ncor33 wrote:
first of all...metabolic syndrome? really? that has zero to do with this conversation. if you cannot understand why, then we are wasting our time speaking. metabolic syndrome, as many have said is a consequence, not a cause of weight gain. let me try to make a simple explanation, with non accurate numbers used simply to illustrate
patient A eats the following in a day. and patient b eats this: and patient c, this
1000 cal carbs 2500 cal carbs 500 cal carbs
1000 cal fat 500 cal fat 2500 cal fat
1000 cal prot 500 cal prot 500 cal prot
their daily calorie burn rates are 4000 cal. therefore they are in a deficit of 1000 cal. they will lose weight. period.
No Arguments here.
Quote:
now, what happens with those calories he took in??? well, the carbs get stored as glycogen (not used immediately, in most cases) in the liver as a easy source of ATP. the fat gets stored as fat (with lots of different uses, ie. cell walls, steroid synthesis, etc....) and the protien gets stored as protien (collagen, dna, myocytes,etc...) notice that what you EAT gets STORED. not utilized immediately.
While correct, this is not entirely factual.
1. Some ingested carbohydrate go immediately into circulation.
2. The type of carbohydrate determines where it is metabolized. E.g. Fructose is primarily metabolized in the liver. It is both oxidized in the liver for energy for live-tissue and also restocks the liver's glycogen supply, which is important for maintaining blood sugar. When the liver's glycogen stores are full, and (approximately 400 kcals worth), what isn't immediately oxidized is likely converted to triglyceride. Note that the liver only stores approximately 400 kcals worth of glycogen. This is not a lot and frankly is the issue with humans consuming the amount of High Fructose Corn Syrup that we do: 1 20oz soda has approximately 240 Kcals of HFCS. If this is consumed by an otherwise sedentary individual, these livers stores will be constantly topped off, which means an increase in triglyceride production. Glucose on the other hand, typically bypasses the liver to be metabolized throughout the body.
Quote:
where does the calorie burn come from? well, depending on the metabolic state (which can be influenced by LOTS of stuff, but mainly activity and big things like your thyroid), your body requires ATP. it gets it from those three basic compounds, in that order. glycogen first (from carbs), then fat and then protien. so, no matter what you ingest, your body will first utilize the glycogen as an energy source. then it will burn fat. then it will burn protien.
Patently false. The Ratio of Carbohydrate to Fat oxidation, in well-fed humans, is primarily determined by exercise intensity and having the intermediaries to oxidize fat. (We can all burn CHO well). Secondarily, the rates of Fat and Protein oxidation are determined by CHO availability, however, we see upticks in Fat and Protein oxidation rates prior to the body "running out" of carbohydrate. Additional, in the vast majority of circumstances, Protein oxidation rates are quite low.
Quote:
i can anticipate the response to that....so, if you don't eat carbs, you never have glycogen, and you must burn more fat! nice thought, but not so fast....your body will make glycogen out of fat to store in your liver. so, no, a low carb diet does not burn "more" fat that way. again, the calories you ingest get stored. your body turns to glycogen first, then fat for fuel. when you are done excersising, it will build more glycogen for you to burn later, either out of your carbs or from your fat. so, if you eat 3000 cal and burn 4000 cal, you will lose weight. your body will store what it can, convert what fat it must, and then burn it off.
The human body may or may not be able to create glucose from fatty acids. There is evidence to support both sides. The greater category of Gluconeogenesis (creating glucose from non-carbohydrate sources) is both possible and important. This can occur from glycerol, amino acids etc. While this is important for maintaining blood sugar at rest, the rate of gluconeogenesis in humans is too low to fuel exercise and glycogen synthesis in a significant manner.
Further, the rate of gluconeogenesis does not change in habituated low-carbohydrate cyclists. The primary adaptation to low-carbohydrate eating strategies is not an increase in endogenous carbohydrate production, but a decrease in carbohydrate utilization.
Quote:
a good way to imagine it is that your body is a fireplace. when you eat you replace the wood in the pile. the fireplace continues to burn wood. it likes pine best (carbs), so it burns that first. when that is gone, it will burn up the oak (fat). if you are almost out of wood, it will reluctantly burn walnut (protien, basically starvation state). when the fire calms down (when you are at rest) the woodpile gets refilled, in the same order it gets used. pine gets stocked first, even if you have to trade some oak in to get it. when your activity fires up again, you hit the pine first.
See above.
And, I hate fireplace analogies.
Quote:
what you eat for your next meal has very little to do with your energy source for that day. your liver has your glycogen (mostly) and your body uses that first, then burns fat. almost never protien, cause we all have some fat to burn first.
In a well-fed state, for the most part, yes.
Quote:
you are trying to argue several things that make no sense if you have a basic understanding of physiology. remember, the question posed was basically "why am i not losing weight". and the answer is almost certainly because you are eating more than you think and burning less than you think. it is that simple. you are confusing that question with the more profound and difficult to answer question "how to i lose weight MOST EFFECIENTLY". can you see where the confusion is??? two very different questions. one with a simple answer: eat less, excersise more. the second can be argued forever, by many experts with valid OPINIONS, and will likely never have a single perfect answer.
Personal, I have a somewhat deep understanding of physiology, but I'm not the OP.
Second, Yes, with broad strokes it is easy to say " Calories In < Calories Out"
Third, Yes, the deeper "Strategies" are likely associated with an increase in efficiency, (e.g. losing the most weight for least disturbance in caloric intake).
This is important because, as athletes, exercising in a low-caloric situation is:
1. Difficult to impossible to maintain performance
2. Can result in negative adaptations with regard to overall performance
3. Can increase markers of stress (e.g. Cortisol), which lead to over-reaching / over-training, decreased motivation, etc.
Quote:
simple, right? eat less of whatever you want, and your body MUST get ATP from glycogen, fat stores and then protien, in that order, as long as you are in a calorie deficit.As an aside, as someone whom is trying to be a "knowledgeable individual", I would remind you to be cognisant of your tone, grammer, spelling, and punctuation. I wrote my response, primarily, because you spelled "PROTEIN" incorrectly throughout your response. Whether this is a lack of knowledge or a lack of care, it undermines whatever you are trying to communicate. We all make mistakes; repeated errors are not mistakes.
I talk a lot - Give it a listen: http://www.fasttalklabs.com/category/fast-talk
I also give Training Advice via http://www.ForeverEndurance.com
The above poster has eschewed traditional employment and is currently undertaking the ill-conceived task of launching his own hardgoods company. Statements are not made on behalf of nor reflective of anything in any manner... unless they're good, then they count.
http://www.AGNCYINNOVATION.com[/quote][/quote]
Last edited by:
xtrpickels: Apr 29, 20 11:04