7 ms·

> I think it's meant to drive home the point is the only thing that actually matters is total energy expenditure and calorie intake. If you're not losing weight

> I think it's meant to drive home the point is the only thing that actually matters is total energy expenditure and calorie intake. If you're not losing weight you need to eat less and exercise more and vice versa if you want to gain weight. There's really nothing else to it. This is the crux of what I think misses the point so entirely that you might not see it: "the point" is to figure out how to lose weight (and keep it off while being healthy). Beating on the dead horse of thermodynamic laws is utterly irrelevant to the question of which macronutrients have what effect on body fat and bodyweight. As I wrote in my edit, "a calorie is a calorie" is exactly as useful as dieting advice as "just spend less and earn more" is useful budgeting advice. The advice-giver can feel satisfied that they've emphasized a physical-mathematical truth, without realizing that they haven't actually done anything to help.

Spivak 6y ago
> the point" is to figure out how to lose weight (and keep it off while being healthy) Well yeah, and finding a good macro balance is huge positive for your overall health. But beating the dead horse of technicalities about how our bodies metabolize different foods a little differently is utterly irrelevant to the question of how much energy am I intaking (and metabolizing) and how much am I expending which is the only thing that has any meaningful effect on body fat and body weight unless your already fit and doing athletic training. There's lots of good advice on dieting: eating high-volume foods, keeping track of satiation, staying hydrated, eating slower, staving off cravings by not quitting foods cold turkey, focusing on exercises that have a good kcal/time ratio, understanding the process model for self-control and managing your willpower. But all of it has the singular goal and of making net calorie expenditure positive and what tricks and rules of thumb that work for people is personal and situation dependent. Telling someone to adjust their macros as dieting advice is setting them up for failure unless you happen to already know that the result of their adjustments will put them in a deficit. It's really hard to help people who are doing some diet like keto, aren't losing weight, and end up frustrated because "it's supposed to work." But when you estimate their TDEE and count their calories the problem becomes super obvious.

Spivak 6y ago

> the point" is to figure out how to lose weight (and keep it off while being healthy) Well yeah, and finding a good macro balance is huge positive for your overall health. But beating the dead horse of technicalities about how our bodies metabolize different foods a little differently is utterly irrelevant to the question of how much energy am I intaking (and metabolizing) and how much am I expending which is the only thing that has any meaningful effect on body fat and body weight unless your already fit and doing athletic training. There's lots of good advice on dieting: eating high-volume foods, keeping track of satiation, staying hydrated, eating slower, staving off cravings by not quitting foods cold turkey, focusing on exercises that have a good kcal/time ratio, understanding the process model for self-control and managing your willpower. But all of it has the singular goal and of making net calorie expenditure positive and what tricks and rules of thumb that work for people is personal and situation dependent. Telling someone to adjust their macros as dieting advice is setting them up for failure unless you happen to already know that the result of their adjustments will put them in a deficit. It's really hard to help people who are doing some diet like keto, aren't losing weight, and end up frustrated because "it's supposed to work." But when you estimate their TDEE and count their calories the problem becomes super obvious.