Calories in calories out

shscruggs82

so dumb it down for me, if you eat 2000 calories how much then should you lose to lose weight, not just maintain? the net calories dont matter as long as your burning enough to lose weight, and how do you go about that?

Rawfoodsho

lol at everyone acting like they haven't had a close relative or friend that ate crap all day long, sat around and never gained a pound. Well clearly it can be reversed.

These folks usually started with a slightly higher than expected metabolism, they retained their LBM by not actually sitting as much as you would think, and when they do eat more in excess their metabolism is more willing to rev up to burn it and body is less efficient at dealing with the food, because it's a plenty.

You can leave the crap and healthy food aspect out of it. They may cause other stress with mineral or vitamin deficiencies, but in general doesn't matter.

And yes you can easily reverse the person sitting around skinning to being moving around and big, slowly over time.

Sadly the person that allowed themselves to get overweight and has always been doing some sort of diet and exercise routine, has likely lost LBM, and their metabolism isn't what it could be anyway, so they would have to eat even less than expected to actually lose weight.

And they will likely NOT be able to reverse that down the road, even at maintenance. They'll always have to eat less than their skinny friend that was always that way.

So because their lbm is damaged the calories in calories out will not 100% work for them?

Iron_Feline

so dumb it down for me, if you eat 2000 calories how much then should you lose to lose weight, not just maintain? the net calories dont matter as long as your burning enough to lose weight, and how do you go about that?

Read this

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1080242-a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants :flowerforyou:

guroprincess

Maintaining weight has always been surprisingly easy for me. When I got to be 12 or 13 I finally got a computer. I was suddenly moving around a lot less, therefore my TDEE went down. I continued to eat like I was active, though, and slowly but steadily gained weight. It does not take someone eating 3000-4000 calories a day to gain weight. For me, my sedentary TDEE is only around 2000 calories, so even eating 2100 calories over a year = 36500 extra calories = 11 pounds a year. All of my weight gain happened at that time.

These days, if I went back to not watching my calories, I'd be in maintenance. It's happened a few times before.

Maybe your 300lb friend is in maintenance with a slow metabolism? If their TDEE is only around 2500 calories (which I believe is my "active" range), it's incredibly easy to hit that every day if you're not watching your calories closely.

ETA: also want to echo what everyone else is saying. Just because you only ever see the thin girl eat fast food doesn't mean it's all she eats. Also, thin people /usually/ have the advantage of eating until they're full and knowing when they're actually hungry. So long as she's eating at maintenance, she could eat entirely fast food and not gain a pound.

Rawfoodsho

How does this work when we have all known a 300 pound person who eats healthy and works an active job but still cant lose ? Like for example I have a friend who is an overweight nurse, she does zumba, eats salads and has a very active job (always on her feet) yet she is still large and has been since a child. Yet I have another friend whos a stay at home mom, 28 years old, eats nothing but fast food and is like 110 soaking wet. So if we accept the fact that there are super skinny girls who cant eat whatever they want and not gain a pound why cant the reverse be true? Why cant someone eat healthy, have a deficit and NOT lose? If a skinny girl can eat 4000 calories a day of fast food with out the calories in calories out applying why does it always 100% apply to overweight people? The bigger people I know that are 300 pounds dont eat ANYWHERE near 3000 plus calories a day like the internet says it takes for them to maintain that weight....

This is what is referred to as a straw man argument (Aunt Sally for those in the UK). If the basis of your argument is a fallacy to start with, how can any debate after be anything less than drivel.

We do not accept the fact that there are super skinny girls that can eat whatever they want unless whatever they want just happens to be always within their caloric limit for maintaining weight. The 300 lb man and overweight nurse are eating more calories than what needs to be eaten to maintain a healthy weight.

They are eating too much. Trying to prove otherwise (medical conditions excluded) is just creating an excuse of eating at a surplus. Those sorts of excuses only help people give up instead of trying to actually solve the problem of being overweight.

You dont have to accept what I have already seen and know as fact. That is not the point of this topic. This does happen, calories in calories out is not 100% a 300 pound person can easily not eat to much, NOT hide what they are eating and still not lose weight. Just like a girl can be 110 pounds and eat tons of crap and not gain. I have plenty of thin friends who dont work out, eat tons of crap and dont gain. Actually, my step sister drinks like 2200 calories plus of beer a day, sits on her computer playing slots and cards, never leaves her house and weighs 125 pounds at like 5'10. She cant even gain weight if she tried, so yes this does happen everyday all around us.

The real problem, is how when someone isn't seeing results people on these bored automatically tell them its all THEIR fault, they MUST being doing something wrong. They dont consider they could be doing everything right and that it just doesn't work for some people? Like it has been stated if your metabolism is damaged you might have to eat a lower deficit then suggested through these websites.

YesIAm17

lol at everyone acting like they haven't had a close relative or friend that ate crap all day long, sat around and never gained a pound. Well clearly it can be reversed.

These folks usually started with a slightly higher than expected metabolism, they retained their LBM by not actually sitting as much as you would think, and when they do eat more in excess their metabolism is more willing to rev up to burn it and body is less efficient at dealing with the food, because it's a plenty.

You can leave the crap and healthy food aspect out of it. They may cause other stress with mineral or vitamin deficiencies, but in general doesn't matter.

And yes you can easily reverse the person sitting around skinning to being moving around and big, slowly over time.

Sadly the person that allowed themselves to get overweight and has always been doing some sort of diet and exercise routine, has likely lost LBM, and their metabolism isn't what it could be anyway, so they would have to eat even less than expected to actually lose weight.

And they will likely NOT be able to reverse that down the road, even at maintenance. They'll always have to eat less than their skinny friend that was always that way.

So because their lbm is damaged the calories in calories out will not 100% work for them?

That is not at all what heybales was saying. Calories in/out works 100% for everyone, period. There are no exceptions. If you are burning more calories than you are consuming then your body will tap into fat stores (and muscles) and you will lose weight.

Rawfoodsho

Maintaining weight has always been surprisingly easy for me. When I got to be 12 or 13 I finally got a computer. I was suddenly moving around a lot less, therefore my TDEE went down. I continued to eat like I was active, though, and slowly but steadily gained weight. It does not take someone eating 3000-4000 calories a day to gain weight. For me, my sedentary TDEE is only around 2000 calories, so even eating 2100 calories over a year = 36500 extra calories = 11 pounds a year. All of my weight gain happened at that time.

These days, if I went back to not watching my calories, I'd be in maintenance. It's happened a few times before.

Maybe your 300lb friend is in maintenance with a slow metabolism? If their TDEE is only around 2500 calories (which I believe is my "active" range), it's incredibly easy to hit that every day if you're not watching your calories closely.

ETA: also want to echo what everyone else is saying. Just because you only ever see the thin girl eat fast food doesn't mean it's all she eats. Also, thin people /usually/ have the advantage of eating until they're full and knowing when they're actually hungry. So long as she's eating at maintenance, she could eat entirely fast food and not gain a pound.

Yeah I have tons of females friends who drink mass amounts of beer and dont gain a pound.

MyChocolateDiet

How does this work when we have all known a 300 pound person who eats healthy and works an active job but still cant lose ? Like for example I have a friend who is an overweight nurse, she does zumba, eats salads and has a very active job (always on her feet) yet she is still large and has been since a child. Yet I have another friend whos a stay at home mom, 28 years old, eats nothing but fast food and is like 110 soaking wet. So if we accept the fact that there are super skinny girls who cant eat whatever they want and not gain a pound why cant the reverse be true? Why cant someone eat healthy, have a deficit and NOT lose? If a skinny girl can eat 4000 calories a day of fast food with out the calories in calories out applying why does it always 100% apply to overweight people? The bigger people I know that are 300 pounds dont eat ANYWHERE near 3000 plus calories a day like the internet says it takes for them to maintain that weight....

Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal.

The NURSE may be eating when you don't see her do so.
The SAHM may be working out or running after and lifting heavy things (kids) when you don't see her do so.


Are you with any of your friends 24 hours a day? I know I'm not. No one of them may draw conclusions on my weight loss or gain as they do not know what else I do unless I tell them and I am very good at guarding my privacy for other reasons and so they would never know. Probably you don't.

(an·ec·do·tal
ˌanikˈdōtl/Submit
adjective
1.
(of an account) not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research.)

Rawfoodsho

How does this work when we have all known a 300 pound person who eats healthy and works an active job but still cant lose ? Like for example I have a friend who is an overweight nurse, she does zumba, eats salads and has a very active job (always on her feet) yet she is still large and has been since a child. Yet I have another friend whos a stay at home mom, 28 years old, eats nothing but fast food and is like 110 soaking wet. So if we accept the fact that there are super skinny girls who cant eat whatever they want and not gain a pound why cant the reverse be true? Why cant someone eat healthy, have a deficit and NOT lose? If a skinny girl can eat 4000 calories a day of fast food with out the calories in calories out applying why does it always 100% apply to overweight people? The bigger people I know that are 300 pounds dont eat ANYWHERE near 3000 plus calories a day like the internet says it takes for them to maintain that weight....

Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal.

The NURSE may be eating when you don't see her do so.
The SAHM may be working out or running after and lifting heavy things (kids) when you don't see her do so.
Are you with any of your friends 24 hours a day? I know I'm not. No one of them may draw conclusions on my weight loss or gain as they do not know what else I do unless I tell them and I am very good at guarding my privacy for other reasons and so they would never know. Probably you don't.

(an·ec·do·tal
ˌanikˈdōtl/Submit
adjective
1.
(of an account) not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research.)

I dont care if you think my story is true or relatable. Neither is half the articles and information you people read or hear about and then reiterate in this forum as fact. Also yes I have been around people I LIVED with all the time.

guroprincess

You dont have to accept what I have already seen and know as fact. That is not the point of this topic. This does happen, calories in calories out is not 100% a 300 pound person can easily not eat to much, NOT hide what they are eating and still not lose weight. Just like a girl can be 110 pounds and eat tons of crap and not gain. I have plenty of thin friends who dont work out, eat tons of crap and dont gain. Actually, my step sister drinks like 2200 calories plus of beer a day, sits on her computer playing slots and cards, never leaves her house and weighs 125 pounds at like 5'10. She cant even gain weight if she tried, so yes this does happen everyday all around us.

The real problem, is how when someone isn't seeing results people on these bored automatically tell them its all THEIR fault, they MUST being doing something wrong. They dont consider they could be doing everything right and that it just doesn't work for some people? Like it has been stated if your metabolism is damaged you might have to eat a lower deficit then suggested through these websites.

It's almost like people have different bodies and different metabolisms.

But there's a modicum of personal responsibility assumed with websites like these. If MFP has you eating 2000 calories/day and you're not losing the weight that it says you are supposed to, lower your calories.

If you consume less than you burn, you're going to lose weight. That's all there is to it. It's just a matter of accurately logging every single piece of food that goes into your mouth and adjusting your calories based on progress (or lack thereof.) That's where the personal responsibility comes in.

YesIAm17

OP has in essence decided that 1 + 1 does not equal 2 and 2 - 1 does not equal 1. All the mathematicians are wrong. The OP has seen it first hand, they know. The point of this thread is a kind of public service announcement... you see the OP is concerned that people are being told that if their math is wrong they are doing something wrong, but this is not true because the math is not the math... ok? Thanks.

MyChocolateDiet

How does this work when we have all known a 300 pound person who eats healthy and works an active job but still cant lose ? Like for example I have a friend who is an overweight nurse, she does zumba, eats salads and has a very active job (always on her feet) yet she is still large and has been since a child. Yet I have another friend whos a stay at home mom, 28 years old, eats nothing but fast food and is like 110 soaking wet. So if we accept the fact that there are super skinny girls who cant eat whatever they want and not gain a pound why cant the reverse be true? Why cant someone eat healthy, have a deficit and NOT lose? If a skinny girl can eat 4000 calories a day of fast food with out the calories in calories out applying why does it always 100% apply to overweight people? The bigger people I know that are 300 pounds dont eat ANYWHERE near 3000 plus calories a day like the internet says it takes for them to maintain that weight....

This is what is referred to as a straw man argument (Aunt Sally for those in the UK). If the basis of your argument is a fallacy to start with, how can any debate after be anything less than drivel.

We do not accept the fact that there are super skinny girls that can eat whatever they want unless whatever they want just happens to be always within their caloric limit for maintaining weight. The 300 lb man and overweight nurse are eating more calories than what needs to be eaten to maintain a healthy weight.

They are eating too much. Trying to prove otherwise (medical conditions excluded) is just creating an excuse of eating at a surplus. Those sorts of excuses only help people give up instead of trying to actually solve the problem of being overweight.

You dont have to accept what I have already seen and know as fact. That is not the point of this topic. This does happen, calories in calories out is not 100% a 300 pound person can easily not eat to much, NOT hide what they are eating and still not lose weight. Just like a girl can be 110 pounds and eat tons of crap and not gain. I have plenty of thin friends who dont work out, eat tons of crap and dont gain. Actually, my step sister drinks like 2200 calories plus of beer a day, sits on her computer playing slots and cards, never leaves her house and weighs 125 pounds at like 5'10. She cant even gain weight if she tried, so yes this does happen everyday all around us.

The real problem, is how when someone isn't seeing results people on these bored automatically tell them its all THEIR fault, they MUST being doing something wrong. They dont consider they could be doing everything right and that it just doesn't work for some people? Like it has been stated if your metabolism is damaged you might have to eat a lower deficit then suggested through these websites.

If the world is filled with slots playing beer guzzling skinnies and bird like eating heavy nurses and men, then there is no physics, a calorie as defined means nothing. Is that where you are willing to go, because that's where you are headed. Make sense?

Rawfoodsho

How does this work when we have all known a 300 pound person who eats healthy and works an active job but still cant lose ? Like for example I have a friend who is an overweight nurse, she does zumba, eats salads and has a very active job (always on her feet) yet she is still large and has been since a child. Yet I have another friend whos a stay at home mom, 28 years old, eats nothing but fast food and is like 110 soaking wet. So if we accept the fact that there are super skinny girls who cant eat whatever they want and not gain a pound why cant the reverse be true? Why cant someone eat healthy, have a deficit and NOT lose? If a skinny girl can eat 4000 calories a day of fast food with out the calories in calories out applying why does it always 100% apply to overweight people? The bigger people I know that are 300 pounds dont eat ANYWHERE near 3000 plus calories a day like the internet says it takes for them to maintain that weight....

A good place to start would be in not accepting that "fact".

If you take in more calories than you burn, then you store it.

If you burn more calories than you take in, then you burn what you had previously stored.

Well since I have seen it over and over again first hand I will accept it.

So you know for a fact exactly how many calories 300lb girl was consuming vs burning? and exactly how many calories skinny girl was burning vs consuming? Really?

Yes these are people I know very well.

are these "salads" covered in mayo and cheese? lol

You mean like 800 calories of ranch dressing? Yeah no

Iron_Feline

FitnessMind_SS

How does this work when we have all known a 300 pound person who eats healthy and works an active job but still cant lose ? Like for example I have a friend who is an overweight nurse, she does zumba, eats salads and has a very active job (always on her feet) yet she is still large and has been since a child. Yet I have another friend whos a stay at home mom, 28 years old, eats nothing but fast food and is like 110 soaking wet. So if we accept the fact that there are super skinny girls who cant eat whatever they want and not gain a pound why cant the reverse be true? Why cant someone eat healthy, have a deficit and NOT lose? If a skinny girl can eat 4000 calories a day of fast food with out the calories in calories out applying why does it always 100% apply to overweight people? The bigger people I know that are 300 pounds dont eat ANYWHERE near 3000 plus calories a day like the internet says it takes for them to maintain that weight....

This is what is referred to as a straw man argument (Aunt Sally for those in the UK). If the basis of your argument is a fallacy to start with, how can any debate after be anything less than drivel.

We do not accept the fact that there are super skinny girls that can eat whatever they want unless whatever they want just happens to be always within their caloric limit for maintaining weight. The 300 lb man and overweight nurse are eating more calories than what needs to be eaten to maintain a healthy weight.

They are eating too much. Trying to prove otherwise (medical conditions excluded) is just creating an excuse of eating at a surplus. Those sorts of excuses only help people give up instead of trying to actually solve the problem of being overweight.

You dont have to accept what I have already seen and know as fact. That is not the point of this topic. This does happen, calories in calories out is not 100% a 300 pound person can easily not eat to much, NOT hide what they are eating and still not lose weight. Just like a girl can be 110 pounds and eat tons of crap and not gain. I have plenty of thin friends who dont work out, eat tons of crap and dont gain. Actually, my step sister drinks like 2200 calories plus of beer a day, sits on her computer playing slots and cards, never leaves her house and weighs 125 pounds at like 5'10. She cant even gain weight if she tried, so yes this does happen everyday all around us.

The real problem, is how when someone isn't seeing results people on these bored automatically tell them its all THEIR fault, they MUST being doing something wrong. They dont consider they could be doing everything right and that it just doesn't work for some people? Like it has been stated if your metabolism is damaged you might have to eat a lower deficit then suggested through these websites.

You're thinking of it backwards in my opinion. Rather than thinking that there are people who are in an energy deficit and not losing weight, I would think of it that they are not losing weight and therefore they are not in an energy deficit. Change in body mass (excluding fluids) indicates overall state of energy balance.

Additionally, for perspective sake, I use a food scale and I measure and track things to the best of my ability. Even with these habits in play, there's a fair amount of error in estimation of both energy intake and energy output. The fact that you are claiming to know what someone else consumes for energy intake, unless you're weighing and measuring their food (which you aren't), and logging what they eat (which you aren't) then you're really not determining what their intake is.

Additionally, I think there's merit in the idea that people have varying levels of non exercise activity thermogenesis. You're not strapping an HRM to the "friends you observe" or trying to tightly monitor their energy output, so you can't make much of any conclusions about that either.

In short, while your observations about people being generally junk food eaters or generally "lazy" might be valid, they don't say ANYTHING about a thermodynamic model because you're not doing ANYTHING to account for those variables. You are watching and formulating an opinion that the calorie model must not work because of what you are seeing.

Yet to my knowledge, every time we stick someone in a metabolic ward and tightly control the variables, energy deficits cause a decrease in body mass. Because science.

Rawfoodsho

How does this work when we have all known a 300 pound person who eats healthy and works an active job but still cant lose ? Like for example I have a friend who is an overweight nurse, she does zumba, eats salads and has a very active job (always on her feet) yet she is still large and has been since a child. Yet I have another friend whos a stay at home mom, 28 years old, eats nothing but fast food and is like 110 soaking wet. So if we accept the fact that there are super skinny girls who cant eat whatever they want and not gain a pound why cant the reverse be true? Why cant someone eat healthy, have a deficit and NOT lose? If a skinny girl can eat 4000 calories a day of fast food with out the calories in calories out applying why does it always 100% apply to overweight people? The bigger people I know that are 300 pounds dont eat ANYWHERE near 3000 plus calories a day like the internet says it takes for them to maintain that weight....

This is what is referred to as a straw man argument (Aunt Sally for those in the UK). If the basis of your argument is a fallacy to start with, how can any debate after be anything less than drivel.

We do not accept the fact that there are super skinny girls that can eat whatever they want unless whatever they want just happens to be always within their caloric limit for maintaining weight. The 300 lb man and overweight nurse are eating more calories than what needs to be eaten to maintain a healthy weight.

They are eating too much. Trying to prove otherwise (medical conditions excluded) is just creating an excuse of eating at a surplus. Those sorts of excuses only help people give up instead of trying to actually solve the problem of being overweight.

You dont have to accept what I have already seen and know as fact. That is not the point of this topic. This does happen, calories in calories out is not 100% a 300 pound person can easily not eat to much, NOT hide what they are eating and still not lose weight. Just like a girl can be 110 pounds and eat tons of crap and not gain. I have plenty of thin friends who dont work out, eat tons of crap and dont gain. Actually, my step sister drinks like 2200 calories plus of beer a day, sits on her computer playing slots and cards, never leaves her house and weighs 125 pounds at like 5'10. She cant even gain weight if she tried, so yes this does happen everyday all around us.

The real problem, is how when someone isn't seeing results people on these bored automatically tell them its all THEIR fault, they MUST being doing something wrong. They dont consider they could be doing everything right and that it just doesn't work for some people? Like it has been stated if your metabolism is damaged you might have to eat a lower deficit then suggested through these websites.

If the world is filled with slots playing beer guzzling skinnies and bird like eating heavy nurses and men, then there is no physics, a calorie as defined means nothing. Is that where you are willing to go, because that's where you are headed. Make sense?

That is the world. I know plenty of skinny girls who eat tons of crap and stay 120 pounds. Is that a hard concept to grasp that, that is indeed possible. lol

MyChocolateDiet

How does this work when we have all known a 300 pound person who eats healthy and works an active job but still cant lose ? Like for example I have a friend who is an overweight nurse, she does zumba, eats salads and has a very active job (always on her feet) yet she is still large and has been since a child. Yet I have another friend whos a stay at home mom, 28 years old, eats nothing but fast food and is like 110 soaking wet. So if we accept the fact that there are super skinny girls who cant eat whatever they want and not gain a pound why cant the reverse be true? Why cant someone eat healthy, have a deficit and NOT lose? If a skinny girl can eat 4000 calories a day of fast food with out the calories in calories out applying why does it always 100% apply to overweight people? The bigger people I know that are 300 pounds dont eat ANYWHERE near 3000 plus calories a day like the internet says it takes for them to maintain that weight....

Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal.

The NURSE may be eating when you don't see her do so.
The SAHM may be working out or running after and lifting heavy things (kids) when you don't see her do so.
Are you with any of your friends 24 hours a day? I know I'm not. No one of them may draw conclusions on my weight loss or gain as they do not know what else I do unless I tell them and I am very good at guarding my privacy for other reasons and so they would never know. Probably you don't.

(an·ec·do·tal
ˌanikˈdōtl/Submit
adjective
1.
(of an account) not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research.)

I dont care if you think my story is true or relatable. Neither is half the articles and information you people read or hear about and then reiterate in this forum as fact. Also yes I have been around people I LIVED with all the time.

Us people? Which people would that be? The Chanel tribe?

Rawfoodsho

How does this work when we have all known a 300 pound person who eats healthy and works an active job but still cant lose ? Like for example I have a friend who is an overweight nurse, she does zumba, eats salads and has a very active job (always on her feet) yet she is still large and has been since a child. Yet I have another friend whos a stay at home mom, 28 years old, eats nothing but fast food and is like 110 soaking wet. So if we accept the fact that there are super skinny girls who cant eat whatever they want and not gain a pound why cant the reverse be true? Why cant someone eat healthy, have a deficit and NOT lose? If a skinny girl can eat 4000 calories a day of fast food with out the calories in calories out applying why does it always 100% apply to overweight people? The bigger people I know that are 300 pounds dont eat ANYWHERE near 3000 plus calories a day like the internet says it takes for them to maintain that weight....

This is what is referred to as a straw man argument (Aunt Sally for those in the UK). If the basis of your argument is a fallacy to start with, how can any debate after be anything less than drivel.

We do not accept the fact that there are super skinny girls that can eat whatever they want unless whatever they want just happens to be always within their caloric limit for maintaining weight. The 300 lb man and overweight nurse are eating more calories than what needs to be eaten to maintain a healthy weight.

They are eating too much. Trying to prove otherwise (medical conditions excluded) is just creating an excuse of eating at a surplus. Those sorts of excuses only help people give up instead of trying to actually solve the problem of being overweight.

You dont have to accept what I have already seen and know as fact. That is not the point of this topic. This does happen, calories in calories out is not 100% a 300 pound person can easily not eat to much, NOT hide what they are eating and still not lose weight. Just like a girl can be 110 pounds and eat tons of crap and not gain. I have plenty of thin friends who dont work out, eat tons of crap and dont gain. Actually, my step sister drinks like 2200 calories plus of beer a day, sits on her computer playing slots and cards, never leaves her house and weighs 125 pounds at like 5'10. She cant even gain weight if she tried, so yes this does happen everyday all around us.

The real problem, is how when someone isn't seeing results people on these bored automatically tell them its all THEIR fault, they MUST being doing something wrong. They dont consider they could be doing everything right and that it just doesn't work for some people? Like it has been stated if your metabolism is damaged you might have to eat a lower deficit then suggested through these websites.

You're thinking of it backwards in my opinion. Rather than thinking that there are people who are in an energy deficit and not losing weight, I would think of it that they are not losing weight and therefore they are not in an energy deficit. Change in body mass (excluding fluids) indicates overall state of energy balance.

Additionally, for perspective sake, I use a food scale and I measure and track things to the best of my ability. Even with these habits in play, there's a fair amount of error in estimation of both energy intake and energy output. The fact that you are claiming to know what someone else consumes for energy intake, unless you're weighing and measuring their food (which you aren't), and logging what they eat (which you aren't) then you're really not determining what their intake is.

Additionally, I think there's merit in the idea that people have varying levels of non exercise activity thermogenesis. You're not strapping an HRM to the "friends you observe" or trying to tightly monitor their energy output, so you can't make much of any conclusions about that either.

In short, while your observations about people being generally junk food eaters or generally "lazy" might be valid, they don't say ANYTHING about a thermodynamic model because you're not doing ANYTHING to account for those variables. You are watching and formulating an opinion that the calorie model must not work because of what you are seeing.

Yet to my knowledge, every time we stick someone in a metabolic ward and tightly control the variables, energy deficits cause a decrease in body mass. Because science.

Unless you go to a doctor anyways to get your real levels checked none of these tdee, bmr crap on these sites is even 100% correct...All I have to do is be around them all the time, see they eat pure junk and never work out, see they drink tons 3-5 times a week and still weigh 120 pounds. That is ALL I need to see. No thermodynamic model involved. lol

cwolfman13

so dumb it down for me, if you eat 2000 calories how much then should you lose to lose weight, not just maintain? the net calories dont matter as long as your burning enough to lose weight, and how do you go about that?

If you eat 2000 calories and maintain weight then that is your maintenance level of calories...your body is burning 2000 calories per day to maintain your weight. If you eat less than that and/or increase your activity you create a deficit of energy for weight loss.

You don't have to exercise off every single calorie...in fact for most people who workout, exercise is maybe 10 - 15% of their daily calorie requirements. The vast majority of your calorie "burn" come from just being alive...you heart pumping, lungs working, etc. The next biggest burn is you day to day activity...gtting up, going to work, cooking, cleaning, etc...exercise is last and is usually the smallest % of your daily calorie requirements...athletes aside.

guroprincess

Unless you go to a doctor anyways to get your real levels checked none of these tdee, bmr crap on these sites is even 100% correct

No one is claiming that estimated TDEE/BMR/etc are 100% correct all of the time. That's why it's called an estimation.

SideSteel

How does this work when we have all known a 300 pound person who eats healthy and works an active job but still cant lose ? Like for example I have a friend who is an overweight nurse, she does zumba, eats salads and has a very active job (always on her feet) yet she is still large and has been since a child. Yet I have another friend whos a stay at home mom, 28 years old, eats nothing but fast food and is like 110 soaking wet. So if we accept the fact that there are super skinny girls who cant eat whatever they want and not gain a pound why cant the reverse be true? Why cant someone eat healthy, have a deficit and NOT lose? If a skinny girl can eat 4000 calories a day of fast food with out the calories in calories out applying why does it always 100% apply to overweight people? The bigger people I know that are 300 pounds dont eat ANYWHERE near 3000 plus calories a day like the internet says it takes for them to maintain that weight....

This is what is referred to as a straw man argument (Aunt Sally for those in the UK). If the basis of your argument is a fallacy to start with, how can any debate after be anything less than drivel.

We do not accept the fact that there are super skinny girls that can eat whatever they want unless whatever they want just happens to be always within their caloric limit for maintaining weight. The 300 lb man and overweight nurse are eating more calories than what needs to be eaten to maintain a healthy weight.

They are eating too much. Trying to prove otherwise (medical conditions excluded) is just creating an excuse of eating at a surplus. Those sorts of excuses only help people give up instead of trying to actually solve the problem of being overweight.

You dont have to accept what I have already seen and know as fact. That is not the point of this topic. This does happen, calories in calories out is not 100% a 300 pound person can easily not eat to much, NOT hide what they are eating and still not lose weight. Just like a girl can be 110 pounds and eat tons of crap and not gain. I have plenty of thin friends who dont work out, eat tons of crap and dont gain. Actually, my step sister drinks like 2200 calories plus of beer a day, sits on her computer playing slots and cards, never leaves her house and weighs 125 pounds at like 5'10. She cant even gain weight if she tried, so yes this does happen everyday all around us.

The real problem, is how when someone isn't seeing results people on these bored automatically tell them its all THEIR fault, they MUST being doing something wrong. They dont consider they could be doing everything right and that it just doesn't work for some people? Like it has been stated if your metabolism is damaged you might have to eat a lower deficit then suggested through these websites.

You're thinking of it backwards in my opinion. Rather than thinking that there are people who are in an energy deficit and not losing weight, I would think of it that they are not losing weight and therefore they are not in an energy deficit. Change in body mass (excluding fluids) indicates overall state of energy balance.

Additionally, for perspective sake, I use a food scale and I measure and track things to the best of my ability. Even with these habits in play, there's a fair amount of error in estimation of both energy intake and energy output. The fact that you are claiming to know what someone else consumes for energy intake, unless you're weighing and measuring their food (which you aren't), and logging what they eat (which you aren't) then you're really not determining what their intake is.

Additionally, I think there's merit in the idea that people have varying levels of non exercise activity thermogenesis. You're not strapping an HRM to the "friends you observe" or trying to tightly monitor their energy output, so you can't make much of any conclusions about that either.

In short, while your observations about people being generally junk food eaters or generally "lazy" might be valid, they don't say ANYTHING about a thermodynamic model because you're not doing ANYTHING to account for those variables. You are watching and formulating an opinion that the calorie model must not work because of what you are seeing.

Yet to my knowledge, every time we stick someone in a metabolic ward and tightly control the variables, energy deficits cause a decrease in body mass. Because science.

Unless you go to a doctor anyways to get your real levels checked none of these tdee, bmr crap on these sites is even 100% correct

Even if you DO go to a doctor there are still all kinds of sources of error. They are all estimations. But this doesn't invalidate the thermodynamic model. It makes it more complicated and less linear, but it doesn't make it invalid.

Rawfoodsho

How does this work when we have all known a 300 pound person who eats healthy and works an active job but still cant lose ? Like for example I have a friend who is an overweight nurse, she does zumba, eats salads and has a very active job (always on her feet) yet she is still large and has been since a child. Yet I have another friend whos a stay at home mom, 28 years old, eats nothing but fast food and is like 110 soaking wet. So if we accept the fact that there are super skinny girls who cant eat whatever they want and not gain a pound why cant the reverse be true? Why cant someone eat healthy, have a deficit and NOT lose? If a skinny girl can eat 4000 calories a day of fast food with out the calories in calories out applying why does it always 100% apply to overweight people? The bigger people I know that are 300 pounds dont eat ANYWHERE near 3000 plus calories a day like the internet says it takes for them to maintain that weight....

This is what is referred to as a straw man argument (Aunt Sally for those in the UK). If the basis of your argument is a fallacy to start with, how can any debate after be anything less than drivel.

We do not accept the fact that there are super skinny girls that can eat whatever they want unless whatever they want just happens to be always within their caloric limit for maintaining weight. The 300 lb man and overweight nurse are eating more calories than what needs to be eaten to maintain a healthy weight.

They are eating too much. Trying to prove otherwise (medical conditions excluded) is just creating an excuse of eating at a surplus. Those sorts of excuses only help people give up instead of trying to actually solve the problem of being overweight.

You dont have to accept what I have already seen and know as fact. That is not the point of this topic. This does happen, calories in calories out is not 100% a 300 pound person can easily not eat to much, NOT hide what they are eating and still not lose weight. Just like a girl can be 110 pounds and eat tons of crap and not gain. I have plenty of thin friends who dont work out, eat tons of crap and dont gain. Actually, my step sister drinks like 2200 calories plus of beer a day, sits on her computer playing slots and cards, never leaves her house and weighs 125 pounds at like 5'10. She cant even gain weight if she tried, so yes this does happen everyday all around us.

The real problem, is how when someone isn't seeing results people on these bored automatically tell them its all THEIR fault, they MUST being doing something wrong. They dont consider they could be doing everything right and that it just doesn't work for some people? Like it has been stated if your metabolism is damaged you might have to eat a lower deficit then suggested through these websites.

You're thinking of it backwards in my opinion. Rather than thinking that there are people who are in an energy deficit and not losing weight, I would think of it that they are not losing weight and therefore they are not in an energy deficit. Change in body mass (excluding fluids) indicates overall state of energy balance.

Additionally, for perspective sake, I use a food scale and I measure and track things to the best of my ability. Even with these habits in play, there's a fair amount of error in estimation of both energy intake and energy output. The fact that you are claiming to know what someone else consumes for energy intake, unless you're weighing and measuring their food (which you aren't), and logging what they eat (which you aren't) then you're really not determining what their intake is.

Additionally, I think there's merit in the idea that people have varying levels of non exercise activity thermogenesis. You're not strapping an HRM to the "friends you observe" or trying to tightly monitor their energy output, so you can't make much of any conclusions about that either.

In short, while your observations about people being generally junk food eaters or generally "lazy" might be valid, they don't say ANYTHING about a thermodynamic model because you're not doing ANYTHING to account for those variables. You are watching and formulating an opinion that the calorie model must not work because of what you are seeing.

Yet to my knowledge, every time we stick someone in a metabolic ward and tightly control the variables, energy deficits cause a decrease in body mass. Because science.

Unless you go to a doctor anyways to get your real levels checked none of these tdee, bmr crap on these sites is even 100% correct

Even if you DO go to a doctor there are still all kinds of sources of error. They are all estimations. But this doesn't invalidate the thermodynamic model. It makes it more complicated and less linear, but it doesn't make it invalid.

Its not invalid it just doesn't work 100% for everyone

cwolfman13

OP has in essence decided that 1 + 1 does not equal 2 and 2 - 1 does not equal 1. All the mathematicians are wrong. The OP has seen it first hand, they know. The point of this thread is a kind of public service announcement... you see the OP is concerned that people are being told that if their math is wrong they are doing something wrong, but this is not true because the math is not the math... ok? Thanks.

OP probably also thinks the world is flat and the sun revolves around the earth....OP doesn't really seem to "science" much.

Cindyinpg

That is the world. I know plenty of skinny girls who eat tons of crap and stay 120 pounds. Is that a hard concept to grasp that, that is indeed possible. lol

They eat "crap" but they don't eat tons of it. I have lost 123lb in 15 months, eating ice cream everyday, chips, chocolate bars, etc. Look at my diary, it's open. I eat all that "crap" at work and in front of friends and family and some of them are quite puzzled as to why I'm losing weight. I'm eating ar a deficit and those skinny girls, they are at maintenance, Simple.

Rawfoodsho

People who think they know what they are talking about ALWAYS bring up thermodynamics

MyChocolateDiet

How does this work when we have all known a 300 pound person who eats healthy and works an active job but still cant lose ? Like for example I have a friend who is an overweight nurse, she does zumba, eats salads and has a very active job (always on her feet) yet she is still large and has been since a child. Yet I have another friend whos a stay at home mom, 28 years old, eats nothing but fast food and is like 110 soaking wet. So if we accept the fact that there are super skinny girls who cant eat whatever they want and not gain a pound why cant the reverse be true? Why cant someone eat healthy, have a deficit and NOT lose? If a skinny girl can eat 4000 calories a day of fast food with out the calories in calories out applying why does it always 100% apply to overweight people? The bigger people I know that are 300 pounds dont eat ANYWHERE near 3000 plus calories a day like the internet says it takes for them to maintain that weight....

This is what is referred to as a straw man argument (Aunt Sally for those in the UK). If the basis of your argument is a fallacy to start with, how can any debate after be anything less than drivel.

We do not accept the fact that there are super skinny girls that can eat whatever they want unless whatever they want just happens to be always within their caloric limit for maintaining weight. The 300 lb man and overweight nurse are eating more calories than what needs to be eaten to maintain a healthy weight.

They are eating too much. Trying to prove otherwise (medical conditions excluded) is just creating an excuse of eating at a surplus. Those sorts of excuses only help people give up instead of trying to actually solve the problem of being overweight.

You dont have to accept what I have already seen and know as fact. That is not the point of this topic. This does happen, calories in calories out is not 100% a 300 pound person can easily not eat to much, NOT hide what they are eating and still not lose weight. Just like a girl can be 110 pounds and eat tons of crap and not gain. I have plenty of thin friends who dont work out, eat tons of crap and dont gain. Actually, my step sister drinks like 2200 calories plus of beer a day, sits on her computer playing slots and cards, never leaves her house and weighs 125 pounds at like 5'10. She cant even gain weight if she tried, so yes this does happen everyday all around us.

The real problem, is how when someone isn't seeing results people on these bored automatically tell them its all THEIR fault, they MUST being doing something wrong. They dont consider they could be doing everything right and that it just doesn't work for some people? Like it has been stated if your metabolism is damaged you might have to eat a lower deficit then suggested through these websites.

If the world is filled with slots playing beer guzzling skinnies and bird like eating heavy nurses and men, then there is no physics, a calorie as defined means nothing. Is that where you are willing to go, because that's where you are headed. Make sense?

That is the world. I know plenty of skinny girls who eat tons of crap and stay 120 pounds. Is that a hard concept to grasp that, that is indeed possible. lol

It is not a hard concept to grasp. I was once one of them. I considered myself of normal activity levels until a severe injury for which I was bedridden showed me otherwise. (used to cheer, aerobics, bike ride, etc. for "fun" and would often tell people I didn't really "try" to be thin). We are oftentimes in life unaware of how active or sedentary we truly are. It is entirely possible the nurse does less activity than she assumes having an on your feet job like that she could be doing less lifting walking or whatnot at times she has to do other activities like count pills or write reports or depending on her shift if it's late at night there might be less demands or her place of business the type of ward might be less active. The stay at home mom could have a very active lifestyle involving WALKING children to and from school, carrying babies around, playing physical games with her kids, working out, etc...OR her life could be very sedentary driving them places or even outsourcing those tasks to nannies, shuttle services, day care, and etc. And YES I have known women who do not work outside the home who take their kids to day care anyways and have drivers bring them to and from or have a nanny accompany them all day long even though they are home. My point is we cannot make assumptions on what we beleive we know from job titles. Even when looking at ourselves we must suddenly notice and log every food and activity and are surprised by what we find. "Whoa my daily walk is how many cals?" "A muffin has now many carb grams and how little protein?". Things like this.

shscruggs82

so dumb it down for me, if you eat 2000 calories how much then should you lose to lose weight, not just maintain? the net calories dont matter as long as your burning enough to lose weight, and how do you go about that?

Read this

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1080242-a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants :flowerforyou:

thanks! its all very confusing to me, Ive tried to lose weight many times and its never worked out, thats because I wasnt tracking everything, workin out...but Im still a little fuzzy on how much you can eat if you burn calories..Ill read that.

SideSteel

How does this work when we have all known a 300 pound person who eats healthy and works an active job but still cant lose ? Like for example I have a friend who is an overweight nurse, she does zumba, eats salads and has a very active job (always on her feet) yet she is still large and has been since a child. Yet I have another friend whos a stay at home mom, 28 years old, eats nothing but fast food and is like 110 soaking wet. So if we accept the fact that there are super skinny girls who cant eat whatever they want and not gain a pound why cant the reverse be true? Why cant someone eat healthy, have a deficit and NOT lose? If a skinny girl can eat 4000 calories a day of fast food with out the calories in calories out applying why does it always 100% apply to overweight people? The bigger people I know that are 300 pounds dont eat ANYWHERE near 3000 plus calories a day like the internet says it takes for them to maintain that weight....

This is what is referred to as a straw man argument (Aunt Sally for those in the UK). If the basis of your argument is a fallacy to start with, how can any debate after be anything less than drivel.

We do not accept the fact that there are super skinny girls that can eat whatever they want unless whatever they want just happens to be always within their caloric limit for maintaining weight. The 300 lb man and overweight nurse are eating more calories than what needs to be eaten to maintain a healthy weight.

They are eating too much. Trying to prove otherwise (medical conditions excluded) is just creating an excuse of eating at a surplus. Those sorts of excuses only help people give up instead of trying to actually solve the problem of being overweight.

You dont have to accept what I have already seen and know as fact. That is not the point of this topic. This does happen, calories in calories out is not 100% a 300 pound person can easily not eat to much, NOT hide what they are eating and still not lose weight. Just like a girl can be 110 pounds and eat tons of crap and not gain. I have plenty of thin friends who dont work out, eat tons of crap and dont gain. Actually, my step sister drinks like 2200 calories plus of beer a day, sits on her computer playing slots and cards, never leaves her house and weighs 125 pounds at like 5'10. She cant even gain weight if she tried, so yes this does happen everyday all around us.

The real problem, is how when someone isn't seeing results people on these bored automatically tell them its all THEIR fault, they MUST being doing something wrong. They dont consider they could be doing everything right and that it just doesn't work for some people? Like it has been stated if your metabolism is damaged you might have to eat a lower deficit then suggested through these websites.

You're thinking of it backwards in my opinion. Rather than thinking that there are people who are in an energy deficit and not losing weight, I would think of it that they are not losing weight and therefore they are not in an energy deficit. Change in body mass (excluding fluids) indicates overall state of energy balance.

Additionally, for perspective sake, I use a food scale and I measure and track things to the best of my ability. Even with these habits in play, there's a fair amount of error in estimation of both energy intake and energy output. The fact that you are claiming to know what someone else consumes for energy intake, unless you're weighing and measuring their food (which you aren't), and logging what they eat (which you aren't) then you're really not determining what their intake is.

Additionally, I think there's merit in the idea that people have varying levels of non exercise activity thermogenesis. You're not strapping an HRM to the "friends you observe" or trying to tightly monitor their energy output, so you can't make much of any conclusions about that either.

In short, while your observations about people being generally junk food eaters or generally "lazy" might be valid, they don't say ANYTHING about a thermodynamic model because you're not doing ANYTHING to account for those variables. You are watching and formulating an opinion that the calorie model must not work because of what you are seeing.

Yet to my knowledge, every time we stick someone in a metabolic ward and tightly control the variables, energy deficits cause a decrease in body mass. Because science.

Unless you go to a doctor anyways to get your real levels checked none of these tdee, bmr crap on these sites is even 100% correct

Even if you DO go to a doctor there are still all kinds of sources of error. They are all estimations. But this doesn't invalidate the thermodynamic model. It makes it more complicated and less linear, but it doesn't make it invalid.

Its not invalid it just doesn't work 100% for everyone

I have yet to see a documented example of it not working when variables are tightly controlled. I'm genuinely interested in cases if anyone has them.

MeanderingMammal

How does this work ...

A calorie is merely a measurement of energy. If one consumes more than one expends, then some of the excess is stored in the body, in a number of ways. If one expends more than one consumes then the balance needs to come from those stores.

The law of Conservation of Energy is fairly simple, the chemical energy stored in food is converted to heat, kinetic or chemical energy in the body.

Rawfoodsho

That is the world. I know plenty of skinny girls who eat tons of crap and stay 120 pounds. Is that a hard concept to grasp that, that is indeed possible. lol

They eat "crap" but they don't eat tons of it. I have lost 123lb in 15 months, eating ice cream everyday, chips, chocolate bars, etc. Look at my diary, it's open. I eat all that "crap" at work and in front of friends and family and some of them are quite puzzled as to why I'm losing weight. I'm eating ar a deficit and those skinny girls, they are at maintenance, Simple.

Great you eat tons of junk food instead of real natural whole foods, you lost weight still being able to eat pure junk while you sit around at work? Yeah forget learning good healthy eating habits.