4 ms·

It is important to understand that time restricted eating is behavioral adaptation to reduce caloric consumption. A calorie deficit is what drives weight loss.

by hodder 2y ago

It is important to understand that time restricted eating is behavioral adaptation to reduce caloric consumption. A calorie deficit is what drives weight loss. Here is a list of similar things that also "work". It is key to understand that "working"- meaning weight loss is the result of a deficit of energy requiring the body to use stored fuel (fat) as energy over time: -higher protein is more satiating -higher fiber is more satiating -keto diets are for most people pretty satiating so they reduce caloric intake -GLP1s like Ozempic and Mounjaro lead you to feel "full" and eat less through a few mechanisms - slowing digestion, stabilizing insulin and blood sugar -Drinking lots of water -subbing out sugars with artificial sweeteners -fasting, intermittent fasting, time restricted eating, alternate day fasting. For some can lead to a binge but if you adhere to it you are likely to consume less calories -switching from processed foods to whole foods high in fiber and protein is more satiating -wearing tighter and more revealing clothing will lead one to eat less -weighing yourself daily will lead you to eat less (assuming you understand thermodynamics) -exercising and cardio will lead you to burn more calories. Muscle mass accrued over time burns modestly more calories than fat mass and cardio burns calories directly -counting calories directly (leads to greater adherence). Just like budgeting. If you don't measure and estimate what is going in vs going out at all and have no experience measuring you are unlikely to succeed. It is important to understand that NONE of the above are a substitute for a caloric deficit for losing weight but rather one possible path to CAUSING a caloric deficit. The deficit is still required. These are behavioral tools. Hormones, PCOS, insulin etc are also not workarounds to the laws of thermodynamics. They can make you more hungry or burn more or less calories at the margins but they dont change the equation of calories in vs calories out. Often people confuse the behavioral method to achieve weight loss with the mechanism driving it, and this leads to most of the confusion on weight loss outside of scientific literature (among blogger quacks, fitness guru snakeoil salesman etc.) Rant over.

bestouff 2y ago
Brillant rant.
scns 2y ago
> cardio burns calories directly And lowers energy expenditure afterwards. Walking works better.
- hodder 2y ago
  A few nitpicks with this: -Yes some studies show that increasing high intensity cardio or LISS cardio vs very low intensity cardio like walking can lead to both higher hunger and a reduction in NEAT, however it isn't correct to necessarily say walking is better. Walking is also effective, but there is a clear dose response effect here: -If you run or swim etc for an hour, even with a reduction in NEAT for the rest of the day, you will have burned more calories net than walking for an hour, though it is more taxing. There are other benefits to higher intensity cardio than pure caloric expenditure (there are also drawbacks).
- Kirby64 2y ago
  Walking is cardio. It’s not high intensity cardio, but it’s cardio nonetheless. The main point of cardio for burning calories is to raise your heart rate; walking is the most sustainable way to do this, although it isn’t the fastest way, time wise.
latentcall 2y ago
This is all true for me except counting calories. I don’t usually eat things with a barcode. I’m also not good at eyeballing 1/4 cup of pecans, for example. In Noom, it requires specific measurements. So if I eat at the hospital cafeteria and get a salad that the staff makes, I don’t feel comfortable logging it because I guarantee the measurements are off. Now this is different if I have two bananas for breakfast and an apple. That is easy to track and input.
- hodder 2y ago
  Agreed it isn't simple, but I'm just saying tracking is effective. Tracking is in fact the single most effective way of ensuring a deficit. But yes it isnt easy and you can absolutely be successful in achieving a deficit without tracking. A food scale and weighing and understanding portion sizes for a couple weeks can be a lifetime level learning that you can apply though even if you don't stick to it - as most won't. Much like you can save money without strict budgeting. I'm saying tracking is objectively "true" contrary to your statement. That doesn't make it easy though. Some find the other suggestions difficult. It is important to find what works for you.
- dwighttk 2y ago
  For me it worked to just estimate and tend to miss high... so if you're not sure how much of something there is, just guess and keep increasing until you're like "well it's definitely not THAT much"... and if I wasn't losing weight I adjusted my estimates up assuming I hadn't hit the mark.
- ktimespi 2y ago
  I think the approach here is to overestimate your calories a bit if you're not sure. Practice makes perfect when it comes to eyeballing quantities.
  - myheartisinohio 2y ago
    This
- Kirby64 2y ago
sethammons 2y ago
Everything you say is accurate, but there is something that needs a big asterisk: > calories in vs calories out Yes, thermodynamics. Also: the human body is a dynamic system where adjusting either of those sides can alter the other. Calorie restriction can lead to slower metabolism, and vise-versa.
- hodder 2y ago
  Yes of course. The impact of caloric restriction on metabolism however is FAR overstated as we know from the available literature. "Starvation mode" is largely relegated to pseudo science at this point and most of the reduction in metabolism you speak of is due weight loss itself and a small reduction in NEAT. But yes the human body is a complicated system effected by hormones, and other individual factors. However it is important for the layman to understand the basics. It VERY rarely helps people struggling with weight loss to gloss over the basics and talk about metabolic adaption or provide other "excuses" like PCOS, hormones or starvation mode. They miss the forest for the trees.
  - ktimespi 2y ago
    I agree. This nuance is overblown and the knowledge to notice and deal with cues from the body aren't brought up whenever people mention this, which I think is really unhelpful.
- ktimespi 2y ago
  It's very easy to observe the changes you mention: A lack of energy in activities in the short term, which you can control with diet adjustments. In the long term (over the course of a few months), you should be tracking your weight chart and reducing your intake. The body can adjust to caloric deficits, but not so much that consistent effort over weeks will be blocked. I think it's necessary to mention how to deal with these changes, whenever they're mentioned.
tangent-man 2y ago
I don't think this is entirely true. Way too many variables to consider here and the human heart/mind/body is much more complex than this, and at the same time much more simple. To give one example.. by time restricted eating you are breaking the cycle of eating out of habit when you are not even hungry.. or eating because you crave a certain taste or sensation in the body (as opposed to actually being hungry). You are training the mind/body out of these behaviours so that during the times when you are allowed to eat you are trained not to eat unless actually hungry, for example. I am sure there are many other things to consider other than just calories in .. calories out - such as adapting the body to use stored fuel .. rather than expecting a constant payload of calories to consume.. etc. etc. Peace out.
- hodder 2y ago
  "by time restricted eating you are breaking the cycle of eating out of habit when you are not even hungry.. or eating because you crave a certain taste or sensation in the body (as opposed to actually being hungry). You are training the mind/body out of these behaviours so that during the times when you are allowed to eat you are trained not to eat unless actually hungry, for example." You are describing what I posted above. This is a behavioral tool to achieve a mechanism of caloric deficit. Getting out of a cycle of pointless eating is the definition of behavioral shift. Not exactly sure what you are describing in the next paragraph but we have studies that equate calories between time restricted eating and non time restricted eating and find no statistical difference in expected weight outcomes. Yes there are differences is hormonal hunger signaling etc. My point is rather that a calorie deficit is why the weight loss occurs. The time restricted eating is the METHOD some choose to help achieve it.
from-nibly 2y ago
> assuming you understand thermodynamics Even in a car engine having different kinds of fuels changes how much of it gets converted to energy. Your body is infitely more complex than a car. Calories in calories out is not an immutable law. If that were the case, you could binge eat 30,000 calories and then you'd somehow add 28,000 calories worth of fat to your body in one day, which just isnt how that works.
- dragonwriter 2y ago
  > Calories in calories out is not an immutable law. It actually can be, if you define both "in" and "out" in a way which makes it so; but for any definition of those terms where it is an immutable law, we, in practice, have only very rough proxy measures for at least one, and maybe both, of "calories in" or "calories out", and the problem then becomes mistaking the proxy for the actual figure of merit. But the bigger problem is that CICO is only a starting point, it a set of targets, and an actionable plan that works in the real world isn't just the targets the plan is directed at.
  - from-nibly 2y ago
    Yes agreed. Obviously molecules are not appearing out of thin air.
- hilux 2y ago
  I know that CICO has been debunked, but I've never seen such a wonderfully clear example as in your last sentence. Thank you!
  - hodder 2y ago
    CICO has not been debunked at all. If you take it to the extremes like eating 30k cals in a day yes your body will pass much of it undigested, but that doesn’t debunk it at all but rather adjust one of the 2 inputs into the equation, and for the vast vast majority of people following anything resembling a sane diet, CICO is the determinant of weight loss. You can eat straight sugar in a caloric deficit and body weight will fall off of you. You can eat straight fat or protein and it’ll do the same. You can eat in one meal or 20 meals. It still holds in every single study ever done.
myheartisinohio 2y ago
I've struggled with being overweight my entire life. I feel like I am in control and have made a lot of progress-- so I want to preach about this. Restrictive diets work but if you can't maintain it for a long time (keto, vegan, paleo, etc.) the weight will come back. I yo-yo dieted like many obese people do. Anyone out there struggling here is how I've lost 160 lbs and gained muscle / mobility: - Make sure you get good sleep. Sleep is incredibly important. - Intermittent fast (black coffee, tea, or caffeine pill in the am) lunch afternoon - track what you eat (there are a plethora of free apps that can help) - track how much you walk aim for 10k+ steps - do resistance work outs (free weights, calisthenics, ruck march, etc.) - cut back alcohol as much as possible - cut back sugar as much as possible - use the scale as a tool don't be afraid of it. (when I stepped on a scale I weighed over lbs. it was so painful to see that but ultimately worth it) The biggest thing that has helped is a shift in my mindset. I look at going to the gym as treat /privilege. I've envisioned the end goal of how I look and feel.
- hodder 2y ago
  Great to hear!
jiggawatts 2y ago
> subbing out sugars with artificial sweeteners This one is tricky. Tastebuds "adjust" over time. People that eat spicy foods regularly build up a tolerance to spicy. Similarly, I noticed that bitter drinks like beer or tonic water makes me barely taste bitter flavours at all after a while. Regular consumption of artificial sweeteners have the same effect: they make you less sensitive to sweet flavours, making you compensate by eating sweeter foods.
- hodder 2y ago
  We have studies on this too and there is no truth to what you are saying. Adding artistic sweeteners has no statistical impact on cravings for sugar and sweeter foods.

by hodder 2y ago

bestouff 2y ago

Brillant rant.

scns 2y ago

> cardio burns calories directly And lowers energy expenditure afterwards. Walking works better.

hodder 2y ago
A few nitpicks with this: -Yes some studies show that increasing high intensity cardio or LISS cardio vs very low intensity cardio like walking can lead to both higher hunger and a reduction in NEAT, however it isn't correct to necessarily say walking is better. Walking is also effective, but there is a clear dose response effect here: -If you run or swim etc for an hour, even with a reduction in NEAT for the rest of the day, you will have burned more calories net than walking for an hour, though it is more taxing. There are other benefits to higher intensity cardio than pure caloric expenditure (there are also drawbacks).
Kirby64 2y ago
Walking is cardio. It’s not high intensity cardio, but it’s cardio nonetheless. The main point of cardio for burning calories is to raise your heart rate; walking is the most sustainable way to do this, although it isn’t the fastest way, time wise.

latentcall 2y ago

This is all true for me except counting calories. I don’t usually eat things with a barcode. I’m also not good at eyeballing 1/4 cup of pecans, for example. In Noom, it requires specific measurements. So if I eat at the hospital cafeteria and get a salad that the staff makes, I don’t feel comfortable logging it because I guarantee the measurements are off. Now this is different if I have two bananas for breakfast and an apple. That is easy to track and input.

hodder 2y ago
Agreed it isn't simple, but I'm just saying tracking is effective. Tracking is in fact the single most effective way of ensuring a deficit. But yes it isnt easy and you can absolutely be successful in achieving a deficit without tracking. A food scale and weighing and understanding portion sizes for a couple weeks can be a lifetime level learning that you can apply though even if you don't stick to it - as most won't. Much like you can save money without strict budgeting. I'm saying tracking is objectively "true" contrary to your statement. That doesn't make it easy though. Some find the other suggestions difficult. It is important to find what works for you.
dwighttk 2y ago
For me it worked to just estimate and tend to miss high... so if you're not sure how much of something there is, just guess and keep increasing until you're like "well it's definitely not THAT much"... and if I wasn't losing weight I adjusted my estimates up assuming I hadn't hit the mark.
ktimespi 2y ago
I think the approach here is to overestimate your calories a bit if you're not sure. Practice makes perfect when it comes to eyeballing quantities.
- myheartisinohio 2y ago
  This
Kirby64 2y ago

sethammons 2y ago

Everything you say is accurate, but there is something that needs a big asterisk: > calories in vs calories out Yes, thermodynamics. Also: the human body is a dynamic system where adjusting either of those sides can alter the other. Calorie restriction can lead to slower metabolism, and vise-versa.

hodder 2y ago
Yes of course. The impact of caloric restriction on metabolism however is FAR overstated as we know from the available literature. "Starvation mode" is largely relegated to pseudo science at this point and most of the reduction in metabolism you speak of is due weight loss itself and a small reduction in NEAT. But yes the human body is a complicated system effected by hormones, and other individual factors. However it is important for the layman to understand the basics. It VERY rarely helps people struggling with weight loss to gloss over the basics and talk about metabolic adaption or provide other "excuses" like PCOS, hormones or starvation mode. They miss the forest for the trees.
- ktimespi 2y ago
  I agree. This nuance is overblown and the knowledge to notice and deal with cues from the body aren't brought up whenever people mention this, which I think is really unhelpful.
ktimespi 2y ago
It's very easy to observe the changes you mention: A lack of energy in activities in the short term, which you can control with diet adjustments. In the long term (over the course of a few months), you should be tracking your weight chart and reducing your intake. The body can adjust to caloric deficits, but not so much that consistent effort over weeks will be blocked. I think it's necessary to mention how to deal with these changes, whenever they're mentioned.

tangent-man 2y ago

I don't think this is entirely true. Way too many variables to consider here and the human heart/mind/body is much more complex than this, and at the same time much more simple. To give one example.. by time restricted eating you are breaking the cycle of eating out of habit when you are not even hungry.. or eating because you crave a certain taste or sensation in the body (as opposed to actually being hungry). You are training the mind/body out of these behaviours so that during the times when you are allowed to eat you are trained not to eat unless actually hungry, for example. I am sure there are many other things to consider other than just calories in .. calories out - such as adapting the body to use stored fuel .. rather than expecting a constant payload of calories to consume.. etc. etc. Peace out.

hodder 2y ago
"by time restricted eating you are breaking the cycle of eating out of habit when you are not even hungry.. or eating because you crave a certain taste or sensation in the body (as opposed to actually being hungry). You are training the mind/body out of these behaviours so that during the times when you are allowed to eat you are trained not to eat unless actually hungry, for example." You are describing what I posted above. This is a behavioral tool to achieve a mechanism of caloric deficit. Getting out of a cycle of pointless eating is the definition of behavioral shift. Not exactly sure what you are describing in the next paragraph but we have studies that equate calories between time restricted eating and non time restricted eating and find no statistical difference in expected weight outcomes. Yes there are differences is hormonal hunger signaling etc. My point is rather that a calorie deficit is why the weight loss occurs. The time restricted eating is the METHOD some choose to help achieve it.

from-nibly 2y ago

> assuming you understand thermodynamics Even in a car engine having different kinds of fuels changes how much of it gets converted to energy. Your body is infitely more complex than a car. Calories in calories out is not an immutable law. If that were the case, you could binge eat 30,000 calories and then you'd somehow add 28,000 calories worth of fat to your body in one day, which just isnt how that works.

dragonwriter 2y ago
> Calories in calories out is not an immutable law. It actually can be, if you define both "in" and "out" in a way which makes it so; but for any definition of those terms where it is an immutable law, we, in practice, have only very rough proxy measures for at least one, and maybe both, of "calories in" or "calories out", and the problem then becomes mistaking the proxy for the actual figure of merit. But the bigger problem is that CICO is only a starting point, it a set of targets, and an actionable plan that works in the real world isn't just the targets the plan is directed at.
- from-nibly 2y ago
  Yes agreed. Obviously molecules are not appearing out of thin air.
hilux 2y ago
I know that CICO has been debunked, but I've never seen such a wonderfully clear example as in your last sentence. Thank you!
- hodder 2y ago
  CICO has not been debunked at all. If you take it to the extremes like eating 30k cals in a day yes your body will pass much of it undigested, but that doesn’t debunk it at all but rather adjust one of the 2 inputs into the equation, and for the vast vast majority of people following anything resembling a sane diet, CICO is the determinant of weight loss. You can eat straight sugar in a caloric deficit and body weight will fall off of you. You can eat straight fat or protein and it’ll do the same. You can eat in one meal or 20 meals. It still holds in every single study ever done.

myheartisinohio 2y ago

I've struggled with being overweight my entire life. I feel like I am in control and have made a lot of progress-- so I want to preach about this. Restrictive diets work but if you can't maintain it for a long time (keto, vegan, paleo, etc.) the weight will come back. I yo-yo dieted like many obese people do. Anyone out there struggling here is how I've lost 160 lbs and gained muscle / mobility: - Make sure you get good sleep. Sleep is incredibly important. - Intermittent fast (black coffee, tea, or caffeine pill in the am) lunch afternoon - track what you eat (there are a plethora of free apps that can help) - track how much you walk aim for 10k+ steps - do resistance work outs (free weights, calisthenics, ruck march, etc.) - cut back alcohol as much as possible - cut back sugar as much as possible - use the scale as a tool don't be afraid of it. (when I stepped on a scale I weighed over lbs. it was so painful to see that but ultimately worth it) The biggest thing that has helped is a shift in my mindset. I look at going to the gym as treat /privilege. I've envisioned the end goal of how I look and feel.

hodder 2y ago
Great to hear!

jiggawatts 2y ago

> subbing out sugars with artificial sweeteners This one is tricky. Tastebuds "adjust" over time. People that eat spicy foods regularly build up a tolerance to spicy. Similarly, I noticed that bitter drinks like beer or tonic water makes me barely taste bitter flavours at all after a while. Regular consumption of artificial sweeteners have the same effect: they make you less sensitive to sweet flavours, making you compensate by eating sweeter foods.

hodder 2y ago
We have studies on this too and there is no truth to what you are saying. Adding artistic sweeteners has no statistical impact on cravings for sugar and sweeter foods.