Login or register


Last status update:
Gender: male
Date Signed Up:5/24/2011
Last Login:9/29/2016
Comment Ranking:#6194
Highest Content Rank:#512
Highest Comment Rank:#1246
Content Thumbs: 9683 total,  10607 ,  924
Comment Thumbs: 15954 total,  17754 ,  1800
Content Level Progress: 71% (71/100)
Level 196 Content: Anon Annihilator → Level 197 Content: Anon Annihilator
Comment Level Progress: 64% (640/1000)
Level 313 Comments: Wizard → Level 314 Comments: Wizard
Content Views:92082
Times Content Favorited:860 times
Total Comments Made:3412
FJ Points:6902
Favorite Tags: no tags (2) | Spider Bro (2) | tags (2) | The Game (2)

latest user's comments

#59 - You still haven't proven your point. Have you ever actually fo…  [+] (8 replies) 05/26/2016 on Goldmine of Fatlogic in the... 0
User avatar
#96 - lolollo (05/27/2016) [-]
Psst, when you don't support a claim, it can't be considered valid
#81 - lolollo (05/26/2016) [-]
It's called having a naturally slow metabolism, going into starvation mode due to a lack of caloric intake, and not being able to do as much physical exercise due to half of your exercise being moving your body around.

But by all means, continue to bitch and moan about my argumentative technique while you use ad hominem to try and make your point.
User avatar
#95 - thedungeonmaster (05/26/2016) [-]
Well no, you're just wrong. Plain and simple.
User avatar
#74 - lolollo (05/26/2016) [-]
Every single one of those sources are as outdated in their logic as using simple height and weight to calculate BMI. They're all based on an average.

Besideswhich, it ignores the adaptive phenomenon where delving into extreme starvation will actually put your body on lock down, where it starts to actively burn calories slower due to the subconscious perception of an environment low in sources of food.

Here's a simple source on it: authoritynutrition.com/starvation-mode/

The point is that everyone presumes caloric intake and output to be simple addition and subtraction. In truth it looks more like 2nd semester algebra.
User avatar
#79 - thedungeonmaster (05/26/2016) [-]
I never said it was a sustainable way to lose weight. My argument is that there's no way a fat woman, or anyone for that matter, ate like that, did that exercise, and didn't lose a single pound. And where are all these "non average" body types you think are so common? Even if those sources are based on the average body type, no one will eat 1000 calories a day and exercise regularly without seeing some sort of weight loss, even if it's temporary. That's all I was trying to get across. You must be some fat fuck in denial to be defending your side this hard. Why don't you try it for real? Even for two weeks, eat 1000 calories a day and exercise 5 days a week and then tell me you didn't experience any sort of weight loss. Your constant tendency to start arguments on FJ might make it difficult to find the time to, but seriously give it a try.
User avatar
#60 - lolollo (05/26/2016) [-]
Post them then. It's a little silly to claim to have them, but then not take the simple copy/paste to actually post them.
User avatar
#71 - thedungeonmaster (05/26/2016) [-]
And I see now that you just do this for fun and I fell for it, so my efforts are wasted.
User avatar
#69 - thedungeonmaster (05/26/2016) [-]



www.freedieting.com/tools/calorie_calculator.htm I even used this calculator to see how many calories are needed for extreme weight loss on a 25 year old female who is 5'0 115 lbs and it's still above 1000. So if you still want to argue that an obese woman can eat 1000 calories a day while exercising 5 times a week can't lose a single pound, then that's your issue.