9 ms·

Glad you lost weight but kale smoothies and fasting are not magic--it's just reduced caloric intake conferring most of the benefits you're seeing. The biggest

Glad you lost weight but kale smoothies and fasting are not magic--it's just reduced caloric intake conferring most of the benefits you're seeing. The biggest problem people have is overeating, bottom line. I honestly have several strict vegan friends who are obese -- at the end of the day a calorie is a calorie. My only issue when people recount stories like yours, as inspiring as they are, is they associate non-scientifically-provable properties to their eating. As if fasting or kale give you more energy (they don't). Or carbs are automatically evil by themselves and cause weight gain (also wrong). There is no such thing as "super nutrients" -- there are only nutrients. It's like when people talk about going on a "cleanse" from "toxins" in their body, it's just nonsense. I wish high schools would teach everyone how to track their calories, it's a super useful skill that would help many in understanding how much a penalty there is in eating those Five Guys fries. But "I lost weight from [insert special diet here] wow now I have [amazing qualities]" just exaggerates the basic underlying process of reducing caloric intake. And for the record I'm 6'2" & 168 lbs / 76 kg with 5% body fat (measured via calipers), training for multiple athletic events, so I'm not saying this as someone who struggles with following strict diets.

icu 7y ago
Sure, but honestly from where I'm sitting, it feels like magic. I'm sure the result can be completely explained with science but I'm not going to sit down and work it all out. I just care that I'm a healthy weight again and that I found a method of healthy living that I can stick to.
- ordinaryperson 7y ago
  And that's great. It's inspiring to lose weight and be healthier. Not trying to take anything away from what you accomplished, just trying to sort out where the health benefits are coming from: it's weight loss. From reduced caloric intake. Personally, I like fasting. In an era when food is available 24/7 I think it helps teach self-discipline and clearly reduces the likelihood one will overeat. I also like vegetable-heavy diets. Clearly good for you. But to say kale smoothies have "super nutrients" is not scientific. While it's tempting to confer special properties on the foods which have helped transform your life, most likely these are just methods to reducing over-eating. Congrats again.
nugget 7y ago
>Glad you lost weight but kale smoothies and fasting are not magic--it's just reduced caloric intake conferring most of the benefits you're seeing. >As if fasting or kale give you more energy (they don't). Your comment implies that all food is more or less equal, which doesn't seem to be the case. Couldn't the OP's change in "energy" reflect the reduced intake of hormones and other unhealthy additives that are present in the supply chain for most meats and other processed foods?
jonwinstanley 7y ago
> at the end of the day a calorie is a calorie No, calories vary massively. If someone ate 2000 calories of vegetables each day and someone else ate 2000 calories of sugar there would be a huge amount of difference between their nutrition. > The biggest problem people have is overeating, bottom line Sorry to say that I disagree with this too. The body does a great job of negating over-eating provided the food eaten is of the right types, it is just pushed back out as waste. Going back to the vegetable example, you could eat several kg of green vegetables every day and continue to lose weight.
- ordinaryperson 7y ago
  > Going back to the vegetable example, you could eat several kg of green vegetables every day and continue to lose weight. This is just not true. Anecdotally I know multiple obese vegans, but that aside at the end of the day it's calories burned vs calories consumed. Generally speaking 1 lb = 3,500 calories[1]. What you're essentially arguing is that the caloric measurement of vegetables is wrong, that they're over-estimated, and you can secretly eat "kilograms" of extra vegetables and not get fat. You gain weight from taking in more calories than you burn. You can take in too many calories from vegetables. It all depends on your lifestyle. [edit: 3,500 calories, not 3,000. Sources: https://www.google.com/search?q=3500+calories+1+lb&oq=3500+calories+1+lb https://www.google.com/search?q=3500+calories+1+lb&oq=3500+c...]
  - dna_polymerase 7y ago
    > Anecdotally I know multiple obese vegans, but that aside at the end of the day it's calories burned vs calories consumed. Anecdotes are not data, but 'obese vegans' don't suprise me at all. Carbs are very present in vegan diets, therefore it's easy to overeat. Also, yes you can get fat from veggies, but honestly, most have so few calories per kg, you would need to feast on them the whole day.
    - ordinaryperson 7y ago
      Not necessarily. People have different lifestyles, metabolisms, biologies, health issues. It is very possible to overeat and get fat on vegetables without having to "feast on them the whole day."
soneca 7y ago
There are diets that make much easier to reduce calories intake. Low-carb high-fat is one that do that for me. Intermittent fasting too. It is counter productive for me to dismiss all of these as just ways to disguise calories intake reduction. But not only that, I don't think it is as simples as "a calorie is a calorie". Different food are digested differently and trigger different responses for the body. To use an ad absurdum example, if I drink gasoline I don't get fat.
- ordinaryperson 7y ago
  > It is counter productive for me to dismiss all of these as just ways to disguise calories intake reduction. I didn't "dismiss" these, of course these are useful techniques that help people. My point is to not associate non-scientific properties to having kale smoothies or avoiding carbs. Losing weight is great. Many ways to do it. To say there are such things as "super nutrients" distorts the real process at work here, which is reducing over-eating. As for a calorie being a calorie, you're misunderstanding my argument. I'm not saying all _foods_ will have the same impact on you biologically. Of course not. Human biology is extremely complex and people should eat a balanced diet. But what happens too often is people confer special, almost mythical properties to foods or nutrients (like kale, or omega-3 fatty acids, or plant-only diets, or carbs, etc) when the most fundamental process is calories in vs calories out. Yes, it's possible to lose weight and still be unhealthy (just eating 1500 kcal of McDonalds per day, e.g.), but most health benefits associated from dieting come from weight loss, not isolating particular properties or compounds or ingredients.
galaxyLogic 7y ago
> it's just reduced caloric intake Right, but the point is it is easier to stick to this kind of regime than counting every calorie. And if you stick to the regime it also keeps you focused and conscious about not eating too many colories in general, you don't "forget" that you are trying to lose weight. Further I've read that fasting kicks your body into a state where it starts to burn the extra reserve fat you have, which should make you feel less hungry after the start of the fast. SO rather than taking calories in, you are using what you already have. I don't know if 16 hours is long enough to get this fat-burning process started but perhaps. I almost follow this same regime but I often slip and eat all night after the fast :-) But the account above gives me more inspiration to try a lit bit harder. Don't eat after 8pm. Skip the breakfast. How easy is that
- ordinaryperson 7y ago
  I think this is a fair argument but not what the top comment was arguing. He associates fasting, kale and "super nutrients" with this lifestyle transformation -- when it's just about reducing calories. If his argument was, "It's hard to count calories, if you stick to this approach you'll automatically cut your take without having to journal every sip of OJ" -- then yes, I wholeheartedly agree. There is some evidence that fasting can be good but people are so different it's hard to generalize-- others will over-eat in their feeding window. For some micro-meals throughout the day is a better technique to managing their hunger and keeps their metabolism up. There's no one-size-fits-all technique. My main point is, when reading about "How I lost weight, it's so amazing" is caveat emptor.
  - icu 7y ago
    Sorry if it came across that I'm associating kale with magical weight loss. What I was getting at was I break my fast with a burst of fresh nutrients that my body can easily absorb. I think the whole approach of strict fasting, along with the plant-based diet is what worked... and I can't see how it won't work for others, but then again I have no idea. People are radically different, and certainly, I was super motivated to lose weight because I never, ever wanted to be obese. When I was a kid I used to watch The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, and Will Smith did a bit about Dunlap Syndrome. When my Doc told me I was going to be obese that bit from Fresh Prince flashed in my mind's eye and it was like Will Smith was laughing at me lol. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeU0fJ-nRIk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeU0fJ-nRIk
stjohnswarts 7y ago
People like you never realize the value in the fact that not everyone has the same physiology as you. Some people do well with keto, some do well with IF, some do well with vegan. It's not all about caloric restriction, that is a facet, not the key goal. The goal is to find a meal plan you can deal with that doesn't lead to you feeling deprived and starving at the end of the day. That is doomed to fail. I agree that cleanses are bullshit as are most nutritional supplements. There are nutrients though. Getting carbs from whole wheat bread is a lot better than getting it from white "enriched" bread.
- wtallis 7y ago
  > It's not all about caloric restriction, that is a facet, not the key goal. The goal is to find a meal plan you can deal with that doesn't lead to you feeling deprived and starving at the end of the day. The second sentence here is the reason why the first sentence is exactly wrong. The best way to maintain the calorie deficit necessary for weight loss is if you can find a way to not feel hungry while maintaining that calorie deficit. But that calorie deficit is absolutely the most important goal of a weight loss plan, and is a necessary and sufficient condition for its success.
tchaffee 7y ago
This is misinformation. Just as one small example, fat keeps you satisfied far longer than protein or carbs. All calories are not equal. Yes it eventually comes down to calories consumed vs. calories expended. But what those calories are made up of have a profound effect on when you eat next and your energy levels. And we haven't even gotten into psychology and effort. Counting calories is a lot of work and annoying for some people. Stopping eating at 8pm and not eating until lunch soon just becomes a very easy to maintain habit that requires no effort and barely any willpower.

icu 7y ago

Sure, but honestly from where I'm sitting, it feels like magic. I'm sure the result can be completely explained with science but I'm not going to sit down and work it all out. I just care that I'm a healthy weight again and that I found a method of healthy living that I can stick to.

ordinaryperson 7y ago
And that's great. It's inspiring to lose weight and be healthier. Not trying to take anything away from what you accomplished, just trying to sort out where the health benefits are coming from: it's weight loss. From reduced caloric intake. Personally, I like fasting. In an era when food is available 24/7 I think it helps teach self-discipline and clearly reduces the likelihood one will overeat. I also like vegetable-heavy diets. Clearly good for you. But to say kale smoothies have "super nutrients" is not scientific. While it's tempting to confer special properties on the foods which have helped transform your life, most likely these are just methods to reducing over-eating. Congrats again.

nugget 7y ago

>Glad you lost weight but kale smoothies and fasting are not magic--it's just reduced caloric intake conferring most of the benefits you're seeing. >As if fasting or kale give you more energy (they don't). Your comment implies that all food is more or less equal, which doesn't seem to be the case. Couldn't the OP's change in "energy" reflect the reduced intake of hormones and other unhealthy additives that are present in the supply chain for most meats and other processed foods?

jonwinstanley 7y ago

> at the end of the day a calorie is a calorie No, calories vary massively. If someone ate 2000 calories of vegetables each day and someone else ate 2000 calories of sugar there would be a huge amount of difference between their nutrition. > The biggest problem people have is overeating, bottom line Sorry to say that I disagree with this too. The body does a great job of negating over-eating provided the food eaten is of the right types, it is just pushed back out as waste. Going back to the vegetable example, you could eat several kg of green vegetables every day and continue to lose weight.

ordinaryperson 7y ago
> Going back to the vegetable example, you could eat several kg of green vegetables every day and continue to lose weight. This is just not true. Anecdotally I know multiple obese vegans, but that aside at the end of the day it's calories burned vs calories consumed. Generally speaking 1 lb = 3,500 calories[1]. What you're essentially arguing is that the caloric measurement of vegetables is wrong, that they're over-estimated, and you can secretly eat "kilograms" of extra vegetables and not get fat. You gain weight from taking in more calories than you burn. You can take in too many calories from vegetables. It all depends on your lifestyle. [edit: 3,500 calories, not 3,000. Sources: https://www.google.com/search?q=3500+calories+1+lb&oq=3500+calories+1+lb https://www.google.com/search?q=3500+calories+1+lb&oq=3500+c...]
- dna_polymerase 7y ago
  > Anecdotally I know multiple obese vegans, but that aside at the end of the day it's calories burned vs calories consumed. Anecdotes are not data, but 'obese vegans' don't suprise me at all. Carbs are very present in vegan diets, therefore it's easy to overeat. Also, yes you can get fat from veggies, but honestly, most have so few calories per kg, you would need to feast on them the whole day.
  - ordinaryperson 7y ago
    Not necessarily. People have different lifestyles, metabolisms, biologies, health issues. It is very possible to overeat and get fat on vegetables without having to "feast on them the whole day."

soneca 7y ago

There are diets that make much easier to reduce calories intake. Low-carb high-fat is one that do that for me. Intermittent fasting too. It is counter productive for me to dismiss all of these as just ways to disguise calories intake reduction. But not only that, I don't think it is as simples as "a calorie is a calorie". Different food are digested differently and trigger different responses for the body. To use an ad absurdum example, if I drink gasoline I don't get fat.

ordinaryperson 7y ago
> It is counter productive for me to dismiss all of these as just ways to disguise calories intake reduction. I didn't "dismiss" these, of course these are useful techniques that help people. My point is to not associate non-scientific properties to having kale smoothies or avoiding carbs. Losing weight is great. Many ways to do it. To say there are such things as "super nutrients" distorts the real process at work here, which is reducing over-eating. As for a calorie being a calorie, you're misunderstanding my argument. I'm not saying all _foods_ will have the same impact on you biologically. Of course not. Human biology is extremely complex and people should eat a balanced diet. But what happens too often is people confer special, almost mythical properties to foods or nutrients (like kale, or omega-3 fatty acids, or plant-only diets, or carbs, etc) when the most fundamental process is calories in vs calories out. Yes, it's possible to lose weight and still be unhealthy (just eating 1500 kcal of McDonalds per day, e.g.), but most health benefits associated from dieting come from weight loss, not isolating particular properties or compounds or ingredients.

galaxyLogic 7y ago

> it's just reduced caloric intake Right, but the point is it is easier to stick to this kind of regime than counting every calorie. And if you stick to the regime it also keeps you focused and conscious about not eating too many colories in general, you don't "forget" that you are trying to lose weight. Further I've read that fasting kicks your body into a state where it starts to burn the extra reserve fat you have, which should make you feel less hungry after the start of the fast. SO rather than taking calories in, you are using what you already have. I don't know if 16 hours is long enough to get this fat-burning process started but perhaps. I almost follow this same regime but I often slip and eat all night after the fast :-) But the account above gives me more inspiration to try a lit bit harder. Don't eat after 8pm. Skip the breakfast. How easy is that

ordinaryperson 7y ago
I think this is a fair argument but not what the top comment was arguing. He associates fasting, kale and "super nutrients" with this lifestyle transformation -- when it's just about reducing calories. If his argument was, "It's hard to count calories, if you stick to this approach you'll automatically cut your take without having to journal every sip of OJ" -- then yes, I wholeheartedly agree. There is some evidence that fasting can be good but people are so different it's hard to generalize-- others will over-eat in their feeding window. For some micro-meals throughout the day is a better technique to managing their hunger and keeps their metabolism up. There's no one-size-fits-all technique. My main point is, when reading about "How I lost weight, it's so amazing" is caveat emptor.
- icu 7y ago
  Sorry if it came across that I'm associating kale with magical weight loss. What I was getting at was I break my fast with a burst of fresh nutrients that my body can easily absorb. I think the whole approach of strict fasting, along with the plant-based diet is what worked... and I can't see how it won't work for others, but then again I have no idea. People are radically different, and certainly, I was super motivated to lose weight because I never, ever wanted to be obese. When I was a kid I used to watch The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, and Will Smith did a bit about Dunlap Syndrome. When my Doc told me I was going to be obese that bit from Fresh Prince flashed in my mind's eye and it was like Will Smith was laughing at me lol. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeU0fJ-nRIk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeU0fJ-nRIk

stjohnswarts 7y ago

People like you never realize the value in the fact that not everyone has the same physiology as you. Some people do well with keto, some do well with IF, some do well with vegan. It's not all about caloric restriction, that is a facet, not the key goal. The goal is to find a meal plan you can deal with that doesn't lead to you feeling deprived and starving at the end of the day. That is doomed to fail. I agree that cleanses are bullshit as are most nutritional supplements. There are nutrients though. Getting carbs from whole wheat bread is a lot better than getting it from white "enriched" bread.

wtallis 7y ago
> It's not all about caloric restriction, that is a facet, not the key goal. The goal is to find a meal plan you can deal with that doesn't lead to you feeling deprived and starving at the end of the day. The second sentence here is the reason why the first sentence is exactly wrong. The best way to maintain the calorie deficit necessary for weight loss is if you can find a way to not feel hungry while maintaining that calorie deficit. But that calorie deficit is absolutely the most important goal of a weight loss plan, and is a necessary and sufficient condition for its success.

tchaffee 7y ago

This is misinformation. Just as one small example, fat keeps you satisfied far longer than protein or carbs. All calories are not equal. Yes it eventually comes down to calories consumed vs. calories expended. But what those calories are made up of have a profound effect on when you eat next and your energy levels. And we haven't even gotten into psychology and effort. Counting calories is a lot of work and annoying for some people. Stopping eating at 8pm and not eating until lunch soon just becomes a very easy to maintain habit that requires no effort and barely any willpower.