I weigh myself once a week, consistently on Sunday morning. I wake up, I go to the bathroom, I drink one glass of water, and I weigh myself on a scale that also estimates body fat percentage. If you keep in mind that your weight will fluctuate a little this is still a useful method, over the course of a long period of time consistent results will emerge similar to what you'd see if you weighed daily and took an average. For most people, knowing exactly how much you weigh isn't important. Weekly weighing is less accurate than daily and taking an average, but if you have no requirements on your actual weight, who cares? If we accept that we may be up a little or down a little on a daily basis, what does it even mean to say "I weigh X" at a specific moment in terms of accuracy? It'll probably only matter to people who undertake activities by weight class.

@@Melesniannon "most people" won't be watching layne. You drink water before weighing yourself? Wack!

@@cgibbons2673 Why's that "wack"? You think the amount of water in a person's body who lives a normal life is somehow a constant factor? It's one of the things that causes such weight fluctuations. Since I weigh in the morning and haven't typically hydrated for 7-8 hours I am more hydrated than I'd be under normal circumstances where my weight might actually matter, not that, and this is the point, in most practical situations for most people that 1-2 pounds actually matters. So it doesn't really matter that I drink a bit of water before weighing, what matters is that I drink the same amount of water so I still have a consistent measurement. All that requires is using the same glass. What matters is that I compare my current state against my previous state in a consistent manner so I can track changes.

@@Melesniannon lol, you totally contradicted yourself. It is just plain dumb, I can't believe you shared this. When you go on vacation do you take your glass away with you? Is it like a safety blanket

@@cgibbons2673 How did I contradict myself? Please cite the two statements which cannot simultaneously be true. And no, obviously not, but then I don't take my scale with me on vacation either, doofus. What kind of obsessive person even thinks like that? And what kind of narrowminded person wouldn't immediately understand that if I WOULD want to maintain consistency in that scenario, all I need to know is the volume of the glass? You think finding a 200 ml container is hard? Try to make more sense instead of relying on desperate insults.

this

Bingo. It was especially beneficial during the winter when it was easier to fast due to shorter days. Bleaker days as well.

Yes! 👍😁

Exactly , and fasting doesn't cause the same crash I experienced when dieting for 7 years prior to fasting . I tried keto, low carb (low cal diet) I tried over ans over and always plateaued at a certain point felt like crap usually 3 months in and couldn't keep up which caused me to regain the weight back in a few months . Fasting was the solution I was looking for my whole life. I do adf I don't count calories , I dropped 10 kilos from 87.5 to 77.5, weight loss stopped hunger went up a bit then it died down again now I'm perfectly adapted at around 80kg for like 7 months into it. I perform even better energy wise when fasted than fed. Will get blood work done and see how it has impacted my blood plasma in all this time. These things are very complicated and it would be wrong to claim one superior over the other . Just try it all and see what works long term and stick to it I'd say .

I was constantly hungry & fatigued on Keto. It changed for me when I went low fat, high whole carb. I "only" fast for about 14 - 16 hours every day. So, I have the opposite experience. 🙂

I’ve lost over 160 pounds using some of your advice.

@Greg Doucette i want to know if we eat 4000 calories of wooden chips would we get fat because of caloric surplus as per cico

Doc fungus =))) it's so true and annoying that normal people would rather listen to doctor idiot that has nothing to do with losing weight, but not listen to a bodybuilder that does that for his job

What's your thought on Type 2 diabetes and diet. That is what his specialty is, Half the population has Type 2

@@CathyRodriguez34 more than half the population is overweight and sedentary, I think that answers the question.

Agreed!

No chance .. all he does is slag people off

I somehow don't thing j fumg will want to be in this guys company he's a rip roaring narcississt.

Debate Prof Bart Kay too .. he will rip lame a new one

@@tifqureshi3895 oh big time but it will never happen,narc Lane would never allow it as he knows what will happen.

All this video is misunderstanding every word Jason Fung says.

@@ReflejoPositivo9898 ya its more of a nitpicking rather than debunking. He needs to understand the context.

Even then studies showed that increase in insulin produced increased hunger and food take as well like sweet and sugary foods and on top of that a study showed that how different insulin levels produced by the type of food ingested may affect subsequent food intake

I agree with all the above comments. The best explanation I have ever heard of calories in vs calories out is how this is a complete oversimplification and if true and a person is always in a calorie deficit then eventually they'd whither away to nothing. Hormones supercede that equation. He makes too fine a point here and his argument whithers away to nothing

Medical doctor that sees patients daily vs some jerkoff with phd with no patient interaction and uses his phd to get people to buy supplements that u don’t need at all.

why would you want to eat every moment of the day?

​@@dadadudududa5500 Cope, stress eating, bingeing, general lifestyle of some people etc

What point are you trying to make here ?

Have you seen the 100 dollars part? He literally says ''today'' @24:10

Keto does not affect hormones, well it affects insulin. You can stay on a keto diet because fat is more filling that’s why. But not because of insulin. There are people who don’t function without carbs, me being one of them. It’s not the hormones it’s your body’s preferred source of energy. And most of the humans, biologically function on glucose. Keto is just an adaptation where your body produces pseudo carbohydrates from fat. If you know the physiology behind it you will see it’s just an emergency survival mechanism

Learn how to manipulate calories to your advantage . Volume eating + flexible dieting is the key to sustainable weight loss. Make lower calorie versions of the foods you love , I eat burritos , breakfast egg and potatos bowls , pastas , chili cheese fries , air fried chicken sandwiches , burgers etc. and allow them all to fit in a 2200 calorie diet . It’s not that hard I promise

" when I apply what he says, I get results." Because you are operating at a caloric deficit. Extended fasting and/or intermittent fasting is basically a cheat code for caloric restriction. If you aren't eating 2 days a week, for example, you're almost definitely gonna consume less calories per week. That doesn't mean his "science" isn't bogus, because most of it is.

@@ajejegroz9080 protein tends to be the satieting aspect of foods on a keto diet. Your body can make glucose from fat and from complete proteins. Most people won't eat everything in an animal so they will need some form of carbohydrate to get all their micronutrients and/or supplement it. People can do all meat diets and be fine. There is a transition phase to using fat as a preferred fuel source, it's not just a genetic factor it's a behavioral one.

@tanya Spot on. His target audience is lay people, not scientists. At the end it is energy balance, but, I found that IF is a lot easier to stick to. A year on and I down 35lbs at 152. Unfortunately 25% of that was lean body mass per my dexa scan so now I lift 4xweek. Love the content here.

That is exactly Fung’s thesis. And in my personal experience, he’s right. With IF and low carb diet I’ve lost 45 lbs and reversed my T2 diabetes in the last 4 months. I don’t feel hungry, I haven’t had to dick about with calorie counting and I have more energy and motivation to work out. I think the key point is that you need a calorie deficit AND a reduction in insulin to successfully lose fat, and for it to be sustainable. I’ve done calorie restriction before and lost a bit of weight, but felt lethargic, constantly tired, constantly hungry, cold and generally miserable AF. Inevitably my willpower eventually cracked and I piled the weight back on, and some extra.

it's NOT about the insulin. That is one of the main points Layne explained. If your body is in a caloric deficit it HAS to used stored energy (body fat, extreme case muscle mass) to "fuel" your energy expenditure. Regardless what is currently happening with your insulin, thyroid etc. If it was dependent on only insulin or other hormones nobody in the world would starve. All the success stories of people who lose weight and keep it off is because they found a eating structure that works for them and that creates this caloric deficit that is sustainable. That's all.

I agree with you. Dr.fungs approach helped me too. I don't exercise and have lost 25lb with low carb diet and intermittent fasting. I've done this 3 times. Everytime I go off of it I gain the weight back, but when I stick to this diet I lose weight.

​@@HSS787 And that's awesome. Dr Fung has a philosophy. If he believes that, fine, if it helps SOME people, better again. The issue is Dr Fung, with no real evidence rubbishing pretty well established facts.

The thing with Dr Fung's advice is that it works but not what he thinks. Intermittent fasting and keto only works because you're still eating less calories. If you did those things but still overate you would gain fat anyway

@@JerseyJake98 as a biologist, i totally disagree with the construct and concept that you are repeating - by which i mean to calories. calorie is nothing but a measure of energy in a closed thermodynamic system. it has nothing to do with fat loss or fat gain. what you just said about ketogenic diet and fasting is exactly true about the calories rubbish - by which i mean that the only reason people lose weight or gain weight when they are in caloric deficit or surplus respectively, is because they are eating less or eating more respectively. there is nothing about calories themselves and its freaking nonsense to think of food as calories in a closed thermodynamic system like bomb calorimeter

​@itamar.j.rachailovich As another biologist, you throwing around "closed energy system" as if ot bolsters your claim of how it affects fat loss or fat gain in a non appreciative way is off the fucking planet incorrect. Was physics also a part of your biology background? Because if it was, you'd understand the thermodynamics of how this works. Just because an isolated variable operates in a vacuum a certain way, does NOT negate the reality of its effect on a system with variances. You act like calories only work in a vacuum. Your body changing its ability to process calories does not negate the caloric argument. CICO is a PHYSICAL LAW, my g. Just because there are variables that change the equation does not mean the answer still isn't either net gain or net loss. This shit isn't that complicated....

After all this time, people still don't understand the point of IF. They think it's about weight loss. It's not about weight loss. It's about autophagy, reducing inflammation, and blood glucose control over time. It's about improved focus and giving your body a respite to heal. Can those things help (keyword) while trying to achieve weight loss? Yes. But at the end of the day, calories in vs calories out is all that really matters for weight loss. If you eat 2500 calories per day, and burn 2500 calories per day, it doesn't really matter when you eat, you are not going to lose any meaningful weight. (all of this assumes you have no dysfunction) Three rules to live by: 1. Move or die (exercise) 2. Calories in vs. calories out (weight management) 3. You are what you eat (overall health) IF is a tool. It's not meant to be a weight loss tool. One thing I'd like to see nutritionists start to push is the idea that consuming anything at all causes damage to your organs, and you need to give your body a chance to recover from that damage as well as control how much damage is being done by the food that is being consumed. The problem is that message is easily lost in transmission and can lead to very dangerous eating disorders if not understood properly. I'm not saying not to eat. I'm saying to be extremely picky about what calories you consume. The goal is to consume as few calories as possible while not sacrificing your goals. (Also, eating absolutely nothing for extended periods of time can also damage organs. There's a balance.)

im having the opposite effect rn after listening to dr fund ive lost 13 pounds in 1 week sure half of it is water hut thats almost as much as ive lost in the past year and a half doing other protocols. look into rolling 72 hour fasts it gets easier with time and you get fast results personally i love it combining it with keto seems like the way to go

@@flyingbanana971272 hour fasts give your internal body (organs) a chance to recover from the damage you do to them every time you consume food. I think Keto is a fantastic diet to follow. But weight loss mainly boils down to calories in vs. calories out. Yes, there can be some extenuating factors there like water retention, bloating, etc that can be relieved through some other means and result in some quick wins. However, long term, calories in vs calories out is the big winner. When you couple that with picking the highest quality calories, or calories of a certain type (fats and proteins over carbs) then you can supercharge your health on top of losing weight and prevent destroying your body's insulin sensitivity.

@@user-ij5ky4lr3x - I both agree and disagree with you. The point of IF is different for different people. I IF strictly to control my blood sugar. I have gout, and keeping my blood sugar down reduces the uric acid in my body, which keeps the flare-ups away. I fell off the wagon recently, started eating way more sugar than I should (#*$!ed angel cream donuts!) and ignoring my fasting hours, and as a result, have been struggling with a gout attack for the past two days. I don't care if I lose a pound or healing my body, whatever that is. IF is a tool, true, but a tool isn't always used for the same purpose. It's like saying you can only use a screwdriver to turn a screw when you know darned well, you've used one as an icepick or to open a can of paint.

I.f. definitely helps weight loss but there's so many other benefits that come along with it

Fasting naturally puts you in a calorie deficit and it drives me bonkers that Fung and his crew won’t admit calories are part of the equation.. I actually heard a podcast where Megan Ramos stated you can eat to “satiety” and still lose weight. They stay carefully worded in this area but guess what - not eating 42hrs and then having 2 meals to “satiety” such as with ADF - puts you in a natural calorie deficit. I agree with Fung that fasting and hormones are a valuable part of the equation that has been overlooked when it comes to CICO. But he wants to act like he reinvented the wheel (likely for profit). I mean - who wants to go on another calorie restricted diet. In my opinion as an RDN, calories will always be part of the equation, but all the parts have to come together for it to work. Denial is not the answer.

Is the fasting results to lower insulin levels. If you don’t have an obesity diabetic problem your gym and diet works until you get older and that doesn’t work s as my more. Been there and done that. You aren’t old enough s as md diabetic to understand it and give your opinion on this matter because you aren’t a scientist or a physician to give an educational podcast to give your research opinion 😊

@@Paloma1977 I am actually a type 1 diabetic and a practicing clinical dietitian in my 40s. I would gather that would give me more ground to comment than most, but I digress. I’m not exactly sure what your argument is? No one is denying fasting works by addressing hormone changes that occur with aging which contributes to its success. However it is completely obvious fasting 42hrs 3x/week is putting a person in a calorie deficit. It’s likely a combo of both that gets results. So if it looks, talks, walks like a duck, it’s a duck! Why the lack of transparency? I think it is because it pads the pockets of those not telling the full truth. Overall, glad you found something that works for you - no matter what you want to call it.

@@Paloma1977 A calorie deficit does not “stop” working for people above 50. That is a flat out lie. No one needs fasting, it is just an optional tool to induce calorie deficit.

@@C0d0ps I’m way over 60 lol Kept 100 lbs OFF for over 5 years I do not count calories. when old and can not longer hit a gym start to get bigger with diabetes then your gym guru will no longer be any use for old diabetic handicapped and obese. Google dr Jason Fung he’s the only hope to stay off the insulin.

A lot of this comes down to people getting too loyal to a particular ideology. The calorie guys are to blind to look at a different perspective.

Sausen, but is the root cause properly identified by saying insulin is the problem? Or is insulin a problem because (as you said) excessive frequent eating (excess caloric intake) causes the downstream effects that include increased insulin and fat storage?

Insulin is a growth hormone. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18465354/

Excessive eating over YEARS and bad eating of course. If you have to eat 2000 kcal to lose weight it is imposible that you gain weight eating that amount, even if you eat them from junk food or healthy food. You won’t be that healthy like having deficients of vit/min, cholesterol, etc but you are not going to gain weight if you have a calorie deficit.

Even if you frequently eat if you are in a calorie deficient you won’t gain weight. Body fat in the stomach region in excess causes insulin resistance.

Why you want calorie deficit u wanna get sick?

@@randyhollier A (small - 500 cal or less) calorie deficit will not make you sick. In actuality, small calorie deficits (+ as long as you are getting adequate nutrition!) are linked to anti-ageing in mammalian studies. Your body produces less mitochondrial free radicals/oxidative species - these are normally produced in small amounts through the mitochondrial electron transport chain. They're very reactive and cause damage to proteins (enzymes, transcription factors, etc.) and DNA. Over time, the damage accumulates, leading to symptoms of ageing like DNA mutations which create misfolded (dysfunctional) proteins and enzymes, and with age, the body's own clearance system of these proteins is less efficient, so those also build up and can aggregate leading to disease. Caloric restriction has shown to reduce the amount of free radicals produced vs. mammals on a non-restricted diet. If you're interested in reading more I can point you to some journal articles :)

@@pseudonym3733 i disagree. Hunger is a physiological response to low food intake it means your body is breaking homeostasis to survive the percieved food shortage

@@randyhollier Mild caloric restriction or hunger are not the same as starvation. Starvation is a type of caloric deficit technically, but an extremely large one that is much too low to function or obtain adequate nutrition. We are not taking about that. Maybe you overestimate how much 500 calories is? For instance, in my cupboard I have a bag of chocolate raisins (150g), this small bag is 630 calories. My maintenance is 2300 calories. If I eat 1800 in meals/other snacks, and this bag of raisins, I'll stay the same weight. But if I skip the bag of raisins, I'm in a 500 cal deficit with no issues. You can disagree with scientific evidence all you want - i offered to send you the articles - but don't fear monger and spread misinformation that is not based on fact or a true understanding of what is being suggested.

@@pseudonym3733 I am not spreading misinformation all the conclusion i reached are a priori logical deductions. If you disagree with logic thats your problem. Go to my vid and comment if you want proof this section is heavily moderated ...

You are correct. If you put on fat above your fat threshold you get type 2 diabetes. The only route out is weight loss.

Exactly.

They don't they lose weight just as fast.

Different dietary behaviors yes, metabolic behaviors no. You CAN cause permanent metabolic damage due to long term morbid obesity but that doesn't mean the mechanisms for weight loss are no longer there. You cannot sustain a specific body size without replenishing resources you constantly lose.

Insulin is a growth hormone. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18465354/

They're all just trying to ride on the algorithm and get more clicks / views themselves. Shame.

sorry bro he is a quack. Yes his method works. But not for the reason you think. You follow his advice and fast for 20 hours and only eat for 4 you are essentially creating a calorie deficit. you cut carbs out and thats even more calories gone.

@@tomwilson666 Seems to me that doesn't make him a"quack". It's easy for KZfaqrs to throw the word around for clicks. I'm going to go with "more research is needed". Especially for diabetics and people prone to high blood sugar. Someone isn't a "quack" because they prescribe a method that works (for whatever reason) and then propose a mechanism. What bugs me is this guy getting clicks by putting pics of Fung and DeLauer in his thumbnails, dragging them through the mud. It's sleazy.

Fung literally makes several ridiculous claims that are blatantly false which you can figure out by a 5 minute google search. Calories in and calories out works. It’s the only method that works. When you follow Fungs method by fasting you you creating a calorie deficit. Fungs theory and explanation violates the law of conservation of energy and thermodynamics.

@@tomwilson666 Maybe you follow Fung closer than I do, but, from what I remember seeing, he does say you need to maintain a caloric deficit. I've seen (maybe) one click-baity title that implies otherwise, but actually listening to him, he does acknowledge a caloric deficit is necessary for weight loss.

The thermic effect of food is pretty tiny if you just eat protein all the time you might just save a hundred calories

@@williammclean6594 yeah, but protein makes you feel more full, so it displaces more calories that you would otherwise eat if you had carbs instead. My only issue with protein is the increased aging/cancer risk. So I prefer to feel full from high fiber foods

@@gerardt3284 yeah if you look at bodybuilders who eat extreme protein there is evidence that really high levels of protein damages your body like your kidneys. There is also a lot of research that says you don't really need super high levels of protein to build muscle usually 100 grams or a little more is sufficient

@@williammclean6594 they take PED's thats why their organs are so bad, its not the protein intake lmao

Very NEAT indeed. Hormones go bmrrrrrr

explaining the huge differences in metabolic rate by "random fiddling" is just a say to say you don't know what causes the difference

That. Also brain uses 20% of your body energy, if you use brain daily - math, software engineers, chess players, researchers and scientists, you study hard , STEM college students etc you consume a lot of energy because brain is a very expensive organ to run. Brain is NEAT but it isn’t really included?

Yes, you would get less of the amino acids from protein you may need, on paper you could fiddle the numbers and buy high protein cookies, but the ratio of the amino acids would not be ideal (also vitamins/minerals), you could also have much less satiety.

Significantly less protein = significantly worse body composition. You will also probably get a lot of brain freeze. However, while that may have been a genuine question (in which case, fair play), if it was instead an attempt at presenting a simplified argument against what people think is meant by the CICO model, what you have done in that case is present a "straw man" argument - an over-the-top, extreme, exaggerated misrepresentation of an argument which is therefore easy to dismiss and shoot down. I don't think you will find a single health and nutrition expert that recommends for you to eat nothing but cookies and ice cream, so it's not really proving anything to say that you probably shouldn't. No proponents of the CICO model that i've ever seen say that micronutrients, macronutrients and fibre aren't important for HEALTH, only that calorie balance is what drives weight loss and weight gain. That's not the same thing as health markers, levels of vitamins, minerals, amino acids, essential fatty acids, levels of hunger, satiety, perceived energy levels throughout the day, etc.

This is true. But do we really want to be taking drugs to stay lean and healthy? Fun fact- I was hyper thyroid in my twenties (the version that makes your metabolism go wild) my resting heart rate went up 20 points, I burned so hot I would steam up the car windows on my side, I barely slept. Yet I actually put on weight because I was so hungry I ate like a horse.

yes

90 to 175 in a year on keto. When my doc called frantic for me to see a cardiologist, it scared me. Low saturated fat, whole food plant-based & fish works really really well. LDL down below 60 now. BMI = 24. Massively diverse & exciting diet.

Exactly!! 💯

You’re welcome

@@biolayne1 Is TEF calculated on nutritional facts on food packaging?

I don't think i slept for 8 hours completly after I hit about 250 - 255

This comment right here is really useful

Your body can only burn so much fat in one day, but it's easy to binge and eat way more calories in a single day. This is why fat gain can happen so fast compared to fat loss. I know you said you ate relatively the same thing, but if you didn't strictly count your calories, it's hard to tell

Adrenal Fatigue doesn't exist.

@@jesmondo5785 Ok, It's still a good catch all term for symptoms related to lack of sleep and an increase in stress hormones.

I also don’t count my exercise calories in my calorie intake because I don’t believe the numbers lol

I’m not going to read his shitty book. I’m not putting words in his mouth. I literally showed you what he said

@@biolayne1 you can't say it's shitty if you haven't read it lol. I don't blindly follow anyone, but it's always good to read and research all view points and be skeptical on everyone. I'm not saying you're putting words in his mouth. I'm saying he explains things better and more clearly in his book. He has the same exact energy equations that you mentioned there. I disagree with this video clip of his too.

@@biolayne1 Bullshit, you took a couple minute clip out of context and tried to refute it. You saying "his shitty book" just proves you're trying to create a name for yourself by being edgy and contrary. You will fail.

@@biolayne1 classy reply. Nice.

@@biolayne1 arrogant

Fasting and calorie restriction are both valid strategies for losing fat. Just because you found success with 1 method, doesn't mean the other way doesn't work.

That's amazing. You achieved a consistent calorie deficit for a sustained period.

@Ozzy1984_ I don't fast anymore but still maintain 150+ lb weight loss. Weight loss is easy, keeping off is the hard part.

@truth3404 I agree it's rough. I'm taking running pretty seriously, and I burn a Ron of calories, but still struggle to stay at a consistent race weight.

​@@gerardt3284not really because your body starts to adjust to the deficit and becomes more efficient.

look up andrew huberman. He talks about dopamine for example is what people want from food, not necesarily extra calories and such..I can +1 to your comment, I have the same experience :)

@@serban2139 Huberman fan right here, but I was thinking more along the lines of psychological research in my OC, rather than biomechanical

As a layman im trying to learn all I can about low carb / keto and Dr Chris Palmer MD (psychiatry) has credentials from Harvard and McLean hospital has been doing a ketogenic diet for treatment resistant mental disorders and has noted a patient of Dr Eric Westman who had chronic schizophrenia and started a ketogenic diet at age 70 after 53 yrs of having schizophrenia and being treatment resistant. They have long term data on this one patient after 13 years and she has been in full remission off all psychiatric meds and a ton of other positive things. I don’t know if this helps with you OC and I understand it’s just one patient documented in literature. Chris Palmer I think is trying this with multiple patients and has a book coming out in November

No one could tell you the answer expect your online body bud. It really depends on your metabolic attenuation to your caloric deficit as well as any changes in macro composition , total activity, and NEAT. Just track your daily weight and calories as well as you can and see what your change in rate of weight loss might be. Also, remember the fact that weight-loss doesn’t always equate to fat loss.

Thanks for including the time stamp, I went back and listened Layne is so nice lol

What carbs did she eat? Twinkies, pizza and pasta?

Numerous studies have found that weight loss, in particular fat loss can reverse diabetes, or at least significantly improve it, i.e. it almost normalizes glucose tolerance. Low carbs without weight/fat loss just mask the symptoms.

That is very encouraging to hear!

Do you understand that most carbs turn into sugar?!

@@rumble2468 most of what you’re saying is absolutely true but low carb being a mask is not true because one of the biggest problems a diabetes patient has is insulin resistance. And lowering your insulin helps your cells getting their sensitivity back. Anyways at the end what is important is building muscle and eat as clean as possible ofcourse.

Keto is bullshit

@@chouchouyummies8861 Then explain how I and millions of others have lost plenty of fat from it? Explain why Drs recommend it to patients now like never before, explain how diabetes reverse their condition by doing keto and intermittent fasting?

Intermittent fasting closes that eating window, so you have fewer opportunities to consume more calories than you need. As for low carb, glycogen requires water, in fact, 1 gram of carbohydrates requires 3 grams of water, so if you are in a caloric deficit and still eat a high carb diet, you will weigh more due to the water, but that doesn’t mean your actual body fat percentage is any higher. It will just take time to see fat loss of you are on a high carb diet due to this as long as you are in a caloric deficit, so in the long term it won’t matter, but in the short term, you will probably see faster weight loss with keto due to cutting carbs, which means losing that 3 grams of water per stored gram of glycogen. At the end of the day, I always say do what is sustainable for you. I’ve been able to lose over 125 pounds three different times with a high carb diet, because it is what’s sustainable for me. Now losing weight and keeping it off are two different things.

@@limitless484 That’s not true you can eat high calorie foods m fact that what a lot of body builder do when they Intermittently Fast.

@@justchilling704 I never said you couldn't eat high caloric foods during a feeding window, I said that having a feeding window provides less time to eat in a day which will likely equate to lower calories consumed. But the bottom line is, it is all about calories in/out, and if you consume more calories than your body needs in a feeding window, you will still gain fat, regardless of if it is keto, carnivore, or a high carb diet. Like Layne said, Protein has a higher thermic effect as opposed to fats, which means either a larger deficit if you consume a specific number of calories (given your diet is high in protein), or it also means you can consume more food because of the extra calories burned from digesting the protein. Protein also makes it easier for a recomp if that's what you want to do. The best diet to lose weight on is one that you can sustain, whether that is a high protein diet, keto, or a balanced approach, because it is all about the calories consumed/burned.

Try Drs. Sarah Myhill and/or Elizabeth Bright. They both specialize in thyroid disorders

thank you!!@@alaskabarb8089

@@RaveyDavey people think somehow that that’s different from calories in calories out. If you don’t keep track of how much you are eating then you will gain or lose weight depending on those other factors that control hunger... but that doesn’t change if you’re in a caloric surplus you gain weight and if you’re in a caloric deficit you lose weight. They just determine if you naturally eat in a surplus or deficit. That and metabolically how much you burn. I mean maintenance calories aren’t a specific number, they’re a range really. So if you cut 100 calories out of your diet and don’t lose weight it isn’t because calories in calories out is incorrect, it just means it isn’t really a deficit and if it is it’s so small that it will become maintenance calories before you even notice a difference in weight. If these “hormones alone control gaining or losing fat.” Zealots could comprehend counting calories and the law of thermodynamics/calories in calories out aren’t the same thing they would understand that it still is the number of calories you burn or store that matters, and the hormonal stuff is what determines the caloric needs of your body. It’s like they are incapable of 3D thinking or understanding multifactoral problems.

There are some studies showing that neat is highly modifiable. For example, a loss of 10% of body weight may produce up to a 400 cal reduction in neat

@@biolayne1 Do you think that's what Jason Fung is actually referring to when he talks about his 500 calorie body adaption? (Even though he refers to it as a BMR reduction) So on the days you take in 500 less calories you feel sluggish, lower on energy, sit on your arse all day and therefore burn significantly fewer calories, perhaps even as much as 500.

@@jonmcc8676 so his solution is to not eat at all and somehow that will fix it? That makes ZERO sense

@@biolayne1 Agreed. A video on the science of hunger, cravings etc would be a good one.

Good luck on the journey! Yeah it's sad that someone from the scientific community (Fung) makes so many claims that go against scientific evidence, and that to make a profit. Goes to show how important it is to hear different perspectives from multiple experts. Very cool that you sought out different views and read a science article!

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/q51ndsiHrrSRlX0.html eating a big breakfast might actually help you on your weight loss journey (for certain individuals)

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/nax-fZCks6_ZZok.html

this one might be more sustainable long term

Breakfasts are not for everyone, if they are for you then eat them. It won’t affect your weight loss given the daily/weekly calories are in a deficit. Personally I eat fruit/fiber for breakfast and berries for late night snack with a protein shake. This helps me stay full before breakfast and before lunch.

What else can you feed cattle apart from grass or dried grass products

@@rayparnell7432 Corn and soy, primarily grass is rarely given.

@@mynock250 I've been around cattle sheep and horses all my life all I've seen them fed on is grass hay. They might be given cereals Barley corn oats etc. All my sheep and horses eat are grass and hay. If the weather is really bad then I might give them some mixed feed. Cattle horses etc need a large volume of food the eat almost continuously.

Not based on the current literature

Yes, try to find anything on an internet search to back up your claims that Fung's a charlatan. All you get are people -- including RDs -- singing his praises. It's sick.

@@michelesatanove5781 Yeah, and there's hardly any info. Which makes it even more shady that he's supposedly really informative, yet isn't really known or critiqued. Hopefully that changes now lolol

@@michelesatanove5781 “I don’t understand” = must be fake. I wouldn’t be surprised if you were also anti-vax

​@@Seysande Your comment makes no sense at all, especially in light of my having given a 1-1/2-hour presentation yesterday on Covid and vaccines and why vaccines are so important. Fung's a scammer -- like so many of the self-proclaimed "expert" anti-vaxxers.

This is because he actively attacks the careers of people that speak out against him. He’s a sociopath.

Do not look at the percentage of macro nutrients, keep the carbs low and eat only real whole food. Everyone enters ketosis if carbs are below 20 grams per day. Do that for the first week or two then if you want slowly increase carbs you can find your threshold, I go by look, feel and blood work.

If you're eating a shit-ton of calories via carbs, by definition you won't be "keeping your insulin low". You will have very high insulin through the times of the day when you're not fasting. Also, I think the study he mentions leaves a lot of questions unanswered - yes, in the study, the majority of fat they gained was from fat, but that's because they were eating a lot of fat, and fat is easily stored. Theoretically, if they'd eaten the same number of calories but primarily carbohydrates, the amount of fat they gained would've been almost as high, but it would've come from carbs; the body would've had to ramp up de-novo lipogenesis which is the process where it turns carbs into fats in the liver, which COULD, in that extreme of an example, potentially lead to some non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (POTENTIALLY - we really don't know, they really need to run a study like we talked about and see what happens with liver markers).

If you eat, insulin will be released. If you overfeed, the net outcome is that adipose stores will be filled with the fat in the bloodstream, even if there are other macronutrients present as a result of overfeeding. Almost every food, with the exception of pure sugar and whey isolate powders, will provide a source of some fat-even meat sources are often not entirely lean. That being said, if you are hypothesising that eating fewer fats/the minimum amount recommended (~0.3g per lb) will result in slower fat accumulation over time in a caloric surplus, then yeah you’d be right. Fat generally( unless I am mistaken) will be first shuttled to fat stores before it is liberated as needed to be oxidised for energy- the stimulus for excess (underscore excess) fat oxidation is provided via a caloric deficit.

@@jonathanblacksmith This question wasn’t about whether fat can be stored in the absence of carbs, it was about whether carbs can (en masse ) be stored in the absence of fat as adipose tissue.

@@jonathanblacksmith Thanks! I found it. It says: “The data collected provide a clear picture of the effects of carbohydrate overfeeding on the disposal of a large oral glucose load. Under standard isocaloric conditions, 42% of the ingested glucose was oxidized over the 5-hour postingestive period. The remaining 58% was essentially stored as glycogen (54%), with very little net de novo lipogenesis (4% of the glucose load). There is no indication as to where such de novo lipogenesis occurred. It is likely that part of it took place in the liver because it has been reported that fractional hepatic de novo lipogenesis represents 1-5% of very-low-density lipoprotein-fatty acids turnover under such conditions ((16)). Because indirect calorimetry measures only net de novo lipogenesis (i.e., fat synthesis in excess of fat oxidation), it is quite possible that this figure somewhat underestimates absolute de novo lipogenesis. Isotopic measurements of hepatic de novo lipogenesis in humans after carbohydrate administration, however, confirm that the absolute amount of fat synthesized is small under such conditions ((17)).” So in this study, the amount of de novo lipogenesis was very small, which is good 👍🏻 They also say “...a recent study during which healthy humans were overfed with carbohydrates reported that total hepatic de novo lipogenesis amounted to 43 g/d ((5)). Because the absolute carbohydrate load in this study was higher than in our present study and because this value of 43 g/d hepatic de novo lipogenesis is far lower than the whole body net de novo lipogenesis observed in our study, we can safely conclude that the bulk of de novo lipogenesis occurred in extrahepatic tissues”, which is also good 👍🏻👍🏻 and helps to quench my non-alcoholic fatty liver disease concerns. HOWEVER, they also say “Cumulated over 4 days, the excess carbohydrate to be disposed of nonoxidatively was therefore roughly 800 g, which is within the glycogen storage capacity of humans, as previously demonstrated by Acheson et al.” SO I can’t tell whether that level was reached early in the study, and then the carb-burning was ramped up to dispose of the excess, OR whether de novo lipogenesis was still low because glycogen stores hadn’t yet been fully filled. This was only a 4-day study overfeeding subjects who were heavily glycogen-depleted. They were eating around 760g of carbs per day on average, if I am reading that correctly? You would think that would be sufficient to fill glycogen within the first couple of days, but maybe not? I don’t know. Would de novo lipogenesis have been ramped up if the study went on for, say, two weeks? If you’re better at reading the data, I’d really like to know if the glycogen was filled early in the study.

This is a lot of words to say it's CICO

I have the same question!

Retinol A... google it...Also put lotion on a wet face to hold moisture in skin...Cerve products are great...And Vitamin E oil...Drink 1 gallon of water a day...And buy a Facial Scrub..Like Aveeno..

You can check moreplatesmoredates skincare routine video, has some useful information kzfaq.info/get/bejne/Y7pha7Jns7G0XXk.html

1) Yes. 2) Yes, there is a limit, because your body needs a certain amount of energy to function, but you will feel highly unmotivated to move your body. 3) There is no standard number - it varies, just like total metabolism varies, but you can assume an extremely low energy expenditure from physical activity. 4) Deliberate exercise increases metabolism, overall, but can lead to some unique adaptations (I covered a paper on the matter recently), 5) Long term dieting does not change the equation, the same rules apply, but your metabolism is now lower because you weigh less. Credentials: PhD[c] Molecular Medicine (Cell Physiology), Masters in Exercise Physiology. Hope it helps, Xris.

I think there were a bunch of studies done during WW2 (recent, I know) to study the effects of starvation on POWs and yea, your metabolism will drop significantly if actually starved; BUT, the average overweight person who says "if I don't eat this family size bag of Doritos my metabolism will stop" is full of shit.

Oh really? So 2000 calories a day of broccoli and chicken are THE SAME as 2000 calories of donuts and cupcakes??? It doesn't take "philosophizing" to see what nonsense that is.

@@Jason_P agreed they’re different types of fat and those added sugars cause increase risk of many diseases I feel like this video is just nit picking what Jason says tbh

@@Jason_P if 2000 calories was a deficit, you’d lose weight no matter if it was all broccoli or donuts. Nobody is suggesting one isn’t better than the other, but as far as WEIGHT loss goes, it’s all the same

That's NEAT

@@SuperOCHomes *rimshot*

me too. I've lost 100 lbs counting calories, gained weight counting calories (intentionally and not regrettably). Everything worked exactly... as... fucking... predicted.

@@SuperOCHomes 🤣

Depends on the type of calories

There are principles that's true for all diets, though. Like eating high protein

@@GoalOrientedLifting Protein and fiber. Carnivore diets are not the most healthy ones, exactly same as veganism. Cutting out major food groups will only lead to micronutrients deficiency.

Some things all diets value (besides carnivore) is the important of fiber because of how it affects blood sugar+pressure and insulin. Protein because it affects your recovery and muscle growth. Your choice of energy source for carbs or fats is up to you. Neither is inherently “better” given that the amount of protein and fiber is met every day. For men the recommendation is 38g/day and for women 28g/day. This leads to healthy blood levels and insulin.

Make animal based food your first choice then pick a leafy green and a few other above ground vegetables don't eat starches all the time but and don't eat processed crap. If you bloat, have gas or stomach issues cut back on the veggies a bit and or dairy. Raw dairy is best but hard cheese and yogurt may be ok from regular. Try to eat whole and clean.

I would be likely to agree with you if it weren't for a repetitive history of him saying completely erroneous claims and then refusing to admit it while also avoiding debate & attempting to get people fired from their jobs who disagree with him

Oh that part about trying to get people fired is terrible. Never a good sign. You will always be high on my trust list I think@@biolayne1

​​​​@@biolayne1None of that has any bearing on the scientific debate. There are a significant number of people with metabolic disease (80+% of the US pop) and CICO cannot treat it. That's a fact. The recidivism rate for CICO is nuts (90+%). Why even bother shopping that to people when it *maybe* helps 10% of them long term? Waste of time. You're only talking to the chicken and broccoli bodybuilding bro science crowd and you know it. This is one of those annoying flexes about being more disciplined than everyone else (eye roll) disguised as health advice. Do calories matter? To some extent, of course. Does your metabolism strongly determine how those calories are utilized/stored? Yes. Did humans for most of history have access to food three times a day? Of course not. Was our body designed to flexibly deal with this? Yes. Is it a fundamental part of our metabolism? Absolutely. It's not the "calorie deficit" that does it- it's the ketones. I know plenty of women, in particular, who eat low calorie and are still full of visceral fat, dumpy, and metabolically ill. CICO isn't going to save them, even with a ton of exercise. Only an IF meat-based diet with low/flexible/seasonal carbohydrate intake helped my metabolic health. I've never been fat in my life, but the diet most of you advocate for made me sick as fuck. Fasting and high fat, low carb for the win. Everything else is a SAD diet.

There are other factors that you're not considering. What has changed in the last fifty years? The ease of access of junk food, portion sizes, increase of desk jobs, more reliability on cars rather than walking; there are so many different factors that all lower a person's tdee. There's a reason that carbs are the preferred source of energy for the human body, which is evident by the body's ability to store carbs in the form of glycogen. Even though all carbs are converted into blood glucose, the importance lies within the rate at which that absorption and conversion occurs. If people want to do keto, I'm all for it because it is their choice. The simple truth is that all diets work as long as you are in a caloric deficit, and all diets will fail if you are not in a caloric deficit, the common denominator is a caloric deficit.

@@limitless484 I hear what you're saying, but at the same time, it would be a poor accountant who sat behind his desk and told his client that if he is broke, try getting more money. Boom, simple. I have a hard time believing that concurrently with the governments decision to demonize dietary fat and promote breads, pasta, and grains, people self control bombed and they became lazy pigs. After all, generations before them were not obese. Btw I don't know if it matters but I calorie counted and loss 110lbs over the course of a few years. But I gained half of it back over the next few. In my opinion, you can't accurately gauge your own calories in, calories out with any precision. And thin people don't do it. They eat until their body says "enough." Yet the modern processed carb has all the satiety mechanisms bred out of it and processed it to the point where you might as well eat pure sugar.

@@philipekema4315 Overweight and obesity rates have been rising over the years, and the last time I checked, the obesity rate was like 33% and the percentage of overweight people in the US was 66%. I really think there are many factors that have caused this trend and not one single factor. I totally get what you're saying about fats, but can you argue that if someone were to over consume on a keto diet or a protein diet, that they wouldn't gain fat? If that is true, then it is about calories and not just a particular macronutrient or insulin as all macronutrients induce insulin and can potentially increase the risk of insulin resistance. And I totally agree that it is impossible to get a very accurate number in terms of caloric TDEE, but I think it is a very useful tool that gives a good estimate that everyone can use if they are trying to lose fat, like a starting point. I'm with you on the weight loss and regain. I've lost 125 pounds in 2008, gained it back, and lost 125 pounds in 2015, gained it back, I lost 75 pounds twice and 50 pounds probably 5 or more times in between that. I'm down 125 pounds again for the third time, and I can tell you with 100% confidence that taking a calculated approach to fat loss (calculating my TDEE and counting calories) has worked for me. My diet is about 50% carbs, 40% protein, and 10% fat (I don't handle fats well due to having gallbladder removed). But what I've learned (and always really knew) from past weight loss journeys is that I need to do what is sustainable for me. and everyone should do the same, whether that be Keto, carnivore, or a modified balanced diet. It is all about sustainability in the long term and keeping it off, doing what you can sustain. I can't give up iced coffee, so I drink it everyday, but I found a way to make it lower in calories compared to starbucks. Appreciate the conversation and great job on the weight loss, hope you can lose that other half you regained! Losing it and maintaining it is a different ball game, but For myself it is all about sustainability and trigger foods and avoiding those foods at all costs and making physical activity a part of my life.

@@limitless484 Seems we are both part of the 100+ lbs club and the yoyo club! :) Congrats on the weight loss! We both know how much work and dedication it takes and I am really proud of you!

@@limitless484 And there are factors you're not considering. * Calorie restriction diets are temporary * Most thin people in the world are not doing keto * Dr. Atkins is dead. Yeah yeah, it was an accident, but he was found to be fat (which it seems he was hiding). "What has changed in the last fifty years?" What hasn't changed in 36 years is my weight. I'm 53, male, and weigh 135. I've always eaten a high carb AND usually a high-calorie diet "all diets will fail if you are not in a caloric deficit" Nope. Here's some terms I invented and teach on my channel and ebooks: "Redundant Insulin" - the cause of diabetes. "Fat-storage thermostat" - The body stores fat depending on how much the body thinks it may need that emergency storage.(lack of vitamins; lack of calories; general unhealthy lifestyle. If those things are not present, the body will shed the fat. It will burn excess calories thru thermogenisis.

I've done low carb for over a year, and I had better blood sugar levels, but not enough until I've lower calories. Then I've lost weight and brought mu blood sugar to normal level.

Mick dungeon It depends on the source of calories. Not all calories are equal.

just drop to 2500

@@adrianceja8224 you are right. 2500 is totally effective, its just that i am trying to maintain as much strength as possible so i try to drop as slow as can work to drop bf

This is probably the most clear headed comment in this section. Possibly including both Laynes and Fungs videos haha

It seems so, yes.

they are oxidized or stored as glycogen.

Jason “Phone” (I’m strongly assuming that u’r playing with his last name, and attempting to call him phoney)… and u expect objective ppl to take u seriously…???

@@mazkebar lol oh gosh no my sincere apologies. I did not mean to type phone. I was "talk texting" when I did the comment so it didn't translate it correctly. No by no means do I think Dr. Fung is a phoney. Truly I don't. I hear his heart for trying to help people and I understand it, but I think he has gone in a complete extreme the other direction of data on this situation. I watched a more recent interview with him on Max Lugavere's youtube channel. It gave me more insight into why he says things like this. He knows calories matter, but he prioritizes food choices over how much we eat and does not say a word about calories. I think they both equally matter. All the best to you and thanks for pointing out my typo!

A bit of an "argument from authority": "he had to know something, he was ripped year-round". What about someone like Joe Delaney who is also ripped year round and eats a high-carb diet and doesn't fast? It's like when people say you need to do heavy low-volume training because "that's what Dorian Yates did, and he was Mr Olympia", ignoring the fact that that's the exact opposite way Jay Cutler, Phil Heath and Big Ramy train, and they're also all Mr Olympia winners. You need to look at what all these people have in common, rather than just picking one example of one person who gets results doing something in a certain way. In the case of diet, it's not overeating calories and eating a healthy nutritious diet.

@@seanissomething That isn't a carbohydrate problem it's just a lack of discipline if someone overeats.

And he died at 56 from a heart attack.