Calories in calories out

Cindyinpg

Google "calories in calories out flawed" and look at the billions of pages.

Google fu isn't actual research. It's searching for answers you want to hear..........

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

And there is tons of scientific information on why this doesn't work

Can you post some of it? You can start here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed

tons of things have been posted. Google is your friend. Do the work..I know its hard

You are the one making the claims, not me. The burden of proof is on you, I fear.

If google is your friend consider her your bad friend who holds up a small hand held mirror that provides the incomplete picture and doesn't tell you where to look. You have to then grab that mirror and point it where you want. You can either let her keep it on your face where everything's hunky dory, or take it from her, move it all around your body and notice where the truth might lie and then focus your efforts there. OR get a full length mirror with 2 swivel doors on the side to see all the sides of the situation. This final option will require that you expand your mentality enough to then form a mental image of the problem in it's entirety an then use your own selective prowess to hone in on where work needs to be done.

Insert Standing ovation gif.

Well said.

(Sorry at work on phone so no gif)

tilmoph

No one said all of science in the whole world doesn't work. Hive mind sheep do think alike. As it was said. You people are lemmings. You all believe everything you nurtionalists and the mainstream health departments have told you. Thats why you believe this garbage. Its not science, its in place to sell diet food and products. But you can keep being naive to it

So, we're at the big conspiracy stage, now are we? So, this begs the question; what diet food is being advanced by calories in vs calories out, again? Which products? Seriously, who stands to gain from "no specific foods make you fat. No specific exercise product will make you not fat. Products which say they will help you lose weight without diet or excersice is a pile of crap"?

ninerbuff

No one said all of science in the whole world doesn't work. Hive mind sheep do think alike. As it was said. You people are lemmings. You all believe everything you nurtionalists and the mainstream health departments have told you. Thats why you believe this garbage. Its not science, its in place to sell diet food and products. But you can keep being naive to it

Ah, so you're pissed off at the fitness industry. Got it now. Good thing to be pissed off about it because there are alot of myths and broscience by them.
But we're speaking in terms of actually science relating to physiology, endocrinology and body mechanics. Don't discredit the work and research that these entities provide because you have a beef with the fitness industry's propoganda.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Iron_Feline

No one said all of science in the whole world doesn't work. Hive mind sheep do think alike. As it was said. You people are lemmings. You all believe everything you nurtionalists and the mainstream health departments have told you. Thats why you believe this garbage. Its not science, its in place to sell diet food and products. But you can keep being naive to it

So, we're at the big conspiracy stage, now are we? So, this begs the question; what diet food is being advanced by calories in vs calories out, again? Which products? Seriously, who stands to gain from "no specific foods make you fat. No specific exercise product will make you not fat. Products which say they will help you lose weight without diet or excersice is a pile of crap"?

I KNOW I KNOW

Cindyinpg

No one said all of science in the whole world doesn't work. Hive mind sheep do think alike. As it was said. You people are lemmings. You all believe everything you nurtionalists and the mainstream health departments have told you. Thats why you believe this garbage. Its not science, its in place to sell diet food and products. But you can keep being naive to it

So, we're at the big conspiracy stage, now are we? So, this begs the question; what diet food is being advanced by calories in vs calories out, again? Which products? Seriously, who stands to gain from "no specific foods make you fat. No specific exercise product will make you not fat. Products which say they will help you lose weight without diet or excersice is a pile of crap"?

I predict a the evils of sugar diatribe coming next... perhaps with a youtube link.

ninerbuff

Yes aliens, vampires, big foot, I believe everything I read on the internet. I even believe all the scientific THEORIES, i hear that are not proven as fact. Just as crazy....

Gravity is a theory. Just sayin'.

You're unconvinced. We get it. You're wrong, but we get it.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

And you are still in denial about the fact that you are not right.

Nah. I flex in the mirror and look at all the success my clients have and have much gratitude to science for getting it. Science helped me to help them. How are you helping your friends? That working out okay?

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Ahh I get it. You come on a calorie counter website to reiterate that same brainwashed advices you learned at institution? Ahh college learned personal trainer. hahahahah. You are spoon fed false information to reiterate back to people. Your education is a joke.

Yep, that's how straw man arguments work. Don't be mad because I actually help people with correct information. Hatin' on me just shows your maturity level.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

tilmoph

I predict a the evils of sugar diatribe coming next... perhaps with a youtube link.

Oh, I'll bet $20 and the favor of Llolth that the link will be to Lusting.

silenceinspace

No one said all of science in the whole world doesn't work. Hive mind sheep do think alike. As it was said. You people are lemmings. You all believe everything you nurtionalists and the mainstream health departments have told you. Thats why you believe this garbage. Its not science, its in place to sell diet food and products. But you can keep being naive to it

So, we're at the big conspiracy stage, now are we? So, this begs the question; what diet food is being advanced by calories in vs calories out, again? Which products? Seriously, who stands to gain from "no specific foods make you fat. No specific exercise product will make you not fat. Products which say they will help you lose weight without diet or excersice is a pile of crap"?

I predict a the evils of sugar diatribe coming next... perhaps with a youtube link.

Hey! These are facts, guys!
- 100% of people die
- 100% of people eat sugar
- We can safely conclude that sugar is 10000% deadly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

LiftAllThePizzas

Your weight is actually determined by Renenet, the ancient Egyptian god of harvest and nourishment. She writes down (in hieroglyphics, with bad handwriting, in cypher) what you will weigh every single day. Whatever you eat has precisely jack squat to do with what you weight. Trying to screw with Renenet's decrees will always fail. Always.

My experience is consistent with this model.

lynn_glenmont

You know what, screw it. OP, you are totally right. Calories in vs calorie out totally isn't right. Your weight is actually determined by Renenet, the ancient Egyptian god of harvest and nourishment. She writes down (in hieroglyphics, with bad handwriting, in cypher) what you will weigh every single day. Whatever you eat has precisely jack squat to do with what you weight. Trying to screw with Renenet's decrees will always fail. Always.



Now that we've made OP feel better about whatever they were on about, let's turn our attention to any lurkers or googlers who may have stumbled upon this thread. Now, silent folks, you may have noticed that pretty much everyone disagrees with the OPs disbelief in calories in vs calories out. Contrary to what some more displeased members of the site would lead you to believe, this isn't because MFP is some cruel hive mind hell bent on making people feel stupid for the lulz. It is because calorie in vs calorie out is the most fundamental point to weight lose, weight maintenance, and weight gain.

Now, you may be wondering about things like hormonal resistances and metabolic rates and whatever it is you kooky kids have come up with with all your sciencings that might affect your weight loss rate. Surely those count, right? Of course they do, dear shy ones, of course they do. However, what they are is a modifier on our core cal in vs cal out equation. Please take note that c in vs c out is always listed as a comparison of variables, not of absolute figures. This is to account for the many, many differences between different people. So when someone tells you it's all about how much you vs how much you burn, they aren't dismissing any metabolic concerns you may have. They are pointing out that those concerns don't change hwat you have to do to lose, gain, or maintain weight; eta less/ as much/ more than what you use up by existing and doing whatever it is you do. You just may have been hit with a condition or (sadly for you) a set of conditions that results in you needing to eat even less than someone else to lose weight, even of your the same height, weight, gender, age, and activity level.

To determine if this is required of you, if life decided to be a bit mean to you on this, track what you eat. No eyeballing, now. No "forgetting" to write it down, we both know you didn't forget, now did you? Of course not. Keep accurate track of all of that. Now, and this is a bit trickier, but make your best effort, track your activity level. Do this for about a month. Now compare the two. What do the numbers predict will happen? What actually happened? If the numbers said you'd lose more than you did by a significant amount, eat less, or up your activity level. Repeat until the numbers are within about 2% or so of each other. If you had to do this a lot, see a doctor, because you really shouldn't need to do that so much, and that could indicate a medical problem.

Clearly. I personally eat a deficit, that is how I lose weight, DUH. But what I was saying was this doesn't work for everyone, possibly because of health problems they dont even know they had.

It does work for everyone, because "calories in/calories out" (meaning calories taken in are either burned, expelled, or stored) is not just science, it's a truism, unless you think there are people whose bodies don't run on energy. Obviously there are variations in how different bodies burn, expel, and store energy at different times. It's a real pain that every year as a I get older I'm like to burn marginally fewer at-rest calories. If I get the flu or diarrhea, I may expel food without extracting the full caloric value. And of course online calculator, which rely on user-supplied data and only offer four or five specific points for activity level factors when common sense indicates that it's an analog scale and the vast majority of people will fall between predetermined points, are not going to be closer than the general ballpark, if that, in determining your TDEE or TDEE before exercise, as MFP does. It's a starting point. Measure, track, and over time you can maybe do the math yourself based on calories consumed and weight gained or lost to figure out your maintenance level, but even that is only going to be an estimate, because pretty much all of your exercise burns are estimates and unless you only eat food you've prepared yourself from whole foods, some of your calories consumed will be estimated. The fact that we have to rely on less-than-perfect data doesn't make the underlying equation that we're plugging the data into wrong.

Your body doesn't manufacture calories out of nowhere, nor does it whisk it them into nonexistence.

lynn_glenmont

No one said all of science in the whole world doesn't work. Hive mind sheep do think alike. As it was said. You people are lemmings. You all believe everything you nurtionalists and the mainstream health departments have told you. Thats why you believe this garbage. Its not science, its in place to sell diet food and products. But you can keep being naive to it

So, we're at the big conspiracy stage, now are we? So, this begs the question; what diet food is being advanced by calories in vs calories out, again? Which products? Seriously, who stands to gain from "no specific foods make you fat. No specific exercise product will make you not fat. Products which say they will help you lose weight without diet or excersice is a pile of crap"?

I predict a the evils of sugar diatribe coming next... perhaps with a youtube link.

Hey! These are facts, guys!
- 100% of people die
- 100% of people eat sugar
- We can safely conclude that sugar is 10000% deadly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

Are you sure that's right? I think the percentages are additive, not multiplicative. Sugar is only 1000% deadly. (Or is it exponential.....?)

gypsyrose64

I'm not going to get into the scientific part of this discussion, but I will say these "variables" to why one person is skinny and another is not...is not always obvious to the naked eye.

At my heaviest, I was 240 and never was one to binge or eat tons of food. I was eating tons of carbs back then, and have since found out I am extremely sensitive to carbs(pre diabetic). It's taken me a year+ and still haven't broken the 200 mark. I'm sedentary (desk job) and back problems have kept me from jumping on the exercise wagon. I eat at a deficit more often than not, but fat doesn't fall off of me easily.

My son (yes he's 15, but) has to eat like 4,000 cals/day to maintain his weight. Otherwise he looks malnourished! Obviously got his dad's skinny gene (also eats whatever and stays lean). I've actually tracked his intake on a weekend, and watched him lose weight eating 4,000+ calories.

One thing I've noticed about our differences though, is my son and ex both are type-A hyper active and always seem uptight. My son cannot sit still...even when he's sitting, he's twitching, squirming, kicking a foot, jumping up and pacing around, etc.

Me? I am more zen-type personality, and don't budge a muscle sometimes when I sit down to relax. I think some people just naturally burn more calories being themselves, because of those minuscule variables and movements. The science is there, but you don't see it because you don't realize how many times skinny girl twitches those muscles and burns a few extra cals that the fat friend didn't. Maybe fat friend is insulin resistant and doesn't know it. I can maintain weight at 1400 cals/day if my carbs get too high... or I can lose weight on same cals when I reduce carbs/sugar.

I still think the cals in/out work...but I think it's more complicated than just how much you see them eat or how often you think they are active.

silenceinspace

No one said all of science in the whole world doesn't work. Hive mind sheep do think alike. As it was said. You people are lemmings. You all believe everything you nurtionalists and the mainstream health departments have told you. Thats why you believe this garbage. Its not science, its in place to sell diet food and products. But you can keep being naive to it

So, we're at the big conspiracy stage, now are we? So, this begs the question; what diet food is being advanced by calories in vs calories out, again? Which products? Seriously, who stands to gain from "no specific foods make you fat. No specific exercise product will make you not fat. Products which say they will help you lose weight without diet or excersice is a pile of crap"?

I predict a the evils of sugar diatribe coming next... perhaps with a youtube link.

Hey! These are facts, guys!
- 100% of people die
- 100% of people eat sugar
- We can safely conclude that sugar is 10000% deadly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

Are you sure that's right? I think the percentages are additive, not multiplicative. Sugar is only 1000% deadly. (Or is it exponential.....?)

No, they are multiplicative! Google "multiplicative"!

olehcat

I haven't read all the replies here (just the first page), but I would hazard a guess that she is not logging accurately (if at all).

So in my own example, I am slightly overweight and have been steadily gaining over the past few years. I just now, today, had a rather large discovery as to why after logging for a few weeks now. I bring salads and very healthy lunches to work. I appear to be the picture of health with my running and fitness levels.

But if you look at my log (sorry, not literally, diary's closed), you will see that when I think I am eating light and being restrained, most days I'm easily packing 2500+ calories, which is too much for me to lose. And that's on the days when I don't let myself have a "free for all" (which has happened WAY too frequently).

So if I hadn't been logging as accurately as I can, I might stomp my foot with frustration and say, "Wah, why am I not losing weight? I'm eating salads and running a lot!" (And as for the secret eating, what my coworkers who see me eating salads and healthy food at work do not know is that I love my red wine and I love Asian take away food, and my weekends can be a disaster sometimes). So all that being said, my guess is that the 300 pound active person is still somehow eating way more than she thinks she is.

Cindyinpg

I'm not going to get into the scientific part of this discussion, but I will say these "variables" to why one person is skinny and another is not...is not always obvious to the naked eye.

At my heaviest, I was 240 and never was one to binge or eat tons of food. I was eating tons of carbs back then, and have since found out I am extremely sensitive to carbs(pre diabetic). It's taken me a year+ and still haven't broken the 200 mark. I'm sedentary (desk job) and back problems have kept me from jumping on the exercise wagon. I eat at a deficit more often than not, but fat doesn't fall off of me easily.

My son (yes he's 15, but) has to eat like 4,000 cals/day to maintain his weight. Otherwise he looks malnourished! Obviously got his dad's skinny gene (also eats whatever and stays lean). I've actually tracked his intake on a weekend, and watched him lose weight eating 4,000+ calories.

One thing I've noticed about our differences though, is my son and ex both are type-A hyper active and always seem uptight. My son cannot sit still...even when he's sitting, he's twitching, squirming, kicking a foot, jumping up and pacing around, etc.

Me? I am more zen-type personality, and don't budge a muscle sometimes when I sit down to relax. I think some people just naturally burn more calories being themselves, because of those minuscule variables and movements. The science is there, but you don't see it because you don't realize how many times skinny girl twitches those muscles and burns a few extra cals that the fat friend didn't. Maybe fat friend is insulin resistant and doesn't know it. I can maintain weight at 1400 cals/day if my carbs get too high... or I can lose weight on same cals when I reduce carbs/sugar.

I still think the cals in/out work...but I think it's more complicated than just how much you see them eat or how often you think they are active.

Yep, I'm betting if you strapped a heartrate monitor on your son, that he is burning all those calories. I have a Bodymedia and so does a young male friend of mine. He eats 4,000 calories a day and maintains a very lean physique, never gains an ounce. Never goes to the gym or does any formal exercise either. But he never sits still and is burning a crap ton of activity just in everyday life. To an outsider who does not know him, he would be one of those skinny people who are defying all the rules, but really, he's not.

nutmegoreo

I think my IQ just dropped about 20 points in the last 30 minutes...

nutmegoreo

hmm googles "calories in calories out flawed" is in denial about the first 10 pages of articles and facts stated that clearly explains why this doesn't apply or work 100% of the time.

As it has been pointed out, if you damage your metabolism you may need a different amount of calories, therefore it doesn't work because you could think you need one amount but you could not be losing because of a damaged metabolism. 100% would be if their were ZERO variables, but since there are tons, its not black and white, the body is not a simple machine, people do not burn the same and it doesn't always work this simply.

Google 'aliens abducted me' and be in denial about the first 10 pages of articles and facts that clearly explain... oh wait. That would be dumb to think a google search proves anything.

Um, are you saying aliens don't abduct people? Because my sister in law was abducted and I used to live with her and I know it happened because we lived together.

My bad, if you lived with her and she claimed to be abducted, I stand corrected. Aliens abduct people, calories exist but don't exist (depending on how it fits with my argument at the time) and unicorns stole my cupcakes because I live with my cupcakes and they didn't haves sprinkles on them this morning but they do now.

Google unicorns and cupcakes and you'll be a believer too!

LOL. Put the calorie in a box. Schrodinger's calorie. Maybe it's there, maybe it's not. MEH!

Iron_Feline

hmm googles "calories in calories out flawed" is in denial about the first 10 pages of articles and facts stated that clearly explains why this doesn't apply or work 100% of the time.

As it has been pointed out, if you damage your metabolism you may need a different amount of calories, therefore it doesn't work because you could think you need one amount but you could not be losing because of a damaged metabolism. 100% would be if their were ZERO variables, but since there are tons, its not black and white, the body is not a simple machine, people do not burn the same and it doesn't always work this simply.

Google 'aliens abducted me' and be in denial about the first 10 pages of articles and facts that clearly explain... oh wait. That would be dumb to think a google search proves anything.

Um, are you saying aliens don't abduct people? Because my sister in law was abducted and I used to live with her and I know it happened because we lived together.

My bad, if you lived with her and she claimed to be abducted, I stand corrected. Aliens abduct people, calories exist but don't exist (depending on how it fits with my argument at the time) and unicorns stole my cupcakes because I live with my cupcakes and they didn't haves sprinkles on them this morning but they do now.

Google unicorns and cupcakes and you'll be a believer too!

LOL. Put the calorie in a box. Schrodinger's calorie. Maybe it's there, maybe it's not. MEH!

You win the internet today



of course you also fail as science is not allowed in this thread :happy:

MyChocolateDiet

No one said all of science in the whole world doesn't work. Hive mind sheep do think alike. As it was said. You people are lemmings. You all believe everything you nurtionalists and the mainstream health departments have told you. Thats why you believe this garbage. Its not science, its in place to sell diet food and products. But you can keep being naive to it

So, we're at the big conspiracy stage, now are we? So, this begs the question; what diet food is being advanced by calories in vs calories out, again? Which products? Seriously, who stands to gain from "no specific foods make you fat. No specific exercise product will make you not fat. Products which say they will help you lose weight without diet or excersice is a pile of crap"?

I predict a the evils of sugar diatribe coming next... perhaps with a youtube link.

I'll take that bet. 5 dollars says it goes back to a general "whole foods" rant.

nutmegoreo

Science makes me angry. It has too many calories that aren't calories. I need a cuddle with grumpy cat.

:happy: