Log In

Your email is not your username

Register

If you were a member of the old Bodybuilding.com forums and would like to reuse your previous username, you can request it below. We use your email only for registration and do not store it. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Confirm your email

A registration code was sent to your email. Enter it here.

Welcome

You have successfully setup your account.

Sign in

Quick Navigation Bottom Misc
Forum » Weight Loss Is Simply Calories In Vs Calories Out
  1. Results 31 to 60 of 94
  2. Page 2 of 4
  3. First
  5. 1
  6. 2
  7. 3
  8. 4
  10. Last

Thread: Weight Loss Is Simply Calories In Vs Calories Out

post 1671965423 11-29-2022, 11:45 AM
-
#31
  1. ChrisPrattt
  2. Registered User
  1. ChrisPrattt
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Nov 2022
  4. Age: 56
  5. Posts: 106
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By DrewDarden⏩
Then you didn't think about it hard enough.

It's a good analogy. There are other factors to consider besides just calories, even though energy expenditure vs intake does ultimately regulate bodyweight.

Just like there are other factors to consider besides just quitting alcohol despite the fact that you can literally cure it by stopping the habit right now.
it’s not about addiction and it’s not a good analogy, Because even “hard gainers” cope and say they can’t gain weight no matter how much they eat when they just aren’t eating enough..
post 1671965673 11-29-2022, 11:49 AM
-
#32
  1. sooby
  2. WOATbrah of peace :)
  1. sooby
  2. WOATbrah of peace :)
  3. Join Date: Feb 2015
  4. Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  5. Posts: 43,319
  6. Rep Power: 219409
problem with saying it's just calories vs calories out, the "advice" is about as actionable as, "you're broke, just get a job and make more money".

no phucking chit.

people often don't know where to start, try to start off with extremes right off the bat rather than sticking to basic things which are easier to maintain.

actionable advice might be something like, switching fattier meats for chicken breast, drinking zero calorie sodas instead of regular, portion control, other lower calorie options, going for a walk 15 minutes a day, etc. something that is simple and easy to follow.


nowadays, I don't strictly track my calories, I know roughly and have a ballpark amount that I generally consume. I just look at the scale and if it plateaus for 2-3 weeks, I'll maybe have 1 less scoop of ice cream or half a glass of orange juice instead of a full glass. And slightly increase my cardio time, that usually gets the ball rolling.

it is simple but people have a hard time knowing what they should be doing and what to follow. so instead go on ridiculous detox diets or complete cold turkey on their favourite foods only to give up. people also don't lift which should be half of the equation as well. "weight loss" should go hand-in-hand with lifting because the ultimate goal should be a more ideal body composition, not a skinnier version of your fat self, which has zero muscle.
positivity brah crew
dont take my posts too srs crew srs
JFL @ everything crew
lol @ tradies srs crew
BIG LOL @ sky tradies srs crew (RealAesthetic)
indian crew
living in clown world crew so screw it crew
anti-degen crew
post 1671965983 11-29-2022, 11:52 AM
-
#33
  1. ChrisPrattt
  2. Registered User
  1. ChrisPrattt
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Nov 2022
  4. Age: 56
  5. Posts: 106
  6. Rep Power: 0
This thread is going from facts to motivation

The bottom line cact is “eat less calories” or “ eat more”


Anyone with discipline will do this regardless of how they “feel”
post 1671966233 11-29-2022, 11:54 AM
-
#34
  1. Rebel012
  2. Registered User
  1. Rebel012
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: May 2018
  4. Location: Canada
  5. Age: 43
  6. Posts: 7,027
  7. Rep Power: 57751
Originally Posted By hydraides⏩
Naw no way , first of all your not even taking in the thermobolic effect of protein

Eat 2000 kcal of doughy nuts vs

2000 kcal of chicken (is only like eating 1400 kcal because 30% metabolized to break protein down)
This doesn't debunk CICO at all. The only (valid) point you've made here is that the "calories-out" side of the equation matters. Thermic expenditure is just part of "Calories Out."
post 1671966343 11-29-2022, 11:55 AM
-
#35
  1. northernlights7
  2. Banned
  1. northernlights7
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Jun 2013
  4. Posts: 24,527
  5. Rep Power: 24
2004 called.
post 1671966483 11-29-2022, 11:57 AM
-
#36
  1. AriesTH
  2. Certified User
  1. AriesTH
  2. Certified User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2013
  4. Location: Vancouver, B.C, Canada
  5. Posts: 2,115
  6. Rep Power: 30930
Originally Posted By DrewDarden⏩
Aries if you want more information on this, Gary Taubes writes about it in his books.
I did a quick google, but don't have time to read his books. He seems like a big proponent of keto and low carb/high fat + protein diets, and then mentions that insulin is an issue, but a lot of this has been disproven as far as I know.

I'm admittedly no scientist but isn't the idea of calories being a measure of heat and the body running on chemical energy kind of ... irrelevant ... for lack of a better word? Like there is going to be heat in the creation of ATP or any other form of energy which is used... just as a quick example... it's very much connected
ASOT Crew
BLM Crew (Bang Local MILFs)
post 1671966763 11-29-2022, 11:59 AM
-
#37
  1. AriesTH
  2. Certified User
  1. AriesTH
  2. Certified User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2013
  4. Location: Vancouver, B.C, Canada
  5. Posts: 2,115
  6. Rep Power: 30930
Originally Posted By Gronnie⏩
Let me clarify -- energy in energy out will dictate a large part of what you weigh. Calories however are not the correct way to measure energy in and energy out will be dictated by a ton of things.... certainly not just some bs TDEE calculator.
What do you suggest is the correct way then, to get as close as possible? I agree TDEE calculators will never ever be exact, but they're a good place to get a ballpark figure to start with.

Thanks for clarifying the first part, completely agree there.
ASOT Crew
BLM Crew (Bang Local MILFs)
post 1671966813 11-29-2022, 11:59 AM
-
#38
  1. Ratfish
  1. Ratfish
  3. Join Date: Jul 2009
  4. Location: Portland, Oregon, United States
  5. Posts: 113,850
  6. Rep Power: 576095
best chit was when scientists produced a ton of studies trying to figure out why obesecels gained fat despite their (self-reported) normal food intake

they assumed low metabolic rate etc

then they put them in a metabolic chamber and controlled all food intake and found that not only do they not have a low metabolic rate, but just as anyone with half a brain would assume, larger people aka fatsocels have substantially higher metabolic rates, TDEEs etc than their lean counterparts

wasn't underactive thyroid, it was overactive lying

jfl

incidentally, the "naturally lean" people you encounter overstate their total food intake and just eat an amount consistent with their size, for whatever reason
Make Europe Germany Again
post 1671967013 11-29-2022, 12:02 PM
-
#39
  1. ChrisPrattt
  2. Registered User
  1. ChrisPrattt
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Nov 2022
  4. Age: 56
  5. Posts: 106
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By Ratfish⏩
best chit was when scientists produced a ton of studies trying to figure out why obesecels gained fat despite their (self-reported) normal food intake

they assumed low metabolic rate etc

then they put them in a metabolic chamber and controlled all food intake and found that not only do they not have a low metabolic rate, but just as anyone with half a brain would assume, larger people aka fatsocels have substantially higher metabolic rates, TDEEs etc than their lean counterparts

wasn't underactive thyroid, it was overactive lying

jfl
post 1671967063 11-29-2022, 12:03 PM
-
#40
  1. AriesTH
  2. Certified User
  1. AriesTH
  2. Certified User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2013
  4. Location: Vancouver, B.C, Canada
  5. Posts: 2,115
  6. Rep Power: 30930
Originally Posted By Ratfish⏩
best chit was when scientists produced a ton of studies trying to figure out why obesecels gained fat despite their (self-reported) normal food intake

they assumed low metabolic rate etc

then they put them in a metabolic chamber and controlled all food intake and found that not only do they not have a low metabolic rate, but just as anyone with half a brain would assume, larger people aka fatsocels have substantially higher metabolic rates, TDEEs etc than their lean counterparts

wasn't underactive thyroid, it was overactive lying

jfl
this, lol

there's a study where they put a bunch of people in these "metabolic wards" and people told to guesstimate how much they burned/ate and they were over reporting their exercise and under reporting their eating by 400-600 calories each (e.g. thought they burned 900 cals, only burned 500; thought they ate 1200 cals, but actually ate 1600). If I remember right, these were trained individuals too, not people with zero knowledge base.
ASOT Crew
BLM Crew (Bang Local MILFs)
post 1671967393 11-29-2022, 12:06 PM
-
#41
  1. Rebel012
  2. Registered User
  1. Rebel012
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: May 2018
  4. Location: Canada
  5. Age: 43
  6. Posts: 7,027
  7. Rep Power: 57751
Originally Posted By AriesTH⏩
this, lol

there's a study where they put a bunch of people in these "metabolic wards" and people told to guesstimate how much they burned/ate and they were over reporting their exercise and under reporting their eating by 400-600 calories each (e.g. thought they burned 900 cals, only burned 500; thought they ate 1200 cals, but actually ate 1600). If I remember right, these were trained individuals too, not people with zero knowledge base.
There's also the now classic "Minnesota starvation experiment." At 1500 calories a day, those guys never stopped losing weight, even with their diet consisting largely of carbs. Their metabolism never slowed to the point where weight loss stalled, and quickly bounced back once they started eating right again.
post 1671967863 11-29-2022, 12:14 PM
-
#42
  1. AriesTH
  2. Certified User
  1. AriesTH
  2. Certified User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2013
  4. Location: Vancouver, B.C, Canada
  5. Posts: 2,115
  6. Rep Power: 30930
Originally Posted By Rebel012⏩
There's also the now classic "Minnesota starvation experiment." At 1500 calories a day, those guys never stopped losing weight, even with their diet consisting largely of carbs. Their metabolism never slowed to the point where weight loss stalled, and quickly bounced back once they started eating right again.
Yeah, the idea of your metabolism just randomly slowing significantly is pretty much BS. There may have been a study that said something about minimal, like under 50 calories, of "metabolic adaptation" but I cannot even remember if that was the case. Been a while since I have read anything on the topic.

eating low amounts of food and losing muscle mass WILL cause your "metabolism" to "slow down" though due to the reduction in lean tissue, but all else equal it will not randomly drop off.
(^ or in old people ~60+, deterioration of other fat free mass - brain, organs, heart, etc.)
ASOT Crew
BLM Crew (Bang Local MILFs)
post 1671967953 11-29-2022, 12:16 PM
-
#43
  1. hackerwacker
  2. Registered User
  1. hackerwacker
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Sep 2011
  4. Age: 35
  5. Posts: 11,669
  6. Rep Power: 62380
Anyone who has successfully done keto for long periods will tell you calories aren't the only factor. I can shed more fat and maintain body comp by cutting carbs than I ever was able to cutting cals
post 1671968073 11-29-2022, 12:17 PM
-
#44
  1. Gronnie
  2. Registered User
  1. Gronnie
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Rochester, Minnesota, United States
  5. Posts: 1,883
  6. Rep Power: 7175
Originally Posted By AriesTH⏩
What do you suggest is the correct way then, to get as close as possible? I agree TDEE calculators will never ever be exact, but they're a good place to get a ballpark figure to start with.

Thanks for clarifying the first part, completely agree there.
I don't think we have a good way of measuring human food energy (at least not in a feasible and economical way), that's why we use calories. I'm a big proponent of eating mostly low carb whole foods and to satiety. It will be hard to overeat when eating that way. It was the only way I was ever able to lose weight. People can obviously do as they please though.
Principal Engineer
CS Crew

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." - Charlston Heston
post 1671968173 11-29-2022, 12:18 PM
-
#45
  1. Ratfish
  1. Ratfish
  3. Join Date: Jul 2009
  4. Location: Portland, Oregon, United States
  5. Posts: 113,850
  6. Rep Power: 576095
Originally Posted By AriesTH⏩
Yeah, the idea of your metabolism just randomly slowing significantly is pretty much BS. There may have been a study that said something about minimal, like under 50 calories, of "metabolic adaptation" but I cannot even remember if that was the case. Been a while since I have read anything on the topic.

eating low amounts of food and losing muscle mass WILL cause your "metabolism" to "slow down" though due to the reduction in lean tissue, but all else equal it will not randomly drop off.
(^ or in old people ~60+, deterioration of other fat free mass - brain, organs, heart, etc.)
yeah, you take a hit with TEF and lower body mass requires less energy

you likely will also have less NEAT due to laying around wishing for death because you can't eat donuts as well

i fkn LOL @ "i cut too fast months ago and now have metabolic damage"

no possible hypothalamic mechanism for such a phenomenon to persist for any significant amount of time
Make Europe Germany Again
post 1671968243 11-29-2022, 12:19 PM
-
#46
  1. sooby
  2. WOATbrah of peace :)
  1. sooby
  2. WOATbrah of peace :)
  3. Join Date: Feb 2015
  4. Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  5. Posts: 43,319
  6. Rep Power: 219409
Originally Posted By AriesTH⏩
I did a quick google, but don't have time to read his books. He seems like a big proponent of keto and low carb/high fat + protein diets, and then mentions that insulin is an issue, but a lot of this has been disproven as far as I know.

I'm admittedly no scientist but isn't the idea of calories being a measure of heat and the body running on chemical energy kind of ... irrelevant ... for lack of a better word? Like there is going to be heat in the creation of ATP or any other form of energy which is used... just as a quick example... it's very much connected
don't, he's pretty much a charlatan in the nutritional world, or unless you're actually interested in what he has to say. he still believes in the insulin and carb hypothesis of obesity.

most of the best studies don't show any significant difference at all between keto or just any "regular" non-keto diet. at the end of the day is whatever gets you to eat consume less calories, whether it's keto, IF or some other diet/method. none are inherently special.

energy is pretty much synonymous with heat in that case. body stores energy via adipose tissue. when the body needs to tap into that energy source via certain conditions, i.e a caloric deficit, it metabolizes the fat/releases the energy via chemical reactions. so you're right lol.
positivity brah crew
dont take my posts too srs crew srs
JFL @ everything crew
lol @ tradies srs crew
BIG LOL @ sky tradies srs crew (RealAesthetic)
indian crew
living in clown world crew so screw it crew
anti-degen crew
post 1671968443 11-29-2022, 12:23 PM
-
#47
  1. Ratfish
  1. Ratfish
  3. Join Date: Jul 2009
  4. Location: Portland, Oregon, United States
  5. Posts: 113,850
  6. Rep Power: 576095
Originally Posted By sooby⏩
don't, he's pretty much a charlatan in the nutritional world, or unless you're actually interested in what he has to say. he still believes in the insulin and carb hypothesis of obesity.

most of the best studies don't show any significant difference at all between keto or just any "regular" non-keto diet. at the end of the day is whatever gets you to eat consume less calories, whether it's keto, IF or some other diet/method. none are inherently special.

energy is pretty much synonymous with heat in that case. body stores energy via adipose tissue. when the body needs to tap into that energy source via certain conditions, i.e a caloric deficit, it metabolizes the fat/releases the energy via chemical reactions. so you're right lol.
if anything, it's the opposite

the body considers carb restriction to be food restriction aka starvation
Make Europe Germany Again
post 1671968483 11-29-2022, 12:23 PM
-
#48
  1. Rebel012
  2. Registered User
  1. Rebel012
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: May 2018
  4. Location: Canada
  5. Age: 43
  6. Posts: 7,027
  7. Rep Power: 57751
Originally Posted By hackerwacker⏩
Anyone who has successfully done keto for long periods will tell you calories aren't the only factor. I can shed more fat and maintain body comp by cutting carbs than I ever was able to cutting cals
In the end, that still comes down to CICO. The high protein and fats help you feel satiated for longer, and the foods you're eating have a high thermic effect. If you were to raise calories high enough on that diet, you would end up burning dietary fat instead of body fat.
post 1671969093 11-29-2022, 12:33 PM
-
#49
  1. AriesTH
  2. Certified User
  1. AriesTH
  2. Certified User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2013
  4. Location: Vancouver, B.C, Canada
  5. Posts: 2,115
  6. Rep Power: 30930
so many smart miscers in this thread, makes me happy

repping you all for knowing your ****

edit: given out too much rep FML, just when i need it most
ASOT Crew
BLM Crew (Bang Local MILFs)
post 1671969193 11-29-2022, 12:34 PM
-
#50
  1. Bishomang
  2. Banned
  1. Bishomang
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Nov 2022
  4. Posts: 210
  5. Rep Power: 0
So we have concluded that it always comes down to CICO

/thread
post 1671969263 11-29-2022, 12:35 PM
-
#51
  1. AriesTH
  2. Certified User
  1. AriesTH
  2. Certified User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2013
  4. Location: Vancouver, B.C, Canada
  5. Posts: 2,115
  6. Rep Power: 30930
Originally Posted By hackerwacker⏩
Anyone who has successfully done keto for long periods will tell you calories aren't the only factor. I can shed more fat and maintain body comp by cutting carbs than I ever was able to cutting cals
Sorry but if you truly believe this you just aren't understanding the full picture. There's plenty of literature that suggests otherwise.
ASOT Crew
BLM Crew (Bang Local MILFs)
post 1671969513 11-29-2022, 12:39 PM
-
#52
  1. DrewDarden
  1. DrewDarden
  3. Join Date: Nov 2016
  4. Posts: 23,041
  5. Subscribers: 5
  6. Rep Power: 509636
Originally Posted By Bishomang⏩
So we have concluded that it always comes down to CICO

/thread
Energy expenditure is the governing principle, yes.

But that doesn't change the fact that there's a lot more to consider than just that.
Misc Lifting Crew (Team Lead)
post 1671970503 11-29-2022, 12:54 PM
-
#53
  1. Gronnie
  2. Registered User
  1. Gronnie
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Rochester, Minnesota, United States
  5. Posts: 1,883
  6. Rep Power: 7175
Originally Posted By AriesTH⏩
Sorry but if you truly believe this you just aren't understanding the full picture. There's plenty of literature that suggests otherwise.
I've yet to see a single compelling long term nutrition study.

A lot of nutrition studies that don't show the results the Seventh Day Adventist cult wants to show just get buried too.
Principal Engineer
CS Crew

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." - Charlston Heston
post 1671970643 11-29-2022, 12:56 PM
-
#54
  1. Bishomang
  2. Banned
  1. Bishomang
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Nov 2022
  4. Posts: 210
  5. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By DrewDarden⏩
Energy expenditure is the governing principle, yes.

But that doesn't change the fact that there's a lot more to consider than just that.
Anything else is just cope, you either choose to eat less/more or don't
post 1671970693 11-29-2022, 12:56 PM
-
#55
  1. Gronnie
  2. Registered User
  1. Gronnie
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Rochester, Minnesota, United States
  5. Posts: 1,883
  6. Rep Power: 7175
Originally Posted By Bishomang⏩
Anything else is just cope, you either choose to eat less/more or don't
Have you ever heard of confirmation bias? Survivorship bias? You are showing both.
Principal Engineer
CS Crew

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." - Charlston Heston
post 1671970973 11-29-2022, 01:00 PM
-
#56
  1. Tommy W.
  2. My pronouns are bro/brah
  1. Tommy W.
  2. My pronouns are bro/brah
  3. Join Date: Feb 2006
  4. Posts: 20,914
  5. Rep Power: 135046
Originally Posted By Gronnie⏩
. Calories however are not the correct way to measure energy in and energy out .
Ok oh wise one, please aware me on how to measure.
If you don't get what you want you didn't want it bad enough

Pro Choice
Non Christian
MAGA
2A Advocate
FJB
post 1671971133 11-29-2022, 01:03 PM
-
#57
  1. ArtCore22
  2. Registered User
  1. ArtCore22
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: May 2012
  4. Posts: 1,616
  5. Rep Power: 19484
People don't usually want to lose weight, they want to lose fat
post 1671971203 11-29-2022, 01:04 PM
-
#58
  1. Tommy W.
  2. My pronouns are bro/brah
  1. Tommy W.
  2. My pronouns are bro/brah
  3. Join Date: Feb 2006
  4. Posts: 20,914
  5. Rep Power: 135046
Originally Posted By hackerwacker⏩
I can shed more fat and maintain body comp by cutting carbs than I ever was able to cutting cals
lol, cutting carbs IS cutting calories.
If you don't get what you want you didn't want it bad enough

Pro Choice
Non Christian
MAGA
2A Advocate
FJB
post 1671971393 11-29-2022, 01:07 PM
-
#59
  1. Rebel012
  2. Registered User
  1. Rebel012
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: May 2018
  4. Location: Canada
  5. Age: 43
  6. Posts: 7,027
  7. Rep Power: 57751
Originally Posted By Bishomang⏩
Anything else is just cope, you either choose to eat less/more or don't
This is also dogmatic nonsense. Try eating 1500 kcal worth of cupcakes for six months and see what happens to your body composition. Not to mention your satiety levels. You'll just end up binging, which is why "just eat less bro" is worthless advice.

However, it's true that in the end no one escapes thermodynamics.

https://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/0...sor/index.html
post 1671971533 11-29-2022, 01:10 PM
-
#60
  1. CuttyUnderleaf
  2. Unregistered User
  1. CuttyUnderleaf
  2. Unregistered User
  3. Join Date: Feb 2020
  4. Posts: 6,205
  5. Rep Power: 182033
Originally Posted By hackerwacker⏩
Anyone who has successfully done keto for long periods will tell you calories aren't the only factor. I can shed more fat and maintain body comp by cutting carbs than I ever was able to cutting cals
Same here. I was able to lose weight using CICO, but I had to eat 800 tops in addition to working out 5/6 days a week. It worked but damn.

Keto is so easy comparatively. I hardly felt hungry, had tons of energy, my skin and hair looked great thanks to all the healthy fats. Once I was fat adapted I could eat a few chicken wings, cheese and olives and that would keep me full all day.
Quick Navigation Top Misc
Bookmarks
Digg.com
Digg
del.icio.us
del.icio.us
Stumbleupon.com
StumbleUpon
Google.com
Google
Facebook.com
Facebook
Posting Permissions
  1. You may not post new threads
  2. You may not post replies
  3. You may not post attachments
  4. You may not edit your posts