Calories In, Calories Out: Fact or Fiction … Redux

In an article I wrote for Breaking Muscle yesterday on the 7 Fitness Myths You Gotta Know About, I accidentally stirred up quite the controversy over an ongoing debate among fitness professionals about how important the Calories In vs Calories Out equation is.

I made the claim that the most important part of the equation when you are trying to lose fat is that the amount of calories coming in should be less than the amount of calories going out. By extension, I said the the quality of your food was FAR less important than the total quantity when if comes to losing weight.

I’d expected my stance on Running to be the controversial one. I was dead wrong!

What’s great about this type of situation where people come out of the woodwork to argue against a point I’m making is that it allows me a chance to think about what they’re saying, take their points to heart, and then come back to make clarifications that explain my reasons more clearly.

A good many of the concerns people had with my claim were well thought out and reasonable. I still think I’m right, but not because I think they are wrong. That might seem wild! But, I think the problem comes down to one of a lack of clear definitions and emphasis. In very few cases did I feel like we were really at odds with one another. We were largely talking PAST one another.

But, before I get into that, I want to make a separate, and equally important clarificatory point … I was talking EXCLUSIVELY about weight loss NOT health or performance AT ALL. I wasn’t just talking about fat loss, but weight loss generally. (More on this below.)

Rule One: Coaches Lie

The first major objection some might have to what I said is that it was overly simplistic.

YES. Yes it was. Here’s why …

I’ve discussed before that Coaches Lie, sometimes outright, sometimes by omission, because they MUST. Teachers, educators of any kind, cannot come out with every last detail of the subject they are teaching on day one and expect the student to do well. That is a disaster.

One step at a time MEANS that you only get part of the picture at a time, and sometimes the implications are that you’re learning something that is wrong to a high-level practitioner.

The classic example is when Olympic lifting coaches tell you to DRAG the bar up your legs, keep it actually touching your thighs at all times. I don’t want my more advanced lifters doing that. It is wrong. You should hydroplane, not drag the bar up. But, in the beginning, we’ve all found that if you don’t force contact of the bar with the thighs, the bar drifts off too far from the body. We’re erring on the side we see as more important, ignoring the details for a moment, and focusing on the MOST important thing – having the bar in the hip at the right moment.

The entire point of a step-by-step process to learning and teaching is that step one is the most important! Often, it is SO important that if you did everything else wrong, but you got that right, you’d by 80%+ of the way there. So, even if you are causing the beginner to get the other steps wrong (for now, we’ll fix that later) at the start, they are doing the first step right.

It is a fantasy that you can do everything right all at once. Any teacher can back me up on this.

So, when I write a simple, fun, list-article for a website like Breaking Muscle I have to keep it rather to the point, almost aphoristic. Hell, I’d originally wanted to make it 12 Fitness Myths, not 7, but I ran out of space!! Non-writers sometimes forget that you only get so many words to play with. I can’t fully explain a point in two or three paragraphs, no one can. I simply needed to say what I believed to be step one: Get a deficit. We’ll worry about quality of food, macronutrient manipulation, and quality of exercise, etc later.

It is NOT ideal. But, we’re talking about short articles on the internet, not a serious College course in Nutrition Science …

Definitions Matter: A Look At The Equation

Speaking of Science!

At the outset, the equation seems too simplistic to be true. Life and biology and physics are all complicated. Not simple. Pretending that one little equation sums up the whole of weight loss is naive … right?

Wrong. That is obscuring a basic reality of mathematical abstraction: Just because the equation looks simple, doesn’t mean that the information contained within the variables in that equation is simple! Much of mathematics and theoretical physics (and theoretical science in general) is an act of trying to find clear general equations, rules, and laws that encapsulate in a simple way the complexity of the universe.

Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection is ridiculously simple on the surface. But, the details of WHY it works are very hard and are the life’s work of thousands of scientists.

Bare with me while I bring out the Math on you! Here’s the equation put in a more formal way:

  • Let W = weight loss (not just fat, but general loss of pounds on the scale)
  • Let X = the number of calories actually metabolized by the human body (more on this in a moment), and not simply flushed down the toilet.
  • Let Y = the number of calories expended by the body.

Then, we have the following definition of weight loss that I claimed was true in the article:

X < Y if and only if W

That is, someone loses weight (W) only when the Calories metabolized (X) is less than the number of calories burned (Y). (The converse also holds, if someone is losing weight, there MUST be a deficit, even if you don’t know how it is occurring.)

Now, here’s the rub. X and Y are extremely complex variables, so knowing exactly what they are is literally impossible by the tenets of Chaos theory. But, that doesn’t make the equation above less true.

A Practical Example

Lets say that we have 2 people, Mojo and Filta, who are genetically identical – not twins, clones! They are the exact same weight, and they have the exact same activity level.

Mojo and Filta both eat the same number of calories per day, but Mojo is on a high carb diet, and Filta is on a high protein diet. From what we can calculate based on their activity levels, they seem to be burning the same number of calories per day as each other.

Further, their X matches their Y.

However … Filta is losing weight, but Mojo is not. What gives?! Clearly, the quality of food matters, not just quantity. Right?

What’s happening is that while their X value is the same as one another’s, their Y values are not the same … we were wrong in our calculations of Y.

High protein diets have been shown to cause your body to burn more calories per day that lower protein diets. So, for Mojo, X = Y, but this isn’t true for Filta. Her X value is the same as Mojo’s, but her Y is higher.

For Filta, X < Y, and that explains the weight loss.

X and Y are Hard to Pin Down

We never really know the EXACT number of calories that the body is burning, nor the amount of calories the body has actually metabolized. Just because you ate something, that doesn’t mean that your body used it, stored it, or did anything with it at all.

Technically, a rock has calories, but your body can’t process it, so if you eat it, you’ll just shit it out. So, using the calories of your food before you eat it as a gauge is not particularly accurate. Everyone digests differently, and so you can’t know how much of the food you eat is even a part of your X value. You can’t know the number that X represents, it is impossible.

Your Y value is equally confusing. The food you metabolize has an effect on the number of calories burned per day.

That means X affects Y!!

The quality of your food obviously has an effect on how you lose weight, but largely because it has the power to raise or lower your Y value … thus contributing to the calorie deficit. Quality affects Quantity.

The use of calorie cycling, and other types of macro nutrient manipulation work because they are a way of constantly keeping Y high. Your body is sneaky, it adapts! It want’s to lower Y. You can make your weight loss efforts work better if you do everything in your power to up your Y value.

But, none of that negates the basic equation.

Thermodynamics

Clearly I’m making an argument based upon the second law of thermodynamics which essentially states that you can’t break even. That is, X = Y doesn’t really happen ever unless we redefine Y to be more than JUST calories out. Instead …

Y = Calories Out + Entropy

That is, there is always a LOSS of energy because no system of chemical reactions can occur with 100% efficiency.

Here’s Protein Power on the issue:

How does this apply to weight loss?

Each of the many chemical reactions in the body end up dissipating energy. We get our energy in the form of calories from the food we eat. This energy gets consumed in all the countless chemical reactions that go on all the time. Just like an automobile, we are not all that efficient. We don’t convert calories to energy on a one to one basis because of the loss of energy to the universe described by the second law.

Different foods, like protein, are LESS efficient from an energy standpoint than sugar. So, you can eat the same number of calories in protein or sugar, but the Y value will be different.

Again, the point is that the X < Y has to hold to lose weight, but that doesn’t mean that you can’t manipulate this with Macro Nutrients. By eating more healthy foods like high protein and fiber, you can actually eat MORE calories and still lose weight than a diet of sugar and white pasta. But, in either case, if you don’t have X < Y (whatever those numbers are), you won’t lose weight.

This is where applications to athletes in weight-classed sports like Weightlifting and Wrestling can get interesting. Manipulation of macro nutrients is often the go-to method before an absolute drop in calories.

Fat Loss vs Weight Loss

A big objection is that what I’m talking about is true for weight loss, but if left unchecked, you won’t just lose fat, you’ll lose muscle. That is BAD.

Agreed.

I don’t think people should stop at Step One, they need to move onto steps two and three. In my opinion, these are the steps of proper fat loss:

  1. Create a Calorie Deficit
  2. Get a Good Weight Training Program in Place
  3. Make Sure the Food You Eat is Healthy and Supportive of Muscle Gain

In that order! (Step 4 would be to find a way to do High Intensity cardio … if you so choose. Not at all necessary, but can increase the rate of progress for many.)

If you only did step one, then you’d lose fat … but, you’d also lose muscle. If you only did step one and step two, but skipped three, you’d likely keep most of your muscle, you’d lose fat, but your health would suffer long term which will slowly lower your Y value making weightloss harder over time.

You need all three to be able to lose fat fast over the long haul and keep it off and be healthy along the way.

But, I still stand by my ordering. The reason is twofold.

First, most people in America will NOT do all three. They won’t. We can preach all we want till we’re blue in the face. But, most people in this country don’t value their long term health enough to make dramatic life changes in all the areas we’d want them to. That is not going to change overnight, or ever.

Second, it is worse to be very fat – well over 20, 50, or even 100 pounds over weight – than to lose some muscle while losing all the fat. Some people may not agree with me, but I think you are better off being at a low weight with little fat – even if you don’t have much muscle and don’t workout at all, and the food you eat is only marginal – than if you eat very healthy, workout all the time, but are grossly overweight (50+ pounds on a person of average height.)

I know that losing muscle during the fatloss phase makes gaining it back more likely, but if they have internalized the low calorie reality, and stick to that – forever – they will be more likely to stay smaller forever.

In my experience this is a more “doable” thing for the average non-fitness type who HATES working out than joining a CrossFit club and going Paleo. They’ll actually do it and stick to it. Nothing is more important than consistency.

(Interestingly, I find athletes to be the opposite. They will eat healthy food and work their tales off in the gym … but ask them to lower calories and they freak out. I can totally relate!)

The Biggest Loser Example

I love the show The Biggest Loser. The diets they promote are moronic and WAY too low in protein. The workouts they suggest are stupidly unrealistic for the at home person, and their methods of teaching exercises leave a lot to be desired. But, every season, without fail, EVERYONE loses weight.

Not everyone keeps it off, but that’s true for all trainers. Not all of my clients keep it off either, because at some point they stop following my advice. Nothing new here. The goal isn’t 100% success rates. The goal is a large success rate. The Biggest Loser has that.

They’ve shown, over and over again, that anyone can lose fat in a big way and dramatically improve their health simply by following the equation X < Y. No matter how you set it up, so long as X < Y, you’ll lose weight. And, if you aren’t losing weight, something is causing the equation to fail. Either X = Y, or worse, X > Y. (Finding out what exactly that is, is hard sometimes.)

Given the insane amount of fat most Americans are carrying at this point, I believe that it is more important for them to lose it – at all costs – than to keep it around. Americans need to get smaller – a LOT smaller.

The Best of Both Worlds Fallacy

We don’t get to have our cake and eat it too. We don’t.

American’s – outside of our tight-nit group of CrossFitters, Fitness maniacs, weightlifters, powerlifters, and athletes – haven’t the faintest idea what they are doing, have a tiny attention span for health information, and will only do what they need to if they see it as easy. They hate to workout, they don’t like to cook, they have no interest in sticking to diets that force them to choose veggies over their favorite foods, etc.

The reason I like Intermittent Fasting so much is not because of the potential health effects, or because it may make losing fat happen faster, but because it is psychologically easier to stick with for the long haul. It makes maintaining a low calorie diet doable. Anyone can do it.

There are no rules on WHAT to eat. It works simply because of the X < Y equation: Keep your calories under a certain amount; eat most of those calories in one or two big meals so that you get to feel full and eat the foods you enjoy; and watch the weight fall off your body.

You can make it better by eating healthy high protein foods, and by lifting heavy weights – I strongly advise that!! – but, if you only do ONE thing, and your goal is to lose weight … drop your calories under what you’re burning.

The Fitness Elite: We Are The 1%

You and I are part of the tiny 1% of American’s who not only workout all the time and eat healthy food most of the time, but go out of our way to hunt down information like this, comment on blogs and engage in conversations on the topic, and try to learn as much was we can.

We’re not normal. Not even close.

My lifters and I often comment how easy it is to forget that most people who lift weights don’t squat as deep as we do, don’t take snatching and cleaning for granted, and don’t focus the majority of their training time around big lifts like squats. But, at least those other people workout!

Say what you want about Globo Gyms, but at least the people curling in the squat rack show up.

Most American’s don’t do shit. Nothing. No exercise what-so-ever, ever. And they won’t start anytime soon.

The insights and deeper knowledge that we find compelling and totally worth arguing over turns off the rest of America. They hate that crap, and they think all we’re doing is PROVING that scientists and trainers and the fitness industry don’t know ANYTHING.

That’s a crock of shit, of course. Lots and lots is unknown, but a few basic things are known rather well. Workout more, and you will live a healthier life (maybe not longer, but better). Don’t eat a bunch of processed crap all the time, and you’ll be healthier still. Create a calorie deficit and you’ll lose weight.

Imagine what this country would look like if all the severely overweight people out there took those things to heart and put them into practice. More lifting, less junk food, lower calories. Boom … it would be amazing.

Recap

I made a few points (understatement!), so it’s probably a good idea for me to go over them again really fast.

First, I can’t explain everything with total complexity in a few paragraphs in a short article for an Online Magazine. That’s impossible. So, in those situations, I cut to the chase and risk being misinterpreted.

Second, coaches lie on purpose. We omit details, and even overemphasize points we’d never overemphasize with advanced clients. The learning process requires this.

Third, A simple equation can contain a lot of complex information. X < Y doesn’t mean X and Y are simple. In fact, X affects Y. The calories you eat and metabolize can change the number of calories you burn everyday. But, none of that complexity negates the underlying reality that a deficit is necessary for total weight loss by an application of the second law of thermodynamics. We’re humans, a walking bunch of cells and chemical reactions. The laws of physics and chemistry don’t stop applying to us simply because they are hard to calculate.

Fourth, The first step is setting the stage for total weight loss. Only then can we worry about step two, which is to make sure the most of that is fat loss and not muscle loss.

Fifth, American’s are fat. Really really fat. They are also lazy and unwilling to workout hard and completely alter their diets to resemble those that most of us fitness-nuts have. You can either become cynical and ignore them, or you can at least help them understand that total weight loss isn’t particularly complicated. So long as they create a deficit, they will lose weight. We’d LOVE for them to get a touch more complicated, and put in more work so that they are also getting fit generally along the way. But, at the very least, they MUST lose that weight.

For every 1 person who joins a CrossFit club or some place like mine and gets really into exercise and healthy eating, there are literally thousands who NEVER will … ever. And yet they will spend their lives looking for diet information and trying those diets out. If they get only ONE thing right, they need to learn that if they don’t start eating LESS food, they will never lose weight. We can help them on that front.

Sixth, This type of ultra basic point about a calorie deficit only seems obvious to us. It is far too easy to get wrapped up in our own world. We’re part of the 1% of the Fitness Elite who are many many steps in. It’s easy to forget just how out of touch with the basics the majority of American’s are.

Final Word

I love a good debate. It helps everyone involved. So long as we’re all respectful of one another, and remember that it’s supposed to be FUN, then it is all for the good – not just the good of us, but the many people out there who are going to have the chance to learn from what we’re saying and get healthier because of it.

I welcome disagreement. So, if you have a comment about how you think I’m off base, I’d love to hear it. Not all of this is clear cut. There is a LOT of science we just don’t understand well enough for anyone to claim they have all the answers. As of right now, this is what I believe. But, I reserve the right to change my mind in the future.

 

New Graphic

Related Articles:

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest

Dear Nick,

I'm turning 45 this year and weigh 160 lbs. I've been losing weight since I've been walking more.
My work pants are 2 sizes too big and I'm usually 165 for years I've been that weight. I've shrunk in muscle size that I put on in the summer when I was on a shorter mail route.

I'd like to be 170 lbs. and muscular and fit.

My question(s) Nick is I walk about 4-5 hours a day (approx. 10 miles) on all kinds of leg and back pulverizing terrain (and weather) as a mailman from 9:30 am and am too tired to work out on our home gym afterwards when I come home in the early evening about 4-5 pm. It's a 30 minute drive home from work. Should I take a nap?

What advice do have for me to eat properly in the morning and throughout the day so I can have enough energy to do a workout even for 20 minutes on our home gym?

Do I eat carbs like pasta for breakfast ?

I have a few chicken w/ cheese sandwiches and a CLIF protein bar out on the road while delivering the mail and my watered down apple juice for fluids.

Are there any supplements you recommend I take as well?

I have creatine supplements (Jack3D) and USP Labs BCAA that I take when working out.

I get 7-8 hours of sleep most of the time and try to get to bed early since I get up at 5 am.

I have one coffee in the morning to help me concentrate on accurate mail sortation.

My wife and I love making whey protein smoothies but when should I be drinking them I'm not sure.

I still look OK but the love handles and my stomach I've got my eye on. I don't want that "trucker" appearance when I'm 65 years old if you know what I mean? Lol.

I would appreciate any website with a health/workout plan or personal advice you could give me to keep me on the right path to a lifetime of health. Thank you Nick!

Yours sincerely,

John Poirier

John, are you a postal worker? I ask because my wife LOVES postal workers. She has always had a strong positive association with them. I think she had a lot of pen-pals as a kid. Now everytime the mail person comes, she gets gitty. :-)

As per your questions:

- If you can take a nap, do. It's always good to get more sleep.
- Carbs should be limited to around your workouts, IMO. Avoid them at breakfast - unless you workout first thing in the morning.
- I'm a big fan of something called Intermittent Fasting (see my links below) primarily because it makes keeping your calories down so much easier. I like "no brainer" methods for success!
- As long as you are doing strength training and keeping your calories under control, you WILL lose weight. When in doubt, something is probably wrong with the diet.

OK, here are some resources:

- My article on how I lost weight using Intermittent Fasting (I was 205 at one point, I'm now 160): http://www.theironsamurai.com/2011/08/29/intermitt...

- Check out my new blog that I'm starting with my collegue, Peter Curcio (a Registered Dietitian). It's new, but it's all about diet and fatloss from our unique perspectives: http://www.highoctanebody.com Make sure you sign up for the newsletter to stay up to date as I'll be writing a lot about exactly what you're questions pertain to.

- A major resource is the website by Martin Berkhan, www.leangains.com He's done a TON of research on this subject. And it's well worth a look.

Hope that helps!!

calories in calories out has been proven false for a long time now.
what matters is hormone control.
if you want to lose weight you have to keep your insulin down by staying away from sugar and carbs.
sugar and carbs are in almost all processed foods, grains, whole wheat, vegetables, and fruits.
clinical studies have PROVEN that people who go on atkins diets compared to low fat ornish diets have lost more weight, and have had better heart health indicators ( triglycerides)

eating natural saturated animal fat is healthy for you, processed grains, sugar, and oils are not.

Curt,

Thanks for the reply.

In fact it has never been "proven", nor can it be, that calories in/out is false. What has been shown is that many many things affect weight and fatloss precisely because those things affect the ration of calories in/out.

To recap, the calories you eat can (and do) alter the calories out. So it is very complex. However, that doesn't change the laws of thermodynamics.

That said, I very much agree with a lot of what you said about the value of animal fats in the diet. I also agree that minimizing processed foods in your diet is a good thing.

Wow there are so many things to learn from this article! I am watching that show as well, and I found it very interesting that everyone like you said is doing good in the final. Strange..

I appreciate that, Rebecca. I'm glad you're finding the article useful.

AS for the show, they follow the laws of physics, and they get results. Not always pretty, mind you, but it's fun to watch!!

btw.. sorry for the grammar

Haha! Comments sections are like that :)

... Another thing is that when you are severely overweight things like macronutrient ratios are less important and you mention this in your blogpost. The more overweight someone is the less they have to worry about muscle loss while dieting, hence less importance needs to be put on higher protein content of the diet. That also means that cardio training has a higher priority than weight training for people who are severely overweight, because it has more potential to burn calories. As you come closer to your goal weight, preventing muscle loss becomes more important as a strategy. So, in opinion the priorities of strenth training and cardio training are reversed with people who do have a lot of weight to lose compared to people who are closer to their ideal weight. Even though strength training for the severely overweight does have the benefit of preventing injuries and eliciting muscle GAIN (not just preventing muscle loss).

Macronutrient concerns aren't as important for the severly overweight, I agree. However, I stronly disagree that one should ever have them priorities cardio over weight training.

My reasons are:

1. Weight training burns more calories than people think it does. And if you do it in "circuit" fashion, then it burns MORE calories than most - if not all - other forms of cardio. Cardio-Strength-Training style workouts give you the best of both worlds, but focus primarily on the strength component.

2. Risk of injury is MASSSIVE when dealing with the obese. The bigger a person is, the higher the risk. They have a nearly impossible time moving correctly because of the ratio of muscle mass and strength they currently have to the overwhelming total weight they carry on their body. Priority #1 is to find a way to lower their risk of injury. That means building muscle and strength.

3. Psychologically, most obese people just can't commit to the added cardio sessions ... and they tend to HATE them. This means they will quit. I have found FAR more success with having only 2 strength training days a week combined with a low calorie diet, and little to no cardio, than when I had people doing more cardio as a way of creating a deficit.

You can create a deficit in a host of ways, but the two extremes are an exercised induced one and a diet induced one. I prefer a diet induced one for people who honestly hate the gym, hate working out, and will not stick to any program that is only going to work if they stick to the cardio.

Athletes and people who love the gym are different. But, for the general public, a diet-created deficit + strength training, IMO, works at keeping them consistent.

Great discussion!!

Good blog post, Nick.

I agree with you about the calories and you have done a good job explaining the nuances and what the priorities are when losing weight in this article. This article was a very good read.

I also read your article on the fitness myths and I don't know why running is always singled out. I do agree that people need to build up their running properly and do strength training in order to become better at running. But this is true for any other sport as well, including sprinting. I would say that in sprinting preparation through strength training is even more important than in running. Even weightlifters will require other modalaties like mobility and stretching in order to remain healthy while performing their sport. I am not a runner, but I think it is cliché to always pick out running as the black sheep in the family. In any modality people will have to develop fitness gradually and can use other types of training as an assistence to get there.

Thanks Daniel,

I think the reason we all single out (pick on!) running is because it is THE thing people do all the time. Most people who want to get into shape don't take up Hockey, or Sprinting, and certainly not Weightlifting. As a rule, we'll focus on the areas where the largest number of people will make the biggest mistakes.

The general public has absolutely no idea about the downsides of running. And, yet that is the first thing they think of when they think of fat loss or weight loss.

Second, it IS easier to hurt yourself running than lifting weights - even if you haven't a clue what you are doing. Surely, you can hurt yourself doing anything, and all sport-like activities are risky. But, running is the "go to" for most people, so fitness professionals feel obligated to constantly battle that until the attitudes of the general public change ... could be a while.

I am sure you did nearly get shot for the running tid bit in that post! But as a marathon runner, triathlete and an overall endurance athlete I can not tell you how true much of what you said is true. I see so many people take up running not realizing that there's a long period of acclimation they need to gut through and that weight training is something you CAN NOT neglect if you want to avoid injuries. I see it so often, I can pretty much call it with my eyes closed. I can typically predict injuries a short while before they happen because when it comes down to it, it's a science: when you over tax weak muscles and bones, eventually they will fail you but only because you failed them!

Fantastic point, Kirsten!

And the longer the distance is that your competitions require of you, the more important the focus on strength work and recovery becomes. Marathons and triathlons are hard on the body, and taking great care is a must.

Thankfully, I think the running/distance world is picking up on this. I'm pretty positive on it. I'm seeing more and more seriously distance athletes taking these steps. It's not just run, run, run anymore. It's getting much more scientific, as you said.

Excellent article as always, Nick!

Shows like 'The Biggest Losers' and even 'Oprah' are some of the reasons why there's so much bad info out there. Our own dang government is a culprit as well, with their food pyramid crap and its close ties with the corn industry.

I laugh when my fata$$ coworkers eat only the egg whites and never the yolk because 'it's fattening,' and at the same time these same people don't think twice about putting 10-syllable unpronouncable ingredients when they eat processed crap. Ugh!!

Keep spreading the word, bro!

I know! I have a love-hate relationship with The Biggest Loser. On the one hand, I love seeing people go from HUGE to lean in such a short time. People on the show honestly are being saved from an early dealth. It's that important.

However, their methods are abysmal! And, I don't like the "exercise-based" approach to fatloss they promote because it requires hours and hours and hours a day to work. Most Americans will give you 2 or 3 days a week for about 1/2 hour at a time for working out ... if you're lucky!

So, having a diet-based approach to fat loss (focussing on keeping calories low) and using your workouts for strength training mainly is something I've found to work very well for people who otherwise wouldn't want anything to do with a gym.

BTW, just watched your vid on the post for the Flippity floppity (or whatever you called it) drill and sled work. I'm impressed by your Snatch technique! Great work!!

Nick

Great post! Aparently cleared the air, there doesnt seem to be too much argument. I really like how you exlained how x can effect y, I might barrow that one from you.
Thanks for the information, your site has quickly become one of my favorites.

Thanks Rob! I really appreciate that!

Yes, the X affecting Y may be one of the most interesting things about the whole process. Brings out the math-nerd in me :)

Great Article Nick!

I TOTALLY agree:

1. Remember the "twinkie diet"? Where the nutrition professor lost like 27 pounds eating twinkies and other junk food? It was pure calories in and calories out.

What proves your point even more is that his blood markers of health (cholesterol, etc) all improved after losing the weight ... even though ... he was eating junk.

Now of course, bombarding your body with high insulin levels, and chronic inflammation from sugar and crap food, etc for a lifetime is not the best plan ... but ... the point is that losing the weight NOW is the most important thing. Simple rule of calories in VS calories out is the answer to that!

2. Agree that the next step is weight training. NOT cardio like you said. You've probably heard of the study with females on a 800 cal/day restricted diet but because of weight training 3x per week lost almost no muscle. Your body is smart like you said -- it adapts and knows that it NEEDS that muscle when you challenge it like that while dieting -- so it gets rid of the fat instead.

3. Agreed that the last step is switching to better foods.

It's always crazy when you get the "fanatics" on both sides of the fence -- you just can't ignore the facts of the matter.

Great post!
Caleb

OH ya, the Twinky diet! That would have a been a good addition. I fully admit to being shocked when I heard that. Hell, I was shocked by the first few seasons of the Biggest Loser. These trainers were nuts, but the end result, and the dramatic positive changes in health of the participants was undeniable.

There are always better ways to do things, more refined. But, understanding the first step isn't as easy for the average american as we'd like it to be.

Great stuff!

Good response, Nick. I'm a paleo guy who still believes that calories count (although I don't recommend counting them).

Calories in, calories out works just fine (I lost 75lbs using that principal), but what people on the other side fail to realize is that we don't truly know the calories of each food, since they are estimates. They also change based on ripeness, macros, stale vs fresh, cooked vs raw, how well you chew, body temperature, how healthy your gut is, etc.

On the other end, we don't really know how much our output is. Our 'metabolism' goes up and down based on hormones, mood, temperature, body weight, LBM, what we ate, and so many other things that cannot be tracked by fitday, a fitbit, or a bodybugg. When we train, walk, or clean house, we don't truly know how much effort we're giving it.

Between Estimated Calories In and Estimated Calories Out, there's a huge mysterious cloud where we can't know what's truly happening. There are so many variables, but the law does not change.

If you add to this the habit of low carb and paleo gurus saying clever things like "as we know," "as we've seen," and "as has been proven," followed by "calorie counting doesn't work," we get an irrefutable position, because you cannot refute a guru who says "as we know."

Typically, these diets do work if you can keep it up and adjust your formula, but most people get really tired of it and quit eventually. So, they might not work in the long run, but that's not as cool a thing to quote. It takes too many words to explain, so fans have trouble creating jpgs from the quotes and putting it up on facebook. You're not a success until your quote makes it into a jpg posted onto facebook!

Roland

Thanks, Roland! Thought you might find this interesting.

I think you are right, the polarization of this topic has a lot to do with how people are perceiving it. Symantically, saying Calories in Calories out IS wrong, and it obscures the details just enough to raise the ire of those who are already skeptical. So, sometimes folks like me, who err on the side of simplicity in my writing can get in trouble.

This stuff is REALLY complicated, for sure. Defining what we mean by "calories in", how much of that gets utilized by the body, and what that does to affect the overall system is hard. It's possibly even harder on the calorie out side because of entropy, and that it is dependent variable relative to the calorie in factor. whoo!

But, fundamentally, as you well know from your own fatloss experience, if you totally ignore calories, most of the time, you'll not make it.

We can't know the numbers exactly, and they will constantly vary on us (even daily), but keeping the general rule in mind is a huge aid toward successful fatloss, in my opinion.

Switch to our mobile site