TeknOShEeP
15d ago
Calorie counting has historically and scientifically been shown to have just about zero impact on dieting and positive health decisions. It works for a tiny minority of people. I called it the diet for people that love accounting.
I frankly do not believe you here. Citations are needed, and I having a very difficult time conceiving of how a plan deliberately discarding information critical to its success would somehow be more successful than one that actually acquires said information.
TeknOShEeP
17d ago
Okay, you are off on some tangent responding to a staw man I cannot even conceive of. I have not, and am not saying anything about experienced levels of hunger, or the theory of mind of an obese person. All I am saying is that the basis of a successful diet must be the recognition of the fundamental equation that determines whether body mass increases, decreases, or remains the same. Use whatever strategies you want to manage both sides, but to claim that CICO is somehow disproven, as OP does, is grossly incorrect.
TeknOShEeP
17d ago
Oh no, I have not forgotten the maintenance nightmare aspect, but thats not exclusive to swing wings (ie the C-5 galaxy makes both the B-1 and F-14 look easy).
No, the original argument against variable geometry (aside from systems complexity) was that changing the sweep, chord length, and span mid-flight would result in an extremely taxing and dangerous variance of flight characteristics that would drive the pilot mad, and then into an undesirable air-ground interface. The claim was that this is designing the optimum plane on paper instead of paying attention to how they are actually flown, and to be fair this was entirely valid logic if you based it on a) the F-111s development and early flight testing and b) publically available info about variable geometry aircraft.
But of course the DoD and the MIC had actually learned a few things, and the Tomcat and Bone both turned out to be excellent performers with long service histories. If you look at the whole batch of variable geomtery aircraft all born around the same time, with the F-111, MiG-27, Tu-22M, and the Tornado the idea as a whole seems to actually have produced highly successful aircraft, despite their inherent complexity.
TeknOShEeP
17d ago
I am not advocating for dismissing anyones self-control issues, in fact I think they are fundamental for any successful diet plan. All I am advocating for is recognition of fundamental truths that, for reasons I do not understand, are vociferously denied by a portion of those interested in loosing weight.
If you do not have the self control to stop eating in abundance, plan around that- maybe substitute foods that can be eaten in large amounts with few calories. Maybe have that donut, but as a treat for a good exercise session. Many wiser people have many better thoughts. But throwing up your hands and saying "CICO is wrong" is not going to help.
TeknOShEeP
17d ago
be indentical yet have TDEEs that vary by over a thousand calories despite being nearly equally active
Either we have very different definitions of the word "identical", or i am going to need a source on that claim. It seems to be farcically untrue at face value.
I'm sorry, but you have disproven nothing, and your comments about willpower are frankly irrelevant. Willpower is just a modifier to your calories input, and calories output. If you completely lack the will to put down the donut and go for a run/swim/whatever, and have no interest in balancing or reversing the energy flux of your body, then sorry your ass is fat and will get fatter barring external intervention. For proof of this, I refer you to Novo Nordisk's stock price.
All successful diets must deal with the fundamental truth of CICO, it cannot be otherwise. You can adopt any number of strategies for managing the two halves of the equation, but you cannot pretend the equation does not exist. The universe has no complaint department.
TeknOShEeP
17d ago
CICO is not a diet plan, it is a description of the fundamental physics that govern bodyweight. My comment is not an endorsement of any diet plan, but a reaction against the, as demonstrated by the storm of replies, substantial contingent of people who will do absolutely anything other than admit you must create a net gradient in a body's energy flux to achieve change.
The strawman is comments about "willpower" or "different basal metabolic rates"- these are simply inputs to be considered but not a reason to pretend the fundamental equation is not what it is.
TeknOShEeP
17d ago
Yes, this is trivially true for say, tall people burn more energy by virtue of having more surface area to radiate heat.
Overfeeding studies show enormous individual variability as to what percentage of surplus calories are stored as fat or burned off.
I have yet to see one of these, properly controlling for things like height and weight, that demonstrates an effect I would call "enormous variability". Low single digit percentages, sure.
TeknOShEeP
17d ago
"Yo momma so fat she halted the expansion of the universe!"
TeknOShEeP
17d ago
You are completely misstating the point of CICO- it is the fundamental truth of body weight from which all other successes must derive, but it is not a prescription for success. Upthread 07mk has a good description- you have to look at the CI and CO components and make for former smaller than the latter. Whateve strategies work for you to accomplish that goal is your path to success, but denying fundamental truths of physics are not one of them.
TeknOShEeP
18d ago
A) CICO necessarily follows from the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which is perhaps the most confirmed scientific theory of all time. The day you disprove it is the day physics gets really, really weird and reality as we know it ceases to make sense. So CICO is a theory in the sense that conservation of energy is a theory, which is to say it is as cold and hard of an absolute as we know to exist in the universe, no amount of obesity cheerleading will change that.
B) The effects noted in the study are frankly not that big. Like a 3% increased likelihood of active brown adipose tissue, which might increase total energy expenditure of the bodies resting metabolism of up to 5%. So conceiving in the winter gives your baby a slightly higher chance of being slightly better at burning energy, which is only a benefit if you live in a post-scarsity world.
"You eat too much and you dont exercise enough" remains the core of any and all successful diet criticism.
TeknOShEeP
18d ago
is a mostly French thing
Thats because French Aerospace engineers scoffed at things like the F-14 and the B-1 as needlessly complicated and would never fulfill their claimed potential and focused on sexy delta wings instead. (To be fair, in the case of the F-14 they had no way of knowing the sweep was automatically controlled by the air data computer, which just so happened to be the first practical implementation of the microprocessor in the world greatly simplifying the pilots workload, and kept very hush-hush). Given that both aircraft are widely regarded as among the best of their types, and pure delta wings are a thing of the past, history has rendered its silent verdict on the matter.
TeknOShEeP
19d ago
Contra point on Canada. PP was never the "pro-Trump" pick. He's Trudeau lite, instrad of Carney as Trudeau 2.0. Trump supporters cheering him on are missing the point just as badly as Trump haters cheering his downfall. Frankly there is no pro-Trump option in the Laurentian elite, and there is unlikely to ever be with the current arrangement of Canadaian politics. You would need one of two things to happen- a PM from Alberta, or the current Canadian politcal class to have it hammered into their skulls that they are truly a vassal of the US, probably by a trade war that crashes their economy but leaves America unnoticably effected.
TeknOShEeP
25d ago
it could be better
Yes and that is the point of this excercise. Making things better for the average American.
denying prosperity is not honest
I think the average American is being quite honest when they say rising costs for everything combined with stagnant wages does not leave them feeling very prosperous. This recent canard of insisting that the working class disbelieve their lying eyes and consider themselves lucky is very strange to me, especially since it usually comes from those who claim to be advocates for the everyman.
13% over last year.
And theres approximately 10,000% more media hysterics now than in say, 2022 when it was down roughly 20%. This is not whatsboutism, but rather praise for the recognition then that markets get overheated and correct, and number does not always go up. I remain unmoved, and will contiue to DCA as always.
TeknOShEeP
25d ago
peace
I would not call the state of the world today "peaceful".
prosperity
For whom? Real incomes have been down for a generation for the average American worker, pretty much every other challenge the working class faces is downstream of that. Also, if you are referring to the stock market a) it is not the economy, and b) as of this minute up on the day.
I like the new term "Panicans" which very succintly describes those for whom a bit of chaos and correction is a world changing event, and contrasts nicely with the Stoics, who just want to have a pint and wait for it to all blow over.
TeknOShEeP
28d ago
Certainly a possibility, but I think it unlikely.
TeknOShEeP
28d ago
Yes, because yes. 1945-1979 saw a massive expansion in the American manufacturing sector with wages that were, adjusting for inflation, median wages, and CoL, comparatively much higher than they are today. Now will a new American manufacturing boom look like that one? No, it will be much more heavily automated and high tech, but the funny thing about robots is they still need a large number of people to operate, maintain, repair, upgrade, and pioneer more uses for them. A factory I worked at actually hired more workers despite completely automating the actual assembly line and ended up passing out a lot of raises as people skilled up.
TeknOShEeP
28d ago
Happily, MAGA does not have to choose between just the two options you listed. There is a middle path where the globalist agenda is crushed via onshoring manufacturing which yes, will increase costs for the coastal elite who own big corporations, but will also raise wages for the working and middle class.
I think it is a serious error to assume the MAGA coalition is held together by a desire to "own the libs". Thats what some figures may cathartically tweet about, but the actual voters that matter care about their jobs, the cost of groceries and morgtages, and their kids education. On all of these the proggo left has failed misrably the past few years, which is why in 2024 the GOP, not the DNC, won the lion's share of the working class vote.
TeknOShEeP
29d ago
the disaster predicted by the experts is already underway
Currently SPY is down roughly 3.9% on the day. Which is certainly a bit rough compared to the normal +/- 1% daily churn, but is a roughly 1% type event, so something you would expect to happen more than once a year, but not more than a few times. I am unmoved.
TeknOShEeP
29d ago
and the Heard and McDonald islands, which are uninhabited.
But are controlled by Australia. So they get Australia's rate to avoid some enterprising schmuck setting up a nominal presence there to circumvent the tarrifs.
Why? Crimea is, and has been for the past two centuries, culturally, linguistically, and economically Russian. It was only part of Ukraine because Krushchev did a Kruschev in the 1950s and it didnt matter as they were all part of glorious Soviet Union. It became awkward after the fall of the wall, but they hashed out a compromise where Crimea operated as an autonomous region of Ukraine instead of a integrated one, the state that persisted for 30 years until Russia formally annexed it.
I don't condone the whole "starting a war" thing, but Crimea has never been Ukrainian in any but the most nit-picky sense, and blowing a peace deal over it would be catastrophically stupid.
More options
Context Copy link