Toitun tervislikult, teen trenni aga kaal ei lähe alla!

anna aega.

Valk pole valk, rasv pole rasv ja süsivesik pole süsivesik, ehk siis kalor pole kalor. Peab ikka jälgima, mida suust sisse ajada ja kunas mida süüa. Kui sa 1-2x päevas sööd, siis pole ka ime, miks kaal ei lange.

Tahan öelda seda, et see ei ütle meile mitte midagi su toitumisest.

Valk pole valk, rasv pole rasv ja süsivesik pole süsivesik, ehk siis kalor pole kalor. Peab ikka jälgima, mida suust sisse ajada ja kunas mida süüa. Kui sa 1-2x päevas sööd, siis pole ka ime, miks kaal ei lange.

“>

http://www.ncbi.nlm….pubmed/19943985

This study shows there was no difference in weight loss between subjects with high/low meal frequencies.

http://www.ncbi.nlm…./pubmed/9155494

Evidence supports that meal frequency has nothing to do with energy in the subjects.

http://www.ncbi.nlm….pubmed/11319656

Yet again, no difference in energy in the subjects compared to 2 meals/d to 6 meals/d.

Bray GA et. al. Hormonal Responses to a Fast-Food Meal Compared with Nutritionally Comparable Meals of Different Composition. Ann Nutr Metab. 2007 May 29;51(2):163-171 [Epub ahead of print]

“The pattern of nutrient and hormonal response was similar for a given subject to each of the 3 meals.”

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/hormonal-responses-to-a-fast-food-meal-compared-with-nutritionally-comparable-meals-of-different-composition-research-review.html

This study basically backs up what I’ve been saying for years: a single fast food meal, within the context of a calorie controlled diet, is not death on a plate. It won’t destroy your diet and it won’t make you immediately turn into a big fat pile of blubber. And, frankly, this can be predicted on basic physiology (in terms of nutrient digestion) alone. It’s just nice to see it verified in a controlled setting.

It’s not uncommon for the physique obsessed to literally become social pariahs, afraid to eat out because eating out is somehow defined as ‘unclean’ (never mind that a grilled chicken breast eaten out is fundamentally no different than a grilled chicken breast cooked at home) and fast food is, of course, the death of any diet. This is in addition to the fact that apparently eating fast food makes you morally inferior as well. Well, that’s what bodybuilders and other orthorexics will tell you anyhow.

Except that it’s clearly not. Given caloric control, the body’s response to a given set of nutrients, with the exception of blood lipids would appear to be more determined by the total caloric and macro content of that meal more than the source of the food.

In terms of the hormonal response, clean vs. unclean just doesn’t matter, it’s all about calories and macros.

Which is what I’ve been saying all along.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/is-a-calorie-a-calorie.html

Is A Calorie a Calorie?

So is a calorie a calorie? Yes and no. Based on the data’ date=’ my general feeling is this:[list’]

[*]A sufficient protein intake will always beat out an insufficient protein intake, no matter what you do. Since all of the diets described in this book are based around sufficient protein, this is a non-issue.

[*]Assuming caloric intake can be controlled (and protein is adequate of course), shuffling of carbs and fats tends to have a minor, approaching negligble effect.

[*]There might be exceptions at the extremes (folks going to single digit bodyfat or extreme obesity) but that doesn’t apply to the majority of folks.

In this respect, given adequate protein, it seems to matter very little what diet is chosen. From a weight or bodyfat standpoint, high carb should be as good as low-carb. Right? Well, no. The problem is that there’s a HUGE assumption built into statement #2 above: that calories can be controlled under a given set of conditions. As has been found repeatedly in the real-world, this simply isn’t a safe assumption.

Put a little bit differently, it might very well be possible to lose all the weight/fat you wanted on a calorie controlled junk-food diet with some high quality protein source. The problem that would probably arise is that most people wouldn’t be able to control their hunger or appetite on such a diet and they’d probably end up eating more in the long run. In eating more, they’d either lose less weight/fat or even gain it. Even if a given dietary approach appears optimal for some reason, if you can’t control your caloric intake, and end up eating more because of it, it won’t produce results.

Understand me here? Issues such as hunger control, long-term adherence, individual variance, athletic performance, and a few others all go into the determination of what food might or might not be a better choice under a given set of circumstances.

Ärge paanitsege toiduvalikute või söömiste sageduste üle.

Sööge mitmekülgselt ja täisväärtuslikku toitu. Kuid ärge elimineerige toiduaineid ilma mingi põhjuseta.

Looge endale vastav kaloridefitsiit ja kaal kukub. Seage õiged makro-toitainete vahekorrad ning rasv põleb ning lihas säilib.

Teema-algatajale: Sa kas loed oma kaloreid valesti, või on sinu metabolism pika-ajaliste madala-kalorsusega dieetide peal lihtsalt vähe kokku jooksnud ning on vaja lasta tal normaaltasemele tagasi töötada. Selleks on aga spetsiifilisemad lahendused.

Seedimise korrashoidmine ka aitaks. Süia kiudaineid piisavalt. Minumeelest peaks sööma tihedalt kuna see ka kiirendab seedimist ” srcset=”/uploads/emoticons/wink@2x.png 2x” width=”20″ height=”20″> .

See on ühtlasi ka üks suurimaid toitumismüüte. Tiheda toitumise ainus mõte on selles, et kõht dieeditades

tühjaks ei läheks ja dieeditaja hiljem korraga toitu kugistama ei hakkaks.