[Filligree]

A remarkable fraction of your energy consumption is spent on basic maintenance, and of the rest, far more than you'd think is spent on the brain. Your body is extremely efficient, by engineering standards, but that includes locomotion.

Exercise is still a good way to drop in weight, but not simply due to burning up the fat; that could happen anyway. What seems to be happening is that the exercise improves the body's budgeting logic, probably by putting you back in a regime evolution already dealt with.

The way to drop in weight isn't to exercise (as such), and it isn't to eat less. All the logic that says those count, is valid, but you have to account for the body fighting back. The goal is to eat less because you don't feel hungry, not despite feeling hungry. Very few have the willpower to literally starve themselves.

[Jhsto]

> The goal is to eat less because you don't feel hungry, not despite feeling hungry. Very few have the willpower to literally starve themselves.

I'm not sure if I understand this correctly, but isn't this a bad practice? I mean, I can agree with the sentiment of eating too many times per day. E.g. if you tend to eat snacks and then soon after a real meal, then you should definitely use your willpower to just skip the snacks before your upcoming meal.

But as far as I know, if you don't exercise and instead just starve yourself, the body first burns through your muscles before it gets to fat. If that's so, then some exercise is crucial to upkeep your muscles even while on a calory deficiency.

[jtuente]

The key point is the first part of that statement, "eat less because you don't feel hungry". It's not the best worded though, but the alternative "only eat until you don't feel hungry" isn't much better since someone can feel like they're hungry when they aren't really. Also your body burns through the muscles to maintain the composition of the other muscles/hormones of your body, because muscles and fat aren't made of the same components.

[yetihehe]

> Very few have the willpower to literally starve themselves.

Yep, tried this recently with closed loop weight control. After about 8-10kg (from 116kg) lost it's almost impossible to keep on going, you can't control yourself enough to not eat.

[sparkzilla]

I have lost the same amount from about the same weight in the past eight weeks or so, and will have no trouble continuing. The key (for me at least) is to eat a big lunch (around 1000 calories) of whatever you like (today I had burger and fries) and then have a couple of small snacks to a total of 200-300 calories in the evening (I'm eating a Muller corner yoghurt right now). The problem with most diets is that they starve you throughout the day, when the actual problem is habitual snacking. With this method, the most you have to wait is until the next day, when you can eat whatever you like again for lunch. Originally I intended to have a cheat day every 10 days, but I've barely needed them.

[revelation]

Locomotion is incredibly inefficient, even by engineering standards.

An average human exercising is about 22% efficient, that's worse than some ICEs. An electrical engine is >80%.

[makapuf]

Electricity is not a source of energy so you have to factor in the efficiency of its production.

[revelation]

Why would I do that, I didn't for the human? What's the efficiency in creating cow meat, .1%?

[makapuf]

Mkay so to compare start from the same form, vegetal by example. Or sun.