Weight Loss Thread

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!

mkopec

<Gold Donor>
26,515
40,685
Well considering the national BMI charts, you fall right in line for normal, for a 6' man with BMI 26 is 190, to get down to 20 BMI you would weigh 150. Other charts of weight to height ratio average for a small frame man and medium frame man have normal range pegged at 152-164 and 160-174 respectively, so you are not a freak dude, just normal.
 

Itlan

Blackwing Lair Raider
4,994
744
If you're going low carb I wouldn't replace it with protein personally. I would absolutely up my fat intake, but that's just me.
 

Ossoi

Potato del Grande
<Rickshaw Potatoes>
17,888
8,780
If you're going low carb I wouldn't replace it with protein personally. I would absolutely up my fat intake, but that's just me.
Well my more protein comment was in reply to this nonsense

Stop what, bro? Whats he supposed to eat then on a low carb diet? You have to replace the fucking carbs with something, right?
mkopec is obviously oblivious to the fact there are more than 2 macro nutrients.

Besides, increasing protein intake in the absense of carbs is not radical advice. Proteins more filling than fat for a start, quite important if you're restricting calories.
 

Itlan

Blackwing Lair Raider
4,994
744
Well if he's already taking in enough protein there's no need to add excess. Fats are cheaper and more abundant.

As for your suggestion protein is more satiating, do you have a study to back that up? Because fats have always been the macro that sated me the most.
 

mkopec

<Gold Donor>
26,515
40,685
As for your suggestion protein is more satiating, do you have a study to back that up? Because fats have always been the macro that sated me the most.
Of course they are. this is why a low carb/high fat/moderate protein diet, people tend to keep caloric intake down naturally because they just feel full and eat less. Carbs, especially the highly refined ones, have been shown to have an addictive quality to them. Like when you eat a bag of chips or cheetos, you want more, you are still hungry. Even shit like rice and potatoes, just speaking from personal experience, tend to be very addictive.
 

Warmuth

Molten Core Raider
877
520
Protein is harder to consume, calorie for calorie than fat for me. It's not even close. Fatty foods are incredibly calorie dense. Which high fat foods in particular would be higher in satiety than say chicken breast or tuna?
A whole lot of the highest ranking foods are carbs, a lot of them fruits ,while potatoes are off the charts.
 

Ossoi

Potato del Grande
<Rickshaw Potatoes>
17,888
8,780
Of course they are. this is why a low carb/high fat/moderate protein diet, people tend to keep caloric intake down naturally because they just feel full and eat less. Carbs, especially the highly refined ones, have been shown to have an addictive quality to them. Like when you eat a bag of chips or cheetos, you want more, you are still hungry. Even shit like rice and potatoes, just speaking from personal experience, tend to be very addictive.
he was specifically asking about protein vs fats. That wasn't the cue for you to launch into another anti-carb tirade.

As for studies (not that I care what a study says - absolutely meaningless because everyone that wants to will find a reason to debunk any study):

"It is well established that under most conditions, protein is more satiating than the isoenergetic ingestion of carbohydrate or fat"Protein, weight management, and satiety

Isn't it patently obvious that eating protein at 4cals per gram is going to allow you to eat more food than if you increased fats at 9cals per gram.

This whole circular debate is retarded anyway. I'm actually coming off a 2 week diet break where I consumed vast amounts of Ben and Jerrys, I also found out that the supermarket at the end of my road is open 24/7 and sells krispy kremes. I've been eating 225-250g protein, 70-90g of fats and carbs have been under 30g, so I'm in ketosis and am dropping a lot of water weight. Yet by next week I'll be back to eating carbs post workout and will be back under 10% body fat by the end of September.
 

Ossoi

Potato del Grande
<Rickshaw Potatoes>
17,888
8,780
Of course they are. this is why a low carb/high fat/moderate protein diet, people tend to keep caloric intake down naturally because they just feel full and eat less. Carbs, especially the highly refined ones, have been shown to have an addictive quality to them. Like when you eat a bag of chips or cheetos, you want more, you are still hungry. Even shit like rice and potatoes, just speaking from personal experience, tend to be very addictive.
he was specifically asking about protein vs fats. That wasn't the cue for you to launch into another anti-carb tirade.

As for studies (not that I care what a study says - absolutely meaningless because everyone that wants to will find a reason to debunk any study):

"It is well established that under most conditions, protein is more satiating than the isoenergetic ingestion of carbohydrate or fat"Protein, weight management, and satiety

Isn't it patently obvious that eating protein at 4cals per gram is going to allow you to eat more food than if you increased fats at 9cals per gram.

This whole circular debate is retarded anyway. I'm actually coming off a 2 week diet break where I consumed vast amounts of Ben and Jerrys, I also found out that the supermarket at the end of my road is open 24/7 and sells krispy kremes. I've been eating 225-250g protein, 70-90g of fats and carbs have been under 30g, so I'm in ketosis and am dropping a lot of water weight. Yet by next week I'll be back to eating carbs post workout and will be back under 10% body fat by the end of September.
 

Itlan

Blackwing Lair Raider
4,994
744
I'm not debating fats are more calorically dense. I just tend to get very full off fatty foods. Then again, most of my protein comes from fattier cuts of meat as well, along with eggs.
 

mkopec

<Gold Donor>
26,515
40,685
And thats fine, bro. But again, this is the "Weight loss thread" not what can get a meathead to 8% bodyfat the fastest, keep that in mind. And yes you are right, calorically wise of course a 180cal can of tuna will be more satiating than 2 tablespoon of 180 cal olive oil. But you cannot discount that a fatty steak will be more satiating than a can of low fat water packed tuna when calories are discounted.

The question becomes how can I lose fat and sustain that weight loss over time while not feeling starved all the time. And for me, its been to increase fat eat moderate protein and cut the carbs. Because for me eating that type of diet, Its hard for me to go more than like 1500-1700 calories per day when I was counting them. Not even talking about keto here since I have only been on keto for like 4 weeks trying to break that 195 lb mark stall.

Again, in my experience when I eat carbs like rice or potato, or bread typically I feel full, almost grossly full, but then I crash and the cravings and hunger come back much faster. This is why I cut the carbs. I have went from 260 down to 195 in 5 months. Am I saying that this is the be all end all of dieting? Fuck no. There are other ways to lose the fat. But it sure has worked for me so far in a relatively short amount of time. And I dont do cardio or work out. Im sedetary as fuck. Best of all I wasnt even counting my macros and caloric intake after a few months because when I did, I knew I was in a deficit naturally.

Typically before me trying keto, I was probably consuming somewhere around +/-100g of carbs per day. And that included breads, wraps, potatoes and rice. I also practiced short term fasting, like 17 is hours?, even before reading about it. My last meal was probably around 6-8PM, and the next meal was the next day around 1 PM followed by the dinner, again at 6-8PM.
 

Khane

Got something right about marriage
20,626
14,374
"It is well established that under most conditions, protein is more satiating than the isoenergetic ingestion of carbohydrate or fat"Protein, weight management, and satiety

Isn't it patently obvious that eating protein at 4cals per gram is going to allow you to eat more food than if you increased fats at 9cals per gram.
Yes, because not only is it more volume but gets used for energy last. However, under situations where you're burning fats vs burning protein, the fat will keep you sated for longer because there is more energy (calories) to burn per gram all else being equal.

Satiation is different than feeling full. Carbs like veggies and fruits have so many less calories comparitively in volume that you will feel full faster eating less calories, but you also burn through it a lot faster and then get hungry again sooner. They sate hunger far less as a result.
 

mkopec

<Gold Donor>
26,515
40,685
Also keep in mind that protein, more often than not, comes along with fat. Other than a few really low fat protein offerings, it always comes as a pair not mutually exclusive.
 

Warmuth

Molten Core Raider
877
520
Id be willing to bet it matters what the fat is paired with. The vast majority of fat laden food will have such small portions it doesn't matter how slow it digests if there's simply not much volume there in the first place. Variance between individuals is probably fairly large too in regards to personal preference.
 

Ossoi

Potato del Grande
<Rickshaw Potatoes>
17,888
8,780
And thats fine, bro. But again, this is the "Weight loss thread" not what can get a meathead to 8% bodyfat the fastest
why are you arguing with me then? And just lol at trying to make a distinction between losing weight and losing body fat.

"nah bro, who cares how quickly you can burn fat and lose muscle in the gym, THIS IS THE WEIGHT LOSS THREAD, GO KETO" , you're literally one shitpost away from going on ignore. Toying with keto kretins is fun at first but then when you realise how devoted they are to their keto kult kool aid it becomes tiresome
 

Khane

Got something right about marriage
20,626
14,374
Id be willing to bet it matters what the fat is paired with. The vast majority of fat laden food will have such small portions it doesn't matter how slow it digests if there's simply not much volume there in the first place. Variance between individuals is probably fairly large too in regards to personal preference.
Studies have shown that how fast you eat has a lot more to do with how full you feel than how much you're actually consuming. You're stomach can't send signals to your brain fast enough when you just shovel food into your mouth.

Slow Down, You Eat Too Fast

I wish I could find the actual studies but that seems difficult unless you're in academia or in the scientific fields.
 

Itlan

Blackwing Lair Raider
4,994
744
It takes me an hour to eat my breakfast at work. 5 eggs, 4 oz of chicken and a cup of oats.

Half the time I want to shove my face into the container and just end my life.
 

DickTrickle

Definitely NOT Furor Planedefiler
13,571
15,884
65 pounds in five months with no cardio or lifting? Are these off the cuff rough numbers or actually accurate?
 

Ossoi

Potato del Grande
<Rickshaw Potatoes>
17,888
8,780
Really-low-fat vs somewhat-lower-carb - a nuanced analysis - Examine.com Blog | Examine.comcame across this earlier on /r/leangains

Nowadays, new dieters often pair low-carb with higher protein, the latter of which can boost weight loss.
As usual, don't bother with media headlines -- this study is NOT a blow to low-carb dieting, which can be quite effective due to factors such as typically higher protein and more limited junk food options. Rather, this study shows that a low-carb diet isn't necessary for fat loss and that lowering carbs and insulin doesn't provide a magical metabolic advantage.
If you need a broad and simple takeaway from this study, here is one: weight loss does not rely on certain carb levels or manipulation of insulin, it relies on eating less. Don't be scared that eating carbs will cause insulin to trap fat inside your fat cells.
Ossoi right again.
 

mkopec

<Gold Donor>
26,515
40,685
65 pounds in five months with no cardio or lifting? Are these off the cuff rough numbers or actually accurate?
Started April at 260ish. Now at 195. No cardio no lifting other than maybe a month in the spring. My summers are too busy for that shit. I will go back this fall.