Atkins Diet Misconceptions: Calorie-In Calorie-Out Fallacy

Additional contact methods:
Twitter: bowulf
Blog: http://www.network-admin.net
IM or Skype: Contact Me First
How to Atkins Diet TV: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/how-to-atkins-diet-tv

This is the next one in my series of Atkins Diet Misconceptions where I combat all myths and misunderstandings regarding low carbing and weight loss in general. In this episode, I deal with the fallacy of the Calorie-In, Calorie-Out theory of weight loss. That is the belief that human weight loss is nothing more than the Law of Thermodynamics. The human body is nothing more than a steam engine, which takes in fuel and burns it to do work. In order to track how many pounds to lose, you simply need to count the burned Calories and divide by 3000.

My problem with this theory is that it is just wrong. It ignores the countless human body processes that affect weight loss - hormones (like stress hormones that cause the body to hold on to body fat), electrolyte balance and water weight, exercise and muscle building. It does not deal with how or where the weight is being consumed, and that different foods may react differently irregardless of the Caloric intake.

Finally, it has been proven wrong in many studies. The most famous study is the 2003 Harvard study (http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2003/10.23/03-lowcarb.html) lead by Penelope Greene. She carried out a 12 week study of three groups with controlled exercise and food intake. The three groups were two groups eating the same Caloric intake (high carb / low carb (high fat)) and a third group who eat 300 more Calories per day (25,000 excess Calories over the 12 week study). The two low carb both lost more weight (35%) than the high carb group. The excess Calorie group did lose less weight than lower Calorie low carb group, but three pound difference did not equate to the excess 25,000 excess Calories.

Gary Taubes - http://webcast.berkeley.edu/event_details.php?webcastid=21216
Calorie Fallacy - http://www.ourcivilisation.com/fat/chap2.htm

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• Atkins
• Diet
• Low
• Carb
• Bowulf
• Calorie
• In
• out
• Obesity
• Fitness
• Weight
• loss

[HelenaVenom]

I don't believe the calorie-in-calorie-out-theory. Eating "normal" with lots of carbs I gain if I only eat 1300 calories (I have insulin resistance and PCOS). Eating lowcarb I can eat more than 2000 and loose weight!

[bowulf]

@HelenaVenom Amen!

[oshinkoboy]

Nonsense.

[bowulf]

@oshinkoboy Well why wouldn't one listen to such reasoned prose...

[stockmaster1982]

@anotherjoe50 A calorie may not be just a calorie

i agree with you on that one. Because not all food

are created equally because of the amount of nutrition

you get from each particular types of food! But the

calorie theory is not fallacy. Even if you choose the

best types of food, less fattening with high nutrition,

if you eat those healthy food in excess amount

you will gain weight, despite how health it is!

Energy balance theory is valid, but the type

of food is also important!

[bowulf]

Great - now move along and pass along your wisdom elsewhere...

[Satarack]

But you see that this is what a science is. Calories in, Calories out simply says everything comes down to behaviour. It ends the scientific thought process, and makes it a psychiatric process. It says "you got fat because you let yourself get bad habits," when you should instead be asking, "what caused the bad habits that got you fat?"

The point is we need actual scientific theories here, not sociological and psychiatric ones. This is a biological phenomena, it needs a biological explanation.

[Satarack]

Ok then, what hormone is this; and what is giving this instruction?

And here we don't necessarily know quite as well. There's evidence to suggest that insulin is the primary hormone responsible, and figures like Dr. Robert Lustig and Gary Taubes believe this to be the case for the majority of the obese population.

[Satarack]

So what needs to happen is if someone does increase in weight, we have to ask ourselves, "what caused them to change their energy intake and energy outtake?" The answer is that their biochemical regulation system received some biochemical signal to store excess energy as fat; and they modified their eating and energy expenditure habits to accomplish this.

Then we delve further: what was this signal? Well most signals like that are hormones. That's how your body typically gives instructions.

[Satarack]

I feel this video is inadequate to explain the falacy of calorie in-calorie out.

The falacy is not in the law of thermodynamics, but rather is a thought terminating idiom. The problem is the claim that it's JUST calories in, calories out. That the road ends here, and there are no questions to ask. The reality is that your body mass is a regulated system, and that your eating and exercising habits are a response to this system, and are not the direct cause.

[bowulf]

@sumbarine Now you are grasping at straws to prove your argument. People today lie, but people in 1910 are honest and are better able to judge how much they eat. That's quite an example of self-justification.

[sumbarine]

@bowulf Calorie needs are based on Basal metabolic rates,muscle mass,size,activity level,age etc which can vary from person to person.Studies of under reporting are confirmed by witnesses(example one obese woman claimed to eat 2 tblespoons of peanut butter a day,her husband confirmed later it was 8).Back in 1910 before the obesity epidemic there was no cause for people to lie or exagerate