Help me target love Handle

[sunsean]

You posted two comments to refute rhadam within 2 minutes of each other; you come on here posting comment after comment repeating the same information- me making one reply to you does not equal the same thing. You are being persistant in the same, incorrect statements trying to prove you are right with no data or sources to support it.

And yes, a calorie is a calorie. End of story. A single degree F is still a degree F whether you measure it in the Northern hemisphere or the Southern one, it's a unit of measurement, those by definition do not change. A Joule of energy is still a Joule, whether you are measuring 1 Newton of force over 1 meter, or if you're measuring 1 Amp of current through a resistance of 1 Ohm for 1 Second... it's still the same unit. You're essentially stating that a pound of feathers is different in its measurement than a pound of lead.

What you may be confusing is the quality of the food that carries that caloric energy compared to the energy itself. In terms of weight loss, you are wrong. In terms of total body health and the ability to build additional muscle or bone density, those things obvious matter, but it still does not change how the body reacts to energy input (in the form of food) when it comes to storing excess energy as fat, or using it for physiological functions.

Do you see the difference?

You've written a very long post confirming what I wrote - thank you. I know a calorie is a calorie, but what those calories are composed of plays a large part in how those calories will affect the eater. Someone eating 2000 calories of cake will not look the same as someone eating 2000 calories of a balanced diet. Perhaps it is you who got too hung up on the idea that I was trying to change the definition of a calorie - I was not, I was stating that different foods (aka the calories we consume) will have a different effect beyond just the caloric count.

Then go to school. Or, read authors like Alan Aragon, Eric Helms, Lyle McDonald, Stu Phillips.

Ok, thanks for the references. I wonder what you're doing on a bodybuilding forum, though, if you refuse to discuss diet and fitness? And how in the hell did you hit 32k posts? Pure condescension and judgement?

[W.I.N.]

ffs who the hell is saying you should eat 100% cake instead of keto? seriously

[Luclin999]

"A calorie is a calorie. "

Absolutely true in the long term (weeks/months).

In the short term (days) then yes different calories can cause different effects in the body. Starchy carbs can cause water retention and "puffiness", which is why a low carb diet (Keto) can make it "appear" as if you have magically lost fat faster.

Truth is, you didn't. You depleted the carbs in your system which causes the body to hold onto less water. This gives the illusion of having lost fat more quickly however you haven't you just lost an extra couple pounds of water weight which will come back almost immediately once you begin consuming carbs again.

On the other hand, if you are in a non-carb restricted diet at exactly the same calorie intake that you would have been in with a Keto diet then over time you will lose just the same amount of actual ~body fat~ but with less of a "rebound effect" of weight being immediately re-gained once you return to your normal maintenance level and types of food that you would normally be consuming.

[rhadam]

Ok, thanks for the references. I wonder what you're doing on a bodybuilding forum, though, if you refuse to discuss diet and fitness? And how in the hell did you hit 32k posts? Pure condescension and judgement?

Yep, definitely haven't spent countless hours of my own time helping people on these forums. I simply said I wouldn't educate you, and now you're upset and want to attack me personally. Another reason I won't spend any time on you. I gave you resources, you're welcome. But it's not my job to educate, and that you have the audacity and arrogance to demand I do so... lol.

Edit: you're also wrong about composition of calories changing the way someone looks. For body composition purposes things don't really change that much when you manipulate macro nutrients. Now, if you want to go to an extreme and reduce protein to sub-optimal levels we might see a difference. But when you have the same total calories between two subjects, meet minimum protein, the levels of carbs and fat won't change body composition outside of some water retention.

[sunsean]

ffs who the hell is saying you should eat 100% cake instead of keto? seriously

Haha nobody, but I just said it as an extreme example of how it's not always as simple as "a calorie is a calorie." That's all I was saying, nothing more, nothing less. Because, if all calories were EQUAL as is being repeatedly fed down my throat, then we could all eat the proper caloric amount of cake everyday and be fine...and we all know that's now how it works.

"A calorie is a calorie. "

Absolutely true in the long term (weeks/months).

In the sort term (days) then yes different calories can cause different effects in the body. Starchy carbs can cause water retention and "puffiness", which is why a low carb diet (Keto) can make it "appear" as if you have magically lost fat faster.

Truth is, you didn't. You depleted the carbs in your system which causes the body to hold onto less water. This gives the illusion of having lost fat more quickly however you haven't you just lost an extra couple pounds of water weight which will come back almost immediately once you begin consuming carbs again.

On the other hand, if you are in a non-carb restricted diet at exactly the same calorie intake that you would have been in with a Keto diet then over time you will lose just the same amount of actual ~body fat~ but with less of a "rebound effect" of weight being immediately re-gained once you return to your normal maintenance level and types of food that you would normally be consuming.

Good points, thanks for that. I'm sure keto's effect on water retention plays a part in the apparent decrease in body fat...

Yep, definitely haven't spent countless hours of my own time helping people on these forums. I simply said I wouldn't educate you, and now you're upset and want to attack me personally. Another reason I won't spend any time on you. I gave you resources, you're welcome. But it's not my job to educate, and that you have the audacity and arrogance to demand I do so... lol.

Edit: you're also wrong about composition of calories changing the way someone looks. For body composition purposes things don't really change that much when you manipulate macro nutrients. Now, if you want to go to an extreme and reduce protein to sub-optimal levels we might see a difference. But when you have the same total calories between two subjects, meet minimum protein, the levels of carbs and fat won't change body composition outside of some water retention.

Haha I'm not upset dude, just was honestly confused as to why you wouldn't explain your position with 32k posts and your RD certification. And if you go back over this thread, you'll see that I initially replied to you with "utmost respect" which I meant because I've seen you around and know you have a sh-t ton of posts. But that doesn't mean I'm going to automatically agree with whatever you type ipso facto. You're the one who seems upset that I'm asking for qualification and not just taking your word for it. The idea that keto accelerates fat loss by utilizing fat stores for fuel isn't an obscure one - google "keto" and you'll see about a million posts on the subject. So I was merely asking you to explain why you disagree with so many other sources.

But no sweat off my back. Peace be with you.

[davisj3537]

It irritates me this thread went past the 4th post.

[jasondjulian]

You've written a very long post confirming what I wrote - thank you. I know a calorie is a calorie, but what those calories are composed of plays a large part in how those calories will affect the eater. Someone eating 2000 calories of cake will not look the same as someone eating 2000 calories of a balanced diet. Perhaps it is you who got too hung up on the idea that I was trying to change the definition of a calorie - I was not, I was stating that different foods (aka the calories we consume) will have a different effect beyond just the caloric count.

That was not long, you should see some of the posts I make on other forums.

Regarding your 2000 calories of cake vs balanced diet, as it pertains to weight loss, these are going to have the same effect. Here, we disagree.

That is NOT to say that the person won't "look differently" internally, as their health will be total crap. No argument over the benefits of a well balanced diet, but in terms of pure body weight, all that matters is energy consumption vs energy expenditure.

I think we are talking about two different things, and disagreeing on the fuzzy middle zone where they overlap.

[PhantomLancer]

In the long-term, a ketogenic diet actually has a metabolic disadvantage, since low-carbs + low calories = less T4 to T3 conversion....more than enough to offset the increased thermic effect from higher protein intake.

Yes, they would. Don't confuse ketosis with the basic laws of thermodynamics. Everything is still governed by calories in vs. calories out. You can be in ketosis, eating above maintenance calories, and have a net gain in bodyfat at the end of the day. Remember, just because you're in ketosis and oxidizing fat at a higher rate doesn't mean you're not storing fat at a similar rate or higher.

On the flipside, you can be eating a high carb diet, eating below maintenance, with a much lower rate of bodyfat turnover but a net loss in bodyfat at the end of the day.