Anyone see that supersive Vs superskinny last night?

[Panter]

Anyone see that supersize Vs superskinny last night?

Basically, it was an overweight woman who ate healthily but just too much and an underweight bloke who ate only chocolate and sausage rolls.

The funny thing was that the bloke was ingesting 2600Kcals a day but was still 3 Stone underweight.
I was always under the impression that weight loss/gain was a very simple calories in vs calories out equation.
There's obviously as lot more than that to it then?

 

[Bigtwin]

I was always under the impression that weight loss/gain was a very simple calories in vs calories out equation.
There's obviously as lot more than that to it then?

Nope - that's all there is to it. If he's thin, he's burning off calories somewhere.

 

[ColinJ]

If he was moderately active, he might need (say) 3,100 kcals a day and he'd be losing a pound a week. That's nearly 4 stone in just one year.

 

[Panter]

He was a very slight bloke though, and there was absolutely no mention of strenous activity.

TBH, he looked to frail to do very much at all.

 

[medication25]

its down to the body type of the person... some burn fat and can eat what they like others just pile on the fat. read about the types, he must be an Ectomorphic...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somatotype

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

i tend to agree with bigtwin, in reasonably healthy people, however everybody has different metabolic rates, perhaps his was fast or perhaps an underlying health problem. i knew a bloke who had a disease where his body just wouldn't digest his food, i think it was chrones, not sure.

i was amazed by different body types when i watched that jamie oliver thing a few years ago, he had different body types. he put them thru a rmi(?) machine, funnily enough the active beer guzzling, overweight, oldish rugby player was the healthiest overall against skinny under active lazy gits who looked really healthy. so i don't worry now..lol