DIPSLICK Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 On the contrary! My guys run so efficiently and autonomously that I have time to chat here every now and then THE DUTCHIES have a saying for a wolf like you,, you sound like an insurance salesman answer for everything
Sports Certified Dietitian Posted June 5, 2015 Author Posted June 5, 2015 I am sure that there are people out there who aren't capable of using Whatsapp and can't use PCs, but note who your audience is here, and how they are engaging with you. They are cyclists, using a web based electronic forum.I agree with you wrt the hub. Luckily there is more to nutrition than simply weight
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 THE DUTCHIES have a saying for a wolf like you,, you sound like an insurance salesman answer for everything Oi!
Dgas Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 I agree with your first paragraph in terms of energy balance. Most approaches to weight-loss can work. Whether the method to promote weight-loss is healthy and whether you have side efects, loss of sport performance etc. is another thing. Many people do not know what a healthy diet is, how many grams of protein etc. they need to take in and so forth. Some people are not IT literate, so logging meals and snacks on iPads and laptops is stretching them too far. Some people are averse to exercise or have medical issues e.g. osteoarthritis of the knees which prevent them from pushing the exercise component. I could carry on, but I'm sure you see why the condition of being overweight is more prevalent than with what could be explained by the energy balance equation.As this is a cycling site, I was addressing ( or thought I was) a audience that was not averse to excersize and had some acces to a PC, Tablet or a smartphone. I fully agrre with you that not everybody has knowledge to be able to stick to a healthy diet. I use "My Fitness Pal" to log all my kilojoule intake and expenditure, The APP also gives a simple split between carbohydrates, fat and protein. You can set it up to be more complex. Not all diets are healthy, although people swear by it, the Tim Noaks or the Atkins diets are nowhere near healthy choices. You may loose weight but health? Most of the diet fads are there to make people money from writting a book. Tim Noaks being a good example. As a vegetarian I should almost automatically be on good diet if I cut out the chips, coke and chocolate, cheese, etc, which is esentially what I did and reduced my portions in line with kilojoule intake. Upped my excersize to around 250km per week and 20 kg's are gone. Want to loose another 5 or so but a bit slower that I lost the 20kg's.
SwissVan Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 EXACTLY and then moan that we aren't fat adapt and that LCHF is rubbish..... My wife (please baby jesus do not let her read this) is a good example... She says, she thinks and even believes that she is on LCHF. And moans that she isnt losing weight. I then kept a food diary for her for 1 week to show her the truth, she is now angry at me Thanx for the laugh, we all been there, the males that is...you are male?
khm4252 Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 I agree with you fully. I avoided using BMI as a rough guide for this forum as, even with myself, it is highly inaccurate. H-squared should just be a guide to defining, or moving in the right direction with one's weight. Body composition is a much better and more accurate way to determine an acceptable body weight. Next week I shall address body composition! What is H-squared? I actually had a session with my dietician today and she always pulls out the calipers and calculates a BMI out of that. Is that not accurate?
khm4252 Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 It was basically some blood tests, metabolism, width of my wrists and hip bones. I also was with another "dietician" (not qualified) about 7 years ago who said I must weigh 92.5 kg, also based on some measurements. On this specific diet I lost weight until 94 kg, and still had some fat around the waist, so I reckon 85 - 87 seems fair. My cycling buddy is 1.86 and weighs 78 kg's. I guess you must have quite some lean mass (muscle) if you are 93 and not fat. Jan Serfontein is also 1.87 and is 97 kg' and he is for sure not overweight I have been seeing a dietician since January and have lost 10kgs. It is quite interesting, we are quite similar as I am 1.86 and now 93kg. My body fat % is now 24% and has come down nicely. My goal weight is 90kg but the dietician said I could well get to 85kg. So the numbers of 85-87kg for a 1.86/7 male sounds pretty consistent. I am sure that would be a body fat % of around 15%. It is amazing talking about a potential sub 90kg weight as I never thought sub 100kg was possible. A year ago I was 108kg even with lots of sport and training the best I got to was 103kg but an overhaul of my diet allowed me to break 100kg. I am primarily a vegetarian but do eat meat twice a week so my diet consisted too much of carbs and too little of protein in the past. Getting the balance right for me was essential. I worked with a dietician to build a brand new diet that had the right mix. It was hard to start but it feels like normal now. To me the key is snacking, the mid morning and afternoon snack where I have a fat free yogurt and an apple or cottage cheese and a piece of rye toast were essential to not over eating and not eating junk. I think people drink too many carbs but am fortunate to have always been a big water drinker and cutting out the odd juice (gave up soft drinks 10 years ago) was no issue. A little science behind food and training also seems to help as I have 8 scoops of FutureLife high protein with water an hour before I do a ride 2hrs or longer and then I have either 500ml of an energy drink per hour or 500ml water and 1 energy bar per hour of riding. These small changes to my diet have made a difference to my riding. The weight loss and training are addictive; once you feel you don't fear your local hills any longer, you just want to go faster. Currently I ride twice a week indoors on a Wattbike in a Cadence/Spinning style class and ride once or twice a week on the road or off road. Mix that with some gym, squash and golf, it is a good amount of physical activity.
HBO Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 Morning BoB........... Time for some 1427733439432908_large.jpgNow was this picture really necessary?
Patchelicious Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 Not all diets are healthy, although people swear by it, the Tim Noaks or the Atkins diets are nowhere near healthy choices. You may loose weight but health? Most of the diet fads are there to make people money from writting a book. Tim Noaks being a good example. Some pretty big statements being made there. What did you base your statement on? Most of the scientific papers on LCHF are about health benefits not weight loss. Did you choose to be vegetarian for health or ethical reasons?
Dgas Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 Some pretty big statements being made there. What did you base your statement on?Most of the scientific papers on LCHF are about health benefits not weight loss.Did you choose to be vegetarian for health or ethical reasons?All weight loss diets are based on a restricted calorie consumption and this includes the LCHF diets. You cannot eat as much steak or bacon as you like and still loose weight. High red meat consumption is associated with colon cancer, kidney disease and coronary disease. The Medeterrian diet is supposed to be healthy. I am a vegeterian for ethical and health reasons.
JannievanZyl Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 All weight loss diets are based on a restricted calorie consumption and this includes the LCHF diets. You cannot eat as much steak or bacon as you like and still loose weight. High red meat consumption is associated with colon cancer, kidney disease and coronary disease. The Medeterrian diet is supposed to be healthy. I am a vegeterian for ethical and health reasons.Can you please provide the studies to substantiate your claims? And before you link a couple of vegetarian websites that attack meat eaters, first read the actual studies yourself (I did) and come and explain here why you think red meat causes cancer and kidney disease.
JannievanZyl Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 EXACTLY and then moan that we aren't fat adapt and that LCHF is rubbish..... My wife (please baby jesus do not let her read this) is a good example... She says, she thinks and even believes that she is on LCHF. And moans that she isnt losing weight. I then kept a food diary for her for 1 week to show her the truth, she is now angry at me 100% People love to believe they do better (on any subject) than reality. Thus is why self-reported nutritional studies are pretty much useless.
Patchelicious Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 All weight loss diets are based on a restricted calorie consumption and this includes the LCHF diets. You cannot eat as much steak or bacon as you like and still loose weight. High red meat consumption is associated with colon cancer, kidney disease and coronary disease. The Medeterrian diet is supposed to be healthy. I am a vegeterian for ethical and health reasons.Wow wow wow, who said anything about eating AS MUCH as you like? I think that is a common misconception of "Banting". You still need to be in a calorie deficit to lose weight, it's just easier to control your hunger when your insulin levels are not spiking.
JannievanZyl Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 Wow wow wow, who said anything about eating AS MUCH as you like? I think that is a common misconception of "Banting".You still need to be in a calorie deficit to lose weight, it's just easier to control your hunger when your insulin levels are not spiking.Yup. When you eat a high-carb diet, insulin will ensure a fair amount of those calories are going to be stored away, leading to a continuous cycle of eating and being hungry again a few hours later. The only way to lose weight in this environment is to consiously restrict calories with ensuing constant hunger. Eating a low carb, moderate protein but high fat diet eliminates this glucose/insulin spikes and creates a feeling of satiety. Thus, most people on LCHF, end up eating less calories than before and it contributes substantially to the weight loss. But you always have to do both; get your macro percentages right and get your energy balance sorted. Trying to do just the one or the other will lead to failure.
Dgas Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 Wow wow wow, who said anything about eating AS MUCH as you like? I think that is a common misconception of "Banting".You still need to be in a calorie deficit to lose weight, it's just easier to control your hunger when your insulin levels are not spiking.And that was really my point a few posts ago. Regardless of how you go about it, or what diet you choose to follow, your calorie intake will have to be negative for you to loose weight. It's not rocket science, it's the books that are written about it that make it more complicated than it is. Some diets may make it easier as you don't get as hungry.
Dgas Posted June 5, 2015 Posted June 5, 2015 Can you please provide the studies to substantiate your claims?And before you link a couple of vegetarian websites that attack meat eaters, first read the actual studies yourself (I did) and come and explain here why you think red meat causes cancer and kidney disease.It's 11pm and I am getting up in the morning to go and ride through a freezing cold Cradle. I don't have a list of websites lying handily next to my bed to post straight away. I will look up and post tomorrow. If you have nothing to do tonight, download ( Amazon) and read "The China Study" by Dr Colin T Campbell. It is the biggest and most comprehensive study ever done on cancer linked to diet.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.