'High Fructose Corn Syrup Isn't That Bad'

Nutrition
81

[quote]7thSonofa7thSon wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Josh Rider wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Scott M wrote:
How many sodas were you drinking in a day?[/quote]

Probably a liter a day. [/quote]

That’s about 3000 extra calories a week mainly from sugar. If you cut out 3000 calories a week from any source, weight loss would occur. [/quote]

Try cutting out 3k cals a week from healthy food, tell me how easy that would be. [/quote]

So like one less bowl of rice per day?

What’s your point?[/quote]

from pure life experience, …calories did nothing to stop me form getting fat.
back when i was 37%bf, i ate about 1500 calories everyday.
i lost 50 lbs and got to 16%bf by eating 3000 calories, but the calories came from healthy foods.

so i think calories in vs calories out is a simple way of explaining fat loss and fat gain,
but it’s narrow minded because it doesn’t take into account the types of calories at nutrient timing.

ex:250 claories of lucky charms at night=bad
500 caloires from casein, evoo, and other oils(cocunut, fish, walnut, almond, flax etc) at night is good!
[/quote]

I’m calling bullshit. Seriously.

MAYBE if you went from being totally sedentary, extremely low lean body mass, and consuming no protein (higher TEF) to being highly active and consuming 25%+ of your daily caloric intake from protein, then it could MAYBE be possible.

Overweight people are NOTORIOUS for underreporting caloric intake. This has been documented repeatedly. Look at it this way: if fat people were truly aware of how much they ate on a daily basis, do you think they’d be fat? You had 50 lbs of bodyfat to lose (congrats on the weight loss, btw) in order to even get close to a respectably low bodyfat, so do you really think you were mindful of everything you ate in the process of gaining that 50 lbs? If you got to 37% bodyfat, then you had to have been overeating on a fairly regular basis, whether you realized it or not.

As for your night-time shake example, well…I don’t want to burst your bubble about the night-time insulin fairy…BUT, did you ever think that maybe there was something wrong with the reasoning behind feeding your body an ample amount of energy substrate in the form that is most readily stored as fat right before an 8-10 hour period of inactivity?

Let’s put it this way.

The first law of nutrient timing is: total caloric intake and macronutrient composition is always more important than nutrient timing.
The second law of nutrient timing is: total caloric intake and macronutrient composition is always more important than nutrient timing.[/quote]

i went from fairly active(was in lacrosse and football) while eating shit to extremely active.
after i lost all the weight i wanted to find out how much i was eating and found out it was only about 1500 calories per day.

this was all i ate:
breakfast:cheerios and milk
lunch: 2 slices turkey with 2 slices white bread(wonder brand)
dinner:4 rotis(indian whole grain bread) with some vegetables

breakfast:544(used to put alot of cheerios in my bowl)
lunch:220
dinner:763
*used calorie count for this
*and no, i am not bullshiting, i have better things to do in my life than lie in a computer forum.

[/quote]

Brother, you DO NOT get to THIRTY-SEVEN FUCKING PERCENT bodyfat by playing football, lacrosse, and eating 1500 calories a day.

Do you have any idea how fucking fat 37%BF is?[/quote]

x2

Actually, I’m sure our friend here ate that exact same thing, every single day while he was gaining that 60 lbs. I’m sure he never drank any sort of sweetened drinks or snacked on calorie dense foods. He probably never ate fast-food calorie bombs on any sort of regular basis or pigged out at social functions.

Just because you ate 1500 calories on one particular day says nothing about your lifestyle in general during the amount of time (most likely measured in years) that it took you to get that fat.[/quote]

ummmm…
actually i did eat those things everyday because i used to believe a high carb diet was healthy. i also wanted to lose weight 2 years ago and this was why i was only eating 1500 calories everyday for 2 years. the scale still went up though!

and playing sports didn’t do anything except make me have shin splits and make me more popular in school :slight_smile:

honestly, i get where this suspicion that i’m bullshitting is coming from. i’m honestly the exception to rule in that i gain weight on carbs easily. after just cutting white bread and cereal, replacing it with brown rice and oatmeal; and adding fats and protein(thus the higher calories), i lost fat easily.

and yes, i do know how fat that is. i was pre-diabetic and had nearly deadly cholesterol levels, but strangely i was only 211 lbs@6ft.(LBM was horrible)
[/quote]

So you’re eating the same amount of carbs, but from sources with lower Glycemic Load?

Does not compute.[/quote]

actually, i was eating MORE carbs when losing weight!

i really wish i had some pictures to back up my claims on the fat loss…
[/quote]

The other thing I dont get is that you said you gain fat easily on high carbs, but that you were eating MORE carbs when losing weight. That statement totally contradicts itself and if you ask me, it wasn’t the carbs to begin with, but the TYPES of carbs.
[/quote]

Honestly, in equal amounts in a training individual, I seriously doubt there’s much difference between bread and cereal and brown rice and oatmeal.

Especially 1500 calories worth.[/quote]

It sounds to me like this guy may have lost the weight he claims, but isn’t aware of precisely how he did it, as no one sheds 50 pounds by doubling caloric intake, regardless of where those calories come from (unless their diet consists of literally nothing but sugary dietary nightmares). I lost 60 pounds since mid march, and I know exactly how I did it. Vastly increased activity, while decreasing my caloric intake while also making sure that the decreased calories come from more protein, and less carbs and fat.[/quote]

but i do know how i did it?

(1. cut out processed carbs 211 lbs 5/17
(2. replace with whole grains 198 lbs 5/23
(3.start taking protein shake 195 lbs 6/15
(4.double meat consumption 192 lbs 6/26
(5. increase fat consumption 182 lbs 7/3
(6.see how progress is going 177 lbs 7/18
(7.increase carb consumption 176 lbs 7/28
(8.increase protein consumption more 172 lbs 8/19
(9.increase fat consumption more(introduced walnuts, alot of walnuts!) 169 lbs 9/1
(10.increase protein consumption yet again! 165 lbs(now at 169 again) 9/11

this is EXACTLY what i did, in the order i did it.

i guess i’m the first person to lose 50 lbs while doubling calories :slight_smile:

82

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

but i do know how i did it?

(1. cut out processed carbs 211 lbs 5/17
(2. replace with whole grains 198 lbs 5/23
(3.start taking protein shake 195 lbs 6/15
(4.double meat consumption 192 lbs 6/26
(5. increase fat consumption 182 lbs 7/3
(6.see how progress is going 177 lbs 7/18
(7.increase carb consumption 176 lbs 7/28
(8.increase protein consumption more 172 lbs 8/19
(9.increase fat consumption more(introduced walnuts, alot of walnuts!) 169 lbs 9/1
(10.increase protein consumption yet again! 165 lbs(now at 169 again) 9/11

this is EXACTLY what i did, in the order i did it.

i guess i’m the first person to lose 50 lbs while doubling calories :)[/quote]

First of all, 211 to 169 is 40 lbs. Second of all, you just replaced calorie dense foods with less dense foods with more protein and fiber for the first two months. I’m assuming you also started weight training during this time period, which means it was also possible for you to gain muscle while eating a deficit due to the total lack of lean tissue and abundance of adiposity. You also likely began to focus more on your eating habits so you werent eating mindlessly or binging at social functions.

This still, however, does nothing to support your claim that you somehow managed to accumulate 78 lbs of fat while eating 1500 calories per day and leading an active lifestyle. My money is on you grossly underestimating the amount of food it took you to get that fat.

83

[quote]7thSonofa7thSon wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Josh Rider wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Scott M wrote:
How many sodas were you drinking in a day?[/quote]

Probably a liter a day. [/quote]

That’s about 3000 extra calories a week mainly from sugar. If you cut out 3000 calories a week from any source, weight loss would occur. [/quote]

Try cutting out 3k cals a week from healthy food, tell me how easy that would be. [/quote]

So like one less bowl of rice per day?

What’s your point?[/quote]

from pure life experience, …calories did nothing to stop me form getting fat.
back when i was 37%bf, i ate about 1500 calories everyday.
i lost 50 lbs and got to 16%bf by eating 3000 calories, but the calories came from healthy foods.

so i think calories in vs calories out is a simple way of explaining fat loss and fat gain,
but it’s narrow minded because it doesn’t take into account the types of calories at nutrient timing.

ex:250 claories of lucky charms at night=bad
500 caloires from casein, evoo, and other oils(cocunut, fish, walnut, almond, flax etc) at night is good!
[/quote]

I’m calling bullshit. Seriously.

MAYBE if you went from being totally sedentary, extremely low lean body mass, and consuming no protein (higher TEF) to being highly active and consuming 25%+ of your daily caloric intake from protein, then it could MAYBE be possible.

Overweight people are NOTORIOUS for underreporting caloric intake. This has been documented repeatedly. Look at it this way: if fat people were truly aware of how much they ate on a daily basis, do you think they’d be fat? You had 50 lbs of bodyfat to lose (congrats on the weight loss, btw) in order to even get close to a respectably low bodyfat, so do you really think you were mindful of everything you ate in the process of gaining that 50 lbs? If you got to 37% bodyfat, then you had to have been overeating on a fairly regular basis, whether you realized it or not.

As for your night-time shake example, well…I don’t want to burst your bubble about the night-time insulin fairy…BUT, did you ever think that maybe there was something wrong with the reasoning behind feeding your body an ample amount of energy substrate in the form that is most readily stored as fat right before an 8-10 hour period of inactivity?

Let’s put it this way.

The first law of nutrient timing is: total caloric intake and macronutrient composition is always more important than nutrient timing.
The second law of nutrient timing is: total caloric intake and macronutrient composition is always more important than nutrient timing.[/quote]

i went from fairly active(was in lacrosse and football) while eating shit to extremely active.
after i lost all the weight i wanted to find out how much i was eating and found out it was only about 1500 calories per day.

this was all i ate:
breakfast:cheerios and milk
lunch: 2 slices turkey with 2 slices white bread(wonder brand)
dinner:4 rotis(indian whole grain bread) with some vegetables

breakfast:544(used to put alot of cheerios in my bowl)
lunch:220
dinner:763
*used calorie count for this
*and no, i am not bullshiting, i have better things to do in my life than lie in a computer forum.

[/quote]

Brother, you DO NOT get to THIRTY-SEVEN FUCKING PERCENT bodyfat by playing football, lacrosse, and eating 1500 calories a day.

Do you have any idea how fucking fat 37%BF is?[/quote]

x2

Actually, I’m sure our friend here ate that exact same thing, every single day while he was gaining that 60 lbs. I’m sure he never drank any sort of sweetened drinks or snacked on calorie dense foods. He probably never ate fast-food calorie bombs on any sort of regular basis or pigged out at social functions.

Just because you ate 1500 calories on one particular day says nothing about your lifestyle in general during the amount of time (most likely measured in years) that it took you to get that fat.[/quote]

ummmm…
actually i did eat those things everyday because i used to believe a high carb diet was healthy. i also wanted to lose weight 2 years ago and this was why i was only eating 1500 calories everyday for 2 years. the scale still went up though!

and playing sports didn’t do anything except make me have shin splits and make me more popular in school :slight_smile:

honestly, i get where this suspicion that i’m bullshitting is coming from. i’m honestly the exception to rule in that i gain weight on carbs easily. after just cutting white bread and cereal, replacing it with brown rice and oatmeal; and adding fats and protein(thus the higher calories), i lost fat easily.

and yes, i do know how fat that is. i was pre-diabetic and had nearly deadly cholesterol levels, but strangely i was only 211 lbs@6ft.(LBM was horrible)
[/quote]

So you’re eating the same amount of carbs, but from sources with lower Glycemic Load?

Does not compute.[/quote]

actually, i was eating MORE carbs when losing weight!

i really wish i had some pictures to back up my claims on the fat loss…
[/quote]

The other thing I dont get is that you said you gain fat easily on high carbs, but that you were eating MORE carbs when losing weight. That statement totally contradicts itself and if you ask me, it wasn’t the carbs to begin with, but the TYPES of carbs.
[/quote]

Honestly, in equal amounts in a training individual, I seriously doubt there’s much difference between bread and cereal and brown rice and oatmeal.

Especially 1500 calories worth.[/quote]

It sounds to me like this guy may have lost the weight he claims, but isn’t aware of precisely how he did it, as no one sheds 50 pounds by doubling caloric intake, regardless of where those calories come from (unless their diet consists of literally nothing but sugary dietary nightmares). I lost 60 pounds since mid march, and I know exactly how I did it. Vastly increased activity, while decreasing my caloric intake while also making sure that the decreased calories come from more protein, and less carbs and fat.[/quote]

The almighty calorie is more important than where it comes from.

Way back when, for reasons I don’t quite remember, I was losing weight eating pop-tarts and ice cream, with no training whatsoever.

This is because I was only eating about 1800 calories worth.

84

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

but i do know how i did it?

(1. cut out processed carbs 211 lbs 5/17
(2. replace with whole grains 198 lbs 5/23
(3.start taking protein shake 195 lbs 6/15
(4.double meat consumption 192 lbs 6/26
(5. increase fat consumption 182 lbs 7/3
(6.see how progress is going 177 lbs 7/18
(7.increase carb consumption 176 lbs 7/28
(8.increase protein consumption more 172 lbs 8/19
(9.increase fat consumption more(introduced walnuts, alot of walnuts!) 169 lbs 9/1
(10.increase protein consumption yet again! 165 lbs(now at 169 again) 9/11

this is EXACTLY what i did, in the order i did it.

i guess i’m the first person to lose 50 lbs while doubling calories :)[/quote]

First of all, 211 to 169 is 40 lbs. Second of all, you just replaced calorie dense foods with less dense foods with more protein and fiber for the first two months. I’m assuming you also started weight training during this time period, which means it was also possible for you to gain muscle while eating a deficit due to the total lack of lean tissue and abundance of adiposity. You also likely began to focus more on your eating habits so you weren’t eating mindlessly or binging at social functions.

This still, however, does nothing to support your claim that you somehow managed to accumulate 78 lbs of fat while eating 1500 calories per day and leading an active lifestyle. My money is on you grossly underestimating the amount of food it took you to get that fat.[/quote]

actually the lowest i got was 165, and 211-165 is 46, which rounds up to 50…

and i started weightlifting 2 years ago.
i also didn’t underestimate the amount i ate.
i also never ate at social functions as i made sure to have my meals at home and just get some celery sticks or something like that in social functions.
i don’t know how, but i got fat of 1500 calories, must be a world record imo!

85

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]7thSonofa7thSon wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Josh Rider wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Scott M wrote:
How many sodas were you drinking in a day?[/quote]

Probably a liter a day. [/quote]

That’s about 3000 extra calories a week mainly from sugar. If you cut out 3000 calories a week from any source, weight loss would occur. [/quote]

Try cutting out 3k cals a week from healthy food, tell me how easy that would be. [/quote]

So like one less bowl of rice per day?

What’s your point?[/quote]

from pure life experience, …calories did nothing to stop me form getting fat.
back when i was 37%bf, i ate about 1500 calories everyday.
i lost 50 lbs and got to 16%bf by eating 3000 calories, but the calories came from healthy foods.

so i think calories in vs calories out is a simple way of explaining fat loss and fat gain,
but it’s narrow minded because it doesn’t take into account the types of calories at nutrient timing.

ex:250 claories of lucky charms at night=bad
500 caloires from casein, evoo, and other oils(cocunut, fish, walnut, almond, flax etc) at night is good!
[/quote]

I’m calling bullshit. Seriously.

MAYBE if you went from being totally sedentary, extremely low lean body mass, and consuming no protein (higher TEF) to being highly active and consuming 25%+ of your daily caloric intake from protein, then it could MAYBE be possible.

Overweight people are NOTORIOUS for underreporting caloric intake. This has been documented repeatedly. Look at it this way: if fat people were truly aware of how much they ate on a daily basis, do you think they’d be fat? You had 50 lbs of bodyfat to lose (congrats on the weight loss, btw) in order to even get close to a respectably low bodyfat, so do you really think you were mindful of everything you ate in the process of gaining that 50 lbs? If you got to 37% bodyfat, then you had to have been overeating on a fairly regular basis, whether you realized it or not.

As for your night-time shake example, well…I don’t want to burst your bubble about the night-time insulin fairy…BUT, did you ever think that maybe there was something wrong with the reasoning behind feeding your body an ample amount of energy substrate in the form that is most readily stored as fat right before an 8-10 hour period of inactivity?

Let’s put it this way.

The first law of nutrient timing is: total caloric intake and macronutrient composition is always more important than nutrient timing.
The second law of nutrient timing is: total caloric intake and macronutrient composition is always more important than nutrient timing.[/quote]

i went from fairly active(was in lacrosse and football) while eating shit to extremely active.
after i lost all the weight i wanted to find out how much i was eating and found out it was only about 1500 calories per day.

this was all i ate:
breakfast:cheerios and milk
lunch: 2 slices turkey with 2 slices white bread(wonder brand)
dinner:4 rotis(indian whole grain bread) with some vegetables

breakfast:544(used to put alot of cheerios in my bowl)
lunch:220
dinner:763
*used calorie count for this
*and no, i am not bullshiting, i have better things to do in my life than lie in a computer forum.

[/quote]

Brother, you DO NOT get to THIRTY-SEVEN FUCKING PERCENT bodyfat by playing football, lacrosse, and eating 1500 calories a day.

Do you have any idea how fucking fat 37%BF is?[/quote]

x2

Actually, I’m sure our friend here ate that exact same thing, every single day while he was gaining that 60 lbs. I’m sure he never drank any sort of sweetened drinks or snacked on calorie dense foods. He probably never ate fast-food calorie bombs on any sort of regular basis or pigged out at social functions.

Just because you ate 1500 calories on one particular day says nothing about your lifestyle in general during the amount of time (most likely measured in years) that it took you to get that fat.[/quote]

ummmm…
actually i did eat those things everyday because i used to believe a high carb diet was healthy. i also wanted to lose weight 2 years ago and this was why i was only eating 1500 calories everyday for 2 years. the scale still went up though!

and playing sports didn’t do anything except make me have shin splits and make me more popular in school :slight_smile:

honestly, i get where this suspicion that i’m bullshitting is coming from. i’m honestly the exception to rule in that i gain weight on carbs easily. after just cutting white bread and cereal, replacing it with brown rice and oatmeal; and adding fats and protein(thus the higher calories), i lost fat easily.

and yes, i do know how fat that is. i was pre-diabetic and had nearly deadly cholesterol levels, but strangely i was only 211 lbs@6ft.(LBM was horrible)
[/quote]

So you’re eating the same amount of carbs, but from sources with lower Glycemic Load?

Does not compute.[/quote]

actually, i was eating MORE carbs when losing weight!

i really wish i had some pictures to back up my claims on the fat loss…
[/quote]

The other thing I dont get is that you said you gain fat easily on high carbs, but that you were eating MORE carbs when losing weight. That statement totally contradicts itself and if you ask me, it wasn’t the carbs to begin with, but the TYPES of carbs.
[/quote]

Honestly, in equal amounts in a training individual, I seriously doubt there’s much difference between bread and cereal and brown rice and oatmeal.

Especially 1500 calories worth.[/quote]

It sounds to me like this guy may have lost the weight he claims, but isn’t aware of precisely how he did it, as no one sheds 50 pounds by doubling caloric intake, regardless of where those calories come from (unless their diet consists of literally nothing but sugary dietary nightmares). I lost 60 pounds since mid march, and I know exactly how I did it. Vastly increased activity, while decreasing my caloric intake while also making sure that the decreased calories come from more protein, and less carbs and fat.[/quote]

The almighty calorie is more important than where it comes from.

Way back when, for reasons I don’t quite remember, I was losing weight eating pop-tarts and ice cream, with no training whatsoever.

This is because I was only eating about 1800 calories worth.[/quote]

in all fairness, if i were eating 3000 calories when i was fat, and doubled to 6000, i would’ve gotten fatter. but since it was 1500 which is relatively little, 3000 somehow made me lose fat?

and even with calories, “quality overrides quantity”

86

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:
and even with calories, “quality overrides quantity”[/quote]

Granted, this isn’t a rat study (so clearly it isn’t authoritative), but I still found it interesting:

Junk Food: The New Weight Loss Diet?

87

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

and even with calories, “quality overrides quantity”[/quote]

No.

Given EQUAL caloric intake, sources will affect results.

88

And seriously, it’s unpossible to get fat eating 1500 calories a day, unless there is some underlying medical issue.

Like you have no thyroid.

89

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

and even with calories, “quality overrides quantity”[/quote]

No.

Given EQUAL caloric intake, sources will affect results.[/quote]

However, I would say that most people’s practical experiences suggests that quantity and quality are not independent of each other.

90

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

and even with calories, “quality overrides quantity”[/quote]

No.

Given EQUAL caloric intake, sources will affect results.[/quote]

However, I would say that most people’s practical experiences suggests that quantity and quality are not independent of each other.[/quote]

Obviously there are differences. I’m not saying 1000 calories of protein and 1000 calories of carbs are going to have the same effect on your body.

But the difference between equal caloric amounts of brown rice and white bread are pretty insignificant.

91

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

but i do know how i did it?

(1. cut out processed carbs 211 lbs 5/17
(2. replace with whole grains 198 lbs 5/23
(3.start taking protein shake 195 lbs 6/15
(4.double meat consumption 192 lbs 6/26
(5. increase fat consumption 182 lbs 7/3
(6.see how progress is going 177 lbs 7/18
(7.increase carb consumption 176 lbs 7/28
(8.increase protein consumption more 172 lbs 8/19
(9.increase fat consumption more(introduced walnuts, alot of walnuts!) 169 lbs 9/1
(10.increase protein consumption yet again! 165 lbs(now at 169 again) 9/11

this is EXACTLY what i did, in the order i did it.

i guess i’m the first person to lose 50 lbs while doubling calories :)[/quote]

First of all, 211 to 169 is 40 lbs. Second of all, you just replaced calorie dense foods with less dense foods with more protein and fiber for the first two months. I’m assuming you also started weight training during this time period, which means it was also possible for you to gain muscle while eating a deficit due to the total lack of lean tissue and abundance of adiposity. You also likely began to focus more on your eating habits so you weren’t eating mindlessly or binging at social functions.

This still, however, does nothing to support your claim that you somehow managed to accumulate 78 lbs of fat while eating 1500 calories per day and leading an active lifestyle. My money is on you grossly underestimating the amount of food it took you to get that fat.[/quote]

actually the lowest i got was 165, and 211-165 is 46, which rounds up to 50…

and i started weightlifting 2 years ago.
i also didn’t underestimate the amount i ate.
i also never ate at social functions as i made sure to have my meals at home and just get some celery sticks or something like that in social functions.
i don’t know how, but i got fat of 1500 calories, must be a world record imo!
[/quote]

Yeah, and I get out of bed every morning, piss roughly 14 oz of Cherry Sprite Zero, telepathically dress myself, walk out on my front porch and levitate off to go about my business.

I swear, it’s true! It doesn’t matter if all of those things completely ignore the laws of physics and physiology, I must be special!

Occam’s razor, friend. Which is more likely: your body managing to somehow completely disregard the laws of thermodynamics OR you not having your story straight somewhere along the line?

92

[quote]Vicomte wrote:
But the difference between equal caloric amounts of brown rice and white bread are pretty insignificant.[/quote]

True, but just about anybody I know would have no problem downing 4 slices of toast with butter and jelly for breakfast. Most would still be hungry shortly after.

How many of them could eat 2 cups of cooked brown rice? How many of them could eat 5 apples? 50 cups of spinach?

There’s a reason this guy is swearing up and down he only ate 1,500 calories when he was eating junkfood…

93

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

but i do know how i did it?

(1. cut out processed carbs 211 lbs 5/17
(2. replace with whole grains 198 lbs 5/23
(3.start taking protein shake 195 lbs 6/15
(4.double meat consumption 192 lbs 6/26
(5. increase fat consumption 182 lbs 7/3
(6.see how progress is going 177 lbs 7/18
(7.increase carb consumption 176 lbs 7/28
(8.increase protein consumption more 172 lbs 8/19
(9.increase fat consumption more(introduced walnuts, alot of walnuts!) 169 lbs 9/1
(10.increase protein consumption yet again! 165 lbs(now at 169 again) 9/11

this is EXACTLY what i did, in the order i did it.

i guess i’m the first person to lose 50 lbs while doubling calories :)[/quote]

First of all, 211 to 169 is 40 lbs. Second of all, you just replaced calorie dense foods with less dense foods with more protein and fiber for the first two months. I’m assuming you also started weight training during this time period, which means it was also possible for you to gain muscle while eating a deficit due to the total lack of lean tissue and abundance of adiposity. You also likely began to focus more on your eating habits so you weren’t eating mindlessly or binging at social functions.

This still, however, does nothing to support your claim that you somehow managed to accumulate 78 lbs of fat while eating 1500 calories per day and leading an active lifestyle. My money is on you grossly underestimating the amount of food it took you to get that fat.[/quote]

actually the lowest i got was 165, and 211-165 is 46, which rounds up to 50…

and i started weightlifting 2 years ago.
i also didn’t underestimate the amount i ate.
i also never ate at social functions as i made sure to have my meals at home and just get some celery sticks or something like that in social functions.
i don’t know how, but i got fat of 1500 calories, must be a world record imo!
[/quote]

Yeah, and I get out of bed every morning, piss roughly 14 oz of Cherry Sprite Zero, telepathically dress myself, walk out on my front porch and levitate off to go about my business.

I swear, it’s true! It doesn’t matter if all of those things completely ignore the laws of physics and physiology, I must be special!

Occam’s razor, friend. Which is more likely: your body managing to somehow completely disregard the laws of thermodynamics OR you not having your story straight somewhere along the line?[/quote]
^This, for the love of GOD THIS!!! I can’t handle the stupidity anymore.

94

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:
But the difference between equal caloric amounts of brown rice and white bread are pretty insignificant.[/quote]

True, but just about anybody I know would have no problem downing 4 slices of toast with butter and jelly for breakfast. Most would still be hungry shortly after.

How many of them could eat 2 cups of cooked brown rice? How many of them could eat 5 apples? 50 cups of spinach?

There’s a reason this guy is swearing up and down he only ate 1,500 calories when he was eating junkfood… [/quote]

Differences in satiety or how easy it is to eat something aren’t things I concern myself with, really. These things are only a problem if you don’t have limits on your diet in the first place. 200g of carbs is 200g of carbs, you know?

95

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:
But the difference between equal caloric amounts of brown rice and white bread are pretty insignificant.[/quote]

True, but just about anybody I know would have no problem downing 4 slices of toast with butter and jelly for breakfast. Most would still be hungry shortly after.

How many of them could eat 2 cups of cooked brown rice? How many of them could eat 5 apples? 50 cups of spinach?

There’s a reason this guy is swearing up and down he only ate 1,500 calories when he was eating junkfood… [/quote]

Differences in satiety or how easy it is to eat something aren’t things I concern myself with, really. These things are only a problem if you don’t have limits on your diet in the first place. 200g of carbs is 200g of carbs, you know?[/quote]

Do you think a diet with 200g of carbs coming from sweets, candy, chocolate, etc would have the same effect on your body and performance as 200 grams from veggies, beans, fruit, oatmeal, brown rice, or PWO carbs, etc ?

You are not taking into account the impact those carbs have on hormones like insulin, leptin, glucagon, CCK, etc.

Quality, quantity, and timing.

The same way a metabolism is built, it can also be dismantled or disassembled through lack of exercise and shitty nutrition.

96

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:
But the difference between equal caloric amounts of brown rice and white bread are pretty insignificant.[/quote]

True, but just about anybody I know would have no problem downing 4 slices of toast with butter and jelly for breakfast. Most would still be hungry shortly after.

How many of them could eat 2 cups of cooked brown rice? How many of them could eat 5 apples? 50 cups of spinach?

There’s a reason this guy is swearing up and down he only ate 1,500 calories when he was eating junkfood… [/quote]

Differences in satiety or how easy it is to eat something aren’t things I concern myself with, really. These things are only a problem if you don’t have limits on your diet in the first place. 200g of carbs is 200g of carbs, you know?[/quote]

Do you think a diet with 200g of carbs coming from sweets, candy, chocolate, etc would have the same effect on your body and performance as 200 grams from veggies, beans, fruit, oatmeal, brown rice, or PWO carbs, etc ?

You are not taking into account the impact those carbs have on hormones like insulin, leptin, glucagon, CCK, etc.

Quality, quantity, and timing.

The same way a metabolism is built, it can also be dismantled or disassembled through lack of exercise and shitty nutrition. [/quote]

I was speaking primarily in the context of DLG’s switch from bread to rice and oatmeal.

But still, I’d say timing trumps sources. Eating candy after training won’t hurt you. Basically, as long as your macros/calories/timing are together, carb sources don’t seem that important. Or, at least as important as some people would make it out to be.

I’m not saying it’s better to eat candy, of course.

97

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:
But the difference between equal caloric amounts of brown rice and white bread are pretty insignificant.[/quote]

True, but just about anybody I know would have no problem downing 4 slices of toast with butter and jelly for breakfast. Most would still be hungry shortly after.

How many of them could eat 2 cups of cooked brown rice? How many of them could eat 5 apples? 50 cups of spinach?

There’s a reason this guy is swearing up and down he only ate 1,500 calories when he was eating junkfood… [/quote]

Differences in satiety or how easy it is to eat something aren’t things I concern myself with, really. These things are only a problem if you don’t have limits on your diet in the first place. 200g of carbs is 200g of carbs, you know?[/quote]

Do you think a diet with 200g of carbs coming from sweets, candy, chocolate, etc would have the same effect on your body and performance as 200 grams from veggies, beans, fruit, oatmeal, brown rice, or PWO carbs, etc ?

You are not taking into account the impact those carbs have on hormones like insulin, leptin, glucagon, CCK, etc.

Quality, quantity, and timing.

The same way a metabolism is built, it can also be dismantled or disassembled through lack of exercise and shitty nutrition. [/quote]

exactly, my old diet was at least 80-90% carbs, now it’s 30%. unless your an olympic athlete or bodybuilders(pro), that’ll get you fat!(i’m not trying to sound like a carb phobe!)

1500 calories of shit to 3000 calories of nutritious foods=fat loss
3000 calories of nutritious foods to 1500 calories of shit=fat gain!

98

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:
But the difference between equal caloric amounts of brown rice and white bread are pretty insignificant.[/quote]

True, but just about anybody I know would have no problem downing 4 slices of toast with butter and jelly for breakfast. Most would still be hungry shortly after.

How many of them could eat 2 cups of cooked brown rice? How many of them could eat 5 apples? 50 cups of spinach?

There’s a reason this guy is swearing up and down he only ate 1,500 calories when he was eating junkfood… [/quote]

Differences in satiety or how easy it is to eat something aren’t things I concern myself with, really. These things are only a problem if you don’t have limits on your diet in the first place. 200g of carbs is 200g of carbs, you know?[/quote]

Do you think a diet with 200g of carbs coming from sweets, candy, chocolate, etc would have the same effect on your body and performance as 200 grams from veggies, beans, fruit, oatmeal, brown rice, or PWO carbs, etc ?

You are not taking into account the impact those carbs have on hormones like insulin, leptin, glucagon, CCK, etc.

Quality, quantity, and timing.

The same way a metabolism is built, it can also be dismantled or disassembled through lack of exercise and shitty nutrition. [/quote]

And this argument, once again, ignores CONTEXT.

Vic already stated above he wasn’t trying to compare ALL SUGAR vs ALL STARCH. Of course fiber content, glycemic load, etc. all come into play and make some difference, albeit not as large a difference as you want to portray with your "3000 calories of soda vs. 3000 calories of “healthy food”’ argument. What he’s saying, is that arbitrarily defining…say…oatmeal as “clean” and bread or pasta as “not clean” in the CONTEXT of a mixed diet (which throws the glycemic index out the window) in a training individual is stupid and unnecessary. Just like the argument that natural sugar (sucrose) is somehow better than HFCS despite being nearly chemically identical since it’s more “natural”.

99

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:
But the difference between equal caloric amounts of brown rice and white bread are pretty insignificant.[/quote]

True, but just about anybody I know would have no problem downing 4 slices of toast with butter and jelly for breakfast. Most would still be hungry shortly after.

How many of them could eat 2 cups of cooked brown rice? How many of them could eat 5 apples? 50 cups of spinach?

There’s a reason this guy is swearing up and down he only ate 1,500 calories when he was eating junkfood… [/quote]

Differences in satiety or how easy it is to eat something aren’t things I concern myself with, really. These things are only a problem if you don’t have limits on your diet in the first place. 200g of carbs is 200g of carbs, you know?[/quote]

Do you think a diet with 200g of carbs coming from sweets, candy, chocolate, etc would have the same effect on your body and performance as 200 grams from veggies, beans, fruit, oatmeal, brown rice, or PWO carbs, etc ?

You are not taking into account the impact those carbs have on hormones like insulin, leptin, glucagon, CCK, etc.

Quality, quantity, and timing.

The same way a metabolism is built, it can also be dismantled or disassembled through lack of exercise and shitty nutrition. [/quote]

exactly, my old diet was at least 80-90% carbs, now it’s 30%. unless your an olympic athlete or bodybuilders(pro), that’ll get you fat!(i’m not trying to sound like a carb phobe!)

1500 calories of shit to 3000 calories of nutritious foods=fat loss
3000 calories of nutritious foods to 1500 calories of shit=fat gain!
[/quote]

How old are you? Just curious.

100

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:

[quote]jtrinsey wrote:

[quote]Vicomte wrote:
But the difference between equal caloric amounts of brown rice and white bread are pretty insignificant.[/quote]

True, but just about anybody I know would have no problem downing 4 slices of toast with butter and jelly for breakfast. Most would still be hungry shortly after.

How many of them could eat 2 cups of cooked brown rice? How many of them could eat 5 apples? 50 cups of spinach?

There’s a reason this guy is swearing up and down he only ate 1,500 calories when he was eating junkfood… [/quote]

Differences in satiety or how easy it is to eat something aren’t things I concern myself with, really. These things are only a problem if you don’t have limits on your diet in the first place. 200g of carbs is 200g of carbs, you know?[/quote]

Do you think a diet with 200g of carbs coming from sweets, candy, chocolate, etc would have the same effect on your body and performance as 200 grams from veggies, beans, fruit, oatmeal, brown rice, or PWO carbs, etc ?

You are not taking into account the impact those carbs have on hormones like insulin, leptin, glucagon, CCK, etc.

Quality, quantity, and timing.

The same way a metabolism is built, it can also be dismantled or disassembled through lack of exercise and shitty nutrition. [/quote]

exactly, my old diet was at least 80-90% carbs, now it’s 30%. unless your an olympic athlete or bodybuilders(pro), that’ll get you fat!(i’m not trying to sound like a carb phobe!)

1500 calories of shit to 3000 calories of nutritious foods=fat loss
3000 calories of nutritious foods to 1500 calories of shit=fat gain!
[/quote]

How old are you? Just curious.[/quote]

16

and please don’t be like
“you’re 16, your young and don’t know what your taking about”