Weight Loss Thread

Ossoi · Mar 10, 2021

LiquidDeath said:
Second, from the information provided, it appears that the amount of time that was mandatory for the participants to spend with the doctors and support staff learning about proper diet and control was substantial in year 1 but greatly decreased as the study continued.

I lied about waiting for you to respond, because this one is a "free throw".

Correct, the amount of time required to spend with the doctors either on site or remotely to learn about ketogenic diets decreased as the study went on

I'm pretty sure that it doesn't take 2 years of weekly meetings to learn how to get in to and stay in nutritional ketosis:

"Eat low carb, by low carb we mean less than 30g a day to begin with"

"Here are foods that are high in carb and should be avoided"

"Vegetables and fruits contain carbs also"

"You can check the carb content of your food by looking on nutritional labels"

"Lots of sauces have hidden carbs so make sure you check before applying salad dressing"

I'm pretty sure ketogenic diets aren't the equivalent of a college degree which require two years of weekly classes.

Also, what was it you were telling me about reading comprehension?

Participants selected their preferred education mode (CCI-virtual, n = 126 or CCI-onsite, n = 136) during recruitment. The CCI-virtual group received care and education primarily via app-based communication. The CCI-onsite group also received care and education via clinic-based group meetings (weekly for 12 weeks, bi-weekly for 12 weeks, monthly for 6 months, and then quarterly in the second year

Almost 50% of the CCI group were not receiving classes FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, choosing instead to get their "care and education" via an app. It was 136/262 who chose the classes.

Therefore, your point about "the amount of education they got was reduced as the study went on, ergo this study is unreliable" has been well and truly dismantled, at the very best it only applies to 136 of the 262 participants. But as explained above, it doesn't take 104 weekly classes to learn how to keto. PLUS ALL PARTICIPANTS HAD ACCESS TO THE APP ANYWAY - for communication with their care team, online resources, biomarker tracking and the opportunity to participate in an online peer community for social support

The only difference was that some chose to get classes delivered via the app, some chose to go in person.

It's remote learning vs in person learning.

I'm fairly sure that you're man enough to admit that this reason was a fail and no more needs to be said.

Kirun · Mar 10, 2021

All that the whole "IT'S NOT AS SIMPLE AS CICO!! IT'S ABOUT HORMONES AND INSULIN!!!!" quack science is about, is allowing fat asses to convince themselves that they aren't losing weight because of a "hormone problem", rather than the fact that they have no fucking self control and keep stuffing their faces.

There is absolutely ZERO way you won't lose weight if you're consuming less calories than your BMR. Sure, if you're only consuming 100 less it's going to take you over a month to lose a single pound, but you're still losing weight. We can get into all sorts of fucking semantic arguments about insulin speeding up this process or slowing down that process, blah, blah, blah. At the end of the fucking day it literally is as simple as CICO.

Ossoi · Mar 10, 2021

Kirun said:
All that the whole "IT'S NOT AS SIMPLE AS CICO!! IT'S ABOUT HORMONES AND INSULIN!!!!" quack science is about, is allowing fat asses to convince themselves that they aren't losing weight because of a "hormone problem", rather than the fact that they have no fucking self control and keep stuffing their faces.

There is absolutely ZERO way you won't lose weight if you're consuming less calories than your BMR. Sure, if you're only consuming 100 less it's going to take you over a month to lose a single pound, but you're still losing weight. We can get into all sorts of fucking semantic arguments about insulin speeding up this process or slowing down that process, blah, blah, blah. At the end of the fucking day it literally is as simple as CICO.

As retarded as it is to say this, 3 people

Burnem Wizfyre

Faux

LiquidDeath have spent almost an entire week arguing this very point with a narcissistic autist who is in better shape than all three of them put together

And they all claim I'm the stupid one

LachiusTZ · Mar 10, 2021

This might be the worst thread on the whole fucking forum.

LiquidDeath · Mar 10, 2021

Well, I tried but I'm not doing this. Mainly because of things like this:

Ossoi said:
Therefore, your point about "the amount of education they got was reduced as the study went on, ergo this study is unreliable" has been well and truly dismantled

I never made this claim a single time. In fact, I used the amount of mandatory education time as an inference to participants falling off their diet because the actual data to confirm dietary adherence doesn't exist. I even asked if you found that data because I couldn't.

Anyways, I'm not spending any amount of time going through this with someone who can't even attempt to argue genuinely. It's my own fault, really. I knew better than to try and I still did it.

Ossoi · Mar 10, 2021

LiquidDeath said:
Well, I tried but I'm not doing this. Mainly because of things like this:

I never made this claim a single time. In fact, I used the amount of mandatory education time as an inference to participants falling off their diet because the actual data to confirm dietary adherence doesn't exist. I even asked if you found that data because I couldn't.

Anyways, I'm not spending any amount of time going through this with someone who can't even attempt to argue genuinely.

And there it is folks - it was easier to call foul on the second point over semantics, rather than respond to my first response

You are throwing in the towel because I rephrased this:

Second, from the information provided, it appears that the amount of time that was mandatory for the participants to spend with the doctors and support staff learning about proper diet and control was substantial in year 1 but greatly decreased as the study continued.

INTO THIS

Therefore, your point about "the amount of education they got was reduced as the study went on, ergo this study is unreliable" has been well and truly dismantled

If you weren't trying to discredit the study by referring to the amount of time spent receiving onsite education about keto declining as the study went on, why even mention it at all?

Why not address or acknowledge the point that 50% of the participants DID NOT GET ANY ONSITE EDUCATION AT ALL AND INSTEAD PREFERRED TO GET IT THROUGH THE APP

Surely anyone who bothers to read this can see that his points have been so conclusively dismantled, which is why he's throwing in the towel, taking his ball and going home?

The best part is, I haven't even finished writing my reply to his third point and he's already called it quits

Needless to say, I will finish that reply

-----------------------------

I am interested in what everyone else thinks:

Was

LiquidDeath attempting to discredit the study by saying "Second, from the information provided, it appears that the amount of time that was mandatory for the participants to spend with the doctors and support staff learning about proper diet and control was substantial in year 1 but greatly decreased as the study continued." OR NOT?

LiquidDeath I legitimately said this "I'm fairly sure that you're man enough to admit that this reason was a fail and no more needs to be said." because I hoped you would be man enough to hold your hands up and say "ok you got me, allow me to withdraw this point"

But instead you've ran away

Izo · Mar 10, 2021

It’s been awhile since we’ve seen an @ossie selfie. I mean, how do we now he’s not slacking?

Ossoi · Mar 10, 2021

Izo said:
It’s been awhile since we’ve seen an @ossie selfie. I mean, how do we now he’s not slacking?

I actually said last night "I'll start holiday diet tomorrow" and ordered a late night Dominos.

Pizza, wings, garlic bread and cookies.

It gets delivered and I sit down and realise he's given me an extra pizza. I don't like wasting food because there's kids in Africa, starving, so I called the Dominos and they sent the driver back round. Started eating my wings whilst I waited for him, he arrives, I give him the spare pizza.

Finish the wings and then realise that my pizza is the wrong one and looks more like the "pepperoni passion" that should have been in the box I just gave back. So I assume that the store put the pizzas in the wrong boxes.

Phone back the restaurant and they just offer me an instant refund for the hassle, so I got a free meal.

So today, I ordered pizza from a non chain place, but to be honest it was average.

Slacking enough for you?

Izo · Mar 10, 2021

Ossoi said:
I actually said last night "I'll start holiday diet tomorrow" and ordered a late night Dominos.

Pizza, wings, garlic bread and cookies.

It gets delivered and I sit down and realise he's given me an extra pizza. I don't like wasting food because there's kids in Africa, starving, so I called the Dominos and they sent the driver back round. Started eating my wings whilst I waited for him, he arrives, I give him the spare pizza.

Finish the wings and then realise that my pizza is the wrong one and looks more like the "pepperoni passion" that should have been in the box I just gave back. So I assume that the store put the pizzas in the wrong boxes.

Phone back the restaurant and they just offer me an instant refund for the hassle, so I got a free meal.

So today, I ordered pizza from a non chain place, but to be honest it was average.

Slacking enough for you?

Clearly you have a natural aptitude for using words and ideas in a quick and inventive way to create humour, Sir.

Happy munching.

Fogel · Mar 10, 2021

okay it's getting weird in here

LiquidDeath · Mar 10, 2021

Ossoi said:
And there it is folks - it was easier to call foul on the second point over semantics, rather than respond to my first response

You are throwing in the towel because I rephrased this:

INTO THIS

If you weren't trying to discredit the study by referring to the amount of time spent receiving onsite education about keto declining as the study went on, why even mention it at all?

Why not address or acknowledge the point that 50% of the participants DID NOT GET ANY ONSITE EDUCATION AT ALL AND INSTEAD PREFERRED TO GET IT THROUGH THE APP

Surely anyone who bothers to read this can see that his points have been so conclusively dismantled, which is why he's throwing in the towel, taking his ball and going home?

The best part is, I haven't even finished writing my reply to his third point and he's already called it quits

Needless to say, I will finish that reply

-----------------------------

I am interested in what everyone else thinks:

Was LiquidDeath attempting to discredit the study by saying "Second, from the information provided, it appears that the amount of time that was mandatory for the participants to spend with the doctors and support staff learning about proper diet and control was substantial in year 1 but greatly decreased as the study continued." OR NOT?

LiquidDeath I legitimately said this "I'm fairly sure that you're man enough to admit that this reason was a fail and no more needs to be said." because I hoped you would be man enough to hold your hands up and say "ok you got me, allow me to withdraw this point"

But instead you've ran away

You're so fucking stupid it hurts.

There is no discrediting of the study. The study concludes that the CIC group had overwhelming positive effects over the control group and I agree with the conclusions.

You made a claim the study never did, namely:

Ossoi said:
Ketosis and 50% lower fasting insulin should have meant continual weight loss, or at the very least weight maintenance. But instead there was a modest increase in both weight and abdominal fat

The 3 points I provided were a counter to your claim, not anything in the study.

Learn to fucking read.

Ossoi · Mar 10, 2021

You seem to be thinking that BHB of 0.5mM or above is a requirement to be in ketosis. Admittedly the study does say that the "encouraged range" is 0.5 mM or above.

You use the fact that only 32.8% of measurements taken hit that minimum threshold to say the "study wasn't well controlled" and "can't be used".

You claim that because only 32% of measurements over two years, then the group was "in ketosis for less than a third of the entire study".

You also claim that the 0.5 mM was only observed in 14.1% of participants at the two year mark.

And your final conclusion is that the group "wasn't keto for the vast majority of two years"

You have failed with all of the above points.

0.5 was the target "encouraged range" but 0.5 is not the minimum BHB level to be in ketosis.

The actual section on "Retention and long-term dietary adherence" (which funnily enough you didn't mention, instead skipping straight past - really? You made claims about adherence without even referencing the actual adherence section and expect people to take you seriously?) states

So the mean BHB level was 0.27 and this was stable over the 2 year period (which further discredits your "but the coaching stopped claim)

And yes 0.27 is enough to be in ketosis, which is also "50% higher than the baseline value"

Also, if you know anything about ketones you should know:

a) More ketones doesn't = more fat loss/stronger ketosis.

b) Over time, as your body gets adapted to using ketones then the ketone levels reduce. 61% did hit the 0.5mm target at some point, so perhaps their increased efficiency was why the average was 0.27

But regardless, you're just playing the science fallacy this whole time. Looking for ways to discredit a study because it contradicts your world view. I doubt that you apply the same level of forensic cross examination to studies that support your worldview

____________________________________________________

Insulin levels remaining low like in the below figure? Is that low enough and sustained enough for you?

Ossoi · Mar 10, 2021

LiquidDeath said:
You're so fucking stupid it hurts.

There is no discrediting of the study. The study concludes that the CIC group had overwhelming positive effects over the control group and I agree with the conclusions.

You made a claim the study never did, namely:

The 3 points I provided were a counter to your claim, not anything in the study.

Learn to fucking read.

I have now responded to all 3 of your rebuttals

Admittedly, if I had just done what I said I would and not responded to 2 and 3 until you had addressed 1, then this conversation would be in a much better place.

Now, I will allow myself to respond to the above - which is really a semantic argument concerning Point 2 and its rebuttal

If you weren't trying to discredit the study (which was the basis for my concluding claim) why even mention the following:

Second, from the information provided, it appears that the amount of time that was mandatory for the participants to spend with the doctors and support staff learning about proper diet and control was substantial in year 1 but greatly decreased as the study continued.

Third, and you're not going to like this, but the study wasn't well-controlled for ensuring ketosis in the participants and so can't be used to make some damning indictment of keto.

It's always the same, you guys get debunked so you resort to splitting hairs over semantics, which then becames an endless cycle of reminding you what you said.

Ok, let's take a step back

Let me focus my rebuttal of Point two: "Second, from the information provided, it appears that the amount of time that was mandatory for the participants to spend with the doctors and support staff learning about proper diet and control was substantial in year 1 but greatly decreased as the study continued."

By reminding you that:

a) 50% of the group chose NOT TO RECEIVE ANY ONSITE EDUCATION/CARE WITH THE DOCTORS FROM THE VERY BEGINNING. They instead got all their education via the app, which the onsite group also had access to

b) Ketogenic diets aren't some complex topic that require 104 weekly classes, hence the gradual reduction in onsite class time.

Either respond to my first rebuttal or address point a) and b)

Ossoi · Mar 10, 2021

LiquidDeath said:
You're so fucking stupid it hurts.

There is no discrediting of the study.

So, in total, the group was in ketosis for less than a third of the entire study. Also, since only 14% were in ketosis at the end of the two years it stands to reason that the majority of the participants' time spent in ketosis came in the first half of the study when there was much more contact with the staff concerning proper diet and control. That mandatory contact was reduced to once every three months in year 2, down significantly from the early part of the study, and so more people came off the diet.

Sure, (falsely) claiming the group wasn't in ketosis for the majority of study, (falsely) pointing out that only 14% were in ketosis at the end, and then making another false claim that reduced contact meant people coming off the diet, wasn't an attempt to discredit the study

why point those things out then?

And I realise I'm giving him something else to respond to whilst requesting him to respond to my first response. But his posts are so easy to debunk, it's like walking past a shop window and not checking out my reflection - it's impossible not to

Aychamo BanBan · Mar 10, 2021

Ossoi said:
As retarded as it is to say this, 3 people Burnem Wizfyre Faux LiquidDeath have spent almost an entire week arguing this very point with a narcissistic autist who is in better shape than all three of them put together

And they all claim I'm the stupid one

The low point of the thread for me was Burnem Wizfire claiming Dunning-Kruger about digestive physiology while he’s literally a truck driver educated by YouTube. Not to be a condescending prick but fucking LOL.

Burnem Wizfyre · Mar 10, 2021

Falxy-US said:
The low point of the thread for me was Burnem Wizfire claiming Dunning-Kruger about digestive physiology while he’s literally a truck driver educated by YouTube. Not to be a condescending prick but fucking LOL.

What was I wrong about that I didn’t admit to. Ossoi is a shining example of Dunning-Kruger who apparently is such an annoying cunt he has to pay prostitutes to eat their pussy.

Izo · Mar 11, 2021

Words, words, words. Need a flex to back up those claims,

Ossoi

Ossoi · Mar 11, 2021

Izo said:
Words, words, words. Need a flex to back up those claims, Ossoi

The cunt has me on ignore and has spent the whole time

A) telling me he has me on ignore
B) hurling insults at me
C) telling everyone else he has me on ignore
D) pointing out how much more intelligent he is than me
E) whilst not seeing the many rebuttals and debunks I've since posted

Does that sound like someone who is "ignoring" me

It's actually another example of his dunning Kruger, because I clearly got to him so badly that he can't get me out of his head

The other irony is, out of all three of the insulin idiot trinity, he's the one that made the most exaggerated claims

The highlight for me was "I lost more weight than you in the same time therefore I'm very smarter than you." No shit, you started off almost double my actual weight

His complete ignorance of life in single digit body fat % was also hilarious. I calculated at my lowest I was probably 8% body fat. Bodybuilders on stage get down to what? 4-5% and even then they don't maintain that for longer than the week of competition. So, the claim that I wasn't optimising my results but he knows how to do it better, also absurd.

I tried to explain to him that I'm not a professional bodybuilder and the extra sacrifices and effort to get lower aren't worth it, but again nothing back.

What else was he wrong about, the claim "I lost 50lbs of fat"

Ok prove it, where's your dexa scans?

How do you know how much of your weight was fat, muscle, water?

You were not eating anything for days, nor lifting weights, so how exactly were you preserving any muscle?

If he doubles down on the "it was 100% fat loss" then it's game over for him, because if he's discovered how to lose 100% fat whilst dieting, fasting for days at a time and not doing any exercise, he's making a claim that nobody else, living or dead, has ever made before

Although for actual hilarity,

LiquidDeath got close last night. He has continually called me out for lack of "reading comprehension" yet he made the following observation about the study I linked him:

Second, from the information provided, it appears that the amount of time that was mandatory for the participants to spend with the doctors and support staff learning about proper diet and control was substantial in year 1 but greatly decreased as the study continued.

Yet, what he FAILED TO COMPREHEND was that the participants self-selected whether they wanted to get their care and diet education via an App or onsite, and the group was an almost 50/50 split between APP and ONSITE learning.

His "LOGIC" was that as the amount of contact with doctors/educators was reduced "more people came off the diet" (which is why he thinks the participants had a modest regain of weight). Less education = less adherence = weight regain.

When ACTUALLY 50% of the group not getting ANY ONSITE CARE from the VERY BEGINNING and STILL LOSING WEIGHT/BEING IN KETOSIS shows that ONSITE CARE was not necessary for adherence/weight loss. If it was, the weight loss data would have been skewed by the APP GROUP

He also FAILED TO COMPREHEND that BOTH GROUPS still had access to the app, from which they could get education, care and contact with the relevant people.

It also speaks volumes to HIS INTELLIGENCE that he thinks Ketosis is such an advanced and complicated subject, that it needs weekly lessons for two years in order to learn and understand. Bitch, this isn't fucking remedial advanced calculus and astrophysics.

Think about that for a second: If a study asked you to attend a weekly class on keto/low carb diets, EVERY WEEK for two years because such attendance was necessary in order to adhere to study.:

A) How long would it take for you to think you knew everything there was to know about keto?
B) How long would your motivation to attend last?
C) How many people do you think would attend every class and thus adhere to the study?

Actually fucking lol, I've already commented on the "science fallacy" - how people who have a religious zeal about a certain diet will react to studies which contradict their faith with "bad study".

What are the easiest/most common ways to discredit a study, some of which we've seen already

a) There wasn't enough participants
b) they didn't adhere to the diet.

A study which makes difficult/unreasonable demands of its participants is just setting itself up for failure, and future discrediting

LachiusTZ · Mar 11, 2021

Ossoi said:
The cunt has me on ignore and has spent the whole time

A) telling me he has me on ignore
B) hurling insults at me
C) telling everyone else he has me on ignore
D) pointing out how much more intelligent he is than me
E) whilst not seeing the many rebuttals and debunks I've since posted

Does that sound like someone who is "ignoring" me

It's actually another example of his dunning Kruger, because I clearly got to him so badly that he can't get me out of his head

The other irony is, out of all three of the insulin idiot trinity, he's the one that made the most exaggerated claims

The highlight for me was "I lost more weight than you in the same time therefore I'm very smarter than you." No shit, you started off almost double my actual weight

His complete ignorance of life in single digit body fat % was also hilarious. I calculated at my lowest I was probably 8% body fat. Bodybuilders on stage get down to what? 4-5% and even then they don't maintain that for longer than the week of competition. So, the claim that I wasn't optimising my results but he knows how to do it better, also absurd.

I tried to explain to him that I'm not a professional bodybuilder and the extra sacrifices and effort to get lower aren't worth it, but again nothing back.

What else was he wrong about, the claim "I lost 50lbs of fat"

Ok prove it, where's your dexa scans?

How do you know how much of your weight was fat, muscle, water?

You were not eating anything for days, nor lifting weights, so how exactly were you preserving any muscle?

If he doubles down on the "it was 100% fat loss" then it's game over for him, because if he's discovered how to lose 100% fat whilst dieting, fasting for days at a time and not doing any exercise, he's making a claim that nobody else, living or dead, has ever made before

Although for actual hilarity, LiquidDeath got close last night. He has continually called me out for lack of "reading comprehension" yet he made the following observation about the study I linked him:

Yet, what he FAILED TO COMPREHEND was that the participants self-selected whether they wanted to get their care and diet education via an App or onsite, and the group was an almost 50/50 split between APP and ONSITE learning.

His "LOGIC" was that as the amount of contact with doctors/educators was reduced "more people came off the diet" (which is why he thinks the participants had a modest regain of weight). Less education = less adherence = weight regain.

When ACTUALLY 50% of the group not getting ANY ONSITE CARE from the VERY BEGINNING and STILL LOSING WEIGHT/BEING IN KETOSIS shows that ONSITE CARE was not necessary for adherence/weight loss. If it was, the weight loss data would have been skewed by the APP GROUP

He also FAILED TO COMPREHEND that BOTH GROUPS still had access to the app, from which they could get education, care and contact with the relevant people.

It also speaks volumes to HIS INTELLIGENCE that he thinks Ketosis is such an advanced and complicated subject, that it needs weekly lessons for two years in order to learn and understand. Bitch, this isn't fucking remedial advanced calculus and astrophysics.

Think about that for a second: If a study asked you to attend a weekly class on keto/low carb diets, EVERY WEEK for two years because such attendance was necessary in order to adhere to study.:

A) How long would it take for you to think you knew everything there was to know about keto?
B) How long would your motivation to attend last?
C) How many people do you think would attend every class and thus adhere to the study?

Actually fucking lol, I've already commented on the "science fallacy" - how people who have a religious zeal about a certain diet will react to studies which contradict their faith with "bad study".

What are the easiest/most common ways to discredit a study, some of which we've seen already

a) There wasn't enough participants
b) they didn't adhere to the diet.

A study which makes difficult/unreasonable demands of its participants is just setting itself up for failure, and future discrediting

You are more entirely invested in this than is healthy.

And...

View attachment 341153

Ossoi · Mar 11, 2021

LachiusTZ said:
You are more entirely invested in this than is healthy.

And...

View attachment 341153

"You do not have permission to view this page or perform this action."

And I'm no more invested (ok, well maybe a little bit) than the people perpetuating the other side of the argument. The only difference is, they are much more invested in their specific diets - to the point of fanaticism/religious zeal

Weight Loss Thread

Tranny Chaser

Buzzfeed Editor

Tranny Chaser

Rogue Deathwalker Box

Magnus Deadlift the Fucktiger

Tranny Chaser

Tranny Chaser

Tranny Chaser

Tranny Chaser

Mr. Poopybutthole

Magnus Deadlift the Fucktiger

Tranny Chaser

Tranny Chaser

Tranny Chaser

Log Wizard

Tranny Chaser

Tranny Chaser

Rogue Deathwalker Box

Tranny Chaser