Hot water or cold water for fat loss by JuggerNaught - TribalWar Forums
Click Here to find great hosting deals from Branzone.com


Go Back   TribalWar Forums > TribalWar Community > General Discussion
Reload this Page Hot water or cold water for fat loss
Page 1 of 7
Thread Tools
JuggerNaught
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
1 - 09-18-2022, 00:53
Reply With Quote
Ok TW doctors, settle something.

I've always heard that cold water is conducive to weight loss because your body has to increase calorie usage to raise the temp of the water when you drink it.

But just lately , im hearing people and seeing online where it says hot water is best for fat loss as hot water helps break down fat tissue.

I mean i guess both could be true, but does one work better than the other?
 
JuggerNaught is online now
 
Sponsored Links
havax
VeteranXV
Contributor
Old
2 - 09-18-2022, 00:56
Reply With Quote
i like to alternate quickly between drinking 16 oz of scalding hot water and 16 oz of almost ice cold water, just to get those throat and stomach pores to open up and get that metabolism working. i do about 3 of those quick alternating drinks a day.
 
havax is offline
 
uno
VeteranXX
Old
3 - 09-18-2022, 00:57
Reply With Quote
 
uno is offline
 
Mitchdubai
Pooptruck++
Old
4 - 09-18-2022, 00:59
Reply With Quote
What an absolute crock of ****. There are no calories or nutrients in water. How many calories you think you burn raising the temperature of a glass of cold water to body temperature? And hot water is no longer hot by the time it hits your digestive system because duh.

FFS stop trying to find the magic beans and go lift some heavy ****.
 
Mitchdubai is online now
 
Paladin-5
VeteranXX
Old
5 - 09-18-2022, 01:08
Reply With Quote
your body normalizes the temperature of the water within seconds of consuming it.
even for you this is awkwardly stupid.
 
Paladin-5 is offline
 
uno
VeteranXX
Old
6 - 09-18-2022, 01:09
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin-5 View Post
your body normalizes the temperature of the water within seconds of consuming it.
even for you this is awkwardly stupid.
 
uno is offline
 
Mitchdubai
Pooptruck++
Old
7 - 09-18-2022, 01:16
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin-5 View Post
your body normalizes the temperature of the water within seconds of consuming it.
even for you this is awkwardly stupid.
Pretty much what I said, worded differently.
 
Mitchdubai is online now
 
Mitchdubai
Pooptruck++
Old
8 - 09-18-2022, 01:28
Reply With Quote
Energy required to heat a pint of water from just above freezing to body temperature is 21 calories.

So yeah do that 30 or 40 times a day and it will contribute as much to your weight loss as a decent 90 minute workout.

GG Juggs post pics when you get to a ripped 180 drinking ****ing water until your bladder explodes
 
Mitchdubai is online now
 
lemontw
Veteran++
Old
9 - 09-18-2022, 01:45
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanster View Post
As I said, we go off topic, and it has to be about me, because Lemon has the IQ of a 5th grader and it goes down every year.

I predicted it would be a personal attack, by the person I said and was disappointed when a declining in mental decline by that person.

It's got so suck when Biden will have way outlived Biden's mental abiity.

I really am sorry.
 
lemontw is offline
 
Vanster
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
10 - 09-18-2022, 02:09
Reply With Quote
Eat less calories than you expend.
 
Vanster is offline
 
T-Dawg
VeteranXV
Old
11 - 09-18-2022, 02:13
Reply With Quote
75% fresh fruit and vegetables.

That's everything you need to know to lose weight

I couldn't gain weight if I wanted to
 
T-Dawg is offline
 
Mitchdubai
Pooptruck++
Old
12 - 09-18-2022, 02:17
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Dawg View Post
75% fresh fruit and vegetables.

That's everything you need to know to lose weight

I couldn't gain weight if I wanted to
**** me do you know anything about anything or are you just trolling? First poker and now this
 
Mitchdubai is online now
 
Mitchdubai
Pooptruck++
Old
13 - 09-18-2022, 03:18
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanster View Post
Eat less calories than you expend.
Isn't that a huge oversimplification though, in the sense that individual digestive systems work at different levels of efficiency, and therefore from a notional 100 calories of food, different people would absorb and convert into energy varying proportions of that?

And similarly 2 guys weighing 200lbs running at the same speed for the same length of time would burn different amounts of calories depending on factors like age, fitness level, body composition etc.?

I mean for the average Joe, working out your BMR in an online calculator, reading food labels and whatever calories the treadmill says you have burned is as close an approximation as you can get, but in practice it's far more complex than that and you need to drill much deeper into macro- and micro-nutrients, right?

That or it's all about the cold water
 
Mitchdubai is online now
 
Denver
VeteranXV
Old
14 - 09-18-2022, 05:00
Reply With Quote
It's not oversimplification.

it does take into account differences in metabolism. If your metabolism is slower you spend less calories and it just means you need to eat less than someone else.

Calculate from Harris-Benedict formula (for basal metabolic rate), factor in your activity and work from there. If you're in the majority eating little less than what harris-benedict gives (the 1984 revision is the standard used in scientific studies), usually works for weight loss. If you're all the time fatigued and not recovering from workouts and losing weight too fast, eat a little more... and if the opposite is true, eat a little less. But it's a good baseline to start from.

And mitch the BMR calculators take into account age, fitness level (activity), height etc.
Micronutrients are not shown to affect weight loss or gain in current literature, calories in and calories out are still the best way to control weight gain or loss.
 
Denver is offline
 
Mitchdubai
Pooptruck++
Old
15 - 09-18-2022, 05:15
Reply With Quote
I know you know your science / nutrition, but for the sake of being a tiny bit pedantic, thread title is specifically about fat loss rather than general weight loss. By "oversimplification" what I'm saying is 2 people could have the same BMR, same bodyweight, and same calories in/out. However if their activity levels (and specifically type of activity strength v. cardio) and their macros were balanced very differently for the same calories, then their outcomes in terms of body composition would also be vastly different.

To illustrate, Dood 1 burns 600 calories in the gym by walking on the treadmill for 2 hours. Dood 2 burns 600 calories in an hour or less doing strength and HIIT. Dood 1 has 10% protein, 40% fat, 50% carbs. Dood 2 has 40% protein, 10% fat, 60% carbs. Same total calories.

Very different outcomes, right, regardless of how much hot and cold water Juggs drinks?
 
Mitchdubai is online now
 
Denver
VeteranXV
Old
16 - 09-18-2022, 05:44
Reply With Quote
yes, I didn't state that macronutrients didn't matter (micros have not been shown to matter, lot's of interest in this though so might be the opinion changes at some point).

Maintaining muscle mass whilst losing weight in athletes is different than general population trying to lose weight. (in the former situation protein intake should be around 2 - 2.5g per bodyweight in kilograms a day and some evidence of benefits of fat intake around 1g per bodyweight in kilograms instead of not eating fats at all --> rest coming from carbohydrates). And obviously if trying to maintain muscle mass strength training is given.

Activities do matter some, but not as much as generally believed. There's no "fat burning zone" in low intensity cardio ---> basically beating up your body in multitudes of ways results in increased energy consumption following days (to repair caused damage, slow gradient of EPOC (excessive post exercise oxygen consumption) and for adaptation processes like increased protein synthesis etc.)

This is known and all of this affects the "how much calories you spend" and to lose weight you should eat less than you spend. Which is why I stated Vanster didn't over simplify, but was actually quite precise.

From your example, the two people would lose similar amount of weight in the first month or so. After which the BMR would differ (the other not losing as much of muscle mass or even gaining some, would actually increase his basal metabolic rate as muscle mass uses energy where as fat mass doesn't). so if they didn't adapt in the long run the other would stagnate (he/her would need to keep on decreasing the calories he eats when his mass goes down, where as the others energy consumption would remain high for much longer). The biggest difference being the other would lose alot of muscle mass along with fat mass whilst the other maintained muscle mass much better and only lose fat mass. They both could reach very low levels of fat mass though, other would be overall healthier and perform better in sports (the one with muscle mass), but the other would still get general health benefits of having low fat percentage in comparison to obesity etc.

And yea BMR calculators are approximations, which don't take into account body composition very well. so if you have alot of muscle mass, your BMR is most likely higher than what the calculators give. And if you got none, then the calculators are likely overestimating your consumption.
 
Denver is offline
 
Denver
VeteranXV
Old
17 - 09-18-2022, 05:51
Reply With Quote
And for clarity about micronutrients. they don't seem to matter as long as you're not deficient in some of them. If you cause defiency, then they do seem to matter.

But yea lot's of research going into this currently. So far stuff like vitamin D shows some promise but can't say it's proven science yet.
 
Denver is offline
 
Synth
VeteranXX
Old
18 - 09-18-2022, 06:00
Reply With Quote
im fat and only drink ice cold water, send this to your friends
 
Synth is offline
 
Mitchdubai
Pooptruck++
Old
19 - 09-18-2022, 06:02
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denver View Post

Maintaining muscle mass whilst losing weight in athletes is different than general population trying to lose weight. (in the former situation protein intake should be around 2 - 2.5g per bodyweight in kilograms a day and some evidence of benefits of fat intake around 1g per bodyweight in kilograms instead of not eating fats at all --> rest coming from carbohydrates). And obviously if trying to maintain muscle mass strength training is given.
Thanks. Everything in this paragraph agrees with what my PT/coach is doing with me, this is pretty much exactly where I am on macros right now.

You probably mentioned this before, but what's your background, did you study nutrition, do you work in this field?
 
Mitchdubai is online now
 
T-Dawg
VeteranXV
Old
20 - 09-18-2022, 06:13
Reply With Quote
Here is a demonstration of how insignificant water is:
Calorie = heat needed to raise 1 kilogram of water by 1 C
35.27 ounces in one kilogram

37 C = 98.6 F (body temperature)
12 C = 53.6 F (target temperature - lowered by 25C)

So, drinking about 2.2 pounds (35.27 ounces) of water chilled to 25C (45F) cooler than body temperature will cause your body to compensate for heat lost by burning exactly 25 calories.

It takes burning 3500 calories to lose one pound.
3500/25 = 140
You would therefore need to drink 140 Kilograms or 4938.35 ounces of water @ 53.6F to lose one pound
 
T-Dawg is offline
 
Page 1 of 7
Reply


Go Back   TribalWar Forums > TribalWar Community > General Discussion
Reload this Page Hot water or cold water for fat loss

Social Website Bullshit


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


AGENT: CCBot/2.0 (https://commoncrawl.org/faq/) / Y
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:58.