Bike Forums

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   General Cycling Discussion (https://www.bikeforums.net/general-cycling-discussion/)
-   -   Weight Loss (https://www.bikeforums.net/general-cycling-discussion/1125846-weight-loss.html)

SquidPuppet 10-24-17 06:11 PM


Originally Posted by rachel120 (Post 19950586)
Last time I read up on biology, the brain of every human needs glucose as an energy source. So yeah, every human has to eat on a regular basis if they want fuel for their brain to function optimally.

Everyone's body is different.

I can fast for many consecutive days with no issues. I've done it.

andcarrotrope 10-24-17 06:14 PM

i'm losing weight without even trying. i eat the same as before and ride 6-8 hours a week. it's starting to be a problem, though. the fat is leaving my face!

Ryder1 10-24-17 06:34 PM


Originally Posted by northtexasbiker (Post 19950317)
Why does anyone want to fast? Yeah I get it can work, but if your overweight it probably stands to reason that you don't like empty stomachs. Eating healthy is fairly simple.

Like calorie counting, it can provide a structure that helps some people succeed: [1] This is the time when I eat, and [2] This is the time when I do NOT eat.

It also can have health benefits: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition...ittent-fasting

FrenchFit 10-24-17 06:41 PM


Originally Posted by General Geoff (Post 19946224)
Nope, doesn't matter. You could eat pure lard, but if you only eat 500 calories of lard per day, you will lose weight just sitting on the couch.

This was debunked a decade ago. The human body is not a german oven, nor is it as simple as the Law of Thermodynmaics. Do some reading.

General Geoff 10-24-17 06:43 PM


Originally Posted by FrenchFit (Post 19950754)
This was debunked a decade ago. The human body is not a german oven, nor is it as simple as the Law of Thermodynmaics. Do some reading.

So the human body is a perpetual motion machine? Please, cite your sources.

rachel120 10-24-17 06:49 PM


Originally Posted by General Geoff (Post 19950669)
Incorrect. The human brain can metabolize ketone bodies in addition to or instead of glucose.

If you get to the point where you are burning ketones, you are in a world of hurt. Your diabetes is either way, way out of control, or you are desperate enough to try that fat only diet because every anti-seizure medication has failed. Burning ketones is not healthy.

General Geoff 10-24-17 06:52 PM


Originally Posted by rachel120 (Post 19950773)
If you get to the point where you are burning ketones, you are in a world of hurt. Your diabetes is either way, way out of control, or you are desperate enough to try that fat only diet because every anti-seizure medication has failed. Burning ketones is not healthy.

You only have to go about a day without eating for the ketone metabolism to start. I don't find fasting for several days to be painful at all. I do not have diabetes nor siezures of any kind.

FrenchFit 10-24-17 06:56 PM


Originally Posted by General Geoff (Post 19950761)
So the human body is a perpetual motion machine? Please, cite your sources.

Do a little reading, educate yourself. Books are your friend.

General Geoff 10-24-17 06:58 PM


Originally Posted by FrenchFit (Post 19950786)
Do a little reading, educate yourself. Books are your friend.

In other words, you have no sources. Understood.

Machka 10-24-17 07:19 PM


Originally Posted by FrenchFit (Post 19950786)
Do a little reading, educate yourself. Books are your friend.

Books??

How old school!

It's all about peer reviewed journal articles now.

FrenchFit 10-24-17 07:48 PM


Originally Posted by Machka (Post 19950835)
Books??

How old school!

It's all about peer reviewed journal articles now.

Sometimes the old ways are the best.

Maelochs 10-24-17 09:04 PM


Originally Posted by caloso (Post 19950534)
When you were having severe blood sugar drops, your doctor was telling you that your blood sugar was low due to not eating enough.

Exactly my point. Some people need to eat almost constantly. some often, some less, some little .... Maybe you were borderline hypoglycemic. Maybe you had an unusual metabolism. I thought you had mentioned some health problems ( I am too lazy to look back.)

But yes. I Would assume your doctor knew what s/he knew what s/he was talking about.

I assume if I had cancer and you didn’t your doctor would make different diagnoses for each of us.

OBoile 10-25-17 08:16 AM


Originally Posted by rachel120 (Post 19950461)
I can tell you this about nutrition. When I was having severe blood sugar drops twice, three times a week, a medical doctor told me the issue was that I was letting 6 hours go by between meals and that I just couldn't go that long without food.

I would certainly hope a doctor would know what she was talking about when she said my low blood sugar was due to not eating often enough.

And this is something where the knowledge has been around forever. As a teen when I felt shaky and sweaty and disoriented my mother would insist I eat a sugar and a protein, the sugar to feel better immediately, the protein to keep me feeling better. She learned that from my grandmother, who was born in the 19-teens. So the need to eat and what to eat to stabilize your blood sugar has been general non-medical knowledge for close to 100 years.

If you can't go 6 hours without food, I would suggest you may have some other sort of underlying medical issue at play here. Were that the case for most humans, our species would have never survived as hunter/gatherers.

OBoile 10-25-17 08:20 AM


Originally Posted by FrenchFit (Post 19950754)
This was debunked a decade ago. The human body is not a german oven, nor is it as simple as the Law of Thermodynmaics. Do some reading.

Geoff is correct. Humans can't violate the law of thermodynamics.

PedalingWalrus 10-25-17 08:38 AM


Originally Posted by rachel120 (Post 19948207)
I just lost a decent amount of weight. A few of the lessons I learned:

- Starvation mode is real. If your calorie in/calorie out is too unbalanced, your brain and body will be convinced there isn't a reliable source of food and your metabolism will slow down.

if Your metabolism slows down isn't it also a good way to save $$$ ? :) As long as You east less calories than You need you should also lose weight and eat less food ($)

I forgot where I read it but I seem to recall a statistic that most people on this earth only eat once per day. This breakfast, snack, snack, lunch, snack, snack, dinner, snack, alcohol daily cycle is pure luxury for most people.

rachel120 10-25-17 08:57 AM


Originally Posted by PedalingWalrus (Post 19951647)
if Your metabolism slows down isn't it also a good way to save $$$ ? :) As long as You east less calories than You need you should also lose weight and eat less food ($)

I forgot where I read it but I seem to recall a statistic that most people on this earth only eat once per day. This breakfast, snack, snack, lunch, snack, snack, dinner, snack, alcohol daily cycle is pure luxury for most people.

The problem is that you don't feel less hungry. In fact your hunger reflex gets stronger and you crave dense foods. Its a survival instinct, if denied adequate calories too long the brain triggers a lot of things to get calorie intake back up while reducing calorie outgo. You just have to spend a couple of weeks convincing your subconscious that food is actually readily available.

FrenchFit 10-25-17 09:22 AM


Originally Posted by OBoile (Post 19951610)
Geoff is correct. Humans can't violate the law of thermodynamics.

No one is violating anything. Your reasoning leads you to the truism "A calorie is a calorie".

Were life so simple...

General Geoff 10-25-17 10:01 AM


Originally Posted by rachel120 (Post 19951692)
The problem is that you don't feel less hungry. In fact your hunger reflex gets stronger and you crave dense foods. Its a survival instinct, if denied adequate calories too long the brain triggers a lot of things to get calorie intake back up while reducing calorie outgo. You just have to spend a couple of weeks convincing your subconscious that food is actually readily available.

In my experience, the feeling of hunger presents itself around the time that one would routinely eat. If you eat 5 times a day, and try to fast, you will probably get hungry and stay hungry almost constantly because your body is expecting food constantly. If you settle into a more sparse eating pattern like once a day, your body becomes accustomed to that and you don't get hungry until that time of day that you ordinarily eat.

General Geoff 10-25-17 10:08 AM


Originally Posted by FrenchFit (Post 19951748)
No one is violating anything. Your reasoning leads you to the truism "A calorie is a calorie".

Were life so simple...

You still haven't provided any citations to suggest that a calorie (actually kilocalorie, which is a scentific unit of energy measurement equivalent to 4184 Joules) of chocolate will in any way take more effort to burn than a calorie of, say, broccoli. While the energy densities of these foods are vastly different, if you're measuring by calorie and not volume, then you've already corrected for that factor.

dwing 10-25-17 10:46 AM

Maybe skip the Power Bars... some of them things have more fat & calories than you think. And don't misjudge the amount of calories being burned while biking. It takes discipline and serious change in eating lifestyle habits to drop and sustain significant weight loss.

PedalingWalrus 10-25-17 11:09 AM

The perceived impact of biking on weight loss is far too optimistic. I basically do not take it into account at all and consider it a bonus on top of the already difficult task to limit calories intake every day.


Originally Posted by dwing (Post 19951975)
Maybe skip the Power Bars... some of them things have more fat & calories than you think. And don't misjudge the amount of calories being burned while biking. It takes discipline and serious change in eating lifestyle habits to drop and sustain significant weight loss.


PedalingWalrus 10-25-17 11:13 AM

I agree. I used to do what the common majority trumpeted - eat 3-5 times per day. It just did not work for me. I started by completely skipping breakfast, thinking that if I haven't done anything to burn the calories of the preceding evening I sure do not need to stuff my face first thing in the morning before I head out to my office job where I sit on my butt and work out on my tactile keyboard. Everyone around me were saying: "ooh you should not do this...breakfast is necessary to start the day"... At first my mind and body screamed for attention but over time my routine developed to be without food until around 11AM and feel no significant physical or emotional impact. That has been approximately 2 years ago and I'm doing great. Now I'm working on limiting the evening hours of calorie intake. :-)






Originally Posted by General Geoff (Post 19951852)
In my experience, the feeling of hunger presents itself around the time that one would routinely eat. If you eat 5 times a day, and try to fast, you will probably get hungry and stay hungry almost constantly because your body is expecting food constantly. If you settle into a more sparse eating pattern like once a day, your body becomes accustomed to that and you don't get hungry until that time of day that you ordinarily eat.


OBoile 10-25-17 11:14 AM


Originally Posted by FrenchFit (Post 19951748)
No one is violating anything. Your reasoning leads you to the truism "A calorie is a calorie".

Were life so simple...

Since a calorie is a unit of energy, "a calorie is a calorie" is entirely true.

In the real world, the calorie counts on various products are just estimates and it is true that your body may be slightly less efficient at processing/digesting some forms of caloric intake than with others but this overall effect is minor. There is no physical way for your body to not lose weight on 500 calories a day regardless of the source.

pickettt 10-25-17 11:14 AM


Originally Posted by FrenchFit (Post 19950754)
This was debunked a decade ago. The human body is not a german oven, nor is it as simple as the Law of Thermodynmaics. Do some reading.

Science is anything but. If you believe something was accepted before, but now debunked, why do you assume what you now accept is true?

rgconner 10-25-17 11:19 AM

I see the poop flinging has started.

:popcorn


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:27 AM.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.