Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Chemical Hunger: Mysteries

slimemoldtimemold.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 201 posts

Re: A Chemical Hunger: Mysteries

#111

Post by tsimionescu »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #69
defaultname wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's the fundamental, most basic truth. If there is anything that people who want to lose weight should do, it's eat less . Skip the snack. Smaller portions. That's incredibly hard to do, of course, and easier said than done, but ultimately it is behind virtually all successful weight loss. What is behind an enormous number of failed weight loss attempts are waving that away and believing some specific macronutri…

I'm not surprised to see your comment in the grey even though everything you're saying is absolutely true. I've lost >150lbs and kept it off[0] and I can assure everyone that the one thing that absolutely 100% works for losing weight is eating less. It's also the most difficult thing, which is why everyone wants to believe bullshit marketing that says otherwise. [0] put about 30lb on during the pandemic period that I…

That is well known and undisputed. The question is: when can you stop eating less than your body is telling you that you should? Did you ever get rid of the hunger?

I lost about 30kg (105 -> 75) by eating less, excersing more, all in about the span of a year. I never stopped feeling hungry overall for this period, constantly had to fight the urge to eat more. In periods where high stress reduced my willpower, I started putting back weight. I've put on about 10kg back in the following 5 years, so on balance I'm still in pretty good shape, but the trend is clear.

The mystery is why I have this relationship with food, and why other people don't. Most thin people are not going to bed dreaming of tomorrow's meal.

Re: A Chemical Hunger: Mysteries

#112

Post by heax »

I think the simple truth is we simply eat too much.

Possible the worldwide most known modern food product is the Big Mac. Named Big Mac, not Best Mac, think about it. And it doesn't stop there, large pizzas, pizzas with a lot on top, XXL Schnitzels, All you can eat Chinese.

A lot people make quantity a priority over quality, guess what happens :)

Re: A Chemical Hunger: Mysteries

#113

Post by elliekelly »

derbOac wrote: post #101
faichai wrote: post #24

The lipostat theory is quite interesting. This is pure conjecture, but its already known that plastics can impact estrogen levels, I wonder if plastics also have some, yet unknown, impact on metabolism that is upsetting lipostatic homeostasis. Estrogen, cortisol and testosterone all operate in a delicate, interrelated balance, so it's not too big a leap.

For some reason when I read the lipostat section I was reminded of decreases in average body temperature trends over time -- probably because of the temperature analogies. I've sometimes wondered if microbiome factors are in play, and by extension, things like antibiotic use (maybe there are some studies about antibiotic exposure and weight gain?). I've usually thought of it in terms of microbiome -> gut -> digestion…

Where can I read more about this?

Re: A Chemical Hunger: Mysteries

#114

Post by frabjoused »

heax wrote: post #112

I think the simple truth is we simply eat too much. Possible the worldwide most known modern food product is the Big Mac. Named Big Mac, not Best Mac, think about it. And it doesn't stop there, large pizzas, pizzas with a lot on top, XXL Schnitzels, All you can eat Chinese. A lot people make quantity a priority over quality, guess what happens :)

This. There's so many ideas and theories on diets, but it seems the bottom line is, are you eating more than you're burning?

Re: A Chemical Hunger: Mysteries

#115

Post by defaultname »

tsimionescu wrote: post #111
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not surprised to see your comment in the grey even though everything you're saying is absolutely true. I've lost >150lbs and kept it off[0] and I can assure everyone that the one thing that absolutely 100% works for losing weight is eating less. It's also the most difficult thing, which is why everyone wants to believe bullshit marketing that says otherwise. [0] put about 30lb on during the pandemic period that I…

That is well known and undisputed. The question is: when can you stop eating less than your body is telling you that you should? Did you ever get rid of the hunger? I lost about 30kg (105 -> 75) by eating less, excersing more, all in about the span of a year. I never stopped feeling hungry overall for this period, constantly had to fight the urge to eat more. In periods where high stress reduced my willpower, I start…

"That is well known and undisputed."

Unfortunately, loads of people in this very thread are disputing it. This submission is based upon the bizarre hope that there's a mysterious external influence that's actually causing people to gain weight, and not the merely coincidental simultaneous rise in caloric intake.

The psychological element is complex and profoundly difficult. That is without question.

Re: A Chemical Hunger: Mysteries

#116

Post by stronglikedan »

heax wrote: post #112

I think the simple truth is we simply eat too much. Possible the worldwide most known modern food product is the Big Mac. Named Big Mac, not Best Mac, think about it. And it doesn't stop there, large pizzas, pizzas with a lot on top, XXL Schnitzels, All you can eat Chinese. A lot people make quantity a priority over quality, guess what happens :)

> we simply eat too much

Hear, hear. I dropped ~70 pounds just by learning my portions. It took about 6 months, but now I can just look at a plate of food and separate out the amount that will fill me, before I even start to eat (the 2-fist rule is a good start). I can make 2-3 meals out of a typical restaurant dinner portion, or I can just order an appetizer as my meal if I'm not taking leftovers.

I dropped another ~20 pounds by cutting out processed foods, preservatives, and chemicals. I likely won't eat something that I couldn't otherwise make a home using whole ingredients.

Restrictive diets never worked for me. I eat whatever I want, whether it be loaded with carbs or fried. I just make sure to include plenty of fiber in my diet, only eat when hungry, and never over eat. It's the only diet that I've been able to sustain for more than a year (~5 years now, to be exact).

Re: A Chemical Hunger: Mysteries

#117

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

tsimionescu wrote: post #111
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not surprised to see your comment in the grey even though everything you're saying is absolutely true. I've lost >150lbs and kept it off[0] and I can assure everyone that the one thing that absolutely 100% works for losing weight is eating less. It's also the most difficult thing, which is why everyone wants to believe bullshit marketing that says otherwise. [0] put about 30lb on during the pandemic period that I…

That is well known and undisputed. The question is: when can you stop eating less than your body is telling you that you should? Did you ever get rid of the hunger? I lost about 30kg (105 -> 75) by eating less, excersing more, all in about the span of a year. I never stopped feeling hungry overall for this period, constantly had to fight the urge to eat more. In periods where high stress reduced my willpower, I start…

Yep, that's basically the same with me and as far as I can tell pretty much everyone else who's had to lose a lot of weight. The only thing I've ever found that allowed me to not feel hungry was amphetamines. Until that brief period where I was on them I'd never before had the experience of forgetting to eat that people sometimes talk about. Unfortunately, amphetamines bring a lot of undesirable effects with them too.

I eagerly await the day science figures out how to stop my food cravings and delivers it in a form I can obtain easily.

Re: A Chemical Hunger: Mysteries

#118

Post by jwdunne »

gadders wrote: post #110
jwdunne wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if science ever justifies the cruelty of fat shaming mate?

It's value neutral. It's just a fact. It's like saying the sky is blue, or the earth is a sphere. How people react to that information is up to them. What other science would you like prevented to spare people's feelings?

So, really, you agree that science cannot justify the cruelty of fat shaming? As you said, it’s value neutral.

Which part of my comment says I’d like science to spare people’s feelings?

Show me the science that justifies fat shaming and inappropriate behaviour.

Fat shaming somebody because “science” doesn’t make you any less of shit person. In fact, you can’t really use any science to excuse poor behaviour.

So I think we might be in violent agreement? Do you talk to your mother like that when you misunderstand her? Wow.

Re: A Chemical Hunger: Mysteries

#120

Post by gadders »

jwdunne wrote: post #118
gadders wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's value neutral. It's just a fact. It's like saying the sky is blue, or the earth is a sphere. How people react to that information is up to them. What other science would you like prevented to spare people's feelings?

So, really, you agree that science cannot justify the cruelty of fat shaming? As you said, it’s value neutral. Which part of my comment says I’d like science to spare people’s feelings? Show me the science that justifies fat shaming and inappropriate behaviour. Fat shaming somebody because “science” doesn’t make you any less of shit person. In fact, you can’t really use any science to excuse poor behaviour. So I thin…

I'm saying that the phenomena of fat shaming should not be used to suppress the fact that calories in/calories out is how you lose weight and works.

Would I run up to a morbidly fat person and shout "Calories in/Calories out"? No. Would I contradict an obese person who said "Calories In/Calories Out" was wrong? Yes.

Post reply on HN