No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
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.
Questions 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 META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser 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.
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- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
view the rest of the comments
Your body probably will go full panic mode and store back as much as possible as soon as you starts to eat normally again. I'd advice agains doing anything so violent, and just lower your food intake to a bit under normal.
Store back what? That's not how physics works. If they continue to eat only what their body needs to maintain a set weight, they're not magically going to gain weight because their body somehow is able to violate the laws of physics.
It's callef the yoyo effect (that's why you should see a nutritionist when you want to lose weight). Also recent research hints at cells becoming more efficient when there is less energy available. There is even a Kurzhesagt video about it if you are interested.
It seems it is not so easy as calories in, calories out.
No...just no. You're arguing against literal physical laws here. Most people do not accurately count their calories and end up posting antidotal garbage that gets passed off as science.
Dude, cells are not using up 100% of the energy you ingest, if they did you could live off a sugar cube a year. I think it might be you that doesn't understand how the laws of physics work lol.
You have just argued that they do. You cannot magically create mass from eating less. That's literally what you're stating.
I didn't state something along those lines, ofc you cannot gain 100gram eating only 50grams.
Let me expmain:
If your body gets 100 "energy" out of a burger, that doesn't mean getting "200" energy out of a burger is against physics.
Then that's CICO... what's your point?
Dude, either you aren't reading or understanding what I'm typing, ot you just throws parts of your random knowledge in here withput logic.
If you want to discuss, great! But if you want to make random word salad, no thank you.
You're not saying anything. You just explained calorie intake...
Here is a explanation:
When you eat, your body process the food and tries to utilize it for different things (Nutrients absorpsion, muscle/fat/bone repair and creation and so on). This processes are not 100% independent and they are modulated via several ways, as an example insulin regulates(or inhibits, depends who you ask) lyposis, which is the fat burning process.
There are a large number of ways to regulate all of this process and to some extend they all regulate each other constantly.
Now, the yoyo effect, i.e. ganing lots of ways after finishing a diet: After your body runs in a deficit for a whiley your body is behaving as is food was scarse then, when you increase your calorie intake your body uses its enzymes, hormones and whatnot to assure that the most energy is saved, it can do this, going back to the fat example by raising your insuling levels more than usual and so, storing more energy from the same meal.
It makes sense from a evolutionary view also, your body can't try to store everything when your starving, since it needs the extra effort to go get food, then, when you find the food it tries to store it all and also, since it has enough you can spare some hours of letargy, i.e. why peoole get sleepy after a big meal. Also relevant, when you are in a deficit your body starts pumpling growth hormones, even tho it has nothing to grow off, but the hormone is there to kick start creation as soon as some extra energy is avaliable.
Of course that, compunded with how normally people tent to underestimate their calorie intake is even worst. Which happens a lot.
This is literally it. It's nothing to do with anything else you posted. People get fat or regain the weight not because they dieted and not because of some bullshit cave man theory... it's because they go back to over eating.
Well... Is not a caveman theory... Is actually kind of a new topic in nutrition...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9036397/
This paper even address the first law of thermodymics, which you really do not seem to understad. Bodies do not use 100% of the energy in your food, the usaged percentage is variable and what is not use you just shit, conserving the 1st law.
And true, people go back to eat too much, but you can't assure that 100% of the cases of weight regain after diet are coused because of that, there are:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6082688/
This is quite the hot topics between nutrition experts, but I'm guessing you already know that, since your seem to belive to already have analysed all possible information about this ultra-complex topic.
Yes, CICO works most of the time if you count well enough, but there are somw cases where your hormones will just fuck you over.
I really can't tell if you're trolling or if you reaaaaaaallyyyyy think you know what the 1st law actually means but are not capable enough to see that open systems are not bound by it in the way you think they are.
https://bookdown.org/asvn90/Understanding-Thermodynamics/the-first-law-for-open-systems.html
Take a look at chapter 5.2, it explains how the 1st law applies to open systems -like your body, in case you don't get why I am talking about open systems-
In shot
Food = energy + shit (+others)
You can shit more or less, depending on how your body process food. I hope that one is simple enough for you.
Also: maybe is easier to understand https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPrjP4A_X4s
This paper is also not about the starvation theory, this is about fasting.
No where have I said that, I've literally pointed out multiple times now, that people who gain weight, don't magically do so with less calories. You all continue to spew HAAS bullshit about how people can magically gain weight on less, as you do just in the next line here.
Yes...yes you can. Holy shit, you cannot create more mass from less. Again, I'm not the one that doesn't understand physics here.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6082688/
Are you even reading the papers your linking here?
There is only one way to gain weight, eat more than your body needs. This is not rocket science and all studies you have linked so far point this out. None of them have stated in any way, that people eating less than their bodies need magically gain weight.
No, thats still eating to much.
I... don't know if you're trolling either at this point, you clearly don't understand any of the articles or papers on this topic. Thermodynamics is not going to magically change because you think you're body is somehow different because you gained weight.
What's with you all thinking I believe that your body is %100 effective at using calories....the fuck is with you.
Yes, totally, that's why people get fat, because they can't shit like skinny people.
Fucking stop. CICO is physics, you're eating to much if you're gaining weight. PERIOD.
Also: maybe is easier to understand https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPrjP4A_X4s
Ah yes a YT video, is this one going to explain how I'm wrong....and that obesity comes from people eating "normal" and it's not their fault that consuming 4.5k calories a day made them obese...
I feel like I'm arguing with a climate denier.
So first off, I don't think you should bring the laws of physics into conversations of how human bodies store fat. I know it's tempting - I've been there before - but it's just too reductive to be useful in the conversation, and it leads to generally poor conclusions.
While it's true that energy cannot be 'conjured from nothing' - human bodies don't quite work on a fixed energy in/out model. They can be variably efficient in how much energy is required to perform certain tasks, and secondary systems can be turned off when the need to conserve energy becomes apparent (leptin is the signaling mechanism for this).
The main mechanisms that cause rebound weight gain after sharp dieting is a reduction in passive energy needs stemming from the change in leptin levels, along with leptins very strong effect on appetite.
I suggest to you, and anyone still under the impression that CICO is a useful model for understanding human metabolism, to read the book The Hungry Brain. It's hugely useful for gaining greater insight into the subject.
Are you suggesting our bodies are more efficient and break thermodynamics?
What secondary systems get turned off? You're body is going to utilize energy anyway it can if it needs it, if it doesn't it stores it, usually in the form of fat.
No it's from eating way more calories...this is literally junk science your parroting here. The rebound in weight is because someone decides to stuff themselves again.
That book is about the psychology of overeating.
Hell here is a quote from his AMA:
https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/5stv4n/comment/ddhwzhf/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Did you miss the "when you start eating normally again" bit?
You can rant all you want about the laws of physics, but you might want to practice your reading comprehension.
Then you're not eating normally... you're eating more than you need.
Most people don't count calories. You said it yourself, a few posts below. Are you going to start redefining "normal" now to meet your argument?
Wow....so you think my argument of CICO is bunk... because....most people don't count calories...the fuck type of logic is this?
You really need to work on that reading comprehension. Valmond stated that people will regain weight when they return to eating normally after dieting.
You claim that's not how physics work, then move the goal posts stating "if people only eat what they need, they won't gain the weight back." Well no shit Sherlock, but they're not eating normally. They're gaining the weight back if they go back to eating normally.
Quit being so quick to attack folk and read the fucking post.
Again, that's not normal eating is it? If they were obese in the first place. Stop acting like it's somehow normal for someone to consume 4000 calories a day or more.
Normal for them, not your normal. Nobody asked you for your personal definition of normal. Again, reading comprehension. Get some.
Lol no just no. Stop please. We're talking about CICO and actual facts. Not bullshit made up by the HAAS gang who doesn't want to believe that being obese is extremely not healthy for you.
No, we're not discussing CICO. We're discussing your inability to recognize that the OP used the phrase "eating normally" to describe dieters returning to their normal eating habits (ie, how they ate prior to dieting), and your resulting attack on the OP.
Yes we are discussing CICO, which you and a few others seem to be completely ignorant of.
On top of that, no where has OP said anything about eating normally in his post. They have stated they wanted to know if the junk science they have been told is true or not. You coming into the topic and describing bunk science and acting like a climate denier, is exactly what I'm tired of seeing. It's bullshit science you're spewing and doesn't actually help anyone.
Quote by the OP, emphasis mine: "Your body probably will go full panic mode and store back as much as possible as soon as you starts [sic] to eat normally again. I'd advice agains [sic] doing anything so violent, and just lower your food intake to a bit under normal."
After which you attack the OP for violating the laws of physics. The OP didn't attack CICO, promote bunk science, or deny climate. Neither am I.
You've got the personality of dog shit and an equivalent reading comprehension. Quit gaslighting.
OP is the OP not a commentor in this comment chain. I didn't attack them, I pointed out that they're wrong. It's not my damn fault you guys follow junk science and yes go read other comments from here, people absolutely are attacking CICO with more junk science.
I honestly don't give a shit about my personality, this is a forum and I'm here to have honest factual discussions, not have people lie and twist facts to their own agendas. If you want that go to truth social or Facebook.