All of this is true. It is also true that decreasing energy intake in order to continue losing fat can greatly increase hunger drive which can make continuing the diet very difficult. It is furthermore true that people lose a combination of fat and lean mass on a crash diet, regain fat without regaining much of the lean mass back and end up with a worse body composition than before with a lower TDEE, making future crash dieting efforts even harder. This is probably a common reason for why a lot of people have such a hard time keeping weight off.
If you drop your calories on a high Carb diet, your braun senses malnourishment and activates Hunger. If you Switch to low Carb or Keto your Insulin goes down an your hunger vanishes.
Just wanna say that if you like Menno’s content and are a book nerd like myself, he also has a book and it’s great! Very clear, concise, actionable ideas - this is coming from someone who sucks at adhering to my diet, focussing on work etc. It’s a great book with actionable tips that you can slowly bring into your current lifestyle!
8260 calories to lose a kilo if you do the math is 3754 calories to lose a pound of fat...seems well within the margin of error of 3500 calories, unless I'm missing something
@@sethdunn96 I assume that he is Dutch, so using the metric system, which is also using 'pound'. One metric pound is 500 g and 1 kg is 2 x 500 g. Therefore his calculation is correct and logic. One US pound is 453.59 g, he is definitely not referring to that.
When it comes to the last myth, I feel like there must be some body defense mechanism that detects low enough body fat levels and send the signal to the brain that cause you to be super hungry until you restore your fat to the healthy levels. I got super-lean, with veins in my abs, had high activity every day and was eating ~2700 calories on daily basis to maintain the weight. ALL of those calories were super healthy food. Not one calorie was from junk. Nevertheless, I was dying of starvation every single day. All I could think about was food. I tried to distract my hunger with anything, just to stop thinking about eating but nothing helped. I did it for months in hope that it would one day go away, but it never did. Not saying that everyone is the same as me. Just sharing few thoughts.
Agreed. The dual intervention model that Eric Helms popularized is what I think is more accurate. I think you can slowly lower your 'set point range' over time but that you probably can't set it to shredded unless you are genetically predisposed to it. The goal is probably to find the lowest BF you can sustain/live well with before your body's signals are too much (this being very individual).
Fat cells secrete a hormone called leptin, which quells your hunger. The more full fat cells are, the more leptin they secrete, so when you're really lean, they're not releasing much of the 'stop being hungry' hormone. So yeah you're right!
i agree. there's clearly no hard set point we are predestined to but there's a clear signaling that occurs based on fat percentage. and even that is individual from our basal metabolism. it's not a good enough explanation to say that it just doesn't exist, when it clearly does given how widespread the experience is.
Right but this isn't a SET POINT, it's a minimum threshold. So you're correct, but that's entirely compatible with what Meno says. And for 99% of people it's below 6 pack bodyfat (approx. 12% for men).
We all like the solid facts. It's important to remember that these truths don't make other realities any less valid: yes, if you eat less and move more you will lose weight; you can argue with that all you want, it will still be true. However, whether the scales move fast or slow, and whether you lose fat or muscle depends on a few factors. How easily you can achieve deliberate weight change depends on many factors. Whether it is practicable, or even possible in the first place, for a specific individual depends on many more factors. If you watched this video and felt attacked, chill out. Data is just data. Use what you can use, discard the rest. A single consistent sustained strategy with some accurate core principles is likely to succeed, it doesn't have to be optimal.
More of these please! Loved it. Could be a segway into doing something similar with "truth of false!. Woman have it hard/easier losing weight, satiation is different between protein/fat/carb, etc etc.
@@TrueWrenMetabolic ward studies show hormones make very little difference when people are forced in to things. They have lots of effects on how much people consume when left up to their own devices though... And hence the willpower and discipline argument.
@@Snerdles I get the compliance argument, for sure that's a factor, I'm interested in the fact you say very little difference, which means they make some difference. Also what about the fact that you breath and urinate ketones, surely that's extra calories leaving the system. This must compound itself and make a difference.
As a meanwhile 61 Year old natural bodybuilder since over 40 Years and a also former professionell natural scientist long time ago...: I can absolutedly agree. Greetings from Germany
My weight went down from 115kg to 88kg in three months by eating first Low carb, then OMAD. One day was not hungry, so I ate nothing. As I was not hungry, I did water fasting for one full month. I think that Low Insulin was the cause of not being hungry. I went to gym during that time and even gained some strength. Today some years later I am 64 and weigh around 80 kg. I continued to eat Low Carb twice a day.
I’d love a further dive into the thyroid/hypothyroid condition. From what I understand, the metabolism does slow if hypo, but fat loss can still happen when calories are adjusted down to find a deficit, yes?
6 is puzzling me because I've listened to Layne Norton talking about diet breaks. If metabolism is purely given by your current body composition, what are diet breaks doing?
I've tried to reason with people in the past about this hormone imbalance myth, but people would rather find excuses than look in the mirror. My mom has thyroid issues and she's normal weight cause she doesn't eat like a pig and she exercises.
You can call these "myths" all you want, but they hold true for me. After going super-low carb (high protein and high saturated fat), it's been much, MUCH easier to keep the weight off, and gain muscle *WHILE* losing bodyfat at the same time. Whereas when I was eating 2 bowls of rice a day, eating low fat as much as possible with a ton of vegetables, I would gain weight if I ate slightly above my basal metabolism. No one can convince me that hormones don't play a significant role in how the calories are processed. There have even been stretches of time (previously while on a high carb/low fat diet) during which I'd go to bed feeling hungry, and yet I steadily gained bodyfat in this time period. Explain how that happened if hormones didn't play a role. On the other hand, while doing keto/carnivore/low carb, I'd go to bed not feeling hungry, and yet I'm steadily losing bodyfat over time. I'm convinced you can mess up your metabolic health to such a degree through hormonal imbalances, such that you can be in a caloric deficit and still gain body fat. And vice versa, caloric surplus, but if they're certain foods, your body accelerates burning those calories and you would remain the same weight, or even lose weight, all else being equal (including activity level). Science is always changing. Many things thought to be false, turn out to be true. Many things thought to be true, are later found to be false. I bet this is one of them. And this video will need to be taken down or at least amended.
I heard from a scientist who said that you breath out ketones and urinate them, which is energy. How is that accounted for? Ps I'm not keto and have lost weight by calorie restriction in the past, tho I do feel there is something to the hormone side of things.
Gonna point out that the 3500 calorie deficit to lose a pound isn't far off. You mentioned the myth in pounds then explained things in kilos. 1 kilo == 2.2 lbs, if I recall. So if as you said it requires a deficit of 8,260 calories to lose 1 kilo. Then wouldn't that be around 3700 calories for 1 lb?? 8260\2.2 = 3754. Is my math wrong?
I'm in my 50s and I find I can't lose weight unless I am consistently under 1500 c. I have a moderate activity lever (weights 3 times per week a martial arts class once per week and a lot of walking) - after pretty much everyone told me I was not eating enough I moved to 2000 c and put weight on.... Well I'm not doing that again! - took me ages to get back to my old weight
I generally agree with what he's been saying, but I can't say I agree with #1. And I say this because I have done the experiment on myself, and in my younger days, I was obviously younger and more active, but could never get below 20% BF. As soon as I understood the role of insulin and how carbs trigger it, I got around 7-8%. I'm now 46 and I'm still shredded. So yeah studies say this and that, but for me the proof is in the process and achieving the actual goal, which never happenned with the law of Thermo dynamics. I'm not as smart as Mano that's for sure but it's OK to disagree with a reason.
This is a great video. Any chance you could do a video on hard gainers. I'm 52 and I've been lifting for about 6 years. I'm 5 10" and only weigh about 156 pounds. I'm consistent at the gym ppl program and I only miss the gym on vacations or illness. It would be great to get science backed help
Chances are you don't. Don't estimate your intake but weigh everything you put in your mouth for two weeks and you will see. And if you turn out to be correct (because you have a very high calorie demand in your job or do lots of endurance work, for example) - well, you gotta increase calorie intake.
Have you ever been fat? If not , then you do not know what you are talking about. I went down from 115 kg to 80 kg Not by willpower and counting calories, but by switching to keto and some water fast with no hunger at all.
This is so common sense that it requires high-level scientific research to be able to prove it to people who just don’t want to admit the truth. Outstanding content. 👍👍
I heard you say that your body stops burning fat until you drop to 1800 calories, regardless of how much cardio you do. I just realised this is my problem 😢 i got down to 1900 at 190lbs and probably pushing single digit body fat, with a very physical job, i regularly go beyond 20k steps per day. And the fat loss has just stopped! 😭 Seems im going to have to go lower, despite how much my sleep suffers 😢
idk who told you that but it’s 100% bs, chances are you’re experiencing diet fatigue from going hard for an extended period of time which has a plethora of subtle but significant effects which are likely resulting is less fat loss, (cravings, poor sleep, stress, etc.) Do a diet break for a week or two where you eat at maintenance or higher whenever and try again.
@Nrg400 it was the man himself actually 🤭 but I probably am experiencing diet fatigue to be fair, but do suffer from fluctuations in water retention and as said in this video, do usually have a whoosh effect pretty regularly....I'll see what this weekends weigh in says and maybe think of a diet break
@@Nrg400 but what is diet fatigue exactly that prevents you from losing weight? You mean adaptations or what exactly because Menno said thermodynamics apply and hormones don't matter and metabolical damage doesn't exist but I was deiting for 4 months very religiously trackign my calories, running a lot, walking a lot, training moderately and my weight stopped dropping after 3 months even though I increased my mileage. My hair would fall off and my pulse was super low but I still didn't lose any weight for last 6 weeks. And it wasn't water retention. I'm really curious because people just assume I wasn't good at tracking or sth but if I was on maintenance calories why the fuck was my pulse so low etc.? It was like I was on a substantial deficit (hence all these side effects) BUT didn't lose fat anyway. I mean, people starving to death have insane diet fatigue and still lose weight, right? So what is this diet fatigue and do you just assume we stop tracking food or what? And I really don't mean to be mean. Your advice is okay but honestly if what Manno says is true, the guy should just cut calories, not "take a break". What does the break do? Does it affect hormones? But they don't matter really much according to Manno, right?
And it always will, because thermodynamics are part of fundamental laws of physics, no matter how much delusional charlatans rage against the truth. Saying CICO doesn't work is as lunatic as denying gravity.
Do it slowly. And it depends how much fat you have. If you are heavily overweight you will mostly lose fat anyways, only once you get below 15% bodyfat resistance training is important to not lose muscle.
You remove the hurdles hindering you from resistance training, and then you start it slowly and gradually. Barring full-body paralyzation, everyone should be able to do some resistance training to start with.
I kind of disagree with number 7 - genetic body-fat setpoint. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. And how do you explain that people on GLP1RA who don't even "lifestyle" will automatically settle on a new lower weight plateau about 18 months in and stay there for (so far confirmed) 3,5 years as long as they continue using the medication? While dieters in every study literally creep back up to their initial weight or even higher? Wouldn't higher percentage than about 5% be successful? To me, this confirms our body has a strong say in our body composition and now that we can alter the underlying equation with repeating shots of long acting hormones, we see it nicely that they simply affect the equation and help us reach new lower plateau on autopilot, whether we further support it with efforts like dieting and exercising or not.
You can adjust your weight Set Point by reducing insulin. Which means eating Keto. I reduced my weight from 115 kg to around 80 kg für many years now. When I gain some kgs, I Just reduce my carbs a bit.
"when you equate the total energy content of the diet" - and therein lies the rub. Most dieters find it quite problematic to stay in deficit on a low-fat diet, and much less problematic on a low-carb diet. Carbs make you fat by making you eat more carbs than you were planning to.
Where do you get "most dieters" from? Some poeple thrive on ketogenic diets, others don't. For many people food volume plays a huge role in satiety, which can be increased by primarily eating veggies - aka carbs. Also most people overeating aren't consuming "low-fat diets". Food volume, context clues & portion sizes matter much more than the macro composition of a meal
@oskg23 Most people trying to diet are eating a low-fat diet because that's the most common native dietary approach - if you want to be less fat, eat less fat. And most people end up failing or returning to baseline after they stop the diet, because their dietary preferences did not change and they still crave carbs. Veggies mostly contain insoluble fiber, and while the bulk of it does send a satiety signal, it actually speeds up gastric emptying, so you will want to eat again soon. Fat, on the other hand, produces a lasting satiety signal. And a ketogenic diet actually reduces craving, so the weight loss is more likely to stick. Of course, if someone can easily maintain a healthy weight on a low-fat diet, that's great and they probably should stick to it. But people that find it difficult should definitely try low-carb/keto because it is highly likely to go differently for them.
@crusia You may want to try to substantiate your argument better next time. Tribal proclamations make you feel good but do little to convince anyone not already on your side.
Wait, isn't 8,260 calories for a kilo of fat not close enough to 3.5k for a pound? It would come to around 3,750 wouldn't it? There's 2.205lbs in a KG not just 2lbs. Not sure if that's what you were thinking?
Yess. One type 1 Diabetic can eat 10.000 kcals without gaining weight. It is because of extreme low insulin. If you give people Insulin, they will gain weight inevitably.
I'd love you to be able to discuss making a calorie deficit easy and sustainable because of hormonal function instead of just saying "go on a calorie deficit lol"
@StarfireReborn I understand that it is difficult for some people to think critically and logically. And CICO is a very flawed model. And unfortunately the real world is not as simple as that.
I recommend this podcast for a deeper perspective on what's really going on - despite most of these "absolutes" being "true". ua-cam.com/video/C5KpIXjpzdY/v-deo.html
You´d have to read the fine print in these studies, low carb diets do better over all in terms of satiety and cravings. Sure, you can starve yourself on any diet.
low carb also directly hinders athletic ability. It is far more enjoyable way to be healthy for a lot of people to have their carbs and be active than be a keto couch potato
Subscriber of RICK DE LA STICK, saw that he approved of your content. I better see some HORSE COCKING videos proving that you can add GIRTH and ROTUNDNESS to my frame or else im outta here k peaceoutbi
Saying fat loss all boils down to CICO is like saying to a heroin addict to "just stop using heroin". It's not wrong. But it's horrible advice. It's only good as a sanity check.
Yes, it's as helpful as a chocolate teapot to just say 'eat less move more' but when people will scream 'slow metabolism' or 'menopause' instead of understanding the basic fundamentals of how fat loss occurs (aka, eat less move more) it clears up the issue very succinctly - personal responsibility sucks, but that's what the science has concluded - CICO is fundamental and everyone needs to accept it, not argue with it and find excuses as to why 'it doesn't work for them' lol.
you show your ignorance when you quote laws of thermo. It only applies to closed systems. while i think both types can be effective quit spewing mistruths in while wraping youself in the name of science. the issues are much more nuanced than you make out.
Entropy and conservation of energy have proven to apply everywhere and everytime they have been tested. That is why they are referred to as laws instead of theories. The application of the laws is literally universal. I think you are confused. There is no way to have a truly closed system in our universe when energy can literally radiate through a vacuum. Only in theoretical models can you have a system where no energy leaves or is added. Maybe you mean the mathematical formulas for the laws of thermodynamics are only truly accurate in a closed system?
@@owentaylor6550 i am sorry i am not confused. I did not say the 2nd lay of thermo is not true, my objection is when when you apply the laws and then measure energy in in Kcal when the body doesn't burn the food(look up krebs cycle), also no one measures what comes out of the system, heat/waste or takes into account that protein can be used for building muscle or processed for fuel two very different processes with very different energy equations. I like menno but if he is going to sell himself as a scientist he needs to act like one. if he wants to quote that in highly functioning metabolisms both diets can be effective in losing fat we can agree but don't use quoting thermo laws to kill discussion about how the body processes food for energy on a nutritional study which are extremely difficult to control or rely on the data due to adherance, length of study and wanting measurements.
All of this is true. It is also true that decreasing energy intake in order to continue losing fat can greatly increase hunger drive which can make continuing the diet very difficult. It is furthermore true that people lose a combination of fat and lean mass on a crash diet, regain fat without regaining much of the lean mass back and end up with a worse body composition than before with a lower TDEE, making future crash dieting efforts even harder. This is probably a common reason for why a lot of people have such a hard time keeping weight off.
Exactly hormones seem to have a HUGE impact (estrogen in particular) but you can fight them for some time.
If you drop your calories on a high Carb diet, your braun senses malnourishment and activates Hunger.
If you Switch to low Carb or Keto your Insulin goes down an your hunger vanishes.
Love how your videos are just straight to the point
I hope you can post more frequently Menno ! Your input, the way you articulate science based facts is unrivaled
Just wanna say that if you like Menno’s content and are a book nerd like myself, he also has a book and it’s great! Very clear, concise, actionable ideas - this is coming from someone who sucks at adhering to my diet, focussing on work etc. It’s a great book with actionable tips that you can slowly bring into your current lifestyle!
8260 calories to lose a kilo if you do the math is 3754 calories to lose a pound of fat...seems well within the margin of error of 3500 calories, unless I'm missing something
I came to say just that!
Myth #3: It takes 3500kcal to lose 1lb of fat. He is debunking this.
And thats assuming that one would/could lose 100% pure fat tissue per lb/kg of weight loss. Seems like a fairly pedantic 'myth' to me.
Yeah I came to the same conclusion. He bounced between pounds and kilos. Kinda deceptive/confusing.
@@sethdunn96 I assume that he is Dutch, so using the metric system, which is also using 'pound'. One metric pound is 500 g and 1 kg is 2 x 500 g. Therefore his calculation is correct and logic. One US pound is 453.59 g, he is definitely not referring to that.
When it comes to the last myth, I feel like there must be some body defense mechanism that detects low enough body fat levels and send the signal to the brain that cause you to be super hungry until you restore your fat to the healthy levels. I got super-lean, with veins in my abs, had high activity every day and was eating ~2700 calories on daily basis to maintain the weight. ALL of those calories were super healthy food. Not one calorie was from junk. Nevertheless, I was dying of starvation every single day. All I could think about was food. I tried to distract my hunger with anything, just to stop thinking about eating but nothing helped. I did it for months in hope that it would one day go away, but it never did. Not saying that everyone is the same as me. Just sharing few thoughts.
whoa i feel like i wrote this. every single detail happened to me too
Agreed. The dual intervention model that Eric Helms popularized is what I think is more accurate. I think you can slowly lower your 'set point range' over time but that you probably can't set it to shredded unless you are genetically predisposed to it. The goal is probably to find the lowest BF you can sustain/live well with before your body's signals are too much (this being very individual).
Fat cells secrete a hormone called leptin, which quells your hunger. The more full fat cells are, the more leptin they secrete, so when you're really lean, they're not releasing much of the 'stop being hungry' hormone. So yeah you're right!
i agree. there's clearly no hard set point we are predestined to but there's a clear signaling that occurs based on fat percentage. and even that is individual from our basal metabolism. it's not a good enough explanation to say that it just doesn't exist, when it clearly does given how widespread the experience is.
Right but this isn't a SET POINT, it's a minimum threshold. So you're correct, but that's entirely compatible with what Meno says. And for 99% of people it's below 6 pack bodyfat (approx. 12% for men).
We all like the solid facts. It's important to remember that these truths don't make other realities any less valid: yes, if you eat less and move more you will lose weight; you can argue with that all you want, it will still be true. However, whether the scales move fast or slow, and whether you lose fat or muscle depends on a few factors. How easily you can achieve deliberate weight change depends on many factors. Whether it is practicable, or even possible in the first place, for a specific individual depends on many more factors. If you watched this video and felt attacked, chill out. Data is just data. Use what you can use, discard the rest. A single consistent sustained strategy with some accurate core principles is likely to succeed, it doesn't have to be optimal.
I cannot thank you and Dr Mike enough for your videos and teachings. Thanks a lot !!!
Great video! Would love to see more "myth" style videos like this one
Always top quality content. Thanks Dr H
Excellent information as always. Thank you
Very interesting point on the body fat setpoint. Never actually looked at it the way you explained it. I'm learning new things every day, thanx!
Awsome menno!
More of these please! Loved it.
Could be a segway into doing something similar with "truth of false!.
Woman have it hard/easier losing weight, satiation is different between protein/fat/carb, etc etc.
Everyone stop punching each other in the Gym, there's a new menno video.
Excellent and concise video. Appreciate all your content
Menno, can you please cover strategies for managing diet fatigue?
I hate when people say “my metabolism just doesn’t work”
just an excuse to go off the diet and become a couch potato
Or blame it on hormones..... yuck. Personal responsibility be damned!!!
@@ElizabethNonsuchbut I feel hormones to pay a bigger role than he is saying, but it's no excuse as you can sort the hormones out hopefully
@@TrueWrenMetabolic ward studies show hormones make very little difference when people are forced in to things. They have lots of effects on how much people consume when left up to their own devices though... And hence the willpower and discipline argument.
@@Snerdles I get the compliance argument, for sure that's a factor, I'm interested in the fact you say very little difference, which means they make some difference. Also what about the fact that you breath and urinate ketones, surely that's extra calories leaving the system.
This must compound itself and make a difference.
Great video.
As a meanwhile 61 Year old natural bodybuilder since over 40 Years and a also former professionell natural scientist long time ago...:
I can absolutedly agree.
Greetings from Germany
Good stuff.
My weight went down from 115kg to 88kg in three months by eating first Low carb, then OMAD. One day was not hungry, so I ate nothing. As I was not hungry, I did water fasting for one full month.
I think that Low Insulin was the cause of not being hungry.
I went to gym during that time and even gained some strength.
Today some years later I am 64 and weigh around 80 kg. I continued to eat Low Carb twice a day.
I’d love a further dive into the thyroid/hypothyroid condition. From what I understand, the metabolism does slow if hypo, but fat loss can still happen when calories are adjusted down to find a deficit, yes?
We need a beard shaving guide Menno
6 is puzzling me because I've listened to Layne Norton talking about diet breaks. If metabolism is purely given by your current body composition, what are diet breaks doing?
Awesome info brohirim.
I've tried to reason with people in the past about this hormone imbalance myth, but people would rather find excuses than look in the mirror. My mom has thyroid issues and she's normal weight cause she doesn't eat like a pig and she exercises.
You can call these "myths" all you want, but they hold true for me. After going super-low carb (high protein and high saturated fat), it's been much, MUCH easier to keep the weight off, and gain muscle *WHILE* losing bodyfat at the same time. Whereas when I was eating 2 bowls of rice a day, eating low fat as much as possible with a ton of vegetables, I would gain weight if I ate slightly above my basal metabolism. No one can convince me that hormones don't play a significant role in how the calories are processed. There have even been stretches of time (previously while on a high carb/low fat diet) during which I'd go to bed feeling hungry, and yet I steadily gained bodyfat in this time period. Explain how that happened if hormones didn't play a role.
On the other hand, while doing keto/carnivore/low carb, I'd go to bed not feeling hungry, and yet I'm steadily losing bodyfat over time.
I'm convinced you can mess up your metabolic health to such a degree through hormonal imbalances, such that you can be in a caloric deficit and still gain body fat. And vice versa, caloric surplus, but if they're certain foods, your body accelerates burning those calories and you would remain the same weight, or even lose weight, all else being equal (including activity level).
Science is always changing. Many things thought to be false, turn out to be true. Many things thought to be true, are later found to be false. I bet this is one of them. And this video will need to be taken down or at least amended.
The laws of thermodynamics apply, but how do you account for energy accurately in an open system like a body, that isn't a closed system?
I heard from a scientist who said that you breath out ketones and urinate them, which is energy. How is that accounted for?
Ps I'm not keto and have lost weight by calorie restriction in the past, tho I do feel there is something to the hormone side of things.
@TrueWren agreed.
Whatever one digit exchanges happen don't factor in a lot when the total system is operating in a couple thousands.
Gonna point out that the 3500 calorie deficit to lose a pound isn't far off. You mentioned the myth in pounds then explained things in kilos. 1 kilo == 2.2 lbs, if I recall. So if as you said it requires a deficit of 8,260 calories to lose 1 kilo. Then wouldn't that be around 3700 calories for 1 lb?? 8260\2.2 = 3754. Is my math wrong?
In theory there is no difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is.
Golden!!
.
I'm in my 50s and I find I can't lose weight unless I am consistently under 1500 c. I have a moderate activity lever (weights 3 times per week a martial arts class once per week and a lot of walking) - after pretty much everyone told me I was not eating enough I moved to 2000 c and put weight on.... Well I'm not doing that again! - took me ages to get back to my old weight
And the first law of thermodynamics only applies in a closed system. A human body is NOT a closed system 🤦🏼♂️
I generally agree with what he's been saying, but I can't say I agree with #1. And I say this because I have done the experiment on myself, and in my younger days, I was obviously younger and more active, but could never get below 20% BF. As soon as I understood the role of insulin and how carbs trigger it, I got around 7-8%. I'm now 46 and I'm still shredded. So yeah studies say this and that, but for me the proof is in the process and achieving the actual goal, which never happenned with the law of Thermo dynamics. I'm not as smart as Mano that's for sure but it's OK to disagree with a reason.
Are "mini cuts" dead?
"Dream bulking" is dead, and with the study on >500 kcal deficits leading to muscle loss, it seems mini cuts are dead too...
What about clen Menno
The laws of thermo dynamics do not apply to human metabolism.
I would suggest people have a little look at Bart Kay for this subject.
This is a great video. Any chance you could do a video on hard gainers. I'm 52 and I've been lifting for about 6 years. I'm 5 10" and only weigh about 156 pounds. I'm consistent at the gym ppl program and I only miss the gym on vacations or illness. It would be great to get science backed help
If you aren't gaining weight, it's very simple, you have to eat MORE
@MocroSaiyan I actually eat around 3000 cals a day I eat whole foods, very little sugar
Chances are you don't. Don't estimate your intake but weigh everything you put in your mouth for two weeks and you will see.
And if you turn out to be correct (because you have a very high calorie demand in your job or do lots of endurance work, for example) - well, you gotta increase calorie intake.
@gregorammann7147 I use my fitness pal and I log everything,even beer🤣
@@garrybuxton4483 haha up the food intake
Myth #3 is the most interesting to me. It takes 8,260 calories to lose a kg of adipose tissue!
Can't count how many clients I've had who blaim their obesity on bad genetics and "broken" metabolism. No sense of responsibility.
Have you ever been fat? If not , then you do not know what you are talking about.
I went down from 115 kg to 80 kg Not by willpower and counting calories, but by switching to keto and some water fast with no hunger at all.
Does the "settling point" thing gravitate you to a certain bodyfat percentage or a certain weight?
This is so common sense that it requires high-level scientific research to be able to prove it to people who just don’t want to admit the truth. Outstanding content. 👍👍
I heard you say that your body stops burning fat until you drop to 1800 calories, regardless of how much cardio you do. I just realised this is my problem 😢 i got down to 1900 at 190lbs and probably pushing single digit body fat, with a very physical job, i regularly go beyond 20k steps per day. And the fat loss has just stopped! 😭 Seems im going to have to go lower, despite how much my sleep suffers 😢
idk who told you that but it’s 100% bs, chances are you’re experiencing diet fatigue from going hard for an extended period of time which has a plethora of subtle but significant effects which are likely resulting is less fat loss, (cravings, poor sleep, stress, etc.) Do a diet break for a week or two where you eat at maintenance or higher whenever and try again.
@Nrg400 it was the man himself actually 🤭 but I probably am experiencing diet fatigue to be fair, but do suffer from fluctuations in water retention and as said in this video, do usually have a whoosh effect pretty regularly....I'll see what this weekends weigh in says and maybe think of a diet break
@@Nrg400 but what is diet fatigue exactly that prevents you from losing weight? You mean adaptations or what exactly because Menno said thermodynamics apply and hormones don't matter and metabolical damage doesn't exist but I was deiting for 4 months very religiously trackign my calories, running a lot, walking a lot, training moderately and my weight stopped dropping after 3 months even though I increased my mileage. My hair would fall off and my pulse was super low but I still didn't lose any weight for last 6 weeks. And it wasn't water retention. I'm really curious because people just assume I wasn't good at tracking or sth but if I was on maintenance calories why the fuck was my pulse so low etc.? It was like I was on a substantial deficit (hence all these side effects) BUT didn't lose fat anyway. I mean, people starving to death have insane diet fatigue and still lose weight, right? So what is this diet fatigue and do you just assume we stop tracking food or what?
And I really don't mean to be mean. Your advice is okay but honestly if what Manno says is true, the guy should just cut calories, not "take a break". What does the break do? Does it affect hormones? But they don't matter really much according to Manno, right?
As always, CICO is undefeated.
And it always will, because thermodynamics are part of fundamental laws of physics, no matter how much delusional charlatans rage against the truth. Saying CICO doesn't work is as lunatic as denying gravity.
Is diet fatigue a real thing?
sure corroborates my experience
What if you cant do any weighttraining, what is the best approach to lose bodyfat without losing to much muscle?
if u dont use it u will lose it
Do it slowly. And it depends how much fat you have. If you are heavily overweight you will mostly lose fat anyways, only once you get below 15% bodyfat resistance training is important to not lose muscle.
@@raziel8799 it's only about 5kg and i think im above 15%
You remove the hurdles hindering you from resistance training, and then you start it slowly and gradually. Barring full-body paralyzation, everyone should be able to do some resistance training to start with.
@@daniel355273 Do not come with the'' just do resistance training''.
It's not what im asking so i dont seek that answer.
Nailed.
I kind of disagree with number 7 - genetic body-fat setpoint. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. And how do you explain that people on GLP1RA who don't even "lifestyle" will automatically settle on a new lower weight plateau about 18 months in and stay there for (so far confirmed) 3,5 years as long as they continue using the medication? While dieters in every study literally creep back up to their initial weight or even higher? Wouldn't higher percentage than about 5% be successful?
To me, this confirms our body has a strong say in our body composition and now that we can alter the underlying equation with repeating shots of long acting hormones, we see it nicely that they simply affect the equation and help us reach new lower plateau on autopilot, whether we further support it with efforts like dieting and exercising or not.
You can adjust your weight Set Point by reducing insulin. Which means eating Keto.
I reduced my weight from 115 kg to around 80 kg für many years now.
When I gain some kgs, I Just reduce my carbs a bit.
"when you equate the total energy content of the diet" - and therein lies the rub. Most dieters find it quite problematic to stay in deficit on a low-fat diet, and much less problematic on a low-carb diet. Carbs make you fat by making you eat more carbs than you were planning to.
Where do you get "most dieters" from? Some poeple thrive on ketogenic diets, others don't. For many people food volume plays a huge role in satiety, which can be increased by primarily eating veggies - aka carbs. Also most people overeating aren't consuming "low-fat diets". Food volume, context clues & portion sizes matter much more than the macro composition of a meal
@oskg23 Most people trying to diet are eating a low-fat diet because that's the most common native dietary approach - if you want to be less fat, eat less fat. And most people end up failing or returning to baseline after they stop the diet, because their dietary preferences did not change and they still crave carbs. Veggies mostly contain insoluble fiber, and while the bulk of it does send a satiety signal, it actually speeds up gastric emptying, so you will want to eat again soon. Fat, on the other hand, produces a lasting satiety signal. And a ketogenic diet actually reduces craving, so the weight loss is more likely to stick. Of course, if someone can easily maintain a healthy weight on a low-fat diet, that's great and they probably should stick to it. But people that find it difficult should definitely try low-carb/keto because it is highly likely to go differently for them.
@@AlexV-jh7ul you're spewing keto bullshit my man, maybe try getting nutritional info from people who are not cherry picking to support their view
@crusia You may want to try to substantiate your argument better next time. Tribal proclamations make you feel good but do little to convince anyone not already on your side.
Wait, isn't 8,260 calories for a kilo of fat not close enough to 3.5k for a pound? It would come to around 3,750 wouldn't it? There's 2.205lbs in a KG not just 2lbs. Not sure if that's what you were thinking?
if hormones don't have a big effect explain then type 1 diabetics
Yess. One type 1 Diabetic can eat 10.000 kcals without gaining weight. It is because of extreme low insulin.
If you give people Insulin, they will gain weight inevitably.
Fat loss myths keeping you big as hell
I'd love you to be able to discuss making a calorie deficit easy and sustainable because of hormonal function instead of just saying "go on a calorie deficit lol"
Yes
Hi Menno, could you talk about creatine HCL? Is it better than monohydrate? Can I take a lower dose?
Thx
A project invictus non piace questo video.
Didn't the biggest loserstudy show a drop in bmr after excessive weight loss and gain?
Does he not know that there are 2.2 pounds in a kilo, not 2?
I am a perpetuum mobile.
Myth #1 is already wrong. We don’t consume calories. Calories are a measure of energy or required heat. And not a very accurate one. 🤦🏼♂️
@StarfireReborn I understand that it is difficult for some people to think critically and logically. And CICO is a very flawed model. And unfortunately the real world is not as simple as that.
I recommend this podcast for a deeper perspective on what's really going on - despite most of these "absolutes" being "true".
ua-cam.com/video/C5KpIXjpzdY/v-deo.html
You´d have to read the fine print in these studies, low carb diets do better over all in terms of satiety and cravings. Sure, you can starve yourself on any diet.
low carb also directly hinders athletic ability. It is far more enjoyable way to be healthy for a lot of people to have their carbs and be active than be a keto couch potato
low carb works for some people, for me i could not fucking think at all particularly as winter made it colder
@@ChamplooMusashi if it works only for SOME people then what got us into the obesity epidemic ?
👍🏻
Menno, can you address the biggest loser study?
Subscriber of RICK DE LA STICK, saw that he approved of your content. I better see some HORSE COCKING videos proving that you can add GIRTH and ROTUNDNESS to my frame or else im outta here k peaceoutbi
Saying fat loss all boils down to CICO is like saying to a heroin addict to "just stop using heroin".
It's not wrong. But it's horrible advice. It's only good as a sanity check.
Yes, it's as helpful as a chocolate teapot to just say 'eat less move more' but when people will scream 'slow metabolism' or 'menopause' instead of understanding the basic fundamentals of how fat loss occurs (aka, eat less move more) it clears up the issue very succinctly - personal responsibility sucks, but that's what the science has concluded - CICO is fundamental and everyone needs to accept it, not argue with it and find excuses as to why 'it doesn't work for them' lol.
@@ElizabethNonsuch In this context, the physics is simple, but the psychology is complicated.
you show your ignorance when you quote laws of thermo. It only applies to closed systems. while i think both types can be effective quit spewing mistruths in while wraping youself in the name of science. the issues are much more nuanced than you make out.
Entropy and conservation of energy have proven to apply everywhere and everytime they have been tested. That is why they are referred to as laws instead of theories. The application of the laws is literally universal.
I think you are confused. There is no way to have a truly closed system in our universe when energy can literally radiate through a vacuum. Only in theoretical models can you have a system where no energy leaves or is added.
Maybe you mean the mathematical formulas for the laws of thermodynamics are only truly accurate in a closed system?
@@owentaylor6550 i am sorry i am not confused. I did not say the 2nd lay of thermo is not true, my objection is when when you apply the laws and then measure energy in in Kcal when the body doesn't burn the food(look up krebs cycle), also no one measures what comes out of the system, heat/waste or takes into account that protein can be used for building muscle or processed for fuel two very different processes with very different energy equations. I like menno but if he is going to sell himself as a scientist he needs to act like one. if he wants to quote that in highly functioning metabolisms both diets can be effective in losing fat we can agree but don't use quoting thermo laws to kill discussion about how the body processes food for energy on a nutritional study which are extremely difficult to control or rely on the data due to adherance, length of study and wanting measurements.
We got Menno clickbait thumbnail meta before GTA 6
not clickbait. completely accurate thumb