>After weight loss, there is a reduction in total energy expenditure primarily due to a greater reduction in non-resting energy expenditure or physical activity, which is responsible for 30% of the total energy expenditure. It appears that skeletal muscle energy expenditure becomes more efficient, and less energy is used. Compensatory changes are also seen after intentional energy restriction where various hormones act to favour weight regain.

>>76734157
Nobody is making you put food in your mouth. Just because you have an excerpt from some medical journal with a bunch of fancy words doesn't make it true. Go find a medical journal that says that men can become women if they take estrogen and cut their cock off. I'm sure it has some fancy lingo that made the person who wrote it feel like they were a thousand IQ. Doesn't make it true.

>>76734166
>Genes may be responsible for why two individuals living in the same environment can vary considerably in body size as demonstrated in seminal studies of twins. In the first study, genetic factors accounted for almost 40–70% of the variance in BMI in a sample of monozygotic (identical) twins and dizygotic (fraternal) twins.

>>76734170
Yeah, I didn't read your stupid green text because clearly it's just an excerpt from the same nonsense journal that you quoted, which means you totally missed my entire point.

>>76734172
you're not going to read actual evidence-based conclusions from twin studies, but i should take your barely literate 4chan posts as gospel?

>Walking just 30 minutes a day lowers the risk of cardiovascular disease, stroke and type 2 diabetes by an estimated 30–40%.
>Although fast-food restaurants are highly visible and more widespread in disadvantaged areas, there appears to be no differences in the consumption of fruit and vegetables and sugar-sweetened beverages based on proximity to these outlets.

this is pretty interesting

>>76734174
You can believe whatever you want. I'm not the thought police, and you can integrate whatever teaching you want into your routine and lifestyle. But the fact that you posted this journal excerpt on an anime website, shifting the blame of obesity to external factors rather than personal responsibility, means that you actually aren't going to, and you just did it for engagement and giggles

This is all information that someone with 120IQ+ can deduce without the need for books. Lets take a look at the 'is obesity the individuals fault' from an IQ perspective

120+ IQ Take (top 10% iq)
Junk food is not designed to be ingested by humans. Refined sugars, salts and saturate fats disrupts your hormonal profile which results in permanent (yes, permanent) changes to your body with the end result being a broken gauge for fullness and hunger. Disrupted ghrelin, insulin and leptin production in the body means your body can no longer take stock of how much bodyfat you have and because it cant detect bodyfat it assumes you must be starving and works hard to make you eat more because you are malnourished. (yes, obese peoples brains think they are starving paradoxically).

When death is on the cards to your brains mindset you cannot resist eating more. your brain will do whatever it takes to make you eat more. You can reverse some resistances by eating better, exercising and sleeping but you will never get your hormonal profile to before junk food addiction and results vary. Some people are doomed to be obese forever if their addiction and hormonal changes are particularly resistant to change once established


100IQ take (average 50% IQ)
You need to diet and exercise. CICO

90IQ and below take (Bottom 25% IQ)
If your fat its becoz you are a lazy fat fuck that should just stop putting food to your mouth idiot

>>76734178
>means that you actually aren't going to
aren't actually going to what?

your post lacks an actual point. specifically what are you telling me to do? ignore this evidence? write incorrect answers on my exam? cite "some dude on 4chan" as my source?

if what you're telling me is that fat people should eat healthy and do exercise, i can tell you right now that the textbook says the same thing. but it sounds to me like you have some larger ideological point to make, and no evidence to support that point at all - whatever it may be.

>>76734180
The funny part of this post is that high IQ people who actually know what they're talking about never mention their IQ or talk about IQ

>>76734188
Most people are dumb as rocks my guy. It is actually painful to see the obesity debate play out because most people are the "society has no hand in why everyone is fat its all on the individual"

These people are letting us all know they are below 100IQ and never developed critical thinking skills

>>76734182
Yeah, I'm not going to continue to have this conversation with you. You missed the first point that I made, and now you're just continuing to argue for no apparent reason. Nobody is forcing anybody to put food in their mouth. And we get these kind of threads all the time saying that obesity is caused by external factors and genes and blah, blah, blah. And people don't actually have agency and it's involuntary. And every single person knows that it's garbage. We have a fat loss general for a reason, because all of this meme speak is objectively untrue. If you try hard enough, you can lose weight. If you try hard enough, you can get your butt off the couch and go for a walk. You are clearly just upset that your rage bait hasn't worked. I'm going to leave the thread now and I won't see any replies. Feel free to keep replying because you will, I won't see it.

>>76734170
>Gene's Burger House
>Gene's Fish and Chip shop
>Gene's Raspberry Cola

DAMN YOU GENE

>>76734192
>You are clearly just upset that your rage bait hasn't worked.
and yet here you are

you think i missed your point. i didn't. i know exactly the point you're making and that point is not wrong, merely incomplete.

hence why i posted the twin studies.

which you ignored.

you cannot end a conversation you refused to start, lmao. cya l8r, idiot.

File: 1485e910a699dc26b95ecbc6d(...).jpg (60 KB, 600x419)

60 KB JPG

>>76734195

>>76734192
>Despite the known benefits of weight loss, it is a relapsing condition. Obesity treatment begins with patients understanding their weight history and deciding on a plan that is best for them and fits with their values and goals.

>Exploring an individual’s motivation for weight loss is essential for overall success. People attempt weight loss for many reasons including to improve overall health and chronic conditions and for body image concerns. Using principles from motivational interviewing, patients can be helped to understand their desire to lose weight and gain confidence in achieving weight loss. Focusing on the reasons for wanting to lose weight may help patients develop strategies that are focused on life and health goals.

>Any supervised plan of care must be directed at different processes: (1) healthy nutrition to adequately meet energy needs, (2) clinically relevant weight loss through energy deficit and (3) successful weight maintenance, which requires long-term behaviour changes.

>A multifaceted approach is recommended, including lifestyle (nutritional therapy, physical activity), behaviour modification and, for some people, pharmacotherapy and metabolic surgical and non-surgical interventions. Focusing on more than one therapy provides for more effective weight loss and weight loss maintenance with lifestyle therapies the foundation therapy. When teaching patients, stress healthy eating habits and adequate physical activity as lifestyle patterns to develop and maintain, even without weight loss.

>Even with a comprehensive action plan, there is a high rate of weight regain. This is discouraging when one considers the amount of time, effort and money expended in attempts to lose weight. For successful management of obesity, it is beneficial to view obesity as a chronic lifelong condition that necessitates day-to-day attention.

>>76734192
>Multiple therapies are more effective than one therapy alone and lifestyle modifications are the foundation for all therapies. Intentional weight loss through energy restriction diets is entirely achievable for most people, until the diet is ceased and weight gain occurs. Several biological alterations accompany energy restriction that encourage weight gain and persist well beyond the diet. These are identified as increased appetite, a reduction in satiety hormones and preference for high-fat food. The adaptations to weight loss defend the original body weight, which explains why weight loss is so difficult to maintain. 42 , 43 Any alteration in nutrition therapy needs to be maintained long-term because of the biological defence of weight loss.

File: IMG_2564.jpg (74 KB, 700x693)

74 KB JPG

>>76734157

>>76734157
>>76734165
The fat studies are what makes it so hard for me to trust any medical research that comes out these days.

>>76734214
Obesity is literally a drug addiction.

Junk food is a hard drug and its isnane people dont realise this

>>76734231
90 IQ person alert. His low IQ results in him having very low abstract reasoning capabilities. This manifests in this specimen only being able to imagine scenarios that he has already personally experienced. If expected to extrapolate existing experiences into new novel experiences by tweaking variables (i.e. imagining life through someone elses shoes) it will inevitably result in a Blue screen of death 404 error. ERROR ERROR DOES NOT COMPUTE. IQ TOO LOW TO IMAGINE SCENARIOS I DIDNT EXPERIENCE. This results in an integer overflow and the specimen shutting down and dismissing whatever he has heard. Not from a place of smugness or superiorirty but from a complete lack of understanding of a scenario. He is the proverbial pondskater sitting on top of a pond unaware that theres a whole universe of life swimming around underneath him. To him there is no pond, it cant exist, it hasnt seen it. To this specimen he believes heroin addiction isnt real since he hasnt gotten addiction to heroin. He thinks schizophrenia isnt real since he doesnt have it. In effect this specimens universe is inside of his head and nice vice versa

>>76734157
I've noticed that every time genetics is brought up, it completely fails to acknowledge that it's probably fat parents who eat like absolute shit, who feed their kids the same shit, and in huge quantities that the parent is used to or deems appropriate. Now, I will say that the only thing we can say in terms of genetics and why some people even when exposed to addictive foods and fatening foods, don't end up fat, is genetics because they just aren't that hungry. The high that some people get from food is not universal and not everyone really likes it. The same way that not everyone who tries cocaine will think it's absolutely amazing and get hooked and fall down the hole. Thank you.

>>76734243
Yes junk food is literally a hard drug. If you hook your children onto it they will really struggle to get off it it and will have to be careful for the rest of their lives and it will be a weekly struggle to not balloon up in weight.

If you give your kids addictive junk food you are condeming them to a life of sisyphus pushing a boulder up a mountain forever. You stop pushing for one second and youll be dialling up takeout and eating 5000 calories in a day.

>>76734192
>Yeah, I'm not going to continue to have this conversation with you.
>writes a paragraph
What did he mean by this?

>>76734175
>this is pretty interesting
Not really.
>there appears to be no differences in the consumption of fruit and vegetables
So they're eating fruit + vegetable + utter garbage.
>and sugar-sweetened beverages based on proximity to these outlets.
Are they controlling for non-disadvantaged areas that poor fats travel for work?
Just put the fucking fork down.

>>76734239
I'm not saying that I can't put myself in someone else's shoes. I'm not saying that I can't conceptualize hypotheticals. I absolutely can. It's just that this really doesn't make sense. There has not been a singular person on this earth that we have been able to isolate entirely in, say, a hospital unit, or any other controlled environment, feed them a caloric deficit, and see them maintain size or grow. It's just not real, so this is a lot of very interesting information but because it contradicts reality so hard, it's clearly nonsense made to feel someone feel better. I'm sorry. It'd be really cool if it worked like that, but aren't we grateful that it doesn't? Shouldn't we be grateful that anyone can lose weight if they actually try, if they're honest with themselves?
And haven't we also seen recently that pretty much anyone can get a PhD, anyone can write a doctoral thesis, anyone can write these research papers and no one is going back over it? Wasn't there a scandal like a few years ago where it turned out that some absolute loser wrote a ton of pediatric articles that were just actually about Star Trek and held no value, no significance, and actually had no research backing behind them?

>>76734269
Did we see them eat the fruits and vegetables? Do they eat them when people aren't watching? Most fat people I've known that insist they eat fruits and vegetables consume apple sauce or other fruit sauces or pastes, without realizing there's an absolute shit ton of added sugar, or their vegetables are deep fried, or slathered in butter, of some sort of variation. It's just all fats. It's turned into fast food somehowor another. You ever seen a fat bitch eat a salad? It's literally like a quarter cup if not more of salad dressing, which is entirely almost sugar or oil, or some combination thereof.

>>76734157
>>Energy is regulated by a homeostatic system that controls energy intake and energy expenditure to maintain a relatively stable weight in healthy adults.
So you should avoid getting fat in the first place, got it

>>76734294
Ask a fat fuck what percentage of tomato sauce is sugar.
Every answer I've been given has been between 'uh, 5%' and 'anon, why would they put sugar in tomato sauce?'

>>76734308
The whole point of this bullshit is to relieve the buttery masses of personal accountability.
No amount of semantic games to make the cause of obesity inscrutable will change the fact it's at least 85% eating shit.

>>76734157
Sure it's harder for fatties to lose weight but if you really restricted your calories for months and had self control you would lose it. But since you cope with science instead of being disciplined you will never be lean sorry better luck next life

>>76734327
>but its not sweet!

>>76734289
>so this is a lot of very interesting information but because it contradicts reality so hard, it's clearly nonsense made to feel someone feel better.
You are a moron. Nothing in the posted excerpts contradicts CICO. You are pretending that it does as an excuse to disregard it, presumably so that you can avoid having your worldview challenged. I could speculate as to why.

>>76734402
Do tell then, how did genetics make you fat , if not for just increasing hunger and making someone predisposed to get much more of a high off junk food?

>>76734411
>Do tell then, how did genetics make you fat
For just one example, as the excerpts explain, the body defends against weight loss by reducing energy expenditure in myriad ways. It's an obvious conclusion that the aggressiveness of this defence would vary based on genetics. As just one example.

>>76734419
But how did they test this? Usually when I see this defended, it's really easy to explain. The body does not just make you this efficient machine that needs so much less. It just makes them tired. It makes them more likely to choose the elevator instead of the stairs. It makes them walk as little as possible to save energy. It's a subconscious behavior. Not this really cool super-science microbiology shit. And I get it. I'm once again using personal experience, but it just doesn't make sense. It sounds like a lot of pseudoscience nonsense. If that's true, then how come we can very accurately predict weight loss if everything else is controlled? Fitness science in itself is a complete fucking joke because of what ends up counting on some of these research papers and the fact that they are not completely isolating people. They are not taking people for six months, putting them in a cell and observing every single thing that they do and asking them why they think they do it.

>>76734432
>But how did they test this?
Caloric expenditure can be directly and accurately measured using exhaled gas analysis.

>>76734436
Can it? I thought you not only needed gas expenditure but you also needed a metabolic panel, you also needed to know height, weight, body fat percent, FFMI. I thought you needed all these different measurements to accurately gauge everything, including what they need. Are they accurately testing how much they intake? Are they actually measuring it? Or are they just listening to some fat bitch say she totally only eats of 1200 calories a day?

>>76734448
If you're so ignorant of basic facts and methods about obesity, how have you managed to form such strongly held and certain opinions on it?

>>76734449
It's kind of hard to actually read research papers when I've seen so many that are absolute bullshit that get called out by others who actually do have the credentials to say it's bullshit. Why can you only question things if you have the credentials anyway? If it's so obvious, then why don't you explain it? Why don't you explain why they don't need to be kept in an extremely controlled environment and monitored? How is it good science to have so many uncontrolled variables?

>>76734327
>The whole point of this bullshit is to relieve the buttery masses of personal accountability.
I know, but by their own logic getting fat is even worse than most people think, because it's basically incurable. So you should try even harder not to become fat.

>>76734522
That's not an answer.

If you don't know then you don't know, and that's fine. But if you don't know these basic things, I wonder how you came to be so confident about your conclusions.

File: saargeon.jpg (464 KB, 1046x1831)

464 KB JPG

>>76734157
>listening to the psychopathic retards in the medical industry

>>76734548
how many 90 year old vegetables do you think that cardiac surgeon has performed near impossible cutting edge miraculous surgery on to buy them another 1 month of insensate life shitting into a pan?

he's fucking right. it's time to just let some people fucking die.

File: DXz3xDEWAAAvLJt-1.jpg (167 KB, 1070x1072)

167 KB JPG

>>76734553
I agree, stop prolonging the pointless life of roid troons, let them die in agony as they deserve. Although I'm not sure you'd get much use from their fucked up organs

File: Screenshot_20251017_22034(...).jpg (526 KB, 1080x2340)

526 KB JPG

>>76734553
I actually do agree with this stance. There was some celebrity that died recently over the age of 70, and it's supposed to be this big terrible tragedy gone too soon. Too soon. 70 is when we're supposed to die. We are not supposed to live to be over a hundred, or 90. 80 is really, really pushing it. Your quality of life is in the fucking toilet. We started looking at causes of death that are pretty much just age-related and saying we need to cure it. We need to make sure people live as long as possible. Bitch, just let me die. If I'm 70 and going into heart failure, I just want to be comfortable. Don't cure me. Don't cut out someone else's heart and put it into me. Give it to some kid. I do not want to be saved above someone who still has a life to live. I have lived mine.

>>76734289
Bro you are too dumb to realise that the problem was never about CICO. We know that fat people eat a lot. Everybody knows this. Its not a revelation

The issue has always, always been about fat people not being able to stop themselves eating too much.

If the problem and solution was to eat less dont you think fat people have considered this before? You know what bro, I think you are onto something. Head down to all the crackhead hotspots in america and tell them you have found the cure for addiction

All them methheads slamming meth, crackheads doing their crack, alcoholics drinking their alcohol and of course fat people eating their slop, go ahead and let them know that the solution is to stop eating as much, or do less drugs. Im sure theyll all cease immediately and get better

>>76734192
lol he's so mad

>>76735603
They will if they care enough about themselves and or are pushed far enough to a point and dont decide to just give up on life. I know multiple former addicts.

>>76734575
My parents are 80 and their quality of life is great. Daily walks, going out to lunch or dinner with friends, traveling, seeing grandkids. If you have enough money and good health (and good healthcare lol), your 80s are not much different from being in your 60s if your brain hasn't gone to shit

>>76735673
Based. One time an 80 year old jogged past me up a mountain i was hiking. He said the answer is to stay in shape and that the fitness you fo in each decade of your life is prepsring your health for the next decade. I have internalized this.

>>76734157
"Nutritionists" having to pretend that there is no difference in the dietary makeup of modern "food" and the food available 2000 years ago or they get sued by coca cola and Mondelez is very amusing and based on this thread I'm sure it appeals to retarded fat people.

I don't believe that genes or dna is a real thing.
Children probably inherit the appetites of their parents, to varying degrees and intensity

>>76734157
Explain GLP-1s.

>>76736040
Kids usually don't get to choose or have a say in the food they eat or their parents buy.

File: genetics.jpg (99 KB, 524x772)

99 KB JPG

>>76734195
>>76734199

>>76736185
>The arcuate nucleus of the hypothalamus is the primary control centre for appetite and energy expenditure as shown in Figure 40.6 . The arcuate nucleus projects into other brain areas where one group of neurons stimulates appetite, and another group inhibits appetite. These neurons receive both long-term signals and short-term signals that indicate energy balance (see Table 40.4. Leptin produced by adipose tissue and insulin released by the pancreas are both long-term signals. Hormones such as ghrelin, cholescystokinin (CCK), glucagon-like peptide-2 (GLP-2), peptide YY (PYY) and several others are short-term acting signals meaning that they send meal to meal related signals via the bloodstream and the vagus nerve to the arcuate nucleus neurons.
>Liraglutide (Saxenda) is a glucagon-like peptide (GLP-1) agonist used in therapy for hyperglycaemia and type 2 diabetes to reduce glucose secretion and insulin response to glucose. The side effects of this drug include a reduction in appetite and food consumption with an increase in satiety.
straight from my notes

basically GLP-1 makes you less hungry because it lights up the part of your brain that keeps track of how much food you've eaten.

File: 1758699600984914 TT0331BT(...).jpg (330 KB, 1280x720)

330 KB JPG

>>76734157

Sin of gluttony. Nothing new.

Also the set weight shit is wrong. We have a set weight, but its not impossible to change. It mostly is the weight avrage laste three years. If you diet and become normal, and keep it for 1-3 years, your body has a new set weight in normal range.

Overcoming sins are hard tho. Denying yourself, and picking up your cross walking on the narrow path is work. Hard work when dealing with sins.

Repent, change and take the grace that thy lord gives you.

T. Former fatty

>>76736451
weight LOSS is defended, but weight GAIN is not defended. resetting your set weight doesn't help you avoid gaining back weight, so essentially what you're saying is "if you maintain weight loss, you will maintain your weight loss"