Re: The POTUS and physical fitness

On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 01:13:37 GMT, gekko
<gekko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>Mairzydoats and dozydoats, but little Josh Hill
><usereplyto@xxxxxxxxx> posts to misc.writing, saying ...
>
>
>> Forex, it takes
>> almost an hour of aerobics to burn off a single 340 calorie Krispy
>> Kreme kreme-filled donut, and 28 minutes of walking to burn the
>> energy in a plain donut.
>
>You are too stupid for words, Josh.

Watch it, Gekko. I peeked ahead, and you're about to do a Ray here.

>You burn calories based on your weight, heart rate, muscle-to-fat
>ratio, sex, and height.
>
>The calories contained in food -- potential, Josh, not actual
>*things* that move about -- do not magically know that they are
>Krispy Kreme Kreme-Filled Donut Kalories and, like, kling to your
>chubby ass stubbornly refusing to burn until you do your 60 minutes
>of aerobic exercise. They likewise don't suddenly change their
>ability to be utilized because they're the smaller, non-glazed,
>unfilled, plain Safeway store donut.
>
>Once the food substance has been converted to a form that you _can_
>metabolize, you metabolize it, or you store it, depending on how much
>energy you require. No matter whether it started life as a Krispy
>Kreme or a tasty carrot stick.
>
>That "plain donut" you're talking about? Has fewer calories than the
>Krispy Kreme one.

Will you stop playing nursery school teacher for a moment? Everyone
here has known these facts since birth.

>If you're a 120 pound, 63" female, aged 46, with 22% body fat, and
>you get your heart rate up to an average of 150 bpm, then you will
>burn around 300 calories in 50 minutes of high intensity aerobics.
>You could eat *nothing*, Josh, and still burn that 300 calories. You
>could eat a plain donut, and burn that 300 calories. You could eat a
>Krispy Kreme, and burn that 300 calories.
>
>What you are so badly trying to state is that people are unaware that
>they are consuming *more* calories, and probably getting less
>appetite satisfaction, when they eat the Krispy Kreme than the
>smaller, plain brand.
>
>What you are also badly expressing is the odd interaction between
>food groups and the body -- the rapidity with which the body
>processes certain types of calories and the feelings of satiation
>following, the energy levels provided after, the duration of said
>energy levels, and the general state of health.
>
>If I eat a steak, I feel more full, more satiated, for longer, and
>end up feeling more energetic far longer into the day than if I grab
>a Three Musketeer bar that has the same caloric potential.
>
>Why? Because the steak takes longer to break down into the sugars
>the body uses for fuel. It stays in the stomach longer. The body
>reacts to the protein by releasing glycogen, which triggers your body
>to use stored fuel for energy, rather than releasing insulin, which
>triggers the body to store the sugars as fat for later use. The
>candy bar gives you an initial surge of energy but then you feel
>"down" later, as well as hungry because it has left your stomach and
>your body still hasn't gotten what it needed. Your energy levels
>are lower, so you're less inclined to want to get out and exercise.
>
>And so on.

And here we go again. You call me "too stupid for words," and then you
regurgitate information that every schoolboy knows -- information that
is completely consistent with what I've said, and, in fact, supports
my argument.

>*That* is the problem with today's processed foods and their easy
>access, Josh. Not that they exist. Not that they hold guns to
>peoples' heads and demand to be consumed.

And then you make a statement that's illogical at best -- if today's
processed foods didn't exist, they wouldn't be a problem, would they?
And you follow that up by putting words in my mouth in the time-tested
fashion of demagogues -- words that do nothing to counter the research
done on dopamine pathways and the like.

So:

1. You argued that the rich are thin because of their genes (!) and
that the poor are that way because liberals have deprived them of
personal responsibility. Apparently it wasn't sufficient to spout
nonsense twice -- you had to spout two nonsenses that were mutually
contradictory.

2. I did not deny that genetics played a role in obesity, but argued
that the evidence did not support the hypothesis that there was a
genetic divide between rich and poor, and pointed out that our current
obesity epidemic could not be genetic in origin.

3. Instead, I pointed to junk food as the major cause of the obesity
epidemic, and, in other posts, to market economics. I also pointed out
that junk food has some of the attributes of narcotics.

4. You pointed to exercise. I pointed out that while physical activity
certainly plays a role, it is unrealistic to suppose that people will
get enough exercise to work off even one extra bag of potato chips.

4. You reinforced the point I had made about the nutritional tricks
played by junk food, and then put words in my mouth.

It sounds to me like you've ceded all the substantial points.



--
Josh
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The POTUS and physical fitness
    ... Mairzydoats and dozydoats, but little Josh Hill ... > almost an hour of aerobics to burn off a single 340 calorie Krispy ... > energy in a plain donut. ... You burn calories based on your weight, heart rate, muscle-to-fat ...
    (misc.writing)
  • Re: The POTUS and physical fitness
    ... Mairzydoats and dozydoats, but little Josh Hill ... > Will you stop playing nursery school teacher for a moment? ... your very first deceitful argument had to do with the *food* ... that the "plain" donut had fewer calories. ...
    (misc.writing)
  • Re: Carbs vs. high fat
    ... in general less calories more burn is a starting place, but you must then consider how your body reacts to what you are eating, how well you get nutrients from your food groups, what you are sensitive to and allergic to... ... If you want to lose weight, eat less of what foods you can eat. ... If you eat more calories than you burn, ...
    (rec.food.cooking)
  • Re: Land of the Free, Home of the Fat - America home to 23% of planets obese.
    ... food, not do anything to burn off calories and gain weight, and we all ... know people who gain weight just looking at brownies. ... It seems clear to me that for some people food goes through ...
    (rec.food.cooking)
  • Re: Scammed again???? Re: KettleWorx.....
    ... First, if someone CAN burn 20 cal/min running, then of course they ... Oh, Oh, I just burntid 500 calories in 45 min, and I didn't even ... the slower per mile pace that I posted in the recent 5K that I ran ... Well, not disputing this, cuz resistance training does have some fat burning ...
    (misc.fitness.weights)