> The point is that energy expenditure is a function of foods eaten.
But there is a lower bound. If you carry some bags up the stairs, drink cold water and excrete warm sweat, inhale cold air and exhale hot there is some value of energy that you had to expend that's calculable by physics only.
Also energy intake is a function of lot's of stuff but it is not higher than the energy you could get from food by burning it (also calculated by physics or rather simple chemistry).
If you choose foods and activities so that there is a match between the upper bound of intake and lower bound of expenditure you will loose weight. That sounds like a sure recipe for weight loss for me.
> But they still don't address the psychological barriers of weight loss. People don't want to feel hungry, or cold, or exhausted. If they are required to do so to lose weight, it probably won't happen, as being too fat causes them less acute discomfort than the effort to not be too fat.
Yeah. You are right. But what makes me wonder is why gut reduction surgery works. If people physically can't eat as much as they are used to, they somehow magically are able to bear all the consequences of extremely low energy intake. They don't stuff themselves with pure sucrose and lard to maintain high calories at reduced volume.
> Give encouragement, not advice. Most of the time, a fat person knows exactly what he must do to not be fat.
Fortunately I don't know any fat people that I could hurt by my simplistic approach to what is for me almost purely intellectual problem.
What always made biggest difference for my weight was routine changes. Public transportation or cycling or walking instead of car for commuting, skipping the lunch, unsubscribing from meals cooked by my mom, not buying cheese. That's what I would advice. Skip some meals, change the way you usually move around.
But there is a lower bound. If you carry some bags up the stairs, drink cold water and excrete warm sweat, inhale cold air and exhale hot there is some value of energy that you had to expend that's calculable by physics only.
Also energy intake is a function of lot's of stuff but it is not higher than the energy you could get from food by burning it (also calculated by physics or rather simple chemistry).
If you choose foods and activities so that there is a match between the upper bound of intake and lower bound of expenditure you will loose weight. That sounds like a sure recipe for weight loss for me.
> But they still don't address the psychological barriers of weight loss. People don't want to feel hungry, or cold, or exhausted. If they are required to do so to lose weight, it probably won't happen, as being too fat causes them less acute discomfort than the effort to not be too fat.
Yeah. You are right. But what makes me wonder is why gut reduction surgery works. If people physically can't eat as much as they are used to, they somehow magically are able to bear all the consequences of extremely low energy intake. They don't stuff themselves with pure sucrose and lard to maintain high calories at reduced volume.
> Give encouragement, not advice. Most of the time, a fat person knows exactly what he must do to not be fat.
Fortunately I don't know any fat people that I could hurt by my simplistic approach to what is for me almost purely intellectual problem.
What always made biggest difference for my weight was routine changes. Public transportation or cycling or walking instead of car for commuting, skipping the lunch, unsubscribing from meals cooked by my mom, not buying cheese. That's what I would advice. Skip some meals, change the way you usually move around.