471
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2024
471 points (93.1% liked)
You Should Know
33137 readers
3 users here now
YSK - for all the things that can make your life easier!
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with YSK.
All posts must begin with YSK. If you're a Mastodon user, then include YSK after @youshouldknow. This is a community to share tips and tricks that will help you improve your life.
Rule 2- Your post body text must include the reason "Why" YSK:
**In your post's text body, you must include the reason "Why" YSK: It’s helpful for readability, and informs readers about the importance of the content. **
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-YSK posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-YSK posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
If you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- The majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities:
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
Credits
Our icon(masterpiece) was made by @clen15!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'm like you, and no it's not simple. As others said, calories in, calories out. Nothing else matters, you need to find your own way to keep it. And no, exercise does not help much with weight, only if paired with a good diet. You would need to work out for hours continuously just to lose the calories from a random extra dessert.
But, you can do it. Two things I wish I had known:
For example, my body was able to keep my weight instead of losing it if I kept calories intake where it should be and had a "cheat day" once a week at most. No cheat days for me, my body is too smart for that.
Sometimes you feel you are on track, and then you get stuck at a certain weight. Even if you keep your diet, you might get stuck at a certain weight despite losing it well beforehand. Keep at it. You will break through at one point, closer than you think. But you have to keep at it.
It is not as simple as just calories in vs calories out. Your body has a setting point for what weight it thinks it should be. Once you are overweight, your setting point will be higher and your body wants to get back to that higher weight. It will start working actively against you. This might mean your appetite will increase and your metabolism will slow down. I think that is what you are describing here.
Trying to push yourself to lose more weight despite your body working against you can cause rebound weight gain if you are not able to keep the diet (which might become increasingly difficult due to increasing appetite). The most important thing is to keep a healthy diet that does not reduce your quality of life too much and is doable on the long term, I think. If you are struggling everyday, then it might be better to eat a little bit more and stay on a higher weight a bit longer to ensure that you will maintain the weight loss.
Maybe this is already what you meant. But the phrase "calories in vs calories out" and stating that nothing else matters made me want to respond. I think it is a popular oversimplification that causes a lot of unnecessary suffering for people trying to lose weight.
This is not true.
It’s just not true.
Very solid argumentation...
You said words that weren’t factually accurate.
I’m not going to argue with you about it but straight up the notion that your body has some “set point” and the idea of needing to keep your metabolism in the right area so calories work is … it’s bullshit.
It’s wrong.
The real problem with CICO is people don’t measure properly and our bodies have a varying requirement day to day based on a myriad of factors but that doesn’t invalidate the simple truth that is CICO.
Despite what others are saying, I think you are right in a lot of ways.
There definitely is a set point where your body feels comfortable. You can get above and below a few kilos, and your body will return to that set point if you return to what you eat normally. That's why it's hard, to move the set point, you have to get around 5 under and keep at it. So when you are 5 under and your weight loss suddenly stops, that's when you really started to push the kilos down, that's why it suddenly gets harder. And you should go that 5 kilos past your set point because you will gain it back when you stop eating less.
With me, with a resting consumption of around 1800 kcal, how it went is that I did 6 months of trying to keep it below 1500 kcal, targeting 1400 if I can - but no less, and more or less kept it. My results have been going from 124 kg to 110 then rebounding to 114, then another round of doing the same got me from 114 to 100 then rebound to 104. After the ~4 kg rebound, it stabilized. Just now, a month after finishing, I just ate nothing but shitty McDonalds for 3 days (have been on the road a lot) and my weight went from 104.2 to 103.9.
I guess what I'm saying is that your only real way of affecting the system is cals in vs cals out, but as you say, the inside of the system is not simple. Also, don't crash diet, and even if you feel like eating less on one day for some reason, keep your diet from the other side as well. Every time I ate less than 1400, the next day I fucked it up and went to 1800-ish, every single time. It makes it much harder.
Thanks! I think you are describing what a lot of people experience. Weight loss is highly complex and by oversimplifying it, lots of people do not get the help they need and are made to feel bad about themselves.
There is actually quite some scientific work supporting what I am saying. For example, this is an article in Journal of Obesity. It discusses the role of willpower and provides an overview of some of the research on other factors that affect whether people lose weight, such as metabolic compensation.
This is another interesting paper in the Irish Journal of Medical Science on patient's view on obesity as a disease. I think the conclusion of this study aligns well with some of my claims:
[This] (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0953620521000029) paper on weight regain also claims that it is not just about compliance with a diet, but that, amongst others, metabolic adaptation and changed appetite play an important role as well.
I am personally quite interested in work on obesity due to eating disorders. The reason for this is that I suffered from an eating disorder causing obesity for most of my life (fortunately, I do not have the disorder anymore). The constant pressure to just eat less and getting blamed if you fail, severely increased my eating disorder and I saw the same thing happen to others with similar issues. I know that this is anecdotal and not everyone that is obese has an eating disorder and not everyone with an eating disorder is the same. However, there is some limited evidence that weight neutral treatment of binge eating disorder has better outcomes. This and treatment for my CPTSD is exactly what worked for me.
This is propaganda from companies that want you to keep gorging on their slop instead of natural portions of food.
It is not. I am not saying people should not eat healthy or should not try to lose weight. I am just saying that pushing the oversimplification that for everyone it is just calories in vs calories out and that it is only about willpower is not correct. People should get the right help with losing weight and the factors that cause the weight gain or makes people not losing the weight should be addressed.
There is lots of scientific work on this. I copied some links from another comment I made.
For example, this is an article in Journal of Obesity. It discusses the role of willpower and provides an overview of some of the research on other factors that affect whether people lose weight, such as metabolic compensation.
This is another interesting paper in the Irish Journal of Medical Science on patient's view on obesity as a disease. I think the conclusion of this study aligns well with some of my claims:
[This] (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0953620521000029) paper on weight regain also claims that it is not just about compliance with a diet, but that, amongst others, metabolic adaptation and changed appetite play an important role as well.
If you disagree, please provide some substantiation. I would be interested in reading it.