It's NOT always as simple as a deficit

QuietBloom

As I see it, the weight loss formula SOUNDS simple, but it can be hard to fine tune the numbers to enable weight loss for an individual. The calculators give estimates, but those estimates don't apply to every single person who calculates. Any person could need fewer calories or more calories. Staying motivated to find the balance that works for the individual is the hard part.

But in the end I think it still distills down to achieving a deficit.

Exactly. :drinker:

eric_sg61

Got any science to back up this statement? "A calorie is a calorie" violates the second law of thermodynamics http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC506782/

Explain to me how 1 calorie does not equal 1 calorie.

I think you are quite confused if you think this has anything to do with the second law of thermodynamics.

Read the paper and you will find it has everything to do with topic. Those that misunderstand the second law of thermodynamics regularly use this as scientific proof that a calorie = a calorie. In fact the law proves the opposite! So it seems that the snowflakes are the special ones that believe their bodies operate beyond scientific law, where a calorie is a calorie and everyone else is doing it wrong and must be greedy, lazy, and stupid.

I have read the paper, and it does not say anything like 1 calorie =/= 1 calorie. This was already thoroughly discussed in another thread, that I believe you participated in.

Methinks you are projecting here, because no one is accusing anyone of being greedy, lazy OR stupid. That is your own personal bias speaking.

Your intent here, seems to be to incite a riot over pretty much nothing at all.

That poster always post studies, has no idea how to interpret them, gets called out be people that actually read them, gets told that the studies don't say what she thinks they say........it is a losing battle

paganstar71

The OP was not looking for what you seem to think is "advice", maybe you should read it again. The "advice" given included:

1. Suggesting the OP is unable to log correctly.
2. Suggesting the OP is doing things wrong despite the fact that the original post states she has found what works (for her).
3. Nitpicking the OP's food diary - carbs intake, food choices, etc.
4. Dragging in the OP's medical history.

These personal attacks do not invalidate what she said, they only serve to stifle discussion by intimidating anyone who doesn't subscribe to the crap science spewed by a gang of vocal MFP members.

You certainly are a pot stirrer, aren't you?

OP posted why she thinks that weight loss is not as simple as a calorie deficit, and indicates that she is having trouble losing weight. People are trying to help her understand what is going on, using the simple fact that if you eat less than you burn, you will lose weight.

Explain to me how that is a personal attack or diary nitpicking.

Thank you. :flowerforyou:

I refer you to my previous post quoted above. She was not looking for advice she was motivating others to keep trying until they find what works for them. The responses that involved my 4 points above were not attempting to help her, but denigrate her capabilities to manage her own diet.

Marcia315

I'm one of those special snowflakes with hypothyroidism and PCOSA lower carb diet seems to work best for me. If I hit my carb macros recommended by MFP, I'm hangry all the time and my weight loss stalls.

Whatever, it works for me.

If that makes me a special snowflake, great.

QuietBloom

I'm one of those special snowflakes with hypothyroidism and PCOSA lower carb diet seems to work best for me. If I hit my carb macros recommended by MFP, I'm hangry all the time and my weight loss stalls.

Whatever, it works for me.

If that makes me a special snowflake, great.

I have hypothyroid as well, and it DOESN'T make me a special snowflake. I still lose weight when in a calorie deficit. Macros have nothing to do with it - they are there to be adjusted as we see fit and according to our goals. :drinker:

SezxyStef

in for later...gotta clean the house

QuietBloom

The OP was not looking for what you seem to think is "advice", maybe you should read it again. The "advice" given included:

1. Suggesting the OP is unable to log correctly.
2. Suggesting the OP is doing things wrong despite the fact that the original post states she has found what works (for her).
3. Nitpicking the OP's food diary - carbs intake, food choices, etc.
4. Dragging in the OP's medical history.

These personal attacks do not invalidate what she said, they only serve to stifle discussion by intimidating anyone who doesn't subscribe to the crap science spewed by a gang of vocal MFP members.

You certainly are a pot stirrer, aren't you?

OP posted why she thinks that weight loss is not as simple as a calorie deficit, and indicates that she is having trouble losing weight. People are trying to help her understand what is going on, using the simple fact that if you eat less than you burn, you will lose weight.

Explain to me how that is a personal attack or diary nitpicking.

Thank you. :flowerforyou:

I refer you to my previous post quoted above. She was not looking for advice she was motivating others to keep trying until they find what works for them. The responses that involved my 4 points above were not attempting to help her, but denigrate her capabilities to manage her own diet.

So you refer me to your own unfounded post in answer to my question as to who was attacking and denigrating the OP? I think you are having a little bit of trouble following here. Or are being purposefully obtuse. Either way, carry on. It's rather entertaining.

t73reed

How did you know I'd hit that point as well?! Thank you for encouragement. I had been depressed and for the first time in 10 months considered giving up because obviously I'll never get to goal weight. It is so hard the older we get! (I just turned 41). Thanks again for the reminder that it took time to gain and it will take time to lose.

paganstar71

I have read the paper, and it does not say anything like 1 calorie =/= 1 calorie. This was already thoroughly discussed in another thread, that I believe you participated in.

Methinks you are projecting here, because no one is accusing anyone of being greedy, lazy OR stupid. That is your own personal bias speaking.

You clearly have not read the paper or understood it.

Your intent here, seems to be to incite a riot over pretty much nothing at all.

Oh, I see - am I not allowed to support someone in the Motivation and Support board? How strange. Whereas it is acceptable and not riot-raising to diary bash here? Something a bit twisted about that logic.

That poster always post studies, has no idea how to interpret them, gets called out be people that actually read them, gets told that the studies don't say what she thinks they say........it is a losing battle

Where is the evidence for this little gem? Yes, I post a few studies, show me where I have got "called out".

andit001

Calorie deficit = fat loose (probably among muscles).

That's easy.

If a person thinks differently, the logic that person has is flawed.

It's like this: If you turn off the power a light bulp has, it will surely stop to give light after a while.

That's the same as when you don't give enough food to someone. This person will not only get lean over time, but will eventually die because there's not enough energy to keep the body functioning. No one who ever really starved got fat from that.

Everyone who thinks a person can get fat or keep their fat on by not eating enough is believing in magic.

If it's healthy to have this deficit depends on other factors though. Like how large the deficit really is and such.

paganstar71

The OP was not looking for what you seem to think is "advice", maybe you should read it again. The "advice" given included:

1. Suggesting the OP is unable to log correctly.
2. Suggesting the OP is doing things wrong despite the fact that the original post states she has found what works (for her).
3. Nitpicking the OP's food diary - carbs intake, food choices, etc.
4. Dragging in the OP's medical history.

These personal attacks do not invalidate what she said, they only serve to stifle discussion by intimidating anyone who doesn't subscribe to the crap science spewed by a gang of vocal MFP members.

You certainly are a pot stirrer, aren't you?

OP posted why she thinks that weight loss is not as simple as a calorie deficit, and indicates that she is having trouble losing weight. People are trying to help her understand what is going on, using the simple fact that if you eat less than you burn, you will lose weight.

Explain to me how that is a personal attack or diary nitpicking.

Thank you. :flowerforyou:

I refer you to my previous post quoted above. She was not looking for advice she was motivating others to keep trying until they find what works for them. The responses that involved my 4 points above were not attempting to help her, but denigrate her capabilities to manage her own diet.

So you refer me to your own unfounded post in answer to my question as to who was attacking and denigrating the OP? I think you are having a little bit of trouble following here. Or are being purposefully obtuse. Either way, carry on. It's rather entertaining.

My post is not unfounded. You did not originally ask 'who' was attacking and denigrating the OP - look above. You said:

Explain to me how that is a personal attack or diary nitpicking.

'How' not 'who', which I had already clearly outlined. Now you seem to be specifically asking me 'who'. Now why would that be when the evidence in in this thread?

QuietBloom

The OP was not looking for what you seem to think is "advice", maybe you should read it again. The "advice" given included:

1. Suggesting the OP is unable to log correctly.
2. Suggesting the OP is doing things wrong despite the fact that the original post states she has found what works (for her).
3. Nitpicking the OP's food diary - carbs intake, food choices, etc.
4. Dragging in the OP's medical history.

These personal attacks do not invalidate what she said, they only serve to stifle discussion by intimidating anyone who doesn't subscribe to the crap science spewed by a gang of vocal MFP members.

You certainly are a pot stirrer, aren't you?

OP posted why she thinks that weight loss is not as simple as a calorie deficit, and indicates that she is having trouble losing weight. People are trying to help her understand what is going on, using the simple fact that if you eat less than you burn, you will lose weight.

Explain to me how that is a personal attack or diary nitpicking.

Thank you. :flowerforyou:

I refer you to my previous post quoted above. She was not looking for advice she was motivating others to keep trying until they find what works for them. The responses that involved my 4 points above were not attempting to help her, but denigrate her capabilities to manage her own diet.

So you refer me to your own unfounded post in answer to my question as to who was attacking and denigrating the OP? I think you are having a little bit of trouble following here. Or are being purposefully obtuse. Either way, carry on. It's rather entertaining.

My post is not unfounded. You did not originally ask 'who' was attacking and denigrating the OP - look above. You said:

Explain to me how that is a personal attack or diary nitpicking.

'How' not 'who', which I had already clearly outlined. Now you seem to be specifically asking me 'who'. Now why would that be when the evidence in in this thread?

I still don't see it. You are going to need to draw me a picture.

eric_sg61

I have read the paper, and it does not say anything like 1 calorie =/= 1 calorie. This was already thoroughly discussed in another thread, that I believe you participated in.

Methinks you are projecting here, because no one is accusing anyone of being greedy, lazy OR stupid. That is your own personal bias speaking.

You clearly have not read the paper or understood it.

Your intent here, seems to be to incite a riot over pretty much nothing at all.

Oh, I see - am I not allowed to support someone in the Motivation and Support board? How strange. Whereas it is acceptable and not riot-raising to diary bash here? Something a bit twisted about that logic.

That poster always post studies, has no idea how to interpret them, gets called out be people that actually read them, gets told that the studies don't say what she thinks they say........it is a losing battle

Where is the evidence for this little gem? Yes, I post a few studies, show me where I have got "called out".

All over this thread.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1171416-i-like-sugar?page=10

annabellj

bump

FatFreeFrolicking

Bump for later

kennie2

There is no trick to calorie deficits. If you have one, you'll lose weight. For most people it's not a huge chore to guesstimate a TDEE. But if you're having a problem with the equation, that's probably it.

i don't have one and I'm losing weight....
like a good 0.5lb a week
for someone my size thats quite a lot without a deflect

paganstar71

Where is the evidence for this little gem? Yes, I post a few studies, show me where I have got "called out".

All over this thread.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1171416-i-like-sugar?page=10

Well done you have found one of the posts where I have posted some studies, now perhaps you can be good enough to show me where I got "called out". I think you will find that no one responded to my last post and it quickly degenerated into posting pictures of chocolate. :laugh:

paganstar71

'How' not 'who', which I had already clearly outlined. Now you seem to be specifically asking me 'who'. Now why would that be when the evidence in in this thread?

I still don't see it. You are going to need to draw me a picture.

At this stage of the discussion I'm not sure what you are asking. Are you trying to get me to name specific posters?

ndj1979

I hear you OP. I eat healthy, log, and get PLENTY of exercise every day. I've talked to my doctor about my sudden weight gain and how slow losing has been and he keeps talking to me about STRESS. High cortisol levels makes weight loss difficult. I've worked to manage stress better. I truly believe that it isn't as simple as calorie deficits.

that would be water retention and not fat retention…slight difference...

Dugleik

In.

Popcorn.gif