Eat everything in Moderation as dietary advice?

Options
12346

Replies

  • Azexas
    Azexas Posts: 4,334 Member
    Options
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!
    Just do what works for you. There is no One True Path to weight loss. If it works for you, that's what you do. And if the whole rest of the world screams that it's wrong, then let them scream. Just keep losing your weight.

    They can't lose your weight. Only you can lose your weight.

    Yes there is: CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain (medical issues might make it little harder, but it's still CI/CO) ;)
    Let me get this straight. You are claiming that "CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain" is the One True Path to weight loss?

    Wouldn't want to misquote.

    It all boils down to burning more calories than you take in for weight loss.
    Doesn't matter how you get there, that depends on the person and works for them( low carb, IIFYM, high carb and so on)

    Are you saying there is another way?
  • galgenstrick
    galgenstrick Posts: 2,086 Member
    Options
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!
    Just do what works for you. There is no One True Path to weight loss. If it works for you, that's what you do. And if the whole rest of the world screams that it's wrong, then let them scream. Just keep losing your weight.

    They can't lose your weight. Only you can lose your weight.

    Yes there is: CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain (medical issues might make it little harder, but it's still CI/CO) ;)
    Let me get this straight. You are claiming that "CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain" is the One True Path to weight loss?

    Wouldn't want to misquote.

    CICO is what it boils down to. If you're not in a caloric deficit you won't lose weight (fat or LBM). There is no other way short of amputation
  • Kalikel
    Kalikel Posts: 9,626 Member
    Options
    Troutsy wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!
    Just do what works for you. There is no One True Path to weight loss. If it works for you, that's what you do. And if the whole rest of the world screams that it's wrong, then let them scream. Just keep losing your weight.

    They can't lose your weight. Only you can lose your weight.

    Yes there is: CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain (medical issues might make it little harder, but it's still CI/CO) ;)
    Let me get this straight. You are claiming that "CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain" is the One True Path to weight loss?

    Wouldn't want to misquote.

    It all boils down to burning more calories than you take in for weight loss.
    Doesn't matter how you get there, that depends on the person and works for them( low carb, IIFYM, high carb and so on)

    Are you saying there is another way?
    No, of course not. Well, you could have liposuction, I guess, but of course you have to burn more than you take in. Everyone knows that.

    That's not even what the thread is about. It's about different diet strategies and whether one way of eating less than you burn is better than another.
  • Azexas
    Azexas Posts: 4,334 Member
    Options
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Troutsy wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!
    Just do what works for you. There is no One True Path to weight loss. If it works for you, that's what you do. And if the whole rest of the world screams that it's wrong, then let them scream. Just keep losing your weight.

    They can't lose your weight. Only you can lose your weight.

    Yes there is: CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain (medical issues might make it little harder, but it's still CI/CO) ;)
    Let me get this straight. You are claiming that "CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain" is the One True Path to weight loss?

    Wouldn't want to misquote.

    It all boils down to burning more calories than you take in for weight loss.
    Doesn't matter how you get there, that depends on the person and works for them( low carb, IIFYM, high carb and so on)

    Are you saying there is another way?
    No, of course not. Well, you could have liposuction, I guess, but of course you have to burn more than you take in. Everyone knows that.

    That's not even what the thread is about. It's about different diet strategies and whether one way of eating less than you burn is better than another.

    Your last post seemed very skeptical of Sereh87, which is what made me question.
  • AlabasterVerve
    AlabasterVerve Posts: 3,171 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    seska422 wrote: »
    Annie_01 wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    I'm fairly new here, but have been a bit overwhelmed with all the eat everything in modération advice that is despensed regardless of dietary issues.

    Are there some studies available to read that give the eat everything/moderation plan some credibility?

    Here you go OP:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11883916

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10336790
    umayster wrote: »
    czymom123 wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    I'm fairly new here, but have been a bit overwhelmed with all the eat everything in modération advice that is despensed regardless of dietary issues.

    Are there some studies available to read that give the eat everything/moderation plan some credibility?


    Have there been any studies or articles posted on the credibility of eating everything in moderation?
    If you have not posted verified studies and simply your own opinion or experience, then why would you be so invested someone else's opinion or experience?

    I'm trying to find the basis of all the EIM advice. I would like to know what happens to many others (I.e. a study) when EIM is used or not used as a diet or nutritional strategy.

    I am reposting Alyssa's post in case you missed it. These two articles might help.

    lol I especially liked this bit:

    "The second strongest canonical correlation (r=0.59) associated calorie counting and conscious dieting with overeating while alone and increased body mass."
    Right above that was this:

    "The strongest canonical correlation (r=0.65) was the relationship between flexible dieting and the absence of overeating, lower body mass and lower levels of depression and anxiety."

    I found it a little odd that they separated out calorie counting from "flexible dieting" like you can't do both at the same time. :| I'm basically doing flexible dieting within calorie counting.

    In a broader sense these associations might have value for further research but, in my opinion, it's all a bunch of tosh. People who count calories are fatter? People who don't overeat are thinner? You don't say...

    This stuff might be good enough for a newspaper headline but it would be foolish to give it any credence.
  • Serah87
    Serah87 Posts: 5,481 Member
    Options
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Troutsy wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!
    Just do what works for you. There is no One True Path to weight loss. If it works for you, that's what you do. And if the whole rest of the world screams that it's wrong, then let them scream. Just keep losing your weight.

    They can't lose your weight. Only you can lose your weight.

    Yes there is: CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain (medical issues might make it little harder, but it's still CI/CO) ;)
    Let me get this straight. You are claiming that "CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain" is the One True Path to weight loss?

    Wouldn't want to misquote.

    It all boils down to burning more calories than you take in for weight loss.
    Doesn't matter how you get there, that depends on the person and works for them( low carb, IIFYM, high carb and so on)

    Are you saying there is another way?
    No, of course not. Well, you could have liposuction, I guess, but of course you have to burn more than you take in. Everyone knows that.

    That's not even what the thread is about. It's about different diet strategies and whether one way of eating less than you burn is better than another.

    The only reason I brought it up is because you stated and quoted, "There is no One True Path to weight loss."

    And that's not true. :D
  • VintageFeline
    VintageFeline Posts: 6,771 Member
    Options
    It really is as simple as CICO, despite what the very lucrative diet industry would have you believe.

    The hard part is untangling the psychology of your own personal relationship with food and how to control that by developing effective sustainable strategies in order to achieve the above long term.
  • Kalikel
    Kalikel Posts: 9,626 Member
    Options
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!
    Just do what works for you. There is no One True Path to weight loss. If it works for you, that's what you do. And if the whole rest of the world screams that it's wrong, then let them scream. Just keep losing your weight.

    They can't lose your weight. Only you can lose your weight.

    Yes there is: CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain (medical issues might make it little harder, but it's still CI/CO) ;)
    Let me get this straight. You are claiming that "CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain" is the One True Path to weight loss?

    Wouldn't want to misquote.

    How else would you lose weight?
    You mean besides gaining? Or maintaining?

    I'll go with losing. And there many, many ways to do it.

  • honkytonks85
    honkytonks85 Posts: 669 Member
    Options
    There are many studies that support CICO for weight loss and not a single study that proves eating a gluten free/GMO free/low carb (or whatever the latest fad is) you will lose weight in a caloric surplus.
  • umayster
    umayster Posts: 651 Member
    Options
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!

    What is the opposite of EIM? EEYS (Eat Everything You See)?

    B) Actually, P & FIM, minimizing C

  • Azexas
    Azexas Posts: 4,334 Member
    Options
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!
    Just do what works for you. There is no One True Path to weight loss. If it works for you, that's what you do. And if the whole rest of the world screams that it's wrong, then let them scream. Just keep losing your weight.

    They can't lose your weight. Only you can lose your weight.

    Yes there is: CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain (medical issues might make it little harder, but it's still CI/CO) ;)
    Let me get this straight. You are claiming that "CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain" is the One True Path to weight loss?

    Wouldn't want to misquote.

    How else would you lose weight?
    You mean besides gaining? Or maintaining?

    I'll go with losing. And there many, many ways to do it.

    Other than ci/co?
  • Serah87
    Serah87 Posts: 5,481 Member
    Options
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!
    Just do what works for you. There is no One True Path to weight loss. If it works for you, that's what you do. And if the whole rest of the world screams that it's wrong, then let them scream. Just keep losing your weight.

    They can't lose your weight. Only you can lose your weight.

    Yes there is: CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain (medical issues might make it little harder, but it's still CI/CO) ;)
    Let me get this straight. You are claiming that "CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain" is the One True Path to weight loss?

    Wouldn't want to misquote.

    How else would you lose weight?
    You mean besides gaining? Or maintaining?

    I'll go with losing. And there many, many ways to do it.

    Nope, still one way, CI/CO. ;)
  • Kalikel
    Kalikel Posts: 9,626 Member
    Options
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!
    Just do what works for you. There is no One True Path to weight loss. If it works for you, that's what you do. And if the whole rest of the world screams that it's wrong, then let them scream. Just keep losing your weight.

    They can't lose your weight. Only you can lose your weight.

    Yes there is: CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain (medical issues might make it little harder, but it's still CI/CO) ;)
    Let me get this straight. You are claiming that "CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain" is the One True Path to weight loss?

    Wouldn't want to misquote.

    CICO is what it boils down to. If you're not in a caloric deficit you won't lose weight (fat or LBM). There is no other way short of amputation
    Nobody is disputing that. The thread is/was about different approaches to weight loss.
  • Kalikel
    Kalikel Posts: 9,626 Member
    Options
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Troutsy wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!
    Just do what works for you. There is no One True Path to weight loss. If it works for you, that's what you do. And if the whole rest of the world screams that it's wrong, then let them scream. Just keep losing your weight.

    They can't lose your weight. Only you can lose your weight.

    Yes there is: CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain (medical issues might make it little harder, but it's still CI/CO) ;)
    Let me get this straight. You are claiming that "CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain" is the One True Path to weight loss?

    Wouldn't want to misquote.

    It all boils down to burning more calories than you take in for weight loss.
    Doesn't matter how you get there, that depends on the person and works for them( low carb, IIFYM, high carb and so on)

    Are you saying there is another way?
    No, of course not. Well, you could have liposuction, I guess, but of course you have to burn more than you take in. Everyone knows that.

    That's not even what the thread is about. It's about different diet strategies and whether one way of eating less than you burn is better than another.

    The only reason I brought it up is because you stated and quoted, "There is no One True Path to weight loss."

    And that's not true. :D
    Yes, there are. There are many, many different ways to lose weight.

    Your way is not better than anyone else's.
  • Azexas
    Azexas Posts: 4,334 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Troutsy wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!
    Just do what works for you. There is no One True Path to weight loss. If it works for you, that's what you do. And if the whole rest of the world screams that it's wrong, then let them scream. Just keep losing your weight.

    They can't lose your weight. Only you can lose your weight.

    Yes there is: CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain (medical issues might make it little harder, but it's still CI/CO) ;)
    Let me get this straight. You are claiming that "CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain" is the One True Path to weight loss?

    Wouldn't want to misquote.

    It all boils down to burning more calories than you take in for weight loss.
    Doesn't matter how you get there, that depends on the person and works for them( low carb, IIFYM, high carb and so on)

    Are you saying there is another way?
    No, of course not. Well, you could have liposuction, I guess, but of course you have to burn more than you take in. Everyone knows that.

    That's not even what the thread is about. It's about different diet strategies and whether one way of eating less than you burn is better than another.

    The only reason I brought it up is because you stated and quoted, "There is no One True Path to weight loss."

    And that's not true. :D
    Yes, there are. There are many, many different ways to lose weight.

    Your way is not better than anyone else's.

    How are there any other ways to lose weight other than CI/CO?
  • Serah87
    Serah87 Posts: 5,481 Member
    Options
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Troutsy wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!
    Just do what works for you. There is no One True Path to weight loss. If it works for you, that's what you do. And if the whole rest of the world screams that it's wrong, then let them scream. Just keep losing your weight.

    They can't lose your weight. Only you can lose your weight.

    Yes there is: CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain (medical issues might make it little harder, but it's still CI/CO) ;)
    Let me get this straight. You are claiming that "CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain" is the One True Path to weight loss?

    Wouldn't want to misquote.

    It all boils down to burning more calories than you take in for weight loss.
    Doesn't matter how you get there, that depends on the person and works for them( low carb, IIFYM, high carb and so on)

    Are you saying there is another way?
    No, of course not. Well, you could have liposuction, I guess, but of course you have to burn more than you take in. Everyone knows that.

    That's not even what the thread is about. It's about different diet strategies and whether one way of eating less than you burn is better than another.

    The only reason I brought it up is because you stated and quoted, "There is no One True Path to weight loss."

    And that's not true. :D
    Yes, there are. There are many, many different ways to lose weight.

    Nope, nope, nope. 1 way only.
  • Kalikel
    Kalikel Posts: 9,626 Member
    Options
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Troutsy wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!
    Just do what works for you. There is no One True Path to weight loss. If it works for you, that's what you do. And if the whole rest of the world screams that it's wrong, then let them scream. Just keep losing your weight.

    They can't lose your weight. Only you can lose your weight.

    Yes there is: CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain (medical issues might make it little harder, but it's still CI/CO) ;)
    Let me get this straight. You are claiming that "CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain" is the One True Path to weight loss?

    Wouldn't want to misquote.

    It all boils down to burning more calories than you take in for weight loss.
    Doesn't matter how you get there, that depends on the person and works for them( low carb, IIFYM, high carb and so on)

    Are you saying there is another way?
    No, of course not. Well, you could have liposuction, I guess, but of course you have to burn more than you take in. Everyone knows that.

    That's not even what the thread is about. It's about different diet strategies and whether one way of eating less than you burn is better than another.

    The only reason I brought it up is because you stated and quoted, "There is no One True Path to weight loss."

    And that's not true. :D
    Yes, there are. There are many, many different ways to lose weight.

    Nope, nope, nope. 1 way only.
    Thanks for you input.
  • zyxst
    zyxst Posts: 9,134 Member
    Options
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Troutsy wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!
    Just do what works for you. There is no One True Path to weight loss. If it works for you, that's what you do. And if the whole rest of the world screams that it's wrong, then let them scream. Just keep losing your weight.

    They can't lose your weight. Only you can lose your weight.

    Yes there is: CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain (medical issues might make it little harder, but it's still CI/CO) ;)
    Let me get this straight. You are claiming that "CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain" is the One True Path to weight loss?

    Wouldn't want to misquote.

    It all boils down to burning more calories than you take in for weight loss.
    Doesn't matter how you get there, that depends on the person and works for them( low carb, IIFYM, high carb and so on)

    Are you saying there is another way?
    No, of course not. Well, you could have liposuction, I guess, but of course you have to burn more than you take in. Everyone knows that.

    That's not even what the thread is about. It's about different diet strategies and whether one way of eating less than you burn is better than another.

    The only reason I brought it up is because you stated and quoted, "There is no One True Path to weight loss."

    And that's not true. :D
    Yes, there are. There are many, many different ways to lose weight.

    Your way is not better than anyone else's.

    So what other ways are there to lose weight that do not involve CICO? Are you speaking about surgical means (removing body parts)?
  • Azexas
    Azexas Posts: 4,334 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Troutsy wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!
    Just do what works for you. There is no One True Path to weight loss. If it works for you, that's what you do. And if the whole rest of the world screams that it's wrong, then let them scream. Just keep losing your weight.

    They can't lose your weight. Only you can lose your weight.

    Yes there is: CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain (medical issues might make it little harder, but it's still CI/CO) ;)
    Let me get this straight. You are claiming that "CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain" is the One True Path to weight loss?

    Wouldn't want to misquote.

    It all boils down to burning more calories than you take in for weight loss.
    Doesn't matter how you get there, that depends on the person and works for them( low carb, IIFYM, high carb and so on)

    Are you saying there is another way?
    No, of course not. Well, you could have liposuction, I guess, but of course you have to burn more than you take in. Everyone knows that.

    That's not even what the thread is about. It's about different diet strategies and whether one way of eating less than you burn is better than another.

    I'm a little confused. Can you please clarify. Before you said there isn't any other way to lose weight than ci/co and now you say there are many other ways. Please clarify. I'm confused.
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Troutsy wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Serah87 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    umayster wrote: »
    kjurassic wrote: »
    Why don't you try it and see if it work for you and if it does, does it really matter if it works for anybody else?

    I'm actually working on the opposite of EIM for the first time in my life and want to make sure I'm not missing something important!
    Just do what works for you. There is no One True Path to weight loss. If it works for you, that's what you do. And if the whole rest of the world screams that it's wrong, then let them scream. Just keep losing your weight.

    They can't lose your weight. Only you can lose your weight.

    Yes there is: CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain (medical issues might make it little harder, but it's still CI/CO) ;)
    Let me get this straight. You are claiming that "CI/CO = weight loss/maintaining/weight gain" is the One True Path to weight loss?

    Wouldn't want to misquote.

    It all boils down to burning more calories than you take in for weight loss.
    Doesn't matter how you get there, that depends on the person and works for them( low carb, IIFYM, high carb and so on)

    Are you saying there is another way?
    No, of course not. Well, you could have liposuction, I guess, but of course you have to burn more than you take in. Everyone knows that.

    That's not even what the thread is about. It's about different diet strategies and whether one way of eating less than you burn is better than another.

    The only reason I brought it up is because you stated and quoted, "There is no One True Path to weight loss."

    And that's not true. :D
    Yes, there are. There are many, many different ways to lose weight.

    Your way is not better than anyone else's.

  • galgenstrick
    galgenstrick Posts: 2,086 Member
    Options
    Perhaps they meant there are many many ways to reach a deficit?
This discussion has been closed.