Zaine comments on Optimizing for attractiveness - Less Wrong

13 Post author: MrMind 31 May 2013 09:14AM

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

Comments (219)

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

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 01 June 2013 07:26:06PM 9 points [-]

There is no thermodynamic law stating that fat cells must release fat just because your body needs it. If you're built so that weight loss is impossible and you try eating less, your metabolism slows down - possibly in much the same way it would as if you tried eating less and you had no fat cells whatsoever. I can't cite studies but wouldn't be particularly surprised to see that muscle gets cannibalized instead of fat being lost, if you try to eat less than the most slowed metabolism needs. And if most metabolically disprivileged people stop trying to eat below their minimal metabolic rate before doing significant damage to themselves, that's just the survival instinct kicking in. I would seriously not be surprised to find that fat people have starved to death without their fat cells releasing fat, and blinded by preconceptions, nobody managed to notice or note down when this occurred. But I would expect that to be rare - most people, if their body tells them they're starving to death, will eat. This gets cited as weakness of will.

Metabolically privileged people assume that if you eat less, your fat cells will release fat. (Bitter laughter.) No. We don't have energy storage units like you do, we have energy retention units. Calories go in, they don't come out. Or if they do, it's on special occasions we don't understand how to predict or trigger, and which don't have any obvious relation to attempts to eat less or exercise more. The laws of thermodynamics do not require that a physical fat cell physically release stored lipids when you eat less or exercise more - and if your fat cells are malfunctioning, they just won't.

In that case medical interventions to remove fat directly are inadvisable as the fat will simply be regained, psychological treatment is required instead.

This is simply wrong. If you start out metabolically disprivileged, medical interventions to directly remove fat result in reduced appetite as your fat cells no longer suck glucose and fatty acids out of your bloodstream.

Comment author: Zaine 01 June 2013 10:07:11PM *  2 points [-]

If you undergo ketosis your humoural triglycerides will be lysed.

Other people have written much on undergoing ketosis for weight loss, if you're interested; beware though that much of their weight loss comes from loss of glycogen and water stores. Keeping yourself hydrated mitigates the latter, but liver glycogen stores will be depleted. Absent readily available glycogen, your body will break down humoural trigylcerides as it is your only remaining source of energy; glycogen stored in your muscles is left untouched lest you exercise extreme physical exertion. I now speculate, but at this point your body has become accustomed to using fats as its main energy source. If you enter into any sort of fasted state, be it through a caloric deficit, intermittent fasting, sleeping, etcetera, your body will lipolyse adipose cells for energy; this must happen or you will die - whatever prevented this previously will have been circumvented. Actually, if verily your body is so stubborn it won't touch your adipose tissue, first you'd lose your skeletal muscle - then you'd die.

These are the physiological properties - if they don't apply to you, then whatever genetic mutation causes your body's nonconformity is unknown and I'd venture to guess has other effects as well.

If anyone tries this, pay attention to how fruity your urine/breath smells. If it becomes an overpowering scent, your blood pH may be too high. Either stop or take measures to rebalance your pH.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 01 June 2013 10:48:21PM 8 points [-]

A zero-carb diet for a couple of weeks did not produce any ketosis as measured by a ketosis stick. Also lipolysis != dead fat cells.

Comment author: jimrandomh 04 June 2013 08:28:27PM 1 point [-]

A zero-carb diet for a couple of weeks did not produce any ketosis as measured by a ketosis stick.

The most likely explanation is that you were eating a large amount of excess protein, most of which turns into glucose before it turns into ATP, and this was supplying (or nearly supplying) your nerve cells' energy needs and inhibiting ketosis.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 02 June 2013 10:02:51AM 0 points [-]

Lack of ketosis supplies at least part of an explanation of what's going on with your metabolism. A fast google doesn't supply any information about why ketosis might not happen, but it seems like a topic worth researching.

Comment author: Zaine 02 June 2013 04:05:01AM *  0 points [-]

[L]ipolysis != dead fat cells.

Of course.

If you have too many amino acids in your blood your body doesn't need to undergo ketosis. The generally recommended ratio is 65% fat or higher, %30 protein or less, and %5 carbohydrates or less.


Of course.

Sorry, I just realized we had a point of confusion due to a lack of clarity in my expression. I hope my edits are clearer.

Comment author: wedrifid 02 June 2013 07:57:40AM *  1 point [-]

If you undergo ketosis your fat cells will be lysed. Anecdotal reports aside, physiologically that must happen unless you are incapable of it (a genetic mutation which would - speculatively - have far-ranging effects).

Why must that happen? Ketosis means that lipolysis is occuring. Lipolysis does not inherently require that fat cells must be lysed as a physiological inevitability. ie. The fat that is to be broken down can itself come from diet instead of the lysing of fat cells.