The True Definition of Calories i.e. "Why what you believe is extremist BS" page 58

[magicmerl]

I don't think so. I just think he unloads a necessarily large load of information and ranting on someone a newbie who is asking for details in a simple question. Sometimes said person also may be metabolically/psychologically damaged, something he often overlooks when he is posting. But otherwise I find his posts very informative and meaningful.

I think that Choco is more right than wrong in the stuff he posts. But he's not as right in reality as he is in his own head. He mistakes things which are subjectively true for him as being objectively true for all people and all times (like how being thin has always been what people consider attractive throughout history).

And he likes to 'stir people out of their complacency' (my phrase) by being intentionally provocative with false statements like cream being nutritionless. I would not characterise avoiding a 'debate' with someone who is trying to provoke you as 'lazy'. I think it's the path of wisdom on the internet.

[Neckhammer]

I would not characterise avoiding a 'debate' with someone who is trying to provoke you as 'lazy'. I think it's the path of wisdom on the internet.

absolutely....and why I never strive to get "the last word". Life is too short.

[Hawkward]

Huh?



If you are consuming calories, you are not fasting. They aren't IF'ing if they are drinking butter in their coffee. There is no such thing as "bulletproof fasting." It is a marketing term. It's no different than me finding a guy named Jack Vegetarian, starting a slaughterhouse called Vegetarian Farms and selling the product as Vegetarian Beef on the shelves. It's just a name.

If you are consuming calories, you are not fasting. So eat eggs or meat or vegetables or fruit or potatoes or almonds or salmon or any other conceivable kind of real food. If you're going to eat breakfast, eat a real breakfast and stop drinking butter. Butter is not real food, it is a byproduct of food that comes from another species not designed by nature to be ingested by humans. Honey is closer to real food than butter. Would you eat an entire jar of honey for breakfast? I'm guessing no.

Apparently you missed the very first sentence of my post where I said that I don't even drink coffee, much less put butter in it. I was simply passing along the rationale I've seen people use for doing it. But by all means, carry on with your sanctimonious lecturing.

[sakura_girl]

Apparently you missed the very first sentence of my post where I said that I don't even drink coffee, much less put butter in it. I was simply passing along the rationale I've seen people use for doing it. But by all means, carry on with your sanctimonious lecturing.

I think it depends on your definition of fasting. If fasting means no energy intake for the next 24 hours, that's his definition. I think that one is more particularly useful if you are trying to lose weight, because you're obviously ingesting calories. If you mean fasting in terms of minimizing impact on the endocrine system, then that's your definition right there. But tbh, if you are making ANY impact on your body through ingesting food of any kind, I count that as breaking the fast.

[sakura_girl]

I think that Choco is more right than wrong in the stuff he posts. But he's as right in reality as he is in his own head. He mistakes things which are subjectively true for him as being objectively true for all people and all times (like how being thin has always been what people consider attractive throughout history).

And he likes to 'stir people out of their complacency' (my phrase) by being intentionally provocative with false statements like cream being nutritionless. I would not characterise avoiding a 'debate' with someone who is trying to provoke you as 'lazy'. I think it's the path of wisdom on the internet.

That is true. But I find that after digging through his stuff, some of it really is useful If it's not applicable to me at the moment, it does become applicable eventually.

[TARNIP]

Other things that affect weight loss tremendously in my opinion:

- snacking/frequent small meals. This has a negative effect.
- eating large meals infrequently. This has a positive effect.
- chronic undereating. Might not cause weight gain but does mess up a lot of women's relationship to food
- chronic, excessive low-grade cardio. This has a negative effect for some people or after a certain amount of time. It did for me.
- short, explosive exercises such as sprinting. This seems to have a positive effect of at least stimulating certain beneficial hormones.
- undersleeping. Negative hormonally and also if you are really tired you tend to eat more or eat more of the things you shouldn't.

I also wonder if there is a negative effect to eating more food volume than you need, in other words, eating until you are uncomfortably stuffed, even if the calorie count of the food is within your range. I think there might be hormonal effects to this that are not positive, but it's only speculation on my part.

This is how we are all very different...........regarding the first 2 items in your list, the reverse is true for me. I feel much better and lose more weight when I snack and eat smaller meals more regularly. I have tried over and over to eat less frequently and it does not work for my metabolism. A great book to read is "The Metabolic Effect Diet" by Jade and Keoni Teta. The brothers both have bachelor's degrees in biochemistry, are doctors of naturopathic medicine , NSCA certified strength and conditioning specialists and have masters degrees in acupuncture. These guys are highly qualified in dealing with people that have metabolic conditions and I apply there fundamental rules with Primal guidelines and I am having greater success this time around, especially now i am snacking again (which they highly recommend for people with metabolic conditions).

[Primal Wayne]

I think what people are not even considering is that the body doesn't metabolize all foods the same. Yes, CICO is the "big picture" and is valid, but to the human body a 1000 calories of butter =/= a 1000 calories of watermelon. They are broken down differently. Plus, when you drop a deuce some of those calories are secreted. CICO is valid, but it's almost impossible to track how much you're truly expending. I don't count my calories because I know I'd be far off anyway, so I see no sense in doing it. I just try to eat whole, nutricious meals 'til I'm no longer hungry and go about my day. Plus, do you think Grok thought about how many calories are in a wildabeast and chiseled it onto a rock so he could "track his calories?" He was too worried about trying to survive.

[sakura_girl]

CICO is valid, but it's almost impossible to track how much you're truly expending

Have you been paying attention the last 30 pages? :P Just kidding...these threads are getting kind of tiring for me too >_>

[Neckhammer]

Have you been paying attention the last 30 pages? :P Just kidding...these threads are getting kind of tiring for me too >_>

Meh....the ones that go on this long do so just cause its a common place to congregate and post some shit one way or another. Or to provide some sanctimonious lecturing. I'll contribute with a bit more of nothing important right now see

[Lawyerchick12]

aaaanyway....OAN....how do you know if you have a high metabolism or if you are messing up your metabolism? Is it based on your frequent "expulsion" of waste? is it the unexplainable (I am sure it is explainable...just don't know what it is) wired feeling you get after you have just eaten? or is it as arbitrary as trying to determine your calorie output?