3 ms·

It's a tautology. It's like saying "people get richer because more money enters their bank account than leaves it." That's not the cause - that's the very defin

It's a tautology. It's like saying "people get richer because more money enters their bank account than leaves it." That's not the cause - that's the very definition of getting richer. You're just rephrasing it.

1shox 4y ago
This has bad logic written all over it, the "cause" is in the very sentence you typed. "Rich people are rich" is a tautology.
- exfatloss 4y ago
  Please explain how counting calories causes fat loss, then. I eat around 2,300kcal and I seem to burn around 3,300. Had my resting metabolic rate tested at 2,950 or so.
  - 1shox 4y ago
    you're either underrepresenting your food in your calorie counting or overestimating your sedentary TDEE, anyways I wish you luck, cya! free link to calculate sedentary TDEE: https://tdeecalculator.net/ https://tdeecalculator.net/
    - exfatloss 4y ago
      That calculator must be wrong. I got my RMR measured (that's the energy I'll burn up just existing, not even moving or doing anything) at 2,300 and this suggests less than that as TDEE. Clearly my total energy expenditure is higher than my minimum expenditure, which is also reflected by the fact that I've been eating 2,300kcal and losing about .3lb/day for over 5 months, which adds up to about 3,100kcal.
      - 1shox 4y ago
        this guy is losing weight by counting calories after saying counting calories doesn't work, good bait, I must admit.
        exfatloss 4y ago
        I didn't say counting calories doesn't work :) Just that it's an accounting exercise that doesn't "cause" anything. I am taking account of my calories after I lose weight. Why wouldn't I?
  - borroka 4y ago
    It would cause weight loss in 999 out of 1000 people. You might be an exception, so my comment is not about you. My comment is about the fact that when you see reality shows (I also have examples of a stronger nature) like "Survivor" all the participants lose weight at -- allow me to use a non-metric system -- an "insane" rate? How come prisoners of war kept on "bread and water" lose weight? Now, one might say that they do not end their captivity in "good health." But we are talking about losing weight, and since the dawn of time, calorie reduction has worked to lose weight. What about bodybuilders? What do they do when they want to lose weight? Do they try the "watermelon" diet or choose brown rice instead of white rice? Apart from particular "manipulations" that occur in the last 1-2 weeks (depletion of glycogen and subsequent replenishment, cutting out water, salt, etc.), they simply eat less. And it works for every single bodybuilder, everyone loses weight. How to lose more fat than other tissues requires a longer discussion, but how to lose weight is settled science.
    - exfatloss 4y ago
      Ok, clearly 999 out of 1000 people are interested in losing fat, not lean mass :) And I would say the advice of "just eat less" doesn't work for probably 20-30% of people. Especially the very obese. You don't get to morbidly obese by "eating a little bit too much for 10 years." You don't fix it by eating a little bit less. Obviously people can starve. There are 3 phases of starvation. Phase I is basically just "between meals" where the liver puts out some glycogen into your blood stream to maintain stable blood glucose. Phase II is your body using your fat storage to provide energy via free fatty acids and ketone bodies. This can last, depending on the deficit and how much body fat you have, for weeks at a time. The record I've seen is over 400 days of a Scottish man going from over 400lbs to less than 200lbs. Phase III starvation is when the body begins scavenging lean body mass for energy. This is Very Bad. This is why the POWs you see in photos look so emaciated and skinny. The body used all the fat and then it began using the protein. The problem for dieting is that you can't just hang out in Phase II until you have six-pack abs. If your body cannot meet the energy requirements necessary from body fat then it'll go straight into Phase III. Many obese people have a "broken" metabolism in some way (how so is not very clear, that's what I'm trying to figure out). Despite carrying lots and lots of body fat around (I had over 100lbs of it on me!) they somehow couldn't "access" that energy. So the body went straight into Phase III with all the signals like reduced expenditure, lower body temperature, lower immune system, increased hunger.. and even if you could willpower though that for 100lbs, you'd lose a ton of protein as the body would use it for energy. So you'd probably die of organ failure before you lost the 100lbs. Unless you somehow managed to do what the Scottish man did. I've fasted for 10 days and I could absolutely not do 400 days. Bodybuilders are a completely different topic than obese people, I think. They're typically already at a healthy fat level or below. So they really do have to force themselves to undereat and just minimize the muscle scavenging and maximize fat used for energy. But it's temporary for most, they do this in cycles before shows and photo shoots. No bodybuilder I know of had 100lbs of fat on him and then lost it for a show. They go from their walking-around-at 10-15% of body fat to 5-8%.

1shox 4y ago

This has bad logic written all over it, the "cause" is in the very sentence you typed. "Rich people are rich" is a tautology.

exfatloss 4y ago
Please explain how counting calories causes fat loss, then. I eat around 2,300kcal and I seem to burn around 3,300. Had my resting metabolic rate tested at 2,950 or so.
- 1shox 4y ago
  you're either underrepresenting your food in your calorie counting or overestimating your sedentary TDEE, anyways I wish you luck, cya! free link to calculate sedentary TDEE: https://tdeecalculator.net/ https://tdeecalculator.net/
  - exfatloss 4y ago
    That calculator must be wrong. I got my RMR measured (that's the energy I'll burn up just existing, not even moving or doing anything) at 2,300 and this suggests less than that as TDEE. Clearly my total energy expenditure is higher than my minimum expenditure, which is also reflected by the fact that I've been eating 2,300kcal and losing about .3lb/day for over 5 months, which adds up to about 3,100kcal.
    - 1shox 4y ago
      this guy is losing weight by counting calories after saying counting calories doesn't work, good bait, I must admit.
      - exfatloss 4y ago
        I didn't say counting calories doesn't work :) Just that it's an accounting exercise that doesn't "cause" anything. I am taking account of my calories after I lose weight. Why wouldn't I?
- borroka 4y ago
  It would cause weight loss in 999 out of 1000 people. You might be an exception, so my comment is not about you. My comment is about the fact that when you see reality shows (I also have examples of a stronger nature) like "Survivor" all the participants lose weight at -- allow me to use a non-metric system -- an "insane" rate? How come prisoners of war kept on "bread and water" lose weight? Now, one might say that they do not end their captivity in "good health." But we are talking about losing weight, and since the dawn of time, calorie reduction has worked to lose weight. What about bodybuilders? What do they do when they want to lose weight? Do they try the "watermelon" diet or choose brown rice instead of white rice? Apart from particular "manipulations" that occur in the last 1-2 weeks (depletion of glycogen and subsequent replenishment, cutting out water, salt, etc.), they simply eat less. And it works for every single bodybuilder, everyone loses weight. How to lose more fat than other tissues requires a longer discussion, but how to lose weight is settled science.
  - exfatloss 4y ago
    Ok, clearly 999 out of 1000 people are interested in losing fat, not lean mass :) And I would say the advice of "just eat less" doesn't work for probably 20-30% of people. Especially the very obese. You don't get to morbidly obese by "eating a little bit too much for 10 years." You don't fix it by eating a little bit less. Obviously people can starve. There are 3 phases of starvation. Phase I is basically just "between meals" where the liver puts out some glycogen into your blood stream to maintain stable blood glucose. Phase II is your body using your fat storage to provide energy via free fatty acids and ketone bodies. This can last, depending on the deficit and how much body fat you have, for weeks at a time. The record I've seen is over 400 days of a Scottish man going from over 400lbs to less than 200lbs. Phase III starvation is when the body begins scavenging lean body mass for energy. This is Very Bad. This is why the POWs you see in photos look so emaciated and skinny. The body used all the fat and then it began using the protein. The problem for dieting is that you can't just hang out in Phase II until you have six-pack abs. If your body cannot meet the energy requirements necessary from body fat then it'll go straight into Phase III. Many obese people have a "broken" metabolism in some way (how so is not very clear, that's what I'm trying to figure out). Despite carrying lots and lots of body fat around (I had over 100lbs of it on me!) they somehow couldn't "access" that energy. So the body went straight into Phase III with all the signals like reduced expenditure, lower body temperature, lower immune system, increased hunger.. and even if you could willpower though that for 100lbs, you'd lose a ton of protein as the body would use it for energy. So you'd probably die of organ failure before you lost the 100lbs. Unless you somehow managed to do what the Scottish man did. I've fasted for 10 days and I could absolutely not do 400 days. Bodybuilders are a completely different topic than obese people, I think. They're typically already at a healthy fat level or below. So they really do have to force themselves to undereat and just minimize the muscle scavenging and maximize fat used for energy. But it's temporary for most, they do this in cycles before shows and photo shoots. No bodybuilder I know of had 100lbs of fat on him and then lost it for a show. They go from their walking-around-at 10-15% of body fat to 5-8%.