Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:25:40 UTC No. 16227703

>>16227664
A 4chan screenshot is biased information. Find the actual study the guy is referring to

An explanation out of my ass for that result in the pic may relate to why we chew food. Due to digestion, crushing food makes it easier to absorb the calories in it compared to swallowing it whole. Eating powdered food perhaps fully exposes all the calories in it, hence the weight gain despite the same total calories. You need to find to original article to be sure instead of relying on some guy saying "There was a study that did bluh bluh" without citing it

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:26:42 UTC No. 16227706

>>16227664
Obesity is caused by eating too much

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 02:34:39 UTC No. 16227834

>>16227664
No idea but im resonant

Im what they call hypglycemic, i dont metabolize sugar well i dont get a sugar high, just a crash.

When i switched to keto i lost 30 lbs, my face cleared up and my mood stabilized. This could well be a factor

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:41:10 UTC No. 16227995

>>16227664
Any post that claims to break the conservation of mass or energy is false so yes it's bullshit.

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:29:45 UTC No. 16228083

>>16227664
>CICO is wrong because hyperprocessed goyslop reduces the CO part (BMR)
CICO stands undefeated

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:47:12 UTC No. 16228094

>>16228083
It also increases calories in, for instance if you take a long wood fiber and eat it it has more calories than if you break it down to sugars first but if your body can't process it it all goes to waste. It's fairly obvious that if you make a smoothie out of your food it makes it more bio available as the mechanical forces break it down to more easily digestible chunks. It's no different than being served a whole animal that you have to tooth and claw a chunk out off instead of being served a ready cut steak, the calories are the same but more work goes into one and more is being wasted in one.

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:47:49 UTC No. 16228095

Obesity causes the insulin resistance of type-2 diabetes.
It is fully reversible by losing weight.
Idk about other metabolic issues, but for this one it's true.

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 08:09:34 UTC No. 16228112

>>16228094
Of course, but in the end it's still CICO. You can make a similar argument at the level of macro and micro nutrients, bioavailability, incomplete vs complete proteins, "antinutrients", etc.

In the end it's all higher order corrections (however significant) to the first order truth of CICO.

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 08:11:34 UTC No. 16228116

>>16228112
Yes I wasn't trying to contradict, just saying that processing can effect all facets of the equation. Eat less spend more always works.

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 09:38:51 UTC No. 16228159

>>16228112
>in the end it's still CICO
Such a jewish trick: using the same word to refer to different phenomena:
>whether a person dies in a sword fight or gets blown up by a drone it's still called ''war''.
Not it's not the same ''war'' and likewise the hegemony of eat less exercise more needs to be replaced by a more valid, accurate and reliable interpretation of how CICO works.

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 09:45:00 UTC No. 16228167

>>16228159
No wait disregard that post it sucks cocks. Instead: stop spending so much time, money and energy on the details of why a human should just eat some fresh animals and plants.

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 09:53:12 UTC No. 16228175

>>16228159
The jewish trick is to say that "Calories In, Calories Out" is wrong because of things that affect the total amount of "Calories" being taken "In", and the "Calories" being burned "Out".

They want you to express yourself ineffectively like a retard (and you do it because you are).

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 10:12:49 UTC No. 16228198

>>16228175
Smell that? I farted.

-B00T

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 10:15:02 UTC No. 16228200

>>16228175
Except that sales of processed foods rely on the false belief of if-it-fits-your-macros. Try again jew.

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 10:18:27 UTC No. 16228203

>>16228200
Vegetable protein is shit and bio-unavailable, you get less of it than what's written on the box, but I'm sure you don't dismiss "protein intake" as a jewish plot as a whole.

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 10:31:41 UTC No. 16228210

>>16228203
>but I'm sure you don't dismiss "protein intake" as a jewish plot as a whole.
But I do. Protein intake is yet another mythology to explain why some people are lean and/or muscular and other people are not. What the body needs and how the body handles what it consumes is so complicated that it's a horrific display of hubris to talk about how much of this or that product to consume. The body is more intelligent than our mind. The best we can do now is listen to the body, eat what is natural, do our best in whatever we strive for and leave the rest to fate. The idea that we can use science to outsmart our biology to minimize the risk for this disease and optimize the results of that ambition is the root of evil. I'm not against science in principle but if you have not come to the realization that nutrition/medical science/dentistry has failed us I don't even want to talk to you anymore.

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 11:41:50 UTC No. 16228236

>>16227664
>It's not calories absorbed vs. calories extended because if the absorption/expenditure rate is altered the result is altered concordantly I WIN I WIN I WIN
Ok.
>Nooo I can't just eat less until I stop being fat, someone else eats more than me and isn't fat
So?
>buuut muh dietary limit
Unless you have some acute underlying health issue I see no reason to rely on arbitrary guidelines over your actual physical condition

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:28:05 UTC No. 16228293

>>16228210
>the scientific method is prone to reductionism sometimes therefore you can't know nuffin, nutrition science edition