4 ms·

"When it comes to weight loss, creating a caloric deficit is the most important thing that matters; eating less, not moving more, is the most realistic way to d

"When it comes to weight loss, creating a caloric deficit is the most important thing that matters; eating less, not moving more, is the most realistic way to do so." What? Please read Gary Taubes "Good Calories, Bad Calories" or "Why we get fat". He is one of the leading thinkers in nutrition and is worshipped by other gurus like Tim Noakes (who wrote the runners bible Lore of Running). Taubes spends the first third of "Why we get fat" rebuking this "first law of thermodynamics" approach to dieting. I'd also argue that nutrition today is evolving from an anecdotal approach to what works e.g. Dr Atkins discovering that if he eats meat-only he gets thin, to a science based approach where we are beginning to understand the profound effect insulin has on fat storage and why dietary fat does not make you fat. Reddit is a great resource for new data, but not a source. It does however have some amazing pointers. Another case in point is the cult of Mark Rippetoe fans on Reddit and the AMA that Rip did on Reddit a while ago which was awesome. [Rippetoe is pretty much God in strength training circles and his book "Starting Strength" is the strength training bible.]

tomjen3 14y ago
I have read Christians "refuting" evolution too. I give a guy who doesn't thermodynamics (one does not refute that in a popsci book) the same credit. If he had really discovered something important, he would not be worshipped. He would present evidence to other researchers, who would confirm his experiments, etc.
- ehsanu1 14y ago
  The first law of thermodynamics only applies to a closed system. The body is not a closed system, and thus conservation of energy does not apply. There is both input and output of energy/mass, and some efficiency of conversion of food/oxygen to useful energy/body mass, as opposed to sweat, urine, stool, hair loss, exfoliation of skin, etc. It was probably that kind of refutal: the first law of thermodynamics is just fine, for a closed system.
- glenra 14y ago
  Taubes has been presenting evidence to other researchers. But the medical establishment takes a loooooong time to change its collective mind on stuff like this. Here's a relevant video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4362041487661765149 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4362041487661765149 In that video, I think Taubes actually refutes the "law of thermodynamics" approach to losing weight in a single picture, with an existence proof. There exist people who are emaciated in half their body (say, the top half) and obese in the other half (say, the bottom). According to the "law of thermodynamics" approach, such a person should simultaneously "eat less, move more" (to cure their bottom half) and "eat more, move less" (to cure their top). This is clearly impossible advice to follow. These people need some other form of advice. Once we figure out what that advice should be, it's probably going to be of benefit to people who are fat or emaciated over their entire body rather than a selected part. As for your analogy: I'm an atheist, but if any Christian that others saw as "refuting" evolution had as much social proof as Taubes - had huge communities of my peers recommending his work - I'd kind of be inclined to check it out and see what he had to say.

tomjen3 14y ago

I have read Christians "refuting" evolution too. I give a guy who doesn't thermodynamics (one does not refute that in a popsci book) the same credit. If he had really discovered something important, he would not be worshipped. He would present evidence to other researchers, who would confirm his experiments, etc.

ehsanu1 14y ago
The first law of thermodynamics only applies to a closed system. The body is not a closed system, and thus conservation of energy does not apply. There is both input and output of energy/mass, and some efficiency of conversion of food/oxygen to useful energy/body mass, as opposed to sweat, urine, stool, hair loss, exfoliation of skin, etc. It was probably that kind of refutal: the first law of thermodynamics is just fine, for a closed system.
glenra 14y ago
Taubes has been presenting evidence to other researchers. But the medical establishment takes a loooooong time to change its collective mind on stuff like this. Here's a relevant video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4362041487661765149 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4362041487661765149 In that video, I think Taubes actually refutes the "law of thermodynamics" approach to losing weight in a single picture, with an existence proof. There exist people who are emaciated in half their body (say, the top half) and obese in the other half (say, the bottom). According to the "law of thermodynamics" approach, such a person should simultaneously "eat less, move more" (to cure their bottom half) and "eat more, move less" (to cure their top). This is clearly impossible advice to follow. These people need some other form of advice. Once we figure out what that advice should be, it's probably going to be of benefit to people who are fat or emaciated over their entire body rather than a selected part. As for your analogy: I'm an atheist, but if any Christian that others saw as "refuting" evolution had as much social proof as Taubes - had huge communities of my peers recommending his work - I'd kind of be inclined to check it out and see what he had to say.