4 ms·

I think you're both saying the same thing here. The key point is that nutrition can change the weights of your equation, which must be accurate even if by appea

by rjf72 8y ago

I think you're both saying the same thing here. The key point is that nutrition can change the weights of your equation, which must be accurate even if by appealing to the conservation laws of the universe, in ways that are not obvious to many people. For instance aspartame, a fake '0 calorie' sugar, has been shown to have a relationship with weight gain by numerous studies including some controlled experimental studies. In other words it's not confounded by the fact that overweight/obese are likely substantially more likely to consume aspartame infused products than others. But there's no magic there. While the exact mechanism isn't known (it's not that it simply makes you eat more food) it's going to come down to something that impairs your ability to burn calories. So the equation still stands. It just means that if you consume aspartame you need to eat even less to see weight loss (or not weight gain) than somebody who does not. In practice the exact opposite happens, and then people try to blame things outside their control - such as genetics. But such arguments hold little weight. Obesity has skyrocketed exponentially in just the past several decades. People didn't suddenly all spontaneously change their genetics. But nutritional standards, and indeed calories consumed, both radically changed for the worse.

a11595 8y ago
>relationship with weight gain Yes. An Inverse one. There is no getting around the fact that a 16oz coke has 300 calories, and diet has zero. Believing those tailored studies apply to the obesity use case is being ignorant, and reading the abstract, not the body of the study. Sweeteners can confuse you into being more hungry vs no sweeteners. That does not mean sweeteners making you a tiny bit more hungry, and you eating an extra bite of food to reflect that, is worse than the 300 calories from the coke. Also, if someone is not overweight but actually obese, this does not effect them at all. overweight people - as in no stomach hanging over the belt, but no visible abs stop eating when they stop being hungry, but don't burn all those calories. Aspartame will be worse for them vs having no sweetener OR sugar. But if you have to have something sweet, of course the sweetener is better - it's 300 calories less, and tens of extra calories from the extra bite of food. Obese people - sweeteners don't effect them in any way at all vs no sweetener. They don't just not do enough physical activity to burn off the calories. They also keep eating once they're full. And then they eat some more. Them feeling hungry for an extra 5 minutes does nothing to change the time they stop eating - which is 30 minutes after they stopped being hungry. Shit be tastin' goo boo. Now, I eat complete crap. I eat pizza before bed, and always have desert. I'm 40, 5'11 at 170lb, 6% bodyfat. I've been this way all my life. Food tastes good, and I like to have lots of muscles, so I use up all the calories. So to summarize, you as well as the OP with his talk of exercise, are completely wrong.

by rjf72 8y ago

a11595 8y ago

>relationship with weight gain Yes. An Inverse one. There is no getting around the fact that a 16oz coke has 300 calories, and diet has zero. Believing those tailored studies apply to the obesity use case is being ignorant, and reading the abstract, not the body of the study. Sweeteners can confuse you into being more hungry vs no sweeteners. That does not mean sweeteners making you a tiny bit more hungry, and you eating an extra bite of food to reflect that, is worse than the 300 calories from the coke. Also, if someone is not overweight but actually obese, this does not effect them at all. overweight people - as in no stomach hanging over the belt, but no visible abs stop eating when they stop being hungry, but don't burn all those calories. Aspartame will be worse for them vs having no sweetener OR sugar. But if you have to have something sweet, of course the sweetener is better - it's 300 calories less, and tens of extra calories from the extra bite of food. Obese people - sweeteners don't effect them in any way at all vs no sweetener. They don't just not do enough physical activity to burn off the calories. They also keep eating once they're full. And then they eat some more. Them feeling hungry for an extra 5 minutes does nothing to change the time they stop eating - which is 30 minutes after they stopped being hungry. Shit be tastin' goo boo. Now, I eat complete crap. I eat pizza before bed, and always have desert. I'm 40, 5'11 at 170lb, 6% bodyfat. I've been this way all my life. Food tastes good, and I like to have lots of muscles, so I use up all the calories. So to summarize, you as well as the OP with his talk of exercise, are completely wrong.