5 ms·

Hey there! Just eating less never really worked for me. I think it works if your metabolism is in a good place, but mine hasn't ever really been. So eating less

Hey there! Just eating less never really worked for me. I think it works if your metabolism is in a good place, but mine hasn't ever really been. So eating less just resulting in feeling shitty, losing 3lbs, and then rebounding. The issue with compliance is that you can't drive with an empty gas tank. I think most diets can't be complied with and then we blame the dieter when the body's feedback system activates.

voldacar 4y ago
It works for everyone, due to conservation of mass and conservation of energy
- ac2u 4y ago
  It's obvious even from the message you're replying to that they meant "works" in a manner that encompasses compliance. But don't let you already knowing that get in the way of a pointless quip implying that they need educated in thermodynamics.
  - voldacar 4y ago
    If you try and fail to eat less food, the correct conclusion is not that eating less food "doesn't work"
    - paulryanrogers 4y ago
      There is more to trying than being told. Also the level of effort/sacrifice to have the same impact with vary by age and individual.
      - exfatloss 4y ago
        Trust me, I'm the most OCD guy ever. I literally just ate the same meal every day for 5 months. I've tried the craziest diets. Compliance is not the problem in people like me. It's something metabolic.
    - orangepurple 4y ago
      I tried and failed to eat less food for decades. Ultimately it was total abstinence for many hours at a time that proved to be sustainable and actually easy after 3 months.
    - exfatloss 4y ago
      I think it is, if it is being recommended to the person to lose weight.
- exfatloss 4y ago
  You're thinking of CICO, not eating less. They have nothing to do with each other.
orangepurple 4y ago
The feeling of hunger has three components the majority of people cannot untangle unless you have a lot of experience. 1. dehydration (feels like you are hungry/dying) 2. insufficient electrolytes (feels like you are hungry/dying) 3. high ghrelin (feels like you are hungry/dying) The trick is to stay on top of #1 and #2 and power through #3. Eventually #3 will go way down.
- exfatloss 4y ago
  I think there could be even more components. For example eating some foods actually makes me way more hungry than I was before. Take yogurt or (stevia) sweetened, flavored whey protein powder. I'm ok, then I eat some, then I'm ravenous. I'm literally way hungrier after eating those foods than before. Cheese has it, too. Most carbs as well, especially sweet ones I think it might be something about insulin being released from dairy and from sweet taste. Even if it's zero-caloric sweetener like stevia or monk fruit, I feel a spike in appetite 15-30 minutes later.
- saurik 4y ago
  FWIW, I went like two months managing to barely eat anything and not feeling hungry--using electrolytes, supplements, and careful decisions about fat vs. carbohydrate intake with respect to satiety--but I swear my body started breaking down and it led me to panic. I am considering trying again and bulk-loading protein at the same time... but I feel like I haven't even recovered yet from trying to eat less the last time. At least I haven't gained back much weight... but I only lost (net) 10 pounds. Honestly, I just don't understand how people lose weight by simply not eating, as it feels like you have remarkably little control over what your body spends its remaining energy on or even how much energy it chooses to spend. To flip this: up until a few years ago for me--when a switch flipped and I started rapidly gaining weight for some reason--it was also hard for me to gain too much weight, despite how I cared absolutely not for how much I ate. Like, people act like eating is some choice and that's what causes you to gain or lose weight, but if you try to eat too much it isn't trivial that you just gain weight. My experience is that I'd get full and just not want to eat as much for days after I ate too much, I'd get feelings of more energy leading me to burn more without realizing I was doing so, and I swear your digestion changes somewhat and you absorb less. Like, what actually causes this mysterious engine to stop regulating itself is crazy. You know what has correlated with my gaining weight? I started feeling cold a lot. I used to never feel cold, but I started getting cold all the time and now I sleep under a giant stack of blankets and it is difficult for me to sleep without them... it is actually ridiculous how cold I get now. My body has clearly decided to stop spending much energy on raising its body temperature. So like, I can eat less, but there are a ton of ramifications to that and my body starts automatically trying to correct and fight against it and inherently is making energy tradeoffs that I disagree with ("just burn the fat already!" ;P). People do these weird diet regimes--like keto--because it makes them think (maybe correctly!) that it gives them some control over how their body spends that energy budget. I honestly frankly think maybe I just need "more sun" or something stupid like that and I'll lose weight without even trying so hard.
borroka 4y ago
This is a rationalization of a natural impulse that chronic overweight people appear to be unwilling to curb. Just go back in time 30 years, and people were much thinner. Were they driving around with an empty tank? I don't think so, and neither did they. Now, weight loss is complex at the societal level, but very easy at the individual level. I am currently on a diet because I want to lose 10 or 15 pounds. Do I find it enjoyable? Not really. But I don't find it torture like I did when I had to have an urological exam. Good planning helps, choosing protein over carbs and fats helps, and after 3 weeks, more or less, the feeling of hunger decreases significantly. And if you go back in time -- not that they were necessarily better times, I'm just talking about the contexts I write about -- many more men wore a suit and many more women wore a dress. Today, asking someone to wear a dress or a suit seems like asking a stallion to wear a saddle for the first time. Were those who chose the attractiveness of certain more formal dresses over the comfort of sagging shorts and flip-flops foolish? It seems to me that when people are free from certain social expectations they tend, entropically, to choose maximum comfort, such as unlimited calorie consumption and sloppiness in self-presentation. And one could argue why this modern trend does not also see an explosion in the number of sexual relationships -- after all, sex should be one of our strongest urges. But it has just been replaced by pornography, just as physical performance -- showing one's muscles or strength, or sensitivity of soul and body -- has been replaced with watching professional sports played by others while gorging ourselves on chips and beer from the comfort of the couch.
- exfatloss 4y ago
  Unwilling or unable?
  - borroka 4y ago
    I think, given current knowledge (perhaps in the future the difference between a simple desire and an irresistible impulse will be clearer), the question is philosophical rather than based on science. Is the violent person unable or unwilling to be nonviolent toward others? It is hard to say, but for violent people, we (Western democracies) have decided that they are unwilling to be nonviolent, not incapable. In fact, apart from a few "insane" cases, they are housed in normal prisons (separations from gen pop can take place for security reasons) and not in special institutions. As for addicts, the modern view in Western societies is that they are largely incapable of controlling themselves (when I was a teenager years ago, they were considered unwilling). Addiction is considered a disease, not a lifestyle choice. But cigarette smokers, for some reason, are considered unwilling to quit, not incapable (not: "they need help," but: "it's disgusting"). The jealous lunatic is considered unwilling, not unable to stop acting like a jealous lunatic: could they be addicted to love? (No, some say, that they are addicted to control, not love. But would the diagnosis of "addiction" change?). For fat people we are observing the same transition observed for addicts. When I was a teenager, being fat was a moral weakness. Today it is the fault of genes, broken families, seed oils, soils lacking magnesium: "they cannot lose weight, either because of genetics or soil and water", etc. Since more and more people are getting fat, which is bad, I don't think, from a consequentialist point of view, that the "addiction" approach for fat people is working.

voldacar 4y ago

It works for everyone, due to conservation of mass and conservation of energy

ac2u 4y ago
It's obvious even from the message you're replying to that they meant "works" in a manner that encompasses compliance. But don't let you already knowing that get in the way of a pointless quip implying that they need educated in thermodynamics.
- voldacar 4y ago
  If you try and fail to eat less food, the correct conclusion is not that eating less food "doesn't work"
  - paulryanrogers 4y ago
    There is more to trying than being told. Also the level of effort/sacrifice to have the same impact with vary by age and individual.
    - exfatloss 4y ago
      Trust me, I'm the most OCD guy ever. I literally just ate the same meal every day for 5 months. I've tried the craziest diets. Compliance is not the problem in people like me. It's something metabolic.
  - orangepurple 4y ago
    I tried and failed to eat less food for decades. Ultimately it was total abstinence for many hours at a time that proved to be sustainable and actually easy after 3 months.
  - exfatloss 4y ago
    I think it is, if it is being recommended to the person to lose weight.
exfatloss 4y ago
You're thinking of CICO, not eating less. They have nothing to do with each other.

orangepurple 4y ago

The feeling of hunger has three components the majority of people cannot untangle unless you have a lot of experience. 1. dehydration (feels like you are hungry/dying) 2. insufficient electrolytes (feels like you are hungry/dying) 3. high ghrelin (feels like you are hungry/dying) The trick is to stay on top of #1 and #2 and power through #3. Eventually #3 will go way down.

exfatloss 4y ago
I think there could be even more components. For example eating some foods actually makes me way more hungry than I was before. Take yogurt or (stevia) sweetened, flavored whey protein powder. I'm ok, then I eat some, then I'm ravenous. I'm literally way hungrier after eating those foods than before. Cheese has it, too. Most carbs as well, especially sweet ones I think it might be something about insulin being released from dairy and from sweet taste. Even if it's zero-caloric sweetener like stevia or monk fruit, I feel a spike in appetite 15-30 minutes later.
saurik 4y ago
FWIW, I went like two months managing to barely eat anything and not feeling hungry--using electrolytes, supplements, and careful decisions about fat vs. carbohydrate intake with respect to satiety--but I swear my body started breaking down and it led me to panic. I am considering trying again and bulk-loading protein at the same time... but I feel like I haven't even recovered yet from trying to eat less the last time. At least I haven't gained back much weight... but I only lost (net) 10 pounds. Honestly, I just don't understand how people lose weight by simply not eating, as it feels like you have remarkably little control over what your body spends its remaining energy on or even how much energy it chooses to spend. To flip this: up until a few years ago for me--when a switch flipped and I started rapidly gaining weight for some reason--it was also hard for me to gain too much weight, despite how I cared absolutely not for how much I ate. Like, people act like eating is some choice and that's what causes you to gain or lose weight, but if you try to eat too much it isn't trivial that you just gain weight. My experience is that I'd get full and just not want to eat as much for days after I ate too much, I'd get feelings of more energy leading me to burn more without realizing I was doing so, and I swear your digestion changes somewhat and you absorb less. Like, what actually causes this mysterious engine to stop regulating itself is crazy. You know what has correlated with my gaining weight? I started feeling cold a lot. I used to never feel cold, but I started getting cold all the time and now I sleep under a giant stack of blankets and it is difficult for me to sleep without them... it is actually ridiculous how cold I get now. My body has clearly decided to stop spending much energy on raising its body temperature. So like, I can eat less, but there are a ton of ramifications to that and my body starts automatically trying to correct and fight against it and inherently is making energy tradeoffs that I disagree with ("just burn the fat already!" ;P). People do these weird diet regimes--like keto--because it makes them think (maybe correctly!) that it gives them some control over how their body spends that energy budget. I honestly frankly think maybe I just need "more sun" or something stupid like that and I'll lose weight without even trying so hard.

borroka 4y ago

This is a rationalization of a natural impulse that chronic overweight people appear to be unwilling to curb. Just go back in time 30 years, and people were much thinner. Were they driving around with an empty tank? I don't think so, and neither did they. Now, weight loss is complex at the societal level, but very easy at the individual level. I am currently on a diet because I want to lose 10 or 15 pounds. Do I find it enjoyable? Not really. But I don't find it torture like I did when I had to have an urological exam. Good planning helps, choosing protein over carbs and fats helps, and after 3 weeks, more or less, the feeling of hunger decreases significantly. And if you go back in time -- not that they were necessarily better times, I'm just talking about the contexts I write about -- many more men wore a suit and many more women wore a dress. Today, asking someone to wear a dress or a suit seems like asking a stallion to wear a saddle for the first time. Were those who chose the attractiveness of certain more formal dresses over the comfort of sagging shorts and flip-flops foolish? It seems to me that when people are free from certain social expectations they tend, entropically, to choose maximum comfort, such as unlimited calorie consumption and sloppiness in self-presentation. And one could argue why this modern trend does not also see an explosion in the number of sexual relationships -- after all, sex should be one of our strongest urges. But it has just been replaced by pornography, just as physical performance -- showing one's muscles or strength, or sensitivity of soul and body -- has been replaced with watching professional sports played by others while gorging ourselves on chips and beer from the comfort of the couch.

exfatloss 4y ago
Unwilling or unable?
- borroka 4y ago
  I think, given current knowledge (perhaps in the future the difference between a simple desire and an irresistible impulse will be clearer), the question is philosophical rather than based on science. Is the violent person unable or unwilling to be nonviolent toward others? It is hard to say, but for violent people, we (Western democracies) have decided that they are unwilling to be nonviolent, not incapable. In fact, apart from a few "insane" cases, they are housed in normal prisons (separations from gen pop can take place for security reasons) and not in special institutions. As for addicts, the modern view in Western societies is that they are largely incapable of controlling themselves (when I was a teenager years ago, they were considered unwilling). Addiction is considered a disease, not a lifestyle choice. But cigarette smokers, for some reason, are considered unwilling to quit, not incapable (not: "they need help," but: "it's disgusting"). The jealous lunatic is considered unwilling, not unable to stop acting like a jealous lunatic: could they be addicted to love? (No, some say, that they are addicted to control, not love. But would the diagnosis of "addiction" change?). For fat people we are observing the same transition observed for addicts. When I was a teenager, being fat was a moral weakness. Today it is the fault of genes, broken families, seed oils, soils lacking magnesium: "they cannot lose weight, either because of genetics or soil and water", etc. Since more and more people are getting fat, which is bad, I don't think, from a consequentialist point of view, that the "addiction" approach for fat people is working.