Is it just me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MyOffDays

I seem to gain weight so easily! I'm off sugar for lent, not even replacing it with anything, just eating my normal meals and I still seem to be gaining weight...

---

Sugar usually isn't a bit problem unless you eat it by the tonne. Instead of focusing on sugar, I'd focus on your calorie intake. That is usually where the problem lies.

For lots of people who were addicted for sugar and then "give it up" (although giving up sugar is close to impossible as it's in all sorts of things), often find themselves really tired all the time because they were on a constant sugar rush before. Because they're tired, they choose to eat more or replace it with things like carbs, which are just as bad as sugar if you have too much. This is probably what you're doing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Callum.

Metabolism is actually a pretty interesting thing and there's a lot of myths about it, like slow metabolism is a reason fat people often give for being overweight although somewhat true I believe.

I don't think there are huge differences in metabolisms. I've always been pretty slim and ate what I wanted when I wanted. However to gain weight you need to consume more calories than your body uses. I always claimed that I ate loads, but really when I counted everything that I'd eat in a normal day it was around 2000, less than the RDA and certainly not enough to put any weight on. It seemed like I was eating lots, but really I wasn't. So me putting the non weight gain as being down to metabloism (although true to some extent) was most likely wrong as I just wasn't eating enough in the first place.

However you should watch what you eat a little. Junk foods are obviously not good for you especially in excess which is probably what you're eating. No one wants to die early from heart problems etc.

**** a half helpful post, this is new.

---

All of this is dead on. Real cases of 'fast' and 'slow' metabolism makes about a 200 calorie difference either way which is extremely little (that's less than what you'd find in a large glass of milk). Anyone claiming they are overweight because of a slow metabolism and accordingly anyone claiming to be underweight because of a fast metabolism is talking out their arse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LoveToStack

All of this is dead on. Real cases of 'fast' and 'slow' metabolism makes about a 200 calorie difference either way which is extremely little (that's less than what you'd find in a large glass of milk). Anyone claiming they are overweight because of a slow metabolism and accordingly anyone claiming to be underweight because of a fast metabolism is talking out their arse.

---

That's genuinely quite interesting haha. Guess it's just another thing that seems to be over-exaggerated in the media :P? (And that silly people fall for i.e me).