# How many calories do you really burn skiing?



## Nick (Jan 3, 2013)

Its a new year and with a new year comes a renewed effort to shed some pounds. I was 183 back in September but the holidays crept me back up to 188. I'd like to shoot for 178 now, so 10 lb. 

I started my strict diet regimen again and my wife said I will probably blow it out with eating and drinking at the summit. To which I replied, at least I'm burning calories skiing. She told me I wasn't. And I used to always say how skiing wasn't all that difficult (cardiovascularly) compared to, say, running or biking. Itnoa anaerobic and you do sweat but then you get frequent 10 - 20 min breaks on the lift. 

I'm sure its also a factor of the terrain you ski, how fast you ski, etc., but in general, how many calories do you think are burned during alpine skiing? Some apps say crazy numbers like 700 calories per hour. That seems high to me... I have to run 5 miles for the same amount. 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Riverskier (Jan 3, 2013)

I have no idea of the actual answer, but I know you burn a ton of calories being active outdoors in really cold weather. I read something to the effect that you need like 4000-5000 calories a day backpacking in the winter.


----------



## soposkier (Jan 3, 2013)

Not really versed in how many calories are burned an hour for any exercise, but Id believe the 700 per hour of real skiing time (excluding lifts).  Maybe not on groomed terrain, but id say skiing ungroomed/woods all day is as good of a workout as anything.


----------



## drjeff (Jan 3, 2013)

Nick said:


> Its a new year and with a new year comes a renewed effort to shed some pounds. I was 183 back in September but the holidays crept me back up to 188. I'd like to shoot for 178 now, so 10 lb.
> 
> I started my strict diet regimen again and my wife said I will probably blow it out with eating and drinking at the summit. To which I replied, at least I'm burning calories skiing. She told me I wasn't. And I used to always say how skiing wasn't all that difficult (cardiovascularly) compared to, say, running or biking. Itnoa anaerobic and you do sweat but then you get frequent 10 - 20 min breaks on the lift.
> 
> ...



I could see 700 per hour IF one is skiing hard in bumps/trees/deep powder and getting atleast 30 min per hour of that intensity skiing in. Maybe of you're earning your turns too that number could be higher also depending on how much climbing and resting you're doing. But my guess is that the folks who might be burning 700 per hour are by far and away the minority of folks on the hill on any given day.  But compared to the CONSISTANT level of exertion that my treadmill or my bike trainer tells me that it takes to burn 700 calories, I know that I rarely have an hour like that when I'm on the hill, let alone an entire day on the hill with that consistant a level of physical output.

For me, I'm about 99% sure that if I'm doing a bit of apres :beer: that my caloric intake for that day will more than likely exceed my caloric output (a few pints of 7-11% beers, which is what I tend to have if i'm going to have a few on that day) add up the calories pretty quick.

I will say that solid food wise, I've definately gone towards the lighter and healthier and smaller meal choices that tend to be popping up in more and more ski area cafeteria's and restaurants these days. That small cup of turkey chilli or a turkey wrap sandwich is far more likely to be infront of me these days than that cheeseburger and fries. But I'd be dreaming if I thought that day in and day out that my downhill skiing caloric burn ends up with me burning off more than I injest


----------



## Mpdsnowman (Jan 3, 2013)

I would also think there would be a wide range based on peoples metabolism rates.  Everyone burns different....I have the worst eating habits of anyone I know personally but I tend to burn it off quick...


----------



## Cannonball (Jan 3, 2013)

soposkier said:


> Not really versed in how many calories are burned an hour for any exercise, but Id believe the 700 per hour of real skiing time (excluding lifts).  Maybe not on groomed terrain, but id say skiing ungroomed/woods all day is as good of a workout as anything.



This.   That is one of the reasons the AlpineReplay app is useful.  It automatically calculates your lift time versus your active ski time versus your rest time.  Other sports tracking apps perceive that you are active while riding the lift.  You probably actively ski ~1/3 of the total time you are out on the hill (+/- how hard you go and not including breaks).  That probably puts you closer to ~300kcal/hr ballpark if going hard for all your turns.

Nordic and AT on the other hand, off the charts!  Easily 800kcal/hr when cruising along and >1,200 on climbs.


----------



## SKIQUATTRO (Jan 3, 2013)

i wore a Polar HR monitor one day spring skiing bumps at Sbush.....3800 calories burned


----------



## Cannonball (Jan 3, 2013)

SKIQUATTRO said:


> i wore a Polar HR monitor one day spring skiing bumps at Sbush.....3800 calories burned



How long a day?  That sounds pretty reasonable for a full day of going hard.


----------



## Powderqueen (Jan 3, 2013)

Nick said:


> Its a new year and with a new year comes a renewed effort to shed some pounds. I was 183 back in September but the holidays crept me back up to 188. I'd like to shoot for 178 now, so 10 lb.
> 
> I started my strict diet regimen again and my wife said I will probably blow it out with eating and drinking at the summit. To which I replied, at least I'm burning calories skiing. She told me I wasn't. And I used to always say how skiing wasn't all that difficult (cardiovascularly) compared to, say, running or biking. Itnoa anaerobic and you do sweat but then you get frequent 10 - 20 min breaks on the lift.
> 
> ...



You burn a good amount being out in the cold and skiing. If you eat a normal diet and reduce the amount of fat and sugar, you will lose weight skiing. I have taken off a couple of pounds skiing the last week, so I must be burning more than I'm eating. I don't like to eat a lot while skiing because it slows me down. I usually just eat a PBJ and a piece of fruit, maybe some corn chips and a cup of coffee. I'll have an energy bar while skiing if I get hungry. Apres ski I'll have a couple of beers and maybe a few chicken wings (they are 200 fat cals each! so don't eat a dozen...share a dozen with a few friends). Have steak, salad and potato for dinner and share a dessert and you'll be fine.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Jan 3, 2013)

I don't know about calories burned..

But I have the metabolism of a jackrabbit. Prior to ski season I was probably around 155lb, due to limited amounts of exercise in the summer.

Now I'm 167lb and 90% of that new weight is muscle. This is an all time high for me.. never been over 165 before. I was actually shooting for 165lbs but seems like I'm off to a better start than expected so maybe I'll shoot for 175lbs by the end of the season. And try to keep it on by mountain biking more in the summer.


----------



## Cheese (Jan 3, 2013)

Nick said:


> Its a new year and with a new year comes a renewed effort to shed some pounds. I was 183 back in September but the holidays crept me back up to 188. I'd like to shoot for 178 now, so 10 lb.
> 
> I started my strict diet regimen again and my wife said I will probably blow it out with eating and drinking at the summit. To which I replied, at least I'm burning calories skiing. She told me I wasn't. And I used to always say how skiing wasn't all that difficult (cardiovascularly) compared to, say, running or biking. Itnoa anaerobic and you do sweat but then you get frequent 10 - 20 min breaks on the lift.
> 
> ...



Simply put, concentrate on calories in (log, count and reduce).  Calories out always varies so it's a poor way to plan a weight maintenance or reduction diet.  If you ever get too light, putting on a couple pounds is easy.  Compared to banking on a constant exercise level then missing a few ski days or workouts, you'll be far more successful at losing the weight and keeping it off for years if you only worry about how many calories you eat.  Burning them off is just a bonus.


----------



## Cannonball (Jan 3, 2013)

Cheese said:


> Simply put, concentrate on calories in (log, count and reduce).  Calories out always varies so it's a poor way to plan a weight maintenance or reduction diet.  If you ever get too light, putting on a couple pounds is easy.  Compared to banking on a constant exercise level then missing a few ski days or workouts, you'll be far more successful at losing the weight and keeping it off for years if you only worry about how many calories you eat.  Burning them off is just a bonus.



Yes and no.  I hear what you are saying but you alsoreally need to fuel your activities.  If you are burning 400-700/hr or 3,000/day you need to re-fuel that get the most out of your skiing, health, and fitness. Massive calorie deficits while doing something active will make you under-perform and actually won't help with long term weight loss or maintenance.


----------



## BackLoafRiver (Jan 3, 2013)

I'm actually really glad this came up...I was wondering the same thing.  I've seen numbers tossed around from 400 - 700/ hour.  That seemed low to me and I figured that didn't take into account chair time.  I also downloaded the Alpine replay app. I hope it works.

As an aside, the calorie in vs calorie out thing kills me....after 6 + hours on the hill, I am starving. A cliff bar doesn't cut it and I need real sustenance so I end up binging. Not good. I don't want to take a break for lunch, especially if the skiing is prime like it is now. I need to figure out some kind of balance.


----------



## Cheese (Jan 3, 2013)

BackLoafRiver said:


> I'm actually really glad this came up...I was wondering the same thing.  I've seen numbers tossed around from 400 - 700/ hour.  That seemed low to me and I figured that didn't take into account chair time.  I also downloaded the Alpine replay app. I hope it works.
> 
> As an aside, the calorie in vs calorie out thing kills me....after 6 + hours on the hill, I am starving. A cliff bar doesn't cut it and I need real sustenance so I end up binging. Not good. I don't want to take a break for lunch, especially if the skiing is prime like it is now. I need to figure out some kind of balance.



I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that your binge wasn't greater than 3K calories.  So, if you believe the calories burned numbers in this thread, you're fine.

However, if you want to truly maintain energy while controlling weight, consider better planning and a stronger mental control over eating.  

*Planning:  *Breakfast when leaving home, a Clif bar at 10am on the chair, a brown bag lunch (known calorie quantity vs. a calorie guess at what came out of the cafeteria), a fruit and nut trail mix at 2pm and a normal sized dinner later.  The Clif bar and trail mix should provide a 500 calorie boost for the day.  Between three meals per day, two extra snacks, dipping into some fat stores in your body (assuming you're above single digit percentage body fat) and plenty of water, your body should perform just fine for the day.

*Mental control: *Both the additional snacks are for energy between main meals.  Snacks WILL NOT fill your stomach even though they have curbed hunger.  Mentally you have to learn the difference between _hungry_ and _full_ so that you don't over _snack_ to the _full_ point.  Eat the snack, believe that you are no longer hungry and don't let a non-full feeling trick you into believing you're still hungry.

The 500 calorie boost in the snacks I mentioned works just fine for me during the ski season.  There is no way I could increase my calories by 3K per ski day and maintain my weight just because I'm skiing.  No way!  More often any temporary weight loss I notice after skiing is due to dehydration and those pounds creep right back up mid-week.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 3, 2013)

As someone who literally and not figuratively counts calories on a daily basis, I agree with those who claim there's no way in hell skiing burns 700 calories per hour.  

And not to depress people further, but when you see those calorie burn charts you need to know whether they're including normal metabolic burn in that activity or not, or the chart is de facto useless (i.e. people burn calores while sitting on the couch mouth breathing and watching Dancing With The Stars).


----------



## Puck it (Jan 3, 2013)

Colder it is then more calories are burn. Like today.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 3, 2013)

uphillklimber said:


> I can't say how many calories skiing takes out, but 3-4 hours of good hard skiing loses 2 lbs a day for me, even with the food I eat.



That's mostly h2o weight you're losing (2 lb drop = 7,000 calories)


----------



## ScottySkis (Jan 3, 2013)

Sent from my ADR6410LVW using Tapatalk 2

Probably some but then when I use be in safety meeting I would put on more calories then what ever I took off.


----------



## Nick (Jan 3, 2013)

SKIQUATTRO said:


> i wore a Polar HR monitor one day spring skiing bumps at Sbush.....3800 calories burned



See to me that just seems insane. 

I ran the Boston Marathon and burned 3900 calories, also according to a HRM. How the hell can skiing a single day match up with running a marathon?


----------



## Nick (Jan 3, 2013)

BenedictGomez said:


> As someone who literally and not figuratively counts calories on a daily basis, I agree with those who claim there's no way in hell skiing burns 700 calories per hour.
> 
> And not to depress people further, but when you see those calorie burn charts you need to know whether they're including normal metabolic burn in that activity or not, or the chart is de facto useless (i.e. people burn calores while sitting on the couch mouth breathing and watching Dancing With The Stars).



Right. That's your 2000 calories per day you need to stay the same. Mouth-breathing calories :lol:


----------



## TheBEast (Jan 3, 2013)

myfitnesspal app is an excellent way to track food intake and exercise output.  While the calories burned from skiing are suspect in the app it helped me last spring reduce my calorie instake, monitor and give me a better idea of what I was eating (and the calories I was consuming) and lose about 30 lbs in 3 months (and have kept it off to date).  So in my mind the food tracking is as key as is exercise, but as others have said you need to fuel that exercise properly.  Food tracking takes some effort and getting used to but once you work that into your routine it will become second nature and you'll make better choices food wise.  Good luck!


----------



## from_the_NEK (Jan 3, 2013)

Nick said:


> See to me that just seems insane.
> 
> I ran the Boston Marathon and burned 3900 calories, also according to a HRM. How the hell can skiing a single day match up with running a marathon?



Marathon = 3-4 hours of activity. Skiing bumps bell to bell = 5-6 hours (minus lift time) of strenuous activity. Hard charging bumps all day long is an exhausting activity. I could see this burning calories on par with a marathon given the longer duration.


----------



## kingslug (Jan 3, 2013)

It's impossible to just label "skiing" and trying to figure out calorie burn as there are too many variables. Are you cruising the blues, banging double d bumps, how about length of the trail and altitude. I'm sure when I'm at a 4000 vert mountain at 11000 feet panting my brains out I'm burning a hell of a lot more than just cruising around and banging some bumps on 1000 vert...and then of course the beers afterwards just blows the whole thing to hell...


----------



## skiNEwhere (Jan 3, 2013)

I tele ski early and late season when the bowls and more difficult terrain isn't open. I am curious to how many calories I burn. I do know that I can alpine ski multiple days in a row even if I am out of shape, but I can't tele ski days in a row just because of how physically tiring it is, especially on my quads


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 3, 2013)

Nick said:


> See to me that just seems insane.
> 
> *I ran the Boston Marathon and burned 3900 calories*, also according to a HRM. *How the hell can skiing a single day match up with running a marathon?*



It cant.  Heck, if you go hard on an elliptical machine for 1 hour sustained, that's only about 700 calories.

Skiing is great exercise, but a lot of these charts and apps are way overdoing it on the calories burned (for this and other activities).  For instance, I don't believe playing violin for 1 hour burns 175 calories either.

  Realistically, I imagine these "calories per hour of skiing" rates are based off the premise of a continuous 50 mile long ski run, in which you could ski for a full hour uninterrupted.  The reality is, even the short breaks in lift line, riding the lift, and maneuvering to the run you intend will destroy the per/hour metrics, much like how stopping at a traffic light destroys your average mph on a trip.


----------



## SIKSKIER (Jan 3, 2013)

[h=2]I think standing outside in your underwear burns quite a bit.

Metabolism and Cold[/h]Your body uses energy to regulate your temperature. This  process is called thermoregulation and keeps your body close to the ideal  temperature of around 98 degrees by sweating to cool us down or shivering to  generate heat. In extreme weather conditions, our bodies work hard to keep our  temperature regulated and this process requires more energy. According to the  Appalachian State University, shivering uses energy in the form of carbohydrates  at a rate five to six times the normal amount. Additionally, the winter months  can lead to our bodies switching from carbohydrates to fat as a main source of  energy.


----------



## Scruffy (Jan 3, 2013)

Bump skiing may or may not be exhausting, depends on your skill level. Down hill lift served skiing is an anaerobic exercise; cross country skiing ( done right, i.e. hard charging )  is aerobic and will burn a lot more cal.


----------



## Nick (Jan 3, 2013)

from_the_NEK said:


> Marathon = 3-4 hours of activity. Skiing bumps bell to bell = 5-6 hours (minus lift time) of strenuous activity. Hard charging bumps all day long is an exhausting activity. I could see this burning calories on par with a marathon given the longer duration.



I'd be shocked if anyone could realistically ski , skis on the snow ski, 5 hours of bumps in a day. Literally 5 hours of bumping. 

SO far based on what I'm seeing from AlpineReplay, I spend about a 60/40 split on snow and on the lift. So I'm only "skiing" for 20 - 25 minutes out of every hour I'm actively on the slopes. 

Of that 20 - 25 minutes, probably at least 5 -10 is loading / unloading the chair, putting on my gloves, tightening boots, waiting in the lift line at the bottom, turning on and off a gopro, straightlining it on a runout, etc etc etc. 

So realistically ... I'd be surprised if many people in a full 8AM - 4PM day of skiing if the average person is actually actively making turns for a total of 2 hrs per day.


----------



## jrmagic (Jan 3, 2013)

I just assume I am getting a reasonable workout and burned some calories and leave it at that. The old mantra that you can not outtrain a bad diet holds true regardless.  So Nick for your purposes at the AZ Summit, even if you go hog wild on food and drink for 2 days (not counting Sunday as that's mroe ski and leave without partynig) you will likely add at most 4,000 calories on top of your norm which is a little more than a pound not counting any extra calories that you may burn so I say just have fun :grin:


----------



## Cheese (Jan 3, 2013)

uphillklimber said:


> Nick, When I ski , I actually beat my chair back down the mountain, and not by a little bit.



Stop tucking the bunny hills and ski some gnarly terrain where you have to take a break now and then!


----------



## TropicTundR (Jan 3, 2013)

Anyone use their Garmin connected to a pulse meter?


----------



## UVSHTSTRM (Jan 3, 2013)

I run a lot and typically burn about 600-800 calories an hour.  I find it hard that I burn the same amount while skiing/riding.  Especially when you consider that it is said that you need 20-30 minutes of continous cardio to really have affective calorie burn.  And when you consider that you ski/ride at 10-15 minute clips then take 10-15 minute breaks I find it even more unlikely that a skier can burn 800 calories an hour.  Don't get me wrong, I would still think it does wonder for ones muscles.  I by no means am an expert and could be way off.


----------



## steamboat1 (Jan 4, 2013)

Doesn't seem to matter what I do. I've been between 178 lbs. & 184 lbs. for 20 years (5' 11"). Got quite a beer belly too. I find the belly helps with the forward lean & keeping my weight downhill.


----------



## SIKSKIER (Jan 4, 2013)

steamboat1 said:


> Doesn't seem to matter what I do. I've been between 178 lbs. & 184 lbs. for 20 years (5' 11"). Got quite a beer belly too. I find the belly helps with the forward lean & keeping my weight downhill.


It also helps to save that joint that fell out of your mouth when your on the lift.:smile:


----------



## kingslug (Jan 4, 2013)

Nick said:


> I'd be shocked if anyone could realistically ski , skis on the snow ski, 5 hours of bumps in a day. Literally 5 hours of bumping.
> 
> SO far based on what I'm seeing from AlpineReplay, I spend about a 60/40 split on snow and on the lift. So I'm only "skiing" for 20 - 25 minutes out of every hour I'm actively on the slopes.
> 
> ...



Depends on vertical and how long you can sustain a single run...I've been on mountains that take 35 minutes to get down. Its what kills us easterners when we go to these places as we are used to under 2K vert so we are trained that way..


----------



## Nick (Jan 4, 2013)

^Very good point.


----------



## PomfretPlunge (Jan 4, 2013)

Nick said:


> I'd be shocked if anyone could realistically ski , skis on the snow ski, 5 hours of bumps in a day. Literally 5 hours of bumping.



At the Mogul Logic camps it starts at about 9:30 AM, 30-45 min of flats, then bumps until 2, with breaks.  Basically maybe 3-3:30 hours per day on bumps.  And everybody is completely wiped by the end, every day.  After lunch the kids in training and the coaches go do tramp/gym/cardio for hours... but the adult crowd is wrekked.  5 hours would be impossible! <pant..tongue hanging out...quads freezin up..puff puff..ackk..  ohh but so much fun   >


----------



## JaniceOC (Feb 5, 2013)

Great information here


----------



## FRITOLAYGUY (Feb 5, 2013)

anyone ever use alpinereplay app?  It keeps track of calories burned after you enter your weight etc, im looking at my day at okemo a few weeks ago it says i skied 14.1 miles, i burned 777 calories skiing a total of 36 minutes, 89 minutes on chairlifts and 1491 total calories burned during the day im not sure how they get that number maybe traversing between lifts etc who knows but its a pretty cool app to see your top mph, sustained speed, total vertical, it seems to be pretty accurate i just find it funny that at a mtn for 6hrs and 10 runs is only 36minutes of actual ski time.


----------



## Nick (Feb 6, 2013)

Yup! Hey Fritolayguy; check out the AlpineZone leaderboards on AlpineReplay. 

Just search in groups. Free to join!


----------



## FRITOLAYGUY (Feb 6, 2013)

Thx nick i joined the group today


----------



## gottabelight (Feb 12, 2013)

FRITOLAYGUY said:


> anyone ever use alpinereplay app?  It keeps track of calories burned after you enter your weight etc, im looking at my day at okemo a few weeks ago it says i skied 14.1 miles, i burned 777 calories skiing a total of 36 minutes, 89 minutes on chairlifts and 1491 total calories burned during the day im not sure how they get that number maybe traversing between lifts etc who knows but its a pretty cool app to see your top mph, sustained speed, total vertical, it seems to be pretty accurate i just find it funny that at a mtn for 6hrs and 10 runs is only 36minutes of actual ski time.



I just started using this app the other day and liked it. I did think I was burning more calories than it says I am though. That was a little disappointing.


----------



## jaywbigred (Feb 13, 2013)

ive always used 400/hr (of actual ski time) as a baseline, but there will be tons of variance, obviously.

Also in my opinion, you are completely wasting your time if the diet your using is not based on ketogenesis/ketosis/low carb. You want t lose fat, not muscle. Muscle is not only good for your body (burns more cals at rest, supports joint and skeletal health, etc) but it is important for the enjoyment of our sport.


----------



## gottabelight (Feb 13, 2013)

Ketogenic diet (I had to look it up):

The ketogenic diet is a high-fat, adequate-protein, low-carbohydrate diet that in medicine is used primarily to treat difficult-to-control (refractory) epilepsy in children. The diet forces the body to burn fats rather than carbohydrates. 

So I agree that diet is essential for performance as well as general well being. But I do not believe in neglecting carbs. I think good, complex carbs are very important. Your body needs them. I stay away from white bread, white pasta etc. Just my opinion.


----------



## legalskier (Feb 14, 2013)

If you're a young parent skiing the greens you still can burn off plenty of cals- by constantly picking your little ones up off the snow after they fall (been there, done that).
But I guess that would be more weightlifting than skiing, hehe.

Nowadays I get a good idea of cals burnt when I wring my baselayer out at the end of the day.


----------



## tomcat (Feb 15, 2013)

I was wondering this myself.  I skied 3 days in a row with 20 hrs of slope time including the last day in up to 10 inches of pow.  The last day I was somewhat dehydrated since I didn't drink much water apres skiing since I wanted to make the 5 hr drive nonstop.  I was down about 4-5 lbs. I ate decently.  No lodge food or alcohol and kept hydrated except the last day before the drive.  I am normally very active  XC ski, cycle, hike and I consider downhill anaerobic compared to the other activities.  Definitively a different muscle fatigue at days end than something more aerobic.  Oddly enough after the three days my abs were also a little tender in addition to my quads.

 If you lifted weights (anaerobic exercise) taking regular breaks for 5-6 hours (a full day of skiing) you would burn plenty of calories.  There is still exertion skiing.  The quads are certainly burning by days end.  You wouldn't burn as much as say cycling a century or running a marathon but you'd still burn a quite a few calories.
I think every person would vary quite a bit.  The guy who is in the trees for hours vs the groomer skier.  I'm sure when I ski alone I ski harder because I tend to ski top to bottom rather than stopping to regroup with other skiers. Pow vs packed snow etc.  All these vary every time we ski so calorie burn differs. That being said every activity's calorie burn would differ from person to person, even in identical conditions. A 250lb person burns more than a 150lb person etc.

For what it's worth I find the most unbeatable calorie burn to be long distance backpacking. When I hiked the AT I could never eat enough and still lost weight and I'm fairly small to begin with.


----------



## gottabelight (Feb 15, 2013)

I agree with what tomcat said how big an impact your skiing partners can make on calorie burn. Being with people of equal ability you can ski all the way down without having to stop and wait for people. The stop / start breaks make it a lot less taxing on your body (calorie burn).


----------



## goldsbar (Feb 16, 2013)

Just making your way down the mountain won't burn much.  To me, skiing is an athletic activity like biking.  High edge angle, near boot out carving is killer.  Maybe more calorie burn than bumps.


----------



## Cheese (Feb 17, 2013)

tomcat said:


> I was down about 4-5 lbs



You were dehydrated.  Unless you're trying to convince us that you burned 14,000-17,500 calories in 3 days of skiing it has to be water weight.  Don't feel bad, most fad diets use the same dehydration technique to lure followers into believing they're actually losing weight.


----------



## jaywbigred (Feb 19, 2013)

gottabelight said:


> Ketogenic diet (I had to look it up):
> 
> The ketogenic diet is a high-fat, adequate-protein, low-carbohydrate diet that in medicine is used primarily to treat difficult-to-control (refractory) epilepsy in children. The diet forces the body to burn fats rather than carbohydrates.
> 
> So I agree that diet is essential for performance as well as general well being. But I do not believe in neglecting carbs. I think good, complex carbs are very important. Your body needs them. I stay away from white bread, white pasta etc. Just my opinion.



I agree with you, a well rounded diet includes many carbs, especially those that are whole grain and full of fiber. I am talking purely about "dieting", i.e. not "your normal diet". I consider _dieting _a waste of time if results in you losing muscle mass with your weight. If you lose muscle mass with the weight, you wind up lighter, but it is likely short term because a) most people tend to put weight back on and b) your reduced muscle mass burns less calories while at rest than you did before, which means a) is more likely to happen...you're going to put weight back on more quickly, and now you have less muscle to burn it off.

My understanding from doctor friends is that ketosis is the state where ketogenesis is occurring, which means your body is converting fat stores to energy. I believe your kidneys help cleave ketones from fat molecules so that they can be used in place of glucose in your blood for energy. But your body won't seek out your fat stores until it thinks it has already depleted the safe amount of muscle it can use. High protein diets "trick" your body into doing this, and, so long as you are still calorie deficient, result in fat loss rather than muscle loss. There are different versions of how to do it, but I think that is the basis.

And it is certainly not just used to treat epilepsy in children. It is used to treat obesity, is the basis for South Beach, Atkins, and so forth, and is used by athletes and body builders who place an emphasis on muscle mass retention. I know there are high-fat versions, but I try to keep it as lean as possible for heart health. You also REALLY have to watch salt intake, and drink a ton of water so that your kidney flushes all the nasty by-products of the molecule cleaving.

When I am carb-cycling and skiing, the weight def. comes off a little quicker, because calories are being burned and muscles being strengthened. Skiing is, after all, most anaerobic, and a day skiing is more akin to a day lifting weights than a day running or swimming.

Once I reach my goal weight, I try to go back to a well-balanced diet including many carbs (though I try to eat them earlier in the day), but always trying to keep a tab on calories. This gets very hard when it comes to beer and holidays though.


----------



## Cheese (Feb 19, 2013)

jaywbigred said:


> It is used to treat obesity, is the basis for South Beach, Atkins, and so forth, and is used by athletes and body builders who place an emphasis on muscle mass retention. I know there are high-fat versions, but I try to keep it as lean as possible for heart health. You also REALLY have to watch salt intake, and drink a ton of water so that your kidney flushes all the nasty by-products of the molecule cleaving.



It's used briefly, not continuously for those diets.  Carbs are supposed to be reintroduced gradually.  Like most fad diets, the "miraculous" initial weight loss comes from dehydration and starvation as followers struggle to find ingredients they are allowed to eat.  Once fluids return and followers become more able to find foods that aren't forbidden for one reason or another the weight comes back and often brings a few extra pounds along as well.


----------



## jaywbigred (Feb 19, 2013)

Cheese said:


> It's used briefly, not continuously for those diets.  Carbs are supposed to be reintroduced gradually.  Like most fad diets, the "miraculous" initial weight loss comes from dehydration and starvation as followers struggle to find ingredients they are allowed to eat.  Once fluids return and followers become more able to find foods that aren't forbidden for one reason or another the weight comes back and often brings a few extra pounds along as well.



What do you mean by briefly? Ketosis is used "long term" (i.e. for the duration of a diet) in most low carb diets, until a target weight is reached. Carb-cycling is used short term to shed pounds on obese patients in hospitals, and short term on body builders and athletes before a weigh-in. 

My doctor echoed that the initial weight loss can be water weight _if you do not hydrate_. He even recommended a ton of water, of course,and even a small amount of electrolyte based drinks (count the carbs though). I've found that if I properly hydrate, carb cycling once or twice a year, I can lose the 3-7 pounds I am trying to get rid of in 2-4 weeks, with short periods of of carb-reintroduction spaced throughout. My pants immediately fit better when I am done, and my wife notices my face is thinner. My doctor said this is likely because my body-type stores fat at the belly and neck. I can usually keep that weight off for 6-12 months, sometimes longer, by counting calories and eating a well-balanced diet. Long term that is what everyone should shoot for when setting their "normal diet."

But don't confuse "diet" with "dieting," i.e. when you are actively trying to shed pounds. They are two different things. One involves a few weeks or months of hard work, the other a long-term commitment to lifestyle change or at least modification.

I also think, after 2 or more decades of prolonged use, that you cannot call low carb diets "fad diets" anymore than you can call snowboarding a fad. I also believe the medical world disagrees. This is not a fad diet like a juice a diet or a cleanse or a "only eat oranges" or what have you. It is based on metabolic science. Any real drawbacks and lack of understanding center around effects on cholesterol levels, sodium intake, kidney function, and heart health.


----------



## Cheese (Feb 19, 2013)

jaywbigred said:


> What do you mean by briefly? Ketosis is used "long term" (i.e. for the duration of a diet) in most low carb diets, until a target weight is reached.



I meant the _Introduction_ (Atkins) which last 14 days and _Phase 1_ (South Beach) which last 2 weeks.  These periods are nearly zero carbs and they clearly state that it is for a limited time.  It's these short periods that the body is in ketosis.  Often cleanses last the same 2 week duration.  It's a nice amount of time to make a large change to the normal eating habits and spur a rapid weight loss which gets subscribers hooked.  

Fad diets I would consider those that pop up on a Google search of "fad diets".  Ones that are known to fail very often for basically the same reason.  They restrict ingredients rather than teaching portion control.  Additionally I'd consider fad diets to be the ones that are used as an excuse when in public.  A reason to be rude at a friend or family member's dinner table so to say, "sorry I can't eat that, I'm on Atkins."  Justification as to why one can't share the birthday cake or a celebratory cocktail because I'm on South Beach or cleansing.  A diet that makes patrons stare at a restaurant menu tormented because there are very few choices on their diet.  Those are diets I consider "fads".

Then again, I'm old fashioned and was brought up differently.  I was taught it was polite to eat what was put in front of me.  I had to try all of it but I didn't have to finish all of it unless I had served the large portion myself.


----------



## ScottySkis (Feb 19, 2013)

I know some people who are on no carb diets and they both loss lots of weight. But they dont look good. To skinny and look unhealthy actually.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 19, 2013)

I could lose weight going on an all pizza  or an all McDonalds diet.   Total calories consumed matters, nothing else.


----------



## Cheese (Feb 19, 2013)

BenedictGomez said:


> I could lose weight going on an all pizza  or an all McDonalds diet.   Total calories consumed matters, nothing else.



Very true for weight, but if you want maximum energy, muscle growth or retention and cardiovascular health you might want to carefully choose the nutrients that are packed into those total (limited) calories you eat.


----------



## gottabelight (Feb 19, 2013)

I believe if you eat healthy, control your portions and exercise frequently you will be fine. I don't calorie count, but I know the caloric value of most of the foods I eat. I know if I eat moderate portions of healthy food and I exercise then I am not going to be overweight.

My Uncle is a big guy, he works out like a fiend, I asked him how he hasn't lost any weight.... he said "Input - Output = Stay put." Pretty simple equation.


----------

