3 ms·

People are talking about thermodynamics here as if your body is a fire and every single thing put in is consumed entirely and exactly for each and every person.

People are talking about thermodynamics here as if your body is a fire and every single thing put in is consumed entirely and exactly for each and every person. Can you gaurantee a 100 calories equivalent food will produce 100 calories worth of energy conversation and gaurantee this for every single individual. I think this is the opposite of physics envy. People try to dumb down a whole science by waving hands and saying "physics, bitches!"

croon 6y ago
Sure it's a bit more complicated, and it's a fire that doesn't burn 100% of all different fuels. But it's still thermodynamics, but with byproducts that "waste" some macros more than others, which is good if you want to keep your weight down. Edit: And all the second order effects of hormonal/hunger changes. Physics doesn't stop working in humans.
- dmingod666 6y ago
  Sure, physics doesn't stop working. My argument is, are you sure the "its only physics" people are modeling the world in a correct, precise way and there aren't other factors to be considered beyond what they propose. The point I think the author is making isn't 'calorie counting is wrong' -- 'calorie counting is not the whole picture'. When someone says software is just 1s and 0s, How hard can building software be? You're right its 1s and 0s, but that's not an entirely helpful model to work with if you're trying to build software. For example, you could say the number of people coming out of a building will equal the number of people that go into a building, its basic Maths - counting is the only thing you need. Now if the person uses this logic for a maternity hospital and they suddenly find out there are more people coming out than are going in. It doesn't mean that math is broken.
  - croon 6y ago
    I don't disagree about your example, but that works both ways. That's why you measure mass and not units of something of arbitrary size. Energy enters through front door or delivery trucks, energy leaves through sewers, windows/chimneys or front door.
AndrewDucker 6y ago
Yup. And the science shows it's not that simple. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2246056-there-is-no-perfect-diet-that-works-for-every-metabolism-or-body-type/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/2246056-there-is-no-per...
mam2 6y ago
No but if you take 15% less food for a month and then 30% less in the next month, you will lose weights twice faster... Source: i did the graphs for myself over a few months.. cico works if you calibrate first for a month
- masonic 6y ago
  Then, if you fast for the third month, you... vanish?
  - mam2 6y ago
    Haha. well from my own experience there's a percentage of body fat where you actually start some sort of starvation mode where you have 0 energy whatsover. during the evening i used to stare at the wall for like 4 hours before going to sleep because i had no interest in anything. it was quite peaceful though. Also I felt that some muscle parts were deteriorating so I had to stop.. i would not recommend anyway but it was a fun experience. I also realized something: body image perception is subjective.. i did that because I thought I was fat. when I took 1kg more after that and I was at 69kg i though it was the end of the world. now i'm like 10 kg more and even though i still think I'm fat, I don't think I'm 10x more fat than back and actually I think I look slightly better (there are other factors.. i do thai boxing so I have more muscle shape also..). The point is I always felt the same at every weight. I felt "I'm fat". Now I just learnt to live with the "i'm fat" thought into my head and i'm good lol.
glogla 6y ago
Pointing to thermodynamics is the same "bootstraps" mentality you see elsewhere, just applied to food and health instead of money. Just like telling the poor "just make more money", it might technically be true but it is such an unhelpful and useless thing to say, that it is hard to believe the speaker is trying to help and not just make themselves feel better. So I don't think it's physics, I think it's some people just enjoy pretending systemic effects - inequality, privilege and just blind luck don't matter.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

croon 6y ago

Sure it's a bit more complicated, and it's a fire that doesn't burn 100% of all different fuels. But it's still thermodynamics, but with byproducts that "waste" some macros more than others, which is good if you want to keep your weight down. Edit: And all the second order effects of hormonal/hunger changes. Physics doesn't stop working in humans.

dmingod666 6y ago
Sure, physics doesn't stop working. My argument is, are you sure the "its only physics" people are modeling the world in a correct, precise way and there aren't other factors to be considered beyond what they propose. The point I think the author is making isn't 'calorie counting is wrong' -- 'calorie counting is not the whole picture'. When someone says software is just 1s and 0s, How hard can building software be? You're right its 1s and 0s, but that's not an entirely helpful model to work with if you're trying to build software. For example, you could say the number of people coming out of a building will equal the number of people that go into a building, its basic Maths - counting is the only thing you need. Now if the person uses this logic for a maternity hospital and they suddenly find out there are more people coming out than are going in. It doesn't mean that math is broken.
- croon 6y ago
  I don't disagree about your example, but that works both ways. That's why you measure mass and not units of something of arbitrary size. Energy enters through front door or delivery trucks, energy leaves through sewers, windows/chimneys or front door.

AndrewDucker 6y ago

Yup. And the science shows it's not that simple. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2246056-there-is-no-perfect-diet-that-works-for-every-metabolism-or-body-type/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/2246056-there-is-no-per...

mam2 6y ago

No but if you take 15% less food for a month and then 30% less in the next month, you will lose weights twice faster... Source: i did the graphs for myself over a few months.. cico works if you calibrate first for a month

masonic 6y ago
Then, if you fast for the third month, you... vanish?
- mam2 6y ago
  Haha. well from my own experience there's a percentage of body fat where you actually start some sort of starvation mode where you have 0 energy whatsover. during the evening i used to stare at the wall for like 4 hours before going to sleep because i had no interest in anything. it was quite peaceful though. Also I felt that some muscle parts were deteriorating so I had to stop.. i would not recommend anyway but it was a fun experience. I also realized something: body image perception is subjective.. i did that because I thought I was fat. when I took 1kg more after that and I was at 69kg i though it was the end of the world. now i'm like 10 kg more and even though i still think I'm fat, I don't think I'm 10x more fat than back and actually I think I look slightly better (there are other factors.. i do thai boxing so I have more muscle shape also..). The point is I always felt the same at every weight. I felt "I'm fat". Now I just learnt to live with the "i'm fat" thought into my head and i'm good lol.

glogla 6y ago

Pointing to thermodynamics is the same "bootstraps" mentality you see elsewhere, just applied to food and health instead of money. Just like telling the poor "just make more money", it might technically be true but it is such an unhelpful and useless thing to say, that it is hard to believe the speaker is trying to help and not just make themselves feel better. So I don't think it's physics, I think it's some people just enjoy pretending systemic effects - inequality, privilege and just blind luck don't matter.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]