Ravenwood - 11/12/10 03:00 PM
Whenever anyone would ask me how to lose weight, I always told them to eat less. For years I've been telling people it all boils down to calories eaten versus calories burned. Now the rest of the world finally seems to be catching up to me.
"I didn't do any exercise. I didn't work out. What I did do was eat less. I cut out all sweets, all desserts, and quit drinking during the week. I also ate a lot of popcorn. . .My 14 months is up, and I've lost 96 pounds." -- Ravenwood, December 2008.
"The bottom-line diet: Eat less." -- CNN Headline, November, 2010.
I'm planning to eat more and put on muscle right now. Once I've done that, I'll burn more calories at rest and it should be easier. (I tried starting out without eating more and just ended up sore and not building muscle.)
After I've got some muscle, I'll be doing the same thing. I really hate doing cardio, though, which is the other part of the equation. (Not required but sure makes it faster.)
Calories ingested < calories burned = fat burned
It works both ways. Most people just don't understand how hard it is to increase the one on the right faster than the one on the left. Hint: 20 minutes on an exercise bike won't work off that Snickers bar.
Im not about to go vegan just becuase of some wacko hindu doctor in the wretched UN over this GLOBAL WARMING poppycock bull twaddle nonsense
Not quite so simple as "Calories ingested < calories burned = fat burned" even if it is *technically* true. *What* those calories are composed of makes a huge difference.
Check out Taubes books "Why We Get Fat: And What to Do About It" and "Good Calories, Bad Calories: Fats, Carbs, and the Controversial Science of Diet and Health". Well worth your time to read.
Garfield is right DIET is DIE with a T at the end
(c) Ravenwood and Associates, 1990 - 2010