3 ms·
The relationship won't be linear, immediate, proportional or unary. But it will be causal. So... you agree with the comment you're replying to, then? No one d
by randallsquared 14y ago
The relationship won't be linear, immediate, proportional or unary. But it will be causal.
So... you agree with the comment you're replying to, then?
No one disputes that a body cannot burn more energy than it has taken in. However, other factors can swamp a "mere" 25% percent reduction in caloric intake. IF has been the most effective weight loss strategy for me, but it doesn't work forever unless you keep reducing the amount you're eating. Eating only every other day worked great for two months or so, but eventually the loss tapered off (this was 2010), and something else must be done. The body doesn't need nearly as much energy as we typically give it, apparently, and varying the amount discarded can affect weight gain or loss greatly.
- jacques_chester 14y agoOne thing you probably overlooked: fat cells add to BMR.
- randallsquared 14y agoWhile I didn't overlook it entirely, it's true that it is quite difficult to know how to account for it without , since resting metabolism varies widely ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_metabolic_rate#Causes_of_individual_differences_in_BMR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_metabolic_rate#Causes_of_... suggests more than 25% variation after accounting for a number of potential factors). My own anecdotes suggest that once the (my) body adapts to higher caloric intake, it discards much more of it than when times are leaner.
- jacques_chester 14y ago25% is for extreme outliers. http://examine.com/faq/does-metabolism-vary-between-two-people.html http://examine.com/faq/does-metabolism-vary-between-two-peop... BMR varies mostly on body size. Taller, heavier people have a higher BMR because there's more of them to keep alive.