How does one reject the hypothesis “You’re failing because you aren’t trying hard enough / you’re doing it wrong?”
In the case of the Shangri-la bit, it obviously works, but in the “eat less, excersize more” diet, how can one conclude that the failing is in the strategy and not the user?
I’m not trying to say you’re wrong; I’m genuinely curious as to how one can decide this approach fails.
Well, if you hold your diet steady but burn an extra 500 calories a day (3500 calories a week) exercising, with no significant changes to your weight, that would a pretty big indicator...
If you aren’t losing weight with the “eat less, exercise more” diet, you’re doing it wrong and conservation of energy says so.
A somewhat separate question is “is the ‘eat less, exercise more’ diet supposed to lower your set point through exercise or just make you miserable but skinny?” To see if that works for you I guess you’d just lose weight and then ask yourself “how much does this suck?”
How does one reject the hypothesis “You’re failing because you aren’t trying hard enough / you’re doing it wrong?”
In the case of the Shangri-la bit, it obviously works, but in the “eat less, excersize more” diet, how can one conclude that the failing is in the strategy and not the user?
I’m not trying to say you’re wrong; I’m genuinely curious as to how one can decide this approach fails.
Well, if you hold your diet steady but burn an extra 500 calories a day (3500 calories a week) exercising, with no significant changes to your weight, that would a pretty big indicator...
If you aren’t losing weight with the “eat less, exercise more” diet, you’re doing it wrong and conservation of energy says so.
A somewhat separate question is “is the ‘eat less, exercise more’ diet supposed to lower your set point through exercise or just make you miserable but skinny?” To see if that works for you I guess you’d just lose weight and then ask yourself “how much does this suck?”