Why is losing weight more difficult now?

[Willapp]

Hear what you are saying, but eating 3 proper meals a day is one of those pre-1980 good habits. If you don't eat between meals, the meals themselves can be pretty hefty and calorie intake will still be moderate, ie. less than 2k. Guess i am stating the obvious here.

I'm not saying you can't stay slim on 3 'square' meals a day, but the reason more recently we get recommended to eat smaller, more regular portions is partly an attempt to reduce snacking on unhealthy food when you get hungry midway between meal times.

By planning regular snacks that are good - bananas, a small quantity of nuts or other fruit etc. - you reduce the chance of getting hungry and grabbing a mars bar or sugary drink.

You are also distributing your daily calorie intake over a longer period which evidence suggests can lower the chances of fat storage compared against taking your 2000 cals in 3 large chunks.

[Dallas]

Nothing bigger than the palm of your hand every ~4 hours between 8am and 8pm.

[d000hg]

So we've gone from "all that matters is how much you eat and how much you burn" to discussions on how important the way and times you eat are. Which are basically the exact opposites

[meridian]

So we've gone from "all that matters is how much you eat and how much you burn" to discussions on how important the way and times you eat are. Which are basically the exact opposites

The nutrition/fitness industry is divided in pretty much the same way, between those that say in = out and those that are looking at much more complex interactions.

[Willapp]

Well, seeing as it's something I spend a lot of time discussing (although I am by no means a qualified nutritionist), it's like most things in that on the surface yes it is simple: regularly consume more calories than you burn and you will put on weight.

The complexity lies in how to best manage your calorie intake to stay healthy and maintain body weight, which is where macro-nutrient breakdown, meal timing etc. does have a bearing. Someone said earlier that "not all calories are equal" but I think what they meant was you get different amounts of calories per gram of fat, carbs and protein. (IIRC roughly 10 cals per g of fat and only 4 cals per g of protein). Which is why a protein-rich diet is likely to keep you slimmer than a fat-rich one, because if you consume the same quantity of each, you'll get 2.5x more calories from the fatty diet than you do from the protein one.

Of course what you really need is a balanced mix of all macros which is where it breaks down further (saturated fats versus mono- and poly- unsaturated, starchy versus sugary carbs etc.)

And that's where most people get fed up and head to Maccy D's to make themselves feel better

[MrMarkyMark]

Yes, you need a balanced diet, therefore getting the right mix of carbs, fats etc.

Also, the more nutritional food you eat the less you will need to consume.
Thats the reason why people are hungry half an hour after eating McDonalds, as it is nutritionally poor. .

[meridian]

Well, seeing as it's something I spend a lot of time discussing (although I am by no means a qualified nutritionist), it's like most things in that on the surface yes it is simple: regularly consume more calories than you burn and you will put on weight.

The complexity lies in how to best manage your calorie intake to stay healthy and maintain body weight, which is where macro-nutrient breakdown, meal timing etc. does have a bearing. Someone said earlier that "not all calories are equal" but I think what they meant was you get different amounts of calories per gram of fat, carbs and protein. (IIRC roughly 10 cals per g of fat and only 4 cals per g of protein). Which is why a protein-rich diet is likely to keep you slimmer than a fat-rich one, because if you consume the same quantity of each, you'll get 2.5x more calories from the fatty diet than you do from the protein one.

Of course what you really need is a balanced mix of all macros which is where it breaks down further (saturated fats versus mono- and poly- unsaturated, starchy versus sugary carbs etc.)

And that's where most people get fed up and head to Maccy D's to make themselves feel better

For "not all calories are equal", the difference is in the quality and type of food as well. Just to take carbs as an example, the glycemic index is well known - different carbs have a different effect on absorption, metabolic rate, and release of hormones such as insulin.

[SueEllen]

Yes, you need a balanced diet, therefore getting the right mix of carbs, fats etc.

Also, the more nutritional food you eat the less you will need to consume.
Thats the reason why people are hungry half an hour after eating McDonalds, as it is nutritionally poor. .

And the reason lots of adults remember why they avoid McDs is because the quality of the food makes them feel ill afterwards.

[FatLazyContractor]

And the reason lots of adults remember why they avoid McDs is because the quality of the food makes them feel ill afterwards.

Not sure about McD but every time I eat at Burger King, I fall ill

[SpontaneousOrder]

Well the article was suggesting they might be finding things of that nature, suggesting it's in the early stages of research.

However genetics is only one possibility. I mean, that genetics has an impact is known but that our genes are changing that rapidly seems unlikely (although given the spike in autism it can't be ruled out).
Pollution/pesticides/additives/ingredients being different could be an avenue of research. You could run similar experiments in countries with very clean and very dirty air for instance.

Genes change slowly, but the ways in which they are expressed can change much faster - and, supposedly, there is evidence that inheritance of those gene expressions is not necessarily insignificant. I.e. if you suffer some horrible experience you can pass that trauma down to your unborn children's genetic mechanisms.