I’m a 64 yo who’s been bodybuilding since 1970s. I have “leaned down” countless times in countless ways. Intermittent fasting, keto, calorie counting, low carb, calorie restriction, lots of cardio, etc. I have lost bf doing every one of those; however, once I stopped each one I gained weight back. So I feel that there’s more ways than one to reach your goals and the best way is the one you can incorporate into your lifestyle. For me counting calories is easiest, NOT saying it’s best for everyone, just my 40+ years with MY body and lifestyle. The hardest is keto for me because I have crappy workouts when I’m in ketosis and I like a variety of foods.
Balance is best overall. I can cut carbs and lean down too but after a while my muscles look flat and my sleep suffers. Carbs add an enjoyment element too
I don't understand how people think they can stop doing what they did to loose the weight and not expect to put it back on. 😐 like no shit Sherlock. You can never go back to how you were before and expect to stay at the deited weight.
@@_nebulousthoughts you obviously didn’t understand my comment. You may want to reread it. I stated exactly that. You need a method of weight management that fits into your lifestyle SO you can easily continue it without getting off of it. That my point. Some people can go low carb for life and if that works for them then they found what works best for them. As a bodybuilder trying to reach very low bf levels, I have tried all the common methods, but most were impossible to continue for more than a few months because, for me, they were not conducive to a pleasant lifestyle. You got it now, Doctor Watson?
I have watched a lot of videos with Jason Fung and I’ve seen him say multiple times that calories DO matter (but he says that hormones matter too). He makes sure to tell his patients to not over eat after a fast or else it would NOT work for fat loss. He said if you fast and then overeat, you’re still in balance, you need to create a deficit. He knows this. And he’s also said there’s no preferred diet as long as it’s whole natural foods: the best option. He’s ok with feasting on more fun foods occasionally (he does it himself) as long as afterwards you eat much less (intermittent fast) to lose the weight gained from it. He knows CICO is required. Thank you for your channel. I’m recommending it far and wide. I like that you’re not religious to one specific diet.
Sounds like he knows that cico is the basis of weight loss, but knows he can't make much money off of saying just that. So he comes up with new methods that sound ground breaking and innovative, but still relies on cico. So he tricks people into thinking he came up with a new method for weight loss and spend money on him. Makes him more of a charlatan.
@@ballsackschrader218 I guess it seems like it doesn’t matter what you convince people of, as long as it gives them results. Megan of Dr. Fung’s crew said that their motto is “progress over perfection”. No doubt that they’re very effective at helping people drop tons of fat.
I totally agree with you, I’ve seen him discuss cico plenty of times, stating that OF COURSE they matter. But eating begets eating. The more often you eat, the more opportunities to overeat, and it also will increase hunger hormones. The more I fast the less hungry I get. THATS his point.
@@Guitarlvr01 Add to all of this another great benefit to fasting: healthy food tastes delicious and you actually crave natural/unprocessed foods, because you’ve reset your taste buds. Hunger is the best seasoning.
Exactly I think he understands this a lot more than Layne understands his message I know fung is bigger on lower carb then Layne is but overall they have very similar views they just speak on them from different perspectives and angles I found a podcast fung was on about 3 weeks ago and decided to get my health in line because I’m pretty sure I’m pre diabetic and in 3 weeks I’m down 22 pounds fungs message got threw to me in ways others like Layne haven’t and Layne is great but fung is too
1. The mic seems to be working better! 2. Layne seems to have rekindled his enthusiasm for WTFitness episodes 🥳 3. Triple HRCT holler in 1 episode? ✅✅✅
+1 for #1. defintely much better audio. hopefully the lack of people mentioning the mic is evidence to Layne that he's found a solid solution :) keep up the awesome work and BS busting from these click bait fools
Just to anyone not understanding the sarcasm here. If you inject insulin without consuming enough glucose you are going to experience hypoglycemia and possibly die 😅
That math don't math! Great video, Layne, really nailed it on this one. I really appreciate your work! Especially this narrow walk of personal responsibility vs. environment, which you navigate particularly well.
He doesn't say it doesn't work, if you don't replace the calories you missed while fasting. If you do replace the calories (like skipping two meals and then eating three with your next meal, or 1.5 meals for next two) then it does work because you are restricting calories by fasting. If you're talking about the other routes benefits (metal clarity and the like) then yes, he does say that is hocus-pocus 😂
Not necessarily arguing for Fung's model, but I think his basic theory is as follows: 1. CICO is true in terms of physics, but it's an ineffective fat loss strategy as evidenced by millions of fat people knowing about CICO and still being fat, including doctors. Even if it's rude, I think he has a point that if you are promoting a set of practices for fat loss and YOU are fat, then your model might have problems. 2. The reason he makes the "It's not your fault" argument is that he believes hormones drive behavior. If this is true and you have no idea how your eating patterns are affecting your hormones, then you are effectively at the mercy of your hormones, which can for instance tell your body to store more fat or make you super hungry. 3. If you know what's driving hormones, you can use your hormones as a lever for progress that reduces the importance of willpower. I.E. "I do the thing that makes me less hungry and less prone to store fat." His theory still does mandate that you have enough willpower to fast and not eat all the time, but he posits that this is actually a sustainable longterm strategy (whereas pure "eat less and move more" isn't) because as your hormones stabilize, you're less prone to be hungry and store fat. His whole point about CICO and "There are no Biggest Loser reunions" is that CICO doesn't work long-term because people are in a constant battle against hormones which are demanding that they eat. 4. His basic ideas regarding caloric intake is that the body has a weight "set point" and that even if you lower calories, the body will compensate by reducing its energy expenditure to maintain that set point. So if you cut x amount of calories per day, the body consequently reduces its activity so that your weight is maintained despite you eating less calories. He basically argues that your "calories out" is not 100% in your conscious control. If your calories in reduced AND your calories out remained constant with no downside and infinite sustainability, Fung would probably have no issues with CICO. But that's not what we see. We see people's activity levels reduce and we see them put weight back on over time. 5. The purpose of fasting isn't to reduce calories outright, it's to reduce exposure to insulin and thereby reduce insulin insensitivity over time. Long term goal is that via fasting, the body's satiety signaling is restored and people are no longer eating something and then feeling voracious again shortly after. I think his line of thinking is interesting. He's looking at what's being prescribed to patients (eat less, move more) and how effective it is (it's not effective). He thinks blaming patient adherence makes no sense because their hormonal environment, without their knowledge, is driving them to not adhere, hence fat doctors. I think there is definitely merit in asking questions like "Why am I starving just a couple hours after I last ate?" that nobody else seems to be asking.
eat less, move more does work it's just that if you're already obese its probably really hard to stick to. food can be an addiction, we need to start helping people with their addictions and discipline/ motivation, not blame hormones.a fat person can't stop at one piece of cake cause yes it spikes insulin and makes you hungry again. But a thin fit person can just have one piece of cake, why? because they learned how to control impulse eating. Doesn't mean they don't want more cake, they just don't want to get fat. It's easier to have discipline when you're thin already yes, but fat people need to learn how to fake it till you make it. meaning pretend you have discipline till it's a real habit. everything is more a mental battle than anything.
The carbohydrate-insulin model of weight gain, so well accepted in the fasting/low carb diet movements, is storytelling about how insulin magically makes your body store energy that it doesn't have.
Kevin Hall locked up a bunch of people in a ward for a couple of months and had them on both high carb and high fat. Zero difference, except for the high fat diet lost more LBM as insulin has a protective function for protein, so the keto group lost less fat. 😂🤣
Research the Minnesota starvation study to prove a deficit always works enough to lose everything you want to lose. Metabolic slowdown was topped at 20% which means you were eating 2K calories and at the end 1600. Metabolism never stops or we wouldn't need food/fuel
Nobody really thinks that cutting back on calories alone will make you not lose weight. The issue is that it's just too hard to keep up with because you end up feeling hungry all the time. Eventually, your willpower runs out, you give in to the hunger, go back to eating too much, and probably end up eating even more than before to make up for it. That's why it doesn't really work. We need a way to eat less without feeling starving, and that's where things like the keto diet come in. Also, doing something like intermittent fasting can be easier to stick with than just trying to eat less all the time, because your hunger actually decreases when you fast, unlike when you're just trying to cut down on calories and end up feeling hungrier.
The only caveat I would say about hormone impact on weight loss is menopause. The radical drop of oestrogen and the rise of cortisol has an effect. It would be great if you covered this. Thnx! ❤
Low estrogen increases appetite and lowers metabolism and the inclination to move. It also favours storing fat in the worst places like your waist instead of boobs and hips. So it’s still CICO aside from the distribution pattern. The cure is obvious.
Was looking for this comment. I have so many problems since menopause, it's not that easy as calories in and out. I started resistance training and hope this will help.
I would love to see Dr. Norton go head to head with Dr. Mary Claire Haver. I adore both of them, even though they are guilty of having their own biases (aka are human).
Same here counting calories, eating 2000 calories so roughly 300 below maintenance for me running 4 times a week in 59 days I’ve lost 8kg and 5% body fat
@@Coeus-the-Titan It's a huge shame and embarrassment to the medical community to have someone like that pumping out these ludicrous headlines that are meant to create panic or incite arguments. People like that need to find a hobby or spend their time doing something that actually contributes to society.
He's a huge grifter, does it solely to generate wealth. Obviously doesn't care about the ramifications of the content he puts out there. Such a shame so many people buy into their bs.
Great quality information Layne. As usual!👌 By the way… the usual great information is not the only reason I have been following your channel for now more than one year. It's also because you are absolutely not afraid to effectively call out the BS, whoever is saying it. Thank you very much for your contribution to the world Dr. Norton. It's honestly greatly appreciated!🙌😊
Lol. Layne is an arrogant prick. Sure, some of what he says is acurate, but some is definitely not. Go watch Ben Bikman on insulin and fat and then go watch Bart Kay's takedown on Layme's nonsense about the first law of thermodynamics and RCT. Once you've done so, if you haven't changed your mind about Layne Norton you're lost. P.S. Go listen to more of Jason Fung to, because Jason do understand CICO, and what he's saying is not that it doesn't work, but that hormons play a vital role.
For Mr. Fung, that's the problem when you've built your entire reputation and livelihood on a single take that is unwavering. He's afraid to lose face and admit it's nuanced!
I do low carb and glycemic control techniques because it makes me feel less hungry. I do feel that my body can regulate my appetite better when I don’t eat carbs. I agree that calories in calories out should not be the focus of the diet, you should base what you eat on how your body responds to it. This doesn’t mean that you should not consider the calories that you eat, rather they should adjust as a consequence. This is more of an actual lifestyle change than a temporary diet and that is what I have found working best.
I did intermittent fasting for a while, but stopped it as I feared I might loose too much muscle. I did often not get my 1,2g/kg body weight of protein. I‘m not a big fan of protein shakes or powder. I used protein bars, but still- they have lots of calories. But anyway what IF definitely teaches you like any other kind of fasting, is that hunger goes away when ignored long enough.
I really recommend clear whey protein powder if you're not usually a fan of protein shakes and have trouble getting in enough protein. I use the my protein sour watermelon flavor and it tastes kind of like Kool aid. It's really good and uses hydrolyzed whey isolate, which is supposedly the most hypoallergenic form of whey and is very absorbant
Kudos to you for calling out this illogical recent trend in the nutrition world downplaying the role of calories in weight loss. Yes, a calorie of broccoli isn't the same as a calorie of a cookie. However, calorie balance is the biggest factor in determining whether someone loses or gains weight. That is very different than whether tracking calories is an effective strategy to monitor calorie intake (it's not a successful strategy for most people due to lost of factors). However, being difficult to track doesn't mean that calorie balance isn't a major factor in the weight loss battle.
IF I remember correctly, and forgive me if I'm wrong, but Jason Fung was on John Berardi's podcast a few years ago, in which John really pressed Fung to directly answer whether he believes that calories in / calories out works like that or not, and he admitted that it works like that. Sadly John stopped his podcast.
The "willpower doesn't solve obesity" argument will always make me laugh when the same person pushes fasting as the cure. As if fasting doesn't take 'some' amount of willpower to do.
I get calories in and calories out, but how many calories should I restrict? I am 5 ft 9 in 67 years old male, I weight 208 I have folks telling me all kinds of things. if I eat 1000 calories a day, I lose weight, if I eat 1500 calories a day I maintain weight, if I eat more than 1500 calories I gain weight. everyone is telling me 1000 calories is not enough to live. Confused. thanks
I put your numbers into some BMR calculators and they all say your maintenance is around 2100 calories. Get some blood work done if you haven't recently. Maybe there are some calories you aren't counting? Fats like olive oil are 120 calories per tablespoon, I would sometimes forget to measure when cooking and have to guess.
What ever your weight is in pounds you just times the number by 15 and it will you your maintenance calories. It's not exact but it's pretty close. So if your maintenance is 2800 and you want to lose weight then just minus 300 to 500 calories to start off with.
Fung's book, "The Obesity Code," runs this beaten-down anti-calories and "it's the insulin!" idea for a few hundred pages. Besides the fasting thing, being like the other low-carb promoters and bashing calories, CICO, and insulin makes up much of what he says. He's so deep in this cash cow that he'll never change his message to outright say that calories do matter, despite his practices all being based on reducing the number of calories eaten and finding a balance to prevent future weight gain. My aunt, an RN, recently became a devotee of his and constantly rants about carbs and insulin while at the same time reducing the amount of calories she eats by skipping meals. She is then smug at how she's losing weight by following Fung's advice. Yeah, it's definitely due to letting her insulin levels drop and not the fact that she just "fasted" through a meal time where she'd normally eat 700+ calories. Really weird how that works after a few weeks!
So for me fasting in the morning does actually help with focus. If I eat I don't work as well.... That could be the caffeine getting into my system faster with an empty stomach, but idk it works for me
One of the worst channels on TH-cam tbh. You can tell it's bad by a) the clickbait titles b) those crazy jumpcut intros (reminiscent of "hard hitting" 90's sensationalist TV shows) and c) the constant run of charlatans he has on
As a Brit, the comma and therefore pause you put before innit doesn’t make sense 😂 we wouldn’t pause before using innit (to mean isn’t it) at the end of a sentence. Or just don’t be American and do this crap anyway 😂
Not related to Jason Fung but you got me thinking about topics tangential to CI/CO. You have a few videos covering Herman Pontzer's research, but have you discussed his work with the Hadza tribe? That's a topic that I bring up often since I find it so interesting, and most people flat out refuse to entertain it as a possibility.
To say that being obese is 70% gentics, is like saying smoking is 70% gentic. I am sorry, but it comes down to personal choice not your metabolism. Yes for some people it is harder because their cravings and hunger cue may "feel" stronger than "normal" persons, but just like smoking you gotta make the choice to quit
I also believed for years that obesity might be hereditary and hence the reason why I threw the towel for years, believing that I will die of a painful death plagued with health problem until I found fasting and everything changed, it's not magical but a tool to help against snacking all the time
Lol. It's not a cult. Insulin is real. Go listen to Ben Bikman and then you will understand how it works. That said, undereating will still work if you want to shed weight.
Layne is wrong lol he knows better than that fung is right Layne never heard of hypo or hyperthyroidism hormones that if are messed up that cico shit is not working not even a little bit
@@ricardosanu5467hyperthyroidism doesn’t disprove the CICO model - it supports it. Any influence an overactive thyroid has on changes to fat store , it has precisely because it influences either calories in, calories out or both.
Jason Fung is completely consistent with the science of insulin, that's why he says the same thing for the past 10 years. Ben Bikman, an actual research scientist who studies insulin, fat cells, and metabolism says the exact same things and even he says that the calories model of weight loss is absolutely wrong. Layne gaslights anyone and everyone who conflicts with his dogmatic views on calories. He gaslights Jason because he's an easy target, but he would never do so against Ben Bikman who says the exact same things.
The weird thing about Jason Fung is that he actually uses caloric measurements in his arguments about intermittent fasting, such as regarding his claim that your metabolism actually rises during fasting, his evidence for this is a rise in metabolic rate expressed in calories. This probably ties back in to how he "confuses" (I doubt he's actually confused) the CICO model with the act of counting calories. Listening to his argumentation on these topics I didn't actually hear anything that was incompatible with the CICO model, in fact by his own evidence it was more supplemental information.
Would love to see a video explaining where these 2 agree. I do IM 3 or 4 days a week, avoid highly processed foods as best I can. Dropped a bunch of weight and feel better. I try not to get too crazy about the details. They both have good points to raise. I bet some sort of ‘intersection’ would be helpful to anyone.
Im not a biographer of Fung but from what ive seen and read from him I did not gather at all what You did, I may have misunderstood. He says calorie balance is whay determines weight but the way go control the hunger that gets you there is related to hormones andd the way our food enviroment affects those who are a risk for obesity and metaboloc syndrome as a whole. And that does not mean at all that calories arent the bottom line. In fact , two years ago or so I made an attempt to lose weight at 29 I had become obese in my mid 20s I read fungs obesity code and I started a low carb diet almost keto and cut out all sugar , refined carbs, etc. On par to returning to training ( i used to be in good shape up to like 21) I lost significant weight then I started getting more into fitness etc. And I read a portion of Your book fatloss forever. I became convinces by your material and other guys like renassaince periodization etc. That fung and those people are total whacks, its all about the calories, I should schedule refeed days etc . I started reintroducing everything because hey its all calories, I allowed myself a "refeed" meal once a week or so to bear the set point yadayada worked great for about a month then I spiralled couldnt contro my appetite, work got in the way of planned meals I got stressed balloned back got even bigger developed sleep apnea slept terrible. I just forgot about it all and just continued being fat and I became food addicted for those 2 years I started eating ( no bullshit) yhe food volume equivalent of 2 family pizzas and a big coke in every meal every day, I got into cooking amd recepies and foodiness and I basically just went crazy. Do I have no self control? Idk I quit smoking at 23 after a 10yr 2 pack a day habit cold turkey, I quit drinking and drugs about a year later, I stayed in shape up until around 21 and wasnt obese till 25, I been a migrant to several countries, I get up to work everyday, I take care of my kids and partner, I recovered full mobility of my arm after an accident that basically severed it at 18 the surgeon gave me less than 2% chance of having enough mobility to feed i busted my ass in rehab and 3 yrs later I had 100% mobility and muscle tone etc. So I aint no David Goggins but its not like ive never tried hard in my life The reason im back looking at this is abput 3 weeks ago a 150kg (around 300lbs) I started feeling really bad for a couple of months, just generally sick but I ignored it , finally one day I checked myself at the ER bp 175/110, bloodsugar (nonfasted) 463 , triglycerides 1640, colesterol over normal but couldnt be determined in hdl and ldl because i develop lipemic serum in my blood , very fatty liver , my resting bp like 110, at 31 yo I was at the verge of death according to the doctor, was put in the er , drugs, insulin etc, was sent home that night with bp 150/100 and blood sugar 390 , the doc ordered I set an appointment with a gp asap to begin a treatment protocol etc . I happen to live in Paraguay in a small town and of course I attend public hospitals, I managed to get an appointment the very next day, the doctor was an asshole and for the very first time I learned fatphobia was real, he refused to refer me to anyone or offer me a prescription his only words were if you people cant stop eating there is no point in checking your labs ( the only reason i didnt smack him is he was like 80yo and with a cane , he was the only gp in duty that day in my town). I left angry and terrified , I have a young family , I was dying My dad who lives abroad and is a fitness person pointed to low carbs abd stuff like that, I revisited a littlw, and went hardcore for about 10 days zero "carbs" as in grains sugar refined stuff etc, only steak porkchop eggs and yes a shitload of vegetables which I fortunately like and a lot of fat and fasting 16-8 and I made a commitment to sleep better and on time. This will sound bonkers but just as i recovered my arm all those years ago IN 10 FUCKING DAYS ( i did add exercise back which is key), my blood triglycerides went from over 1600 to 310 , my sugar from 463 at its highest to 160 , I lost 10kg , and my bp stayed around 145/ 85 I passed from a time bomb to being reasonably curable. Now for the last few days I have slowly reintroduced carbs but, not at dinner or on rest days, in small amount and only whole carbs say brown rice, beans, sweetpotatoe, yuca/mandioca, etc. I elimimated cooking oils, cleaned up my fats and ditched proccessed meat. My blood glucose is now hovering betwee 94 to 112 fasted and 140 to 160 after meals, havent rechecked my lipids, no I didnt regain my weight when reintroducing carbs so I dont believe it was water weight Now THE MOST important thing of all this , is MY CRAZY HUNGER DISSAPEARED , i was eating compulsively each meal till physically uncomfortably full very sugar fried and junk heavy, snacking all day long, at least 3 big bottles of coke daily or orange soda etc I just couldnt stop. So bottomline I may be talking off anecdote but You cant convince me that Fungs claim that hormones are the main driver of hunger and therefore overeating and therefore obesity is not true Fung calls calorie balance the "proximal cause " of obesity he doesnt deny it, his point is that its not the real cause in and of itself as if people just dont have disicpline , its a bad hormonal emviroment, now I think he also misses a psychological factor , its multifactorial But its clear to me that hormones and psychology are the main causes of obesity and not the calories as an isolated factor, calorie balance is just the physical description of overeating but the overeating is itself product of a deeper cause and thats Fungs point. Most doctors and "science based" people treat the calorie as an isolated factor that people can just freely manipulate if they put their mind into it and get the right program, its the same delusion classical economics makes in thinking that buyers are perfectly free and rational consumers The truth is in neither case are people freeagents 100% I keep sugar, refined carbs, processed & deli meats, deep fried food , booze & drugs out of my life, get enough sleep, and manage stress and anxiety plus exercise and my appetite tanks I dont give 2 shits about the bottle of coke my father in law has on the fridge or my childrens cookies, I just dont care , thats hormones , yes the end result is ñower calotie consumption but there is a hormonal/emotional pathway that keeps getting ignored, in fact "science based" guys go so far as saying that eating 100cals of jelly beans is the same shit as 100cals of broccoli and thats just not true If I reintroduce sugar , booze, stop managing my stress , exercising, skip sleep my insane hunger returns fast, that is hormonal I dont need to be an endocrinologist to underdtand why I feel so insanely hungry when those things fall put off place, unless I start believing in pixie dust its obviously due to the hormonal effect in my body. There is a reason traditional weightloss programs have a 98% fail rate, hell most people I know had a bypass surgery are fag again ( thats 3 people btw) Now finally there is definately a genetic and nurture component and I think here is where the bias from people like you or so many sports scientist comes from, You have not been morbidly obese either because your body doesnt respond like that to our modern food enviroment and/or you had a set of influences in your development that made you a kid or youth deeply pasionate about fitness, sports etc and never got sick ; which leads me to 2 points first definately there is a genetic component because I have relatives who give me a run for my money at my worst eating and dont workout and are not remotely obese a little beer gut at best but not even more than skinny fat, and that there is a breaking point because up until 21 I ate big not crazy but big but I was in good shape not show shape but decent beach body shape then I got out of shape and like 25 I was living with an girlfirend I had and we became "foodies" and my obesity just appeared and skyrocketed so there is also I believe genes that just get turned on when there is a perfect storm and you are predisposed and you just balloon and once you qualify for metabolic syndrome ai think its like an alcoholic I used to eat sugar and all that and stayed in shape until that switch turned on and now I cant touch that crap because I relapse fast very fast Thats my experience whoever cares to read
Btw and all those wars studies that get used in every argument, I may be too ignorant yes but as far as I have seen or read I see 2 errors in all of them: 1. Yeah most studies dont give people twinkies, coke and beer , those studies that compare keto diets vs regular diets and stuff they give them hospital foods that kind of defeats the purpose. 2. The studies are usually NOT all you can eat buffets they are ward studies were calories are heavily controlled which kind of defeats the purpose again This is about the HUNGER - hormonal theory of obesity which is NOT the same as the hormonal theory of obesity which IS QUACKERY and you seem to confused the two One says calories dont matter hormones create fat from thin air, so eat 6000 cals of fat on keto , yeah those people about and are whack The HUNGER hormonal theory ( which is Fungs view I still think You strawman him) is that YES calories are the bottom line, BUT people(those who are genetically predisposed) cant control they eating ( amount of calories) because there is only so much willpower and modern food enviroment creates insaciable hunger (plus it fucks up your energy, inflamation, sleep, recovery etc I need no phd just empirically eating a tub of icecream and 3 bicmac before bed makes you sleep like shit and have a soreness like a hangover all day) and THAT creates an effective calorie excess in the diet They are not the same, and until you have a ward study with people who are predisposed to weight gain and where you give one group " clean food" and im not talking keto it can be whole fiber carbs too, with no processed seasonings and water only or unsweetend tea cofee etc. And the other group a fucking pig fest of pizza , coke, beer, sweets, chips etc And let them eat all they want at any time they want ( INSTEAD OF HOSPITAL FOOD AND TIGHTLY CONTROLLED PORTIONS BY CALORIE) Until that, You dont have realworld valid ward study
Thanks for sharing. I had tsimilar experience, when I was 14-16 I tried to get my six pack. I trained basketball and gym seven days per week at least 5 hours per day. So I had a lot of calories out. The problem was I couldn't controll my hunger, I ate four-five meals a day. I would eat tons of rice with lproteins and very little fat because at the time I was thought that is the best diet. When I was 20, learned about the carnivore diet and tried it. I couldn't believe i, I could fast for 2 days without a problem. If calorie in calorie out is true, than fasting 2 days is the biggest deficit I can achieve in 2 days (on the third day I would only eat slightly more than a norml carnivore meal). I think you hit the nail. By restricitng your eating time and reducing carbs you can reduce your hunger which allows you to be in calorie deficit. Also I think it is much simpler to accomplish than counting your calories. I can't do math when I am hungry but I can stick to the ruöe of eating only at this time (sometthing about grelin) and only eat certain food that make you full longer. . The downside of low carb is your training gets worst. I read that after a time your body adapts but I haven't achieved that yet
Dude, how did youtube allow you to write so much in a comment section? This is insane. I had to stop reading because it's your life story, not a comment.
Honest question: If I eat only broccoli and eggs and gain weight because I overeat 500 caloriries per day. Would I then gain same weight had I eaten only candy- long as the amount of calories are exactly the same? I understand that no one can live on those diets but my question is hypothetical. I have difficult to understand why you would gain same weight because its logical to me that the amount of insuline produced in the body should matter since its a storage hormone.
If I eat 1500 calories of candy I will get hungry again faster than if I eat 1500 calories of broccoli. Is this not partly because of more calories being stored than being used as energy when I eat candy? Please explain to me why the insuline is not an important variable in this equation?
I know this much. I was a year into a prolonged fasting regimen completely based on guesses as to why I couldn’t lose weight generally. During this period I lost 40 lbs and got significantly stronger in my weight training. One day I landed on a long video by Jason Fung. I was so excited I called my dad and said this guy is explaining everything I have been experiencing. I was excited because all the conventional wisdom was that what I was doing would lead to muscle wasting and that the weight would just bounce back. But it didn’t. 10 years in (I’m 57 now) and fasting is part of my routine. Now granted I’m not a big believer that 16 hours counts as fasting but fasting as a method of calorie restriction without the awful hunger that months of just not eating enough has been my ticket. And it is the hormones that make you think you’re going to die of starvation because you haven’t eaten in six hours that keep you fat.
I agree with you. Fasting causes insulin to drop and engages the body to burn its fan. You will feel some hunger throughout the day but you won’t run out of energy. Just alert the whole day. It is a great way to lose fat. As for this Layne Norton fella, he is good entertainment and I don’t take his opinions seriously.
@@kostar500bro his opinions? he shows dozens more studies and meta analysis than someone like Jason Fung. he is showing real results AND explaining the actual mechanisms as well.
I am so tired of people trying to reinvent the wheel when it comes to weight loss. We’ve solved this decades ago. People just don’t want to do the work. It sucks, but reality wins every time. Keep up correcting these charlatans Layne.
Jason should talk with Dr. Baker. Dr. Baker who claims to eat near perfect carnivore diet also says "if" he eats too much fat from meat and butter, he gains weight. Even Dr. Baker who's not eating carbs has to restrict food intake (calorie intake) or would gain weight.
Excess calories from fat are the easiest to store as body fat as it costs almost nothing for the body to do so, but those carnivore diet promoters are not going to tell that to their audience and impact their likelihood
@@DrAJ_LatinAmerica and kudos to him for that, I could criticise him for many things but if he's open on that he may be open on many things in the future
@@enamuossuo Your body can only absorb so much fat in a day because you can only make so much bile. I mean, if you're really getting fat on carnivore you're stuffing yourself to the point of abuse.
Intermittent fasting caused me to lose all of my excess fat. It also caused me to lose a load of muscle mass too. Now building muscle fast and back to eating a high quality protein breakfast every morning.
It isn't an easy genetic leap to make, check out Dr. Robert Plomin, the world's premiere beahvioural geneticist. BMI (which is obviously just a proxy) is about 70% heritable and since every trait is partly heritable, it seems unlikely that it would be a majority of environment involved. Case in point, adopted children have BMIs that correlate with their actual, genetic parents as opposed to their adopted parents.
Hormones will affect things such as increased allocation of protein and glycogen to build and fuel muscles before the remainder goes to energy (fat) stores, it can't alter the total amounts or make them behave in any matter that doesn't apply to the laws of thermodynamics and physics. People's problem with calorie counting is that they suck at it, and track wrong data on both the input and output. Because they overestimate their caloric output and underestimate their caloric intake, they just think it is BS and look for something easier like an all-bacon diet or not eating anything on tuesday and thursday.
Also, your body doesn't use heat released from food (calories) as energy. When you burn a steak it releases calories... but your body doesn't use calories, and it doesn't use all of the protiens fats and minerals as energy. And more so, energy doesn't effect mass. This is really a MASS in and MASS out equation.
Humans are not machines. We have metabolism and body fat set points...that is what manages our hunger, caloric intake and body fat percentage...willpower can't do it forever...
So i'm not good at ready studies but abstract of PMID: 28193517 says "our meta-analysis of 32 controlled feeding studies with isocaloric substitution of carbohydrate for fat found that both energy expenditure (26 kcal/d; P
Hi, I'm not Layne, but I think I can offer some insight. The differences in fat loss were clinically insignificant, while statistically significant. The differences, however, don't negate calories, in calories out, but are controlled by calories in, calories out - in this case, by calories out. I would postulate that the reason for the rather insignificant advantage of the low fat dies was down to carbohydrates' greater impact on what's called the thermic effect of food; on average this extra energy used up during digestion is about 10% of the total energy we take in from our food. So, if you eat a meal that gives you 2000 calories, about 200 of those calories are burned up during the digestion process - but this varies between the different macros. In short, it takes a bit more energy from your body to digest carbs, as opposed to digesting fat. Protein has by far the highest thermic effect, which is why it needs to be equated between diets when doing these trials. It could seem on the surface that this meta analysis negates calories in, calories, but it in fact supports it, and since the differences were so absolutely minimal, it comes down to personal preference of diet, as long as net calories are kept the same. These trials are also always done by humans, so there's always going to be random variance and factors beyond the researchers' control. So, as long as the differences are clinically insignificant, and you get similar results repeatedly, it becomes safe to assume these random variances don't debunk the overall theory of calories in, calories out.
It's typical guru-talk. Say something that goes against the consensus, make sure it tickles the ears of your audience, and then say that "they" are against you because you're upsetting their institutional group-think. It's actually too kind to ascribe his stubbornness to ignorance instead of malice; he's nothing but a guru with programs and books to sell.
As someone who has gone from being Stage 3 Obese to a controlled normal range weight without drugs or surgical intervention consider me a skeptic on Jason's theories. You can't expect the fuel level in your storage tank to drop without pumping out more fuel than you put in.
Ok. I have a question. Every Lent, I do a 5/2 (fast 5 days, eat for 2) for the entirety of Lent. The first time doing this, I expected to lose a lot of weight. The first two weeks of this fast, I drop about 10 pounds. After that, my weight remains constant. From Monday to Friday, I only have fluids. On the weekend I eat what I would normally eat (no double portions or anything). So, even though I am consuming massively less calories, my weight stays the same for the bulk of the fast. What's going on there? Should also note my physical actuvity remains the same. ~1km (30 min) swim everyday. 5km jog on the weekens. I don't change my behaviour while I fast.
First fast weight loss is mostly water and then your body replenishes the water while burning actual fat to the tune of those 10 pounds. A five day fast will also see your body slowing down. So you move less outside of exercise and body temperature drops all of which which conserves energy so you do burn less. It also depends what a normal day intake is. If you generally overeat then that cuts the deficit. A ten pound weight loss sounds about right for 40 days. The average weight loss on any diet is around a pound of fat a week.
@@stargazerbird I understand the water weight loss. What I don't get is the lack of further weightloss. My "normal day" intake has given me stable body weight. I tend to remain the same weight with my ad libim food intake. And I get my weight taken each week when I go donate plasma. So I am no just guessing here. I know my weight is constant. So if it is calories in and calories out, I by definition generally do not over eat as my weight is stable. I also challenge the 1 pound a week for body weight loss. I know I have in the past lost much more in a week while on a diet. I jut don't get why the same weight loss does no occur when I fast. Especially if it is all just calories in and calories out. Either my body is capable of tremendous metabolism control, or something else is needed to the equation.
I’ve been “dieting” (whole food keto) for two years and if I’m not taking phentermine I cannot lose weight. I was calorie restricting to 1600 calories a day and still not losing weight. I felt awful but kept the weight on.
My RD recommended a 72 hr fast like if it was some pancea and all it did was disrupt and setback my workout routine and progress while taking 2-3 days to get back to get eating normal.
Insulin is good. Its anabolic. I want to spike my insulin because it will yield the best environment for muscle growth. I want more carbs, to refill glycogen stores. Keto is so stupid.
Hi Dr. Norton, again what an amazing banger video! Thanks for your educational input! Love it!! Keep this great work! I am really shocked about how someone can even continue like this in the scientific field. And also thinks has the power to actually fire people from their job! What the hell is going on? Is there not a way to fire him? At least he got your fist directly into his face. I really hope a lot of people see this video!!! Keep doing such a great job! Looking forward seeing your next video!
Do the folks at JPL have Jason's phone number? They'd LOVE to hear how you can increase energy stores, as you burn and fail to restock energy. They got some trips planned, some r-e-a-l long trips, where his science could really help out!
For the algo! I lost 45 kg (135 to 90) with all kinds of diets (keto, if, etc.) and kept it off since 2020 when i realized what was the common theme = I tracked calories. When I stop, i slowely regain weight...
I get the calorie in and out thing, but why as a 53 woman in menopause did I gain weight when nothing in my diet changed if this is not hormones? And why did I gain weight only in the mid section (visceral fat) where as in my younger days when I gained weight it was only fat tissue on my legs or butt. And how do I figure out how many calories I need now? All those fancy calculators give different results. And then there is the people that say that elder women do lose a lot of muscle mass and especially in menopause. Do I need more protein than women not in menopause? How much? I want to do the right thing but it's exhausting.
You know. People can learn. I know I learned a lot even in the last year. Its humbling and enlightening to admit you're wrong so you can cast aside your false information and become more educated. Why can't people like Jason Fung and these Carnivores do that?
Exercise helps me maintain mobility and flexibility plus if I get up and move (I prefer lifting weights) for 60 minutes a day I am able to not only manage my weight and fitness better but my kids also see that I care about my health.
I'd be curious to see studies on having a majority of your diet come from ultra processed foods, BUT staying at your caloric maintenance and/or a slight caloric deficit. Even that new study on ultra processed food, which I only glanced through so I may have missed it, seems to make the same point that ultra processed foods make it easy to overeat and the caloric surplus is the culprit. It will probably end up that the ingredients, as well as the impact on gut microbiome, from ultra processed foods isn't healthy, I'm just not convinced it's the culprit in obesity when calories are not in excess. Would love to see Layne address something like this.
TH-cam seems to censor links these days - at least my comments with links never go through. But if you google "Twinkie Diet", it's basically that. Not really a study, it was something a professor just kinda did to himself to showcase that all you need is a calorie deficit, but it still offers you something.
Had a co worked off for 6 months due to injury with a broken foot. There is a lot lot of walking involved in our occupation. When he came back to work, I almost did recognize him he gained so much weight.
Would love to see a face to face discussion with you and either Jason Fung or Ben Bikman. Easy to refute someone without giving them the chance to respond.
Came here to understand who was Nicholas Norwitz talking about in his latest video. I followed Jason Fung's advice and it worked, five years now and counting, as opposed to all the calorie-restricting diets that all the experts like you prescribed me in the tens of years before (and for quite some money!) which always left me hungrier and weaker. IF + low carb + meditation + HIIT and you'll never need to count your calories again.
If calories in calories out doesn’t work and exercise doesn’t matter, I must be some kind of anomaly because that’s exactly how I lost 40 pounds. I didn’t know I was so special lol.
It really is some amazing Orwellian double-think shell game fast talk this guy pulls off. He convinces people who can’t manage portions into giving up eating altogether. It’s like getting a kid who won’t eat peas to gobble down split pea soup by telling them it’s ice cream. So yea, biochemistry? zero stars do not recommend. But on Psychology? Slow clap. Bravo
I think Fung’s background is in medical interventions with extremely obese patients. “In the wild”, telling these people just have periods of time where you don’t eat solves the Calorie issue better than counting. In the face of highly palatable foods it’s hard to scale down below a calorie threshold (“once you pop you can’t stop!”) and getting weight loss started and sustainable can then generate its own momentum. It’s calorie in calorie out through the back door, because keeping insulin low is another way of saying control calories in?
Yes, most people's lifestyle are fairly sedentary, yes we have high calorie dense food and yes, lots of great tasting/low nutrient junk food very accesible and inexpensive....all of these, in the end come down to choices = personal responsibility. To say not everything is a person's fault is to remove the free will and ability to choose or not choose these things. Unless there is something biologically off with a person's chemistry, regardless of how you may want to spin it, a person's weight is that person's choice.
Maybe you’ve addressed this and I forgot or missed it, but I’d be interested in seeing an educational video reviewing the numbers in relation to all relevant hormones’ impacts on energy expenditure. Like what % change does it make +/- on a daily basis etc. I’ve seen you address insulin and a few quick references to T3, I’d be curious about estrogen, test, anything at all that can impede a higher “natural” BMR/TDEE
I get extreme mental clarity when I fast. Espacially after 2 days. The Romans were obsessed with the way you could fast and improve mental clarity. Seems like Layne should be a little familiar with this mechanism as it works for everybody.
I think any diet that you starve then pig out has the worst outcome on all hormones long term. Those that keep stable weight and exercise do even better. If you have fat that needs to go, if it is done too fast, it leads to viseral fat. If it's done slowly overtime, but with excessive fasting it leads to hypothyroidism. For starters
Fung numerous times always refers back to religious traditions and ancient cultures for instituting what we now equate to IF. Fung has also said that calories do matter, but types especially quality foods and their properites behave differently than soda (almonds vs. soda). Fung has said that he tried to find an eating regimen that a person realistically will stick with. And on and on ... Im sure there are some Fung claims that are off. I like Layne, but he didnt seem to do his homework and actually listen to entire Fung lectures and interviews (rather than clips).
Studies are relevant of course but if I look at my own example, calories in calories out never worked for me. It was only when I went low carb/sugar when I saw some real results. For myself, I will do whatever works for me and I can clearly see the results.
@AzmiBesar not the point. 1,000 calories a day is significantly low so unless if you have hormonal issues, you will lose weight but going hungry each and single day is a stupid approach. In my approach, I reduced carbs (including Sugar) while slightly increased fats and proteins. Though I slightly reduced my caloric intake, I wasn't really hungry or felt an empty stomach so I think insulin response is also a relevant factor which we can't completely abolish in favor of calories in/calories out.
@@MuhammadWaqas-zv6qz So you reduced your caloric intake? So if you lose weight means you are in a caloric deficit. Of course the type of food will help you maintain a caloric deficit. You cant eat 2000 calories of ice cream and be full and maintain that for 1 month but you can if you have a balanced meal with balance macros, protein etc. I eat carbs - rice everyday and im losing weight from 92kg since March of this year till now.
@AzmiBesar I also reduced my caloric intake without changing Macros at all with no results. I have also experimented with keeping the calories in the same but increasing the calories out with more strenuous workout sessions with no apparent results. It was only when I reduced Carbs and Sugar and replaced with the other 2 Macros when I saw some real results. I agree that there might have been other factors involved which could have potentially explained the results but as I said, you do what works for you. There could be 1000's of studies but if you don't see the results for yourself, what's the point?
Re: mental clarity, the argument might be that by fasting you are by definition avoiding postprandial glucose response. Or perhaps that fasting shifts towards using ketones which some argue is preferred fuel for brain. I think there are some reasonable mechanistic arguments there and probably some research, but I could also be talking out my butt.
Calories in/calories out ABSOLUTELY works. It's absurd to say otherwise. This is how people starve. If you take in fewer calories than you burn you will lose weight and eventually starve. And your body uses your fat stores when in a staved state. The key is that you have to actually BURN more calories than you take in. The mistake people make is that they put themselves on a specific calorie deficit and THEN they reduce their overall activity (exercise and NEAT), and no longer take in fewer calories than they burn at the NEW reduced energy expenditure level. Of course, cal in/cal out is not optimal as it does not take into account macro and micro nutrients. But in the simplest sense it DOES work. If it didn't work then it would be impossible for people to starve to death. And we know people can starve to death.
I wonder if the emaciated people in countries that suffer from famines are walking skeletons because they don't get enough calories or because they're unintentionally fasting?
Layne Norton, I'd like to ask you (or your viewers) the following because I'm genuinely curious- when speaking about the kinds of foods that we eat, what effects/differences are we looking at that matters? Sometimes it's really confusing when trying to understand what matters where, so in this case when we talk about CICO model and understanding that fat loss occurs whether you eat one kinds of food or the other, but maintaining the same calories, why would we pay attention to what we eat?
Weight loss it s not the same with eaten healthy. You can losee weight eaten only chocolate or just mcdonalds that doesn t mean ur gona be healthy on the long rung most likely u will get in trouble at some point . If you asked the importance of macronutrients and micronutrients, so the 'ingredients' of the food just google protein,carbs,fats, minerals,vitamines and anto oxidants just google each and u ll find more about their role , the recommended daily use and.so on.
Because in the long term, with bad habits and CICO you will have worse results than with better eating habits and CICO. Not because CICO really doesnt work, but because there will be some differences over time. (Like you get better regeneration, more energy, you will work out harder, more muscle gains, in the end you will burn more calories, so you will get better results earlier)
Lyle McDonald once said something like calories in vs out works better the closer you get to your ideal (forget his word) weight: any trials on waist 44 vs waist eg 36?
I never knew he tried to get people fired. That is pretty low when you screw with someone's livelihood because you don't agree with them.
Typical behaviour from people with ASPD when they lose their face.
Yup
I’m a 64 yo who’s been bodybuilding since 1970s. I have “leaned down” countless times in countless ways. Intermittent fasting, keto, calorie counting, low carb, calorie restriction, lots of cardio, etc. I have lost bf doing every one of those; however, once I stopped each one I gained weight back. So I feel that there’s more ways than one to reach your goals and the best way is the one you can incorporate into your lifestyle. For me counting calories is easiest, NOT saying it’s best for everyone, just my 40+ years with MY body and lifestyle. The hardest is keto for me because I have crappy workouts when I’m in ketosis and I like a variety of foods.
Balance is best overall. I can cut carbs and lean down too but after a while my muscles look flat and my sleep suffers. Carbs add an enjoyment element too
@@davidgreene8608 totally
I don't understand how people think they can stop doing what they did to loose the weight and not expect to put it back on. 😐 like no shit Sherlock. You can never go back to how you were before and expect to stay at the deited weight.
@@_nebulousthoughts you obviously didn’t understand my comment. You may want to reread it. I stated exactly that. You need a method of weight management that fits into your lifestyle SO you can easily continue it without getting off of it. That my point. Some people can go low carb for life and if that works for them then they found what works best for them. As a bodybuilder trying to reach very low bf levels, I have tried all the common methods, but most were impossible to continue for more than a few months because, for me, they were not conducive to a pleasant lifestyle. You got it now, Doctor Watson?
@rays2794 are you able to lean out eating moderate carbs?
I have watched a lot of videos with Jason Fung and I’ve seen him say multiple times that calories DO matter (but he says that hormones matter too). He makes sure to tell his patients to not over eat after a fast or else it would NOT work for fat loss. He said if you fast and then overeat, you’re still in balance, you need to create a deficit. He knows this. And he’s also said there’s no preferred diet as long as it’s whole natural foods: the best option. He’s ok with feasting on more fun foods occasionally (he does it himself) as long as afterwards you eat much less (intermittent fast) to lose the weight gained from it. He knows CICO is required.
Thank you for your channel. I’m recommending it far and wide. I like that you’re not religious to one specific diet.
Sounds like he knows that cico is the basis of weight loss, but knows he can't make much money off of saying just that. So he comes up with new methods that sound ground breaking and innovative, but still relies on cico. So he tricks people into thinking he came up with a new method for weight loss and spend money on him. Makes him more of a charlatan.
@@ballsackschrader218 I guess it seems like it doesn’t matter what you convince people of, as long as it gives them results. Megan of Dr. Fung’s crew said that their motto is “progress over perfection”. No doubt that they’re very effective at helping people drop tons of fat.
I totally agree with you, I’ve seen him discuss cico plenty of times, stating that OF COURSE they matter. But eating begets eating. The more often you eat, the more opportunities to overeat, and it also will increase hunger hormones. The more I fast the less hungry I get. THATS his point.
@@Guitarlvr01 Add to all of this another great benefit to fasting: healthy food tastes delicious and you actually crave natural/unprocessed foods, because you’ve reset your taste buds. Hunger is the best seasoning.
Exactly I think he understands this a lot more than Layne understands his message I know fung is bigger on lower carb then Layne is but overall they have very similar views they just speak on them from different perspectives and angles I found a podcast fung was on about 3 weeks ago and decided to get my health in line because I’m pretty sure I’m pre diabetic and in 3 weeks I’m down 22 pounds fungs message got threw to me in ways others like Layne haven’t and Layne is great but fung is too
this is gonna be... fung
😂
OMG, I laughed my ass off.
So much fung
Friday Fung!
Datz race-izm! 😳
Bro. How are you not on the floor laughing at “founder of intermittent fasting”?
I didn’t know Fung invented being poor?!
Or the founder of multiple religions including Islam!
Back in the days the used to call it "darn I missed with the spear today diet". 😂
@@PSA78hahaha
your mum is the inventor of being poor
1. The mic seems to be working better!
2. Layne seems to have rekindled his enthusiasm for WTFitness episodes 🥳
3. Triple HRCT holler in 1 episode? ✅✅✅
+1 for #1. defintely much better audio. hopefully the lack of people mentioning the mic is evidence to Layne that he's found a solid solution :) keep up the awesome work and BS busting from these click bait fools
Indeed, but some visual queues and effects would go a long way to engage people. Not just a dude with a white background
Next bulk: eat nothing, inject insulin.
I'm gonna be HUUUUGE! Think of the cost and time savings too!
Just to anyone not understanding the sarcasm here.
If you inject insulin without consuming enough glucose you are going to experience hypoglycemia and possibly die 😅
If you think it will save you money- try buying a bottle of insulin 😂
@@InformaticageNJP Which will almost instantly solve all your problems.
do the cut by injecting insulin , you will cry your guts out .
@@raedove4816that's the point... the sarcasm
That math don't math!
Great video, Layne, really nailed it on this one. I really appreciate your work! Especially this narrow walk of personal responsibility vs. environment, which you navigate particularly well.
It's always funny to me to hear Jason say "X doesn't work" and I'm standing here going "But X keeps working for me!"
That is called an anecdote. You should watch more of Layne's videos 😏😁
@@ziilux84 I'm aware it's an anecdote, which doesn't provide good evidence by itself, but I still find stuff like that a bit funny.
@@ziilux84, all of Fung's fans should try actually doing X for a while.
Bam, one million anecdotes.
He doesn't say it doesn't work, if you don't replace the calories you missed while fasting. If you do replace the calories (like skipping two meals and then eating three with your next meal, or 1.5 meals for next two) then it does work because you are restricting calories by fasting.
If you're talking about the other routes benefits (metal clarity and the like) then yes, he does say that is hocus-pocus 😂
It works for some people but it never worked for me. I had to cut carbs to see any results.
Not necessarily arguing for Fung's model, but I think his basic theory is as follows:
1. CICO is true in terms of physics, but it's an ineffective fat loss strategy as evidenced by millions of fat people knowing about CICO and still being fat, including doctors. Even if it's rude, I think he has a point that if you are promoting a set of practices for fat loss and YOU are fat, then your model might have problems.
2. The reason he makes the "It's not your fault" argument is that he believes hormones drive behavior. If this is true and you have no idea how your eating patterns are affecting your hormones, then you are effectively at the mercy of your hormones, which can for instance tell your body to store more fat or make you super hungry.
3. If you know what's driving hormones, you can use your hormones as a lever for progress that reduces the importance of willpower. I.E. "I do the thing that makes me less hungry and less prone to store fat." His theory still does mandate that you have enough willpower to fast and not eat all the time, but he posits that this is actually a sustainable longterm strategy (whereas pure "eat less and move more" isn't) because as your hormones stabilize, you're less prone to be hungry and store fat. His whole point about CICO and "There are no Biggest Loser reunions" is that CICO doesn't work long-term because people are in a constant battle against hormones which are demanding that they eat.
4. His basic ideas regarding caloric intake is that the body has a weight "set point" and that even if you lower calories, the body will compensate by reducing its energy expenditure to maintain that set point. So if you cut x amount of calories per day, the body consequently reduces its activity so that your weight is maintained despite you eating less calories. He basically argues that your "calories out" is not 100% in your conscious control. If your calories in reduced AND your calories out remained constant with no downside and infinite sustainability, Fung would probably have no issues with CICO. But that's not what we see. We see people's activity levels reduce and we see them put weight back on over time.
5. The purpose of fasting isn't to reduce calories outright, it's to reduce exposure to insulin and thereby reduce insulin insensitivity over time. Long term goal is that via fasting, the body's satiety signaling is restored and people are no longer eating something and then feeling voracious again shortly after.
I think his line of thinking is interesting. He's looking at what's being prescribed to patients (eat less, move more) and how effective it is (it's not effective). He thinks blaming patient adherence makes no sense because their hormonal environment, without their knowledge, is driving them to not adhere, hence fat doctors. I think there is definitely merit in asking questions like "Why am I starving just a couple hours after I last ate?" that nobody else seems to be asking.
eat less, move more does work it's just that if you're already obese its probably really hard to stick to. food can be an addiction, we need to start helping people with their addictions and discipline/ motivation, not blame hormones.a fat person can't stop at one piece of cake cause yes it spikes insulin and makes you hungry again. But a thin fit person can just have one piece of cake, why? because they learned how to control impulse eating. Doesn't mean they don't want more cake, they just don't want to get fat. It's easier to have discipline when you're thin already yes, but fat people need to learn how to fake it till you make it. meaning pretend you have discipline till it's a real habit. everything is more a mental battle than anything.
The carbohydrate-insulin model of weight gain, so well accepted in the fasting/low carb diet movements, is storytelling about how insulin magically makes your body store energy that it doesn't have.
Kevin Hall locked up a bunch of people in a ward for a couple of months and had them on both high carb and high fat. Zero difference, except for the high fat diet lost more LBM as insulin has a protective function for protein, so the keto group lost less fat. 😂🤣
@@PSA78 Lol. Maybe you should read that study again and then come back to us, because that is not what it said.
You can get fat deposition at insulin injection sites.
Ozempic proved its all about calories
I'm so grateful that you explain this in a reasonable and logical way. I'd seen Jason Fung on other shows and he is so confident and convincing
Research the Minnesota starvation study to prove a deficit always works enough to lose everything you want to lose. Metabolic slowdown was topped at 20% which means you were eating 2K calories and at the end 1600. Metabolism never stops or we wouldn't need food/fuel
Is that for bmr or tdee?
Jason Fung is a charlatan he once said in an interview that if you only ate 700 calories a day you wouldn’t loose weight 😂
Everything would be so easy if you could get all of his simps to just do exactly that for a month.
Bam, zero followers.
👻
I think people in a coma receive 1200-1800 calories per day and there is some weight loss, mostly muscle.
@@brucejensen3081 you just said in coma, if you stay in bed for a few weeks you’ll lose a lot of muscles due to inactivity
@@imhassane just saying no adult is not losing weight on a 700cal a day diet
Nobody really thinks that cutting back on calories alone will make you not lose weight. The issue is that it's just too hard to keep up with because you end up feeling hungry all the time. Eventually, your willpower runs out, you give in to the hunger, go back to eating too much, and probably end up eating even more than before to make up for it. That's why it doesn't really work. We need a way to eat less without feeling starving, and that's where things like the keto diet come in. Also, doing something like intermittent fasting can be easier to stick with than just trying to eat less all the time, because your hunger actually decreases when you fast, unlike when you're just trying to cut down on calories and end up feeling hungrier.
The only caveat I would say about hormone impact on weight loss is menopause. The radical drop of oestrogen and the rise of cortisol has an effect. It would be great if you covered this. Thnx! ❤
He won't
Low estrogen increases appetite and lowers metabolism and the inclination to move. It also favours storing fat in the worst places like your waist instead of boobs and hips. So it’s still CICO aside from the distribution pattern.
The cure is obvious.
Was looking for this comment. I have so many problems since menopause, it's not that easy as calories in and out. I started resistance training and hope this will help.
CICO still rules, it’s just your calorie expenditure has changed, so you have to match the calories in to compensate.
I would love to see Dr. Norton go head to head with Dr. Mary Claire Haver. I adore both of them, even though they are guilty of having their own biases (aka are human).
BUT THE HORMONES LAYNE I WANT AN EXCUSE AND A MAGIC FIX RATHER THAN THE TRUTH
@user-pg4jg5eh8k You're delusional
@user-pg4jg5eh8kProven? He sites crappy not human or unrelated studies in most of his videos?
I suspect that you’re feigning sarcasm, but you really mean it.
@user-pg4jg5eh8k You're delulu...lol. Research doesn't care about your feelings
@@DennisBolanos No I'm dead serious, the most serious post I've ever posted
Watching this while I've lost 8 pounds since mid January by lowering my calories, doing more cardio and heavy lifting.
Guess it's all an illusion
Same here actually 😂
Same here counting calories, eating 2000 calories so roughly 300 below maintenance for me running 4 times a week in 59 days I’ve lost 8kg and 5% body fat
@@thisizpatrickk damn I wish I could eat 2k calories and lose weight 😂😭
You're stunning 👀 lol
@@JTguitarlessons awww thank you! But I'm really not 😅
Diary of a CEO has to one of the most BS-sensationalist health channels, especially his video titles/thumbnails 🤮
Thanks for this nugget. I couldn’t figure out why they have such a large following.
@@Coeus-the-TitanThanks
@@Coeus-the-Titan It's a huge shame and embarrassment to the medical community to have someone like that pumping out these ludicrous headlines that are meant to create panic or incite arguments. People like that need to find a hobby or spend their time doing something that actually contributes to society.
He's a huge grifter, does it solely to generate wealth. Obviously doesn't care about the ramifications of the content he puts out there. Such a shame so many people buy into their bs.
Great quality information Layne. As usual!👌
By the way… the usual great information is not the only reason I have been following your channel for now more than one year. It's also because you are absolutely not afraid to effectively call out the BS, whoever is saying it.
Thank you very much for your contribution to the world Dr. Norton. It's honestly greatly appreciated!🙌😊
Lol. Layne is an arrogant prick. Sure, some of what he says is acurate, but some is definitely not.
Go watch Ben Bikman on insulin and fat and then go watch Bart Kay's takedown on Layme's nonsense about the first law of thermodynamics and RCT.
Once you've done so, if you haven't changed your mind about Layne Norton you're lost.
P.S. Go listen to more of Jason Fung to, because Jason do understand CICO, and what he's saying is not that it doesn't work, but that hormons play a vital role.
For Mr. Fung, that's the problem when you've built your entire reputation and livelihood on a single take that is unwavering. He's afraid to lose face and admit it's nuanced!
He looks to be gaining face… he is getting fatter year by year.
You should do a video on Jessie Inchauspé's glucose claims
Oh yes, please!
She is always selling anti aging and glucose control but she looks like an old woman and young woman at the same time . Schrödinger types .
I do low carb and glycemic control techniques because it makes me feel less hungry. I do feel that my body can regulate my appetite better when I don’t eat carbs. I agree that calories in calories out should not be the focus of the diet, you should base what you eat on how your body responds to it. This doesn’t mean that you should not consider the calories that you eat, rather they should adjust as a consequence. This is more of an actual lifestyle change than a temporary diet and that is what I have found working best.
I did intermittent fasting for a while, but stopped it as I feared I might loose too much muscle. I did often not get my 1,2g/kg body weight of protein. I‘m not a big fan of protein shakes or powder. I used protein bars, but still- they have lots of calories.
But anyway what IF definitely teaches you like any other kind of fasting, is that hunger goes away when ignored long enough.
agree i think fasting is invaluable as it teaches you to be able to sit and be comfortable with ‘hunger’
I really recommend clear whey protein powder if you're not usually a fan of protein shakes and have trouble getting in enough protein. I use the my protein sour watermelon flavor and it tastes kind of like Kool aid. It's really good and uses hydrolyzed whey isolate, which is supposedly the most hypoallergenic form of whey and is very absorbant
Thank you for providing research to back up your claims!🙏
I'm so tired of hearing information that isn't based in reality, this channel is refreshing
Dr. Fung's point is that *telling* obese people to eat less, move more doesn't work as well as fasting.
..as telling them to eat less often and less carbs.
They both provide the same result if calories in and out are the same. Just two different paths to the same destination.
Telling people to fast is the exact same thing as telling them to eat less
What???😂😂😂😂
It doesn’t work because they don’t do it. It’s a choice.
I hate to break it to people, but life requires self will and making good life choices.
Kudos to you for calling out this illogical recent trend in the nutrition world downplaying the role of calories in weight loss. Yes, a calorie of broccoli isn't the same as a calorie of a cookie. However, calorie balance is the biggest factor in determining whether someone loses or gains weight. That is very different than whether tracking calories is an effective strategy to monitor calorie intake (it's not a successful strategy for most people due to lost of factors). However, being difficult to track doesn't mean that calorie balance isn't a major factor in the weight loss battle.
Do you even know what a calorie is? Are you one of these "first laws of thermodynamics" people?
IF I remember correctly, and forgive me if I'm wrong, but Jason Fung was on John Berardi's podcast a few years ago, in which John really pressed Fung to directly answer whether he believes that calories in / calories out works like that or not, and he admitted that it works like that. Sadly John stopped his podcast.
The "willpower doesn't solve obesity" argument will always make me laugh when the same person pushes fasting as the cure. As if fasting doesn't take 'some' amount of willpower to do.
So crazy that he founded intermittent fasting, because I invented jogging.
I get calories in and calories out, but how many calories should I restrict? I am 5 ft 9 in 67 years old male, I weight 208 I have folks telling me all kinds of things. if I eat 1000 calories a day, I lose weight, if I eat 1500 calories a day I maintain weight, if I eat more than 1500 calories I gain weight. everyone is telling me 1000 calories is not enough to live. Confused. thanks
I put your numbers into some BMR calculators and they all say your maintenance is around 2100 calories.
Get some blood work done if you haven't recently. Maybe there are some calories you aren't counting? Fats like olive oil are 120 calories per tablespoon, I would sometimes forget to measure when cooking and have to guess.
I am using cronometer and logging every single food I eat. Most of my food sources are single foods so its easier to get the right caloric measuments.
What ever your weight is in pounds you just times the number by 15 and it will you your maintenance calories. It's not exact but it's pretty close. So if your maintenance is 2800 and you want to lose weight then just minus 300 to 500 calories to start off with.
Fung's book, "The Obesity Code," runs this beaten-down anti-calories and "it's the insulin!" idea for a few hundred pages. Besides the fasting thing, being like the other low-carb promoters and bashing calories, CICO, and insulin makes up much of what he says. He's so deep in this cash cow that he'll never change his message to outright say that calories do matter, despite his practices all being based on reducing the number of calories eaten and finding a balance to prevent future weight gain. My aunt, an RN, recently became a devotee of his and constantly rants about carbs and insulin while at the same time reducing the amount of calories she eats by skipping meals. She is then smug at how she's losing weight by following Fung's advice. Yeah, it's definitely due to letting her insulin levels drop and not the fact that she just "fasted" through a meal time where she'd normally eat 700+ calories. Really weird how that works after a few weeks!
So for me fasting in the morning does actually help with focus. If I eat I don't work as well.... That could be the caffeine getting into my system faster with an empty stomach, but idk it works for me
Can I like all of your videos by a million?😂 Thank you for calling out BS and being a voice of realism.
Diary of a CEO is kind of a nightmare, innit?
Yes!
One of the worst channels on TH-cam tbh. You can tell it's bad by a) the clickbait titles b) those crazy jumpcut intros (reminiscent of "hard hitting" 90's sensationalist TV shows) and c) the constant run of charlatans he has on
One of the many laughable but popular channels.
As a Brit, the comma and therefore pause you put before innit doesn’t make sense 😂 we wouldn’t pause before using innit (to mean isn’t it) at the end of a sentence. Or just don’t be American and do this crap anyway 😂
@@kJ922-h3j As a Brit, you need to go to the dentist to get rid of those rotten teeth and stinking breath.
Do cancer cells feed on glucose or ketones?
Depends but many can use glucose fats amino acids ketones, anything really
@@knockingseeker majority can’t use ketones correct
@@knockingseeker You need oxidation to be able to burn fat. Cancer sells can't do that because they have broken mitochondria.
Just found your channel through Dr. Gil Carvalho’s recommendation, and I must say, I’m very amused 😂😂😂 Funny introduction 😂 great content 👍
Not related to Jason Fung but you got me thinking about topics tangential to CI/CO. You have a few videos covering Herman Pontzer's research, but have you discussed his work with the Hadza tribe? That's a topic that I bring up often since I find it so interesting, and most people flat out refuse to entertain it as a possibility.
To say that being obese is 70% gentics, is like saying smoking is 70% gentic. I am sorry, but it comes down to personal choice not your metabolism. Yes for some people it is harder because their cravings and hunger cue may "feel" stronger than "normal" persons, but just like smoking you gotta make the choice to quit
I also believed for years that obesity might be hereditary and hence the reason why I threw the towel for years, believing that I will die of a painful death plagued with health problem until I found fasting and everything changed, it's not magical but a tool to help against snacking all the time
Layne thank you for getting me out of the insuline cult.
Lol. It's not a cult. Insulin is real. Go listen to Ben Bikman and then you will understand how it works. That said, undereating will still work if you want to shed weight.
Layne is wrong lol he knows better than that fung is right Layne never heard of hypo or hyperthyroidism hormones that if are messed up that cico shit is not working not even a little bit
@@ricardosanu5467hyperthyroidism doesn’t disprove the CICO model - it supports it. Any influence an overactive thyroid has on changes to fat store , it has precisely because it influences either calories in, calories out or both.
Jason Fung is completely consistent with the science of insulin, that's why he says the same thing for the past 10 years.
Ben Bikman, an actual research scientist who studies insulin, fat cells, and metabolism says the exact same things and even he says that the calories model of weight loss is absolutely wrong.
Layne gaslights anyone and everyone who conflicts with his dogmatic views on calories. He gaslights Jason because he's an easy target, but he would never do so against Ben Bikman who says the exact same things.
@@739jep at the end of the day our bodies are not calorimeters
The weird thing about Jason Fung is that he actually uses caloric measurements in his arguments about intermittent fasting, such as regarding his claim that your metabolism actually rises during fasting, his evidence for this is a rise in metabolic rate expressed in calories. This probably ties back in to how he "confuses" (I doubt he's actually confused) the CICO model with the act of counting calories. Listening to his argumentation on these topics I didn't actually hear anything that was incompatible with the CICO model, in fact by his own evidence it was more supplemental information.
Would love to see a video explaining where these 2 agree. I do IM 3 or 4 days a week, avoid highly processed foods as best I can. Dropped a bunch of weight and feel better. I try not to get too crazy about the details. They both have good points to raise. I bet some sort of ‘intersection’ would be helpful to anyone.
Im not a biographer of Fung but from what ive seen and read from him I did not gather at all what You did, I may have misunderstood.
He says calorie balance is whay determines weight but the way go control the hunger that gets you there is related to hormones andd the way our food enviroment affects those who are a risk for obesity and metaboloc syndrome as a whole.
And that does not mean at all that calories arent the bottom line.
In fact , two years ago or so I made an attempt to lose weight at 29 I had become obese in my mid 20s I read fungs obesity code and I started a low carb diet almost keto and cut out all sugar , refined carbs, etc. On par to returning to training ( i used to be in good shape up to like 21) I lost significant weight then I started getting more into fitness etc. And I read a portion of Your book fatloss forever.
I became convinces by your material and other guys like renassaince periodization etc. That fung and those people are total whacks, its all about the calories, I should schedule refeed days etc .
I started reintroducing everything because hey its all calories, I allowed myself a "refeed" meal once a week or so to bear the set point yadayada worked great for about a month then I spiralled couldnt contro my appetite, work got in the way of planned meals I got stressed balloned back got even bigger developed sleep apnea slept terrible.
I just forgot about it all and just continued being fat and I became food addicted for those 2 years I started eating ( no bullshit) yhe food volume equivalent of 2 family pizzas and a big coke in every meal every day, I got into cooking amd recepies and foodiness and I basically just went crazy.
Do I have no self control? Idk I quit smoking at 23 after a 10yr 2 pack a day habit cold turkey, I quit drinking and drugs about a year later, I stayed in shape up until around 21 and wasnt obese till 25, I been a migrant to several countries, I get up to work everyday, I take care of my kids and partner, I recovered full mobility of my arm after an accident that basically severed it at 18 the surgeon gave me less than 2% chance of having enough mobility to feed i busted my ass in rehab and 3 yrs later I had 100% mobility and muscle tone etc. So I aint no David Goggins but its not like ive never tried hard in my life
The reason im back looking at this is abput 3 weeks ago a 150kg (around 300lbs) I started feeling really bad for a couple of months, just generally sick but I ignored it , finally one day I checked myself at the ER bp 175/110, bloodsugar (nonfasted) 463 , triglycerides 1640, colesterol over normal but couldnt be determined in hdl and ldl because i develop lipemic serum in my blood , very fatty liver , my resting bp like 110, at 31 yo
I was at the verge of death according to the doctor, was put in the er , drugs, insulin etc, was sent home that night with bp 150/100 and blood sugar 390 , the doc ordered I set an appointment with a gp asap to begin a treatment protocol etc .
I happen to live in Paraguay in a small town and of course I attend public hospitals, I managed to get an appointment the very next day, the doctor was an asshole and for the very first time I learned fatphobia was real, he refused to refer me to anyone or offer me a prescription his only words were if you people cant stop eating there is no point in checking your labs ( the only reason i didnt smack him is he was like 80yo and with a cane , he was the only gp in duty that day in my town).
I left angry and terrified , I have a young family , I was dying
My dad who lives abroad and is a fitness person pointed to low carbs abd stuff like that, I revisited a littlw, and went hardcore for about 10 days zero "carbs" as in grains sugar refined stuff etc, only steak porkchop eggs and yes a shitload of vegetables which I fortunately like and a lot of fat and fasting 16-8 and I made a commitment to sleep better and on time.
This will sound bonkers but just as i recovered my arm all those years ago IN 10 FUCKING DAYS ( i did add exercise back which is key), my blood triglycerides went from over 1600 to 310 , my sugar from 463 at its highest to 160 , I lost 10kg , and my bp stayed around 145/ 85 I passed from a time bomb to being reasonably curable.
Now for the last few days I have slowly reintroduced carbs but, not at dinner or on rest days, in small amount and only whole carbs say brown rice, beans, sweetpotatoe, yuca/mandioca, etc. I elimimated cooking oils, cleaned up my fats and ditched proccessed meat.
My blood glucose is now hovering betwee 94 to 112 fasted and 140 to 160 after meals, havent rechecked my lipids, no I didnt regain my weight when reintroducing carbs so I dont believe it was water weight
Now THE MOST important thing of all this , is MY CRAZY HUNGER DISSAPEARED , i was eating compulsively each meal till physically uncomfortably full very sugar fried and junk heavy, snacking all day long, at least 3 big bottles of coke daily or orange soda etc I just couldnt stop.
So bottomline I may be talking off anecdote but You cant convince me that Fungs claim that hormones are the main driver of hunger and therefore overeating and therefore obesity is not true
Fung calls calorie balance the "proximal cause " of obesity he doesnt deny it, his point is that its not the real cause in and of itself as if people just dont have disicpline , its a bad hormonal emviroment, now I think he also misses a psychological factor , its multifactorial
But its clear to me that hormones and psychology are the main causes of obesity and not the calories as an isolated factor, calorie balance is just the physical description of overeating but the overeating is itself product of a deeper cause and thats Fungs point.
Most doctors and "science based" people treat the calorie as an isolated factor that people can just freely manipulate if they put their mind into it and get the right program, its the same delusion classical economics makes in thinking that buyers are perfectly free and rational consumers
The truth is in neither case are people freeagents 100%
I keep sugar, refined carbs, processed & deli meats, deep fried food , booze & drugs out of my life, get enough sleep, and manage stress and anxiety plus exercise and my appetite tanks I dont give 2 shits about the bottle of coke my father in law has on the fridge or my childrens cookies, I just dont care , thats hormones , yes the end result is ñower calotie consumption but there is a hormonal/emotional pathway that keeps getting ignored, in fact "science based" guys go so far as saying that eating 100cals of jelly beans is the same shit as 100cals of broccoli and thats just not true
If I reintroduce sugar , booze, stop managing my stress , exercising, skip sleep my insane hunger returns fast, that is hormonal I dont need to be an endocrinologist to underdtand why I feel so insanely hungry when those things fall put off place, unless I start believing in pixie dust its obviously due to the hormonal effect in my body.
There is a reason traditional weightloss programs have a 98% fail rate, hell most people I know had a bypass surgery are fag again ( thats 3 people btw)
Now finally there is definately a genetic and nurture component and I think here is where the bias from people like you or so many sports scientist comes from, You have not been morbidly obese either because your body doesnt respond like that to our modern food enviroment and/or you had a set of influences in your development that made you a kid or youth deeply pasionate about fitness, sports etc and never got sick ; which leads me to 2 points first definately there is a genetic component because I have relatives who give me a run for my money at my worst eating and dont workout and are not remotely obese a little beer gut at best but not even more than skinny fat, and that there is a breaking point because up until 21 I ate big not crazy but big but I was in good shape not show shape but decent beach body shape then I got out of shape and like 25 I was living with an girlfirend I had and we became "foodies" and my obesity just appeared and skyrocketed so there is also I believe genes that just get turned on when there is a perfect storm and you are predisposed and you just balloon and once you qualify for metabolic syndrome ai think its like an alcoholic I used to eat sugar and all that and stayed in shape until that switch turned on and now I cant touch that crap because I relapse fast very fast
Thats my experience whoever cares to read
Btw and all those wars studies that get used in every argument, I may be too ignorant yes but as far as I have seen or read I see 2 errors in all of them:
1. Yeah most studies dont give people twinkies, coke and beer , those studies that compare keto diets vs regular diets and stuff they give them hospital foods that kind of defeats the purpose.
2. The studies are usually NOT all you can eat buffets they are ward studies were calories are heavily controlled which kind of defeats the purpose again
This is about the HUNGER - hormonal theory of obesity which is NOT the same as the hormonal theory of obesity which IS QUACKERY and you seem to confused the two
One says calories dont matter hormones create fat from thin air, so eat 6000 cals of fat on keto , yeah those people about and are whack
The HUNGER hormonal theory ( which is Fungs view I still think You strawman him) is that YES calories are the bottom line, BUT people(those who are genetically predisposed) cant control they eating ( amount of calories) because there is only so much willpower and modern food enviroment creates insaciable hunger (plus it fucks up your energy, inflamation, sleep, recovery etc I need no phd just empirically eating a tub of icecream and 3 bicmac before bed makes you sleep like shit and have a soreness like a hangover all day) and THAT creates an effective calorie excess in the diet
They are not the same, and until you have a ward study with people who are predisposed to weight gain and where you give one group " clean food" and im not talking keto it can be whole fiber carbs too, with no processed seasonings and water only or unsweetend tea cofee etc. And the other group a fucking pig fest of pizza , coke, beer, sweets, chips etc
And let them eat all they want at any time they want
( INSTEAD OF HOSPITAL FOOD AND TIGHTLY CONTROLLED PORTIONS BY CALORIE)
Until that, You dont have realworld valid ward study
Thanks for sharing. I had tsimilar experience, when I was 14-16 I tried to get my six pack. I trained basketball and gym seven days per week at least 5 hours per day. So I had a lot of calories out. The problem was I couldn't controll my hunger, I ate four-five meals a day. I would eat tons of rice with lproteins and very little fat because at the time I was thought that is the best diet.
When I was 20, learned about the carnivore diet and tried it. I couldn't believe i, I could fast for 2 days without a problem. If calorie in calorie out is true, than fasting 2 days is the biggest deficit I can achieve in 2 days (on the third day I would only eat slightly more than a norml carnivore meal).
I think you hit the nail. By restricitng your eating time and reducing carbs you can reduce your hunger which allows you to be in calorie deficit. Also I think it is much simpler to accomplish than counting your calories. I can't do math when I am hungry but I can stick to the ruöe of eating only at this time (sometthing about grelin) and only eat certain food that make you full longer.
.
The downside of low carb is your training gets worst. I read that after a time your body adapts but I haven't achieved that yet
Dude, how did youtube allow you to write so much in a comment section? This is insane. I had to stop reading because it's your life story, not a comment.
@@Niman9934 If the software allows it and it got a few likes it means it was of value to some people. If it wasnt for You cool, keep it movin
@@JoseVivas-ct4up brother, the shit is toooooo long.
We need a human randomized control trial shirt
Totally, I thought he would have had one by now. I'd buy two.
Would soooo get a couple of those!!
Holy fck, you can get one online in 5 minutes. That’s the audience that is watching this 🤡
Honest question: If I eat only broccoli and eggs and gain weight because I overeat 500 caloriries per day. Would I then gain same weight had I eaten only candy- long as the amount of calories are exactly the same? I understand that no one can live on those diets but my question is hypothetical. I have difficult to understand why you would gain same weight because its logical to me that the amount of insuline produced in the body should matter since its a storage hormone.
If I eat 1500 calories of candy I will get hungry again faster than if I eat 1500 calories of broccoli. Is this not partly because of more calories being stored than being used as energy when I eat candy? Please explain to me why the insuline is not an important variable in this equation?
I know this much. I was a year into a prolonged fasting regimen completely based on guesses as to why I couldn’t lose weight generally. During this period I lost 40 lbs and got significantly stronger in my weight training. One day I landed on a long video by Jason Fung. I was so excited I called my dad and said this guy is explaining everything I have been experiencing. I was excited because all the conventional wisdom was that what I was doing would lead to muscle wasting and that the weight would just bounce back. But it didn’t. 10 years in (I’m 57 now) and fasting is part of my routine. Now granted I’m not a big believer that 16 hours counts as fasting but fasting as a method of calorie restriction without the awful hunger that months of just not eating enough has been my ticket. And it is the hormones that make you think you’re going to die of starvation because you haven’t eaten in six hours that keep you fat.
I agree with you. Fasting causes insulin to drop and engages the body to burn its fan. You will feel some hunger throughout the day but you won’t run out of energy. Just alert the whole day. It is a great way to lose fat. As for this Layne Norton fella, he is good entertainment and I don’t take his opinions seriously.
@@kostar500bro his opinions? he shows dozens more studies and meta analysis than someone like Jason Fung. he is showing real results AND explaining the actual mechanisms as well.
I am so tired of people trying to reinvent the wheel when it comes to weight loss. We’ve solved this decades ago. People just don’t want to do the work. It sucks, but reality wins every time. Keep up correcting these charlatans Layne.
Thank you for this. I never listen to Fung anyway…. Thanks for continuing to speak truth
Jason should talk with Dr. Baker. Dr. Baker who claims to eat near perfect carnivore diet also says "if" he eats too much fat from meat and butter, he gains weight. Even Dr. Baker who's not eating carbs has to restrict food intake (calorie intake) or would gain weight.
Excess calories from fat are the easiest to store as body fat as it costs almost nothing for the body to do so, but those carnivore diet promoters are not going to tell that to their audience and impact their likelihood
@@enamuossuo right. Only Dr Baker is honest about that point, others avoid the topic
@@DrAJ_LatinAmerica and kudos to him for that, I could criticise him for many things but if he's open on that he may be open on many things in the future
@@enamuossuo Your body can only absorb so much fat in a day because you can only make so much bile. I mean, if you're really getting fat on carnivore you're stuffing yourself to the point of abuse.
Good for him. A few other carnivores have said the same about fat intake. Nice to see.
Intermittent fasting caused me to lose all of my excess fat. It also caused me to lose a load of muscle mass too. Now building muscle fast and back to eating a high quality protein breakfast every morning.
It isn't an easy genetic leap to make, check out Dr. Robert Plomin, the world's premiere beahvioural geneticist. BMI (which is obviously just a proxy) is about 70% heritable and since every trait is partly heritable, it seems unlikely that it would be a majority of environment involved. Case in point, adopted children have BMIs that correlate with their actual, genetic parents as opposed to their adopted parents.
Hormones will affect things such as increased allocation of protein and glycogen to build and fuel muscles before the remainder goes to energy (fat) stores, it can't alter the total amounts or make them behave in any matter that doesn't apply to the laws of thermodynamics and physics.
People's problem with calorie counting is that they suck at it, and track wrong data on both the input and output. Because they overestimate their caloric output and underestimate their caloric intake, they just think it is BS and look for something easier like an all-bacon diet or not eating anything on tuesday and thursday.
Also, your body doesn't use heat released from food (calories) as energy. When you burn a steak it releases calories... but your body doesn't use calories, and it doesn't use all of the protiens fats and minerals as energy. And more so, energy doesn't effect mass.
This is really a MASS in and MASS out equation.
Humans are not machines. We have metabolism and body fat set points...that is what manages our hunger, caloric intake and body fat percentage...willpower can't do it forever...
So i'm not good at ready studies but abstract of PMID: 28193517 says
"our meta-analysis of 32 controlled feeding studies with isocaloric substitution of carbohydrate for fat found that both energy expenditure (26 kcal/d; P
@biolayne1
@biolayne1
Hi, I'm not Layne, but I think I can offer some insight. The differences in fat loss were clinically insignificant, while statistically significant. The differences, however, don't negate calories, in calories out, but are controlled by calories in, calories out - in this case, by calories out.
I would postulate that the reason for the rather insignificant advantage of the low fat dies was down to carbohydrates' greater impact on what's called the thermic effect of food; on average this extra energy used up during digestion is about 10% of the total energy we take in from our food. So, if you eat a meal that gives you 2000 calories, about 200 of those calories are burned up during the digestion process - but this varies between the different macros. In short, it takes a bit more energy from your body to digest carbs, as opposed to digesting fat. Protein has by far the highest thermic effect, which is why it needs to be equated between diets when doing these trials.
It could seem on the surface that this meta analysis negates calories in, calories, but it in fact supports it, and since the differences were so absolutely minimal, it comes down to personal preference of diet, as long as net calories are kept the same.
These trials are also always done by humans, so there's always going to be random variance and factors beyond the researchers' control. So, as long as the differences are clinically insignificant, and you get similar results repeatedly, it becomes safe to assume these random variances don't debunk the overall theory of calories in, calories out.
@@StraightEdgeJunkie Thanks my G. That really helped.
It's typical guru-talk. Say something that goes against the consensus, make sure it tickles the ears of your audience, and then say that "they" are against you because you're upsetting their institutional group-think. It's actually too kind to ascribe his stubbornness to ignorance instead of malice; he's nothing but a guru with programs and books to sell.
Wake up sheeple!
As someone who has gone from being Stage 3 Obese to a controlled normal range weight without drugs or surgical intervention consider me a skeptic on Jason's theories.
You can't expect the fuel level in your storage tank to drop without pumping out more fuel than you put in.
Ok. I have a question. Every Lent, I do a 5/2 (fast 5 days, eat for 2) for the entirety of Lent. The first time doing this, I expected to lose a lot of weight. The first two weeks of this fast, I drop about 10 pounds. After that, my weight remains constant. From Monday to Friday, I only have fluids. On the weekend I eat what I would normally eat (no double portions or anything). So, even though I am consuming massively less calories, my weight stays the same for the bulk of the fast. What's going on there?
Should also note my physical actuvity remains the same. ~1km (30 min) swim everyday. 5km jog on the weekens. I don't change my behaviour while I fast.
First fast weight loss is mostly water and then your body replenishes the water while burning actual fat to the tune of those 10 pounds. A five day fast will also see your body slowing down. So you move less outside of exercise and body temperature drops all of which which conserves energy so you do burn less. It also depends what a normal day intake is. If you generally overeat then that cuts the deficit. A ten pound weight loss sounds about right for 40 days. The average weight loss on any diet is around a pound of fat a week.
@@stargazerbird I understand the water weight loss. What I don't get is the lack of further weightloss. My "normal day" intake has given me stable body weight. I tend to remain the same weight with my ad libim food intake. And I get my weight taken each week when I go donate plasma. So I am no just guessing here. I know my weight is constant. So if it is calories in and calories out, I by definition generally do not over eat as my weight is stable.
I also challenge the 1 pound a week for body weight loss. I know I have in the past lost much more in a week while on a diet. I jut don't get why the same weight loss does no occur when I fast. Especially if it is all just calories in and calories out. Either my body is capable of tremendous metabolism control, or something else is needed to the equation.
I’ve been “dieting” (whole food keto) for two years and if I’m not taking phentermine I cannot lose weight. I was calorie restricting to 1600 calories a day and still not losing weight. I felt awful but kept the weight on.
Background: 34 male 6’1” 260 lbs.
My RD recommended a 72 hr fast like if it was some pancea and all it did was disrupt and setback my workout routine and progress while taking 2-3 days to get back to get eating normal.
So, thermodynamics doesn't work?
What happens when you don't eat, aka fast? You don't take in calories... Hmmm....
Insulin is good. Its anabolic. I want to spike my insulin because it will yield the best environment for muscle growth. I want more carbs, to refill glycogen stores. Keto is so stupid.
Hi Dr. Norton, again what an amazing banger video! Thanks for your educational input! Love it!! Keep this great work! I am really shocked about how someone can even continue like this in the scientific field. And also thinks has the power to actually fire people from their job! What the hell is going on? Is there not a way to fire him? At least he got your fist directly into his face. I really hope a lot of people see this video!!! Keep doing such a great job! Looking forward seeing your next video!
Do the folks at JPL have Jason's phone number? They'd LOVE to hear how you can increase energy stores, as you burn and fail to restock energy. They got some trips planned, some r-e-a-l long trips, where his science could really help out!
Spillin the tea! 😂😂😂😂 great episode-glad I found you. Thanks!!
Waiting for your absolute honest take on whatever went down with Nick Norwitz
For the algo! I lost 45 kg (135 to 90) with all kinds of diets (keto, if, etc.) and kept it off since 2020 when i realized what was the common theme = I tracked calories. When I stop, i slowely regain weight...
Did he ever get back to you about setting up a debate?
If you want to speak to my boss... you're looking at him! hahaha
I get the calorie in and out thing, but why as a 53 woman in menopause did I gain weight when nothing in my diet changed if this is not hormones? And why did I gain weight only in the mid section (visceral fat) where as in my younger days when I gained weight it was only fat tissue on my legs or butt.
And how do I figure out how many calories I need now? All those fancy calculators give different results. And then there is the people that say that elder women do lose a lot of muscle mass and especially in menopause. Do I need more protein than women not in menopause? How much? I want to do the right thing but it's exhausting.
You know. People can learn. I know I learned a lot even in the last year. Its humbling and enlightening to admit you're wrong so you can cast aside your false information and become more educated. Why can't people like Jason Fung and these Carnivores do that?
ghrelin and leptin?
I guess calories and exercise do not influence hormones at all in Fung's mind....oh wait, they do. A lot.
I would love to see them debate. I’m confused 🤔
"you're looking at him" LOVE IT
Exercise helps me maintain mobility and flexibility plus if I get up and move (I prefer lifting weights) for 60 minutes a day I am able to not only manage my weight and fitness better but my kids also see that I care about my health.
I want more debunking discrediting Jason Fung content. If you look up IF on TH-cam it's aaaaall him and it's frustrating.
I'd be curious to see studies on having a majority of your diet come from ultra processed foods, BUT staying at your caloric maintenance and/or a slight caloric deficit. Even that new study on ultra processed food, which I only glanced through so I may have missed it, seems to make the same point that ultra processed foods make it easy to overeat and the caloric surplus is the culprit. It will probably end up that the ingredients, as well as the impact on gut microbiome, from ultra processed foods isn't healthy, I'm just not convinced it's the culprit in obesity when calories are not in excess. Would love to see Layne address something like this.
TH-cam seems to censor links these days - at least my comments with links never go through. But if you google "Twinkie Diet", it's basically that. Not really a study, it was something a professor just kinda did to himself to showcase that all you need is a calorie deficit, but it still offers you something.
When we start responding “yes there is a study, but it depends”…..
Had a co worked off for 6 months due to injury with a broken foot. There is a lot lot of walking involved in our occupation.
When he came back to work, I almost did recognize him he gained so much weight.
Would love to see a face to face discussion with you and either Jason Fung or Ben Bikman. Easy to refute someone without giving them the chance to respond.
You are the only person that makes sense on youtube. In the nutrition game!
Came here to understand who was Nicholas Norwitz talking about in his latest video.
I followed Jason Fung's advice and it worked, five years now and counting, as opposed to all the calorie-restricting diets that all the experts like you prescribed me in the tens of years before (and for quite some money!) which always left me hungrier and weaker. IF + low carb + meditation + HIIT and you'll never need to count your calories again.
If calories in calories out doesn’t work and exercise doesn’t matter, I must be some kind of anomaly because that’s exactly how I lost 40 pounds. I didn’t know I was so special lol.
I thought Lean Gains was the fasting window original.
It really is some amazing Orwellian double-think shell game fast talk this guy pulls off. He convinces people who can’t manage portions into giving up eating altogether. It’s like getting a kid who won’t eat peas to gobble down split pea soup by telling them it’s ice cream. So yea, biochemistry? zero stars do not recommend. But on Psychology? Slow clap. Bravo
Its good jason is not a financial advisor. "Spending less wont help you save money"😂😂😂
I think Fung’s background is in medical interventions with extremely obese patients. “In the wild”, telling these people just have periods of time where you don’t eat solves the Calorie issue better than counting. In the face of highly palatable foods it’s hard to scale down below a calorie threshold (“once you pop you can’t stop!”) and getting weight loss started and sustainable can then generate its own momentum. It’s calorie in calorie out through the back door, because keeping insulin low is another way of saying control calories in?
Yes, most people's lifestyle are fairly sedentary, yes we have high calorie dense food and yes, lots of great tasting/low nutrient junk food very accesible and inexpensive....all of these, in the end come down to choices = personal responsibility. To say not everything is a person's fault is to remove the free will and ability to choose or not choose these things. Unless there is something biologically off with a person's chemistry, regardless of how you may want to spin it, a person's weight is that person's choice.
Maybe you’ve addressed this and I forgot or missed it, but I’d be interested in seeing an educational video reviewing the numbers in relation to all relevant hormones’ impacts on energy expenditure. Like what % change does it make +/- on a daily basis etc. I’ve seen you address insulin and a few quick references to T3, I’d be curious about estrogen, test, anything at all that can impede a higher “natural” BMR/TDEE
To put it more plainly, are peoples f’d up hormones causing small daily changes like expending 50 cal less a day, or or larger ones in the hundreds
Its all over the place and impossible to know. So many things fluctuate day to day. Thats why trying to calculate any of this is futile.
Glad to see you fired up again, Layne! Missed this passion! 🔥🔥
I get extreme mental clarity when I fast. Espacially after 2 days. The Romans were obsessed with the way you could fast and improve mental clarity. Seems like Layne should be a little familiar with this mechanism as it works for everybody.
I think any diet that you starve then pig out has the worst outcome on all hormones long term. Those that keep stable weight and exercise do even better. If you have fat that needs to go, if it is done too fast, it leads to viseral fat. If it's done slowly overtime, but with excessive fasting it leads to hypothyroidism. For starters
Fung numerous times always refers back to religious traditions and ancient cultures for instituting what we now equate to IF.
Fung has also said that calories do matter, but types especially quality foods and their properites behave differently than soda (almonds vs. soda).
Fung has said that he tried to find an eating regimen that a person realistically will stick with.
And on and on ... Im sure there are some Fung claims that are off. I like Layne, but he didnt seem to do his homework and actually listen to entire Fung lectures and interviews (rather than clips).
Studies are relevant of course but if I look at my own example, calories in calories out never worked for me. It was only when I went low carb/sugar when I saw some real results. For myself, I will do whatever works for me and I can clearly see the results.
So if you eat only 1000/calories per day for 1 month, you never lose weight? Get real.
@AzmiBesar not the point. 1,000 calories a day is significantly low so unless if you have hormonal issues, you will lose weight but going hungry each and single day is a stupid approach. In my approach, I reduced carbs (including Sugar) while slightly increased fats and proteins. Though I slightly reduced my caloric intake, I wasn't really hungry or felt an empty stomach so I think insulin response is also a relevant factor which we can't completely abolish in favor of calories in/calories out.
@@MuhammadWaqas-zv6qz So you reduced your caloric intake? So if you lose weight means you are in a caloric deficit. Of course the type of food will help you maintain a caloric deficit. You cant eat 2000 calories of ice cream and be full and maintain that for 1 month but you can if you have a balanced meal with balance macros, protein etc. I eat carbs - rice everyday and im losing weight from 92kg since March of this year till now.
@AzmiBesar I also reduced my caloric intake without changing Macros at all with no results. I have also experimented with keeping the calories in the same but increasing the calories out with more strenuous workout sessions with no apparent results. It was only when I reduced Carbs and Sugar and replaced with the other 2 Macros when I saw some real results. I agree that there might have been other factors involved which could have potentially explained the results but as I said, you do what works for you. There could be 1000's of studies but if you don't see the results for yourself, what's the point?
Re: mental clarity, the argument might be that by fasting you are by definition avoiding postprandial glucose response. Or perhaps that fasting shifts towards using ketones which some argue is preferred fuel for brain. I think there are some reasonable mechanistic arguments there and probably some research, but I could also be talking out my butt.
guess i lost 90 lbs from a placebo effect vs CICO
Fung doesn't say that CICO is wrong. So you either misunderstood him or lying about Fung's position.
Calories in/calories out ABSOLUTELY works. It's absurd to say otherwise. This is how people starve. If you take in fewer calories than you burn you will lose weight and eventually starve. And your body uses your fat stores when in a staved state.
The key is that you have to actually BURN more calories than you take in. The mistake people make is that they put themselves on a specific calorie deficit and THEN they reduce their overall activity (exercise and NEAT), and no longer take in fewer calories than they burn at the NEW reduced energy expenditure level.
Of course, cal in/cal out is not optimal as it does not take into account macro and micro nutrients. But in the simplest sense it DOES work. If it didn't work then it would be impossible for people to starve to death. And we know people can starve to death.
I wonder if the emaciated people in countries that suffer from famines are walking skeletons because they don't get enough calories or because they're unintentionally fasting?
Layne Norton, I'd like to ask you (or your viewers) the following because I'm genuinely curious- when speaking about the kinds of foods that we eat, what effects/differences are we looking at that matters? Sometimes it's really confusing when trying to understand what matters where, so in this case when we talk about CICO model and understanding that fat loss occurs whether you eat one kinds of food or the other, but maintaining the same calories, why would we pay attention to what we eat?
Weight loss it s not the same with eaten healthy. You can losee weight eaten only chocolate or just mcdonalds that doesn t mean ur gona be healthy on the long rung most likely u will get in trouble at some point . If you asked the importance of macronutrients and micronutrients, so the 'ingredients' of the food just google protein,carbs,fats, minerals,vitamines and anto oxidants just google each and u ll find more about their role , the recommended daily use and.so on.
Because in the long term, with bad habits and CICO you will have worse results than with better eating habits and CICO. Not because CICO really doesnt work, but because there will be some differences over time. (Like you get better regeneration, more energy, you will work out harder, more muscle gains, in the end you will burn more calories, so you will get better results earlier)
Lyle McDonald once said something like calories in vs out works better the closer you get to your ideal (forget his word) weight: any trials on waist 44 vs waist eg 36?