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Calorie in calorie out method is outdated
Replies
-
"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 -
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.
There is nothing special about IF. I practice staccato fasting. It works for me.6 -
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.
my question is if you dont care what others believe then why keep arguing about it? why are you still here arguing your point? you keep trying to prove your experience as proof yet showing none. all you keep saying is for people to make a bet with you or come to your home and follow you around. you are also wagering with others not online about whether someone here will take an offer or not. why does it matter to you? if you think and believe you are right them either get on with your life and stop caring what others think or show them the proof not just anecdotal evidence. if I were a special snowflake I would want the world to know and would be contacting the media,scientists and so on to get my proof out there. I would be glad to share my proof with anyone who asked.11 -
See my question to him above. I'm very curious about the ulterior motive as well.CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »my question is if you dont care what others believe then why keep arguing about it? why are you still here arguing your point?...
If what he was saying was true, there would be metabolic researchers lined up literally begging him and his multitudes of minions to be study subjects. It would be groundbreaking to discover something which countered all known laws of physics and physiology.CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »...if I were a special snowflake I would want the world to know and would be contacting the media,scientists and so on to get my proof out there. I would be glad to share my proof with anyone who asked.
But the truth is, if he went to any metabolic researcher with his claims, he'd be laughed right out of the room.4 -
See my question to him above. I'm very curious about the ulterior motive as well.CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »my question is if you dont care what others believe then why keep arguing about it? why are you still here arguing your point?...
If what he was saying was true, there would be metabolic researchers lined up literally begging him and his multitudes of minions to be study subjects. It would be groundbreaking to discover something which countered all known laws of physics and physiology.CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »...if I were a special snowflake I would want the world to know and would be contacting the media,scientists and so on to get my proof out there. I would be glad to share my proof with anyone who asked.
But the truth is, if he went to any metabolic researcher with his claims, he'd be laughed right out of the room.
I saw your posts and wonder as well about the ulterior motives as well.3 -
PaulChasinDreams wrote: »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.
Well, it wasn't quite clear you were doing OMAD, because you were too busy making up thousands and thousands of people and telling us all to go to google.
There are still other ways you could be playing a calorie shell game, especially with OMAD, because make no mistake... if you're losing weight, your body is absorbing less calories than it burns.5
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393K Introduce Yourself
- 43.7K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.8K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 416 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.6K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions