|
|
|
|
|
by HyperSane
1214 days ago
|
|
"I know you're really attached to the energy imbalance theory of obesity. " It isn't a theory, it is a fact. It is basic thermodynamics. The human body requires a constant amount of energy for basic operation and activity. Any excess is stored as fat for future use. Creating fat requires calories that HAVE to come from food. Eat few enough calories and you WILL lose weight. Eat zero and you WILL die. Eat 20,000/day for a year and you WILL get very fat. A good example of this is this man went 382 days without eating https://www.diabetes.co.uk/blog/2018/02/story-angus-barbieri... He had a calories surplus for long enough to weigh 207kg. While not eating his body consumed energy in his fat to stay alive and he got down to 81kg. ((207-87)kg * 7700 calories/kg)/382 days = 2539 calories/day, which is a very plausible number. |
|
To say "it's just thermodynamics" might be right as far as the physics goes, but it doesn't recognise that biological drives overwhelm everything. It's hugely complicated how energy expenditure and steady state energy consumption interacts with weight gain, not least because the body will invariably work to make your actions as efficient as possible to maintain weight. For example, observational studies of hunter societies that might travel large distances daily, energy requirements bear little relation to daily activity after any transition time has elapsed when compared to relatively inactive Western counterparts. These people can't just will their activities to be less efficient if they hypothetically wanted to consume more energy.
Ultimately, the biology will decide what the effect of any intervention is, regardless of how motivated or not you are. Any advice that doesn't explicitly factor that in is just hot air.