Eating less does not result in weight loss

Courageous writes:

2. They smoke. Like chimneys.

Most Europeans do. However, I don't think this explains their lower
prevalence of obesity.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Michael Snyder writes:

... yet there is not a single diet or practice that works
for ALL people, including eating less and exercising more.

This is incorrect. Eating less and exercising more ALWAYS works, if it
creates a calorie deficit. Additionally, all other diets that produce
weight loss also work by creating a calorie deficit. A calorie deficit
(eating fewer calories than one burns) always results in weight loss,
with no exceptions. Diets that create a deficit always produce weight
loss. Diets that do not create a deficit never produce weight loss.

The reason why different diets may or may not work for different people
is that they must persuade individuals to eat less in order to work.
Some people find that they eat less on a low-carb diet; others find that
they eat less on a low-fat diet. It really doesn't matter which diet
they follow, as long as it "tricks" them into eating less; and a diet
that does not "trick" them won't work, unless they consciously adopt a
hypocaloric diet and stick to it (only a minority of fat people seem to
have the sense of personal responsibility and discipline required for
anything this straightforward, however).

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Michael Snyder writes:

Right. That's why the all-fat diet works so well.

The all-fat diet is no better or worse than any other diet. Diets work
when the people on those diets consume fewer calories than they burn.
The actual content of the diet is irrelevant. Most fad diets are
designed to trick people into eating less without realizing it, and this
can produce weight loss. For people who are willing to acknowledge that
they overeat and are prepared to discipline themselves to eat less, fad
diets are not required--they can eat anything they want, as long as they
consume fewer calories than they burn, and they will lose weight.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Ralph DuBose writes:

I was referring to the type of difference that is actually
genetically determined to a large degree and that effects energy
consumption.

There is no such difference. If obesity were genetically determind,
then Europeans would be just as fat as Americans, since they have the
same genes. But Europeans are much thinner, so clearly the obesity of
Americans is not genetic. Americans just eat too much.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Michael Snyder writes:

Absurd. There is no such thing as a BMR.

Yes, there is. BMR is the minimum energy required to keep you alive.
It includes the energy required to sustain vital organs (which is
extremely constant), plus the energy required to maintain whatever fat
and muscle tissue you have (which varies with body composition). A
person in a coma burns only the number of calories in his BMR. Everyone
else burns slightly more, since a conscious person always engages in
some amount of extra activity that burns a few extra calories, even
sitting up in bed all day.

If I lie in bed all day and eat, I will consume more calories
than I will if I lie in bed all day and fast.

No, you will not.

Haven't you ever noticed that there are no fat, comatose people? That's
because doctors precisely control the nutrients that comatose patients
receive, and adjust the number of calories to match the BMR plus any
resting energy requirement (usually close to zero). Extra body fat is
gradually lost as the body burns it to provide energy to sustain it,
until body weight stabilizes at an optimal level. If the myriad myths
concerning magic variations in metabolism actually had any basis in
fact, there would be lots of obese, comatose patients--but in reality
all comatose patients are slender.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Michael Snyder writes:

Fascinating -- no wonder you are a billionaire, since you are able to
reliably help anyone lose weight.

I've never tried to make money at it. It would be hard to make money at
it by telling the truth, since the last thing most fat people want to
hear is that they are fat because they overeat.

Your advice works, where so many others does not, so
you must be richer than God.

See above. And it's not my advice, it's the consensus opinion in the
mainstream medical community, backed up by endless mountains of data
that invariably support these conclusions.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

In article ,
"Michael Snyder" wrote:

SuperSpark ® wrote in message ...
In article ,
"Michael Snyder" wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote in message ...
Bob Ward writes:

Eating less doesn't necessarily GUARANTEE weight loss.

It does if it results in consuming fewer calories than you burn.
Otherwise it does not.

But eating less often CAUSES you to burn less calories --
so the simple equation is obviously invalid.


You don't burn less than your BMR, no matter what you eat.

Absurd. There is no such thing as a BMR.

No such thing as your basal metabolic rate? Well, this is news, isn't it?


If I lie in bed all day and eat, I will consume more calories
than I will if I lie in bed all day and fast.

True. You consume more calories when you eat than when you fast.

(????)

In article ,
"Michael Snyder" wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote in message ...
Mr. F. Le Mur writes:

True, but I think the idea is if you don't eat anough fat, then
you still have cravings (for fat) and eat more calories-worth
of stuff with less fat.

It's funny how people elsewhere in the world manage to remain thin
without having to worry about how much fat or carbs they are eating,
isn't it?

Yes it is. As it is also funny that a high-carb/low fat/low protein diet
works for SOME people, while a high-protein/low carb diet works for
SOME people, while eating only pineapple and tree frogs works for
SOME people... yet there is not a single diet or practice that works
for ALL people, including eating less and exercising more.

Eating less and excercising more works 100% of the time, for all people,
if applied correctly. Simple, basic human physiology.

It does not matter what you eat; if you eat below your BMR, you're in a
caloric deficit mode, whether you do the Atkins, the grapefruit diet or
all you eat is chocolate frosting.

SOME people... yet there is not a single diet or practice that works
for ALL people, including eating less and exercising more.

Eh? This is mathematically impossible. Excercise requires calories and
food provides those calories. The calories _must_ come from somewhere.

C//

Right. That's why the all-fat diet works so well.

The all-fat diet is no better or worse than any other diet. Diets work
when the people on those diets consume fewer calories than they burn.
The actual content of the diet is irrelevant.

An "all fat" diet causes excessive ketosis -- the presence of
keytones in the blood -- one side effect of ketosis is loss of
appetite.

Note that it is the _ketosis_ and not, strictly speaking,
the diet that is important here. Some people, with a mix of
fats, carbs, and proteins, get into ketosis more easily than others.
Hence, on a fat-centric diet, one must use ketostix to positively
id the ketosis on a regular basis.

I've seen assertions that ketone-driven metabolism only burns fat
at a rate of 7 colories (instead of the traditional 9) per gram.
I've not actually pursued the scientific truth of this myself.

C//