Energy in clearly matters, but equally as important is what happens inside the body once it’s consumed. An extreme end of the scale, admittedly, but it serves a point to pose the question to those who deny any impact of CIM: if insulin does not or cannot drive obesity then how do we explain that those with insulin deficiency lose weight no matter how much they eat?
No further questions.
There is an irony that when it comes to proposed or known human mechanisms that when it comes to fructose-metabolism etc. the body is infallible, but when it comes to calories suddenly it's all about "...but humans aren't closed machines"
But you are right that calories in is not the whole story. There is definitely a distinction to be made between calories in vs absorbed/utilisable energy. However, in the context of weight-gain/loss it seems to be a bit of a red-herring, because I fail to see any action/reaction of metabolism that doesn't subtract calories/energy from the initial pay-load i.e If the food i eat is said to contain 2000kcal, there doesn't seem to be anyway that that a person could end up absorbing, for instance 2200kcal.
Of course, there are mechanisms by which the body can dial back metabolism and effect energy-expenditure such that we don't burn off as much of the initial given caloric load, and in more extreme case to perhaps lead to some weigh-gain. I'm not familiar with all the exact mechanisms, as I'm but a lay-person. Suffice to say, these mechanisms can be over-ruled, and we can see the devastating effects in those who intentionally starve themselves into anorexia etc.
But, as I already said, in the context of weight-management, this disparity between calories pushed into the cake-hole and what is utilisable only reinforces the deficit aspect of dieting.
So, if someone has a known (Let's say they've been metabolically-tested) TDEE of 3000kcal, per day. If their intention is to slowly lose weight (Slow enough to try and avoid the body getting scared of starvation), they might decide to stick to a small daily deficit of 300kcal. And let's say the cost of digestion, energy lost to TEF etc. robs that initial pay-load of another 70kcal, how is that not of benefit to someone trying to lose weight using calories in/out?
How does the body not being a machine and losing energy to its various processes falsify the claim that cutting a certain amount of calories in, at the face, is a good strategy for losing weight/fat?
those who deny any impact of CIM: if insulin does not or cannot drive obesity then how do we explain that those with insulin deficiency lose weight no matter how much they eat?
Firstly, Im not denying that CIM has any impact, I just believe that it's a small part of a much bigger story, and that that story is full of countless (literally) observable instances that falsify CIM as an explanation for the obesity pandemic.
Now it seems that Taubes has somewhat dialled back his message (Perhaps wasting $40million of private investment in debunking ones self will do that to ya
), but now he seems content with showing potential favourable differences in caloric-burn, over carbs make us fat. Maybe that message will eventually filter down to the masses, because there are still people on this forum and the rest of eh low-carb world who believe that carbs = obesity.
I'm also not saying insulin does not or cannot play a part in it. Of course it does...mechanistically-so. But mechanisms are just one part of a bigger whole, and we can observe in many cases where human outcomes fly in the face of proposed mechanisms; no doubt, in part due to the fact that humans aren't closed systems
As for your question, I'm afraid I'm not knowledgable enough to explain that situation. Would be interested if you find out.
I'd say that when it comes to dropping the mic, that you're getting ahead of yourself
----------
----------
As an aside, it's perhaps worth pointing out that I used to believe a lot of this stuff also. Years ago, I experimented with low-carb, keto, primal etc. I used to live out in the middle-of-nowhere, and had to take advantage of fewer shopping trips to stock up on huge amounts of meat I (not so fondly, at this point) remember dividing up portions of liver, chicken, cow into separate freezer-bags. Ahh, the good ol' days. Had it been a year or so later, I could've got my animals killed right in front of me, as my friends started rearing their own pigs, chickens etc.
I bought into the whole low-carb idea, and was a regular reader of Sisson's now defunct 'Daily Apple' and Richard Nikoley's blog. My own experiential misgivings aside, things started to fall-apart when Nikoley and a guy who went by the name 'Duck Dodgers' started experimenting with potatoes and resistant-starch. And much (I'm sure) to Sisson's chagrin, many on his forum also started experimenting with potatoes. Many seemed to report breaking through long-held weight-loss plateaus and reported feelings of greater energy and well-being.