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

The myth of outrunning your diet

williamjbarry.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–97 of 97 posts

Re: The myth of outrunning your diet

#91

Post by ehnto »

seec wrote: post #90
weird-eye-issue wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are completely wrong because over the long term, thermodynamics isn’t just a theory — it’s the governing principle. No matter how “inefficient” the body is at using or storing energy, it still obeys conservation of energy. If you consistently burn more calories than you consume, your body has to draw on stored energy (fat, muscle, glycogen, etc.) to make up the difference. That’s not up for debate — it’s been pro…

Exactly. I'm amazed people are still contesting basic stuff like this. It's not open for debate, it has been proven in many ways. In fact, one can set out to prove it to himself, by just using an accurate enough smartwatch and precisely logging all calories. Over time, the math just math, even if it's off by a few percent that's largely irrelevant and can be attributed to measurement error. I think people refuse to a…

The argument misses the point, is why. It's something you would say to trivialise a complex human problem, in order to sound smart. It's treated as if all the advice people need to lose weight is a Thermodynamics 101 class. Just like how all you need to write software is knowing binary. Technically true, woefully ineffective.

If it helps you understand my point of view, I have been strength and fitness training for 15 years, this isn't a matter of lack of discipline. I understand the human aspect of the problem. People don't learn about the thermodynamic aspect and suddenly it all works out for them, it doesn't help.

Re: The myth of outrunning your diet

#92

Post by ehnto »

weird-eye-issue wrote: post #88
ehnto wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the same way that we don't rely on the assurance of entropy to mix stew however, thermodynamics is not something to base your diet and exercise plan on. We both know you are technically correct, but it doesn't help you to plan your lifestyle change to know it. That's why it's a frustrating reduction of the problem, the knowledge inbetween helps us make good decisions that involve a lot more than just the physics o…

Of course details matter when you actually implement it in your life But there are people arguing about the underlying concept of calories in/out being wrong which is just silly > thermodynamics is not something to base your diet and exercise plan on Except it literally is. You can use it to figure out exactly how much weight you'll gain/lose over the long term if you track things properly

I was not doing that. I was pointing out how reducing the problem to thermodynamics is not a particularly helpful part of the conversation. I see it a lot, it's not a novel insight but it is often unhelpful.

Re: The myth of outrunning your diet

#93

Post by weird-eye-issue »

ehnto wrote: post #92
weird-eye-issue wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course details matter when you actually implement it in your life But there are people arguing about the underlying concept of calories in/out being wrong which is just silly > thermodynamics is not something to base your diet and exercise plan on Except it literally is. You can use it to figure out exactly how much weight you'll gain/lose over the long term if you track things properly

I was not doing that. I was pointing out how reducing the problem to thermodynamics is not a particularly helpful part of the conversation. I see it a lot, it's not a novel insight but it is often unhelpful.

There are people that do argue against it, which is why I had to even point it out in the first place. If you didn't disagree, you didn't need to reply

Re: The myth of outrunning your diet

#94

Post by seec »

ehnto wrote: post #91
seec wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. I'm amazed people are still contesting basic stuff like this. It's not open for debate, it has been proven in many ways. In fact, one can set out to prove it to himself, by just using an accurate enough smartwatch and precisely logging all calories. Over time, the math just math, even if it's off by a few percent that's largely irrelevant and can be attributed to measurement error. I think people refuse to a…

The argument misses the point, is why. It's something you would say to trivialise a complex human problem, in order to sound smart. It's treated as if all the advice people need to lose weight is a Thermodynamics 101 class. Just like how all you need to write software is knowing binary. Technically true, woefully ineffective. If it helps you understand my point of view, I have been strength and fitness training for 1…

I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

Are you suggesting that I advocate for people going through a thermodynamics class so they "get it"? Traditional education isn't very effective even for some trivial matters so I wouldn't dare to propose that. As far as I'm concerned, the vast majority of people cannot learn much of complex science and there is nothing wrong with that.

And I wouldn't advise learning about thermodynamics just to solve a diet/exercice balance problem. In fact, I do the opposite. I tell people interested in the matter about various strategies they can use to control their caloric input and other strategies/motivations they can use to get a minimum of exercice.

But that's largely irrelevant, that's not the point. The problem is the various gurus who spit pseudo-science on the matter, pretending that CiCo isn't a thing and pointing the finger at various other things (sometimes with a sprinkle of truth to make things confusing).

There are many nuances in nutrition but if you don't get the basics right, nothing good can happen. And the gist of the matter is that every human needs to find a strategy that works for him to control his caloric input in relation to his energy expenditure.

One way to do this that is extremely effective is to build an intuition on how many calories most common foods are "worth" but also how much various activities/exercices spend. It takes effort but it is pretty simple and once people have the intuition on the matter they can more easily regulate the intake or exercice more, depending on what's easier/more successful for them. It doesn't necessarily solve some psychological disorders (like addictions and compulsive eating to regulate emotional state) but at least it gives a "roadmap" and a pretty accurate picture on how/why.

I have no idea what you are trying to say but it really isn't that complex of a problem. Humans being what they are make it more complicated than it needs to be.

Re: The myth of outrunning your diet

#95

Post by jokoon »

seec wrote: post #89
jokoon wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean spending energy for nothing

There is no physical output to acquire but it's not for nothing. In exchange you get a natural anti-depressant and a good load of positive hormones. On top of that you get fitness that can be used at any time for any situation and you get muscle mass (that has positive side effects) and hunger suppression. All in all, it's not bad for something you almost get for "free". But you can also choose to enjoy life, get fat…

read the original comment

physical activity is unnatural, because species are not expected to exercise for their health, since they already exercise naturally

Re: The myth of outrunning your diet

#96

Post by esseph »

sa46 wrote: post #18
esseph wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's expected the US Army soldier expends somewhere around 5400 cal in high intensity environments like Combat or even Ranger School. 6,000 calories a day or beyond for the same level of exertion in a cold weather, high stress, high intensity environment. You can absolutely burn more calories that you take in, especially if stressed and not eating right. Or if simply... overtraining because of various psychological i…

Weight loss in Ranger School is additionally “aided” by limiting students to 2 MREs per patrol day (2400 calories) to increase stress. Anecdotally, I lost 26 lbs in Ranger School.

I'll give you my jalapeno cheese and crackers for your strawberry dairy shake

Re: The myth of outrunning your diet

#97

Post by sa46 »

esseph wrote: post #96
sa46 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weight loss in Ranger School is additionally “aided” by limiting students to 2 MREs per patrol day (2400 calories) to increase stress. Anecdotally, I lost 26 lbs in Ranger School.

I'll give you my jalapeno cheese and crackers for your strawberry dairy shake

Sold if you provide a rock or something.
Post reply on HN