DerBerggeist comments on Solved Problems Repository - Less Wrong

25 Post author: Qiaochu_Yuan 27 March 2013 04:51AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (270)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: [deleted] 30 March 2013 02:52:18PM *  1 point [-]

[300-500 kcal's generally touted for muscle preservation for those not on steroids by the internet, but that's still pretty slow and not obvious weightloss against a backdrop of fluctuating water weight]

It is obvious if you weigh yourself every day for a couple months or longer and you know how to do stats.

(FWIW, my weight since 12 February fits to a straight line a + bx where a = (93.74 ± 0.19) kg, b = (−0.018 ± 0.007) kg/day, and x is the time elapsed since 12 February; the RMS of residuals is 0.68 kg. Approximating the posterior pdf of b as a Gaussian, which ought to be close enough given 46 degrees of freedom, I'm 99.42% sure that b < 0.)

Comment author: DerBerggeist 31 March 2013 06:53:58AM 3 points [-]

Haha, well yeah. Though you should hardly need stats if you're recording over a period of months ("golly, I wonder if my 40 lb weight change these past 6 months is just me being dehydrated right now? Maybe I should wait till after I drink my morning 4 gallons just to be sure"). I meant it more on time scales of "between 1 week and 2 weeks", or for where weight loss was very minor due to a tiny caloric deficit.

With more precise measurement (eg, via bodpod) of body composition you would better be able to track smaller changes, too.