Girl eats nothing but chicken nuggets for 15 years...

[FrugalCopywrite]

Try this: don't eat anything for a few days and try going for a run. You think your body wouldn't force you to stay on the couch? Conversely, stuff your face all day with natural, whole foods. Then try sitting on the couch all night watching TV. You'll feel like you have a hyperkinetic disorder.

The part about not eating anything I agree with. But, to say that just because you have an energy surplus, you will instinctively find a way to burn it off? Umm, no...

The better question is: How does the amount of calories you eat affect the amount of energy your body has available to operate on a daily basis?

More calories = more energy. More energy does not automatically mean you will instinctively find a way burn it off....

No, not at all. You eat more food than normal, create an energy surplus, but then you move more (instinctively) to burn it off. It's not a matter of will, it's natural instinct.

But wait, eating a ton of junk food will still create a huge energy surplus. You then move more instinctively to burn it off? No, I think most people would tend to agree that is false....

------------------------------------------

A few things...

1st - This really has very little to do with the calories in vs calories out argument. The problem is that so many people try to layer so many things on top of the argument that the original point gets lost. I am talking about nutrient metabolism, you are going into natural instinct and other things that have nothing to do with the original argument.

2nd - So many people overestimate the amount of calories extra activity will burn. For the average sized man, it will take you 1 hour of brisk walking to burn off the calories consumed from 2 apples, or 2 tbsp of olive oil, of other small amounts of healthy food. To think that even over the long, long term, this will all somehow even out due to natural human instinct is absurd.

You know what every successful diet does? It creates a caloric deficit. Low Carb, High Carb, Low Carb, High Carb, etc - they are all designed in different ways and focus on different macronutrient groups, but if they cause you to lose weight, it is through a caloric deficit. It is just that simple...

At the end of the day, though, this is starting to veer off in a totally different direction than what the OP is about...

The only reason I am still here is because I can't sleep due to a prolonged case of food poisoning...from bean sprouts - healthy food my a**...

 

[stickyicky]

 

[charlesmartel]

Is eating that crap worse than eating English food all day?

 

[cardine]

Being thin doesn't mean you are healthy.

Pretty sure what turbo has been trying to say is that if calories in are less than calories out, you will not get heavier. However you can still (despite looking thin) be unhealthy as fuck.

So monitoring calories but only eating unhealthy food will make you look healthy on the outside but you'll probably be very unhealthy on the inside and you'll probably have high blood pressure, have a higher risk of heart disease, cancer, etc.

 

[Deliguy]

I'll admit I'm similar but not as extreme. I can pick a single food item and eat nothing but for easily a month or two. I struggle pretty hard to keep variety in my diet. I'm not sure why I've always been that way. Once i get a craving for something everything else sounds like crap until I get a craving for something else.

 

[Dankface]

TIL Turbolapp fed her kids pizza, mac and cheese, & mcnuggets for 3 years and thought it wasn't that big of a deal.

 

[megatabbers]

The part about not eating anything I agree with.

OK, good. We can agree on that.

But, to say that just because you have an energy surplus, you will instinctively find a way to burn it off? Umm, no...

I'll explain this at the end with your final statement because there's a very important distinction needed to be made.

More calories = more energy. More energy does not automatically mean you will instinctively find a way burn it off....

It does, provided you take in the right amount of energy. Our bodies are always striving to maintain homeostasis.

But wait, eating a ton of junk food will still create a huge energy surplus. You then move more instinctively to burn it off? No, I think most people would tend to agree that is false....

And so do I... it's very, very false. However, I wasn't talking about junk food. I was referring to our natural diets. When we eat junk food, most people shuttle those calories into their fat cells. In fact, the fat cells will get fed at the expense of starving the rest of the organs of the body.

So, even though you create an energy surplus, in this case, you would not move more to burn it off. You can't access it because it's trapped inside the fat cells due to the high levels of insulin circulating in the bloodstream (insulin inhibits the breakdown of TAG into free fat acids to be used for energy). The end result is you'd get (paradoxically) tired despite eating more.

Of course, this doesn't apply to the "genetically gifted" who can eat whatever they want and still burn it off (and hence, never really gain weight).

Furthermore, in order to completely explain this I'd need several pages which I'm sure you don't want to read. It all breaks down to biochem and physiology though.

A few things...

1st - This really has very little to do with the calories in vs calories out argument. The problem is that so many people try to layer so many things on top of the argument that the original point gets lost. I am talking about nutrient metabolism, you are going into natural instinct and other things that have nothing to do with the original argument

It has everything to do with calories-in/calories out. And we are talking about the same thing: nutrient metabolism. All I'm saying is that nutrients allow us to have a functional metabolism whereas junk derails it.

2nd - So many people overestimate the amount of calories extra activity will burn. For the average sized man, it will take you 1 hour of brisk walking to burn off the calories consumed from 2 apples, or 2 tbsp of olive oil, of other small amounts of healthy food. To think that even over the long, long term, this will all somehow even out due to natural human instinct is absurd.

I completely agree about overestimation. But again, we're going back to the issue of instinct vs. intellect. What's really absurd is the thought that our maker/evolution (whatever) made us into the most perfect being in existence...

....where every single thing is accounted for (i.e. you climb a flight of stairs, your body needs more oxygen, you automatically start breathing more, your heart rate goes up to ensure that O2 gets transported to the tissues, etc..) yet the most basic functions of survival (i.e. energy intake/expenditure) are left to our mere will. Doesn't that strike you a bit odd?

You know what every successful diet does? It creates a caloric deficit. Low Carb, High Carb, Low Carb, High Carb, etc - they are all designed in different ways and focus on different macronutrient groups, but if they cause you to lose weight, it is through a caloric deficit. It is just that simple...

Can't argue with that. Not one bit.

At the end of the day, though, this is starting to veer off in a totally different direction than what the OP is about...

The only reason I am still here is because I can't sleep due to a prolonged case of food poisoning...from bean sprouts - healthy food my a**...

You're right... it's time to let this go. Feel better (and by the way, beans aren't a health food... not even close; but that's a whole new argument, LOL)

 

[turbolapp]

Alright, you dumbshit, you've beaten me down with your persistent idiocy.

So I got off my lazy ass and did the research for you.

I don't expect that you'll actually be able to comprehend anything I post here, but I'll try to pick out the small words.



The Calorie In/Calorie Out Myth

TL;DR: You're a fucking idiot and I'm pissed that I wasted my time proving that you're a fucking idiot because everyone here already knew that you're a fucking idiot.

Now go get your fucking shinebox you fucking idiot.

You still haven't show the opposite of what I stated, you only showed there are other factors involved. Which I already allowed for in OP.

An example of a common and successful The calorie in/calorie out plan is the 500 calorie/day reduction plan. If a person reduces their calories by 500 per day, over the span of, lets say a year, your position is they will not lose weight if it isn't the "right" kind of calories. Yes? (you can say "for the most part" if you like ) And this is simply false. The majority of people will lose weight with a consistent reduction of 500 calories a day, no matter the type of calories. If you say no, that is not your position, then the opposite of that would be in agreement with me.

Let's call a spade a spade, shall we? You are attempting to strawman your way out of this and most people here are smart enough to see that. If you have a way to refute the original statement with the opposite of what I stated (as you stated you could do) please do so now, otherwise, please spare us all the same shit over and over.

 

[soulbyproxy]

This is a bullshit planted story. Marketers fall for marketing once again.

 

[danke]

TIL Turbolapp fed her kids pizza, mac and cheese, & mcnuggets for 3 years and thought it wasn't that big of a deal.

Which is fucking disgusting then she says, "I want to see you not do this". LMAO

Some mothers actually know how to make balanced diets (as crazy as that sounds).

 

[Beach Affiliate]

You still haven't show the opposite of what I stated, you only showed there are other factors involved. Which I already allowed for in OP.

An example of a common and successful The calorie in/calorie out plan is the 500 calorie/day reduction plan. If a person reduces their calories by 500 per day, over the span of, lets say a year, your position is they will not lose weight if it isn't the "right" kind of calories. Yes? (you can say "for the most part" if you like ) And this is simply false. The majority of people will lose weight with a consistent reduction of 500 calories a day, no matter the type of calories. If you say no, that is not your position, then the opposite of that would be in agreement with me.

Let's call a spade a spade, shall we? You are attempting to strawman your way out of this and most people here are smart enough to see that. If you've got away to refute the original statement with the opposite of what I stated (as you stated you could do) please do so now, otherwise, please spare us all the same shit over and over.

Holy shit, are you fucking delirious?

This is your original statement:

People need to stop thinking this way. What you eat doesn't matter, for the most part, in terms of being thin. Calories in. Calories out. That's it.

Did you even read anything in that post?

Everything (meaning peer-reviewed published medical research papers) there specifically denounce that exact premise.

Here's just one of the published papers that specifically denounces your idiocy: "A calorie is a calorie" violates the second law of thermodynamics

You're not only a moron, you're a cowardly moron that doesn't have the gumption to admit you're wrong.

People like you that fall for all this pseudo-science bullshit are 1) more stupid and 2) morally worse than the greedy dumbshits that get taken for $10k+ by guru scam artists.

Because while money is important, health is much more important.

And you're not just hurting yourself. You're hurting your fucking offspring as well - which should be criminal.

My first one ate only 3 things for the first 3 years (chicken nuggets, mac and cheese and pizza) I was so worried that he would grow up to be one of those guys in that diabetes ad in the other thread. But we have a rule that you always have to try one bite of everything we eat. Today he eats pretty much everything we do (although still prefers above listed crap)

Now we're back to square one with the youngest :/

I rest my case.

Fucking idiot.

How you're the moderator of anything more important than a box of broken crayons is beyond me.

 

[Fatbat]

I just knew this was going to be an article from the UK. Some of Jamie Oliver's specials on kids and food and trying to bring healthy food programmes into the schools are shocking. He encountered kids entering the school system who didn't know how to use a fork and a knife because for their first 5 years they'd eaten nothing but fish fingers, nuggets and fries. Ridiculous.

Every picky child's parent's worst fear. My first one ate only 3 things for the first 3 years (chicken nuggets, mac and cheese and pizza) I was so worried that he would grow up to be one of those guys in that diabetes ad in the other thread. But we have a rule that you always have to try one bite of everything we eat. Today he eats pretty much everything we do (although still prefers above listed crap)

Now we're back to square one with the youngest :/

It wouldn't have ever been a "fear" if you hadn't fed him that crap in the first place. You were the enabler. It's akin to giving someone their first hit of crack and then continuing to supply them with drugs to feed their habit. You see these fat fucks that are 800 pounds and who can't even get out of the house because they're too big for the door yet someone, namely their mother, is supplying them with tens of thousands of calories every day because they're "her baby".

So for the first three years of your kid's existence you let him eat nothing but garbage and were "fearful" but didn't actually do anything about it, and now you're repeating your mistake again.

Why would any parent feed a 2 year old McDonalds is beyond me.

Exactly.

If your kids refuse to eat what you're cooking don't feed them anything else. They'll eventually eat it. You're the parent and dictate to them what a healthy diet is. It's not the other way around.

Once again, it's not hard to understand.

I know how to feed my kids...

No, you don't.

Turbolapp fed her kids pizza, mac and cheese, & mcnuggets for 3 years and thought it wasn't that big of a deal.

Exactly.

Some mothers actually know how to make balanced diets (as crazy as that sounds).

Bingo.

How you're the moderator of anything more important than a box of broken crayons is beyond me.

Mean, but I had to LoL.

Seriously, it's not difficult. Don't be the enabler.

 

[evasive]

My first one ate only 3 things for the first 3 years (chicken nuggets, mac and cheese and pizza)

Horrible parenting job right there.

 

[soulbyproxy]

Stop attacking this broad for her parenting style. You can make your points without being assholes about it.

Bad nutrition is a chronic problem.

If you're genuinely concerned, offer some constructive alternatives. I have a sister whose kids refuse to eat vegetables. Little do they realize, virtually everything they eat contains puréed vegetables. She doubles up on the good things in other creative ways as well.

 

[kamired2]

 

[Dankface]

Turbolapp, worst mo' the year award.

 

[lukep]

C'mon, Turbo! You know all my fetishes feature you, but you're really losing this argument pretty badly. Two points you must address to win this now:

1. You said "That's it" when you were talking about calories = calories for weight loss purposes. That literally translates to "there is nothing in the equation but calories = calories. Meanwhile his sources show that something else is in the equation.

2. Since a calorie of ice cream accompanies more fat and sugar than a calorie in carrots, you've got to address the root of why a body would break down the extra fat and sugar in the ice cream for us with the same end result as the carrot's calorie, contrary to what seems logical.

I still believe in you though; You can do it. Go Turbo!

 

[Mugshot]

 

[Gambit]

This has to be a publicity stunt. That girl actually doesn't look too bad. If this story was true, she'd look like a blimp.

 

[turbolapp]

I forgot about this thread.
I've nothing to add about the calorie in/calorie out statement and don't care to continuously repeat myself.

With regards to the other matter, I'll take advise on parenting from abunch of 20 year old single guys and no children with a grain of salt.

I will say that, for the record, with regards on how to feed picky eaters, I would suggest you read the literature before you comment again. Most of it says: feed them what they will eat while slowly introducing all the stuff they won't. Hense, why both my children are required to eat 1 bite of EVERYTHING served at every meal. I notice how none of you commented on the fact that my oldest (remember the one that only liked 3 things) now eats almost everything we do. Why? I guess it's because, as is the style of this board, many of you enjoy ganging up on the only "mouthy bitch" around.

Anyways, next time do me a favor and at least READ and COMPREHEND before speaking. That way you can argue your points more effectively.