Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: animal1991 on April 16, 2012, 09:09:29 AM
-
In one of my study guides it states that in a "study" a group of men and women followed a diet in which they were in a calorie deficit. In the "study" it states that the participants did not experience any weight loss and only one man and one woman lost some weight. So according to them the say the whole "calorie in vs calorie out" theory is flawed..
Then in another "study" the participants followed a low fat diet and lost a significant amount of weight.
Now in my study guide it states that to lose weight you have to lower your fat intake. So what they are actually saying is that "fat makes you fat".
The statement is stupid to me because we all know to lose weight/fat you have to establish a calorie deficit first and bodybuilders have been doing this for decades, no matter what diet they follow (keto, high carb, balanced etc.)
Discuss...
-
In one of my study guides it states that in a "study" a group of men and women followed a diet in which they were in a calorie deficit. In the "study" it states that the participants did not experience any weight loss and only one man and one woman lost some weight. So according to them the say the whole "calorie in vs calorie out" theory is flawed..
Then in another "study" the participants followed a low fat diet and lost a significant amount of weight.
Now in my study guide it states that to lose weight you have to lower your fat intake. So what they are actually saying is that "fat makes you fat".
The statement is stupid to me because we all know to lose weight/fat you have to establish a calorie deficit first and bodybuilders have been doing this for decades, no matter what diet they follow (keto, high carb, balanced etc.)
Discuss...
Post the studies, see what methodology they followed, how did they handle the different variables, who performed the studies, etc.
There is more to science that just reading it from the internets
-
1. If it was a study where the participants reported their caloric intake/activity level themselves, it's bullshit because people tend to overestimate activity and underestimate intake by quite a big margin.
2. An isocaloric amount of fat and carbohydrates is, depending on composition, not providing the same amount of energy. Fat is processed and stored with near 100% efficiency and little TEF, whereas up to 20% of the carbohydrates you take in might just be "lost" (not absorbed; mainly dependent on fiber content). Carbohydrates also have a higher TEF.
-
1. If it was a study where the participants reported their caloric intake/activity level themselves, it's bullshit because people tend to overestimate activity and underestimate intake by quite a big margin.
2. An isocaloric amount of fat and carbohydrates is, depending on composition, not providing the same amount of energy. Fat is processed and stored with near 100% efficiency and little TEF, whereas up to 20% of the carbohydrates you take in might just be "lost" (not absorbed; mainly dependent on fiber content). Carbohydrates also have a higher TEF.
This depends on the total amount of both, though. More carbs ingested, and less fats, more carbs are stored and less fat, vice versa its the same.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/nutrient-intake-nutrient-storage-and-nutrient-oxidation.html
-
This depends on the total amount of both, though. More carbs ingested, and less fats, more carbs are stored and less fat, vice versa its the same.
Carbs are only stored as fat in significant amounts if your diet is artificially low in fat (rule of thumb would be <10% of total caloric intake from fat) or after artificially high carb overfeeding (we're talking 600-800g every single day for at least 3-4 days). The only pathway for this conversion in humans is de novo lipogenesis, which is a way smaller player than most people make it out to be. The way carbohydrates contribute to fat gain is via insulin/activation of lipoprotein lipase, which blocks the oxidation of fatty acids.
-
Carbs are only stored as fat in significant amounts if your diet is artificially low in fat (rule of thumb would be <10% of total caloric intake from fat) or after artificially high carb overfeeding (we're talking 600-800g every single day for at least 3-4 days). The only pathway for this conversion in humans is de novo lipogenesis, which is a way smaller player than most people make it out to be. The way carbohydrates contribute to fat gain is via insulin/activation of lipoprotein lipase, which blocks the oxidation of fatty acids.
We agree...its just that carbs and fat are "interdependant" storage wise, thats why they DO have a similar storage efficiency in a regular non artificial diet like keto or whatever.. Which is also the reason why ketogenic diets are simply not better than regular diets. Eat more fats, and no carbs, and store more fats.
ps: Im not sure where were you going to with that answer...
-
"Dr Michael Colgan conducted a study at Colgan Institure in San Diego California with four men and two women aged 23-40 whose weight and body fat were stable, that is, did not vary week to week by more than 2%. For six weeks, they reduced their usual lunch by 250-400 calories every day, and kept all other meals strictly at their usual levels. According to the American diet industry, that's a sure fire prescription for losing weight. Over the six weeks, subjects reduced their so-called "caloric intake" by a total of 8400 to 18900 calories. According to the calories in - calories out myth that dominates the dieting industry, these subjects should have lost substantial weight. At approximately 3600 calories per pound, they should have lost between 2,25-5,25 pounds. In fact, only one man and one woman lost any weight, the man 0,9kg and the woman 0,3kg. The other four lost nothing at all. Counting calories just doesn't add up."
-
Bogus study with self reported caloric intake and a sample size of 8. There can be a billion reasons this didn't work out.
-
"Dr Wayne Miller and colleagues at the University of Illinois did a convincing series of studies with RATS. They gave one group of rats a diet containing 42% fats, not too different from the standard American diet. They gave a seconde froup a low-fat diet of Ralston Purina animal chow. Both groups ate as much as desired. Over 60 weeks, both groups ate almost exactly the same number of calories (36000 per rat). Common beliefs in the weight-loss industry about calorie intake and body fat, would predict that bothe groups would be equally fat. The high-fat group was very plump with an average bodyfat of 51%. The low-fat group was lean with an average bodyfat of 30%. There is no longer any doubt that fat calories pack on bodyfat."
-
Counting calories just doesn't add up.
There is no longer any doubt that fat calories pack on bodyfat.
Ok, now spill the beans.
What are they trying to sell?
-
Ok, now spill the beans.
What are they trying to sell?
I don't know!
This is the shit they print in our study material and preach it as gospel. WTF! Some of our lecturers don't know shit.
-
In one of my study guides it states that in a "study" a group of men and women followed a diet in which they were in a calorie deficit. In the "study" it states that the participants did not experience any weight loss and only one man and one woman lost some weight. So according to them the say the whole "calorie in vs calorie out" theory is flawed..
Then in another "study" the participants followed a low fat diet and lost a significant amount of weight.
Now in my study guide it states that to lose weight you have to lower your fat intake. So what they are actually saying is that "fat makes you fat".
The statement is stupid to me because we all know to lose weight/fat you have to establish a calorie deficit first and bodybuilders have been doing this for decades, no matter what diet they follow (keto, high carb, balanced etc.)
Discuss...
TL:DR
go out fatboy!
;D
-
Folks, there is no linear relationship between calorie consumption and weight gain/loss. Consider this: whatever your current daily calorie consumption average is, lets say that you increased it by an average of 400 calories per day for a year without any change to your activity level. Then lets say you increased your average calorie consumption by another 600 calories per day for the following year. If you do the math, with a pound of fat equaling 3500 calories, this would mean that in those two years you should gain over 100 pounds, right? Not likely. You would likely gain some weight, but time and time again it's been proven that there is no linear relationship between calorie consumption and weight gain.
Similarly, if there was a linear relationship between calorie intake and weight loss, cutting daily calorie intake from 3000 to 1000 calories would result in a 60,000 calorie deficit, and a 17 pound weight loss in 30 days, which would equate to a 200 pound weight loss after 12 months. What if a person began the diet weighing 200 pounds, would that person disappear? Get the point?
-
"The Colgan Institute" is an online scam that hawks miracle weightloss drugs.
-
Folks, there is no linear relationship between calorie consumption and weight gain/loss. Consider this: whatever your current daily calorie consumption average is, lets say that you increased it by an average of 400 calories per day for a year without any change to your activity level. Then lets say you increased your average calorie consumption by another 600 calories per day for the following year. If you do the math, with a pound of fat equaling 3500 calories, this would mean that in those two years you should gain over 100 pounds, right? Not likely. You would likely gain some weight, but time and time again it's been proven that there is no linear relationship between calorie consumption and weight gain.
Similarly, if there was a linear relationship between calorie intake and weight loss, cutting daily calorie intake from 3000 to 1000 calories would result in a 60,000 calorie deficit, and a 17 pound weight loss in 30 days, which would equate to a 200 pound weight loss after 12 months. What if a person began the diet weighing 200 pounds, would that person disappear? Get the point?
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand this is why Lyle McDonalds, Alan Aragon, Stephan Guyenet and even the retard Taubes can ackowledge the role of hormones in weight variations. Which accounts for all the mathematical extreme, and ridiculous, cases you point out, because you know....you can eventually die of food deprivation, its called Inanition. So yeah, one COULD say that calorie deprivation for all that period of time wil llead to an eventual mass of 0 after irreversible decomposition, hence why Zyzz is so shredded he has 0 % bodyfat.
Fact of the matter is calories is the best measure for bodyweight regulation we can figure, and use to our advantage in daily life, and it works pretty well.
-
8)
-
Fuck this bullshit!
I'm sick of reading postings OVERANALYISING diet and training.
99% of the time, Its posted by a fat person. AND HOW DID THEY GET THAT WAY? EATING TO FUCKING MUCH, NOT DOING CARDIO AND BEING LAZY!!!!
The "SCIENCE" crap is a FRONT for LAZIENES, so what do these fuckers do? THEY TAKE MORE GAS AND PONTIFICATE BOUT USELESS TRAINING PROTOCOLS!
Harsh? Yes. TRUE? YES!
-
Fuck this bullshit!
I'm sick of reading postings OVERANALYISING diet and training.
99% of the time, Its posted by a fat person. AND HOW DID THEY GET THAT WAY? EATING TO FUCKING MUCH, NOT DOING CARDIO AND BEING LAZY!!!!
The "SCIENCE" crap is a FRONT for LAZIENES, so what do these fuckers do? THEY TAKE MORE GAS AND PONTIFICATE BOUT USELESS TRAINING PROTOCOLS!
Harsh? Yes. TRUE? YES!
Very true............good post as usual bro!
-
Fuck this bullshit!
I'm sick of reading postings OVERANALYISING diet and training.
99% of the time, Its posted by a fat person. AND HOW DID THEY GET THAT WAY? EATING TO FUCKING MUCH, NOT DOING CARDIO AND BEING LAZY!!!!
The "SCIENCE" crap is a FRONT for LAZIENES, so what do these fuckers do? THEY TAKE MORE GAS AND PONTIFICATE BOUT USELESS TRAINING PROTOCOLS!
Harsh? Yes. TRUE? YES!
Yeah bro! you right bro! fuck biology, bro! Only need more juice, bro! ::)
It amazes me how much people miss the point when dealing with "serious" subjects.
-
Yeah bro! you right bro! fuck biology, bro! Only need more juice, bro! ::)
It amazes me how much people miss the point when dealing with "serious" subjects.
Dum-dum.
Reread my post. DO I HAVE TO EXPLAIN WHAT I WROTE ::)?
Wholly shit.
-
Very true............good post as usual bro!
Wise Wes,
Thanks.
I'm just getting started................. ......... ;D
-
Dum-dum.
Reread my post. DO I HAVE TO EXPLAIN WHAT I WROTE ::)
Wholly shit.
"Fuck this bullshit!
I'm sick of reading postings OVERANALYISING diet and training."
"The "SCIENCE" crap is a FRONT for LAZIENES, so what do these fuckers do? THEY TAKE MORE GAS AND PONTIFICATE BOUT USELESS TRAINING PROTOCOLS!"
You urgently need to go back to middle school where they teach you how to elaborate on your ideas because you clearly cant seem to convey the message you have in mind and just write whatever hits your mind.
Which is another way of saying, then WHAT THE FUCK did you mean with your post? Doesnt it occur to you that there are lots of poeple actually interested in biology (including sterngth training, which is why we are here?)
-
"Fuck this bullshit!
I'm sick of reading postings OVERANALYISING diet and training."
"The "SCIENCE" crap is a FRONT for LAZIENES, so what do these fuckers do? THEY TAKE MORE GAS AND PONTIFICATE BOUT USELESS TRAINING PROTOCOLS!"
You urgently need to go back to middle school where they teach you how to elaborate on your ideas because you clearly cant seem to convey the message you have in mind and just write whatever hits your mind.
Which is another way of saying, then WHAT THE FUCK did you mean with your post? Doesn't it occur to you that there are lots of people actually interested in biology (including strength training, which is why we are here?)
You write like a bitter fatty.
Gut is at 36 inches. Correct?
I AM interested in the science of bodybuilding, BUT NOT AS A COVER FOR LACK OF DEDICATION, WILL POWER and common sense.
Did you comprehend that? Shall I ELBORATE?
-
You write like a bitter fatty.
Gut is at 36 inches. Correct?
I AM interested in the science of bodybuilding, BUT NOT AS A COVER FOR LACK OF DEDICATION, WILL POWER and common sense.
Did you comprehend that? Shall I ELBORATE?
Oh the cute drugaddict is calling me a fatty...care to make it interesting, ignorant fuck?
-
Oh the cute drugaddict is calling me a fatty...care to make it interesting, ignorant fuck?
NOW ya talking mang ;D
What is AMAZING is that you STILL haven't comprehended my two posts.
I attempted to write it simply, since you lack basic reading comprehension skills.
Let's try ONE MORE TIME.
I was pointing out the hypocrisy of a very overweight poster (animal something) who uses large doses of anabolics, quoting a flawed scientific study WHEN HE SHOULD BE CONCERED ABOUT EATING LESS AND DOING CARDIO.
Get it genius?
Probably not.
-
NOW ya talking mang ;D
What is AMAZING is that you STILL haven't comprehended my two posts.
I attempted to write it simply since you lack basic reading comprehension skills.
Let's try ONE MORE TIME.
I was pointing out the hypocrisy of a very overweight poster (animal something) and uses large doses of anabolics quoting a flawed scientific study WHEN HE SHOULD BE CONCERED ABOUT EATING LESS AND DOING CARDIO.
Get it genius?
Probably not.
You still havent understood what I pointed out about your fucking idiotic post. You dont have writing skills. You dont know how to get messages across and blame me of not understanding you.
Your post was full on bullshit by a drugaddict that doesnt understand nutrition, claims "hard work" for his "results" and calls everybody else lazy, etc.
YOU ARE A HUGE DOUCHEBAG and lack writing skills, you are pathetic.
-
You still haven't understood what I pointed out about your fucking idiotic post. You dont have writing skills. You dont know how to get messages across and blame me of not understanding you.
Your post was full on bullshit by a drugaddict that doesnt understand nutrition, claims "hard work" for his "results" and calls everybody else lazy, etc.
YOU ARE A HUGE DOUCHEBAG and lack writing skills, you are pathetic.
I'm starting to like you.
You decided to pick a fight and even though you have been knocked out twice, you still keep swinging wildly. THATS COMMIMITMENT.
RESPECT.
-
I'm starting to like you.
You decided to pick a fight and even though you have been knocked out twice, you still keep swinging wildly. THATS COMMIMITMENT.
RESPECT.
You are beyond retarded... :-\
-
You are beyond retarded... :-\
That is a typical response from someone who has received a beating and is frustrated and embarrassed.
Hey man, I don't blame you for feeling that way.
-
That is a typical response from someone who has received a beating and is frustrated and embarrassed.
Hey man, I don't blame you for feeling that way.
The old "I win because I claim victory first" move, you sir are a Scholar and a Gentlemen, I hope you make it big in the academics. But first, learn how to speak your mind, you have clear issues when transmitting ideas (sorry for using long words).
-
The old "I win because I claim victory first" move, you sir are a Scholar and a Gentlemen, I hope you make it big in the academics. But first, learn how to speak your mind, you have clear issues when transmitting ideas (sorry for using long words).
Oh the irony. 8)
Anyway try to read things slower so you will be able to comprehend.
Or just continue being a foolish, fat, jack ass.
-
Oh the irony.
Anyway try to read things slower so you will be able to comprehend.
Or just continue being a foolish, fat jack ass.
Wait, you already said you won, hence you won, why do you keep posting? ???
-
Wait, you already said you won, hence you won, why do you keep posting? ???
No, YOU said I won. I never wrote or insinuated that it was some gay-ass competition. YOU DID ;D
Again pal, READING COMPREHENSION ;D
-
No, YOU said I won. I never wrote or insinuated that it was some gay-ass competition. YOU DID ;D
Again pal, READING COMPREHENSION ;D
"You decided to pick a fight and even though you have been knocked out twice"
"That is a typical response from someone who has received a beating and is frustrated and embarrassed."
Oh, what are the odds, you are actually limited in the head...or you just dont ever think what you write (or cant)? ;D
-
"You decided to pick a fight and even though you have been knocked out twice"
"That is a typical response from someone who has received a beating and is frustrated and embarrassed."
Oh, what are the odds, you are actually limited in the head...or you just dont ever think what you write (or cant)? ;D
Nice.
You quote the words of a "limited in the head" (btw liked that)
It wasn't a COMPETION knuckle head, it was a disagreement....where you REPEATEDLY showed that you are not intelligent and enjoy beatings.
GO ON A DIET. PLEASE.
-
Nice.
You quote the words of a "limited in the head" (btw liked that)
It wasn't a COMPETION, knuckle head it was a disagreement....where you REPEDETDLY showed that you are not intelligent and enjoy beatings.
GO ON A DIET. PLEASE.
"I never wrote or insinuated that it was some gay-ass competition. YOU DID"
"That is a typical response from someone who has received a beating and is frustrated and embarrassed."
What else silly man? Denial wont get you very far. And its still funny that you "PWND" this thread and yet are here still reassuring your PWNING.
Sad man :'(
-
shut.the.fuck.up or be expelled
-
"I never wrote or insinuated that it was some gay-ass competition. YOU DID"
"That is a typical response from someone who has received a beating and is frustrated and embarrassed."
What else silly man? Denial wont get you very far. And its still funny that you "PWND" this thread and yet are here still reassuring your PWNING.
Sad man :'(
Is THAT what I'm doing? Really?
Dude, lay off the pseudo psychological diagnose and DO SOME CARDIO.
-
Is THAT what I'm doing? Really?
Dude, lay off the pseudo psychological diagnose and DO SOME CARDIO.
You surely do know how to PWN THE HOUSE
-
You surely do know how to PWN THE HOUSE
STILL blabbing about pwning?
Brother, you behave like a special needs child.
That's not nice.
PLEASE STOP READING FLAWED SCIENTIFIC STUDIES, THE STRESS IS CAUSING YOU TO OVEREAT..OR IS IT HIGH CORTISOL...???
-
STILL blabbing about pwning?
Brother, you behave like a special needs child.
That's not nice.
PLEASE STOP READING FLAWED SCIENTIFIC STUDIES, THE STRESS IS CAUSING YOU TO OVEREAT..OR IS IT HIGH CORTISOL...???
Seriously though, youre just getting lame by this point.
-
@DOUP:
I posted this out of interest sake, because I know fat loss doesn't work the way they said in the so called "studies" and wanted to hear opinions of others.
I'm not an idiot fucktard.
-
Wes, this kid is throwing it RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE and slow. :)
Shall I SMASH IT? ;D
-
what a stupid topic.
If you are eating at a caloric deficit you will lose weight.
Fat, and yes saturated fat, is healthy. Trans fat is not healthy. Your body needs fat. There is nothing wrong with eating fat.
Calories in - Calories out. You can eat whatever you want.
Calculate properly and you will see results.
People can't do the simple math it's their fault.
Your study book is garbage.
-
I also posted this to show the dumb shit they put in our study material. So don't come over here with attitude and start flaming people and not fucking positively contributing to this thread.
Almost everyone posted intelligent replies besides you who think you can come boast here with all your "hard work" and "dedication" bullshit.
Get a fucking life man.
-
what a stupid topic.
If you are eating at a caloric deficit you will lose weight.
Fat, and yes saturated fat, is healthy. Trans fat is not healthy. Your body needs fat. There is nothing wrong with eating fat.
Calories in - Calories out. You can eat whatever you want.
Calculate properly and you will see results.
People can't do the simple math it's their fault.
Your study book is garbage.
YEP.
-
what a stupid topic.
If you are eating at a caloric deficit you will lose weight.
Fat, and yes saturated fat, is healthy. Trans fat is not healthy. Your body needs fat. There is nothing wrong with eating fat.
Calories in - Calories out. You can eat whatever you want.
Calculate properly and you will see results.
People can't do the simple math it's their fault.
Your study book is garbage.
Truth
As I mentioned I posted this to show you the shit the "teach" us at University and everyone fucking believes it because if "the lecturer said it, it must be true, right?" WTF!
-
you get a life dork. you made this topic to entice people.
Real bodybuilders know how to diet properly. Only punks and "bro scientists" will come up with all this mumbo jumbo CRAP!!!
I post the facts, the simple facts. The TRUTH.
The haters can go on their grapefruit diets and starve.
-
I also posted this to show the dumb shit they put in our study material. So don't come over here with attitude and start flaming people and not fucking positively contributing to this thread.
Almost everyone posted intelligent replies besides you who think you can come boast here with all your "hard work" and "dedication" bullshit.
Get a fucking life man.
Oh man.....
You are either-
1. DUMB (VERY)
2. delusional
3. combo of the two
Please shut up. Thank you.
-
you get a life dork. you made this topic to entice people.
Real bodybuilders know how to diet properly. Only punks and "bro scientists" will come up with all this mumbo jumbo CRAP!!!
I post the facts, the simple facts. The TRUTH.
The haters can go on their grapefruit diets and starve.
That "get a life" post wasn't meant for you bud. :)
Exactly, only the people you mentioned will come up with this shit.
Bodybuilders know what works
-
Oh man.....
You are either-
1. DUMB (VERY)
2. delusional
3. combo of the two
Please shut up. Thank you.
Maybe you should do the same 'cause you never seem to make an intellectual post.
-
That "get a life" post wasn't meant for you bud. :)
Exactly, only the people you mentioned will come up with this shit.
Bodybuilders know what works
ok sorry I got a little defensive. :(
but my original posts stands. Calories in Calories out. You can eat whatever you want. I preach this because I have had friends and fellow gym pals doing these ridiculous diets. Low carb diet, high fat diet, 40/40/20, high protein, shakes only, etc. Give me a break. What a waste of TIME.
Oh and don't get me started on protein shakes after a workout. >:(
-
Maybe you should do the same 'cause you never seem to make an intellectual post.
;D ;D
Pal, DO YOU EVEN UNDERSTAND THAT USING THE WORD "INTELLECTUAL" IN THAT CONTEXT, MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE, AND IS IMPROPER ENGLISH?
l :-[
-
;D ;D
Pal, DO YOU EVEN UNDERSTAND THAT USING THE WORD "INTELLECTUAL" IN THAT CONTEXT, MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE AND IS IMPROPER ENGLISH?
l :-[
English is not my first language. I'm not a fucking American.
-
English is not my first language. I'm not a fucking American.
What is your first language fatty?
You are a fucking child. A spoiled, lazy punk -ass kid.
Remember YOU posted your pics and no you don't deserve ANY credit for taking anabolics yet EATING WHATEVER AND WHENEVER YOU WANTED.
-
Afrikaans
-
Afrikaans
In that case.
SHUT THE FUCK UP.
Don't try to comment on MY POSTS which is written in a LANGUAGE YOU DO NOT EVEN UNDERSTAND!!!
-
In that case.
SHUT THE FUCK UP.
Don't try to comment on MY POSTS which is written in a LANGUAGE YOU DO NOT EVEN UNDERSTAND!!!
Gaan jy verstaan as ek die heeltyd in Afrikaans tik jou dom doos! Jy is 'n dom fokker en die enigste taal wat 95% Amerikaners kan verstaan is fokken Engels. So moenie met my kom kak praat oor tale wat ek nie kan verstaan nie, want jy gaan nou nie 'n fok weet wat ek nou net vir jou gese het nie. Jou dom fokken kont poes geig stuk kak!
-
I'm done arguing with idiots in the internet. Pointless
-
I'm done arguing with idiots in the internet. Pointless
I agree. Delete your account directly.
DO US ALL A FAVOR.
-
The OP posted the topic because he disagrees with "science of fat loss" ,
It seems everyone else agrees with him, yet the guy is still getting slammed, lol
Welcome to getbig ;D
-
English is not my first language. I'm not a fucking American.
Remember, there is no world outside the USA
-
science ::)
-
(http://i670.photobucket.com/albums/vv67/FilipeFalcao/62e33f1c.jpg)
-
Wes, this kid is throwing it RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE and slow. :)
Shall I SMASH IT? ;D
Isnt it a little bit embarassing for you to be the stereotypical internet tough guy? ::)
Also, nice calling to your sugat daddy, silly man, keep dem punches comin, u pwning tha house.
-
'Studies' are the reason hospitals and the American Diabetes Association say that diabetics can safely eat nothing but pure sugar, provided they keep their calories under 2000 a day. And take their medication.
No idea why Layme Norton and his band of toolbags are always waffling about studies done on obese 60 year old women or mice... as if those even remotely apply to a 200+ bber on grams a week.
-
Isnt it a little bit embarassing for you to be the stereotypical internet tough guy? ::)
Also, nice calling to your sugat daddy, silly man, keep dem punches comin, u pwning tha house.
....and you're STILL blathering about being pwned. YOU keep mentioning it.
Ouch.
-
....and you're STILL blathering about being pwned. YOU keep mentioning it.
Ouch.
::)