4 ms·
I thought it was common knowledge by now that 'caloric intake' is mostly useless as a predictor for obesity? Mostly useless, because it says nothing about the a
by w0utert 7y ago
I thought it was common knowledge by now that 'caloric intake' is mostly useless as a predictor for obesity? Mostly useless, because it says nothing about the amount of energy the body has to expend to metabolize the foods that contain them, and it completely disregards systematic metabolic changes resulting from dietary choices.
- marcusverus 7y agoSome bodies burn more calories at rest. Some bodies burn more calories when working out. All bodies burn available fat when they take in fewer calories than they burn. It's a physics thing.
- narag 7y agoA physics thing that is mostly useless if you look at caloric diet success ratio. People feel mere calories restriction as torture. If you want them to keep a diet, you should pay as much attention to what they eat as to how much they eat.
- milankragujevic 7y agoI have an unfounded belief that people do not actually use up most of the calories they eat, they are excreted. Everyone, including both normal-weight ("thin") and obese people eats ingests more calories than is needed by the body given the sedentary lifestyles in modern society, yet some do not gain weight as quickly. Additionally, given how efficient human bodies are, meaning how much work you have to do to burn an apple's worth of calories, it is impossible to suggest that everyone of normal weight burns all excess calories.
- narag 7y agoI have a well founded belief that obesity cause is sugar and its close relatives. There's no mistery about that. Obesity is almost unknown before sugar is introduced in a country's diet. Current epidemic is caused because sugar is not only available but practically unavoidable if you consume prepackaged food. It's added to all kinds of food, some of them, like mayo, bread or sausages, totally superfluous. Meanwhile some "experts" keep talking about dietary fat and calories.