safely reduce body fat

Bruno26

MaceFace wrote: »

Where Bruno gets a magic 150g number from, I have no idea. I don't understand this "magic" number. There was a time when I ate a low carb (<20g/day) diet and put on weight, so it completely flies in the face of the facts that Bruno puts out.
Maybe for him, 150g/day has worked, but I don't see how that can apply to a general population.

.

Under 150 g = lose weight / easy to maintain weight.
Under 100 g = weight loss
Under 50 g = ketosis & weight loss.

This is what will happen if someone has fat to lose and they have removed all grains and sugar (processed food).

You were eating only 20 g a day and put on weight? I presume you had no weight to lose and were doing weights so you put on muscle.

ford2600

Bruno26 wrote: »

Under 150 g = lose weight / easy to maintain weight.
Under 100 g = weight loss
Under 50 g = ketosis & weight loss.

This is what will happen if someone has fat to lose and they have removed all grains and sugar (processed food).

You were eating only 20 g a day and put on weight? I presume you had no weight to lose and were doing weights so you put on muscle.

@Bruno I know you mean well but that is nonsense.

High fat does not suit a lot of people, it suits others very well. People vary a lot

There is no magic number of carbs you can apply to everybody.

I'd imagine @Maceface has read all your books and a few others to.

Bruno26

ford2600 wrote: »

@Bruno I know you mean well but that is nonsense.

High fat does not suit a lot of people, it suits others very well. People vary a lot

There is no magic number of carbs you can apply to everybody.

I'd imagine @Maceface has read all your books and a few others to.

Why are you bringing high fat into it? I never mentioned it here.

It's not nonsense. Indeed there is no magic number but I guarantee anyone who needs to lose fat will lose it if they lower their carb intake to less than 150 g daily. Thats all they have to do- no counting calories involved.

Alf Veedersane

Bruno26 wrote: »

Indeed there is no magic number but I guarantee anyone who needs to lose fat will lose it if they lower their carb intake to less than 150 g daily.

Is that a money-back guarantee?

Hanley

Does the OP eat at least 3 meals per day consistently?

Does he/she sleep 8 hours per night, minimum?

Do their meals look something like - 2 palm sized portions of protein, 2 handfuls of veg, a cupped handful of starchy carbs on training days and 2 thumb sized portions of fat?

Are they getting it at least 80% right?

Are they strength training?

Cos otherwise you're all majoring in the minors.

ford2600

Bruno26 wrote: »

Why are you bringing high fat into it? I never mentioned it here.

It's not nonsense. Indeed there is no magic number but I guarantee anyone who needs to lose fat will lose it if they lower their carb intake to less than 150 g daily. Thats all they have to do- no counting calories involved.

Excluding some weird very very high protein diet, by mentioned reducing carbs fat as a percentage has to go up?

Even if you reduce carbs drastically but keep protein high(by not eating enough fat) your body won't enter keotsis. The body will just use it as fuel.

Two high fat advocates, Volek and Pinney, have done studies which suggest reducing carbs in a calorie restricted diet along with cardio/weights mix works best for weight loss in people with a predisposition for diabetes.

I know of people who despite following best advice with a well formulated high fat diet who cannot function well on it.

generic2012

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa0804748

CONCLUSIONS
Reduced-calorie diets result in clinically meaningful weight loss regardless of which macronutrients they emphasize.

Bruno26

ford2600 wrote: »

Excluding some weird very very high protein diet, by mentioned reducing carbs fat as a percentage has to go up?

Even if you reduce carbs drastically but keep protein high(by not eating enough fat) your body won't enter keotsis. The body will just use it as fuel.

Two high fat advocates, Volek and Pinney, have done studies which suggest reducing carbs in a calorie restricted diet along with cardio/weights mix works best for weight loss in people with a predisposition for diabetes.

I know of people who despite following best advice with a well formulated high fat diet who cannot function well on it.

I agree with most of what you say. You said that what I said was nonsense. You then use Volek & Phinney. They say to restrict carbs to 75 g daily. They also say calories are important but don't need to be counted. That is what I'm saying. Who wants to count calories forever to maintain a certain weight. People who count calories are also not eating as much nutrient dense food as they could be eating.

Blacktie.

Bruno26 wrote: »

People who count calories are also not eating as much nutrient dense food as they could be eating.

And you're getting this info from where?

generic2012

You only have to count calories for a few days, then you learn to eye ball portions, most lean meats are similar in macros, rices are surprisingly similar, as is pasta, no need for most people to count green veg, most people will eat full tins of beans/full tubs of yoghurt/full whatevers of whatevers, the same serving size of milk each time etc. It's not hard to do, you'd be surprised how little different foods people eat regularly.

Bruno26

Blacktie. wrote: »

And you're getting this info from where?

It's fairly obvious. Look at plates the next time you have a chance somewhere. People fill half their plate with grains and starchy carbs. This leaves less room for green veg, if any at all. Green veg should fill at least half the plate. Are they eating green veg with 2/3 of their meals? No.

I'd also presume they take very little butter / olive oil as they believe it will make them fat / prevent weight loss.

Additionally I doubt people are eating lots of fish, in particular shellfish and organ meats.

Fish, offal , green veg are some of the most nutrient dense foods. The majority trying to lose weight by counting calories still eat grains which means eating less of the most nutrient dense foods.

generic2012

Bruno26 wrote: »

It's fairly obvious. Look at plates the next time you have a chance somewhere. People fill half their plate with grains and starchy carbs. This leaves less room for green veg, if any at all. Green veg should fill at least half the plate. Are they eating green veg with 2/3 of their meals? No.

I'd also presume they take very little butter / olive oil as they believe it will make them fat / prevent weight loss.

Additionally I doubt people are eating lots of fish, in particular shellfish and organ meats.

Fish, offal , green veg are some of the most nutrient dense foods. The majority trying to lose weight by counting calories still eat grains which means eating less of the most nutrient dense foods.

So anyone that uses 'plates somewhere' is counting calories? Again, a statement well grounded in fact and logic.

Blacktie.

Bruno26 wrote: »

It's fairly obvious. Look at plates the next time you have a chance somewhere. People fill half their plate with grains and starchy carbs. This leaves less room for green veg, if any at all. Green veg should fill at least half the plate. Are they eating green veg with 2/3 of their meals? No.

Cause everyone else eating is trying to lose weight?

I'd also presume they take very little butter / olive oil as they believe it will make them fat / prevent weight loss.

Additionally I doubt people are eating lots of fish, in particular shellfish and organ meats.

Fish, offal , green veg are some of the most nutrient dense foods. The majority trying to lose weight by counting calories still eat grains which means eating less of the most nutrient dense foods.

So overhaul their entire life to fit your 150g magic carb no. weightloss method based on your presumptions?

Bruno26

generic2012 wrote: »

So anyone that uses 'plates somewhere' is counting calories? Again, a statement well grounded in fact and logic.

Yes of course that's what I meant!

What an idiotic response. Anything to start an arguement. Pick out something, change it to suit yourself and don't actually respond coherently to the post.

Bruno26

Blacktie. wrote: »

Cause everyone else eating is trying to lose weight?







So overhaul their entire life to fit your 150g magic carb no. weightloss method based on your presumptions?

This is about giving an opinion right. We are talking about someone trying to lose weight here.

Where you getting this idea that it's a magic number from? It's not magic. It's actually fact.

You asked me to explain why I said that people counting calories don't eat enough nutrient dense food. I gave my answer- you actually didn't respond to that issue at all. Is that because you actually agree with it but wouldn't like to say?

Bruno26

generic2012 wrote: »

You only have to count calories for a few days, then you learn to eye ball portions, most lean meats are similar in macros, rices are surprisingly similar, as is pasta, no need for most people to count green veg, most people will eat full tins of beans/full tubs of yoghurt/full whatevers of whatevers, the same serving size of milk each time etc. It's not hard to do, you'd be surprised how little different foods people eat regularly.

Again you are not making sense.

No you are actually counting all the time. It's just you learn how much is in each food after a few days but you are still counting (with your eyeballs). You are eating to hit a number - that's counting.

generic2012

You've got issues, hombre....

Bruno26

generic2012 wrote: »

You've got issues, hombre....

Again what an irrelevant post. Have I? Please explain them to me? I'd love to hear what issues you think I have.

Failure to actually respond to a post leads me to believe you realise you are incorrect.

Alf Veedersane

Bruno26 wrote: »

No you are actually counting all the time. It's just you learn how much is in each food after a few days but you are still counting (with your eyeballs). You are eating to hit a number - that's counting.

How do you count your carb consumption without counting?

generic2012

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

How do you count your carb consumption without counting?

I wish I thought of that line!!

Bruno26

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

How do you count your carb consumption without counting?

You can't. Different to counting calories every day of your life. If you are making the correct food choices there won't be a need to count- that's the key. Eating the right foods you know that you are never going to eat too many carbs. If you are eating lots of fruit and starchy veg then you may need to count the carbs.

Alf Veedersane

Bruno26 wrote: »

You can't. Different to counting calories every day of your life. If you are making the correct food choices there won't be a need to count- that's the key. Eating the right foods you know that you are never going to eat too many carbs. If you are eating lots of fruit and starchy veg then you may need to count the carbs.

But you're still logging to count your carbs.

If that's the case, you're not doing a whole lot different to people who monitor calories.

generic2012

Bruno26 wrote: »

You can't. Different to counting calories every day of your life. If you are making the correct food choices there won't be a need to count- that's the key. Eating the right foods you know that you are never going to eat too many carbs. If you are eating lots of fruit and starchy veg then you may need to count the carbs.

-

Bruno26 wrote: »

Again what an irrelevant post.

Failure to actually respond to a post leads me to believe you realise you are incorrect.

Bruno26

generic2012 wrote: »

I wish I thought of that line!!

In fairness that was never going to happen! We've seen your attempts at humour!

generic2012

Bruno26 wrote: »

In fairness that was never going to happen! We've seen your attempts at humour!

It wasn't meant to be funny? He asked you a genuine question, which of course you just waffled around rather than answered. You can add humour to the list of things you don't understand....

Bruno26

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

But you're still logging to count your carbs.

If that's the case, you're not doing a whole lot different to people who monitor calories.

To get used to it. To know how many carbs you are eating you would have to initially to be certain. You get used to it and there is no need to. It depends on how precise you want to be.

Ok its both counting but I believe the methods to be very different. With calories if you hit your number and you are still hungry then you pretty much can't eat anymore. I just see counting calories as too restrictive. I tried it- couldn't do it.

If you are counting carbs and you think you have eaten to your limit then just eat some protein and fat- you're not going to be hungry.

Alf Veedersane

Bruno26 wrote: »

To get used to it. To know how many carbs you are eating you would have to initially to be certain. You get used to it and there is no need to. It depends on how precise you want to be.

Ok its both counting but I believe the methods to be very different. With calories if you hit your number and you are still hungry then you pretty much can't eat anymore. I just see counting calories as too restrictive. I tried it- couldn't do it.

If you are counting carbs and you think you have eaten to your limit then just eat some protein and fat- you're not going to be hungry.

The whole premise of this is based on a lot of assumptions of people who count calories.

If you go to conzy's log for example, you'll see the log of someone who counts calories but eats well.

Not everyone who counts calories is ignorant of nutrition.

Of course there are people who try to count calories and are ignorant of nutrition but the advice to them is always going to be the same. Eat proper food (no one is going to disagree with you there) and log your intake so you can get used to knowing what is in the food you're eating.

No one recommends calorie counting on here as a way of regulating your food intake for life. It's recommended as a means to educate people on what they're getting in and to start implementing better food choices on the back of that.

Bruno26

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

The whole premise of this is based on a lot of assumptions of people who count calories.

If you go to conzy's log for example, you'll see the log of someone who counts calories but eats well.

Not everyone who counts calories is ignorant of nutrition.

Of course there are people who try to count calories and are ignorant of nutrition but the advice to them is always going to be the same. Eat proper food (no one is going to disagree with you there) and log your intake so you can get used to knowing what is in the food you're eating.

No one recommends calorie counting on here as a way of regulating your food intake for life. It's recommended as a means to educate people on what they're getting in and to start implementing better food choices on the back of that.

Pretty much every response to a thread on someone looking to lose weight / fat advises that counting calories is the only solution to lose the weight / fat.

Alf Veedersane

Bruno26 wrote: »

Pretty much every response to a thread on someone looking to lose weight / fat advises that counting calories is the only solution to lose the weight / fat.

Read what I said about counting calories again.

More carefully this time.

Look out for the bit 'for life'.

Then the bit after where it says about using it as a tool to educate themselves about what they're eating and what's in it.

They were pretty key.

Bruno26

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Read what I said about counting calories again.

More carefully this time.

Look out for the bit 'for life'.

Then the bit after where it says about using it as a tool to educate themselves about what they're eating and what's in it.

They were pretty key.

I read it. Explain what happens when the person finishes the calorie restiction diet and stops counting calories. Are they fixed? Will they continue to make good food choices forever?

Alf Veedersane

Bruno26 wrote: »

I read it. Explain what happens when the person finishes the calorie restiction diet and stops counting calories. Are they fixed? Will they continue to make good food choices forever?

Who said anything about calorie restriction diets?

Count what you're eating, look at your food choices, see where they could be improved, make better choices, eat proper food and win.

It's a long game, Bruno. No one is going to overhaul immediately.

No one is going to implement your diet straight away.

Like I said, logging what you eat to see what's in it is a tool for educating yourself. People who need to make changes don't know where to start. Logging is a starting point in their change.

Bruno26

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Who said anything about calorie restriction diets?

Count what you're eating, look at your food choices, see where they could be improved, make better choices, eat proper food and win.

It's a long game, Bruno. No one is going to overhaul immediately.

No one is going to implement your diet straight away.

Like I said, logging what you eat to see what's in it is a tool for educating yourself. People who need to make changes don't know where to start. Logging is a starting point in their change.

Everyone said it.

People on here underestimate the ability of people to change habits. My diet is just real food. If someone decides once and for all to lose weight and get healthy why cant they eliminate all processed food overnight. Surely its as easy as doing it gradually. Yes it might be hard initially but it just takes some determination and a willingness to change bad habits into good habits.

Blacktie.

Bruno26 wrote: »

If someone decides once and for all to lose weight and get healthy why cant they eliminate all processed food overnight. Surely its as easy as doing it gradually.

What? You're saying a complete overhaul of someones diet is the same as changing say one thing a week in terms of willpower?

Bruno26

Blacktie. wrote: »

What? You're saying a complete overhaul of someones diet is the same as changing say one thing a week in terms of willpower?

No- I'm just suggesting it may be easier and quicker over a prolonged time of gradually changing things. Remove all temptations to eat foods that have made you fat. Restock your kitchen etc. I suppose the key is understanding the reasons for this before it commences.

generic2012

Bruno26 wrote: »

People on here underestimate the ability of people to change habits. My diet is just real food. If someone decides once and for all to lose weight and get healthy why cant they eliminate all processed food overnight. Surely its as easy as doing it gradually. Yes it might be hard initially but it just takes some determination and a willingness to change bad habits into good habits.

I don't see how any of that is inapplicable to counting calories?

Bruno26 wrote: »

Remove all temptations to eat foods that have made you fat.

It's the amount of foods someone eats that can make them fat, not the actual foods.

I'd love to hear your take on If It Fits Your Macros (IIFYM)?

Alf Veedersane

Bruno26 wrote: »

Everyone said it.

People on here underestimate the ability of people to change habits. My diet is just real food. If someone decides once and for all to lose weight and get healthy why cant they eliminate all processed food overnight. Surely its as easy as doing it gradually. Yes it might be hard initially but it just takes some determination and a willingness to change bad habits into good habits.

So you're associating failure to change eating habits to a 'calorie restriction regime' rather than the inability to completely switch their lifestyles?

If you did it immediately, well done.

But you'll fine the majority of people don't for a variety of reasons. Lack of knowledge on what constitutes 'good' food for a start.

That's why learning knowing what's good and bad about what you currently do is important before you can do it.

It's all well and good saying to people to cut out grains and sugars but more people don't know what doesn't have grains and what doesn't have sugar.

A lot of people with poor diets don't know what constitutes processed food.

Telling people to "eat real food" is great but people also need to know what real food is and why they should eat it.

Blacktie.

Bruno26 wrote: »

No- I'm just suggesting it may be easier and quicker over a prolonged time of gradually changing things. Remove all temptations to eat foods that have made you fat. Restock your kitchen etc. I suppose the key is understanding the reasons for this before it commences.

Would it be quicker to change everything at once? It probably would alright. Until people come up against the first hurdle and everything collapses around them because it was too hard. Seriously consistency is the key to any dietary change and making it all at once just destroys your willpower.

Essien

Bruno26 wrote: »

Pretty much every response to a thread on someone looking to lose weight / fat advises that counting calories is the only solution to lose the weight / fat.

No it's not. It's most commonly recommended as a means to monitor a persons intake in order to educate them to make better decisions long term. It will lead to improved food quality if the individual has an ounce of cop on.

Bruno26 wrote: »

I read it. Explain what happens when the person finishes the calorie restiction diet and stops counting calories. Are they fixed? Will they continue to make good food choices forever?

They aren't finishing the calorie restriction diet, they're finishing counting. At which point they'll naturally be making better food choices which will automatically lead to reducing calories more in line to what their body needs.

Whether or not they continue to make good food decisions is irrelevant, and completely up to the individual. If they want to stay in shape they will, if they don't, they won't. But at least after educating themselves they'll be armed with the knowledge to make that decision naturally.

Bruno26

generic2012 wrote: »

I don't see how any of that is inapplicable to counting calories?



It's the amount of foods someone eats that can make them fat, not the actual foods.

At last you actually post something relevant.

That's far too simplistic a statement. 99% of those who eat too much food eat too many carbs/ processed foods. Very few people eat too much fat/protein. Its actually near impossible to eat too much fat/protein. You can argue all day but to believe its as simple as the above statement is delusional.

Alf Veedersane

Bruno26 wrote: »

Remove all temptations to eat foods that have made you fat. Restock your kitchen etc. I suppose the key is understanding the reasons for this before it commences.

....which is what I said but you seemed to disagree or morph into something that I didn't say

generic2012

Bruno26 wrote: »

At last you actually post something relevant.

That's far too simplistic a statement. 99% of those who eat too much food eat too many carbs/ processed foods. Very few people eat too much fat/protein. Its actually near impossible to eat too much fat/protein. You can argue all day but to believe its as simple as the above statement is delusional.

You're a lost cause.

Essien

Bruno26 wrote: »

100 % of those who eat too much food eat too much food

FTFY

Bruno26

Essien wrote: »

FTFY

You failed to finish the sentence so you fixed nothing.

Bruno26

generic2012 wrote: »

You're a lost cause.

Being oblivious to this gives your posts zero credibility.

Bruno26

Essien wrote: »

No it's not. It's most commonly recommended as a means to monitor a persons intake in order to educate them to make better decisions long term. It will lead to improved food quality if the individual has an ounce of cop on.



They aren't finishing the calorie restriction diet, they're finishing counting. At which point they'll naturally be making better food choices which will automatically lead to reducing calories more in line to what their body needs.

Whether or not they continue to make good food decisions is irrelevant, and completely up to the individual. If they want to stay in shape they will, if they don't, they won't. But at least after educating themselves they'll be armed with the knowledge to make that decision naturally.

You can educate someone without constantly referring to counting calories.

You would hope they would continue to choose real food.

Bruno26

Blacktie. wrote: »

Would it be quicker to change everything at once? It probably would alright. Until people come up against the first hurdle and everything collapses around them because it was too hard. Seriously consistency is the key to any dietary change and making it all at once just destroys your willpower.

People obviously don't want it enough then. People need to educate themselves on what foods they should be eating. It's easier to choose the correct foods than to eat everything in moderation and count calories. Consistently choose the correct foods to eat.

Alf Veedersane

Bruno26 wrote: »

You can educate someone without constantly referring to counting calories.

You would hope they would continue to choose real food.

People don't know where they're making wrong choices.

They need to see where they're going wrong.

And you have to know why you do what you do or it will never become ingrained.

generic2012

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

And you have to know why you do what you do or it will never become ingrained.

+1

Bruno26

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

People don't know where they're making wrong choices.

They need to see where they're going wrong.

And you have to know why you do what you do or it will never become ingrained.

Yes I agree. It's all about self-learning. We know the official messages we are told are wrong.

Processed carbs / crap everywhere. Very little real food or benefits of real food advertised.

Alf Veedersane

Advertising won't educate anyone.

And you don't necessarily have to read books on it either.