[smgj]

Opprinnelig lagt inn av CookingWithGas, her.

Det var vel derfor jeg sa at det vanker en nobelpris eller to på de som klarer det

Den menneskelige metabolisme er et usannsynlig komplisert økosystem, med et tilnærmet uendelig antall variabler. Så jeg er den første til å erkjenne at slike beregninger er overforenklinger.

Men termodynamikkens lover klarer vi dessverre ikke å lure. Det er ganske stor forskjell på å være innenfor et akseptert slingringsmonn/feilmargin, og det å finne opp sin egen naturlov.

Og hvem setter grensene for hva som er et akseptabelt og troverdig slingringsmonn....?

Sitat:

3) The less you eat, the less you must continue to eat to have any chance of losing more weight and weight loss will stop, at some point, whether you like it or not.
As Keys showed, the men needed 3,200 calories, on average, to maintain their weight. As the men were given 1,570 calories a day in the ‘starvation period’, they lost weight and their energy need fell and therefore the calorie level needed to fall, to maintain the deficit.
Interestingly, Keys rejected the 3,500 formula from the outset and relied instead on adjusting the calorie intake every week to try to induce his desired weight loss of 25%. Keys found he needed to limit some men to 1,000 calories a day to try to induce further weight loss (the men should have been losing over 5lbs per week, at this calorie intake, having created a deficit of almost 2,500 calories a day from their original calorie need. In reality the body had adjusted energy need to resist any further weight loss).
All reached a plateau around week 20 and further weight loss could not be induced. At least one diary recorded weight gain in the final month of the ‘starvation’ period.