Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

interesting blog article about the first law of thermodynamics

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • interesting blog article about the first law of thermodynamics

    http://www.raisin-hell.com/2010/05/w...cs-has-no.html

  • #2
    Yep - fab blog post. I think Taubes made a similar point in GCBC. The energy equation is so simple an idiot could understand it, and there are a lot of idiots in the nutritionista business.
    My website: http://www.shoppinganywhere.net/

    Comment


    • #3
      That's a great article. Thanks for posting it!
      Rebecca

      Right click here to watch me lose 22.5 pounds of body fat and gain 5.5 pounds of muscle in only 5 months right before your eyes in this cool morphing video!

      Click the banner below to visit my blog:

      sigpic

      Feb 2009 - 158 pounds - 43.6% body fat
      Aug 2013 - 138 pounds - 34.3% body fat
      So far, lost 19.8 pounds of body fat and gained 1.8 pounds of lean mass
      Goal - 136 pounds - 30% body fat
      Still need to lose 6.4 more pounds of body fat and gain 4.2 more pounds of lean mass

      Comment


      • #4
        Good web site.

        Brought something to mind though. The second law of thermodynamics talks about entropy. Entropy basically is a "systems' natural tendency to move toward disorder, not order. I wonder how the physics types and the biology types work it out. Entropy doesn't seem to allow for evolution.
        Tayatha om bekandze

        Bekandze maha bekandze

        Randza samu gate soha

        Comment


        • #5
          Ah yeah the entropy one is a good point too. I've heard the argument that that per calorie, our bodies need to spend more energy to process protein than carbs so 50 calories of carbs and 50 calories of protein will have a different impact on weight. Not anywhere close to significant but that theory gets attributed to the efficacy of high protein, low carb diets.

          The first law of theormodynamics would make sense if energy output was static. Its proponents are kind of of banking on that me, a 140 pound active male, will spend about 2500 calories per day and if I ate 3000, I would store the difference. But if I eat 3000 I spend 3000 no matter my exercise. So that's clearly bunk. If an insulin/leptin resistant person is "supposed to" eat 3000 to maintain weight, they can likely eat 2500 and still gain weight. Insulin resistance causes more initial storage of carbs and leptin resistance inhibits lipolysis. Duh.

          It's sad that there are still people doing weight watchers and crap. We need a universal megaphone or something.
          Stabbing conventional wisdom in its face.

          Anyone who wants to talk nutrition should PM me!

          Comment


          • #6
            yeah, nothing in nature can be that clear cut. there are ALWAYS variables XD
            "I know what my body needs and what it can handle. There's no better way to achieve my goal than what im doing now. If my regimen leads to my death, be it in six days or six months...I will die fullfiled. The outcome is irrelavent so long as i steer towards my fate. If death is to be my prize, i welcome it with open arms."

            "A pound of meat a day keeps the doctor away"

            Comment


            • #7
              I wonder if any one has bothered to tell mother nature of all these unbelievable findings of science that effects our energy balance? No wonder I'm gaining weight eating nothing. j/k
              Whether you think you can..... or you think you can't..... your 100 % correct.

              Comment

              Working...
              X