Weightloss Forum


Notices

» Site Navigation
 > Shop
» Chat
» Shop
» Advertisers
» Stats
Members: 27,081
Threads: 30,543
Posts: 587,625
Top Poster: maleficent (20,075)
Welcome to our newest member, Diet Watchers
» Fitness Shop
View Single Post
  I need some references Post #11 (permalink)  
Old February 21st, 2008, 03:31 PM
Steve's Avatar
Steve Steve is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Deos Fortioribus Adesse
Posts: 17,048
Rep Power: 182
Steve has disabled reputation
Send a message via Yahoo to Steve
Quote:
Originally Posted by [Focus] View Post
Hahaha. That's brutal. There's a reason I don't bother arguing with people on the internet. Nobody actually wants to learn anything, they just want to spout their poorly-conceived rhetoric. Both sides think they are objectively correct. Problem is, there is no objective "right".

Having said that, low (under 50g/day) carb diets are effective for a number of purposes. Some people are just as narrow minded in decrying their efficacy as your ignorant friends are at touting it, but the fact remains that calories in vs. calories out is still usually the primary consideration in fat loss.

This does not mean, however, that those women are not seeing results. There's a documented (mostly anecdotal, but meh) auto-regulation of the appetite effect that occurs for many people on a ketogenic diet. (It has to do with the relative absence of insulin and some "dependent" "hunger hormones"). So it is entirely possible that they can eat "as much as they want (because this ends up being less than their maintenance)" and lose fat. Are they seeing optimal results, though? Of course not. Intellectual arrogance has always been the enemy of knowledge.
Wise words and exactly.

And to the OP, it's not really a calorie theory. It's basic thermodynamics.
Reply With Quote
 

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin Version
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

| fitness.com | Fitness Training | Babyforum.com | |