Do you still think it's all about calories in vs calories out and fat people are not disciplined enough ?

[deebate]

I've been doing a lot of online research over the years around diet/ exercise and what's the answer. How can I keep fit and be healthy.

I've tried various things and I am generally a believer in calories in vs calories out. Which seems to be the favoured method on here.

If anyone complains they're struggling with losing weight, it must be because they're not counting everything etc.

In any case, I've now stumbled across a number of podcasts of different doctors and nutritionists in the field talking about gut microbes and sugar spikes etc and how actually it's really not just about calories at all.

What's the consensus on here about all this ?

For the vast majority of people who are overweight, it is all about calories in v calories out. There will of course be plenty of people for whom it isn’t that simple because of medication or hormones or mobility issues etc, but there are a lot of people who seem to be determined to find a reason why they are overweight that doesn’t involve how much they eat. It’s easy to be in denial about overeating, especially when it comes to portion sizes.

Theres a lot of scientific evidence that support the calories in v calories out theory but what scientific evidence is there of the other things you mention or are you basing your theory on social media & podcasts?

Some people can change how many calories they eat and not gain or lose weight. Their body can adjust to it somehow. There was a documentary where they made people who were ‘naturally slim’ eats 5000 calories a day. It was very interesting.
Ultimately though if anyone is starved they will lose weight, some slower, some faster.
However most people aren’t starved, most people have an abundance of food. People choose what they eat and different triggers cause different people to overeat. UPF, culture, genetics, fast food, wheat, gut health etc all seem to play a part.

Calories in vs calories out always was hogwash.

A kcal is literally the amount of heat needed to warm up one litre of water by 1C.

Food kcals are calculated by how many grams you need to burn to warm up one litre of water by 1C

Because our stomachs are little furnaces see, and we burn food in them and are powered by heat see.

Whoever thought this could be applied to how humans absorb energy from food was a “scientist of his time” let’s say, just like many scientists in the 1400s believed maggots spontaneously generated from dead things and were not related to flies at all were also “scientists of their time.”

Unfortunately the calorie thing became way too popular science and so it endured far longer than it should have. The reality is that there are many factors that make some humans able to absorb more energy from food than other humans and some humans are more efficient at expending energy than other humans.

Calories belong on the rubbish heap of history.

Fundamentally if you put less calories in than you need, your body has to use other sources of energy, or you die, because you can't power the systems that keep you alive.

That means eating into your reserves of energy, and that means you lose weight.

That's just how the human body works.

Medication, hormones, mobility doesnt change that its CICO, it usually means that

Medication = makes you eat more, so you're eating more calories
Hormones = make you eat more or as per my underactive thyroid means everything is slowed down for me, so I need much fewer calories
Mobility = cant move around easily, so not using as many calories

All of the small intricacies of differences in calories between something of protein and something of carbs or something of fat isnt enough to make a different to the average person, as long as they work out their TDEE and through trial and error work out their maintenance they'll be able to work out what works for them. For some of us who are olde,r who have perhaps thyroid issues, what works is fewer calories that I would like, but there it is.

She's my twin.

All the hoo-hah about different magical fixes all boil down to a way to ensure that energy expenditure > energy consumption for a long enough period to need to access the fat stores - without the person fainting, taking to their bed with exhaustion (and therefore reducing their energy expenditure) or eyeing up the cat's dinner, thinking 'that doesn't smell too bad, really'.

The money comes for the 'experts' in flogging books, programmes, UPF shakes and snacks when their last book deal and programme was about The EVILS of UPFs in promising that their method will be magically easy, fast and you will never put on weight again.

I'm literally just basing it on documentaries and podcasts and reading online.

I have no scientific background in any way shape or form and I've not read many scientific papers on the subject.

That's why I actually made sure to mention the kind of ' research ' I've done, to be totally transparent about it. It's not advanced research of any kind.

It is as simple as calories in and out

And a lot more complicated

If you are 100 calories over a day - one apple or biscuit extra- you will put on a stone in a year

So maintaining a balance is quite skilled

And to maintain that balance you are relying on interpretation of body signals like "hungry" and "stressed - better eat to build up reserves " and all sorts of stuff

the apple might not actually make 100 net calories available to you but the biscuit will

And "hungry" signals can get messed up by whatever you have eaten earlier ( sugar crashes even from sweeteners ) or by boredom masquerading as hungry etc

And food is essential to life and is associated with love and caring for each other

And we have so much delicious variety of food that our bodies get overexcited by it

So everyone can be right - it's simple and much more all at the same time

Haven't read the replies but* watch the documentary on the gut biome. Some people actually extract more calories from identical foods than other people, because they basically have gut biome bacteria making them prone to be fatter. It's fascinating. Netflix, Hack Your Health*

Show me the evidence that the amount of heat generated by x grams of a food to heat 1 litre of water by 1C is exactly correlated with the amount of energy a human gets by eating x grams of that food?

You can’t. No evidence exists to prove the initial link 1:1 between heat generated by burning food and the energy generated by eating food.

I watched that today ! I wonder how true it is.

I've also recently done Zoe testing etc.

That doesnt mean its not CICO to gain or lose weight though does it?

Why are people insisting on comparing calorie amounts from person to person? What relevance is that to anything?
Its about what your personal body needs, not what your next door neighbour is digesting.

Let’s rephrase then 🙄

weight management is Energy in vs. Energy out.

”calories” with regard to food is a blunt tool, admittedly. But it’s roughly correct- a mars bar is more “calories”, or energy, than an apple. So it’s a useful, in not exact, guide as to whether you are taking in too much energy.

as pp have said, not all people are the same. So you need to fine tune- if you’re gaining, eat less food for energy and increase your energy output.

Yes but how much more energy? The #### you see are wildly inaccurate. The long list of things to adjust for are red flags that it is not accurate it is so blunt a tool, it is equivalent to trying to cut down a tree with a herring.

If you eat enough calories but a diet of nutrient poor UPFs then your body will tell you that you need to eat more, so you will then overeat calories. Maybe not today but in the long run. Very few people could stick to a calorie maintenance or deficit if their body still desperately needed real nutrition.

No, when they do studies on people who don't struggle with their weight, they find that they moderate themselves without even thinking about it. Skip meals, reduce portions, eat healthier because their bodied are responding in the correct way, by telling them they don't need more. I don't think your one example of chocolate is very relevant here. You have no idea if you find it as difficult as someone else. The fact that you were successful would suggest not no? Even so I doubt its binary, one or the other. There are most likely people who struggle more then me and less then you.

I have met individuals like this myself, ironically who have praised MY will power because they claim 'I just eat what ever I want'. If I ate whatever i wanted I would be double my size. Its a constant struggle I think about food all the time.

Twin studies suggest that your weight is 70% genetic. Some people are fighting against nature.

I think it's calories in vs calories out to an extent, but as someone with pcos and an underactive thyroid I seem to be able to have to consume less calories than someone doing the same amount of exercise (e.g. if my sister and I eat the same and exercise the same she can eat more before she puts on weight than me). But regardless of that the reality is to lose weight I need to eat less and more more the same as her. Its just my less is less.

Do you think it would make any difference of someone could tell you "eat exactly 1276 calories to lose 1kg a month"

It's irrelevant what the exact number is - there are a lot of variables - that's called being in the real world not a simple
School book example so the best method is to start with a reasonable figure and adjust from there to get your unique answer

Like a genetic algorithm works - like we solve many optimisation problems - because that method is a lot quicker and simpler than trying to work through an exact answer based on all variables - many of which - like tomorrows temperature - are not even knowable in advance

Was someone selling something to help some people lose weight?
/Cynical.

Of course you’re right op but it’s not something people wish to hear.

I'm a picker and little pickers wear big knickers they say!!
Honestly I know I could lose weight by 3 meals and no snacks in between even if those meals aren't particularly healthy.
I just have no willpower not to snack 🤐

From a scientific point of view, your body needs energy. About 25% of that energy in a day is your brain. Whether your body gets that from food or from stored energy doesn’t really matter. I don’t believe in the ‘storing fat in starvation mode’ your body isn’t that complicated. The only way that could be possible is if you stopped using energy, ie stopped moving as much. Otherwise if you are still doing the same things you still burning the same energy.
I think lots of people overcomplicate it. Your body doesn’t really care what form energy comes in, it uses it just the same. Energy is different to nutrients too. If you eat nothing but 5 chocolate bars, then your energy needs would be met. But not your nutrient needs.

I'm basing my ideas on a highly trained dietitian's advice.

Hear hear @Cherryon

I have been hoping someone would come on to talk about the creation of calories and about how it’s not all it’s cracked up to be!

What tips would you recommend for weight loss?