News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Diet hacker data point by coffee on Monday November 08, 2010 @01:51PM (#1883473)
I think this is a startling revelation to MOST people.

Most people do, as you've noted, mix up healthy food with weight loss.

Have you ever told someone who wants to lose weight they should not add ton's of fattening (yet healthy) olive oil to their salads? Typical response: "But, it's healthy fat!" - yea, but it's fattening at 110 calories per tablespoon...

Weight loss and good nutrition are mixed together.

It's the premise behind a lot of marketing on food labels. Look how healthy some food product labels appear. "I want to lose weight, and the label says 'healthy choice' so it must be okay for me to eat!"

A close review of the nutrition facts tells a completely different story.

But who really reviews nutrition facts?

I never looked at the nutrition facts, and I was always overweight. This last year I started tracking my food and it's calories ( one example: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1828786 ) - This is the first time in my life that I've been decreasing body fat percentage and increasing muscle percentage. No fad diet, hell, I drink beer and eat pizza. But the days that I do, I make sure to keep my calorie count in a deficit.

It was startling to me, as obvious as it is now, that "healthy food" does not equal "low calorie food." And the way to lose body fat is eat less calories.

Whodathunkit :)

Re:Diet hacker data point by byrneseyeview on Monday November 08, 2010 @02:56PM (#1883733)
As someone who is eating a delicious, olive oil-doused salad right now, I have to interject: your calorie sources do affect your weight gain, albeit indirectly: if you're getting most of your energy from carbs, you'll consistently crave food a few hours after eating. If you get the majority of your calories from protein and fat, you'll get over this.

I consume a lot of fat and protein: two or three dozen eggs per week, fatty red meat for most dinners, olive oil-soaked salads for lunch, etc. This has led to significant weight loss, as well as a substantial energy boost. As this is (fairly) close to the diet that humans evolved to consume, it's not especially surprising that it works.

Re:Diet hacker data point by coffee on Monday November 08, 2010 @03:26PM (#1883843)
You're missing the point.

You are stating that if one eats the "correct types" of food, one will lose weight.

Not true.

You can eat to many calories of the "correct types" of food and still gain weight.

The article discusses a man eating Twinkies, yet still lost weight. You're saying you eat fatty red meats, yet still lost weight.

The Twinkies guy, as well as you, have lost weight because you're in a calorie deficit, regardless of the "types" of food you're eating.

Re:Diet hacker data point by mikeklaas on Monday November 08, 2010 @04:29PM (#1884085)
His point was that eating less carbs leads to eating less total calories (through suppression of appetite). He didn't claim that eating two different foods comprising the same # of calories lead to different amount of weight loss.
Re:Diet hacker data point by niels_olson on Monday November 08, 2010 @02:05PM (#1883528)
> "healthy food" does not equal "low calorie food." And the way to lose body fat is eat less calories.

Can't be overstated. Please tell anyone who will listen.

Re:Diet hacker data point by eru on Monday November 08, 2010 @08:19PM (#1884864)
You can also try to grow more muscles by, say, weightlifting to get a more active metabolism.
Re:Diet hacker data point by sliverstorm on Monday November 08, 2010 @08:59PM (#1884959)
> I think this is a startling revelation to MOST people.

> Most people do, as you've noted, mix up healthy food with weight loss.

Absolutely. I came up with the idea this guy tested a few years back, and you would not believe the number of people who are convinced I'm dead wrong. (I shared it with a lot of people)