5 ms·

I wonder whether calories in - calories out is too simplistic a picture. Why do people put on antipsychotics gain an ungodly amount of weight? If metabolism sl

I wonder whether calories in - calories out is too simplistic a picture. Why do people put on antipsychotics gain an ungodly amount of weight? If metabolism slows down sufficiently, it will take more effort to burn those calories you take in (even if one hasn't substantially increased ones intake). This is a complex issue and I wish more scientists studied the link between medications and weight gain.

chongli 8y ago
Yes, calories in - calories out is too simplistic. It really ought to be modelled with a partial differential equation, where calories out depends on calories in, current fat storage, exercise levels, sleep routine, stress, and more, with all of those things being affected by subjective energy level. It is a well established fact that the body makes a host of metabolic adjustments in response to changes in diet.
- crankylinuxuser 8y ago
  I've heard from 2 dieticians (professional, not online), that the primary way we lose weight is through our breath. Food we eat is drained of nutrients and excreted. The excretions are less than the food, and the rest is absorbed into the body. The other excretion we have is sweat, which is primarily salts and water. The only avenue in which we can shed weight is by CO2 exhaled... (I do not have a citation for this from a paper, but heard the same description from 2 different dieticians. I accepted this as fact.)
atomical 8y ago
Are you assuming people who take antipsychotics don't eat more?
- andai 8y ago
  It's both: if you dysregulate the metabolism, that affects hunger levels and cravings as well.
  - atomical 8y ago
    Proof?
    - andai 8y ago
      Here's one example: substances which increase metabolic output (and can cause mania/psychosis) suppress the appetite (Adderall, Ritalin, Meth) and have been marketed as appetite suppressants in the past. I have used their little sister, caffeine for this same purpose earlier this week.
koala_man 8y ago
I think a lot of these diets still boil down to CICO, and that all the restrictions like "one meal or day" are more about getting tricked into consuming less than anything else. But yes, in 100 years, I bet the obesity crisis will be another cooky documentary topic like the lobotomy hype, tobacco smoking and the treatment of ulcers with vacations instead of antibiotics.
kjeetgill 8y ago
I've always felt that the biggest oversimplification in these diet conversations is taking too much about nutrition and what's 'healthy'. Losing weight to combat obesity and just generally being healthy to maintain your weight are two different situations. You take meds to address specific illnesses. Need to lose weight? Calories in and out is probably 80% of the nutritional knowledge you need. Everything else is just psychology. What keeps you consistent? 5 small meals or one big one? Try em both. See what sticks. Simple. Not Easy, but simple.

chongli 8y ago

Yes, calories in - calories out is too simplistic. It really ought to be modelled with a partial differential equation, where calories out depends on calories in, current fat storage, exercise levels, sleep routine, stress, and more, with all of those things being affected by subjective energy level. It is a well established fact that the body makes a host of metabolic adjustments in response to changes in diet.

crankylinuxuser 8y ago
I've heard from 2 dieticians (professional, not online), that the primary way we lose weight is through our breath. Food we eat is drained of nutrients and excreted. The excretions are less than the food, and the rest is absorbed into the body. The other excretion we have is sweat, which is primarily salts and water. The only avenue in which we can shed weight is by CO2 exhaled... (I do not have a citation for this from a paper, but heard the same description from 2 different dieticians. I accepted this as fact.)

atomical 8y ago

Are you assuming people who take antipsychotics don't eat more?

andai 8y ago
It's both: if you dysregulate the metabolism, that affects hunger levels and cravings as well.
- atomical 8y ago
  Proof?
  - andai 8y ago
    Here's one example: substances which increase metabolic output (and can cause mania/psychosis) suppress the appetite (Adderall, Ritalin, Meth) and have been marketed as appetite suppressants in the past. I have used their little sister, caffeine for this same purpose earlier this week.

koala_man 8y ago

I think a lot of these diets still boil down to CICO, and that all the restrictions like "one meal or day" are more about getting tricked into consuming less than anything else. But yes, in 100 years, I bet the obesity crisis will be another cooky documentary topic like the lobotomy hype, tobacco smoking and the treatment of ulcers with vacations instead of antibiotics.

kjeetgill 8y ago

I've always felt that the biggest oversimplification in these diet conversations is taking too much about nutrition and what's 'healthy'. Losing weight to combat obesity and just generally being healthy to maintain your weight are two different situations. You take meds to address specific illnesses. Need to lose weight? Calories in and out is probably 80% of the nutritional knowledge you need. Everything else is just psychology. What keeps you consistent? 5 small meals or one big one? Try em both. See what sticks. Simple. Not Easy, but simple.