Losing weight is like hitting a steeply sloping treadmill with a broken switch. But it does not have to be that way. This myth of metabolism and the rabid treadmill might even feel like a gentle slope.
As Graeme Tomlinson, a nutrition trainer named The Fitness Chef, recently discovered, in a world where people take their own nutritional notes of Instagram stories, workouts of influencers and diet plans of 10-second Facebook videos let themselves go comply with the promise of a "metabolism-promoting" diet easier than ever.
According to Graeme, however, this is the truth Contrary to what a select group of fitness gurus apparently decided in 2006, "You do not have to change your body [sic] to lose fat."
View this post on Instagram 
& # 39; Metabolism & # 39; (Noun) is: "The chemical processes that take place in a living organism to sustain life". This is the definition of a metabolic event. It happens every day in thousands of complicated ways to ensure our survival. As late as 2006, some "fitness gurus" decided that you need to change the metabolic rate of your body to lose fat. So they have coined the concept of "speeding up" the metabolism to optimize fat loss. Their logic and evidence remains unproven and unknown. When we consider the metabolic process of digestion of food (thermo-effect of feeding), we know that this process consumes energy. And given the fact that fat loss requires an energy deficit, it's logical to claim that we can burn more calories through regular digestion of food – because we can. The basic drawback of this concept, however, is that the calories we consume also play a role in the energy balance – and they amount to much more than the energy consumed in the metabolism of food. The truth is that we regularly consume food to achieve this Increase your metabolism is just another unnecessary and unfounded myth of fat loss. If you were consuming 1800 calories per day over six 300 calorie meals, you would probably burn around 10% during digestion (30 calories per meal and a total of 180 calories). However, if you were to eat 1800 calories per day over two 900-calorie meals on the same principle, you would burn 90 calories per meal and still have a total of 180 calories. In the end it is the same. Versuch Trying to change your metabolism to lose fat is another senseless, pseudo-scientific process that clouds your thinking. Because when it comes to fat loss, the regularity of meals does not matter. You do not have to have breakfast if you do not want to. You can rarely eat large meals if this is your daily routine. Adhering to a realistic, sustained calorie deficit over a period of time leads to progressive loss of unwanted fat – we need to remember that. 🙂 - - #Fat Loss #Metabolism #Lose Fat #Calorie Deficiency # Calorie Counting #Fat Loss Travel # Diet # Equilibrium #EatingSnacking Time #Fatloose Tips #Losebelly Fat #Calories #Fat Loss Trainer # Diet #Slow World
According to Graeme, the "logic and evidence" for diets that promote consistent nibbling to accelerate metabolism "remains unproven and unknown. "
" When we consider the metabolic process of digestion (thermo-effect of feeding), we know that this process consumes energy, "he says. "Given the fat loss that energy deficit presupposes, it's logical to say that we can burn more calories through regular digestion of food – because we can."
The problem? The calories we eat are also part of the energy balance and "they count for much more than the energy used to metabolize food."
"The truth is to regularly consume foods to boost your metabolism only another myth about unnecessary and unfounded fat loss. If you were consuming 1800 calories per day over six 300 calorie meals, you would probably burn around 10% during digestion (30 calories per meal and a total of 180 calories). However, if you were to eat 1800 calories per day over two 900-calorie meals on the same principle, you would burn 90 calories per meal and still have a total of 180 calories. It ends the same way. "
" Trying to change your metabolism to lose fat, "adds Graeme," is another pointless, pseudo-scientific process that ruins one's mindset. "Graeme says it has two consequences: First, you do not have to have breakfast if you do not want to, and second, you can eat large meals less often, if that suits your daily routine."
Graeme has been skirmishing with Keto in the past Diet-advocates, he seems to still be on the same page as to the importance (or lack of) of regularity of meals.
Overall, however, it still differs from the low-carb gurus in that he believes that adhering to a realistic, sustained calorie deficit over a period of time is more important for weight loss than excluding certain food groups in favor of protein and fat.