I burned 1,000 calories while playing eq this morning

[Rager and Quitter]

Originally Posted by pink grapefruit [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by pink grapefruit [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[nom_fats]

another 865 knocked out this morning!

[pink grapefruit]

Originally Posted by aussenseiter [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Is there a reason you read so much about losing weight? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

2005 - 2009 era xanga

those of us who survived will forever bare our scars.

[aussenseiter]

Originally Posted by pink grapefruit [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by aussenseiter [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Oh, please bare them. 😼

finally one i understand! xD

[Ratchet51]

Originally Posted by Toxigen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by Smoofers [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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=