3 ms·
But you are still assuming that the metabolism is effectively qualitatively identical. I.e, that the only thing changing is the quantity of calories burned rat
by einhverfr 12y ago
But you are still assuming that the metabolism is effectively qualitatively identical. I.e, that the only thing changing is the quantity of calories burned rather than how the excess calories are used. Part of what makes this research fascinating is that it raises doubt about that, which isn't really surprising given what we know about Cytochrome P450 variance and pharmaceutical metabolism. Some people, for example, do not find vicodin effective because the pro-drug is metabolized much slower than the active metabolites....
- SixSigma 12y agoAh, that does make a difference. Still, weight gain is still a function of calories in > calories out
- einhverfr 12y agoAssuming that: 1. All excess calories end up as fat, and 2. All weight gain is fat Then it is a function generally. However, if that is not the case, then you have many possible outputs for any given input, and that's not a function. For a forum where functional programming is frequently discussed, I think it is worth using the term "function of" in the strict sense.
- SixSigma 12y agoAgreed. I was too lazy to correct by misuse of "function", hoping you would understand me.