jump to content
my subreddits
more »
Want to join? Log in or sign up in seconds.|
[-]
use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
subreddit:subreddit
find submissions in "subreddit"
author:username
find submissions by "username"
site:example.com
find submissions from "example.com"
url:text
search for "text" in url
selftext:text
search for "text" in self post contents
self:yes (or self:no)
include (or exclude) self posts
nsfw:yes (or nsfw:no)
include (or exclude) results marked as NSFW
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
this post was submitted on
9 points (58% upvoted)
shortlink:
reset password

Negareddit

subscribeunsubscribe8,594 readers
~54 users here now
Fuck reddit.
Like /r/circlebroke but with less effort. Like /r/circlejerk but without subtext.
Feel like your voice is being drowned out by the hivemind?
For people who'd like to share opinions that are directly contrary to the circlejerking redditry.

It's possible to dislike aspects of something you enjoy.

WARNING: We might ban you just because we feel like it.

ABPE - Agreed but please elaborate

created by Combative_DoucheNegareddit creatora community for
you are viewing a single comment's thread.
[–]IrbyTremor [score hidden]  (35 children)
They think its the law of thermodynamics but the stomach is not an engine. The acid breaks down food for nutrients, its not firing it for fuel. The law literally does not apply to the stomach or the rest of the digestion system. if it did, we wouldnt shit. we would dump ash.
CICO weight loss only works for some people because restricting nutrients makes them lose weight. Others? their insulin goes to shit, sugar cravings go throough the roof and their body would be able to suck glucose from a stone if they swallowed one. Cue fatigue, mind fog, depression, insulin resistance. And some FPH asshole on reddit will just tell them they're not trying hard enough.
Dietary science concerning obesity and diabetes is moving away from CICO to carb/protein/fat ratios for a reason.
[–]queer_pinko [score hidden]  (33 children)
The fundamental laws that explain the behavior of literally all other natural phenomena don't apply to biological systems....what? The stomach isn't an engine, but the rest of the body as a thermodynamic system might as well be, and the body can't simply create or destroy energy that it takes in. If you consistently eat at a caloric surplus, you will gain weight, and if you consistent eat at a caloric deficit, you will lose weight. You're right, eating certain ratios of carbs/fats/proteins can indeed aid weight loss, but CICO is still the fundamental mechanism underlying it. Fats and proteins help with satiety, which is why nutritional scientists advocate increase intake of fats/proteins and decrease carbs. At the end of the day, though, 500 cal of sugar and 500 cal of protein provide the same amount of energy, so CICO still applies.
[–]SergeantPenguin [score hidden]  (0 children)
Ever want to disagree with redditors so much you deny the laws of thermodynamics?
[–]IrbyTremor [score hidden]  (31 children)
The human body stores calories. Applying the law of thermodynamics assumes, blatantly, that it wouldnt be able to.
Secondly, the law of thermodynamics would mean everyone has the same basal metabolic rate. This is demonstrably not true.
third, it requires that the body be a perfectly efficient calorie burning machine. See above. Perfectly efficient and uniform.
Also demonstrably not true.
Fourthly, the law of thermodynamics would mean hormones and glucose have no bearing on weight gain or loss. If this was true diabetes wouldnt exist. So yeah. No.
You just splained a lot of shit to rationalize CICO, not even justify it. The macros are far more important than satiety.
Calorie surplus: Nutrient surplus
Calories lacking, opposite of surplus: nutrients lacking. lacking nutrients literally means turning to fat deposits instead of glucose (depending on what you eat!! HUGELY) to keep the brain healthy and provide nutrients enough to function.
You ignored every point I made to go "BUT CICO!"
Glucose, hormones and nutrients decide weight. Misapplying a horrible interpretation of the laws of thermodynamics does not. People who claim this have no idea what the harris-benedict equation even is.
[–]Nerdlinger [score hidden]  (18 children)
The human body stores calories. Applying the law of thermodynamics assumes, blatantly, that it wouldnt be able to.
Do you also believe that batteries violate the laws of thermodynamics?
addendum:
Secondly, the law of thermodynamics would mean everyone has the same basal metabolic rate.
Please explain how this follows from the laws (plural, there's not just one, you know) of thermodynamics. I so have to hear this.
third, it requires that the body be a perfectly efficient calorie burning machine. See above. Perfectly efficient and uniform.
There are no perfect engines, yet the laws of thermodynamics still govern them.
Fourthly, the law of thermodynamics would mean hormones and glucose have no bearing on weight gain or loss.
Again, explain how this follows from the laws.
[–]IrbyTremor [score hidden]  (17 children)
A battery is a closed system. The human body is not.
-thumbs up-
[–]HOOKER_HUGGER [score hidden]  (1 child)
Do you know why energy is coming out of a battery? Because it is not closed, you utter moron.
[–]IrbyTremor [score hidden]  (0 children)
I think an utter moron is someone who doesnt actually understand what a closed system is. xD Woooooooooooooooooooooooooooow
A batter is still a closed system even if energy can come out of it, dude. If you're gonna get mad about terminology, you might want to look up its definition
[–]JustARogue [score hidden]  (8 children)
I don't think the laws of thermodynamics mean what you think they mean.
Are you under the impression that human body creates energy or destroys it?
[–]IrbyTremor [score hidden]  (7 children)
I'm pretty sure they do. You need to look up the first law of thermodynamics and what a closed system is.
[–]JustARogue [score hidden]  (6 children)
Are you under the impression that human body creates energy or destroys it?
[–]IrbyTremor [score hidden]  (5 children)
Are you under the impression that I said the human body (not a closed system, does not engage in entropy until after death, has multiple energy inputs but CICO by the first law of thermodynamics and the harris-benedict equation) can do either?
Because I definitely didnt. Move the goalposts back
[–]JustARogue [score hidden]  (4 children)
Because I definitely didnt. Move the goalposts back
Who is moving goal posts? The laws of thermodynamics say energy can't be created or destroyed.
But according to you: "energy goes in, energy goes out... you can't explain that."
[–]Nerdlinger [score hidden]  (5 children)
A battery is no more a closed system than a human. Put a battery in a charger and holy shit energy flows into it. Put a battery in, say, a cell phone, and energy leaves it. Why do you think you are able to start cars over and over for years, but they also fail to start shortly after the alternator dies.
And no, cars aren't closed systems either.
[–]IrbyTremor [score hidden]  (4 children)
A battery is no more a closed system than a human. Put a battery in a charger and holy shit energy flows into it.
Yeah. Yall are arguing terminology against me but taking a literal definition of closed system and not the one that actually applies.
There's just no conversation here until you get that together.
[–]JustARogue [score hidden]  (3 children)
Feel free to enlighten us. What is your definition of "closed system" in this context?
[–]IrbyTremor [score hidden]  (2 children)
Not one that has multiple energy inputs. You all are assuming I'm saying ALL OF THERMODYNAMICS HAS NO FUNCTION INSIDE OF THE HUMAN BODY
that would be stupid. Pay attention to my words before you flip out? lol
My point is that the first law of thermodynamics and its limitations does not apply through CICO as a simplification of weight loss and gain. Our body does obviously use calories for energy but weight loss and gain is hormonal and nutrient based first and foremost. Which is actually scentifically sound
Otherwise, there would be no such thing as a metabolic rate
[–]JustARogue [score hidden]  (1 child)
So where is the excess of energy going and where is the deficit of energy coming from if CICO doesn't apply to weight gain/loss?
You can argue that hormones, etc affect weight change, that's fine. But then you are just arguing that the CO part of CICO is variable, which is also fine. It doesn't mean that CICO is invalid when it comes to weight change.
[–]queer_pinko [score hidden]  (11 children)
I might have dropped out of pre-med before switching to political science, but I did take organic chemistry and biochemistry...
The first law of thermodynamics says that energy cannot be created or destroyed, but it can be changed. When the body stores calories as fat, it is simply changing energy via chemical processes. Energy is stored in the bonds between atoms and molecules. Creating bonds requires an input of energy, while breaking bonds releases that energy. A Calorie is a derived unit that measures the net energy stored in the bonds of a particular macromolecule (fats, carbs, proteins). If I consume more calories than my body has need of, then, through chemical processes, the body changes the configuration of individual bonds between molecules to form fat molecules. The energy is still there, it's just "arranged" differently. If, then, I consume less calories than my body needs, it can get energy by breaking down the bonds in fat molecules it has stored. You clearly don't understand basic chemistry.
The reason nutritionists are encouraging people to increase fat/protein in their diets is because fat and protein produce greater satiety than carbohydrates do. The amount of energy in 100 cal of carbs is the exact same amount of energy in 100 cal of protein, but the protein often makes you feel fuller, thereby, avoiding feelings of hunger while eating at a calorie deficit. Once again, the human body cannot somehow violate the basic laws of physics that govern literally all known, observable phenomena. CICO is the fundamental mechanism of weight loss. Yeah, age, biological sex, and other things can impact an individual's metabolism, but all of that is still subordinate to the laws of physics.
[–]IrbyTremor [score hidden]  (10 children)
I might have dropped out of pre-med before switching to political science, but I did take organic chemistry and biochemistry...
And that would make you automatically right becaaaaause?
Like I said, there are actual limitations to the law of thermodynamics and using it to apply CICO to adipose tissue flies in the face of the Harris-Benedict equation
Congrats on learning a science or two. You're still not right. Energy is involves in weight loss but what actually matters is nutrients.
You clearly don't understand basic chemistry
Actually I understand much past basic chemistry, my smug and assumptive friend. Contrary to popular belief you're not the only person who's ever been educated. Shock! Awe!
You are misapplying laws of energy and thermodynamics to how the body processes nutrients and calories. In fact, you're cutting nutrients and hormones out completely.
That is where you are wrong.
[–]queer_pinko [score hidden]  (9 children)
This is pointless. You clearly have such a poor understanding of chemistry and physics that you don't even understand why you're wrong. Hell, you're not even wrong because what you're arguing is simply so disconnected from actual established science that there isn't even enough common ground to make any kind of truth statement about the claims you are proposing. Have fun being wrong and being completely scientifically illiterate. I'll be here, in the real world, comfortable with the fact that literally all reputable, peer-reviewed science corroborates my statements.
[–]IrbyTremor [score hidden]  (8 children)
This is pointless.
True.
And in the real world if you think I got my research from blogs instead of also science, you're an idiot. It is actual, defined science. So much that the medical industry is moving away from the guidelines posited by research firms like the ADA and more because of exactly what I have been saying
But yes, you can stop. -waves-
[–]queer_pinko [score hidden]  (7 children)
Go try proposing your theory to a reputable biochemist or biophysicist. I'd be surprised if they could stop laughing long enough to even try to explain to you why you're wrong.
[–]IrbyTremor [score hidden]  (6 children)
Go try proposing your theory
Already been done. Not by me. By actual industry professionals.
But you can stop now, I promise.
[–]queer_pinko [score hidden]  (5 children)
Then please, I'd love to read these studies. I expect peer-reviewed, primary, academic sources from reputable researchers with at least a PhD (in a relevant field e.g. chemistry, biology, physics, no sociologists or whatever) or MD.
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy (updated). © 2016 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
π Rendered by PID 8892 on app-558 at 2016-10-12 01:08:41.197012+00:00 running 3f49cad country code: NL.
Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies.  Learn More
0%
 
10%
 
20%
 
30%
 
40%
 
50%
 
60%
 
70%
 
80%
 
90%
 
100%