Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Calorie in calorie out method is outdated
Options
Replies
-
PaulChasinDreams wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »PaulChasinDreams wrote: »Same small group of people here on the forum who are in denial and obviously always will be. They have not ever done this and have no first hand knowledge of it. They read articles/studies paid for and sponsored by groups hired or instructed by the food and drug lobby. Research that too. Tons of info on that too.
Hopefully people looking to lose weight will do their own research (easy to find all the info I posted). Like I said; contact actual people doing it as a a way of living. They are first hand real time information gateways. Not ink on a pad.
I have done keto. It is all kitten. Get back to us in a year and maybe we can talk. Right now, it’s called the honeymoon phase for you.
ETA spelling
As I said. You have not done both keto combined with high ratio window of fasting ie 20 to 23 hrs between every meal. That is where the metabolism/rate of fat burn changes. Not keto alone. If you read my post in full you would have seen that. So you saying "I have done keto. It is all kitten" is irrelevant to my points and my results.
Post the research.
It's never going to happen. We all know that.. Because you can't post something that doesn't exist.8 -
PaulChasinDreams wrote: »Same small group of people here on the forum who are in denial and obviously always will be. They have not ever done this and have no first hand knowledge of it. They read articles/studies paid for and sponsored by groups hired or instructed by the food and drug lobby. Research that too. Tons of info on that too.
Hopefully people looking to lose weight will do their own research (easy to find all the info I posted). Like I said; contact actual people doing it as a a way of living. They are first hand real time information gateways. Not ink on a pad.
Do you not ever tire of posting nonsense with no facts to back it up? I'll give you credit for persistence and consistence. But you are consistently wrong.7 -
PaulChasinDreams wrote: »Same small group of people here on the forum who are in denial and obviously always will be. They have not ever done this and have no first hand knowledge of it. They read articles/studies paid for and sponsored by groups hired or instructed by the food and drug lobby. Research that too. Tons of info on that too.
Hopefully people looking to lose weight will do their own research (easy to find all the info I posted). Like I said; contact actual people doing it as a a way of living. They are first hand real time information gateways. Not ink on a pad.
I would love to read some of your research because I haven't found anything to support your claims. In fact, what you say it completely contrary to the thousands of metabolic ward studies and information coming from the NIH, but also information also coming from the most prominent researchers in the field for intermittent fasting and ketogenic diets.
And I know your will ignore this, like my previous posts, but the information I have posted is coming from the NIH, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (KDH).
You are a forum moderator here so I would hope you are truly an unbiased person. If you are and you want to get to the 100% bottom of this and have 100% proof of what I say I will offer you this: I will tell you where I live. I will welcome you with open arms into my home. We have a farm on acerage. We have guest rooms. You are welcome to stay with us for a week (Do it on your holiday time. I will also take you fishing on the west coast to make it worth your holiday time) I am a married father of two teen girls. We are a tight family with good values. You can then watch, weigh, measure every gram of food I eat and calorie I burn. I would even go so far as to not do any exercise during the week so there can be no confusion of calories burned. The conditions would be: 1. I will eat a 200 calorie per day surplus in calories. 2. I will eat keto meals. 3. I will fast 23 to 23.5 hrs between meals. 4. No matter what the results may be you as a moderator guarantee to post a permanent sticky thread here on the forum in the debate section of the results of this first hand supervised study. 5. The owner of this community will openly agree to the terms of this agreement and will start a sticky describing what we are going to do and will update the sticky thread as discussed with the way the study is done and it's findings.
I don't know how else I could possibly make it easier for you to see first hand what I and 10's of thousands of other people around the world are doing. You will clearly see that you DO NOT have to be in a calorie deficit if you combine intermittent fasting at high ratio hours between meals with keto.
*edit..incorrectly typed "surplus" instead of "deficit" in last paragraph. Have corrected it.30 -
PaulChasinDreams wrote: »PaulChasinDreams wrote: »Same small group of people here on the forum who are in denial and obviously always will be. They have not ever done this and have no first hand knowledge of it. They read articles/studies paid for and sponsored by groups hired or instructed by the food and drug lobby. Research that too. Tons of info on that too.
Hopefully people looking to lose weight will do their own research (easy to find all the info I posted). Like I said; contact actual people doing it as a a way of living. They are first hand real time information gateways. Not ink on a pad.
I would love to read some of your research because I haven't found anything to support your claims. In fact, what you say it completely contrary to the thousands of metabolic ward studies and information coming from the NIH, but also information also coming from the most prominent researchers in the field for intermittent fasting and ketogenic diets.
And I know your will ignore this, like my previous posts, but the information I have posted is coming from the NIH, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (KDH).
You are a forum moderator here so I would hope you are truly an unbiased person. If you are and you want to get to the 100% bottom of this and have 100% proof of what I say I will offer you this: I will tell you where I live. I will welcome you with open arms into my home. We have a farm on acerage. We have guest rooms. You are welcome to stay with us for a week (Do it on your holiday time. I will also take you fishing on the west coast to make it worth your holiday time) I am a married father of two teen girls. We are a tight family with good values. You can then watch, weigh, measure every gram of food I eat and calorie I burn. I would even go so far as to not do any exercise during the week so there can be no confusion of calories burned. The conditions would be: 1. I will eat a 200 calorie per day surplus in calories. 2. I will eat keto meals. 3. I will fast 23 to 23.5 hrs between meals. 4. No matter what the results may be you as a moderator guarantee to post a permanent sticky thread here on the forum in the debate section of the results of this first hand supervised study. 5. The owner of this community will openly agree to the terms of this agreement and will start a sticky describing what we are going to do and will update the sticky thread as discussed with the way the study is done and it's findings.
I don't know how else I could possibly make it easier for you to see first hand what I and 10's of thousands of other people around the world are doing. You will clearly see that you DO NOT have to be in a calorie surplus if you combine intermittent fasting at high ratio hours between meals with keto.
I am unbiased when it comes to people following the rules. That is the role and responsibility of a moderator. I have spend roughly a decade on this site now and over 6 years as a moderator. I have done a lot of research and followed many diets to see what has worked best for me, to include doing IF, Paleo, carb and calorie cycling and other diets. None of them produced any additional benefits. Low carb makes me starving.. so going keto wouldn't help that. Also, I can't do keto because the calories are too expensive and I am a huge volume eater. And volume eating + keto do not mix; plus it eliminates foods I love and enjoy (i.e., fruits and starches) which have been linked to health. And giving up foods that have helped me lose 50 lbs and improved all of my metabolic markers for the past 6 years would be ridiculous.
If you really want to make a solid argument, than it would be highly beneficial to present your case with data and studies. That is how we all learn and make more informed decisions. The fact that nothing has ever been presented to justify your position, is why no one believes you. At some point, if you want to improve the quality of the decisions, you should present a case with studies and evidence. This is how you drive changes in people's opinions in views. This is how I have continued to grow personally and improved the quality of my advice to newbies.
There is no reason why I would need to come to your house, because you do not have a metabolic ward chamber there. That means, we couldn't measure your energy output, so there would be no way to baselines what your energetic needs would be. Saying you eat in a surplus, by definition, would suggest you are eating about your bodies energy balance needs. You may eat more than what a calculator tells you to but that doesn't make it in a surplus.
My personal goals are muscle gains, strength gains and improved explosive performance for sports. Currently, all the evidence is in favor of higher carb/protein based diets as it relates to those goals. That said, I do like to look at scientific evidence to see if my views are valid and that I provide people with appropriate information.20 -
I just had a wager here with a couple peers that you wouldn't take the offer or opportunity because this 100% confirms you are BIASED and this forum WILL NOT post truth that contradicts and proves that CICO is not the only way to lose fat.
What else do you want me to offer LOL
Sure I will strap myself in a chair for a week and you can video tape it. There's your "metabolic chamber" LOL what a joke your excuses are. 38 -
"proves"
You keep using that word...14 -
PaulChasinDreams wrote: »I just had a wager here with a couple peers that you wouldn't take the offer or opportunity because this 100% confirms you are BIASED and this forum WILL NOT post truth that contradicts and proves that CICO is not the only way to lose fat.
What else do you want me to offer LOL Sure I will strap myself in a chair for a week and you can video tape it. There's your "metabolic chamber" LOL what a joke your excuses are.
The hoops that you will jump through to avoid posting objective evidence is hilarious.
21 -
15
-
Can I ask what might be a silly question...
Eats 200 calories over burn..
Then skips a day eating but still burns calories
Then eats 200 calories over burn
Then skips a day eating but still burns calories, because not deceased.
What am I missing here?
How is this not a deficit and how can anyone claim it's not with a straight face?14 -
This whole thing has gone way beyond science and logic. It’s crossed into a really weird, cult-y, bizarro kind of alternate reality. It’s entertaining - in a sad, demented, train wreck kind of way.10
-
PaulChasinDreams wrote: »I just had a wager here with a couple peers that you wouldn't take the offer or opportunity because this 100% confirms you are BIASED and this forum WILL NOT post truth that contradicts and proves that CICO is not the only way to lose fat.
What else do you want me to offer LOL Sure I will strap myself in a chair for a week and you can video tape it. There's your "metabolic chamber" LOL what a joke your excuses are.
Show your research. Then I might just start believing you.8 -
PaulChasinDreams wrote: »I just had a wager here with a couple peers that you wouldn't take the offer or opportunity because this 100% confirms you are BIASED and this forum WILL NOT post truth that contradicts and proves that CICO is not the only way to lose fat.
What else do you want me to offer LOL Sure I will strap myself in a chair for a week and you can video tape it. There's your "metabolic chamber" LOL what a joke your excuses are.
Someone not wanting to stay with you is an excuse? Really? I can't imagine staying with a complete stranger, observing them constantly, for any length of time. Even assuming he had no life and nothing better to do with his time (which I would assume is not the case - yes, a lot of assumptions here), that would just be so awkward and weird. This has to be one of the strangest concepts of what constitutes "proof."GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Can I ask what might be a silly question...
Eats 200 calories over burn..
Then skips a day eating but still burns calories
Then eats 200 calories over burn
Then skips a day eating but still burns calories, because not deceased.
What am I missing here?
How is this not a deficit and how can anyone claim it's not with a straight face?
To extend this with numbers:
Assume TDEE of 3000: that would be 3200 eaten once every two days so 1600/day, which equals 1400/day deficit
Assume TDEE of 2000: 2200 eaten every two days, 1100/day intake, 1100/day deficit11 -
Thanks for putting numbers to it, @nutmegoreo
Seriously, it's like a caloric shell game, and Fung has all his followers scammed. It cracks me up.6 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »PaulChasinDreams wrote: »I just had a wager here with a couple peers that you wouldn't take the offer or opportunity because this 100% confirms you are BIASED and this forum WILL NOT post truth that contradicts and proves that CICO is not the only way to lose fat.
What else do you want me to offer LOL Sure I will strap myself in a chair for a week and you can video tape it. There's your "metabolic chamber" LOL what a joke your excuses are.
Someone not wanting to stay with you is an excuse? Really? I can't imagine staying with a complete stranger, observing them constantly, for any length of time. Even assuming he had no life and nothing better to do with his time (which I would assume is not the case - yes, a lot of assumptions here), that would just be so awkward and weird. This has to be one of the strangest concepts of what constitutes "proof."GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Can I ask what might be a silly question...
Eats 200 calories over burn..
Then skips a day eating but still burns calories
Then eats 200 calories over burn
Then skips a day eating but still burns calories, because not deceased.
What am I missing here?
How is this not a deficit and how can anyone claim it's not with a straight face?
To extend this with numbers:
Assume TDEE of 3000: that would be 3200 eaten once every two days so 1600/day, which equals 1400/day deficit
Assume TDEE of 2000: 2200 eaten every two days, 1100/day intake, 1100/day deficit
Incorrect. Eating every 23 hrs is in the same day (once a day lol) You do know there's 24 hrs in a day right lol.
Here's your corrected math (come on you are educated aren't you?) 7days x 3200=22400 for ONE WEEK (in your scenerio at eating every 23 hrs) Give your old head a shake there. Your own numbers not mine lol.
And that's why I even offered to make it an enjoyable stay while going fishing lol. Ya it would be odd having a stranger hang out. But I've been a commercial guide in the past so I am very used to making customers/strangers feel welcome and at home while touring/fishing the west coast.20 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Thanks for putting numbers to it, @nutmegoreo
Seriously, it's like a caloric shell game, and Fung has all his followers scammed. It cracks me up. LOL there seriously isn't any simpler math possible for you to have to figure out.... 7 days x one big meal. Come on a shell game! You guys really do grasp at any straw you can to try to prove your unproven points. 20 -
PaulChasinDreams wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »PaulChasinDreams wrote: »I just had a wager here with a couple peers that you wouldn't take the offer or opportunity because this 100% confirms you are BIASED and this forum WILL NOT post truth that contradicts and proves that CICO is not the only way to lose fat.
What else do you want me to offer LOL Sure I will strap myself in a chair for a week and you can video tape it. There's your "metabolic chamber" LOL what a joke your excuses are.
Someone not wanting to stay with you is an excuse? Really? I can't imagine staying with a complete stranger, observing them constantly, for any length of time. Even assuming he had no life and nothing better to do with his time (which I would assume is not the case - yes, a lot of assumptions here), that would just be so awkward and weird. This has to be one of the strangest concepts of what constitutes "proof."GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Can I ask what might be a silly question...
Eats 200 calories over burn..
Then skips a day eating but still burns calories
Then eats 200 calories over burn
Then skips a day eating but still burns calories, because not deceased.
What am I missing here?
How is this not a deficit and how can anyone claim it's not with a straight face?
To extend this with numbers:
Assume TDEE of 3000: that would be 3200 eaten once every two days so 1600/day, which equals 1400/day deficit
Assume TDEE of 2000: 2200 eaten every two days, 1100/day intake, 1100/day deficit
Incorrect. Eating every 23 hrs is in the same day (once a day lol) You do know there's 24 hrs in a day right lol.
Here's your corrected math (come on you are educated aren't you?) 7days x 3200=22400 for ONE WEEK (in your scenerio at eating every 23 hrs) Give your old head a shake there. Your own numbers not mine lol.
And that's why I even offered to make it an enjoyable stay while going fishing lol. Ya it would be odd having a stranger hang out. But I've been a commercial guide in the past so I am very used to making customers/strangers feel welcome and at home while touring/fishing the west coast.
I was going off the post I quoted, which specifically asked if there was something missing. If there was you could certainly say so without being passive-aggressive about it. Seriously, how do expect anyone to take you seriously?7 -
soufauxgirl wrote: »PaulChasinDreams wrote: »I just had a wager here with a couple peers that you wouldn't take the offer or opportunity because this 100% confirms you are BIASED and this forum WILL NOT post truth that contradicts and proves that CICO is not the only way to lose fat.
What else do you want me to offer LOL Sure I will strap myself in a chair for a week and you can video tape it. There's your "metabolic chamber" LOL what a joke your excuses are.
Show your research. Then I might just start believing you.
You are assuming that I care what you believe. I do not. I put the info out there for people to research it if they care to. I do however care about people who want to drop a lot of fat to get healthy. How anyone does it is totally their own prerogative. If people reached out for info/help/guidance than I would enjoy sharing what I have learned and experienced just like others have done with me.20 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »PaulChasinDreams wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »PaulChasinDreams wrote: »I just had a wager here with a couple peers that you wouldn't take the offer or opportunity because this 100% confirms you are BIASED and this forum WILL NOT post truth that contradicts and proves that CICO is not the only way to lose fat.
What else do you want me to offer LOL Sure I will strap myself in a chair for a week and you can video tape it. There's your "metabolic chamber" LOL what a joke your excuses are.
Someone not wanting to stay with you is an excuse? Really? I can't imagine staying with a complete stranger, observing them constantly, for any length of time. Even assuming he had no life and nothing better to do with his time (which I would assume is not the case - yes, a lot of assumptions here), that would just be so awkward and weird. This has to be one of the strangest concepts of what constitutes "proof."
IGottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Can I ask what might be a silly question...
Eats 200 calories over burn..
Then skips a day eating but still burns calories
Then eats 200 calories over burn
Then skips a day eating but still burns calories, because not deceased.
What am I missing here?
How is this not a deficit and how can anyone claim it's not with a straight face?
To extend this with numbers:
Assume TDEE of 3000: that would be 3200 eaten once every two days so 1600/day, which equals 1400/day deficit
Assume TDEE of 2000: 2200 eaten every two days, 1100/day intake, 1100/day deficit
Incorrect. Eating every 23 hrs is in the same day (once a day lol) You do know there's 24 hrs in a day right lol.
Here's your corrected math (come on you are educated aren't you?) 7days x 3200=22400 for ONE WEEK (in your scenerio at eating every 23 hrs) Give your old head a shake there. Your own numbers not mine lol.
And that's why I even offered to make it an enjoyable stay while going fishing lol. Ya it would be odd having a stranger hang out. But I've been a commercial guide in the past so I am very used to making customers/strangers feel welcome and at home while touring/fishing the west coast.
I was going off the post I quoted, which specifically asked if there was something missing. If there was you could certainly say so without being passive-aggressive about it. Seriously, how do expect anyone to take you seriously?
Sorry, I apologize for, being passive aggressive in that response. It is hard not to be when 98% of other peoples comments are "passive aggressive in the group here so dedicated to try to squash any other information given about this topic. It's easy to get caught up in the back and forth. I would like to keep it civil.18 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Thanks for putting numbers to it, @nutmegoreo
Seriously, it's like a caloric shell game, and Fung has all his followers scammed. It cracks me up.
7 -
PaulChasinDreams wrote: »soufauxgirl wrote: »PaulChasinDreams wrote: »I just had a wager here with a couple peers that you wouldn't take the offer or opportunity because this 100% confirms you are BIASED and this forum WILL NOT post truth that contradicts and proves that CICO is not the only way to lose fat.
What else do you want me to offer LOL Sure I will strap myself in a chair for a week and you can video tape it. There's your "metabolic chamber" LOL what a joke your excuses are.
Show your research. Then I might just start believing you.
You are assuming that I care what you believe. I do not. I put the info out there for people to research it if they care to. I do however care about people who want to drop a lot of fat to get healthy. How anyone does it is totally their own prerogative. If people reached out for info/help/guidance than I would enjoy sharing what I have learned and experienced just like others have done with me.
So let's cut to the chase - what are you selling? Is it a book? A diet plan? A subscription-only website where you offer your "expertise", or what? Are you shilling for Fung or one of his lackeys? Or maybe another Turing complete bot experiment here, we've had a couple of those too.
You offer no evidence of anything other than your far-out anecdotal claims which defy all known science, you refuse to post any evidence or studies to corroborate them, and you're obviously a True Believer on a fully religious scale, who refuses to even consider any evidence to the contrary. You've been shot down over and over again, yet you keep coming back for more. Most often, those types have something to sell.
So what is it? What are you trying to peddle here?7
This discussion has been closed.
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
- 390 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
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions