New York City office. He later died while in a coma. While in the coma he suffered from swelling. His autopsy shows he had heart damage. This is the headline most people have heard. The full story is that he had heart damage as a young man and the corner did note there was heart damage, but did not attribute it to his diet.

    --
    vi + /etc over regedit any day of the week.
  86. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by suutar · · Score: 1

    The figure I've heard is that 10 calories per pound is a rough average for maintenance. It goes up if you have more muscle.

  87. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a fundamental misunderstanding. The order of importance for MINIMUM macros is:
    1. protein (without aminos you will waste away, and the body will be unable to repair itself.
    2. fat (without sufficient fat, your brain will not function properly (leading to depression), you'll start having a host of health issues from lack of fatty acids)
    3. carbs (very little use for these, other than pure energy. NO, your brain doesn't need you to consume a single gram to survive, your liver makes enough for the parts of the brain that require glucose through gluconeogenesis and the rest (80+%) runs better off of ketone bodies)

  88. Re:Cut Calories and Increase Exercise. My god! by lordmage · · Score: 1

    Congratulations. I initially lost the 50+ lbs and I gained 10 back but that was due to offseason from sports and 3 Kidney Stone surgeries. Yea, another reason to avoid Sodas!

    Keep it up! good deal!

    --
    I can program myself out of a Hello World Contest!!
  89. Temperature regulation for caloric expenditure by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 3, Interesting

    One way to passively burn more energy that I don't see mentioned enough is to simply lower the ambient temperature (and don't add more clothing). Staying in a cooler room (or not using a heavy blanket when sleeping, etc) can use a significant amount of extra energy. Sleeping humans use between 20 and 80 kCal/hour, depending on ambient temperature, blankets, etc. (80-20)*8=480kCal potential burn, per night of sleep. Over the course of a week that's 3360kCal, or nearly a pound of body fat's worth of energy. Use your basal metabolic rate to burn more energy by staying in cooler environments.

    --
    Not a sentence!
  90. Re:Cut Calories and Increase Exercise. My god! by lordmage · · Score: 1

    Oh.. I did forget to put that on the baked Potato was BUTTER, just button only.. and LOTS of it. And Thousand Island on the Salad.

    No bread though. Its almost like the Calorie counters push you towards a more Atkins style life anyways.

    --
    I can program myself out of a Hello World Contest!!
  91. Too bad I love beer by Nukenbar · · Score: 1

    I think if I cut beer out of my life, I'd drop 30 pounds in a year. But then life would be too boring.

  92. Fast Metabolism Diet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you want a diet that actually thinks about the fat-burning mechanism, or if when dieting you get so hungry that you MUST EAT NOW, look at the Fast Metabolism Diet (abstracts available online). It's not quite "eat as much as you like", it's "eat more in order to lose more weight", which is good enough for me. I went down 10 pounds in four weeks, feeling great, eating five or even six times a day, barely working out, and I did not respect the diet completely (couldn't resist a glass of alcohol from time to time, for example). Guacamole burritos every weekend too -- but that's part of the diet, yessir.

    Can't resist writing a bit more: basically high-protein for two days to burn fat, then a different diet for five days to convince your body that there wasn't really a problem after all and that there is no reason to stockpile fat to replace what was burned. Apparently there are as many neurons in the human digestive tract as in a dog's brain, so training is definitely an issue.

  93. Nearly identical to my experience... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I as 6' 200 lbs around age 37 (I had been 150-170 for most of my high school/college years). I was down to 170 after about six months. The only things I did were:

    1. Download the myfitness pal app and use it to record all of my food intake.
    2. Weigh myself each morning and record it.
    3. Walk for about 20-30 minutes after lunch.

    That's it. I was kind of shocked how quick the weight came off. I try to tell people that say 'I'm going to work out to lose weight" that they are probably attacking the wrong end of things. You can eat an extra 1,000 calories in a few minutes with little effort, but to work off that 1,000 calories is going to take a really long, intense workout at the gym. Which is easier and more likely to be accomplished: NOT eating those extra 1,000 calories, or working out for an hour at the gym?

    My other big discovery is how you can still eat about the same amount and type of food without getting all the calories. Before the myfitness pal app, here was my typical lunch at Panda Express:

    Fried Rice (530 calories)
    Orange Chicken (440 calories)
    Beijing Beef (690 calories)
    Medium Coke (300 calories)
    for a grand total of 1,960 calories, which is nearly what I should eat in an entire day. I then switched my meal to:

    White Rice/Mixed veggies (225 calories)
    Orange Chicken (440 calories)
    Broccoli Beef (130 calories)
    Small Coke (200 calories)
    for a grand total of 995 (and then I would work of about another 50 calories going for a walk afterwards)

    So, without changing my typical lunch too much, I knocked off 1,000 calories. Guess who didn't have to sign up for a gym membership?

  94. It's 100% sugar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I saw the YouTube video "Sugar: The Bitter Truth" years and years ago when it first appeared on Slashdot. Ever since I watched my weight and noticed that every gain in weight was associated with a sugar-eating binge. Every single one over years and years.

    At the beginning of this year I finally decided to give the shit up for good, and so I've been without it entirely for 3 months and 23 days. Without sugar, losing weight is automatic. I mean, I fill myself up with as much of my favorite foods as I like. I love cheese balls and eat a whole fucking cheese ball (along with a full box of crackers) in a single sitting. I also love pizza and cook a couple of home-made pizzas a day. Yet despite continuing to pig out on food, I've lost about 5 pounds per month ever since I gave up sugar entirely. No exercise either, I'm quite lazy and just sit around on the computer all fucking day.

    People want to say it's bullshit, that sugar is a sweet and innocent chemical, and that all calories count, and that it's lack of exercise, but it's not. It's just sugar that is the problem. Everyone needs to get sugar out of their diet immediately.

    1. Re:It's 100% sugar. by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      Crackers, pizza crust, etc are carbs, and carbs are sugar, unless I'm missing something.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    2. Re:It's 100% sugar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Crackers, pizza crust, etc are carbs, and carbs are sugar, unless I'm missing something.

      You are. Almost everyone is. The problem is that testing diet theories is far from trivial, and so most people don't choose their favorite diet theory based on the outcome of experimentation, but rather, they choose whatever sounds the most correct to them, then come to Slashdot and post about how stupid everyone else is because "obviously" whatever sounds the most obvious to them must be the correct theory.

      All I can say is that avoiding sugar works. People have theories as to why, but I'm in no position to say whether those theories are correct. All I can say is that I haven't eaten sugar in 3.5 months and I've lost 17.5 pounds despite having no other diet restrictions and despite not changing my activity levels at all. After the first two weeks my desire to eat just cut itself in half and so I haven't had to force myself to eat less, I just haven't wanted to eat as much food as I wanted to eat before. So I continue to eat as much as I want, and yet I lose weight. If that's not the description of a diet plan that actually works then I don't know what is.

    3. Re:It's 100% sugar. by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      I think you're missing my point. Define "sugar". Which subset of saccharides are you talking about skipping out on?

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    4. Re:It's 100% sugar. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The present "sugar causes obesity" theory is rather complex. There are three components to it:

      1. Fructose. The metabolic pathway for fructose is absolutely awful. Unlike glucose which can be used by every cell in the human body, fructose can only be metabolized by the liver, and what it does with it isn't all that dissimilar to what it does with alcohol, leading to the same long-term health effects.

      2. Leptin resistance. Leptin is a hormone released by fat cells to inform the brain about energy stores so that the brain can regulate appetite. The mechanism of leptin resistance is believed to be that insulin suppresses leptin sensitivity, and that excess insulin is present due to insulin resistance, which is caused by excessive sugar consumption. So in this case at least, "sugar" means any sugar that the body will release insulin in response to.

      3. Sugar addiction. While I'm sure that 90% of people will say "that's an abuse of the word 'addiction'" all I can say is that, if it is, then we need a new word to describe what it is when someone can stay away from a substance they believe to be harmful for months, then upon getting one small taste of it, find themselves binging on it for the next two weeks.

      So my sugar-free diet basically consists of these three concepts:

      1. Avoid fructose specifically. It's all out bad, the body does nothing good with it, so just consume as little of it as possible. For this reason I avoid table sugar, HFCS, the many other names of sugar like "evaporated cane juice," and of course fruit. While Robert Lustig (the doctor behind the "Sugar: The Bitter Truth" video) believes fruit is OK because it contains fiber and because people just won't eat that much of it, I personally think he's wrong about that. When it comes to vitamin C, I can get that in pill form, so fuck fruit.

      2. Avoid excessive sugar intake in general. This one I don't think about much since there aren't many sources of sugar where that sugar isn't ordinary table sugar which contains fructose. Thus, simply by avoiding fructose, I'm avoiding essentially all added sugar already. However, there are a few glucose-only treats, the Red Vines candy being one of them, and I stay away from them as well. Even though they don't contain fructose, I don't want to trigger excessive insulin responses either, as ensuring proper leptin sensitivity is important if I am to lose weight without feeling as if I am starving myself.

      3. Never make any exceptions. This isn't the first time I've quit sugar, it's more like the third or fourth. I know it works, because each time I quit it works the same way: I'm hungry as all hell for the first two weeks, then suddenly I'm not and I only eat half as much as I was eating before. However, previously I wasn't aware of just how serious the "sugar addiction" aspect was, and so eventually one day I'd just have a little snack for some reason or another. The most recent was when I was at a birthday party and everyone was like "oh, whatever, one piece of cake won't hurt." ...but it did hurt, and it was the end of months of avoiding sugar as I then found myself driving to the store to buy doughnuts and chocolate milk every day for the next two weeks and gained 20 pounds before I was able to control myself again. So I've learned my lesson and this time I'm staying away from the stuff as if it leads to instant death. The next time someone tells me "one piece of cake won't hurt" they're just going to get some "fuck you."

      Also, to deal with the addiction aspect, I've been making heavy use of aspartame. I've not used it in food as I don't want to do anything to encourage me to eat more than I'm genuinely hungry for, but I started by drinking a lot of diet soda, and after deciding that was too expensive, I've switched to using the stuff to make Kool-Aid. Of course, the end result of this is that I'm now addicted to aspartame, but people have been insisting that stuff is the cause of all evil for decades and yet no one seems to be

    5. Re:It's 100% sugar. by Cederic · · Score: 1

      I'd rather be overweight and addicted to sugar than consume aspartame.

      Mental health matters more to me than physical.

      However, this whole conversation (including your post) has urged me to try and cut down on sugar consumption. I'm very unlikely to try and cut it out entirely though.

    6. Re:It's 100% sugar. by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      That was a much more reasoned and informative post than most of the others I've seen in this thread, thank you. Generally, what I've been seeing is a lot of "If you do X, then fuck you! Why? You're an asshole, that's why! Evidence? Details? We don't need no stinkin' information!" Seeing something with at least a fair amount of explanation behind it is refreshing.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  95. Angelo is an asshole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    His tone sounds like that because he's one of /.'s assholes. As you found out, calling people idiots and then shitting all over their posts is what he does. It's his thing.

  96. Re: It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't forget to mention the unthinking sheep dominate that sub and crackpots, and you are the enemy if you show up with anything contrary to groupthink, even peer reviewed science. the only good science is keto scienxe. All else flawed. Quick attack the nonbelievers

  97. "without running" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a bit of a joke that the article claims he did this without running, and then he goes on to write: "My workouts for most of this entire period consisted of some muscle strengthening (PT rehab, mostly) and low impact mellow cardio (elliptical, spin, real stairs, et al.) workouts between 25 and 45 minutes, generally 30-35 minutes. I was typically at the gym four to six days a week with some breaks when I traveled. I only practiced yoga intermittently in order to focus on my cardio at the gym. [...] If I notice my weight creep upwards, it's time to return to more careful calorie counting and exercise."

    There is no "hacking" going on here. "Burn at least as many calories as you consume" is not exactly new.

  98. Fail proof solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Eat less, exercise more.
    Eat more peanuts, eat less carbs, eat more fish, take these pills, take those pills, do this, do that etc. People... there is no magical combination that suddenly cancels out other things you are eating compared to what you are burning off. Your caloric intake has to be equal to the amount you are burning to sustain your weight. If it is more, you gain weight, if it is less, you lose weight. No strings attached!!!! No tricks, no smoke and mirrors. If you feel you HAVE to eat, you need to deal with that but it is not an excuse. Most people want something that allows them to eat what they want, exercise less and they should and still be healthy and lose weight. IT CANNOT HAPPEN! Don't believe the diets of the rich and famous, the infomercials, the morning news talk shows, the articles in the magazines, food claims that somehow turn a sugary chocolate granola bar into something that you can eat and lose weight with.

    "But I have a slow metabolism", okay, so eat even less. No one said you have to eat X calories a day, accept that your rate is less than other peoples then. Deal with it. If you continue to eat more than you are burning you will gain weight. Obviously your body cut back on burning so you cut back on food. Get your suggested daily amount of vitamins and minerals.

    Eating less does not have to be less mass of food, it could mean eating less high calorie food and more less calorie foods.

    There are millions of ways to lose weight, even a hundred or so in this /. article. ALL of the different methods that actually work require one thing. You eat less calories than your body needs daily and you will loose weight.
           

  99. The unanswered question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So after healing his knee and slimming down, did he go back to stalking his ex?

  100. Good article by djrobxx · · Score: 1

    The author did a good job of outlining what worked for him. I also lost about 40 lbs over the last year (from 190lbs down to 150 now, which is a good weight for me). I've held around 150-152 for the last 3 months or so and feel great.

    For me, it's less about the diet and more about the exercise. For me the key was making my health my own #1 priority. I had to make time for myself to go the gym. I had to stop putting work, or spending time with my significant other/family/friends/pets ahead of my gym schedule. I also learned to stop depending on others - having a gym buddy or going to class with a friend is great, but at the end of the day you need to go whether they do or don't.

    Yes, I watched what I ate, and yes, I looked at the calorie counts to roughly budget, but I never kept logs of how many calories I was eating over a week. I'd just weigh myself once in a while to ensure I was still progressing. For me, I found the more I exercised, the more I naturally wanted healthier foods. Something like a donut or a dessert seemed revolting after spending a couple hours cycling. As with his calorie intake needing to be reduced has he progressed, if you keep working out, your ability to burn more calories increases along with your stamina. I can easily knock out 800 calories in a spin class now.

    Find healthy foods and forms of exercise that you actually enjoy so you can keep the weight off. My breakfast/snack of choice is now greek yogurt, and I've found that I have a great time taking group fitness classes.

  101. Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Summary: I reduced my calorie count by not snacking, and substituting low-calorie food.

    Duh.

    Easier said than done, but it's simply a matter of willpower.

  102. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by _DangerousDwarf · · Score: 1

    Really? Are you sure you need a lot less calories then 2000? Even sitting on your butt all day? http://www.health-calc.com/die... Being in your mid thirties, ~155 pounds, and sitting or sleeping all day shows a total calorie count of over 2000.

  103. Stop it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can we please stop calling everything "hacking"?

  104. Re:Cut Calories and Increase Exercise. My god! by Tom+Arneberg · · Score: 1

    I lost my last 30 lbs using "Hacker's Diet" (tracking my weight every day with a 20-day exponentially-smoothed rolling average chart) and tracking my food intake with My Fitness Pal. I exercise a lot, but that didn't do it. In 2012, I averaged 64 minutes a day of vigorous physical exercise, but lost only about 3 pounds. But in 2013, I used Hacker's Diet and MFP and went from 180 to 155 in six months, then slowly tapered down to 150, where I've now been for over a year (fluctuating +/- 3-4 pounds). (And this at 54 years of age!) I wrote a few newspaper columns about it, including this one: http://arneberg.com/columns/ch...

  105. Re: It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by fwarren · · Score: 1

    This is slashdot, home of that kind of behavior.

    If you are interested in what nutritional ketosis is and want a quick way to do it right without buying $100 in books this is an excellent place to start.

    If you see article X and then ask in the group about it, they will point you to article Y or citation Z. As always common sense is left up to the reader. Read both X and Y and make a decision for yourself.

    I can tell you if I eat the typical "heart healthy" diet with plenty of grains, fruits and vegetables and avoid sweets...I am still pre-diabetic.

    However if I eat a diet very low in carbohydrates, my blood sugar is fine. So I have 4 options

    1. Eat all the processed foods and sugar and want and end up diabetic.
    2. Eat what is considered a low fat, low cholesterol, heart healthy diet and end up diabetic.
    3. Eat a low carbohydrate diet of under 50grams of carbs a day to remain healthy and non-diabetic.
    4. Eat a very low carbohydrate diet under 25grams of carbs a day to remain healthy, non-diabetic and reap the benefits of nutritional ketosis

    It really is not a religious issue. For me and my body, the only question I have to ask, "is it worth the extra effort to stay below 25grams of carbs a day to reap whatever benefits nutritional ketosis will give me or is standard low carb going to work better for me?"

    For anyone interested, get a blood glucose meter and some testing strips and test your blood sugar levels, if you ever get above 120, the odds are a low carb diet will reap you some major health benefits. Also the words "keto" and "low carb" when used on pinterest will yield a butt load of delicious recipes that are low carb.

    --
    vi + /etc over regedit any day of the week.
  106. I just used slashdot(Japanese edition) for Hacking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hi. I am a Japanese slashdot(slashdot.jp) user. about 10 yeas ago, I used slashdot itself to hacking weight loss.
    The hacking method is very simple, just write my weight in slashdot diary.
    My weight became down about 10 pounds(86Kg->80kg) and keep this about 10 yeas.

    My link is this

    Thanls.

    A japanese anonymous coward

  107. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by bingoUV · · Score: 1

    You make it sound like starvation is necessary for effective weight loss. This is extremely incorrect.

    The way fat (especially saturated) has been maligned by "experts" in 80s, 90s and early 2000s - millions of people have gained weight just by eating too much carbohydrate. Just replacing some of it by fat makes for tastier, more filling, body weight reducing, and health giving food. Quite the opposite of starvation.

    For very rapid body fat loss, you might have to go on very low carbohydrates - which while not starving, does need to fight the other animal in the body which craves carbohydrates, simpler the better.

    --
    Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
  108. Simplicity is prerequisite for reliability by bingoUV · · Score: 1

    It's difficult, but reliable.

    No way. Impossible. Simplicity is prerequisite for reliability - Edsger Dijkstra.

    --
    Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
  109. So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So diet and exercise works, who knew!

  110. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yup, if you move as little as sediment moves, you're burning zero calories in a millenium.

  111. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Proteins have a mainly structural purpose, fat have both, structural and energy purposes, and carbohydrates are used for energy. But all of them can be biochemically transformed to be used for another purpose (for instance, amino acids can be transformed into glucose). The thing is, all of them are necessary and transforming one into the other is highly inefficient and doesn't come without consequences (subproducts). You need the fats for the cellular walls and you need the carbs for your brain. A diet must be, more than anything, a balanced diet. It's easier to keep a low-calorie diet if you don't feel like crap all the time and getting all the nutrients your body needs is essential to that goal. Diets with too few carbs can produce headaches and make you feel groggy. Diets with too few fats will make you hungry and tired. In low-calorie diets, some daze and fatigue is to be expected, but not to the point of impacting your life significantly.

  112. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by master_kaos · · Score: 1

    Yup, before winter came I was walking 1 hour 5 times a week at a brisk pace(6.3km/hour). I was losing 4lbs/week at 340lbs. Too bad I only started walking a few weeks before snow hit and -20 degree weather. Just started walking(and jogging) again this week so we will see if it ramps back up again.

  113. Just cheer up!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How fricking complicated is it to eat less than you burn?

    That's like telling somebody who suffers from depression to "just cheer up"

  114. My wife and I lost 130 pounds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    by stopping eating earlier in the day.

    Try to generally eat healthily, but beyond that anything goes. Just stop eating at 12 or 3 or whenever, and the weight drops off.

    At night I might have some toast, and she'll have some kind of clear soup. THat's about it.

  115. the hacker diet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    one thing of note.. the inventor of the hacker diet ended up finding out that the paleo diet was far superior to what he came up with. i personally lost about 90lbs over a year and a half doing paleo and low carb. these so called 'fad diets' actually DO work.

  116. How to lose more and keep it off HCG, no exercise. by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    First you have to be committed. Doc told me I wouldn't make 50, I was 43 at the time. Sent me to the fat doc. I was the lightest there at the clinic, even the women were heavier than I was. They do bariatric surgery. They said they'll shrink my stomach down. For this I'll need to take vitamin supplements, or I'll lose my hair. Then I found out I don't have a bariatric benefit on my health insurance. Might now, didn't then. Thank goodness.

    Dude in the next cube was heavier than I was, and I was 305 at the time. He said go HCG diet. I though yea, yea.. yet another fad diet. Then I watched him lose 30, then 60 Lbs. I started at that point. I asked if he were ready to eat dirt at that point, he wasn't. Wasn't hungry. Here's why:

    HCG protocol. Google it and read it. AS LONG AS YOU DO WHAT THEY SAY, YOU'RE GOING TO BE SUCCESSFUL EVERY DAY. No, really. Everyone I know that has tried this has been successful. At first you'll gain about 6 Lbs, then you'll lose those 6 lbs and expect to lose a pound every day. Sometimes you won't, don't get upset. Keep with it, you'll lose the next day. Whatever you do, don't cheat. Think of breaking a toe if you cheat, because that'll be about how it is. You'll get those cravings back and it's really hard to keep on it. Just don't do it. Believe me, I know.

      Start weighing yourself every day and keep a record. No exercise bullshit. In fact, don't exercise or you'll likely end up on the floor. Exercise is the crazy left's way of doing things. Sure it works, however you're far better off not consuming the calories in the first place. Work for an hour to burn off 400 calories IF YOU'RE LUCKY? I don't think so. They say you burn 3500 calories/pound. For me 1 Lbs is more like 1500 calories. I can lose 1 Lbs in a day, or spend 3 hours at the gym under heavy exercise? If you have 50 Lbs to lose, you see how stupid that is.

    1) Build up fat for two days - eat whatever you want and as much as you want. Be careful, if you over eat too much you'll be sick later in the day. Here's what I did (Start drops now. HCG diet drops, hcgdiet.com, I use hcglean2000 drops. Make sure it's homeopathic. There's no HCG in there, however it works. It's the protocol that works. No you won't grow boobs or anything to do with being female):
        A) Breakfast at Duncan Donuts. 3 donuts.
        B) Lunch at 5 guys, dessert at Cold Stone - large sunday
        C) Dinner at another fatty place, pick up a half gallon of (hersheys) ice cream on the way home.
        D) Have half that half gallon of ice cream at night.
        Next day repeat.
    2) Next 38 days you'll be eating 500 calories. Take vitamins, and potassium if you get cramps/charlie horses.
          You can have each day:
          Meal:
          A) 6 ounces of meat - 3 for lunch, 3 for dinner - other types of meat. Like chicken and steak, chicken and shrimp, etc.
          B) Veggie - like a whole tomato.
          Snack - afternoon and evening - one fruit. Like one apple, or 5 strawberries. Note, you cannot have 2 small apples. Just one.
    3) Next 3 weeks you'll add in more food to level off. If you gain, you must lose it the next day.
    4) Next 3 weeks start adding in more carbs and sugars. Again if you gain you must lose it right away.

    Now you can start all over again.

    If you stop, continue to weight yourself every day. Do not let yourself gain. Always remember - you are the easiest person in the world to fool. Is that cake worth it? Bag of cookies? Of course not. You'll feel bad if you gain again.

    I'm 5 years out and 75 Lbs down. I'd like to lose some more, just haven't started again yet. I think my skin is about ready to do that now.
    *YOU* CAN do it.

    BTW, on the way down I had a LOT more energy. Some days I felt like I had to run around the outside of the building or I'd explode with energy. I mean like I was when I was in the 1st grade. I also got acne back as I got rid of stuff inside. All normal. Goes away when you level off.

    Hope this helps someone out there.

  117. I recommend gastritis. by shihonage · · Score: 1

    Lost 30lbs in a month. Great for keeping in shape. Natural inability to digest many junk foods, chocolate, soda, etc. It's great!*

    __________________________
    *Not really great

  118. Re:It's simple. Eat less and eat less crap by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

    average person would be lucky to need maybe 1200-1300 calories as their TDEE (Total Daily Energy Expenditure)

    This is just not true. Not unless you're talking about the average sub-5'-tall postmenopausal woman.

    As a sedentary middle aged dude, I need about 1900 calories, and will lose weight if I consume less. 1300 calories would be starvation-level for me.

    --
    They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
  119. Proof that the Internet Makes You Fat by obscuro · · Score: 1

    That guy's chart is proof that html makes you fat. See that little downward tick around 2011 when everyone started abandoning the web for mobile apps. Then BOOM - Bootstrap brings him back to html pages. And that steep recent drop. He thinks it's from his diet and exercise but it's really because all the time he spends looking at his Fit Bit he's not on the web.

    --
    Every rule has more than one consequence.
  120. Weight loss by Bmi123456 · · Score: 1

    Finding the perfect weight loss diet plan can be confusing at times, but it should not be a struggle. You should see fast results when starting a healthy diet, regardless of whether or not you limit calories, because your body will be happy not having to fend off all the bad foods it was being stuffed with before. http://aboutbmicalculator.blog...