If we reduce to core principles, if you know your stuff, there's probably not much to disagree on. There are many factors affecting variables like appetite, sub

If we reduce to core principles, if you know your stuff, there's probably not much to disagree on. There are many factors affecting variables like appetite, subjective energy level, energy used through spontaneous movement, many hormones and so on. But, if you're an individual trying to decide what works and what doesn't in a field where the popular media is full of misinformation, I have a really hard time seeing the position that counting calories is _completely_ unhelpful. > "Pitting will-power against metabotically driven hunger ends, in the long-term, with biology winning every time." Yet, awareness of calories in vs calories out can be a way to plan your strategies, to know from the start whether a given strategy can even work or not, from the point of view of physics. Many people try things that this simple knowledge would rule out. A lifestyle change that does not result in a negative energy balance will not cause someone to lose weight, period. It's also a framework where you can discover what works for yourself. Does lowering carbs vs lowering fat affect your appetite at the same calorie level? How does burning an extra 500 calories through exercise make you feel vs lowering food intake by that amount? These are valuable things to know, again for an individual on a personal quest, not talking about making public policy or population science. Some people find an intuitive lifestyle change that successfully allows them to lower their body fat and keep it down. Bravo. Some people also succeed more mechanically with conscious calorie control. I have a hard time seeing the argument that both of these can't be useful and successful.