If it is simply calories in and out...
Replies
-
But you are asking calories in and out. As I said earlier. Those factors will determine the person's maintenance. Eating below that will cause a drop in weight. What you seem to be arguing or mixing up is the determination of the maintenance calorie amount...not really whether it is simply calories in and out.
Of course dropping below a maintenance level will lose weight.
But its determining this rate. And I see the line "simply calories in/out" that determine weight loss, when it doesn't take into account anything about the person at hand.
These factors effect how many calories are needed.
If it was simply calories in/out at a certain size and weight we would need the same calories.
Its far from as simple as people make out!
So you are arguing the determination of the amount. How can you argue simply calories in and out when it really is simply calories in and out ONCE you get a handle on your maintenance and therefore on what you should be eating deficit wise?
And is it easy to figure this out? Basically, yes..although it may take time. Setting calorie goals for yourself for 4-8 weeks and recording your intake/weight fluctuations will help you determine these numbers. Or you go the route to getting tested. Either way...all of this does not negate the calories in and out concept. Is it simple? Yes? But why must it be complicated for the concept to still hold true or work?0 -
But you are asking calories in and out. As I said earlier. Those factors will determine the person's maintenance. Eating below that will cause a drop in weight. What you seem to be arguing or mixing up is the determination of the maintenance calorie amount...not really whether it is simply calories in and out.
Of course dropping below a maintenance level will lose weight.
But its determining this rate. And I see the line "simply calories in/out" that determine weight loss, when it doesn't take into account anything about the person at hand.
These factors effect how many calories are needed.
If it was simply calories in/out at a certain size and weight we would need the same calories.
Its far from as simple as people make out!
Well, this is awkward.0 -
Because we don't all eat/exercise at the same rate. :huh:
So using that logic, no exercise and equal calories = same weight gain/loss for each persons?
Different muscle mass, different lifestyles, slight variations in hormone levels and such...
Therefore not simply calories in/out, no?
Yes, it still comes down to calories in/out. It is just how to accurately obtain an accurate caloric requirement that is the issue.
Its not that simple, as in/out then, is it?
For example:
Metabolic rates - Two people, identical height and weight and muscle mass.
Different metabolic rate thro hormone levels. Same calories would result in different weight gains/losses.
If it was simply in/out, you would just need height/weight/age/sex and would be able to say what they need. Indeed, some people are more sensitive to carbs than others, for example and lose fat or gain muscle in a harder/easier manner than others.
Umm...no.
You're still talking about variables which make them different from each other.
Giving examples of outliers that do not follow the trend is not good science.0 -
Because we don't all eat/exercise at the same rate. :huh:
So using that logic, no exercise and equal calories = same weight gain/loss for each persons?
Different muscle mass, different lifestyles, slight variations in hormone levels and such...
Therefore not simply calories in/out, no?
Yes, it still comes down to calories in/out. It is just how to accurately obtain an accurate caloric requirement that is the issue.
Its not that simple, as in/out then, is it?
For example:
Metabolic rates - Two people, identical height and weight and muscle mass.
Different metabolic rate thro hormone levels. Same calories would result in different weight gains/losses.
If it was simply in/out, you would just need height/weight/age/sex and would be able to say what they need. Indeed, some people are more sensitive to carbs than others, for example and lose fat or gain muscle in a harder/easier manner than others.
Umm...no.
You're still talking about variables which make them different from each other.
Giving examples of outliers that do not follow the trend is not good science.
No, he is just confused. It has nothing to do with outliers or science.
OP, put your thinking cap on please.0 -
0 -
0 -
Why do we not all gain/lose weight at the same rate?
because a calorie is not a calorie...not all calories are created equal. not all human bodies work the same way. there are conditions, illnesses that will slow down your metabolic rate. you can have hormone problems which will make it impossible or very difficult to loose weight. we have different lifestyles. we have different body shapes. we have different level of stress...
does this make sense?0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Why do we not all gain/lose weight at the same rate?
because a calorie is not a calorie...not all calories are created equal. not all human bodies work the same way. there are conditions, illnesses that will slow down your metabolic rate. you can have hormone problems which will make it impossible or very difficult to loose weight. we have different lifestyles. we have different body shapes. we have different level of stress...
does this make sense?
But it is still calories in, calories out. There is nothing magical that happens in anyone, that makes a calorie simply disappear. And a calorie is a unit of measure, so all calories ARE equal. Human bodies all pretty much work the same way. Just not necessarily at the same rate.0 -
But you are asking calories in and out. As I said earlier. Those factors will determine the person's maintenance. Eating below that will cause a drop in weight. What you seem to be arguing or mixing up is the determination of the maintenance calorie amount...not really whether it is simply calories in and out.
Of course dropping below a maintenance level will lose weight.
But its determining this rate. And I see the line "simply calories in/out" that determine weight loss, when it doesn't take into account anything about the person at hand.
These factors effect how many calories are needed.
If it was simply calories in/out at a certain size and weight we would need the same calories.
Its far from as simple as people make out!
So are you suggesting that it is not about calories in/out and that a person can eat above their TDEE and lose weight, or eat below their TDEE and gain weight? :huh:0 -
My only Christmas wish was to not have to see a Cal in / cal out argument thread.
Thanks for ruining my Christmas, Matt.
This is why we can't have nice things here.0 -
0 -
Why do we not all gain/lose weight at the same rate?
because a calorie is not a calorie...not all calories are created equal. not all human bodies work the same way. there are conditions, illnesses that will slow down your metabolic rate. you can have hormone problems which will make it impossible or very difficult to loose weight. we have different lifestyles. we have different body shapes. we have different level of stress...
does this make sense?
What is a calorie when a calorie isn't a calorie?0 -
Why do we not all gain/lose weight at the same rate?
because a calorie is not a calorie...not all calories are created equal. not all human bodies work the same way. there are conditions, illnesses that will slow down your metabolic rate. you can have hormone problems which will make it impossible or very difficult to loose weight. we have different lifestyles. we have different body shapes. we have different level of stress...
does this make sense?
What is a calorie when a calorie isn't a calorie?
poop?0 -
0 -
Yes. It's the old IN and OUT.*
*no giggity on Christmas day, sinners!
0 -
Yes. It's the old IN and OUT.*
*no giggity on Christmas day, sinners!
but really....
Giggity.
:flowerforyou:0 -
Why do we not all gain/lose weight at the same rate?
because a calorie is not a calorie...not all calories are created equal. not all human bodies work the same way. there are conditions, illnesses that will slow down your metabolic rate. you can have hormone problems which will make it impossible or very difficult to loose weight. we have different lifestyles. we have different body shapes. we have different level of stress...
does this make sense?
What is a calorie when a calorie isn't a calorie?
poop?
When it's one of the negative calories. You know, like the ones in broccoli?0 -
Yes. It's the old IN and OUT.*
*no giggity on Christmas day, sinners!
You should have told me this sooner! 0 -
Yes. It's the old IN and OUT.*
*no giggity on Christmas day, sinners!
That's what I asked Santa for, and I was really good this year. Don't deny me.0 -
Why do we not all gain/lose weight at the same rate?
because a calorie is not a calorie...not all calories are created equal. not all human bodies work the same way. there are conditions, illnesses that will slow down your metabolic rate. you can have hormone problems which will make it impossible or very difficult to loose weight. we have different lifestyles. we have different body shapes. we have different level of stress...
does this make sense?
What is a calorie when a calorie isn't a calorie?
poop?
When it's one of the negative calories. You know, like the ones in broccoli?
I shall take both answers. You may both pass on to the next riddle
Why do people keep confusing the concept of "a calorie is a calorie" with the idea of "all foods are created equal"0 -
So are you suggesting that it is not about calories in/out and that a person can eat above their TDEE and lose weight, or eat below their TDEE and gain weight? :huh:
No and you know i'm not.So you are arguing the determination of the amount. How can you argue simply calories in and out when it really is simply calories in and out ONCE you get a handle on your maintenance and therefore on what you should be eating deficit wise?
And is it easy to figure this out? Basically, yes..although it may take time. Setting calorie goals for yourself for 4-8 weeks and recording your intake/weight fluctuations will help you determine these numbers. Or you go the route to getting tested. Either way...all of this does not negate the calories in and out concept. Is it simple? Yes? But why must it be complicated for the concept to still hold true or work?
OK enough of the piss taking.
If you view the original question literally in terms simple mathmatics about energy, yes it is simply in and out. This was not the point of the thread. It was to raise the point that has come up that we are all slightly different and thus different needs.
Yes the body follows the rules of the universe - energy isn't made, its just transferred and will burn fat to make the energy if you go below the maintenance.
The whole point I was trying to raise as has been counter argued and kinda proves the point I was trying to raise... its not simply calories in/out without any thinking and just basing it on simple stats, is it?
To get to the in/out levels you need to know many aspects of the said person to get to this level needed.
CLEARLY if you know the exact amount of calories you need for a person, it is just in/out.
This thread isn't a thread about "which is heavier, a kilo of feather or stones?" question.
I think people are taking me too literally rather than seeing the point I'm trying to put across.0 -
Why do I feel this thread is about to go swirling down the Porcelain Bowl of Pedantry?
I like you.0 -
So are you suggesting that it is not about calories in/out and that a person can eat above their TDEE and lose weight, or eat below their TDEE and gain weight? :huh:
No and you know i'm not.So you are arguing the determination of the amount. How can you argue simply calories in and out when it really is simply calories in and out ONCE you get a handle on your maintenance and therefore on what you should be eating deficit wise?
And is it easy to figure this out? Basically, yes..although it may take time. Setting calorie goals for yourself for 4-8 weeks and recording your intake/weight fluctuations will help you determine these numbers. Or you go the route to getting tested. Either way...all of this does not negate the calories in and out concept. Is it simple? Yes? But why must it be complicated for the concept to still hold true or work?
OK enough of the piss taking.
If you view the original question literally in terms simple mathmatics about energy, yes it is simply in and out. This was not the point of the thread. It was to raise the point that has come up that we are all slightly different and thus different needs.
Yes the body follows the rules of the universe - energy isn't made, its just transferred and will burn fat to make the energy if you go below the maintenance.
The whole point I was trying to raise as has been counter argued and kinda proves the point I was trying to raise... its not simply calories in/out without any thinking and just basing it on simple stats, is it?
To get to the in/out levels you need to know many aspects of the said person to get to this level needed.
CLEARLY if you know the exact amount of calories you need for a person, it is just in/out.
This thread isn't a thread about "which is heavier, a kilo of feather or stones?" question.
I think people are taking me too literally rather than seeing the point I'm trying to put across.
Yeah...I still don't see the point you're trying to get across.0 -
So are you suggesting that it is not about calories in/out and that a person can eat above their TDEE and lose weight, or eat below their TDEE and gain weight? :huh:
No and you know i'm not.So you are arguing the determination of the amount. How can you argue simply calories in and out when it really is simply calories in and out ONCE you get a handle on your maintenance and therefore on what you should be eating deficit wise?
And is it easy to figure this out? Basically, yes..although it may take time. Setting calorie goals for yourself for 4-8 weeks and recording your intake/weight fluctuations will help you determine these numbers. Or you go the route to getting tested. Either way...all of this does not negate the calories in and out concept. Is it simple? Yes? But why must it be complicated for the concept to still hold true or work?
OK enough of the piss taking.
If you view the original question literally in terms simple mathmatics about energy, yes it is simply in and out. This was not the point of the thread. It was to raise the point that has come up that we are all slightly different and thus different needs.
Yes the body follows the rules of the universe - energy isn't made, its just transferred and will burn fat to make the energy if you go below the maintenance.
The whole point I was trying to raise as has been counter argued and kinda proves the point I was trying to raise... its not simply calories in/out without any thinking and just basing it on simple stats, is it?
To get to the in/out levels you need to know many aspects of the said person to get to this level needed.
CLEARLY if you know the exact amount of calories you need for a person, it is just in/out.
This thread isn't a thread about "which is heavier, a kilo of feather or stones?" question.
I think people are taking me too literally rather than seeing the point I'm trying to put across.
*sigh* Really? This was all to enlighten us on a point that didn't even exist? I think you will find in life, that there are not many things that require absolutely no brain power what so ever. However, there ARE things that people make WAY too complicated, and weight loss is one of them.
Are you a personal trainer by chance?0 -
So are you suggesting that it is not about calories in/out and that a person can eat above their TDEE and lose weight, or eat below their TDEE and gain weight? :huh:
No and you know i'm not.So you are arguing the determination of the amount. How can you argue simply calories in and out when it really is simply calories in and out ONCE you get a handle on your maintenance and therefore on what you should be eating deficit wise?
And is it easy to figure this out? Basically, yes..although it may take time. Setting calorie goals for yourself for 4-8 weeks and recording your intake/weight fluctuations will help you determine these numbers. Or you go the route to getting tested. Either way...all of this does not negate the calories in and out concept. Is it simple? Yes? But why must it be complicated for the concept to still hold true or work?
OK enough of the piss taking.
If you view the original question literally in terms simple mathmatics about energy, yes it is simply in and out. This was not the point of the thread. It was to raise the point that has come up that we are all slightly different and thus different needs.
Yes the body follows the rules of the universe - energy isn't made, its just transferred and will burn fat to make the energy if you go below the maintenance.
The whole point I was trying to raise as has been counter argued and kinda proves the point I was trying to raise... its not simply calories in/out without any thinking and just basing it on simple stats, is it?
To get to the in/out levels you need to know many aspects of the said person to get to this level needed.
CLEARLY if you know the exact amount of calories you need for a person, it is just in/out.
This thread isn't a thread about "which is heavier, a kilo of feather or stones?" question.
I think people are taking me too literally rather than seeing the point I'm trying to put across.
Yeah...I still don't see the point you're trying to get across.
Dog goes woof
Cat goes meow
Bird goes tweet
And mouse goes squeek
Cow goes moo
Frog goes croak
And the elephant goes toot
Ducks say quack, fish goes blub
And the seal goes ow ow ow
But...
0 -
So are you suggesting that it is not about calories in/out and that a person can eat above their TDEE and lose weight, or eat below their TDEE and gain weight? :huh:
No and you know i'm not.So you are arguing the determination of the amount. How can you argue simply calories in and out when it really is simply calories in and out ONCE you get a handle on your maintenance and therefore on what you should be eating deficit wise?
And is it easy to figure this out? Basically, yes..although it may take time. Setting calorie goals for yourself for 4-8 weeks and recording your intake/weight fluctuations will help you determine these numbers. Or you go the route to getting tested. Either way...all of this does not negate the calories in and out concept. Is it simple? Yes? But why must it be complicated for the concept to still hold true or work?
OK enough of the piss taking.
If you view the original question literally in terms simple mathmatics about energy, yes it is simply in and out. This was not the point of the thread. It was to raise the point that has come up that we are all slightly different and thus different needs.
Yes the body follows the rules of the universe - energy isn't made, its just transferred and will burn fat to make the energy if you go below the maintenance.
The whole point I was trying to raise as has been counter argued and kinda proves the point I was trying to raise... its not simply calories in/out without any thinking and just basing it on simple stats, is it?
To get to the in/out levels you need to know many aspects of the said person to get to this level needed.
CLEARLY if you know the exact amount of calories you need for a person, it is just in/out.
This thread isn't a thread about "which is heavier, a kilo of feather or stones?" question.
I think people are taking me too literally rather than seeing the point I'm trying to put across.
Yeah...I still don't see the point you're trying to get across.
It's just he -
1. Didn't make a point in the original post and instead asked a question in such a way that the most logical thing to do was to take it at face value.
2. He complains about being taken literally/semantics but the question and his arguments up to this point have not aided him in whatever point he is trying to make. Because of the vague question that can only be interpreted as it is presented, his arguments just make it seem he's confused about the concept that he's arguing about (which really isn't what he seems to want to really argue about).0 -
So are you suggesting that it is not about calories in/out and that a person can eat above their TDEE and lose weight, or eat below their TDEE and gain weight? :huh:
No and you know i'm not.So you are arguing the determination of the amount. How can you argue simply calories in and out when it really is simply calories in and out ONCE you get a handle on your maintenance and therefore on what you should be eating deficit wise?
And is it easy to figure this out? Basically, yes..although it may take time. Setting calorie goals for yourself for 4-8 weeks and recording your intake/weight fluctuations will help you determine these numbers. Or you go the route to getting tested. Either way...all of this does not negate the calories in and out concept. Is it simple? Yes? But why must it be complicated for the concept to still hold true or work?
OK enough of the piss taking.
If you view the original question literally in terms simple mathmatics about energy, yes it is simply in and out. This was not the point of the thread. It was to raise the point that has come up that we are all slightly different and thus different needs.
Yes the body follows the rules of the universe - energy isn't made, its just transferred and will burn fat to make the energy if you go below the maintenance.
The whole point I was trying to raise as has been counter argued and kinda proves the point I was trying to raise... its not simply calories in/out without any thinking and just basing it on simple stats, is it?
To get to the in/out levels you need to know many aspects of the said person to get to this level needed.
CLEARLY if you know the exact amount of calories you need for a person, it is just in/out.
This thread isn't a thread about "which is heavier, a kilo of feather or stones?" question.
I think people are taking me too literally rather than seeing the point I'm trying to put across.
Yeah...I still don't see the point you're trying to get across.
Dog goes woof
Cat goes meow
Bird goes tweet
And mouse goes squeek
Cow goes moo
Frog goes croak
And the elephant goes toot
Ducks say quack, fish goes blub
And the seal goes ow ow ow
But...
0 -
So are you suggesting that it is not about calories in/out and that a person can eat above their TDEE and lose weight, or eat below their TDEE and gain weight? :huh:
No and you know i'm not.So you are arguing the determination of the amount. How can you argue simply calories in and out when it really is simply calories in and out ONCE you get a handle on your maintenance and therefore on what you should be eating deficit wise?
And is it easy to figure this out? Basically, yes..although it may take time. Setting calorie goals for yourself for 4-8 weeks and recording your intake/weight fluctuations will help you determine these numbers. Or you go the route to getting tested. Either way...all of this does not negate the calories in and out concept. Is it simple? Yes? But why must it be complicated for the concept to still hold true or work?
OK enough of the piss taking.
If you view the original question literally in terms simple mathmatics about energy, yes it is simply in and out. This was not the point of the thread. It was to raise the point that has come up that we are all slightly different and thus different needs.
Yes the body follows the rules of the universe - energy isn't made, its just transferred and will burn fat to make the energy if you go below the maintenance.
The whole point I was trying to raise as has been counter argued and kinda proves the point I was trying to raise... its not simply calories in/out without any thinking and just basing it on simple stats, is it?
To get to the in/out levels you need to know many aspects of the said person to get to this level needed.
CLEARLY if you know the exact amount of calories you need for a person, it is just in/out.
This thread isn't a thread about "which is heavier, a kilo of feather or stones?" question.
I think people are taking me too literally rather than seeing the point I'm trying to put across.
Yeah...I still don't see the point you're trying to get across.
Dog goes woof
Cat goes meow
Bird goes tweet
And mouse goes squeek
Cow goes moo
Frog goes croak
And the elephant goes toot
Ducks say quack, fish goes blub
And the seal goes ow ow ow
But...
My 9 year old daughter's favorite song. lol0 -
OK enough of the piss taking.
If you view the original question literally in terms simple mathmatics about energy, yes it is simply in and out. This was not the point of the thread. It was to raise the point that has come up that we are all slightly different and thus different needs.
Yes the body follows the rules of the universe - energy isn't made, its just transferred and will burn fat to make the energy if you go below the maintenance.
The whole point I was trying to raise as has been counter argued and kinda proves the point I was trying to raise... its not simply calories in/out without any thinking and just basing it on simple stats, is it?
To get to the in/out levels you need to know many aspects of the said person to get to this level needed.
CLEARLY if you know the exact amount of calories you need for a person, it is just in/out.
This thread isn't a thread about "which is heavier, a kilo of feather or stones?" question.
I think people are taking me too literally rather than seeing the point I'm trying to put across.
Is your point that 2 people who weigh say 180 pounds, 15% BF, same activity level, might still have slightly different caloric needs? I don't think anyone is disputing that.
But in the end, it's sill about calories in/calories out. I believe what you are getting at is that just using a TDEE calculator and eating under that amount of calories *might* not work for 100% of people as they might have a lower/higher TDEE than average. But you are supposed to adjust as you go anyways as most calculators are pretty much aneducated guess, so to speak. A starting point.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 421 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions