Strong nutrition igonarce gtfih!

[Francis333]

Just had a discussion with this dude was pretty lulz:

Him:Carbs won't make you fat. Fat won't make you fat. Carbs and fat together won't make you fat. Whether or not you gain fat is all about food quality. A 3000-calorie diet can make you gain fat or lose it, depending on the foods you eat. Once quality is in place, then it's time to look at quantity.

Me:quantity>quality

Him: no lol

Me: eating over your cal maintenance will cause a weight gain. Eating under maintenance will cause weight loss. Eating at maintenance will maintain. Simple as that. Doenst matter if its pop tarts or apples

Him: Well you go ahead and drink 1000 calories of soda each day for a few weeks, then eat 1000 calories of brown rice and lean meat for another couple of weeks. You tell me which option keeps you full and not fat Francis.

Me: Same thing. A calorie is a calorie. Those diets would have the same effect on body composition.

Him: No man, one of those options takes a lot more energy to metabolize and offers far more nutritionally... ignorant child!

Me: Cals in = Cals out = Maintain weight
Cals in < Cals out = Lose weight
Cals in > Cals out = Gain weight

Me: Whats in those calories doesn't matter for body composition. But yes I do agree that the brown rice and lean meat is the better diet for health than soda.

Him: "What's in those calories"? You're talking as if a calorie is something more than a unit of measurement.

Me: What foods those calories are comprised of*

Him: Now you're making a bit more sense buddy haha

Me: *"Those diets would have the same effect on body composition." Ah I was wrong. I meant to say: Those diets would have the same effect on weight loss/gain"

Him: Regardless of what you're saying or what you meant to say. You're still wrong lol

Someone else: umm, of course the calories matter... Because your getting those calories from specific energy sources (eg. fat, carbs, protein) , and each of those sources react differently with your body, and your body absorbs and utilizes them differently. The calorie in calorie out theory is extremely basic and not creditable. The human body is much more complex than an equation that simple

Him: I was going to say that. But I felt Francis would eventually figure that out, he's a relatively smart lad.

Me: Sydney: If you are in a calorie deficit, no matter the composition of macronutrients, will you lose weight? The calorie in/calorie out method is all that is needed for weight loss or gain.

Him: Considering you've never actually had to do weight gain or weight loss. You have no input anymore haha.

Lulz. Who is right?

[yepimonfire]

Just had a discussion with this dude was pretty lulz:

Him:Carbs won't make you fat. Fat won't make you fat. Carbs and fat together won't make you fat. Whether or not you gain fat is all about food quality. A 3000-calorie diet can make you gain fat or lose it, depending on the foods you eat. Once quality is in place, then it's time to look at quantity.

Me:quantity>quality

Him: no lol

Me: eating over your cal maintenance will cause a weight gain. Eating under maintenance will cause weight loss. Eating at maintenance will maintain. Simple as that. Doenst matter if its pop tarts or apples

Him: Well you go ahead and drink 1000 calories of soda each day for a few weeks, then eat 1000 calories of brown rice and lean meat for another couple of weeks. You tell me which option keeps you full and not fat Francis.

Me: Same thing. A calorie is a calorie. Those diets would have the same effect on body composition.

Him: No man, one of those options takes a lot more energy to metabolize and offers far more nutritionally... ignorant child!

Me: Cals in = Cals out = Maintain weight
Cals in < Cals out = Lose weight
Cals in > Cals out = Gain weight

Me: Whats in those calories doesn't matter for body composition. But yes I do agree that the brown rice and lean meat is the better diet for health than soda.

Him: "What's in those calories"? You're talking as if a calorie is something more than a unit of measurement.

Me: What foods those calories are comprised of*

Him: Now you're making a bit more sense buddy haha

Me: *"Those diets would have the same effect on body composition." Ah I was wrong. I meant to say: Those diets would have the same effect on weight loss/gain"

Him: Regardless of what you're saying or what you meant to say. You're still wrong lol

Someone else: umm, of course the calories matter... Because your getting those calories from specific energy sources (eg. fat, carbs, protein) , and each of those sources react differently with your body, and your body absorbs and utilizes them differently. The calorie in calorie out theory is extremely basic and not creditable. The human body is much more complex than an equation that simple

Him: I was going to say that. But I felt Francis would eventually figure that out, he's a relatively smart lad.

Me: Sydney: If you are in a calorie deficit, no matter the composition of macronutrients, will you lose weight? The calorie in/calorie out method is all that is needed for weight loss or gain.

Him: Considering you've never actually had to do weight gain or weight loss. You have no input anymore haha.

Lulz. Who is right?

a calorie is a calorie duh.

protein fat and carbs matter only to the extent of maintaining lean mass, overall weight loss or gain its all calories. i lost 50lbs when i first began lifting and i ate plenty of garbage like poptarts to fill calories.

[AlwaysTryin]

Him: Well you go ahead and drink 1000 calories of soda each day for a few weeks, then eat 1000 calories of brown rice and lean meat for another couple of weeks. You tell me which option keeps you full and not fat Francis.

Me: Same thing. A calorie is a calorie. Those diets would have the same effect on body composition.

Please explain how

[Leprechauns1021]

strong igonarce

[Francis333]

Please explain how

Guess you didnt read this:

*"Those diets would have the same effect on body composition." Ah I was wrong. I meant to say: Those diets would have the same effect on weight loss/gain"

I was wrong.

[Francis333]

strong igonarce

I dun goofed.

[Francis333]

He just said this: I agree that eating a lot will usually result in weight gain. I don't, however, agree that calories determine whether or not you lose or gain weight.



LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOl

[Francis333]

Someone else: nah dood imo weight gain and losses main factor wud be the person in the equations body type / system, foods is prob the second thing in the mix

Me: Scenario: your calorie maintenance is 3000 cals. You eat 2500 calories for a month. You're telling me you won't lose weight? (lets say all these calories are pop tarts)

[Francis333]

Him: Yep, you'll probably stay exactly the same.

Me: "Yep, you'll probably stay exactly the same." O.o

ME: What determines weight loss/gain then if the amount of cal intake relative to your cal expenditure does not?

[Francis333]

oh my lawd, apparently a deficit will cause your weight to be the exact same LOOLz

[Francis333]

Him: Calorie maintenance is bull****, unless you do the exact same movements everyday, breate the same amount of breaths everyday, have exactly the same heartbeats everyday. Unless the ****ing temperature outside isn't exactly the same everyday.... you will not have or need a 3000 calorie maintenance. (Given your senario)

Him: Now stop talking to me about this and go read a ****ing book.

Me: Typically maintenance is around the same everyday but whatever

[HunterCML]

You're way too excited about this brah. srs.

[Jen0va]

I would just like to add in that according to the box, poptarts are "a great source of 8 vitimins and minerals"


^_^

[Apex702]

You're way too excited about this brah. srs.

In for HunterCML sighting in Nutrition Section.

[Francis333]

You're way too excited about this brah. srs.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat...-equation.html

Does lyle agree or refute that "A calorie is a calorie"?

[Apex702]

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat...-equation.html

Does lyle agree or refute that "A calorie is a calorie"?

A calorie is a calorie in terms of weight gain/loss, body comp is something different entirely.

[Francis333]

A calorie is a calorie in terms of weight gain/loss, body comp is something different entirely.

BUT: "Of course, even that is not so simple. First and foremost, not all foods are digested with identical efficiency. On average, high quality animal-source proteins are digested with roughly 90-95% efficiency with vegetable source proteins coming in lower than that (80-85%), fats digest with about 97% efficiency and carbs can be as low as 80% depending on fiber content.

There can be some variance between different sources of the same nutrient as well. For example, a recently developed carbohydrate called resistant starch (it resists digestion) is absorbed with poor efficiency, more calories are lost in the stool compared to other carbs; some sugar alcohols share this effect (although they can just as readily cause massive stomach upset and diarrhea because of it). You don’t generally see massive differences in proteins or fats although there can be slight differences.

Put differently, some energy is lost prior to digestion (and shows up in the feces), never to be absorbed by the body. But strictly speaking you can make an adjustment on the energy in side of the equation to take digestibility into account with a correction factor (which would vary depending on the nutrient in question)

But I think you get the idea: the point is that the calorie in value can vary a bit depending on the specific nutrient and source of that nutrient. The amount of calories listed on the side of the food you’re eating may not be exactly the number of calories that make it through digestion and into the body. If anything, the value will be slightly less."

[Francis333]

"The amount of calories listed on the side of the food you’re eating may not be exactly the number of calories that make it through digestion and into the body. If anything, the value will be slightly less."

So how is a calorie a calorie?

[Apex702]

"The amount of calories listed on the side of the food you’re eating may not be exactly the number of calories that make it through digestion and into the body. If anything, the value will be slightly less."

So how is a calorie a calorie?

A calorie is a unit of measurement. Just like an inch is an inch.

[Calpoly]

He's right your wrong

[alex2363]

i go through this everyday, some people are just set in thier ways...........

[Apex702]

He's right your wrong

More specific.

[Francis333]

A calorie is a unit of measurement. Just like an inch is an inch.

What you say is true, but that doesnt mean that every nutrient is processed by the body equally.

[nobrah]

See my bolded comments in the quoted post:

Just had a discussion with this dude was pretty lulz:

Him:Carbs won't make you fat. Fat won't make you fat. Carbs and fat together won't make you fat. Whether or not you gain fat is all about food quality. A 3000-calorie diet can make you gain fat or lose it, depending on the foods you eat. Once quality is in place, then it's time to look at quantity.

Me:quantity>quality

Him: no lol

Given strictly what was said and without reading between the lines, I'd agree with your friend 95%. The discussion is about fat loss or gain (ie. body composition), so food quality in the form of macros and micros is paramount. However, calories dictate weight management, so they can't be completely ignored while pursuing food quality. Also, it's somewhat difficult to manage food quality if you don't know what fits into your allownace, and quantity tells you what your allowance is.

Me: eating over your cal maintenance will cause a weight gain. Eating under maintenance will cause weight loss. Eating at maintenance will maintain. Simple as that. Doenst matter if its pop tarts or apples

Him: Well you go ahead and drink 1000 calories of soda each day for a few weeks, then eat 1000 calories of brown rice and lean meat for another couple of weeks. You tell me which option keeps you full and not fat Francis.

Me: Same thing. A calorie is a calorie. Those diets would have the same effect on body composition.

Him: No man, one of those options takes a lot more energy to metabolize and offers far more nutritionally... ignorant child!

Me: Cals in = Cals out = Maintain weight
Cals in < Cals out = Lose weight
Cals in > Cals out = Gain weight

Me: Whats in those calories doesn't matter for body composition. But yes I do agree that the brown rice and lean meat is the better diet for health than soda.

Once again, when the topic is body composition, straight calories aren't enough. Your friend is still correct, but I suspect the two of you didn't establish a context before starting out on this conversation, which means you're both talking about something slightly different.

Him: "What's in those calories"? You're talking as if a calorie is something more than a unit of measurement.

Me: What foods those calories are comprised of*

Him: Now you're making a bit more sense buddy haha

Me: *"Those diets would have the same effect on body composition." Ah I was wrong. I meant to say: Those diets would have the same effect on weight loss/gain"

Him: Regardless of what you're saying or what you meant to say. You're still wrong lol

Now that you've established the context of weight management and not body composition, your statements are correct. Also, your friend is now incorrect for sticking to his guns and saying that your newly qualified statements are still wrong. But he's still correct in terms of body composition.

Someone else: umm, of course the calories matter... Because your getting those calories from specific energy sources (eg. fat, carbs, protein) , and each of those sources react differently with your body, and your body absorbs and utilizes them differently. The calorie in calorie out theory is extremely basic and not creditable. The human body is much more complex than an equation that simple

This is correct to a point. The human body is indeed more complex than simple CICO, but that doesn't invalidate the equation completely, it just means CICO isn't predictable all of the time. CICO is still the single biggest factor in weight management, and if you don't have it in check, you'll fail to meet your goals.

Him: I was going to say that. But I felt Francis would eventually figure that out, he's a relatively smart lad.

Me: Sydney: If you are in a calorie deficit, no matter the composition of macronutrients, will you lose weight? The calorie in/calorie out method is all that is needed for weight loss or gain.

Yes. There are other factors involved that will alter the speed at which you lose weight, but a consistent calorie deficit will result in weight loss.

Him: Considering you've never actually had to do weight gain or weight loss. You have no input anymore haha.

This is a logical fallacy. One doesn't need experience to have knowledge, and one with experience isn't guaranteed to have knowledge. Unfortunately, the whole "you're not huge and ripped, so what you say is wrong" is a common cheap trick to dismiss things one doesn't agree with. Note that it's not just broscientists who use this trick.

Lulz. Who is right?

[Francis333]

See my bolded comments in the quoted post:

I agree with most of your points. Every time I said body comp just sub in weight management. I was not referring to body comp ( at least i didnt mean to) and thats why I didnt bring up macros.

[MikeK46]

Calories in vs. calories out = change in weight.

It's thermodynamics. End of story.

Many people get confused because the amount and type of "calories in" affects "calories out." That does not change the equation!

Body composition and long-term health are entirely different subjects.

[waqas11]

When people talk to me about nutrition, i listen and agree with what they say. Then just let it go out the other ear! I cant be bothered to argue with them.

[BBqChicken1]

Calories in vs. calories out = change in weight.

Incorrect if calories in=calories out, you mad bro?

[Apex702]

Incorrect if calories in=calories out, you mad bro?

Semantics at its finest.

[graffiti36]

You do realize the media and nutritionists have always appealed to diets that emphasize on quality rather than quantity right?
Its years of teaching that leads this people to think this way and while wrong, ultimately, if you eat foods more micro-nutrient dense you do indeed have a better health which while has a small impact on your overall calorie expense it does lead to more filling meals and therefore easier weight loss....
Now, while your friend might be wrong, i dont see the ****ing point to post this conversation on a ****ing forum to raise your ego.

Gratz dude, your infinite knowledge of nutrition leaves me astonished...
There's just so much to nutrition than IIFYM...