[sleepdev]

"For 10 weeks, ..."

For his own health I am glad that he didn't continue the diet much longer. There are a number of confounding variables here that the article forgot to mention, which most likely played a larger part in his weight loss than any calorie counting:

Stress. Stress can cause sudden weight loss. This weight will come right back if you give your body any time to catch up and yet the effect is significant enough to provide "evidence" for the craziest of dieting fads. Eating debbie cakes for 3 meals a day is going to put some serious stress on your body.

Metabolism is not constant. Michael Phelps eats more for breakfast than I do in a week, and yet he is in much better shape. The scary thing about junk food is not so much the empty calories, but more how it affects your metabolism in the long term. If you draw out this sort of a diet for 2 or 3 years, then I would expect that not only could you give yourself diabetes, but also you will start craving more and needing less. That is when weight gain will start to become a serious problem.

[spudlyo]

There are a number of confounding variables here that the article forgot to mention, which most likely played a larger part in his weight loss than any calorie counting.

I disagree completely. Stress and metabolism are minor factors compared to the repeatable, testable, and well understood calculus of calories in vs calories out.

[robchez]

I'm sorry but in the Health and fitness community this has been disproven time and time again. Someone can fix their sleep and eat at their bmr with good foods and still lose heaps of weight. See good calories bad calories by Gary taubes

[niels_olson]

Basal metabolic rate is something developed in hospitals for bed-ridden patients on total parenteral nutrition. It is the calories you burn just staying alive. If you, a healthy person walking around, eats at your BMR, you will, definitely, loose a heap of weight. However, the BMR for the average human is quite low.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_metabolic_rate

Also, on brief review, Taubes appear to thoroughly misunderstand the issue on a variety of levels. I'm going through more of his material, if I am mistaken, I will report my error.

[niels_olson]

On further review, I stand by my original statement: Taubes thoroughly misunderstands the issue.

[sleepdev]

I don't disagree completely. We are talking about completely different things.

I am talking about long term, you are talking about 10 weeks. Yes, you can calculate calories in vs calories out. No, you cannot extrapolate that to determine if Professor Mark Haub will be alive on that diet in 3 years. What is the metabolism of dead?

[spinlock]

What repeatable calculus? This is a story about one guy not a study of a population of people. I'd be cautious before you jump to the conclusion that these results will generalize. That probably says more about your own biases than it does any scientific learning that was produced by this experiment.

[spudlyo]

The Harris-Benedict equations are generally accepted as empirically corroborated and reliable predictors of weight change as a function of daily caloric intake.

[billjings]

Metabolism is a minor factor compared to calories in vs. calories out?

You are aware that one of the variables in that equation is intimately tied up with metabolism, aren't you?

[spudlyo]

Of course. Most dieters don't have access to a ventilated hood indirect colorimeter, so they have to rely on a method for estimating their BMR.

What I'm saying is that the difference between their measured BMR and estimated BMR (using either Harris-Benedict, WHO, or Schofield equations) is a minor factor.

[billjings]

I'm saying that I believe that diet has a real effect on metabolism. Not basal metabolism, but on the ability to maintain a given activity level. If you try and restrict your calorie intake, you will be less likely to go on a run, take a walk - etc. This is why Harris-Benedict may not be a good tool to manage long term weight loss, even though it is a useful predictive tool.