• Keep up to date with Ausbb via Twitter and Facebook. Please add us!
  • Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

    The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.

    Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.

Big Mick

"2014 - Kunce of the year"
I often hear Calories In vs Calories Out when referring to weight loss.

Is this actually true?

Is it really that simple or do other factors play a role?

Is it a sustainable realistic long term method to control weight?

Please qualify your answers with some evidence of why it works or why it does not work.
 
Calories in vs Calories out.

Yes, for most people, in most situations, this is how it works. Are there special cases? Probably.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
 
The issue for some is the tracking. It can get tedious, and this puts them off massively.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
 
Calories in vs Calories out.

Yes, for most people, in most situations, this is how it works. Are there special cases? Probably.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Interesting, I actually believe quite the opposite. Calories are pretty much irrelevant in most cases, and there may be very few special cases where it MAY play a role.

Weight loss is 90% hormonal response to the food you eat. Hormones store fat.
 
Its definately more complicated for some people, but for most people, consume less than you burn...and voila, weight loss will happen. ;)


Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
 
Its definately more complicated for some people, but for most people, consume less than you burn...and voila, weight loss will happen. ;)

But this is an almost impossible task, as you consume less and less your metabolism adjusts accordingly (your body is designed like that as a survival mechanism), this gets even worse when you are attempting to maintain muscle mass, and even worse when attempting to gain muscle mass.

If you are consuming less than you burn you put yourself in a catabolic state, not a place you ever want to be as a body builder or weight lifter.

And how come the same person can either gain/maintain/lose weight on the exact same amount of calories and activity simply by adjusting the types or food you consume or even food intake timing?? That completely throws the calories in vs calories out argument out the window.
 
Counting calories does get tricky more so as one gets older.

Yeah The In versus out can be a bit vague and the balance between what and how much you eat versus an aging body and the balance of activities we use to kill fat will change over time.

if ones really serious about losing or killing fat them calories should be counted with adjustments made here and there and doing a safe hard workout to build and or maintain muscle.

Having said all that shit, muscle is key to everything, and as you get older muscle maintenance gets harder “less is more” has never been more true.
 
A calorie is a unit of measure, there's nothing complicated about it.

Where it does get shady is that everyone processes that calorie differently, It could be easily tested by feeding coma patients the same calorific diet and measuring individual weightloss because activity is completely removed from the equation but the fact remains that when energy output > energy input over a period of time, weight loss occurs.

That's physics and irrefutable.
 
A calorie is a unit of measure, there's nothing complicated about it.

Agreed

Where it does get shady is that everyone processes that calorie differently

Agreed, but also consider where the calories come from affects the way they get processed.

It could be easily tested by feeding coma patients the same calorific diet and measuring individual weightloss because activity is completely removed from the equation

Won't work, metabolic rate differs from person to person.

but the fact remains that when energy output > energy input over a period of time, weight loss occurs.

Over time may be if the calories are low enough and you are starving the person. Not really optimal for someone trying to gain muscle.

That's physics and irrefutable.

But you have completely disregarded why food turns too fat.

Eat 3000 calories and you will most likely not gain weight

Eat 3000 calories and add insulin and you are likely to gain weight.
 
Top