Does it matter?

Um, that guy didn't lose "tons" of weight. He lost 27 pounds.

Plus, while his cholesterol numbers improved, they didn't improve by as much as you'd expect for someone who lost as much weight as he did.

The thing is: all it takes to lose weight it to eat less calories than you burn. It's really that simple.

The complicated part is that no one know exactly how many calories they are burning or even how many they are eating. (Though it's easier to estimate how many you are eating.) The numbers and formulas are all just estimates and they can get you into the ballpark, but only if you fit the assumptions that their formulas make.

So, for example, some people eat too many carbs and their metabolism slows down. So now they think they are burning as many calories as last week when they weren't eating as many carbs, but they aren't. They are burning less.

Someone else may get really fit and have a high VO2Max. This person now burns more calories during exercise than someone who isn't as fit but is the same weight.

Another thing that happens is that humans aren't machines and our minds play tricks on us. Studies show we consistently under-estimate what we eat and over-estimate how much we work out. (Logging can help with that, btw.)

Finally, the scale can be very precise but it's not necessarily that accurate a way to measure fat loss. So sometimes people do things like eat more one day and their body responds by using more energy from their glycogen store and they lose a bunch of water weight. So it looks like they lost weight by eating more, but it's a temporary thing because the body will put that glycogen back and the water back with it.

Related to that, sometimes when people eat more, they have more energy and so are more active. They push harder when they workout. They move around more (maybe take 7000 steps a day instead of their normal 4000). So they are burning more calories than they were at the lower calorie intake, but don't necessarily realize it.

My approach to maintenance was to ignore all formulas. I was eating a certain amount and losing weight and I wanted to stop. So I upped my calorie intake by 200 calories and waited two weeks. I was still losing so I went up 200 calories more. Then 100 calories. I kept adding calories (100-200 at a time), waiting two weeks to see what happened until I stopped losing weight.

I ended up discovering that the right amount for me is net calories around 1550-1650. Is that what the formulas predicted? No. It's actually higher. (I think that's because my VO2Max is higher than average.) But someone else may end up with a lower net calorie range than the formula predicts for any number of reasons. This doesn't necessarily mean your metabolism is "screwed up". It just means you aren't average in one or more area that the formula is assuming you are.

Like I said, I definitely wasn't advocating this man's diet. As a matter of fact, I didn't even read the article or see the news reports, I just had conversations with people who had. I'm trying to figure out the maintenance thing. I am very careful abou****ching my intake and trying to find the right balance with protein/carbs/fat. I have definitely upped the intensity of my workouts, and a month ago, my body fat percentage was around 13%, but I have changed shape a lot since then, so it may be lower now. I have upped my calories to around 1300 most days, but it does seem like days I eat 1500, I lose a pound. It is odd to me, but it may be exactly what you were talking about.

It doesn't surprise me in the least that people are taking this news story and spinning into something that justifies eating crap though. Sounds like that's what the people who saw the story did. Suddenly it's not a modest amount of weight but a "ton". LOL

The man said he did it to prove that losing weight is a matter of calories in vs. calories out and IMO that's pretty much all his story proves.

Everyone is looking for the easy way out, something that uses no self control, eat what you want, don't have to work out, etc. Heck, that's what I used to want. The first couple of weeks of a lifestyle change are hard, cravings are bad, you are tired from working out, then BAM! something changes. I feel sluggish when I don't work out. I hate taking days off, even though I know you have to give your body a rest sometimes. If I eat something not so healthy, I feel guilty and it messes up my digestive system.

I have always liked healthy food, but I ate way too much of it and ate bad snacks on a regular basis. I do believe I needed the sleeve to restrict my portions, but I didn't get to goal and beyond in 5 months by relying on that alone and eating small portions of junk food!

"I have always liked healthy food, but I ate way too much of it and ate bad snacks on a regular basis."

Hey, me too.

However, I don't think we can under-estimate the power of hormones. Ghrelin is very powerful and it does drive people to eat and not to move. I feel like not having as much ghrelin is part of why I am so active now and why it's easier to make healthy choices.