General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

diet idea

Started by physiocrat · · Last activity · 4 posts · 468 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
4 August 2005
Last activity
15 August 2005
Original author
physiocrat
Posts
4
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
468
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–4 of 4
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Another message gave me an idea for a diet program. Obtain an
    instrument known as a pedometer. It registers foot steps. It will
    function as a measure of calories burned. Wear it all the time. It must
    be calibrated. Let's arbitrarily assign one step per calorie. If, at
    the end of the day, the dieter has taken 1,000 steps, the dieter may
    consume 1,000 calories of food energy. Consuming more would lead to
    body fat build-up. That's not unreasonable, is it? Eat whatever you
    like. Nutrition is another story. This is a strict calorie-counting
    diet.
    http://www.pedometersusa.com/

  2. "physiocrat" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    ... function as a measure of calories burned.


    Calories cannot be"burned"; what do yo get? Calorie oxide?

    Quoted message said:

    That's not unreasonable, is it?


    Yes, it is unreasonable to believe the current misinformation about
    "calories" flailing about in contemporary nutribabble.
    http://www.ecologos.org/ex.htm
    http://www.ecologos.org/pcf.htm

    Laurie

  3. Laurie said:

    "physiocrat" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    ... function as a measure of calories burned.


    Calories cannot be"burned"; what do yo get? Calorie oxide?

    Quoted message said:

    That's not unreasonable, is it?


    Yes, it is unreasonable to believe the current misinformation about
    "calories" flailing about in contemporary nutribabble.
    http://www.ecologos.org/ex.htm
    http://www.ecologos.org/pcf.htm

    Laurie

    I agree. The whole calorie thing is bogus. The numbers don't make sense
    in the real world. 95% of low-calorie diets fail, which statistically
    signifies that low-calorie dieting is a complete failure. People on
    low-carb diets can eat up to around 300 calories more than people on
    low-fat and still lose more weigth (which is supposed to be contrary to
    the laws of energy, according to those who adhere to the calorie
    concept). The manufacturers don't report and measure them accurately.
    The calorie/food valuations themselves are highly suspect and a number
    of fudge-factors had to be applied to calculate them and make them
    sorta work. No follow up was done to the original calorie/food
    valuation calculations to 1) confirm them or 2) to actually show that
    they can be applied to weight management. There does not exist any
    original, seminal and/or groundbreaking study or report that actually
    made the scientific finding that calories can be applied directly to
    predict weight gain or loss based strictly on calories in vs calories
    out.

    It is all a mirage. The big lie. Smoke and mirrors. Fool's gold.

    TC

  4. TC said:
    Laurie said:

    "physiocrat" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    ... function as a measure of calories burned.


    Calories cannot be"burned"; what do yo get? Calorie oxide?

    Quoted message said:

    That's not unreasonable, is it?


    Yes, it is unreasonable to believe the current misinformation about
    "calories" flailing about in contemporary nutribabble.
    http://www.ecologos.org/ex.htm
    http://www.ecologos.org/pcf.htm

    Laurie

    I agree. The whole calorie thing is bogus. The numbers don't make sense
    in the real world. 95% of low-calorie diets fail, which statistically
    signifies that low-calorie dieting is a complete failure. People on
    low-carb diets can eat up to around 300 calories more than people on
    low-fat and still lose more weigth (which is supposed to be contrary to
    the laws of energy, according to those who adhere to the calorie
    concept). The manufacturers don't report and measure them accurately.
    The calorie/food valuations themselves are highly suspect and a number
    of fudge-factors had to be applied to calculate them and make them
    sorta work. No follow up was done to the original calorie/food
    valuation calculations to 1) confirm them or 2) to actually show that
    they can be applied to weight management. There does not exist any
    original, seminal and/or groundbreaking study or report that actually
    made the scientific finding that calories can be applied directly to
    predict weight gain or loss based strictly on calories in vs calories
    out.

    It is all a mirage. The big lie. Smoke and mirrors. Fool's gold.

    TC

    And in case Robert is out there, it is all the fault of the USDA for
    foisting the calories valuations on us poor stupid foreigners.

    TC

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.