ControlsFreak
No bio...
User ID: 1422
ControlsFreak
2d ago
Yeah, I'mma need you to actually give a reason why you think I'm not engaging in good faith. Otherwise, this is pretty much just another bald accusation.
I just gave you a thorough explanation of what I believe, as you asked for. What have you given me in response? Where is your good faith?
In the words of my wife, she "knew", but didn't "know know".
After we got married, she just started eating about the same as what I was eating. Neither of us paid much attention. She didn't gain all that much, but realized she was gaining and wanted to stop/reverse it. I talked to her and set out some plans. Sure, she "knew" that how much you eat/calories had something to do with it, but she didn't "know know". She played along with my plan, but every other week, there was, "Maybe it's not working anymore!" "Maybe my metabolism has changed!" And so on. All these things correspond with the FUD that is constantly attached to the basic statements of the reality of the situation.
Guess what? It kept working. Every time. It wasn't until after multiple rounds of her thinking it wasn't working and me telling her to stop complaining and just do it that she "knew knew".
I think you've probably met yourself in the western world. I honestly would guess (I'm not sure, but I would guess) that you don't "know know". This is not a question about whether you or others are "vaguely aware". As I put it in my other comment:
Not in a, "Sure, calories theoretically matter, BUT [insert any of a million excuses people give to proceed to immediately ignore calories]," way, but in a genuine, "Ok, my weight actually does meaningfully correspond in the long run to the calories I consume and the calories I expend, even if my measurement of the phenomena is noisy," way.
I far more often meet people in the western world who believe some form of the former rather than the latter.
ControlsFreak
2d ago
I've already done so, twice.
I don't think you have. You haven't even given me a complete sentence.
If you believe I'm mistaken, please say what you do believe.
I wrote an entire long comment on what I believe.
Allow me to add some additional things I believe.
I believe that people shouldn't conflate describing a problem and fixing it. I also believe that people shouldn't falsely accuse others of doing so. I also believe that if you want me to take you seriously, you need to at least do a "Yes, but" instead of a "But".
Moreover, I believe that your entire initial comment was premised on this false accusation. If this accusation was false and irrelevant, then I believe that your entire original comment was irrelevant. I don't believe there's anything in it for me to respond to unless your accusation is true. Thus, an emphasis on determining its truth value. I believe I need more than two words to support your accusation. A complete sentence would be preferred. Alternatively, if you'd like to admit that your accusation was false, then I would be happy for you to have a redo on your original comment. I'd like to hear some of your thoughts that are responsive to my thoughts. I don't particularly like hearing your thoughts that are only oriented toward a strawman.
ControlsFreak
3d ago
I'm not sure what you're talking about. I don't see anything in there that describes any other sources of data that you think can, theoretically and practically, be brought to bear on this question. Nor do I see any indication of what sort of precision you think is necessary.
ControlsFreak
3d ago
If you can't think of any others, then just say that's the only one you can think of. If you have no thoughts on what sort of precision you think is necessary, then just say that you have no thoughts on what sort of precision is necessary. Ya know, instead of wasting our time.
ControlsFreak
3d ago
None of that is pointing to a place where I did the particular thing that you claimed was "the problem". That's two words and your own commentary. Two words is not enough to establish conflation of multiple things.
Please show me where I did as described by:
The problem with the calorie-based paradigm of weight-loss and gain isn't that its wrong, it's that its advocates conflate describing a process and fixing it.
At least a complete sentence would be preferred.
ControlsFreak
3d ago
What other sources of data do you think can, theoretically and practically, be brought to bear on this question? Is that literally the only one? What sort of precision do you think is necessary?
ControlsFreak
3d ago
The problem with the calorie-based paradigm of weight-loss and gain isn't that its wrong, it's that its advocates conflate describing a process and fixing it.
Where did I do this? This particular thing that you claim is done by such people whom you bin into a "camp". This particular thing that you claimed was "the problem". Where did I do that thing?
ControlsFreak
3d ago
The problem with the calorie-based paradigm of weight-loss and gain isn't that its wrong, it's that its advocates conflate describing a process and fixing it.
Where did I do that? This sounds like tilting at strawmen.
ControlsFreak
3d ago
You say many true and almost-true things.
Count calories all you want (and most people don't want to spend tons of time doing that), but what you eat is gonna determine whether you feel fine and satiated or hungry and miserable. Being hungry and miserable all the time is a great way to quit a diet. So why not skip the part where you count calories, eat the right foods, and don't feel hungry and miserable all the time.
Because the vast majority of people have absolutely no bollocks idea what the goal even is. They've been constantly lied to on this topic. How do you pick "the right foods" to eat? What are some plausible metrics? I would interpret from your comment that one plausible metric is "good satiety", but how do you even measure that? Do you have some normalization? Is it satiety per liter? Per kilogram? ...per calorie? You sort of can't even get off the ground if you're someone who has been taken in by the lies and doesn't believe that calories can possibly matter because I guess the body magically adjusts and makes them meaningless anyway or something.
Once a person actually acknowledges that calories matter. Not in a, "Sure, calories theoretically matter, BUT [insert any of a million excuses people give to proceed to immediately ignore calories]," way, but in a genuine, "Ok, my weight actually does meaningfully correspond in the long run to the calories I consume and the calories I expend, even if my measurement of the phenomena is noisy," way. Then a person can start to make meaningful choices and tradeoffs with eyes wide open. They won't fall for things like, "I heard once that nuts are the right foods, so I constantly snack on nuts all day."
Many people are never going to read a study on satiety of various foods. But if you get them to actually acknowledge that calories do matter (again, not in the fake and gay way where you immediately follow it by saying they don't matter), many folks can figure it out. "Oh, I can have that much of Food A and it's like the sort of equivalent of this much of Food B?!" And maybe they won't reconstruct satiety studies on their own, but they will likely be a lot more open to you bringing it up. At that point, they have a goal, and you have a valuable piece of information that can be very useful to their goal. If, instead, they think it's just about picking "the right foods", why do they care about that? "Haven't you heard, man? Avocados are like, a 'superfood'. That means they're the right food."
There are a lot of different ways for a person to ultimately put in place a selection of foods that satisfy their nutritional needs and also fit within their caloric budget. They may depend on many lifestyle factors. There is no one single "right way". If you're telling people that you have the magic one single right way, then first, you have to compete with all the other folks who have their own single magic right way, like the avocado guy or whatever. Those guys are also saying that calories are bullshit. Second, your magic right way may not actually fit with another person's lifestyle.
Instead, a person needs to understand that there are many ways, but calories do matter (yet again, not in a bullshit way where one immediately follows it by saying calories don't matter). One can certainly try different ways that are out there, but it is sure a useful diagnosis tool. "Joe is telling me to eat nothing but avocados. Since I know I'm targeting X calories, that means I can eat Y avocados. I guess I'll see if I can make this work?" Versus just randomly shooting in the dark aimlessly.
Once a person uses this diagnostic and is able to wrap their head around what the tradeoff space actually looks like, in terms of things like satiety as well, then they may not actually need to count calories anymore. But it's an invaluable tool for the people who are serious and real, whereas the vast majority of folks who forever chase the latest "right food" will never have enough grounding to even know what the point is.
ControlsFreak
3d ago
What sources of data do you think can, theoretically and practically, be brought to bear on this question? What sort of precision do you think is necessary?
ControlsFreak
5d ago
Have I changed my opinion on weight loss? No.
So were you right? Has your experience been like what you had expected?
I expect the required measures to be extreme; exercising for several hours every other day, chugging water all day to kill hunger, moving to a cold climate to burn more calories maintaining body temperature, eating bland food like Soylent and MealSquares, avoiding social occasions like birthdays and weddings so that you are not tempted to break your diet, etc. In the worst case, they might have to move to an isolated rural area in Alaska to avoid just driving down to the Walmart for a snack raid. It'd be something like a medical residency, where you endure four years of hell in exchange for a greatly improved rest of your life.
Did you do that stuff?
For what? What rule? Be serious.
More options
Context Copy link