Causal Essay – Ryan Veltman

Macronutrient Management

Having an aesthetically pleasing body is something that everyone seeks. However, reaching this goal can be quite difficult for most people, especially when diet comes into play. People often have a preconceived notion that dieting basically entails restriction from any foods that taste good or are desirable. Even when people do follow diets and lose the weight they desire, they usually end up putting the weight right back on once they finish their diet because their lifestyle was not maintainable. The diet plan merely provided them with a temporary fix to their weight issues. In even worse case scenarios, people who do follow these unsustainable diets for too long are likely to develop eating disorders.  In order for people to attain a better physique and actually be able to maintain it, they must have a diet that can be sustainable as a lifestyle change.

When it comes to dieting, the most important thing to understand is how calories work. Calories are what make up food, and are divided into three categories: protein, carbohydrate, and fat. These categories are called macronutrients. Protein and carbohydrates each contain four calories per gram, while fat contains 9 calories per gram. The energy that our bodies use come from the calories of each of these macronutrients that we consume. Therefore, everyone has a maintenance level of caloric intake that will cause them to neither gain nor lose weight. When weight gain and weight loss come into play, the primary factor is calories being consumed vs. calories being burned. A caloric surplus of +500 calories per day will result in weight gain, regardless of which type of food is eaten. On the other end of the spectrum, a caloric deficit of -500 calories per day will result in weight loss, regardless of the food that is consumed. This fundamental dieting principle concludes that the primary contributor to weight gain or weight loss is calories in vs. calories out. Although the quality of food, meaning its macronutrient components, is still important in determining which type of weight – either fat or muscle – is lost or gained, it is not the top priority to account for when losing or gaining weight.

A new, flexible dieting method that has recently become popular is a diet called “if it fits your macros” (abbreviated IIFYM). IIFYM has its dieters focus on daily macronutrient (carb, protein, fat) requirements to consume. The science behind it basically states that the human body does not discriminate against macronutrients. A carb is a carb, fat is fat, and protein is protein, regardless of where they come from. How the dieter chooses to reach these numbers is entirely up to him/her. Those that follow this type of diet can literally choose whichever foods they want to eat so long as they fulfill these macronutrient requirements. The diet ensures that so long as the proper amount of macronutrients are consumed on a daily basis, the dieters will see the results they want, whether that be fat loss or muscle gain. This is becoming an extremely popular trend because not only does it produce physical benefits, but it also helps peoples’ mental states in that it allows them to eat what they want and satisfy their cravings without feeling guilty about “cheating” on their diet, which is how many people who follow restrictive diet plans tend to feel when they treat themselves to something outside of their regimen.

With all this in mind, though, the question that always comes up is usually something along the lines of “So if I can eat whatever I want, does that mean I could eat junk food all day and still see physical improvements in my body?” The answer to this  question is yes, if done so properly. A self-experiment performed by Mark Haub, a Human Nutrition professor at Kansas State University, tested this concept.  For ten weeks, Haub consumed a twinkie and either some doritos or oreos every three hours in replacements of his usual meals. These food sources made up two-thirds of his diet. The remaining one-third of his diet was a protein shake and either a can of green beans or a couple of celery sticks. Haub was also taking a multivitamin supplement as well. His logic in doing this was that since raw caloric consumption is the main determining factor of weight loss and weight gain, the quality of his food did not matter. The diet that he was on during this time period equated to about 1,800 calories per day. Haub’s maintenance level was around 2,600 calories per day, so this was a significant caloric deficit of -800 calories per day. After two months, he lost twenty-seven pounds. His body mass index decreased from 28.8 to 24.9.  His “bad” cholesterol (low-density lipoprotein, or LDL), went down twenty percent, while his “good” cholesterol (high-density lipoprotein, or HDL), increased by twenty percent.  His triglyceride levels, a form of fat, also decreased by thirty-nine percent.  Haub’s overall body fat after this experiment decreased from 33.4 percent to 24.9 percent. Although his method was not at all usual, his experimental diet made it evident that the quantity of food certainly outweighs the quality when it comes to losing or gaining weight.

 

Works Cited

1.) “Clean Eating vs IIFYM: The Truth – RippedNFit: Exercise, Nutrition, Lifestyle & Online Fitness Community.” RippedNFit: Exercise, Nutrition, Lifestyle & Online Fitness Community. RippednFit, 24 Sept. 2013. Web. 23 Apr. 2014. <http://www.rippednfit.com/nutrition/clean-eating-vs-iifym-the-truth/&gt;

2.) “Food: It’s Not Just Physical, It’s Psychological.” Gorgo Magazine Inc Food Its Not Just Physical Its Psychological Comments. Gorgo Magazine Inc, 31 Oct. 2013. Web. 23 Apr. 2014. <http://gorgomag.com/food-its-not-just-physical-its-psychological/&gt;.

3.) Samuels, Mike. “Getting Dirty Diet: If It Fits Your Macros.” Elite FTS. EliteFTS, 20 June 2012. Web. 23 Apr. 2014. <http://articles.elitefts.com/nutrition/getting-dirty-if-it-fits-your-macros-needs-formatted/>.

4.) Park, Madison. “Twinkie Diet Helps Nutrition Professor Lose 27 Pounds.” CNN. Cable News Network, 08 Nov. 2010. Web. 24 Apr. 2014. <http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/&gt;.

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Causal Essay – Ryan Veltman

  1. veltmanr0's avatar veltmanr0 says:

    -Feedback request
    -I think I may have dived into the rebuttal portion of the next assignment too quickly before making a better causal argument(?)

    Feedback provided. —DSH

  2. davidbdale's avatar davidbdale says:

    OK, Ryan.
    I’m going to try to restrain my remarks to answering your question first: Did I go to far toward rebuttal and neglect to make a good causal argument? (Let’s see how much will power I have.)

  3. davidbdale's avatar davidbdale says:

    P1. It’s hard to tell exactly what your thesis is here, Ryan, but you do entertain some causal material.
    Definition Claim first:
    —Diet = avoiding delicious food
    Causal Claim:
    —Diet (D) does not cause (L) Long-term weight loss.
    Causal Claim:
    —Poorly planned diets (P) cause diet abandonment (A)
    Causal Claim:
    —Poorly planned diets (P) cause food anxiety issues or disorders (O) like orthorexia.

    So far, so good. Looks like causal argument to me.

    P2.
    Macronutrient Eating Plan (MEP) causes (?) what exactly? “The results they want.” You haven’t mentioned weight loss. Don’t assume it’s understood. You haven’t identified the physical benefits. The mental benefit is named and explained, but it’s only available to people who used to “feel guilty” about “cheating.” It’s a negative benefit, isn’t it?

    Still no rebuttal, but not much cause and effect here either.

    P3. Pure rebuttal, and leaves you WIDE open for more counterargument too. Do you really want to claim that eating vitamins along with my junk food is a valid macronutrient diet? If so, the goals of the diet need to be VERY clearly specified. What exactly are those “results they want” again?

    P4. This paragraph could go either way, Ryan. It does function as the beginning of a rebuttal to a common objection. But it could easily be written as primary argument material too. The strongest rebuttal question isn’t “Can I splurge on McDonald’s and succeed on this diet?”; it’s, “Can I live on nothing but McDonald’s?” You’re answering the first, not the second. (You also hint that there’s a difference in proteins. I don’t think you’re allowed to specify under the terms you’ve laid down for the diet.)

    Put the diet to a (very specific) test. Whatever the quantities, can I achieve “the results I want” from cheeseburgers and vitamins? There’s plenty of fat, carbohydrate, and protein there. Maybe I need to throw away a couple of buns or tinker with the proportions, but otherwise, does it truly not matter where I buy my food?

    That would be a good causal essay AND satisfy your need to refute a strong counterargument.

    Grade recorded. Always improvable.
    (Can’t pass without in-text citations and a valid Works Cited.)

  4. veltmanr0's avatar veltmanr0 says:

    Could I have some feedback on the revision? Should I make the McDonald’s scenario more specific?

    Feedback provided. —DSH

  5. davidbdale's avatar davidbdale says:

    As before, I will try to confine my remarks to the question you asked me, Ryan. Overall feedback on persuasiveness. Specific question about the McDonald’s scenario.

    Persuasive Causal Argument:
    You’ve only answered one causal question, Ryan, and you haven’t even clearly identified the question. Your first paragraph talks as if you have defined the goal of the IIfYM diet as “weight control, plain and simple,” but you haven’t actually said so. Why is that? As alert readers, we notice the shortcoming and can’t be persuaded of anything until you acknowledge it.

    You poison the pool very early when, in your first sentence, you announce “fit and healthy” as everyone’s goal. Surely the Supersize Me diet can’t accomplish that, no matter how little of everything else we consume. Is fitness measured only by weight relative to height?

    McDonalds Scenario:
    The McDonalds Scenario doesn’t need to be more “specific,” exactly, but it does need to be honest. The reason we ask the question is not to find out whether McDonalds for breakfast will use up half our numbers. We know that it will. The question instead has always been: If I’m willing to eat fewer meals, will I achieve “fit and healthy” by “fulfilling all my macronutrient requirements” at McDonalds.

    Or, will I only achieve my target weight?

    I hope the difference is clear. You’ve been answering the wrong question. (And yes, this does now move into Rebuttal territory, since you’re answering an objection.) That won’t matter in your Research Argument, since we don’t count which words you’ve devoted to each type of argument, but here in the Causal, you should try to devote most of your words to causation.

    You could certainly devote some space to an explanation of how these magic numbers achieve the results you say they do. Is there any connection between the CPF “requirements” and calories? Is exercise entirely irrelevant? Both of these causal questions, and others, remain unanswered (not even raised).

    Grade recorded APR 29.
    Improvable here and in your portfolio.

Leave a reply to veltmanr0 Cancel reply