My Response To Common Weight Loss Myths

bump

Ok, so the OP deactivated. And this thread will more than likely get locked. So I'll throw my two-cents in anyway because I'm a forum-reknowned THREAD KILLER! Once I get in, that's it. For some reason, I KILL THREADS!

So here I am, to kill the thread for everybody.

While the OP deactivated, I hope he checks this later and sees this message. OP, you never stated that your word was gospel and that you were a genius, expert or even a fully credible scientist - and yet every single one of the sharks come out to play on you. Unfair.
Sure, you overreacted and got defensive but the lesson here is when you try to help people just remember there are a lot of people who don't want help. You posted some parts of your post without any citations but I hardly see that as a deadly sin. Everyone needs to put their guns away.

Thanks for trying, OP. It was tl;dr IMO, but I can at least see you were trying to help. Which is something these forum-warriors need to remember.

Trying to help is one thing. Writing in a condescending, incomprehensible manner while trying to pass something off as having scientic basis without any support is another.

Ok, so the OP deactivated. And this thread will more than likely get locked. So I'll throw my two-cents in anyway because I'm a forum-reknowned THREAD KILLER! Once I get in, that's it. For some reason, I KILL THREADS!

So here I am, to kill the thread for everybody.

While the OP deactivated, I hope he checks this later and sees this message. OP, you never stated that your word was gospel and that you were a genius, expert or even a fully credible scientist - and yet every single one of the sharks come out to play on you. Unfair.
Sure, you overreacted and got defensive but the lesson here is when you try to help people just remember there are a lot of people who don't want help. You posted some parts of your post without any citations but I hardly see that as a deadly sin. Everyone needs to put their guns away.

Thanks for trying, OP. It was tl;dr IMO, but I can at least see you were trying to help. Which is something these forum-warriors need to remember.

Trying to help is one thing. Writing in a condescending, incomprehensible manner while trying to pass something off as having scientic basis without any support is another.

^^this...worse yet, he tried to pass off his unsubstatiated supposed facts as his own thoughts

bump want to read tonight

bump for later

[/quote]

I also agree.

Part of being a scientist is learning to take criticism of your work. You've demonstrated a complete failure in your ability to take criticism here by attacking those who, rightfully, questioned your claims. The article you wrote initially is borderline incoherent, lacks any citations to legitimate scientific literature, and is disorganized at best. If I read this article from a student of mine, the grade would be very poor.

I highly recommend you think more about what you post before you make a thread like this so that we understand your points more clearly and provide the necessary references or citations.

My credentials:
M.S. in Mathematics, finishing up a Ph.D. in biology at a top tier university
I've been teaching basic biology and calculus for the last 5 years as well.
8 publications (4 of which occurred as an undergraduate) and a book coauthorship.

P.S. I'm not saying any of this to be mean to you at all, but it's important to get your head around these concepts if you ever plan to be successful in science. Furthermore, there are a lot of people on here including Acg67, Sidesteal, and PercivalHackworth who know a lot about nutrition and fitness. Their opinions are based in science, so it is unwise to dismiss them as "trolls" when they question you.
[/quote]

This is the best response to a post, ever, in the history of the world. Thank you.

Save to read

I'm sorry, but what myths were you responding to exactly?

I am a terrific researcher....
.... Also, sorry for any grammar or spelling mistakes....

Lol.

Thank your for taking the time to explain so much .. and in very clear scientific (yet understandable !) terms.
I truly appreciate the honesty.
A question .. I was recently reading in Timothy Ferris' book The 4-hour Body that the amount of calories macro-nutrients (proteins, fats and carbs) release are measured by how much energy they release when incinerated.. and that our bodies , rather than incinerate metabolise these nutrients differently. In a study (conducted by Kekwick and Pawan) he quotes... 3 groups put on calorically equal , semi-starvation diets of 90% fat, 90% protein and 90% fat. The results were as follows... the 90% fat group lost .9lbs/day, the 90% protein group lost .6lbs/day, and the 90% carb group gainer .24/day.
His rationale is that the way we measure calories today was established in 19th century by chemist Wilbur O. Atwater through incinerating foods and is archaic. That it's the hormonal response to macronutrients (in particular carbs) that determines whether our bodies store or burn the metabolites ... and that each person's response varies.
I find this fascinating!
Love to hear your thoughts!!
j

This was the only value I got out of this thread. You cited a specific scientific test, with hypothesis, test parameters and results and source for those who wish to dig deeper. You gave us something we could google. Concise with a point.

I happen to be smart enough and have a long enough attention span to read the original article, the only value I got out if it was that it prompted your reply which was free of the ad hominem (albeit no entirely undeserved) that stained the rest of this thread.


I thank you