So sick of people saying caloric deficit is all that matters to lose weight.

[lawrencep93]

I think there is more to it than calories in vs calories out, that is just a condition that has to be satisfied for something to happen, it's like saying why are was there more people at that music festival? and someone answered because more people went. It's a dumb answer if you look at it.

Also calories in effects calories out, they are not independent. If you eat more, you end up burning more energy, if you eat less you burn less energy.

Calorie counting is super inaccurate and it's almost impossible to measure energy expended unless you sit in an air tight room for a week that measures changes in air mix ratios to a tiny fraction of a %.

I also think hormones have more to do with it, also how the weight fluctuates due to food we eat, lot's of people will become skinny fat from reduction of calories, and still maintain high levels of body fat. Then do so much metabolic damage they have to starve themselves to death almost to keep weight down. I would hate to be forever hungry!

[Former300lber]

Cut down from 302lbs to 160lbs, eating in a deficit... Not once went low carb, did this in 9 months, umad OP?

[pdt414]

Becoming skinny fat from fat fat from a calorie deficient, if the number on the scale is lower then previous, is losing weight.

NOTE: Calorie deficient is what matters when losing weight

[buffmuff]

Cut down from 302lbs to 160lbs, eating in a deficit... Not once went low carb, did this in 9 months, umad OP?

no way congrats man, all that really proves is you were not as insulin resistant as other obese people, and no calorie deficit is not what matters, you put an obese person in a slight deficit of there normal 4000 calories of mixed macros, and give them pure white carbs or sugars, they wil not lose weight because lack of insulin secretion i cant believe you guys argue this fact still. science has proven this. im not talking about bodybuilders, or people cuting after a bulk im talking about obese insulin resistant people, carbs matter. not sayin they have to cut them out completely, but they def. need to balance carbs more then anything, more so then calories.

[pdt414]

no way congrats man, all that really proves is you were not as insulin resistant as other obese people, and no calorie deficit is not what matters, you put an obese person in a slight deficit of there normal 4000 calories of mixed macros, and give them pure white carbs or sugars, they wil not lose weight because lack of insulin secretion i cant believe you guys argue this fact still. science has proven this. im not talking about bodybuilders, or people cuting after a bulk im talking about obese insulin resistant people, carbs matter. not sayin they have to cut them out completely, but they def. need to balance carbs more then anything, more so then calories.

Are you getting weight loss and fat loss mixed up?

[buffmuff]

Are you getting weight loss and fat loss mixed up?

=/ no. same thing in my books, if your aiming to lose lean mass on any diet your a idiot rofl. im talking about the difference of fat loss/weight loss same thing in my books for obese, yes you have to be in a deficit to lose weight, but its far from all that matters due to insulin resistance. 4000 calories at say 30 30 40 bad diet versus 3500 at pure sugar and white carbs, gurantee that guys not losing weight if hes insulin resistance , if a calories a calorie carbs wouldent effect blood sugar differently then the other macros.

[pdt414]

=/ no. same thing in my books, if your aiming to lose lean mass on any diet your a idiot rofl. im talking about the difference of fat loss/weight loss same thing in my books for obese, yes you have to be in a deficit to lose weight, but its far from all that matters due to insulin resistance. 4000 calories at say 30 30 40 bad diet versus 3500 at pure sugar and white carbs, gurantee that guys not losing weight if hes insulin resistance , if a calories a calorie carbs wouldent effect blood sugar differently then the other macros.

http://www.docdroid.net/6898/is-a-ca...-2004.pdf.html

A calorie is a calorie

[buffmuff]

you do realize this argument goes on decades and you can post a study or link trying to counter what i say and theres always 1 to counter yours, maybe that shows nothings for sure, but 1 thing it does seem to show based on different test subjects reacting different to different diets is that everyones different. ive heard some of the best bodybuilding coaches in the world and dietitians say that they have clients that are sensitive to carbs, that cancels the notion out a calorie is a calorie my friend. i didn't even bother checking your link, because ive read enough creditable sources saying otherwise to not care about studys or this doctor countering this doctor, if your stupid enough to think carbs cant be stored as fat even in a deficit then you need to drop arguing about it , because your bro brain has you happily married to the idea of counting calories is all there is to dieting, maybe your a iifym bone rider and thats why you keep denying basic human biology, next your going to say if someone has hypothyroidism can eat in a deficit and lose weight right roflmao.

[pdt414]

you do realize this argument goes on decades and you can post a study or link trying to counter what i say and theres always 1 to counter yours, maybe that shows nothings for sure, but 1 thing it does seem to show based on different test subjects reacting different to different diets is that everyones different. ive heard some of the best bodybuilding coaches in the world and dietitians say that they have clients that are sensitive to carbs, that cancels the notion out a calorie is a calorie my friend. i didn't even bother checking your link, because ive read enough creditable sources saying otherwise to not care about studys or this doctor countering this doctor, if your stupid enough to think carbs cant be stored as fat even in a deficit then you need to drop arguing about it , because your bro brain has you happily married to the idea of counting calories is all there is to dieting, maybe your a iifym bone rider and thats why you keep denying basic human biology, next your going to say if someone has hypothyroidism can eat in a deficit and lose weight right roflmao.

What are you talking about lol? This is about calories as individuals not macronutrients. You are mixing things up.

[pdt414]

you do realize this argument goes on decades and you can post a study or link trying to counter what i say and theres always 1 to counter yours, maybe that shows nothings for sure, but 1 thing it does seem to show based on different test subjects reacting different to different diets is that everyones different. ive heard some of the best bodybuilding coaches in the world and dietitians say that they have clients that are sensitive to carbs, that cancels the notion out a calorie is a calorie my friend. i didn't even bother checking your link, because ive read enough creditable sources saying otherwise to not care about studys or this doctor countering this doctor, if your stupid enough to think carbs cant be stored as fat even in a deficit then you need to drop arguing about it , because your bro brain has you happily married to the idea of counting calories is all there is to dieting, maybe your a iifym bone rider and thats why you keep denying basic human biology, next your going to say if someone has hypothyroidism can eat in a deficit and lose weight right roflmao.

Of course carbs can be stored as fat. But that has nothing to do with "weight loss" Which is the whole point of the argument that a calorie is a calorie. You can lose weight and gain fat.

[buffmuff]

Of course carbs can be stored as fat. But that has nothing to do with "weight loss" Which is the whole point of the argument that a calorie is a calorie. You can lose weight and gain fat.

oh fo sho

[lawrencep93]

Calories in and calories out are automatically regulated.

http://thesmarterscienceofslim.com/r...lly-regulated/


And why thermodynamics laws are used incorrectly in describing calories in vs calories out. http://thesmarterscienceofslim.com/thermodynamics/

[pdt414]

Calories in and calories out are automatically regulated.

http://thesmarterscienceofslim.com/r...lly-regulated/


And why thermodynamics laws are used incorrectly in describing calories in vs calories out.

“This study examined the relationships among body fat…energy intake, and exercise…There was no relationship between energy intake [calories in] and adiposity [body fat]”

[pdt414]

“This study examined the relationships among body fat…energy intake, and exercise…There was no relationship between energy intake [calories in] and adiposity [body fat]”

nothing to do with weight

[costahobo]

and actually thyroid conditions totally defy your so called laws, everyone is different and the body is way more complex then calories in calories out.

Wait wait, so, let me make sure that I'm understanding you - you have somehow managed to defy the law of thermodynamics? My god man, what are you doing on bb.com?? There are a plethora of people waiting to interview you. You belong on the covers of magazines and newspapers, not wasting your time posting on a forum. Make some phone calls, man. You're about to become insanely famous!

[WonderPug]

“This study examined the relationships among body fat…energy intake, and exercise…There was no relationship between energy intake [calories in] and adiposity [body fat]”

FYI: That's because the chronic delta between energy intake and energy output is a primary determinant of body fat. In other words, it's not how much you consume that determines body fat but, rather, the difference between the amount of energy you consume and the amount of energy you expended.

[thedudesdad]

Cut down from 302lbs to 160lbs, eating in a deficit... Not once went low carb, did this in 9 months, umad OP?

"If true then why do you say in your story from your sig that " I've done Keto, I've done PSMF, I've done this and I've done that, You name it I've probably done it."

[Lvisaa2]

i guess you know more then gary taubes and the 23 studys done that shows low carb diets prevailed on obese individuals. and your in the keto channel making fun of keto your obviously calling keto a eating disorder cause thats all i said i used , and i did defy your so called science, i was eating the same amount of calories on higher carb low fat, as i did on keto and lost over 50 pounds on keto versus staying the same on high carb , gg k thx, heh sup. and actually thyroid conditions totally defy your so called laws, everyone is different and the body is way more complex then calories in calories out.

Thyroid conditions don't defy calories in/out - once again, they change the out portion of the equation.

I think there is more to it than calories in vs calories out, that is just a condition that has to be satisfied for something to happen, it's like saying why are was there more people at that music festival? and someone answered because more people went. It's a dumb answer if you look at it.

Also calories in effects calories out, they are not independent. If you eat more, you end up burning more energy, if you eat less you burn less energy.

Calorie counting is super inaccurate and it's almost impossible to measure energy expended unless you sit in an air tight room for a week that measures changes in air mix ratios to a tiny fraction of a %.

I also think hormones have more to do with it, also how the weight fluctuates due to food we eat, lot's of people will become skinny fat from reduction of calories, and still maintain high levels of body fat. Then do so much metabolic damage they have to starve themselves to death almost to keep weight down. I would hate to be forever hungry!

Nothing you've said remotely makes calories in/out incorrect. In fact, the things you've said(hormones play a role, intake affects outake) are all examples of why people get confused about calories in/out. They assume they can easily calculate the out portion, but it is highly variable and individual. In a normal population, it is easier to calculate, but start adding in various issues(like thyroid or obesity) and it becomes that much harder to find your true 'out' value and enables more things to affect that out value. Yet none of that changes the validity of the equation.

"If true then why do you say in your story from your sig that " I've done Keto, I've done PSMF, I've done this and I've done that, You name it I've probably done it."

Probably because he did Keto outside of this 9 month window in one of his other failed attempts to lose weight. I don't know if this is the case, but it seems entirely logical and it surprises me that you can't come to this conclusion on your own.

[WonderPug]

"If true then why do you say in your story from your sig that " I've done Keto, I've done PSMF, I've done this and I've done that, You name it I've probably done it."

FYI: A PSMF is ketogenic.






CICO is vacuously obvious. The debate in the scientific community is if ketogenic diets meaningfully impact the CO part of the equation through, for example, futile cycle wasting of energy.

[mattvdh]

buffmuff, the really cool thing about science, the really awesome part is ... it doesn't matter if you agree with it or not. You're wrong on this one. You're not special, you're not unique. Your body doesn't defy the law of thermodynamics. Sorry. Continue with your eating disorder if you wish, but don't try to convince others that you're right.

That quote on not agreeing with science or not is such a side step. Of course science can be incorrect, research studies can easily have a hole in method/procedure.

If a calorie is a calorie then why are there people with sedentary jobs and generally non-active lifestyles, and can basically eat whatever they want and can remain trim, and yet there are people that work physically demanding jobs and have to really monitor their eating habits, and yet they are over weight.

The concern shouldn't be calories in/calories out, the concern should be how does your particular body metabolize food(s) and how does your body burn energy. Again, we don't have the proper tools yet to provide us with these answers, so we rely on primitive math equations.

[mattvdh]

I don't think I was talking to you considering you weren't who I quoted. I've refrained from trying to teach you anything as you've consistently proven an inability to understand even basic things, so either you're a troll or hopeless. Neither of which warrant my time or effort.

Sorry I misread that quote. Not sure why you think you have all the answers though.

[mattvdh]

Calories in and calories out are automatically regulated.

http://thesmarterscienceofslim.com/r...lly-regulated/


And why thermodynamics laws are used incorrectly in describing calories in vs calories out. http://thesmarterscienceofslim.com/thermodynamics/

Interesting article, I agree with that thinking of eating less just makes your body slow down. My metabolism in particular simply adapts to the caloric deficit, if I diet for too long my body becomes catabolic.

Science loves putting humans in this robotic box of ecto/mezo/endo, and cals in/out as if we are simple machines. What a narrow view on human life--why are some people hands on learners, some self-taught, and others can regurgitate book information(?). Current diet philosophy is similar to how we try to grind students through the education system rather than adapting to the students method of learning.

Just think about what happens to people when they take AAS, their bodies become super efficient at synthesizing proteins, and some men/people are just genetically tuned for a higher level of test, this is so obvious, and only a fraction of the equation of weight loss/muscle gain.

Hormones, genetics and metabolism should be at the base of the pyramid, calories in/out should be at the top.

Just watch some Bostin Loyd videos, he laughs at dieting/dieters--he just increases the drugs when he wants to start his cutting phase.

[Lvisaa2]

Sorry I misread that quote. Not sure why you think you have all the answers though.

Never said I knew everything, I just said that I won't waste my time trying to teach you the things I do actually know.

[mattvdh]

Never said I knew everything, I just said that I won't waste my time trying to teach you the things I do actually know.

Yeah that's great bud, I doubt anyone cares what you have say anyway.

[xJellyBirdx]

Yeah that's great bud, I doubt anyone cares what you have say anyway.

I care.

[mattvdh]

I care.

nobody cares that you care, carebear stare.

[tst313]

Well this is an argument that will never find a answer in our lifetimes, but here is my piece. When I was 27 I could consume 4000+ calories a day and barely gain a pound. I maintained a bodyfat around 12% and had virtually no muscle mass. Started lifting, and in a year went from 140lbs to 180. Never had issues with fat. Skip forward a decade and a half. I can work out like a fiend, and eat at a deficit, and yet I still put on bodyfat. I may maintain, but it is almost impossible to lose bodyfat at this point. Gets real frustrating. The solution? Full keto- I hate it. It sucks. I feel like crap on it. But it is the only way my body will drop bodyfat. The only way. I have tried 500 cal/1000/cal deficits. Does nothing. Increased cardio nothing. HIT nothing. Increased weights. Nothing. Keto? Progressive fat loss. There is more to science than calories in and out. Our bodies are not crucibles. There are numerous chemical events taking place in our body. We don't defy the laws of physics (laws of thermodynamics). We just burn and store energy in different ways. The concept of caloric deficit is generally good, but in many people (ie as you get older) it stops working as well due to numerous chemical events that take place. I so wish I could just eat less and watch fat roll off. Life would be really easy. It used to be that way, but it sure as hell isn't now. And as always, if it was easy, everyone would be ripped....

[Leadreign]

Full of win.

[Leadreign]

if your aiming to lose lean mass on any diet your a idiot rofl.

This, amongst others, discredits you. You're quick to call people morons and idiots when your posting is a mess.