Can't Lose Weight

[Brierley]

Just now, robblok said:

I don't really care that you don't agree. I have plenty of studies proving otherwise.

 

But i do agree that life style plays a role. Plus i do agree breakfast is important but saying that the breakfast calories don't count is misleading and  crazy. There MIGHT be a small difference but that is not even close to burning a complete breakfast.

 

Also it is found that a bigger breakfast helps to keep you full. I do believe in meal tapering a so breakfast is more important. But to act like the calories don't count is exaggerating to the extreme.

 

 

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Weight Control Information Network web site, “it does not matter what time of day you eat. It is what and how much you eat and how much physical activity you do during the whole day that determines whether you gain, lose, or maintain your weight.”

 

When that "whole day" is limited to 2 hours after dinner....well, you work it out!

[ExpatOilWorker]

54 minutes ago, Brierley said:

Bypass stool is where the large colon gets partially blocked by compacted stool but the muscles in the colon still allow other stool to pass by the blockage. The person doesn't realize there's a blockage because they can still pass stool although it is usually much less well formed. A key symptom is abdominal distention which is less pronounced after a bowel movement. My gastroenterologist alerted me to the problem and an x-ray confirmed things. The solution is to cleanse the bowel using a strong laxative, fortunately I was due to have a colonoscopy so my bowel was 100% emptied. The trick is to weigh yourself at that point and use that as your baseline or unladen weight. Monitor your weight thereafter allowing for the fact that your gut normally contains undigested food, mine weighs about 4 lbs at any time....you will come to understand what your content weight is after a while. Dupholac is a Dutch firm that sells laxative medicine in Thailand, the product is well regarded.

Could be I have what you describe at bypass stool. I have a "lazy bowel" and can sometimes go 7-8 days without bowel movement. 

I will try ur laxative suggestion.

Edited April 21, 2021 by ExpatOilWorker

[robblok]

1 minute ago, CharlieH said:

The other thing I started doing which I felt worked and helped alot with overall management was to forget the "habits" of eating because its time, and eat ONLY when you feel hungry.

Too many people eat at this time or that time, not because they are actually hungry, but just because its lunch time, dinner time and so on. Same with portion sizes, do you really need that quantity, oris it because thats what you have grown to eat as a habit.

All I am suggesting is to think about what you are actually doing each day, is it habit or is it needed ?

You have to kind of re--program your eating habits and choices.

Good point that helps some people and not others. I feel that when i eat when i am hungry i overeat more easily.

 

I found that buying stuff from lean licious helps (bankgok food chain that i have no affiliation with). Reason being they are high protein with some brown / white rice mixed and have a number of calories printed on it. So its easy to know how much you eat. I also feel the meals are quite filling.

 

But that is personal, if i have found one thing to be true there will be differences between people and what works for one does not work for an other (as good). I never got any results from going keto (though carbs a bit helps me but full keto does not). Bodies are not all the same or work allt he same. But universally if you eat too many calories its bad.

 

They have done studies comparing keto and in the end the difference was not that much or not at all. Depending on how long it took. Keto often gives good results at first (as carbs hold water) so eliminating them makes you lose water and weight at first but its not the same as burning fat.

[robblok]

3 minutes ago, Brierley said:

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Weight Control Information Network web site, “it does not matter what time of day you eat. It is what and how much you eat and how much physical activity you do during the whole day that determines whether you gain, lose, or maintain your weight.”

 

When that "whole day" is limited to 2 hours after dinner....well, you work it out!

You just proved my point.

[Brierley]

Just now, robblok said:

You just proved my point.

Except the word "and" appears between the words "eat" and "how"!

 

In your world the person who eats 1,500 cals for dinner and then goes to sleep, gains as much as the person who eats that 1,500 cals for lunch instead, followed by twelve hours of exercise, I don't believe that but if you do, it's your prerogative.

[CharlieH]

2 minutes ago, robblok said:

Good point that helps some people and not others. I feel that when i eat when i am hungry i overeat more easily.

 

I found that buying stuff from lean licious helps (bankgok food chain that i have no affiliation with). Reason being they are high protein with some brown / white rice mixed and have a number of calories printed on it. So its easy to know how much you eat. I also feel the meals are quite filling.

 

But that is personal, if i have found one thing to be true there will be differences between people and what works for one does not work for an other (as good). I never got any results from going keto (though carbs a bit helps me but full keto does not). Bodies are not all the same or work allt he same. But universally if you eat too many calories its bad.

 

They have done studies comparing keto and in the end the difference was not that much or not at all. Depending on how long it took. Keto often gives good results at first (as carbs hold water) so eliminating them makes you lose water and weight at first but its not the same as burning fat.

Tota.ly agree there is no "one size fits all" in dieting, we are all different, different lifestyles habits and so on, way too many variables. Its matter of taking suggestions and finding what works for you.

I tried no carb, and it slammed the brakes on any loss,  introduced low carb and it was more succesful.

Takes time and perserverance to get your individual balance.

AND alot of will power , ????

[cmarshall]

6 minutes ago, Brierley said:

Except the word "and" appears between the words "eat" and "how"!

 

In your world the person who eats 1,500 cals for dinner and then goes to sleep, gains as much as the person who eats that 1,500 cals for lunch instead, followed by twelve hours of exercise, I don't believe that but if you do, it's your prerogative.

 

If there is a difference, it is not enough to matter.

[robblok]

5 minutes ago, Brierley said:

Except the word "and" appears between the words "eat" and "how"!

 

In your world the person who eats 1,500 cals for dinner and then goes to sleep, gains as much as the person who eats that 1,500 cals for lunch instead, followed by twelve hours of exercise, I don't believe that but if you do, it's your prerogative.

Again your taking things into extreme seems to be your strong suit. How about this you eat a 5000 calorie breakfast and not eat anymore and then you will lose weight.. because you said breakfast does not count.

 

Also if you exercise during the day and are in a caloric deficit you will burn fat and your big meal will first be used to fill your glycogen stores. So it wont be used as fat.

 

I said the differences are minimal and they are your own post just found as much. I read many scientific studies of people who were in house (so locked up in a labratory all day) those are the gold standards of studies but they are usually not long term as they are expensive. But these studies have proven that it all really does not matter that much but what matters is total amount. 

 

There are some small differences but none big enough to negate a complete meal. Because that was what your stating. I already said that meal tapering can work. But its no magic. Total amount of food and kind of food are more important.

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

 

If there is a difference, it is not enough to matter.

Indeed that is the whole point he made an extreme remark that was just crazy faulty and could send people to eat too much and not lose any weight.

 

Anyway one has to find a way that suits the person best as its a long term thing and a change of lifestyle that does it. I gained a bit of weight again because i moved from my old house with home gym to BKK where i went to a normal gym. Until covid hit and i stopped it disrupted me.

 

Now moving my home gym and looking at the right foods  again. I know what works for me. Exercise and food reduction  (food reduction is most important as it takes a lot of time to burn a few calories)

[Brierley]

3 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

 

If there is a difference, it is not enough to matter.

The point is that if that's the persons lifestyle is such then the accumulated amount over time will not be insignificant. I suspect we can all agree there is more to successful dieting than just calories in and calories out. It includes  the type of calories, the composition of those calories and as we all seem to have agreed, the timing of the caloric intake, albeit to a lesser degree on a single occasion but potentially significant is repeated day in day out..

[CharlieH]

Dieting in my opinion is damn hard work initially until you find what works for your circumstances etc. Then its a case of self discipline and determination to ditch the bad habits.

 

One other thing I fou d very helpful, a day off ! One day a week when I would eat what the hell I wanted (in moderation) whether it be pizza, ice cream, chocolate or whatever. That one day helped me through the tough days initially and I actually enjoyed them more too.

Now its everything in moderation, portion control, regular exercise and I found "my" balance.The weight came off, I lost a good amount of weight, still not got to my goal, but happy with the way its going for my lifestyle.

 

[Brierley]

4 minutes ago, robblok said:

Indeed that is the whole point he made an extreme remark that was just crazy faulty and could send people to eat too much and not lose any weight.

 

Anyway one has to find a way that suits the person best as its a long term thing and a change of lifestyle that does it. I gained a bit of weight again because i moved from my old house with home gym to BKK where i went to a normal gym. Until covid hit and i stopped it disrupted me.

 

Now moving my home gym and looking at the right foods  again. I know what works for me. Exercise and food reduction  (food reduction is most important as it takes a lot of time to burn a few calories)

Calm down and debate/discuss, this is not a personal issue or a competition! I was unable to find anything regarding my earlier comment concerning breakfast, I believe it was being said in the context of the benefits of a healthy breakfast outweighing the benefits of a corresponding caloric reduction, which made sense to me at least. AND nobody is advising anyone to rush out and eat large amounts of food for lunch as you have stated, the example I used was purposely exaggerated to demonstrate the point and my argument. Now, since you appear to be getting emotional I will withdraw, for the sake of the topic.

[robblok]

4 minutes ago, Brierley said:

The point is that if that's the persons lifestyle is such then the accumulated amount over time will not be insignificant. I suspect we can all agree there is more to successful dieting than just calories in and calories out. It includes  the type of calories, the composition of those calories and as we all seem to have agreed, the timing of the caloric intake, albeit to a lesser degree on a single occasion but potentially significant is repeated day in day out..

We are taling about really small differences maybe a 100 calories extra burned. Sure if you count that up during a year it helps. In a month a lil.

 

But to say breakfast does not count is something you must retract as its misleading.

 

Type of calories play a role for sure, but amount is the thing that is most important. Also the type is highly individual i respond better to high protein as i lift weights. 

 

Your reasoning is a bit strange because your saying that if you exercise all day and not eat nothing happens. While in reality your glycogen stores are burned and then the fat is burned. Then no matter when evening night or whatever you eat again first your glycogen stores (you do know what these are do you ?) will be filled from your meal (no fat storage at all). Unless of course you eat too much. 

 

 

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, Brierley said:

Calm down and debate/discuss, this is not a personal issue or a competition! I was unable to find anything regarding my earlier comment concerning breakfast, I believe it was being said in the context of the benefits of a healthy breakfast outweighing the benefits of a corresponding caloric reduction, which made sense to me at least. AND nobody is advising anyone to rush out and eat large amounts of food for lunch as you have stated, the example I used was purposely exaggerated to demonstrate the point and my argument. Now, since you appear to be getting emotional I will withdraw, for the sake of the topic.

I am calm but i just hate false information. I had countless debates about dieting. (just go through the fitness forum and this forum).

 

No a healthy breakfast does not outweigh a caloric reduction. A healthy and bigger breakfast combined with a smaller evening meal has more benefits then two equal size meals but not that much. Again if you eat a 600 call breakfast and a 600 cal diner it might be less effective then an 800 cal breakfast and a 400 cal diner. But if you eat a 500 call breakfast and a 500 call diner you still win as you can only win about 100 call (if that). Of course we as males eat more then a 1000 calls a day. far more. I just used the numbers to give an example.

 

No need to withdraw but find some studies to back your claims up that is how it works. I don't take this personal at all. Nor am i excited its my way of debating. 

 

Also there is one problem with studies, most of them are not done in a laboratorium but done by self reporting. These studies can really mess up. Especially as it has been proven that a bigger breakfast helps (most not all) people stay full longer and thus consume less calories over the day. They might not report this as such. That is why labratory research is best but because of the cost not many are done. I have read much about this from really knowledgeable people. Not doctors but gym coaches who wrote their own scientific papers. They all come back to the same thing the differences are not that big. 

 

Also they said many studies are flawed because of duration and self reporting. Its hard to find good information and then when someone posts breakfast does not count it makes me want to respond as it can screw up a diet.

 

What is most important is consistency, and lifestyle changes.

[cmarshall]

20 minutes ago, Brierley said:

The point is that if that's the persons lifestyle is such then the accumulated amount over time will not be insignificant. I suspect we can all agree there is more to successful dieting than just calories in and calories out. It includes  the type of calories, the composition of those calories and as we all seem to have agreed, the timing of the caloric intake, albeit to a lesser degree on a single occasion but potentially significant is repeated day in day out..

 

We certainly do not agree that it is anything but a matter of calories.  "Lifestyle" can also be reduced to calories burned in exercise and consumed in eating.  If you eat fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight.  Else not.  There may be some refinements to that model in the lab, but in real life that is all that matters.  

[Brierley]

7 minutes ago, robblok said:

I am calm but i just hate false information. I had countless debates about dieting. (just go through the fitness forum and this forum).

 

No a healthy breakfast does not outweigh a caloric reduction. A healthy and bigger breakfast combined with a smaller evening meal has more benefits then two equal size meals but not that much. Again if you eat a 600 call breakfast and a 600 cal diner it might be less effective then an 800 cal breakfast and a 400 cal diner. But if you eat a 500 call breakfast and a 500 call diner you still win as you can only win about 100 call (if that). Of course we as males eat more then a 1000 calls a day. far more. I just used the numbers to give an example.

 

No need to withdraw but find some studies to back your claims up that is how it works. I don't take this personal at all. Nor am i excited its my way of debating. 

 

Also there is one problem with studies, most of them are not done in a laboratorium but done by self reporting. These studies can really mess up. Especially as it has been proven that a bigger breakfast helps (most not all) people stay full longer and thus consume less calories over the day. They might not report this as such. That is why labratory research is best but because of the cost not many are done. I have read much about this from really knowledgeable people. Not doctors but gym coaches who wrote their own scientific papers. They all come back to the same thing the differences are not that big. 

 

Also they said many studies are flawed because of duration and self reporting. Its hard to find good information and then when someone posts breakfast does not count it makes me want to respond as it can screw up a diet.

 

What is most important is consistency, and lifestyle changes.

Unless you can post your medical qualifications as an MD or a qualified dietician, you remain just another poster with his or her view, albeit you have expressed it frequently. G'bye!

[Brierley]

3 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

 

We certainly do not agree that it is anything but a matter of calories.  "Lifestyle" can also be reduced to calories burned in exercise and consumed in eating.  If you eat fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight.  Else not.  There may be some refinements to that model in the lab, but in real life that is all that matters.  

Apologies, I intended to write, calorie counting.

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, Brierley said:

Unless you can post your medical qualifications as an MD or a qualified dietician, you remain just another poster with his or her view, albeit you have expressed it frequently. G'bye!

You can call me anything you want but thinking that a MD knows it better is foolish. Even people who studied  for it often have it wrong. You can only learn this by reading a lot and trying things out.

 

And yes maybe its better not to debate with me as you don't like backing your ideas up with studies and facts. Big problem is that there are so many people saying stuff and so few real good studies out there that its hard to get conclusive evidence.

 

Also you got the personal variations in lifestyle. An evening person might skip breakfast eat more in the evening and exercise later at night. Your problem is that you don't seem to have read much yet or have much experience yet. 

[Saddic]

46 minutes ago, Brierley said:

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Weight Control Information Network web site, “it does not matter what time of day you eat. It is what and how much you eat and how much physical activity you do during the whole day that determines whether you gain, lose, or maintain your weight.”

 

When that "whole day" is limited to 2 hours after dinner....well, you work it out!

I stopped trusting them, when I learned they still classify catsup as a vegetable ...  And don't get me started on the food pyramid...

 

No matter which camp of "diet" you fall into... I suggest you learn from your own body what it wants... not what your hunger craves...

 

I suggest watching "The Magic Pill" (was on netflix a while back)...

I suggest educating yourself about what foods do to your body... tons of youtube vids...

 

Personally, I prefer the keto, low carb, caveman route... it reversed my A1c scores back to acceptable levels...

 

good luck...

[robblok]

10 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

 

We certainly do not agree that it is anything but a matter of calories.  "Lifestyle" can also be reduced to calories burned in exercise and consumed in eating.  If you eat fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight.  Else not.  There may be some refinements to that model in the lab, but in real life that is all that matters.  

So true, unfortunately there is no magic way to lose weight. It all comes down to burning more then you consume. Small differences might be there but they are also individual. 

 

But i think we can agree that its also important to choose what you eat as in unprocessed (some processing is needed of course) but the more stuff is processed the worse it gets in general.

 

Also a sugary drink will have a different effect on your body then a protein meal. Insulin can mess up dieting and some people really need to go lower carb first (though going lower calories also means lower carb in general). 

 

But there are also examples of people loosing weight on a twinkie diet. Too bad that guy could not be cloned to see how much he would have lost on a healthy diet with the same calories. 

 

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/chewing-on-the-twinkie-di_b_782678#:~:text=An overweight nutrition professor at,from almost obese to normal.

[robblok]

6 minutes ago, Saddic said:

I stopped trusting them, when I learned they still classify catsup as a vegetable ...  And don't get me started on the food pyramid...

 

No matter which camp of "diet" you fall into... I suggest you learn from your own body what it wants... not what your hunger craves...

 

I suggest watching "The Magic Pill" (was on netflix a while back)...

I suggest educating yourself about what foods do to your body... tons of youtube vids...

 

Personally, I prefer the keto, low carb, caveman route... it reversed my A1c scores back to acceptable levels...

 

good luck...

I don't 100% agree with the keto low carb caveman but i agree that you wrote down personally there. That is all that matters.

 

Also most people respond good to unprocessed foods (caveman) i do too. Like eat an apple don't drink apple juice. Though i find the whole caveman a bit strange as historically what cavemen ate was dependent on where they lived. So the myth of a universal caveman diet is untrue. But as long as your meals are veggies and meats or fish or eggs and stuff your golden. Its better then cakes and other processed foods.

 

I also 100% agree that you have to find out what your body responds too. Not everyone is the same. There was a BBC documentary about slim people who were force fed foods like 5000 cals a day to get them fat. One guy did not get fat but got more muscular without working out (asian guy). His body just refused to get fat. It was a nice documentary. 

[cmarshall]

1 minute ago, robblok said:

So true, unfortunately there is no magic way to lose weight. It all comes down to burning more then you consume. Small differences might be there but they are also individual. 

 

But i think we can agree that its also important to choose what you eat as in unprocessed (some processing is needed of course) but the more stuff is processed the worse it gets in general.

 

Also a sugary drink will have a different effect on your body then a protein meal. Insulin can mess up dieting and some people really need to go lower carb first (though going lower calories also means lower carb in general). 

 

But there are also examples of people loosing weight on a twinkie diet. Too bad that guy could not be cloned to see how much he would have lost on a healthy diet with the same calories. 

 

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/chewing-on-the-twinkie-di_b_782678#:~:text=An overweight nutrition professor at,from almost obese to normal.

 

People love to think of themselves as unique and therefore special, but in terms of converting food to energy we are all the same model.  Processed food is designed to be high-calorie and habit-forming, but as long as you control the total calories, you can eat it if you want.  

 

I find the hardest part of a diet is the first three days during which I still crave the foods that I have been carelessly eating previously.  But then, after about three days on 1200 calories a day my body is adjusted.  At that level I get hungry before each meal, which is roughly 4 hours after the last one.  I have a late afternoon snack of yogurt to tide me over until dinner and then 150 grams of fruit for an early evening snack.  I no longer crave the processed foods and I never feel too hungry.  Sometimes I do want to eat an extra serving of bread, for instance, for the pleasure of the taste, but since I am not really hungry, I am usually able to resist.  The necessary change in psychology is to learn to focus on hunger, not taste.  

 

So, we need to develop individual strategies for managing eating, but in the end the arithmetic is the same for everyone.  

[ozimoron]

2 hours ago, simon43 said:

Nuts are very fattening!  But they also have protein and other essential minerals.  So they are good for your health, but don't eat too many ????

 

5 hours ago, cobra said:

Very true, most nuts have a high fat content and if salted, water retention.

 

Give intermittent  fasting a try,

 

Recently my GP told me that I have insulin resistance but all other blood tests were fine with a slightly high (5.1) total cholesterol count. This scared me and so a a couple of weeks ago I started on a keto diet and intermittent fasting every day. I average 18 hours without food and no real hunger.

 

I'm not fat and not looking to lose weight but have a pot belly. I'm just under 70Kg and 173cm tall. I read that calories don't seem to matter and so have tucked into the cheese and nuts in an effort to eat enough fat. I don't eat red meat but do eat salmon and sardines.

 

It seems like I have gained weight (in the gut) in the second week after losing it in the first week. Should I cut down on the fat? I have eaten 2 eggs fried in coconut oil every day but am not really an egg lover either. The keto diet is hard for me, not because of compliance but just that I am not used to eating that much salt and fat.

 

[robblok]

21 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

 

Recently my GP told me that I have insulin resistance but all other blood tests were fine with a slightly high (5.1) total cholesterol count. This scared me and so a a couple of weeks ago I started on a keto diet and intermittent fasting every day. I average 18 hours without food and no real hunger.

 

I'm not fat and not looking to lose weight but have a pot belly. I'm just under 70Kg and 173cm tall. I read that calories don't seem to matter and so have tucked into the cheese and nuts in an effort to eat enough fat. I don't eat red meat but do eat salmon and sardines.

 

It seems like I have gained weight (in the gut) in the second week after losing it in the first week. Should I cut down on the fat? I have eaten 2 eggs fried in coconut oil every day but am not really an egg lover either. The keto diet is hard for me, not because of compliance but just that I am not used to eating that much salt and fat.

 

If you got a pot belly then your fat. Your what they call a skinny fat. Look it up.  (no offence meant its a term)

https://legionathletics.com/skinny-fat/  just read more about it.

 

Just cut down on the fat a bit if your gaining weight. Every gram of fat is 9 calories opposed to protein and carbs that are just 4 calories. So fat is twice as caloric rich. Why don't you just fry the eggs in a pan without adding too much fat. 

 

 

[Neeranam]

6 hours ago, cobra said:

Very true, most nuts have a high fat content and if salted, water retention.

 

Give intermittent  fasting a try,

Do you mean not eating for a whole day? 

[Neeranam]

26 minutes ago, robblok said:

If you got a pot belly then your fat. Your what they call a skinny fat. Look it up.  (no offence meant its a term)

https://legionathletics.com/skinny-fat/  just read more about it.

 

Just cut down on the fat a bit if your gaining weight. Every gram of fat is 9 calories opposed to protein and carbs that are just 4 calories. So fat is twice as caloric rich. Why don't you just fry the eggs in a pan without adding too much fat. 

 

 

That's me ???? 

[robblok]

17 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

That's me ???? 

Then do read a bit more about this kind of body. There is a lot of information about this. 

While i do believe that calories in and calories out work ( i live by it) I also believe that it sometimes works differently (insulin resistance). Also it is possible that people eat too little and stuff like reverse dieting works then. But I believe your a bit older ? Normally id say do a lil bit of weight training to gain a bit of muscle but that is hard (not impossible)

 

I am not talking about hardcore weightlifting. Maybe ask Bigstar (believe former Jsixpack) who uses bodyweight exercises and TRX bands.  

[LosLobo]

An important factor in losing weight  is sleep.

 

Evidently lack of sleep has a direct link to obesity. 

 

One would have thought that sleeping less would burn more calories and thus lose weight but the opposite can be true.

 

Lack of sleep is linked to obesity, new evidence shows -- ScienceDaily

 

Why Sleep Is the Most Important Factor for Weight Loss (healthifyme.com)

Edited April 21, 2021 by LosLobo

[Neeranam]

15 minutes ago, robblok said:

Then do read a bit more about this kind of body. There is a lot of information about this. 

While i do believe that calories in and calories out work ( i live by it) I also believe that it sometimes works differently (insulin resistance). Also it is possible that people eat too little and stuff like reverse dieting works then. But I believe your a bit older ? Normally id say do a lil bit of weight training to gain a bit of muscle but that is hard (not impossible)

 

I am not talking about hardcore weightlifting. Maybe ask Bigstar (believe former Jsixpack) who uses bodyweight exercises and TRX bands.  

I'm 55. I have a 6 pack app on my phone. Do about 20 minutes every day but so far no 6 pack ???? 

[Neeranam]

1 minute ago, LosLobo said:

An important factor in losing weight  is sleep.

 

Evidently lack of sleep has a direct link to obesity. 

 

One would have thought that sleeping less would burn more calories but the opposite can be true.

 

Lack of sleep is linked to obesity, new evidence shows -- ScienceDaily

 

Why Sleep Is the Most Important Factor for Weight Loss (healthifyme.com)

Wow, interesting.