Page 27 of 44 FirstFirst ... 17252627282937 ... LastLast
Results 261 to 270 of 440

Thread: "Calories in / Calories Out" -- Please Stop the Madness page 27

  1. #261
    RichMahogany's Avatar
    RichMahogany is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,381
    Shop Now
    Quote Originally Posted by Gorbag View Post
    You are continuing pulling straw-men out of a certain private body part, where the light of reason has no access, and the sun never shines?!
    Sorry, but this is BS. The straw man is the claim that the Alternative Hypothesis denies the First Law of Thermodynamics.

  2. #262
    Lumifer's Avatar
    Lumifer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by RichMahogany View Post
    Then, they go around telling people "because CICO describes weight gain or loss, simply manipulating these variables is the only strategy/best strategy to achieve weight loss"
    You haven't been paying much attention :-P

    Yes, manipulating your energy input and/or output is the only strategy to achieve weight loss.

    The trick is that there are many, many ways to manipulate your energy balance. Including your favorite way of adjusting the content of your diet, *what* you eat.

    You are assuming a strawman which says "the only way to manipulate the energy balance is to count calories and restrict the input". That's a pure strawman, CICO does not claim this.

    Quote Originally Posted by RichMahogany View Post
    The Alternative Hypothesis is that the variables are dependent.
    As you might have noticed in my post that you're replying to, I agree with that.

    Quote Originally Posted by RichMahogany View Post
    CICO as prescription presupposes that they are not.
    That is... an incorrect claim.

    Quote Originally Posted by RichMahogany View Post
    Again, NOBODY with half a brain believes that you can gain weight in a calorie deficit or lose weight in a calorie surplus. That's like saying a circle is square, or that up is down.
    Again, I can quote you people in this very thread who say so :-D

    Quote Originally Posted by RichMahogany View Post
    What's contended is the cause.
    Which one is the cause? The causality chain is long, we can extend it as far back as we want. Any particular reason you want to stop at the hormonal regulation? It has its causes, too, and those have their causes...
    Last edited by Lumifer; 04-05-2013 at 09:23 AM.

  3. #263
    RichMahogany's Avatar
    RichMahogany is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,381
    Quote Originally Posted by Lumifer View Post
    You haven't been paying much attention :-P
    Or I'm the only one who has :-P right back at ya.

    [quote=Lumifer;1149922]Yes, manipulating your energy input and/or output is the only strategy to achieve weight loss.

    Yes, this is where CICO and Alternative Hypothesis agree...

    Quote Originally Posted by Lumifer View Post
    The trick is that there are many, many ways to manipulate your energy balance. Including your favorite way of adjusting the content of your diet, *what* you eat.
    So you want to agree with the content of the Alternative Hypothesis but claim to be a supporter of CICO?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lumifer View Post
    You are assuming a strawman which says "the only way to manipulate the energy balance is to count calories and restrict the input". That's a pure strawman, CICO does not claim this.
    I've been very careful to distinguish between calling the First Law of Thermodynamics "CICO" and "CICO as a prescription/dogma" The adherents of CICO love the confusion. It allows them to make unsupported claims and then claim that those who disagree are invoking magic.

    You're basically agreeing with the alternative hypothesis and arguing for the FLT (which nobody in their right mind is disputing)

    Quote Originally Posted by Lumifer View Post
    As you might have noticed in my post that you're replying to, I agree with
    Yeah, you agree with me but just love arguing about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lumifer View Post
    That is... an incorrect claim.
    No, it isn't

    Quote Originally Posted by Lumifer View Post
    Again, I can quote you people in this very thread who say so :-D
    If you're talking about the original post, I took that as being facetious. Nobody except a lunatic thinks that CICO doesn't describe what happens when someone loses or gains weight (or doesn't).

    Quote Originally Posted by Lumifer View Post
    Which one is the cause? The causality chain is long, we can extend it as far back as we want. Any particular reason you want to stop at the hormonal regulation? It has its causes, too, and those have their causes...
    Again, now you're arguing for the Alternative Hypothesis. Make up your mind.

    Sure, we could trace it all the way back to the Big Bang if we really wanted to. I'm not that good a physicist (I'm not one at all), but theoretically, you could say "Your thighs are fat because of the Big Bang" and it may be accurate. But not useful. CICO is accurate, it's just not useful, because of dependent variables and confounders, among which is the fact that the adipose tissue is an endocrine organ and the body is a complicated place. Why are you trying to find nits to pick with my argument, which you seemingly agree with?

  4. #264
    boomingno's Avatar
    boomingno is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    84
    The fact that this thread continued past this post is either very funny or deeply sad... I'm not sure which.

  5. #265
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Account closed
    Posts
    1,458
    Some interesting distinctions, Lumifer. I need to re-read, but it almost sounds as though you are saying the Alternative Hypothesis does not contradict CICO, but rather subsumes it.

  6. #266
    Lumifer's Avatar
    Lumifer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by RichMahogany View Post
    ...now you're arguing for the Alternative Hypothesis. Make up your mind.
    I am sorry, I am really bad at fitting into pigeonholes :-P

    You have a idea in your mind which you call CICO and you're trying to make my views match it. It doesn't look like they match well. Try ignoring labels for a bit and *read* my post without preconceived notions of what I must be saying.

    Quote Originally Posted by RichMahogany View Post
    CICO is accurate, it's just not useful
    Ah. :-) It's a good thing it's accurate, then. Usefulness is really in the mind of the beholder...

    Quote Originally Posted by RichMahogany View Post
    Why are you trying to find nits to pick with my argument, which you seemingly agree with?
    Because you keep saying silly things and keep telling me I'm wrong :-P

  7. #267
    Lumifer's Avatar
    Lumifer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Finnegans Wake View Post
    Some interesting distinctions, Lumifer. I need to re-read, but it almost sounds as though you are saying the Alternative Hypothesis does not contradict CICO, but rather subsumes it.
    Yep, that would be a fair way to put it.

    You just need to remember that the underlying layer of CICO is still true, always -- and some people (who RichMahogany says don't exist) tend to forget this...

  8. #268
    Gorbag's Avatar
    Gorbag is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    3,853
    Quote Originally Posted by boomingno View Post
    The fact that this thread continued past this post is either very funny or deeply sad... I'm not sure which.
    Yep, but mostly funny IMO, similar to those that still believes in the geocentric worldview, the flat earth society, or that the moon is made of cheese etc…

  9. #269
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Account closed
    Posts
    1,458
    Quote Originally Posted by boomingno View Post
    The fact that this thread continued past this post is either very funny or deeply sad... I'm not sure which.
    Very good link.

  10. #270
    RichMahogany's Avatar
    RichMahogany is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,381
    Quote Originally Posted by Lumifer View Post
    I am sorry, I am really bad at fitting into pigeonholes :-P

    You have a idea in your mind which you call CICO and you're trying to make my views match it. It doesn't look like they match well. Try ignoring labels for a bit and *read* my post without preconceived notions of what I must be saying.

    Ah. :-) It's a good thing it's accurate, then. Usefulness is really in the mind of the beholder...

    Because you keep saying silly things and keep telling me I'm wrong :-P
    Usefulness isn't in the mind of the beholder when we're trying to accomplish a specific goal, which, in this case is strongly implied to be the normalization of a person's weight.

    You admit freely that there are different ways of manipulating energy balance. The one commonly referred to as CICO says "eat less+move around more=lose weight." The Alternative says "fix the broken fat storage-regulation machinery, then (assuming you're overfat), you'll eat less and/or move around more = lose weight."

    We can debate whether which is easier is relevant, and whether either would technically work in a forced experiment (sure they would). But for populations of live, actual humans running around in the actual, real world, I find it hard to believe that you wouldn't agree that the latter is more likely to have a widespread positive effect. Especially in light of the past 40+ years of evidence.

    Now, tell me if we disagree, or if you insist on continuing to use the term "CICO" with a meaning other than its commonly accepted use just for the sake of argument. Good talk.

Page 27 of 44 FirstFirst ... 17252627282937 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •