That's a great story, Laurie, maybe that will give someone else hope!

"So where is the energy going to?"

I have never heard anything about the amount of calories that go through the digestion system unprocessed.

Is it because we have an aversion to talking about p00p?

Simple logic and observation tells me that there are unprocessed calories.

For example, if you drink more water, the excess is eliminated, must be the same with solid matter.

What you see on nutrition labels, menus, etc. already accounts for the systematic losses through our body's processing.

"I also snack (graze) both off and on the trail. I find it a better way to keep my energy up throughout the day. I find that keeps me from over-eating at main meals."

This way of eating has worked really well for me in the past. I typically eat this way when I'm logging calories and eating "healthy". Carbs at about 50% of total calories but all from healthy sources. etc. With this method I can lose weight and keep it off given that I'm maintaining my calorie target.

The problem for me is that healthy, high carb eating requires that I eat all day (meal, snack, meal, snack, meal, snack) or endure periods of hunger. Either way food is always on my mind. The biggest change for me so far w/the Primal thing has been a major increase in fat consumption. I've swapped carbs for fat. I'm now at 60% of cals from fat and ~10% from carbs. I'll have a 700 calorie breakfast, 600 calorie lunch and 500-800 calorie dinner. Each of these 6 hours (or so) apart. I haven't been snacking at all. I don't get hungry for hours and I get to just *not* think about food. Hunger also feels different now. 5-6 hours from my last meal I'll start to think about food and develop a gentle sense of hunger in my stomach. I never (not once in the last 6 weeks) get that hunger pang I used to get. If I don't have healthy food around I can just wait it out until I have access.


@David Ure
You're acting on the presumption that everyone experiences life the same way you do. Psychology is meaningful and it is an oversimplification to assume that lifestyle behaviors are based 100% on choice. It might appear so on the surface but the fact is that psychological factors affect how difficult it is to make the *right* choices. I definitely don't buy the argument that most people are obese due to factors other than choice (hormones, etc) but I think that a person's psyche has to be taken into account when looking for realistic solutions to their problems. Many things can be muscled through but muscling through is not always the most elegant solution.

I want to thank everyone with all this great information. I especially want to thank Doug for starting the thread and Miguel with all his very insightful information.

My wonderful wife was aghast at my diet before we got married. And since holy matrimony has forced me to eat fish, green thingys, and rice most of the time. All of which tastes awful to me. She has especially restricted my intake of red meat and eggs.

She has been going through something she calls the "change." I don't know what the "change" is, but it is a real pain in the rear, and I wish it would go away. Recently she mentioned that she can no longer wear her size 5 clothes (opps... more new clothes -- cha-ching!), and would like to lose a few pounds. Now I can't afford to lose too much weight, but eating meat and eggs again sounds like a great idea.

So I showed her some Paleo links, and Mark's Daily Apple blog. Some of the recipes look great. I explained that this is not a diet, but a life style. She seems to like it. And she is off to buy Sisson's book right now. Whoo Hoo! Meat again! And she promises she will no longer try to fool me with "turkey" burgers and steaks that are camouflaged to look like real meat. Now I know that I will not be able to eat meat every meal or even every day, but it has to be better than what I get now, plus I am tired of sneaking out during the day to go to McDonalds. The only problem I am going to have is our long-lasting compromise of real pizza once a week.

Thanks All.


signed,

Starving for real food in California

.

Edited by Feileung on 01/08/2012 14:22:04 MST.

So what ouputs are there in humans that have been proven different between individuals that point to efficiency variation?

A out of shape person and in shape person, both 170 lbs @ 30% fat, run a mile. In-shape person is less out of breath b/c their body uses oxygen more efficiently, which means their lungs have done less work, which means that fewer calories are expended for the same amount of activity. The actual difference in oxygen utilization can be quantified by measuring VO2 max.

So where is the energy going to? Is there a lower body temperature for example that would require less energy to maintain? The energy has to be accounted for somehow.

I don't know, and clearly science hasn't gotten it figured out either. The point I was trying to make is that when calories in and calories out are accounted for and show a deficit, and the body in question is not losing mass, then that is not a violation of physics. It is a reality that the calories in/calories out model can't explain.

The calories in/calories out model is accurate for some people, just as the ideal gas law is accurate for some gases. But simplified models have limits, which is why someone saying, "I did it, therefore it's possible," means essentially nothing except that the model describes them accurately.

If a model doesn't describe reality, as in the case of people who have diligently applied calories in/calories out to lose weight and have failed, you don't deny reality. You come up with a better model.

" So what ouputs are there in humans that have been proven different between individuals that point to efficiency variation? "

Heat. The fine tuning of an individuals Krebs Cycle via uncoupling proteins.

More UCP = less efficient Kreb's cycle = more heat output = less ATP created per calorie consumed = reduction of surplus energy = reduction of energy storage = reduced propensity for fat storage.

"What you see on nutrition labels, menus, etc. already accounts for the systematic losses through our body's processing."

It seems overly simplistic to say that all people, all the time have the same percentage losses through our body

It may be that some diets result in less percentage being absorbed

"Mind. Body. Environment. Switch around the variables however you want, but if these three can't be synced somewhat successfully, you're likely fighting a losing battle."

I agree, Craig, but I would not necessarily assign them equal weight. IMO, if you master the mental aspect the body will respond, as it has for millenia. That is how people stayed alive in very challenging circumstances. It is in our genes. Same goes for the environment, again IMO. My personal feeling is that environment is the least critical piece of the puzzle, at least, IME. When I was still running, I never let environmental obstacles, be they physical, other people, work schedules, whatever, stand in the way. At times that proved very challenging, but there was always a way to circumvent them, simply because I had the mental determination to do so. Nor do I feel I am unique in that regard. I have known many others who responded the same way to environmental obstacles. In your case, based on what I know or think I know of you, I am relatively certain that the answer to your environmental situation lies squarely between your ears, and I'm betting you won't prove me wrong. I'll look forward to a post in the not too distant future that you have nailed that sub 3:30. ;=)

" So what ouputs are there in humans that have been proven different between individuals that point to efficiency variation? Higher Co2, less undigested carbs? Maybe "skinny folks" only digest 50% of the carbs that they eat? Could be, but I would think that would be measurable and fully researched."

A lot of the variables have been researched, Greg, but not all. For instance, the calorie content of fiber is still controversial and research is in progress. Many have assumed that fiber has no content, but there is growing evidence that it does contain available energy. How much has still not been settled to my knowledge. Another variable that may never be fully calculated is how much impact the thoroughness with which you chew your food has on the calories available to you from the food you eat. The possibilities are nearly endless, given the variability of food an individual eats and how thoroughly they chew their food. It would require a lot of p00p analysis to figure that one out, and I imagine there is not a long line of doctoral candidates in physiology queued up to do their thesis on this one. No glory there. That said, it would seem that in a controlled environment a liquid diet containing precise amounts of carbs, fat, and protein(think Ensure for instance) could be used to determine the basic efficiency of an individual's metabolism of the basic nutrients. Whether that has been done, and how applicable it would be in the real world, I do not know.

"Re reading my posts, i think i came across as uncaring, and that wasn't my intention."

Nah, Mike, you simply came across as Scottish..... ;-)

FWIW, I agree, for the most part, with the personal responsibility meme. I'm fat because of me, and only me, I take responsibility for it, and I'm taking responsibility for changing it.

But I also agree with Craig, what we do involves mind, body and environment. I believe that many of us get to a point, though, when we have the choice on how to influence these things to bring about the change we want/need. Many of us, not all of us. There are still far too many people (generally the poor) who don't have real access to grocery stores and decent food.

@ Jerry et al: "So where is the energy going to?"

I have never heard anything about the amount of calories that go through the digestion system unprocessed.

Is it because we have an aversion to talking about p00p?

Simple logic and observation tells me that there are unprocessed calories.

Basic metabolism. Human burn most of their calories to maintain bodily functions, very few with exercise, and the human body is very good at absorbing them if everything is flowing right and eliminating wastes. Just (IMO) delicious calories are readily available thanks to our processed foods industry, so most ingest more than they burn. That's why a larger person can lose a lot of weight - they burn more calories to start with, then add some exercise to move that mass, and weight loss start unless the person starts taking in extra calories to deal with hunger, .... plus joint issues, and other stuff that's really in the M.D. /dietician lane. Also with carb deprivation long-term or any extreme diet, at least consult a pro (MD, RD, etc..) about it as there are some biochemical consequences. It is physics at one point but also connected biochemical pathways trying to maintain a balance with some potential for bad.

To understand how carbs work in the body then it is important to know how the body actually uses those sugars. Becoming T2 diabetic gave me great insight into this because I did a lot of reading to wrap my head around what was going on in my body... this also helped me to understand how the body works in a non-diabetic.

Simplified it's like this...

A normal person without excess weight is insulin sensitive. When they consume carbohydrates the body produces insulin to help the cells use the sugars. Think of the insulin as a key to cells with a big padlock on them. The insulin unlocks the cells and they use the energy.

Obesity causes the body to be less insulin sensitive so when carbs are consumed the cells remain locked because not enough insulin is released and used by the cells. They remain locked and the glucose gets dumped into the bloodstream rather than the cells. That's why Type 2 diabetes is practically epidemic in our countries and can be reversed with diet and exercise. Now Type 1 is a totally different beast so I won't even go there.

The body uses insulin to restore muscle glycogen after intense physical activity. That's why many athletes carb-load the day before intense training or an event. You'll often hear of runners using something like chocolate milk as a recovery drink.

I remember being over 360 pounds. When I would try to lose weight I could drop 20 pounds in a week because the caloric burn was so great when I did anything... walking, hiking, etc. I lost weight more easily despite hormonal issues. The same activity now, when I am a mere 30 pounds from being a perfectly regular weight, burns far less calories. When you are obese it takes far more energy just for you to exist. That's partially why you see such dramatic weight loss in shows like The Biggest Loser. I used to laugh when my "skinny" friends would say that they are "so fat" and "can't lose this 10 pounds". It's a lot more work in some ways than it was when I was stage 3 morbidly obese.

A healthy, lean body, uses calories more efficiently. When we do cardiovascular exercise (hiking, running, etc) the muscles make and use energy. This is very dependent on force, movement and intensity. There is a compound that our muscles produce too. It is called ATP (what it stands for eludes my brain at the moment). Muscle glycogen also provides more glucose during high intensity workouts but stores can wane when doing something for a long duration... and that's why snacking on some carbs while hiking can be helpful.

I don't know if that was of any help or not... hopefully it made sense.

Edited by Laurie_Ann on 01/08/2012 17:42:22 MST.

Adenosine tri-phosphate used in muscle and other cells. Having a metabolic problem like diabetes obviously requires a physician, who will attempt to have the patient control insulin and carbohydrate levels. ATP can be generated from carbohydrates and lipids so the muscles try to have a constant supply of it + oxygen At a certain level, you get back to conditioning and exercise as the body needs oxygen to generate ATP.

"When they consume carbohydrates the body produces insulin to help the cells use the sugars. Think of the insulin as a key to cells with a big padlock on them. The insulin unlocks the cells and they use the energy."

The cells could use the energy to do work - as in exercise

or they could use the energy to produce heat

Does an overweight person, that lost weight, and is now being more efficient with calories and thus more likely to regain weight, is that person colder? That would explain where the calories are going. There is something to be said for the physics conservation of energy argument.

I can't say for sure whether a person is colder or not... but I do find I feel cooler even at rest than I did when I was obese. I figure it is because I have less insulation now... lol.

I do know that I release less CO2. How do I know this? Mosquitoes (and a friend who's a bug guy at a local university).

You see, mossies (as I like to call them) are attracted by the C02 in our breath. That's why those propane patio mosquito controllers work. The bigger/fatter you are the more CO2 you expel... and that's why I was always a smorg for the bloodsuckers. I've noticed a dramatic decrease in the mossie attacks since I've lost weight.

I definitely run a lot colder now than I did even when I was at a healthy weight (but with a higher body fat percentage). Like Laurie, I primarily contribute it to lack of insulation, but the reality is I have no idea why I run colder. The worst is my hands and feet which are cold even now with it ~ 62 F in my house. Also, I run very hot when I initially go to bed and when I exercise.

FWIW, I don't believe that someone who was once overweight and is now fit is any more likely to become overweight again than someone who has never been overweight (medical conditions aside). Look at NFL guys. They get very used to consuming a massive amount of calories to maintain their size and fitness regime. But if they get injured, can no longer compete, and subsequently fail to decrease their caloric intake they are highly likely to end up considerably overweight.

Edited by simplespirit on 01/09/2012 07:43:45 MST.

My feet are always cold but part of that is that I have neuropathy. My hands... freezing all the time. I'm so cold when working at the computer that I have the thermostat in my office at 71°F and I am wearing two layers which include a heavy weight sweater. I freeze when I go to bed... to the point I am using a 750 fill down bag as my summer bag and I use a down duvet and heavy blanket at home. I noticed this summer that I needed a wrap or jacket in the evenings although it was in the high 90's still.

My spouse is always hot, unless he's ill so there is a constant thermostat battle around here.

Chris, you might be surprised at how many over weight folk don't eat any more than "regular" folk. It isn't always about eating tons of food, ie calories. The lack of moving and or a lethargic metabolism (from not being active) can lead to it.

And why do you run colder? It has NOTHING most likely with your body weight. It is simply how YOUR body functions! If you are cold you probably need to get moving more :-P Pretty simple when you look at it - it is your body telling you two things biologically: you don't move you will freeze or go eat and get the furnace going inside. Don't look any deeper, it isn't a deep question.

Or as my Mom would say when I was young "If your cold, go do a load of dishes". That worked pretty well. If I am cold now, I do that, go for a walk or sit next to my husband "The Heater".

PS: By BMI charts most, if not all, NFL players are "obese" due to their physical size (height and weight) because of the sheer muscle mass they carry. They can weigh 300-350 lbs where the charts say they should weigh 200 at most - muscle mass is what throws the BMI chart off quickly.

And PS2: 62* IS COLD. Just in case you hadn't noticed. LOL! Hate to break the bad news, but 62* is only considered warm by a few folks ;-) No wonder you are cold...hah!!

Sure, there are several factors that make a person cold or warm . Metabolism, age, thyroid....AND amount of fat. That cannot be dismissed. I have several heftier girlfriends and they run much warmer than me. I gain an average of 5 lbs in the winter and it really helps. Fat is great insulation, aging....not so much.