Comment by fingerprinter | Hacker News Reader

Comment by fingerprinter | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

No way. Try getting fat eating just protein. It is so incredibly hard. Just try it.

Now, try getting fat eating nothing but fat+protein. Hard, but much easier than just protein.

Now, try getting fat eating just carbs. Easy.

Now, try getting fat eating carbs+anything. Easy.

A "calorie is a calorie" isn't true now and never has been. It was a very simple model. Our understanding has changed and we now know much more.

For instance, there are hormonal changes that come from eating the above (re: hgh secretion, testosterone production (both up and down) and insulin (which we knew all along)).

Eating little does help you lose weight, but the key is the word 'weight'. If you are beyond trying to just be a certain number on a scale and care about things like muscle, performance, body fat percentage or how you look, there are other things to consider.

For instance, trying to build muscle? Eat protein+carbs post working out heavy with weights. Do not eat carbs before you workout. Which means, fat+protein only before a workout.

Trying to lose fat? Have a long way to go? (say upper teens+ in body fat). Do very low carb (protein+fat+veggies like broccoli) for 6.5 days a week. The evening of the 7th day, eat protein+carbs (the carb refeed). do this until you like what you see in the mirror. (this is a muscle sparring approach).

Just trying to live a normal life and don't care about the two above (and you don't exercise much)? Generally restrict carbs to around 100g a day MAX. You aren't using them, so your body doesn't need them. If you keep giving your body carbs it doesn't need, overtime you'll get fatter. Play with the number of carbs a day, but know this is the one dial you have.

You'll have much better results with this than lowering the total calories.

The first part of your comment isn't exclusive to "a calorie is a calorie." Protein has been shown to be more satiating than either fat or carbs, and the low blood sugar following an insulin spike from a high glycemic, carb heavy meal will strongly promote hunger. If you can manage to eat a ton of carb and protein calories, you will probably lose some water weight initially, but overall stay the same relative to other macronutrient distributions.

> If you can manage to eat a ton of carb and protein calories, you will probably lose some water weight initially, but overall stay the same relative to other macronutrient distributions.

There is another reply in this thread where I talk about goals, so I won't repeat what I said there here.

In reply to the above, what is lacking in that is what happened right before someone at protein+carbs. If someone worked out with heavy weights, the body is actually primed to use both the protein and the carbs to rebuild the muscle. You are actually going to use them.

If someone is going to eat protein+carbs after sitting on the couch all day, everyday, the body is not primed to use them.

Let's say you at the exact same meals in either case, you'll get very different results? Why is that? Because a calorie is not a calorie. Hormones play a HUGE role in all this. Understanding the role they play, the timing of them and how to manipulate them is vitally important. "a calorie is a calorie" neglects this and we end up with people thinking eating x, y or z is ok b/c someone who else eats them successfully under different circumstances for different goals.

Yes, it is hard gaining weight only on protein

Because protein gives a very strong fullness sensation

So you end up eating less calories overall than with a mixed protein/carb (and fats) meal

And a calorie is a calorie with a big if: if your macro nutrients are in range

> And a calorie is a calorie with a big if: if your macro nutrients are in range

The statement, 'a calorie is a calorie' is used to make the point that macro ratios don't matter for weight loss/maintenance. ... so then the argument is won, and we can all agree that a calorie is not a calorie.

My personal experience is the opposite, I find eating only protein for dinner leaves me without a fullness sensation. Such as Sashimi, I can eat that forever while Sushi (with rice) fills me up.

Deleted comment

From the study: 5% of energy from protein (low protein), 15% (normal protein), or 25% (high protein)

25% is not high protein. That means 75% is coming from either fat+carbs.

On a typical cutting (VLC) day, I'll eat 50% protein+45%fat+5% broccoli. And I don't consider it a high protein day.

If the average person reading this ate 40% protein + 40% fat + 10% veggies (like broccli) + 10% carbs (sweet potato, rice etc), their weight would stabilize much better, faster and for a longer period of time.

"Carbs" is such a vague word there are complex carbohydrates and simple carbohydrates, a blanket statement calling both "carbs" is generalizing.

Same for fats.

This is why nobody should be taking fitness advice from random non-professionals on the internet

Does anyone think there is a place for bad fats in their diet today? I mean, do we really need to be explicit there?

I'll give you carbs, but fats? If you are reading this and it is unclear...do not eat bad fats. Good fats are fine.

So to be explicit on carbs (if someone is unclear): There is actually a place for all carbs. If you are lifting heavy weights, post workout you can eat simple carbs. I personally put dextrose in my shake.

And then, depending on my goals, I'll either eat complex or simple carbs until I go to bed. Like I said, depends on my goals at the time. Same goes for my general advise to others....all depends on their goals and how they react to the carbs.

PS. I'm actually a professional so....

> Does anyone think there is a place for bad fats in their diet today? I mean, do we really need to be explicit there?

You probably do really need to be explicit there. From Taubes' article that started it all:

"Foods considered more or less deadly under the low-fat dogma turn out to be comparatively benign if you actually look at their fat content. More than two-thirds of the fat in a porterhouse steak, for instance, will definitively improve your cholesterol profile (at least in comparison with the baked potato next to it); it's true that the remainder will raise your L.D.L., the bad stuff, but it will also boost your H.D.L. The same is true for lard. If you work out the numbers, you come to the surreal conclusion that you can eat lard straight from the can and conceivably reduce your risk of heart disease."

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/07/magazine/what-if-it-s-all-...

Bad fats still do good things for you. It's weird, but you actually need some saturated fats in your diet. But more of the 'good' fats is safer. The only fat you should never eat is trans fats [anything listing 'hydrogenated' or 'shortening'] because they negatively affect both HDL and LDL.

Fucking dieticians, how do they work?

Bad fats aren't saturated fats. Milk is saturated fat. Milk is pretty awesome for you, especially if you are trying to gain muscle.

Trans fats, as you mention, are the real bad fats. The whole '80s and '90s in terms of diet really, really screwed us up. I wish I knew then what I know now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans_fat

Almost every article you find from Googling "good and bad fats" show all saturated fats as bad, because of a increase in risk of cardiovascular problems in some studies. Completely ignoring the wealth of positive[1] effects[2] from saturated fats. They even lump in trans fats as if they have exactly the same risk factors.

[1] http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/09/2... [2] http://www.marksdailyapple.com/saturated-fat-healthy/

P.S. you know there's a whole anti-milk cabal that tracks down and castrates anyone who says milk is good for you? be careful out there.

Clearly we should all be eating Lemon Curd.

> Now, try getting fat eating nothing but fat+protein. Hard, but much easier than just protein.

This one isn't hard at all. I unwittingly gained a bunch of weight in one period because I was busy at work and too lazy to make proper food, so I just ate a lot of peanuts as snack food, 'cause I'd heard they're somewhat healthier than other snack foods. Peanuts are basically nothing but protein+fat, but I gained a bunch of weight because they're so calorie-dense (one 8-oz bag has like 1500 calories). I'm not 100% sure, but I think the fat+salt aspect might promote overeating; I can't imagine eating enough walnuts, say, to gain weight, but I can munch on salted/roasted peanuts all day.

You were probably eating Planters or some other 'big brand.' Most peanut snack foods come loaded with sugar, carbs, and bad oil. http://www.fatsecret.com/calories-nutrition/food/peanuts/car...

No sugar/etc., just salted peanuts. Ingredients: peanuts, salt. It's hard to counteract eating thousands of calories of peanuts daily, though (for a while I was going through 2x bags, i.e. 3000 calories/day just from peanuts).

Most low/no carb diets say to stay away from nuts in general because they are generally starchy and have hidden carbs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com