[paul-woolcock]

The "calories in/calories out" argument is based on the assumption that the human body is a closed system. This is simply not the case, and touting it as a diet strategy is irresponsible. You might lose weight if you lower your caloric intake by only eating 1 McDonalds cheeseburger a day instead of 2, but in the end you are still eating crap food "product", and you won't be as healthy as you could be by focusing on the _quality_ of your food as opposed to the _quantity_.

[getsat]

There's a few National Institute of Health studies that back the calories in vs calories out argument. Keep your calorie intake below your BMR (basal metabolic rate) + what you burn during the day if you want to lose weight. Very simple. You don't have to "balance saturated and unsatured fats", get ten hours of sleep per day, or whatever other ridiculous microoptimisations people come up with.

Eat 500 calories below your MBR + burn rate and you lose one pound per week.

You can do it while eating garbage food (fast food, heavily processed food products) or you could do it while eating a totally vegan diet. It doesn't matter for weight loss.

[Drbble]

Look up "compliance" and how it relates to self-applied medical care for nutrition, acne, exercise, birth control, etc. Vasectomy is more effective than pill is more effective than condom, not because of chemistry or biology or physics, but because of psychology.

[paul-woolcock]

That makes sense. I suppose I just think of something different than I should when I hear "weight loss." When someone says "weight loss," I hear "body composition change," which is obviously different than weight loss.

[robomartin]

Well, there's loosing weight and loosing body fat. Two very different things. Two visibly different things.