Beauty...At least it isn't like this anymore.

actually, it's happened many times. Unless you completely stop eating of course. in theory, it's impossible, but you have to look beyond a typical case like that. It all has to do with how a person's body uses the food. yo-yo dieters may eat less than normal, but gain tons of weight because their metabolism is totally messed up from the body in starvation mode every time they go on a new diet.

 

Isn't "messing up their metabolism" another way of saying "burning fewer calories while at rest."

 

Actually weight gain and loss ISN'T as simple as intake vs. output, as tempting as it might be to look at it that way.

Things like metabolism, hormone levels, blood sugar regulation, age and genetics have a LOT to do with it.

or instance, many people of Native American desent require fewer calories than the average person of european desent and have a harder time processing high carb diets.

There are a lot of factors...we're talking biochemistry here not simple addition or subtraction.

 

I was going to say, especially during my cucle...Sometimes I take in large quantities of calories..I always eat when I'm hungry, easiest diet in the world.
I've also always been thin....

 

thankyou, this is exactily what I was trying to say.

 

I don't know why anyone bothers trying to reason with Spooner, he's proven time and time again that he's just ignorant. Either that or he says things on purpose just to piss everyone off.

I hope it's the latter because I really hope no one is that stupid.

I mean honestly, he thinks that the average Joe Shmoe can just waltz into a big sports arena and run around?? *sporfles* Good luck.

 

wow. maybe you should look up sports arena and then tell me you can't go in them for the most part.

from dictionary.com "an area for indoor sports"

 

yup

 

these things can affect resting metabolic rate. they can affect how a body stores excess energy. but if you burn more calories (through both rest and excercise) than you take in, your body doesn't store anything. if it is storing anything, you are taking in more than you are burning.

 

yes, that's obvious, but for some people, it doesn't work, for all the resons listed above.

 

Yeah, sure. They just let ya run around, playin ball or runnin track at Soldier's Field, just if you ask real nice, like. I've done it a thousand times.......(please catch heavy sarcasm and eye rolling......)

 

where exactly do i play hockey all winter? i'll give you a hint - there is a roof.

 

That is so true. Society still places great pressure on us to do certain things, but we have far more free will nowadays to ignore society. I don't wear makeup or have fake parts and I am not a social outcast or anything either.

 

Thats because beauty changes to what is rare and unusual. It used to be attractive to be chubby because it meant you had a lot of food which showed you were wealthy. Now that anyone can be fat it's become sign of prestige to be thin.

 

I'm afraid I'm going with spooner on this. You can’t get more energy (fat/other tissue), than you put in. If you starve, your metabolism slows down (becomes more efficient). This means that when you do eat, your body stores more energy (fat).

If you put in less energy than you need, then your body uses its stored energy (fat), and you loose weight. Of course, it is better to make your body need more energy by exercising (rather than simply limiting your food intake which slows down your metabolism making it easier to gain weight when you do consume more calories).

 

Yeah...Circular logic is my favorite treadmill too.

 

Sure, because retaining water doesn't cause weight gain. Because it's not possible that some disorder zaps you of ALL energy. Because it's always a person's fault that they are fat...

I tell you what, you develop my genetic condition and see how far diet and exercise take you. And don't go with that input/output argument. I ate no more than 1500 calories a day, and walked a lot. And gained...Not possible? You explain that to my body.

 

uh, you got it backwards. The more it slows down the LESS efficient it becomes.
Seriously you guys, look past your own logic and do some research.

 

Actually, I didn’t make a mistake. To clarify, what I said was that as the metabolism slows down it becomes more efficient at storing fat (and therefore less efficient at burning energy). It is however true that a fast metabolism is more efficient at burning energy, but does not store as much fat.

So, within the context of my post, what I said still makes sense.

 

Retaining water doesn't make you fat

If it sapped (not zapped) you of all your energy, and you really are that sedentary, then you shouldn't be eating hardly anything at all.

Are you looking for sympathy? Do you want me to say that there is nothing you can do to lose that weight? Or do you want me to be realistic, say you ate too much and excercised to little, but that there is no reason you can't change that.

I'll tell you what - get as much excercise as I do, then tell me you're still fat within a year.

Two things:
1) Walking is barely excercising. Try running.
2) I honestly doubt how perfectly you stuck to this diet, and whether this amount gave you a caloric defecit. I have no idea how active you are (although I can make assumptions based on how you consider walking serious excercise).