• idiomaddict@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    It’s also misleading as hell, because calorie absorption and basal metabolic rates differ so widely among people. My husband and I live similarly active lifestyles and eat about the same amount of food. I’m slightly taller than he is, but half his weight. I don’t know how that happens, but it does.

    • gmtom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Not really, evidence suggests that between average people you will see at most 4% difference in BMR

      • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        If it’s not a big difference, how does it lead to such divergent results? I’d suggest that a 4% difference is in fact pretty big, as that’s the equivalent of over 500 calories a week.

        Do you have a link for the evidence? I’d be interested to see what it says about calorie absorption, as I suspect that has an even greater effect. Unfortunately, everyone just seems to repeat CICO as though it’s easy or simple to measure either of those inputs with accuracy. People just hope they’re average and that it will work normally for them. Most people are average, so that works for a lot of people, but not everyone.

        I personally don’t digest animal fat well, so anything other than white meat chicken will give me the shits. I don’t eat animal products anymore, but when I did, I obviously wasn’t receiving 200 calories from 200 calories worth of beef. My sister has celiac’s, and when she realized it and stopped eating gluten, she gained a bunch of weight, because she was finally absorbing calories from her diet.