• BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 hours ago

    With every diet, named or not, the weight loss aspect always comes from “calories in vs calories out”.

    Some of them, like keto, change the way the body accesses the calories in food, but the math still holds. If your body can’t access the calories in what you eat, they literally become “calories out” when you go to the bathroom later.

    Other diets help with mentally being able to track calories better, or to just help you deal with how hard it is to eat fewer calories.

    But no matter what, conservation of mass and energy always applies.

    • xep@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      Mass is not conserved. And while CICO may be true in the same sense that spherical cows can be used as an approximation, the devil’s in the details.

      • BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 minutes ago

        I didn’t say just mass was conserved. I said that mass and energy, when taken together, are conserved. Mass is just another form of energy.

        I assure you, ci/co is not a “spherical cow”. Every single joule of energy is accounted for.

    • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      57 minutes ago

      You forgot that we don’t use 100% of the energy intake, like at all. That invalidates your assumptions IMO.

      • BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        13 minutes ago

        Huh? No I didn’t, it’s all accounted for.

        Unused energy is stored, or passed out as waste (literally calories down the toilet).