Posted: 27/01/2016 at 00:28
Oh and I spotted this one on the RW home page tonight.
Some clever bloke says the 3500 calorie per lb of fat rule is wrong. But then goes on to say it is broadly right for burning it in a lab. Either wrong or broadly right but not both.
He has constructed a much better model than Harris Benedict Or Miflin StJoer presumably. Well if you follow the link the model is Miflin StJoer but it only calculates the figures at the start (when you weigh lots) and thus as you lose weight the apparent deficit contributing towards the loss will reduce.
So for me it gives a maintain of 3,256, a diet of 1,813, and an end of diet maintain of 3,009. (3256+3009)/2=3132 for the average kcal burn.
Subtract 1813 of 3132 = 1319 per day deficit for a 90 day period to lose 29lbs.
Well that works out at 4095/lb of fat. Or a difference if 4lb over the 90 days.
But he states that you lose weight faster at the start so just averaging the start and end calorie burns will give a figure that is too high. So the actual calorie deficit will be less than 1319 per day averaged across the period. This will bring his result closer to the 3500kcal per lb of fat.
So he uses Miflins calorie burn model but adjusts the deficit for the duration compared to the 3500kcal estimate. So what, we are all different. He also doesn't mention that the calorie burn should be recalculate daily as you lose weight (which my excel tracker does).
And the difference from 3500 to his figure. Is probably within the margin of error of the Miflin model which differs from Harris Benedict (maybe mifflin was wrong and Harris was better), the calculations of kcal in food (which aren't exact anyway), and the calculation of exercise loading.
So he doesn't like the method to calculate 3500 kcal in 1lb of fat, as they just burn it in lab. Well guess how they calculate the kcal in food?
He does make some valid points. It gets harder later, the last albs os tougher than the 1st etc. Yep common sense. He also uses some very long term timelines. We all know adaption takes place in running, cycling and swimming. We get more efficient (a better runner, a better cyclist, a better swimmer). We therefore do the same stuff more efficiently which burns less calories. We are human our bodies are lazy. So if you walk 5-miles/day at the start of the study and the end the calories burnt will be less partly because you weight less but also because you have adapted.
Oh and the longer the diet goes on the more lax you will become unless you have the will power of the captain of the will power team from will power university.
He's not wrong but don't think there is much to say he is more right than before.
Do you own research.