3 ms·
Out of curiosity, what were the arguments that convinced you that simple calories in/out ins't valid? I'm personally a tiny bit incredulous anytime someone men
by goostavos 14y ago
Out of curiosity, what were the arguments that convinced you that simple calories in/out ins't valid?
I'm personally a tiny bit incredulous anytime someone mentions that they've tried cutting calories, but with no results. I've always wondered how they continue to get an energy surplus in the absence of input. These seemingly perpetual motion machines would be of great interest to science, I'm sure ;)
- polyfractal 14y agoTo be fair, the human body is pretty good at limiting calorie depletion when caloric intake decreases. When you cut calories, your body automatically scales back how much you are using. Of course, this is why any good diet needs to be coupled with an exercise program. Even better, increase your caloric intake, switch to a high-protein diet and start lifting some heavy weights. Muscle creation is metabolically expensive, and muscle maintenance uses a lot of calories. Furthermore, even though muscle is heavier than fat (omg you may gain weight!) it looks a lot slimmer and more fit. Moral of the story: lift weights, eat protein, get fit, lose "mirror" pounds (even if you actually put more mass on)
- TeMPOraL 14y agoAll arguments went along the line: the body is a very complex mechanism and assuming that cutting down on calories will result in weight loss is an oversimplification; also that not all calories are equal. Example discussion I pulled out of google: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=710399 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=710399