Beware chess makes you fat!.

No, it's calories the body stores fat when there is excess energy that has not been burned off. Calories are a measurement for energy, therefore if one consumes too many calories then they will gain bodily fat. Carbohydrates have 4 calories per gram, as does protein (yes too much protein makes you fat, deal with it) and fat has 9 calories per gram. Therefore fat, not carbohydrates, is the main culprit.

I think you need to look at what people are consuming to find the culprit -- not how calorie dense the candidates are.

High-fructose corn syrup anyone?

Padman-"A sedentry lifestyle is the killer." oh that is just great now I am a serial killer.

Yeah a mass murders

That's not something I'd want to see from behind . . .

--Cystem 

Nope, it's overconsumption of carbs.

No that is not how it works. This misconception is exactly the reason why so many diets do not work and why people stay fat. The problem is indeed overconsumption of carbs.

Long story short: Carbs do not satisfy your hunger. Fat and protein does. This means someone that eats 100 calories in form of fat and protein is going to be satisfied while someone eating 100 calories in form of mainly carbs is still going to be hungry, making him overconsume calories. You can easily compare this to trying to feel full by eating candy. It does not work. And yes, pasta, potatoes, bread are mainly carbs = long sugar chains.

There is another problem with eating carbs. Carbs trigger your insuline production and as soon as you have insuline in your blood it cuts off the fatburning process of your liver. The energy gained from fat does not do this. This is why Atkins diet (high fat and protein but very low carb intake) works extremly well for losing weight and keeping it off without going hungry.

You really need to read up on this and I do know many people have it all wrong. Actually the majority of the population has it wrong including many doctors and dietists (which is suprising).

And yes I myself am living proof of it. I know it works because I've seen it work on myself and people I know. I lost 12kg fat in 2 months WITHOUT any excercise at all by just sitting infront of my pc.

"This is why Atkins diet . . . "

I knew there was going to be a commercial coming somewhere in that lecture . . .

1. It does not change the facts

2. I used it as an example because people tend to have heard of it. The proper name is probably LCHF-diet. Low-carb High-fat.

Who knew chess players had so many opinions on...everything.

Nope, this has been proven false lately. Cutting down on carbs is not a one-sided diet either. What did humans eat before we had bread and sugar? Fat and protein mainly. This we have done for 200.000+ of years. It is quite astonishing that so many people think it could be healthy to overconsume carbs. Compared to the carb intake of our former life a meal with full of potatoes is an extreme overintake of carbs. The input output theory has no scientific proof to stand on. It just some theory some doctor in 60s came up with that doesn't work.

It's not quite that simple.

Let's say that you are burning 100 calories a day (simple numbers, I know its too little). This means you need to eat 100 calories a day and nothing happens to your weight, right?

No. Your body first of all adapts to different kinds of calorie intakes. If you have a low calorie intake your body will make good use of every single calorie. How effectively your body extracts energy from food varies! It is not constant. This is why intake output theory does not work.

There is also a huge difference of eating 100 calories in form of 60% carbs, 30% protein, 10%fat and 100 calories in form of 70%fat, 25%protein, 5% carbs. With the latter mentioned intake you will feel full and satisfied. With the former mentioned intake you will still go around hungry and your body will try to hold on to every single calorie and fat particle.

The important thing is to understand that the body has its own energy regulator controlled by hunger IF you eat food we are designed to eat. Before the invention of bread and sugar in large amounts carbs were found in nature more rarely in form of fruit  for example and was used by our body as luxury energy because it is a fast and effective form of energy for our body. This is the reason why carbs do not satisfy hunger because in earlier days it would be stupid for our body to reject quality energy like carbs. There was no problem of overconsumption because there simply was not enough to overconsume.

Today it is quite different. Our bodies have not adapted to the constant luxory of having infinite supply of carbs in every corner of our lives. This is why it is a problem today and a greater problem that people do not understand this fact and still belive the problem lies in calori intake.

Our bodies are not born with a deficiency that makes us unable to feel the right energy balance needed in our intake. We don't need to calculate intake and output for our food as long as we eat GOOD FOOD. Skip the carbs.

Like an apple a day.

Beast, it's the first time I'm untracking one of your threads.

How many fat chess players over 2700 ? 

1-Chucky ?

Svidler

Gelfand

Well that was my point. The input output diet is bogus because as you said you need to know the calories extracted from the food by your body and not the calories you put into your mouth. The input output diet idea goes down the drain because you can't measure what you need to measure, right?

And ofcourse when I say "skip" it hardly means zero carbs because there are carbs in almost everything. An (or two or three) apple a day is fine but eating meals mainly based on carbs (which the majority of western civ ppl do) is overconsuming and few people can cope with it without getting fat as you can see from the sad state of our western way of life.