*Potential long read involving a little thought*

So, I asked the question on here a while back (last year some time) about the feeding efficiency that we posses.

I didn't believe that our bodies were as efficient as we make them out to be when it comes to digestion and counting calories. I thought that there was no way we could be as efficient as a bomb calorimeter, which determine what goes on food labels. It furthered my thought about why some people have better or worse abilities when it comes to gaining or losing weight. I brought up how certain steroids also effect feed efficiency in cattle, allowing them more muscle growth without increasing food intake.

If I recall, I was told that we are efficient enough to get all of the calories out of what we eat, and that my thought was unfounded, but there was no evidence either way.

This is a few years old, is not in journal format (rather a sumation of ideas from studies), but it looks like it had been thought about a bit, and there is still not a definitive answer. But, this makes me think, once again, that calorie and macro counting isn't as cut and dried as 99% of people make it out to be for a number of reasons. (Also why IIFYM may be slightly less efficient for losing weight than eating 'clean' due to the difference in allowances for highly processed foods).

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/08/27/the-hidden-truths-about-calories/

inb4 lightman

very interesting, there are a lot of solid points in that article to support the theory. especially the rare vs. cooked meat part. i wonder how/when something like this could be scientifically proven? the experiment on mice was kind of surprising to read about, but who knows exactly how much or how little humans would differ.

i've studied a lot about nutrition and have never sought out reading about this topic, but now i'm interested

anyways, all i do is eat clean and eat big, it's always worked for me.

ScientificAmerican.com

Site Under Maintenance
Sorry for the inconvenience. ScientificAmerican.com is currently down for maintenance. Please check back later.

Thank you for your understanding.

Webmaster
ScientificAmerican.com



I got rekt.......


But yeah, sounds legit to me. I think a lot of this "IIFYM" stuff is a title for overly simplistic shit that has been said before. What more does it have to tell me than "calories in - calories out".
I'm sure I know 3+ women from my school alone ('highly educated people') who are subscribed to all of these facebook groups and go on about calories and so forth when talking with their friends.
They're just ~100lb Asian girls who don't eat during the day.


And most of the calories counted (in every form and function) are by estimation which is why I wonder why people make these elaborate spreadsheets and use these apps and buy food scales.
Maybe a month into researching and trying this shit yourself you should be able to draw up estimates and conclude what works and what doesn't.
Brb - Need 2800 calories to maintain
Brb - Need to count every mL of coconut milk calories
Brb - Medium apple has 52 calories exactly
Brb - Eating what I want to when I want to with no other regard for my health as long as it doesn't exceed the daily count
Brb - Didn't count the exercise of all of my other daily activities
Brb - I eat soo much and still don't gain - XYZ app told me so



I'm pretty sure that this is all most people ever needed to do besides regular weight-lifting and intensity. GG
Not major worries this way about micronutrients, GMOs, calories counted, bad fats, good fats, mediocre fats, sad fats etc.

i guess i'll be the first...

IIFYM IS NOT A DIET

if people arent lazy swines none of that matters
eat healthy and lift and theres no need to count calories or diet
unless youre training to be mr olympia

I didn't read it all but anyone who counts and thinks it precise is retarded ofc it's not. There are too many variables. I count just because it's still wayyyy more accurate than not keeping track at all lol... And that goes without saying.

Roughly accurate is better than just guessing. "Oh I eat healthy and I eat a lot of lean protein" meanwhile ur only eating 150 grams of protein lol

And once ur used to counting and weighing it becomes second nature.

I don't want to bust my ass in the gym and not maximize my potential Cuz I'm not eating enough. So rather play it safe and sure and count my calories and macros. Because I know for a fact that if I didnt I wouldn't eat nearly enough half the time.

/e or I might even over eat because Id be super compensating by trying to eat big. Without counting. And get fat

This post was edited by Xdaci on Mar 19 2015 10:12am

iifym does work just as efficiently for losing weight I can attest. I lost 40lbs in 4 months. Steady weight loss on a counted and tracked deficit eating w.e I wanted. Including a frozen pizza almost every other day lmao.


However I will note I lost a LOT of strength gains. So slow and clean cut is better in that regard im sure. But as for just dropping weight not worrying about muscle wasting. Iifym works just as effiecently for pure weight loss.

/e also this isn't taking into account being healthy, or absolute optimal outcomes. Just talking about dropping weight on the scale and body fat %

This post was edited by Xdaci on Mar 19 2015 10:21am

Dis.

However, Ben - I didn't read the article, but I think anyone that is even slightly educated in the basics of thermogenics knows that that there are slight differences in the way we metabolize fat, carbs, proteins etc. Protein has a very low rate of being stored as fat while fat has a higher chance etc. That's why I think anyone with a brain that preaches IIFYM should know to mention that it still isn't an excuse to eat entirely shit food..... just mostly shit food...wut?

inb4 balla