No, we’re not discussing CICO. We’re discussing your inability to recognize that the OP used the phrase “eating normally” to describe dieters returning to their normal eating habits (ie, how they ate prior to dieting), and your resulting attack on the OP.
Normal for them, not your normal. Nobody asked you for your personal definition of normal. Again, reading comprehension. Get some.
You really need to work on that reading comprehension. Valmond stated that people will regain weight when they return to eating normally after dieting.
You claim that’s not how physics work, then move the goal posts stating “if people only eat what they need, they won’t gain the weight back.” Well no shit Sherlock, but they’re not eating normally. They’re gaining the weight back if they go back to eating normally.
Quit being so quick to attack folk and read the fucking post.
Most people don’t count calories. You said it yourself, a few posts below. Are you going to start redefining “normal” now to meet your argument?
Did you miss the “when you start eating normally again” bit?
You can rant all you want about the laws of physics, but you might want to practice your reading comprehension.
I’ve got several years of experience riding motorcycles. It’s taught me to read traffic. I see a gap in a line of traffic like that, it’s either a driver who’s smart enough not to block an intersection (rare), or someone letting another someone out.
Very much the point. Building a boat is labor intensive. The materials are relatively inexpensive, compared to the time invested in building. The person selling that used Pocketship was likely the builder, and sees value in their time spent building it.
That ~50 year old Westerly? That labor is long gone. The previous owner did invest his time in a partial refit, but relinquished his interest when he stopped paying storage fees and let a lien be placed on it. The club has no time invested, just the lost storage fees, but would rather minimize future loss; an abandoned boat takes up space that would otherwise be generating revenue for them. The club members (nearly all power boaters) see little value in the boat itself. Any revenue gained from scrapping it would likely exceed the cost to scrap the fiberglass hull (again, a labor intensive process).
She really is a cool boat, though. I’m having a great time completing the refit, and I don’t see my labor invested as lost when I’m enjoying the process as much as I am.
Boats are weird. I’ve looked at buying kit from CLC to build a 15’ Pocketship: about $12,000 US. Buying a used one, a couple years old? $15k.
Meanwhile, my local yacht club had a 26’ 1969 Westerly Centaur one step away from being crushed. Prior owner stopped paying storage fees and refused further contact, so the club put a lien on it. I picked it up cheap, $500. Nobody bothered cutting the lock off the companionway; it was chock full of tools and supplies the prior owner was using to refit it.
I’ve dropped some cash into finishing the refit, but nowhere near what I would have spent on a 15’ Pocketship, and I’ve got a much more capable boat. There are deals out there.
They’re not supposed to answer to the DOJ.
Seems that whenever Trump is involved, a lot of things that aren’t supposed to happen keep happening.
The legal system can piss on a person and tell them it’s raining, and you’d be willing to drink it.
Please provide references demonstrating that the founding fathers defined “shall” to include an implicit inclusion of “only”, “exclusively”, or any similar verbiage.
I’ll wait.
Please point out the word “only” in Section 5 to me. I must be blind: “The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”
“I would expect that a goodly number of states will say whoever the Democratic candidate is, you’re off the ballot, and others, for the Republican candidate, you’re off the ballot. It will come down to just a handful of states that are going to decide the presidential election. That’s a pretty daunting consequence,” the chief justice, John Roberts, said during oral argument. (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/04/trump-scotus-colorado-ruling)
Damn inconsistent of them, being concerned about consequences after the current court’s previous rulings.
Keep your religion out of our government. You have no right pushing your religious beliefs upon others through the use of government.
Investigating is one thing; persecuting with nothing more than suspicion is quite another.
Standing close to a window above the second floor, eh?
Not if it leads to your excuses and justifications of “war was always like this. No need to change it.”
Absolutely disgusting, down to the very core of my being. I want nothing to do with your beliefs.
Be better.
Your views and beliefs are as pungent as a fifty five gallon drum of pig manure left in the summer sun for a week.
I’d be happy to leave them with you, except for your stated desire to force them upon others. May you never succeed.
Quote by the OP, emphasis mine: “Your body probably will go full panic mode and store back as much as possible as soon as you starts [sic] to eat normally again. I’d advice agains [sic] doing anything so violent, and just lower your food intake to a bit under normal.”
After which you attack the OP for violating the laws of physics. The OP didn’t attack CICO, promote bunk science, or deny climate. Neither am I.
You’ve got the personality of dog shit and an equivalent reading comprehension. Quit gaslighting.