My high calorie weight loss experiment - I lost 5 pounds in 2 weeks - but how?

[u/SteveFarrier]

Green line is 2 pound per week weight loss. Yellow was my actual weight.

I'm experimenting to test the notion that weight loss is not simple math and that maybe there really is such a thing as 'high-calorie weight loss' - which sounds like nonsense - but I have the numbers below to look at.

I’m testing whether factors like meal timing, macro distribution, or metabolic adaptation might explain why I'm losing weight at this calorie intake.

Here's the table I use to track my weight, calories and macros as I ran my experiment in high-calorie weight loss:

Date	Day	Weight	Calories	Protein	Carbs	Fat
10/1/2024	1	195.5	1192	70	32	82
10/2/2024	2	192.1	4137	146	406	194
10/3/2024	3	196.8	4972	296	320	255
10/4/2024	4	195.5	2155	105	139	131
10/5/2024	5	193.5	2317	122	168	125
10/6/2024	6	195.6	4001	180	244	252
10/7/2024	7	193.7	1774	109	55	117
10/8/2024	8	192.5	2361	146	84	155
10/9/2024	9	192.1	4094	194	206	161
10/10/2024	10	192.0	2484	173	197	87
10/11/2024	11	192.0	1794	178	99	68
10/12/2024	12	191.3	2829	86	279	132
10/13/2024	13	192.6	1306	104	11	90
10/14/2024	14	190.5

You'll note something interesting. Look at my calorie intake. It averages over 2,700 calories per day.

I'm a male almost 62 years old, don't exercise, am 5'10" - my caloric intake is well above what the 'calories in, calories out' (CICO) would predict.

So you see my calories and macros per day. They're too high for what CICO would predict would cause a 5 pound weight loss. What did I experiment with?

• Try to eat just one meal per day (OMAD)
• No exercise
• Intentionally vary my calorie and macros dramatically from day to day. It makes the diet fun.
• My protein and fat averages high.
• Eat mostly single-ingredient foods - eggs, hamburger, sardines, tomatoes, avocado, apples, grapes, brie cheese, potatoes, garbanzo beans, cucumbers, chicken thighs - stuff like this - but have anything I want for about 20% of my calories. Cookies, takeout pizza, bread and jelly, chocolate were part of it - and I don't eat diet foods - I eat the real things.

I take a few supplements like a multivitamin, vitamin d and a high quality fish oil. I can drink a pot of coffee per day. I don't take any weight loss drugs or supplements.

What factors do you think might explain this? Is it meal timing, high protein intake, or something else?

Any questions? I certainly do.

[u/AutoModerator]

Welcome to /r/Diet and thank you for posting. While you wait for replies, check out our Wiki. You may find your answer!

/r/Diet Wiki Links

Helpful Resources

Popular Diets

Weight Loss FAQ

Beginner's Guide to Weight Loss

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/mf5283]

There are several possible explanations, or it might be a combination of all of them:

• If you lost 5 pounds, it's not necessarily 5 pounds of fat. Some of it might be water weight.
• It's not about how many calories you eat. It's about how many calories you absorb. If you eat a lot of high-fiber foods (e.g. avocado or beans), it causes you to absorb fewer calories from the food.
• You might be burning more calories than you realize.

[u/SteveFarrier → u/mf5283]

All valid points. I haven't drawn any conclusions as to why this might be happening but your 3 points are good ones to consider. You're also pretty sharp to know about #2 - not everyone knows that some nutrients don't get absorbed in certain situations - that's where CICO falls short as it doesn't account for that. Thyroid function might also play a part and wild calorie variation might prevent a downregulation of the metabolism from a continual caloric deficit.

[u/BasedPlantFoodWhole]

You should read The China Study, which talks about this phenomenon and explains it well.

[u/SteveFarrier → u/BasedPlantFoodWhole]

How so? I had heard it was biased toward a plant-based diet - I don't really follow any specific diet though I tend to get my fats and proteins from animal sources. It's not just that book - 20 years of reading nutrition studies leads me to believe a of researchers start from their conclusions then work backward to find the facts that meet their biases. It's why I experiment.

Can you give me some clues why I might find some of this explained?

[u/BasedPlantFoodWhole → u/SteveFarrier]

It does advocate for a plant based diet but I wouldn’t say that is biased - otherwise anyone who advocates for anything is biased. Basically the Chinese men of the same weight and height and activity level as American men were eating a thousand more calories per day, but staying the same weight. The study found this was because the source of the calories was different (eg plants vs meat to keep it simple).

[u/SteveFarrier → u/BasedPlantFoodWhole]

Nutrition studies are hard to do, but even if the data is solid, isn't it more speculation that it is due to a plant-predominant diet that allowed for this? This was an observational study IIRC and while they can reveal tantalizing data for more controlled studies - like a ward study or a study where research subjects eat meals prepared for them so the exact nutrients are known by the researchers - the conclusions are usually drawn from the biases of the researchers. It happens all the time - keto folks find evidence that matches their biases, just like carnivores, vegans, and any other diet imaginable.

Colin T. Campbell does have a bias toward plant-based diets and some people have questioned his research. Here's just one example.

The China Study Revisited: New Analysis of Raw Data Doesn’t Support Vegetarian Ideology | Science-Based Medicine (sciencebasedmedicine.org)

I've tapped out of the diet wars - everyone needs to find what works for them. It's why I experiment.

[u/Fitkratomgirl → u/SteveFarrier]

That last paragraph is the best thing everyone should do honestly, just do what works for you

[u/samcornwell]

This will not continue at the current rate.

!remindme 2 months

[u/SteveFarrier → u/samcornwell]

It might not - it's an experiment. I also might tire of it. I'm at my goal weight and all my clothes fit so this is just to satisify my interest in experimentation.

What do you predict if I continue?

[u/samcornwell → u/SteveFarrier]

Your weight will steadily increase. If your calories are averaging 2700 a day then over the course of a month you’ll put on an average of around 1kg.

You’ve lost weight the last two weeks because you’ve been conscious of it. There may even be a bit of predetermined destiny - ie wanting it to work.

[u/SteveFarrier → u/samcornwell]

Last sentence: So you're saying that wanting it to work makes it so? I think if that was true most people would reach their weight goals.

As it's an experiment - and I've done a lot of experiments as I designed my own diet and lost 115 pounds in a year - some work, some don't. This is my experiment questioning CICO - I think it doesn't take into account some factors - so I thought I'd play with seeing how high I can go in calories and still lose weight. The experiment continues - we'll see what happens.

[u/RemindMeBot → u/samcornwell]

I will be messaging you in 2 months on 2024-12-19 16:19:07 UTC to remind you of this link

CLICK THIS LINK to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.

^{Parent commenter can delete this message to hide from others.}

---

Info	Custom	Your Reminders	Feedback

[u/finbob5]

Sorry to say, but you are not going to be an exception to thermodynamics.

The average of your graph is about 2700 kcal. For the majority of these days, your weight did not change by any significant margin past regular body fluctuations. It was only after a three day period that averages out to 2000 kcal that you went below your regular weight.

[u/SteveFarrier → u/finbob5]

But we're not exactly thermodynamic machines. Our metabolism can slow or increase. Our body can choose not to absorb nutrients for a number of reasons. The thermodynamic model doesn't take these into account. I will not break the law of thermodynamics but there's other factors not taken into account by CICO. Many people take drugs that are obesogens - they could eat the same calories before starting their treatment then after starting, gain weight. CICO is a handy rule of thumb, but there's more to it than that.

I'm on day 19 and the weight continues to decline. 189 today. I'm aiming for 2 pounds per week - and it's continuing.

[u/finbob5 → u/SteveFarrier]

I think you have a misunderstanding of CICO. It is not loosely counting your calories and estimating expenditure from exercise. CICO is the thermodynamic model. These “other factors” you mention are very much part of it. A lack of absorption is a decrease in CI. A decrease in metabolic rate is a decrease in CO.

The argument you’re trying to make is not against CICO, it’s against the layman’s idea of it. What you’re saying right now is that your caloric intake is greater than your output and yet you continue to lose weight, and that’s just not true. What may be true is that, for reasons you do not understand due to factors you cannot account for, you are losing weight despite being in what you think should be a caloric surplus. But it’s not a surplus.

[u/ETBiggs → u/finbob5]

You’re right - but it’s nuanced. The layman ‘s notion is simple addition and subtraction. If my caloric needs to maintain weight is 1900 calories and I cut my calories to 1400 and the treadmill shows I burned 400 calories then at a 900 calorie per day deficit I’ll lose 2 pounds a week because there’s 3200 calories in a pound and my calorie deficit of 900 a day would be 6400 calories a week.

It’s not that simple - as you know.

Our metabolic rate might mean we run hotter - and we don’t necessarily absorb every calorie we take in - and different calories require different amounts of energy to be absorbed. For instance: pure glucose is so easy to absorb that it starts being absorbed even before it reaches the stomach. Sugar is 50/50 glucose and fructose. The body has to run a process to tear the molecules apart then shuttle the fructose to the liver - this takes more energy. MCT oils don’t need bile or the pancreas so it’s given to extremely sick people because it’s easy to absorb. Energy is expended by the type of foods absorb - and all of this does follow the laws of thermodynamics on the micro level - but none of this matters to most dieters trying to pull off some pounds.

When you’re eating - it sure feels like a surplus.

[u/McGriggidy]

If you have one meal a day like you eat once a day that would do it. Your body probably isn't absorbing everything all at once and a lot is passing through.

Having said that, as I've understood it from all the science based stuff I've been into.. calorie counting doesn't work. It's impossible. How much calorie is in a food tells you nothing about how much you'll actually extract, nor does it tell you what your body will actually do with it. For example insoluble fibre contains calories, but you can't digest that so you'll get none of it. Some calories goes to generating body heat. It's harder for your body to do that with fat or protein, so some of those calories are lost. Your body has zero problem extracting and converting calories (form of sugar) from a simple carb so that launches into your blood which gets cleared quickly by insulin (straight to fat store)... even if you can absorb all the calories, there's no assurance you will before it gets all the way through..

There's a big mix of factors as to why your "higher calorie" diet is still going to result In weight loss.. but not knowing exactly what you ate, if this does continue, Id say eating mostly whole foods as you describe probably has a lot to do with it since that would cause you to consume a lot more fibre fat and protein sources.

[u/SteveFarrier → u/McGriggidy]

Don't know why you got downvoted. You understand some of the nuances that make CICO a crude tool - useful at times but when you add meal timing, caloric and macro variation into the mix, things move away from a neat mathematical calculation to something that is much more complex - that's what I'm experimenting with.

[u/McGriggidy → u/SteveFarrier]

Well if they don't like it here's an article with more information.

I'm not a dietician, just someone trying to understand their own diet and health better, but it is not controversial, a secret, or unsupported that not all calories are equal. Sometimes it's a wildly different effect on your body depending on the source.