Adipose tissue retains an epigenetic memory of obesity after weight loss

Calorie counting is the only truly reliable way to lose weight

That's clearly not true. Calorie counting can work if you stick to it and aren't shit at estimating the calories in food. Almost any diet can work if you are able to stick with it. Appetite suppressants like amphetamines seen to work too. We've also seen that the new diabetes drugs actually work.

“Any diet” is still putting you at a net caloric deficit. There is no other principle that can explain weight loss that I know of. Whether you’re counting calories to achieve that deficit or following a “diet” it comes down to the exact same thing. Counting calories just demystifies the process of weight loss.

The only reliable way to lose weight is through a caloric deficit. And the only reliable way to be on a caloric deficit is through counting your calories. If you're dieting without actually counting your calories, then at best you are only hoping and guessing that your diet is sufficient enough to put you in a caloric deficit.

The only true reliable way is to burn more than you eat. Counting calories is a way to keep track of that, but it's only going to be so-so accurate unless you only eat labeled food. I will certainly not measure the weight of a banana I eat, and anything else is just a very rough estimate as a banana can be twice the size of another banana.

In general, when I was losing weight I did not really need to count calories, I just ate less than I did. And this worked because I was always hungry especially initially, until the body adapts. If you're always going to check "can I eat this one more thing dear calculator" I'd say you're not really ready to lose weight because tormenting yourself like this every day you will burn out before you can make a dent.

> I will certainly not measure the weight of a banana I eat, and anything else is just a very rough estimate as a banana can be twice the size of another banana.

This is the wrong way to look at it. Sometimes you'll have a larger banana, sometimes a smaller banana, but overall it'll average out. What you need is consistency to compare to your own previous measurements, not perfect accuracy.

For example: By counting my calories and keeping track of my weight, I've learned that I burn about 2200 calories per day. If I went over my foods and measured them perfectly it probably wouldn't be that number, but because I'm consistent in how I measure it I can know with certainty whether I'm above or below that limit. I've been able to reliably control my weight for a few years now because of this and I'm not even measuring, just eyeballing how much of things I use.

You don't have to count calories to eat in a caloric deficit. Counting is not the only reliable way to hit a deficit. Tons and tons of people on GLP-1 drugs are not counting calories but are in a deficit.

I'd argue that taking a drug to suppress your appetite is way more extreme and unhealthy than simply counting calories, but I guess to each their own. And yes even in that case you're still guessing and hoping you're in a caloric deficit because different foods will satiate your hunger for different caloric cost. If you're not counting calories you could be cutting calories too aggressively or not aggressively enough, or you might not be getting required macronutrient intake with your given diet.

This thread is not discussing the relative merits of different weight loss mechanisms. Your claim was simply that calorie counting is required for weight loss; it is not.

> If you're not counting calories you could be cutting calories too aggressively or not aggressively enough

This, too, can be monitored without calorie counting (e.g., periodic scale measurements will tell you this).

Wrong. My claim is that the only reliable way for weight loss is through calorie counting. You can guestimate it without counting calories but that is not reliable. You can't rely on taking a drug indefinitely for weight loss.