-
Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.
Wheat Belly. Myth or scientific?
We are not even talking about that. So it does seem you just spout out the shitty line for no reason.
Of course different foods effect the body different. Never said otherwise.
Calories in vs calories out is the bulk of it for weight gain vs loss. Don't try and say otherwise, it's been proven over and over in research and real life settings.
Artificial sweeteners have been some of the most studied food additives in history. They have been proven safe. Show us some of your peer reviewed research that suggests otherwise.
You example of 3000 calories shows where your confusion is on the topic. No we wouldn't all be the same weight if we ate 3000 calories. Never suggested that ever, you can't even be reading my posts.
We all come in different shapes and sizes with different genetic makeups, hormone levels activity levels and ages.
You don't compare calorie intakes across different people and expect the same thing. It needs to be done individually. If you are eating 3000 calories and getting fat you will have to either up your energy expenditure or eat less calories to lose weight. Someone else could be eating 3000 calories and losing weight. It's still calories in vs calories out but different people's calories out vary greatly.
So your black and white line should have been directed at yourself. You were the only one looking at something as only black and white.
Well according to US data it's excess calories and on average people were eating more fat from 30-40 years ago. Carb and protein intakes have been similar.
Wheat and sugar are the current fads as the enemies. Wait 10 years when as a average we get fatter still and people with move onto something else.
People want the easy answer. They want a enemy food that they can simply avoid. Cutting out wheat may help you lose weight but if you double your fat intake to compensate you are not going to lose weight.
The simple answer is food is so fucken cheap and easy to get compared to 40 years ago and daily work is so much easier. So people are eating more and burning off less.
Darkoz
-
You're the one who mentioned it here you baggy nutsack
Anyway, talk the hand girlfriend
Goosey
.
Yes you are right, we are less active than 20 years ago, but as I said over and over there are other factors.
meat and eggs are more expensive so the common dominant food is wheat in an average diet.
The wheat that we eat is highly processed with minimal nutrient value that is usually supplemented vitamins and such.
i don't think there is anything wrong with telling an overweight person to cut wheat completely out of the equation and substitute this with other carb sources.
but as we say meal timing and cal intake is key to fat loss, not exercise.
100 cal of friut, is going to be a lot better than a cal of processed wheat.
Just doing a quick google search for comparisons to 1975. On US figures for the equivalent money eggs and milk are half the price today compared to 40 years ago. Bread is basically the same. Sugar is more expensive today. It looks pretty similar on Aussie figures.
Out of that whole post to you that's all you reply to. Says a lot doesn't it.
Goosey
.
These products have always been more expensive than grain.
so people just didn't eat much, wheat is the problem.
Protein sources seem to have gotten a lot cheaper over the last 40 years. My grandma tells me about chicken being a luxury, people eat it every day now if they want.
You seem to be singling out wheat as the issue with no evidence for that. You just said eggs have got more expensive when they haven't.
Personal experience I was at my fattest, probably most unhealthy, doing strict low carb, wasn't eating any wheat then. Again talking to older family members, meat used to be expensive, they would fill up on breads back then. Meat was a luxury.
This anti wheat or anti sugar thing is the same as the anti fat 20 years ago. We will move onto something else as some point.
Last edited:
Goosey
.
Find someone else to annoy, I did not say "eggs have got more expensive"
the he anti fat thing was more to do with cholesterol, look it up.
when I was fat I was eating too much, I cut out and down what I didn't need and wheat in the form of pasta, bread, cakes and biscuits was just some of them, I cut down on rice too, and sugar, and alcohol.
do what you like think what you like, if it works good for you.
i still believe wheat products are not required and will make you fat.
and speaking of fads, there are some that say meat is bad, there is no anti wheat movement just some recognize that it's not a super food that the FDA has been saying. For the last 40 to 50 years.
Nothing is a superfood. No such thing.
Darkoz
-
Why would I waste my time with anything more.
The thing is Barry you will just say the opposite
Convenient for you hey darko.
Your supposed summary of my thinking of calories in vs calories out was so far off the mark it wasn't funny. When called out on that now very conveniently for you now have no time to reply. Even though you have enough time to tell me you have no time to reply. Lol.
Goosey
.
Darkoz
-
Change your tune Barry you're boring, besides, those last two sentences make no bloody sense.
Here we go. So you cant argue the topic so it's time to get personal.
Goosey
.
The whole grain is full of good stuff.