This is incorrect, as I outlined in my post. All calories are not created equal. It’s smarter to track your macros than your calories. It would’ve taken me several years instead of several months if I was simply counting calories for a deficit.
Discussion
I’m realizing that you might not have seen the post I’m referring to, but it’s at the top of my page.
Yeah saying calories is all that matters is a dumb argument. Then you could just eat lettuce and lose weight. Nutrient density within those calories is more important than the calories themselves.
Sorry, but you’re simply wrong. A calorie is a unit of energy, all calories are identical. You may feel more satiated by eating 500 calories of bacon vs 500 calories of veggies, but the energy content is identical.
YOU are wrong. We are not simple calorie burning machines. Nutritional density & the form in which we consume our calories are critical in determining body compostion & function.
You are spouting nonsense promoted by candy companies.
You can consume 2000-3000 calories of cocacola in a day, be hangry, moody, have brain fog, & feel like you are starving (because you are) & actually get fat at the same time.
Or you can consume the same amount in steak, be completely satiated, & lose weight. Your general physical activity level does not have to change.
To whatever degree raw energy measurments (input/output) matter I would suggest brain function (among other things) probably makes up a lot of the difference. The brain is the most resource hungry organ. And I discovered (basically by accident) that I cannot listen to podcasts & audiobooks at 3x if I have been eating sugary crap. My brain just does not function as well.
I literally have no idea what y'all are arguing about.