Hooligans Sportsbook

Took Potato 10 minutes to run a mile today

  • Start date •
  • Replies
    118 Replies •
  • Views 8,816 Views
Follow
MF is right, to an extent. the problem is that if youre going to restrict caloric intake you have to restrict your 'empty' calories rather than positively nutritional calories as daft said. otherwise you will enter a situation where your body is depleted of certain vitamins/minerals/amino acids/phytonutrients/etc.

while what MF posted is absolutely correct (specific calorie to fat ratio completely metabolism dependent), the dieting has to be done in the manner that daft suggested in order for it to be a healthy way of losing weight.
 
Daft
Monitoring what you put in your mouth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EV than jogging on a treadmill for 3 hours a day


I'm not totally discounting cardio and resistance training but Potato will lose WAY more weight WAY faster if he drastically changes the foods that he eats.


He did not get 50 pounds above his H.S. hockey weight because he stopped taking long walks. He got 50 pounds overweight by eating empty calories that his body stored as fat.


So evidently it's not as simple as you would make it out to be.
Click to expand...

Hmm. So you think people tend to get fat because they change their eating habits and not because they become far more sedentary?

Interesting theory. I'm a seller though.
 
this is like budget talk nonsense. neither caloric intake nor burning is 'more' important than one another for the casual dieter. rather, it is the balance between the two that creates results. MF stop fuking arguing with daft. there are far more retarded people on here in the last 24 hours that need to be buried (although im not sure they would respond appropriately due to being complete mongoloids; a lot of these kind of folk fail to realize when they are being destroyed).
 
Fu Manchu
this is like budget talk nonsense. neither caloric intake nor burning is 'more' important than one another for the casual dieter. rather, it is the balance between the two that creates results. MF stop fuking arguing with daft. there are far more retarded people on here in the last 24 hours that need to be buried (although im not sure they would respond appropriately due to being complete mongoloids; a lot of these kind of folk fail to realize when they are being destroyed).
Click to expand...

LOL. It's not an argument. It's pretty simple math.

I'm not advocating that a diet be nutritionally deficient, but it's far easier for someone to burn 1000 more calories in a day than for them to eliminate 1000 calories from their daily diet.
 
yes. it is all math. you have to burn more than you eat. simple as that. but if you consumed 2000 calories worth of beer per day (and nothing else), you would be far worse off than you would be consuming 2500 calories worth of Standard American Diet (SAD) food over any amount of time. although you would weigh more with the second option, the nutritional deficiency of the beer only diet (a hyperbolic example, of course) would be so extreme as to make it a non-viable dietary option.


potato... depending on your age, your basal metabolic rate is anywhere between 2200 and 2400 calories per day. that means that your body will burn this amount just resting at room temperature every day with no exercise. the goal is to have the total amount you consume minus the total amount you burn come out to be a smaller value than your basal metabolic rate. this will mathematically be guaranteed to lead to weight loss.
 
MF is right to the theory part, but just like gambling it's not as easy as beating the closing line. When you eat those calories matters. How much water you consume. Your metabolism. Hours of rest are just a start to the entire process of weight loss. You are essentially changing what your body has been doing which is taking in excessive calories and turning them to fat. Starving yourself is not how to do it.
 
Pretty easy to restrict calories. Eat vast amounts of veggies 'til your stomach tells you it's full. You'll have consumed a ridiculously low amount of calories.

I may have lost my weight loss bet (by a wide margin too, only lost about 6 pounds on the scale) but I'm told I look like I lost a ton of weight. Even Fiver thought he'd lost the bet there for a moment.

gl Potato
 
The ultimate goal is NOT to simply burn more calories than you take in to lose weight. This is amateur and will only make for SHORT TERM WEIGHT LOSS because you will inevitably return to your sedentary lifestyle. Not to mention that disregarding what you put in your mouth is -EV for your colon, heart etc etc etc.

The ultimate goal NOT to go on a diet. This will produce SHORT TERM WEIGHT LOSS because you will inevitably return to your standard way of eating.


The ultimate goal is to lose weight by changing the way you approach eating (while still being able to enjoy the occasional pizza yada yada), use resistance training to produce muscle (which will in turn burn more calories at rest) and to add a cardio program which will not only burn calories but KEEP YOU FROM DYING 5/10 YEARS EARLIER THAN YOU EXPECTED TO.


Potato, how old are you.
 
In today's workout Potato got his mile down to 9:30. Yesterday he used like a stair master thingy which you almost x-country ski on. Today it was a treadmill.

After 4 days we stepped on a scale only to see 244. Probably means the fat hasn't really started to burn but muscle is coming back.

Tomorrows probable meal

Breakfast: 2 eggs scrambled, cut up potatoes, 2 sausage links, toast, orange juice, and water
Lunch: turkey sub with cheese on wheat with lettuce and tomato + water
Dinner: garlic chicken with noodles, broccoli, carrots, and corn + regular milk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.