Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
.jpg "Research Chemical Sciences")
.png "Research Chemical Sciences")
Caloric deficit
- Thread starter gucciman
- Start date
Eating less. That's pretty much it.
it simply means eating less calories.. the cookie cutter method is eating in a 500-1000 calorie deficit. the truth is this may work in the short term.. long term it doesn't work
think about it logically.. if you weigh 200 pounds.. eat in a weekly deficit you are supposed to lose 1 pound a week right? so that would mean after 200 weeks you would weigh 0.
this is why the 'eat in a deficit to lose weight' theory makes absolutely ZERO FUCKING SENSE!
not to mention that we don't know how many calories we burn a day, and we have zero way to know how many calories we actually consume in a day. the research has shown people are off by 20-40% when they try and count their calories and macros. this is why weight watchers has a 95% failure rate
then we can get into if a 1000 calories of twinkies is the same as 1000 calories of raw nuts and avocado. NOT the same thing. add it all up and if you ever are told by a diet coach to count your calories and eat this much calories a day then RUN, they have no clue what they are talking about. counting macros is just an excuse for people to eat cheesecake, pizza, soda, and other junk food and still feel like they are okay cause they 'hit their macros for the day'
think about it logically.. if you weigh 200 pounds.. eat in a weekly deficit you are supposed to lose 1 pound a week right? so that would mean after 200 weeks you would weigh 0.
this is why the 'eat in a deficit to lose weight' theory makes absolutely ZERO FUCKING SENSE!
not to mention that we don't know how many calories we burn a day, and we have zero way to know how many calories we actually consume in a day. the research has shown people are off by 20-40% when they try and count their calories and macros. this is why weight watchers has a 95% failure rate
then we can get into if a 1000 calories of twinkies is the same as 1000 calories of raw nuts and avocado. NOT the same thing. add it all up and if you ever are told by a diet coach to count your calories and eat this much calories a day then RUN, they have no clue what they are talking about. counting macros is just an excuse for people to eat cheesecake, pizza, soda, and other junk food and still feel like they are okay cause they 'hit their macros for the day'
I don't quite understand your question.
If you eat in a deficit you eat less than your body is burning throughout the day. Simple as that.
Yes it is safe but unless you have no reason to do that I don't see why would you want to do that.
It wouldn't. Let's say 3000kcals kept me at 250lbs. I ate, as you suggest, a few hundred less and lost weight. I'd hit a number (let's call it 240) and I'd stay there. It'd work if, week on week we constantly adjusted the calories down. I mean we'd never hit 0 obvs cos we'd die first but still.
As for weight watchers (and all the others too) - the reason why so many fail is they go back to what they did before. They 'diet' for X weeks, lose weight, then go back to the same crap levels that got them fat before.
What Stevesmi did, what I do and what Stevesmi teaches is LIFESTYLE stuff. It's not a 'diet' that only last 10 weeks or whatever, it's eating habits for LIFE. Whether that's fat loss or muscle gain.
This is pretty much it
https://www.evolutionary.org/evolutionary-radio-episode-249/ check out that podcast, you can skip the early part of it but listen to where we talk about calorie deficits and why they don't work
i will switch your point around.. the reason calorie deficits work for a lot of people on this forum is because they are already lean. if you are 8% body fat and eat in a calorie deficit everyday you will stay lean. homeostasis works.
but to tell someone who is 30% body fat to eat in a calorie deficit will work only initially. it will not work long term, and not because what you wrote.. a lot of fat people eat very little and stay fat.
