Calories in calories out

brower47

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

People who think they know exactly what their friends eat always make excuses for them instead of puzzling out the obvious fact that they eat more than you think they do.

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

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.

Since the variables are not often tightly controlled when it comes to different people it doesn't really matter if it works on the specific controlled group.

Rawfoodsho

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

People who think they know exactly what their friends eat always make excuses for them instead of puzzling out the obvious fact that they eat more than you think they do.

I mentioned also the fact that I have lived with family, been around them all day and seen what they eat. And yes, people can drink beer, eat crap and stay 110 pounds.

Iron_Feline

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

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.

Since the variables are not often tightly controlled when it comes to different people it doesn't really matter if it works on the specific controlled group.

It would matter if you could find examples in a tightly controlled setting where it doesn't work because it would validate your claims.

Cindyinpg

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

People who think they know exactly what their friends eat always make excuses for them instead of puzzling out the obvious fact that they eat more than you think they do.

I mentioned also the fact that I have lived with family, been around them all day and seen what they eat. And yes, people can drink beer, eat crap and stay 110 pounds.

No one said they can't. I eat what you call "crap" and LOSE weight, as do thousands of other people on here. Because that has nothing to do with it.

YesIAm17

I do not think the OP is stupid, or doesn't really believe in science.

I think the OP has a subconscious emotional (technically irrational) reason to not want to believe that calories in/out really is rock solid science. There could be a number of issues at the root of this but I do not have the time or desire to dive that deeply into their psyche.

Once a decision/conclusion is made based on an emotional reason (especially if done subconsciously) it can be extremely difficult to change it in some cases, even in the face of a logically/scientifically irrefutable mountain of evidence to the contrary.

.... or trolling... could just be trolling. IDK.

SideSteel

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

People who think they know exactly what their friends eat always make excuses for them instead of puzzling out the obvious fact that they eat more than you think they do.

I mentioned also the fact that I have lived with family, been around them all day and seen what they eat. And yes, people can drink beer, eat crap and stay 110 pounds.

These people do not eat in a chronic energy surplus when you look at long periods of time. This doesn't invalidate the calorie model.

silenceinspace

Next time we see a thread of this nature, I think we should all point people to these three posts, because they're all that's needed.

Math matters

It doesn't take 3,000 calories a day to maintain being overweight. I'd venture a guess that they can eat much less than that to maintain their weight if their basal metabolic rate is low. There are ways to rev up your metabolism, but truth is that some people have a harder time losing or keeping weight off and they have to be more vigilant. However, they are not in "deficit" and maintaining that weight. The only way to truly know how much you are taking in is to record every single thing that goes into your mouth, through a tool like MFP.

If you watch your day to day reports of "If every day were like today you would weigh XXX in six weeks" - you will see that even going 20 calories over your limit will cause you to gain weight over time. (This is over your maintenance level of calories, not the amount you have set for losing).

So if your friend should normally be eating, say, 1800 calories a day to maintain her weight, but comes in at 2000 and exercises as well, she is still going to be over and will maintain her weight quite easily. People often over-estimate the number of calories burned during exercise and then reward themselves by eating those exercise calories back. We need to be realistic with ourselves.

In reference to the original post:

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.

The death of logic:

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

I'm willing to accept a lot but I am never willing to accept illogical, unreasonable, anecdotal evidence, because it isn't evidence.

Stop trying to make excuses for your friend or yourself or anyone. She is fat (and I am fat, and others are fat) because we eat more calories than we burn through living.

Now shut up and learn a little about science and personal responsibility. You're in sore need of an education on both.

Iron_Feline

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.

Since the variables are not often tightly controlled when it comes to different people it doesn't really matter if it works on the specific controlled group.

Ok I'm calling it.

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.

I was questioning the reliability of stories from friends.

Anyways assuming you "lived" with. We can also pick apart the "salads" the nurse eats versus the "fast food" the SAHM eats.

Do we know nurse eats ONLY salads and might those salads have nuts, legumes, cheeses, dressings, oils or other calorie laden ingredients? Might the friend be eating her burgers plain as some kids too and simply be eating the leftovers of her childrens kid's meals? I've known a mom or two who did this and maintained slim figures. A kids burger with no crazy sauce and very few ingredients has relatively few cals, and it has even less if one third of it has already been eaten by your toddler.

brower47

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

People who think they know exactly what their friends eat always make excuses for them instead of puzzling out the obvious fact that they eat more than you think they do.

I mentioned also the fact that I have lived with family, been around them all day and seen what they eat. And yes, people can drink beer, eat crap and stay 110 pounds.

You are not omnipotent. Unless you are weighing all their food and then watching them all day as they eat and making sure that they are not eating anything extra (or anything less in the case of the skinny people), then you can't possibly know.

You mentioned the nurse, you honestly want us to believe that you were around her 24/7? She ate enough to maintain her weight, end of story.

STOP MAKING EXCUSES! You do no one, not your family and not yourself, any good by trying to convince the world that they're fat simply because they breath air.

They ate at a surplus, maybe only a slight surplus of 100 calories a day for years, but enough to keep that weight and not lose it. They skinny girls are light because they only ate at maintenance levels.

Rawfoodsho

I do not think the OP is stupid, or doesn't really believe in science.

I think the OP has a subconscious emotional (technically irrational) reason to not want to believe that calories in/out really is rock solid science. There could be a number of issues at the root of this but I do not have the time or desire to dive that deeply into their psyche.

Once a decision/conclusion is made based on an emotional reason (especially if done subconsciously) it can be extremely difficult to change it in some cases, even in the face of a logically/scientifically irrefutable mountain of evidence to the contrary.

Its not science. There are tons of variables, everyone is different and its not 100% accurate.

silenceinspace

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.

Since the variables are not often tightly controlled when it comes to different people it doesn't really matter if it works on the specific controlled group.

Ok I'm calling it.

I second this.

Rawfoodsho

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

People who think they know exactly what their friends eat always make excuses for them instead of puzzling out the obvious fact that they eat more than you think they do.

I mentioned also the fact that I have lived with family, been around them all day and seen what they eat. And yes, people can drink beer, eat crap and stay 110 pounds.

You are not omnipotent. Unless you are weighing all their food and then watching them all day as they eat and making sure that they are not eating anything extra (or anything less in the case of the skinny people), then you can't possibly know.

You mentioned the nurse, you honestly want us to believe that you were around her 24/7? She ate enough to maintain her weight, end of story.

STOP MAKING EXCUSES! You do no one, not your family and not yourself, any good by trying to convince the world that they're fat simply because they breath air.

They ate at a surplus, maybe only a slight surplus of 100 calories a day for years, but enough to keep that weight and not lose it. They skinny girls are light because they only ate at maintenance levels.

lol stop with the martyr BULL CRAP. I am not making excuses, I lose weight easy enough, I have just seen first hand what I already described you can be in denial about it all you want. Or think I am making excuses for fat people. lol. I have seen first hand skinny girls eat whatever they want and not gain. Yes some of them were family I was around almost all day long for a while. Who says breathing makes people fat? What are you even talking about in your bad attempt to sound smart?

MeanderingMammal

Its not science.

*snort*

Jericha1992

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

I had a friend growing up who ate and ate and ate, and drank nothing but Mountain Dew, and never exercised, and was always crazy skinny.

She now weighs 220 pounds. She is a CNA. That kind life catches up with you.

Meanwhile, I have ALWAYS been overweight. I've tried losing weight many times before. I consistently tried to make healthy choices. Always ate my vegetables, and chose whole grains, even when I wasn't trying to lose weight. Guess what... I still gained weight. You know what? I was overestimating my calories, and overestimating my own metabolism. It's an easy thing to do.

You know what else? Since I've been tracking my calories, I've lost 25 pounds in a little over 2 months. I now weigh less than my "skinny" friend.

If anecdotes are gospel, as you seem to believe, then my story must present all the facts as well.

silenceinspace

I do not think the OP is stupid, or doesn't really believe in science.

I think the OP has a subconscious emotional (technically irrational) reason to not want to believe that calories in/out really is rock solid science. There could be a number of issues at the root of this but I do not have the time or desire to dive that deeply into their psyche.

Once a decision/conclusion is made based on an emotional reason (especially if done subconsciously) it can be extremely difficult to change it in some cases, even in the face of a logically/scientifically irrefutable mountain of evidence to the contrary.

Its not science. There are tons of variables, everyone is different and its not 100% accurate.

This is a genuine question, OP (100% and not sarcastic). Why did you post this? This is a mainly calorie counting website and thus it is understood (or should be) that paying attention to calories in, calories out is how many of the people here choose to lose weight. It has worked for many of these people, in fact. People here are not going to support a scientifically unsubstantiated claim, so I'm curious as to why you brought this up here.

emilyisbonkers

denial

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

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.

Since the variables are not often tightly controlled when it comes to different people it doesn't really matter if it works on the specific controlled group.

It would matter if you could find examples in a tightly controlled setting where it doesn't work because it would validate your claims.

Well a controlled setting with healthy people isn't reality. You can find anything on the internet saying anything is good. Articles are constantly contradicting each other, so where are your studies?

ninerbuff

Unless there's a hormonal issue or disease, for the GENERAL population the laws of thermodynamics apply. If your friend is overweight and can't lose (barring the above mentioned) they're eating more than they need to. Sorry, but science works here.

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

brower47

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.

Since the variables are not often tightly controlled when it comes to different people it doesn't really matter if it works on the specific controlled group.

Ok I'm calling it.

I second this.

I really, really hope this is the case or it's humanity -1 for the cosmic scoreboard today.

brower47

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.

Since the variables are not often tightly controlled when it comes to different people it doesn't really matter if it works on the specific controlled group.

It would matter if you could find examples in a tightly controlled setting where it doesn't work because it would validate your claims.

Well a controlled setting with healthy people isn't reality. You can find anything on the internet saying anything is good. Articles are constantly contradicting each other, so where are your studies?

You made the original claim so where are your studies.

YesIAm17

I do not think the OP is stupid, or doesn't really believe in science.

I think the OP has a subconscious emotional (technically irrational) reason to not want to believe that calories in/out really is rock solid science. There could be a number of issues at the root of this but I do not have the time or desire to dive that deeply into their psyche.

Once a decision/conclusion is made based on an emotional reason (especially if done subconsciously) it can be extremely difficult to change it in some cases, even in the face of a logically/scientifically irrefutable mountain of evidence to the contrary.

Its not science. There are tons of variables, everyone is different and its not 100% accurate.

MyChocolateDiet

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.

I think we are getting to the emotional psychoanalysis part right here. There is an exaggeration Level 5 going on in inferring TONS of junk food from the previous posters list of things she was able to enjoy (possibly in moderation while losing her 15 lbs). This is causing anger to a person who beleives in "whole" foods and is puzzled as to why that simple rule alone is not resulting in weight loss. To clarify "whole foods" diets does not mean you are allowed to eat "whole turkeys" or "whole veggie pizzas", or "whole watermelons" no matter how healthy those ingredients may be.

Rawfoodsho

I do not think the OP is stupid, or doesn't really believe in science.

I think the OP has a subconscious emotional (technically irrational) reason to not want to believe that calories in/out really is rock solid science. There could be a number of issues at the root of this but I do not have the time or desire to dive that deeply into their psyche.

Once a decision/conclusion is made based on an emotional reason (especially if done subconsciously) it can be extremely difficult to change it in some cases, even in the face of a logically/scientifically irrefutable mountain of evidence to the contrary.

Its not science. There are tons of variables, everyone is different and its not 100% accurate.

This is a genuine question, OP (100% and not sarcastic). Why did you post this? This is a mainly calorie counting website and thus it is understood (or should be) that paying attention to calories in, calories out is how many of the people here choose to lose weight. It has worked for many of these people, in fact. People here are not going to support a scientifically unsubstantiated claim, so I'm curious as to why you brought this up here.

Here lets make it easy for you guys


http://www.thegreatfitnessexperiment.com/2011/07/harvard-says-calories-incalories-out-model-is-flawed-so-what-do-we-use-instead.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/19/health/19brody.html?_r=0

http://authoritynutrition.com/debunking-the-calorie-myth/

http://danceswithfat.wordpress.com/2011/03/06/the-calories-incalories-out-myth/

http://www.cbn.com/health/nutrition/drlen_countcalories.aspx

cwolfman13

I do not think the OP is stupid, or doesn't really believe in science.

I do...

silenceinspace

OP, I'd like an answer to my question or I'm going to continue assuming you are trolling. I quoted it below for you.

This is a genuine question, OP (100% and not sarcastic). Why did you post this? This is a mainly calorie counting website and thus it is understood (or should be) that paying attention to calories in, calories out is how many of the people here choose to lose weight. It has worked for many of these people, in fact. People here are not going to support a scientifically unsubstantiated claim, so I'm curious as to why you brought this up here.

Achrya

You people are such bullies, getting on the OP for not beliving in science and placing her belifes in anecdotes and things she/he's observed. We're all different and yet here for the same thing, support!

shscruggs82

ok, Im still confused...I did the calculation of BMR and it says I should eat 1,823, is that before I work out, so I burn approximately 400 calories a day (based on my stepper calculation and I do the 30 day shred video every day) so at the end of the day I shouldnt be lower than 1400 calories a day in order to be getting what I need?