PA, simplifying your argument and just saying its basic reasoning is bull. Cite a source and be done with it. Saying that we’re not educated enough to understand your argument is another load of shiite. I agree with a lot of your dietary arguments, but the calorie one needs more of an explanation.
Side note: Saw this chick reading a 300 page book on the subway called ‘Intuitive Eating’…thought that was pretty ironic
^Did you bang her ?
It would appear homo sapiens are the ones who are full of themselves, believing they grasp something they don’t. And you specifically believing you can Google the answer LOL. You can’t Google what isn’t known.
But there is no source, and there is no explanation. Because humans do not understand it yet.
I am my own source, pointing out the obvious theory that fits the observations. The existing theories conflict with the observations, so they are clearly wrong.
I think the calories in vs calories out model is archaic. Yes it is one component, but there are other factors like insulin driven fat retention that are also going on.
Finally, you can’t outrun your genetic destiny.
WTF is this crap??
Basic reasoning skills?
You can’t appeal to authority in this case, science does not know the answer, nor does yahoo.com.
I guess PA is an X-Man?
Very much so, but it appeals to human’s desire to have a simple explanation they can understand, instead of accepting the answer is unknown/complicated. It also appeals to the American meme “you are in control, and responsible for your choices”, which is pumped up by corporations for obvious reasons (shrugging off externalities).
All of progress and corporate interests are behind it, only basic reasoning skills stand in its way. So it’s basically impossible to get people to move off this seductive explanation.
The sad thing is, we’re all pretty much on the same page (with the exception of PA who apparently just took the next step in evolution before our eyes).
The “calorie counting” diet is certainly the bare minimum one can do to lose weight. But, that doesn’t mean it’s not effective. Both those sources take the next step and describe the quality of your diet, which I’m not arguing. Very, very few sources, however, will go full tilt and say calories don’t matter at all so long as you eat paleo (which is consistently ranked the worst diet one can choose).
tl;dr - Calories do matter. Quality does matter. The mix between the two depends on your goal.
I don’t think PA is disagreeing either. The CICO is a thermodynamic interpretation (what PA referred to as machines), and works as a 30k ft view of the situation. But when thinking about what to eat, it’s not always that useful.
By industry , for obvious reasons. All other diets play into “eat healthy neolithic foods, and eat industrial revolution foods responsibly”, paleo says wrong. Industry freaked when Banting said it in 1870, and Atkins in 1970. Guess what kids, “progress” was wrong.
How come it’s not working then? Everyone tries it, yet population continues to get fatter. Perhaps because they are eating more calories LOL?
i don’t think anyone makes that claim. what you’re missing is that paleo eating (which is now outdated, and really is now “primal” which includes much higher good fat intake) means you do not have to focus on caloric intake to maintain an optimal level of fat on your body. The method restores your insulin sensitivity which allows you to eat intuitively. You eat primal foods when you feel the need to. That feeling of need is restored to a level that is commensurate with optimal health and therefore an optimal amount of body fat. Calories and body fat % are beside the point. people should only care about weight and body fat % insofar as an excess is an indicator of sub optimal health.
http://health.usnews.com/best-diet/best-overall-diets
Looks like this year it’s ranked 37th/38. Previous years it’s gotten last place (we could dig up last year’s thread on this where I cited the same thing). And we had the same conversation. Paleo does suck and it’s impossible to follow. What you advocate isn’t paleo. It’s a spin-off that I have no opinion on.
^ You are again citing pop culture media political nonsense as being an “authority”. Quit with the links, there is nothing out there that will help you.
Ok if you want to rag on a diet that no informed person thinks represents current understanding go ahead. Hey did you hear - they landed on the moon!!!
This is where you have no evidence to support your claim. It does work. I’ve done it several times. I’m actually doing it right now since I lived like a Roman Emperor over the summer and packed on some weight. After four weeks of consuming an average of 1,500 calories a day, I’m down 9 lbs. I’ve done this several times before.
The reason people are fat are the same reason I’ve had to do this diet several times. I don’t give a shit about staying healthy. I get down to my goal weight and then go back to eating (and more specifically, drinking) whatever I want.
When people try it, it works. When they don’t stick with it (just like 95% of any diet a person tries) they get fat again. Same reason rehab doesn’t work. People don’t like to restrict themselves (or you would probably say something like, “humans lack discipline”).
And that should be your argument.
Oh I see, an individual did it. Shrug, nobody cares, what about the population?
In our 100yr history since the industrial revolution, it has never happened once that a population tried to “eat less and exercise more” and became thinner. Perhaps next year it will happen? 
Or the more likely answer; everyone has it wrong, calories are an outcome, there is a central driver, and that driver is the changing food supply.
Interestingly, I was going to cite a few more sources but that one seems to be the authority. See the below “pop culture” link from Emory.
http://news.emory.edu/stories/2016/01/jjm_cardiology_sperling_best_diets_2016/campus.html
All those “big cario industry” doctors must be in cahoots!