calories confusion

CALORIE CONFUSION – No relationship between diabetes and calories

CALORIE CONFUSION – No relationship between diabetes and calories.

EAT LESS. CUT YOUR CALORIES. Watch your portion size. These mantras have formed the foundation of conventional weight-loss advice over the past fifty years. And the widespread obesity epidemic proves that this advice has been an utter disaster, perhaps only topped by the nuclear meltdown of Chernobyl. This caloric reduction advice is based on a false understanding of what causes weight gain.

WHAT CAUSES OBESITY? We don’t stop to consider this basic question because we believe that we already know the full answer. It seems so obvious, doesn’t it? Excessive intake of calories in compared to too few calories out leads to weight gain. This energy balance model of obesity has been drilled into us since childhood.

Fat Gained = Calories In – Calories Out

For the past fifty years, our best weight-loss advice was primarily to restrict our caloric intake. Specifically, we were told to restrict the amount of dietary fat, which is calorically dense. This means reducing foods high in fat, such as meat, butter, cheese, and nuts, in order to lower our calorie intake and therefore lose weight. They made food guides, food pyramids and food plates to indoctrinate children into this brand-new, low-calorie religion. “Cut Your Calories“, they declared. “Eat Less, Move More”, they chanted.


Nutrition labels were mandated to include calorie counts. Programs and apps were created to more precisely count calories. They invented small devices such as Fitbits to measure exactly how many calories we were burning. Using all our ingenuity, focused like a laser beam and dogged as a turtle crossing a road, we cut calories.

CALORIE CONFUSION – No relationship between diabetes and calories

WHAT WAS THE RESULT?

Did the problem of obesity simply fade away like the morning mist on a hot summer day? In a word, NO. The underlying, unspoken premise of this model is that energy creation(calories in), energy expenditure(calories out), and fat gain are independent variables fully under our conscious control. It assumes that the number of calories used to keep our bodies running more or less normally remains stable and unchanging. But this is untrue.

The truth is that the body can adjust its basal metabolic rate(BMR) – the energy required to keep the heart pumping, lungs breathing, kidneys and liver detoxifying, brain thinking, body generating heat and so on – up or down by 40 percent. When you eat fewer calories, your body slows down so it uses fewer calories, which means you don’t lose weight.

This model also completely ignores the multiple overlapping hormonal systems that signal hunger and satiety. That is, we may decide what to eat and when to eat it, but we cannot decide to feel less hungry. We cannot decide when to burn calories as body heat and when to store them as body fat. Hormones make these decisions. The results of the so-called “caloric reduction as primary” advice could hardly have been worse if we had tried. The storm of obesity and type 2 diabetes that began in the late 1970’s has today, some forty years, become a global category 5 hurricane threatening to engulf the entire world in sickness and disability.

Only two possibilities can explain how obesity could spread so rapidly in the face of their shiny new advice to reduce fat and calories: first, perhaps this advice is good but people are simply not following it; second, perhaps the advice is simply wrong. CALORIE CONFUSION – No relationship between diabetes and calories

The idea that the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak – that people have the dream but not the drive – is as absurd as expecting a drowning man to laugh.

Was the entire obesity epidemic simply a sudden, simultaneous, coordinated, worldwide lack of willpower? The world can’t agree on which side of the road we should drive on, yet without discussion, we all decided to eat more and move less so that we could become undesirably fat? This explanation is only the latest iteration of the game called “blame the victim”. It shifts the responsibility from the advice-giver( the advice is bad) to the advice taker (the advice is good, but you are not following it).

Bad Advice

By declaring that their scientifically unproven caloric reduction advice was flawless, doctors and nutritionists could conveniently shift the blame from themselves to you. It wasn’t their fault. It was yours. Their advice was good. You didn’t follow it. No wonder they love this game so much. To admit that all their precious theories of obesity were simply incorrect was too psychologically difficult. Yet evidence continued to accumulate that this new caloric restriction strategy was about as useful as a comb to a bald man.

RELATED  TYPE 2 DIABETES The Whole Body Effect

The Women’s Health Initiative was the most ambitious, important nutrition study ever done. This randomised trial involving almost 50,000 women evaluated the low-fat, low-calorie approach to weight loss. Although it was not specifically a weight-loss trial, one group of women was encouraged through intensive counseling to reduce their caloric intake by 342 calories and to increase their level of exercise by 10 percent. These calorie counters expected a weight loss of 32 pounds every single year. When the final results were tallied in 1997, there was only crushing disappointment. Despite good compliance, more than seven years of calorie counting had led to virtually no weight loss. Not even a single pound. This study was a stunning and severe rebuke to the caloric theory of obesity. Reducing calories did not lead to weight loss. More about the studies here…

Real-world studies have only confirmed this stunning fiasco. The conventional weight-loss advice to eat fewer calories carries an estimated failure rate of 99.4 percent. For morbid obesity, the failure rate is 99.9 percent. These statistics would not surprise anybody in the diet industry or, for that matter, anybody who has ever tried to lose weight.

The Calories-In, Calories-Out theory gained widespread acceptance based on its seemingly intuitive truth. CALORIE CONFUSION – No relationship between diabetes and calories

The most important error is believing that basal metabolic rate, or Calories Out, always remains stable. But a 40-percent reduction in calorie intake is quickly met with a 40-percent decrease in basal metabolic rate. The net result is no weight loss.

The other major false assumption is that weight is consciously regulated. But no system in our body functions like that. The thyroid, parathyroid, sympathetic, parasympathetic, respiratory, circulatory, hepatic, renal, gastrointestinal and adrenal systems are all closely controlled by hormones. Bodyweight and body fat are also strictly regulated by hormones. In fact, our bodies contain multiple overlapping systems of body weight control. Body fat, one of the most important determinants of survival in the wild, is simply not left to the vagaries of what we decide to put in our mouths.

RELATED  HORMONES - Food Body Weight And Diabetes

CALORIE CONFUSION – No relationship between diabetes and calories

About Lukas G

Founder of thefod.club - Fighting Type 2 Diabetes.

1 Comment

  1. […] CALORIE CONFUSION – No relationship between diabetes and calories […]

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

We did move all recipes/click me to see details

PLEASE NOTE: All recipes have been moved to klcdiet.com . Click here to go to klcdiet.com