Calories in calories out what science says

Options
1356

Replies

  • doctorsookie
    doctorsookie Posts: 1,084 Member
    Options
    I have a headache.
  • Arbeidslyst
    Arbeidslyst Posts: 129
    Options
    Oh brother... not this thread... again!

    Yes it is 100%... No it's not... Yes it is.... Gifs.... /end thread and return to counting calories

    80648.gif
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    Options
    For anyone interested, full text of the abstract that the OP posted, without actually citing the source....tsk tsk..


    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC543577/


    Still no idea what the question is though
    I think there is not a question but a rather inane statement that we all have different metabolisms so CICO will be different for all of us. Well DUH!!

    Oh, and the OP thinks that somehow disproves thermodynamics. :yawn: Whatev.......
  • FredDoyle
    FredDoyle Posts: 2,273 Member
    Options
    So lets clear up something.

    Theory vs. Fact vs. Theory

    Theory in laymen's terms is a hypothesis that you are trying to prove with anecdotal evidence. Most commonly used for things like english papers or M.A. Thesis

    Facts things science has proven as true. Like that the earth revolves around the sun, gravity, existence of DNA, and atoms.

    Theory in scientific terms. A way to explain FACTS.

    Theories in science are ways to explain things science KNOWS to be TRUE.


    hahahahahahahahaha lol

    Its a theory because it cant be proven...

    Take a friggin science course. A scientific theory is not what you, as a layman, think of as a theory.
  • firstsip
    firstsip Posts: 8,399 Member
    Options
    You guys. Joined this month. Username relevant to his/her posts. "Lol at theory it can't be proven."

    Come now.
  • BrainyBurro
    BrainyBurro Posts: 6,129 Member
    Options
    So this whole Thermodynamics thing gets thrown around a lot but lets see what I found online


    It is commonly held that "a calorie is a calorie", i.e. that diets of equal caloric content will result in identical weight change independent of macronutrient composition, and appeal is frequently made to the laws of thermodynamics. We have previously shown that thermodynamics does not support such a view and that diets of different macronutrient content may be expected to induce different changes in body mass.

    In this review, for pedagogic clarity, we reframe the theoretical discussion to directly link thermodynamic inefficiency to weight change.

    KEYWORD- THEORETICAL.

    the engineer in me doesn't like using the word "thermodynamics" to explain calories in and calories out. i prefer "energy balance" or "the energy balance equation". i think this is more descriptive and intuitive to non-technical people.

    however, if you define the boundary of the human body in such a way that the human body can be modeled as a closed system, then of course the first and second laws of thermodynamics apply.
  • whitebalance
    whitebalance Posts: 1,654 Member
    Options
    So all this time I've been living in an unscientific dream world, and what I've been doing hasn't actually caused me to lose ~40 pounds and get stronger, leaner, and healthier?





    Well, damn. :grumble:
  • LiftAllThePizzas
    LiftAllThePizzas Posts: 17,857 Member
    Options
    CONCLUSIONS: Variable thermodynamic efficiency due to dietary manipulation is permitted by physical laws, is supported by much experimental data, and may be reasonably explained by plausible mechanisms.

    Yup. That is why each person's calories out is different. But for each person, it is still calories in, calories out.

    For some reason the very simplicity of this phenomenon confounds so many people.

    Yes each persons calories out is different. Making each person need a different calories in. So you could enter your basic specs into one of these websites to find your tdee and bmr, eat the way it says and still not lose....BECAUSE of variables. Its not 100%
    Entering your basic specs on a website is not calories in/calories out. I can disprove gravity by entering the approximate mass of a body and getting an inaccurate answer for its gravitational pull. Or any physical law.
  • _SABOTEUR_
    _SABOTEUR_ Posts: 6,833 Member
    Options
    CONCLUSIONS: Variable thermodynamic efficiency due to dietary manipulation is permitted by physical laws, is supported by much experimental data, and may be reasonably explained by plausible mechanisms.

    Yup. That is why each person's calories out is different. But for each person, it is still calories in, calories out.

    For some reason the very simplicity of this phenomenon confounds so many people.

    Yes each persons calories out is different. Making each person need a different calories in. So you could enter your basic specs into one of these websites to find your tdee and bmr, eat the way it says and still not lose....BECAUSE of variables. Its not 100%
    Entering your basic specs on a website is not calories in/calories out. I can disprove gravity by entering the approximate mass of a body and getting an inaccurate answer for its gravitational pull. Or any physical law.

    IN to break laws.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    CONCLUSIONS: Variable thermodynamic efficiency due to dietary manipulation is permitted by physical laws, is supported by much experimental data, and may be reasonably explained by plausible mechanisms.

    Yup. That is why each person's calories out is different. But for each person, it is still calories in, calories out.

    For some reason the very simplicity of this phenomenon confounds so many people.

    Yes each persons calories out is different. Making each person need a different calories in. So you could enter your basic specs into one of these websites to find your tdee and bmr, eat the way it says and still not lose....BECAUSE of variables. Its not 100%
    Entering your basic specs on a website is not calories in/calories out. I can disprove gravity by entering the approximate mass of a body and getting an inaccurate answer for its gravitational pull. Or any physical law.

    IN to break laws.

    tumblr_mduwmkIOD91r99lo2.gif
  • davert123
    davert123 Posts: 1,568 Member
    Options
    You haven't mentioned the effect size though. Is a 1 Oz difference per month ? This could still be statistically significant but may not be of practice interests.
  • geebusuk
    geebusuk Posts: 3,348 Member
    Options
    Calories in vs Calories out absolutely holds true.

    A calorie is a unit of energy that's a basic measure - as per a mile or a litre, you can't really change it.

    What no doubt CAN happen is that 'Calories Out' can be changed by many things, including the way you have 'calories in' amongst other factors.

    This does not make "Calories in vs Calories out" incorrect, it just shows people don't understand the concept :).
  • DebbieLyn63
    DebbieLyn63 Posts: 2,650 Member
    Options
    Calories in vs Calories out absolutely holds true.

    A calorie is a unit of energy that's a basic measure - as per a mile or a litre, you can't really change it.

    What no doubt CAN happen is that 'Calories Out' can be changed by many things, including the way you have 'calories in' amongst other factors.

    This does not make "Calories in vs Calories out" incorrect, it just shows people don't understand the concept :).

    QFT

    Quite simply, no matter what your metabolism is, or how many calories you burn in a day, if you are not losing weight over a period of time, your 'calories in' is not less than your 'calories out'.
  • DebbieLyn63
    DebbieLyn63 Posts: 2,650 Member
    Options
    Eh, nvm, the troll has been fed enough.
  • Dissecti0n
    Dissecti0n Posts: 63
    Options
    Calories in vs Calories out absolutely holds true.

    A calorie is a unit of energy that's a basic measure - as per a mile or a litre, you can't really change it.

    What no doubt CAN happen is that 'Calories Out' can be changed by many things, including the way you have 'calories in' amongst other factors.

    This does not make "Calories in vs Calories out" incorrect, it just shows people don't understand the concept :).

    lol it can be changed by many things, making it not 100%
  • jofjltncb6
    jofjltncb6 Posts: 34,415 Member
    Options
    Calories in vs Calories out absolutely holds true.

    A calorie is a unit of energy that's a basic measure - as per a mile or a litre, you can't really change it.

    What no doubt CAN happen is that 'Calories Out' can be changed by many things, including the way you have 'calories in' amongst other factors.

    This does not make "Calories in vs Calories out" incorrect, it just shows people don't understand the concept :).

    lol it can be changed by many things, making it not 100%

    *head desk*
  • Dissecti0n
    Dissecti0n Posts: 63
    Options
    So lets clear up something.

    Theory vs. Fact vs. Theory

    Theory in laymen's terms is a hypothesis that you are trying to prove with anecdotal evidence. Most commonly used for things like english papers or M.A. Thesis

    Facts things science has proven as true. Like that the earth revolves around the sun, gravity, existence of DNA, and atoms.

    Theory in scientific terms. A way to explain FACTS.

    Theories in science are ways to explain things science KNOWS to be TRUE.


    hahahahahahahahaha lol

    Its a theory because it cant be proven...

    Take a friggin science course. A scientific theory is not what you, as a layman, think of as a theory.

    taken plenty of science courses a theory isn't fact
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    Calories in vs Calories out absolutely holds true.

    A calorie is a unit of energy that's a basic measure - as per a mile or a litre, you can't really change it.

    What no doubt CAN happen is that 'Calories Out' can be changed by many things, including the way you have 'calories in' amongst other factors.

    This does not make "Calories in vs Calories out" incorrect, it just shows people don't understand the concept :).

    lol it can be changed by many things, making it not 100%

    I think you are confused.

    Calories In = the amount of calories you eat, which is obviously variable

    Calories Out = the number of calories you burn, which again is obviously variable and is impacted by Calories In.

    A - B = C

    Changing A or changing B obviously changes C. It does not change the '-' or put a square root in there anywhere.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    Calories in vs Calories out absolutely holds true.

    A calorie is a unit of energy that's a basic measure - as per a mile or a litre, you can't really change it.

    What no doubt CAN happen is that 'Calories Out' can be changed by many things, including the way you have 'calories in' amongst other factors.

    This does not make "Calories in vs Calories out" incorrect, it just shows people don't understand the concept :).

    lol it can be changed by many things, making it not 100%

    DI5RYT2.jpg
  • Dissecti0n
    Dissecti0n Posts: 63
    Options
    http://authoritynutrition.com/debunking-the-calorie-myth/

    http://blogs.menshealth.com/bellyoff-nutritionist/nutritionists-are-lying-to-you-calories-arent-equal/2012/11/05/

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/02/20/172403779/calorie-counts-fatally-flawed-or-our-best-defense-against-pudge

    http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/calories-thermodynamics-and-weight/

    The law wasn't made to apply to people and is flawed.

Categories