The Worst Nutrition Advice in History (article)

BrainyBurro

So, medication can affect people differently, but not food, not calories? Those are the same with the same effects for everyone?

now you're being silly. if there is a medicine that affects your metabolism, then it affects your TDEE. i don't know what medicines would do that, but let's assume such medicines exist. you simply adjust your TDEE accordingly and the calories in vs. calories out model is still accurate.

if you decide to eat 3lbs of meat per day and want to account for the TEF of protein as part of your TDEE, then you can do that too. i think it's relatively insignificant, but if you want to try and be exact on that one variable while not being as exact on all of the others, you're not going to have any effect on the overall error margin of the model. but if that makes you sleep better at night then go ahead and do it. the calories in vs. calories out model is still accurate.

what you seem to not understand is that we're not saying that everyone has a TDEE of 1689 and therefore if you eat less than 1689 you'll lose weight and if you eat more than 1689 you'll gain weight... what we're saying is that if you eat less than TDEE you'll lose weight and if you eat more than TDEE you'll gain weight. that's the calorie in vs. calorie out model. your TDEE and my TDEE will be different. it just so happens that i can get reasonable estimates of my TDEE from standard equations. you may need to adjust your TDEE results from those equations to account for your medical problems, etc. but once you know your TDEE within a reasonable accuracy, then losing weight is simply a matter of eating less than that amount by a sufficient margin to account for all of the intrinsic errors in these approximate calculations.

I was being silly, but for a reason. If we can agree that medications affect people differently, why do you think it could not be the same as food? Or at least types of food? That there is something intrinsically important with food other than it's caloric value? That's the point I was getting at.

There are many medications that have a side effect of weight loss or weight gain, oftentimes for reasons that are not clearly understood. And, of course, some people react well to certain medications and others don't. That's what leads me to believe that it's either not all about TDEE or at least our current understanding of how to calculate TDEE is inaccurate because there are many other mechanism involved that are not readily apparent which explain such phenomena as these.

So, the oversimplification of CICO is useful, to a point. But, at least in regards to practical application to weight loss, it has its limits and isn't quite as simple as the thermodynamic oversimplification may at first appear.

calories in vs. calories out can be as detailed and as accurate as you want it to be. the model itself is not inherently inaccurate. it's just that no sane person wants or needs the level of accuracy that you are insisting upon. there is no magical process in the body that is excluded from the model. if you can measure and quantify it, then you can refine the model accordingly. i don't have the time or desire to do so and for all practical purposes, for weight loss the normal error margins that the rest of us live with in determining our TDEE don't affect out results in any appreciable way.

this is why i keep stating as a fact that calories in vs. calories out is always correct for everybody. i'm happy with a 5% or 10% error margin (or whatever it is). i don't need more than that. if you want a 3% or a 1% error margin, then you need to be at a certain level of accuracy on every variable in the model to get that accuracy and that quickly gets to the point of diminishing returns for almost everybody else.

LiftAllThePizzas

So, medication can affect people differently, but not food, not calories? Those are the same with the same effects for everyone?

now you're being silly. if there is a medicine that affects your metabolism, then it affects your TDEE. i don't know what medicines would do that, but let's assume such medicines exist. you simply adjust your TDEE accordingly and the calories in vs. calories out model is still accurate.

if you decide to eat 3lbs of meat per day and want to account for the TEF of protein as part of your TDEE, then you can do that too. i think it's relatively insignificant, but if you want to try and be exact on that one variable while not being as exact on all of the others, you're not going to have any effect on the overall error margin of the model. but if that makes you sleep better at night then go ahead and do it. the calories in vs. calories out model is still accurate.

what you seem to not understand is that we're not saying that everyone has a TDEE of 1689 and therefore if you eat less than 1689 you'll lose weight and if you eat more than 1689 you'll gain weight... what we're saying is that if you eat less than TDEE you'll lose weight and if you eat more than TDEE you'll gain weight. that's the calorie in vs. calorie out model. your TDEE and my TDEE will be different. it just so happens that i can get reasonable estimates of my TDEE from standard equations. you may need to adjust your TDEE results from those equations to account for your medical problems, etc. but once you know your TDEE within a reasonable accuracy, then losing weight is simply a matter of eating less than that amount by a sufficient margin to account for all of the intrinsic errors in these approximate calculations.

I was being silly, but for a reason. If we can agree that medications affect people differently, why do you think it could not be the same as food? Or at least types of food? That there is something intrinsically important with food other than it's mere caloric value? Caloric value is important, but is it the ONLY important thing when referencing weight loss? That's the point I was getting at.

There are many medications that have a side effect of weight loss or weight gain, oftentimes for reasons that are not clearly understood. And, of course, some people react well to certain medications and others don't. That's what leads me to believe that it's either not all about TDEE or at least our current understanding of how to calculate TDEE is inaccurate or incomplete because there are many other mechanism involved that are not readily apparent which explain such phenomena as these.

So, the oversimplification of CICO is useful, to a point. But, at least in regards to practical application to weight loss, it has its limits and isn't quite as simple as the thermodynamic oversimplification may at first appear.

Can you name a medication that causes people to be able to create new lipid molecules de novo without having ingested any of the energy used in these novel molecules?

geebusuk

Okay, how do you account for people with metabolic issues with glucose that store a disproportionate amount of carbs as fat? Just wondering how these problems are solved...

CICO still explains why they aren't losing weight. Their calories in is the same or higher than their calories out.
A person in that situation, as with EVERY situation has a choice of either reducing CI to lose weight, or increasing CO. It may be that finding an appropriate medical solution will increase CO by allowing more carbs to be used as fuel rather than stored immediately.

One of the other things I think this approach misses is that there has been a DRAMATIC change in the availability of food in the intervening time. Supermarkets, along with the ability to consume a lot of calories cheaply, are relatively recent developments.

Also in activity levels. Even the people "at the top" likely led considerably more active lives then many people "at the bottom" of society do now.

Azdak

Good post, Lindsey. That's some of what I was getting at, but you said it much better.

Just wait--she'll say it 500 more times.

lindsey1979

Good post, Lindsey. That's some of what I was getting at, but you said it much better.

Just wait--she'll say it 500 more times.

That's very kind of you. Well done. Do you feel better about yourself now?

BrainyBurro

Good post, Lindsey. That's some of what I was getting at, but you said it much better.

Just wait--she'll say it 500 more times.

this is why arguing with lawyers is soul sucking. they are literally professional arguers who get paid to argue.

lindsey1979

So, medication can affect people differently, but not food, not calories? Those are the same with the same effects for everyone?

now you're being silly. if there is a medicine that affects your metabolism, then it affects your TDEE. i don't know what medicines would do that, but let's assume such medicines exist. you simply adjust your TDEE accordingly and the calories in vs. calories out model is still accurate.

if you decide to eat 3lbs of meat per day and want to account for the TEF of protein as part of your TDEE, then you can do that too. i think it's relatively insignificant, but if you want to try and be exact on that one variable while not being as exact on all of the others, you're not going to have any effect on the overall error margin of the model. but if that makes you sleep better at night then go ahead and do it. the calories in vs. calories out model is still accurate.

what you seem to not understand is that we're not saying that everyone has a TDEE of 1689 and therefore if you eat less than 1689 you'll lose weight and if you eat more than 1689 you'll gain weight... what we're saying is that if you eat less than TDEE you'll lose weight and if you eat more than TDEE you'll gain weight. that's the calorie in vs. calorie out model. your TDEE and my TDEE will be different. it just so happens that i can get reasonable estimates of my TDEE from standard equations. you may need to adjust your TDEE results from those equations to account for your medical problems, etc. but once you know your TDEE within a reasonable accuracy, then losing weight is simply a matter of eating less than that amount by a sufficient margin to account for all of the intrinsic errors in these approximate calculations.

I was being silly, but for a reason. If we can agree that medications affect people differently, why do you think it could not be the same as food? Or at least types of food? That there is something intrinsically important with food other than it's caloric value? That's the point I was getting at.

There are many medications that have a side effect of weight loss or weight gain, oftentimes for reasons that are not clearly understood. And, of course, some people react well to certain medications and others don't. That's what leads me to believe that it's either not all about TDEE or at least our current understanding of how to calculate TDEE is inaccurate because there are many other mechanism involved that are not readily apparent which explain such phenomena as these.

So, the oversimplification of CICO is useful, to a point. But, at least in regards to practical application to weight loss, it has its limits and isn't quite as simple as the thermodynamic oversimplification may at first appear.

calories in vs. calories out can be as detailed and as accurate as you want it to be. the model itself is not inherently inaccurate. it's just that no sane person wants or needs the level of accuracy that you are insisting upon. there is no magical process in the body that is excluded from the model. if you can measure and quantify it, then you can refine the model accordingly. i don't have the time or desire to do so and for all practical purposes, for weight loss the normal error margins that the rest of us live with in determining our TDEE don't affect out results in any appreciable way.

this is why i keep stating as a fact that calories in vs. calories out is always correct for everybody. i'm happy with a 5% or 10% error margin (or whatever it is). i don't need more than that. if you want a 3% or a 1% error margin, then you need to be at a certain level of accuracy on every variable in the model to get that accuracy and that quickly gets to the point of diminishing returns for almost everybody else.

I just think that the error margin for some people is a LOT greater than a mere 10%. I'm happy that hasn't been the case for you. I'm just glad you can acknowledge that there is an error margin or at least error margin in application. Some cannot.

tennisdude2004

Good post, Lindsey. That's some of what I was getting at, but you said it much better.

Just wait--she'll say it 500 more times.

That's very kind of you. Well done. Do you feel better about yourself now?

Sadly Lindsey, it needs to be said 500 times before things get through.

lindsey1979

Good post, Lindsey. That's some of what I was getting at, but you said it much better.

Just wait--she'll say it 500 more times.

That's very kind of you. Well done. Do you feel better about yourself now?

Sadly Lindsey, it needs to be said 500 times before things get through.

I'm just wondering what the next potshot will be. Will they tell me I'm ugly? Or stupid? And that people don't like me? Sometimes this site just cracks me up.

geebusuk

I just think that the error margin for some people is a LOT greater than a mere 10%. I'm happy that hasn't been the case for you. I'm just glad you can acknowledge that there is an error margin or at least error margin in application. Some cannot.

I would estimate my current TDEE at around 3000 calories before cardio (but including weights).
If you count that as 'exercise 3x a week' a calculator says around 2500, if you don't 2150 (realistically I'm moving some metal up and down 45 times in a session + warmup, I'm barely covering an orange's worth of calories from the actual exercise).

Eating an average of around 2000 calories a day before eating back cardio, I'm losing around 2lb/week.

So for me, certainly more than 10%. Generally it seems less likely, however, that people calculating things correctly go the other way. When I tested my RMR a while ago, the day after a weights session, it came out at 2400 calories. Which is congruent with the rest.

QuietBloom

calories in vs. calories out is scientific fact. it cannot be disputed. it's in agreement with the laws of physics.

that said, each of us is different. so when we "model" ourselves as a system, we have to take into account those differences.

medical conditions don't disprove the model, they simply affect the "calories out" part of the system.

that's what lindsey refuses to understand.

if a healthy person has an average daily BMR of 1500 at a given weight and a thyroid condition slows that by 20%, then we account for that for that particular person within their model. once that's done, and all such adjustments that need to be made are made, then the conclusion still applies for EVERYONE... if you eat less than your TDEE, you'll lose weight because your body cannot create energy from nothing and therefore must convert existing body mass to meet that extra energy need. that's a law of physics and it is inviolate.

what is different for all special snowflakes is simply their TDEE calculations compared to the rest of us who can get a reasonable estimate from some well-known equations, but the calorie in vs. calorie out rule is still 100% valid.

So, when someone takes a medication that causes dramatic weight gain, do you think it causes their metabolism to immediately slow down?

again, the laws of physics are facts. that medication is likely leading to excessive fluid retention which is not weight gain in the sense that we are discussing, but for the sake of argument...

if i eat 1500 calories a day and maintain my weight.

and then start taking a medication that causes no peripheral issues such as fluid retention that can be confused for weight gain.

and i now begin to gain fat while still eating 1500 calories, then yes, that medication has affected my metabolism such that 1500 is now more than my body needs to maintain my weight and is storing the extra calories in as fat.

if that's the only variable that has changed, then the medication is the culprit.

Well, if that's the case, then why doesn't the medication have that effect on everyone?

Uh... You have a degree in biology. Or so you said. You should know the answer to this.

BlueButterfly94

Have known for a very long time that egg yolks are super nutritious. :P

kjo9692

LiftAllThePizzas

Can you name a medication that causes people to be able to create new lipid molecules de novo without having ingested any of the energy used in these novel molecules?

Still waiting to hear how this magic works.

QuietBloom

calories in vs. calories out is scientific fact. it cannot be disputed. it's in agreement with the laws of physics.

that said, each of us is different. so when we "model" ourselves as a system, we have to take into account those differences.

medical conditions don't disprove the model, they simply affect the "calories out" part of the system.

that's what lindsey refuses to understand.

if a healthy person has an average daily BMR of 1500 at a given weight and a thyroid condition slows that by 20%, then we account for that for that particular person within their model. once that's done, and all such adjustments that need to be made are made, then the conclusion still applies for EVERYONE... if you eat less than your TDEE, you'll lose weight because your body cannot create energy from nothing and therefore must convert existing body mass to meet that extra energy need. that's a law of physics and it is inviolate.

what is different for all special snowflakes is simply their TDEE calculations compared to the rest of us who can get a reasonable estimate from some well-known equations, but the calorie in vs. calorie out rule is still 100% valid.

So, when someone takes a medication that causes dramatic weight gain, do you think it causes their metabolism to immediately slow down?

again, the laws of physics are facts. that medication is likely leading to excessive fluid retention which is not weight gain in the sense that we are discussing, but for the sake of argument...

if i eat 1500 calories a day and maintain my weight.

and then start taking a medication that causes no peripheral issues such as fluid retention that can be confused for weight gain.

and i now begin to gain fat while still eating 1500 calories, then yes, that medication has affected my metabolism such that 1500 is now more than my body needs to maintain my weight and is storing the extra calories in as fat.

if that's the only variable that has changed, then the medication is the culprit.

Well, if that's the case, then why doesn't the medication have that effect on everyone?

Uh... You have a degree in biology. Or so you said. You should know the answer to this.

Oh, I see. You were asking a rhetorical question. It doesn't matter where the calories come from if there is an excess, there is an excess and the body will store it as glycogen and fat. That happens to every body, not just insulin resistant people. That is CICO. If someone feels better eating fewer carbs and more fat, great. Do it. But the calorie amounts still have to be less than they burn for weight loss to happen. CICO. There is no magic that makes fat appear while one is in a calorie deficit. Right? Do you agree?

QuietBloom

calories in vs. calories out is scientific fact. it cannot be disputed. it's in agreement with the laws of physics.

that said, each of us is different. so when we "model" ourselves as a system, we have to take into account those differences.

medical conditions don't disprove the model, they simply affect the "calories out" part of the system.

that's what lindsey refuses to understand.

if a healthy person has an average daily BMR of 1500 at a given weight and a thyroid condition slows that by 20%, then we account for that for that particular person within their model. once that's done, and all such adjustments that need to be made are made, then the conclusion still applies for EVERYONE... if you eat less than your TDEE, you'll lose weight because your body cannot create energy from nothing and therefore must convert existing body mass to meet that extra energy need. that's a law of physics and it is inviolate.

what is different for all special snowflakes is simply their TDEE calculations compared to the rest of us who can get a reasonable estimate from some well-known equations, but the calorie in vs. calorie out rule is still 100% valid.

So, when someone takes a medication that causes dramatic weight gain, do you think it causes their metabolism to immediately slow down?

again, the laws of physics are facts. that medication is likely leading to excessive fluid retention which is not weight gain in the sense that we are discussing, but for the sake of argument...

if i eat 1500 calories a day and maintain my weight.

and then start taking a medication that causes no peripheral issues such as fluid retention that can be confused for weight gain.

and i now begin to gain fat while still eating 1500 calories, then yes, that medication has affected my metabolism such that 1500 is now more than my body needs to maintain my weight and is storing the extra calories in as fat.

if that's the only variable that has changed, then the medication is the culprit.

Well, if that's the case, then why doesn't the medication have that effect on everyone?

Uh... You have a degree in biology. Or so you said. You should know the answer to this.

hey that's not fair, I have a degree in biology too but we didn't cover much pharmacology in any classes

Hmm. OK, you're right, I take it back. I sort of forgot that I worked in pharmacology for a few years after graduation.

Nice knee btw.

QuietBloom

I'm just wondering what the next potshot will be. Will they tell me I'm ugly? Or stupid? And that people don't like me? Sometimes this site just cracks me up.

That's the best you got Lindsey? To try and whip up some drama? OK.

SbetaK

@ rocbola A low fat diet is a low fat diet. It doesn't make a difference if the low fat diet is from all whole foods. That's just absurd. So the fats in whole foods become super fats in order to compensate for the lack of dietary fat?

don't waste your time with him. it's like arguing philosophy with a dung beetle.

HaHAHAhaaaaa