/fit/ - Fitness, Health, and Feels

>>150592

A high metabolism is still Calories-In-versus-Calories-Out. A high metabolism just means that you're inefficient and waste calories as heat that must be dissipated.

I can also eat large amounts of food without gaining weight, but after stuffing myself I don't eat again for a day or so, like the other anon.

There was a time that I ate much more and didn't gain weight, but I was much more physically active then. CICO is basic physics.

>>150593

>A high metabolism just means that you're inefficient and waste calories as heat that must be dissipated.

Does Science back up this claim? Do people with higher metabolisms live at a higher body temperature?

From my understanding, just being even one degree above 37.5 degrees Celsius is pretty bad and I think, if we're talking about people eating calories in excess of 3000, that's a lot of extra energy and thus, a lot of heat. I think it would need to boost the body temperature by more than a degree if this explanation were correct.

>I can also eat large amounts of food without gaining weight, but after stuffing myself I don't eat again for a day or so, like the other anon.

Well then that would imply that if one were to expand their scope of time from daily to, say, weekly, one would find that you were in fact eating normally.

Consider the man that eats 4000kcal in a day but only once out of every two days. Well, if you average this hypothetical man's intake across those two days, you'd find that it's as though he was eating 2000kcal every day, which is normal.

If you are, with regards to weekly calorie intake rather than daily, eating normally then this would ultimately be a simple case of CICO i.e. it would not be the supposed "high metabolism" case where a person is eating a lot of calories and yet failing to gain weight.

>There was a time that I ate much more and didn't gain weight, but I was much more physically active then

Right, which would comply with CICO, not with this idea that you have a high metabolism.

In conclusion, as your explanation for a high metabolism is something I consider unlikely and since your claim that you eat large amounts of food is not truly representative of your average daily calorie intake, I'm inclined to believe that a "high metabolism" is a myth. I look forward to further posts on the topic.

>>150596

> Does Science back up this claim?

It's basic physics. It's the Law of Conservation of Energy.

> Do people with higher metabolisms live at a higher body temperature?

No, the additional heat is dissipated. Such people sweat more easily, stay in cooler places, or otherwise are more efficient at dissipating heat.

> Right, which would comply with CICO, not with this idea that you have a high metabolism.

The ability to maintain higher physical activity implies a higher metabolism. "High metabolism" is CICO.

>>150598

>No, the additional heat is dissipated.

If the additional heat is being dissipated then surely one would detect such energy? You may need to give me a bit of a physics lesson on this one. I recall being taught in school that if a metal rod and block of wood are at the same temperature, the rod will still feel hotter than the wood (assuming both were above body temperature in temperature) because the rod is a better heat conductor than the wood. It transmits heat more readily. The lesson here then is that how hot something feels isn't representative of how hot it actually is.

Applying this lesson, even if those with a high metabolism were not living at a higher body temperature, surely they would at least feel hotter to touch? Returning to my question of the scientific validity of these claims, has Science shown that those with a high metabolism radiate more heat? You seem to just be assuming this. I mean, it's a reasonable assumption but I'd like to see that it was proven.

>The ability to maintain higher physical activity implies a higher metabolism. "High metabolism" is CICO.

I think I understand now.

You acknowledge that there are indeed people out there who truly can, daily, consume a large volume of calories without gaining weight. Your explanation for this is that the energy of the excess calories is radiated out of the body through heat.

Simultaneously, there are those who are able to endure the caloric demands of a physically active life because their metabolism is able to rise high enough to, again, burn through those calories. Implicitly then, the metabolic rate seems to be the rate at which your body burns through calories.

In your eyes, the existence of people who can, daily, consume a large amount of calories does not violate CICO because the energy from those calories is lost through heat and thus, the Law of Conservation of Energy remains unbroken.

Now, my issue with the existence of slim, gluttonous eaters was not that they seem to violate the Laws of Physics, it was that they do indeed, daily, consume a large amount of calories without experiencing weight gain.

You see, the basis underlying the HAES movement is the notion that because some people will naturally gravitate towards particular bodyfat percentages, that all bodies should be accepted. Now originally, my stance in relation to this was that the supporters of HAES had misinterpreted reality in the following way: They see their slim friends eating just as much, if not more food than them and so the fat observer concludes that the difference between their bodies must be solely due to genetics. What the fat observer is oblivious to however is that the slim friend doesn't always eat like this.

For skinny people, there will regularly be days where they will barely eat anything and that's if they eat anything at all. Slim people may actually worsen this delusion as they themselves will forget that there are days where they didn't eat or they will claim to "eat a lot" when in reality, they merely think they do. I always believed that if fat people could simply see the truth of how much slim people really eat, they would be much more likely to change their ways.

Now however, you have confirmed that it is indeed true that some people truly are able to consume, daily, a large amount of calories without experiencing weight gain. Now, you have also explained it, that these people radiate out more heat rather than put on fat but nonetheless, just as the HAES-supporters argued, there are indeed people living in this world who are naturally slim. On this point, they were correct.

This was an interesting discussion for me. You see, while I did believe some people seem to need to eat more in order to gain weight, I never actually questioned where the calories go. As I failed to acknowledge calories as a form of energy, the thought that the energy must go somewhere never occurred to me. It just seemed like some were eating more without consequence.

Well anyway, it seems that it is indeed true then that some people must work harder than others to attain the same result. I'm somewhat upset by this revelation but it's not like anyone has an easy time putting on muscle. It just feels upsetting that some people are basically protected from ever experiencing the shame and humiliation of being obese by virtue of their genetics as it's clearly better to be skinny than fat. To conclude, I'd like to say thanks, for taking the time to explain all of this to me.

>>150598

Out of both a sense of gratitude and urgency, I'd also like to reach out to you.

I haven't watched this video embedded into my post just yet but it might be persuasive on the topic of why we are in fact in the end-times. I think it would be good if, in the end, you are able to see the Father in heaven and so I'd like to extend this olive-branch to you and invite you to join the Roman Catholic Church.

Now, if you reject this offer, I understand. I myself at one point believed everything /x/ and /pol/ had to say regarding the "true nature" of not just Christianity but all of the Abrahamic religions (not that their theories are necessarily your reasons for rejecting it of course). It's just that I fear the unrepentant are indeed running out of time to repent and so, moreso for my own peace of mind, I'd like to know that at some point, somebody tried to reach out to you. With that, I wish you well.

>>150599

There is another possible inefficiency. Eating calories does not guarantee that you will be able to digest and absorb those calories. Some seemingly gluttonous eaters may not be getting the full caloric value of their food.

>>150601

At least it's not an Allah spammer.

Let's see if you're human and actually in the group you promote.

What is the difference between the Church spiritual and Church temporal? What are magisteria?

>>150602

Apologies for the delayed response. I could never get back to you sooner due to my poor time-management.

I didn't know some people could be really inefficient with their caloric intake to the point where they could eat gluttonously and seemingly gain no weight. That's interesting.

I must admit, I'm new to my faith. Almost everything I know about it is coming from the lectures available on the Sensus Fidelium YouTube Channel.

I think when you say "Church temporal", you perhaps mean what I commonly hear referred to as "Church Militant", that is, well, us Catholics here on Earth. We're at risk of losing our salvation but our prayers are more efficacious than the ones coming from those in "Church Suffering" and we can earn "merit" (I believe this to be a kind of spiritual reward in heaven? I'm not too clear to be honest).

"Church Spiritual" isn't something I've heard before. What I know is that there's two other "Churches" outside of Militant. There's "Church Suffering" i.e. those being purified in the fires of Purgatory and there's "Church Triumphant" i.e. those in Heaven, enjoying the "beatific vision" of The Trinity.

I don't know what the "magisteria" are but I do hear the term "magisterium" occasionally (perhaps that's a bit nitpicky? I'd rather be safe than sorry though). From my understanding, they are a group of people (clergy perhaps? I've literally never looked into it) who exist to interpret the Bible in a way such that its lessons can be applied to the questions raised by modern life. Take for example, the fact that the Bible does not explicitly condemn IVF. Now, God, in his omniscience, must've known that IVF would be discovered. Now, while he never explicitly condemned it, the magisterium have deduced that it is not an acceptable practise. I must admit, the explanation doesn't really strike me as "holy". It feels more like a calculation, actually but I suppose that too is still valid.

Correct nutrition really helped me to be more healthy and lose some weight. Plus I visited coolsculpting procedure on https://www.byoulaserclinic.com/contact-us/ because I always wanted to get rid of fats on my body. Plus now I attend to fitness lessons two times per week.

>>150592

>Meanwhile, I also remember an anon admitting that initially, he believed himself to have a high metabolism since he too could seemingly eat a lot of food without gaining weight but what was really happening was that he had an irregular daily calorie intake such that on some days, he'd eat around 2500 calories and on other days, he'd eat as little as 500 and so when you look at his weekly calorie intake, he's actually undereating.

I have seen this happen, even with my own kids. You put something down on the table that they like, stand back, they will fight you for it and lick the plate. Then they barely eat anything for two days. If you measured only the binge, you would think they would be total fatasses. The kid that binges the worst is also the thinnest.

I'm on a bulk now, and find myself not wanting to eat as much, it has become a chore. But I make it happen even if it always isn't the cleanest food. It's fucking hard to source enough meat during covid…

I think the secret to these people is that after a binge, they just aren't hungry, so they don't eat. Food doesn't sound good to them, there's nothing that sounds good to eat. They don't really notice, if you didn't have to take a piss would you notice if you went for a day or two without a piss? Probably not.

>>150596

>I think it would need to boost the body temperature by more than a degree if this explanation were correct.

It's unpleasant, you find ways to cool off. Unless you think you would just sit there in a puddle of sweat. You take clothes off, wear lighter clothes, turn down the AC, drink ice water, etc.

>>150599

>Slim people may actually worsen this delusion as they themselves will forget that there are days where they didn't eat or they will claim to "eat a lot" when in reality, they merely think they do. I always believed that if fat people could simply see the truth of how much slim people really eat, they would be much more likely to change their ways.

Here's the thing. Do you want to be this person:

>eats ton of food

>fat person notices

>hey anon, you sure eat a lot, but you are skinny

Ok, choice time, do you:

>yeah, this is my first meal today

>probably won't eat tomorrow either

>looks at lard ass, who you know is going to go home and eat more after this

or:

>Teehee, yeah, I sure do eat a lot. Guess I'm lucky!

No one wants to tell the fatty that they are skinny because they don't eat, because then you are basically calling the fatty a glutton. Which they are, but it's usually not socially acceptable to call fatties out on it. So you have to pretend you don't know how it happens. This includes people of average build also. No one wants to hear how much you lift. No one wants to hear that you work for it. Because if it's not "random genetics" then they could look /fit/, but they don't because of a character flaw, they are lazy. People understand this, and are relieved when you tell them you don't lift.

>HAES

Those fatties need to fucking die. I'm tired of looking at fatties, they are getting into media, I don't want to see so much goddamn fat that women could be naked and you don't even see any naughty bits. That's foul and fat acceptance people should burn for it.

Also, food choices matter. If you have a lot of junk food around, it's easy to pack on calories without even trying. Get rid of the junk food, the foods that you can fuck up your day with a 600 calorie bowl of ice cream and go back for seconds. If you are hungry have a banana or some yogurt.

Anyways anon, good luck. And remember, no one wants to see your gut. I still wish you luck and strength though.

>>150619

>No one wants to tell the fatty that they are skinny because they don't eat, because then you are basically calling the fatty a glutton. Which they are, but it's usually not socially acceptable to call fatties out on it.

Oh, I see.

Not only are there people with inefficient metabolisms who eat a lot of food and fail to gain weight, there are also irregular eaters who are also aware of their irregular eating habit and merely hide the truth of this matter from their fat friend. That sounds a bit cruel but at the same time, I think there's a difference between the fat friend who whines about her weight difference with her friends and merely seeks consolation and the fat friend who sincerely seeks weight-loss advice and is willing to accept critique to make changes. The fat friend was probably seeking consolation.

Well, thanks for the information anyway.