Slashdot Mirror

"it is very difficult to eat less than you burn, because the body adjusts its burn and "waste" rate extremely heavy."
Except there is no peer reviewed scientific paper out there that says that.
There are hundreds of papers saying so.
I know this since 30 years, or 40. And personal experience confirms that, AFAICT.

One mile of running burns 150ish kcal. One hour of running burns over 500 kcal
In total perhaps. But not on top of your base burn rate. And I doubt the in total. For diets it is relevant to know how much "more" you burn if you do a certain activity. Hm, OTOH you might have a point. Perhaps I underestimated how difficult jogging is in or days :D For some reason I have memorized that you consume during jogging a little bit less than half the amount you do during swimming. Which would be in the range of 180 - 200 kcal. But well, perhaps I'm wrong. I will check again and update my "mind" :D Or in the same range as making love.

In every single study the body reduces its burn by less than the caloric reduction. Once again see https://www.caloriecount.com/f...
Did you read your link? He supports my statement. And not yours. However instead of reducing intake -- as I said -- minimum by 30%, they talk about 50%. In other words: reducing it by a fixed amount of e.g. 500 kcal usually does not work, as the body goes into "saving" mode instead of "starvation" mode.

Correction: we both stumbled over a wrong web page. One hour running burns 150 kcal, not 550. No idea why my first hit confirmed your number more or less. There is basically no human activity you can do to burn 550 kcal in one hour.

One mile of running burns 150ish kcal. One hour of running burns over 500 kcal
ashttp://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist3.htm/ seen http://www.runnersworld.com/fitness-calculators/calories-burned-calculator/ on http://www.cosmopolitan.com/health-fitness/advice/a29580/workouts-that-burn-more-calories-than-jogging// websites http://running.competitor.com/2015/03/training/many-calories-running-burn_123951/
You're the one mixed up here.

Because a slice of bread is not a sandwich?! If you want to argue about how much calories or kcals a slice of bread has then say so. It is difference if I imagine a real sandwich that was 400 - 600 kcals and you simply talk about a slice of bread that indeed only has 110 - 130. Anyway, probably you are american and a slice of bread is a synonym for a sandwich :D

Now you change to an 1700 kcal diet. What you think is happening? The layman would say: the body burns 200kcal fat, or muscles if he has no fat.
Truth is: the body starts saving! Nothing is happening, for a week or two weeks minimum. In other words the body prefers to adapt to the reduced kcals instead of attacking its reserves.

Drop your diet to 1700 kcal and your body go into saving mode and burn 1800 kcal per day.
see https://www.caloriecount.com/forums/weight-loss/truth-starvation-mode//

To forth your body to switch you need healthy food, and have to reduce kcal intake by about 1/3 below your burn rate. In other words: it is very difficult to eat less than you burn, because the body adjusts its burn and "waste" rate extremely heavy.

Except there is no peer reviewed scientific paper out there that says that. In every single study the body reduces its burn by less than the caloric reduction. Once again see https://www.caloriecount.com/forums/weight-loss/truth-starvation-mode//

Correction: we both stumbled over a wrong web page. One hour running burns 150 kcal, not 550. No idea why my first hit confirmed your number more or less. There is basically no human activity you can do to burn 550 kcal in one hour.

One mile of running burns 150ish kcal. One hour of running burns over 500 kcal
ashttp://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist3.htm/ seen http://www.runnersworld.com/fitness-calculators/calories-burned-calculator/ on http://www.cosmopolitan.com/health-fitness/advice/a29580/workouts-that-burn-more-calories-than-jogging// websites http://running.competitor.com/2015/03/training/many-calories-running-burn_123951/
You're the one mixed up here.

Because a slice of bread is not a sandwich?! If you want to argue about how much calories or kcals a slice of bread has then say so. It is difference if I imagine a real sandwich that was 400 - 600 kcals and you simply talk about a slice of bread that indeed only has 110 - 130. Anyway, probably you are american and a slice of bread is a synonym for a sandwich :D

Now you change to an 1700 kcal diet. What you think is happening? The layman would say: the body burns 200kcal fat, or muscles if he has no fat.
Truth is: the body starts saving! Nothing is happening, for a week or two weeks minimum. In other words the body prefers to adapt to the reduced kcals instead of attacking its reserves.

Drop your diet to 1700 kcal and your body go into saving mode and burn 1800 kcal per day.
see https://www.caloriecount.com/forums/weight-loss/truth-starvation-mode//

To forth your body to switch you need healthy food, and have to reduce kcal intake by about 1/3 below your burn rate. In other words: it is very difficult to eat less than you burn, because the body adjusts its burn and "waste" rate extremely heavy.

Except there is no peer reviewed scientific paper out there that says that. In every single study the body reduces its burn by less than the caloric reduction. Once again see https://www.caloriecount.com/forums/weight-loss/truth-starvation-mode//

Not the guy you're responding to but here I'm not AC and im citing something other than reddit
https://www.caloriecount.com/forums/weight-loss/truth-starvation-mode/

Actually, burning muscle before fat in that case is exactly what would happen. If you starve your body of too many calories, it turns to burning muscle as it costs more energy to maintain.

Only if you aren't overweight.

In the study, an example of a lean subject studied after death from starvation: it can be deduced that loss of body fat accounted for 28-36% of the weight loss and fat-free mass 64-72%. In obese individuals, the proportion of energy derived from protein (Pcal%) is only 6% compared to 21% in the lean individual. More than half the weight loss in the obese is fat, whereas most of the weight loss in the lean individual is fat-free mass.

from: https://www.caloriecount.com/forums/weight-loss/truth-starvation-mode/

Is it just too fucking hard for you to use your imagination a little bit and imagine what it must be like to be somebody who can't stop gaining weight even while eating 300-600 calories per day?

You know they've done scientific studies and found that the starvation mode decrease never completely offsets the drop from their normal BMR. Their metabolic rate may go as low as 40% of the normal BMR but it will always decrease by less than the actual caloric decrease. If their normal BMR is not 300-600 kcal per day then they absolutely will lose weight at 300-600 kcal per day. Read https://www.caloriecount.com/forums/weight-loss/truth-starvation-mode/ for more information on this. You won't actually gain weight in starvation mode unless you ramp up your caloric intake. He lays out why exactly you're wrong and cites peer reviewed studies to prove your wrong. Cut out the insulting people because you can't grasp the concept of science.