3 ms·

Isn't it obvious that you will not lose weight unless you eat [fewer] calories than what you burn? Yes, it is obvious. Losing weight is a simple mathematical

by byoung2 15y ago

Isn't it obvious that you will not lose weight unless you eat [fewer] calories than what you burn? Yes, it is obvious. Losing weight is a simple mathematical equation. Burn 2500 calories a day, and eat 2000, and every week you will lose 1 pound (1 pound ~ 3500 calories). The difficult part is making it happen on a daily basis. Say your body burns 2200 calories a day...can you squeeze in 45 minutes of intense cardio each day to burn another 300? On top of that, can you restrict your calorie intake to 2000 when a typical fast food combo is 1100 calories and a Starbucks latte is 190? There is even a salad on CPK's menu that weighs in at a whopping 1800 calories. I think the problem with losing weight, especially in the United States, is not a matter of math, it is a matter of discipline. If you are American and you want to lose weight, I suggest moving to Japan. I have been there twice, and I lose an average of 5 pounds a week there because of a diet heavy on rice and seafood, but with extremely small portions, lots of walking, dancing til 5am, and lots of pushing on crowded trains.

hn141514 15y ago
So what would you want in a service that wants to help you lose weight? Would it be useful if just before you eat, you SMS out what you are about to eat and get an estimated calory count back instantly via SMS?
- byoung2 15y ago
  So what would you want in a service that wants to help you lose weight? I had this conversation with my doctor. He said my BMI was too high, and that I should lose weight. I countered that BMI was not an accurate gauge of obesity, because it failed to take into account body composition and muscle mass (it just uses height and weight). I am 6 feet tall and weigh 240 pounds...but then so are many professional football players. I think we need a better measurement than BMI, that would take into account height, weight, waist/hip ratio, age, and body fat % to give a more accurate picture. Seeing how this measurement changes over time would be a better gauge of health, and not just losing weight. In some cases, gaining muscle would cause you to gain weight, but it would be healthier for you. Conversely, losing weight by shedding muscle would lower your BMI, but be less healthy. So I guess tools that would be more helpful would be tools that give a better picture of how healthy I am, and not just my weight. So if my weight goes up, but my muscle mass went up and fat went down, that would be a good thing. And tools that would help me track how small changes over time add up would be helpful. For example, I can't go to the gym for an hour 3 days a week, but I can walk a half mile to lunch and back each day for a total of 5 miles a week. Can you tell me how much weight I'd lose doing that for a year? Or how many calories I'd avoid if I switched from sugar to Splenda for 2 cups of coffee every day for 6 months? That might be the motivation I need to make small changes that don't seem significant, but can add up. EDIT: So apparently walking 1 mile each business day at lunch at a brisk pace for a year is good for about 30,000 calories or 10 pounds, and switching from sugar to Splenda is good for another 25,000 calories, or another 7 pounds. I think that is a good start for an app...showing people how these small changes can add up.
gvb 15y ago
I disagree with the "simple mathematical equation". I am pretty sure that it is a fairly complex nonlinear mathematical equation with estimate and unknowns, not constants. * How do you know you burned 2500 calories in a given day? Unless you are instrumented, you don't know. Various people burn more or fewer calories for the same level of activity. * How do you know you ate 2000 calories? I find it hard to believe that every Starbucks latte is 190 calories - those syrup shooters, etc., cannot be that finely calibrated. * Most of what I read indicates your metabolism is nonlinear with respect to efficiency: when you "starve" yourself, your metabolism tends to go down and your conversion efficiency is probably optimized.
- hn141514 15y ago
  Actually, long term studies indicate that if you eat a little bit less (say 10% fewer calories every day), you suffer no side effects, lose 1/2-1 lb every week and are able to keep it off in the long term. Sorry for the PDF link but this FDA brochure (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cfsan.fda.gov%2F~dms%2Fwgtloss.html&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CEAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fweightnomoreohio.com%2Fpdfs%2FDHHSPublication_92-1189.pdf&ei=jV3BTvzPK-OfiQLPtvyqAw&usg=AFQjCNHPxRCNIBYCJ8CSHHVHT9CpE47x6Q&cad=rja http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=http%3A%2F%2F...) lays it out pretty nicely.
- byoung2 15y ago
  How do you know you burned 2500 calories in a given day? How do you know you ate 2000 calories? A typical person wouldn't know exactly, but in theory if he did eat exactly 2500 calories or more and he ate exactly 2000 calories or less every day, over a long period of time, he would lose weight averaging about 1 pound per week. Of course there could be other factors at work, such as the body adapting to eating and exercise patterns to more efficiently store and burn fat, which might slow the weight loss. Another thing that makes it hard to follow the mathematical is equation is that you can't measure calories in or out exactly. So you have to overcompensate. Maybe you'd shoot for 600 calories on the treadmill every day, and aim to eat 1900 calories, just in case you over/underestimate burning or storing rates.
tomkarlo 15y ago
It's very hard for people to sacrifice short-term enjoyment for a very vague and somewhat nebulous long-term benefit. Generally, as a race we take the short-term choice and discount long-term rewards - something that isn't totally irrational, if you think about it. IMHO it's easier to lose weight by changing things so you don't have to CHOOSE each day to do the right thing. If you move somewhere that you walk to work instead of driving, that's good for about 10-15 lbs, according to some studies, for example. As for the service idea, rather than making it something where I have to do the right thing each time, come up with something where I have to proactively choose to incur discomfort so I can deviate from my plan... I don't know, maybe make it so when I eat at a fast food joint and put it on my debit card, you double the bill and send the extra to a charity?

by byoung2 15y ago

hn141514 15y ago

So what would you want in a service that wants to help you lose weight? Would it be useful if just before you eat, you SMS out what you are about to eat and get an estimated calory count back instantly via SMS?

byoung2 15y ago
So what would you want in a service that wants to help you lose weight? I had this conversation with my doctor. He said my BMI was too high, and that I should lose weight. I countered that BMI was not an accurate gauge of obesity, because it failed to take into account body composition and muscle mass (it just uses height and weight). I am 6 feet tall and weigh 240 pounds...but then so are many professional football players. I think we need a better measurement than BMI, that would take into account height, weight, waist/hip ratio, age, and body fat % to give a more accurate picture. Seeing how this measurement changes over time would be a better gauge of health, and not just losing weight. In some cases, gaining muscle would cause you to gain weight, but it would be healthier for you. Conversely, losing weight by shedding muscle would lower your BMI, but be less healthy. So I guess tools that would be more helpful would be tools that give a better picture of how healthy I am, and not just my weight. So if my weight goes up, but my muscle mass went up and fat went down, that would be a good thing. And tools that would help me track how small changes over time add up would be helpful. For example, I can't go to the gym for an hour 3 days a week, but I can walk a half mile to lunch and back each day for a total of 5 miles a week. Can you tell me how much weight I'd lose doing that for a year? Or how many calories I'd avoid if I switched from sugar to Splenda for 2 cups of coffee every day for 6 months? That might be the motivation I need to make small changes that don't seem significant, but can add up. EDIT: So apparently walking 1 mile each business day at lunch at a brisk pace for a year is good for about 30,000 calories or 10 pounds, and switching from sugar to Splenda is good for another 25,000 calories, or another 7 pounds. I think that is a good start for an app...showing people how these small changes can add up.

gvb 15y ago

I disagree with the "simple mathematical equation". I am pretty sure that it is a fairly complex nonlinear mathematical equation with estimate and unknowns, not constants. * How do you know you burned 2500 calories in a given day? Unless you are instrumented, you don't know. Various people burn more or fewer calories for the same level of activity. * How do you know you ate 2000 calories? I find it hard to believe that every Starbucks latte is 190 calories - those syrup shooters, etc., cannot be that finely calibrated. * Most of what I read indicates your metabolism is nonlinear with respect to efficiency: when you "starve" yourself, your metabolism tends to go down and your conversion efficiency is probably optimized.

hn141514 15y ago
Actually, long term studies indicate that if you eat a little bit less (say 10% fewer calories every day), you suffer no side effects, lose 1/2-1 lb every week and are able to keep it off in the long term. Sorry for the PDF link but this FDA brochure (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cfsan.fda.gov%2F~dms%2Fwgtloss.html&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CEAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fweightnomoreohio.com%2Fpdfs%2FDHHSPublication_92-1189.pdf&ei=jV3BTvzPK-OfiQLPtvyqAw&usg=AFQjCNHPxRCNIBYCJ8CSHHVHT9CpE47x6Q&cad=rja http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=http%3A%2F%2F...) lays it out pretty nicely.
byoung2 15y ago
How do you know you burned 2500 calories in a given day? How do you know you ate 2000 calories? A typical person wouldn't know exactly, but in theory if he did eat exactly 2500 calories or more and he ate exactly 2000 calories or less every day, over a long period of time, he would lose weight averaging about 1 pound per week. Of course there could be other factors at work, such as the body adapting to eating and exercise patterns to more efficiently store and burn fat, which might slow the weight loss. Another thing that makes it hard to follow the mathematical is equation is that you can't measure calories in or out exactly. So you have to overcompensate. Maybe you'd shoot for 600 calories on the treadmill every day, and aim to eat 1900 calories, just in case you over/underestimate burning or storing rates.

tomkarlo 15y ago

It's very hard for people to sacrifice short-term enjoyment for a very vague and somewhat nebulous long-term benefit. Generally, as a race we take the short-term choice and discount long-term rewards - something that isn't totally irrational, if you think about it. IMHO it's easier to lose weight by changing things so you don't have to CHOOSE each day to do the right thing. If you move somewhere that you walk to work instead of driving, that's good for about 10-15 lbs, according to some studies, for example. As for the service idea, rather than making it something where I have to do the right thing each time, come up with something where I have to proactively choose to incur discomfort so I can deviate from my plan... I don't know, maybe make it so when I eat at a fast food joint and put it on my debit card, you double the bill and send the extra to a charity?