More to Weight Loss Than Calories In/Out

[WavyDavey]

I've often said, weight loss is just a matter of calories in and calories out. Reduce calories in to below calories burned, and weight loss occurs. While this is the essence, there are also variables we should be aware of that complicate this equation and can make the process of weight loss go slower than we expect.

1.) Age. As we age our metabolism tends to slow, leading to a slower rate of weight loss.

2.) Thyroid health - has a lot to do with our metabolic rate.

3.) Insulin Resistance - pre-diabetic or diabetic conditions will keep insulin high and make weight loss more difficult.

4.) Stress and 5.) Sleep both have a powerful effect on our ability to lose weight.

6, How calories and types of food influence hormones, which isn't accounted for in calories in/out calculations.

7.. Other body issues-- such as auto-immune or inflammatory conditions will affect our ability to lose weight.

Thanks to Dr. Eric Berg for the ideas.

[Julia_G]

@WavyDavey , I totally agree. A “calorie” was first defined about 200 years ago, and its first use as a nutrition/ diet theory is about 100 years ago.

While it is true that if you consistently, over a period of time, burn significantly more calories than you consume, you will lose weight, and eventually starve. Victims of famine, concentration camps, and sufferers of eating disorders prove this, if we had any doubt.

But for most of us, our relationship to food and exercise is more nuanced, and we also now know so much more about the metabolic effects of what we eat.  I have said quite often on these pages that not all calories are created equal, and I wish everyone would begin to take that on board.  The metabolic effects of a meal consisting of a donut, and one of a chicken breast with salad will be very different, even if the calories are the same.  

[Dominique]

---

@WavyDavey wrote:

Thanks to Dr. Eric Berg for the ideas.

---

It is worth noting he’s a controversial figure. For one thing, he’s not a medical doctor (there’s been disciplinary action against him), nor does he hold a Ph.D. (he’s a chiropractor). Then, he pushes dubious supplements on his online store.

If I were to follow someone with similar views (anti-carb, pro-keto/intermittent fasting), I’d rather pick Dr. Jason Fung, who is a medical doctor, who has lined up a rather impressive team of specialists (doctors, nutritionists, dietitians etc.) and who is putting what he preaches in practice in his own clinic. He’s the author of two books: The Obesity Code and the Diabetes Code. I personally don’t espouse his views, but his credentials strike me as more serious.

[WavyDavey]

Hi @Dominique,

Thanks for the information and your reply. I don't fully understand your point--are you saying that because of the issues you outlined with Dr. Berg, that stress/sleep/hormones don't have a role in weight loss? I didn't have any point to make about keto, low-carb of fasting--just merely wanted to suggest some factors that might be helpful to people who post here wondering why their weight loss might be stalled despite the fact that they're managing the calories in/out equation.

Dr. Fung is a good resource, thanks for bringing him up.

[Julia_G]

Almost 20 years ago I read a book called “Protein Power” by a medical doctor husband and wife (Drs Eades) that really changed my life.  It discussed the hormonal influences that affected whether, how, and when your body stored fat.

It was more about being healthy (or rather reversing or avoiding certain serious health issues, notably heart disease and diabetes).  It was one of the fairly early dissenters from the notion that consuming dietary fat causes heart disease.

I do remember that at some point in the book the authors cautioned that while their dietary recommendations (not a diet!) would likely produce health results in all cases, it was probable that if you also wanted to lose weight you would probably also need to limit your fat intake.

I think this addresses (to some extent) @Dominique ‘s insistence on the simple equation of calories in / calories out.  Yes, if you consistently eat more than you burn, in whatever form, you will gain weight, and the converse is also true.

However, there still remain questions.  I think it is increasingly clear that calories from sugar and other simple carbohydrates affect your metabolism very differently from calories from proteins and fats.  

It is also likely, from gathering evidence, that because periods of fasting switch metabolism from glucose to ketones (sorry for simplistic lay explanation), there are other metabolic effects, which may be favourable to both health and weight loss.

@Dominique regularly acknowledges the ‘starvation’ effect of slowing down metabolism if weight loss is too precipitate and too prolonged, and, quite wisely, in my opinion, advises periods of maintenance after loss. I often wonder, therefore, why he seems to remain so resistant to other (I would say not so very different) notions of metabolic effect depending on types and timing of dietary choices.  He seems to embrace the simple model of calories in / calories out, while I (with similarly good, but more recent, evidence) have long maintained that not all calories are created equal.  It is not just health, but (for want of a better word) fatness that is affected by dietary choices,  I continue to assert that donut calories affect your body differently than chicken choices (just for example) and it is not only about health - it is also about weight loss.

On a closely related matter, I thought that the demonization of saturated fat had been mostly debunked, but I noted on a recent google that the Harvard Health Letter is still sticking to that good fat / bad fat model.  I would have thought better of my old Alma Mater!

I’ll happily eat chicken skin, but margarine never passes my lips.  The former is delicious, and (to me) worth the calories. I take pleasure in the (tentative) theory that the latter may actually be much worse for me, even though the calories may be the same.  (And now we are back to the premise that not all calories are created equal.)

@WavyDavey  also quite rightly raises the issues of sleep / stress hormones, which can also make a difference in how an individual responds to food consumed.

My sense is that it is clear from the evidence that while the simple calories in vs out model of weight loss is broadly correct, there are many other important metabolic factors that can make a significant difference.