Calories In / Calories Out Paradigm (Page 4)

Maybe this is an issue with terminology.

Given two runs, both 10 miles.

If I run the first run at 5:00/mile pace, and the second one at 10:00/mile pace, I burn the same amount of calories.

The first one took 50 minutes.  The second one too 100 minutes.  Same number of calories used.

As noted, the 1:40 training run is about 10 miles. 

Rides are not the same distance.

I agree with Scout. Another analagy:

Bodybuilder bench presses 200lbs 5 times in 10 seconds.
I (scrawny triathlete) bench press 200 lbs 5 times in 3 minutes.

We both did the same amount of work and therefore (roughly) burned the same amout of calories. The same principle applies to running. Two equal massed peoply propel their bodies the same distance, they burn the same (roughly) amount of calories irregardless of the time it takes or the perceived effort to run the distance.

That's a huge assumption then.  bryan and I are not "equally massed" by a longshot.

I get what Scout is saying, it is not THAT complicated ........

The person that runs 10 miles at 10:00 pace is still running 10 miles.  If they burn 150 cal/mile, then they have used up 1500 calories.

If another person runs 10 miles at 5:00 pace is still running ..... wait for it ..... 10 miles.  If they ALSO burn 150 cal/mile, then they have ALSO burned 1500 calories.  Just in significantly less time.

Edit:  And he also did say that it is based on the runners weight ......... so no, those 2 would not necessarily burn the same amount, but one person would burn the same regardless if they were running fast or slow per mile.

The source of that fuel may vary some.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing just confused since I would think speed has a lot to do with it.

How much horsepower (energy, which is calories) would it take to move one vechile up to a speed of 20 mph and another one 40 mph over the same distance?  shouldn't the faster one need more to achieve that speed? whether it be car or one runner at 5 min/mile and another at a  10 min/mile

edit just read rick's post and it makes a little more sense

There is only one source of fuel in the car.

There are 3 main ones in the human body and these are triggered based on availability and intensity.  As you go faster, you use up stored glycogen faster as the glycosis of fat goes down significantly (conversion of fat simply can't keep up with the intensity).

Yes, but only for two reasons:  wind resistance and rolling friction.  Niether of which are signifcant at low speeds and weights.

I'm following along trying to understand it all. I was always under the impression that it doesn't matter if person A can run 10 miles in 1:10 and person B runs it in 1:40.  They are covering the same distance and using the same amount of calories.  Is this wrong?  I saw someone's post noting that the calories come from different places for different intensities, but would the quanity be the same, give or take?  Also, couldn't both person A & B, while running at those different paces, be at the same intensity? Again, just trying to understand.

That's why I said I think most people take in too much.  My opinion on that part.

But considering people here are concerned about losing weight, I think it makes sense to evaluate how much you take in during training.

On top of that, I think that maximizing weight loss and maximizing performance, from a nutritional aspect, tend to go against each other.  Maximizing performance usually means taking in more calories, which will either slow or halt weight loss.

carrie1 - 2009-01-26 3:07 PM I'm following along trying to understand it all. I was always under the impression that it doesn't matter if person A can run 10 miles in 1:10 and person B runs it in 1:40.  They are covering the same distance and using the same amount of calories.  Is this wrong?  I saw someone's post noting that the calories come from different places for different intensities, but would the quantity be the same, give or take?  Also, couldn't both person A & B, while running at those different paces, be at the same intensity? Again, just trying to understand.

You have gotten what is being said except they will not really burn the exact same amout as it is based on the individual (weight).  And yes, depending on abilities both people may be running at the same intensity levels but still be minutes apart in pacing.

For example, the reason they keep bringing Bryancd's pace up is that he can casually run 7 flat for most of the day.  Others may take 11 minutes per mile at the same level of effort.  Bryan will obviously take a lot less time to run 10 miles than the other person.  But assuming both of them are running the same intensity, they will generally be using the same sources of fuel (a mixture of fat glycolysis and straight glycogen depletion) during that time.

I should eat oatmeal for b'fast instead, but been going with the microwave biscuits because of time - I pop them in for 45 seconds and then eat them in the car on the way to work.

I eat the rice cakes cause they have way less calories and carbs than even a slice of whole wheat bread ... and I'm just looking for a filler ... really something to put my peanut butter on for the good kind of fat in PB and the protein (since I cut out meat at lunch)

I could bring in those mini bags of carrots for an afternoon snack - but then would need to get some non-fat dressing to keep here as well I guess.

I eat the Nature Valley Honey Oat bars ... they seem to have the lowest calories and carbs of all the granola bars ... I started eating these on the recommendation of the Nutritionist I saw ... who told me I wasn't getting enough carbs during the day.  I also backed off on eating  a lot of fruit during the day cause she told me that even too much fructose would be bad and would spike blood-sugar levels.

I was eating the latenight popcorn and having my Fat Day ever since the beginning, even during the time frame I lost 65 lbs. in 7 months.

Really, there is not much different in my diet now than what it was from Jan 08 to Jul 08 when I was losing weight pretty easily ...  the big changes are almost all meat cut out, went to more carbs, stopped heavy weight lifting every day and stopped walking 4-5 miles everyday ... went to S/B/R training about every day ... and I'm eating dinner at 10:30 pm now and not at 9:15 pm.

Hence ... my confusion and apparent frustration of those who read this ... because it seems medically, mathematically, and physiologically impossible that this would be happening ... but indeed it is/has.

I did see a Nutritionist, for a couple of sessions.  She looked at my 7 day food journal and training logs and thought it looked great.  At the time I was at the tail end of my good weight loss months ... and I went to see her to find ways to fuel better and not have it sabotage my weight loss.

I was feeling very tired and fatigued and was having problems keeping my blood-sugars high enough some days ... was getting the shakes badly ... one day in about a 20 hr. period I was having trouble getting my blood-glucose levels to stay over 45 or 50 ... I was eating like crazy and spike it back up to 100 or 110 ... and within 30-60 minutes it was back down to 45 or 50 ...

Anyhow, the Nutritionist suggested I needed way more carbs than I was eating ...  Okay, let me backup ... I was eating lots of lean meat plus taking protein shakes once or twice a day, plus some other amino acids, body-building stuff ... etc.... and didn't drink enough water, heavy workouts with lots of lactic acid ... so I was making myself sick and my kidneys couldn't filter it all .. .appeared they were shutting down and that I was headed toward dialysis in the next couple of months.

My doctor had be back off the protein and drink more water ... was monitored for a couple of months and the kidneys were once again functioning normally ... but now I had no energy, getting tired easily .. and was a few weeks into my tri training.

So, I visit the Nutrionist to see how to better my diet so I wouldn't overdo on protein, but yet have energy to S/B/R train, and to not hamper my weight loss efforts.

She said everything I was doing was great, except I needed way more carbs.  I was not eating over 30-40g of carbs a day and even then only whole grain bread or brown rice ... no white bread or potatos of any kind, no white rice, no candy, ice cream, etc ...if I did it was at most once every 2 weeks or so ...

Anyhow, I started on more carbs and even then whole grain breads, brown rice, granola bars, etc ... and cut out the weightlifting almost altogether ... and almost exclusively S/B/R for the workouts.

Within a few weeks my weight loss stopped.

Then I started cutting back on how much I ate.  Didn't help (but maybe because I was dragging by the time I got to the gym I also was not working out as hard ... so probably for every calorie I cut out from eating .. I was burning that much less as well ...in hindsight)

So here I am today, thinking I'll go back to more protein, more weights, and more slower, less intense cardio for a while.

I do see some areas now where I could tighten up the diet ... but I think I'll wait a couple of weeks, let my body get to use to eating this way and the new workout regimen, to see if it will reset my metabolism at a good rate (I guess this is just theory... I dunno...) ... and then I'll cut those things out like sausage biscuits in the morning ... and hopefully spark the fat loss again.

You mean like this?

(Before_and_After_01.JPG)

 Ok I really think it's great that you are listening to advice and have done so well so far with your weight loss with the different medical issue's that you have.. and I really hate to bold one little comment out of everything you wrote. but ..

If you were consuming that low of an amount of carbs you were basically on the adkins diet, which keeps you at under 30 gr of carbs for the first two weeks of an induction period to get your body in a state of Ketosis (sp) which can be very harmfull to your kidneys.  Even on the Adkins they don't want a person in that state all the time, since they expect you to slowly increase carbs 10-15 grs a week until you find your break even point... Let me say that I"m NOT advocating this type of diet, just that I have knowledge of it.. I do know some MD's that believe this is a good way to treat diabetics though.. so make sure you are in agreement with the specialist that is handeling you

 I think I posted something in the other thread or this one that too much or too little of anything is usually a bad thing,, I'd think most registered Dieticains would agree that a break down somewhere along the lines of 50 % carbs,  25% fat,  25 %protein would be a good starting point for someone..   I'm sure some people on here are closer to a 60% carb rate given their training load and hx of training.

If you in Ketosis (I can't spell today) you would see some extreme weight loss even up to a body a day since your body is basically feeding off itself. You might have noticed bad breath, or a bad smell of your urine.

There is a lot of controversy on this type of diet, (just like using a bucket in transition).

when you say that you are eating lots of carbs now, do you have an idea of the breakdown of carb/protein/fat  ??  

Daremo - 2009-01-26 1:25 PM True.  But I'd puke if I tried to eat that much.

You need to devote time and effort.  Start slow and don't increase consumpton by more than 10% per sitting.

BTW, I now feel like I am reading string about SAT questions. 

Now see .... this is exactly some of the questions or issues that I read about or think about and try to figure out if there is truth to this or not .... according to many who have posted (and admittedly what seems logical) ... is that body type shouldn't matter ... it's just simply Calories In vs. Calories Out ...

... now it seems you might be suggesting that an Endomorph might be more efficient at taking whatever calories come in ... and if not used immediately ... stored easily as fat ...

... and the last part about denial of food causes one to aggressively to store fat .... and a post or two above this where a person talked about going into Ketosis (sp?) be taking in too few of carbs ....

... These are exactly 2 of the main points that I've been questioning and that I believe I have fallen victim to ...

Yes, I was restricting as many carbs as I could ... not because I was trying to follow the Adkins diet or anything... just because the first doctor I had a couple of years ago when I was first told I had Type-II diabetes ... told me I needed to restrict as many carbs as possible (along with all forms of sugar) because those spike blood-sugar levels ...

... So I would rarely eat anything that had more than 14-20 carbs or more per serving ... it was rare for me to even eat whole wheat bread ... basically, for over a year or more and esp during the first 5-6 months into my weight loss ... I avoided all carbs like the plague.

... so that may have been contributed to my kdney problems, that, too much protein, a certain medication I was on, and too much lactic acid buildup from strenous weightlifting ... I was getting very sickly, weak, and fatigued ... my current doctor said I had been slowly poisoning myself and leading to lactic acidosis ... which can kill you.

... and if there is something to this Endomorph stuff ... then it would make sense that once I backed off the protein some and increased the carbs ... then maybe I was now storing fat much easier ....

... this all goes back to that article I first linked to ... I think there are mahy more variables .. such as type of food, time of day you eat it and/or what combinations of food types you eat together, exercise intensity ... etc ... and what you current metabolism level may be at ... all factor in and change the simple forumal Cal In minus Cal Out ... and turns it more into an alegbraic type of expression.

Anyhow, in case anyone is interested, normal kidney creatinine levels is 0.5 to 1.1 (some will say 0.5 to 1.3) ... I started out at 0.9, then went to 1.1, then 1.5, then 1.75 ... and at that point the doc told me that when folks get to 2.4 they have to go on dialysis .... so I was headed there quickly as these level increases for me occured in about a 6-7 month time frame.

I laid off the protein shakes, other supplements, most meat, and went onto more carbs and way less weightlifting ... and in a couple of months was back down to 1.1   ... but also even I'm eating basically the same foods (except for less meat, but more Complex Carbs -- BUT the calorie value is practically the same ...) ... the weight loss stopped for me ...  no more intense weightlifting, lo protein, hi carbs, higher intensity cardio vs. lower intensity ...

So, for me it's not simply Cal In minus Cal Out ... I'm thinking there are many more variables and it's more like an Algebra problem for me.

Looking at your last post is the key to the calories in/calories out issue.  Calories out, as others allude to and describe is much harder to track.  You did a less weight lifting. So you burned fewer calories both as a matter of the exercise itself (which is not the biggest source of calories out) AND in your resting metabolism.  Weight lifting builds muscle, which is highly metabolically active.  So even in a state of rest, a pound of muscle burns many more calories than say a pound of bone or of fat. So weight loss drops off even with no change in calories in.

Also as a fellow endomorph, I can relate to the frustration of body mass being distributed in ways that are clearly unfair.  When I hang out with runners or cyclists (in general), I always look and feel "bigger" than most of them, even when I was at my optimal weight.  OTOH, I find that there are a lot more "big guys" scuba diving.

Also a high protein diet is very stressful for kidneys.  You could add back in your weight lifting with modified expectations of bulking up, and increase your BMR.  I know I should, but I am still trying to motivate myself to get in my "normal" workouts. 

What I have read the women eat 1200 calories a day and men 1800 a day and they work out more like 8 hours a day.

 actually for biggest loser they take their weight and multiple by 7. so if someone weighed 300 lbs they would eat 2100.. and amazingly they actually do workout all day. 6hrs+