Constrained Energy Expenditure

[5byfive]

When it comes to losing weight, what you eat matters most. Cardio has my support, but it simply doesn't shift the number on the scale in the way people once assumed. This isn't new information, yet more and more data keeps confirming it. A poor diet can't be fixed by exercise alone. What's curious is that resistance training appears to be a different story. Short and to the point video. For me, Menno Henselmans sets the standard when it comes to dissecting research.

View: https://youtu.be/yiclzDPIyQ0?si

 

[Rezwalker]

skipping 500 cal through diet is simpler than exercising off 500 cal with cardio

 

[N Sharp]

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

 

[wildweasel]

every point raised here looks accurate to me.

One thing that deserves a nod is fasted cardio. When you do cardio on an empty stomach, your body has to tap into fat and glycogen reserves. That won't cancel out bad eating habits or a calorie surplus, but it does nudge your body toward using stored fat for fuel rather than relying on calories from food.

 

[Grogu]

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

I'm in complete agreement — the calories we take in get undercounted far too often, and I'd put my agreement at 1,000%. Serving sizes have drifted so far from any sensible baseline, packaging claims can steer you wrong, and tracking every calorie is something most folks simply won't do.

For myself, I log intake on 5 days out of the week and keep calories in check, though I treat the result as a ballpark rather than a precise measurement. In my view it's "close enough for government work".

On the output side, I've never subtracted exercise burn from what I eat, apart from using an overall estimated TDEE based on how active I am. That figure has come down alongside my weight loss, and so has my intake.

Back when I began tirz, counting calories wasn't part of my routine, since I figured people at a "normal" weight don't bother with it. The trouble was my TDEE sat so high (3,400) that simply eating less did the job.

 

[Grogu]

5byfive said:

When it comes to losing weight, what you eat matters most. Cardio has my support, but it simply doesn't shift the number on the scale in the way people once assumed. This isn't new information, yet more and more data keeps confirming it. A poor diet can't be fixed by exercise alone. What's curious is that resistance training appears to be a different story. Short and to the point video. For me, Menno Henselmans sets the standard when it comes to dissecting research.

View: https://youtu.be/yiclzDPIyQ0?si

Right — a poor diet can't be fixed by running or walking alone. In my area there's a man who is roughly as wide as he is tall. Friendly guy. He goes walking in the worst heat of south Florida, fully covered in workout gear. He's kept this up for years. During all that time, it doesn't appear he has dropped any weight. Once I ran into him at the supermarket and took a look at what was in his cart, checking item by item, and it was loaded with nothing but junk food. (I felt so envious ).

Let me say this before anyone comes at me: I'm not claiming cardio has no health advantages past weight loss, and I do believe cardio is beneficial. Still, when it comes to losing weight, it doesn't help much.

 

[Hawk_recon]

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

In my opinion, for anyone trying to lose weight, these two areas are likely where most people slip up. To get steady results over the long haul, you have to remain disciplined and watchful.

 

[N Sharp]

Grogu said:

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

I'm in complete agreement — the calories we take in get undercounted far too often, and I'd put my agreement at 1,000%. Serving sizes have drifted so far from any sensible baseline, packaging claims can steer you wrong, and tracking every calorie is something most folks simply won't do.

For myself, I log intake on 5 days out of the week and keep calories in check, though I treat the result as a ballpark rather than a precise measurement. In my view it's "close enough for government work".

On the output side, I've never subtracted exercise burn from what I eat, apart from using an overall estimated TDEE based on how active I am. That figure has come down alongside my weight loss, and so has my intake.

Back when I began tirz, counting calories wasn't part of my routine, since I figured people at a "normal" weight don't bother with it. The trouble was my TDEE sat so high (3,400) that simply eating less did the job.

Same here — when I first began tirz, I tried to "eat intuitively" for that exact reason.

Turns out that approach is mostly nonsense. If intuitive eating had actually worked for me, I wouldn't have been overeating to begin with.

On top of that, the health and fitness world is packed with bad information. So even after buying a food scale and figuring out how to decode confusing nutrition labels, you still second-guess yourself and struggle to trust the process.

It's great that you landed on something that works and that you can keep up with. For me, once I got really used to my own portion sizes, I could loosen up a lot too and simply tweak what I ate based on weekly weigh-ins.

 

[Smiter]

Grogu said:

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

I'm in complete agreement — the calories we take in get undercounted far too often, and I'd put my agreement at 1,000%. Serving sizes have drifted so far from any sensible baseline, packaging claims can steer you wrong, and tracking every calorie is something most folks simply won't do.

For myself, I log intake on 5 days out of the week and keep calories in check, though I treat the result as a ballpark rather than a precise measurement. In my view it's "close enough for government work".

On the output side, I've never subtracted exercise burn from what I eat, apart from using an overall estimated TDEE based on how active I am. That figure has come down alongside my weight loss, and so has my intake.

Back when I began tirz, counting calories wasn't part of my routine, since I figured people at a "normal" weight don't bother with it. The trouble was my TDEE sat so high (3,400) that simply eating less did the job.

Huh? In what way? What was your starting size?

Grogu said:

5byfive said:

When it comes to losing weight, what you eat matters most. Cardio has my support, but it simply doesn't shift the number on the scale in the way people once assumed. This isn't new information, yet more and more data keeps confirming it. A poor diet can't be fixed by exercise alone. What's curious is that resistance training appears to be a different story. Short and to the point video. For me, Menno Henselmans sets the standard when it comes to dissecting research.

View: https://youtu.be/yiclzDPIyQ0?si

Right — a poor diet can't be fixed by running or walking alone. In my area there's a man who is roughly as wide as he is tall. Friendly guy. He goes walking in the worst heat of south Florida, fully covered in workout gear. He's kept this up for years. During all that time, it doesn't appear he has dropped any weight. Once I ran into him at the supermarket and took a look at what was in his cart, checking item by item, and it was loaded with nothing but junk food. (I felt so envious ).

Let me say this before anyone comes at me: I'm not claiming cardio has no health advantages past weight loss, and I do believe cardio is beneficial. Still, when it comes to losing weight, it doesn't help much.

Hang in there, sis...cardio suxx...even if it doesnt.

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

PREACH!

wildweasel said:

every point raised here looks accurate to me.

One thing that deserves a nod is fasted cardio. When you do cardio on an empty stomach, your body has to tap into fat and glycogen reserves. That won't cancel out bad eating habits or a calorie surplus, but it does nudge your body toward using stored fat for fuel rather than relying on calories from food.

That is Au. Raise thermogenesis in our bodies and it becomes platinum, and our TDEE rises. With no workouts logged at all, a single 4 hour workout yesterday, helped by thermogeneics, produced these numbers in the watch's app.

 

[wildweasel]

Grogu said:

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

I'm in complete agreement — the calories we take in get undercounted far too often, and I'd put my agreement at 1,000%. Serving sizes have drifted so far from any sensible baseline, packaging claims can steer you wrong, and tracking every calorie is something most folks simply won't do.

For myself, I log intake on 5 days out of the week and keep calories in check, though I treat the result as a ballpark rather than a precise measurement. In my view it's "close enough for government work".

On the output side, I've never subtracted exercise burn from what I eat, apart from using an overall estimated TDEE based on how active I am. That figure has come down alongside my weight loss, and so has my intake.

Back when I began tirz, counting calories wasn't part of my routine, since I figured people at a "normal" weight don't bother with it. The trouble was my TDEE sat so high (3,400) that simply eating less did the job.

Most people at a 'normal' weight, in my view, never bother tracking what they eat — they simply rely on intuition.

For me, learning to count calories turned out to be incredibly effective, and modern tools like cronometer plus a food scale have made the process almost effortless.

Speaking from my own experience: during periods when i skipped calorie counting, my body fat hovered around 15% at best. Several years back, before i began aggressively trying to "eat healthy," i even climbed past 20%+, yet no matter what i did i could never drop below roughly 15% bf.

These days i do count calories, and once i started it shocked me how simple it became to steer my body composition in whatever direction i wanted...

When i began counting cals i weighed 165lbs and carried this stubborn belly fat (~15% bf at the time) that refused to budge even after quite literally over a year of effort... roughly 8 weeks later i had dropped to 155lbs ~10% bf with no stubborn belly fat left, and from that point i've put on about 20 pounds of lean muscle while adding zero body fat.

counting calories is powerful

 

[wildweasel]

Smiter said:

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

I'm in complete agreement — the calories we take in get undercounted far too often, and I'd put my agreement at 1,000%. Serving sizes have drifted so far from any sensible baseline, packaging claims can steer you wrong, and tracking every calorie is something most folks simply won't do.

For myself, I log intake on 5 days out of the week and keep calories in check, though I treat the result as a ballpark rather than a precise measurement. In my view it's "close enough for government work".

On the output side, I've never subtracted exercise burn from what I eat, apart from using an overall estimated TDEE based on how active I am. That figure has come down alongside my weight loss, and so has my intake.

Back when I began tirz, counting calories wasn't part of my routine, since I figured people at a "normal" weight don't bother with it. The trouble was my TDEE sat so high (3,400) that simply eating less did the job.

what? how? How large were you?

Click to expand...

My numbers land in a similar range. When I want to cut, I aim for 3k calories a day, and body fat comes off quite fast. Around 3300 keeps my weight steady, while 3500 is the point where I start gaining.

 

[N Sharp]

Hawk_recon said:

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

In my opinion, for anyone trying to lose weight, these two areas are likely where most people slip up. To get steady results over the long haul, you have to remain disciplined and watchful.

Yep, results come at such a slow pace that people bail out before actually sticking with it long enough.

wildweasel said:

Grogu said:

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

I'm in complete agreement — the calories we take in get undercounted far too often, and I'd put my agreement at 1,000%. Serving sizes have drifted so far from any sensible baseline, packaging claims can steer you wrong, and tracking every calorie is something most folks simply won't do.

For myself, I log intake on 5 days out of the week and keep calories in check, though I treat the result as a ballpark rather than a precise measurement. In my view it's "close enough for government work".

On the output side, I've never subtracted exercise burn from what I eat, apart from using an overall estimated TDEE based on how active I am. That figure has come down alongside my weight loss, and so has my intake.

Back when I began tirz, counting calories wasn't part of my routine, since I figured people at a "normal" weight don't bother with it. The trouble was my TDEE sat so high (3,400) that simply eating less did the job.

Most people at a 'normal' weight, in my view, never bother tracking what they eat — they simply rely on intuition.

For me, learning to count calories turned out to be incredibly effective, and modern tools like cronometer plus a food scale have made the process almost effortless.

Speaking from my own experience: during periods when i skipped calorie counting, my body fat hovered around 15% at best. Several years back, before i began aggressively trying to "eat healthy," i even climbed past 20%+, yet no matter what i did i could never drop below roughly 15% bf.

These days i do count calories, and once i started it shocked me how simple it became to steer my body composition in whatever direction i wanted...

When i began counting cals i weighed 165lbs and carried this stubborn belly fat (~15% bf at the time) that refused to budge even after quite literally over a year of effort... roughly 8 weeks later i had dropped to 155lbs ~10% bf with no stubborn belly fat left, and from that point i've put on about 20 pounds of lean muscle while adding zero body fat.

counting calories is powerful

wildweasel said:

Grogu said:

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

I'm in complete agreement — the calories we take in get undercounted far too often, and I'd put my agreement at 1,000%. Serving sizes have drifted so far from any sensible baseline, packaging claims can steer you wrong, and tracking every calorie is something most folks simply won't do.

For myself, I log intake on 5 days out of the week and keep calories in check, though I treat the result as a ballpark rather than a precise measurement. In my view it's "close enough for government work".

On the output side, I've never subtracted exercise burn from what I eat, apart from using an overall estimated TDEE based on how active I am. That figure has come down alongside my weight loss, and so has my intake.

Back when I began tirz, counting calories wasn't part of my routine, since I figured people at a "normal" weight don't bother with it. The trouble was my TDEE sat so high (3,400) that simply eating less did the job.

Most people at a 'normal' weight, in my view, never bother tracking what they eat — they simply rely on intuition.

For me, learning to count calories turned out to be incredibly effective, and modern tools like cronometer plus a food scale have made the process almost effortless.

Speaking from my own experience: during periods when i skipped calorie counting, my body fat hovered around 15% at best. Several years back, before i began aggressively trying to "eat healthy," i even climbed past 20%+, yet no matter what i did i could never drop below roughly 15% bf.

These days i do count calories, and once i started it shocked me how simple it became to steer my body composition in whatever direction i wanted...

When i began counting cals i weighed 165lbs and carried this stubborn belly fat (~15% bf at the time) that refused to budge even after quite literally over a year of effort... roughly 8 weeks later i had dropped to 155lbs ~10% bf with no stubborn belly fat left, and from that point i've put on about 20 pounds of lean muscle while adding zero body fat.

counting calories is powerful

This^^^ When you commit and put your faith in tracking calories, the effect feels like magic. Amazing recomp—really thrilled for you!

 

[randompersonrandom]

Right, and... something I believe belongs alongside nearly every discussion about how cardio, exercise, or movement won't slim you down: getting thinner isn't the point of it.

The purpose of cutting calories is to "get thinner." The purpose of exercise, cardio included, is to "avoid looking and feeling like hot garbage even after you've gotten thinner."

Currently I'm 5'5" and 128 pounds. Cutting calories on tirz, plus VERY gentle exercise, carried me most of the way. Then roughly a month ago I told myself, "hoo girl, you gotta get off your ass. You look like hell, flabby and loose, and where tf is your endurance and balance that you always had in such high supply and felt so proud of?" So I picked up a bicycle, signed up at a gym, took long walks at night for fun, and now I look and feel a LOT better than I did for awhile there.

 

[wildweasel]

randompersonrandom said:

Right, and... something I believe belongs alongside nearly every discussion about how cardio, exercise, or movement won't slim you down: getting thinner isn't the point of it.

The purpose of cutting calories is to "get thinner." The purpose of exercise, cardio included, is to "avoid looking and feeling like hot garbage even after you've gotten thinner."

Currently I'm 5'5" and 128 pounds. Cutting calories on tirz, plus VERY gentle exercise, carried me most of the way. Then roughly a month ago I told myself, "hoo girl, you gotta get off your ass. You look like hell, flabby and loose, and where tf is your endurance and balance that you always had in such high supply and felt so proud of?" So I picked up a bicycle, signed up at a gym, took long walks at night for fun, and now I look and feel a LOT better than I did for awhile there.

Glad to see this — nice work, and I'm rooting for you.

No argument from me on that point. Movement should be treated as a tool for better health, for building tone, and for feeling good in your body; it won't turn anyone into a thin person by some kind of magic.

Earlier in this thread, another person pointed out that skipping 500 calories is simpler than adding 500 calories of burn through cardio — and for the majority of people, that holds up pretty well.

 

[Grogu]

Smiter said:

Grogu said:

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

I'm in complete agreement — the calories we take in get undercounted far too often, and I'd put my agreement at 1,000%. Serving sizes have drifted so far from any sensible baseline, packaging claims can steer you wrong, and tracking every calorie is something most folks simply won't do.

For myself, I log intake on 5 days out of the week and keep calories in check, though I treat the result as a ballpark rather than a precise measurement. In my view it's "close enough for government work".

On the output side, I've never subtracted exercise burn from what I eat, apart from using an overall estimated TDEE based on how active I am. That figure has come down alongside my weight loss, and so has my intake.

Back when I began tirz, counting calories wasn't part of my routine, since I figured people at a "normal" weight don't bother with it. The trouble was my TDEE sat so high (3,400) that simply eating less did the job.

Huh? In what way? What was your starting size?

Grogu said:

5byfive said:

When it comes to losing weight, what you eat matters most. Cardio has my support, but it simply doesn't shift the number on the scale in the way people once assumed. This isn't new information, yet more and more data keeps confirming it. A poor diet can't be fixed by exercise alone. What's curious is that resistance training appears to be a different story. Short and to the point video. For me, Menno Henselmans sets the standard when it comes to dissecting research.

View: https://youtu.be/yiclzDPIyQ0?si

Right — a poor diet can't be fixed by running or walking alone. In my area there's a man who is roughly as wide as he is tall. Friendly guy. He goes walking in the worst heat of south Florida, fully covered in workout gear. He's kept this up for years. During all that time, it doesn't appear he has dropped any weight. Once I ran into him at the supermarket and took a look at what was in his cart, checking item by item, and it was loaded with nothing but junk food. (I felt so envious ).

Let me say this before anyone comes at me: I'm not claiming cardio has no health advantages past weight loss, and I do believe cardio is beneficial. Still, when it comes to losing weight, it doesn't help much.

Hang in there, sis...cardio suxx...even if it doesnt.

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

PREACH!

wildweasel said:

every point raised here looks accurate to me.

One thing that deserves a nod is fasted cardio. When you do cardio on an empty stomach, your body has to tap into fat and glycogen reserves. That won't cancel out bad eating habits or a calorie surplus, but it does nudge your body toward using stored fat for fuel rather than relying on calories from food.

That is Au. Raise thermogenesis in our bodies and it becomes platinum, and our TDEE rises. With no workouts logged at all, a single 4 hour workout yesterday, helped by thermogeneics, produced these numbers in the watch's app.

At the start of tirzepatide, I was 6’4” and weighed 335—a large person. My TDEE came out to 3,400 calories given my age and how active I was. That figure seems enormous to me, especially since these days I take in roughly 1,800.

 

[wildweasel]

Smiter said:

Grogu said:

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

I'm in complete agreement — the calories we take in get undercounted far too often, and I'd put my agreement at 1,000%. Serving sizes have drifted so far from any sensible baseline, packaging claims can steer you wrong, and tracking every calorie is something most folks simply won't do.

For myself, I log intake on 5 days out of the week and keep calories in check, though I treat the result as a ballpark rather than a precise measurement. In my view it's "close enough for government work".

On the output side, I've never subtracted exercise burn from what I eat, apart from using an overall estimated TDEE based on how active I am. That figure has come down alongside my weight loss, and so has my intake.

Back when I began tirz, counting calories wasn't part of my routine, since I figured people at a "normal" weight don't bother with it. The trouble was my TDEE sat so high (3,400) that simply eating less did the job.

Huh? In what way? What was your starting size?

Grogu said:

5byfive said:

When it comes to losing weight, what you eat matters most. Cardio has my support, but it simply doesn't shift the number on the scale in the way people once assumed. This isn't new information, yet more and more data keeps confirming it. A poor diet can't be fixed by exercise alone. What's curious is that resistance training appears to be a different story. Short and to the point video. For me, Menno Henselmans sets the standard when it comes to dissecting research.

View: https://youtu.be/yiclzDPIyQ0?si

Right — a poor diet can't be fixed by running or walking alone. In my area there's a man who is roughly as wide as he is tall. Friendly guy. He goes walking in the worst heat of south Florida, fully covered in workout gear. He's kept this up for years. During all that time, it doesn't appear he has dropped any weight. Once I ran into him at the supermarket and took a look at what was in his cart, checking item by item, and it was loaded with nothing but junk food. (I felt so envious ).

Let me say this before anyone comes at me: I'm not claiming cardio has no health advantages past weight loss, and I do believe cardio is beneficial. Still, when it comes to losing weight, it doesn't help much.

Hang in there, sis...cardio suxx...even if it doesnt.

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

PREACH!

wildweasel said:

every point raised here looks accurate to me.

One thing that deserves a nod is fasted cardio. When you do cardio on an empty stomach, your body has to tap into fat and glycogen reserves. That won't cancel out bad eating habits or a calorie surplus, but it does nudge your body toward using stored fat for fuel rather than relying on calories from food.

That is Au. Raise thermogenesis in our bodies and it becomes platinum, and our TDEE rises. With no workouts logged at all, a single 4 hour workout yesterday, helped by thermogeneics, produced these numbers in the watch's app.

Which one do you take — caffeine, or a different option?

Grogu said:

Smiter said:

Grogu said:

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

I'm in complete agreement — the calories we take in get undercounted far too often, and I'd put my agreement at 1,000%. Serving sizes have drifted so far from any sensible baseline, packaging claims can steer you wrong, and tracking every calorie is something most folks simply won't do.

For myself, I log intake on 5 days out of the week and keep calories in check, though I treat the result as a ballpark rather than a precise measurement. In my view it's "close enough for government work".

On the output side, I've never subtracted exercise burn from what I eat, apart from using an overall estimated TDEE based on how active I am. That figure has come down alongside my weight loss, and so has my intake.

Back when I began tirz, counting calories wasn't part of my routine, since I figured people at a "normal" weight don't bother with it. The trouble was my TDEE sat so high (3,400) that simply eating less did the job.

Huh? In what way? What was your starting size?

Grogu said:

5byfive said:

When it comes to losing weight, what you eat matters most. Cardio has my support, but it simply doesn't shift the number on the scale in the way people once assumed. This isn't new information, yet more and more data keeps confirming it. A poor diet can't be fixed by exercise alone. What's curious is that resistance training appears to be a different story. Short and to the point video. For me, Menno Henselmans sets the standard when it comes to dissecting research.

View: https://youtu.be/yiclzDPIyQ0?si

Right — a poor diet can't be fixed by running or walking alone. In my area there's a man who is roughly as wide as he is tall. Friendly guy. He goes walking in the worst heat of south Florida, fully covered in workout gear. He's kept this up for years. During all that time, it doesn't appear he has dropped any weight. Once I ran into him at the supermarket and took a look at what was in his cart, checking item by item, and it was loaded with nothing but junk food. (I felt so envious ).

Let me say this before anyone comes at me: I'm not claiming cardio has no health advantages past weight loss, and I do believe cardio is beneficial. Still, when it comes to losing weight, it doesn't help much.

Hang in there, sis...cardio suxx...even if it doesnt.

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

PREACH!

wildweasel said:

every point raised here looks accurate to me.

One thing that deserves a nod is fasted cardio. When you do cardio on an empty stomach, your body has to tap into fat and glycogen reserves. That won't cancel out bad eating habits or a calorie surplus, but it does nudge your body toward using stored fat for fuel rather than relying on calories from food.

That is Au. Raise thermogenesis in our bodies and it becomes platinum, and our TDEE rises. With no workouts logged at all, a single 4 hour workout yesterday, helped by thermogeneics, produced these numbers in the watch's app.

At the start of tirzepatide, I was 6’4” and weighed 335—a large person. My TDEE came out to 3,400 calories given my age and how active I was. That figure seems enormous to me, especially since these days I take in roughly 1,800.

holy shit, i put in more than 20 hours weekly on hybrid training and that equals my TDEE. It amounts to a second job, yet you burned that much simply by existing.

Rooting for you — what's your current body weight?

 

[Grogu]

wildweasel said:

Grogu said:

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

I'm in complete agreement — the calories we take in get undercounted far too often, and I'd put my agreement at 1,000%. Serving sizes have drifted so far from any sensible baseline, packaging claims can steer you wrong, and tracking every calorie is something most folks simply won't do.

For myself, I log intake on 5 days out of the week and keep calories in check, though I treat the result as a ballpark rather than a precise measurement. In my view it's "close enough for government work".

On the output side, I've never subtracted exercise burn from what I eat, apart from using an overall estimated TDEE based on how active I am. That figure has come down alongside my weight loss, and so has my intake.

Back when I began tirz, counting calories wasn't part of my routine, since I figured people at a "normal" weight don't bother with it. The trouble was my TDEE sat so high (3,400) that simply eating less did the job.

Most people at a 'normal' weight, in my view, never bother tracking what they eat — they simply rely on intuition.

For me, learning to count calories turned out to be incredibly effective, and modern tools like cronometer plus a food scale have made the process almost effortless.

Speaking from my own experience: during periods when i skipped calorie counting, my body fat hovered around 15% at best. Several years back, before i began aggressively trying to "eat healthy," i even climbed past 20%+, yet no matter what i did i could never drop below roughly 15% bf.

These days i do count calories, and once i started it shocked me how simple it became to steer my body composition in whatever direction i wanted...

When i began counting cals i weighed 165lbs and carried this stubborn belly fat (~15% bf at the time) that refused to budge even after quite literally over a year of effort... roughly 8 weeks later i had dropped to 155lbs ~10% bf with no stubborn belly fat left, and from that point i've put on about 20 pounds of lean muscle while adding zero body fat.

counting calories is powerful

Cronometer is my go-to. Before that, I spent roughly 4 or 5 months on Nourish's app since I had a nutritionist through my health plan at no cost, and that proprietary app let me snap photos of what I ate. Those pictures led to some genuinely amusing exchanges. Thanks to the nutritionist, I came around to the idea that carbs aren't universally harmful.

Absolutely, tracking calories works.

 

[Smiter]

wildweasel said:

Smiter said:

Grogu said:

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

I'm in complete agreement — the calories we take in get undercounted far too often, and I'd put my agreement at 1,000%. Serving sizes have drifted so far from any sensible baseline, packaging claims can steer you wrong, and tracking every calorie is something most folks simply won't do.

For myself, I log intake on 5 days out of the week and keep calories in check, though I treat the result as a ballpark rather than a precise measurement. In my view it's "close enough for government work".

On the output side, I've never subtracted exercise burn from what I eat, apart from using an overall estimated TDEE based on how active I am. That figure has come down alongside my weight loss, and so has my intake.

Back when I began tirz, counting calories wasn't part of my routine, since I figured people at a "normal" weight don't bother with it. The trouble was my TDEE sat so high (3,400) that simply eating less did the job.

Huh? In what way? What was your starting size?

Grogu said:

5byfive said:

When it comes to losing weight, what you eat matters most. Cardio has my support, but it simply doesn't shift the number on the scale in the way people once assumed. This isn't new information, yet more and more data keeps confirming it. A poor diet can't be fixed by exercise alone. What's curious is that resistance training appears to be a different story. Short and to the point video. For me, Menno Henselmans sets the standard when it comes to dissecting research.

View: https://youtu.be/yiclzDPIyQ0?si

Right — a poor diet can't be fixed by running or walking alone. In my area there's a man who is roughly as wide as he is tall. Friendly guy. He goes walking in the worst heat of south Florida, fully covered in workout gear. He's kept this up for years. During all that time, it doesn't appear he has dropped any weight. Once I ran into him at the supermarket and took a look at what was in his cart, checking item by item, and it was loaded with nothing but junk food. (I felt so envious ).

Let me say this before anyone comes at me: I'm not claiming cardio has no health advantages past weight loss, and I do believe cardio is beneficial. Still, when it comes to losing weight, it doesn't help much.

Hang in there, sis...cardio suxx...even if it doesnt.

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

PREACH!

wildweasel said:

every point raised here looks accurate to me.

One thing that deserves a nod is fasted cardio. When you do cardio on an empty stomach, your body has to tap into fat and glycogen reserves. That won't cancel out bad eating habits or a calorie surplus, but it does nudge your body toward using stored fat for fuel rather than relying on calories from food.

That is Au. Raise thermogenesis in our bodies and it becomes platinum, and our TDEE rises. With no workouts logged at all, a single 4 hour workout yesterday, helped by thermogeneics, produced these numbers in the watch's app.

Which one do you take — caffeine, or a different option?

Grogu said:

Smiter said:

Grogu said:

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

I'm in complete agreement — the calories we take in get undercounted far too often, and I'd put my agreement at 1,000%. Serving sizes have drifted so far from any sensible baseline, packaging claims can steer you wrong, and tracking every calorie is something most folks simply won't do.

For myself, I log intake on 5 days out of the week and keep calories in check, though I treat the result as a ballpark rather than a precise measurement. In my view it's "close enough for government work".

On the output side, I've never subtracted exercise burn from what I eat, apart from using an overall estimated TDEE based on how active I am. That figure has come down alongside my weight loss, and so has my intake.

Back when I began tirz, counting calories wasn't part of my routine, since I figured people at a "normal" weight don't bother with it. The trouble was my TDEE sat so high (3,400) that simply eating less did the job.

Huh? In what way? What was your starting size?

Grogu said:

5byfive said:

When it comes to losing weight, what you eat matters most. Cardio has my support, but it simply doesn't shift the number on the scale in the way people once assumed. This isn't new information, yet more and more data keeps confirming it. A poor diet can't be fixed by exercise alone. What's curious is that resistance training appears to be a different story. Short and to the point video. For me, Menno Henselmans sets the standard when it comes to dissecting research.

View: https://youtu.be/yiclzDPIyQ0?si

Right — a poor diet can't be fixed by running or walking alone. In my area there's a man who is roughly as wide as he is tall. Friendly guy. He goes walking in the worst heat of south Florida, fully covered in workout gear. He's kept this up for years. During all that time, it doesn't appear he has dropped any weight. Once I ran into him at the supermarket and took a look at what was in his cart, checking item by item, and it was loaded with nothing but junk food. (I felt so envious ).

Let me say this before anyone comes at me: I'm not claiming cardio has no health advantages past weight loss, and I do believe cardio is beneficial. Still, when it comes to losing weight, it doesn't help much.

Hang in there, sis...cardio suxx...even if it doesnt.

N Sharp said:

We tend to think we burn far more calories than we actually do.

And we often think we eat fewer calories than we really do.

Thanks for sharing this — it's a really useful resource!

PREACH!

wildweasel said:

every point raised here looks accurate to me.

One thing that deserves a nod is fasted cardio. When you do cardio on an empty stomach, your body has to tap into fat and glycogen reserves. That won't cancel out bad eating habits or a calorie surplus, but it does nudge your body toward using stored fat for fuel rather than relying on calories from food.

That is Au. Raise thermogenesis in our bodies and it becomes platinum, and our TDEE rises. With no workouts logged at all, a single 4 hour workout yesterday, helped by thermogeneics, produced these numbers in the watch's app.

At the start of tirzepatide, I was 6’4” and weighed 335—a large person. My TDEE came out to 3,400 calories given my age and how active I was. That figure seems enormous to me, especially since these days I take in roughly 1,800.

holy shit, i put in more than 20 hours weekly on hybrid training and that equals my TDEE. It amounts to a second job, yet you burned that much simply by existing.

Rooting for you — what's your current body weight?

Anavar and modafinil, the Black-25 blend from Asia, plus Euphoria.

 

[Grogu]

randompersonrandom said:

Right, and... something I believe belongs alongside nearly every discussion about how cardio, exercise, or movement won't slim you down: getting thinner isn't the point of it.

The purpose of cutting calories is to "get thinner." The purpose of exercise, cardio included, is to "avoid looking and feeling like hot garbage even after you've gotten thinner."

Currently I'm 5'5" and 128 pounds. Cutting calories on tirz, plus VERY gentle exercise, carried me most of the way. Then roughly a month ago I told myself, "hoo girl, you gotta get off your ass. You look like hell, flabby and loose, and where tf is your endurance and balance that you always had in such high supply and felt so proud of?" So I picked up a bicycle, signed up at a gym, took long walks at night for fun, and now I look and feel a LOT better than I did for awhile there.

I’m completely on board with everything you said here. That’s exactly why my original post included a note making clear I wasn’t dismissing what cardio or working out can do for you .

The real issue is that for a long time people have been led to believe that eating salads plus exercising will somehow make them thin as if by magic. But two tablespoons of salad dressing can carry 150 calories—and honestly, who stops at just 2 tablespoons…. Once you pile on toppings and protein, a salad can hit 1,000 calories without much effort. Compare that to a brisk 30-minute walk, which might burn around 150 calories?

This time around, I’ve dropped the majority of my weight using only light exercise, while keeping my calories strictly controlled.

 

[lastresort]

The majority of TDEE calculators can't be trusted, since they leave fat percentage and lean mass out of the equation. Not even indirect calorimetry — the device you breathe into — gets it right. Back when I attended a weight loss clinic, I was once given a reading of 3100kcal, and the staff there (likely not even nurses with a BS degree, lol) informed me, completely deadpan, that this was my maintenance intake. I had to fight hard not to laugh in their foolish faces.

A 24 hour metabolic chamber, which precisely tracks oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide output, is the sole genuine method for measuring BMR. Sadly, ordinary people like us can't access one, as metabolic chambers cost a fortune and merely about 40-50 exist worldwide.