The only way to actually guarantee to lose weight

[AceVentures]

I normally eat sweets every day. At least 2-3 ice creams.

Somebody get this boombatty out of all the health threads

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Panos Daras]

Oh my God the comments here. I just want to burn my eyes.

People just spreading misinformation left and right.

Yeah, calories in vs calories out does not work. The first law of thermodynamics is a scam!

How calorie counting process works:

Measure your weight every day. If you “forget/ cheat” one day it is fine don’t let it put you down. Just step on the scale the next day again.

Take the median or average for the week. At the same time measure to the best of your ability how much calories you take.

If the median/ average weight goes up next week, you are in a calorie surplus and you need to adjust. Unless you are a woman and it is one of those days that you know it is normal.

And no you haven’t gained 1 kg of muscle from the gym from last week unless you are on gear.

If your median/ average weight goes down next week you are on a calorie deficit. What you do is working somehow. If it feels sustainable for you continue what you are doing.

The reason we measure calories in this process is to identify how much we spend as a rough approximation, and to be mindful of what we eat.

Even if you do not measure, if you are in a calorie deficit, for example when you skip meals (intermittent fasting), you will lose weight.

Next up, how quantum physics does not work.

 

[Black_Dragon43]

Somebody get this boombatty out of all the health threads

*while being kicked out*

Well, my grandfather lived to be 93, and he ate sweets every day too. So I figured F*ck it, it tastes good, therefore it is good, let’s have it!

 

[samuraijack]

My understanding is that @Johnny boy is basically tracking calories without tracking calories. According to him counting calories can be highly inaccurate and annoying to do, and measuring weight is something you can do accurately and easily. Higher weight on the scale = calorie surplus, Lower weight = calorie deficit.

A lot of people actually do a version of this already. A person tracking calories, who hops on the scale and didnt make weight, would make an adjustment to their diet and eat less daily. Your average joe, who had a big buffet and regrets it the next day, decides to only eat a salad.

If you follow his rule, and dont eat the whole day when you are above your weight limit, you are making the same adjustment. Its just a more "extreme" version.

But there's a lot of holes in this theory.

Like, someone who has failed and cheated on previous diets, would suddenly be able to have the will power to fast for an entire day when they couldn't even stop themselves from eating a chicken nugget? If they could do this, they could have already made the previous diets work. How long will the fast last, until they go "it wont hurt if I eat _______, i havent eaten anything all day!". And when they are starving, what kind of food do you think they will crave?

This method also doesnt account for anything health wise, other than a number on the scale. Why promote eating unhealthy? They can lose weight but still become diabetic and have a heart attack.

I think anyone who finds success losing weight, has the right mindset. And if they have the right mindset, any "diet" can work. But if they have the right mindset, they probably aren't looking for ways to continue eating chicken and waffles every day.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Johnny boy]

My understanding is that @Johnny boy is basically tracking calories without tracking calories. According to him counting calories can be highly inaccurate and annoying to do, and measuring weight is something you can do accurately and easily. Higher weight on the scale = calorie surplus, Lower weight = calorie deficit.

A lot of people actually do a version of this already. A person tracking calories, who hops on the scale and didnt make weight, would make an adjustment to their diet and eat less daily. Your average joe, who had a big buffet and regrets it the next day, decides to only eat a salad.

If you follow his rule, and dont eat the whole day when you are above your weight limit, you are making the same adjustment. Its just a more "extreme" version.

But there's a lot of holes in this theory.

Like, someone who has failed and cheated on previous diets, would suddenly be able to have the will power to fast for an entire day when they couldn't even stop themselves from eating a chicken nugget? If they could do this, they could have already made the previous diets work. How long will the fast last, until they go "it wont hurt if I eat _______, i havent eaten anything all day!". And when they are starving, what kind of food do you think they will crave?

This method also doesnt account for anything health wise, other than a number on the scale. Why promote eating unhealthy? They can lose weight but still become diabetic and have a heart attack.

I think anyone who finds success losing weight, has the right mindset. And if they have the right mindset, any "diet" can work. But if they have the right mindset, they probably aren't looking for ways to continue eating chicken and waffles every day.

It fulfills the promise of the headline, while not being insane to follow.

The point of your fat is energy when you have no food. That’s literally what it’s made for. Want less fat, you need to be hungry.

You can “follow” counting calories and just do it poorly. Because it’s impossible to do it accurately. This has zero room for BS and margin of error. You can have a slow metabolism, or sneaky calories can be in your diet, and you never actually know the exact calories so everything’s an estimate.

It’s not extreme at all to fast until you’re a pound lighter. That’s so easy.

I had a McDouble yesterday and tomorrow I’m going out to dinner with my employees. No idea how many calories that’ll be. I’m still losing weight

 

[samuraijack]

It fulfills the promise of the headline, while not being insane to follow.

The point of your fat is energy when you have no food. That’s literally what it’s made for. Want less fat, you need to be hungry.

You can “follow” counting calories and just do it poorly. Because it’s impossible to do it accurately. This has zero room for BS and margin of error. You can have a slow metabolism, or sneaky calories can be in your diet, and you never actually know the exact calories so everything’s an estimate.

It’s not extreme at all to fast until you’re a pound lighter. That’s so easy.

I had a McDouble yesterday and tomorrow I’m going out to dinner with my employees. No idea how many calories that’ll be. I’m still losing weight

Thats great it works for you, especially since I think you said you train martial arts? I currently train bjj / muay thai back to back 5 days a week + 2 lifting days. I don't think id be able to train fasted or enjoy it.

Your method would most likely become operative conditioning to me to the point that I would be very conscious of what i ate everyday, just so I would make weight and not have to train fasted. Which kinda brings me back to what im doing already, I don't count calories, but i watch the scale and the mirror and adjust my daily intake.

 

[heavy_industry]

Yeah, calories in vs calories out does not work. The first law of thermodynamics is a scam!

Next up, how quantum physics does not work.

Your abysmal level of intelligence is preventing you from achieving functional reading comprehension.

Here is the misinformation. You may need to read it a few times:

Ultimately, it's energy in vs energy out (not calories) - but good luck trying to calculate this, as there are at least 10-20 key variables in this equation.

You will need to lock yourself in a controlled environment and use medical-grade equipment to be able to measure the amount of energy that gets out of your body in a 24-hour span.

The term "calorie" originates from an obsolete scientific theory of the 18th century.

A calorie is a measurement of heat energy.

In order to determine the "amount of calories" in a certain food, you need to light it on fire and measure the amount of heat it generates.

I know it's very hard to imagine, but this is not exactly what happens in the human body.

A large percentage of the food that we eat is directly used for cellular repair and is not "burned" off for energy. Trying to measure how much energy actually gets in and out of your system requires specialized laboratory equipment.

The only reason why we use calories to measure the nutritional value of foods is because we haven't come up with a better solution yet.

For some people, counting calories works - because ANY measurement is better than NO measurement.

But this doesn't change the fact that this model is scientifically invalid and grossly inaccurate - it's the equivalent of trying to measure your height in kilograms.

Or your level of intelligence in micromoles.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[NewManRising]

Actually, it's not.

We have no idea what causes obesity.

You can have two different people following the same "caloric" guidelines, eating the exact same things in the same amounts, and following the same exercise protocol.

One becomes diabetic and morbidly obese, while the other one remains lean and athletic, and all the "excess calories" get instantly released as thermal energy - without getting stored as fat.

The human metabolism is an order of magnitude more complex than "eat less, exercise more", and we're just starting to scratch the surface with our current scientific understanding of this matter.

---

Regarding weight loss...

This should never be the goal lol. It's the opposite of what you want.

Good health = gaining as much weight as humanly possible while keeping your visceral fat levels to nearly 0.

Strength, muscle mass, and good bone density are highly correlated with (if not causal to) improved lifespan, health span, and even neurological function.

Forget about the scale and buy a F*cking mirror and a tape measure:

• The mirror must say 10%-15% body fat for men (20% for women)
• Use the tape measure and make sure the circumference of your waist stays the same or goes down over time - that's where the visceral fat is stored, the toxin-releasing endocrine organ that is slowly killing you from the inside.

While some of this may be true, there are MILLIONS of people who have lost weight with simply counting their calories and taking in less than their BMR.

I've seen really big people like 500 lbs lose more than half their weight this way. It works for a lot of people.

If people need to start somewhere, they can start by calculating their BMR and reducing some of their daily calories.

Caloric deficit over time take the weight off.

 

[Johnny boy]

While some of this may be true, there are MILLIONS of people who have lost weight with simply counting their calories and taking in less than their BMR.

I've seen really big people like 500 lbs lose more than half their weight this way. It works for a lot of people.

If people need to start somewhere, they can start by calculating their BMR and reducing some of their daily calories.

Caloric deficit over time take the weight off.

Out of the hundred million that want to lose weight and try to go on a diet lol.

They should do the only diet that’s guaranteed to actually work.

 

[Kevin88660]

Your abysmal level of intelligence is preventing you from achieving functional reading comprehension.

Here is the misinformation. You may need to read it a few times:



The term "calorie" originates from an obsolete scientific theory of the 18th century.

A calorie is a measurement of heat energy.

In order to determine the "amount of calories" in a certain food, you need to light it on fire and measure the amount of heat it generates.

I know it's very hard to imagine, but this is not exactly what happens in the human body.

A large percentage of the food that we eat is directly used for cellular repair and is not "burned" off for energy. Trying to measure how much energy actually gets in and out of your system requires specialized laboratory equipment.

The only reason why we use calories to measure the nutritional value of foods is because we haven't come up with a better solution yet.

For some people, counting calories works - because ANY measurement is better than NO measurement.

But this doesn't change the fact that this model is scientifically invalid and grossly inaccurate - it's the equivalent of trying to measure your height in kilograms.

Or your level of intelligence in micromoles.

Thanks for sharing.

I always thought food as fuels, and our body works like a car burning gasoline.

I assumed fat as unused gasoline in solid forms.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[heavy_industry]

I always thought food as fuels, and our body works like a car burning gasoline.

It is very similar, but not exactly the same process.

Both humans and combustion engines use carbon and oxygen to generate heat and mechanical tension. We both emit CO2 as a byproduct of this process.

But with humans, a large chunk of the food that we eat is being used to repair the engine.

---

If I eat 200 grams of protein and 100 grams of fat, that would amount to 1700 "calories".

I have no idea how much of these raw materials are going to be used for tissue repair, how much is going to be used for energy production, and how much is going to be stored as adipose tissue (fat).

Nutrient allocation is determined by the body on the spot, based on a myriad of factors, including:

• your psychological stress level - higher stress will result in MORE fat deposition
• the amount of sunlight you get exposed to
• the temperature of your environment
• your overall metabolic health
• whether you have children or not (I'm not joking)
• your glycogen reserve status
• frequency, timing, and size of meals
• the amount of mechanical damage you have from exercising
• the duration and quality of your sleep
• etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

You have a 30-variable equation that you're never going to figure out unless you lock yourself in a lab with medical-grade tracking equipment.

"Calories in, calories out" is a reductionist model that does not account for any of these variables - including the insulin response evoked by certain foods, which is extremely relevant.

Can it work for some people?

Yes.

And if it does - Merry Christmas

But don't F*cking quote me on thermodynamics and quantum mechanics because you can't understand science:

Yeah, calories in vs calories out does not work. The first law of thermodynamics is a scam!

 

[Supa]

Your abysmal level of intelligence is preventing you from achieving functional reading comprehension.

Here is the misinformation. You may need to read it a few times:



The term "calorie" originates from an obsolete scientific theory of the 18th century.

A calorie is a measurement of heat energy.

In order to determine the "amount of calories" in a certain food, you need to light it on fire and measure the amount of heat it generates.

I know it's very hard to imagine, but this is not exactly what happens in the human body.

A large percentage of the food that we eat is directly used for cellular repair and is not "burned" off for energy. Trying to measure how much energy actually gets in and out of your system requires specialized laboratory equipment.

The only reason why we use calories to measure the nutritional value of foods is because we haven't come up with a better solution yet.

For some people, counting calories works - because ANY measurement is better than NO measurement.

But this doesn't change the fact that this model is scientifically invalid and grossly inaccurate - it's the equivalent of trying to measure your height in kilograms.

Or your level of intelligence in micromoles.

I am usually a strong advocate for calories in calories out, because besides sport it was a big component of me losing a lot of weight.

But what you wrote in here makes a lot of sense and I'm starting to loosen my grip on that belief. There were probably more factors at play in my weight loss than the calorie counting.

I will look more into this, thanks for all the in depth explanations!

What I still strongly believe, like you also said, is that tracking what you eat/drink is better than not tracking it when you want to lose weight. Even if it's only to keep you engaged in the process and aware of what you eat/drink and the rough amount of calories of it.

 

[cornishpasty]

Since September last year, I've dropped 20lbs, and gone from 23% bf to 15% bf. My lifts have gone up at the gym too. I fell off the wagon and stopped tracking for about a month post-Christmas, but my method / rules have been very simple and consistent outside of that:

- Eat the same thing for breakfast and lunch every day.
- No processed shit.
- Allow some space for variation with dinners, but keep them relatively consistent week to week.
- Gym 4 times per week.
- Run 5 times per week.
- Weigh myself every morning, first thing.
- Set generic calorie + protein goals, wait 3 weeks to see if the needle is moving on the scales & at the gym.
- If weight, bf and lifts are moving in right direction, keep everything exactly the same.
- If weight, bf and lifts are not moving in the right direction, re-evaluate and try different amounts of food / calories / macros.

Most important thing for me is to track the data and iterate off the feedback (You could probably make some cheesy metaphor linking this to entrepreneurship). I use a smart scale and also track it on a spreadsheet.

Very simple and in fact very easy once the system is in place.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Kevin88660]

It is very similar, but not exactly the same process.

Both humans and combustion engines use carbon and oxygen to generate heat and mechanical tension. We both emit CO2 as a byproduct of this process.

But with humans, a large chunk of the food that we eat is being used to repair the engine.

---

If I eat 200 grams of protein and 100 grams of fat, that would amount to 1700 "calories".

I have no idea how much of these raw materials are going to be used for tissue repair, how much is going to be used for energy production, and how much is going to be stored as adipose tissue (fat).

Nutrient allocation is determined by the body on the spot, based on a myriad of factors, including:

• your psychological stress level - higher stress will result in MORE fat deposition
• the amount of sunlight you get exposed to
• the temperature of your environment
• your overall metabolic health
• whether you have children or not (I'm not joking)
• your glycogen reserve status
• frequency, timing, and size of meals
• the amount of mechanical damage you have from exercising
• the duration and quality of your sleep
• etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

You have a 30-variable equation that you're never going to figure out unless you lock yourself in a lab with medical-grade tracking equipment.

"Calories in, calories out" is a reductionist model that does not account for any of these variables - including the insulin response evoked by certain foods, which is extremely relevant.

Can it work for some people?

Yes.

And if it does - Merry Christmas

But don't F*cking quote me on thermodynamics and quantum mechanics because you can't understand science:

I dumped your posts into chatgpt. While the AI agrees with your points on the complexity of metabolism, it cites studies and say energy balance remains a very important tool in weight management.

While imperfect, calories counting works.

I find it hard to accept that calories counting is like measuring height in kilograms.

According to chatgpt, energy balance is the “foundational” theory in understanding weight loss.

It uses a lancet study in 2011 citing that energy balance is the primary factor in weight loss while accounting that metabolic adaption and other physiological factors play a secondary part in affecting the speed of fat loss.

There are also many recent studies tracking children losing weight using calories cutting vs “my plate method”. Both are equally effective.

 

[Supa]

You know what? F*ck it. Starting tomorrow morning I will give your approach a try, @Johnny boy

I'll report back.

 

[Johnny boy]

You know what? F*ck it. Starting tomorrow morning I will give your approach a try, @Johnny boy

I'll report back.

Ata boy.

Set a goal, say how many lbs you want to lose a week, mark the weight limit on your calendar and no food if above limit, no restrictions if under limit, weigh yourself 1-2x a day.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[savefox]

Would that work for bulking? Eat untill you're 2lb heavier

 

[Johnny boy]

Would that work for bulking? Eat untill you're 2lb heavier

Hahahhahah

Brutal

 

[Devilery]

Would that work for bulking? Eat untill you're 2lb heavier

That sounds like a "how long can you go without pooping?" challenge.

When I was bulking, the difference between my morning and evening weight was about 4-7 pounds, guess what caused the lower starting weight each morning lol?

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Ing]

I never tracked, what I eat, longer than maybe a day.

In my life I often gained weight and fat and lost it again.
The only way to loose weight and fat, was to get my a$$ up at least every second day and make at least a half an hour endurance sports.
No matter, if it was swimming, running, motocross, biking (not touristic).
Going to the gym only didn t work propperly.

Restrictions on eating never worked.

6 weeks ago I broke 2 ribs and feared to get into a gaining fat period again. I found, that running up a hill hurts the less, so I run up a local hill twice a day ( the hill isnt high enough for only once), thats about 40 minutes.
thats enough for me at present to stay in shape, but not enough to gain fitness.

So in my opinion restrict eating is a fine way to make money with diets, but a hard way to loose fat.

Get out and do whatever makes you breathless for half an hour a day and you ll have a good chance to get there.