Right, time to lose weight.

W Balboos GHB

Alas, you've must have gotten a hacked copy of the diet book I was thinking of writing. "The Eat Less Diet" Page 1: Eat Less Page 2-144: (blank, for your notes) Based on the premises that: If you eat fewer calories than you burn you will lose weight. If you eat more calories than you burn you will gain weight. Anything else is just a gimmick.

Ravings en masse^

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein

"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010

Munchies_Matt

Yep, you are spot on.

Foothill

Thanks. I see lots of ads for the latest fad diet and it never fails to amaze me how many people throw their money at them. It's a lot of wasted money when the right way to loose or maintain weigh is simple: know your own personal biology at take advantage of it.

if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); } Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016

Munchies_Matt

My brother is skinny, always was. Me, I am very carb sensitive. I can really pile on the fat, easily. I guess it is my viking genes coming through.

Lost User

F-ES Sitecore wrote:

Why do you only get an obesity crisis in countries where manual labour is rare and food is in abundance?

Lots of sugar, the low price of protein (and fat) and no excercise. Compared to a diet of rice, beans and hard labour. Never understood why people pay for fitness :)

Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]

F ES Sitecore

Foothill wrote:

It's way more complicated than that. It also helps to know a bit of bioligical chemistry

If it's complicated and requires knowledge of biological chemistry then why is there no obesity in developing nations where people have no real education, can barely read or write never mind do chemistry, but do daily manual labour and don't have an overabundance of food? I mean the whole calories in vs out thing is a myth after all....

F ES Sitecore

Munchies_Matt wrote:

Why so negative?

I'm not being negative, I'm being realistic. Your weight is a product of your lifestyle. If you can't maintain the way you eat now forever then only one thing can happen....you'll go back to your old lifestyle, so you'll also go back to your old weight. When the weight gains slow and possible even reverse what are you going to do then? Look for the next fad diet and start the process over. The proper advice is out there, but you can't force people to follow it, the allure that losing weight and being healthy is some complex mystical science just seems more appealing to a lot of people for some reason.

Munchies_Matt

Yes, that is why I am changing my lifestyle.

F ES Sitecore

Eating no carbs? You think you're going to spend the rest of your life eating no carbs? You know that's incredibly unhealthy and unreasonable? Here's a simple idea around a change of lifestyle that is realistic and maintainable....don't drink three glasses of wine a night...400-500 calories a day saving right there.

Munchies_Matt

When I have got to a good weight I can on occasion eat refined carbs and sugars. And no it isnt 'incredibly unhealthy and unreasonable'. Mankind didnt have refined carbs or sugars till about 200 years ago. And no, not drinking red wine is NOT realistic.

F ES Sitecore

LOL Ok, I'll leave you to your pseudo-science mumbo jumbo. When you finally crack the science make sure you go to Africa to spread the word there, maybe help lift those poor uneducated people from their obesity crisis too.

Munchies_Matt

What on earth are you on? It is not 'pseudo-science' to state, correctly, that refined carbs and sugars are a relatively recent introduction to our diet and that hence not eating them is in no way dangerous, or odd. And WTF has Africa got to do with it?

F ES Sitecore

Your original post talked about carbs, not refined carbs and refined sugars. My reply was about carbs, you are now talking about refined carbs ergo are now fighting a straw-man argument as your actual arguments hold no weight.

Munchies_Matt

Well since plant fiber is a carb, dont you suppose I was referring to the usual rice, potatoes, flour trio? (not to mention sugars)

F-ES Sitecore wrote:

now fighting a straw-man argument as your actual arguments hold no weight.

Wow, I didnt realise me wanting to lose weight was such an argument. Apparently to some it is. You for example.

F ES Sitecore

Munchies_Matt wrote:

Well since plant fiber is a carb, dont you suppose I was referring to the usual rice, potatoes, flour trio? (not to mention sugars)

LOL so now we need to know what you mean, not what you say? Regardless, not eating refined carbs is fairly unrealistic too.

Munchies_Matt wrote:

Wow, I didnt realise me wanting to lose weight was such an argument.

I didn't say it was, I think it's fairly obvious the arguments I was referring to are your arguments that losing weight involves knowledge if chemistry, that it is complicated, that you can maintain a no-carb lifestyle and all the other things you (and others) have repeatedly said on this thread. Seeing as it looks like you're finally out of anything of merit to say there is no point dragging this onto semantics.

Munchies_Matt

F-ES Sitecore wrote:

so now we need to know

So you never heard of the GI diet, refined carbs? Really? Do we need to tell you everything?

F-ES Sitecore wrote:

not eating refined carbs is fairly unrealistic too

Because white rice, potatoes, and white flour is impossible not to eat? FFS get real would you.

F-ES Sitecore wrote:

your arguments that losing weight involves knowledge if chemistry

No I didnt. I never mentioned chemistry.

F ES Sitecore

Munchies_Matt wrote:

So you never heard of the GI diet

Garbage fad diet that won't help you lose weight in the long-term.

Munchies_Matt wrote:

Because white rice, potatoes, and white flour is impossible not to eat?

I said fairly unrealistic, not impossible....it's even in the text you quoted. Straw-man argument.

Munchies_Matt wrote:

I never mentioned chemistry.

You might not have mentioned the literal word chemistry, but when you talk about sugars, fats, insulin and their effects that is chemistry - "the scientific discipline involved with compounds composed of atoms, i.e. elements, and molecules, i.e. combinations of atoms: their composition, structure, properties, behavior and the changes they undergo during a reaction with other compounds"

Munchies_Matt

You are wrong and full of shit.

F ES Sitecore

F-ES: 1 Matt: 0

Munchies_Matt

That just proves it.