Redpill me on body psychic and biology /fit/. Is it true that

>>37054011

Not really.

The idea of a 'set point' does kind of exist but its less 'genetic imperative' and more 'what you are used to weighing'. People tend to backslide on their diets whether they're gaining or losing and end up in the same place they started because they're still eating the same.

>>37054011
Statisticly probably yes,
Scientificly speaking, no

http://wholehealthsource.org/2009/12/body-fat-setpoint.html
http://wholehealthsource.org/2010/01/body-fat-setpoint-part-ii-mechanisms-of.html
http://wholehealthsource.org/2010/01/body-fat-setpoint-part-iii-dietary.html
http://wholehealthsource.org/2010/01/body-fat-setpoint-part-iv-changing.html

>>37054200
Post legit scientific journals not some health forum

>>37054133
explain

No this is obviously retarded.

File: 2015-11-23 11_56_07-Donald J. Trump on Twitter_ __@SeanSean252_ @WayneDupreeShow @Rockprincess818 @C.png (353KB, 637x474px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 637x474px

>>37054011
no

>>37054011
whether it's a meme or not, I've never heard the claim it'll be pinned "forever", only a "for some years".

>>37054011
It's the mind and its relationship with food that is the cause for ecto/meso/endo. Same with disorders, just amplified.

>>37054011
No, the set point is adjustable and more of a set range.

I work in a lab researching homeostatic appetitive behavior and metabolism.

>>37057921

How broad is the range?