Yes... the body reacts to caloric restriction through a process called metabolic adaptation. However, that is accounted for in the Calories Out part of CICO. Just like calories in isn’t a static amount, calories out isn’t a static amount either. It adjusts which is why as you continue to diet you have to further lower…

Yes, which is why as you continue to lose weight you will have to lower calories. Also there is less of you to burn off calories. You’re right its a simple concept but hard in execution. However, as you’ve seen from other comments here most people deny the basic concept which is the problem. 

Don’t trust him on that. Literally nothing he said is correct. You’re right though there is so little sweetener in diet soda’s its negligible. Furthermore, most are non-nutritive meaning we dont digest them. Your body cannot turning indigestible items into glucose, that is the equivalent of alchemy. Literally, nothing…

Exactly. The mechanism by which every human regulates weight is energy balance, calories in, calories out. However, how you choose to achieve this deficit is wide open. Low carb, low fat, no carb, no meat, time restricted eating, whatever its still all about energy balance.

Read the comments here and see how many people are resistant to the fact that calories in, calories out governs how our body gains, maintains, and loses weight. The sugar one is my personal favorite of misinformation.

You were in a caloric deficit therefore you lost weight. Intermittent fasting allowed you to be in a caloric deficit so you could lose weight. However, if you were in an equivalent caloric deficit WITHOUT intermittent fasting, you’d still have lost weight. That is what the study is saying.

There have been studies that have compared a group eating more calories but did TRE and another that ate less but didn’t. Guess what? The group that ate more calories lost less fat. Shocking! Physics still works…

All people. It’s physics, we’re all governed by it.

The theory however is wrong. All benefits of time restrictive eating are a result of caloric restriction. There are peer reviewed high quality studies showing this, they’re in agreement, time restrictive eating has no physiological difference in the long term on human health as opposed to any other form of caloric…

Literally everything this dude wrote is wrong, though lots of hucksters pushing it on social media. 

Nice mechanistic theory. Literally no study supports this. The insulin model has been discredited countless times. This is quackery. I eat over 100 grams of sugar a day and over 300 carbs most days, while maintaining 13% body fat and have lost and maintained over a 60 lbs of fat loss. If your theory was correct that…

This is one thing I keep saying I’m going to do but never actually do. Getting older, really need to make stretching a priority. Luckily, I am naturally very flexible in my upper body (not so much in my lower body sadly) so I’ve gotten away with it but should work on this. Question, any tips or tricks to actually DO…

Appeal to authority to justify the previous fallacy… 

Caffeine is a stimulant. THC is primarily a depressant with hallucinogen and stimulatory effects. Completely different compounds. As for the other example you used that is a pure reductio ad absurdum fallacy.

As a general rule of thumb I’d avoid intoxicants during exercise. Seems like a good rule. 

Except heart rate and calories burned are not actually related and that’s how these smart watches estimate it. It’s why they’re so hilariously bad at estimating energy expenditure.

Zercher are harder in my opinion so I think you’re well served. 

I’m aware those benefits also exist in non-ketogenic or low carb diets as well.

Red meat (and cheese) is full of saturated fats which is an independent risk factor for heart disease (and other disease), its accepted by cardiologists one wants to limit red meat intake and prioritize other forms of fats such as polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) and monounsaturated fatty acids. Red meat is also…

The Mechanism: Calories in vs. Calories Out. Simple to understand.