>here's a study >here's all the things about it that i like/agree with my world view so we'll assume them to be true and accurate and unbiased >however they came to the wrong conclusion because they are not as clever as me so that part is wrong (all the other stuff is right though because it agrees with my world view) >here is my explanation backed up by a random youtube video that proves these morons are wrong (except about the stuff I need them to be right about because it supports my world view)
lmao
If someone's TDEE is higher than 2000 then they will lose weight. If it is lower then they will gain weight. Sorry fatty. Fork putdowns are your only option.
Because people like you pivot instead of directly addressing facts
5 months ago
Anonymous
The answer is because people were tricked into believing CICO.
As belief in CICO increased so did the obesity epidemic. Because CICO is a lie. Thinking calories matter causes obesity.
5 months ago
Anonymous
have a nice day fatso
5 months ago
Anonymous
Obesity is really easy to cure for anyone who understands that calories are a lie.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>The answer is because people were tricked into believing CICO
Do you believe that Everyone counts calories then
5 months ago
Anonymous
Everyone generally believes in the calorie psyop. Belief in the relevance of calories makes it impossible to lose weight, because calorie estimates are not actually relevant.
Once you stop believing the calorie hoax it becomes extremely easy to lose weight and keep it off forever.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Of course you didn't answer the question
5 months ago
Anonymous
What do you think the first thing people do when they try to lose weight is? Of course they try calorie counting. Then they fail.
Some people are so brainwashed they blame themselves instead of the failed diet. Like jabboids who get coronavirus infections saying >imagine how much worse it would be if I wasn't vaccinated!
Some smart people figure out CICO is a hoax and then they manage to lose weight successfully and keep it off long term.
It isn't hard to accept. I just treat it like upper and lower bounds and use it to guage my hunger relative to what I ate. Low satiety for high calories = trash. High satiety for low calories = good but probably not really being digested well.
High satiety for mid range calories = target foods. Wouldn't you know it, that comes out to lots of meat, good vegetables on the side, very few starchy carbs like beans and rice, almost no refined carbs like American bread or sugar. A small amount of fresh or frozen berries is fine
Yes, cico is the ultimate truth. There has been different diets around the world for ages, some emphasize on carbs, others on fat, etc. The truth is obesity is caused by too many calories. I was shocked by the size of servings in the USA. I was shocked by the size of packages at the supermarket. In my country, chips 99% of the time is 85g packages (eating them all is around 300 calories). Nobody buys bigger than that unless they're having a party with many guests. A lot of food here is really calorie dense (ice cream, pastries, prosciutto, pizza, a shitton of different breads and cheese etc) but the servings would make you starve
Web 2.0, social media, smartphone, netflix penetration, less moving around, walking, dancing and more stuff done online (flirting, shopping etc), more heating/a/c meaning your body doesn't have to work that hard, more office jobs and less blue collar jobs etc.
when i was walking around all day i could eat 3000+ calories easily and not gain weight, i started gaining weight due to moving around less and not adjusting my eating habits, still not fat tho... hope this helps! 🙂
When you burn 4000 calories+ daily and waste so much time walking and also your job requires you to do actual shit instead of sitting in an office stuffing your mouth with food, it's more difficult to get fat
What makes you think walking around causes people to burn 4000 kcal/day?
5 months ago
Anonymous
If you have bmr of about 1800 calories (which is pretty average for a guy), if you walk 20-25000 steps per day plus have a manual job, you're easily getting in the 3500-4000 calories per day range.
5 months ago
Anonymous
So you believe in Additive DEE? That's a childish fantasy.
Pic related.
5 months ago
Anonymous
I don't believe in things. I'm not American. I know that moving will need more energy than being stationary since we have normal public education here.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>I don't believe in things. I'm not American. >Believes in the US-invented Atwater System, aka CICO
5 months ago
Anonymous
Your pic related shows "models" or theories, not tested reality. Yes, some people, if they exercise, will compensate by being more inactive later on, balancing out their total TDEE somewhat.
It takes anywhere from 2500 to 4000kcal to run a marathon. Adding on the calorie burn from basic metabolic processes means that the day you run a marathon, you must have burned anywhere from 4000-6000kcal total.
5 months ago
Anonymous
What makes you think the women from Westerp's half-marathon study are theoretical?
What makes you think the mice in the 28 day study are theoretical?
5 months ago
Anonymous
*Westerterp's
5 months ago
Anonymous
Go ahead and read the Westerterp study. I did. It shows that the participants raised their daily energy expenditure. I'm not sure how the authors of that picture arrived at that graph - it's certainly not present in the original paper.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah that's right, people working in warehouses 12 hours a day burn the same amount as a person at a cubicle
>What makes you think this has anything to do with obesity?
Not him but exercise has been used for millenia for weight los, MUCH longer than calories are even known. Check out Galen, Ibn Sina, Hippocrates, etc.
I searched for Hippocrates statements on obesity and it all seems to be taken out of context and misrepresented by modern authors.
The first diet book in history was a low-carb diet book.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>I searched for Hippocrates statements on obesity and it all seems to be taken out of context and misrepresented by modern authors. >The first diet book in history was a low-carb diet book.
You're American, aren't you? Banting's diet wasn't low carb either, btw, he ate toast and fruit. Just saying.
5 months ago
Anonymous
The Banting diet was explicitly low-carb.
For general population worse. But those who wanted to lose weight all made it by simply going to the gym and eating less
Nobody actually succeeded unless they were doing Atkins.
5 months ago
Anonymous
I did. Just to get a perspective, I was eating only fruits for dinner. I lost 15kg in just a few months and stopped being overweight
5 months ago
Anonymous
Post body.
5 months ago
Anonymous
5 months ago
Anonymous
>no timestamp
It goes without saying but that means your photo is fake.
5 months ago
Anonymous
The previous pic was actually in the summer, so ignore the hair. I can't take a better pic now, I'm not home.
5 months ago
Anonymous
https://i.imgur.com/UdYknsd.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/y5pgOeR.png
https://i.imgur.com/KYg9a6K.png
Yes. I struggled with obesity until I learned about keto. It's also very good for mental health. Zero carb carnivore is even better than keto.
Its always all talk and no timestamp
5 months ago
Anonymous
What? Didn't you notice the little paper with the date? Don't you think that's enough proof? Let's have an honest conversation instead of that please
5 months ago
Anonymous
The are no papers with the current date in any of those pics
5 months ago
Anonymous
Do you have an insulin pump or colostomy bag?
5 months ago
Anonymous
Nope, don't have such issues sorry. I don't eat any sweets though and no soda, only fruits and veggies. I'm not vegan/vegetarian though, I eat lots of eggs, meat and fish too
5 months ago
Anonymous
I wasn't trying to insult you. It looks like you have a tube on your right side coming out of your lower abdomen and then in the follow up pic its covered with a patch or something
5 months ago
Anonymous
You mean the piece of paper with the date written on? I could remove that but I ain't taking any more pics sorry.
I would be interested to seeing your bodies too
5 months ago
Anonymous
>You mean the piece of paper with the date written on
Its completely illegible. It looks like a patch. This is what km talking about, picrel >I would be interested to seeing your bodies too
stop being combafive it was a question. I didn't call you unfit
5 months ago
Anonymous
You mean the piece of paper with the date written on? I could remove that but I ain't taking any more pics sorry.
I would be interested to seeing your bodies too
I'm*
Combative*
5 months ago
Anonymous
Ok, here's what it is. I understand you are curious, no offense taken, don't worry. It's just a stupid soccer toy.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Oh haha okay my bad. Looked like some kind of tube. You look well by the way
How did they obtain the total energy intake data? Did they directly track the caloric intake of this sample population over the years, or did they just give people a diet survey and say "be honest"?
How did they obtain the total energy intake data? Did they directly track the caloric intake of this sample population over the years, or did they just give people a diet survey and say "be honest"?
Its one guy. He's silos for shawn baker and posts the same pics and same replies over and over. He called people who disagrees with him leftist vegans. He's never posted body with timestamp and he is in every single cico and carnivore thread. Stop replying to him
How did they obtain the total energy intake data? Did they directly track the caloric intake of this sample population over the years, or did they just give people a diet survey and say "be honest"?
its an unsourced twitter image showing a google docs graph with absolutely no context
its guaranteed to be utter bullshit
CICO is a simplification. You don't actually know how much you burn, that's why you use a margin of error and adjust. If you start by eating 2200 a day for a month and you lose 1 pound, try eating 1800 for a month.
CICO is modulated by hormones, simply look at male vs female fat storage etc. Or, more to the point, put men's testosterone back to 1950s levels and then see what the same CICO looks like, because it will be completely different.
Calories are a man-made imaginary unit meant to be used in physics, they can't be used for anything biological (bioavailability, micronutrient, genetics, intolerances....) CICO is a cult.
>Perhaps the powdered food, being partially pre-digested, was absorbed better?
Bingo, though it should be said, "partially" is a major euphamism here. Powdered food is virtually 100% digested.
Did they have a way to measure absorption of the food? Perhaps the powdered food, being partially pre-digested, was absorbed better? In such case, it is still CICO.
It's surface area.
Powdered carbs vs whole food carbs have a much higher surface area and don't require chewing or as much enzymatic activity to digest and absorb.
Imagine eating 200g of raw potato vs 200g of mashed potato. Same calories, but your body spends much more energy chewing and digesting raw potato and mashed potato.
This doesn't disprove CICO, it just demonstrates that food texture affects CICO via modulating the thermic effect.
It's both. Because powdered/blended foods are very rapidly absorbed compared to whole/raw/natural foods, they will induce an exaggerated hormonal response because even though the same total amount of calories are in the meal, they are absorbed more rapidly, causing a sharper increase in blood concentration of sugar, lipids, etc.
Insulin injection spot fat gain is because insulin shuttles in nutrition in blood into the fat cells, so because he had locally extreme insulin levels those cells were superabsorbent. But nutrition in the blood isn't infinite so it's doubtful whether the total overall fat mass increases. We know protein increases insulin secretion but it's at the same time both satiating and antiobesogenic.
>pic related
https://www.asean-endocrinejournal.org/index.php/JAFES/article/view/178/653 >Since then, she has had recurrent episodes of dizziness, disorientation, incoherence, hunger pangs, cold sweats, palpitations and tremors. She developed the frequent urge to eat and she learned to avoid these symptoms by eating every 2 hours. She progressively gained weight as a result.
Which makes sense right, since blood sugar levels are important for keeping you alive, if you suck loads of sugar into your cells you become hypoglycemic. Also, if you don't eat more than usual, you might maintain blood sugar levels through cortisol, which is obesogenic (see cushings). The key should be a diet which appropriately keeps you feeling satiated and energized while in a caloric deficit.
However people with an insulinoma should get that treated first. Weight loss would likely be impossible with permanently high insulin.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>the cure for obesity is a low-carb diet
Not really
5 months ago
Anonymous
Yes, really. Overwhelming scientific evidence demonstrates that low-carb is the most effective diet.
Pic related.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Nah, people have always eaten carby diets. Medical science is fake and gay so your dumb little infographics don't mean squat
5 months ago
Anonymous
As long as people have been eating carbs they have known that carbs cause obesity.
>I have personally observed for two or three years men, who were foregoing starches, and in general their bodies were slight and their complexions good. They could withstand wind, cold, heat, or dampness, but there was not a fat one among them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigu_(grain_avoidance)
5 months ago
Anonymous
5 months ago
Anonymous
Short memory?:
https://i.imgur.com/Vw0ET2Q.png
Yes, really. Overwhelming scientific evidence demonstrates that low-carb is the most effective diet.
Pic related.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Weight loss isn't health
5 months ago
Anonymous
Good observation. A healthy diet will restore you to health whatever your starting point is. That means it should cause weight gain in underweight people, and weight loss in overweight people. As well as curing diseases like type 2 diabetes.
Animal-based keto and/or carnivore diets are the healthiest possible.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Animal-based keto and/or carnivore diets are the healthiest possible.
Do you have personal experience?
5 months ago
Anonymous
Yes. I struggled with obesity until I learned about keto. It's also very good for mental health. Zero carb carnivore is even better than keto.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Would you care to post your body with a timestamp?
5 months ago
Anonymous
5 months ago
Anonymous
>with a timestamp. >digs out same old tired screencap
Sigh alright I'll just assume you're fat I guess.
5 months ago
Anonymous
https://i.imgur.com/KYg9a6K.png
Yes. I struggled with obesity until I learned about keto. It's also very good for mental health. Zero carb carnivore is even better than keto.
*crickets*
5 months ago
Anonymous
>people in the process of weight loss are fat
Ketoschizo really is scum
5 months ago
Anonymous
Doing CICO isn't a "process of weight loss". It's a process of destroying your metabolism and slyrocketing your hunger hormones.
The end result of CICO is always obesity.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Not really though
5 months ago
Anonymous
The same page is about taoist wizards who go decades without eating.
most insulin induced lipohypertrophy effects happen due to people injecting insulin in the exact same spot every day instead of rotating insulin injection throughout the abdomen and glutes, which is why the recomendation is pic related
keep coping
Yes its called resistant starch because, obviously, the starch resists digestion. Its unavailable for digestion and thus utilization. You'll get a lot of gas if you eat raw potato because your gut bugs will digest it though
We have only ever cared about calories in digestible food you turboBlack person. No one actually tries to bulk on uranium or chug gas. Despite being 8kcal/gram we can't process charcoal like food don't even try.
All diets come down to CICO, since you can not challenge the law of thermodynamics.
That being said, having done most types of cutting diets, CICO keto OMAD is the best diet for cutting simply because you don't go hungry due to not triggering an intense insulin response. I've done a cut eating nothing but McDonalds and it worked.
Saying that fasting causes cancer is like saying the clotshots are safe and effective.
>A British man who rejected the standard of care to treat his brain cancer has lived with the typically fatal glioblastoma tumor growing very slowly after adopting a ketogenic diet, providing a case study that researchers say reflects the benefits of using the body's own metabolism to fight this particularly aggressive cancer instead of chemo and radiation therapy.
>Published recently in the journal Frontiers in Nutrition, the report is the first evaluation of the use of ketogenic metabolic therapy (KMT) without chemo or radiation interventions, on a patient diagnosed with IDH1-mutant glioblastoma (GBM). Ketogenic therapy is a non-toxic nutritional approach, viewed as complementary or alternative, that uses a low-carbohydrate, high-fat diet to manage a range of cancers, including glioblastoma.
Saying that fasting causes cancer is like saying the clotshots are safe and effective.
>A British man who rejected the standard of care to treat his brain cancer has lived with the typically fatal glioblastoma tumor growing very slowly after adopting a ketogenic diet, providing a case study that researchers say reflects the benefits of using the body's own metabolism to fight this particularly aggressive cancer instead of chemo and radiation therapy.
>Published recently in the journal Frontiers in Nutrition, the report is the first evaluation of the use of ketogenic metabolic therapy (KMT) without chemo or radiation interventions, on a patient diagnosed with IDH1-mutant glioblastoma (GBM). Ketogenic therapy is a non-toxic nutritional approach, viewed as complementary or alternative, that uses a low-carbohydrate, high-fat diet to manage a range of cancers, including glioblastoma.
It depends on the particular cancer. They are all different.
Some tumours can only use ketones for fuel. Some tumours can only use glucose for fuel.
Some tumours can use either for fuel.
>TDEE is 1850 kcal/day >cutting diet set at 2000 kcal/day >lifting in the morning consumes 180 kcal (average) >cardio in the afternoon (running, swimming or biking) burns no less than 600 kcal on average (mountain biking can go up to 1800 kcal depending on distance)
I’ve managed to lose 4 kilos in almost 2 months (yes, is very slow) while hitting PRs at the gym and recomping.
For me it works.
Hadza have same energy expenditure because they are manlet DYELs without muscle. Come back when you compare energy expenditure between sedentary underweight person and active strongman champion or sprinter, for now - frick off.
It is a law of nature that your energy expenditure is constrained by your body size.
The idea that you can increase your energy expenditure is childish fantasy. It's like believing that if you plug a 100kW item into a 7kW generator the generator will magically create 100kW of energy to match the demand.
>It is a law of nature that your energy expenditure is constrained by your body size.
Lie. The most sedentary obese people often have lowest energy expenditure despite having largest body mass. >It's like believing that if you plug a 100kW item into a 7kW generator the generator will magically create 100kW of energy to match the demand.
Analogy is not an argument. Post real evidence that physical activity does not increase energy expenditure.
Only if they attempt CICO, which suppresses metabolism.
Sedentary people have the same TDEE as people who walk 8+ hours daily.
5 months ago
Anonymous
No matter how slow your metabolism are, you still need fixed amount of energy to produce certain amount of force, and since your body does not have infinite energy, physical activity increases energy expenditure. You can't just slow your metabolism to infinity and become a perpetuum mobile. If you can't understand it you are, in fact, moronic.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Physical activity reduces basal metabolism. As you can see by the study you're replying to, where vigorous exercise combined with calorie restriction reduced metabolism by up to -800kcal/day.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Physical activity reduces basal metabolism.
Proof of causation? And even if It's true it doesen't matter, you can't reduce your metabolism to infinity and become a perpetuum mobile. Physical activity will increase your energy expenditure at the end, there's no way around it. >where vigorous exercise combined with calorie restriction reduced metabolism by up to -800kcal/day.
And the participants still lost weight because they started to spend more energy (regaining it after stoping the regime), what a surprise. Why are you going agains your own arguments? Are you braindead?
5 months ago
Anonymous
>As you can see by the study you're replying to >Sources: Obesity; individual contestants >By The New York Times
yeah boy that's some STUDY you have there lmao
5 months ago
Anonymous
Obesity is a scientific journal.
5 months ago
Anonymous
facepalm >Obesity is the official journal of The Obesity Society and is the premier source of information for increasing knowledge, fostering translational research from basic to population science, and promoting better treatment for people with obesity. Obesity publishes important peer-reviewed research and cutting-edge reviews, commentaries, and public health and medical developments.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Surely this is an unbiased organisation with no vested interest in the assertion that "diet and exercise don't work"
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Physical activity reduces basal metabolism
Physical activity = active energy expenditure
Basal metabolism = inactive energy expenditure >Active energy expenditure reduces inactive energy expenditure
Sure, if you use "walking for 15 minutes" as an excuse to sit around doing nothing for the rest of the day.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Oh look a coping fat homosexual. How much do you weigh fatty?
5 months ago
Anonymous
Me on the right.
I am sure cico will work eventually. It's just a law of physics, right?
I hate that ketobigot carnifascist so much. Why does he look so much better than me? It's not fair. Anyway I am off to eat bread. Don't worry I will measure it and track it in my food diary.
5 months ago
Anonymous
guy on the right has a shit ton of loose skin. He probably lost hundreds of lbs. Guy on the left was skinny all his life and is obviously lifting + unlimited calories means lots of muscle gain.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Guy on the left doesn't lift. That's what sedentary means.
5 months ago
Anonymous
How would you know he doesn't lift? Because the picture says so?
5 months ago
Anonymous
>people always tell the truth on the internet
5 months ago
Anonymous
Right wing people tell the truth, yes.
5 months ago
Anonymous
These are all israeli headlines and you are as moronic as the so called "left wingers" you hate for falling for this shit. Left and right mean nothing. Its rich israelites vs the rest of us.
5 months ago
Anonymous
hilarious that the emaciated skeleton on the left thinks he's impressive
5 months ago
Anonymous
Idk anon, sounds like you're just a chubby moron and well I'd never trust a fatty, let alone a moronic one.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Your pic doesn't prove what you think it proves.
If you're asserting that the contestants were using CICO principles during the show, then you concede that they lost weight during the show's run.
So then they regained weight when they stopped adhering to CICO principles. This doesn't "disprove" CICO.
The contestants have lower (not slower) metabolism because they have lost muscle mass as a result of their continued sedentary lifestyles. Lower FFM = lower energy expenditure, even at rest.
5 months ago
Anonymous
They regained weight because that is always what happens with CICO.
Biology denial has predictably poor results.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Your own picture shows the "Eat less, exercise more" group losing more weight than the "normal diet" group. All the studies you keep posting are based on fat women. Women are really, really bad at following diets and exercising. They are bad at eating the right foods, bad at recollecting what they have eaten, bad at estimating portions, bad at exercising, etc etc etc.
When I want to gain muscle, I increase my calorie intake. When I want to cut fat, I reduce my calorie intake and exercise more. It works for me. That some people are bad at dieting and exercising and bad at reporting their diet and activity to the people carrying out studies doesn't disprove reality.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Here's the same graph with error bars included. There's no difference in weight by the end of the study.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>The intervention included group and individual sessions to promote a decrease in fat intake and increases in vegetable, fruit, and grain consumption and did not include weight loss or caloric restriction goals. >did not include weight loss or caloric restriction goals.
woops
5 months ago
Anonymous
What would happen if one group of people ate unlimited calories and another group of people restricted their calories? Which group would lose more weight?
HINT: See pic related. Unlimited calorie group loses more weight because weight loss is all about hormones.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Why would you label the intervention group in that picture "Eat Less, Exercise More", when they were neither instructed to exercise more, nor to reduce calorie intake?
5 months ago
Anonymous
I don't deny that low carb / keto is great for severely overweight people to lose weight.
That doesn't make it the optimal diet for healthy people.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Optimal diet for all humans is carnivore. Humans are apex predators. Eating bird seed is harmful.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Answer the question you disingenuous liar
Why would you label the intervention group in that picture "Eat Less, Exercise More", when they were neither instructed to exercise more, nor to reduce calorie intake?
https://i.imgur.com/Ohggrar.png
[...]
[...]
Imagine adding fake labels (Eat Less, Exercise More) to your pictures to try and win internet points.
The intervention group did not have calorie restriction goals OR instructions to exercise more. How dishonest of you.
5 months ago
Anonymous
What's the goal behind a low-fat diet? Weight gain?
5 months ago
Anonymous
Yes.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Touche.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>>The intervention included group and individual sessions to promote a decrease in fat intake and increases in vegetable, fruit, and grain consumption and did not include weight loss or caloric restriction goals. >did not include weight loss or caloric restriction goals.
You labelled the intervention group " eat less, exercise more." They were not instructed to eat less / reduce calories or to exercise more. You are a liar.
5 months ago
Anonymous
https://i.imgur.com/GeAUUDu.jpg
Here's the same graph with error bars included. There's no difference in weight by the end of the study.
https://i.imgur.com/rqWHbds.png
They regained weight because that is always what happens with CICO.
Biology denial has predictably poor results.
Imagine adding fake labels (Eat Less, Exercise More) to your pictures to try and win internet points.
The intervention group did not have calorie restriction goals OR instructions to exercise more. How dishonest of you.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Women are really, really bad at following diets and exercising. They are bad at eating the right foods, bad at recollecting what they have eaten, bad at estimating portions, bad at exercising
Why?
5 months ago
Anonymous
Everyone is. Not just women.
5 months ago
Anonymous
When people have correct information they tend to succeed.
It is a law of nature that your energy expenditure is constrained by your body size.
The idea that you can increase your energy expenditure is childish fantasy. It's like believing that if you plug a 100kW item into a 7kW generator the generator will magically create 100kW of energy to match the demand.
https://i.imgur.com/ZdIzbk6.jpg
Only if they attempt CICO, which suppresses metabolism.
Sedentary people have the same TDEE as people who walk 8+ hours daily.
If your point was true people could never lose or gain weight
You can tell that ketogays are likely fat because they ask questions like "would 2000 calories of candy and hot pockets have the same effect as 2000 calories of steak?" A ton of people have lived the life of being skinny with shit diets. That's actually the vast majority of skinny people. That was the majority of skinny ISTizens. Back when IST was good, we would laugh at people who tried to 'dirty bulk' but wouldn't gain weight. They thought that eating a couple of slices of pizza per day would be enough to gain weight, but they would fail because that would be all they ate, and IST understood CICO back then.
Ignore the ketoschizo. When he gets bored of everyone ignoring him in /fat/ he starts trolling the whole board with his homosexualry and blatant samegayging as seen in the OP image.
I promise you if I locked your stupid fatfrick ass in a room with nothing but a sink and a toilet for three months, you would have lost about 100lb when I let you out. CICO doesn't have to be exact or precise. If you have trouble losing weight, just eat less fricking food.
Fine. Once a day every day you would be dispensed one complimentary cookie, just to spike your insulin. You'd lose only 95 lbs then, but I'm willing to acquiesce that since it will make me even more correct in an internet argument.
Pic related is CICO. The central premise of CICO is that the spoonful of sugar is less fattening than tomatoes. If it isn't true (it isn't) then CICO is false (it is false).
Meta analysis shows shawn bakers test is in the toilet, he's diabetic, me lost his medical liscence for violating ethics codes, lies about conflicts of interest on studies hes a part of, and he sells beef and supplements
>Meta analysis shows shawn bakers test is in the toilet, he's diabetic, me lost his medical liscence for violating ethics codes, lies about conflicts of interest on studies hes a part of, and he sells beef and supplements
5 months ago
Anonymous
5 months ago
Anonymous
You morons still post this? T levels fluctuate highly. U can be anywhere from 700 - 200 on any given day, the graph below is the israeliteguys is incorrect and gay too
5 months ago
Anonymous
They also post that old blood test instead of his newer blood test.
Vegans are very dishonest people.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Kek this isn't the own you think it is
5 months ago
Anonymous
Total testosterone doesn't mean anything in regards to androgenicity. About 98% of the testosterone in the body doesn't do anything except float around the bloodstream.
And it doesn't take into account androgen receptor sensitivity and overall genetics. You can put the same fuel in a honda civic and a ferrari f40, which one will go faster?
5 months ago
Anonymous
>About 98% of the testosterone in the body doesn't do anything except float around the bloodstream. >And it doesn't take into account androgen receptor sensitivity and overall genetics.
So test means nothing? Oookay.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Total testosterone doesn't mean anything in regards to androgenicity
Okay so his test is low, and >About 98% of the testosterone in the body doesn't do anything except float around the bloodstream
That mean his effective test is EXTREMELY low. Again, not a good look >You can put the same fuel in a honda civic and a ferrari f40, which one will go faster?
This aphorism isn't applicable here
5 months ago
Anonymous
Total testosterone doesn't mean anything in regards to androgenicity. About 98% of the testosterone in the body doesn't do anything except float around the bloodstream.
And it doesn't take into account androgen receptor sensitivity and overall genetics. You can put the same fuel in a honda civic and a ferrari f40, which one will go faster?
Look I get you want your diet of choice to look good, but shawn is such a conman you should really drop him as an example. He claimed that his bloodwork would be great and then when it came back that he was diabetic, he literally said the numbers mean nothing because his red blood cells live 3 times longer than everyone else's like how can you vouch for this guy
Meta analysis shows shawn bakers test is in the toilet, he's diabetic, me lost his medical liscence for violating ethics codes, lies about conflicts of interest on studies hes a part of, and he sells beef and supplements
Is one guy. he zooms in on pics and tries to claim they are shopped. He's a baker apologist and he's in every single thread that mentions him
https://i.imgur.com/81B2jyX.png
What do you think the first thing people do when they try to lose weight is? Of course they try calorie counting. Then they fail.
Some people are so brainwashed they blame themselves instead of the failed diet. Like jabboids who get coronavirus infections saying >imagine how much worse it would be if I wasn't vaccinated!
Some smart people figure out CICO is a hoax and then they manage to lose weight successfully and keep it off long term.
You still aren't answering the question. The point you are making assumes that people got fat in the first place because they were counting calories. Its absolute nonsense. You think the 600 pound people on scooters were counting calories and eating below maintenance?
5 months ago
Anonymous
It's clearly shopped. Just try asking the vegan for the source of his photoshopped images. Real photos have sources.
5 months ago
Anonymous
OK bud
5 months ago
Anonymous
https://i.imgur.com/81B2jyX.png
What do you think the first thing people do when they try to lose weight is? Of course they try calorie counting. Then they fail.
Some people are so brainwashed they blame themselves instead of the failed diet. Like jabboids who get coronavirus infections saying >imagine how much worse it would be if I wasn't vaccinated!
Some smart people figure out CICO is a hoax and then they manage to lose weight successfully and keep it off long term.
Still waiting for your Answer
5 months ago
Anonymous
When the calorie psyop was adopted by the US government, food manufacturers changed their foods to be low-fat. This causes obesity because fat is satiating but carbs are not satiating. Pic related.
People who notice they are getting obese try to eat less, because they fell for the calorie psyop themselves. Traditional wisdom was to cut out sweets and starches. Sugar Information Inc made sure people lost their traditional method of weight control.
This causes weight to spiral out of control. All as a result of the calorie hoax.
Do you think people who end up 600-lbs never tried dieting? Of course they did. CICO doesn't work so their diets inevitably fail and they end up fatter than when they started.
I remember back in the 90s things were simple, if you wanted to lose weight you'd just hit the gym and don't eat so much food. When did the world became so insane?
>muh keto! Don't eat the salad it will make you fat with all that carbs! >le healthy at every size! >muh genes can't make me thin! >muh hormones
No. Your body generates calories out of nothingness. That’s why >people
who eat only 500 calories a day still somehow get fat. It’s also why diets don’t work. It’s not because the fatass breaks down and rewards herself for losing 5 lbs after shitting by eating 20000 calories. It’s because CICO is a myth.
Yes. Simple shit, if you eat more than your body expends, you will get fatter.
Now, you can go back to discussing your gay ass meme diets where you falsely believe you can "eat as much as you want" on it and only lose fat.
I do think its true for the most part but I also feel like I lose mass insanely fast if I don't keep up with my eating. Been trying to bulk for some time now and I gained about 12 pounds over the last few months. This week there were about 3 days where I ate at or slightly below maintenance and somehow I've lost 5 pounds. Feels kinda shitty to lose that much progress so fast.
>here's a study
>here's all the things about it that i like/agree with my world view so we'll assume them to be true and accurate and unbiased
>however they came to the wrong conclusion because they are not as clever as me so that part is wrong (all the other stuff is right though because it agrees with my world view)
>here is my explanation backed up by a random youtube video that proves these morons are wrong (except about the stuff I need them to be right about because it supports my world view)
lmao
What's so hard to accept that CICO doesn't fully capture the full picture of the digestive process and that you have to factor in hormones too?
You seriously think that eating purely 2000 calories of fries a day will have the same outcome as 2000 calories of steak a day? Kys dumbass
NTA, but it's equally facetious to ignore the role that overall energy intake (measured in calories) has on hormones.
If someone's TDEE is higher than 2000 then they will lose weight. If it is lower then they will gain weight. Sorry fatty. Fork putdowns are your only option.
was just pointing out the hilarious and blatant flaw in your logic not commenting on the content
It's good enough you fat homosexual. There is no need to dive further into it. If you want to lose weight just eat less energy
Eating less doesn't work. Especially if you try to eat less dietary fat instead of cutting carbs.
Weird how its always worked without exception
Why do you believe there is an obesity epidemic?
Because people like you pivot instead of directly addressing facts
The answer is because people were tricked into believing CICO.
As belief in CICO increased so did the obesity epidemic. Because CICO is a lie. Thinking calories matter causes obesity.
have a nice day fatso
Obesity is really easy to cure for anyone who understands that calories are a lie.
>The answer is because people were tricked into believing CICO
Do you believe that Everyone counts calories then
Everyone generally believes in the calorie psyop. Belief in the relevance of calories makes it impossible to lose weight, because calorie estimates are not actually relevant.
Once you stop believing the calorie hoax it becomes extremely easy to lose weight and keep it off forever.
Of course you didn't answer the question
What do you think the first thing people do when they try to lose weight is? Of course they try calorie counting. Then they fail.
Some people are so brainwashed they blame themselves instead of the failed diet. Like jabboids who get coronavirus infections saying
>imagine how much worse it would be if I wasn't vaccinated!
Some smart people figure out CICO is a hoax and then they manage to lose weight successfully and keep it off long term.
It isn't hard to accept. I just treat it like upper and lower bounds and use it to guage my hunger relative to what I ate. Low satiety for high calories = trash. High satiety for low calories = good but probably not really being digested well.
High satiety for mid range calories = target foods. Wouldn't you know it, that comes out to lots of meat, good vegetables on the side, very few starchy carbs like beans and rice, almost no refined carbs like American bread or sugar. A small amount of fresh or frozen berries is fine
Yes, cico is the ultimate truth. There has been different diets around the world for ages, some emphasize on carbs, others on fat, etc. The truth is obesity is caused by too many calories. I was shocked by the size of servings in the USA. I was shocked by the size of packages at the supermarket. In my country, chips 99% of the time is 85g packages (eating them all is around 300 calories). Nobody buys bigger than that unless they're having a party with many guests. A lot of food here is really calorie dense (ice cream, pastries, prosciutto, pizza, a shitton of different breads and cheese etc) but the servings would make you starve
How do you explain pic related?
Hello moxyte.
Web 2.0, social media, smartphone, netflix penetration, less moving around, walking, dancing and more stuff done online (flirting, shopping etc), more heating/a/c meaning your body doesn't have to work that hard, more office jobs and less blue collar jobs etc.
>less moving around
What makes you think this has anything to do with obesity?
when i was walking around all day i could eat 3000+ calories easily and not gain weight, i started gaining weight due to moving around less and not adjusting my eating habits, still not fat tho... hope this helps! 🙂
>Verification not required.
And what do you think is causing that?
When you burn 4000 calories+ daily and waste so much time walking and also your job requires you to do actual shit instead of sitting in an office stuffing your mouth with food, it's more difficult to get fat
What makes you think walking around causes people to burn 4000 kcal/day?
If you have bmr of about 1800 calories (which is pretty average for a guy), if you walk 20-25000 steps per day plus have a manual job, you're easily getting in the 3500-4000 calories per day range.
So you believe in Additive DEE? That's a childish fantasy.
Pic related.
I don't believe in things. I'm not American. I know that moving will need more energy than being stationary since we have normal public education here.
>I don't believe in things. I'm not American.
>Believes in the US-invented Atwater System, aka CICO
Your pic related shows "models" or theories, not tested reality. Yes, some people, if they exercise, will compensate by being more inactive later on, balancing out their total TDEE somewhat.
It takes anywhere from 2500 to 4000kcal to run a marathon. Adding on the calorie burn from basic metabolic processes means that the day you run a marathon, you must have burned anywhere from 4000-6000kcal total.
What makes you think the women from Westerp's half-marathon study are theoretical?
What makes you think the mice in the 28 day study are theoretical?
*Westerterp's
Go ahead and read the Westerterp study. I did. It shows that the participants raised their daily energy expenditure. I'm not sure how the authors of that picture arrived at that graph - it's certainly not present in the original paper.
Yeah that's right, people working in warehouses 12 hours a day burn the same amount as a person at a cubicle
Yes.
Lol ok
If you disagree you are a biology denier.
is this bait?
Why would moving around change the amount of energy your body can generate?
The organ which uses the most energy in the body is the brain. Nobody ever suggests reading a book to cure obesity. Why is that?
>Nobody ever suggests reading a book to cure obesity. Why is that?
Reading isn’t a compound exercise
>What makes you think this has anything to do with obesity?
Not him but exercise has been used for millenia for weight los, MUCH longer than calories are even known. Check out Galen, Ibn Sina, Hippocrates, etc.
I searched for Hippocrates statements on obesity and it all seems to be taken out of context and misrepresented by modern authors.
The first diet book in history was a low-carb diet book.
>I searched for Hippocrates statements on obesity and it all seems to be taken out of context and misrepresented by modern authors.
>The first diet book in history was a low-carb diet book.
You're American, aren't you? Banting's diet wasn't low carb either, btw, he ate toast and fruit. Just saying.
The Banting diet was explicitly low-carb.
Nobody actually succeeded unless they were doing Atkins.
I did. Just to get a perspective, I was eating only fruits for dinner. I lost 15kg in just a few months and stopped being overweight
Post body.
>no timestamp
It goes without saying but that means your photo is fake.
The previous pic was actually in the summer, so ignore the hair. I can't take a better pic now, I'm not home.
Its always all talk and no timestamp
What? Didn't you notice the little paper with the date? Don't you think that's enough proof? Let's have an honest conversation instead of that please
The are no papers with the current date in any of those pics
Do you have an insulin pump or colostomy bag?
Nope, don't have such issues sorry. I don't eat any sweets though and no soda, only fruits and veggies. I'm not vegan/vegetarian though, I eat lots of eggs, meat and fish too
I wasn't trying to insult you. It looks like you have a tube on your right side coming out of your lower abdomen and then in the follow up pic its covered with a patch or something
You mean the piece of paper with the date written on? I could remove that but I ain't taking any more pics sorry.
I would be interested to seeing your bodies too
>You mean the piece of paper with the date written on
Its completely illegible. It looks like a patch. This is what km talking about, picrel
>I would be interested to seeing your bodies too
stop being combafive it was a question. I didn't call you unfit
I'm*
Combative*
Ok, here's what it is. I understand you are curious, no offense taken, don't worry. It's just a stupid soccer toy.
Oh haha okay my bad. Looked like some kind of tube. You look well by the way
What does that have to do with CICO?
What are you talking about
If the average age is 38, how can people be dying of old age?
How did they obtain the total energy intake data? Did they directly track the caloric intake of this sample population over the years, or did they just give people a diet survey and say "be honest"?
its an unsourced twitter image showing a google docs graph with absolutely no context
its guaranteed to be utter bullshit
Its one guy. He's silos for shawn baker and posts the same pics and same replies over and over. He called people who disagrees with him leftist vegans. He's never posted body with timestamp and he is in every single cico and carnivore thread. Stop replying to him
Simps for*
CICO is a simplification. You don't actually know how much you burn, that's why you use a margin of error and adjust. If you start by eating 2200 a day for a month and you lose 1 pound, try eating 1800 for a month.
/thread
These seem like good links. I am already starting to watch them. Will bookmark them all.
>cico is the ultimate truth
not a cult btw
CICO is modulated by hormones, simply look at male vs female fat storage etc. Or, more to the point, put men's testosterone back to 1950s levels and then see what the same CICO looks like, because it will be completely different.
Calories are a man-made imaginary unit meant to be used in physics, they can't be used for anything biological (bioavailability, micronutrient, genetics, intolerances....) CICO is a cult.
Lmao at this dumb Black person still spamming this shit every fricking minute of the day for months on end.
Please explain why CICO isn't basically an MLM at this point
Because those things have absolutely nothing in common
>Perhaps the powdered food, being partially pre-digested, was absorbed better?
Bingo, though it should be said, "partially" is a major euphamism here. Powdered food is virtually 100% digested.
>Powdered food is virtually 100% digested.
brb powdering all my food to extract more calories to save money on buying food.
Did they have a way to measure absorption of the food? Perhaps the powdered food, being partially pre-digested, was absorbed better? In such case, it is still CICO.
It's surface area.
Powdered carbs vs whole food carbs have a much higher surface area and don't require chewing or as much enzymatic activity to digest and absorb.
Imagine eating 200g of raw potato vs 200g of mashed potato. Same calories, but your body spends much more energy chewing and digesting raw potato and mashed potato.
This doesn't disprove CICO, it just demonstrates that food texture affects CICO via modulating the thermic effect.
How do you know it isn't just a hormonal effect?
It's both. Because powdered/blended foods are very rapidly absorbed compared to whole/raw/natural foods, they will induce an exaggerated hormonal response because even though the same total amount of calories are in the meal, they are absorbed more rapidly, causing a sharper increase in blood concentration of sugar, lipids, etc.
Insulin injection spot fat gain is because insulin shuttles in nutrition in blood into the fat cells, so because he had locally extreme insulin levels those cells were superabsorbent. But nutrition in the blood isn't infinite so it's doubtful whether the total overall fat mass increases. We know protein increases insulin secretion but it's at the same time both satiating and antiobesogenic.
Insulin causes obesity independent from calories eaten. Pic related.
See also:
>pic related
https://www.asean-endocrinejournal.org/index.php/JAFES/article/view/178/653
>Since then, she has had recurrent episodes of dizziness, disorientation, incoherence, hunger pangs, cold sweats, palpitations and tremors. She developed the frequent urge to eat and she learned to avoid these symptoms by eating every 2 hours. She progressively gained weight as a result.
Which makes sense right, since blood sugar levels are important for keeping you alive, if you suck loads of sugar into your cells you become hypoglycemic. Also, if you don't eat more than usual, you might maintain blood sugar levels through cortisol, which is obesogenic (see cushings). The key should be a diet which appropriately keeps you feeling satiated and energized while in a caloric deficit.
Yes, the cure for obesity is a low-carb diet.
However people with an insulinoma should get that treated first. Weight loss would likely be impossible with permanently high insulin.
>the cure for obesity is a low-carb diet
Not really
Yes, really. Overwhelming scientific evidence demonstrates that low-carb is the most effective diet.
Pic related.
Nah, people have always eaten carby diets. Medical science is fake and gay so your dumb little infographics don't mean squat
As long as people have been eating carbs they have known that carbs cause obesity.
>I have personally observed for two or three years men, who were foregoing starches, and in general their bodies were slight and their complexions good. They could withstand wind, cold, heat, or dampness, but there was not a fat one among them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigu_(grain_avoidance)
Short memory?:
Weight loss isn't health
Good observation. A healthy diet will restore you to health whatever your starting point is. That means it should cause weight gain in underweight people, and weight loss in overweight people. As well as curing diseases like type 2 diabetes.
Animal-based keto and/or carnivore diets are the healthiest possible.
>Animal-based keto and/or carnivore diets are the healthiest possible.
Do you have personal experience?
Yes. I struggled with obesity until I learned about keto. It's also very good for mental health. Zero carb carnivore is even better than keto.
Would you care to post your body with a timestamp?
>with a timestamp.
>digs out same old tired screencap
Sigh alright I'll just assume you're fat I guess.
*crickets*
>people in the process of weight loss are fat
Ketoschizo really is scum
Doing CICO isn't a "process of weight loss". It's a process of destroying your metabolism and slyrocketing your hunger hormones.
The end result of CICO is always obesity.
Not really though
The same page is about taoist wizards who go decades without eating.
most insulin induced lipohypertrophy effects happen due to people injecting insulin in the exact same spot every day instead of rotating insulin injection throughout the abdomen and glutes, which is why the recomendation is pic related
keep coping
Yeah insulin is a very powerful fat storage hormone. Obese people are hyperinsulinemic.
>Imagine eating 200g of raw potato vs 200g of mashed potato. Same calories
Its not the sane calories. Raw potato is indigestible.
>Raw potato is indigestible
it is?!
Yes its called resistant starch because, obviously, the starch resists digestion. Its unavailable for digestion and thus utilization. You'll get a lot of gas if you eat raw potato because your gut bugs will digest it though
Wait, calories can be different?
So CICO is false, then?
Still being disingenuous I see
How so?
Answer this question
It depends on what scale you are using.
Pick one
Let me ask you a question. At what temperature does water boil,?
We have only ever cared about calories in digestible food you turboBlack person. No one actually tries to bulk on uranium or chug gas. Despite being 8kcal/gram we can't process charcoal like food don't even try.
Why is it impossible to get fat from protein if CICO is true?
Because it isn't impossible. There are well documented biochemical pathways for turning proteins into fat.
All diets come down to CICO, since you can not challenge the law of thermodynamics.
That being said, having done most types of cutting diets, CICO keto OMAD is the best diet for cutting simply because you don't go hungry due to not triggering an intense insulin response. I've done a cut eating nothing but McDonalds and it worked.
Keto causes cancer
CICO causes brainrot. Evidence: this thread.
>"fuel"
Ketones make tumour cells grow, cope
Saying that fasting causes cancer is like saying the clotshots are safe and effective.
>A British man who rejected the standard of care to treat his brain cancer has lived with the typically fatal glioblastoma tumor growing very slowly after adopting a ketogenic diet, providing a case study that researchers say reflects the benefits of using the body's own metabolism to fight this particularly aggressive cancer instead of chemo and radiation therapy.
>Published recently in the journal Frontiers in Nutrition, the report is the first evaluation of the use of ketogenic metabolic therapy (KMT) without chemo or radiation interventions, on a patient diagnosed with IDH1-mutant glioblastoma (GBM). Ketogenic therapy is a non-toxic nutritional approach, viewed as complementary or alternative, that uses a low-carbohydrate, high-fat diet to manage a range of cancers, including glioblastoma.
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-06-case-patient-ketogenic-diet-fully.html
Pointless, if you could prescribe a healthier lifestyle, 90% of medicine would become unnecessary
It depends on the particular cancer. They are all different.
Some tumours can only use ketones for fuel. Some tumours can only use glucose for fuel.
Some tumours can use either for fuel.
Sure, keto made you so sane that you lurk on IST posting the same wrong shit 24/7.
Everyone else has brain rot in your reality.
Keto cures cancer as long as you're doing meat and dairy based keto.
I suppose most plant-based diets probably cause cancer.
>mainstream science is garbage
>my mainstream science says so
not reading that shit but the answer is no
>TDEE is 1850 kcal/day
>cutting diet set at 2000 kcal/day
>lifting in the morning consumes 180 kcal (average)
>cardio in the afternoon (running, swimming or biking) burns no less than 600 kcal on average (mountain biking can go up to 1800 kcal depending on distance)
I’ve managed to lose 4 kilos in almost 2 months (yes, is very slow) while hitting PRs at the gym and recomping.
For me it works.
Exercise doesn't increase your TDEE.
Hadza have same energy expenditure because they are manlet DYELs without muscle. Come back when you compare energy expenditure between sedentary underweight person and active strongman champion or sprinter, for now - frick off.
It is a law of nature that your energy expenditure is constrained by your body size.
The idea that you can increase your energy expenditure is childish fantasy. It's like believing that if you plug a 100kW item into a 7kW generator the generator will magically create 100kW of energy to match the demand.
>It is a law of nature that your energy expenditure is constrained by your body size.
Lie. The most sedentary obese people often have lowest energy expenditure despite having largest body mass.
>It's like believing that if you plug a 100kW item into a 7kW generator the generator will magically create 100kW of energy to match the demand.
Analogy is not an argument. Post real evidence that physical activity does not increase energy expenditure.
Only if they attempt CICO, which suppresses metabolism.
Sedentary people have the same TDEE as people who walk 8+ hours daily.
No matter how slow your metabolism are, you still need fixed amount of energy to produce certain amount of force, and since your body does not have infinite energy, physical activity increases energy expenditure. You can't just slow your metabolism to infinity and become a perpetuum mobile. If you can't understand it you are, in fact, moronic.
Physical activity reduces basal metabolism. As you can see by the study you're replying to, where vigorous exercise combined with calorie restriction reduced metabolism by up to -800kcal/day.
>Physical activity reduces basal metabolism.
Proof of causation? And even if It's true it doesen't matter, you can't reduce your metabolism to infinity and become a perpetuum mobile. Physical activity will increase your energy expenditure at the end, there's no way around it.
>where vigorous exercise combined with calorie restriction reduced metabolism by up to -800kcal/day.
And the participants still lost weight because they started to spend more energy (regaining it after stoping the regime), what a surprise. Why are you going agains your own arguments? Are you braindead?
>As you can see by the study you're replying to
>Sources: Obesity; individual contestants
>By The New York Times
yeah boy that's some STUDY you have there lmao
Obesity is a scientific journal.
facepalm
>Obesity is the official journal of The Obesity Society and is the premier source of information for increasing knowledge, fostering translational research from basic to population science, and promoting better treatment for people with obesity. Obesity publishes important peer-reviewed research and cutting-edge reviews, commentaries, and public health and medical developments.
Surely this is an unbiased organisation with no vested interest in the assertion that "diet and exercise don't work"
>Physical activity reduces basal metabolism
Physical activity = active energy expenditure
Basal metabolism = inactive energy expenditure
>Active energy expenditure reduces inactive energy expenditure
Sure, if you use "walking for 15 minutes" as an excuse to sit around doing nothing for the rest of the day.
Oh look a coping fat homosexual. How much do you weigh fatty?
Me on the right.
I am sure cico will work eventually. It's just a law of physics, right?
I hate that ketobigot carnifascist so much. Why does he look so much better than me? It's not fair. Anyway I am off to eat bread. Don't worry I will measure it and track it in my food diary.
guy on the right has a shit ton of loose skin. He probably lost hundreds of lbs. Guy on the left was skinny all his life and is obviously lifting + unlimited calories means lots of muscle gain.
Guy on the left doesn't lift. That's what sedentary means.
How would you know he doesn't lift? Because the picture says so?
>people always tell the truth on the internet
Right wing people tell the truth, yes.
These are all israeli headlines and you are as moronic as the so called "left wingers" you hate for falling for this shit. Left and right mean nothing. Its rich israelites vs the rest of us.
hilarious that the emaciated skeleton on the left thinks he's impressive
Idk anon, sounds like you're just a chubby moron and well I'd never trust a fatty, let alone a moronic one.
Your pic doesn't prove what you think it proves.
If you're asserting that the contestants were using CICO principles during the show, then you concede that they lost weight during the show's run.
So then they regained weight when they stopped adhering to CICO principles. This doesn't "disprove" CICO.
The contestants have lower (not slower) metabolism because they have lost muscle mass as a result of their continued sedentary lifestyles. Lower FFM = lower energy expenditure, even at rest.
They regained weight because that is always what happens with CICO.
Biology denial has predictably poor results.
Your own picture shows the "Eat less, exercise more" group losing more weight than the "normal diet" group. All the studies you keep posting are based on fat women. Women are really, really bad at following diets and exercising. They are bad at eating the right foods, bad at recollecting what they have eaten, bad at estimating portions, bad at exercising, etc etc etc.
When I want to gain muscle, I increase my calorie intake. When I want to cut fat, I reduce my calorie intake and exercise more. It works for me. That some people are bad at dieting and exercising and bad at reporting their diet and activity to the people carrying out studies doesn't disprove reality.
Here's the same graph with error bars included. There's no difference in weight by the end of the study.
>The intervention included group and individual sessions to promote a decrease in fat intake and increases in vegetable, fruit, and grain consumption and did not include weight loss or caloric restriction goals.
>did not include weight loss or caloric restriction goals.
woops
What would happen if one group of people ate unlimited calories and another group of people restricted their calories? Which group would lose more weight?
HINT: See pic related. Unlimited calorie group loses more weight because weight loss is all about hormones.
Why would you label the intervention group in that picture "Eat Less, Exercise More", when they were neither instructed to exercise more, nor to reduce calorie intake?
I don't deny that low carb / keto is great for severely overweight people to lose weight.
That doesn't make it the optimal diet for healthy people.
Optimal diet for all humans is carnivore. Humans are apex predators. Eating bird seed is harmful.
Answer the question you disingenuous liar
What's the goal behind a low-fat diet? Weight gain?
Yes.
Touche.
>>The intervention included group and individual sessions to promote a decrease in fat intake and increases in vegetable, fruit, and grain consumption and did not include weight loss or caloric restriction goals.
>did not include weight loss or caloric restriction goals.
You labelled the intervention group " eat less, exercise more." They were not instructed to eat less / reduce calories or to exercise more. You are a liar.
Imagine adding fake labels (Eat Less, Exercise More) to your pictures to try and win internet points.
The intervention group did not have calorie restriction goals OR instructions to exercise more. How dishonest of you.
>Women are really, really bad at following diets and exercising. They are bad at eating the right foods, bad at recollecting what they have eaten, bad at estimating portions, bad at exercising
Why?
Everyone is. Not just women.
When people have correct information they tend to succeed.
If your point was true people could never lose or gain weight
You can lose weight by lowering insulin. You can gain weight by raising insulin.
It's just calorie theory which is false. Hormonal theory is still correct.
>You can lose weight by lowering insulin. You can gain weight by raising insulin.
Explain the potato diet
It lowers insulin by swapping powdered carbs for solid carbs.
You've explained nothing. Potatoes are very high GI
Read OP image.
>repeating the same thing
I accept your concession
Potatoes are eaten unpowdered.
Powdered carbs create a different hormonal response to unpowdered carbs.
Yes, CICO is true. Anyone who disagrees is a fat gay trying to cope. Simple as.
brb gonna bulk to 300 lbs on 1000kcal/day
thanks for enlightening me op
are these bot threads at this point?
We're all just clown bots in an amazing digital circus...
Of course it is
3k McDonalds calories = 3k lentils calories
Absolutely no difference
israelite-O
You can tell that ketogays are likely fat because they ask questions like "would 2000 calories of candy and hot pockets have the same effect as 2000 calories of steak?" A ton of people have lived the life of being skinny with shit diets. That's actually the vast majority of skinny people. That was the majority of skinny ISTizens. Back when IST was good, we would laugh at people who tried to 'dirty bulk' but wouldn't gain weight. They thought that eating a couple of slices of pizza per day would be enough to gain weight, but they would fail because that would be all they ate, and IST understood CICO back then.
Ignore the ketoschizo. When he gets bored of everyone ignoring him in /fat/ he starts trolling the whole board with his homosexualry and blatant samegayging as seen in the OP image.
I promise you if I locked your stupid fatfrick ass in a room with nothing but a sink and a toilet for three months, you would have lost about 100lb when I let you out. CICO doesn't have to be exact or precise. If you have trouble losing weight, just eat less fricking food.
Fasting is ketogenic.
Fine. Once a day every day you would be dispensed one complimentary cookie, just to spike your insulin. You'd lose only 95 lbs then, but I'm willing to acquiesce that since it will make me even more correct in an internet argument.
What if you are given a drip feed of insulin? Then what would happen?
Pic related.
Relying on anything other than CICO is cope. Ultimately, if you need to, you can always CICO
>Relying on anything other than CICO is cope
not a cult btw
If you think CICO doesn't work on you, just stop eating and see if you lose weight. Easy to verify or refute.
Fasting isn't CICO.
Pic related is CICO. The central premise of CICO is that the spoonful of sugar is less fattening than tomatoes. If it isn't true (it isn't) then CICO is false (it is false).
>Fasting isn't CICO.
Yes it is. Its CO
burning energy is a complex hormonal process. CICO is equivilent to comparing the energy outbut of a 2kg burning log vs a 1 kg log that isnt burning
Keto doesn't work
Keto works better than any other diet.
But I like to lift and I need carbs for that.
Meta analysis shows carbs have zero benefit for lifting.
Meta analysis shows shawn bakers test is in the toilet, he's diabetic, me lost his medical liscence for violating ethics codes, lies about conflicts of interest on studies hes a part of, and he sells beef and supplements
>Meta analysis shows shawn bakers test is in the toilet, he's diabetic, me lost his medical liscence for violating ethics codes, lies about conflicts of interest on studies hes a part of, and he sells beef and supplements
You morons still post this? T levels fluctuate highly. U can be anywhere from 700 - 200 on any given day, the graph below is the israeliteguys is incorrect and gay too
They also post that old blood test instead of his newer blood test.
Vegans are very dishonest people.
Kek this isn't the own you think it is
Total testosterone doesn't mean anything in regards to androgenicity. About 98% of the testosterone in the body doesn't do anything except float around the bloodstream.
And it doesn't take into account androgen receptor sensitivity and overall genetics. You can put the same fuel in a honda civic and a ferrari f40, which one will go faster?
>About 98% of the testosterone in the body doesn't do anything except float around the bloodstream.
>And it doesn't take into account androgen receptor sensitivity and overall genetics.
So test means nothing? Oookay.
>Total testosterone doesn't mean anything in regards to androgenicity
Okay so his test is low, and
>About 98% of the testosterone in the body doesn't do anything except float around the bloodstream
That mean his effective test is EXTREMELY low. Again, not a good look
>You can put the same fuel in a honda civic and a ferrari f40, which one will go faster?
This aphorism isn't applicable here
Look I get you want your diet of choice to look good, but shawn is such a conman you should really drop him as an example. He claimed that his bloodwork would be great and then when it came back that he was diabetic, he literally said the numbers mean nothing because his red blood cells live 3 times longer than everyone else's like how can you vouch for this guy
Its so sad yeah this is true
Oof
If his test is in the toilet, how is he so strong and manly looking. It doesn't make sense.
No idea, but he posted his bloodwork and his health is crap
I doubt you're a higher dimensional being with control over entropy/time, therefore, CICO is true.
>insulin is a fat storage hormone
WRONG
no u
>ketogays are closer to rats than humans
checks out
>is 1+1=2 true?
frick off moron
I look forward to OP dying of heart disease.
Heart disease is caused by carbs.
im convinced all the CICO deniers is just one moronic homosexual that had to repeat math classes in gradeschool
CICO is biology denial.
>fatfricks will do anything and believe anything instead of making a lifestyle change of simply eating less and moving more
Vegan logo in top left.
he admits it's real
You know it is fake.
Cope
?
>?
Is one guy. he zooms in on pics and tries to claim they are shopped. He's a baker apologist and he's in every single thread that mentions him
You still aren't answering the question. The point you are making assumes that people got fat in the first place because they were counting calories. Its absolute nonsense. You think the 600 pound people on scooters were counting calories and eating below maintenance?
It's clearly shopped. Just try asking the vegan for the source of his photoshopped images. Real photos have sources.
OK bud
Still waiting for your Answer
When the calorie psyop was adopted by the US government, food manufacturers changed their foods to be low-fat. This causes obesity because fat is satiating but carbs are not satiating. Pic related.
People who notice they are getting obese try to eat less, because they fell for the calorie psyop themselves. Traditional wisdom was to cut out sweets and starches. Sugar Information Inc made sure people lost their traditional method of weight control.
This causes weight to spiral out of control. All as a result of the calorie hoax.
Do you think people who end up 600-lbs never tried dieting? Of course they did. CICO doesn't work so their diets inevitably fail and they end up fatter than when they started.
Oh okay, still not answering the question
For sure why would a diabetic meat salesman who lies on studies and lost his medical license ever possibly mislead people
I remember back in the 90s things were simple, if you wanted to lose weight you'd just hit the gym and don't eat so much food. When did the world became so insane?
>muh keto! Don't eat the salad it will make you fat with all that carbs!
>le healthy at every size!
>muh genes can't make me thin!
>muh hormones
So in the 90s they reversed the obesity epidemic? Or did it keep getting worse?
For general population worse. But those who wanted to lose weight all made it by simply going to the gym and eating less
Here's your (You), moxyte. It's funny to see you on the periphery of this conversation getting very upset by it.
Keto causes cancer
You already said that in this thread, moxyte.
See:
How bad is american education that people can't understand there's several effects at play at the same time lmao
How much cope to foreigners have that they think about america 24/7
You can always lose weight if you lower calories enough, but with shitty hormones you need to lower them more.
So what you're saying is, I should be eating baked potates instead of mashed?
Damn, I love me some mashed taters.
Yeah if you're eating carbs you have to chew them yourself to avoid messing up your hormones.
Weird how people that ate bread built society and lived into their 90s
Bread used to be fermented. Microbes eat the carbs and upgrade the nutrition.
It still is idk what bread you are buying
Only sourdough is fermented.
Nothing. I said was wrong
Modern sourdough is not fermented as long as traditional sourdough. And most bread isn't sourdough anyway.
Nothing I said was wrong
No. Your body generates calories out of nothingness. That’s why
>people
who eat only 500 calories a day still somehow get fat. It’s also why diets don’t work. It’s not because the fatass breaks down and rewards herself for losing 5 lbs after shitting by eating 20000 calories. It’s because CICO is a myth.
Yes. Simple shit, if you eat more than your body expends, you will get fatter.
Now, you can go back to discussing your gay ass meme diets where you falsely believe you can "eat as much as you want" on it and only lose fat.
worst thread on IST
How are threads like this always spammed by this one guy obsessed with his meme diet? What mental illness possesses someone to do this?
Keto/carnivore people are literally worse than stoners when it comes to constantly talking about their thing
I do think its true for the most part but I also feel like I lose mass insanely fast if I don't keep up with my eating. Been trying to bulk for some time now and I gained about 12 pounds over the last few months. This week there were about 3 days where I ate at or slightly below maintenance and somehow I've lost 5 pounds. Feels kinda shitty to lose that much progress so fast.