If fat is a simple matter of calories in vs out, then why...

[RAMAIR57]

Why do identical twins always have the EXACT same body habitus? The odds of them consuming identical calories each day, while being thousands of miles apart, is almost astronomical. I thought of this watching the Jets-Dallas game last night. The Ryan brothers are almost identically overweight. This never fails, skinny twins are identical, and fat twins are identical. What do you think?

[bdrusse]

Interesting topic. Umm, learned eating habits, shared social habits, same interests, ect?

Fwiw, I get what your saying, but I know plenty of twins that are said to be identical, yet the body comps vary. More so as they get older.

[nlite2000]

similar setpoints, similar expenditures, similar appetites.


It seems like you are desperately looking for a loophole to this. Explain why calories/in calories out holds in EVERY, SINGLE, CONTROLLED study?

[DarthInvadeHer]

lolwut

[Electricheadd]

similar setpoints, similar expenditures, similar appetites.


It seems like you are desperately looking for a loophole to this. Explain why calories/in calories out holds in EVERY, SINGLE, CONTROLLED study?

^^This^^

I would add similar upbringing, and identical genetics.

[reagansquad]

Its not just calories in / calories out.

[joshqueens]

Why do identical twins always have the EXACT same body habitus? The odds of them consuming identical calories each day, while being thousands of miles apart, is almost astronomical. I thought of this watching the Jets-Dallas game last night. The Ryan brothers are almost identically overweight. This never fails, skinny twins are identical, and fat twins are identical. What do you think?

Genetics determine how much you feel like eating. All has to do with hormones and nerves and so on but I'm too lazy to get into here. It's not ALL genetics, but genetics has something to do with it.

[bdrusse]

Its not just calories in / calories out.

How so? So if in a given time frame, a person burns 6000 and only ate 2500, all water weight aside, they wouldn't be 1 pound lighter? Please explain this one to me.

[want6pack]

Some people I know can eat eat and eat and they never gain weight. Body type and genetics play a role. That doesnt mean its impossible to lose weight. Just means it is harder for some people to lose and harder for some people to gain.

[bdrusse]

Some people I know can eat eat and eat and they never gain weight. I look at a baked potato or pasta and I gain weight. Body type and genetics play a role. That doesnt mean its impossible to lose weight. Just means it is harder for some people to lose and harder for some people to gain.

That doesn't negate the cals in vs out theory, it just means your go out slower than theirs. Therefore, you need to take less in.

[Mode7]

Calories in / calories out is BS.

For a start, for it to work as some of you think, it means your body would have a 100% absorption rate of every calorie consumed.
So to compare two people you have to assume that given an identical meal they will both absorb an identical amount of energy, and also that their bodies burn energy at the same rate if given the same activity.

It's a certainty that there are genetic differences between peoples ability to absorb nutrients in the gut and also metabolic rates.

Perfect example. My girlfriend has to be super strict with herself and eat super healthy to stay in shape (which thankfully she does). I literally have to force feed myself if I want to put weight on, so obviously it's not a simple case of calories in / out, as if she followed my exact diet and exercise, she would be a behemoth in no time.

Not saying it's not useful to estimate, but it's certainly not the be all and end all, which seems to get parroted around here a lot.

[bdrusse]

Yeah, but. Not absorbing them means they went in and you **** them out. Hence, calories out. I don't take it literal as in you have to burn them through exercise, although that's one method.

one way or another, they went in through the pie hole and left the body, be it via energy usage or fertilizer, they still are there no more. That is how I define calories out.

I get what your saying though some peeps can't eat as much and still lose. I put myself in that category. I sometimes feel like a 100lb jr high girl with my diet, while other peeps here cut on 2500. Feelsbadman. Oh well. My solution, take less in.

[Electricheadd]

Calories in / calories out is BS.

For a start, for it to work as some of you think, it means your body would have a 100% absorption rate of every calorie consumed.
So to compare two people you have to assume that given an identical meal they will both absorb an identical amount of energy, and also that their bodies burn energy at the same rate if given the same activity.

It's a certainty that there are genetic differences between peoples ability to absorb nutrients in the gut and also metabolic rates.

Perfect example. My girlfriend has to be super strict with herself and eat super healthy to stay in shape (which thankfully she does). I literally have to force feed myself if I want to put weight on, so obviously it's not a simple case of calories in / out, as if she followed my exact diet and exercise, she would be a behemoth in no time.

Not saying it's not useful to estimate, but it's certainly not the be all and end all, which seems to get parroted around here a lot.

Calories in vs calories out has nothing to do with a comparison between two people it is a extension of the first law of thermodynamics which basically says you can't get more energy out than you put in. The second law of thermodynamics addresses the efficiency of the machine, and nobody who understands the first law would say every human is an identical machine. Simply put, even if your body becomes more efficient you will still lose weight assuming a caloric deficit. That deficit may change over time but it is one of the few measurable means that holds up to the rigors of science when it comes to weight loss.

[belairdfence99]

Calories in / calories out is BS.

For a start, for it to work as some of you think, it means your body would have a 100% absorption rate of every calorie consumed.
So to compare two people you have to assume that given an identical meal they will both absorb an identical amount of energy, and also that their bodies burn energy at the same rate if given the same activity.

It's a certainty that there are genetic differences between peoples ability to absorb nutrients in the gut and also metabolic rates.

Perfect example. My girlfriend has to be super strict with herself and eat super healthy to stay in shape (which thankfully she does). I literally have to force feed myself if I want to put weight on, so obviously it's not a simple case of calories in / out, as if she followed my exact diet and exercise, she would be a behemoth in no time.

Not saying it's not useful to estimate, but it's certainly not the be all and end all, which seems to get parroted around here a lot.

Your gf is much lighter than you and thus needs a lot less calories. The fact that you need more calories is due to you not eating dense calorie foods, overestimating your food consumption, and an increased activity level compared to your gf as well as having more muscle.

Trying to compare a girl's metabolism to a guy's metabolism is just stupid.....


But as to OP's question, I have a twin brother that is 20 pounds heavier than me and we eat vastly different amounts of food.

[DLEHMA]

Why do identical twins always have the EXACT same body habitus? The odds of them consuming identical calories each day, while being thousands of miles apart, is almost astronomical. I thought of this watching the Jets-Dallas game last night. The Ryan brothers are almost identically overweight. This never fails, skinny twins are identical, and fat twins are identical. What do you think?

I have an identical twin and at my heaviest I was over 250. At his heaviest he was 190.

[Mode7]

Yeah, but. Not absorbing them means they went in and you **** them out. Hence, calories out. I don't take it literal as in you have to burn them through exercise, although that's one method.

one way or another, they went in through the pie hole and left the body, be it via energy usage or fertilizer, they still are there no more. That is how I define calories out.

I get what your saying though some peeps can't eat as much and still lose. I put myself in that category. I sometimes feel like a 100lb jr high girl with my diet, while other peeps here cut on 2500. Feelsbadman. Oh well. My solution, take less in.

I agree with you. But how many people take their dumps into account when calculating their calories out.

Calories in vs calories out has nothing to do with a comparison between two people it is a extension of the first law of thermodynamics which basically says you can't get more energy out than you put in. The second law of thermodynamics addresses the efficiency of the machine, and nobody who understands the first law would say every human is an identical machine. Simply put, even if your body becomes more efficient you will still lose weight assuming a caloric deficit. That deficit may change over time but it is one of the few measurable means that holds up to the rigors of science when it comes to weight loss.

Agree on a basic level that if you expend more energy than you consume you lose weight. Impossible not to. I just don't think calories in vs calories out is very useful, because it's impossible in the real world to figure out what your body is retaining in consumed calories, and also what it's expending during a given exercise.

Basically if you want to lose weight, you just have keep eating a bit less until the scales start dropping.

Your gf is much lighter than you and thus needs a lot less calories. The fact that you need more calories is due to you not eating dense calorie foods, overestimating your food consumption, and an increased activity level compared to your gf as well as having more muscle.

Trying to compare a girl's metabolism to a guy's metabolism is just stupid.....


But as to OP's question, I have a twin brother that is 20 pounds heavier than me and we eat vastly different amounts of food.

I'm just trying to make the point that if it was as simple as calories in vs out, then everyone, male, female, fat & thin, could be compared and would have same results from given exercise / diet place. But as I said I think it's so hard to accurately estimate this in the real world, that you may as well not bother and just eat more or less depending if you want to gain/lose
So I guess we are in agreement.

[jsmoor09]

^^This^^

I would add similar upbringing, and identical genetics.

Exactly.

Think about it dude. Who feeds you when you're a kid? Your mom. Who feeds your twin brother, someone else? You're raised learning the same eating habits, and either you're taught to eat healthy or taught to eat what you want. Please think before posting.

[Electricheadd]

Basically if you want to lose weight, you just have keep eating a bit less until the scales start dropping.

I think this is an accurate take away from cals in/out. It sounds like the problem you have is how we figure calories out, and you just hit the nail on the head for how to do it perfectly every time.

[bdrusse]

I agree with you. But how many people take their dumps into account when calculating their calories out.

LMAO. You mean you don't?!? Haha, I'm not advocating weighing or anything like that. I am not even saying pay attention to it. But it is a factor when counting your 3k a day maintenance.

All you gotta know is if you spent a week eating 2500 and gained weight, you are taking in more than you are spending whatever way that may be. So you gotta take less in.

Ha. I never spent more time talking or reading about poo, than I do on this forum. Haha.

[Electricheadd]

LMAO. You mean you don't?!? Haha, I'm not advocating weighing or anything like that. I am not even saying pay attention to it. But it is a factor when counting your 3k a day maintenance. All you gotta know is if you spent a week eating 2500 and gained weight, you are taking in more than you are spending whatever way that may be. So you gotta take less in.

Ha. I never spent more time talking or reading about poo, than I do on this forum. Haha.

Ever notice when you drop from 3k to 2k those dumps shrink more than you think they would.

[bdrusse]

Ever notice when you drop from 3k to 2k those dumps shrink more than you think they would.

Haha. Yup. When I am solid on 1700 or so for the week with good workouts, I can go 3 days without going.

Haha, there I go talking about poo again.

[DLEHMA]

Its not just calories in / calories out.

You say a lot of dumb ****.

[SocratesTX]

I love it when people come on here and try to argue against repetitively proven science. Cals in vs. cals out. You eat less, you lose weight, you eat more, you lose weight. It is that simple.

Now, how fast, by what means and from what part of the body first is different with everyone, but it still doesn't negate the basic laws.

[nlite2000]

Its not just calories in / calories out.

Says the 300 pound future fitness model who lost 20 pounds over a summer.

[aBossyJellyfish]

I know of two brothers who are identical twins. One was obese, the other nothing more than a twig.

Boom, proof.

Just because they're twins, doesn't mean they have some sort of super powers that allows them to stay in the same weight range. Humans are humans.

[SocratesTX]

I know of two brothers who are identical twins. One was obese, the other nothing more than a twig.

Boom, proof.

Just because they're twins, doesn't mean they have some sort of super powers that allows them to stay in the same weight range. Humans are humans.

That and while the Ryan brothers are a little large, isn't one something like 100 lbs. lighter than the other?

[FearisFailure]

I love it when people come on here and try to argue against repetitively proven science. Cals in vs. cals out. You eat less, you lose weight, you eat more, you lose weight. It is that simple.Now, how fast, by what means and from what part of the body first is different with everyone, but it still doesn't negate the basic laws.

Hell yeah I like this idea!! Where can I get some proven science on this baby...... Mr.Aragon get in here please :P