111–120 of 343 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is more likely: - a physics-breaking thermodynamic anomaly - a food addicted person is lying about their consumption 200 kcal a day.. yeah sure. A human body needs more than that just to breathe and pump blood. Even comatose a skinny person needs 5 times as much. Overweight people have a significantly higher metabolic base rate. Just breathing can easily be 1000kcal a day if your lungs have to move 30 kilos of u…
It's insane how arrogant people can be about this. You have not accounted for all of the variables and that is blatantly obvious. The phenomenon is well known and there are multi-variable equations for it, many different models. One popular model is that NEET can decrease below the caloric deficit, meaning you still gain weight by becoming subconsciously lazier despite everything feeling equally difficult subjectivel…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it is, at best, a tautology, at worst, taunting the asker on the very thing they are struggling with. I think we can do better to help each other with something difficult
It is what i did. Learn to live with hunger for a while instead of going to "fix it" instantly. No idea why you are so dismissive.
The more you research/learn about obesity, the worse it is, much like smoking. One of the most depressing stats is that dieting does not get easier with time. The probability of eventually regaining all the weight eventually converges to 100%. Even if you're successful for 2 years, people still regain by year 4, 5, etc. The body never resists trying to regain the weight. GLP-1 drugs are the best hope yet.
This is self-defeating and untrue. Many people, myself included, have kept weight off for decades. But you don’t get there by thinking of your new lifestyle as “dieting”. You need to learn to love eating healthy foods in a healthy amount, and getting exercise. Eventually you can get to a place where the old foods and habits are simply unappealing.
Look at the long term numbers for successfully keeping weight off, 5, 10 years out.
They’re abysmal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And yet it happens. A doctor in my family told the story of a patient they were treating in hospital who medically needed to lose weight, and who they found unable to get any reduction until they dropped below _200_ calories a day. Metabolism is _significantly_ more complex than CI/CO, from experience.
Come on, this is ridiculous. CI/CO is a thing. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamics
Proponents of naive thermodynamics model tend to assume that only "excessive" energy is stored into bodily fat, once all the other tissues have had their fair share.
That is not really true in insulin resistant people, whose storage may be excessive and leave the rest of the body unsatisfied and hungry, which drives them to eat more than a healthy person would.
To us, this looks like deliberate overeating, to them, it is a result of constant hunger caused by the fact that some part of the energy consumed is being immediately locked away in fat tissues by dysregulated metabolic processes.
Notably, it isn't easy to "correct" this situation by just eating less, because that will leave those people feeling really starved. Insulin sensitivity must be restored first, then the fat stores will give up their excess willingly and that person won't suffer.
As someone who's struggled with weight loss, and have known others to struggle with it well, I think we colloquially called this "slow metabolism". It always did feel like it was easier to gain weight than lose it, especially fat weight and not muscle weight for me. I was recently sent a video about fat adaptation (basically teaching your body to be better at burning fat) by a very fit friend, but I wonder how much o…
I use 90% cacao Lindt to control my sweet tooth. 1/2 the bar has 4g of sugar, and I consume it over hours. It also has the side effect of reducing my hunger. If you eat much of 90% chocolate, it makes you feel nausea. The trick is to put a small chip in your mouth and let it melt. It's quite delicious and I've not had any sweets in 80+ days.
As this article shows, there are incredibly complex feedback mechanisms around weight and metabolism, but thermodynamics are still fundamentally a thing. After he died last year, I ran across this engineering and accounting approach to weight maintenance and loss written up by John Walker (one of the Autodesk founders). It worked very well for him and changed the way I thought about weight and eating. It is interesti…
The problem with diets based only on calories is that they don't take satiety into account, nor health. Calories is what makes you gain/lose weight, it's basic physics. Satiety is what makes you want to eat more/less. Nutrients are what is making you healthy. Fiber and protein tends to make you feel full. Lack of them allow you to eat large amount of calories without feeling full. You need to keep track of micro and…
Easy diets: drink this shake 3x a day. Don't eat $food_category. Limit calory intake to $amount / day.
More complex: The above, plus macronutrients.
More complex: The above, plus micronutrients.
Add dimensions like lifestyle choices (vegetarianism, veganism etc) or food sensitivities (celiac, lactose intolerance).
I'm no diet expert and need to lose some weight myself but the main advice I'd give is to get stable first. Plan your meals, eat regular meals at regular intervals, keep excess / luxuries / "rewards" to a minimum. Only when you have reached a stable and sustainable pattern should you start to make adjustments. The problem with diets or major lifestyle changes is that they're hard to keep up, simply because they are so different from your usual. The shake diets generally don't work long term because people suffer and go back to their old habits, if not overcompensate because their body signals a deprivation of some kind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sure an obese person claiming to eat 1000kcal per day can still gain weight but that is largely due to selfreported calorie estimates being a bad measure. Put that person in a chamber where calorie intake is controlled and I'd bet the effect disappears.
Ate only 1000kcal in food. Added in 1400kcal in sugary drinks and 2000kcal in small bites of this and that (that don't need to be counted, because it's just one spoonful of peanut butter!)
As someone who's struggled with weight loss, and have known others to struggle with it well, I think we colloquially called this "slow metabolism". It always did feel like it was easier to gain weight than lose it, especially fat weight and not muscle weight for me. I was recently sent a video about fat adaptation (basically teaching your body to be better at burning fat) by a very fit friend, but I wonder how much o…
If there really was a gene that allowed you to survive on substantially less food than your peers, pretty much all humans would have said gene. The history of humanity is rife with famine, and that gene would be a game-changer for survival