Jump to content

Weight Loss Thread


MattF

Recommended Posts

On 2/24/2020 at 12:11 PM, tony@CIC said:

Spot on. Just minor addition it's the type of calories in: one could consume 1600 calories of Oreo's but that wouldn't be very good for the body or one's health.

One thing I found about exercise (which I do but not fond of it)  is that I start making better decisions. So when I think about reaching for the chips or cookies I stop myself because I relate it to the number of additional minutes of exercise  I need to work that junk food off. 

In the same vein, not all calories created equal. That 1600 calories derived from highly processed foods like those mentioned will actually cause you to gain more weight than 1600 calories from a kale salad. So while weight loss is dependent on calories out being greater than calories in, it will take more calories burned than the 1600 calories in from the Oreos to loose the Oreos weight. I was surprised by this when I read about the study, since I had always thought a calorie in would require a calorie out for equilibrium. The body does not have “calorie receptors”. It reacts to the type and quality of the food. This sucks, because I really love Oreos. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the same vein, not all calories created equal. That 1600 calories derived from highly processed foods like those mentioned will actually cause you to gain more weight than 1600 calories from a kale salad. So while weight loss is dependent on calories out being greater than calories in, it will take more calories burned than the 1600 calories in from the Oreos to loose the Oreos weight. I was surprised by this when I read about the study, since I had always thought a calorie in would require a calorie out for equilibrium. The body does not have “calorie receptors”. It reacts to the type and quality of the food. This sucks, because I really love Oreos. 

 

Scientifically speaking, a calorie in the most basic sense is a unit of measure and a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. Where people get confused is that while all calories are the same, the expenditure you get out of the calorie is what matters most. Protein has the highest energy output from one calorie followed by fiber, carbs and then fat. Protein and fiber are your go-to calories for the day with some carbs and a little fat. All are important and all have a job to do, but you can gain weight with an excess in any of those four types of calories.

 

Also, please post that study/article because it sounds like it defies the laws of physics in the human body.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

 

  • Like 2
  • :ping-small: G410 LST 10.5* w/ VA Composites Nemesys 65 X tipped 1/2" 
  • :ping-small: G425 LST 3W 14.5* w/ Ping Tour 75X
  • :srixon-small: ZX Utility 18* w/ Project X 6.5
  • :callaway-small: X Forged 21* w/ Tour Issue Dynamic Gold S400
  • :taylormade-small: 2020 P770 5-PW w/ Tour Issue Dynamic Gold X100
  • :ping-small: Glide 3.0 54* & 58* w/ Dynamic Gold S400
  • :ping-small: Sigma 2 Arna - 35.25"...coming soon: Evnroll ER5B
  •  Pro V1x Left Dash
  • I'm left-handed so I don't go broke buying all new clubs every week. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time to get moving, and Lent is just the motivation I’ve needed. I lost 15 lbs after my surgery in November, but I’ve gained 20 back. The hardest part about losing any weight is being on the road EVERY day. I’m just going to have to start packing my lunch and snacks so what goes in is healthy.
Time to start using the TRX system, power walking on the treadmill, and doing core exercises to help with my back disease. Here we go!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

  • Like 4

Driver: :cobra-small: King F9 Speedback, Xphlexxx Busa 2 Liquid, XX stiff, 45”

Fwy:  :callaway-small: Super Hybrid 17*, Aldila RIP Alpha 105 S, tipped 1”

Hybrid: :callaway-small: X2 Hot Pro, 20*, Graphite Design Tour AD-DI 105X

Irons: :honma:TR20 Tour P 4-10, :Nippon: Modus 130 stiff, +1”

Wedges: Vega VW-06 50*/54*/58*, Dynamic Gold S400

Putter:  :edel-golf-1: EAS 1.0

All clubs have :Arccos:  In the Winn Dri-Tac 2.0 Oversize grips

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm getting on this train as well.  I'm well north of where I want to be.  I started my food journal a couple of days ago in My Fitness Pal.  I don't enjoy it, but I sure do eat less when I force myself to log everything I eat.

What's in the bag:
Driver - :cobra-small: F8 - Aldila NV Blue 60 ( S )
3 Wood (16*) - :cobra-small: F8 - Aldila NV Blue 60 ( S )
3 Hybrid (19*) - :taylormade-small: RBZ
4i - PW - :wilson_staff_small: D7 Forged - Recoil 760 ( S )
GW - LW - :cobra-small: F8 - N.S. Pro Modus3 Tour105 ( S )
Putter - :ping-small: Craz-e
Bag - :1590477705_SunMountain: 2.5 (Black)
Ball -  :taylormade-small: TP5X Pix
Instagram - @hardcorelooper
Twitter - @meovino
Facebook - mike.eovino

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Day 3 of the 10 minute challenge is complete, and now I'm eating some scrambled egg beaters with spinach. Today was all core workout and I'm exhausted. Can I go back to bed instead of work?

  • Like 1

In my  :wilson_staff_small:  carry bag:
:wilson_staff_small:  D7 
:callaway-small:  GBB 3W (lofted to 4W)
:callaway-small: V-Series Heavenwood
:cobra-small: Baffler XL 5i-PW
:cleveland-small: CBX 54*
:ping-small: iWedge 58*
:cleveland-small: #10
Whatever ball I have 3 dozen of that my kids got me as a gift

Twitter: @russtopherb

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, russtopherb said:

Day 3 of the 10 minute challenge is complete, and now I'm eating some scrambled egg beaters with spinach. Today was all core workout and I'm exhausted. Can I go back to bed instead of work?

No, you can't. I started my T25 last week and everything hurt. Now in week 2, nothing is that sore...you'll get used to it.

  • Like 2

In the bag:
Driver: :titelist-small: TSi2 Project X HZRDUS Smoke Black RDX 6.0
Fairway: :Sub70: 939X 15° Project X Even Flow Blue 6.0
Hybrid: :Sub70: 939X 3 Hybrid Project X Even Flow Riptide 6.0
Irons: :wilson_staff_small: D7 Forged 4-GW Project X Catalyst 80 6.0
Wedge: :cleveland-small: Smartsole S
Putter :yes-small: Tracy
Bag: 
:Ogio: Alpha Convoy 514
Balls::Snell: MTB-X or Black

Cart: :CaddyTek: CaddyLite ONE Ver. 8


God Bless America🇺🇸, God save the Queen🇬🇧, God defend New Zealand🇳🇿 and thank Christ for Australia🇦🇺!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About a year ago, I was within 10 pounds of my target of being <200 lbs. A couple vacations with way too much eating out knocked me off the train and I slowly gained back ~15 lbs. The wife and I have started trying in earnest again. For me, the toughest part is the after-work snacks. I would love to sit down with a bag of chips or smash a half dozen Oreos into my face, but the last few days I have had fruit. Less enjoyable to me, but curbs the hunger until dinner. Combine with a few trips to the gym per week and the weight is slowly trickling off.

  • Like 1

Driver: :taylormade-small: M5 10.5* (set at 8.5*) Tensei CK Orange
3W: :bridgestone-small: Tour B JGR 15* Recoil 460ES
3H, 4H: :bridgestone-small: Tour B JGR 19*, 23* Recoil 780ES
4-AW:  :bridgestone-small: Tour B JGR HF2 Modus3 Tour 105
SW: :cleveland-small: Zipcore Black Satin 54*
LW: :cleveland-small: Zipcore Black Satin 58*
Putter: :odyssey-small: Stroke Lab Marxman
Bag: BigMax Dri Active Lite
Ball: :taylormade-small: TP5x Pix
Pushcart: BigMax iQ+

2021 Test - Callaway Epic Speed

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, txgolfjunkie said:

 

Scientifically speaking, a calorie in the most basic sense is a unit of measure and a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. Where people get confused is that while all calories are the same, the expenditure you get out of the calorie is what matters most. Protein has the highest energy output from one calorie followed by fiber, carbs and then fat. Protein and fiber are your go-to calories for the day with some carbs and a little fat. All are important and all have a job to do, but you can gain weight with an excess in any of those four types of calories.

 

Also, please post that study/article because it sounds like it defies the laws of physics in the human body.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

 

I knew someone would have to ask but didn’t have the references at my fingertips when I posted this comment, for which I apologize. Although there are other references on this topic, see: Fildes A, et al. Probability of an obese person attaining normal body weight: cohort study using electronic health records. Am J Public Health. 2015; 105(9) e54-e59.

I would also refer anyone interested to the most “ambitious, important nutrition study ever done”, namely The Women’s Health Initiative which examines a number of health issues and generated a variety of reports on specific topics. This randomized trial involved almost 50,000 women and one of the subjects evaluated was the low fat, low calorie approach with a 10% increase in exercise to generate weight loss. The trial extended over a 7 year period. The protocol predicted a 32 pound per year weight loss. Although there was very good compliance with the protocol which predicted the results at the end of the seven year period were described as crushing. The protocol lead to not a single pound of weight loss. Not. One. Pound. This completely obliterates the calories in vs. calories out that we all thought was correct that has been advocated for the last 50 plus years. But don’t take my word for it, read it for yourself: Howard BV, et al. Low-fat dietary and weight change over 7 years: the Women’s Health Initiative Dietary Modification Trial. JAMA. 2006 Jan 4; 295(1): 39-49. 
 

So that’s some of the science on this topic, as opposed to just being my opinion. With respect to your comment that it defies physics, you’re right, it does. That’s because it’s not physics. The cause of weight gain is hormonal imbalance. As for a calorie is a calorie is a calorie, want to bet? A calorie is a measure taken from physics: the amount of energy required to raise the temperature of 1 gram of water 1* Celsius. There is no direct connection to hormones and the complex processes of digestion. As you can see, the calorie definition makes no mention of food. The use of references to calories has become a convenient and unfortunately misleading assumptions. As I said, the body does not have “calorie receptors”.

The calories in vs calories out (CICO) model is also called the kitchen sink model. However the analogy is false since storage of the products from eating is not a one compartment analogy, like a sink.  It’s not like taking food in and out of a fridge. The surplus we eat gets stored as fat in a freezer in the basement for consumption once the fridge is empty. Fat storage and consumption works through a different process than that involved with the use of blood sugar. You can’t get to the fat in the freezer until you use what is in the fridge first. This is a hormonal, not a physics issue.
 

Please provide the research that describes, “the laws of physics in the human body” and how they relate to the bodies complex hormone processes. I look forward to some interesting reading on this subject. 

Cheers 🥂

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Pug said:

I knew someone would have to ask but didn’t have the references at my fingertips when I posted this comment, for which I apologize. Although there are other references on this topic, see: Fildes A, et al. Probability of an obese person attaining normal body weight: cohort study using electronic health records. Am J Public Health. 2015; 105(9) e54-e59.

I would also refer anyone interested to the most “ambitious, important nutrition study ever done”, namely The Women’s Health Initiative which examines a number of health issues and generated a variety of reports on specific topics. This randomized trial involved almost 50,000 women and one of the subjects evaluated was the low fat, low calorie approach with a 10% increase in exercise to generate weight loss. The trial extended over a 7 year period. The protocol predicted a 32 pound per year weight loss. Although there was very good compliance with the protocol which predicted the results at the end of the seven year period were described as crushing. The protocol lead to not a single pound of weight loss. Not. One. Pound. This completely obliterates the calories in vs. calories out that we all thought was correct that has been advocated for the last 50 plus years. But don’t take my word for it, read it for yourself: Howard BV, et al. Low-fat dietary and weight change over 7 years: the Women’s Health Initiative Dietary Modification Trial. JAMA. 2006 Jan 4; 295(1): 39-49. 
 

So that’s some of the science on this topic, as opposed to just being my opinion. With respect to your comment that it defies physics, you’re right, it does. That’s because it’s not physics. The cause of weight gain is hormonal imbalance. As for a calorie is a calorie is a calorie, want to bet? A calorie is a measure taken from physics: the amount of energy required to raise the temperature of 1 gram of water 1* Celsius. There is no direct connection to hormones and the complex processes of digestion. As you can see, the calorie definition makes no mention of food. The use of references to calories has become a convenient and unfortunately misleading assumptions. As I said, the body does not have “calorie receptors”.

The calories in vs calories out (CICO) model is also called the kitchen sink model. However the analogy is false since storage of the products from eating is not a one compartment analogy, like a sink.  It’s not like taking food in and out of a fridge. The surplus we eat gets stored as fat in a freezer in the basement for consumption once the fridge is empty. Fat storage and consumption works through a different process than that involved with the use of blood sugar. You can’t get to the fat in the freezer until you use what is in the fridge first. This is a hormonal, not a physics issue.
 

Please provide the research that describes, “the laws of physics in the human body” and how they relate to the bodies complex hormone processes. I look forward to some interesting reading on this subject. 

Cheers 🥂

You might want to go look up some of the stuff Dr Layne Norton has done on CICO. His fat loss forever book is really good resource that dives into the energy aspect of calories and so on.

  • Like 1

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

You might want to go look up some of the stuff Dr Layne Norton has done on CICO. His fat loss forever book is really good resource that dives into the energy aspect of calories and so on.

Thanks for the reference and I will do. There’s always more to learn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Pug said:

I knew someone would have to ask but didn’t have the references at my fingertips when I posted this comment, for which I apologize. Although there are other references on this topic, see: Fildes A, et al. Probability of an obese person attaining normal body weight: cohort study using electronic health records. Am J Public Health. 2015; 105(9) e54-e59.

I would also refer anyone interested to the most “ambitious, important nutrition study ever done”, namely The Women’s Health Initiative which examines a number of health issues and generated a variety of reports on specific topics. This randomized trial involved almost 50,000 women and one of the subjects evaluated was the low fat, low calorie approach with a 10% increase in exercise to generate weight loss. The trial extended over a 7 year period. The protocol predicted a 32 pound per year weight loss. Although there was very good compliance with the protocol which predicted the results at the end of the seven year period were described as crushing. The protocol lead to not a single pound of weight loss. Not. One. Pound. This completely obliterates the calories in vs. calories out that we all thought was correct that has been advocated for the last 50 plus years. But don’t take my word for it, read it for yourself: Howard BV, et al. Low-fat dietary and weight change over 7 years: the Women’s Health Initiative Dietary Modification Trial. JAMA. 2006 Jan 4; 295(1): 39-49. 
 

So that’s some of the science on this topic, as opposed to just being my opinion. With respect to your comment that it defies physics, you’re right, it does. That’s because it’s not physics. The cause of weight gain is hormonal imbalance. As for a calorie is a calorie is a calorie, want to bet? A calorie is a measure taken from physics: the amount of energy required to raise the temperature of 1 gram of water 1* Celsius. There is no direct connection to hormones and the complex processes of digestion. As you can see, the calorie definition makes no mention of food. The use of references to calories has become a convenient and unfortunately misleading assumptions. As I said, the body does not have “calorie receptors”.

The calories in vs calories out (CICO) model is also called the kitchen sink model. However the analogy is false since storage of the products from eating is not a one compartment analogy, like a sink.  It’s not like taking food in and out of a fridge. The surplus we eat gets stored as fat in a freezer in the basement for consumption once the fridge is empty. Fat storage and consumption works through a different process than that involved with the use of blood sugar. You can’t get to the fat in the freezer until you use what is in the fridge first. This is a hormonal, not a physics issue.
 

Please provide the research that describes, “the laws of physics in the human body” and how they relate to the bodies complex hormone processes. I look forward to some interesting reading on this subject. 

Cheers 🥂

Good on you for citing studies. Very few folks do that these days and with the infinite amount of 'nutrition experts' on social media, very few cite studies to push their methodology. In fact, I would encourage you to question everyone you get information from. Do they back up their claims with actual studies? Do the studies include a large number of participants and what is the adherence rate? What other factors are they taking into effect other than 'oh we just gave them a low carb diet and let's see what happens' because there are hundreds of variables a test subject can change to get good/bad results. 

So let's break down this response...

The Fildes study, from what I'm reading, looks at the probability of an obese person obtaining a normal weight. While weight loss is getting overly complicated thanks to social media, one aspect that's not being assessed enough according to some nutrition experts I follow is the psychological side of weight loss. What are the triggers for someone to eat in excess? What environmental factors attribute to an excess in eating? What stress levels and other personal decisions are being made that lead to weight loss? Much like golf, it's more between the ears than anything else. Yes, it is discouraging to read, but at the same time, I'm considered overweight by BMI standards. BMI is too much of a broad stroke and doesn't account for body type. According to the BMI charts, Lebron James is overweight and JJ Watt is obese. Looking at hospital charts and tracking it solely on weight and height as the basis of the study leaves a lot of questions to be answered. 

The WHI study was based on post-menopausal women...ages 50-79. Do you know what happens to a woman's body/hormones pre and post menopause? It's a significant change to say the least. Weight loss in post-menopausal women is extremely difficult. To test post and apply it to pre menopause women is a true WTF moment. Geriatric dietitians actually will recommend a little more weight on the bones as you get older to help protect against falling injuries. Obviously they will promote a healthy weight but it's better to be a little heavier than skinny as you get into your senior years. I don't know why that's brought up in your response, but whoever is using this as a source to rebut CICO is leaving out critical components of the study. 

CICO is about energy balance. To lose fat, you need to be in a caloric deficit. If you gain fat, by definition, you are not in a caloric deficit. Maybe you gained fat because your metabolic rate is outside the average. Maybe you gained fat because you didn't track your calories accurately or underestimated your energy expenditure. Maybe you lost fat because you like ate foods that were less processed with more protein and fiber, all of which are factors that can increase energy expenditure. Different food choices affect the calories out portion of CICO. And as far as hormones go, I encourage you to go get tested. And then what happens if your hormones are fine? What's the excuse? I'm not trying to be a jerk about it, but if people clamor about hormones go get tested and see that everything is normal, then what? I get the push for hormones for weight management but once it's fixed, it's CICO. My wife has hypothyroidism and takes medication for it daily. Before her diagnosis, she ate in a caloric deficit (albeit a small deficit) but gained some weight. Got the thyroid tested and with the help of the medication, her weight is back to a normal level and we're back to CICO. It's not impossible to lose weight with low thyroid, just more difficult. 

As soon as you said it's hormones and CICO is garbage, I immediately thought of Jason Fung. Remember earlier when I said to question those you seek nutritional information from...

The kidney doc who studies the kidneys AND PUSHES A DETOX/FASTING TEA. (The kidneys already detox the body on their own. This is simply a product that no study has shown to be effective)

https://www.piquetea.com/pages/fasting-tea

His ability to leave out evidence based science on his site is appalling.

Here he is pushing IF to cure cancer, yet there's no study to back this up:

https://www.rsng.com/categories/movement-fuel/articles/could-7-days-of-fasting-protect-against-cancer

Fung's Cancer 'Fear Mongering' Article using 25 year old data:

https://medium.com/@drjasonfung/cancer-inc-4cece0eb4e07

And the rebuttal with updated charts that Fung failed to include, but were available to him:

https://nutritionalrevolution.org/2019/03/11/lies-from-fung/

And here's Fung's take on the Women's Health Initiative...not once stating the subjects in this test were post-menopausal:

https://medium.com/@drjasonfung/diet-wars-992db10afa2e 

Here's Fung refusing evidence-based medicine:

https://www.dietdoctor.com/corruption-evidence-based-medicine

Can you imagine MGS refusing evidence based testing? See how ridiculous it sounds? Let's say you have an ailment and go see this 'doc'...do you want this man treating you with something he's come up with or something that has been proven to work? What would your reaction be if you had a headache and this man told you to drink his tea instead of just taking two advil? Advil has been proven to work. His tea? Not so much. 

  • Like 3
  • :ping-small: G410 LST 10.5* w/ VA Composites Nemesys 65 X tipped 1/2" 
  • :ping-small: G425 LST 3W 14.5* w/ Ping Tour 75X
  • :srixon-small: ZX Utility 18* w/ Project X 6.5
  • :callaway-small: X Forged 21* w/ Tour Issue Dynamic Gold S400
  • :taylormade-small: 2020 P770 5-PW w/ Tour Issue Dynamic Gold X100
  • :ping-small: Glide 3.0 54* & 58* w/ Dynamic Gold S400
  • :ping-small: Sigma 2 Arna - 35.25"...coming soon: Evnroll ER5B
  •  Pro V1x Left Dash
  • I'm left-handed so I don't go broke buying all new clubs every week. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, txgolfjunkie said:

Good on you for citing studies. Very few folks do that these days and with the infinite amount of 'nutrition experts' on social media, very few cite studies to push their methodology. In fact, I would encourage you to question everyone you get information from. Do they back up their claims with actual studies? Do the studies include a large number of participants and what is the adherence rate? What other factors are they taking into effect other than 'oh we just gave them a low carb diet and let's see what happens' because there are hundreds of variables a test subject can change to get good/bad results. 

So let's break down this response...

The Fildes study, from what I'm reading, looks at the probability of an obese person obtaining a normal weight. While weight loss is getting overly complicated thanks to social media, one aspect that's not being assessed enough according to some nutrition experts I follow is the psychological side of weight loss. What are the triggers for someone to eat in excess? What environmental factors attribute to an excess in eating? What stress levels and other personal decisions are being made that lead to weight loss? Much like golf, it's more between the ears than anything else. Yes, it is discouraging to read, but at the same time, I'm considered overweight by BMI standards. BMI is too much of a broad stroke and doesn't account for body type. According to the BMI charts, Lebron James is overweight and JJ Watt is obese. Looking at hospital charts and tracking it solely on weight and height as the basis of the study leaves a lot of questions to be answered. 

The WHI study was based on post-menopausal women...ages 50-79. Do you know what happens to a woman's body/hormones pre and post menopause? It's a significant change to say the least. Weight loss in post-menopausal women is extremely difficult. To test post and apply it to pre menopause women is a true WTF moment. Geriatric dietitians actually will recommend a little more weight on the bones as you get older to help protect against falling injuries. Obviously they will promote a healthy weight but it's better to be a little heavier than skinny as you get into your senior years. I don't know why that's brought up in your response, but whoever is using this as a source to rebut CICO is leaving out critical components of the study. 

CICO is about energy balance. To lose fat, you need to be in a caloric deficit. If you gain fat, by definition, you are not in a caloric deficit. Maybe you gained fat because your metabolic rate is outside the average. Maybe you gained fat because you didn't track your calories accurately or underestimated your energy expenditure. Maybe you lost fat because you like ate foods that were less processed with more protein and fiber, all of which are factors that can increase energy expenditure. Different food choices affect the calories out portion of CICO. And as far as hormones go, I encourage you to go get tested. And then what happens if your hormones are fine? What's the excuse? I'm not trying to be a jerk about it, but if people clamor about hormones go get tested and see that everything is normal, then what? I get the push for hormones for weight management but once it's fixed, it's CICO. My wife has hypothyroidism and takes medication for it daily. Before her diagnosis, she ate in a caloric deficit (albeit a small deficit) but gained some weight. Got the thyroid tested and with the help of the medication, her weight is back to a normal level and we're back to CICO. It's not impossible to lose weight with low thyroid, just more difficult. 

As soon as you said it's hormones and CICO is garbage, I immediately thought of Jason Fung. Remember earlier when I said to question those you seek nutritional information from...

The kidney doc who studies the kidneys AND PUSHES A DETOX/FASTING TEA. (The kidneys already detox the body on their own. This is simply a product that no study has shown to be effective)

https://www.piquetea.com/pages/fasting-tea

His ability to leave out evidence based science on his site is appalling.

Here he is pushing IF to cure cancer, yet there's no study to back this up:

https://www.rsng.com/categories/movement-fuel/articles/could-7-days-of-fasting-protect-against-cancer

Fung's Cancer 'Fear Mongering' Article using 25 year old data:

https://medium.com/@drjasonfung/cancer-inc-4cece0eb4e07

And the rebuttal with updated charts that Fung failed to include, but were available to him:

https://nutritionalrevolution.org/2019/03/11/lies-from-fung/

And here's Fung's take on the Women's Health Initiative...not once stating the subjects in this test were post-menopausal:

https://medium.com/@drjasonfung/diet-wars-992db10afa2e 

Here's Fung refusing evidence-based medicine:

https://www.dietdoctor.com/corruption-evidence-based-medicine

Can you imagine MGS refusing evidence based testing? See how ridiculous it sounds? Let's say you have an ailment and go see this 'doc'...do you want this man treating you with something he's come up with or something that has been proven to work? What would your reaction be if you had a headache and this man told you to drink his tea instead of just taking two advil? Advil has been proven to work. His tea? Not so much. 

I really appreciate the quality and thoughtfulness of your response. I will definitely take the time to dig down further on the information you have provided. However, saying I referred to CICO as garbage is a bit hyperbolic, but I do have to take responsibility for not elaborating further in my post regarding circumstances when CICO is successful and not. No excuses, I didn’t take the time to elaborate or refine the post. My concern is similar to yours regarding over simplified thinking regarding health and weight control. I welcome your criticism and the continuing effort by you and other contributors to this thread to advance the conversation. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey txgolfjunkie, 

It is going to take a long time for me to reply to each of your points because you have given me so much to read. Thanks for supplying the links. Let’s just deal with the one I have had the chance to take a look at so far. You made the comment: Here he is pushing IF as a cure for cancer, but there is no study to back that up. So I read the article and that is not actually what he says, and I suggest anyone interested do the same. In the article the suggestion is that the research of Dr. Thomas Seyfried suggests that 7 day fasts may reduce the inflammation that a great deal of science indicates is a cause of cancer. It doesn’t say IF cures cancer. It’s a long step from possible prevention to a cure. The other thing I would question is, if the research of Dr. Thomas Seyfried isn’t a study, what is it? You may want to read it again. I still have to read each of the other articles you provided links to, plus I need to get the book by Dr. Layne Norton that was recommended and apparently has a great deal of information on calories. Fat Loss Forever I think it was called. I will be looking for that today and it will take a bit of time for me to read that as well.

 I do plan to get back to you on each of your other points, time permitting and just not all at once.

Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pug, that might be one of the most civilized responses I've ever encountered on the internet. I'm impressed. And yes, I reached on the 'IF cures cancer'. I retract that statement. 

To equate CICO to golf, CICO is the base TaylorMade driver head with all the adjustability options being your hormones, metabolism, etc. Without a performing head, your fine tune adjustments won't mean squat. On the other hand, moving the loft sleeve or weight track can better improve overall driver performance.  

A few studies regarding inflammation found that B-hydroxybutyrate (BHB) directly inhibits complex sets of proteins called inflammasome. BHB is a metabolite produced by the body in response to high-intensity exercise or a caloric restriction. That caloric restriction can be achieved by any sort of diet...keto, IF, south beach, low-carb, low-fat, etc. While none are a magic bullet for inflammation, they all help reduce inflammation. You'll find studies saying Keto reduces inflammation and others say IF reduce inflammation. But you have to ask why inflammation was reduced...which is derived from the overall caloric restriction. 

Let's keep this discussion going. 

  • :ping-small: G410 LST 10.5* w/ VA Composites Nemesys 65 X tipped 1/2" 
  • :ping-small: G425 LST 3W 14.5* w/ Ping Tour 75X
  • :srixon-small: ZX Utility 18* w/ Project X 6.5
  • :callaway-small: X Forged 21* w/ Tour Issue Dynamic Gold S400
  • :taylormade-small: 2020 P770 5-PW w/ Tour Issue Dynamic Gold X100
  • :ping-small: Glide 3.0 54* & 58* w/ Dynamic Gold S400
  • :ping-small: Sigma 2 Arna - 35.25"...coming soon: Evnroll ER5B
  •  Pro V1x Left Dash
  • I'm left-handed so I don't go broke buying all new clubs every week. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, txgolfjunkie said:

Pug, that might be one of the most civilized responses I've ever encountered on the internet. I'm impressed. And yes, I reached on the 'IF cures cancer'. I retract that statement. 

To equate CICO to golf, CICO is the base TaylorMade driver head with all the adjustability options being your hormones, metabolism, etc. Without a performing head, your fine tune adjustments won't mean squat. On the other hand, moving the loft sleeve or weight track can better improve overall driver performance.  

A few studies regarding inflammation found that B-hydroxybutyrate (BHB) directly inhibits complex sets of proteins called inflammasome. BHB is a metabolite produced by the body in response to high-intensity exercise or a caloric restriction. That caloric restriction can be achieved by any sort of diet...keto, IF, south beach, low-carb, low-fat, etc. While none are a magic bullet for inflammation, they all help reduce inflammation. You'll find studies saying Keto reduces inflammation and others say IF reduce inflammation. But you have to ask why inflammation was reduced...which is derived from the overall caloric restriction. 

Let's keep this discussion going. 

Yes, definitely I am on board with keeping the conversation going. It’s our crazy season at work, so I have to ask for patience in adding to the dialogue, but I am definitely in, if for no other reason than I think you are even wider read on this topic than I. I will definitely get back to you. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that didn't last long. I have to give up the T25 and get back on the treadmill as my hips are done. I suspect my arthritis is making itself comfortable in my hips because it loves my knees and hands so much. So, I'm going to cool it with that, hit the treadmill and total gym for a few weeks and hit the T25 again to see what happens.

  • Like 2

In the bag:
Driver: :titelist-small: TSi2 Project X HZRDUS Smoke Black RDX 6.0
Fairway: :Sub70: 939X 15° Project X Even Flow Blue 6.0
Hybrid: :Sub70: 939X 3 Hybrid Project X Even Flow Riptide 6.0
Irons: :wilson_staff_small: D7 Forged 4-GW Project X Catalyst 80 6.0
Wedge: :cleveland-small: Smartsole S
Putter :yes-small: Tracy
Bag: 
:Ogio: Alpha Convoy 514
Balls::Snell: MTB-X or Black

Cart: :CaddyTek: CaddyLite ONE Ver. 8


God Bless America🇺🇸, God save the Queen🇬🇧, God defend New Zealand🇳🇿 and thank Christ for Australia🇦🇺!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MattF said:

Well, that didn't last long. I have to give up the T25 and get back on the treadmill as my hips are done. I suspect my arthritis is making itself comfortable in my hips because it loves my knees and hands so much. So, I'm going to cool it with that, hit the treadmill and total gym for a few weeks and hit the T25 again to see what happens.

@MattF, my wife has suffered from both arthritis and migraines for years. She did a lot of investigating and ended up with a significant change in her diet. Note: not a weight loss diet, but rather changing out to a healthier one. Both migraines and arthritis are substantially reduced. Everyone is different but perhaps the same may work for you. 

  • Like 1

Left Hand orientation

:ping-small: G410 SFT driver 

Cobra King F-9  5 wood
:ping-small:  410  Hybrids 22*, 26*

Cobra Speed Zone 6-GP/Recoil ESX 460 F3 Shafts 

:titelist-small: SM7 54* Wedge

:ping-small: Glide 3.0  60* Wedge

:odyssey-small: O Works putter
:918457628_PrecisionPro:NX9-HD

:CaddyTek: - 4 Wheel 
:footjoy-small: - too many shoes to list and so many to buy

:1590477705_SunMountain: And  BAG Boy

Golf Balls: Snell MTB-X 

2020 Official Tester :SuperSpeed: Beginning Driver Speed  - 78

2019 Official Tester :ping-small:  410 Driver

2018 Official Tester :wilson-small: C300

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, tony@CIC said:

@MattF, my wife has suffered from both arthritis and migraines for years. She did a lot of investigating and ended up with a significant change in her diet. Note: not a weight loss diet, but rather changing out to a healthier one. Both migraines and arthritis are substantially reduced. Everyone is different but perhaps the same may work for you. 

Thanks @tony@CIC. My diet is rather healthy right now, pretty sure I'm paying for a previous life of fun and adventure.

  • Like 2

In the bag:
Driver: :titelist-small: TSi2 Project X HZRDUS Smoke Black RDX 6.0
Fairway: :Sub70: 939X 15° Project X Even Flow Blue 6.0
Hybrid: :Sub70: 939X 3 Hybrid Project X Even Flow Riptide 6.0
Irons: :wilson_staff_small: D7 Forged 4-GW Project X Catalyst 80 6.0
Wedge: :cleveland-small: Smartsole S
Putter :yes-small: Tracy
Bag: 
:Ogio: Alpha Convoy 514
Balls::Snell: MTB-X or Black

Cart: :CaddyTek: CaddyLite ONE Ver. 8


God Bless America🇺🇸, God save the Queen🇬🇧, God defend New Zealand🇳🇿 and thank Christ for Australia🇦🇺!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did 2.25 miles yesterday arvo and 2 miles at 3.6mph this morning on the treadmill, along with 10 pushups after each walk (gotta start small!). So, that looks like my routine for the foreseeable future.

  • Like 1

In the bag:
Driver: :titelist-small: TSi2 Project X HZRDUS Smoke Black RDX 6.0
Fairway: :Sub70: 939X 15° Project X Even Flow Blue 6.0
Hybrid: :Sub70: 939X 3 Hybrid Project X Even Flow Riptide 6.0
Irons: :wilson_staff_small: D7 Forged 4-GW Project X Catalyst 80 6.0
Wedge: :cleveland-small: Smartsole S
Putter :yes-small: Tracy
Bag: 
:Ogio: Alpha Convoy 514
Balls::Snell: MTB-X or Black

Cart: :CaddyTek: CaddyLite ONE Ver. 8


God Bless America🇺🇸, God save the Queen🇬🇧, God defend New Zealand🇳🇿 and thank Christ for Australia🇦🇺!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, MattF said:

I did 2.25 miles yesterday arvo and 2 miles at 3.6mph this morning on the treadmill, along with 10 pushups after each walk (gotta start small!). So, that looks like my routine for the foreseeable future.

That's great- keep at it.  Keep adding on to the pushups and you'll be at 50 in no time. 

  • Like 1

Left Hand orientation

:ping-small: G410 SFT driver 

Cobra King F-9  5 wood
:ping-small:  410  Hybrids 22*, 26*

Cobra Speed Zone 6-GP/Recoil ESX 460 F3 Shafts 

:titelist-small: SM7 54* Wedge

:ping-small: Glide 3.0  60* Wedge

:odyssey-small: O Works putter
:918457628_PrecisionPro:NX9-HD

:CaddyTek: - 4 Wheel 
:footjoy-small: - too many shoes to list and so many to buy

:1590477705_SunMountain: And  BAG Boy

Golf Balls: Snell MTB-X 

2020 Official Tester :SuperSpeed: Beginning Driver Speed  - 78

2019 Official Tester :ping-small:  410 Driver

2018 Official Tester :wilson-small: C300

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...