If it is simply calories in and out...

vjohn04

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.

ILiftHeavyAcrylics

Achrya

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?

PikaKnight

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?

QuietBloom

Hauntinglyfit

Yes. It's the old IN and OUT.*














*no giggity on Christmas day, sinners!

PikaKnight

Yes. It's the old IN and OUT.*














*no giggity on Christmas day, sinners!

but really....




















Giggity.

:flowerforyou:

QuietBloom

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?

QuietBloom

Yes. It's the old IN and OUT.*














*no giggity on Christmas day, sinners!

You should have told me this sooner!

The_Enginerd

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.

Achrya

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"

Matt_Wild

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.

jennifer_417

Why do I feel this thread is about to go swirling down the Porcelain Bowl of Pedantry?

I like you.

jennifer_417

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.

QuietBloom

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?

cmcollins001

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...

PikaKnight

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).

PikaKnight

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...

QuietBloom

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. lol

Hauntinglyfit

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.