Because all WoW players are overweight and nerds right?vrbtny said:
OT: Awesome, in a scientific way, bad, in a social way. I can't wait to see all the people who try to replicate this and end up getting fatter :/.
Man Loses 27 Pounds Eating Twinkies and Doritos
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
OT: Awesome, in a scientific way, bad, in a social way. I can't wait to see all the people who try to replicate this and end up getting fatter :/.
Those are perplexing figures. The diet would have to continue for a long period of time to tell if it's healthier. He may be losing weight, but that doesn't mean it's healthy. I do wonder how this all turns out and how it's all happening. Maybe we are missing something in how our body works.
The general rule of thumb when losing weight is to not take in more calories then you use, or so my former Royal Marines Commando gym instructor told me 
Case in point, I am always working out and training so as a result of this my metabolism is off the charts and I need to eat. Alot.
As Altorin mentioned, the gentleman who ate twinkies probably had to starve a lot of the time because he wasn't burning any calories (or so I would assume from the original post).
Case in point, I am always working out and training so as a result of this my metabolism is off the charts and I need to eat. Alot.
As Altorin mentioned, the gentleman who ate twinkies probably had to starve a lot of the time because he wasn't burning any calories (or so I would assume from the original post).
I'd probably debate that he actually felt healthier but I suppsoe I can't debate whether he lost weight or not.
I mean all that sugar ... after you crash from the sugar rush you feel overwhelmingly horrible ... like a sledgehammer to your features.
I mean all that sugar ... after you crash from the sugar rush you feel overwhelmingly horrible ... like a sledgehammer to your features.
He dropped his calorie intake, that's kinda what did it.
Of course, if you were to keep up that diet for a long time the other factors or cholesterol and fat would begin to return. It's the same as the Atkins or Dukan diet (I'm currently on the Dukan diet, so I had to learn about this). Eating strictly protein for months will cause rapid weight loss, and you'll appear healthy, but after a month or two you have to start reintroducing other foods, because otherwise your cholesterol skyrockets, and when your cholesterol goes up, your weight follows it.
Similar thing here. If you did this for long enough, eventually the high concentration of sugars and saturated fats would have a quite severe health impact.
The best diet is a completely balanced diet, based on the food pyramid thing, and everything in moderation, eating slightly less than the RDA of calories. Everything else should just be used for a quick blitz to help you over the initial hurdle of weight loss.
Of course, if you were to keep up that diet for a long time the other factors or cholesterol and fat would begin to return. It's the same as the Atkins or Dukan diet (I'm currently on the Dukan diet, so I had to learn about this). Eating strictly protein for months will cause rapid weight loss, and you'll appear healthy, but after a month or two you have to start reintroducing other foods, because otherwise your cholesterol skyrockets, and when your cholesterol goes up, your weight follows it.
Similar thing here. If you did this for long enough, eventually the high concentration of sugars and saturated fats would have a quite severe health impact.
The best diet is a completely balanced diet, based on the food pyramid thing, and everything in moderation, eating slightly less than the RDA of calories. Everything else should just be used for a quick blitz to help you over the initial hurdle of weight loss.
Really. All you needed was to not eat like a pig and you'd be healthy. Really. Glad we know this now.
It gets him to lose weight. But if someone else tried it, any number of things could happen.
People are different, whats healthy for one person could kill someone else. Each person has a health system unique to them. Hell I went a week of eating fast food and lost 2 pounds. I'm sure if anyone else tried that they would gain weight.
Its why I don't do diet plans.
People are different, whats healthy for one person could kill someone else. Each person has a health system unique to them. Hell I went a week of eating fast food and lost 2 pounds. I'm sure if anyone else tried that they would gain weight.
Its why I don't do diet plans.
1) that's what multi-vitamins are forAlex The Rat said:
2) I'm sure there are packaged foods that contain vitamin c, like anything with any amount of real citrus in it
3) He's a nutritionist, he's not going to contract scurvy.
Yep. And I think that's the point; all the fad diets out there (and I include Atkins with 'em) have these "ekstra speshul" eating formulas that are supposed to make pounds melt away. This study blows that idea out of the water, and works in line with the Weight Watchers (or most dieticians, for that matter) idea that it's caloric intake and physical exertion that determine weight gain. You don't have to eat special combinations of food in order to lose weight; you can lose weight eating the same foods you enjoy, just less of it than you used to.*MelasZepheos said:
That this is a revelation to some is a bad sign for how health is dealt with in the media.
-- Steve
* The function of a "balanced diet" is to ensure you get enough vitamins, minerals, proteins, and similar nutrients to support basic health. It takes a particularly bad diet to miss that badly enough these days to make for obvious health problems, given how many packaged foods are fortified with additional nutrients, though I know of a few undergrad students who got into health crises dining solely on ramen, Kraft Dinner, and beer.
I'm not sure I understand your point, but let me make certain so I do not criticize unfairly. It very much appears you are repeating yourself. Caloric restriction works in weight loss, and there are few possible diets that cause you to lose weight that don't include it. These both would seem to indicate it was a very big factor.jonnosferatu said:
If you are saying that most other diets also tend to lead towards lower caloric intake, well, that may be true but begs the question which part of the diet is then being effective?
The world would fix itself almost instantly if everyone could grasp two simple but impossible concepts:Greg Tito said:
1. If you spend less money than you make, you cannot go broke.
2. If you eat fewer calories than you burn, you cannot gain weight.
Seriously, what is fat but stored energy? If you're not taking in that much excess energy, there's nothing to store. Law of conservation of matter, people. If you don't eat it, it can't make you fatter.
Eat enough to keep your metabolism from going into emergency mode, and space it out over the course of the day. Ta-da, you're getting thinner. Add exercise for increased results.
Some things are consistent. Each person has different metabolism, but everyone's bodies obey the first law of thermodynamics. You can't create mass or energy.Irridium said:
So, if you determine your baseline for how many calories you burn during the day, and you make sure that your intake is, say, 10% less than that, you'll see weight loss. It doesn't mean the exact same diet works for everyone, but the exact same method does. Matter and energy are neither created nor destroyed.