biggest loser - strange stuff
From: tcomeau (tunderbar_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 10/27/04
- Next message: tcomeau: "Re: Whats the best way to reduce cholesterol?"
- Previous message: tcomeau: "Re: 6.1 lb more weight loss on low carb diet over 12 weeks"
- Next in thread: nospam_at_aol.com: "Re: biggest loser - strange stuff"
- Reply:(deleted message) nospam_at_aol.com: "Re: biggest loser - strange stuff"
- Reply: Dunne E. Dawe: "Re: biggest loser - strange stuff"
- Reply: Piezo Guru: "Re: biggest loser - strange stuff"
- Reply: Wolfbrother: "Re: biggest loser - strange stuff"
- Maybe reply: markd_at_toad-net.com: "Re: biggest loser - strange stuff"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 27 Oct 2004 09:45:37 -0700
I happened to catch the surreal "reality" show The Biggest Loser last
night.
Really interesting stuff. These overweight people are placed on
classic calorie restricted diets and are made to go through heavy
"calorie-burning" workouts. The theory being that a caloric deficit
leads to weight loss.
Apparently at the first weigh-in, all the participants lost
considerable amounts of weight. Most in the low double digits. Between
10 and 20 or more lbs. This re-inforces the idea that restricting
calories and increasing calorie burning activities leads to weight
loss. As expected, right?
But at the second weigh-in an odd thing happened. The individuals
either lost very small amounts of weight, in the 3 or so lb range,
lost no weight at all or actually gained a lb or three.
Now that is strange. They continued to restrict calories and they
continued to "burn" a lot of calories in their workouts. Their caloric
deficits would have stayed relatively consistent from the very
beginning right up to the second weigh-in but their weight loss did
not. Hmmmmmm.
I thought that a daily caloric deficit would lead to a steady weight
loss. Just like a daily caloric excess will lead to a steady weight
increase. That is the formula isn't it. Too many calories equals
weight gain, too little calories equals weight loss. I am told
repeatedly that there is no other factor that affects weight gain or
loss nearly as much as calories.
Their caloric deficit was constant and consistent and their weight
loss should have been constant and consistent, but it most definitely
was not. Even considering the probability of water loss, their weight
loss was not consistent and has apparently come to a screeching halt.
Interesting.
TC
- Next message: tcomeau: "Re: Whats the best way to reduce cholesterol?"
- Previous message: tcomeau: "Re: 6.1 lb more weight loss on low carb diet over 12 weeks"
- Next in thread: nospam_at_aol.com: "Re: biggest loser - strange stuff"
- Reply:(deleted message) nospam_at_aol.com: "Re: biggest loser - strange stuff"
- Reply: Dunne E. Dawe: "Re: biggest loser - strange stuff"
- Reply: Piezo Guru: "Re: biggest loser - strange stuff"
- Reply: Wolfbrother: "Re: biggest loser - strange stuff"
- Maybe reply: markd_at_toad-net.com: "Re: biggest loser - strange stuff"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|