>eat 500 calorie deficit. >eat 250 calorie deficit and do 250 calories worth of cardio

>The human body expends ~1500 calories a day to just maintain it
>Physical exertion somehow only burns 5-10% more calories

EVERY OTHER MACHINE ON THE PLANET:
Idle - low energy consumption
Work - significantly higher energy consumption

lmao you sound angry. you aren't burning that much from 40 minutes on bile you insufferable homosexual.

I'm not the first person you were responding to and I'm currently training for a 10 mile race. Most cardio machines/calculators vastly overestimate the calories that are burned in a cardio workout, this is common knowledge.

You guys need to step up your cardio game. How do you think this isnt possible, if you aren't sweating and out of breath after cardio you aren't doing it right. You can totally burn 600 in 40 min, why do you think cardio is always recommended for weight loss?

>plug in another device that draws 4.5kW
You flip the breaker aka you have a heart attack, bad analogy try again moron

I can't tell if this is an expert troll or some schizo trying to guerilla train IST to deal with moronic anti-CICO arguments
the disanalogy comes from the fact that OP has an energy surplus, which you're ignoring in the hypothetical. A better analogy would be anon asking how to reduce his fuel tank, by upping the generator output to burn more fuel or reducing adding additional fuel (assuming some amount of fuel gets burned no matter what during the general usage of the generator).

Indeed.
Diet and exercise moderate mitochondrial health and capacity - these regulate bodyfat content, basal metabolic rate and energy expenditure.
Exercise is healthy, you might even slightly increase your energy expenditure if you are sedentary, but if you are metabolically unhealthy, then your body will always pick the easy route and adapt by lowering your basal metabolic rate, before burning more fat, which is an extremely slow and rate-limited process, as white adipocytes contain very few mitochondria.
White fat is intended as a long-term subsistence storage after all.
What do we learn from all of this?
Diet is way more important than exercise in that exercising too much can actually harm your ability to lose fat, while diet regulates all the rest of your metabolic function.
However, some exercise will always be better than no exercise.
The proper choice here would be to emulate nature - fasting for several days, then breaking it properly with a large high-protein meal, using the hormonal response to train heavily that day, possibly even before breaking the fast, eating for some time and repeating the process.
For those who think that you will lose more muscle from fasting than from calorie counting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrjwaqZfjIY

https://i.imgur.com/YxkXbmQ.jpg

I can't tell if this is an expert troll or some schizo trying to guerilla train IST to deal with moronic anti-CICO arguments
the disanalogy comes from the fact that OP has an energy surplus, which you're ignoring in the hypothetical. A better analogy would be anon asking how to reduce his fuel tank, by upping the generator output to burn more fuel or reducing adding additional fuel (assuming some amount of fuel gets burned no matter what during the general usage of the generator).

Your mitochondria are the generator.
You can eat more or less, but you won't burn much more from exercise, until there are more and healthier mitochondria.
Do mind that the mitochondria are also the waste management that gets rid of the biogas shit tank under the floor, which is your body fat and while they do this, they liberate excess calories.
So the question becomes this: "How do you increase your mitochondrial health and capacity through diet and exercise?"
And CICO is simply not conducive to solving that question beyond stopping you from dramatically overeating, as it completely foregoes any and all understanding of biochemistry, behavioral, metabolic and hormonal functions and processes.