trail wrote:
burnthesheep wrote:
Reading the ST link to the forum comment, 90% of that is time tested common sense from decades ago for completely normal folks. Not even athletes.
But going back to the study, I don't believe that you can have different outcomes from the same # of calories is "common sense." Or it wasn't. Maybe it's starting to become common sense.
There've been a number of studies now that
provide evidence (to avoid sophistry from @Trauma) that suggest a good diet takes more consideration than the "it's just thermodynamics" crowd (which has a mafia on this forum).
E.g. this one from February where diet quality also provided a positive outcome with no consideration of calorie count. While it is true that there is no mention of calorie counting per se, the participants were on a "healthy diet" so presumably they were at the very least watching the amount of food they were eating. The main point of this study appears to be that there was no sig diff between the effects of a low-fat diet vs a low carb diet. While is is no doubt true that eating so called "healthy food" fills a person up with fewer calories, at the end of the day a calorie is still a calorie. IMO, eat whatever you want but watch very closely how many cals you are consuming.
"In this randomized clinical trial among 609 overweight adults, weight change over 12 months was not significantly different for participants in the healthy low fat (HLF) diet group (â5.3 kg) vs the healthy low carb (HLC) diet group (â6.0 kg), and there was no significant diet-genotype interaction or diet-insulin interaction with 12-month weight loss."
"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."