8 ms·

"A calorie is a calorie" is good enough, however. People aren't fat because they are consuming 2500 calories from a Big Mac and Fries rather than 2500 calories

"A calorie is a calorie" is good enough, however. People aren't fat because they are consuming 2500 calories from a Big Mac and Fries rather than 2500 calories from carrots. People are fat because they are consuming 6000 calories and burning off 1300. The message is simplistic, sure. For a large majority of overweight people though that's all that is required. Somewhere between reducing caloric intake and becoming fit, the message that not all calories are created equal sinks in, if for no other reason that it quickly becomes apparent that you'll starve only eating one meal of McDonald's a day.

cjp 15y ago
Negative. You miss the entire point of the article. Why are people consuming 6000 calories? They are always hungry and eat too much food. Why are they always hungry? They eat and drink too many carbohydrates. Too many carbohydrates leads to high blood sugar which leads to too much insulin. After the insulin does its job, the blood sugar crashes causing hunger. The cycle repeats, causing problems including insulin resistance, excess fat storage and type 2 diabetes. What is the solution? Don't consume carbohydrates and avoid the hunger/sugar/insulin cycle.
- Groxx 15y ago
  Erm... did you read the article? The only mention of carbohydrate's effect is because it's chosen as a large, easy number to reduce in favor of raising the protein amount, raising the overall inefficiency of the system. They listed, in Atkins-like diets, that shifting from 55% carbs to 8% carbs (with the change going to increased protein intake) results in about 140kcals less useful energy. That's it. From where in the article are you drawing insulin/diabetes/hunger connections?
  - keeptrying 15y ago
    Its not in the article but its a very well know phenomenon. If you research "low-carb diet" or "paleo-diet" you'll find more information. As soon as your insulin spikes due to high amount of carbs ingested, your body immediately starts to convert excess carbs into fat. I've done very low carb diets and easily lost 20 lbs in a month even though I've never weighed over 200lbs. Its pretty difficult though.
    - Groxx 15y ago
      I'm not disagreeing. I'm just pointing out it has nothing to do with the article. After stating that the now-great-great-grandparent had missed the point of the article, they proceeded to talk entirely about things not at all contained in the article. I'm sure there's a better term for it, but the post is pretty blatantly contradictory in that way.
      - Confusion 15y ago
        You are right that clp is incorrect in his suggestion that he criticizes his parent. Rather, he amends the information there with things unrelated to the article, but very much related to the general subject and, frankly, indispensable for anyone seeking to understand weight gain/loss. Upvoted y'all :)
- ak4life 15y ago
  Don't consume carbs? This sounds insane. What about a balanced diet of caloric value inline with one's caloric output?
  - nitrogen 15y ago
    This argument has been rehashed several times here on HN. Do a site search (use Google or searchyc) for Gary Taubes, or pretty much any nutrition-related subject, and there will be a thread about why a calorie-balanced diet is only a very small part of the nutritional picture.
  - glenra 15y ago
    > Don't consume carbs? This sounds insane. What about a balanced diet of caloric value inline with one's caloric output? What about it? It's not necessary. If you look for it, you can find lots of examples of societies that were quite healthy on diets that weren't "balanced". One popular example is the Inuit, who got 75% of their energy intake from fat (largely seal and whale blubber) because that was what was available to them whereas fruits and grains and vegetables were not. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit#Diet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit#Diet
noarchy 15y ago
I expect that you'll end up getting downvoted by the "carbs are evil" crowd, but I think you're largely correct. Too many people are looking for the magic bullet that will let them remain sedentary, overeat, and yet still lose weight.
- Groxx 15y ago
  Nice to meet you, Nostradamus v2.0 :)
ugh 15y ago
Simply counting calories will reduce your weight. I can pretty much confirm that now. Over the last eight months I tried to stay below 1900 calories per day and I have lost 17 kilo. As much as I wanted to, I did not manage to change my diet in any meaningful way, I’m just eating less. I didn’t even manage to keep up a regular sports routine. But my fallback – mercilessly tracking my weight and counting calories – saved me. (I would very much want to eat better. Many of the things I’m eating now have so high calorie densities that I can only eat very little of them.) I do know that I will have to track my weight and count calories for the rest of my life. That’s ok. (As a teenager I already lost a substantial amount of weight with the same method but I gained it all and more back because I stupidly stopped tracking my weight and counting calories. I’m confident that I won’t make the same mistake again.)
- keeptrying 15y ago
  If you simply cut out carbs you will lose a ton of fat. But yeah if you want to eat carbs and be healthy you have to basically count calories for the rest of your life.
  - ugh 15y ago
    Changing my diet never worked for me. Counting calories does. Also: I do love pasta. Counting calories is not that hard. I can do it in my head by now. Tracking my weight (which, I think, is equally important, especially for motivation) is more or less a reward and not a chore by now.
    - teyc 15y ago
      There is also some research that suggests fasting being beneficial in modulating insulin resistance. I try not to consume food after a certain time at night. It is not too difficult to do, and definitely stops short any thoughts of a late night snack.
      - ugh 15y ago
        I'm very skeptical that fasting is healthy, it probably is not. The only thing I do care about is losing weight and that works.
colomon 15y ago
Errr.... consuming 6000 calories and burning off only 1300 would cause you to gain more than a pound. That might be a daily intake for someone weighing 600 pounds, but it's hardly the situation for your run-of-the-mill fat person. Putting it in practical, personal terms -- I was laid up for six weeks for medical reasons this winter, and my bad habits continued for the next six weeks as well. Over that period I gained about 18 pounds, one of the worst periods of weight gain in my life. Simple math (and ignoring the data presented in the article!) tells you I must have been eating about 5250 excess calories a week. Roughly speaking I was probably eating 23,000 calories a week when I should have been having 18,000. Now suppose I had gained that weight on a low-fat diet. The study cited in the article suggests that if I had been on a low-carb diet instead, I wouldn't have gained any weight at all! That's a pretty significant result. (Of course, in practice I was on a "whatever" diet.) For those of us living on the edge, trying to shave off 500 calories a day, the knowledge that not all calories are created equal is a Big Deal.
- run4yourlives 15y ago
  It was an exaggeration to make the point. Sorry, thought that was obvious. For your example: If you had eaten a low-carb diet, you'd probably need to have eaten 50% more food in terms of quantity in order to meet the caloric intake you were getting on the "whatever" diet. That's my point. If you simply focused on the caloric intake and kept it at 18,000 a week (which seems high for someone lying in bed, to be honest) and still ate whatever you wanted, you would't have put on 18 pounds.

cjp 15y ago

Negative. You miss the entire point of the article. Why are people consuming 6000 calories? They are always hungry and eat too much food. Why are they always hungry? They eat and drink too many carbohydrates. Too many carbohydrates leads to high blood sugar which leads to too much insulin. After the insulin does its job, the blood sugar crashes causing hunger. The cycle repeats, causing problems including insulin resistance, excess fat storage and type 2 diabetes. What is the solution? Don't consume carbohydrates and avoid the hunger/sugar/insulin cycle.

Groxx 15y ago
Erm... did you read the article? The only mention of carbohydrate's effect is because it's chosen as a large, easy number to reduce in favor of raising the protein amount, raising the overall inefficiency of the system. They listed, in Atkins-like diets, that shifting from 55% carbs to 8% carbs (with the change going to increased protein intake) results in about 140kcals less useful energy. That's it. From where in the article are you drawing insulin/diabetes/hunger connections?
- keeptrying 15y ago
  Its not in the article but its a very well know phenomenon. If you research "low-carb diet" or "paleo-diet" you'll find more information. As soon as your insulin spikes due to high amount of carbs ingested, your body immediately starts to convert excess carbs into fat. I've done very low carb diets and easily lost 20 lbs in a month even though I've never weighed over 200lbs. Its pretty difficult though.
  - Groxx 15y ago
    I'm not disagreeing. I'm just pointing out it has nothing to do with the article. After stating that the now-great-great-grandparent had missed the point of the article, they proceeded to talk entirely about things not at all contained in the article. I'm sure there's a better term for it, but the post is pretty blatantly contradictory in that way.
    - Confusion 15y ago
      You are right that clp is incorrect in his suggestion that he criticizes his parent. Rather, he amends the information there with things unrelated to the article, but very much related to the general subject and, frankly, indispensable for anyone seeking to understand weight gain/loss. Upvoted y'all :)
ak4life 15y ago
Don't consume carbs? This sounds insane. What about a balanced diet of caloric value inline with one's caloric output?
- nitrogen 15y ago
  This argument has been rehashed several times here on HN. Do a site search (use Google or searchyc) for Gary Taubes, or pretty much any nutrition-related subject, and there will be a thread about why a calorie-balanced diet is only a very small part of the nutritional picture.
- glenra 15y ago
  > Don't consume carbs? This sounds insane. What about a balanced diet of caloric value inline with one's caloric output? What about it? It's not necessary. If you look for it, you can find lots of examples of societies that were quite healthy on diets that weren't "balanced". One popular example is the Inuit, who got 75% of their energy intake from fat (largely seal and whale blubber) because that was what was available to them whereas fruits and grains and vegetables were not. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit#Diet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inuit#Diet

noarchy 15y ago

I expect that you'll end up getting downvoted by the "carbs are evil" crowd, but I think you're largely correct. Too many people are looking for the magic bullet that will let them remain sedentary, overeat, and yet still lose weight.

Groxx 15y ago
Nice to meet you, Nostradamus v2.0 :)

ugh 15y ago

Simply counting calories will reduce your weight. I can pretty much confirm that now. Over the last eight months I tried to stay below 1900 calories per day and I have lost 17 kilo. As much as I wanted to, I did not manage to change my diet in any meaningful way, I’m just eating less. I didn’t even manage to keep up a regular sports routine. But my fallback – mercilessly tracking my weight and counting calories – saved me. (I would very much want to eat better. Many of the things I’m eating now have so high calorie densities that I can only eat very little of them.) I do know that I will have to track my weight and count calories for the rest of my life. That’s ok. (As a teenager I already lost a substantial amount of weight with the same method but I gained it all and more back because I stupidly stopped tracking my weight and counting calories. I’m confident that I won’t make the same mistake again.)

keeptrying 15y ago
If you simply cut out carbs you will lose a ton of fat. But yeah if you want to eat carbs and be healthy you have to basically count calories for the rest of your life.
- ugh 15y ago
  Changing my diet never worked for me. Counting calories does. Also: I do love pasta. Counting calories is not that hard. I can do it in my head by now. Tracking my weight (which, I think, is equally important, especially for motivation) is more or less a reward and not a chore by now.
  - teyc 15y ago
    There is also some research that suggests fasting being beneficial in modulating insulin resistance. I try not to consume food after a certain time at night. It is not too difficult to do, and definitely stops short any thoughts of a late night snack.
    - ugh 15y ago
      I'm very skeptical that fasting is healthy, it probably is not. The only thing I do care about is losing weight and that works.

colomon 15y ago

Errr.... consuming 6000 calories and burning off only 1300 would cause you to gain more than a pound. That might be a daily intake for someone weighing 600 pounds, but it's hardly the situation for your run-of-the-mill fat person. Putting it in practical, personal terms -- I was laid up for six weeks for medical reasons this winter, and my bad habits continued for the next six weeks as well. Over that period I gained about 18 pounds, one of the worst periods of weight gain in my life. Simple math (and ignoring the data presented in the article!) tells you I must have been eating about 5250 excess calories a week. Roughly speaking I was probably eating 23,000 calories a week when I should have been having 18,000. Now suppose I had gained that weight on a low-fat diet. The study cited in the article suggests that if I had been on a low-carb diet instead, I wouldn't have gained any weight at all! That's a pretty significant result. (Of course, in practice I was on a "whatever" diet.) For those of us living on the edge, trying to shave off 500 calories a day, the knowledge that not all calories are created equal is a Big Deal.

run4yourlives 15y ago
It was an exaggeration to make the point. Sorry, thought that was obvious. For your example: If you had eaten a low-carb diet, you'd probably need to have eaten 50% more food in terms of quantity in order to meet the caloric intake you were getting on the "whatever" diet. That's my point. If you simply focused on the caloric intake and kept it at 18,000 a week (which seems high for someone lying in bed, to be honest) and still ate whatever you wanted, you would't have put on 18 pounds.