Stand Up Paddle Surfing is coming of age! We would love your participation in building a strong, global, online Stand Up Paddle Surfing community.
It seems to be all over the map as far as which types of foods break down easier than others:https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/the-hidden-truths-about-calories/
As a relative observer to this thread, the replies make interesting reading because there is an obvious inferred bias in peoples written replies that is somehow trying to legitimise poor nutritional choices - and shifting the emphasis to a calorie deficit (whereas the issue isn't just about weight loss, its about overall health and wellbeing). If you want to do any kind of activity that requires performance, there is plenty of evidence that consuming garbage is not going to get you there - no matter how much weight you apparently lose. I'd recommend the book: 'Racing Weight' by Matt Fitzgerald.Using a media friendly anecdote of a college professor eating twinkies for a month to prove a point is frankly ridiculous. Not only is it a sample of just one (making it virtually meaningless) but its worth bearing in mind the much older 'supersize me' McDonalds example -whereby the guy that lived on that garbage for a month created numerous health issues based on the actual quality of the food.Either way, there are some half decent peer reviewed journal publications out there that have a bit more credibility for you to consider on these issues. Try this one: https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/79/5/899S/4690223?ij#109825928
Quote from: RideTheGlide on February 11, 2019, 08:00:11 AMIt seems to be all over the map as far as which types of foods break down easier than others:https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/the-hidden-truths-about-calories/Thanks for this, that's an interesting article.
Quote from: ukgm on February 11, 2019, 09:40:39 AMQuote from: RideTheGlide on February 11, 2019, 08:00:11 AMIt seems to be all over the map as far as which types of foods break down easier than others:https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/the-hidden-truths-about-calories/Thanks for this, that's an interesting article.Yes an interesting article and agree it would have been very interesting if they had used vegetables too.I wish when they were talking about the the mice losing or gaining 1 or 2 grams of weight they would have relayed that in percentages. Or given the weights of the mice before and after for correlation. The mice lsoing or gaining that much could be as easy as us fluctuating a few pounds during any given day. And it also backs up the saying that not all calories are equal. And throws wrenches in the CICO argument, not contained to this forum. Makes counting calories a whole lot more difficult based on whether your food is cooked, picked, beaten, pounded, rolled.....and then you need a whole DNA test to figure out how much of it you are actually ingesting based on your genes. Gonna need an advanced calculus and statistics class just to figure out how many oreos I can have for desert.
A little tangent, but holy crap this one got my attention:https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/272362645 years or older, a 10% increase in the proportion of ultraprocessed food consumption was statistically significantly associated with a 14% higher risk of all-cause mortalityTime to clean out the pantry/freezer and head over to the farmer's market...
And it also backs up the saying that not all calories are equal. And throws wrenches in the CICO argument, not contained to this forum. Makes counting calories a whole lot more difficult based on whether your food is cooked, picked, beaten, pounded, rolled.....and then you need a whole DNA test to figure out how much of it you are actually ingesting based on your genes. Gonna need an advanced calculus and statistics class just to figure out how many oreos I can have for desert.
Quote from: ninja tuna on February 11, 2019, 10:26:06 AMAnd it also backs up the saying that not all calories are equal. And throws wrenches in the CICO argument, not contained to this forum. Makes counting calories a whole lot more difficult based on whether your food is cooked, picked, beaten, pounded, rolled.....and then you need a whole DNA test to figure out how much of it you are actually ingesting based on your genes. Gonna need an advanced calculus and statistics class just to figure out how many oreos I can have for desert.I'm a fan of issuing advice based on simple principles that can be practically adhered to. In this case, keep your foods, snacks and cooking methods as unprocessed and as straight as you can. Do that and you won't go far wrong. If you want a cake, eat one (it won't matter on your death bed) but don't make it a habit. Don't use exercise as a foil to poor diet.In the case of you Americans (we don't get it in the UK much) - avoid corn syrup at all costs.
This is pretty telling:
Quote from: Admin on February 12, 2019, 02:21:19 AMThis is pretty telling:Not as starkly as that chart appears - some of the nations over on the left have shorter average heights which distorts things a little. This being said, the UK is getting increasingly worse (particularly in children) and I find visits to the USA frankly disturbing in just how out of control obesity has become. Any country that stocks 5XL trousers as a norm and considers that ok has a serious problem.
On the upside though, if you like your sexual partners to be on the plump side, you are gonna have a ball in some of these US states. And the POTUS is doing what he can to set a good example to US citizens with his “astonishingly excellent” physical test results.