Overthinking it and coming up with horse shit reasons why it's totally fine to eat the amount you're eating and blaming some external factor (e.g. one's body) is the problem.
I find it supremely hilarious that you refer to the person's own body as an external factor.
Operate at an energy deficit and I guarantee you'll lose weight.
Is it going to feel horrible? Hell yes.
A Pound is 3,600 calories. I can easily eat 1,800 calories over my maintenance requirement.
Do you think in one year I am going to gain 180 pounds or .5 pounds per day?
>I find it supremely hilarious that you refer to the person's own body as an external factor.
It's external in the sense that we have no control over our DNA, which is implicitly being blamed when one speaks of one's own predisposition towards weight gain. It's not that funny.
Neither your comment nor your parent comment add anything except noise to this discussion.
Weight, health, and fitness are all _correlated_, but sometimes in ways that aren’t intuitive and that western society’s fat-shaming (of which the “just eat less” mantra is a prime example) completely misses the point.
That said, we are not adding noise. We are giving the physics level truth. It's like being told an answer, and being told to show the proof, in my opinion. The answer is to eat less calories, but working the problem isn't so simple. There are a ton of variables into how or why someone can't follow this regime, some valid, some probably not.
Starvation mode is vastly overstated.
I wonder why people in starving nations don't have this magical starvation mode, or glandular problems, or microbiomes that make them fat. Are we exceptional?
I'd actually be surprised if there's much correlation between understanding physics and having one's weight under control.