dietpills

Django x2 · 21 Jan 2012 at 23:25

maccapacca said:
Orlistat gave me ulcerative colitis, get in there.

So, what did you expect? If you don't change your diet whilst on the pills, you'll be sat on the bog.

SexyGreyFox · 21 Jan 2012 at 23:29

Glaucus said:
Have you got any idea how much exercise it takes to burn that amount, hampered by the weight to what they can do. Yes the formula is easy. Sticking to it is very hard.

Exactly.
Every full marathon and half marathon I did + all the training people couldn't understand why I was still at least 3 stone overweight.
If I ran 13.1 miles I'd burn about 1400 calories so basically I'm just using the food I've put in and my weight stays the same.
It would make me laugh because the day after a marathon people would seriously say to me "You should have lost at least a stone doing that"

and I'd just say I hadn't lost anything.

dowie · 21 Jan 2012 at 23:30

One of my flatmate's at uni was fat, she still is now and I dont think she'll change.

She didn't eat anything particularly unhealthy but did have fairly large portions and did go out drinking like any other student etc... Main thing was that she didn't do anything really in terms of sport etc.. she'd just sit in front of the TV or sit doing coursework etc.. when not going out.

She did join the gym for a period of time (didn't last long) - gym was 5 mins walk from the house but she drove there because it was at the bottom of a hill and the house was up the hill... this IMO is the sort of attitude that means she'll never lose weight. Rather than pushing herself in the gym then putting in that bit extra by finishing her session with a short jog up the hill and having a shower at home she'd instead put in a token effort on the treadmill/bike and drive back.

ElliottJames · 21 Jan 2012 at 23:37

dowie said:
Exercise is the key tbh... not only burns calories when doing the exercise but raises your metabolism for a period afterwards. Thing is it needs to be an intense session - no good just doing a light jog on the treadmill for 30 mins then hitting the sauna - your resting metabolism will be back at normal level pretty soon after and you won't have burned much.

Sorry you know nothing just stop speaking

90% of fat loss is down to diet

ElliottJames · 21 Jan 2012 at 23:40

Dimple said:
Exactly.
Every full marathon and half marathon I did + all the training people couldn't understand why I was still at least 3 stone overweight.
If I ran 13.1 miles I'd burn about 1400 calories so basically I'm just using the food I've put in and my weight stays the same.
It would make me laugh because the day after a marathon people would seriously say to me "You should have lost at least a stone doing that" and I'd just say I hadn't lost anything.

Marathon = 26miles

26miles = roughly 2600cals

1lb of fat = 3500cals

So going by that, you wouldn't even lose a pound of fat doing a marathon.

dowie · 21 Jan 2012 at 23:53

ElliottJames said:
Sorry you know nothing just stop speaking

90% of fat loss is down to diet

BS tbh... people don't stick to diets, people will go out drinking with friends, will eat kebabs/other ****

I've had weight gain in the past as a result of an injury and I lost weight again when I started exercising again. You'll carry on burning calories after an intense session and it does make a significant difference.

SexyGreyFox · 21 Jan 2012 at 23:58

ElliottJames said:
Marathon = 26miles

26miles = roughly 2600cals

1lb of fat = 3500cals

So going by that, you wouldn't even lose a pound of fat doing a marathon.

EXACTLY and don't forget that you don't do a marathon on an empty stomach or have Mars Bars and energy drinks located around the course and when you finish you are that hungry that you'll eat a horse.

A fantastic example is Eddie Izzard who did about 53 marathons over 60 days and he still had a bit of fat around him.

marky g · 21 Jan 2012 at 23:59

ok guys wasnt go to take i dont to lose weight i was just asking as ex misses just started taking them and she sed they make her **** 24-7 i thought she was just full of **** lol thats all. so im off to do a marathon *** it im bored lol

SexyGreyFox · 22 Jan 2012 at 00:01

marky g said:
ok guys wasnt go to take i dont to lose weight i was just asking as ex misses just started taking them and she sed they make her **** 24-7 i thought she was just full of **** lol thats all. so im off to do a marathon *** it im bored lol

Lose the sweary quick

Tefal · 22 Jan 2012 at 00:02

marky g said:
ok guys wasnt go to take i dont to lose weight i was just asking as ex misses just started taking them and she sed they make her **** 24-7 i thought she was just full of **** lol thats all. so im off to do a marathon *** it im bored lol

so they're the pills that stop your intestines absorbing some the fat from your food?

if so yeah you'll be be ******** undigested grease, of course you could just stop eating it in the first place.

ElliottJames · 22 Jan 2012 at 00:04

dowie said:
BS tbh... people don't stick to diets, people will go out drinking with friends, will eat kebabs/other ****

I've had weight gain in the past as a result of an injury and I lost weight again when I started exercising again. You'll carry on burning calories after an intense session and it does make a significant difference.

No you know nothing. Weight loss is 90% diet.

Reducing calorie intake by 500-1000 below maintenance is easier to do then a 1hour HIT session which will burn 100-200 cals.

So no it's not BS, you know nothing

Glaucus · 22 Jan 2012 at 00:05

Tefal said:
if so yeah you'll be be ******** undigested grease, of course you could just stop eating it in the first place.

this is what users say. That due to side effects they avoid fatty stuff and then you don't get the side effects. Ontop of that what ever little they do eat, some off it isn't absorbed.

dowie · 22 Jan 2012 at 00:10

ElliottJames said:
No you know nothing. Weight loss is 90% diet.

Reducing calorie intake by 500-1000 below maintenance is easier to do then a 1hour HIT session which will burn 100-200 cals.

So no it's not BS, you know nothing

It is BS... obviously cut out the junk food etc.. but reducing 500-1000 calories below maintenance -for most people a crash diet like that will give some short term weight loss and then they'll just pile it back on after...

There aren't shortcuts tbh... pills and fad diets are flawed - tis a lifestyle change that is needed

SexyGreyFox · 22 Jan 2012 at 00:10

ElliottJames said:
No you know nothing. Weight loss is 90% diet.

Reducing calorie intake by 500-1000 below maintenance is easier to do then a 1hour HIT session which will burn 100-200 cals.

So no it's not BS, you know nothing

This is the absolute truth and I speak from experience.
The most weight I ever lost was reducing my calorie intake to virtually zero but it put me into a Mental Hospital in 1988

m@rty · 22 Jan 2012 at 00:13

ElliottJames said:
No you know nothing. Weight loss is 90% diet.

Reducing calorie intake by 500-1000 below maintenance is easier to do then a 1hour HIT session which will burn 100-200 cals.

So no it's not BS, you know nothing

Ehh?? You will burn quite a lot more than 100-200 cals by doing one hour of HIIT

Skillmister · 22 Jan 2012 at 00:16

dowie said:
It is BS... obviously cut out the junk food etc.. but reducing 500-1000 calories below maintenance -for most people a crash diet like that will give some short term weight loss and then they'll just pile it back on after...

There aren't shortcuts tbh... pills and fad diets are flawed - tis a lifestyle change that is needed

Reducing calorie intake by 500-1000 isn't a crash diet or fad :confused:

For heavily overweight people that eat a lot that's not extreme at all.

cm1179 · 22 Jan 2012 at 00:17

ElliottJames said:
No you know nothing. Weight loss is 90% diet.

Reducing calorie intake by 500-1000 below maintenance is easier to do then a 1hour HIT session which will burn 100-200 cals.

So no it's not BS, you know nothing

it depends what you eat. there has to be a balance, it's no good going on a 5 mile run/walk/swim and getting home and eating a full english because you're (obviously) hungry. swap the full english for 3 poached eggs and a pint of water and you're on the right track.

breaking down food intake into 6 small meals a day (porridge, mid morning snack of tuna, peanuts as a snack, lunch of a baked potato, dinner of chicken and veg, omelette around 7) was what i lived on for nearly 4 years in my late teens early 20's and i was extremely cut though it did make my head spin!

dowie · 22 Jan 2012 at 00:18

Skillmister said:
Reducing calorie intake by 500-1000 isn't a crash diet or fad For heavily overweight people that eat a lot that's not extreme at all.

Reducing it below maintenance is

arctine · 22 Jan 2012 at 00:18

When I injured my back a few years ago I put on a fair bit of weight.

To lose it I just ate 5 times a day and went running for 10-20 minutes every weeknight.

Make sure you have breakfast, I'd have a cereal bar and some juice or a yoghurt and some fruit.

I'd then have a snack at about 10 such as an apple, snack a jacks or beef jerky.

For lunch I'd have some meat, salad and a small amount of carbs.

Then I'd have another snack at around 3, similar to the one at 10. Sometimes I'd skip this snack though.

Finally for dinner I'd have meat and veg. No carbs.

Then I'd not eat anything until the morning. Eventually you stop feeling hungry.

I must have lost around 3lb a week. The initial stage of cutting down on junk was horrible.

As a treat I'd give myself one cheat meal every Friday. Anything I wanted.

Spit · 22 Jan 2012 at 00:20

Watch fat, sick and nearly dead then go on the juice diet.

http://m.imdb.com/title/tt1227378/