While I do love Bart Kay and his debunks are amazing, he hasn't yet sold me on disregarding energy deficits for weight loss.  Bart Kay and Dr. Chaffee both preach the same wisdom that you should just eat fatty red meat until you're either full or the food stops tasting good and to eat when hungry.  This approach doesn't work for me.  I've been stuck on my plateau for a year now, I know I need an energy deficit (some would call it a calorie deficit) in order to lose weight.

I agree with Bart that the calorie is a horrible unit of measurement due to us not "burning" calories like a bomb calorimeter does but he doesn't offer up a better alternative to use as a measurement.  It's like Bart hates measurement as he has stated in the past that he makes it a mandatory condition that his nutrition/fitness clients NOT measure or track their weight and if he catches them doing that then he stops serving that client.  If we are not to use the calorie, then what are we to use Bart?  Yes, I know we shouldn't need to measure, but if we want to measure we should be able to.  The calorie is a flawed unit but not an entirely useless unit, it does at least give us something to measure by and make educated guesses from and unfortunately it's what we have until someone comes up with a more accurate unit.  When that better unit does come along I expect we'll be able to use a very simple conversion formula (or 3) to convert a calorie to the new unit(s) (perhaps protories, carbories and fatories).  We can still use the calorie especially when we know that calories from carbs, fat or protein are not the same and that just counting calories is insufficient.  However, it's commonly stated that one needs a calorie deficit of 3,500 calories to lose a lb of body weight, which I don't believe is that many calories while being low carb based on personal experience.  Also from personal experience working in industrial processes, an imperfect measurement is better than no measurement at all.

I really wish Bart actually walked the walk instead of just talking a very good but very abrasive talk.  He preaches that we should only need to eat ruminant muscle meat and only need to resistance train 3 times a week for less than an hour each session and be fit/have muscles then why is he a string bean?  If it truly is that easy he should be able to show us how it's done with his own body or at least with client success stories.

I get the side about calories being a measurement and not actual mass. The science is straight forward.

After all this time it is now more of a play on words.

I had a 'right out of school Engineer who brought his brand-new Engineering degree to our plant. He made it a point to "factually" correct anything we said, mostly to pull himself ahead of the 'crowd'. He got me on a few occasions. I used the word 'factor' in a training session, and he made it a point to let everyone know that I meant to 'stoic calculation'. I smiled and moved on. Weeks later, he gave a presentation, and he was explaining how they were going to build up and plane down a sealing surface of a plastic housing. He said we are going to use Bondo to make the repair. I seized the opportunity and said, "What he meant to say was body-filler, as Bondo is a name of a brand, not an actual filler material. In both cases everyone knew exactly what the two of us said, but we made a point with a play on words.

Most refer to calories with an 'understood definition'.

I'm eating way less than I ever ate and I have dropped 86lbs in 8 months. The difference now is the lesser amount is more filling than the trash diet I was on before. The lesser amounts have allowed my body to use the fat I stored for energy. Thus, the weight dropped, and the composition changed. 

If I used the term calories and counted them, my "calorie" intake is far less than it was before. If I plugged in different terms, such as mass or proteins, or eggs or steaks, the amounts are less than they were before.

As of late I have tried to stall the weight loss, and I have done that thru adding an extra meal(s) each day. When I eat more than I want, mostly eating when not hungry, I have triggered a stall of sorts and gained 4lbs this week. 

Scott

So many say "eat till satiated".

If I did that with carni / OMAD, I would starve myself. I could go on with 1200 kcal per day for weeks with no hunger and I´m 6.3´/ 220 lbs.

I need my calories and fat to lose weight. Long time ago I remember eating 3000-4000 kcal wine (but still keto) dinners and I lost body fat very well.

Now 20 years later I´m not really sure,looks like a little "deficit" is okay. Last week I stalled with too much protein but there was cal def.

I´m all in for "When in doubt,measure!" with about everything. Now I´m having a gadget phase but I´ve gone without scales and apps for years,too.

Edited January 22Jan 22 by Carburetor

7 hours ago, XaqNautilus said:

While I do love Bart Kay and his debunks are amazing, he hasn't yet sold me on disregarding energy deficits for weight loss.  Bart Kay and Dr. Chaffee both preach the same wisdom that you should just eat fatty red meat until you're either full or the food stops tasting good and to eat when hungry.  This approach doesn't work for me.  I've been stuck on my plateau for a year now, I know I need an energy deficit (some would call it a calorie deficit) in order to lose weight.

I agree with Bart that the calorie is a horrible unit of measurement due to us not "burning" calories like a bomb calorimeter does but he doesn't offer up a better alternative to use as a measurement.  It's like Bart hates measurement as he has stated in the past that he makes it a mandatory condition that his nutrition/fitness clients NOT measure or track their weight and if he catches them doing that then he stops serving that client.  If we are not to use the calorie, then what are we to use Bart?  Yes, I know we shouldn't need to measure, but if we want to measure we should be able to.  The calorie is a flawed unit but not an entirely useless unit, it does at least give us something to measure by and make educated guesses from and unfortunately it's what we have until someone comes up with a more accurate unit.  When that better unit does come along I expect we'll be able to use a very simple conversion formula (or 3) to convert a calorie to the new unit(s) (perhaps protories, carbories and fatories).  We can still use the calorie especially when we know that calories from carbs, fat or protein are not the same and that just counting calories is insufficient.  However, it's commonly stated that one needs a calorie deficit of 3,500 calories to lose a lb of body weight, which I don't believe is that many calories while being low carb based on personal experience.  Also from personal experience working in industrial processes, an imperfect measurement is better than no measurement at all.

I really wish Bart actually walked the walk instead of just talking a very good but very abrasive talk.  He preaches that we should only need to eat ruminant muscle meat and only need to resistance train 3 times a week for less than an hour each session and be fit/have muscles then why is he a string bean?  If it truly is that easy he should be able to show us how it's done with his own body or at least with client success stories.

He's not a string bean. He is shorter than me and heavier than me. I am 135 pound, but 6 pack abs and muscle definition. I think he is a bit chubby tbh. Like you though, there's things that I like, and things I do not like about Bart Kay. If you act silly all the time, how can people take you seriously right? 

13 minutes ago, Carburetor said:

So many say "eat till satiated".

If I did that with carni / OMAD, I would starve myself. I could go on with 1200 kcal per day for weeks with no hunger and I´m 6.3´/ 220 lbs.

I need my calories and fat to lose weight. Long time ago I remember eating 3000-4000 kcal wine (but still keto) dinners and I lost body fat very well.

Now 20 years later I´m not really sure,looks like a little "deficit" is okay. Last week I stalled with too much protein but there was cal def.

I´m all in for "When in doubt,measure!" with about everything. Now I´m having a gadget phase but I´ve gone without scales and apps for years,too.

At least track your food and learn. I do this on accoasion. Sometimes I get by with 1500 calories, and sometimes I need 2700 calories at 135 lbs. My weight stays the same give or take a pound. But weight is just a minor piece of the puzzle, UNLESS one is clearly overweight. I weigh myself really only to learn about what happens when I eat what. 

3 minutes ago, Orweller said:

At least track your food and learn. I do this on accoasion. Sometimes I get by with 1500 calories, and sometimes I need 2700 calories at 135 lbs. My weight stays the same give or take a pound. But weight is just a minor piece of the puzzle, UNLESS one is clearly overweight. I weigh myself really only to learn about what happens when I eat what. 

Yeah I´m in some kind of  an analyzing phase now. Tracker app, scale, BP meter, HR monitor...  I know what works for my weight loss (high fat ketovore, not OMAD) but I´m still experimenting,too. Want to get rid of all this waist fat that I stupidly gathered in the last few years.

10 hours ago, XaqNautilus said:

but he doesn't offer up a better alternative to use as a measurement

Actually I believe he did mention that we look at mass as the measurement. That’s why it’s suggested to consume our food by weight not calories such as 1 gram of protein per ideal body weight. 

2 hours ago, Carburetor said:

I need my calories and fat to lose weight. Long time ago I remember eating 3000-4000 kcal wine (but still keto) dinners and I lost body fat very well.

 

And that kind of proves the point that it’s not calories but the mass they are made of. 
 

I will sometimes use the term calories because I just don’t know any other way to say what I’m trying to explain sometimes but I definitely believe that the whole calorie Ms in calories out thing is bogus. 

6 hours ago, Geezy said:

Actually I believe he did mention that we look at mass as the measurement. That’s why it’s suggested to consume our food by weight not calories such as 1 gram of protein per ideal body weight. 

You may have conflated tracking macros and counting calories here. Obviously, tracking protein or carbs for that matter is by weight. Calories on the other hand, those are a mere estimate that can lead one to failure and discouragement. 

It does make me wonder why we measure food in the US not by weight but by cups, spoons, and other kitchen utensils. Do I smell a conspiracy here? 😆

6 hours ago, Geezy said:

And that kind of proves the point that it’s not calories but the mass they are made of. 
 

I will sometimes use the term calories because I just don’t know any other way to say what I’m trying to explain sometimes but I definitely believe that the whole calorie Ms in calories out thing is bogus. 

Yeah, we haven't gotten any better terms yet, I do the same thing.