Bostin Loyd in kidney failure

[Fat Boy]

this whole ‘muh genetics’ topic has come up on this site before IIRC

 

[airman]

If your body gets fat with clean and essential calories in nutrients, you cannot reduce calories because you weaken it and you die. I mean, technically you can prevent fat gain if you not eat, but in practice it wouldn't be possible.

You make no sense. Doesn't matter if you calories are clean, if you are getting fat, you are eating beyond your caloric expenditure. You don't have to stop eating, just eat below maintenance.

 

[b-boy]

Man I dont even understand this thread anymore, all I will say is this.....

I DONT GIVE A FUCK WHAT TYPE OF CONDITION OR PROBLEM YOU HAVE, IF YOU BURN MORE CALORIES THAN YOU TAKE IN, YOU WILL LOSE WEIGHT!!!!
end of story, there is no arguing this simple FACT.

 

[muscle96ss]

Man I dont even understand this thread anymore, all I will say is this.....

I DONT GIVE A FUCK WHAT TYPE OF CONDITION OR PROBLEM YOU HAVE, IF YOU BURN MORE CALORIES THAN YOU TAKE IN, YOU WILL LOSE WEIGHT!!!!
end of story, there is no arguing this simple FACT.

But its more complicated than that:

Gaining Weight Despite Calorie Restriction — E D I

The reality of gaining weight despite calorie restriction is dogmatically put down to a lack of control and not adequately ensuring the calorie restriction is consistently in place. Trouble is, the science thoroughly disproves that dogma.

edinstitute.org

 

[airman]

But its more complicated than that:

Gaining Weight Despite Calorie Restriction — E D I

The reality of gaining weight despite calorie restriction is dogmatically put down to a lack of control and not adequately ensuring the calorie restriction is consistently in place. Trouble is, the science thoroughly disproves that dogma.

edinstitute.org

Did you even read that? Do you understand what that random blog is saying? They are talking about caloric restriction not a deficit. Talking about metabolism adjusting down.

"
That means restrict a bit and the metabolic response will not only match that deficit, but it will also overcompensate such that excess energy is now available within the system. Some individuals may release that excess into the greater environment (carbon dioxide and water) and others may partition the energy within the system (growth, repair and chemical bonds).

You can therefore gain weight during calorie restriction. This is particularly the case for those with a history of calorie restriction."

They are not speaking about a deficit. Because if you're metabolism down regulates, all you have to do is bring calories down further. You know like we all tend to do over time when we diet.

DEFICIT = LESS CALORIES THAN YOU BURN

No one is speaking about how difficult it might be for some, just that at the end of the day, if you are gaining weight you are not in a deficit.

I swear I feel like I'm trying to explain the theory of relativity to a potato. lol

 

[Dugbet]

You make no sense. Doesn't matter if you calories are clean, if you are getting fat, you are eating beyond your caloric expenditure. You don't have to stop eating, just eat below maintenance.

If your calories are clean it means that you are consuming the essentials to stay alive and carry out daily activities.

I have never believed in the calorie system and no one here does it because otherwise no one would be watching if they eat more or less protein, sugar or fat. Nor would anyone take exogenous hormones to speed up their metabolism or increase their muscle mass or increase their fat burning.

The introduction and manipulation of hormones hack the calorie count. If you can use hormones to burn more calories than you consume even while consuming 5000 calories, it is possible to destroy your hormonal system to gain weight even while consuming 1000 calories.

 

[maldorf]

I also think the guy that posted about gaining weight when in a deficit meant that people with medical problems can gain weight even when they decrease their calorie intake from what it was before they were "sick". They are taking in less calories than before but not really in a true deficit. Thats the only way that works. It can happen like that if the medical problem is significant. Like I said earlier, I take in about 1/3 the calories I did before my heart attack 12 years ago. The combo of my aging and more significantly my heart failure has greatly lowered my BMR and my daily expenditure of calories is much much lower. I weighed a lean 230 lbs when I had my heart attack, and now I am a soft 240 lbs. So technically speaking I gained 10 lbs but I am eating 2000 calories instead of 6000.

 

[airman]

If your calories are clean it means that you are consuming the essentials to stay alive and carry out daily activities.

I have never believed in the calorie system and no one here does it because otherwise no one would be watching if they eat more or less protein, sugar or fat. Nor would anyone take exogenous hormones to speed up their metabolism or increase their muscle mass or increase their fat burning.

The introduction and manipulation of hormones hack the calorie count. If you can use hormones to burn more calories than you consume even while consuming 5000 calories, it is possible to destroy your hormonal system to gain weight even while consuming 1000 calories.

It looks like English is not your first language, so I will try to not sound harsh.

Calories matter. Hormones or not.

If you take drugs to speed up your metabolism to burn fat and lose weight eating 5000 calories... You are in a deficit
If you destroy your "hormonal system" and gain weight while you are consuming 1000 calories... You are not in a deficit

I can't be any more clear than that. If you don't understand that, you have a lot of learning to do.

 

[maldorf]

Did you even read that? Do you understand what that random blog is saying? They are talking about caloric restriction not a deficit. Talking about metabolism adjusting down.

"
That means restrict a bit and the metabolic response will not only match that deficit, but it will also overcompensate such that excess energy is now available within the system. Some individuals may release that excess into the greater environment (carbon dioxide and water) and others may partition the energy within the system (growth, repair and chemical bonds).

You can therefore gain weight during calorie restriction. This is particularly the case for those with a history of calorie restriction."

They are not speaking about a deficit. Because if you're metabolism down regulates, all you have to do is bring calories down further. You know like we all tend to do over time when we diet.

DEFICIT = LESS CALORIES THAN YOU BURN

No one is speaking about how difficult it might be for some, just that at the end of the day, if you are gaining weight you are not in a deficit.

I swear I feel like I'm trying to explain the theory of relativity to a potato. lol

It is the definition of "deficit" that was muddied here by a few people posting. I think they were meaning deficit as in you are taking in less calories than before but still gaining. That isnt the traditional or correct use of the term, but it is a very real phenomenon. i dont think anyone on here is trying to say that you can gain weight when you are in a true calorie deficit. That is like trying to say I can gain muscle when in a protein deficit. Nobody believes that.

 

[airman]

I also think the guy that posted about gaining weight when in a deficit meant that people with medical problems can gain weight even when they decrease their calorie intake from what it was before they were "sick". They are taking in less calories than before but not really in a true deficit. Thats the only way that works. It can happen like that if the medical problem is significant. Like I said earlier, I take in about 1/3 the calories I did before my heart attack 12 years ago. The combo of my aging and more significantly my heart failure has greatly lowered my BMR and my daily expenditure of calories is much much lower. I weighed a lean 230 lbs when I had my heart attack, and now I am a soft 240 lbs. So technically speaking I gained 10 lbs but I am eating 2000 calories instead of 6000.

Exactly. That's what we are trying to explain to all these scientists and researchers. They do not understand what deficit means.

Like you said in a previous post. Although you are eating 1/3 the calories now, you are still not in a deficit. You say you eat 2000 calories per day, maybe you need to be eating 1500 calories to be in a deficit.


Also, for everyone else, metabolism is constantly adjusting. Hence why some years I've dieted on 3000 calories and I was in a deficit, where other years I had to bring it down below 2000 calories. Just a different amount of calories to be in a deficit.

 

[KillerStack]

If your calories are clean it means that you are consuming the essentials to stay alive and carry out daily activities.

I have never believed in the calorie system and no one here does it because otherwise no one would be watching if they eat more or less protein, sugar or fat. Nor would anyone take exogenous hormones to speed up their metabolism or increase their muscle mass or increase their fat burning.

The introduction and manipulation of hormones hack the calorie count. If you can use hormones to burn more calories than you consume even while consuming 5000 calories, it is possible to destroy your hormonal system to gain weight even while consuming 1000 calories.

I know those are hypotheticals, but still, no one is gaining weight on 1K unless we are talking about a 3 year old. And no one really gets lean on 5K either. Dorian's highest intake was 5.5K he said and he came down to 3.6K for shows and he was the biggest mofo ever pretty much. Individuals vary a bit but there's not as big a discrepancy as some think wrt calorie needs to gain/lose. You know, these things have been studied.

 

[maldorf]

Exactly. That's what we are trying to explain to all these scientists and researchers. They do not understand what deficit means.

Like you said in a previous post. Although you are eating 1/3 the calories now, you are still not in a deficit. You say you eat 2000 calories per day, maybe you need to be eating 1500 calories to be in a deficit.


Also, for everyone else, metabolism is constantly adjusting. Hence why some years I've dieted on 3000 calories and I was in a deficit, where other years I had to bring it down below 2000 calories. Just a different amount of calories to be in a deficit.

Yes. I think some on this thread were just getting confused about the terminology of what exactly calorie deficit means. It is physically impossible to gain weight when you are in a calorie deficit. On the other hand, you can decrease your calories and gain weight. That is absolutely possible if the right conditions exist. I have discovered that over the last 12 years. Never thought I would have this happen to me. Not much I can do unless I get my next VT ablation done and it takes care of my VT problem.

 

[KillerStack]

That is like trying to say I can gain muscle when in a protein deficit. Nobody believes that.

People believe a lot of kooky stuff. LOTS of people believe calories don't mean anything at all, it's all about insulin or whatever. People really believe some can eat 500 calories a day and get fat or eat 10K and get ripped, as long as they "manipulate their hormones".
Problem is, these never show up in studies or in the lab.

 

[maldorf]

People believe a lot of kooky stuff. LOTS of people believe calories don't mean anything at all, it's all about insulin or whatever. People really believe some can eat 500 calories a day and get fat or eat 10K and get ripped, as long as they "manipulate their hormones".
Problem is, these never show up in studies or in the lab.

Man, I sure hope some dont believe that stuff!

 

[KillerStack]

Man, I sure hope some dont believe that stuff!

I've seen some argue on bodybuilding forums that no one needs more than 50 grams of protein a day to build muscle, and how this protein craze was invented by supplement companies. When I counter that 50 grams is below FDA recommendation for most, just to maintain health and physiological processes so how could it be optimal to build muscle... they still won't change their minds.
Then you have pro bodybuilders who have no clue how much protein they are taking in, all they know is the ounces of meat they eat. So they say they don't eat much protein... then you calculate their breakfast and it's 100 grams already lol.

 

[Bleed]

The other guy will die on that hill no matter how much proof is brought or how well you made your point. People believe the most absurd shit on their own. When there's a lot of them, like with a diet craze, the group think becomes a force to be reckoned with no matter how many studies you bring to the feelings fight. Ive seen people attach their identity to a diet. It never lasts but those are the people you would be best to not waste time on for anything.

I've seen some argue on bodybuilding forums that no one needs more than 50 grams of protein a day to build muscle, and how this protein craze was invented by supplement companies. When I counter that 50 grams is below FDA recommendation for most, just to maintain health and physiological processes so how could it be optimal to build muscle... they still won't change their minds.
Then you have pro bodybuilders who have no clue how much protein they are taking in, all they know is the ounces of meat they eat. So they say they don't eat much protein... then you calculate their breakfast and it's 100 grams already lol.

 

[muscle96ss]

Did you even read that? Do you understand what that random blog is saying? They are talking about caloric restriction not a deficit. Talking about metabolism adjusting down.

"
That means restrict a bit and the metabolic response will not only match that deficit, but it will also overcompensate such that excess energy is now available within the system. Some individuals may release that excess into the greater environment (carbon dioxide and water) and others may partition the energy within the system (growth, repair and chemical bonds).

You can therefore gain weight during calorie restriction. This is particularly the case for those with a history of calorie restriction."

They are not speaking about a deficit. Because if you're metabolism down regulates, all you have to do is bring calories down further. You know like we all tend to do over time when we diet.

DEFICIT = LESS CALORIES THAN YOU BURN

No one is speaking about how difficult it might be for some, just that at the end of the day, if you are gaining weight you are not in a deficit.

I swear I feel like I'm trying to explain the theory of relativity to a potato. lol

My point was it is not about calories but about energy expenditure. Someone who is not healthy, has disease, or is deficient in hormones; is going to be much less efficient at producing energy than a normal healthy individual.

 

[muscle96ss]

Did you even read that? Do you understand what that random blog is saying? They are talking about caloric restriction not a deficit. Talking about metabolism adjusting down.

"
That means restrict a bit and the metabolic response will not only match that deficit, but it will also overcompensate such that excess energy is now available within the system. Some individuals may release that excess into the greater environment (carbon dioxide and water) and others may partition the energy within the system (growth, repair and chemical bonds).

You can therefore gain weight during calorie restriction. This is particularly the case for those with a history of calorie restriction."

They are not speaking about a deficit. Because if you're metabolism down regulates, all you have to do is bring calories down further. You know like we all tend to do over time when we diet.

DEFICIT = LESS CALORIES THAN YOU BURN

No one is speaking about how difficult it might be for some, just that at the end of the day, if you are gaining weight you are not in a deficit.

I swear I feel like I'm trying to explain the theory of relativity to a potato. lol

Here is another one; it is not just the calories but how they are processed based on different individualistic variables:

Overriding the calorie equation: Hormones and weight gain

Do you feel that despite eating really well and exercising, the weight is just not shifting? Read on to learn about hormones and weight gain.

thepcosnutritionist.com

 

[airman]

My point was it is not about calories but about energy expenditure. Someone who is not healthy, has disease, or is deficient in hormones; is going to be much less efficient at producing energy than a normal healthy individual.

And what does that have to do with DEFICIT?

 

[airman]

Here is another one; it is not just the calories but how they are processed based on different individualistic variables:

Overriding the calorie equation: Hormones and weight gain

Do you feel that despite eating really well and exercising, the weight is just not shifting? Read on to learn about hormones and weight gain.

thepcosnutritionist.com

Man, I don't like to get into name calling, but you are seriously making yourself look stupid.

We are talking about a deficit. That means less than required. If your hormones are out of whack, if you have a disease, if you are on drugs and your metabolism down regulates you are no longer in a deficit, and gain weight. You have a new level of calories that will put you into a deficit.

The amount of calories required to sustain weight or to get below in order to lose weight (deficit) is not constant, it can change for whatever reason.

All you are doing is posting stupid articles, written by morons. From the article "Weight isn’t just a simple matter of calories in vs. calories out. While calories are important, hormones that can override the calorie deficit and stop you from losing weight."

It's is a matter of calories in vs calories out. If you're hormones override your calorie deficit, then you have to lower calories to a new deficit, or fix whatever issues you have so that you can continue to lose weight at the current caloric level.

The moment you stop losing weight for whatever fucking reason, YOU ARE NO LONGER IN DEFICIT!