CICO is truly and finally over.Keto has won.
>>77278723ACKdiet by the carnitard fraud who got his clinical trial retracted because he tried to hide the primary outcome of his ketard study. Americans and their scamconomy at it again.
>humans arent a bomb calorimeter that burn every single carbon-containing molecule you give it under near perfectly constant pressure in pure constant oxygen in a hermetically sealed environmentAbsolutely shocking !!
Lyle would have feel day with this clown
>>77278795Lyle is small and weak
cellulose has about 400 Cals per 100 grams yet you can eat 10000 calories worth of paper and you wont get fat! this means CICO is a lie!
>>77278723>-witzOpinion discarded, ovens warmed, lampshade needed
>>77278802CICO stage of grief>Bargaining : ermmm surface area ! Ermm fiber is actual digestible ! Ermm micronutrients dont matter krebs cycle is a hoax!!! They're all CICO anyways !!>>77278804East germanic name, retard.
>rules of thumb have exceptions, so we should ignore them as rule of thumby'all retards anyway
Oh another ketoshill thread by ketoschizo
>>77278795The fuck is a feel day
>>77278723>t. coping fattyCICO denier posters are fatties.
>>77278723>one guy tried this one weird trick! Your doctors hate him!
skinnyfat reddit cope
Kill yourself.
>>77278840Demonstrably untrue, he guy in op mogs you to oblivion
>>77278723I don't give a fuck. how hard is it to stop eating. Imagine being such a faggot you have to go into ketosis to stuff 6000 extra calories of pizza in your retarded mouth,
faggots lose their shit when you mention keto
>>77278723>twitter screencap thread*yawn*
>>77278834low IQ for "field day"
>>77278834He's gonna feel him all over because Dyele Kentucky fried chicken is a gay iraki
>mediterranean/okinawan style diet and don't eat goyslop>do one 48h or two 24h fasts a week when you need to cut weight until you reach your target weight>eat above maintenance when trying to gain muscle mass, don't fixate on protein intakeNutrition solved for good in three simple steps. Stop listening to chiropractor "doctors" on youtube about nutrition.
>>77279003>>mediterranean/okinawan style dietThat would mean eating a lot of charcuterie, animal fat and olive oil aka even more fat by volume and percentage, raw fish, raw pork, raw muscle meat, lots of sodium and cheese and dairy, wine, a fuckton of starch...The opposite of what dieticians shill. Also mediteranean means Fuck all the french dont eat like egyptians, cypriots dont eat like moroccans, the spanish dont eat like albanians. The only common ingredient between all of these is cheese and olive oil.>Muh vegetables and greens The only time they consume considerable quantities of these is during lent fast, which is what those fraudulent "studies" forsawNice little touch with the iceberg to prove you're a midwit dunning kruger who thought he figured out everythingo
>>77279015>these is cheese and olive oil.Oh yeah and eggsThese three kill you and clog your arteries boooo evil fat and cholesterol the fat you wear etc
>>77279015t. "Dr." Eric Berg subscriber
>>77278723>PLEASE NO I DONT WANT TO COUNT CALORIES IN AND OUT ILL SUCK YOUR COCK M8 I'LL EAT YOUR SHIT
>>77279030Nice to meet you, tho i dont know who that guy is
>>77279036>calorietards are leftists who watch that gay show I forget the name ofThis is obvious but thank you for confirming it.CICO is fundamentally leftism.Calorie believers get all their government recommended mrna injetions, too.
>>77279146>bringing identity politics into fucking everythingkill yourself holy fucking shit. A literal parasite to society.
>>77279176>just eat plants and track your calories in a diary, CHUDS!Lol, no.
>>77278723>Norwitz
>>77278723>Jew with an AI slop thumbnailNot watchin
What food should I eat to try a 9% protein 91% fat diet?
He says you have to eat little protein. How does this prove keto is right? Doesn’t it do the opposite?
>>77279235Keto vs regular bodybuilding cutting diet is about fat vs carbohydrate intake
>>77279235Also i feel sorry for you if at any point did you feel like he even suggested that you "should" or that he was "telling you to do it". I dont know what behavioral disorder does this, probably autism, but you're a genuine retard and it's very common on this website for people to take a suggestion or thought experiment as an order
>>77279239No, it is about protein and fat. You're just ignoring a huge part of keto to somehow be “right” on 4chan.
>>77278746You're right, they're not! The data gathered from those experiments can be used to calculate total energy obtained through the chemical digestion process thanks to a thing we all learned about in high school called "Hess's Law." It would be embarrassing to not know that though, right anon?
>>77279146>>77279184meds
>>77279247Thank god the human body isnt a two steps bomb calorimeter either so hess's law isnt an argument here.
>>77279244https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-carbohydrate_diet#Ketogenic_dietSorry your wrong.
According to this cicotranny >77279247Humans shit carbon dioxideLo'
>>77279252So what you've just demonstrated is that you're either not yet in high school, an adult so stupid they do not know basic high school knowledge, or you're engaging in bad faith, because there's no way you'd type what you just did if you knew what Hess's law was and why "the human body isn't a two step bomb calorimeter" doesn't make sense or discount anything about Hess's Law as a tool to understand complex reaction pathways better. Would you like me to explain it to you, since you seem to have a very poor understanding of the subject, or are you engaging in bad faith?
>>77279261>Humans shit carbon dioxideWell yes, you exhale carbon dioxide, more than you breathe in. Where do you think it comes from?
>>77279262>>77279264>Humans use every single gram of biological matter they ingest and then absorb pure oxygen then hermetically seal their body and only exhale back pure carbon dioxide with little if any residue. POOP DOESNT FUCKING EXIST YOU CONSPIRACY THEORISTKek
>>77279235Keto is high fat. He ate an extremely high fat diet and it increased his metabolism.
>>77279262Honestly just shut the fuck up, you're an embarrassment to your entire family.
>>77278723I've eaten keto for nearly a year and lost >60 lbs doing it. Threads like this do nothing but push people away from whatever the topic. Cico is the only way to lose meaningful weight. You can eat keto, carnivore, paleo, vegan, nothing but carbs, doesn't matter. If you input less than you output, then your body will lose weight. The only thing that diet influences is overall health, but we can't have honest conversations about that either
>>77279291CICO fails every time.
>>77279291>If you input less than you output, then your body will lose weightNot necessarily, not a hard fact or hardcoded truth. This isnt CICO btw and can be expressed simply in food quantity (which doesn't translate to CICO directly)Cico says you can linearly gain or lose weight indefinitely, this is complete biological bogus
>>77278723How much juice do I have to take for it to work?
>>77279296>>77279295I rest my case
>>77279305None. But you might have to eat a few eggs. Not too many because they are high in protein. Maybe skip the egg whites.
>>77279306I accept your concession
>>77279321i pooped your pants
you have to be carbmaxxing
>>77279360>eat the carbs>get the mrna injectionsThank you government.
>>77279272>things people didn't sayso you're engaging in bad faith, got it. Have a good day, good luck with whatever condition you have.>>77279289so you're engaging in bad faith, got it. Have a good day, good luck with whatever condition you have.
>>77278723This dude lies as he breathes. It has to be his goal to trick as many people as possible into making bad choices. Either that or he's schizophrenic.
>>77279235There's two other options to fill the 91% of your remaining calories. Basically the sugar diet, Keto, or a mix. Basically every malady of our world is caused by sugar so Keto is the logical option
>>77279397i can just tell you were coerced into the jab and now you make impotent protests like this post
>>77279563Get a load of this total faggot. You got his number, freud.
>>77278723>2/5) Let’s return to the controlled trial, then my n = 1. Healthy men reduced their protein intake down to 9% Calories from protein for 5 weeks.They were then fed to maintain their body weight. In the end, reducing dietary protein increased energy expenditure by ~600 calories per day.No extra exercise. No lifestyle changes. And no significant muscle mass loss. (muscle-sparing hormones increased)>Over three weeks that created a 6,000+ Calorie surplus. I still lost 6.4 pounds.3 weeks....6000 calories spread over 21 days is a little less than 300 calories a day. This study is retarded clickbait that doesn't even touch on NEAT. I fluctuate between 1-10 lbs a day just depending on water. I feel dumber for even looking at his twitter.Thanks for rage baiting me.
>>77278723Nigga everyone can test this shit. Eat less lose weight eat more gain weight wowwwww. Eat too much of something = bad wowwwwww rocket science wowwww
>social media phd grifterI'm sure he will farm ad revenue from all the retards out there
How is this a real person
>>77279869He's a performative hylic. They're not really people.
Nobody has ever gotten fat eating nothing but steak and eggs. Counting calories is for retards and people too weak-willed to give up eating carb-heavy, seed-oil-ridden junk.Calorie counting is a cope by people who want to get in shape but don't want to give up eating junk. That's all there is to it.Not only that but despite being touted as an absolute truth, it's unscientific as fuck. A calorie is a unit of measurement for HEAT. Works well when you're studying and designing engines, electric heaters, nuclear reactors... using the same logic on the human body is a garbage pseudoscience.Experiments have been repeatedly done in which they scientifically disproved CICO by giving the exact same animals the exact same amount of "calories" from different sources, and they gained or lost body weight at vastly differing rates.There's also definite proof that the numbers of "calories" we get from carbs, fats and so on are false. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIdxuNMbOlQ
>>77278723>last year I read a paper last yeargood morning saar
>>77279912Nice samefag OPNobody wants to do your keto grift meme diet. You should eat some poisonous mushrooms and a gigantic bag of cocks before you kill yourself.
>>77278738it's a jew
>>77279912This is true.Calorie counting was invented by the sugar industry to sell sugar. It's not even a real diet strategy. It's a sugar marketing plan.
>ackshually my LDL of 4,000 is healthy and I can eat 12,000 calories per day on keto while losing weight>what's your evidence for that?>it's in my study>where in your study?>that's antisemiticI hate social media grifters so much.
>>77280066The left can't meme.
>>77279912>eat more stuff gain weight>eat less stuff lose weightHow do you explain this
>>77280072Nice try, shill.
>>77280073This doesn't answer the questionShow me a single person that stays fat in a famineYou can't
>>77279912Once you read up on dietary induced thermogenesis the study makes perfect sense.On average, 10% of our daily energy expenditure is spent on digesting food. Processed food is much, much easier to digest. Hence:>two groups of mice eat the same food>one group spends less energy digesting the food than the other>this leads to a caloric surplus>the mice get fat
>>77279244>everyone has to use my special definitioncan't you just learn what words mean?
>>77280040>Calorie counting was invented by the sugar industry to sell sugarIf you check out the link I posted you'll see it was invented by the US military as a way to not have to give their soldiers as much meat and animal products, which are more expensive, and give them grains and plants instead, which are cheaper.
>>77278723Eaten calories =/= absorbed calories
>>77279706I ate more and lost weight. Now what?
>>77280075It's hormones.
>>77280074This whole thread is started by posting a study where people eat _more_ calories and lose weight.CICO has been falsified. It is unsalvageable.
>you can give yourself massive diarrhea or throw up and eat 6,000 calories a day and lose weight, checkmate atheistsCICO has never been broken in a metabolic ward. Outside of a metabolic ward it happens because people use poor measurement techniques and can't comprehend water weight, glycogen, and food in the gut.
i think it makes more sense to think if you feed your body 500 grams of pure fat in a day (assuming this clickbait 6k is actually literal) you shit most of it out
>>77280547and it won't be a pleasant shit, but one should strive to have a diet that lets you absorb as much of the food as possible
>>77280547>>77280534Fat is simply more thermogenic like protein, meaning your body needs to put extra energy into breaking it down and absorbing it. Sugar takes little energy to absorb>>77280275Kek cicofags are absolutely in shambles
>>77280489>This whole thread is started by posting a study where people eat _more_ calories and lose weight.Yes, that was the presumption made by OP to try to propose a new model in place of CICO to explain nutrition and weight. You were asked a question that your new model should be able to answer. It's weird that you keep avoiding the direct question being asked.>CICO has been falsified. It is unsalvageable.Then the new model you're proposing should be able to answer this question directly: How can someone in a famine lose weight?Any reply which is not a direct answer to this question framed from the keto model is a concession that you're wrong, it's really not a hard question to answer.
>>77280574>Kek cicofags are absolutely in shamblesSo you're saying the human body absorbs 100% of the energy eaten with no waste byproducts? I don't understand how else what he might have said could be wrong.
>>77280596Eating nothing lowers insulin thereby unlocking stored body fat to be used for energy.CICO has still been falsified.
>>77280604What mechanism is lowering the insulin? There's some kind of signal going on, no? That's like answering the question "How do cars move?" by saying "The engine moves the car." You've not actually answered the question in any meaningful way.
>>77280607Take a look at the pic related in the post you are replying to.
>>77280604>when your CI is lower than your CO, you lose weight>BUT IT'S NOT CICO THOUGH CICO BTFO!!!!!!!!!!functionally illiterate sub 70 IQ indians have been ruining this website for yearskill yourself and leave my website forever
>>77280600I'm saying that as the discussion goes on, cicoschizos quickly devolve from "the human body is an efficient machine that absorbs 100% of the calories in the food you give it with a very very small margin, hormons, metabolism, krebs cycle, antinutrients etc dont matter the only thing that matter is your tdee (heigh/weight)" to "erm akchually surface area, hormons, the fat you eat is the fat you wear, akchually it's just a unit of measure, ermm hormon differences are very marginal..."This is the sign of shaky ground and not being convinced with your own beliefs. Some of you argue just to get a few minutes of being smug.
>>77280609The chart does not provide a mechanistic explanation, and you'd have to be retarded to think it does. I am asking a simple question here, anon. I don't think you actually know what you're talking about...
>>77280604If the body burns stored fat for energy if you don't eat anything then how is "eat less, lose weight" falsified
>>77280611Pic related is textbook CICO.It is false. The sugar is actually more fattening because it is a powdered carb. The whole food is less fattening. Therefore CICO is false.Body composition is a result of hormones not calorie measurements.
>>77280616Because you can eat more and lose weight. Just like in the OP. It depends entirely on hormones.Here's another example:>I expected that even though I was eating 2500 calories a day, an increase of 500 calories a day for me, that I would not gain much weight, I already knew that eating fat and protein doesn't make you fat.>The biggest and most unexpected change was losing so much body fat in the 30 days. I lost 19.6 pounds by the end of the monthhttps://ketogasm.com/the-bacon-experiment-interview/You can also eat less and gain weight. For example if you switch from a whole food diet to powdered processed carbs. Or if you inject insulin.CICO is totally falsified.
>>77280619>The sugar is actually more fatteningEvidence?>>77280625>Because you can eat more and lose weightMore than what? Your resting calorie burn rate? Show this>>77280625>Here's another exampleI'd like an actual trial or meta-analysis rather than just a guy
I have been experimenting on myself and i have come to the conclusion that:Cico determines how fat you areandtestostetone determines how much muscle you can grow
>>77280649See pic related.Flat calorie theorists have to pretend(?) to be retarded because they can't argue the facts.
>>77280654Insulin determines how fat you are. Testosterone determines how muscular you are.Body composition is entirely a result of hormones. CICO was and always will be a hoax.
>>77280670There's nothing about energy expenditure on this, can I see the study
>>77280673This occurs biomechanically because the inability to use insulin results in the inability to absorb energy which means the body uses its own. It isn't incompatible with cico at all and is if anything a demonstration of itLack of insulin use is essentially starvation. It's why diabetics lose weight
>>77280691Diet induced obesity in ad-libitum fed mice.CICO is over and done with. Believing flat calorie theory is more shameful than believing flat earth.
>>77280698Reading this study. The primary calorie source in this study is fat and according to it the mice fed fats gained the most weight. Doesn't this go against the claims of keto
>>77280697>cico is true even when it is notFlat calorie theorists are delusional.
>>77280709No the study disproves CICO.Calories have absolutely nothing to do with obesity. See the highlighted groups?>same calories>same macros>literally identical feed>different body compositionThe difference is that one group ate powdered food. Powdered carbs cause an exaggerated hormonal response.
>>77280489Sounds like there were more in, and then even more out.CICO is God, as certain as gravity. Now show me your seethe lol
>>77280775>CICO is GodTypical flat calorie theorist.
>>77278738No carnivore is going to advocate eating less protein you retard, use your fucking brain. Carnivore and keto are also almost diametrically opposed because you have to be low-protein to enter ketosis. Vegan midwits constantly equate lowcarb and keto (a subset of lowcarb, not its equivalent) when the vast majority of people doing low carb are also going heavy on protein.
>>77280963Hold up. If keto can't eat carbs, and can't eat protein, wtf are they eating ? Pure fat only ?
>>77281053He's lying for the sake of the argument, keto is independent of protein intake but most keto diets out there are moderate to high in protein. You will never break ketosis with protein intake and what i assume that retard is thinking about is that meat spikes you insulin as well. Everything does you >>77280963 retarded jew even fat lol
>>77278869the guy in the OP is a grifter who doesn't even believe the bullshit he's saying, he just knows retards like you will give him money for saying it
>>77281080He's experimenting because he has the wherewithal and time and knowledge for it, nowhere does he tell you to follow course. I've been seeing (not particularly watching him extensively to be honest) him for a couple years now, his whole shtick is >There's acquired concepts in diet discussions that are presented as undeniable hardcoded truths, i will pave the way for further research and experimentation by breaking the dogma with my own body first of all since mechanical and lab rat trial take years before research on human is approvedHow i see this 100+ reply thread is that his idea is working, people are basically indoctrinated into some beliefs and challenging them never leads to honest conversation but rather a clash of dogmas and egos. No one so far has came up with any rebuttal or explanation or counter-idea. It's all witty smug comments "oh it's akchually just cico everything is sick-oh, that's just say-ko brah".
>>77280769>Powdered carbs cause an exaggerated hormonal response.From what I'm reading the study proposes that the reason why this is the case is because the powder is easier for the body to absorb and thus requires less energy expenditure for digestion. From what I can tell there is no actual chemical difference between the soft and hard food. Do you disagree with the study's conclusion? How is cico disproved by this? At the very least keto is not affirmed by this at all because the mice that became the fattest in the hard food group are the ones that had the most fats, which is the opposite of what we should see in keto, and the researchers state that high fat diets are the most efficient way to create obese mice
>>77281137>From what I can tell there is no actual chemical difference between the soft and hard food.There is tho.
>>77281168>There is thoOkay, what is it
>>77281196Blended eggs. Crushed leafy green vegetables.
>>77281219Oh yeah, boiled eggs also. Gelatin when in contact with liquids then cooled down long enough. Both behave differently
>>77281090n=1 is retarded. If you have ever taken a statistics class you would know that. There are WAY too many random biases we are completely unaware of. He should know this but instead sits there puts retarded dangerous information out that gullible retards like OP will take and run with."Challenging" the status quo is low quality evidence just confuses people and promotes misinformation. He also admits to taking cholesterol lowering medication, so no he does not believe his own bullshit.
>>77281258Your post is redundant because i already explained why an initial n=1 trial is needed to speed up the process of research. >dangerous information>Eggs and meat are dangerousSure whatever downie
>>77281258Yea don't explore or try to improve your life that's just n=1 don't be retarded
>>77281266Yeah a high LDL is dangerous per the existing literature. You can imply he is just "asking questions" but it's clear he has a narrative he is trying to push and persuade people with. Otherwise he wouldn't be posting it publicly for idiots to copy in the accessible way he does.
>>77281304Wrong. Weak correlation
>>77281310Sorry not going to believe random 4chan user over every cardiovascular organization in the world. I know your favorite YouTuber sold you a good grift.
>>77278723Except low protein works if you do low fat high carb as well (sugar diet, FGF21). Keto is just another way to do it. In fact didn't Norwitz basically learn about this from trying to debunk the sugar diet and accidentally proving it right?High sugar is more efficient at stimulating FGF21 than high fat.
>>77279560>Basically every malady of our world is caused by sugarBut that's wrong you fucking retard. PUFA/seed oils are at fault for most of those problems.
>>77281424Why would he debunk it, keto doesn't deny the principle that krebs cycle is one of the most dictative factors of fat fluctuation (not just weight loss or gain, tho some methods result in water loss more than anything else)
>>77281428It's the combination of both + pesticides from plants. Sugar on it's own is harmless yeah, but combined with fat it becomes a metabolic disaster. There's no high fat high sugar food in nature. Even milk is 1/3 protein 1/3 carbohydrates 1/3 fats, and milk is pretty bad for weight loss but excellent for weight gain. That's as fattening as you get in nature and it's still very easy on your metabolism. Imagine the disaster of a donut or even a stir fry rice
>>77281137The powdered and solid food is the same food just one of them is powdered.The authors speculate about why the two groups eating the same calories had different body composition results. They apparently were unaware of the different hormonal response. When you know about the hormonal response difference between solid and pureed food (See: >>77280484) it becomes obvious that it is the hormonal response which caused the powdered food to be fattening while the solid food was not.
>>77281439>sugar>harmlessEat tons of refined sugar with zero fat whatsoever and watch your metabolism get obliteratedBut yeah it's worse when you fuck your randell cycle by combining both in large amounts
>>77279235You know, for how often people fight over yhe keto diet, it seems very little people actually know what it is.
>>77278723Just eat less if you want to lose weight and eat more if you want to gain weight. If your weight isn't going down, eat even less. If it's not going up, eat even more. It's the simplest goddamn thing in the world but you retards still find a way to argue about it.
>>77281571Meanwhile in reality
This Keto vs CICO shit feels super astroturfed and fake.
>>77281573meanwhile in real reality.
>>77281574What do you mean astroturfed and fake?CICO is a fake diet promoted by the sugar industry. Flat calorie theory caused everyone to become fat.Keto is old wisdom that carbs are fattening. It cures obesity.
keto schitzo is losing his mind that i lost 29 pounds in a month, and i still eat potato's for dinner.
>>77281219This isn't in the study so idk what you're referring to. The study says the food was identical for all groups save for whether it was soft or hard>>77281531Do you have any evidence that they "just didn't know?" What would cause a hormonal response difference in identical nutrient intake if not the fact that one form is easier to absorb than the other, thus provoking all of the biological signs of having consumed more food?
>>77281571>>77281580I love how you are so assmad about keto that you have to make memes that are such an obvious, bare faced lie.>ArnoldArnold's diet, even though it wasn't full keto, was low in carbs and high in fat and protein.He himself said in interviews that he never tracked any calories, macros or anything for many years, so he wasn't practicing CICO calorie-counting.Source: https://www.menshealth.com/uk/nutrition/a44316440/arnold-schwarzenegger-muscle-building-diet/>BoogieDo you have any proof that he has followed keto for any substantial amount of time?Carbschizo meltdowns are getting sillier every day.
>>77281881yes since ice cream is keto
>>77281881hot dog buns are keto right...?
>>77281881AAAAH HE'S EATING SPAGHETTI HE'S GOING TO GET FAT
>>77281887>>77281890>>77281892>*Take picture of anon eating a ribeye*Heh look at yourself ketoschizo, heart attack incoming
>>77281887>>77281890>>77281892All of these pictures are literally of him eating something for a movie role or literal decades after his career in bodybuilding was over.It's so cute to see you so desperately grasp at straws, Carbschizo.
>>77281605They didn't mention hormones so they must not have known that powdered food causes a different hormonal response.Body composition is determined by hormones.
>>77281582Why is every single bodybuilder who tracks their calories meticulously able to modulate their body weight in any way they see fit?
>>77281983"Insulin-induced lipohypertrophy in people without diabetes is extremely rare because chronic subcutaneous insulin injections are uncommon in non-diabetic individuals."your post doesn't make sense since its not about food.
>>77279289Yes. A simpletons brain often steers towards anger once bested.Sad, but also notably funny and slightly adorable.
>>77278723We've been saying CICO is an over-simplification for years and years. It's really just people new to fitness who think calorie-counting is gospel, and people stuck in outdated bodybuilding magazine ideas who cling to that shit. The hormonal model does acknowledge that energy balance is real but just that it serves the grander narrative of hormones. Ben Bikman has done tons of work on this and it has blown away the previous 80s/90s understanding of calories on which much of the fitness industry still clings.It has become especially obvious that there's more to it ever since carnivore became popular what 10 years ago? And veganism for the opposite reasons.Tons of people eating more in calorie terms but losing body fat, and sometimes even gaining muscle while losing bodyfat. It makes no sense under the reductionist CICO understanding but it's actually pretty simple and obvious from a hormonal understanding of body composition. CICO is only really a valid when all other factors are constant, like hormones. If you're eating a very constant diet, your lifestyle doesn't change, your training doesn't change, then you can fairly track weight loss via CICO. But as soon as you introduce hormonal adaptations it all goes out of the window. This is why "noob gains" break CICO, why roiding breaks CICO, and why diets that drastically change hormones like carnivore break CICO. Because all of these things affect what really matters - hormones.>>77282003Because they are doing so in an environment of highly stable hormones. If you remove their drugs and they track their calories with the same precision what happens? Their body composition gets drastically worse. It's not a mystery...
>>77278831I wonder why he doesn't get rangebanned
>>77279247>public highschoolI am an impoverished man, but my parents were not. Disgraced nobility am I. Better than you, a peasant descended from peasants.
>>77281892>HE ATE A NON-LETHAL DOSE OF ARSENIC AND DIDN'T DUE, THEREFORE EATING ARSENIC IS FINE!You will always be fat.
>>77280484Keep telling yourself that, fatty.CICO works.
>>77282125>We've been saying CICO is an over-simplificationIt's not, it is a fact. But it's a useless fact. Because it doesn't tell you how to lose weight without compromising your health.Avocado has the same amount of calories as a Snicker's. But people don't get fat off avocado.
>>77282169>If I starve myself I will lose weight.I can eat til I'm full and still lose weight, you can't. That's why you're fat and why I'm fit.
>>77282171>You'll not lose weight if you starve yourselfOk, fatty.>I'm fitPost body.
>>77278723>Keto has won.Explain fruitarian skeletons then. Or the fairy princess diet.By now, I think the ancients had it right with their humoral pathology system.
>>77281983>They didn't mention hormones so they must not have known that powdered food causes a different hormonal response.But they do speak about hormones in the study. Additionally the fact that more weight is added implies a different hormonal response. The study states that this is likely due to more calories being ingested from the food. What you posted doesn't actually address what I'm askingThe study demonstrates that increased surface area for digestion results in more nutrient absorption and that the more fat is present the more fat will be added to a mouse's body composition. How does any of this disprove CICO?
>>77282202>The study demonstrates that increased surface area for digestion results in more nutrient absorption and that the more fat is present the more fat will be added to a mouse's body composition. How does any of this disprove CICO?Because 9kcal of carbs don't make you fat like 9kcal of fat do. Is that so hard to udnerstand for the darker races?
>>77282222>Because 9kcal of carbs don't make you fat like 9kcal of fat do.Except the study that was posted says nothing about this, so where are you getting this claim from?
>>77282222>>77282229In fact, the study actively disproves this by way of the primary method of weight gain being surface area of ingested material. The mice study has no grounding to make this claim at all, it's pure personal conjecture
>>77282131Propably the meta is to get more activity on a dying forum. But post count doesn't correlate with new posters, so it's in fact poisoning the well. Older posters move to other platforms & new ones stop coming. Soon it'll just be fad shilling, bots and jeets. Kind of a micro simulation of reality.
>>77278723Ketofags have to lower themselves to an AI jew now?
>>77282025Insulin is a hormone that causes fat retention. Foods that raise insulin cause fat retention.
>>77282169Works for me. Sorry about your obesity and struggles with hunger.
>>77282457>both bodies have more fat than muscle>left is skinnyfat>right is fat>both are fat
>>77282518Seethe.
>>77282534Cope, fattie.
>>77282568Post body.
