weight loss

[SLCPUNK]

You can eat more and lose weight, you just have to eat the right things.

[Sin Cut]

Stop eating so fucking much.

There.

finally, a brethren!

[Genesis]

I just don't get why people cry and moan that losing weight is so hard. A strict diet with high protein and total caloric value less than what you need for maintenance + Cardio = Weight Loss. It's not rocket science people...

[Sin Cut]

I just don't get why people cry and moan that losing weight is so hard. A strict diet with high protein and total caloric value less than what you need for maintenance + Cardio = Weight Loss. It's not rocket science people...

Well, sure it's hard.

What I don't understand is the bullshit about genes, big bones, slow metabolism etc.

I mean those are just excuses to be lazy. That it's impossible to lose weight. I mean c'mon it's that attitude that makes it difficult.

[Genesis]

I just don't get why people cry and moan that losing weight is so hard. A strict diet with high protein and total caloric value less than what you need for maintenance + Cardio = Weight Loss. It's not rocket science people...

Well, sure it's hard.

It's hard if you break your diet. Follow a few simple rules and you will lose weight. It's not 'impossible' like I've heard some people claim.

[sandman]

it's all about calories. it takes about 3,500 calories to lose a pound. you're gonna burn roughly 2,000 calories a day just by being alive. eat 1,500 calories a day and you'll lose a pound a week.

look online to get a good estimate of how many calories you're actually burning a day.

and if you're doing this long-term, add some training so you don't lose too much muscle mass. 

it is not that simple. first of all the BMR (basal metabolic rate, ie the calories your body burns per day in a hypothetical situation where you don't move and stay emotionally calm) will drop fast if you cut down on calorie intake.
second, the goal should not be to "lose calories" but to lose calories by burning fat. when you starve, the primary source of energy supply is glycogen breakdown (stored in muscles and liver), not fat breakdown. so basically you will end up "losing more muscle than fat" to put it simply. if you want to lose weight and maintain your ideal weight you should change your lifestyle (eat healthy and do aerobic exercise), not just "cut sown" on calorie intake.

re-read my post. you said the same thing i did, only tried to make it more confusing.

your BMR will not drop THAT fast. you would lose several pounds. and staying 300-500 calories below is NOT starving.

it really is that simple. it's all about burning calories anyway you slice it. but if people realized this, how would the weight loss/personal trainer/fitness industry make their billions???

[ppbebe]

going on a poor diet can cause serious damages. The brain, the pivotal organ of body,  lives on saccharides,  and when it's short of them, it decides that it's a famine time, better restrict any activity that takes calories like metabolism and orders the body to stores energy as fat.

[greekmule]

actually i read it very carefully. obviously you didn't read mine, cause we don't say the same thing.

Actually we say quite the opposite. you say that in order to lose weight one should cut down on calorie intake and I strongly disagree since it is the most unhealthy and ineffective way to lose weight, which of course you will gain rapidly once you go back to your normal diet.

1.first when i meant starvation i didn't mean it literally. in biochemistry and medicine starvation/fasting refers to the metabolic phase that the hormone glucagon is secreted. basically when you eat, insulin is secreted, promoting energy storage. stop eating for 4 hours and glucagon is secreted, promoting energy breakdown. eat once per day and basically your body is starving/fasting almost the whole day.

2.it is not about burning calories in general. it is about burning calories by burning fat. of course you will lose weight if your calorie intake is less than your calorie consumption, but your weight loss will result mainly from muscle breakdown and not many people want that. so if you cut down on calorie intake, you will end up losing more muscle than fat

3. stop eating and your BMR will drop in 2 weeks, that's pretty fast. and once you will go back to your normal diet,you will gain weight rapidly, as your body will have adjusted to the reduced amount of food.

4. trust me, biochemistry is faaar from simple

[sandman]

actually i read it very carefully. obviously you didn't read mine, cause we don't say the same thing.

Actually we say quite the opposite. you say that in order to lose weight one should cut down on calorie intake and I strongly disagree since it is the most unhealthy and ineffective way to lose weight, which of course you will gain rapidly once you go back to your normal diet.

wow. i don't even know how to respond to this comment.

1.first when i meant starvation i didn't mean it literally. in biochemistry and medicine starvation/fasting refers to the metabolic phase that the hormone glucagon is secreted. basically when you eat, insulin is secreted, promoting energy storage. stop eating for 4 hours and glucagon is secreted, promoting energy breakdown. eat once per day and basically your body is starving/fasting almost the whole day.

2.it is not about burning calories in general. it is about burning calories by burning fat. of course you will lose weight if your calorie intake is less than your calorie consumption, but your weight loss will result mainly from muscle breakdown and not many people want that. so if you cut down on calorie intake, you will end up losing more muscle than fat

3. stop eating and your BMR will drop in 2 weeks, that's pretty fast. and once you will go back to your normal diet,you will gain weight rapidly, as your body will have adjusted to the reduced amount of food.

4. trust me, biochemistry is faaar from simple

why are you even bringing up "not eating" or "eating once/twice per day." i never suggested that. your whole argument starts with an assumption of laying in bed doing nothing every day. that's all BMR measures. why are you ignoring AMR? cause the reality is you burn more calories than your BMR.

yes, if you're BMR is 1,800 and you eat 1,300 a day, it's not healthy. and i never suggested that.

BUT if your BMR is 1,800, plus you're moderately active and you burn another 600 calories a day, eating 2,000 calories a day is a GREAT WAY to lose weight. totally healthy and it WILL work. and 2,000 calories a day is hardly starving.

it's all about calories.

[greekmule]

ok let's agree to disagree. so go on and eat 2000 calories of fat per day and burn 3000 calories per day.
of course you will lose weight, but you will increase your fat tissue and decrease your lean tissue, which of course is unhealthy. losing weight  in a healthy way has very little to do with calorie intake-it has much more to do with what you eat and how much you exercise.
If it was that simple to lose weight in a healthy way, everyone would just cut their meals in half and things would magically happen. Unfortunately if you decrease your calorie intake your body will adjust and when you go back to your normal eating habits you will gain weight rapidly.