Do you believe in strictly Calories In - Calories Out?

59gi

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18492820


http://drhyman.com/blog/2014/04/10/calories-dont-matter/#close

Sarauk2sf

Oh dear!

jofjltncb6

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18492820


http://drhyman.com/blog/2014/04/10/calories-dont-matter/#close

Please explain how you believe these links are relevant to the discussion.

yarwell

If they kept the men and women separate in the analysis the variability would be reduced and the chances of finding a significant difference increased.

It is a somehow arbitrary decision that says P<0.05 is "significant" and anything greater is "not significant" - as the value increases the evidence is less convincing but one cannot say "there is no effect" on this basis - http://handbook.cochrane.org/chapter_12/12_4_2_p_values_and_statistical_significance.htm

If I said there was a 25% chance that the extra 20% weight loss of the reduced carbohydrate arm was pure chance would you go for it ? or does it need to be less than 5% chance :-)

59gi

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1871695

metacognition

There are a million subtle differences that determine how much energy a body can get from food, use, and store on a given day. Genetics, age, muscle mass, digestive ability, activity levels, number of fat cells, etc. How much energy is wasted in digestion for a specific kind of food is another issue.

If you follow a formula and check weight on a regular basis, you can get an accurate picture of how many calories your body uses on an average day.

Calories in / out for weight loss is less important than the amount of muscle and fat a person has at a healthy weight. A man eating 2500 calories per day can look soft and round, or like Thor, depending on how much lean tissue they have.

Supertact

In because everyone else is doing it!

59gi

1. No


http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2012/06/when-a-calorie-is-not-just-a-calorie/


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_calorie_is_a_calorie

Charlottesometimes23

If they kept the men and women separate in the analysis the variability would be reduced and the chances of finding a significant difference increased.

It is a somehow arbitrary decision that says P<0.05 is "significant" and anything greater is "not significant" - as the value increases the evidence is less convincing but one cannot say "there is no effect" on this basis - http://handbook.cochrane.org/chapter_12/12_4_2_p_values_and_statistical_significance.htm

If I said there was a 25% chance that the extra 20% weight loss of the reduced carbohydrate arm was pure chance would you go for it ? or does it need to be less than 5% chance :-)

Well, I would say that the p-value for this, off the top of my head would be quite a bit greater than 0.05, looking at the figures and standard errors. Perhaps the full-text has it, but I'm away from work and can't access full-text for a couple of weeks and by then this thread with be long forgotten. :laugh:

Aaron_K123

1. No


http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2012/06/when-a-calorie-is-not-just-a-calorie/

You've already linked that one.

Sarauk2sf

59gi

1. No


http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2012/06/when-a-calorie-is-not-just-a-calorie/

You've already linked that one.

Read it again, if you don't understand!

59gi

If you can't contribute in an intelligent manner then don't

QuietBloom

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18492820


http://drhyman.com/blog/2014/04/10/calories-dont-matter/#close

Wow.

PikaKnight

1. No


http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2012/06/when-a-calorie-is-not-just-a-calorie/

You've already linked that one.

Read it again, if you don't understand!

What? You make no sense. What does that have to do with you having just posted that already?

Sarauk2sf

If you can't contribute in an intelligent manner then don't

Backatcha.....

PikaKnight

If you can't contribute in an intelligent manner then don't

Right back at you. x100000000000000000000

QuietBloom

If you can't contribute in an intelligent manner then don't

You are breaking your own contribution rule. Over and over again.

59gi

If you can't contribute in an intelligent manner then don't

Right back at you. x100000000000000000000

1. No


http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2012/06/when-a-calorie-is-not-just-a-calorie/


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_calorie_is_a_calorie
Edited by ginal59 On July 7, 2014 7:38 PM

Sarauk2sf

If you can't contribute in an intelligent manner then don't

All you have done throughout this thread is post random links again and again with no explanation to how they actually relate to the matter at hand. You have not actually responded in your own words to anything raised.

ETA: and for heavens sake, please learn to use quotes.