3 ms·

This kind of post is something i usually read at Reddit when something related to fat people are being discussed. And of course, many of them appear to have "a

by Ueland 11y ago

This kind of post is something i usually read at Reddit when something related to fat people are being discussed. And of course, many of them appear to have "a metabolic disorder". A post with a whole bunch of undocumented claims is something i do not expect here at HN. You lost weight, therefore you either reduced calorie intake, or you burned more calories. If you somehow broke the laws regarding energy, you have discovered some magic formula that will make you rich.I am going to assume that you did not discover the magic formula as there is none as per now. No wonder people have issues figuring out how to loose weight when they find claims like: - "foods that are known to screw with human biology" - "My caloric intake has not really changed, yet the fat just melted right off." -"... caloric intake doesn't fix obesity" - "chronically low caloric intake .. makes your body think it's starving to death" " unsafe caloric reduction for long periods may cause weight gain in some individuals ..." " ...foods that promote the proper functioning of your body" ".. drop the ones that are known to cause chronic inflammation, metabolic disorders"

mkingston 11y ago
DiabloD3 almost certainly limited caloric intake at some point (at intake or somewhere in digestion). But your comment doesn't address some complexity in the way the body processes food, or in the food itself. For example, eating 200 calories of refined sugar is considerably worse in terms of your eventual absorption of energy than eating 200 calories of banana. This is at least partly because the banana consumes more energy in digestion, and partly because less of the energy in the banana will actually eventually be absorbed by your body. Parenthetically, the banana will not generate a considerable spike in blood sugar, something that, as I understand it, is very unhealthy. While it's not an awful rough guide, nutrition is not as simple as calories in vs. calories out. Better perhaps if you're counting the calories in your stool, but who's going to do that? (And besides, that still wouldn't be a complete solution). Also, in case you're reading this DiabloD3, congratulations. A drastic and I'm sure extremely challenging lifestyle change. I'm happy to hear about such a success story.
- DiabloD3 11y ago
  See, there lies a small problem: I can't measure caloric burn usefully. I can measure what little exercise I do, I can measure a rough amount of what it costs to merely be alive, but I can't measure beyond simple observations like that (I imagine such things can be measured, it is just invasive and expensive). Intake really hasn't changed, I ate 1500-2000 calories a day then, I eat 1500-2000 calories a day now. I didn't log it, but I did a lot of rough estimates based on things I regularly ate then, and regularly ate now. The only difference I've found is I feel like I'm eating more food now than I did then; but it's because carb-rich food is rather energy compact. Also, thanks. I only tell my story when someone has gone off the rails quoting the FDA party line of "caloric intake is 100% why you're fat", when it's a massively complex issue; and even with my lengthy reply, I feel I did a disservice in how complex the issue is. I tried reducing caloric intake, eating lots of "whole grains", limiting meat intake, all the stuff the FDA has recommended for decades: I only kept getting fatter. Caloric intake alone cannot explain why the world is getting fatter: what we're eating clearly does when my diet has worked for so many people, me included.
LinuxBender 11y ago
I broke the laws of energy. Ok, not really. I was gaining weight because I was starving my body of nutrients, so it was storing everything as fat. I stopped eating crap and started drinking health shakes several times a day and started taking multi-vitamins. I have increased my caloric intake and have been steadily losing weight for two years now. It is not a diet, but a permanent lifestyle change. I feel better and have more energy. I don't log things in a scientific manor, but I don't really need to. My reduction in weight and increase in energy is all I need.

by Ueland 11y ago

mkingston 11y ago

DiabloD3 almost certainly limited caloric intake at some point (at intake or somewhere in digestion). But your comment doesn't address some complexity in the way the body processes food, or in the food itself. For example, eating 200 calories of refined sugar is considerably worse in terms of your eventual absorption of energy than eating 200 calories of banana. This is at least partly because the banana consumes more energy in digestion, and partly because less of the energy in the banana will actually eventually be absorbed by your body. Parenthetically, the banana will not generate a considerable spike in blood sugar, something that, as I understand it, is very unhealthy. While it's not an awful rough guide, nutrition is not as simple as calories in vs. calories out. Better perhaps if you're counting the calories in your stool, but who's going to do that? (And besides, that still wouldn't be a complete solution). Also, in case you're reading this DiabloD3, congratulations. A drastic and I'm sure extremely challenging lifestyle change. I'm happy to hear about such a success story.

DiabloD3 11y ago
See, there lies a small problem: I can't measure caloric burn usefully. I can measure what little exercise I do, I can measure a rough amount of what it costs to merely be alive, but I can't measure beyond simple observations like that (I imagine such things can be measured, it is just invasive and expensive). Intake really hasn't changed, I ate 1500-2000 calories a day then, I eat 1500-2000 calories a day now. I didn't log it, but I did a lot of rough estimates based on things I regularly ate then, and regularly ate now. The only difference I've found is I feel like I'm eating more food now than I did then; but it's because carb-rich food is rather energy compact. Also, thanks. I only tell my story when someone has gone off the rails quoting the FDA party line of "caloric intake is 100% why you're fat", when it's a massively complex issue; and even with my lengthy reply, I feel I did a disservice in how complex the issue is. I tried reducing caloric intake, eating lots of "whole grains", limiting meat intake, all the stuff the FDA has recommended for decades: I only kept getting fatter. Caloric intake alone cannot explain why the world is getting fatter: what we're eating clearly does when my diet has worked for so many people, me included.

LinuxBender 11y ago

I broke the laws of energy. Ok, not really. I was gaining weight because I was starving my body of nutrients, so it was storing everything as fat. I stopped eating crap and started drinking health shakes several times a day and started taking multi-vitamins. I have increased my caloric intake and have been steadily losing weight for two years now. It is not a diet, but a permanent lifestyle change. I feel better and have more energy. I don't log things in a scientific manor, but I don't really need to. My reduction in weight and increase in energy is all I need.