"One are individuals with bodies that gain weight regardless of what the person does."
Physically, that's not possible. If calories consumed is less than calories burned, the body cannot add weight. It doesn't have access to zero-point energy.
Physically, that's not possible. If calories consumed is less than calories burned, the body cannot add weight. It doesn't have access to zero-point energy.
There are a plethora of conditions that cause your body and to not use energy. Whether it be physical disability that prevent movement, or diseases that dis-regulate your metabolism.
There are many people who eat sufficient food and are perpetually lethargic. Their body has the energy, and chooses not to use it.
When I did chemo, I actually put on weight, despite eating almost nothing. I had pretty bad nausea despite my 4 anti-emetics, so food was difficult to eat. Even drinking water was hard.
So how could I have possibly put on weight? Well I was sleeping 16+ hours a day, not moving at all, and my hormones plummeted. I lost most of the muscle on my body. I obviously don’t know what my basal metabolic rate was, but it must have been incredibly low. Even my brain, which uses a lot of calories, didn’t work right. I couldn’t think right.
Rather, my point was simple: calories-in and calories-out is correct, but the mistake evangelists of this ideology make is assuming calories-out is fixed or even a simple equation. It's not, and this is what pushes your narrative from "science" to "ideology".
Indeed, you said this instead:
>There are a plethora of conditions that cause your body and to not use energy
Now, grammatically it makes no sense, but I thought "and" was just a typo and then sentence read as: "There are a plethora of conditions that cause your body to not use energy" to witch I responded.
I provided some details about my specific case here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49942780
To sum it up: my DNA is trash when it comes to this. Everything my body could do wrong, it does.