Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think a seriously overlooked application of this principle is in nutrition and dieting. Over- or under- eating by a small percentage of your required intake might not have a discernible effect immediately but really adds up over time, both for weight loss and gain.
It is not how it works at all. The fallacy here is that a human body is a machine with well-defined intake and output. How would one even know what is "exactly" the right amount? Over a year we consume 1 million calories. If one were just 0.1% off of systematically eating more (or less) than required then according to your model one would end up being 200 pounds fatter or 200 pounds leaner ... do you think that anyon…
I was always taught that the body uses up its glycogen stores before burning fat. But if that were true even a small calorie deficit would gradually use up our glycogen stores and we'd be walking around without any after that.
Plus before losing any fat you'd have to experience a glycogen crash/wall which most small deficit dieters don't experience.