I burned 1,000 calories while playing eq this morning

[nom_fats]

bBiGg SstEpPs

[nom_fats]

I burned ober 27,000 calories playing eberquest the past 30 days

[Smoofers]

How many calories did you ingest while playing EQ, though?

[Bardp1999]

https://i.imgur.com/owWwf6V.jpg

[pink grapefruit]

Have you guys heard of Dr. Herman Pontzer and his intriguing research concerning human metabolism? He's a biological anthropologist at Duke University. I read his provocatively titled book Burn: New Research Blows the Lid Off How We Really Burn Calories, Stay Healthy, and Lose Weight, and while I'm not sure how settled the science is it really blew my mind. Super provocative statements made by researchers should be considered very carefully ofc.

A 2012 study he did using the doubly-labeled water method of measuring metabolic expenditure (the gold standard) of a group of tribal hunter-gatherers and then comparing the data with previous findings of Westerners with a variety of lifestyles indicated there may be no significant differences in the metabolic expenditure of these groups: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0040503

It's been a couple years since I read the study, but some of the data didn't quite support the hypothesis and I think they try to explain why that might be. Since the publication, he's continued to perform studies that do keep pointing to this possibly being the case.

Basically, what Pontzer believes is that total metabolic expenditure is not significantly impacted by physical activity- meaning that while exercise is beneficial for a number of reasons, it will not result in loss of adiposity due to "burning more kilocalories". Exercise may result in weight loss for other reasons, such as reduced opportunity to consume kcal while exercising and physical activity making a person more health-conscious overall, but he does not believe that exercise = burning more total kcal.

One hypothesis is that when we expend kcal on physical activity, our bodies become more metabolically "efficient," and expend fewer kcal on other metabolic processes- which may be part of why physical exercise is so health-promoting.

Take all of this with a grain of salt ofc, but this is so fascinating and it's the sorta thing I nerd out hard over.

[Trexller]

https://i.imgflip.com/30c8sz.jpg

[Rygar]

Have you guys heard of Dr. Herman Pontzer and his intriguing research concerning human metabolism? He's a biological anthropologist at Duke University. I read his provocatively titled book Burn: New Research Blows the Lid Off How We Really Burn Calories, Stay Healthy, and Lose Weight, and while I'm not sure how settled the science is it really blew my mind. Super provocative statements made by researchers should be considered very carefully ofc.

A 2012 study he did using the doubly-labeled water method of measuring metabolic expenditure (the gold standard) of a group of tribal hunter-gatherers and then comparing the data with previous findings of Westerners with a variety of lifestyles indicated there may be no significant differences in the metabolic expenditure of these groups: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0040503

It's been a couple years since I read the study, but some of the data didn't quite support the hypothesis and I think they try to explain why that might be. Since the publication, he's continued to perform studies that do keep pointing to this possibly being the case.

Basically, what Pontzer believes is that total metabolic expenditure is not significantly impacted by physical activity- meaning that while exercise is beneficial for a number of reasons, it will not result in loss of adiposity due to "burning more kilocalories". Exercise may result in weight loss for other reasons, such as reduced opportunity to consume kcal while exercising and physical activity making a person more health-conscious overall, but he does not believe that exercise = burning more total kcal.

One hypothesis is that when we expend kcal on physical activity, our bodies become more metabolically "efficient," and expend fewer kcal on other metabolic processes- which may be part of why physical exercise is so health-promoting.

Take all of this with a grain of salt ofc, but this is so fascinating and it's the sorta thing I nerd out hard over.

I'm really against the notion of 'this is the answer for everyone' when it comes to dietary / exercise stuff. I have met people that exercise / diet healthy and remain large, and have met people that eat shit and are rail skinny. Certainly documented cases of conditions that make it extremely difficult to store fat in an individual.

Until "Genetic Metabolism anomaly 1- 439" can be quantified I'm a proponent of 'do what works for you'.

[unsunghero]

Have you guys heard of Dr. Herman Pontzer and his intriguing research concerning human metabolism? He's a biological anthropologist at Duke University. I read his provocatively titled book Burn: New Research Blows the Lid Off How We Really Burn Calories, Stay Healthy, and Lose Weight, and while I'm not sure how settled the science is it really blew my mind. Super provocative statements made by researchers should be considered very carefully ofc.

A 2012 study he did using the doubly-labeled water method of measuring metabolic expenditure (the gold standard) of a group of tribal hunter-gatherers and then comparing the data with previous findings of Westerners with a variety of lifestyles indicated there may be no significant differences in the metabolic expenditure of these groups: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0040503

It's been a couple years since I read the study, but some of the data didn't quite support the hypothesis and I think they try to explain why that might be. Since the publication, he's continued to perform studies that do keep pointing to this possibly being the case.

Basically, what Pontzer believes is that total metabolic expenditure is not significantly impacted by physical activity- meaning that while exercise is beneficial for a number of reasons, it will not result in loss of adiposity due to "burning more kilocalories". Exercise may result in weight loss for other reasons, such as reduced opportunity to consume kcal while exercising and physical activity making a person more health-conscious overall, but he does not believe that exercise = burning more total kcal.

One hypothesis is that when we expend kcal on physical activity, our bodies become more metabolically "efficient," and expend fewer kcal on other metabolic processes- which may be part of why physical exercise is so health-promoting.

Take all of this with a grain of salt ofc, but this is so fascinating and it's the sorta thing I nerd out hard over.

I’ve heard stuff similar to this

What everyone knowledgeable in the fitness agrees upon is that calorie restriction is many, many times more effective for weight loss than calorie expenditure during active, non-NEAT, activity. It’s far effective for the typical person to choose not to eat that extra burger than to attempt to burn it off, basically

But I have heard of the idea that the body adjusts its NEAT (non exercise activity thermogenesis) to things like cardio. I personally don’t believe it, but even if it were true, cardio/exercise has so many other health benefits I consider it crucial

But I have been wrong on science-y stuff before. I just got proven wrong that two vehicles traveling 60mph towards each other exact the same amount of force on each other as a single vehicle going 60mph into a stationary brick wall. You would think it would be more for the former, but after a lengthy argument with a co-worker, I looked it up and I was wrong. I STILL don’t understand the physics on that one ….

[pink grapefruit]

I'm really against the notion of 'this is the answer for everyone' when it comes to dietary / exercise stuff. I have met people that exercise / diet healthy and remain large, and have met people that eat shit and are rail skinny. Certainly documented cases of conditions that make it extremely difficult to store fat in an individual.

Until "Genetic Metabolism anomaly 1- 439" can be quantified I'm a proponent of 'do what works for you'.

Genetic metabolic anomalies can be quantified to an extent already, but no matter what it's always going to be, "do what works for you."

A portion of that book I mentioned spends some time discussing professional athletes, and in particular, the subset of that population that are genetic outliers in terms of metabolic expenditure. Pontzer's hypothesis is that many top-level endurance athletes would have high metabolic expenditure even living sedentary lifestyles, rather than the metabolic expenditure being high due to all the exercise. He doesn't suggest that everyone is the same, but rather that an adult individual's total energy expenditure is relatively consistent regardless of activity level- until around age 60, and with the understanding that certain pathologies can affect this as well.

There are many genetic factors that influence level of adiposity, and obviously energy expenditure ("high" vs "low" metabolism) is one of them, but I currently believe that this one factor gets too much credit. A factor deserving more consideration is imo genetic variation of hunger/satiation cues. A simple example of this being genetic differences in production of (or responsiveness to) ghrelin (the "hunger hormone") and leptin (the "satiation hormone").

There are of course also factors beyond the genetic- including social, psychological, environmental, etc. that all affect adiposity. Each individual is unique, and we all need individualized approaches to support our health. In light of our modern food environment, aggressive treatment with prescription medications, psychotherapy, and dietetic consultation may all be required for many to maintain a healthy weight.

I feel like telling someone with adiposity-based chronic disease to "eat less and move more" is about as effective as telling a person with major depression to "cheer up."

[magnetaress]

Tbh I read somewhere that sleep burns a bunch of calories more than just being awake and it's also really hard to eat while asleep so I aim for as much sleep as possible.

[Rager and Quitter]

Genetic metabolic anomalies can be quantified to an extent already, but no matter what it's always going to be, "do what works for you."

A portion of that book I mentioned spends some time discussing professional athletes, and in particular, the subset of that population that are genetic outliers in terms of metabolic expenditure. Pontzer's hypothesis is that many top-level endurance athletes would have high metabolic expenditure even living sedentary lifestyles, rather than the metabolic expenditure being high due to all the exercise. He doesn't suggest that everyone is the same, but rather that an adult individual's total energy expenditure is relatively consistent regardless of activity level- until around age 60, and with the understanding that certain pathologies can affect this as well.

There are many genetic factors that influence level of adiposity, and obviously energy expenditure ("high" vs "low" metabolism) is one of them, but I currently believe that this one factor gets too much credit. A factor deserving more consideration is imo genetic variation of hunger/satiation cues. A simple example of this being genetic differences in production of (or responsiveness to) ghrelin (the "hunger hormone") and leptin (the "satiation hormone").

There are of course also factors beyond the genetic- including social, psychological, environmental, etc. that all affect adiposity. Each individual is unique, and we all need individualized approaches to support our health. In light of our modern food environment, aggressive treatment with prescription medications, psychotherapy, and dietetic consultation may all be required for many to maintain a healthy weight.

I feel like telling someone with adiposity-based chronic disease to "eat less and move more" is about as effective as telling a person with major depression to "cheer up."

I'll openly admit that I actually read very little of what you wrote, but I will say as someone that was rather large when I was younger from eating more and moving less, I found a plethora of excuses as to why I was the size I was, but until I woke up an realized that I needed to change my diet and become more active, nothing changed.

Sure, there are many reasons why someone is the size they are, but there are too many convenient excuses and too many enabling voices that may be coming from a place of compassion, but all result in the continuity of detrimental health. Eating healthier (by whatever degree possible) and becoming more active (by whatever degree possible) is far more beneficial to the person than to suggest they're just the way they are, and that's what it is.

Nothing is more empowering than an individuals making significant life changes and seeing the result of those changes regardless of the starting or ending point. I'm now in the mid-teens percentage body fat, I can lift heavy weights with the big boys, and my body has never looked or felt better. Empowering people to make whatever changes are right for them in the direction of more healthy living should be the primary goal, regardless of the economic or genetic hurdles they might face.

No more excuses. No more complacency.

[aussenseiter]

Genetic metabolic anomalies can be quantified to an extent already, but no matter what it's always going to be, "do what works for you."

A portion of that book I mentioned spends some time discussing professional athletes, and in particular, the subset of that population that are genetic outliers in terms of metabolic expenditure. Pontzer's hypothesis is that many top-level endurance athletes would have high metabolic expenditure even living sedentary lifestyles, rather than the metabolic expenditure being high due to all the exercise. He doesn't suggest that everyone is the same, but rather that an adult individual's total energy expenditure is relatively consistent regardless of activity level- until around age 60, and with the understanding that certain pathologies can affect this as well.

There are many genetic factors that influence level of adiposity, and obviously energy expenditure ("high" vs "low" metabolism) is one of them, but I currently believe that this one factor gets too much credit. A factor deserving more consideration is imo genetic variation of hunger/satiation cues. A simple example of this being genetic differences in production of (or responsiveness to) ghrelin (the "hunger hormone") and leptin (the "satiation hormone").

There are of course also factors beyond the genetic- including social, psychological, environmental, etc. that all affect adiposity. Each individual is unique, and we all need individualized approaches to support our health. In light of our modern food environment, aggressive treatment with prescription medications, psychotherapy, and dietetic consultation may all be required for many to maintain a healthy weight.

I feel like telling someone with adiposity-based chronic disease to "eat less and move more" is about as effective as telling a person with major depression to "cheer up."

Is there a reason you read so much about losing weight? ;)

[nom_fats]

another 865 knocked out this morning!

[pink grapefruit]

Is there a reason you read so much about losing weight? ;)

2005 - 2009 era xanga

those of us who survived will forever bare our scars.

[aussenseiter]

2005 - 2009 era xanga

those of us who survived will forever bare our scars.

Oh, please bare them. 😼

[Toxigen]

there should be a tax on fat people

[pink grapefruit]

Oh, please bare them. 😼

finally one i understand! xD

[Ratchet51]

there should be a tax on fat people

Hit me with it, I can afford it... Bitch.

[Smoofers]

First law of thermodynamics: change in energy = energy in - energy out. All other explanations are cope. Hope this helps.

[unsunghero]

First law of thermodynamics: change in energy = energy in - energy out. All other explanations are cope. Hope this helps.

To a large extent I agree. Just like to win some gender and sexuality related arguments, some people lean WAYY too fucking hard on the concept that hermaphrodites exist, therefore everything is a spectrum, because some people are born with both genitals, therefore everything is really nothing and nothing is really everything and therefore we can make the rules up as we go to whatever makes me feel better about myself (this is just my dumb uneducated take on it, not looking to start a debate on this subject)

The same idea can be applied to the other factors in obesity. The most simple and most important factor is energy in vs energy out, but there are many little complicating factors like different genetic metabolic rates, different grellin hunger hormone levels, availability of healthy food, etc

All of these other factors are concisely summarized in this video by Jeff Nippard I previously posted to the Lose Weight thread. To what degree you want to lean on these other factors as excuses for your success or more likely your failure (“cope” as you call it) depends on the person. I personally put a shit ton of value on energy in vs energy out and have no qualms about calling people who fail undisciplined and lazy…

…And, if I could volunteer to be injected with DNA that would change my metabolic rate and hunger negatively so I could prove I could STILL lose fat through sheer effort and willpower even with a bigger genetic disadvantage I would. But alas we lack the technology to give me shittier genetics

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=keBZfGAmq2Q

[unsunghero]

^
And if anyone needs a TLDR to this:

[unsunghero]

To play Devil’s advocate:

Normies really don’t give a fuck about people who are currently in shape but who are lifetime fitness freaks, always in shape. What normies like and respect are people who were very fat and then lost all the weight

The pictures that used to get the most upvotes on fitness sites I followed were the biggest fat to fit before and after transformations. Those would beat any bodybuilder in terms of upvotes and praise, always

And it’s not just validation and praise from the public, something people crave more and more in this social media age. It’s also money. If you are smart about it, you can literally pull a Jared from Subway (minus the diddling kids) and claim you lost the weight due to whatever product or gym and sell them your before and after pics to use in advertisements

So heaps of praise and validation from the public, being a role model and inspiration, and possibly being given money if you play your cards right…

….You wouldn’t just be losing fat for you, yknow. Not if you want it to be bigger than that

[pink grapefruit]

To a large extent I agree. Just like to win some gender and sexuality related arguments, some people lean WAYY too fucking hard on the concept that hermaphrodites exist, therefore everything is a spectrum, because some people are born with both genitals, therefore everything is really nothing and nothing is really everything and therefore we can make the rules up as we go to whatever makes me feel better about myself (this is just my dumb uneducated take on it, not looking to start a debate on this subject)

The same idea can be applied to the other factors in obesity. The most simple and most important factor is energy in vs energy out, but there are many little complicating factors like different genetic metabolic rates, different grellin hunger hormone levels, availability of healthy food, etc

All of these other factors are concisely summarized in this video by Jeff Nippard I previously posted to the Lose Weight thread. To what degree you want to lean on these other factors as excuses for your success or more likely your failure (“cope” as you call it) depends on the person. I personally put a shit ton of value on energy in vs energy out and have no qualms about calling people who fail undisciplined and lazy…

Â…And, if I could volunteer to be injected with DNA that would change my metabolic rate and hunger negatively so I could prove I could STILL lose fat through sheer effort and willpower even with a bigger genetic disadvantage I would. But alas we lack the technology to give me shittier genetics

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=keBZfGAmq2Q

ignoring your sad obsession with lgbtq people, i just want to say i'm glad you're following jeff nippard. he's very pretty, and his stuff is always well-sourced and generally based on legitimate science- which is super impressive, especially as someone without a graduate degree in a related field.

to date he is the only "big name" i've seen come out with a decent glute hypertrophy program. if you're writing exercise programs in 2023 and not including a method of autoregulation it's time for you to find a new job tbh. lucy davis and bret contreras got nothin' on nippard <3

quality video that everyone should watch! that was a good link

[unsunghero]

^
Don’t shame my secret t.girl fetish that all of us conserves have. Love is love. Ya, his voice is boring but he def knows his stuff and backs everything with research

Not singling you out, but while I’m aware of the other complicating factors working against people, I personally don’t see much benefit to bringing them up to someone needing to lose weight. Especially since most of them cannot by changed by any drug or activity, they’re truly genetic

Hearing about them I personally see as disempowering. There’s a one legged dude that hobbles up the mountain I regularly do on his arm crutches, and it’s considered a difficult/advanced steep hike. There’s a 90+ yr old man who looks like the Crypt Keeper who gets wheeled out in a wheelchair onto a chair that lowers him into the pool, and then he drags himself across with his one functioning limb while I constantly glance worried that at any moment he could drown on the spot

That’s the stuff I find inspirational and recommend someone look at. Not the negatives working against them that they can’t change. What you focus on, you get more of

It’s def not for everyone, but I always like the approach of hustle porn motivational bro speak

[pink grapefruit]

i also enjoy military-type men yelling at me to get out of bed and get to work! there is meaning in the struggle xD

the better we understand ourselves and the various factors contributing to whatever problems we have, the better equipped we are to fight. it helps to have an inquisitive mind bc you don't wanna feel down and nocebo yourself, but willful ignorance is not the move.

we're amazing organisms capable of great feats of adaptation!

[brendagray]

I never count how many calories I burn :D

[Rivthis]

What's a calorie, is it related to a carrot?

[Toxigen]

What's a calorie, is it related to a carrot?

beet it

[azeth]

Imagine needing to burn calories