Thoughts /fit/?
I don't think I can post in fat hate threads anymore...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBC7IrG5Ke0
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/02/health/biggest-loser-weight-loss.html?_r=0
Well some people even are born different so It makes it even harder and less "fair" for them, yet It's still each ones concern to deal with that.
I hate when we anthropomorphize biological processes like this
The body doesn't "want" anything. There are a series of processes that lead to an outcome. They're not working in tandem according to some sort of overarching goal.
Doesn't the show teach them to count cals?
It's not too surprising that people fall back to old habits after a few years if they aren't forced to work out and monitor their food intake. Sounds more like people lost their motivation to keep up their "new" lifestyle.
>>37289068
>It's not too surprising that people fall back to old habits after a few years if they aren't forced to work out and monitor their food intake.
Nigga, did you watch the video? The contestants had to eat 500-800 calories less than people with the same body weight and height to maintain the weight loss.
Not to mention they had lower leptin levels so felt hungry all the time.
Nobody actually read the article I see
>>37289031
They were conditioned for short change goals.
I mean there is a big support network to make sure they achieve their goals during the show but once they are let go they dont have the knowledge to keep walking the path that they have been set on.
Once they go back to their normal lives they just fall back into old habits and gain weight again, its not that abnormal.
>>37289086
yes they had to, but none of them actually did that for a year or so to see if their maintain calorie intake would grow again.
They just had to count their fucking calories and they wouldn't be fat.
>>37289116
One of the contestants manage to maintain for 6 years and her metabolism was still fucked and much lower than it would normally be
>>37289031
It's still all their own fault. They weren't born fat, they ruined their own metabolism.
>>37289123
Actually, I was born fat, 11 lbs.
Currently overweight but not obese thankfully.
>>37289123
>children in charge of what they eat
Are you fucking retarded m8
"I think that article misses the most important point about those shows: They get people to lose weight under completely non-standard conditions. They don't teach people to integrate fitness into their normal life, they take them out of that life, get professionals to take the weight off, and then send them back out into the world. Without real diet skills, and without the habits that are built by losing weight over a long period, it is makes perfect sense they'd gain back."
>>37289086
b-but muh calories in/out
>>37289049
>don't anthropomorphize the human body
>>37289123
They weren't born fat but most of them were raised fat so you can't really blame them
What they could do was unfuck themselves and try to lose the weight and they did and yet they'll still suffer for it. Poor fatties.
Childhood obesity is awful
>>37289138
I think whoever wrote that is missing the point if the article
>>37289158
which is?
>>37289161
That even after weight loss fat people will have permanently fucked up metabolisms which is why weight re-gain comes faster when they slip up
Or something
>>37289031
Fat people are terrible at counting calories and judging food in general. They're also LIARS!
Unless you can post the actual study and it shows that it wasn't the fatties counting the calories, I just don't believe it. We have far too much evidence of fatties saying they're eating "300-500 calories a day", but in reality they're eating for two people.
It's true that some people have slower metabolisms... SLIGHTLY. Some people will have a bigger apettitte, but that's just behavior you need to control, much like being genetically predisposed to get addicted to heroine. And less full... well, eat less for a long time and you will get used to it, retard.
>>37289116
you are literally an idiot. like, uneducated as fuck, splurting the same old bullshit against scientific discovery. tell me: do you believe dinosaurs existed? guess not. do you believe that the earth is flat? well, probably, with your disgustingly stupid mindset...
the problem is a well known one, actually, it has to do with homeostasis.
and the lowering of metabolic rates has to do with the rate at which the contestants lost their weight.
if you want to lose a lot of weight fast, it is a complicated thing to do without fucking yourself up big time and destroy your leptin levels, for example. you have to eat the right stuff, you have to include days of eating at a higher caloric intake to keep your metabolism going and so on. one hell of a challenge, really, but a rewarding one.
does anyone honestly think that doing cardio for like 8 hours a day and eating 1k calories is a sustainable way to lose weight that won't rebound? of course they regained the weight. had they stuck to a reasonable diet / exercise schedule they would have lost the weight slower but kept it off
the worst part is that hamplanets see this as confirmation bias for why they should stop substituting salad for one of their 10 weekly pizzas
>>37289193
Agreed, they're all looking for excuses. They just eat too much because they are spineless lazy fucks and can't handle that fact.
>>37289198
Lol nice fantasy story m8, u should look at the facts before doing personal attacks.
>>37289180
They dont.
Its the setting in which they live in that affected them in the first place that is affecting them again. Its the same as a drug addict relapsing.
>take a fat person out of their fat making habitat
>support them into being healthier
>they loose weight
>put them back in their former habitat
>they start living like before
gee I wonder why they gained weight again
>>37289193
Ok, video watched, point proven: short blondie complains about having to eat 1400 Calories a day. That's, exactly like I said, a slight deviation on her metabolism.
When you're a tiny woman with no muscle, you HAVE to eat less. Her metabolism is barely different from that of other tiny women with no muscle.
>>37289193
ah, yes, another retard. how is it possible that people who actually are interested in the topic stay that fucking biased? well, most of you are fucking undereducated autists that don't even lift (or still look like skellys after years because you are to dimwitted to do it right), but man, it's like seeing retards playing with their balls.
>>37289180
"That directly contradicts the recent study out of the University of Copenhagen looking at GLP-1, PYY, ghrelin, GIP and glucagon after a year of weight-loss maintenance. Ghrelin is an appetite inducing hormone, immediately after weight loss it is highly elevated but by one year, it had returned to pre-diet levels. Additionally, GLP-1 and PYY are appetite supressing hormones. These remain elevated even after a year. So your appetite inducing hormone returns to the same after a year and your appetite supressing hormones remain more effective after a year. Making it easier to lose weight and keep it off it you maintain for a year."
> http://www.eje-online.org/content/early/2016/03/14/EJE-15-1116
I'm not completely sure if that's true since I'm too stupid to know whether or not a study had major flaws but it sounds legit haha
>Being horribly overweight and going from no excercise to pulling cars and other stupid shit 8 hours a day while eating nothing and losing like 40kg bodyweight might have some negative effects on your body
Wow, did you realise that grass is green too?
>>37289206
what's a "fantasy story" about that, "m8"?
tell me. i'm not really interested, because you obviously don't have to say anything really contributing, but tell me anyways.
>>37289210
You're just mad because you're so fat and ugly that no one wants to see you playing with any kind of ball, they know they'd just vomit.
>>37289202
>10 weekly pizzas
Well fuck you. I just got unreasonably hungry thinking about pizza. Haven't had any in about 2 years.
>>37289193
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/oby.21538/full
Read before you rage
This isn't about "fat people can't count calories" folks
The study is about metabolic damage
>>37289222
you got that one wrong. try again.
or try to shut me up with anything that at least closely resembles scientific facts and not your retard-science.
>>37289193
That study is about obese people trying to lose weight, not former obese people maintaining weight loss like in the OP.
>>37289210
>how is it possible that people who actually are interested in the topic stay that fucking biased?
They're not actually interested man
This is /fit/
They don't care about science they just want to make fun of fat people and feel superior to them
Duh
>>37289225
Honesly, a deepfreeze pizza from Dr oetker is "only" 700-800 calories, you could eat one as a meal every 3 or so weeks.
>>37289208
That's not a slight deviation that's over 500 calories m8
Basically living your whole life on a cut
>>37289236
> /thread
>>37289150
Yupe it really is sad, children with fat parents are doomed the moment they are fed by them.
>>37289198
the "500-800" less was about a tiny women with no muscles that had to eat 1400 calories. That's not that special for such person.
>>37289226
Can't find the numbers. They won't give the real numbers. They say there's a difference, but don't mention what they're comparing it against.
In the video, short blondie clearly talked about 1400 calories a day as if that was far too little for a woman her size, which is simply a lie.
>>37289246
For a 5"5 woman at 23.3 BMI and a SEDENTARY lifestyle, you'd get a TDEE of 1657. 1400 is only slightly under that.
She wants to eat more, she can be less sedentary and create more muscles.
>>37289180
whether that is or is not true is irrelevant. you can't go up to 300lbs from eating like a "normal person", as they say they are.
a "slip-up" isn't going to magically result in a 50lb weight gain. you need to consistently eat like a fucking pig day in day out
jesus i wish i could bulk from a "slip-up"
>>37289276
>jesus i wish i could bulk from a "slip-up"
You can but you have to fuck your metabolism real quick first
Speaking of which how does one's metabolism gets unfucked? I mean there's gotta be a pill or something
>>37289276
Yes, those fatties just keep lying and lying about their calorie intake, they'll never learn.
>>37289031
I fucking hate the metabolism meme
It's fucking shit going inside and outside of your cells
shit your cells need goes in, shit your cells don't need goes out
the reason why these faggots get back all their pounds is because they to back to eating like the disgusting pigs they were before
>>37289306
>metabolism
>meme
>>37289271
>She wants to eat more, she can be less sedentary and create more muscles.
She's not sedentary tho
She already works out, probably every day
She's clearly dedicated since she was the only one to maintain
>This just in: dieting doesn't work!
No shit Sherlock. Everyone here knows that fitness is a lifestyle, not a goal. The Biggest Loser is the epitome of the opposite approach. It, along with countless websites and assorted scams, tries to sell fitness as something you can just do for a little while and have your dream body forever, which is obviously stupid.
Last summer I rode my bike 1000 miles around Italy in three weeks. It was my first bicycle tour. I had no idea what my daily calorie intake or output was, but I knew that I was operating at a major deficit. Italy is a culture of connoisseurs, their quality over quantity approach to food makes it really hard to find several extremely high calorie meals a day, and I was on a budget. At the end I'd gone from ~165 lbs (at 5'10") to ~158 lbs and increased the diameter of my upper legs substantially. When I got home I felt hungrier than I remember feeling since my most intense growth spurts as a kid. I had intense cravings, I ate like crazy, and pretty soon I was back up to my previous weight almost exactly, at which point the hunger subsided.
When you put your body through something sudden and intense then stop suddenly it will try to snap back. That doesn't mean that sustainable, long term changes to your lifestyle don't work. What you have to note about my cycling story is that snapping back involved overeating. These people are not experiencing a violation of the "calories in, calories out" principle. They are failing to make lifestyle changes because the things they do to loose 240 pounds in seven months are unsustainable as long term lifestyle changes, and doing that doesn't doesn't teach you discipline and good decision making. They are feeling way hungrier than usual, and they are lying about their intake because they're embarrassed and ashamed. They are probably even lying to themselves about their intake, because they never learned the discipline and skill to count calories correctly.
>>37289306
>Science is a meme
/fit/ is a meme, I swear to god
>>37289336
You didn't read anything other than the title, huh
>>37289344
I watched the video and read about half of the article. There is absolutely nothing noteworthy here.
Pretty fucked up, but I hope it's not the case
>>37289339
are you fucking fucked in your fucking head, you fucking stupid fuck?
/FIT/ IS NOT A MEME!!!!
/FIT/ IS LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GET THE FUCK OF MY BOARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>37289356
Then how come you completely missed the point of the study and the findings
>>37289356
>There is absolutely nothing noteworthy here.
Noteworthy enough to be on GMA though.
>>37289031
GENETICS
E
N
E
T
I
C
S
>>37289325
>>37289339
>Science
I have my Abitur in nutritional science
dealt with that shit for years
of course it has an impact on your weight on how good your body is using its resources
but blaming 400 fucking pounds on your "slow" metabolism is just bullshit
these people eat like shit and you know it
>>37289391
No one is saying they don't eat like shit
That was not what the report was trying to report
>>37289367
I didn't. At all.
>>37289380
TV news is clickbait tier garbage.
>>37289391
>abitur in nutritional science
EY YO HOL UP WE GOT A REAL EXPERT RIGHT HERE
Anyone check the comments on the video?
The top 3 comments are vegan propaganda, u wot
>>37289408
>I didn't. At all
You absolutely did
>>37289386
Here ya go:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetics_of_obesity
>>37289419
Youtube is a fucking hellhole desu amy video that has anything to do with weight or nutrition your can bet your bottom dollar there will be some vegan fucker in the comments
>>37289423
Find me one line that, when taken in context, is not refuted by my original post and supports the idea that fatties can't lose weight. You won't be able to.
>>37289333
>She's not sedentary tho
>She already works out, probably every day
Oh yeah, the video showed her "working out"... By playing a 1v1 match of very casual basketball. How silly of me to think that she's not active.
>She's clearly dedicated since she was the only one to maintain
She's clearly obese once again.
>>37289419
It's the newest fad diet after Low-carb.
Most people will go off it because it's difficult af to maintain. Recidivism rates 90-95%.
>>37289454
>She's clearly obese once again
She only gained 10 pounds back
Look in the article
>>37289413
>calling me an expert
thanks dude finally someone who appreciates my knowledge
>>37289447
Nothing about anything in the article suggests fatties can't lose weight
>>37289447
He means that the whole "study" was about showing how there were severe differences in metabolism.
But there's not enough information there. The study says there are huge metabolism changes when compared to "baseline", but they don't say what that baseline is.
The women in the video mentions eating at 1400 Calories a day as if that was insane, but that's just slightly under what a woman her height with normal weight would eat. The study mentions differences of ~600 Calories per day in energy expenditure after weight loss, but that's useless without saying what they're comparing it to or at what numbers they're at right now.
If they're using bad numbers such as "well, she's a woman and we're not going to look at her height, so... 2000 Calories a day sounds right, yeah, lets compare to that", their whole study is worthless, misleading garbage.
I can't. stop. bulking. Fuck... 139 kilos now and OHP 120K 8repsx3sets, seated row 130K 9repsx3sets. It's good that I am getting stronger but I want to cut, not end up like a sumo wrestler. But I also don't want to fuck up my hormones anymore by extreme dieting. I guess I'll have to take up those 3 hour afternoon walks again.
>>37289476
>The study says there are huge metabolism changes when compared to "baseline", but they don't say what that baseline is
Don't they take these measurements at the the show tho
It's probably in there somewhere
Crash diets born what lean mass they had making weight come back really easily since there's nothing to burn the calories.
>>37289476
>The women in the video mentions eating at 1400 Calories a day as if that was insane, but that's just slightly under what a woman her height with normal weight would eat. The study mentions differences of ~600 Calories per day in energy expenditure after weight loss, but that's useless without saying what they're comparing it to or at what numbers they're at right now.
It's also useless without saying exactly how intake is measured. I carefully pointed out in my original post that these people lie about this shit. The only way for a scientist to be sure is literally to watch them day and night. If they are counting on any kind of self reporting, then there's previous scientific work that shows that their results will be bullshit, because people do not self report these things accurately.
>>37289517
Yupe, it's so easy for those to go like "I'll just have one quick candy bar, how bad could it be, i just worked out (aka took a walk) so i deserve it" without them realizeing they just shukked in another 250 calories.
fucking fatties always lying
>>37289517
The study appears to have done it through piss and breathing, so not methods they could lie in.
A slower metabolism after weight loss is not all that insane and it's almost common knowledge by now, but the difference is small, much like all other metabolism variations are. "Small" as in less than 10% either way.
>>37289517
Dude there was no self reporting involved AT ALL
What are you guys even trying to refute here
>>37289031
look faggot, it's not my or yours or anyone elses fault that those fatties got fat in the first place. If you let yourself get this fat, you are never gonna make it. You are a failure, your mentality is weak and you deserve to get DARWIN'd.
They gave them drugs on this show and forced them to eat way less than they normally would. And they LOST WEIGHT, it worked. But now, they are back in the real world, where no one is there for them 24/7 and you know what they do? They CAN'T PUT THE FUCKING FORK DOWN.
I seriously don't give a fuck about those people.
Calories in, calories out. That's it.
>>37289271
I'm 5'7 F 130, my sedentary tdee is 1599
That's lots of lean protein, veg, eating 3 meals, 2 snacks per day but no junk and not just filling up on fruit or eating lots of cheese. I can eat more when I can make time to work out, which I am trying to do but pfft...1400 calories per day is NOT 'almost nothing' for a woman her size, it's plenty if her numbers are in line and she eats smart.
What kills me? The marketing of those sneaky fucking 'healthy green smoothies' full of fruit carbs, too many seed or other fats from coconut fat/cream or others nut butters and all the fiber ground out.
It's bullshit.
So some people lost an unhealthy amount of weight in a short amount of time and damaged their metabolism.
What does this have to do with /fit/?
>>37289560
Believe it or not nutrition and metabolism are all things that affect performance and therefore have to do with fitness
But since /fit/ isn't a fitness board then yeah I don't know what it has to do with it either
All fat people should just start lifting and roiding. I maintain my weight on 3800kcals, thats enough foood for fatties.
>>37289560
>So some people lost an unhealthy amount of weight in a short amount of time and damaged their metabolism.
This myth has to die already
>>37289603
Not a myth
Friend: I'm on a diet
Me: Cool. Which food scale did you get?
Friend: Oh I don't have a food scale, I pretty much can tell how much my servings are.
Me: Bye Felicia.
I have watched people guesstimate what 'a serving' is and most do not know at all. They use double or triple portions of things like salad dressing, gravy, coffee cream and peanut butter or cheese but count it as a single portion.
When I told my friend that those oversize deli bagels are actually 4 portions of carbs even on the fucked up US food pyramid, she did not believe me. One bagel = 1 serving.
>>37289594
Except women, we should just lift, cardio and eat smart. Idk what the female version of a CHAD is but I like being a healthy lean chick. (And yes I say chick)
>>37289603
Not a single HAES fatty who shitposts on here has ever lost weight in a way that the biggest loser contestants have
>>37289635
This is so true.
As a former fatty, food scales were ridiculously useful at first. Learning what portions really are.
I don't really need it much these days, but I still break it out from time to time.
>T-t-the biggest loser people gained weight back so that explains why I can't lose any weight
Back to tumblr
>>37289198
Anons guide to weight loss
Step 1: Reduce calories in
Step 2: if weight loss has not occurred then go to step 1
Step 3: congratulations, you have lost weight
>>37289031
>fatties forced to exercise and not eat shit
>remove force and fatties get fat
It's almost like they have no self-control or something.
>>37289542
>Dude there was no self reporting involved AT ALL
This is mentioned in the actual study, which OP could have linked to but didn't. It is not mentioned in the garbage reporting that OP did link to. I stand by my statement that a report like OP's that describes results but not methods is completely useless.
>What are you guys even trying to refute here
From the beginning, my point has been very simple:
Temporary, unsustainable lifestyle changes do not work. Permanent, sustainable lifestyle changed do work. The implication in the article that there is some difficulty to permanently losing weight beyond the difficulty of doing the latter is based on evidence that the former doesn't work, which makes all of this complete bullshit.
>>37289031
Interesting read. But we all know that insane crashdiet fucks you up.
would like to read similar studyes on people who lost alot of weight doing a moderate calorie defecit over a looong period of time if anyone knows any
>Anytime you tell somebody that it's not them, it's something else, It gives them kind of a way to excuse the fact that they really want to eat that doughnut.
This.
They all just look for excuses, none of them actually wants or ever wanted to make it, except maybe the blonde one but even she is saying that 1400 calories is almost nothing, which is simply not true.
1400 calories=11 medium sized chicken breasts.
Imagine eating nothing else but those 11 chicken breasts for a day. This shit could fill me up 100%, of course it's not a good diet, but just to make a point. 1400 calories of correct food is A LOT.
So in reality all these people do is look for excuses, why it's so hard for them. What they don't understand is, being fit is not a 1 month thing, it's a lifestyle. You can eat bad food few times a week, but if 75% of your meals are "clean", you will do fine.
>>37289669
Ditto, the scale does not lie, especially in grams!
I had to learn but after using it a lot I CAN pretty closely estimate but guess what, it's still on the counter. I'd like to get a bit leaner this summer so cut a bit of calories painlessly here and there requires it. And the gym!
So what's the takeaway? Do fat people fuck their metabolism by getting fat, in which case everyone should be discouraged getting fat from the outset, or is it genetic, in which case breeding with them produces children prone to disease and premature death?
>>37289031
Feels good to be blessed with a fast metabolism. Just eat eat eat and never gain an ounce until I'm working out and then it's all muscle mass.
Thanks mum n papah
>>37289682
>Temporary, unsustainable lifestyle changes do not work. Permanent, sustainable lifestyle changed do work.
None of the article is about that
>>37289717
What is it that you think the article is about, if not that losing 240 lbs in seven months doesn't make you healthy forever?
>>37289710
Extreme weight loss fucks up your metabolism so you'll never get to be a normal person even after losing weight
>>37289710
All at once, but disregard metabolism differences, they are just not big enough to warrant attention.
Unless you think having a bite or two less every day is "impossible", or that having a bite or two extra is "omg so lucky".
You see, for someone with a slower metabolism, even the less than 10% difference is enough to make their life hell, they will suffer just to get up. Whereas someone with less than 10% faster metabolism will sweat profusely and stink up everywhere they go, etc. And these cases are the biggest ones, most people will NOT vary much at all.
>>37289728
It's about showing the findings of that study on metabolism retard
>>37289736
And you think the findings are something other than that diets don't work?
>>37289729
No, it MAY mess with it SOME so it MIGHT be somewhat harder to maintain a loss.
So what, make the sacrifice and compensate for it. +/- 10% is not a huge difference.
>>37289729
Well, yeah. If you fuck up your leg real good and have to cut it off, you'll never be a normal person ever again. That's the consequences of your past choices.
People shouldn't become fat to begin with. Same thing with drug addicts: they make the bad decisions, "get around", but will have to be careful for the rest of their lives.
This is why letting children get fat should count as child abuse and why we need to stop allowing excuses for "I'm fat, can't do nothing" to exist. These are harmful as they will get more people to suffer for the rest of their lives.
I don't really buy it. I lost 100 pounds and haven't gained weight outside of like 5 pounds(most likely water) occasionally over the span of like 4 years.
>>37289777
Yeah but did you crash diet it off?
>>37289807
I did it over the span of like 2 years so no. I hadn't considered that my bad.
>>37289825
Good job senpai
Keep it up
>>37289847
Thanks anon, I'm at about 240 pounds at 6'1 but i've been steadily losing weight still, goal weight is 200. I can see the light at the end of the tunnel. It's been a hell of a journey.
>>37289031
>Be fat as fatasss
>Decide to diet and lose weight
>Go all out -1000 to -2000 deficits
>Crazy weight loss
>Slows down overtime but hit goal
>Begin eating at what should be "Maintence" calories
>Metabolism is fucked from crashing metabolism so put on weight from what should be maintenance levels
>Get depressed because weight is going back up even though it shouldn't be
>Start eating even higher than what would be ideal maintenance calories because hungry as fuck
>Turn into fat as fatass again
>Muh science
By the way, nobody is claiming metabolism is the exact same between individuals (though it is very close between individuals) The main factor that contributes to this is either Thyroid issues (accounts for 10-15lb weight gain) and general hormone balances (low test, high estrogen for example)
When you are fat as fatass mode for too long you fuck your body chemistry up hard, which destroys your metabolism.
If these people would have
A) Dropped weight on a modest deficit over a long period of time slowly increasing their deficit up to a maximum of -500
B) Remained consistent
They would have achieved their goals and it would have been more permanent. Instead they crashed their already shit metabolisms and found they could no longer maintain weight loss and whenever they did eat the weight would come back. There are other benefits to dropping weight more slowly (less loose skin and it's more healthy) Test levels would increase as they drop BF% and as long as they were getting enough fats, protein and carbs in their -500 deficit diets.
It is and always will be a case of calories in vs calories out. In my opinion the best thing to help with hunger levels is intermittent fasting, high protein/carb/fats diet and -500 deficits.
If you can find something sustainable for YOU the weight you lose will be very much sustainable in general.
>>37289895
Sorry other contributing factors are also height/weight/sex/age (didn't include this because muh common sense)
>>37289031
>Lose weight
>Literally gain super human survivable ability
How is this a bad thing? Permanent lowered food cost, if you ever find yourself in a survival situation you have an advantage, probably shit like increased endurance as well. Sounds great.
>>37289031
>workout 2 hours
>800 calorie deficit from the "normal" man his size
Do they not realize this is the norm for everyone who isn't a fatty outside America? They probably think the normal TDEE is like 3000+ for a 190lb man.
>>37289929
A depressed metabolic rate without the ghrelin/leptin ratio and such to match absolutely sucks. You know that constant gnawing hunger you get on a hard cut? That's now what you feel like on maintenance calories.
>>37289031
They cut at a massive deficit, devastating their lean body mass, then go back to their degenerate ways. Of course their BMR is low, they've done metabolic damage to themselves. Lift heavy and cut at -350 to -500 and you'll be fine.
>>37289380
yeah, so is a fat soccer mom in a chewbacca mask
>>37289658
I had to google HAES.
I think I'm traumatized now and will fast today.
J/k but I am looking into intermittent fasting soon. Interesting concept, need to read up.
HAES though, that's fucked up.
>>37289031
Yeah they slow down their metabolism and do nothing to accelerate it again.
See >>37290035 and >>37288880
>metabolism is a meme, everyone is the same and you can do nothing to change it!
wat
>>37289042
this...
I have a huge fucking appetite but I've never been above 183lbs (5'11). I can eat a whole box of oreos in one sitting but you don't see me doing it.
Fat fucks.
>>37289476
Ding ding ding. This anon gets it. Maybe the article was written like shit, but I also couldn't tell if the metabolic drop was from their lowest weight or current weight.
Fuck it lets embrace obesity
>the less you weigh the less calories your body needs to maintain itself
Wow no shit? You mean carrying around 300+ lbs takes less energy then carrying around 160?!!!
Are these people retarded? Would you feed a kid fucking 3000 cals a day? No that's why kid's meals are smaller.
>i have to workout for 2 hours a day to maintain my weight
...okay so workout for two hours a day. Problem solved. Between warming up and fitting everything in I don't see how you can spend at least not an hour at the gym
>1400 calories is almost nothing
Bullshit. Also don't sit down 24/7 and see what happens.
Also why do they keep referring to other people as "normal people"? They are normal people. It's like another anon said. They think they go on the show and then they're "done". Obviously yes your body adjusts to calorie maintanance so maybe they should have weaned down from exercising 9 hours a day to 7 to 6 to 5 to 4 and so on. I'm confused as to why they are confused. Oh and that last one: "if I could do it again I wouldn't have gone on the show" and "at least now we know it's not 100% our fault".
>>37289031
> Mr. Cahill was one of the worst off. As he regained more than 100 pounds, his metabolism slowed so much that, just to maintain his current weight of 295 pounds, he now has to eat 800 calories a day less than a typical man his size. Anything more turns to fat.
>>37291134
> 800 calories a day
Something's fishy here
>MUH METABOLISM
>M-M-M-MUUUUHHHHH
>MMMMMETABLISMISMISM
it's just a fucking excuse to them. I bet the minute they went off the show they started eating (what they consider) "normal food" again (which I bet was pizza, burgers, deep fried raccoon anus with butter and extra gravy, etc.) and wondered why they were gaining weight again. "I mean... everybody else is eating that stuff so it must be something else and now that the study confirms it, I knew it all along! Muh metabolism!"
>>37289211
>"Twenty healthy obese individuals"
That seems like a red flag right there, but the real important part is the weight loss percent: 13% compared to the 40-60% range of weight loss the Biggest Loser article reported (although the woman didn't have this excuse). I'd wonder if that and the timing has something to do with it, because the study also took a year with the weight loss. Basically the studied people lost less weight with more time to do it; it's not as aggressive as the Biggest Loser.
>>37291172
800 calories a day less than a 300lb man would usually eat
>>37289419
Well, it makes sense. Carbs make you full and you don't get fat from eating plant foods (unless it's extremely processed shit like Oreos).
People are so afraid of carbs that they do Full Retard diets like Keto or Paleo.
So is starvation mode actually a thing? Is that what's happening to these people cutting 1500 calories a day?
>>37289198
>include days of eating at a higher caloric intake to keep your metabolism going
How to spot a fat retard: they think muh metabolism will stop if they don't gorge. Never mind that you would die if your metabolic processes stopped, which isn't going to happen from a 500 calorie deficit.
>>37291548
it is
I used to gain weight on 1100kcal after a few months of retarded ED-tier cut
One way to look at it is "you can only eat X amount of calories."
Another way to look at it is "you only NEED to eat X amount of calories."
>>37291497
>carbs make you full
wat? Do you mean fiber? Because a handful of sugar doesn't satiate anybody and is terrible for your hormone balance. Eating 6 mangos might fill you up until it all explodes out your ass, and will have the exact same effect as the handful of sugar on your metabolism.
On a larger scale, it's entirely possible to get fat eating plants. People who don't get fat on vegan diets do it because they aren't eating too many Calories, not because the food is from plant sources. I know fat vegans. They eat too much oil, and far too much sugar, and not enough greens and veggies that would fill them up. Vegan is not synonymous with low Calorie, and it's really not hard to eat animal sources of protein and avoid too much Caloric intake. Especially cutting out dairy and eggs will make it more difficult to get all the essential amino acids from your diet, meaning you have to develop a much more conscientious diet of plants to get them all.
>>37291548
Yes, your stress hormones go up and you feel sluggish so you move less and thus burn fewer Calories. If you make yourself move more you will burn just as many Calories, but overworking in this state will lead to faster overtraining and further increase Cortisol. Better idea to just be sensible about it. Eating reasonably and working harder is a better option than huge deficits and sudden cuts.
>>37289682
Pretty sure the point of the article was that extreme dieting wrecked their metabolism so much that at the same weight they were at before the show they burn far fewer calories.
>Before: Fat as fuck, burns 3500 kcal a day
>After: Fat as fuck, burns 2500 kcal a day
Something like that
>>37291641
>Eating 6 mangos might fill you up until it all explodes out your ass, and will have the exact same effect as the handful of sugar on your metabolism.
I can't believe broscience like this still gets thrown around on /fit/.
>>37289031
so im currently battling the fact that i dont want this to happen to me
i used to be pretty in shape but i ate 6 REALLY small meals per day and exercised an hour a day
i gained the weight back and decided to lose it again, but without all of the extremism.
i started to lose weight but kept plateuing. the reason: slow metabolism. you can check your metabolism by taking your temperature first thing in the morning. anything under 97.4 as an average of three days is a slow metabolism- which i had.
i recently switched up the program to the following. I lift/ do cardio for 1 hour a day 4 days per week. i currently weigh 235 and will eat a cyclical keto diet of 3000 calories with no carbs m-f and carb load weekends (the anabolic diet- pros carb cycle) this amount of calories is still a deficit (3400 plus change is my maintenance) hopefully this speeds up my metabolism and helps burn fat.
will test my metabolism again after two weeks and take my bi weekly progress pic. on a positive note i have seen increases in muscle mass it's just the fat is hanging on for dear life
Intelligence is mostly genetic, so when fatties say they're fat because of their genes they're right, but no for the reasons they think.
ITT: dietary experts who haven't read the article but know it is wrong
Former landwhale and medic here.
Obesity is a symptom of metabolic disease, therefore the video makes sense. But, as I often say, "genetics" isn't destiny. People who used to be fat during early childhood or puberty (my case) have more fat cells, so yeah, it's harder to keep the ideal weight. Also, a reality show isn't the best place to learn about lifestyle changes.
Anyway, people often think common diseases are normal, for example, you have to actively ask if an old patient has diabetes or high blood pressure because they think it's a normal trait of age, and it isn't! People who used to be obese must count calories for the rest of its life like a diabetic will have to watch for sugar or renal patients must be alert to salt. Obesity is common, but still a disease - and a serious one.
Former fatties have fucked up metabolism, but it doesn't mean they will regain weight, they'll simply have to be more strict about dieting and exercising at least 180min/weekly. Besides diet and exercising, there are new therapies to kill fat cells as well, like coolsculpting. They don't work alone, but it's great to fix the shitty metabolism.
>>37289031
>Going into a drastic weighloss and training loose huge amount of weight in an estimated amount of time
>thinks the body isnt gonna try to go back to the way it was before
>complaining
gtfo anyone with a brain would understand this.,
This entire thread...
>>37292525
I'm on mobile so I can't post the article, basically there was an article in Science the other week that states while the idea of a weight set point is somewhat true, if the body maintains it's weight for about 6 months the body will adapt to have that weight as the ideal set point. For example, if you weigh 250lbs and drop to 180 an maintain that weight for a year, your body will adjust and use energy accordingly.
>fatties lying/underestimating their calorie consumption
news at 11
>>37289193
A minor metobolic difference can easily compound over years. 100 cal too much a day (5% of a 2000 cal diet, or one slice of bread) works out to a little over 10lbs gained a year. This could make a person blindly following a calorie calculator gain 50 pounds in a five year period.
This is why counting calories is only part of the picture for weightloss. You need to track your weight consistently to make sure what you're doing works.
>>37293323
no it does not, it ads a few grams at best.
>thermodynamics how do they work
>>37289031
>have to eat less than 1400 calories
Lmao I cut at that, and I'm 6'1 190lbs
>>37289391
>abitur
So like a highschool diploma? I mean seriously dude.
>>37289289
Just do meth or take Ritalin, Adderall, or any similar drug. They suppress your appetite like fucking crazy. As long as you aren't a piece of shit human that eats whenever you are bored, you will lose weight as you won't eat as much.
>>37289225
What a fag, I eat one on every lifting day.
8% bf
>37289356
The articles around the study are bullshit, and the study itself is also pretty bad.
So these blokes lost a tremendous amount of weight in an extremely short period of time, right? How they did this was through an extremely low calorie diet and upwards of 6 hours of strenuous cardio a day. That shit makes you drop weight fast - muscle and fat. To avoid losing muscle mass on an extremely low calorie diet you HAVE TO eat almost nothing but protein.
At the end of the contest, the average contestant had a BMR 200+/-200 calories lower than the average BMR for their height/weight/age. The study argues that losing weight permanently decreases your BMR - that's rubbish, the implication then is that the human machine becomes hyper-efficient at processing nutrients after the weight loss. Rather, all of these people were still overweight/obese by body-fat % even if they were a 'healthy' weight by BMI.
http://health.usnews.com/best-diet/biggest-loser-diet/health-and-nutrition
This is the Biggest Loser Diet - 1,200-1,400 calories daily with ~115 grams of protein. When on a VLCD while doing just an hour of exercise a day, the body demands upwards of 1.5 grams of protein per day per pound of lean body mass to avoid cannibalizing muscle (Source: Lyle McDonald's Rapid Fat Loss Handbook). These people need 200g+ protein daily.
When they were cut loose from the show, they had no idea that they were still technically obese - all still were somewhere above 25% body fat. What we see from the study is that even after regaining all the weight they dropped, they never recoup the lost muscle mass - the BMR discrepancy increases to 400+/-200 calories daily. These people just got done living like beasts of burden for however many months, it's no surprise that these people are going to jump into dreamer bulks as soon as they get back to their daily lives.
Now this whole study is being used to fuel that fat acceptance bullshit, it's just more bad, biases science.
>>37289031
Big fucking deal.
The world is hard and unfair. Shocker!
Work harder or fail. There is no participation award here.
Slow metabolism? They just need a little help from my good friend Billy Crystal!
I don't get what the issue is here. If you weigh 400 pounds no shit you're going to need to eat more to maintain weighing 400 pounds, that doesn't constitute a "slower metabolism" Is just means you you're a fat piece of shit who needs to eat less. If you consequently drop too 180 pounds you have literally half the weight you did when you started. You're not going to need to eat as much as you did to maintain you're 400 pounds weight.
Do these fatties not realize that 2000-2200. Calories is normal for someone wanting to maintain a 180 pound weight. Do they not understand that they they're going to have to eat less then they did when they weighed 400 pounds. People who eat 4000 calories a day don't magically stay at 180 pounds. Eat at a maintenance level and stop fucking blaming other people for your fatness.
>>37292191
Interested in the cool-sculpting just for the fat cell death. I've lost 100lbs and am pretty happy where I'm at, but I know the extra fat cells from being obese fuel hunger. Would they do the procedure on a 10-12% BF individual?
The brain is indeed part of the body.
>>37294132
The issue is that these people had a BMR ~300 calories lower than the average BMR for their height/weight/age after the contest finished. In the 6 years or whatever it's been since they regained all the weight lost, their BMR is now ~500 calories lower than someone the same height/weight/age.
The quacks are trying to prove this is because the metabolism permanently slows down after massive weight loss in order to recoup the lost weight.
The reality is that while these people lost a shit load of body fat, they also dropped a lot of lean muscle mass - that's what causes the BMR drop. When they returned to their sedentary lifestyles and ate like kings - let's face it, these people were probably out partying every weekend for months after their weight-loss - they gained back the fat even faster due to the diminished BMR.
>>37289198
This shit is maddening
look, if your body burns 500 calories fewer, brilliant. You now need less to do the same thing (this is obvious bullshit, but whatever, they want to believe it).
I don't see what the problem is with eating 500 fewer calories. If you don't eat junk, it's easy to feel full off of that.
Diets aren't sustainable, you need to change your lifestyle to healthily lose and maintain weight
>>37289555
Smoothies are great if you actually make them yourself. Idk why you have fruits and veg so much, they're great for you. Not like its a juice cleanse or something, now those are bs
>>37289555
>all the fiber ground out.
what the fuck are you even talking about
>>37294326
That's the fucking crazy part. They're trying to show that losing massive amounts of weight makes your body better at using food as fuel for the rest of your life - then saying that that efficiency is bad.
It doesn't make any fucking sense. We should be celebrating. For real, not only did they lose the weight but they need less food for the rest of their life to maintain the same weight as anyone else.
The more I think about this shit the more infuriating it is - like the quacks running the study didn't even take thermodynamics into consideration.
>>37294436
Exactly. The problem is that, if you were to point that out to them, they would then tell you that 1500 calories isn't enough!
What the fuck sense does that make? Either it is enough or it isn't. If it's not enough, then you should still be losing weight. If it is enough, you are awesome; you need less food to do the same thing. Wonderful.
>>37294436
Do you really mean to tell me I can't eat 4000 calories AND maintain my new weight! That's just not right! I should be able to eat as much as I want and be skinny, THIS ISNT FAIR!
Did i fuck myself by being 240lbs? Or did i stop my fat assery before it was too late
>>37294574
Height?
>>37294574
Depends on genetics and how long you've been that way. I was 280lbs at my fattest being 6'2 and it definitely fucked me up during puberty. I weigh 175lbs now and hunger is sometimes an issue but it beats the fuck out of being fat as fuck. Lost it all over 3years too, might've helped with the backlash.
>>37294574
You're absolutely fine if you don't go full retard like they do on the Biggest Loser.
Limit HISS cardio to 20 minutes daily - HIIT and LISS and are a different story. Get a shit ton of protein - the fewer calories you're eating the more you need. Try to get 1 gram per pound of lean body mass - somewhere around 150 grams daily.
Lift fucking weights. Just do it. Three times a week.
I've dropped my fat ass from 430 pounds to 250 pounds and thanks to lifting and jogging my TDEE is higher than it was when I started.
>>37289271
The difference between 1657 and 1400 a day is enough calories to make 25 pounds of fat in a year. That's not minor.
>>37289635
You can diet without a food scale if you pay close attention to the bathroom scale.
>>37289750
While it is easy enough to adjust for a 10% difference, it is plenty big enough to fuck your shit up if you ignore and/or are unaware of it.
If we assume a 2000 calorie baseline adding 10% is 200 calories a day. Eat at that surplus consistently and you're up a pound in less than three weeks.
>>37291844
Losing weight is the easiest thing in the world, all you have to do is eat less
>>37294188
Another trick for fat cell death is alpha lipoic acid. Generally, your fat cells are getting the bare minimum of energy they need to avoid dying off; this stuff clogs the GLUT-4 receptors of adipose tissue.
It's a pretty kick ass amino acid/free radical eliminator aside from that, so you can saturate your system with it and starve all that adipose tissue off without worrying about adverse side affects. Talking 1-2 grams daily, though your piss be smelling like you ate a pound of asparagus.
>>37293336
It adds a lot more than grams when it is a sustained surplus. There is some overhead for storing the fat, but that's minor. People get fat by eating a bit too much every day. It's just like losing weight in reverse. Small changes in habit can be cumulative over time.
>>37295623
Goodness me whatever will I do? I certainly can't adjust my diet accordingly
>>37295796
The problem is these people went on a tv crash diet and don't know what they're doing. After the show they go online and look up calorie calculators and get a number that's 10% off. If they stick to that new diet they start gaining weight steadily. Now remember these aren't people who figured out how to get fit on their own. They'll probably stick to what's not working, pick up some other bullshit diet that doesn't work, or give up because haes and muh genetics are obviously making me fat again.
We need to educate people that there are variations in metabolism and that they are simple enought to account for instead of enabling failure with plug and chug formulas that are good from a population standpoint, but possibly not at an individual level.
At its simplest it is calories in calories out. But digestion isn't universal (3 poops a day to a poop every 3 days is medically normal) and energy expenditure for a given work isn't universal (variations in proportions and body makeup will make some people more efficient at an action than another). Even stupid little things like home temperature, a couple degree difference in body temp, or how much clothing a person wears will change how many calories a person needs to maintain.
We need to push more results based weight management. Blindly following fitbits just feeds the delusions of people who fail.
>b...b...but Im only eating 800 calories! I swear!
Yeah, sure fatty. Just admit you had a relapse and start working hard again. Relapses and "spontanous recover" does occur often. It's quite the subject in behavioral "science" and behavioral analytics.
At least drug addicts man the fuck up when they go back into drug use. Yet fatties cannot. But of course, drugs are bad and obesity isn't!
>>37295623
But you'd catch on to something quickly if you are watching the scale and adjust. Which we do with our gains and losses all the time anyway, recalculate every few pounds. It's not like it suddenly gets away from you and 'whoops, gained 20' if you are paying attention. Most people aren't that disciplined though and won't put in the work. That doesn't mean they are 'bad' just not as motivated.
(But it's annoying when they cry about it then though)
>>37289031
It could be that, after 6 years, these 20-30 somethings are now 30-40 somethings!
Lower metabolism and gains the weight back! Wow!! Who'd have guessed!??
I'm glad professional weight watchers can give me lots of stats to prove their science that losing weight is bad for you and you should just eat whatever and whenever you want without exercising much.
>>37295512
Agreed but it's harder, at least for me. It's also an easy way to keep accountable when you KNOW you over-measured that mayo and are trying to lose and not just maintain. Body scale is fine for maintainance but beginning dieters/exercisers who are wanting steady loss almost always do better with a food scale.
>>37289060
mostly leading a horse to water senpai
>>37289031
Why are people this stupid. I swear to god obesity wouldn't be a thing if people weren't so fucking stupid.
I used to be 120 kg a while ago cause all I was fed when I was little was junk food.
Now I run 6 days a week and lift 3 or 4 days and I eat even more than before and enjoy the exercises. It fixed all my back problems and I feel great. 2500 calories for a male adult is more than enough food for a day
>>37289031
>if you become smaller you need less calories to live
That doctor is a fucking genius
Everyone go home, there is no point in loosing weight if you can eat like before
>>37294433
Juicers expel the fiber in a clump you throw away.
>>37296037
They can still see the numbers go up or down and make adjustments. It's not really hard to figure out to increase calorie deficit and exercise harder and more if gaining. In the beginning it really is as simple as starting that, then learning to fine tune things. But 'eat less, move more' are two constants that everyone can rely on.
Piss off captcha, I don't like noodles.
>>37289031
metabolism slows down? well fucking eat less!
You can't eat 2000 kcal anymore? well, eat 1900, 1700. jesus
Skinny woman without muscle can't eat more than 1400 and keep her weight. Big fucking surprise! Seriously, these americunts...
>>37289198
fat liar who gulps down 6000+ kcals a day detected
>>37289031
>losing 239 pounds
>in half a year or less
Nope, no reason I can see why they gained a fuckload of weight back.
>>37289031
I'm from a country that was socialist, and during socialism nobody was as obese as these people. There were chubby and overweight people, but nobody was morbidly obese. When capitalism and fast foods came SOME people started getting fat like this. Its whats in that food that is making a lot of people in USA and now UK so fat. Its probably true that their metabolism is slower, but its much more probable that its damaged, then that its a "card they have been dealt".
>>37296202
This. Never thought about it this way. Was talking to my brother about training a friend who wants to get into exerscise but when I asked my friend today if he wanted to go around 4 he said "he was too tired". My brother was like people that don't work out just assume that people who do just never get tired. Kek.
>>37289031
Some day this shit's going to give me an aneurysm.
>>37289049
thats literally about the most retarded use of the anthropomorphize ive ever read
>>37289031
I know a lot of people that lost a ton of weight and are capable of staying in shape.. Most other people i know lift and they all bulk and cut pretty regularly.It takes discipline and a scale. You cant drink you have to eat clean and lift. You can never deviate from this. The "evidence" collected is simply insufficient and i cannot take it seriously.
>>37289031
Would explain why diets fail 98% of the time.
They really need to prescribe something to help obese people lose weight and start treating it as a disease.
>>37289333
I'm 5'2 and I eat about 1500kcal a day and pig out sometimes, but also stay under 1000 sometimes because I just lose my appetite some days. I go to the gym at least 3 times a week, lifting and cardio. I do this to maintain an okay body. I could definitely lose some more fat. I just have a slower metabolism, some people do. So I can't eat as much as other or I'll balloon right up. So what?
>>37289193
Im a fatbody but I dont say I eat that. I mean at my weight (300lb/136kg) I'm supposed to be eating 3200 calories per day just to maintain this weight
>>37291256
wait so dont trust this study that is on pubmed, because it only had 20 subjects, but lets trust this other study with no details from abc and which only had 16 participants?
im not following your logic
>>37298944
>I'm 5'2" and eat like a pigslut
>I have just a little extra fat
>But its my slow metabolism and not my diet fuck ups guys, TEE HEE
FUCK
O
F
F
>>37291973
I just read it. It is a retrospective study with no controls whatsoever. Its fucking dogshit. All they did was find the person's weight and RMR before and after in a 6 year period. No setdiet plan was adhered to, no instructions whatsoever given to the contestants after the show
You know literally fuck all of what the contestants did to regain that weight, because it was controlled for in the study. The only thing that study shows is that the contestants eventually regained lost weight, and their metabolism slowed down. IT CAN NOT, and DOES NOT imply or prove anything about the cause of those changes. ABC anchors are being specious at best, in making these claims..
>>37299193
Not him, but appetite is heavily influenced by genetics.
>>37299280
If you're hungry and you know you at enough calories for the day, just stop eating you fatty. Drink some damn water. You're not a fucking animal, you can make choices for yourself
>>37289031
I feel for people like this, I really do, but this shit is hard, it is like a job, and they should've been made aware of that during whatever weight loss regimen they were put through. They should been given, or better yet they should've looked for, means of eating however many calories they can afford to have while feeling full and satisfied. Maybe nothing would work though. If that's the case, there's one choice: don't feel full. It feels awful but hey, so do surgery and chemotherapy, in fact it feels a lot less awful than those.
>>37299193
did you even read my post?
I was agreeing that even if your metabolism is slow, you have to just eat less. You can't sue nobody just because you can't eat 2000kcal and not gain weight.
>>37299193
>1500 cals a day
>eating like pigslut
>>37299312
>>37299312
Sometimes I have less appetite and sometimes more. If I eat too little, I won't have my period until I eat a bit more.
Shit's extra work for the body.
>>37293323
yeah, but if you actually want to maintain or lose weight, you don't just choose a calorie number once and never weigh yourself or change that number. you eat that amount of calories, see if your weight is doing what you want it to do, and if its not, then you change something. Only a moron is going to gain 50 pounds in five years and then be like, well maybe i should have stepped on a scale sooner.
>>37293463
Really? I'm 5'6", I mean 5'7", and about 170, and I lose weight if I eat less than 2800 calories.
>manlet detected
>fuck off
>>37289031
>Their Bodies Fought to Regain Weight
no. their minds went back to what they knew when they didn't have coaches telling them.
>>37299142
He thinks calling them healthy is a redflag, people here are biased teens who don't understand that people fat people can have healthy vitals and such, they just have a huge predisposition toward being unhealthy due to their weight.
Former fat fuck here, a big part of becoming not fat is mental. Teaching yourself how to do things you don't want to do, how to have goals beyond feeling good for one second, and how to motivate yourself rather than expect people to do it for you. It doesn't surprise me that people who don't learn these things don't keep the weight off, because when adversity happens (weight gains back, diet changes) they can't adjust and they can't deal. Then it goes right back to blaming someone else (muh genetics, muh metabolism)
>>37289031
>A bunch of fat people are taken away for a few months to a ranch where they exercise all day, are advised by professional nutritionists, and their onle responsibility is losing weight
>They are given a large financial incentive to lose as much weight as possible and are constantly surrounded by trainers and other contestants who encourage them towards this goal
>These people then return to normal life and many gain back the weight
Is anyone surprised by this?
As for the study, I'll admit I just skimmed but the results don't seem at all unusual. The measured TEE was 3002 calories right after the show at an average weight of 198lbs, and 3429 calories at the 6 year follow up at an average weight of 288lbs. These numbers both seem about normal for these bodyweights, and eating at a deficit would be pretty easy at either point. Yes they consume less energy than when they were fat as fuck, but that's how that works.
>>37289049
>They're not working in tandem according to some sort of overarching goal
They literally are. I guess if you want to get real abstract you can say that everything is deterministic and there is no such thing as "wants" or "goals", but at that point you may as well just kill yourself because life has zero meaning.
>>37289086
And then you actually read the study and you learn that this is not the case
Kek
>>37289031
I didn't bother reading the article or watching the video. I just assume it's former fatties complaining about regaining weight since it's about the biggest loser.
Fat cells are not destroyed. They simply shrink once they no longer contain anything. This is why it is easier for a former fatty to become fat again. For someone that's just becoming fat, their body has to spend energy to create the fat cells to hold the excess energy. For former fatties, this step is removed and the energy goes straight into the fat cells. This is why it's easier for former fatties to gain fat compared to others.
Now this doesn't mean former fatties are prone to gain the weight back. It just means that, if they no longer diet or exercise, they're going to gain weight faster than a normal person. At the end of the day it still comes down to calories in/calories out.
>>37300848
Smokers can have healthy vitals too, as can drug addicts, coal miners, etc. If you're doing something that is causing substantial damage to your body, even if the damage is not life changing at this point in time, you're not healthy.
>>37301074
"I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about"
-Anon, 2016
>>37301074
>they're going to gain weight faster than a normal person
>At the end of the day it still comes down to calories in/calories out
Makes sense
>>37289149
>biological processes
>biological processes
>biological processes
jesus fucking Christ
I see the point your trying to make here
with your green text oxymoron
>look guys, look what I found
your a fucking idiot
fuck
>triggered
>im not even that same anon and im butthurt
>>37301091
Kek
Gotta hate skinny people that act like just because they're skinny, they know everything there is to know about weight loss and health.
It's like a person with clear skin telling someone with acne "just wash your face bro!"
>>37289536
what the fuck are you talking about you cant measure metabolism through "piss and breathing"
>>37289635
>Me: Cool. Which food scale did you get?
what kinda fucking autist talks like that
and you don't need a food scale to lose weight faggot, you don't look slick saying that like some nutritionist guru
>height, dick size, muscle mass, protein synthesis, nutrition partitioning, skeletal structure, face aesthetics, testosterone levels are genetic and there is a surprisingly big variance... both good and bad
>fit : yeah
>metabolism is genetic and can have a surprisingly big variance
>fit : NO NON O LALALALLA BLAH I DONT HEAR ANYTHING NOT TRUE WHAT WAS THAT THING I WAS SUPPOSED TO PARROT, MUH LAW OF SOMETHING SOMETHING CALORIE IS A CALORIE IN AND OUT IN AND OUT IN AN OUT LALALAL
>>37289150
fuck fat parents that force obesity on their kids, and animals that shit really triggers me
>>37301074
I think this is a reason a lot of former fatties will get liposuction, especially if they get skin tightening surgery anywhere too.
adopted childrens weight is closer related to their biological parents weight than to weight of the family they live with.
there is much evidence that fat people are screwed in many ways but yet everybody can lose weight.
muh thermodynamics
>>37302836
is this accurate?
>>37292647
Nigguh think about they type of people who can actually maintain that for 6 months then ask yourself, is it their fucking body that normalizes or just their fucking brain when they realize how to not be fat.
>>37303747
Adopted from birth? Under 1 year old?
Post study.
>>37289031
what s stupid report
> lost weight
> now burn less calories
how does this surprise anyone?
Maybe they fucked up their gut microbiome through years of unhealthy eating and now they're bodies won't process food the same way a normie would.
They should try some fecal bacteriotherapy.
Or maybe they'll just use this as an excuse for why all fatties are fat.
Is it really metabolism or the mindless feasting on everything that lands on the plate after they lost the weight?
>>37304243
fewer calories than people of same age/weight/height/gender as them
i'm pretty surprised, thought metabolism unfucks itself after a while
