Comment on [deleted]
amino@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 months ago
if you don’t starve yourself and eat whenever you’re hungry you actually gain less weight than being on a diet
Comment on [deleted]
amino@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 months ago
if you don’t starve yourself and eat whenever you’re hungry you actually gain less weight than being on a diet
Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 2 months ago
That’s psychology, not physics. If you actually stick to a diet such that you are eating less than you burn, you will lose weight.
No one can break the laws of physics.
amino@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 months ago
too bad human beings aren’t engines huh?
the fake claim that most people even need to lose weight actually derives from the eugenics movement. for more information I recommend the book Belly of the Beast by Da’Shaun L. Harrison.
if you’re burning more calories than you eat that’s called starving yourself and it leads to eating disorders and long-term organ damage. stop spreading harmful misinformation
…edu.au/…/its-time-to-bust-the-calories-in-calori…
Deestan@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Reading past the headline, the article goes on to say that calorie in/out is correct but hard to calculate usefully and thus they recommend strategies that are easier to keep stable.
It’s pretty shitty to equate a first worlder feeling hungry for a bit to actual starvation. One is unpleasant. The other is serious.
amino@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 months ago
reading past the mansplainer explaining the headline to me, what it actually says is that calorie counting can be more harmful than good (which is a very mild take and an under-estimation)
nieminen@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Read the article, 2/3 of it corroborate that it is a calorie in/out balance that determines weight, but is simply more complex than a simple formula. Which we all know. Fiber changes how many calories you actually consume. The type of calorie depends on how much you consume (whole foods vs processed, raw vs cooked) Processed sugars like candy is almost entirely taken in calorie wise, but something like an apple or carrot, have to be converted in the digestive system to be absorbed, thereby reducing the effective calorie input (takes energy to convert).
All that said, you do your best to track, (weigh your own food instead of guessing off the label), and keep your calorie intake below what you spend (again, this is generalized, and won’t be 100% accurate, but should get you close and then you adjust as needed). The problem most people face is they make sweeping changes, and quit their eating habits cold turkey. “I’m never eating candy or ice cream again” <- bad idea unless you’re allergic or something. Forbidding it will increase the craving for it, and then when you eventually succumb to the craving, you feel super guilty and basically give up.
I follow the “add good food” rather than the “reduce what I eat”. If you up your fiber and protein intake, it’s SUPER hard to overeat. Fiber and protein are super satiating, and it lasts a long time. Adding whole foods to what you already eat is a great way to reduce overall consumption.
Btw potatoes and beans are GOATed.
amino@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 months ago
ah yes, promoting calorie counting and weighing food, the famously not disordered gymbro eating patterns. the article actually says that calorie counting can cause more harm than good
Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Humans are engines. Stop eating and you will lose weight. I didn’t make any claims about health. But you absolutely are and engine. The proof is that if you stop eating, you will die. Different fuels burn differently but you can’t defy the laws of physics.
Eugenics is the study of improving humans through breeding. You used the wrong word.
I’m not taking the word of one uneducated author over the overwhelming majority of trained doctors and scientists who all consider obesity to be a medical problem that needs to be treated.
amino@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 months ago
what you’re doing here is mansplaining science by refusing to keep up to date on the recent research that’s only recently starting to make it acceptable in the scientific literature what’s been known all along by indigenous people and survivors of famine. that is that food scarcity doesn’t cause weight loss, it causes systemic retention of fat to survive life threatening scenarios.
in the epigenetics field as well it is well known that famine trauma propagates through generations, which is exemplified by Irish people tending towards larger sizes on average.
you’re also idolizing medics and the medical field by not acknowledging that they’re humans just like us and therefore not devoid of biases. the field is extremely white and man-centric, therefore refusing to accept any science that doesn’t benefit their class interests. eugenics is common practice in medicine nowadays, you can see it in the way fatness is criminalized and punished through violence by most doctors.