>study comes to a conclusion that's counterintuitive on its face, with minimal statistical significance in the findings >struggling journalist has to frame the result with a shitty ragebait headline so that screeching morons click on it and get served ads >the ragebait works and sends spastic brainlets on twitter into a seething tard rage
it's not that IST rejects science. morons just don't grasp science on a fundamental level.
I don't think Karla Walsh meant it as rage bait I think shes just fat or wants to push this idea that fat people can't help it. The whole idea of a study is that they aren't actually being scientific they're just cherry picking certain findings from previous research and framing it in a certain light. Actual science is in the biology. Moving burns calories, eating adds calories. Simple.
IIRC the actual study actually found that TELLING people >eat less move more
didn't make them lose weight. It's not about whether they actually did it, but about the fact that simply telling people to do it doesn't actually make them do it.
No it sounds like they just tried to eat less "healthy" food and failed because it isn't nourishing or satiating. Dieting is idiot-proof if you just stuff yourself with meat and eggs. You can eat until you are completely full and still lose fat. These mainstream diets are always stupid shit like cereal bars, salad, tiny portions of meat, and they wonder why the goyslop addicts can't stick with it...
I think we're at the point where nutritional science is a lost cause, it's just a morass of activists doing food industry biased studies for gibs and journalists using the idiotic results as clickbait.
Almost nobody wants to hear it but if you’re serious about losing fat it’s really as simple as minimizing carb intake, which naturally leads to you eating more filling foods
This is very good advice and very true. Ignore the recommendations and conclusions of reported "science". Its no longer "science" but is "professional research."
if i wanted to write an equally ragebaity headline it would be something like "fatsos to dumb to follow basic instructions" >Methods: Qualitative content analysis was applied to 159 audio recordings of consultations from the Brief Interventions for Weight Loss (BWeL)
trial, where GPs gave brief weight-loss advice to patients with a body mass index ≥30 kg/m2
(or ≥25 kg/m2
if Asian) in 137 UK surgeries. Similar
content was grouped into descriptive clusters. >Results: The results comprised 4 clusters, illuminating different aspects of the advice given: (i) Content of diet and physical activity advice,
showing this was highly varied; (ii) Content of “implementation tips” given to support changes, e.g. using smaller plates; (iii) Content of signposting support, either towards further clinician support, or other resources, e.g. information booklets; (iv) Style of advice delivery, showing GPs
rarely gave personalized advice, or reasons for their advice. >Conclusions and implications: Weight-loss advice from GPs to patients with obesity rarely included effective methods, mostly communicating a general “eat less, do more” approach. Advice was mostly generic, and rarely tailored to patients’ existing knowledge and behaviours.
Effectiveness of brief weight-loss advice could be improved if GPs were given clearer guidance on evidence-based recommendations.
>fatties too lazy to follow health advice of "eat less"
I can see how they could write such a misleading title then
it's not the concept (CICO) that's flawed, it's the manchildren unable to follow it
Why is it that there are so many fat girls now?
even with fitness being popularized there arent many fit chicks.
Instead you have a bunch of fatties wearing industrial-grade shapewear hiding their rolls now. Versus back then it was "accepting" their rolls of fat.
Why is it that there are so many fat girls now?
even with fitness being popularized there arent many fit chicks.
Instead you have a bunch of fatties wearing industrial-grade shapewear hiding their rolls now. Versus back then it was "accepting" their rolls of fat.
Obseity rates are almost always caused by sugary drinks. It is nearly impossible to eat enough calories to incurr modern obesity levels.
What really damages society is self-righteous morons saying "hurr zero calorie sweeteners are worse for you than sugar". Even if shit like aspartame were actually bad for you (it isn't) the amount of artificial sweeteners in "diet" drinks is so small that you'd never be affected by it. The false villification of artificial sweeteners is one of the most damaging narratives in nutrition.
>inb4 uh buh water is better
Of course it fricking is dumb shit but fatasses will never ever drink water over sugary sodas so the best thing that can be done is getting them on diet sodas
Untrue. I packed on like 30 pounds in 2 months (intentionally, got strong as hell) pounding processed carbs on top of my regular chicken/carb/vegetable diet. If technically become obese, and had I kept doing it I 100% would have been what we colloquially understand as obese in like 3 more months.
Zero liquid calories were consumed besides the occasional beers with the boys. Sticking to this rule could very much still get you fat if you’re moronic or lack willpower.
There's probably a negligible amount from the grounds but it would be too small to matter since it's basically just infused water
Not to mention it's also an appetite suppressant so you'll also be saving calories later in the day by not being as tempted to eat outside of meals
A sedentary lifestyle caused by living in a developed country where female-dominated jobs tend to be sitting at a desk indoors, birth control altering hormones, women naturally retaining more fat than men, a culture that condones female obesity but not (to nearly the same degree anyway) male obesity, and a diet high in processed and calorie-dense food that is easily accessible in large quantities.
I had gone as low as 500 calories a day yet I didn't lose weight but had a low carb diet and shit worked. I'm happy that I didn't listen to IST's CICO bullshit and I made it.
Academia homosexual here.
I can find you a study that says anything because 5% of the time, by definition, the findings will be wrong since most scientists use a 95% confidence
Every fricking fraud in the world is putting out fradulent studies in order to sell diets or products or coaching or whatever other bullshit. There is no oversight of the field of publishing studies. Way more than half of all "studies" being published are completely fraudulent.
"Studies" mean nothing, esp in the nutrition/exercise science realm. You have to synthesize ALL the data of human knowledge: anthropology, history, medicine, agriculture, psychology, biology, chemistry, etc.etc. and apply it all to your (or your trainees's) situation to make decisions.
After all, there are studies out there that claim eggs are dangerous as cigarettes. Conversely there are NO studies out there that explain how exactly cigarettes cause lung cancer. If we went by these cherry picked studies alone, we would never eat another egg and smoke cigarettes. But the tnitre body of human knwloedge tells us that is stupid.
Are there any studies out there that says what would happen to OP if he sucked off 100 guys ina row and swallowed their cum? No, of course not. But that doesnt mean OP should run out and start sucking off guys, simply because there is no "study" saying not to when the whole body of human knowedge - and experience - tells us otherwise.
In other words, go ahead and read all the studies you want. But read ALL the studies, experiments, conclusions, papers, history, grapshs, charts, etc. Then synthesize it to make sense with experience and other more subjective forms of logic and knowedge.
The people telling us men can get pregnant and the vaxipad is safe are the same people telling us that fat is healthy and genetic and can’t be helped you fricking troglodyte. Touch grass every so often.
This is the 'team' behind the article you posted OP. It's literally just a bunch of israeli women with a token black and yellow at the end. All they write about is how being a huge fatty is okay, which is ironically exactly what large corporations shown in your meme want (who's investments include the sale of food, drink and the pharmaceuticals necessary to keep fat c**ts feeling better day to day)
You're literally quoting people you hate because a clickbait headline that didn't actually represent the source material tricked you into believing they're on your side.
Calories in Calories out, which is another way to say eat less and move more is absolutely 100% irrefutably true. Gospel truth.
The problem comes with the application of it - its so much more complicated and nuanced than just "eat less, move more" because its so fricking hard and tricky to "eat less calories and move more to burn more calories." Even if true, its not helpful.
CICO is untrue because the human body is not 100% efficient and is not a closed system. People always quote laws of thermodynamics, but those apply only to closed systems while the human body is an open system composed of countless nested open systems.
No, we all gain fat when we eat things that trigger hormones like insulin which cause them to be put into fat storage. If someone pumped you full of insulin all day long you would be incapable of losing weight no matter how few "calories" you ate. Food isn't burned in your gut for energy like a furnace, it's chemically decomposed into constituent parts which are then used throughout the body based on hormonal processes. What you eat matters immensely.
>the human body is an open system
source?
>the human body is not 100% efficient
CICO doesn't need to be 100% efficient for it to be true. >People always quote laws of thermodynamics, but those apply only to closed systems
Spoken like a moron who hasn't actually studied thermodynamics. Only the second law (entropy) does not apply to open systems, and it only applies to isolated systems, not closed systems (yes, there is a difference, read a book you fricking Black person).
The problem with CICO is that there are so many variables that could affect energy intake and energy expenditure that it becomes impossible to predict either side of the equation. Even estimates on calories in food can be off by 20% in either direction. Then you have to account for different types of nutrients being used for different things in the body (example: protein can become muscle, sugar can't) and the fact that it's possible to poop out food that isn't fully digested and all the hundreds of different things from diet to activity to environment that can affect your metabolism. CICO can't even account for the fact that someone injecting a steady stream of insulin won't be able to lose weight because everything that comes in will be stored as fat and the body will never enter a fat-burning state to get rid of it. Even if you entertain the ridiculous idea that food can be likened to a log in a furnace there are STILL too many variables that make the whole equation impossible to actually predict.
>No, we all gain fat when we eat things that trigger hormones like insulin which cause them to be put into fat storage
Come back when you learn what insulin actually does, you fricking moron. >Even estimates on calories in food can be off by 20% in either direction
So include assume the worst in your calculations. Problem solved.
I ate only 800 calories a day and jogged 5 miles each morning for a month, and actually gained weight by the end
Something doesn’t add up
The only thing that doesn't add up is your story.
Stop bullshitting.
>the human body is not 100% efficient
CICO doesn't need to be 100% efficient for it to be true. >People always quote laws of thermodynamics, but those apply only to closed systems
Spoken like a moron who hasn't actually studied thermodynamics. Only the second law (entropy) does not apply to open systems, and it only applies to isolated systems, not closed systems (yes, there is a difference, read a book you fricking Black person).
No, we all gain fat when we eat things that trigger hormones like insulin which cause them to be put into fat storage. If someone pumped you full of insulin all day long you would be incapable of losing weight no matter how few "calories" you ate. Food isn't burned in your gut for energy like a furnace, it's chemically decomposed into constituent parts which are then used throughout the body based on hormonal processes. What you eat matters immensely.
[...]
[...]
The problem with CICO is that there are so many variables that could affect energy intake and energy expenditure that it becomes impossible to predict either side of the equation. Even estimates on calories in food can be off by 20% in either direction. Then you have to account for different types of nutrients being used for different things in the body (example: protein can become muscle, sugar can't) and the fact that it's possible to poop out food that isn't fully digested and all the hundreds of different things from diet to activity to environment that can affect your metabolism. CICO can't even account for the fact that someone injecting a steady stream of insulin won't be able to lose weight because everything that comes in will be stored as fat and the body will never enter a fat-burning state to get rid of it. Even if you entertain the ridiculous idea that food can be likened to a log in a furnace there are STILL too many variables that make the whole equation impossible to actually predict.
So far you have demonstrated that you: >don't understand thermodynamics >don't understand basic biochemistry
You're just a fat moron repeating nonsensical copes made up by other fat morons. If you put as much effort into your health as you do your coping, you wouldn't be fat.
Go outside and lose some weight, lardass.
KEtoschizo did you actually read the study cause I don't think you'll like it....
It concludes that generic advice like don't eat carbs is unhelpful to weightloss and more tailored advice is necessary lmao
>We found that GPs gave mainly generic diet and exercise messages for example “reduce your carbohydrates” and “move more.” Furthermore, weight-loss advice was often not tailored to patients’ existing knowledge and behaviours. Obesity is a chronic and relapsing condition, but patients were not given specific or evidence-based advice to support them to manage this. The findings suggest that the brief weight-loss advice from GPs could be more effective if they were given clearer guidance on which methods of weight-loss evidence has shown actually works.
But overall it's a moronic study that analysed audiocalls and then said 'this isn't helpful!' but didn't actually do ANY statistical analysis of results from that advice, so they're making the assumption it was unhelpful because.. well... they just say so okay! It's literally not even science. It's effectively a subjective review of GP performance like some moronic youtuber making a review of customer service for a tech company.
The problem is the moronic notion so many people have that dieting is a temporary thing you can do for a while until you reach your goal.
It isn't.
If your want your weight loss to be permanent, then your diet and exercise regime must also be permanent.
Recently I was very broke for about two months with hardly any food to eat and I lost almost all of th extra weight I had. I had prior out on a ton of weight and all of it melted off of me in about two weeks so I felt very hungry the whole time but I definitely lost weight. It's almost like not eating food causes my body to burn extra stored fat or something
>new study has disproven the laws of thermodynamics >all power plants on earth are shut down and replaced by fat people who “can’t lose the weight” providing infinite energy >humanity enters the golden age of space exploration >terraforms mars in a decade >saturns moons turn into hotels for views of saturn >Uranus becomes a theme park with an 18+ section on the dark side of the planet >proxima centauri is reached in the year 2105 life is found and we are no longer alone in the universe >more star systems are getting settled every year, humanity grows exponentially and by the year 2500 we have occupied the entire galaxy and taken up a custodianship over all life in our corner of the universe, safeguarding life from external threats like meteors n shit >in the year 3000 the first man made mission reached andromeda >due to local evolution by the year 10000 humans have grown into essentially different species from each other. WE are basically the aliens from all the stories and fables now
This is it bros, the golden timeline where we escape this rock and go beyond the stars.
Was funny the other day. I'm fat fricking I decided to go on a quick cut - barely a week. Lost 5 lbs just like that, what a surprise, calories in and out.
>study comes to a conclusion that's counterintuitive on its face, with minimal statistical significance in the findings
>struggling journalist has to frame the result with a shitty ragebait headline so that screeching morons click on it and get served ads
>the ragebait works and sends spastic brainlets on twitter into a seething tard rage
it's not that IST rejects science. morons just don't grasp science on a fundamental level.
I don't think Karla Walsh meant it as rage bait I think shes just fat or wants to push this idea that fat people can't help it. The whole idea of a study is that they aren't actually being scientific they're just cherry picking certain findings from previous research and framing it in a certain light. Actual science is in the biology. Moving burns calories, eating adds calories. Simple.
I work with AI and live in joy that every journalist not doing fieldwork will soon be fired and replaced with 1/1000th of an ML engineer.
IIRC the actual study actually found that TELLING people
>eat less move more
didn't make them lose weight. It's not about whether they actually did it, but about the fact that simply telling people to do it doesn't actually make them do it.
Let me guess. The participants lost weight but didn't have the willpower to keep it off.
Sounds like a skill issue.
No it sounds like they just tried to eat less "healthy" food and failed because it isn't nourishing or satiating. Dieting is idiot-proof if you just stuff yourself with meat and eggs. You can eat until you are completely full and still lose fat. These mainstream diets are always stupid shit like cereal bars, salad, tiny portions of meat, and they wonder why the goyslop addicts can't stick with it...
I think we're at the point where nutritional science is a lost cause, it's just a morass of activists doing food industry biased studies for gibs and journalists using the idiotic results as clickbait.
Almost nobody wants to hear it but if you’re serious about losing fat it’s really as simple as minimizing carb intake, which naturally leads to you eating more filling foods
This is very good advice and very true. Ignore the recommendations and conclusions of reported "science". Its no longer "science" but is "professional research."
When will moronic normies and women understand its not about how much you weight but how good is your body composition. Its so tiresome.
~~*New Study*~~
Exactly. Not all studies are "scientific"
when will they be destroyed forever? they're literally responsible for all the world's shit
if i wanted to write an equally ragebaity headline it would be something like "fatsos to dumb to follow basic instructions"
>Methods: Qualitative content analysis was applied to 159 audio recordings of consultations from the Brief Interventions for Weight Loss (BWeL)
trial, where GPs gave brief weight-loss advice to patients with a body mass index ≥30 kg/m2
(or ≥25 kg/m2
if Asian) in 137 UK surgeries. Similar
content was grouped into descriptive clusters.
>Results: The results comprised 4 clusters, illuminating different aspects of the advice given: (i) Content of diet and physical activity advice,
showing this was highly varied; (ii) Content of “implementation tips” given to support changes, e.g. using smaller plates; (iii) Content of signposting support, either towards further clinician support, or other resources, e.g. information booklets; (iv) Style of advice delivery, showing GPs
rarely gave personalized advice, or reasons for their advice.
>Conclusions and implications: Weight-loss advice from GPs to patients with obesity rarely included effective methods, mostly communicating a general “eat less, do more” approach. Advice was mostly generic, and rarely tailored to patients’ existing knowledge and behaviours.
Effectiveness of brief weight-loss advice could be improved if GPs were given clearer guidance on evidence-based recommendations.
Thanks for summing it up anon
As expected clickbait. Journalism is either propaganda or clickbait
>fatties too lazy to follow health advice of "eat less"
I can see how they could write such a misleading title then
it's not the concept (CICO) that's flawed, it's the manchildren unable to follow it
Why is it that there are so many fat girls now?
even with fitness being popularized there arent many fit chicks.
Instead you have a bunch of fatties wearing industrial-grade shapewear hiding their rolls now. Versus back then it was "accepting" their rolls of fat.
>Why is it that there are so many fat girls now
Obseity rates are almost always caused by sugary drinks. It is nearly impossible to eat enough calories to incurr modern obesity levels.
What really damages society is self-righteous morons saying "hurr zero calorie sweeteners are worse for you than sugar". Even if shit like aspartame were actually bad for you (it isn't) the amount of artificial sweeteners in "diet" drinks is so small that you'd never be affected by it. The false villification of artificial sweeteners is one of the most damaging narratives in nutrition.
>inb4 uh buh water is better
Of course it fricking is dumb shit but fatasses will never ever drink water over sugary sodas so the best thing that can be done is getting them on diet sodas
Dont reply to me I didn't ask
You posted, he replied. That's how discussion boards work, yawnstamsane?
Reread my post
Anyone in real life ever tell you to have a nice day?
Nope
>water is better
Water from plastic bottles for 1.98 per pint? Or just water?
Untrue. I packed on like 30 pounds in 2 months (intentionally, got strong as hell) pounding processed carbs on top of my regular chicken/carb/vegetable diet. If technically become obese, and had I kept doing it I 100% would have been what we colloquially understand as obese in like 3 more months.
Zero liquid calories were consumed besides the occasional beers with the boys. Sticking to this rule could very much still get you fat if you’re moronic or lack willpower.
Slop is plenty bad but 600-cal lattes and drinking beetus juice in lieu of water takes it to the next level.
Also checked.
I prefer the one on the left.
Does black coffee have 0 calories?
Calories aren't real.
There's probably a negligible amount from the grounds but it would be too small to matter since it's basically just infused water
Not to mention it's also an appetite suppressant so you'll also be saving calories later in the day by not being as tempted to eat outside of meals
Yes. Its also a thermogenic
Normies fall for government advice like
>eat carbs
and
>get injected with pfizer products
that's why they are all so unhealthy.
A sedentary lifestyle caused by living in a developed country where female-dominated jobs tend to be sitting at a desk indoors, birth control altering hormones, women naturally retaining more fat than men, a culture that condones female obesity but not (to nearly the same degree anyway) male obesity, and a diet high in processed and calorie-dense food that is easily accessible in large quantities.
I come here for the lulz, but good to see well written posts like this. You deserve a (you) for this
American health care is just corrupt
They recommend drugs and surgery for obese children
More like Eating Well Beyond What One Should
CICO works
I ate only 800 calories a day and jogged 5 miles each morning for a month, and actually gained weight by the end
Something doesn’t add up
>he fell for the CICO meme
Calories are an incel myth
You're either lying or you fricked up.
>noo you can't have a suppressed metabolism
>that's impossible
>globohomosexual wouldn't lie to me
>it must be the victims who are lying
It doesn't matter. Just eat less.
>"suppressed metabolism"
The things fatties say. Lmao you can't create something out of nothing.
We will see homosexuals like
accusing anon of lying that eating so little and doing more cardio while knowing nothing about hormones and insulin
>hormones and insulin
Unless those things can produce calories out of thin air he is lying.
You're all moronic fatties. Stop gorging yourself like a fricking pig and you'll lose weight.
Don't (You) me roid troony
I had gone as low as 500 calories a day yet I didn't lose weight but had a low carb diet and shit worked. I'm happy that I didn't listen to IST's CICO bullshit and I made it.
>had gone as low as 500 calories a day yet I didn't lose weight
Lol ooookay
Did you not poop the whole month?
Academia homosexual here.
I can find you a study that says anything because 5% of the time, by definition, the findings will be wrong since most scientists use a 95% confidence
Studies show that simply telling people to eat less and move more does not lead to people losing weight.
its true. only way to lose weight is roids and fat burners
Everyone on IST knows 'eat less, move more' is a goyslop psyop.
It's just outside invaders who take vaccinations and don't eat meat who believe the calorie con. They come here to harm our fitness.
Sounds like both rats need to eat less calories. One of them just has genetically higher metabolism.
They're genetically identical.
>here are my own posts screencapped with a link to a youtube video in them
have a nice day.
Here's the link so you don't have to type it out yourself.
Every fricking fraud in the world is putting out fradulent studies in order to sell diets or products or coaching or whatever other bullshit. There is no oversight of the field of publishing studies. Way more than half of all "studies" being published are completely fraudulent.
Works on my machine
Saying it doesn't work is not a comment on the method but an insight into the psyche of fatties.
>clickbait website
"Studies" mean nothing, esp in the nutrition/exercise science realm. You have to synthesize ALL the data of human knowledge: anthropology, history, medicine, agriculture, psychology, biology, chemistry, etc.etc. and apply it all to your (or your trainees's) situation to make decisions.
After all, there are studies out there that claim eggs are dangerous as cigarettes. Conversely there are NO studies out there that explain how exactly cigarettes cause lung cancer. If we went by these cherry picked studies alone, we would never eat another egg and smoke cigarettes. But the tnitre body of human knwloedge tells us that is stupid.
Are there any studies out there that says what would happen to OP if he sucked off 100 guys ina row and swallowed their cum? No, of course not. But that doesnt mean OP should run out and start sucking off guys, simply because there is no "study" saying not to when the whole body of human knowedge - and experience - tells us otherwise.
In other words, go ahead and read all the studies you want. But read ALL the studies, experiments, conclusions, papers, history, grapshs, charts, etc. Then synthesize it to make sense with experience and other more subjective forms of logic and knowedge.
>random clickbait ‘news’ article
>science
Pick one and go back
Science tells us men can get pregnant. That is all.
You need to learn how to distinguish mainstream from counterculture. Or maybe it's not something which can be learned. You may have been born moronic.
The people telling us men can get pregnant also tell us CICO is true. They also say that the clotshots are safe and effective.
First panel on the scarf.
The people telling us men can get pregnant and the vaxipad is safe are the same people telling us that fat is healthy and genetic and can’t be helped you fricking troglodyte. Touch grass every so often.
https://www.eatingwell.com/about-us-6743412#toc-meet-the-team
This is the 'team' behind the article you posted OP. It's literally just a bunch of israeli women with a token black and yellow at the end. All they write about is how being a huge fatty is okay, which is ironically exactly what large corporations shown in your meme want (who's investments include the sale of food, drink and the pharmaceuticals necessary to keep fat c**ts feeling better day to day)
You're literally quoting people you hate because a clickbait headline that didn't actually represent the source material tricked you into believing they're on your side.
Eat less, move more doesn't work. You have to fix WHAT you're eating, not just how much, and you can NEVER out-exercise a shit diet.
Because science is fake and gay
Calories in Calories out, which is another way to say eat less and move more is absolutely 100% irrefutably true. Gospel truth.
The problem comes with the application of it - its so much more complicated and nuanced than just "eat less, move more" because its so fricking hard and tricky to "eat less calories and move more to burn more calories." Even if true, its not helpful.
I have no answers, just opinions.
CICO is untrue because the human body is not 100% efficient and is not a closed system. People always quote laws of thermodynamics, but those apply only to closed systems while the human body is an open system composed of countless nested open systems.
>umm sweaty I actually gain fat via photosynthesis
have a nice day, fat.
No, we all gain fat when we eat things that trigger hormones like insulin which cause them to be put into fat storage. If someone pumped you full of insulin all day long you would be incapable of losing weight no matter how few "calories" you ate. Food isn't burned in your gut for energy like a furnace, it's chemically decomposed into constituent parts which are then used throughout the body based on hormonal processes. What you eat matters immensely.
The problem with CICO is that there are so many variables that could affect energy intake and energy expenditure that it becomes impossible to predict either side of the equation. Even estimates on calories in food can be off by 20% in either direction. Then you have to account for different types of nutrients being used for different things in the body (example: protein can become muscle, sugar can't) and the fact that it's possible to poop out food that isn't fully digested and all the hundreds of different things from diet to activity to environment that can affect your metabolism. CICO can't even account for the fact that someone injecting a steady stream of insulin won't be able to lose weight because everything that comes in will be stored as fat and the body will never enter a fat-burning state to get rid of it. Even if you entertain the ridiculous idea that food can be likened to a log in a furnace there are STILL too many variables that make the whole equation impossible to actually predict.
>No, we all gain fat when we eat things that trigger hormones like insulin which cause them to be put into fat storage
Come back when you learn what insulin actually does, you fricking moron.
>Even estimates on calories in food can be off by 20% in either direction
So include assume the worst in your calculations. Problem solved.
The only thing that doesn't add up is your story.
Stop bullshitting.
>the human body is an open system
source?
>the human body is not 100% efficient
CICO doesn't need to be 100% efficient for it to be true.
>People always quote laws of thermodynamics, but those apply only to closed systems
Spoken like a moron who hasn't actually studied thermodynamics. Only the second law (entropy) does not apply to open systems, and it only applies to isolated systems, not closed systems (yes, there is a difference, read a book you fricking Black person).
So far you have demonstrated that you:
>don't understand thermodynamics
>don't understand basic biochemistry
You're just a fat moron repeating nonsensical copes made up by other fat morons. If you put as much effort into your health as you do your coping, you wouldn't be fat.
Go outside and lose some weight, lardass.
A fat woman posted this after eating the same and walking less and wondering why she doesn't lose weight.
KEtoschizo did you actually read the study cause I don't think you'll like it....
It concludes that generic advice like don't eat carbs is unhelpful to weightloss and more tailored advice is necessary lmao
>We found that GPs gave mainly generic diet and exercise messages for example “reduce your carbohydrates” and “move more.” Furthermore, weight-loss advice was often not tailored to patients’ existing knowledge and behaviours. Obesity is a chronic and relapsing condition, but patients were not given specific or evidence-based advice to support them to manage this. The findings suggest that the brief weight-loss advice from GPs could be more effective if they were given clearer guidance on which methods of weight-loss evidence has shown actually works.
But overall it's a moronic study that analysed audiocalls and then said 'this isn't helpful!' but didn't actually do ANY statistical analysis of results from that advice, so they're making the assumption it was unhelpful because.. well... they just say so okay! It's literally not even science. It's effectively a subjective review of GP performance like some moronic youtuber making a review of customer service for a tech company.
>Heckin science bro!!!
Frick off
Fat people are retarted lazy and can't control themselves there for thermodynamics doesn't work the article
Because I lost weight by eating less
My personal experience > some israelite "scientists" making propaganda
imagine being so stupid you cant figure out how to lose weight
eat less
The problem is the moronic notion so many people have that dieting is a temporary thing you can do for a while until you reach your goal.
It isn't.
If your want your weight loss to be permanent, then your diet and exercise regime must also be permanent.
Recently I was very broke for about two months with hardly any food to eat and I lost almost all of th extra weight I had. I had prior out on a ton of weight and all of it melted off of me in about two weeks so I felt very hungry the whole time but I definitely lost weight. It's almost like not eating food causes my body to burn extra stored fat or something
>new study has disproven the laws of thermodynamics
>all power plants on earth are shut down and replaced by fat people who “can’t lose the weight” providing infinite energy
>humanity enters the golden age of space exploration
>terraforms mars in a decade
>saturns moons turn into hotels for views of saturn
>Uranus becomes a theme park with an 18+ section on the dark side of the planet
>proxima centauri is reached in the year 2105 life is found and we are no longer alone in the universe
>more star systems are getting settled every year, humanity grows exponentially and by the year 2500 we have occupied the entire galaxy and taken up a custodianship over all life in our corner of the universe, safeguarding life from external threats like meteors n shit
>in the year 3000 the first man made mission reached andromeda
>due to local evolution by the year 10000 humans have grown into essentially different species from each other. WE are basically the aliens from all the stories and fables now
This is it bros, the golden timeline where we escape this rock and go beyond the stars.
Was funny the other day. I'm fat fricking I decided to go on a quick cut - barely a week. Lost 5 lbs just like that, what a surprise, calories in and out.