Salt la continut


Fotografie

Dieta Hipocalorica - Principii De Baza

dieta hipocalorica

  • Please log in to reply
8 raspuns(uri) in acest subiect

#1 ActualaSlabutza

ActualaSlabutza

    Yeti

  • Moderatori
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13874 Mesaje:
  • Sex:Feminin
  • Inaltime (cm):165
  • Greutate maxima:81
  • Greutate curenta:68
  • Greutate dorita:64

Postat 10 July 2014 - 11:55 AM

Dieta hipocalorica e simpla, teoretic: arzi mai multe calorii decat mananci. Dar aplicarea acestui principiu este complicata.

 

Riscuri:

 

Infometarea, vezi de ce nu e bine sa consumi prea putine calorii.

 

O femeie de 25 ani, 105 kg si 1.65 intaltime, sedentara, are nevoie pentru mentinere de 2154 calorii. Comparativ, o femeie cu aceeasi intaltime, varsta si activitate, dar care are 70 kg, necesarul caloric pentru mentinere e de 1734 calorii.

 

Trebuie luate in considerare toate aspectele pentru a determina necesarul caloric si cat va fi deficitul. Din pacate multe femei considera ca trebuie sa manance max 1000 calorii si sa faca o ora de sport pe zi, cand de fapt ar trebui sa ajunga si la 2000 calorii.

 

 

Junk-food, vezi calorii goale.

 

Calitatea alimentelor ar trebui sa aiba aceeasi importanta ca si cantitatea. Corpul are nevoie de nutrienti care se pot obtine numai dintr-o alimentatie diversificata.

 

Se poate slabi cu o ciocolata pe zi, are 550-600 calorii, se poate integra intr-o dieta de 1000 calorii pe zi. Dar totul va avea de suferit: muschii, oasele, ficatul, rinichii, tenul.



#2 natalia

natalia

    Taz

  • Membri
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3071 Mesaje:
  • Sex:Feminin

Postat 24 July 2014 - 07:22 PM

cateva articole care mi s-au parut utile.
 

How to Set a Caloric Deficit for Fat Loss
http://evidencemag.c...t-loss-deficit/

#####

Large Calorie Deficit = >25% Below Maintenance

Pros
Fastest rate of fat loss — you can get lean in weeks rather than months. Provides huge immediate gratification, which can encourage long-term adherence to weight loss. Kickstarts your motivation to diet. Reduces the chance you’ll eat too much. The size of the deficit gives you a larger margin of error when monitoring your calorie intake.

Cons
Destroys high volume and/or intensity exercise performance. Increases the risk of illness or injury and makes training miserable. Requires you to eat much less food. Most of the people who need to lose massive amounts of fat can’t or won’t exercise much, so the deficit is going to have to come from their diet. Intimidates some people, which could compromise their adherence. Requires extreme self-deprivation and food restriction which can encourage eating disorder symptoms like binge eating and yo-yo dieting. After setting your protein intake, there isn’t much room for anything else. Increases risk of nutrient deficiencies if sustained for too long. Causes more muscle loss than less severe deficits, especially in lean people. Very overweight people can sometimes use large deficits without losing muscle, however, if they strength train and eat enough protein. Causes a larger drop in movement such as NEAT and NEPA and a larger drop in resting metabolic rate. Increases potential for disappointment. If people don’t set up their crash diet correctly and they don’t see the results they want, they often give up and assume that no diet will work. Diminishes long-term habits to stay lean.


#####

Medium Calorie Deficit = 15-25% Below Maintenance

Pros
Provides strong, immediate, sustainable gratification. Decent and motivating rate of fat loss, often around 1-2 pounds per week. Causes some hunger, but usually manageable. Gives you more food choices, still room for treats and less nutrient dense foods. Usually causes training progress to decrease or stall, but rarely to regress. Recovery from workouts is usually slower, but not horrible. Allows you to keep training, so you can create a deficit through diet and exercise. Reduces risk of muscle loss for overweight or average people. Causes fewer instances of mood issues, lethargy, and metabolic slowdown.

Cons
Increases risk of muscle and strength loss for lean people despite strength training and adequate protein intake. Elevates risk of decreased performance too much for high level athletes. Viewed as boring, since this is how most people diet. Slows fat loss compared to large deficits. Reduces margin of error when restricting calories. Easier to sabotage if you are bad at counting calories or get bored with your diet. Intimidates some people.


#####

Small Calorie Deficit: < 15% Below Maintenance

Pros
Makes dieting easier. Reduces number of lifestyle changes needed. Often as simple as giving up soda or moving a little more throughout the day, like using a standing workstation. Lowers hunger to almost nonexistent levels (for many). Lower barrier to entry for people who are anxious about dieting. Easy to get the ball-rolling. Reduces lethargy, mood problems, or decreases in activity levels or metabolic rate. Reduces the risk of decreasing performance or recovery. Training might be slightly harder, but you can still maintain your intensity and volume. Drastically reduces the risk of muscle loss for lean people. You can sometimes completely prevent muscle loss if you also lift weights and eat enough protein. May increase long-term adherence if you are patient and consistent.

Cons
Drastically reduces rate of fat loss. You have to diet longer and you often don’t notice any change in your appearance or weight for weeks. Requires more patience and consistency. Lowers your margin of error for food intake. You have to be very diligent about making sure you’re in a caloric deficit. If you eat even a few hundred calories more than you think, you won’t lose fat.


deficit maxim recomandat: 20%
din experienta personala, pt "ultimele 5 kg" si pt binge eating in istoric: deficit recomandat 10-15%
zile de mentinere: 1 - 2 pe saptamana
 


Acest mesaj a fost editat de ActualaSlabutza: 04 August 2014 - 07:55 AM
Mutat partial la topicul: Calorii goale (junk food)


#3 ActualaSlabutza

ActualaSlabutza

    Yeti

  • Moderatori
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13874 Mesaje:
  • Sex:Feminin
  • Inaltime (cm):165
  • Greutate maxima:81
  • Greutate curenta:68
  • Greutate dorita:64

Postat 25 July 2014 - 09:15 AM

Un alt aspect al dietei este numaratul caloriilor.

 

Unele persoane considera ca trebuie sa calculeze la sange, ceea ce implica un efort prea mare si stres. O sa dau un exemplu simplu, o rosie.

Rosii - 100 grame, 18 calorii, 0.9 proteine, 0.2 lipide, 3.9 carbohidrati, 1.2 fibre
100g de rosie are 18 calorii, ca procentaj din totalul de calorii pe zi e nesemnificativ. O rosie mica spre medie are 100g, +/- 10g. In jurnalul se poate calcula cu 100g, fara a cantari, diferenta de 10g insemnand doar 1.8calorii!

 

Aceleasi principiu se poate aplica la multe alte alimente. Legumele au putine calorii pe 100g, asa ca diferentele de 10-20g sunt nesemnificative. In timp, cantarind de cateva ori, se poate estima si la alimente care au mult mai multe calorii, cum ar fi oleaginoasele. Intr-un pumn de-al meu inchis intra 14-15g oleaginoase, nu am de ce sa cantaresc de fiecare data.

Se poate tine o evidenta fara a folosi cantarul constant si se poate estima cate grame are o portie dupa 2-3 cantariri, cu o precizie destul de mare.

 

 

 

 

Alte persoane cad in extrema opusa, estimeaza fara sa fi cantarit vreodata.

Daca se estimeaza 2 pumni (inchisi) de nuca la 50g (in loc de 25-30g), diferentele sunt imense, aproximativ 130 calorii! Adica, echivalentul a 7 rosii de care vorbeam mai devreme.

Nuci - 50 grame, 327 calorii, 7.6 proteine, 32.6 lipide, 6.9 carbohidrati, 3.4 fibre
si

Nuci - 30 grame, 196.2 calorii, 4.6 proteine, 19.6 lipide, 4.1 carbohidrati, 2 fibre
 

Estimarile de genul asta duc la deficite calorice mult prea mari. Ceea ce duce la subalimentare, scaderea metabolismului si toate problemele asociate.



#4 natalia

natalia

    Taz

  • Membri
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3071 Mesaje:
  • Sex:Feminin

Postat 31 July 2014 - 12:31 PM

stres (inclusiv aferent unei diete stricte / prea mult sport) = cortisol = retentie de apa, care poate masca scaderea stratului de grasime.

Water Retention and Weight Loss: You Can Lose Fat, But Not Weight?
http://www.musclefor...nd-weight-loss/

Water & Scale Weight Fluctuations
http://theswole.com/...t-fluctuations/

#5 natalia

natalia

    Taz

  • Membri
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3071 Mesaje:
  • Sex:Feminin

Postat 19 July 2015 - 09:36 AM

de ce nu functioneaza pe termen lung dieta hipocalorica HCLF (high carb - low fat).

 

 

 

obezitatea: cauze si solutii: The Aetiology of Obesity - 6 videos

https://www.youtube....asonfung/videos

 

toate studiile in format text: https://intensivedie...ement.com/blog/


Acest mesaj a fost editat de natalia: 19 July 2015 - 09:47 AM


#6 OldAccount

OldAccount

    Koala

  • Membri
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2211 Mesaje:
  • Sex:Masculin
  • Inaltime (cm):180
  • Greutate maxima:100
  • Greutate curenta:76
  • Greutate dorita:78

Postat 10 September 2015 - 06:29 PM

De ce număratul caloriilor este ineficient, periculos și doar o pierdere de timp

 

 

,,Un exemplu simplu – cazul lui Sean Croxton, blogger din SUA.

În mai 2001 termină liceul cu greutatea de 77.5 kg. 10 ani mai târziu are tot 77.5 kg. Acest lucru e de-a dreptul stelar. De ce? Fiindcă pe parcursul a 3,652 de zile el şi-a păstrat exact, băi dar exact, numărul de calorii consumate cu o acurateţe de robot; şi toate acestea fără să folosească un calculator. Dacă ar fi consumat doar 10 calorii în plus în fiecare zi, timp de 10 ani, ar fi avut cu 4.73 kg mai mult azi ( 36.520 calorii împărţit la 7.716 calorii în kg de grăsime = 4.73 ). Doar 10 Kcalorii. Asta înseamnă 1 migdală şi jumătate. Deci după 10 ani de torturi, băute care au ţinut deseori până târziu în noapte şi nenumărate “orgii” alimentare conţinând 1 migdală şi jumătate el şi-a menţinut greutatea echilibrată. Nu e incredibil?''



#7 jasmine

jasmine

    Pestisor

  • Membri
  • PipPip
  • 169 Mesaje:
  • Sex:Feminin

Postat 26 January 2016 - 01:37 PM

So what this study did was to randomly assign two groups of overweight women to eating a large breakfast (BF group) or a large dinner (D group). Both ate 1400 calories/day, and the macronutrient composition of each diet was matched – only the timing of the largest meal was changed. While both groups lost weight, the BF group was clearly superior for both weight loss and waist size (important measure of visceral fat) by almost 2.5 times (-8.7 kg vs -3.6 kg).

https://intensivedie...tms-fasting-17/

#8 OldAccount

OldAccount

    Koala

  • Membri
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2211 Mesaje:
  • Sex:Masculin
  • Inaltime (cm):180
  • Greutate maxima:100
  • Greutate curenta:76
  • Greutate dorita:78

Postat 29 January 2016 - 11:56 AM

Why “Calories in, Calories Out” Doesn’t Tell The Whole Story

#9 natalia

natalia

    Taz

  • Membri
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3071 Mesaje:
  • Sex:Feminin

Postat 26 May 2016 - 03:55 PM

Lectura obligatorie. :)

Why The First Law of Thermodynamics is Utterly Irrelevant
https://intensivedie...ics-irrelevant/





Alte subiecte ce contin una sau mai multe etichete similare: dieta hipocalorica

2 useri citesc subiectul

0 membri, 2 vizitatori, 0 utilizatori anonimi