A Realistic Nutrition Formula

[Kuren]

6 hours ago, EnigmaGrey said:

It's an hour long day by default from 34 on forward.

 

I know it is now. I was simply stating that when I first started playing the days were always too short for me and at that time the days were still 30 minutes. I was actually really happy to see it when they bumped up the day length for this new system but I still think an hour is too short for the current required calorie intake. However, I clearly like a less rushed day so this is obviously just my opinion.

[Erkinwine]

I will begin by disclosing that I have not tried the nutrition system - I'm kinda scared of it.

 

That said, I would like to make a couple of points regarding this formula suggestion and some of the posts that I have read here.

 

This formula seems nice, but it lacks any tie to the player's metabolic rate. The metabolic rate is a significant factor in weight gain or weight loss as those with a higher metabolic rate metabolize (burn) calories faster.  There is an attempt to tie calorie consumption to age in the formula, and it is true that metabolisms tend to slow with age. I would suggest that players who took fitness traits should benefit from higher metabolisms when the traits are positive and lower metabolisms when the traits are negative. Of course, as fitness can increase over time, metabolisms should be able to change as well. A metabolic modifier should be included in the formula.

 

A note regarding carbs, fat and protein. Carbs are converted to glucose quickly to provide energy for the body thus, they should be a high percentage of an individual's daily intake - especially if they are spending a lot of time running from zombies. Fiber content is included in carb count, but it can't be burned for energy. It passes right through the body, making it possible for us to poop regularly. It should have not nutritional value whatsoever in a game that doesn't require defecation. I would suggest deducting four carbs per gram of fiber from food to account for this. An interesting note: fiber will bond with loose fat molecules, taking them out before the body can store them. They are thus calorie dense. Fat is a slow calorie. Unlike carbs, they take a while for the body to break them down, but they have the bonus of having twice as many calories per gram as a carb or a protein. Proteins also take quite some time to burn, because the body wants to use them to build muscle. A survivor trying to subsist on just proteins would find themselves just laying around all the time, only able to make brief periods of activity. Protein also requires the body to be hydrated. Consuming proteins while dehydrated will cause the system to shut down. The body will store fat that isn't burned (like a savings account) or carried away by fiber.

 

The last thing I would like to mention is that weight gain and weight loss are generally something that happens on a weekly, not daily basis. This is because there are a number of factors at play and the human body is extremely resilient and adaptive. Calculations should be made weekly, rather than daily, because diet can fluctuate considerably from day to day, while averaging out over a week or so. I understand that time is compressed somewhat in this game, but I have generally seen that my characters eat about as much in a day as I would expect they would eat in real life - and generally only a single evening meal. Anyone who has fasted for a few days can tell you that they do not loose weight right away. It will eventually happen, but first, the body goes into a conservation mode and it levels off. I once did three days of fasting, while continuing a routine of two workouts per day and I actually gained a pound by day three. That was most likely a result of water, but the point is the body adjusts to intake. This is why the calculations should be made weekly and not daily.

[Rathlord]

Some interesting points there, but a few counterpoints:

 

Fitness and resting metabolic rate aren't specifically tied- that is to say, being in shape (fit) does not mean you have a fast metabolism. I was in great shape as a young man, but ate like a monster. Other people my age would have been hopelessly overweight with the same intake. Thus, actual activity and other factors should determine metabolic rate, not simply whether the player is in shape or not. 

 

Additionally, the daily/weekly calculation is really a moot point. Assuming relatively accurate changes, it doesn't much matter whether you calculate by the hour or day or week- it will all average out identically over time. And if the changes are individually small enough (part of what my personal suggestion aimed for) the frequency of the calculations won't matter to the player, just the long term consequences. 

[EnigmaGrey]

I suppose if you wanted to, you could scale this formula slightly to represent different metabolisms, though this formula is actually metabolic rate, as is. Just stole it from Wikipedia.

[TheWraithPlayer]

Would this new system mean that I would start out weighing more than 80 pounds? I mean, I think a super buff firefighter should way more than that!

[Kuren]

49 minutes ago, TheWraithPlayer said:

Would this new system mean that I would start out weighing more than 80 pounds? I mean, I think a super buff firefighter should way more than that!

Last time I checked the base starting weight is/was 80 kg not 80 lb (so like 175 pounds)

I personally think it's a bit high for an average (not overweight, not buff) person and would like to see strength have an affect on it as well (as I don't believe it currently does).

Edited July 6, 2016 by Kuren

[TheWraithPlayer]

20 hours ago, Kuren said:

Last time I checked the base starting weight is/was 80 kg not 80 lb (so like 175 pounds)

sorry, I don't know kilograms very well. But I get what your saying on a bit high. It would all depend on how they're built. Example; a big large man (not fat or muscular just wide and tall) would weigh more than a small, petite, rail thin woman.

[MyTJ]

On ‎2016‎-‎04‎-‎18 at 5:28 AM, EnigmaGrey said:

I'm not actually sure why fat's even included in the system . . . For long-term nutritional deficits, all that matters is carbs and protein, unless I'm mistaken . . . Fats can simply be folded into calories.

While things like rabbit starvation (very rare) are usually mentioned as requiring fats, it's the amount of protein that does the damage, long term. (Receiving the majority of your daily caloric intake purely from calories is very hard on the body initially and to a point.)

Of course, maybe something could be worked out where the "percentage of calories from fats" is applied to the body fat value, if at the end of the day, the character gains weight.

 

Sorry to say, but you are mistaken.  But that probably come from fat having a bad reputation

 

First they are needed for their constitutive fatty acides ("acides gras") with various effect on the bodily functions (even on cellular level).

 

Second, they are a vector for transmitting vitamins A, D, E and K.

 

As pointed out, they are also a high source of energy.

 

According to this you should eat about 65g of fat a day.

 

http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/LabelingNutrition/ucm064928.htm

Edited July 26, 2016 by MyTJ