Why calories are a con

[@KenDBerryMD]

Very proud of The Economist for tackling this very tough issue and getting it right!

[@jimbo5635]

Maybe they been watching you?

[@jimbo5635]

@Tartaruz Ourea Coke and Pepsi

[@jamesrawlings5781]

Can you help a confused, interested civilian, then? I have counted calories and lost weight, being careful to eat foods that are nutritious and keep me full longer. I have kept said weight off until going out and drinking beer. To a layman like me then, this seems totally at odds with saying 'all we hear about calories is a con'. To what extent is it a 'con' and 'meaningless', and to what extent is it 'flawed' and imprecise? You've got MD after your name there so I understand if you don't have time to respond to every comment on YT but it is a sincere question.

[@birdman9265]

@@jamesrawlings5781 You should see his videos about it. He is a nutrition guru

[@MsMsmak]

@@jamesrawlings5781 When you say "being careful to eat foods that are nutritious and keep you full longer" what foods are you describing? Also, what does "keep me full longer" mean? Do you mean satiated? Or do you mean that you can go longer between meals, or less meals or what?

[@chrismaclean1755]

Again, there's Haaavard again. They seem to cause massive problems with nutrition.

[@leeck_anderson9492]

Sugar is a death angel that people love to eat but kill them quietly.

[@andreatodd3095]

I have to tell you, I never count calories since being on keto an I F. Its much more sustainable. Lost nearly 40 pounds in one year. Every calorie counting diet I went on over the last 30 years prior to eating keto failed...and I ran about 24 klmtrs a week plus gym. Now all I do is go for an enjoyable walk and garden. My weight is maintaining at my goal weight. I now don't care about not eating sugar, and don't miss carbs. The key thing here is people in some parts of the world just plain overeat in general, we simply don't need it.

[@ahhmm2967]

Wow great experience! That's true in my experience as well, don't need to count.

[@cyl0118]

Counting calories is just keeping track of how much you ate. Let’s not get any deeper than that

[@jackmaitland8496]

The point of the video is that what you eat matters as your body has different biochemical reactions to consume different foods, and thus affect your weight.

[@Hii998o]

Epic Games Where Games are Epicness yyujnbghfytj1aqww345678891

[@OneRichMofo]

@Based Gammon how so?

[@michaelrislingnb306]

Based Gammon if you calculate your metabolic rate accurately, then eat said amount of calories, you physically can’t gain weight. Doesn’t matter the source of the calories. It would be unhealthy but if you just ate junk food while staying at that number of calories then you wouldn’t gain weight.

[@KillingTheMotivation]

Michael Risling that’s not necessarily true. If you ate 2500 calories (assuming that was your metabolic rate) but ate it entirely in day Big Macs and fries, your body would struggle to burn energy as efficiently and would instead try to store more fat. So it’s possible that you could gain weight. If you ate say 500 calories under your metabolic rate but all Big Mac and fries, you’d still lose weight, just not as well as a healthy diet would

[@bobk1456]

The Calorie is a unit of energy, neither good nor bad, so it's not going anywhere. Why don't we eliminate Centimeters because some people are unhappy about their height. CICO is fact, the laws of thermodynamics say so. While calories on packages aren't 100% accurate, they're pretty close, and if you weigh 350 lbs counting calories will absolutely help you lose weight if you want.

[@isacpinhao7152]

It's a unit of energy and it isn't going anywhere, the video isn't contesting that.. I think what the video tries to say is that we shoudn't keep assuming that eating 1 calorie of energy of food means the body will retain that 1 calorie of food energy because of factors like the different types/amount of bacteria people have -> so yeah, keep using calories in sciences but don't simplify the "malice" or "benefits" of food to the human being to the calories in them given that I might eat 1 calorie of protein and retain it fully and you (cause the factores are different in you) only retain half, and the other way around (still using you and I as the example) for sugar

[@abandc295]

Isac Pinhão l

[@nancyayers6355]

Bob Kimmel look, if you don't limit your calories and count them for everything you eat, you will not lose weight. I have very slow metabolism and this has made it imperative for me to learn how to count calories. Sometimes it works - but that depends on my self control. If I can stay determined and focused, I'll lose about twelve pounds per month on a 1,200 daily diet. If I go off the diet wagon, I stop my weight loss dead in its tracks. It's all up to the individual and how badly they want to slim down and improve their health. It will happen or it won't, fatties, it's up to you!

[@ObjectiveMedia]

Actually you and the video are BOTH wrong. The reason why counting calories is pointless is because all calories are not equal, the body processes different foods differently (highly processed foods tend to lack the nutrients that out bodies need to digest/use them for example), and eating “high-calorie” foods like fats actually puts your body into fat-burning mode instead of fat-storing mode. Pretty important differences. The problem is people like you/the economist want to see the world as a set of equations that you can predict but the truth is the human body is way more complex than any human being on earth can truly understand (yet), let alone some ego driven capitalist

[@maryamyamah77i51]

uu 5rttrfdddrrtb 9 bbj

[@adamistvanbertalan9579]

To the commenters: Yes physics is physics. But biology is biology.

[@kimberlycooper4170]

Dear Economist writers, publishers, printing plant workers, newspaper delivery persons, etc. Wow! You are awesome! You've got it right, and you've got the courage to tell it! Britain is fortunate to have you!

[@JohnB1872]

Don’t blame the eggs for what the bread did.

[@casualman6716]

I turned fifty not too long ago, and I've exercised regularly for most of my life (barbell training, etc.). My caloric distribution shifted significantly over a year ago, by choice. Most would say that I'm keto, but I've never checked by blood / urine for ketones. Anyway, I was surprised by the effect on my alertness and body composition. Frankly, it was the easiest fat loss that I had ever done. At the end of summer, I had a full six pack and feathered obliques without doing a stitch of cardio. I fully accept that calories do matter, but calorie composition seems to matter too.

[@BioStock08]

Hormones, Hormones, Hormones. Not calories. Nice call Economist.

[@jamesrawlings5781]

When I cut my calories by a few hundred a day, taking care to eat foods that keep me fuller for longer, over several days, weeks etc, I consistently lose weight. I understand mistakes were made and the issue is more complex than often thought, but observing caloric intake has been useful for me. Seems a trendy exaggeration to call it the world's most useless measurement. Maybe you could expand on the 'hormones' bit?

[@2ndtoJohn]

@@jamesrawlings5781 You will lose weight at first but eventually, your body will reduce its energy expenditure in order to compensate for your reduced intake. It’s why people who count calories, like in Biggest Loser, tend to gain the weight back. As your metabolism slows, you stop losing weight and actually gain it back as your reduced intake no longer provides you with a deficit. I’m contrast, eating a diet low in carbohydrates, allows your body to tap into body fat as lipase (the enzyme responsible for fat oxidation) is mediated by insulin (which is activated most by carbohydrates). This allows you to seamlessly transition from burning fat you’ve eaten to burning body fat, even if you are in a deficit, thus maintaining your normal metabolism.

[@jamesrawlings5781]

@@2ndtoJohn No, that never happened. I got down to 81 kg, gradually, from 96 kg. I did it by aiming at a certain net calorie intake and avoiding high gi foods. Worked for me.

[@jamesrawlings5781]

@@2ndtoJohn I love these 'oh, your body does x, y and z' claims. My body will reduce its energy expenditure?? Wouldn't that mean i felt lethargic? Your body can't just decide not to expend energy. If I walk round the park, then my body uses energy to do it. I can't just decide not to. I counted calories, ate low gi, and went for a lot of walks. Easy. Watching what i ate, and keeping under a certain calorie level, allowed me to lose weight, and I never felt lethargic or noticed my body not wanting to expend energy. All is fine.

[@ahhmm2967]

@@jamesrawlings5781 Eating low Glycemic Index influences the hormonal response and helps you lose weight. Yes you counted calories, but most importantly you kept insulin and blood sugar in check and believed it was because of calories but was becasue of low GI. HopefulHumanist is still correct. Also, eating less at one time also helps lose weight because it's not as much of an insulin spike. And yes, HH is correct again that the body expends less and there is proof of that. The body puts rebuilding projects on hold and only expends what is necessary as it thinks you are in a famine.

[@terah101]

Just because you eliminate sugar/fructose/carbs doesn't mean you can now break the 1st law of thermodynamics. Regardless of what you eat, weight gain is caused by a CALORIC SURPLUS, and weight loss is causes by a CALORIC DEFICIT. The amount of carbophobia and fructophobia in the industry at the moment is genuinely alarming

[@ahhmm2967]

This is false and has always been false. The law of thermodynamics doesn't apply to the human body and we all know that. The body is a very complex system. Your body gains weight in relation to your insulin levels- pump a person with insulin and they will gain weight no matter how little you eat.

[@terah101]

Ah Hmm Sorry buddy, i dont know where you get your info from but its incorrect. A meta-analysis of studies comparing low fat vs low carb diets has been done, where two groups of people were controlled for protein and calories, only that one group ate high fat low carb, while the other ate high carb low fat. Do you know what they found? Both groups lost virtually the SAME amount of weight. If insulin was the main driver of obesity, you would have found that the low carb group would have lost more weight than the high carb group. But that wasnt the case, proving that the calories in vs calories out model is the main driver of obesity, NOT INSULIN.

[@ahhmm2967]

@@terah101 Oh a 'study' was done... another one of those..Funded by whom? I can find 20 more studies supporting a lower carb diet with higher levels of fat loss. The studies are almost always biased and if not biased, not done correctly. Read enough of them (as I have) and you will find they all contradict each other and they all sound as equally convincing as the one before it. Thats when it gets really, really interesting. You can find research and proof to support any bias in today's world. Its not supposed science that matters anymore, it's experimenting on your own and finding what works for your own body - cause shocker- every body is different and has different nutritional deficiencies, hence different current requirements. Low carb cured my father of type 2 diabetes- cured. And he lost 200 lbs to boot- eating significant amounts of high calorie food. Insulin is huge with weight loss.

[@terah101]

Ah Hmm its not just "one study". Do you even know what a meta-analysis means? Its when MULTIPLE studies from the past that have similar parameters are looked at and grouped together with a general conclusion. Multiple studies... so its not just one funding source.

[@ahhmm2967]

@@terah101 Yes I know what a meta analysis is. Yes but you can find studies and meta analyses that completely contradict that as well. And you can with every single theory about weight loss, nutrition, etc. Honestly studies are irrelevant, they really are. I am guessing you have only read studies supporting your current beliefs, as we most commonly do. I decided to read both sides of the fence several years ago.. and wow... Talk about having your head spin. There was alot of research that 'fat makes us fat' and causes heart disease 30 years ago.. now completely debunked and found completely false. There are hundreds more examples of 'previously proven' facts that were later found completely false. I can concede this- different diets are better for different people so yes there will always be some that do well on x and not y, and vice versa. But that in no way means that is applicable to you or I.

[@Ryan_DeWitt]

Watch Layne Norton's truth on this matter. Note he is a Phd in nutritional science.

[@adambischoff8581]

No, counting calories doesn't make you fat. It's good advise.

[@BernardoPatino]

It's not

[@jamesrawlings5781]

@@BernardoPatino works for me, in combination with a little knowledge of what foods keep me full for longer.

[@tan_k]

I eat whatever I want and how much ever I want but limit my food intake to 2 meals a day + beverages with no sugar. And since last 10 years my body weight is hovering between 89 - 97 Kgs and I am 177 cms tall. 97 is holiday weight and I am 91 by May/June. I have a desk job and minimal to no exercise. I have never counted calories and never been to gym in my entire life. Calorie counting is nonsense. Consistent eating habit is the key.

[@alexjulius69]

Haven't tracked or counted anything. Haven't been doing keto (in fact, I'm eating a ton of carbs). And I'm still getting leaner and more defined by the week. I simply do this consistently: 1) eat unprocessed, sugar-free, one ingredient foods. At times even bread and pasta too, it doesn't seem to be that bad. 2) Workout 3 times a week. Full body resistance training with bodyweight or homemade weights. 3) Fast. 16+ hours a day.

[@pinwei2390]

The title is misleading, the content talked about monitoring calories intake may not be the most accurate way to lose weight due to metabolic rate varies by individual.

[@donato2927]

Pin Wei metabolic rate is a myth as much as calorie counting. Every individual has different response to different food but, the metabolic rate is definitely the same for thin and fat alike. You can argue that the only difference in metabolic rate can be found in men vs women or if you train vs you don’t.

[@jamesrawlings5781]

@@donato2927 when I cut calories I lose weight. how exactly is it a myth?

[@donato2927]

James Rawlings I think there is a bit of confusion here. Metabolic rate is the speed at which we transform calories into energy. It was believed that who had a “faster” metabolic rate would be less inclined to get fat. So, if you take a fat and a thin person, you would imply that the thin person has a faster metabolic rate, which allows him to burn calories faster though not becoming fat. Here we come to you point, it has been demonstrated that metabolic rate is not the cause of not being fat but, the amount of calories you put into your body is.

[@jamesrawlings5781]

@@donato2927 Sure, I remember hearing people say 'I just don't get fat - I must have a fast metabolic rate'. I can accept that they weren't being very scientific in saying that, just as I can accept the flaws in our notion of calories, and the imprecision implied in counting calories. However, to say these concepts are flawed is different to saying they are a con, a myth - this seems to say that they make no sense at all. Like I say, I have lost weight most effectively and consistently when combining counting calories with a focus on foods that keep me full longer. My achilles heel is that I like beer too much, so my weight goes up and down. However, 'sensible' calorie counting has always got me back in the right direction. This is why I think we need to talk about 'imperfections' rather than 'myths'. Furthermore, I've just had a quick look at a Vox explainer on metabolic rates and it states clearly that "two people with the same size and body composition can have different metabolic rates." Are you saying this is wrong? If so, how are 'regular guys' like me supposed to know whom to believe?

[@TheBart990]

This is gross oversimplification. At least give some references to studies. There are many other factors contributing to obesity. Sugar is just art of it. You can't just throw facts around and look for patterns to draw far reaching conclusion. Have to take a step back and look at the whole picture.

[@AroundTheBest]

There are various other issues with this video. The juxtaposition of the graphs of obesity trends with government regulations heavily implies causation while ignoring an overall increase in calorie consumption. This is cherrypicked data. One could easily juxtapose obesity statistics with calorie consumption and come to precisely the opposite point of view. The inclusion of the graph is misleading at best.

[@phivrl2074]

Agreed, more importantly, the video should suggest an alternative

[@joaopedroribaslyraloes]

There is an article if you care to read it.

[@francescocecchi6506]

Well, you need to read the article, which explains what this video says with a lot more data.

[@isacpinhao7152]

@@phivrl2074 why should the video suggest an alternative? It would be better if it did, but poiting a problem still adds value to the conversation...

[@miscellaneous9506]

*This information is so cherrypicked...*

[@BernardoPatino]

www.1843magazine.com/features/death-of-the-calorie

[@queefelizabeth4497]

Stick to the economy topics. The information is way beyond you.

[@banparlous2552]

I’m ketovore for over 2 years. Lost 50-60 lbs. Counted carbs, not calories (20 vs 2,000) in the beginning. Half the time I eat until I’m full, the other half I over-eat. A calorie is only a calorie in a lab. When you introduce a calorie to a human w/ hormones, the rules change slightly. Of course they would. The environment changed. The environment of a calorimeter is not the same environment of a human body. Like someone else put here, physics is physics, biology is biology. Nobody is arguing against thermodynamics. They’re arguing for the scientific method.

[@XSpImmaLion]

While I do agree that calories is not a good measure of anything specially given how complex and diverse our digestive systems can be, this video comes out as biased, shallow in content, and cherry picking information. It doesn't prove what it's saying, it has no interviews with specialists in the area, it doesn't point out to sources, and it doesn't offer better alternatives of thinking about nutricion. Pretty bad, Economist.

[@jjcirafesi]

There's a detailed article about this in the magazine.

[@googolplexbyte]

I went from obese to normal weight by counting Calories. Weight loss is just a matter of taking in fewer Calories than you let out and fewer Calories in is much easier than more Calories out. The problem is bad reporting of Calories on the products and in this video.

[@drnanard9605]

Weight loss is a matter of moving your ass.

[@huss692]

@@drnanard9605 If you want to lose weight the most important thing is your caloric intake. "Moving your ass" helps though.

[@drnanard9605]

@@huss692 caloric intake has no impact if you use these calories. Athletes eat high-calory food, but they use it. Calories aren't bad, it's just energy. What is bad is not using that energy, which means not moving enough.

[@huss692]

@@drnanard9605 Not talking about athletes here. Talking about the average Joe. For the average Joe the most effective way of losing weight is a low caloric intake coupled with exercise. The exercise isn't as important as intake though. To lose 500 calories it takes 60minutes of jogging at 5mph. Most working people are either too lazy or too busy to fit it into their day. Therefore, these people would benefit more from a good diet.

[@breakaway7017]

DrNanard nope been a lazy ass and have lost around 35 pounds by counting calories I just now recently been going to gym but most of my weight lost was just by eating less

[@vkengr99]

Economist has tarnished its name with this junk

[@BernardoPatino]

They're actually right www.1843magazine.com/features/death-of-the-calorie

[@carolinemcallister1473]

When you only lose by being calorie conscious, calorie counting matters.

[@MrBarryyoung]

Diets don't fail, people do. Eating a high fat or high protein diet is just as bad as eating a high sugar diet. The problem isn't counting calories. The problem is coming up with a system simple enough that people can understand it and that won't be over-simplified by the media. And as far as research goes limiting your calorie intake is the simplest way to reduce weight gain. BUT, you also should be aware of the quality of the food you are eating. Also, people (scientists) are just beginning to understand the how genetics and other factors affect how food is absorbed. But guess what, it isn't as much as you might think. I fear people watching this video will blame genetics and not think how much food they are eating. The easiest way to control your weight in order of importance: be aware of how many calories you need and eat accordingly, eat a balanced diet, and exercise. one of the easiest ways to lose weight is drop any drinks containing calories, with soda and alcohol being the worst. I hope this reaches someone and can help them.

[@ezragriz6723]

High fat/high protein works for me. Lower blood pressure, lower blood sugar, better cholesterol numbers. And weight loss.

[@MrJleonp]

Is this a joke? You can read the calorie amount of sugary foods also... You need two neurons to realise sugar is more calorie dense and of course you can also count it, this video is misleading.

[@erikkoch1923]

Diets fail because adherence is an issue and because your body does not like losing much of its body weight and is going to fight you every step of the way after a certain point. Couple this with hyper palatable high fat AND high sugar foods in combination, and social norms around eating and drinking (often unhealthy things) in excess with friends or family. And yeah you’re going to gain weight over time and have trouble sticking to diets. Find a diet you like and can sustain, lose weight slowly, exercise, don’t over restrict foods you like, take a brief diet break occasionally, and remember that a calorie is a calorie.

[@AntijunkHK]

A calorie is a calorie when you burn it with fire, but when you consume it as food the calories from different food types can behave very differently in your system. - Don't mislead the ill informed.

[@guibox3]

Yeah, okay there Jillian Michaels. Your body uses macronutrients different. Hormones determine how effective your body is in using, burning and storing said calories. The 1960s called. They want their erroneous nutritional science back.

[@joahheyya7226]

Economist and clickbaity title?

[@caelielogan260]

This was an interesting mini history lesson but it would be nice to have an alternate, effective method proposed to tie up the hole that calories leave. Maybe something like counting macronutrients, or restructuring how calories from foods are reported?

[@andrewsmithe6983]

What’s this trash? A calorie is a calorie some are better than others but it’s still a calorie. It’s a basic concept to grasp. If you burn less calories then another person you take in less calories.

[@georgeh4944]

wrong, not all calories affects the body the same. there is a lot of research of the how calories from different foods affect our body. coach.nine.com.au/2017/02/15/10/45/1000-calories-of-healthy-food-vs-1000-cals-of-unhealthy-food www.healthline.com/nutrition/6-reasons-why-a-calorie-is-not-a-calorie#section4

[@reaputnam]

Just because people often don’t succeed with diets doesn’t mean we should be changing facts around to quell their failure. You will lose weight by taking in less calories than you’re putting out.

[@marquez2390]

100%

[@mclurr3197]

Its like saying 1kg of bricks is not the same as 1kg of wood and saying thats its a con becouse same mass has differeny density. Its literally as simple as 1cal = 1cal

[@oliviermagere]

Burning 1kg of brick or wood will have a very different outcome though

[@KimSuBok]

Economist logic: It is harder to go a mile uphill than a mile downhill. Therefore, we should no longer measure distance in miles.

[@krombopulos_michael]

This video really didn't make any points about why counting calories was bad, or what the alternative would be. It basically just said that people burn different types at different rates, but it doesn't really explain how that makes a difference. The points about fat are unrelated to calorie counting, and almost everyone knows now that getting too much of your daily diet from sugar is not healthy. I do count my calories. Not incredibly precisely, but I do it and try to be consistent. I've found it extremely effective for losing weight.

[@agimaster]

You're absolutely right

[@mikedoehla5452]

Ok, so calories aren't perfect. But it's the best we got if people still want to eat some of the foods they enjoy. Otherwise, we're forcing people to adopt a diet that might be too far away from what they're capable of doing. I believe people just need to see calories as an estimation and because of that we should limit the variables, monitor the scale, measurements, and clothes and we will be in the close-enough range. Calorie proponents like myself aren't saying the math is perfect, we're using tracking as a way to get people near where they should be, to learn food, and understand they aren't a bad person if they eat some treats.

[@ahhmm2967]

This is the most intelligent argument FOR calories that I have ever heard. And while it has never, not once worked for me, I can open my mind and hear your argument because it is so well spoken and articulate. I personally believe in following natural hunger and satiety cues, but I can see how what you say might work for someone who has no interest in doing that.

[@alexanabolic5099]

Came here after watching Layne Norton critic response video and I am not disappointed hahaha!

[@Matthias27182]

Can calorie counting make you fat? Only if you're bad at math

[@xDDufiosy]

Or if you eat mostly high energy foods. Your body tries not to burn the protein and essential fatty acids you eat because these are material for body. Carbs are non essential, so if you don’t burn them, you store them. Essential aminos and fatty acids have a lot of uses besides being burned as fuel.

[@liambmn]

@@xDDufiosy carbs replenish your glucose stores so you can make full potential of your muscle mass and they are the brains preferred energy source. Sounds like pretty essential to me.

[@munch92]

Nutrition establishments and the corn industry is very unhappy!

[@jd8290]

It is astounding that most people with a "nutritional and/or fitness" related educational background have more difficulty grasping this concept than someone like me who only has basic understanding of human physiology. Why?

[@manus5423]

it's the lack of the right nutrients in modern food that keeps you eating

[@DMC-ss4cm]

PSEUDOSCIENCE

[@terah101]

The only reason why the majority of diets fail is because people think they can return back to their activity levels (or lack of) and eating habits before they started dieting. If you do that, you'll gain the weight back faster than it took you to lose it.

[@TeamAlphaGriefing]

This video is pointless how exactly has the ‘calorie’ become useless? All they did was talk about how sugar was worse than previously thought? Calories in vs calories out still works

[@MrJleonp]

@@da_revo5747 that article does not even mention a single source for the claims.

[@carold.8782]

It doesn't still work, that thinking is the basis of our huge obesity epidemic. Our bodies use hormones to break down food into energy. Our cells don't deal with the measurement of how much energy is released when a bit of food is burned, they deal with the hormones that are responsible for making excess glucose into fat or breaking down fat for energy when there isn't too much glucose. Very little to do with calories.

[@mkm1015]

Read the damn article www.1843magazine.com/features/death-of-the-calorie Yes, counting calories is misleading and outdated. Its like a GDP per capita, says nothing about how many people are poor etc. So surface level.

[@robertkopp873]

mkm 101 Thanks for the link. I now have the full story. Appreciated.

[@Knoct]

As a guy that truthfully lost 40 lbs last year 180-140lbs ( I'm 5'6) from counting calories I still find some merit in that system, but interesting piece nonetheless.

[@Junokaii]

What helped you the most outside that ya figure?

[@DeftPol]

Over the course of a year or 2 you can expect to be successful. The problem is that without controlling your macros and targeting insulin cycles, all you’ll do long term is down regulate your entire metabolism and end up putting the weight back on. The truth is that you’ll be more successful just controlling your eating hours and cutting carbs/sugars than you will by counting calories

[@ivanhernandez2952]

He discovered that "a calorie is a calorie"

[@ivanoov3285]

so, what should we use?

[@alireid5874]

Macros. Low carb, moderate protein

[@kimberlycooper4170]

20 or fewer grams of carbohydrates per day. Focus on eating animal fats and animal proteins. Carbohydrates raise the blood glucose level and blood insulin level out of homeostasis. An adult's cardiovascular system has 5 grams or less of glucose. 5 grams of glucose is equal to 1 teaspoon of glucose.

[@richardmathews8250]

Counting carbs is a much more useful method to manage weight. Protein, fat and carbohydrates affect insulin differently. Insulin is a fat storage hormone. Avoid the foods that raise insulin the most and your body can burn fat instead of storing it. Eating fat and protein is satiating, carbs are not. Trying to reduce calories shorts your body on fuel and you get hungry sooner. Also your body will not willingly go to your stored fat if you've been giving it lots of carbs. The body will always got to dietary carbs first, and if none exist, then you suddenly get hungry as your body is holding out for carbs. If you've been feeding your body healthy fats and protein, then if it cannot find dietary fat to fuel itself, it simply goes to your stored fat. That's the way things were for many thousands of years, only the last few hundred have we been indulging in carbs at every opportunity. When we our body is content with finding fuel in our stored fat, weight loss happens. Also, this continued high blood sugar caused by all these recommendations to eat and eat lots of carbs has brought obesity and diabetes to become the main cause of our health crisis. "Keto for Health" on Facebook.

[@eclipse5393]

If you need to count calories to avoid being fat, you're fat. It's not that hard to pay attention to your body and look in a mirror.

[@meatmoneymilkmonogamyequal5583]

harsh but true. you made me smile. our ability for denial is quite amazing

[@vittoriafontana4689]

Lovely. Who made the video ? Agency ?

[@aaronbegon2092]

Calories in vs calories out. Very simple concept.

[@ahhmm2967]

Very simple and that's why it's so easy to believe, but it's not exactly how it works. We all want it to be true (me as well) but in my personal experience, it is not true and has never worked for me.

[@fxm5715]

There's no getting around the basic physics of thermodynamics; consume less energy than you burn, and you will lose weight. There will be slight variations between people in their particular efficiency at burning the energy in their food, but that's pretty minor. There are, however, lots of complications tied up in metabolism/hunger/emotion/human behavior that make it hard to be successful by thinking of your body simply as the equivalent of a steam engine. Throw in all the modern foods specifically engineered to make us keep eating them, and it can be a rough road to travel. For some people simple calorie counting will work, for others, ignoring specific numbers and instead focusing on a diet lower in very calorie dense foods while remaining high in nutrition works much better/easier. And almost anything that makes eating more of a conscious choice instead of an automatic habit or reflex will likely help. The, "take a photo of every single thing you eat or drink," diet is even pretty effective for some folks, simply by making food choices consciously explicit. Calorie counting certainly works in an idealized environment, but there's that old joke about they physicist starting by assuming the chicken is perfectly spherical and the road is a perfectly flat, frictionless plane. Atwater was not wrong, but he was only looking at one element in a complex system.

[@ahhmm2967]

If the law of thermodynamics was true for the human body, the Keto diet wouldn't work, plain and simple. Insulin controls your weight, not calories. Don't let the diet industry brainwash you just like it has every American.

[@fxm5715]

@@ahhmm2967 Do you honestly think biology overrides physics? Insulin certainly has a huge role in regulating how calories are metabolized, and it's often far from intuitive, but if you think biology is somehow magic, you are very mistaken. But yes, the diet industry is full of misinformation, hype, honest ignorance, willful ignorance, intentional deception, etc.

[@ahhmm2967]

@@fxm5715 Like was said by someone else: Physics is physics Biology is biology My personal experience with weight loss is what convinced me. I was eating less and less and gaining and gaining and it wasn't until i added two additional small meals and regular snacks that i was able to lose weight, because my cortisol went down, my insulin went down and my blood sugar stabilized. If CICO was in fact, always correct, than Keto and Atkins diets wouldn't work. But they do work and they work really well even when people are eating much more calories than they were before. In the end, it doesn't matter how logical the argument or how much 'sense' it makes, it matters what works, and people keep forgetting that. What works, works, whether it makes sense or not. Whether it fits our belief systems or not. And i am saying this because i used to believe intently in a low fat diet and then when that didn't work, i believed intently in CICO.. and when that didn't work, and eating MORE did, I had to admit to myself .. I was dead wrong. Our bodies are adaptive and the longer you eat less, the more efficient your body becomes at working on less energy and when you do CICO your body starts to use up your muscle first, fat stores last, to keep you alive. There are so many paradoxes in life. We can't use logic alone to explain the human body and it's intricate systems. People have spontaneous remissions, and no one knows why. It seems resisting pain would help it go away- turns out removing resistance to pain is what gets it to go away. Seems trying to float would help you learn to float, turns out when you stop struggling, you float. There are many, many paradoxes in this wonderful life. We have to rely on what directly works and not theory.

[@fxm5715]

@@ahhmm2967 I don't think I'm disagreeing with you. What works, works, but we may not always understand the mechanism behind it. I would gladly bet my life and the lives of everyone I love that biology and diet do not violate the basic laws of thermodynamics. There is no paradox, just incomplete understanding.

[@heymikey1981]

"Sugar industry secretly funded Harvard University to make a study pushing the blame of wieght gain to fat instead of sugar" Every single aspect on the American way of life is shaped by corporations. Lol.

[@helium-379]

Welcome to America. Where "freedom" reign supreme and corporations are our leaders.

[@liambmn]

I don't know who researched for this video, but there was so much of misinformation in it. In diets with the same amount of calories, when sugar consumption is varied, we see no difference in weight loss

[@erikkoch1923]

Mmnope. Count your macros, kids. All diets, whether looking to gain or lose weight depend on energy balance. And if you have no idea how much you’re eating progress can be unpredictable, inconsistent or non-existent. The insulin hypothesis has been thoroughly debunked. No fitness professional or weight loss expert will argue that eating micronutrient and high satiety foods shouldn’t be a staple of a diet, but a calorie is in fact a calorie.

[@ahhmm2967]

"The insulin hypothesis has been thoroughly debunked" Are you serious? Every single health recommendation has been debunked.. i am serious. Research and studies can hardly be trusted because there is always a bias involved and the truth is never factually represented. The truest way to know if insulin matters is to look at the Keto diet and Atkins. My father went on Atkins years ago, ate truckloads of high calorie foods, got off his medication and no longer has Type II diabetes. If a calorie is in fact a calorie, why don't you try eating 2,000 calories a day from donuts and McDonalds for a few weeks and then 2,000 calories a day from Avocadoes, eggs and proteins for a few weeks and see what happens? Obesity is MOST COMMON in poverty and areas with low access to food. Obesity can be found everywhere, including under developed countries. Stress raises insulin, creates weight gain, even with a low intake of food.

[@lomercom]

Come on economist, you are better than this.

[@megavegan5791]

Alan Lomer - Apparently not.

[@BernardoPatino]

They're right

[@v12ish40]

@The Economist delete this video, I will pretend it was never posted.

[@robertkopp873]

That makes sense...

[@Holland1994D]

It is still about calories unless you prove otherwise. If you intake 2000 kcal a day and burn 1800 kcal, you still will gain weight, even if that exists of healthy food. Or if you do sports and still eat more than you will burn, you will accumulate fat. One of better things to start with is: Drink just water, abandon the Cola and other nonsense. Sure it's fine to drink it occasionally, but don't make it a habit.

[@ahhmm2967]

Okay, how does high calorie, low carb Keto work FANTASTICALLY for alot of people? That is proof it is not about calories.

[@williambonac8157]

The title is misleading, this isnt a video about caloric surpluses and deficits its about micro nutrients rather than macro nutrients.

[@YashShah112]

Counting calories won't make you fucking fat if you know your maintainance calories and you stay in a caloric deficit.

[@JohnPascavageFishing]

Nothing you said changes anything about calories in calories out

[@johnrodgers2018]

It works, it worked for me , just don't get religious about them.

[@Emilysafe]

A step in the right direction but... how come they didn’t mention insulin? (Or did I miss it??)

[@tanyad7894]

Yes, they did mention insulin.

[@ericyendall3292]

Over the past year I have lost 35lbs not by counting calories but simply by cutting-out most carbohydrates e.g.bread, potatoes and beer. I have reduced my food intake somewhat but generally eat anything I want except for those carbs. I like a glass or two of wine a day and perhaps pasta once a week. If I can do it, anyone can without fuss or calorie counting. My bp and collestoral levels are well in range.

[@evanwalters63]

Plus the process the body uses to break down food and use it ends with chemical reactions which can't ce compared to combustion which is what's used to measure that foods calories. How much of a food will combust when burned? Most of it except the carbon? Does the body engage that exact amount of material in a chemical reaction? What passes through the body with little to no energy being spent on it compared to the same material being burned? It seems like apples and oranges rather than an accurate analogy of energy spent between the two.

[@BrianTaylor1645]

Very interesting I study exercise and nutrition and all calories are not the same If they are 'equal' it's only on the class room blackboard and not in the human body.There's a big difference between a Snickers and a salad the source of the calorie really does matter.

[@ahhmm2967]

Yes, thank you!

[@LauraDelColBrown]

I've lost over 20 kg since last year purely by counting calories. If it's a con, it's a long one.

[@tayaihnixon1649]

“He believe a calorie is a calorie”..... whaat???🤔

[@arfanr8228]

The comments below just goes to show the unfortunate ignorance of most people when it comes to dietary advice. 1000 calories of sugar is not the same as 1000 calories of fat. Both have vastly different physiological effects on the body.

[@Rokkio96]

This is really bad journalism. Clickbaity title, video doesn't even deal with calorie counting...

[@joshyc2006]

The economist has gone downhill. Clickbait journalism is cancer

[@KimSuBok]

Death of the calorie? Even if an imperfect measure, the calorie is still useful. What’s important is that we be aware of the other factors involved in weight loss and weight gain. But throw it out? Ridiculous! That would be like telling pilots to no longer pay attention to their altimeters because they don’t tell us the whole story regarding the flight of a plane. Of course not. As with altitude, calories tell us only part of the story, but they still certainly tell us something important about our food.

[@cameronbriffa4302]

If you don’t know how to count, yes

[@Junokaii]

Just gotta move more. Even doing little things like taking the stairs over an escalator, beating your eggs by hand, etc can make a surprising difference.

[@MrJleonp]

Actually no, you need to eat less, you need to run half an hour (very intense) to burn a slice of cake (300 Cal)

[@banparlous2552]

The beating your eggs by hand diet... that’s a new one😆

[@tznwyvuk471]

The question is can The Economist be trusted?

[@NINONICOALAN]

Muy buena peli, clara y muy interesante!

[@ZachKettell]

Exactly why i’m a keto dieter, all I did on a low fat diet was gain and with keto all i’ve done is loose and by loose i mean LOOSE

[@ganesha2933]

Unsuscribed. Good bye!

[@phivrl2074]

Hi, what's the soundtrack please :)

[@editorjohn8803]

Not just the content, but the narrator speaks so slowly and with no conviction at all. I wonder why

[@easterntechartists]

if you eat 3000 or 4000 calories of fat or sugar a day and do no exercise you will get fat no matter what it is or how your body is individually 'different'

[@ahhmm2967]

Nope, you can eat 4,000 calories of fat and protein and lose weight all week long (hi Keto, hi Atkins)

[@watmosphere]

The law of conservation of energy works same everywhere: in a black hole, in a combustion engine and of course in a human body So, counting calories matters

[@centralintelligenceagency9003]

Okay, what is your energy output in watts right now? How about when you sleep? Or when you're on a calorie-restricted diet? That's right, your power output varies. A lot. Good luck finding out the averages.

[@ahhmm2967]

Are you really comparing the human body to a combustion engine? We all know that ain't how we work-- the human body is not and has never been, a machine and does not , and has never, worked like one. If calories count, please explain, how keto works. Thanks.

[@watmosphere]

@@ahhmm2967 keto works because of calorie restriction. You don't eat too much food (i. e. calories) when your only food options are fats and proteins, it's just not as tasty as regular food.

[@bagelmold6137]

I hate PC "science"

[@zerubiszeus4687]

Far from useless measure I would say. I need calories, I need to know which foods have high calories and low sugars.

[@mathematicianuoa]

This video is excellent! Thank you Economist

[@demnuh]

gaining fat is primarily calories in vs calories out. even though quality of calories is important, it's not what makes ANYONE fat, it's the lack of physical activity and chronic over eating. don't try to justify irresponsibility over one's own health.

[@user-bp2bc9ek8y]

How can we know that fat industries did not fund you to say bad shits about sugar?

[@akash22791]

Smells like Hume

[@smoothoperator9901]

Wait, so what was the point of this video?

[@MRFLOPPYmr]

just unsubscribed because of this nonsensical video....

[@MRFLOPPYmr]

@Gren Wren sorry but I'm a strong independent black women so take your racist and sexist bullshit elsewhere!

[@montyhobbs9584]

Count calories to track caloric intake

[@Improve305]

Eat food with high nutrient density. Which basically means go to the produce section over food that’s highly processed.

[@pfjbergner]

Everthing is right in the post. But one thing is missing. No mention about how different type of calories cause different hormon response in the body. Of which one is that sugar makes people to eat more.

[@arfanr8228]

High calorie fat based diet combined with fasting will help you lose weight, a high sugar diet will not

[@billyjoeness6546]

This is where we cut connections good bye

[@2hedz77]

Terribly uninformative

[@themusicalsandwich5853]

Been counting calories since the start of the year and lost 7kg so clearly somethings wrong there

[@ahhmm2967]

Definitely not. Calorie counting always appears to work , but would you agree that you are eating alot healthier? And probably less at one time, instead of over stuffing yourself? Those are hormonally positive actions that do help lose weight and the calorie counting makes it appear that it's the calories, but.. it's not.

[@germantobon5498]

Is the fat industry leading the new studies?

[@osvm]

👍 well done. The bitter truth of sugar.

[@HenryTheOunce]

A calorie is a calorie and Brexit means Brexit