Is calories in vs calories burn't a myth?
Options
Replies
-
Your question is like asking if gravity exists, how do planes fly?!
Calories in vs. calories out is very basic science and a proven fact. The reason why people don't think it works is because we have to estimate both sides of the equation and that estimation always has some error attached. If someone is over estimating the calories they burn and underestimating the calories they eat, they can very easily turn a minor deficit into a surplus. Instead of thinking to themselves "I must have made an error somewhere", they instead assume they're perfect and special and the laws of physics don't spply to them.
Its not just a 'law of physics' because humans aren't some form of bloody battery. We don't process 100% of energy that enters our body. A persons metabolism determines this.0 -
People's metabolisms are vastly different for many many reasons. Genetics play a huge role. Also people who are very active simply burn more calories a day via their activity. When you diet for long periods of time you can have some slowdown to your metabolism. It's never going to be enough to make weight loss stop or cause weight gain. Anytime you are not losing weight in the long run when you think you are in a deficit you need to examine a few things. More often then not you are simply eating more then you think. I would say 80% of the time this is the case. Other times people, sometimes unconsciously, become less active during prolonged deficits. Both these examples still fall within CICO. To sum it up, if you aren't losing weight (again in the long run), you're eating too much, you're burning too little, or both.@vismal This makes sense to me actually.
Is it possible that a metabolism adjusts to a lower calorie intake? Or is that just complete BS.
It is surprising that different people's BMR's or required calorie intake can be so far apart. Is this the reason it is possible for some people to be able to eat massive calorie surplus without putting on weight because really it technically isn't a surplus but a variety of different factors such as a fast metabolism/ high energy requirements. If this was true it would stand to reason that their is such a thing as a fat gene and skinny one...0 -
People's metabolisms are vastly different for many many reasons. Genetics play a huge role. Also people who are very active simply burn more calories a day via their activity. When you diet for long periods of time you can have some slowdown to your metabolism. It's never going to be enough to make weight loss stop or cause weight gain. Anytime you are not losing weight in the long run when you think you are in a deficit you need to examine a few things. More often then not you are simply eating more then you think. I would say 80% of the time this is the case. Other times people, sometimes unconsciously, become less active during prolonged deficits. Both these examples still fall within CICO. To sum it up, if you aren't losing weight (again in the long run), you're eating too much, you're burning too little, or both.@vismal This makes sense to me actually.
Is it possible that a metabolism adjusts to a lower calorie intake? Or is that just complete BS.
It is surprising that different people's BMR's or required calorie intake can be so far apart. Is this the reason it is possible for some people to be able to eat massive calorie surplus without putting on weight because really it technically isn't a surplus but a variety of different factors such as a fast metabolism/ high energy requirements. If this was true it would stand to reason that their is such a thing as a fat gene and skinny one...
Okay you've restored my faith in calorie in vs out. But it's not as simple as people make it out to be. It not just X + Y = Z. I naturally assumed that the in vs out was set at 2000 calories for a women and 2500 for a man or there abouts. However, this actualy doesn't have be the case. I think however as a basis to successful weight loss as long as you know roughly your daily calorie requirements to just maintain C in vs C out is a good starting point to loose weight0 -
Your question is like asking if gravity exists, how do planes fly?!
Calories in vs. calories out is very basic science and a proven fact. The reason why people don't think it works is because we have to estimate both sides of the equation and that estimation always has some error attached. If someone is over estimating the calories they burn and underestimating the calories they eat, they can very easily turn a minor deficit into a surplus. Instead of thinking to themselves "I must have made an error somewhere", they instead assume they're perfect and special and the laws of physics don't spply to them.
Its not just a 'law of physics' because humans aren't some form of bloody battery. We don't process 100% of energy that enters our body. A persons metabolism determines this.
You're attacking a strawman, I never said we process 100% of everything we eat. The amount of calories you can absorb from your food is part of the calories in side of the equation if you do it properly.0 -
Your question is like asking if gravity exists, how do planes fly?!
Calories in vs. calories out is very basic science and a proven fact. The reason why people don't think it works is because we have to estimate both sides of the equation and that estimation always has some error attached. If someone is over estimating the calories they burn and underestimating the calories they eat, they can very easily turn a minor deficit into a surplus. Instead of thinking to themselves "I must have made an error somewhere", they instead assume they're perfect and special and the laws of physics don't spply to them.
Its not just a 'law of physics' because humans aren't some form of bloody battery. We don't process 100% of energy that enters our body. A persons metabolism determines this.
You're attacking a strawman, I never said we process 100% of everything we eat. The amount of calories you can absorb from your food is part of the calories in side of the equation if you do it properly.
You're right. But it's not as simple as its made out to be. There a huge number of variables on both sides of the formula. Thanks for the reply
0 -
However, my grand mother for example only eats around 1000 calories a day and has done for the last 20 years.
So you've weighed and tracked your grandmother's intake every day over the last 20 years?
You two must be very close.0 -
You're attacking a strawman, I never said we process 100% of everything we eat. The amount of calories you can absorb from your food is part of the calories in side of the equation if you do it properly.
You're right. But it's not as simple as its made out to be. There a huge number of variables on both sides of the formula. Thanks for the reply
Let me just clarify - the equation is incredibly simple, but there are a huge number of factors involved, making it very difficult to ever calculate super accurately. The question was, "is calories in vs calories burnt a myth?" and the answer is 100% that it is NOT a myth.
That doesn't mean it's simple or easy for everyone to calculate. Everyone has a different calories out, even if they weigh the same and do the same stuff.0 -
well according to the articles i've read (granted, they are on the internet and potentially subject to inherent interwebby stupidity) your metabolism is reduced by about 1% a year after approximately 30 ish unless you keep up a decent amount of muscle, therefore it is not even remotely surprising that your grandmother could eat so much less than you to maintain0
-
No, but have lived with her for periods of time and know that she tends to eat pretty much the same things everyday. I don't see why her BMR would be any lower than mine considering I often barely do any form of activity, sitting must of the day, whereas she walks at least 3 miles a day and does the garden.
Also how do you explain CRON dieters?
Not trying to be mean but what does granny drink? And does she ever visit anyone or eat a biscuit or two? Do you watch her down at the shop, and is she eating a cake and a coffee on supermarket day?
You may know some of the basics of what she eats but you won't have factored in the perks. You certainly don't know how many shots of whiskey she knocks back at 2am.
Also you do not state her age, or her weight or her height. If she's four foot tall weighing 70lb then 1000 cals is probably a reasonable maintenance quantity.
The older you get, the fewer calories you need a day. the smaller you are, the fewer calories you need. The more female you are the fewer calories you need. She's all three.
You can't change the first law of thermodynamics just because you don't think Granny's eating enough to sustain herself. If she is being sustained, she is eating enough to sustain herself. Don't amend the entire global realm of physics for the last 2000 years just to serve your concerns about granny.0 -
However, my grand mother for example only eats around 1000 calories a day and has done for the last 20 years.
So you've weighed and tracked your grandmother's intake every day over the last 20 years?
You two must be very close.
She's someone who generally isn't interested in food and views it as only fuel. She honestly eats pretty much the same thing everyday. I've quizzed her on this as well, i'm not making any crass assumptions ...0 -
No, but have lived with her for periods of time and know that she tends to eat pretty much the same things everyday. I don't see why her BMR would be any lower than mine considering I often barely do any form of activity, sitting must of the day, whereas she walks at least 3 miles a day and does the garden.
Also how do you explain CRON dieters?
Not trying to be mean but what does granny drink? And does she ever visit anyone or eat a biscuit or two? Do you watch her down at the shop, and is she eating a cake and a coffee on supermarket day?
You may know some of the basics of what she eats but you won't have factored in the perks. You certainly don't know how many shots of whiskey she knocks back at 2am.
Also you do not state her age, or her weight or her height. If she's four foot tall weighing 70lb then 1000 cals is probably a reasonable maintenance quantity.
The older you get, the fewer calories you need a day. the smaller you are, the fewer calories you need. The more female you are the fewer calories you need. She's all three.
You can't change the first law of thermodynamics just because you don't think Granny's eating enough to sustain herself. If she is being sustained, she is eating enough to sustain herself. Don't amend the entire global realm of physics for the last 2000 years just to serve your concerns about granny.
I'm not the least bit concerned, just curious. I didn't realise that their was such a big gap between peoples BMR and so many defining factors.0 -
Also the more lean you are the more efficient you are on the 'outward' side of the equation. The fitter your muscles are, the more effectively they can utilise that 1 calorie. An unfit person will lose a lot of calories in heat production. A very fit person will not. A fit person who is performing tasks their body is completely used to, regularly, eg gardening even if heavy gardening, will not use up anything like the calories some newbie will use up.
If you want to study granny, study her. Your very starting points are completely lacking in this thread: height, weight, age. What is her activity level? What actions are she performing daily?
List and name. Identify. Put your cards on the table.
Have faith in the laws of physics. If your granny can break them they're hardly laws.
0 -
Hahaa, I believe you all. But CICO is a very broad forumla, that I suppose isn't comparable from one person to the other.0
-
She is more active than me throughout the day so it's unlikely that her base metabolic rate is much lower than mine.
:laugh:
my bmr estimate now:
1558
if I was 65 with same stats:
1356
if I was a guy:
1724
if I was a 65 yr old guy:
1522
at my goal weight:
1327
at my goal weight and 65:
1125
if i was a guy at my goal:
1493
if i was a guy at my goal and 65:
12910 -
She is more active than me throughout the day so it's unlikely that her base metabolic rate is much lower than mine.
:laugh:
my bmr estimate now:
1558
if I was 65 with same stats:
1356
if I was a guy:
1724
if I was a 65 yr old guy:
1522
at my goal weight:
1327
at my goal weight and 65:
1125
if i was a guy at my goal:
1493
if i was a guy at my goal and 65:
1291
Wow your bmr is 1558, that sucks. I can eat like 3 snickers more than you 0 -
She is more active than me throughout the day so it's unlikely that her base metabolic rate is much lower than mine.
:laugh:
my bmr estimate now:
1558
if I was 65 with same stats:
1356
if I was a guy:
1724
if I was a 65 yr old guy:
1522
at my goal weight:
1327
at my goal weight and 65:
1125
if i was a guy at my goal:
1493
if i was a guy at my goal and 65:
1291
Wow your bmr is 1558, that sucks. I can eat like 3 snickers more than you
Lucky for me my TDEE is closer to 2500 and as such I lose weight eating around 2000 calories.
0 -
She is more active than me throughout the day so it's unlikely that her base metabolic rate is much lower than mine.
:laugh:
my bmr estimate now:
1558
if I was 65 with same stats:
1356
if I was a guy:
1724
if I was a 65 yr old guy:
1522
at my goal weight:
1327
at my goal weight and 65:
1125
if i was a guy at my goal:
1493
if i was a guy at my goal and 65:
1291
Wow your bmr is 1558, that sucks. I can eat like 3 snickers more than you
Lucky for me my TDEE is closer to 2500 and as such I lose weight eating around 2000 calories.
The day I get to lie in bed al day is the day win in on the weight lose !0 -
I doubt the accuracy of your grandmother's estimating acumen.
CI/CO is not negated by one old woman's inability to be accurate.0 -
I'll leave the rest to the others, but I'm fairly confident the word "burn't" is a myth.0
-
If someone eats half the amount an average person eats and does not lose weight it stands to reason that their metabolism is twice as effective at processing calories.
No, it doesn't.
With a variance that large, "it stands to reason" that somebody is counting wrong.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 919 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions