5 ms·
The article doesn't attribute anything to anything, even its recommendations make no sense, like planting legumes instead of soybeans... That's terrible report
by 08-15 7y ago
The article doesn't attribute anything to anything, even its recommendations make no sense, like planting legumes instead of soybeans... That's terrible reporting, possibly worse than useless.
That said, the first law of thermodynamics continues to apply: calories in - calories out == weight gained. The real question is, what makes people overeat to an unhealthy extent? The feedback through leptin should stabilize your weight at slightly above normal by suppressing appetite, but somehow it doesn't seem to work? (Or not anymore?) Why is that?
Lofty talk about unspecified "nutrients" doesn't help anyone. (I think it's probably fructose, especially when not accompanied by fiber. But I don't know enough detail to convince anyone.)
- mcphage 7y ago> calories in - calories out Calories in - (calories used + calories excreted). Of course, calories in = calories in food x extraction efficiency, and already the simple formula has become filled with inconsistent values.
- 08-15 7y agoYou're wrong. Calories are a measure of physiologically usable energy and already take extraction efficiency into account. Even if you had a point, which you don't, the first law of thermodynamics would still apply, and leptin would still provide negative feed back.
- mcphage 7y ago> Even if you had a point, which you don't My point is simple: "calories in" is unmeasurable. It depends on the food you eat, how it's prepared, what else you eat with it, etc. "Calories out" is unmeasurable. It's based on what you do, how you move, how your body processes what you eat, etc. The first law of thermodynamics can apply all the live long day, but the statement "calories in minus calories out" is useless.