21 day 5000 calorie challenge: debunking the calorie myth?

Facts are facts and the one fact that remains is that calories out vs calories in is the one PROVEN method that works EVERY TIME, if people would actually DO IT correctly. Fad diets will come and go.. this is a lifestyle, NOT a diet.

Does he not realise thats paltry to what strong men and bodybuilders used to eat 30 years ago and if you wernt laid on the bed bloated at the end of the day you hadnt eaten enough ...

It's an interesting stunt / gesture / publicity for his business, but we're not going to learn much.

Among the issues that would prevent me calling it an "experiment" :-

1. He wasn't weight stable to start with. He was gaining on >3000 cals.
2. He switched the macro composition on commencing the 500 calorie regime, changing 2 things at once.
3. He doesn't know his baseline body fat.
4. There are no measurements of metabolic rate or activity monitors taken or planned.

So there is no way he or we will ever know how much fat he gained (or lost) or any explanation of the energy balance associated with it.

But it does add to the debate and get people thinking, so good on him.

It's an interesting stunt / gesture / publicity for his business, but we're not going to learn much.

Among the issues that would prevent me calling it an "experiment" :-

1. He wasn't weight stable to start with. He was gaining on >3000 cals.
2. He switched the macro composition on commencing the 500 calorie regime, changing 2 things at once.
3. He doesn't know his baseline body fat.
4. There are no measurements of metabolic rate or activity monitors taken or planned.

So there is no way he or we will ever know how much fat he gained (or lost) or any explanation of the energy balance associated with it.

But it does add to the debate and get people thinking, so good on him.

Agreed - plus 21 days is too short a time to get a true reading of what is happening.

He didn't even get his body fat professionally measured!

This is why it is a vanity experiment and not real science.

You can say whatever you want in a book--doesn't make it true. The fact that there are more sites like MFP popping up, and that restaurants are making nutritional information available, actually suggests that the culture of calorie counting is getting *stronger*, not weaker.

I'm not saying that counting calories necessarily causes me to lose weight. But I know that when I am counting calories, I am far more conscientious about what I eat and how much, and that makes it far more likely that I will lose weight. If something like paleo works for you, great. Don't count your calories in that case. But I know exactly what happens to me when I stop counting my calories (no matter how clean I eat).
[/quote]

^^ Exactly! (insert clapping smiley here)

Just had a rather long discussion on twitter with the person doing the experiment. His point seems to be that the calorie is not the best measure of energy as it applies to the human body and he wants to improve on it. I pointed out that by changing his macros from 30% carbs to 10%, he was skewing the data because he would be losing water weight at the same time gaining muscle/fat. His take was that while HE differentiated between water weight and “real” weight, a CALORIE does not. I think the point is specious relative to real weight gain, but have to grant him that the fact that by changing the macro-nutrient %'s, he offset the caloric changes short term. Again specious, but accurate. If it leads to some better way to measure energy in the human body, great, but my concern was that people would see the experiment and think that if they ate “clean” they could eat all they want and not gain weight. I expressed this concern and asked that he address it in his conclusion.

Sounds like he is better at working out than thinking. Did he actually say a calorie doesn't know something? They are sentient now?

You have to take that comment about calories "knowing" in context. Remember, it's twitter and limited to 140 characters. His point was that the body reacts differently to different types of calories based on which macro-nutrient they are delivered by. In the example, cutting carbs results in water weight loss. Therefore, "a calorie is a calorie" is a myth.

A calorie IS a calorie (although I also do agree, protein is the most important); it's things like fluid,hormone balance, and body composition that make people THINK thermodynamics somehow goes out the window. Fat loss is non linear and there's plenty of reasons/theories out there for it.

At the end of the day though if you know the RIGHT calorie balance (IE have an accurate picture of your metabolism) you can do what you want with your body. Most of this is best guess work though, and why people anecdotally refute cals in/out (there's simply a ton of variables to account for).

but it will tell us if 3,500 surplus calories = 1 lb. of weight gain.

I respectfully disagree.

The only thing he will determine based on the construct of his experiment is the rate at which he gains or loses weight given the current intake of calories and macronutrients.

The more accurate outcome is that his weight will change by a given amount and he can then determine how much of a surplus or deficit he was truly in.

It doesn't rule out not gaining fat because certain foods don't get stored,

Well according to a few here it does

what are these magical foods you speak of?

nothing magical about corn syrup being easier to digest than broccoli

So is the argument that broccoli (compared to corn syrup) results in fewer net calories available to the body because 1) the calories that are required to break it down for use, or 2) it is passed without all of the calories having been extracted? Or some third possibility I haven't considered?

Yes

Just had a rather long discussion on twitter with the person doing the experiment. His point seems to be that the calorie is not the best measure of energy as it applies to the human body and he wants to improve on it. I pointed out that by changing his macros from 30% carbs to 10%, he was skewing the data because he would be losing water weight at the same time gaining muscle/fat. His take was that while HE differentiated between water weight and “real” weight, a CALORIE does not. I think the point is specious relative to real weight gain, but have to grant him that the fact that by changing the macro-nutrient %'s, he offset the caloric changes short term. Again specious, but accurate. If it leads to some better way to measure energy in the human body, great, but my concern was that people would see the experiment and think that if they ate “clean” they could eat all they want and not gain weight. I expressed this concern and asked that he address it in his conclusion.

Sounds like he is better at working out than thinking. Did he actually say a calorie doesn't know something? They are sentient now?

You have to take that comment about calories "knowing" in context. Remember, it's twitter and limited to 140 characters. His point was that the body reacts differently to different types of calories based on which macro-nutrient they are delivered by. In the example, cutting carbs results in water weight loss. Therefore, "a calorie is a calorie" is a myth.

Totally missing the point, since nobody but people making weight for a fight actually cares abut weight, whether or not they think they do. They actually care about body composition and sexual capital. Sometimes they care about health.


Put me in charge of his food, let me choose the quantities (but not the proportins) from his own restricted list, give me a year, and I will turn him into captain jiggles. I can guarantee that. If he doesn't gain on 5000 I will find the number that does make him gain. It's simple.

Btw I went to his site, and all I can say is, what a döuchebag. Yeah, I just got all ad hominem. I'm unstoppable!

I just spent two months with a guy who stays slim on over 3k a day with barely any moving, while eating tons of carbs. With workouts he could definitely do the challenge, but it would prove absolutely nothing useful for my own body composition management, because I gain on anything over 2000. At my fattest, I was eating paleo with no portion control.

I see this as his own n=1 experiment and do not understand the freakin' negativity surrounding it.

What about the IFer who decided to eat 2 lbs of potatoes every day. It was his own n=1
There is another dude on another forum who offers his body to science for his own little n=1 experiments as well.

Frankly, I find it interesting and don't care to nit pick at him because it is HIS body and he can do what he wants with it.

Would I do it? No. Is he suggesting everyone jump in and do this? No.

Haters gonna hate.