ndj1979 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » ndj1979 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » Uh, no!! I'm pretty sure you like to argue just for the sake of arguing. Go pound sand, dude. I'm not entertaining it. ndj1979 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » ncboiler89 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » ndj1979 wrote: » wesaud wrote: » I agree the the OP. I dropped 30 pounds last fall with this same approach. I did no carbs after 2pm. The only carbs I would allow were dark leafy, kale, chard, greens, and Brussel sprouts. The results I gathered came from the reduction of insulin spikes caused by the carbs and their conversion to glucose. In a carb depleted state my body would use fat stores as energy. It worked for my body, glad to he someone else preaching it worked for them. LOL, why don't you run a little experiment on yourself. Eat no carbs after two pm, but eat in a 500 per day calorie surplus, and report back with what happens. I will go with 100% certainty that you gain weight. If its easier for some people to lose by not eating carbs at night then why not go with that strategy? But the question in the OP was if the timing of said carb ingestion makes a difference. If someone can go low carbs and lose weight more power to them but let's not get confused about why this works. It's not the lack of carbs or what time you eat the carbs it the calorie deficit. I'm pretty sure I'm not confused. pretty sure you are... nope, I am just correcting the record for science and what not. and you are the one name calling, not me. Now I'm name calling? Hmmm, I must've missed that one. telling someone to "pound sand" is the equivalent of telling them to F off... funny, you don't practice what you preach.
JSurita2 wrote: » ndj1979 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » Uh, no!! I'm pretty sure you like to argue just for the sake of arguing. Go pound sand, dude. I'm not entertaining it. ndj1979 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » ncboiler89 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » ndj1979 wrote: » wesaud wrote: » I agree the the OP. I dropped 30 pounds last fall with this same approach. I did no carbs after 2pm. The only carbs I would allow were dark leafy, kale, chard, greens, and Brussel sprouts. The results I gathered came from the reduction of insulin spikes caused by the carbs and their conversion to glucose. In a carb depleted state my body would use fat stores as energy. It worked for my body, glad to he someone else preaching it worked for them. LOL, why don't you run a little experiment on yourself. Eat no carbs after two pm, but eat in a 500 per day calorie surplus, and report back with what happens. I will go with 100% certainty that you gain weight. If its easier for some people to lose by not eating carbs at night then why not go with that strategy? But the question in the OP was if the timing of said carb ingestion makes a difference. If someone can go low carbs and lose weight more power to them but let's not get confused about why this works. It's not the lack of carbs or what time you eat the carbs it the calorie deficit. I'm pretty sure I'm not confused. pretty sure you are... nope, I am just correcting the record for science and what not. and you are the one name calling, not me. Now I'm name calling? Hmmm, I must've missed that one.
ndj1979 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » Uh, no!! I'm pretty sure you like to argue just for the sake of arguing. Go pound sand, dude. I'm not entertaining it. ndj1979 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » ncboiler89 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » ndj1979 wrote: » wesaud wrote: » I agree the the OP. I dropped 30 pounds last fall with this same approach. I did no carbs after 2pm. The only carbs I would allow were dark leafy, kale, chard, greens, and Brussel sprouts. The results I gathered came from the reduction of insulin spikes caused by the carbs and their conversion to glucose. In a carb depleted state my body would use fat stores as energy. It worked for my body, glad to he someone else preaching it worked for them. LOL, why don't you run a little experiment on yourself. Eat no carbs after two pm, but eat in a 500 per day calorie surplus, and report back with what happens. I will go with 100% certainty that you gain weight. If its easier for some people to lose by not eating carbs at night then why not go with that strategy? But the question in the OP was if the timing of said carb ingestion makes a difference. If someone can go low carbs and lose weight more power to them but let's not get confused about why this works. It's not the lack of carbs or what time you eat the carbs it the calorie deficit. I'm pretty sure I'm not confused. pretty sure you are... nope, I am just correcting the record for science and what not. and you are the one name calling, not me.
JSurita2 wrote: » Uh, no!! I'm pretty sure you like to argue just for the sake of arguing. Go pound sand, dude. I'm not entertaining it. ndj1979 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » ncboiler89 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » ndj1979 wrote: » wesaud wrote: » I agree the the OP. I dropped 30 pounds last fall with this same approach. I did no carbs after 2pm. The only carbs I would allow were dark leafy, kale, chard, greens, and Brussel sprouts. The results I gathered came from the reduction of insulin spikes caused by the carbs and their conversion to glucose. In a carb depleted state my body would use fat stores as energy. It worked for my body, glad to he someone else preaching it worked for them. LOL, why don't you run a little experiment on yourself. Eat no carbs after two pm, but eat in a 500 per day calorie surplus, and report back with what happens. I will go with 100% certainty that you gain weight. If its easier for some people to lose by not eating carbs at night then why not go with that strategy? But the question in the OP was if the timing of said carb ingestion makes a difference. If someone can go low carbs and lose weight more power to them but let's not get confused about why this works. It's not the lack of carbs or what time you eat the carbs it the calorie deficit. I'm pretty sure I'm not confused. pretty sure you are...
ndj1979 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » ncboiler89 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » ndj1979 wrote: » wesaud wrote: » I agree the the OP. I dropped 30 pounds last fall with this same approach. I did no carbs after 2pm. The only carbs I would allow were dark leafy, kale, chard, greens, and Brussel sprouts. The results I gathered came from the reduction of insulin spikes caused by the carbs and their conversion to glucose. In a carb depleted state my body would use fat stores as energy. It worked for my body, glad to he someone else preaching it worked for them. LOL, why don't you run a little experiment on yourself. Eat no carbs after two pm, but eat in a 500 per day calorie surplus, and report back with what happens. I will go with 100% certainty that you gain weight. If its easier for some people to lose by not eating carbs at night then why not go with that strategy? But the question in the OP was if the timing of said carb ingestion makes a difference. If someone can go low carbs and lose weight more power to them but let's not get confused about why this works. It's not the lack of carbs or what time you eat the carbs it the calorie deficit. I'm pretty sure I'm not confused. pretty sure you are...
JSurita2 wrote: » ncboiler89 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » ndj1979 wrote: » wesaud wrote: » I agree the the OP. I dropped 30 pounds last fall with this same approach. I did no carbs after 2pm. The only carbs I would allow were dark leafy, kale, chard, greens, and Brussel sprouts. The results I gathered came from the reduction of insulin spikes caused by the carbs and their conversion to glucose. In a carb depleted state my body would use fat stores as energy. It worked for my body, glad to he someone else preaching it worked for them. LOL, why don't you run a little experiment on yourself. Eat no carbs after two pm, but eat in a 500 per day calorie surplus, and report back with what happens. I will go with 100% certainty that you gain weight. If its easier for some people to lose by not eating carbs at night then why not go with that strategy? But the question in the OP was if the timing of said carb ingestion makes a difference. If someone can go low carbs and lose weight more power to them but let's not get confused about why this works. It's not the lack of carbs or what time you eat the carbs it the calorie deficit. I'm pretty sure I'm not confused.
ncboiler89 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » ndj1979 wrote: » wesaud wrote: » I agree the the OP. I dropped 30 pounds last fall with this same approach. I did no carbs after 2pm. The only carbs I would allow were dark leafy, kale, chard, greens, and Brussel sprouts. The results I gathered came from the reduction of insulin spikes caused by the carbs and their conversion to glucose. In a carb depleted state my body would use fat stores as energy. It worked for my body, glad to he someone else preaching it worked for them. LOL, why don't you run a little experiment on yourself. Eat no carbs after two pm, but eat in a 500 per day calorie surplus, and report back with what happens. I will go with 100% certainty that you gain weight. If its easier for some people to lose by not eating carbs at night then why not go with that strategy? But the question in the OP was if the timing of said carb ingestion makes a difference. If someone can go low carbs and lose weight more power to them but let's not get confused about why this works. It's not the lack of carbs or what time you eat the carbs it the calorie deficit.
JSurita2 wrote: » ndj1979 wrote: » wesaud wrote: » I agree the the OP. I dropped 30 pounds last fall with this same approach. I did no carbs after 2pm. The only carbs I would allow were dark leafy, kale, chard, greens, and Brussel sprouts. The results I gathered came from the reduction of insulin spikes caused by the carbs and their conversion to glucose. In a carb depleted state my body would use fat stores as energy. It worked for my body, glad to he someone else preaching it worked for them. LOL, why don't you run a little experiment on yourself. Eat no carbs after two pm, but eat in a 500 per day calorie surplus, and report back with what happens. I will go with 100% certainty that you gain weight. If its easier for some people to lose by not eating carbs at night then why not go with that strategy?
ndj1979 wrote: » wesaud wrote: » I agree the the OP. I dropped 30 pounds last fall with this same approach. I did no carbs after 2pm. The only carbs I would allow were dark leafy, kale, chard, greens, and Brussel sprouts. The results I gathered came from the reduction of insulin spikes caused by the carbs and their conversion to glucose. In a carb depleted state my body would use fat stores as energy. It worked for my body, glad to he someone else preaching it worked for them. LOL, why don't you run a little experiment on yourself. Eat no carbs after two pm, but eat in a 500 per day calorie surplus, and report back with what happens. I will go with 100% certainty that you gain weight.
wesaud wrote: » I agree the the OP. I dropped 30 pounds last fall with this same approach. I did no carbs after 2pm. The only carbs I would allow were dark leafy, kale, chard, greens, and Brussel sprouts. The results I gathered came from the reduction of insulin spikes caused by the carbs and their conversion to glucose. In a carb depleted state my body would use fat stores as energy. It worked for my body, glad to he someone else preaching it worked for them.
JSurita2 wrote: » ndj1979 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » ndj1979 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » Uh, no!! I'm pretty sure you like to argue just for the sake of arguing. Go pound sand, dude. I'm not entertaining it. ndj1979 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » ncboiler89 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » ndj1979 wrote: » wesaud wrote: » I agree the the OP. I dropped 30 pounds last fall with this same approach. I did no carbs after 2pm. The only carbs I would allow were dark leafy, kale, chard, greens, and Brussel sprouts. The results I gathered came from the reduction of insulin spikes caused by the carbs and their conversion to glucose. In a carb depleted state my body would use fat stores as energy. It worked for my body, glad to he someone else preaching it worked for them. LOL, why don't you run a little experiment on yourself. Eat no carbs after two pm, but eat in a 500 per day calorie surplus, and report back with what happens. I will go with 100% certainty that you gain weight. If its easier for some people to lose by not eating carbs at night then why not go with that strategy? But the question in the OP was if the timing of said carb ingestion makes a difference. If someone can go low carbs and lose weight more power to them but let's not get confused about why this works. It's not the lack of carbs or what time you eat the carbs it the calorie deficit. I'm pretty sure I'm not confused. pretty sure you are... nope, I am just correcting the record for science and what not. and you are the one name calling, not me. Now I'm name calling? Hmmm, I must've missed that one. telling someone to "pound sand" is the equivalent of telling them to F off... funny, you don't practice what you preach. Oh goodness, whateverrrrrrrrrr!!! Like I said, you like to argue just for the sake of arguing. You do it in most of your posts. Not sure why but you're right, I did say I wasn't going to entertain it and here I am. Go ahead and keep arguing, not with me though.
carmel224466 wrote: » At no time did I say I was going to ignore what some people believed. I can't believe that you people have time to just argue on myfitnesspal! Some of you have written thousands of posts!!! Just relax, everyone seems to be doing well for their own bodies and maybe what works for some people doesn't work for others. The condescending attitudes are not necessary.
nicfitnesszone wrote: » carmel224466 wrote: » At no time did I say I was going to ignore what some people believed. I can't believe that you people have time to just argue on myfitnesspal! Some of you have written thousands of posts!!! Just relax, everyone seems to be doing well for their own bodies and maybe what works for some people doesn't work for others. The condescending attitudes are not necessary. This.
ChrisManch wrote: » When scientists measure the calories in food what they do is dry out out completely in an oven and then burn it in an oxygen atmosphere and measure how much heat it produces. However this is not how your body digest foods, it is much more complex than that. You can't get MORE calories out of the food, but you can get less. Your digestive system detects when food is present, and then release enzymes to break it down. It evolved for a mixed diet of fat, protein and carbs and it works very efficiently for that. However they way it detects "food" is to detect carbs, so when carbs are present in food it releases enzymes, including those that break down fat. If you don't have carbs in your meal then much less of the fat enzymes are released and you absorb less of the calories from the fat. It takes a few hours for the fat enzymes to stop working. So if your evening meal calories are coming from fat and protein, with less carbs, you'll absorb less of the energy from the fat in that meal. This is how low carb diets work. It doesn't take many carbs to turn on the fat enzyme production, the odd cookie (biscuit) can undo any benefit. Fat and Protein also make you less hungry. So eating carbs and protein for half the day, and protein and fat for the other half can mean you absorb less of the calories in the food overall. But you must have a gap of about 5 hours between the 2 sets of meals for it to work.
JSurita2 wrote: » nicfitnesszone wrote: » carmel224466 wrote: » At no time did I say I was going to ignore what some people believed. I can't believe that you people have time to just argue on myfitnesspal! Some of you have written thousands of posts!!! Just relax, everyone seems to be doing well for their own bodies and maybe what works for some people doesn't work for others. The condescending attitudes are not necessary. This. Not everyone has that condescending attitude. It's just a select few. If you can weed those out, it is possible to get great information on here.
JessNelson_ wrote: » Conclusion quote: "Overall the people eating the majority of their carbs at night lost more bodyfat and had better markers of health bey the end of the study than those who ate more of their carbs during the day time."http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/carbs-at-night-fat-loss-killer-or-imaginary-boogeyman.html
ndj1979 wrote: » JSurita2 wrote: » nicfitnesszone wrote: » carmel224466 wrote: » At no time did I say I was going to ignore what some people believed. I can't believe that you people have time to just argue on myfitnesspal! Some of you have written thousands of posts!!! Just relax, everyone seems to be doing well for their own bodies and maybe what works for some people doesn't work for others. The condescending attitudes are not necessary. This. Not everyone has that condescending attitude. It's just a select few. If you can weed those out, it is possible to get great information on here. you mean great information on the pseudo science of carb timing and no carbs after 2pm?
ndj1979 wrote: » carmel224466 wrote: » It's also one of Bob Haper's rules for weight loss? calorie deficit is the only rule for weight loss.
carmel224466 wrote: » It's also one of Bob Haper's rules for weight loss?
kozykondition1 wrote: » ndj1979 wrote: » carmel224466 wrote: » It's also one of Bob Haper's rules for weight loss? calorie deficit is the only rule for weight loss. Okay, calorie deficit is not the only rule for weight loss. It is a requirement for (normal) weight loss. Necrosis, parasites, malabsorption (Crohn's, celiac, diverticulitus, bariatric surgery, stomach flu, lactose intolerance...), and dehydration all lead to weight loss despite not being in a caloric deficit.
kozykondition1 wrote: » ndj1979 wrote: » carmel224466 wrote: » It's also one of Bob Haper's rules for weight loss? calorie deficit is the only rule for weight loss. Okay, calorie deficit is not the only rule for weight loss. It is a requirement for (normal) weight loss. Necrosis, parasites, malabsorption (Crohn's, celiac, diverticulitus, bariatric surgery, stomach flu, lactose intolerance...), and dehydration all lead to weight loss despite not being in a caloric deficit.@carmel224466, One pound of pure fat contains roughly 3,500 Calories (kcal). It is the most dense source of long-term stored energy in the body. The second most-dense is your skeletal muscles. Fully-hydrated muscle contains roughly 75% water. Since fat contains 9 calories per gram, and protein contains 4 calories per gram, muscles contain roughly 400 Calories per pound. The third most-dense and medium term source of stored energy is glycogen. Glycogen is also roughly 75% water with the remainder being glucose (blood sugar). The math works out to it also being roughly 400 Calories per pound. Your body is limited in the amount of glycogen that you can store. You can hold about a pound in your liver and 3-4 pounds in your muscles. So if you burn through all of your glycogen, you can lose 4 pounds with a calorie deficit of 1600 Calories. When you eat carbs, you build up your glycogen stores. So if you deprive your body of carbs, you lose "water weight". If you deprive your body of protein (under deficit), you lose "water weight" and muscle mass. You may be losing fat at a steady rate regardless of when you eat carbs, but your weight will fluctuate accordingly. Now here's the x-factor: Limiting when you eat carbs (like how you describe or intermediate fasting) has an affect on your insulin and possibly adrenaline levels. Insulin causes your body to store energy (even though diabetics can and do lose weight with a caloric deficit). Adrenaline increases when your blood sugar gets too low. And that makes you burn more Calories (by being more active). It's your body telling you, "hey, go get me some food". So if you feel more energetic when you limit afternoon carbs, you should do it. Good Luck!
