|
Post by pconroy on Aug 20, 2004 12:36:27 GMT -5
I cant speak for the rest of the americans here in the USA,their are going to be fatso's the world over.But I pump Iron and eat healthy and weigh 240lbs of muscle. I stated earlier that I had gained 60 LBS in the last 15 year since coming to the states, but I too pumped iron for a few years, and while I am definately carrying a few extra pounds, am not flabby. A year and a half ago I could bench pressing 320 LBS!
|
|
Afro
Full Member
Posts: 248
|
Post by Afro on Aug 22, 2004 0:54:31 GMT -5
www.calorie-count.com/calories/calories-burned.phpIf you don't eat over the amount of calories your body burns in a day, you won't gain weight correct??? Or is there more to it then that??? I myself am a calorie counter, I read the back of all packages and stay away from fast food as much as possible, I also make sure to eat/drink the correct serving amount (And I'll get more on this in a minute), on that site it says I will burn on average 2452 calories a day, so the basic idea is don't eat over 2452 and no weight gain correct?? I don't understand any of the other things though, such as "calories from fat". But about servings per containers, I notice that most small packages of food that you even buy in the store (Here in America at least) are misleading. You would think a bottle of coke would be one serving, look on the back and you will see something like "150 calories per serving, 2 servings per container" I think that thats where they get you. Most people just buy and eat the stuff, nobody ever thinks about how much calories these little bottled and bagged foods/drinks contain. ^^^ One of these is 350 calories! Jesus! Mothers pack these in there childrens lunches daily!
|
|
|
Post by Vitor on Aug 22, 2004 1:11:58 GMT -5
you have to eat more calories than those 2452 calories... You see not all will end up in the blood stream. that is the male average ? The average woman would burn less fat... I believe!
|
|
Afro
Full Member
Posts: 248
|
Post by Afro on Aug 22, 2004 1:21:17 GMT -5
you have to eat more calories than those 2452 calories... You see not all will end up in the blood stream. Could you elaborate on this more? No that is MY average, I messed with the numbers and the more you way the more you will naturally burn everyday (Which is why I guess they say that its easier for overweight people to lose weight then average people). Anyways, theres this new (Well, sorta new I guess) surgery that you can get in the US called "Gastric Bypass" in which they close off part of your stomach to stop you from eating so much, the results for it are of course great (I mean like people will lose 75 pounds in 8 months) and I was watching Bill Maher once and he was talking about how the government gives medical cuts for people getting this surgery. I wonder how far this thing is gonna go, I believe that its sorta expensive right now, but could it one day become the "new" diet??? Gain too much and get your stomach closed???
|
|
|
Post by Vitor on Aug 22, 2004 2:58:53 GMT -5
That is also a typical procedure in portugal, for some years now! I believe our intestines are not 100% efficient, some of the things we eat will not get processed and will go....out... So, you need to eat more than that! if you burn those calories
|
|
|
Post by alex221166 on Aug 22, 2004 19:20:18 GMT -5
Cows milk is NOT healthy ,though goats milk is a bit more healthy then cows. Only womens milk is good for humans. I am sorry, but that can't be true. Human milk is obviously the best, but that goes a long way from saying that cow milk is unhealthy.
|
|
|
Post by alex221166 on Aug 22, 2004 19:26:29 GMT -5
That is also a typical procedure in portugal, for some years now! I believe our intestines are not 100% efficient, some of the things we eat will not get processed and will go....out... So, you need to eat more than that! if you burn those calories The problem with the modern diet is that the food is over-processed. 100 years ago, the food we ate (especially the cereals) was not processed. As a result - and as you pointed out - a large portion of the food was not absorbed. Since modern food is over processed, it is much easier for it to be digested and absorbed. As a result, people get fatter. Of course, a sedentarian lifestyle, a diet low on vegetables and regular consumption of alcohol will help making people fatter.
|
|
|
Post by Silveira on Aug 22, 2004 19:31:43 GMT -5
This is very true. Severe obesity was a non-issue in Portugal until the process of mass consumption of processed food products began about 15 years ago, coinciding with the expansion of large supermarket chains. Even today there are relatively few extremely obese people in Portugal when compared to other western countries.
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Aug 24, 2004 17:16:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by alex221166 on Aug 25, 2004 8:12:43 GMT -5
Some comments: This paragraph alone shows that the guy who wrote this doesn't know what he is talking about. You can't get mad cow disease from milk, mad-cow disease has been linked to Kreutzfeld-Jacob disease (not Alzheimer), when antibiotics are given to cows there is a safety margin (usually 1 or 2 weeks) during which that milk is not used, and needless to say the rest (regarding the diseases milk "supposedly" provokes) is the biggest crock of bullshit I have ever heard regarding medicine. I am a veterinary university student, so I know something about the subject. Bullshit. What happens is that when you intake a regular and large amount of calcium rich foods/beverages, you body will "relax" and it won't be as keen in absorbing everything. On the other hand, someone that drinks small amounts of milk, will have its calcium absorption "systems" all pumped up and working at full strength. I'll tell you one thing: I know that in America the cattle ranchers use growth hormones, abuse in the use of antibiotics, etc etc, all things that aren't allowed in the EU. Our milk IS good for you, but I can't safely say the same thing about the American milk (or meat, for that matter). American milk, not European milk. Milk is not bad for you. If anything, most people drink MORE milk - not less. As to yogurt, it was the main reason why the Bulgarians had (in the XIX century) one of the highest life expectancies in the world. It is healthy and completely advisable. What I would do (if I lived in America) would be to use products from biological farms. There's a reason why American products shouldn't be allowed in Europe, and that reason is that our safety precautions are much higher than yours.
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Aug 25, 2004 9:12:26 GMT -5
Whatever you say ! www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0%2C3605%2C1104740%2C00.htmlDoesnt matter if its Euro or American,milk is not that healthy for humans..And it has been linked to diabetes. of course their are different accounts but the negatives are mounting and are factual,besides milk makes mucus/flem,and gas,which isnt that great either you know?! BTW in that paragraph,.he said"and possibly mad-cow disease"! Theirs a big difference ! I think you dont know what your talking about, cause you didnt read carefully! Drink at your own risk as they say!
|
|
|
Post by alex221166 on Aug 25, 2004 14:36:55 GMT -5
Whatever you say ! www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0%2C3605%2C1104740%2C00.htmlDoesnt matter if its Euro or American,milk is not that healthy for humans..And it has been linked to diabetes. of course their are different accounts but the negatives are mounting and are factual,besides milk makes mucus/flem,and gas,which isnt that great either you know?! BTW in that paragraph,.he said"and possibly mad-cow disease"! Theirs a big difference ! I think you dont know what your talking about, cause you didnt read carefully! Drink at your own risk as they say! 1) Milk causes gas ONLY if you have lactose intolerance 2) It does matter whether the milk comes from European or American farms (guess why American food produce isn't allowed in Europe?) 3) Milk consumption alone is NOT related with diabetes 4) I know which are the parts of the cow that can cause the KJ disease variant linked with mad cow disease: milk is not one of them (the most infectious parts are nerve tissue, the brain, lymph tissue and bone marrow). There is no "possibility". There are several studies on the subject (the chances of anyone getting infected from eating an infected steak are microscopic, let alone from milk) 5) I (and everyone I know) have been drinking around 1 L of milk everyday. Guess what? We aren't farting ourselves to death, and we are all alive and well. Then again, lactose intolerance is not an issue in Portugal.
|
|
|
Post by murphee on Aug 26, 2004 20:28:41 GMT -5
I don't care for milk, drinking soymilk instead, but I like cheese and yogurt. In the United States, there are many farmers who produce organically. The cheese and yogurt I buy are from cows who are given no antibiotics or hormones and who feed on grain and grass which are grown with no pesticides or chemical fertilizers. I think that these products are healthier and in many cases taste better also.
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Aug 27, 2004 3:19:01 GMT -5
<<Milk consumption alone is NOT related with diabetes>> Really is that fact?! To me its yet another bold, unsubstantiated statement without merit! www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/03/010322074643.htmwww.gentlebirth.org/archives/cowprdib.htmlThe only thing I know about Lactose intolerance is that it affects as many as 50 to 70% of people from an Asian, African, Native American, Eastern Europe or Mediterranean ethnic backgrounds. People with Northern or Western European ethnic backgrounds are far less likely to experience this intolerance. I'am sure Portugal has lactose Intolerance issue's far more than what your letting on to me,unless maybe their moslty Nordic germanic now,and displaced the ancient natives of yesteryear! But i really couldnt care which country has this or that like you do.... thats not the point I was making about milk!
|
|
|
Post by deuceswild on Aug 27, 2004 3:35:13 GMT -5
Hmmm...could it be the carbs? Insulin acts as a brake for any significant lipolysis to occur. Theoretically, for current weight maintenance you would take your weight and multiply it by 15 (if you're moderately active of course). For example, if you weigh 170 pounds, your daily caloric needs would be 2550. To lose weight, multiply by a factor of 12, and to gain weight multiply by 18. Of course, these are only theoretical and they aren't fixed (so you might have to tinker with them). But they give you a good starting point.
|
|