Calories in calories out
Replies
-
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19955767Wrong, a caloric deficit does work for everyone. Show 1 properly documented case in all of history where it did not work... good luck.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12574189
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22577758
There are cases where people cannot lose weight even when balancing (calories in) and (calories out) due to having a damaged hypothalamus.
The more you know! :P
(I'm not disagreeing with you though, you are right for like 99.9% of the population)
See OP!!!! See how EASY that was.
Ok, now we have 1 condition that apparently fits the bill, i.e. hypothalamic obesity.
Yeah but there was like 10 different articles quoted for you guys with scientific fact you refused to believe, but ok, this guy uses one article and you jump on it. You aren't biased at all......0 -
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19955767Wrong, a caloric deficit does work for everyone. Show 1 properly documented case in all of history where it did not work... good luck.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12574189
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22577758
There are cases where people cannot lose weight even when balancing (calories in) and (calories out) due to having a damaged hypothalamus.
The more you know! :P
(I'm not disagreeing with you though, you are right for like 99.9% of the population)
See OP!!!! See how EASY that was.
Ok, now we have 1 condition that apparently fits the bill, i.e. hypothalamic obesity.
BTW, OP... now if you seriously believe your sister is one of these people you should urge her to get her hypothalamus checked because it is very possible that she has a tumor. I am not being snarky. I would not wish that on anyone. Seriously, if you believe she maintains her weight despite a massive caloric surplus this is very possibly a sign of major medical issue.
She does have medical issues, clearly thats why she eats freaking 4k calories a day and doesn't gain.
Diagnosed? If not why are you yelling at us to no avail instead of helping her get the medical attention she needs?0 -
These studies show that balancing (calories in) and (calories out) don't work for people with a damaged central nervous system.Uhhh duhhhh. Lets completely deny the studies that have been done that show it doesn't work for everyone.
Are we supposed to believe that because this model of energy expenditure doesn't work for someone with a damaged hypothalamus that it is immediately flawed?
The calories in, calories out model, in its roots, is based on the laws of thermodynamics. If you have scientific evidence that shows the laws of thermodynamics are wrong, please take that evidence with you to the nobel committee so they can give you literally every science prize.
Since everyone's bodies are different this law does not apply to everyone. There is more than one condition this applies to where people have a near impossible time losing weight with out proper medication. So now its "well it DOESN'T work for someone with XYZ" but but but I thought it was 100%.........lol clearly not0 -
Ummmmm....even with a damaged hypothalamus CICO is still fundamentally true. It just becomes very difficult to balance the equation.
But, difficult though it may be to achieve predictably, a deficit will still result in weight loss, and a surplus a gain.
Remember, energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it just changes form.0 -
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19955767Wrong, a caloric deficit does work for everyone. Show 1 properly documented case in all of history where it did not work... good luck.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12574189
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22577758
There are cases where people cannot lose weight even when balancing (calories in) and (calories out) due to having a damaged hypothalamus.
The more you know! :P
(I'm not disagreeing with you though, you are right for like 99.9% of the population)
See OP!!!! See how EASY that was.
Ok, now we have 1 condition that apparently fits the bill, i.e. hypothalamic obesity.
BTW, OP... now if you seriously believe your sister is one of these people you should urge her to get her hypothalamus checked because it is very possible that she has a tumor. I am not being snarky. I would not wish that on anyone. Seriously, if you believe she maintains her weight despite a massive caloric surplus this is very possibly a sign of major medical issue.
She does have medical issues, clearly thats why she eats freaking 4k calories a day and doesn't gain.
Diagnosed? If not why are you yelling at us to no avail instead of helping her get the medical attention she needs?
Oh you are right. Why am I not getting her immediate medical attention because of the advice I got on a random calorie site.0 -
hi shosho
it's been a while.0 -
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19955767Wrong, a caloric deficit does work for everyone. Show 1 properly documented case in all of history where it did not work... good luck.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12574189
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22577758
There are cases where people cannot lose weight even when balancing (calories in) and (calories out) due to having a damaged hypothalamus.
The more you know! :P
(I'm not disagreeing with you though, you are right for like 99.9% of the population)
See OP!!!! See how EASY that was.
Ok, now we have 1 condition that apparently fits the bill, i.e. hypothalamic obesity.
Yeah but there was like 10 different articles quoted for you guys with scientific fact you refused to believe, but ok, this guy uses one article and you jump on it. You aren't biased at all......
None of the articles you referenced said anything about hypothalamic obesity and none of them supported your claim that a person could eat at a surplus and not gain weight.0 -
denial much?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19955767Wrong, a caloric deficit does work for everyone. Show 1 properly documented case in all of history where it did not work... good luck.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12574189
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22577758
There are cases where people cannot lose weight even when balancing (calories in) and (calories out) due to having a damaged hypothalamus.
The more you know! :P
(I'm not disagreeing with you though, you are right for like 99.9% of the population)
See OP!!!! See how EASY that was.
Ok, now we have 1 condition that apparently fits the bill, i.e. hypothalamic obesity.
Yeah but there was like 10 different articles quoted for you guys with scientific fact you refused to believe, but ok, this guy uses one article and you jump on it. You aren't biased at all......
None of the articles you referenced said anything about hypothalamic obesity and none of them supported your claim that a person could eat at a surplus and not gain weight.0 -
santa baby, i forgot to mention one little thing, a ring...This is one of those threads where I want to forget all about manners and forum rules, and potential strikes and really give OP a piece of my mind.
It would not be pretty and could make people cry.
But Christmas is so very close and i promised Santa I'd be good.
and i dont mean on the phone...
0 -
This stupid *kitten* **** is still going?0
-
This stupid *kitten* **** is still going?
Some of us worked today and got in late.0 -
Ummmmm....even with a damaged hypothalamus CICO is still fundamentally true. It just becomes very difficult to balance the equation.
But, difficult though it may be to achieve predictably, a deficit will still result in weight loss, and a surplus a gain.
Remember, energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it just changes form.
Looking more closely. Seems hypothalamic obesity only adds modifiers to the equation that make it more difficult to balance. So I am sticking with the idea that CICO is still 100% and have yet to see a single shred of evidence otherwise.0 -
has she checked her Thyroids?0
-
double post0
-
has she checked her Thyroids?
I doubt she's got more than one..0 -
Ummmmm....even with a damaged hypothalamus CICO is still fundamentally true. It just becomes very difficult to balance the equation.
But, difficult though it may be to achieve predictably, a deficit will still result in weight loss, and a surplus a gain.
Remember, energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it just changes form.
Looking more closely. Seems hypothalamic obesity only adds modifiers to the equation that make it more difficult to balance. So I am sticking with the idea that CICO is still 100% and have yet to see a single shred of evidence otherwise.
Did you have to say this twice0 -
Ummmmm....even with a damaged hypothalamus CICO is still fundamentally true. It just becomes very difficult to balance the equation.
But, difficult though it may be to achieve predictably, a deficit will still result in weight loss, and a surplus a gain.
Remember, energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it just changes form.
Looking more closely. Seems hypothalamic obesity only adds modifiers to the equation that make it more difficult to balance. So I am sticking with the idea that CICO is still 100% and have yet to see a single shred of evidence otherwise.
Did you have to say this twice
It bares repeating.0 -
Ummmmm....even with a damaged hypothalamus CICO is still fundamentally true. It just becomes very difficult to balance the equation.
But, difficult though it may be to achieve predictably, a deficit will still result in weight loss, and a surplus a gain.
Remember, energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it just changes form.
Looking more closely. Seems hypothalamic obesity only adds modifiers to the equation that make it more difficult to balance. So I am sticking with the idea that CICO is still 100% and have yet to see a single shred of evidence otherwise.
Did you have to say this twice
Once for each ear.0 -
Hypothalamic obesity absolutely 100% obeys "calories in, calories out", and every one of those links demonstrates that.
To demonstrate CICO doesn't work, you would have to produce a human being who gains weight with an intake of zero calories.0 -
Ummmmm....even with a damaged hypothalamus CICO is still fundamentally true. It just becomes very difficult to balance the equation.
But, difficult though it may be to achieve predictably, a deficit will still result in weight loss, and a surplus a gain.
Remember, energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it just changes form.
Looking more closely. Seems hypothalamic obesity only adds modifiers to the equation that make it more difficult to balance. So I am sticking with the idea that CICO is still 100% and have yet to see a single shred of evidence otherwise.
Did you have to say this twice
Since you'll probably claim bias or ignore it, I'm gonna go with 'yes'.0 -
Why would anyone eat salads?0
-
Hypothalamic obesity absolutely 100% obeys "calories in, calories out", and every one of those links demonstrates that.
To demonstrate CICO doesn't work, you would have to produce a human being who gains weight with an intake of zero calories.
Yup, and did you notice even though I gave the OP a premature victory there, they still managed to troll on? I am actually kind of impressed at this point.0 -
When I was in my 20s, I could eat like a horse. I was 5'4", and 105 soaking wet, a few months after my second child. When I hit 40, the weight gradually started to come on, so I reduced my intake and leveled off at about 130. Not a bad weight. At 45 I had a total hysterectomy, and the weight started to come on again. At first I did hormone replacement, then stopped that, as I was told it was what made me gain. I am 62, and need to lose at least 30 pounds. I eat 1200 calories a day.... not losing.... slow metabolism, slow heart rate due to heart meds.... bummer.0
-
It's like a train-wreck. I can't look away and I can't leave the scene.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19955767Wrong, a caloric deficit does work for everyone. Show 1 properly documented case in all of history where it did not work... good luck.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12574189
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22577758
There are cases where people cannot lose weight even when balancing (calories in) and (calories out) due to having a damaged hypothalamus.
The more you know! :P
(I'm not disagreeing with you though, you are right for like 99.9% of the population)
Uhhh duhhhh. Lets completely deny the studies that have been done that show it doesn't work for everyone.
Each of those three links are essentially the same investigation. In fact each paper has at least one author that is credited on at least one of the others. They are all talking about the same group of people.
This group of people are those that have undergone some physical damage to the hypothalamus and/or pituitary structures. (not just quit working properly unbeknownst to them, actually surgically removed, resected or otherwise structurally altered by an insult to it like infection or head trauma.)
This does not apply to anyone but a few select individuals on the planet and does not validate your position.
Furthermore, It cannot be used to explain your sisters apparent ability to eat calories at will with no consequences of weight. It is at best irrelevant to your argument because the above mentioned population eat less than a calorie balance and still gain weight. Exactly the opposite of your sister.
This was hypothesized in your OP, but only causally mentioned as a counterblance to your sister's seemingly impossible status. Even if you knew someone who had Hypothalamic Obesity, they wouldn't be in the same position as others as to why they can't lose weight. People tend to remember brain surgery or a significant head injury and subsequent hospital stay. It's no secret, their endocrinologist has laid it all out for them.
Find me ONE study where a regulatory structures alteration provides for the possibility to consume vast amounts of calories and not deposit them as fat. With or without the persons knowledge.0 -
Why would anyone eat salads?
y u no like salad?0 -
It's like a train-wreck. I can't look away and I can't leave the scene.
^^^ Exactly!!!!!!0 -
Why would anyone eat salads?
y u no like salad?
Hmm. I've been doing it wrong.0 -
has she checked her Thyroids?
I doubt she's got more than one..
that might be her problem0 -
has she checked her Thyroids?
I doubt she's got more than one..
that might be her problem
I've been accused of having more than one because of my >3000 average TDEE (and ~2700 even on non-exercise days) despite being "old". I strongly recommend it for effective weight management.0 -
has she checked her Thyroids?
I doubt she's got more than one..
that might be her problem
I've been accused of having more than one because of my >3000 average TDEE (and ~2700 even on non-exercise days) despite being "old". I strongly recommend it for effective weight management.
Dibs if you're sharing the extra.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 422 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions