Contents
The scientific explanation about the weight gain of the fat mass is based on the belief that unused calories are stored in the body as fat mass in fat tissue for later use.
- Misconception about Counting Calories and Weight Management
- Misconception about Energy Balance and Weight Gain-Weight Loss
1. Misconception about Counting Calories and Weight Management
The scientific explanation about the weight gain of the fat mass is based on the belief that unused calories are stored in the body as fat mass in fat tissue for later use.
It is embarrassing as it is unbelievable that for nearly a century long, generations of people involved in the research, treatment and prevention of obesity do not know that a significant amount of energy from food intake leaves the body as metabolic waste. In other words, they do not know that the human body excretes calories.
Until 2005, people involved in the research, treatment and prevention of obesity did not know that metabolic waste contains calories. (A significant amount of energy from food intake leaves the body as metabolic waste.)
It seems that even today, the majority of people involved in the research, prevention and treatment of obesity are not aware about this fact.
Many people involved in the research, treatment and prevention of obesity have made a fortune, garnered a reputation and lucrative career without knowing that a significant percentage of energy from food intake leaves the body as metabolic waste. Since 2008, many of them edit their web pages in the attempt to hide their misconceptions from the public.
Here is just one example of how the world's leading experts on obesity have understood the cause and the solution for obesity.
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
PRESS RELEASE - 17 March 2003
100 calories a day enough to stop obesity epidemic in its tracks, advises US nutritionist
It only takes a few small lifestyle changes to achieve this. Anyone pursuing an activity which burns 100 calories a day - say a 15 or 20 minute walk - or reducing their daily intake of food by just 100 calories would be able to head off the steady weight gain which is responsible for much of the adult obesity we are seeing today.
The first who dared to question the basic science of weight gain/ weight loss was Dr. Charles S. Lieber
The New York Times
By JANE E. BRODY
Published: Tuesday, February 4, 1992
Why the Body May Waste the Calories From Alcohol
HE so-called Drinking Man's Diet, a treacherous scheme popular in the 1960's that suggested substituting alcohol for sugars and starches to shed unwanted pounds, was based on the puzzling observation that heavy drinkers and alcoholics often lose weight despite intakes of a thousand or more extra alcohol calories each day.
This observation baffled nutritionists, who long believed that every calorie that entered the stomach could eventually turn itself into fat. Alcohol researchers, too, wondered how so many alcohol calories could be wasted by the metabolic system, which millions of Americans knew to be highly efficient at storing extra calories as fat.
Now Dr. Charles S. Lieber, a New York physician who has been plumbing the depths of alcohol's many mysteries since 1957, has come up with a biochemical mechanism that he says largely accounts for the remarkable wastage of alcohol calories in heavy drinkers. Dr. Lieber published his findings in the current issue of The Journal of the American Society for Clinical Nutrition under the title, "Perspectives: Do Alcohol Calories Count?"
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; (Up to the date of 17 August 2010) “A calorie is a calorie regardless of its source.” Information obtained from the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (Apparently, it is removed from internet but still there a few sources that can be tracked, like Nutrihand
Morgan Spurlock, in his so called documentary movie “Super Size Me” where he explained the cause for obesity and no one obesity expert including the rest of the population did not question the teachings of Morgan Spurlock, because this was in line with the teachings in medical schools and universities. Super Size Me
The “Super Size Me” documentary did not put any light about the causes of the obesity epidemic but it is a documentary about the the world's top nutrition and obesity authorities.
“A Swedish university has replicated Morgan Spurlock's Super Size Me junk food binge under lab conditions.”(Marten Blomkvist
The Guardian, Thursday 7 September 2006 Only another 5,500 calories to go)
”Indeed, Nyström claims that for some people, eating 10% more will lead to their metabolism increasing at the same level. The extra energy will be burned off as body heat during sleep. "If that was not the case we would all have to keep track of every last calorie," he says.
”Indeed, Nyström claims that for some people, eating 10% more will lead to their metabolism increasing at the same level. The extra energy will be burned off as body heat during sleep. "If that was not the case we would all have to keep track of every last calorie," he says.
They think that they track every calorie but they did not know that some energy in food intake leaves the body as metabolic wastes that could be the only reason for the conclusion that the extra energy will be burned as body heat during sleep.
The study done by “A Swedish University” is just another piece of evidence that up to the date 7 September 2006 the scientific establishment did not know that metabolic waste contains calories.
Doubly labelled water method to assess dietary intake is evidence that scientists involved in the research of obesity did not know that a significant amount of energy in food intake leaves the body as metabolic waste.
“In the 1980s, people did not understand why obese people put on weight. Professor (Dr at the time) Andrew Prentice, at the MRC Dunn Nutrition Unit in Cambridge, worked with Dr Andy Coward to develop the ‘doubly-labelled water method’. This measures how much energy a person expends, using a harmless tracer that tracks the amount of carbon dioxide produced by the body as a by-product of energy generation.”
“Professor Prentice found that obese people had a higher metabolic rate than their lean counterparts, reflecting their larger body size – dispelling the myth that their obesity was caused by a metabolic or behavioural defect that resulted in reduced energy expenditure1. The team demonstrated that reports of low energy intake were spurious and obese people were eating more calories than previously thought.”
The scientist involved in this study deserve the credit for proving “that obese people had a higher metabolic rate than their lean counterparts, reflecting their larger body size – dispelling the myth that their obesity was caused by a metabolic or behavioural defect that resulted in reduced energy expenditure.” The problem is that they came to the conclusion that obese people eat more calories than previously thought because the scientists on obesity did not know that metabolic waste contain calories.
The headline from 1995 “Eating to much makes you fat – official” has strengthen the wrong attitude towards obese people.
Eating too much makes you fat - official
Metabolism is bunk: Hester Lacey meets the scientists who can prove it
HESTER LACEY
Sunday, 22 January 1995
By incorporating the “Double labeled water method” in obesity research, the world renowned scientists on obesity did not put any light on the obesity problem, but they have strengthened the (wrong) pre-existing belief that obesity is caused by gluttony and sloth.
Fidgeting theory is further evidence that obesity researchers did not know that the human body excretes “calories” (they didn’t know that metabolic waste contains calories).
Quote:
“Using sophisticated techniques, they were able to precisely measure the fate of the additional 1,000 calories in each subject. Overall, they found the following:
Fate of Extra 1,000 Calories:
Deposited as fat: 39%
Deposited as other body tissue: 4%
Burned by BMR: 8%
Postprandial thermogenesis: 14%
Burned by NEAT: 33%
The 16 volunteers gained an average of 10 pounds during the two months of the study. However, weight gain varied from two pounds to almost 16 pounds. Those with the greatest increase in NEAT (maximum number of calories burned per day: 692) gained the least amount of fat.
The moral of the story is:
If you want to avoid extra body fat, move around like a little child with ants in his/her pants. Constant fidgeting could be the secret to weight loss revealed by top medical researchers.”
COPYRIGHT 1999 Aerobics and Fitness Association of America
COPYRIGHT 2001 Gale Group
Since 2007, there are no more theories like “fidgeting” because the world's leading scientists on obesity have retreated from further research on obesity or they are busy editing their web sites and/ or removing from the internet everything related to obesity that is written by them.
Despite the fact that there are no more theories like fidgeting, the official scientific explanation of fat gain/loss is unchanged.
Fat gain occurs when the energy (calories) taken in exceeds the energy burned. The three main factors involved in the burning of calories are
* Basal metabolic rate (BMR) -- burning of energy when the body is at rest
* Postprandial thermogenesis -- energy burned in the digestion, absorption and storage of food in the body
* Physical activity -- comprising exercise (sports and fitness activities) and NEAT
· The scientific explanation about weight loss is that the body burns calories, which is just another misconception about the topic of weight gain/weight loss.
· The scientific explanation about the weight gain of the fat mass is based on the belief that unused calories are stored in the body as fat mass in fat tissues for later use.
It seems that scientists working on obesity have mistaken the human body with the mechanical engine driven by internal combustion.
When the worlds’ most renowned scientists on obesity have realised that the human body excrete calories, some of them quickly come to the conclusion to interfere with the excretion as a method for weight loss. Mal-absorptive weight loss surgery and weight loss drugs that alter digestion are examples of interfering with excretion.
Until recently, the world’s most renowned scientists on obesity, including the rest of the people involved in the prevention and treatment of overweight and obesity did not know that human body excretes calories and nowadays they do not know that “any interference with excreting in the attempt to regulate the body weight should be treated as insanity”.
The recently published page on “Wikipedia” about “Atwater system” and Metabolisable Energy (ME) (Up to the date 17 August 2010)
It seems that the recently published (recently added or edited) on Wikipedia about the “Atwater system” is an attempt to mislead people that the medical establishment knows that some amount in the food intake leaves the body as metabolic waste.
The content on Wikipedia about “Atwater system is not worthy of discussion, because no medical journal, scientific papers etc related to obesity research has mentioned that, also it has not mentioned the energy lost in faeces, urine, secretions and gases?
The other point is that any medical doctor, obesity researcher, university professor of biology, etc did not ever say that they were estimating the energy lost in faeces, urine, secretions and gases by using the Atwater System.
On the same page at Wikipedia, there is a sentence about Metabolisable Energy (ME)
Available energy (as used by Atwater) is equivalent to the modern usage of the term Metabolisable Energy (ME). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atwater_system
If you click on that link you will get an answer
Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name (Metabolisable Energy). (Up to the date 17 August 2010)
It seems that the author/authors of those pages on Wikipedia do not know too much about the subject he/they is/are talking about.
To my knowledge, there is no original paper that shows that Wilbur Olin Atwater estimated the energy loss in faeces etc. I could be wrong, but a few years ago, I spent a lot of time researching everything related to Wilbur Olin Atwater work and could not find a single piece of evidence that he estimated the energy lost in faeces or urine.
In the end, whether Wilbur Olin Atwater has estimated or not, the energy in faeces urine, secretions and gases, there is plenty of evidence that until recently all research studies on obesity are done without estimating the amount of energy contained in metabolic waste.
Obesity researchers, endocrinologists and the fitness industry are reluctant to admit that the basic science of weight gain/weight loss is based without knowing that a significant amount of energy in food intake leaves the body as metabolic waste. When they have realised that a significant amount of food intake leaves the body as a metabolic waste, they did not change their attitude towards people affected with obesity but continue to pursue “eat less and/or exercise more” along with pretending to have already known that the body excretes calories
The “counting calories” as a scientific method to understand and control the weight of the body was introduced at the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century by Wilbur Olin Atwater and promoted by Dr Lulu Hans Peterson, and quickly was accepted as an unquestionable scientific truth by the medical establishment and the rest of the population.
First, there is nothing wrong with the method used to determine the number of calories in food. In reality, the calories are just a measurement of the heat produced when the food is burned in laboratories to dry powder ashes. In living organisms, this kind of process (burning) never happens, because the metabolic waste is not dry powder ashes and on the other side, some energy leaves the body before it is fully metabolised and some energy leaves the body after it is metabolised. “The counting calories” is a wrong method to determine how many calories will be fully metabolised.
For example; an intake of 3500kcl does not mean that there is 3500kcl involved. The human body will take only a number of calories that it needs and the rest will be discarded and excreted as metabolic waste.
For example; an intake of 3500kcl does not mean that there is 3500kcl involved. The human body will take only a number of calories that it needs and the rest will be discarded and excreted as metabolic waste.
The difference between the energy intakes and the energy discarded and excreted as metabolic waste is the amount of energy that is fully metabolised.
Even if we know how much energy is fully metabolised, we still can not predict the exceeded number of calories that the body will use because some absorbed calories (metabolized food) body excretes through the skin and hair.
One sort of energy that the body excretes is energy that the body does not convert but excretes mainly through the digestive and urinary system (faecal energy) and another sort is the energy that the body first metabolises and later excretes as metabolic waste through the skin and hair, (for example some people have more greasy skin and/or more greasy hair than others).
The present scientific understanding states that if we intake more energy than the body needs for basal metabolic rate plus energy spent through physical activity, the excess number of calories will be converted into fat mass and stored in the fat tissues for later use.
The fact is that some available energy in the food the body simply does not use but discards and excretes it as metabolic waste (mainly through the digestive and urinary systems).
Furthermore, the accepted dogma that weight gain of the fat mass is “simply a matter of balance” between the calories intake and calories burned out is supported by wrongly applying the Laws of Thermodynamics in the understanding of what is happening with the energy in a living organism.
In practical terms it is possible to apply the Laws of Thermodynamics (First and Second) only in a closed system where no energy coming in and no energy goes out (all energy that comes in and out is measurable). That is the case with any mechanical engine. In the case of the human body, some energy goes out (the energy that practically is not possible to measure).
This fact alone shows that it is pointless to apply the Law of Thermodynamics to explain the occurrences of weight gain/weight loss in humans or any other species. Applying the law of thermodynamics on humans does not explain anything concerning weight gain/weight loss.
Introducing counting calories as a method to understand weight gain/weight loss has the consequence that many people ranging from scientists involved in the research and treatment of obesity to simple people think that metabolic waste is calorie free. Because of that, it is accepted as an unquestionable scientific fact that the increase of the food intake and/or decrease of physical activity is responsible for weight gain and that the decrease in food intake and/or the increase of physical activity are responsible for weight loss. The entire science of obesity and the entire weight loss industry (diet and/or exercise, medications, WLS) is based on such a misconception that has grave consequences for so many people.
This misconception is greatly responsible for an increase in obesity, especially in the last twenty-five years because without really understanding the biological basis of fat formation on the body, the human is not able to counteract the obesity and is not able to discover the real cause for the current epidemic proportions in the incidences of obesity and the severity of obesity.
How has it happened, that for nearly a century, “counting calories” is accepted as a scientific way of understanding the fat formation and at the same time accepted as basic for any intervention in regulating the weight of the body is beyond rational explanation.
From such understanding came the theory of the cause for building fat tissues and it says; “unused calories intake by the body is stored as fat tissues for later use”.
To support the theory of building fat tissues, which has already been accepted as an unquestionable scientific fact, comes the theory that because of genetic factors “different body’s burn energy at different speed”. To support the theory based on genetics (different bodies burn energy at different speeds) came the “hunter/gathered gene” theory and many other theories.
Each new theory of fat formation is made up to support the credibility of already existing ones. Each new theory of the cause for obesity is made up to support the credibility of already existing ones.
Every new theory about the cause of obesity is hailed as a scientific break-through and quickly accepted as an unquestionable scientific fact, followed by the increase of obesity in all population groups.
The public health agencies, the medical practitioners, and medical science researchers have to confront the fact that the basic science of weight gain/weight loss is wrong.
The attitude towards obese people including obese children is born out of the fact that all the science of obesity is created without knowing that the human body excretes calories. It is embarrassing not only for scientists but also for simple people. For some of them it is so embarrassing that they pretend to have known already that the human body excretes calories.
Such an error is embarrassing not only for the scientific establishment, but is also embarrassing for people with average education.
The rest of the population can not believe that such an error in the basic science of obesity can be made.
2. Misconception about Energy Balance and Weight Gain-Weight Loss
We have been told that weight loss occurs because of a state of negative energy balance and that weight gain occurs because of the state of positive energy balance. Such an explanation is accepted as an unquestionable scientific truth by the entire scientific community.
Here are just two examples that reflect the present scientific explanation of the occurrence of weight gain and weight loss.
According to Wikipedia, “Weight loss occurs when an individual is in a state of negative energy balance. When the human body is losing more chemical energy in work and heat than it is gaining from food or other nutritional supplements, it will catabolise stored reserves (or fat) inside the body.”
According to Association for the Study of Obesity the “Weight gain occurs when the amount of energy (calories) consumed as food and drink exceeds the energy which is used for exercise and other metabolic processes of the body. This is known as positive energy balance. The excess energy is stored principally as fat. Each kilogram of fat stores approximately 9000kcal. This fat can only be lost when the body requires more energy than is available from food and thus draws upon its energy stores. This is known as negative energy balance.”
This sounds scientific, but let us scrutinise this unquestionable scientific truth. How is it possible to describe the situation where a body is in a state of negative energy balance (at which point the human body is in a state of negative energy balance)? Is it when the body is in a state of negative energy balance, when there are no calories left in the digestive system and at this point the body starts to “draws upon its energy stores” (literally, bite fat tissues.....self cannibalism ..?) Or is it that the human body is in a state of negative energy balance when there is 1kcal calorie left in the digestive system and at this point the metabolism starts to “draw upon its energy stores''. Or is it when the human body is in a state of negative energy balance and decides to “draw upon its energy stores'' (literarily, bite fat tissues) when 5kcal is left in the digestive system, or when 10kcal or 50kcal or 500kcal is or when there is 2000kcal.
The same questions apply for “a state of positive energy balance”; at which point is the human body in a state of “positive energy balance”? Is the human body in a “state of positive energy balance” when there is 1 kcal in the digestive system that the body decides to convert this energy into fat mass for later use or is it when there is 5kcal or 10kcal, or when is 50 kcal or 500kcal, or 2000kcal in the digestive system?
To get the idea of how this scientific explanation is pointless you can discover it in this way: In the time when you read this article, ask yourself are you at this moment in a state of “positive energy balance” or are you in a “state of negative energy balance” or you are in a state of grace with counting calories - calories in, equal calories out. (It will be funny if such a misconception was not responsible for so many people's misery.)
Any known intervention in the attempt to control the weight of the body, (diet for weight loss, exercise for weight loss, pharmaceutical inventions, all WLS) is based on an understanding that weight gain occurs because of a state of positive energy balance and that weight loss occurs because of a state of negative energy balance.
The common understanding is that the body will lose weight when it expends more energy than it takes in, and this sounds reasonable that to make up the shortfall in energy must come from somewhere. But the question is; when does the body expand more energy than what it takes in? Is it when there is one calorie left in the digestive system, etc?
It should be remembered that long before a body expands more energy than it takes in, the strength of the body will decrease to the point that it will cause an unconscious state, and in a short time, a death will follow parallel with the loss of the remaining strength. Still, the lifeless body (corpse) contains plenty of calories, (glucose, ketones, adenosine triphosphate, etc.)
One important fact that needs to be taken into consideration is that a restriction of food intake negatively affects the strength of the body in everyone; it doesn’t mater if a person is obese, overweight, normal weight or underweight.
- Any mechanical engine stops working when it runs out of energy or by an absence of sufficient energy supply.
- The human body stops to work when it runs out of strength.
The explanation that obesity occurs when the human body takes in more energy than it expends over a given period of time at the first moment sounds reasonable and it leads to the conclusion that the energy balance over a period of time in biology is real. Only one fact needs to be taken into consideration, that in the real world it is not possible to have a situation where the balance over a period of time exists, but doesn’t exist at a particular point of those periods of time. In the real world, nothing cannot turn into something, it doesn’t matter how long a period of time it is.
Concerning weight loss/weight gain, in the human body at any particular point, in any given period of time, this energy balance does not exist.
Weight gain of the fat mass is not “a simple matter of balance” but it is a life process (biological process).
The “energy balance over period of time” has meaning in physics, economics, climatology, hydrology etc and that is the fact that misleads to the conclusion that in biology, energy balance over a period of time exists.
For example, the financial balance over a given period of time is real. We do not need to know for each day what the financial situation is. It is enough at the end of the year to count how much was made and how much was spent. Whether we know or do we not know what the financial situation is for each day is not important. What is important is that the financial situation for each day of the year exists (it is real) and if we like to know what the financial situation for a particular day is, we would be able to gather this knowledge. Each day of the year, it is possible to know what the current financial balance is and that enables us to know what the balance between the annual income and the annual expenditure is.
The impossibility to know what the financial situation is in one particular day will make it pointless for any attempt to know what the financial balance is for one year. Concerning the topic of weight gain/loss, it is not possible to locate the point in time when the body is in a state of positive or negative energy balance because the state of positive and state of negative energy balance does not exist.
Weather and climate balance over a given period of time is a real thing because we can see and know what the current climate and weather situation is and because of that, we can observe the change that is happening in the climate and weather situation over a period of time. We can observe only changes that really happened.
The body weight is a real thing and we can observe changes in the weight over any given period of time and we are also able to know exactly the weight of the body at any present point in a given period of time.
The body weight is a real thing and we can observe changes in the weight over any given period of time and we are also able to know exactly the weight of the body at any present point in a given period of time.
Any attempt to observe the change on things that we cannot find, their existence at the present point of time (which is the case with the state of positive and negative energy balance) is pointless.
Naturally thin people and people affected by certain types of injury, the elderly, and people affected by weightlessness and many other examples show that the scientific explanation based on “energy balance” to explain weight gain/weight loss is pointless.
Bears eat plenty of food in the autumn and gain weight, and over the winter they do not eat and they lose weight gained in the autumn. The first impression is that eating alone is responsible for weight gain and that absence of food is responsible for weight loss. But if we take a closer examination, we can see that even bears do not gain weight in the spring time and in the early summer, but they start to pick up the weight in the middle of the summer and mostly in the autumn.
Excessively feeding bears in the spring will not produce any significant weight gain on them. Exposing bears to harsher restrictions of food intake in the spring or in the summer will not produce any significant weight loss. With harsher restrictions on food intake, the bear will die before it loses any significant amount of body weight.
If we undertake a closer examination of the weight loss induced by weight loss surgeries, we can discover some disturbing facts about the real cause of weight loss. Everyone thinks that weight loss after weight loss surgery is due to restrictions of food intake and this is wrong. In reality, the mechanism of weight loss induced by weight loss surgery is identical to the mechanism of involuntary weight loss by people affected with certain types of injuries.
(The full text article where the mechanism of weight loss induced by weight loss surgery is explained in the article: “Weight Loss Surgeries, Weight Loss, Diabetes and the Biomechanics of Sitting and Walking”
It is hard to believe, but all this evidence points to the theory that a body stores unused energy as a fat mass in fat tissues for later use is based on the assumption that metabolic waste is calorie free. The fact that a significant amount of energy in food intake leaves the body as a metabolic waste shows alone that the “Energy Balance Paradigm” is a product of intellectual misery.
In real life, there are plenty of examples that clearly shows that building the fat mass (weight gain) on the body cannot be explained as simply a matter of a state of positive energy balance, and there is plenty of evidence available that shows that building off the fat mass (weight loss) cannot be explained as simply a matter of a state of negative energy balance.
Restriction of food intake usually (not always) leads to weight loss. Involvement in moderate or vigorous exercise usually (not always) leads to weight loss. In both cases, the occurrence of weight loss is explained as a direct consequence of a state of negative energy balance and that is wrong.
Restriction of food intake usually (not always) leads to weight loss. Involvement in moderate or vigorous exercise usually (not always) leads to weight loss. In both cases, the occurrence of weight loss is explained as a direct consequence of a state of negative energy balance and that is wrong.
For example, people affected by weightlessness (cosmonauts and astronauts) intake of food alone will not produce any weight gain on them. This means that in weightlessness, food is essential for sustaining life but will not produce any weight gain as it also will not prevent or slow down weight loss.
To prevent weight loss and also to counteract other negative consequences for health caused by weightlessness, cosmonauts and astronauts spend a great amount of time doing exercises on specially designed exercise machines and devices.
Here on earth, we have many examples when a regular or increased food intake does not cause any weight gain. In many cases, a normal or increased food intake alone is not sufficient to prevent or to slow involuntary weight loss.
A regular or increased food intake does not produce weight gain to the elderly, people affected with long standing illnesses, people affected with certain types of injuries and people affected by prolonged bed rest.
It is a widely accepted thought that food intake together with physical activity is responsible for building muscle mass and that the food intake alone or combined with the physical inactivity is responsible for building fat mass, but on the other hand, the examples of people affected by weightlessness and people affected by prolonged bed rest, or long standing illnesses and the elderly, it is clear that the absence of physical activity or insufficient physical activity with a regular or increased food intake will not produce any weight gain.
In all these examples, it is clear that the regular or increased food intake alone is not enough not only to gain new weight, but will not be enough to maintain the existing body weight.
It is known that with heavy exercise, it is possible to achieve weight loss. But it is also known that the body does not lose weight at the time of doing these exercises. Weight loss occurs after the exercise is done. The body maintains an elevating breathing rate for a few minutes after exercising and after that period regains pre- exercise breathing level. The post exercise oxygen consumption does not explain the post exercise weight loss.
