3 ms·

I'm very skeptical. I think there are some things that may make us "feel hungrier" but there's nothing changing our metabolism. If we are to believe this, it w

I'm very skeptical. I think there are some things that may make us "feel hungrier" but there's nothing changing our metabolism. If we are to believe this, it would mean that "plastic" is making our bodies so much more efficient that there's extra energy that's being stored as fat. I like to keep my weight exactly at 155# (as a 5'10 59 year old man). Once a year, I "bulk" and go up to 160 while doing more strenuous weight training. The math always works exactly -- for every 3000 extra k/cal I eat, I go up a pound. When it's time to "cut" back to 155#, for every 3000 k/cal deficit I drop a pound. 15 years ago, I got fat. I stopped paying attention to what I was eating. Got my weight up to 205#. I lost it by strictly counting calories. The math worked perfectly. I went to 1200 k/cal and lost 2 pounds a week. Exactly. Every week. Eating no more calories than your body needs works for everyone. You cannot create matter out of thin air, no matter what fat people will tell you. The Obese and Overweight cost society greatly. The fact that they're consuming more than they need, use more fuel to move around, and get sick and require more medical care costs us trillions. It's time they stopped pointing their fingers at "plastics" and started obeying the laws of thermodynamics.

tstrimple 4y ago
> but there's nothing changing our metabolism. Why would you be so confident when we know for a fact that hormone imbalances can absolutely impact our metabolism. Including signaling to your body to produce and store more fat than it normally would. Cortisol the hormone produced in stress responses is shown to do exactly that. Using yourself as an anecdote isn't useful in anyway.
- fortran77 4y ago
  Matter isn't created out of thin air.
  - wtetzner 4y ago
    > I'm very skeptical. I think there are some things that may make us "feel hungrier" but there's nothing changing our metabolism. > If we are to believe this, it would mean that "plastic" is making our bodies so much more efficient that there's extra energy that's being stored as fat. I think it's likely the opposite, e.g. there's something (not necessarily plastic) throwing off hormones, so the body ends up storing more of the calories as fat than it would if it was healthy. It's not at all clear (to me, at least) that a healthy human body would continue to store fat indefinitely, regardless of how many calories were being consumed.
  - tstrimple 4y ago
    That was never the claim. Nice attempt at a straw man though. You seem to be under the impression that body fat only accumulates in scenarios with excess calories. That's explicitly wrong. What some of these metabolic disorders do is prioritize the accumulation of fat from calories over sustaining other parts of the body. There are multiple ways that your body converts calories into energy, and they can be thrown off by hormones. Some metabolic conditions, like Cushings, overstimulates the production of body fat starving the muscles of energy so they atrophy. To put it in clearer terms, you could take two people of identical sex, height and weight and feed them the exact same diet with the exact same exercise routine and still have one pack on more body fat due to hormonal issues impacting how they metabolize food. Telling the person who's gaining fat to just eat less isn't helpful or healthy. They need to address the condition causing the additional body fat accumulation and it's not excess calories. To be perfectly clear, I'm not suggesting that this is the case with microplastics. I don't think we have the research to determine that yet. I'm merely disputing the inane "just eat less bro" nonsense that tends to crop up in these threads.
  - librish 4y ago
    This assumes 100% of energy is absorbed from food which isn't true as far as I know.
    - docandrew 4y ago
      Not too far off - the body is pretty darn efficient.
      - librish 4y ago
        What is your source on this?
        docandrew 4y ago
        It’s pretty common knowledge. Unless you have diarrhea or something, your body will use up just about everything that you eat. https://cathe.com/do-you-absorb-all-of-the-calories-you-eat/ https://cathe.com/do-you-absorb-all-of-the-calories-you-eat/ A textbook I saw said in terms of _mechanical_ efficiency, we get about 25% at converting calories to mechanical work, which beats an internal combustion engine!
        librish 4y ago
        Isn't your own linked thing contradicting you? "The Bottom Line The calculated number of calories in a food or meal assumes you’re able to digest and absorb all of the macronutrients, which is seldom the case. You likely take in fewer calories when you eat whole foods, foods high in fiber and resistant starch, and foods that are uncooked and haven’t been exposed to heat. Now you have another reason to add more whole, unprocessed foods to your diet."

tstrimple 4y ago

> but there's nothing changing our metabolism. Why would you be so confident when we know for a fact that hormone imbalances can absolutely impact our metabolism. Including signaling to your body to produce and store more fat than it normally would. Cortisol the hormone produced in stress responses is shown to do exactly that. Using yourself as an anecdote isn't useful in anyway.

fortran77 4y ago
Matter isn't created out of thin air.
- wtetzner 4y ago
  > I'm very skeptical. I think there are some things that may make us "feel hungrier" but there's nothing changing our metabolism. > If we are to believe this, it would mean that "plastic" is making our bodies so much more efficient that there's extra energy that's being stored as fat. I think it's likely the opposite, e.g. there's something (not necessarily plastic) throwing off hormones, so the body ends up storing more of the calories as fat than it would if it was healthy. It's not at all clear (to me, at least) that a healthy human body would continue to store fat indefinitely, regardless of how many calories were being consumed.
- tstrimple 4y ago
  That was never the claim. Nice attempt at a straw man though. You seem to be under the impression that body fat only accumulates in scenarios with excess calories. That's explicitly wrong. What some of these metabolic disorders do is prioritize the accumulation of fat from calories over sustaining other parts of the body. There are multiple ways that your body converts calories into energy, and they can be thrown off by hormones. Some metabolic conditions, like Cushings, overstimulates the production of body fat starving the muscles of energy so they atrophy. To put it in clearer terms, you could take two people of identical sex, height and weight and feed them the exact same diet with the exact same exercise routine and still have one pack on more body fat due to hormonal issues impacting how they metabolize food. Telling the person who's gaining fat to just eat less isn't helpful or healthy. They need to address the condition causing the additional body fat accumulation and it's not excess calories. To be perfectly clear, I'm not suggesting that this is the case with microplastics. I don't think we have the research to determine that yet. I'm merely disputing the inane "just eat less bro" nonsense that tends to crop up in these threads.
- librish 4y ago
  This assumes 100% of energy is absorbed from food which isn't true as far as I know.
  - docandrew 4y ago
    Not too far off - the body is pretty darn efficient.
    - librish 4y ago
      What is your source on this?
      - docandrew 4y ago
        It’s pretty common knowledge. Unless you have diarrhea or something, your body will use up just about everything that you eat. https://cathe.com/do-you-absorb-all-of-the-calories-you-eat/ https://cathe.com/do-you-absorb-all-of-the-calories-you-eat/ A textbook I saw said in terms of _mechanical_ efficiency, we get about 25% at converting calories to mechanical work, which beats an internal combustion engine!
        librish 4y ago
        Isn't your own linked thing contradicting you? "The Bottom Line The calculated number of calories in a food or meal assumes you’re able to digest and absorb all of the macronutrients, which is seldom the case. You likely take in fewer calories when you eat whole foods, foods high in fiber and resistant starch, and foods that are uncooked and haven’t been exposed to heat. Now you have another reason to add more whole, unprocessed foods to your diet."