Thread: Why Consume Fats When It..
01-20-2006, 08:13 AM #1
Why Consume Fats When It..
is more likely to be stored in adipose tissue than carbohydrates. If I remember right from my nutrition class the teacher said consumed fats take only 2 calories or something like that to be actually stored while the process of storing carbs as fat in the body takes much more calories, and the body naturally choses whats easiest (storing the fats). So if one wanted to cut, shouldnt he cut down on fats more than carbs?
01-20-2006, 08:31 AM #2
no because you need to take in fat to let fat go because if your not taking in fat the body realises this and stop's you losing fat
you should take in EFA not saturated fat
01-20-2006, 09:29 AM #3Originally Posted by stocky121
That not true at all. Low-fat diets have been proven in the long run to help people keep the weight off. Jugo Beun0 is right on when he said that fats are more easily converted to adippose tissue. Due to the structure of carbohydrates they are more difficult to be turned into adipose tissue than fats,. They are also associated with greater levels of satiety and are oxidaized 2x faster than fats, which also means they have a more profound thermic effect.
You do not need fats to lose fat, adipose tissue will be used when presented with an energy deficit, even if you are consuming not fat or no food. You will use adipose tissue, that is whats it's there for.
The role of dietary fat in body fatness: evidence from a preliminary meta-analysis of ad libitum low-fat dietary intervention studies.
Astrup A, Ryan L, Grunwald GK, Storgaard M, Saris W, Melanson E, Hill JO.
Research Department of Human Nutrition & LMC, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Frederiksberg, Denmark. firstname.lastname@example.org
The role of high-fat diets in weight gain and obesity has been questioned because of inconsistent reports in the literature concerning the efficacy of ad libitum low-fat diets to reduce body weight. We conducted a meta-analysis of weight loss occurring on ad libitum low-fat diets in intervention trials, and analysed the relationship between initial body weight and weight loss. We selected controlled trials lasting more than 2 months comparing ad libitum low-fat diets with a control group consuming their habitual diet or a medium-fat diet ad libitum published from 1966 to 1998. Data were included from 16 trials with a duration of 2-12 months, involving 1728 individuals. No trials on obese subjects fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The weighted difference in weight loss between intervention and control groups was 2.55 kg (95% CI, 1.5-3.5; P < 0.0001). Weight loss was positively and independently related to pre-treatment body weight (r = 0.52, P < 0.05) and to reduction in the percentage of energy as fat (0.37 kg/%, P < 0.005) in unweighted analysis. Extrapolated to a BMI of about 30 kg/m2 and assuming a 10% reduction in dietary fat, the predicted weight loss would be 4.4 kg (95% CI, 2.0 to -6.8 kg). Because weight loss was not the primary aim in 12 of the 16 studies, it is unlikely that voluntary energy restriction contributed to the weight loss. Although there is no evidence that a high intake of simple sugars contributes to passive overconsumption, carbohydrate foods with a low glycaemic index may be more satiating and exert more beneficial effects on insulin resistance and cardiovascular risk factors. Moreover, an increase in protein content up to 25% of total energy may also contribute to reducing total energy intake. In conclusion, a low-fat diet, high in protein and fibre-rich carbohydrates, mainly from different vegetables, fruits and whole grains, is highly satiating for fewer calories than fatty foods. This diet composition provides good sources of vitamins, minerals, trace elements and fibre, and may have the most beneficial effect on blood lipids and blood-pressure levels. A reduction in dietary fat without restriction of total energy intake prevents weight gain in subjects of normal weight and produces a weight loss in overweight subjects, which is highly relevant for public health.
I am in no way saying that you don't need fats, because that would be crazy. But you need alot less than you think and there seem to be some misconceptions about carbs out there.
01-20-2006, 09:42 AM #4
The role of dietary fat in obesity.
Department of Human Nutrition, Centre for Advanced Food Studies, The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Current scientific evidence indicates that dietary fat plays a role in weight loss and maintenance. Meta-analyses of intervention trials find that fat-reduced diets cause a 3-4-kg larger weight loss than normal-fat diets. A 10% reduction in dietary fat can cause a 4-5-kg weight loss in individuals with initial body mass index of 30 kg m (-2). Short-term trials show that nonfat dietary components are equally important. Sugar-sweetened beverages promote weight gain, and replacement of energy from fat by sugar-sweetened beverages is counterproductive in diets aimed at weight loss. Protein has been shown to be more satiating than carbohydrate, and fat-reduced diets with a high protein content (20-25% of energy) may increase weight loss significantly. There is little evidence that low-glycemic index foods facilitate weight control. Evidence linking certain fatty acids to body fatness is weak. Monounsaturated fatty acids may even be more fattening than polyunsaturated and saturated fats. No ad libitum dietary intervention study has shown that a normal-fat, high-monounsaturated fatty acid diet is comparable to a low-fat diet in preventing weight gain. Current evidence indicates that the best diet for prevention of weight gain, obesity, type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular disease is low in fat and sug*****ich beverages and high in carbohydrates, fiber, grains, and protein.
01-20-2006, 11:46 AM #5
What about good fats such as flax, nuts, etc? Shouldn't those be included in the diet? Since lipid molecules make up the bulk of the cell membrane's surface area, I don't think fat should be completely removed from the diet... What brings us to question, what exactly is low fat? 10-15% of your total caloric intake?
01-20-2006, 12:05 PM #6
Like I said above, In no way do I recomend cutting out all fats. And I think its obvious that EFA's and unsaturated fats should be included in ones diet for optimal health. I keep my fat intake at about 20% of my diet year round. I'd say 15% though should be the lowest one should go.
01-20-2006, 12:43 PM #7
I try to limit it to mayo with tuna, flax and occasional natty pb when I cant take it anymore
01-20-2006, 01:20 PM #8Originally Posted by Giantz11
when you say 20% fat intake in a diet. what is an easy way to calculate that?
01-20-2006, 01:27 PM #9
20% of total cals. Say you eat 4,00 cals, thats 800 from fat and that's 89g of Fat.
01-20-2006, 01:44 PM #10
ok, so what is a good pro/fat/carb ratio per day. according to the calculators on the main page it says 40% carbs 30% pro 30% fat. which now according to this seems high?
01-20-2006, 01:48 PM #11
I mean, it's not high. I'd say 40% is high. 30% Is def moderate. My personal breakdown is about 40%/40%/20% I go higher with the protein when cutting though.
01-20-2006, 01:51 PM #12AR Hall of Fame
Originally Posted by El Jugo Buen0
- Join Date
- Dec 2002
It's not just what you eat, it's when/why/how much/with what/etc., all influenced by activity.
01-22-2006, 05:08 AM #13
lol yes professor swoleee
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)