So after all the BS that we have had to endure in this thread...omg I've almost unsubbed a mirrion times...

Somebody disprove what Fung is saying or gtfo

Here's the link to the longer version:

I don't eat **** foods, so you're barking up the wrong tree there.

Again, I don't discount these concepts, just the significance. Fung says these biggest loser guys eat 1500 calories a day, lose a ton of weight, then their tdee, due to a slowed down metabolism, goes down to 1300 and that's why they gain weight back; that is, they eat 200 calories over maintenance and gain it all back over time.

Does anyone actually believe that? Fat people who have lost weight gain all the weight back without increasing calories? Bull****. Look at MLY's log into the mind of an obese person and how they track their foods. Look at that ytf guy. He didn't gain it all back by keeping his calories the same.

Gut biota and hormones telling them to overeat, or is there some mental component to it? Fung makes it sound like fat people eat normal amounts of food and are just fat. Next time you're at the store, look in the carts of fat people and then look in the carts of fit people and note the differences.

And hell yeah, fasting 20 hours a day will work. You've got people snacking 24/7 and now their feeding window is restricted to 4 hours and people are surprised they're losing weight?

He's a kidney specialist (MD). And surely you're not saying everyone who's written a diet book is an 'expert in the field of obesity'? LoL's point, which you glazed over, was that Layne Norton actually has a PhD in Nutrition.

You guys are aware of what many in the nutrition field think about Fung, right? Goodness... What's next, some Taubes or the snake diet guy stuff?

There's no reason to say CICO is 'oversimplifying', when it's just actually simplifying.

As someone who manipulates their weight often, it really is that simple. And I actually have no problem with IF, LCHF, etc... But don't make it something that it isn't.

Now, getting into the compliance or sustainability aspect for every diet ever, that's a different issue all together with a good bit of individuality playing a role.

Doing what works for you is absolutely the right thing for you to do. But educating people with the information on how their body actually works is also the right thing to do so that they can figure out what works for them. Many people have failed by just being told to eat less and move more, or that CICO is all you need to know.

Did you even watch the video above before scorning it?

Did you miss this?

I did not miss it. That's why when my clients ask me if I'm a nutritionist I say "Luckily for u I am not."

Corruption, misinformation and delusion infects nearly everything right down to even what your veterinarian is permitted to suggest to you about your dogs diet.

I'm seeing alot of words, and little content besides beliefs.

I'll ask it again... disprove to me what he is saying.

I watched it, and 5:00-10:00 is straight-up pandering to fat people. He must have a book he's selling, eh?

Lmao. I bash Dr Berg, the fraud, and you say MD's know **** about nutrition, and then you post a vid of Fung, saying he's a diet expert, yet he's a nephrologist (MD). Now you're saying PhD's in Nutrition don't know anything about nutrition. So who does, a chiropractor?

Lol @ your answer to someone asking their trainer if they're a nutritionist, particularly a keto cultist one. How many sessions do they last after having to listen to a 10 minute diatribe about nutritionists after asking a simple question?

More BS, zero facts.

Disprove it or GTFO

There is nothing fishy about Dr. Fung. Which is a huge problem imo.

If you're too lazy to read the article Gorilla posted, then watch the video of Fung. He flat-out says that eating 1500 calories daily (the same amount that lost the weight) will result in "gaining the weight back" regarding a person who lost substantial weight (Biggest Loser show). You tell your clients that bull****, too?

Many medical professionals also still believe the Lipid Hypothesis too even though it's 100% disproven. It's just ignorance from not keeping up, and just sticking to 40 year old dogma.

Disprove this: https://www.myoleanfitness.com/evide...c-restriction/

So your telling me that you have evidence that your body will not resist chronic and prolonged kcal restriction?

I'm not going to say it again disprove it or GTFO

I didn't say the body wouldn't resist, ldo.

He said a person who now requires 1300 calories, due to metabolism slow down from weight loss, and has been eating 1500 calories will now gain back 100 pounds (or w/e lost while eating 3500 calories daily) while eating only 1500 calories and never increasing the 1500 calorie intake. Prove what he said to be true. You know that's a bunch of bull****, pandering to the fats, but keep deflecting.

Prove it or GTFO!
Here is some evidence.
I reject all your evidence that doesn't agree with me!


It's easy to win arguments that way.

I have now seen a few posts like this itt (can't remember if they were from you or others) that seem to be misunderstanding the idea of intermittent fasting. You seem to be implying that because people's eating windows are shorter, that they're getting in fewer calories, and therefore the reason they're losing weight is because of basic CICO.

But the entire point of IF is that you are NOT depriving yourself of calories; that you still get in the same amount of your daily calories you normally would. And the fact that people who do this method and end up having weight loss success is evidence that weight loss (and more specifically fat loss) is not just about CICO, but other factors as well such as when and how you actually take in those calories.

Have there been studies done with IF that show people losing weight eating the same amount of calories?

I have no idea and am far too lazy to look, but who knows if they’d be believable if they did exist. Nutrition and dietary research appears to be riddled with poor science, bad data analysis, political/ethical bias and monetary conflicts of interest.

Fair point Booker.

CICO failed paradigmers and insulin model 4lyfers put burden of disproof on others to dispute quackery.

Amazing.

No, it isn't.

https://journals.lww.com/jbisrir/Abstract/2018/02000/Intermittent_fasting_interventions_for_treatment.1 6.aspx

^.

Yes

Your body does resist calorie restriction for sure. Stronger appetite, reduction in NEAT, etc.

Again, I'd implore anyone interested in the topic to read The Hungry Brain by Stephen Guyenet.