[quote]AngryVader wrote:
One of the gems from that article:
"Doesn’t strength training build muscle and therefore increase your resting metabolic rate?
That’s actually a myth. You’d have to be totally ripped �?? like, bodybuilder ripped �?? to get a noticeable bump in your metabolism. Most people burn about one calorie per kilogram of body weight per minute, whereas a bodybuilder burns about 1.2."
I guess that means we can all stop lifting weights then.[/quote]
… Per Kilogram… more muscle = more kilos… the stupid! It burnsssss ussss!
[quote]nowakc wrote:
“Most people burn about one calorie per kilogram of body weight per minute”
um, correct me if i’m misunderstanding this, but doesnt this mean i burned around 90 calories in the last minute (because i’m not you know, ripped like a bodybuilder). Good thing i’m cutting, otherwise in order to maintain I should actually be eating 129600 calories a day.
This article is just ridiculous[/quote]
No wonder I’m always so damn hungry. I’m not eating enough.
[quote]Christine wrote:
nowakc wrote:
“Most people burn about one calorie per kilogram of body weight per minute”
um, correct me if i’m misunderstanding this, but doesnt this mean i burned around 90 calories in the last minute (because i’m not you know, ripped like a bodybuilder). Good thing i’m cutting, otherwise in order to maintain I should actually be eating 129600 calories a day.
This article is just ridiculous
No wonder I’m always so damn hungry. I’m not eating enough.[/quote]
Holy shit. I must have missed that gem of information! So I need 141,120 calories/day to maintain? I would like to ask the author why he needs to write an article on dieting when according to him, it’s damn near impossible to for anyone to be fat. What a dork.
[quote]nowakc wrote:
“Most people burn about one calorie per kilogram of body weight per minute”
um, correct me if i’m misunderstanding this, but doesnt this mean i burned around 90 calories in the last minute (because i’m not you know, ripped like a bodybuilder). Good thing i’m cutting, otherwise in order to maintain I should actually be eating 129600 calories a day.
This article is just ridiculous[/quote]
There is a difference between calories and K-calories.
Does exercise help?
Exercise has many health and emotional benefits, but it doesn’t make a huge difference when it comes to weight loss. You can restrict your food intake by 500 to 1,000 calories starting tomorrow, but you have to work out for a long time, or at a very high intensity, to burn as many calories.
[quote]HangerBaby wrote:
Does exercise help?
Exercise has many health and emotional benefits, but it doesn’t make a huge difference when it comes to weight loss. You can restrict your food intake by 500 to 1,000 calories starting tomorrow, but you have to work out for a long time, or at a very high intensity, to burn as many calories.
Ok. Cya later guys! Exercise isn’t important![/quote]
That’s one of the main fallacies of the article.
In deed exercise is not as important as nutrition for weight loss.
People need to focus on fat loss, rather than weight loss and that will change some of the recommendations in the article.
Not for weight loss it isn’t. You can actually lose a ton of weight by not exercising. I mean, sure it’ll be all muscle, but the point is that the number on the scale goes down.
Not for weight loss it isn’t. You can actually lose a ton of weight by not exercising. I mean, sure it’ll be all muscle, but the point is that the number on the scale goes down.[/quote]
[quote]cyph31 wrote:
streamline wrote:
cyph31 wrote:
streamline wrote:
Dieting 101, K-calories energy expenditure most exceed K-calorie intake. Class dismissed!
it’s not that simple, humans are not a bomb calorimeter
It is that simple.
alright, consume 1000 calories of sugar instead of 1000 calories of animal protein/fats + other protein/fat sources and see if you have the same bf %[/quote]
[quote]cyph31 wrote:
streamline wrote:
cyph31 wrote:
streamline wrote:
Dieting 101, K-calories energy expenditure most exceed K-calorie intake. Class dismissed!
it’s not that simple, humans are not a bomb calorimeter
It is that simple.
alright, consume 1000 calories of sugar instead of 1000 calories of animal protein/fats + other protein/fat sources and see if you have the same bf %[/quote]
Found this in the AD thread (sorry to whoever originally posted it, you will not be receiving credit).
[quote]AngryVader wrote:
Christine wrote:
cyph31 wrote:
streamline wrote:
cyph31 wrote:
streamline wrote:
Dieting 101, K-calories energy expenditure most exceed K-calorie intake. Class dismissed!
it’s not that simple, humans are not a bomb calorimeter
It is that simple.
alright, consume 1000 calories of sugar instead of 1000 calories of animal protein/fats + other protein/fat sources and see if you have the same bf %
The article was about weight loss, not fat loss.
Right?
True, but when people say they want to lose weight, what are they really talking about? Losing fat or losing muscle?
[/quote]
I disagree. The average person doesn’t make that distinction.
They sort of say it, but they don’t want to do what it takes to achieve it. You don’t know how many chicks tell me they like my definition, but then ignore any advice I give.
[quote]Christine wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
Christine wrote:
cyph31 wrote:
streamline wrote:
cyph31 wrote:
streamline wrote:
Dieting 101, K-calories energy expenditure most exceed K-calorie intake. Class dismissed!
it’s not that simple, humans are not a bomb calorimeter
It is that simple.
alright, consume 1000 calories of sugar instead of 1000 calories of animal protein/fats + other protein/fat sources and see if you have the same bf %
The article was about weight loss, not fat loss.
Right?
True, but when people say they want to lose weight, what are they really talking about? Losing fat or losing muscle?
I disagree. The average person doesn’t make that distinction.
They sort of say it, but they don’t want to do what it takes to achieve it. You don’t know how many chicks tell me they like my definition, but then ignore any advice I give.
[/quote]
My fatass bitch of a mom would be fine if you could just suck the bones out of her body as long as she could tell her friends “I’ve lost 20lbs! Yay!”
[quote]Christine wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
Christine wrote:
cyph31 wrote:
streamline wrote:
cyph31 wrote:
streamline wrote:
Dieting 101, K-calories energy expenditure most exceed K-calorie intake. Class dismissed!
it’s not that simple, humans are not a bomb calorimeter
It is that simple.
alright, consume 1000 calories of sugar instead of 1000 calories of animal protein/fats + other protein/fat sources and see if you have the same bf %
The article was about weight loss, not fat loss.
Right?
True, but when people say they want to lose weight, what are they really talking about? Losing fat or losing muscle?
I disagree. The average person doesn’t make that distinction.
They sort of say it, but they don’t want to do what it takes to achieve it. You don’t know how many chicks tell me they like my definition, but then ignore any advice I give.
[/quote]
Well, I disagree with you. They do make that distinction, they just don’t ask the right questions. When people ask me for advice on losing weight, they aren’t asking about losing muscle, they are asking about losing fat.
Whether or not they take any of the advice we give them is a completely different issue though.
