If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#161
|
|||
|
|||
Eating less does not result in weight loss
Michael Snyder writes:
If you eat just before going to bed, you will gain more weight than if you eat the same amount upon rising. No, you won't. Try it for ten years, and you'll see. -- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly. |
#162
|
|||
|
|||
Eating less does not result in weight loss
Michael Snyder writes:
Ok, I'm going to stop arguing with you now ... No, you're not. I recognize the pattern. -- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly. |
#163
|
|||
|
|||
Eating less does not result in weight loss
Michael Snyder writes:
And yet millions of people spend billions of dollars every year, seeking help with losing weight. Only because they don't like to hear about the only method that actually works: eating less and exercising more. If your advice is any good, (and indeed, even if it isn't), a portion of those billions is available to you. I doubt that. See above. If your advice is BETTER than most, then you should be able to capture a respectable chunk of those billions, not to mention put the other charlatans out of business. You seem to equate money-making potential with truth. They aren't the same thing. It is a free market economy -- a product that works should sell better than one that doesn't. True, but it depends on what the buyer expects the product to do. The purpose of fad diets is to provide excuses, not weight loss. -- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly. |
#164
|
|||
|
|||
Eating less does not result in weight loss
Mxsmanic wrote:
Michael Snyder writes: False. Your body is not a car, it is a complex organic system. Complex organic systems obey the same fundamental physical rules as automobiles. Twice the work requires twice the fuel. No. That isn't even true of cars, and cars are far simpler than human bodies. If you start a car cold, driving two miles will not require exactly twice the fuel that driving one mile did. Like your car, your body's energy conversion rate is variable. The assumption that the fuel-to-motion conversion efficiency of your body is constant is patently ridiculous. It is amazingly close to constant. You make so many claims, and yet you back up none of them. When you control and measure all the variables, you find that the human body does indeed follow all the rules, predictably and consistently. Your claim is not even consistant with those of physiologists or fitness trainers, who may tell you that you are likely to burn off more fat calories in the second 10 miles than you did in the first. I've never heard that claim. Then I'd like to introduce you to the word "aerobics". Ummm... excreted? Unlikely. Excretion of unabsorbed calories tends to be an extremely obvious operation. Well yes -- everybody does it. We do it behind closed doors, but no one but you seems to be under the delusion that we don't do it. |
#165
|
|||
|
|||
Eating less does not result in weight loss
Bob wrote:
Michael Snyder wrote: SuperSpark ® wrote: In article , "Michael Snyder" wrote: Mr. F. Le Mur wrote in message ... On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 09:54:22 +0200, Mxsmanic wrote: -Michael Snyder writes: - - And like most such, it has very little relation to reality. - -It is the one and only basis of all weight loss. All successful diets -work by creating a caloric deficit. All unsuccessful diets have in -common that they fail to create a caloric deficit. There are no -exceptions to this rule. True. - - Over-simplifications such as these serve no one -- - least of all people who would like to lose weight. - -They serve those people best of all. However, they are unpleasantly -difficult to deny for people who don't want to face the necessity of -eating less in order to lose weight. - - If you eat less calories on a daily basis, the amount - of calories you USE will very likely change. - -No, it will not. The number of calories you burn is based on your -weight, sex, body composition, and the amount of exercise you get. None -of this suddenly changes just because you decide to eat less, which is -why you lose weight if you significantly reduce your intake of food. Actually one's metabolism does change when calorie intake changes. Lower calorie intake - lower metabolism. I was once told, by a professional physical trainer, that I was eating too little and that if I wanted to lose weight I would need to eat more. My body thought it was starving, and therefore was hanging on to every calory it could get. Bull**** psuedo science. Caloric deficit always results in weight loss. Consult an anorexic for more info. Funny how you guys all want to cite the pathological cases, instead of looking at what normal people experience in real life. Normal people obey the laws of thermodynamics. Energy out eventually equals energy in. Duh, I'm a physicist; don't lecture your granny. Your body does not utilize every gram of fuel you take in. It may leave your body as heat or **** -- and the ratio is variable. The ratio of useful work to heat is also extremely variable. |
#166
|
|||
|
|||
Eating less does not result in weight loss
Michael Snyder writes:
You make so many claims, and yet you back up none of them. I've provided all of the supporting material that you have, i.e., none. I recall also that you said you would no longer reply to my posts ... and yet here you are, as I predicted. Anyway ... Then I'd like to introduce you to the word "aerobics". I'm familiar with it. Well yes -- everybody does it. We do it behind closed doors, but no one but you seems to be under the delusion that we don't do it. Malabsorption syndromes are rather dramatically different. When you have a lot of fats or sugars going through the gut without being absorbed, it produces some pretty explosive symptoms. It is not subtle, and it is not normal. -- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly. |
#167
|
|||
|
|||
Eating less does not result in weight loss
Mxsmanic wrote:
Michael Snyder writes: Well yes -- everybody does it. We do it behind closed doors, but no one but you seems to be under the delusion that we don't do it. Malabsorption syndromes are rather dramatically different. When you have a lot of fats or sugars going through the gut without being absorbed, it produces some pretty explosive symptoms. It is not subtle, and it is not normal. By definition, since YOU introduced the term "mal" into it. Nevertheless, *normal* excreta does contain available fuel -- which is why flies eat it. Thus the recourse to thermodynamics is not justified -- food energy in does not equal metabolic energy expended. As I said, the system is more complex than that. |
#168
|
|||
|
|||
Eating less does not result in weight loss
Michael Snyder writes:
Nevertheless, *normal* excreta does contain available fuel -- which is why flies eat it. Most solid waste produced by human beings is dead bacteria from the gut, not unabsorbed nutrients. Thus the recourse to thermodynamics is not justified -- food energy in does not equal metabolic energy expended. All the rules of thermodynamics hold. Any fuel excreted is not burned. However, the amount lost in this way is very small in healthy individuals, and when it is large, the patient knows it. As I said, the system is more complex than that. Complex as it is, the basic rules are simple and reliable. -- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly. |
#169
|
|||
|
|||
Eating less does not result in weight loss
Michael Snyder writes:
Duh, I'm a physicist; don't lecture your granny. Then you understand conservation of energy. Your body does not utilize every gram of fuel you take in. It uses about 999 out of 1000 grams. It is pretty efficient. It may leave your body as heat or **** -- and the ratio is variable. If it is leaving your body as heat, that means that your body used it. Body heat is produced by metabolism of nutrients, which is why one speaks of "burning" calories. In fact, a 1° C change in body temperature can increase or decrease fuel consumption by about 10%. However, normally body temperature is held constant to within a small fraction of a degree. -- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly. |
#170
|
|||
|
|||
Eating less does not result in weight loss
Michael Snyder wrote:
Bob wrote: Michael Snyder wrote: SuperSpark ® wrote: In article , "Michael Snyder" wrote: Mr. F. Le Mur wrote in message ... On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 09:54:22 +0200, Mxsmanic wrote: -Michael Snyder writes: - - And like most such, it has very little relation to reality. - -It is the one and only basis of all weight loss. All successful diets -work by creating a caloric deficit. All unsuccessful diets have in -common that they fail to create a caloric deficit. There are no -exceptions to this rule. True. - - Over-simplifications such as these serve no one -- - least of all people who would like to lose weight. - -They serve those people best of all. However, they are unpleasantly -difficult to deny for people who don't want to face the necessity of -eating less in order to lose weight. - - If you eat less calories on a daily basis, the amount - of calories you USE will very likely change. - -No, it will not. The number of calories you burn is based on your -weight, sex, body composition, and the amount of exercise you get. None -of this suddenly changes just because you decide to eat less, which is -why you lose weight if you significantly reduce your intake of food. Actually one's metabolism does change when calorie intake changes. Lower calorie intake - lower metabolism. I was once told, by a professional physical trainer, that I was eating too little and that if I wanted to lose weight I would need to eat more. My body thought it was starving, and therefore was hanging on to every calory it could get. Bull**** psuedo science. Caloric deficit always results in weight loss. Consult an anorexic for more info. Funny how you guys all want to cite the pathological cases, instead of looking at what normal people experience in real life. Normal people obey the laws of thermodynamics. Energy out eventually equals energy in. Duh, I'm a physicist; don't lecture your granny. Your body does not utilize every gram of fuel you take in. It may leave your body as heat or **** -- and the ratio is variable. The ratio of useful work to heat is also extremely variable. Nope. You may be a physicist, but why are you claiming that bodies violate the laws of thermodynamics, or that the standard chemical process is "extremely variable" when it is the same process. The energy consumed is proportional to the mass moved and the amount of movement. It always ends up the same. Bob |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Hi - anyone else tried "no dieting" approach to finally getting weight under control? | Jennifer Austin | General Discussion | 9 | September 26th, 2003 04:41 PM |
Some Lapband facts (Can we retire the myths?) | Sharon C | General Discussion | 1 | September 25th, 2003 12:20 PM |
Dr. Phil's weight loss plan | Steve | General Discussion | 6 | September 24th, 2003 10:33 PM |
Medifast diet | Jennifer Austin | General Discussion | 17 | September 23rd, 2003 05:50 AM |
"Ideal weight" followup | beeswing | General Discussion | 8 | September 20th, 2003 01:26 PM |