http://bigthink.com/21st-century-sp irituality/rethinking-th

>>37684625
I don't really wanna read this shit, does /fit/ agree?

File: 85771.jpg (133KB, 443x950px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 443x950px

Screenshot wise most is correct

>>37684718
literally 5 is the only one i can't see jesus fucking christ i hope this is a troll

>>37684625
It seems to be one of those articles that isn't even wrong, just a waste of time in general.

Except... they hate on calories and have biased "scientists" talking about it, but it doesn't appear they even understand how calories in food are even counted.

Just counting calories is obviously retarded from a health standpoint. If you get all your calories from sugar, you'll have enough energy to do your tasks, but there's no way in hell you'll have all the nutrients you need. THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT YOU CAN'T CONTROL YOUR FUCKING WEIGHT THROUGH IT.

Counting calories is the BEST way to control weight and they're fucking EVIL to attack it like this. Also:

> Such thinking would be fine if the low-fat, low-calorie diets humans have been enduring for three decades resulted in positive results. The opposite is true

The opposite is true because you FAT FUCKS keep eating far too many calories! Your diets are NOT low-fat nor are they low-calorie! Holy shit!

File: needless74cruzbladeyamadatrapcrossdressinggirls_squadcomedycute.png (521KB, 844x1200px) Image search: [Google]

521KB, 844x1200px

>>37684735
Have you ever fapped to traps or gotten chub looking at your goal body? Don't worry bro, you aren't alone

>>37684718
>inb4 everyone claims they can't see the 8 in number 5

File: 28w13jo.jpg (15KB, 476x356px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 476x356px

>>37684625
These are pretty good.

I have minor disagreements with #'s 6 and 8. Moderation is key and healthy snacking (nuts, vegetables, etc) works for me to keep binge-inducing hunger at bay.

#7 is absolute bullshit. You have to count calories.

>>37684625
5 is a huuuge exaggeration. Fiber intake negates all detriment associated with sugar intake.

Number 7 is pure retardation.

The rest is legit.

Sat fats are GOAT

>>37686834
0/10 b8

>>37684625
All of them are correct except 7 and 3. I don't know much about #3. But for sure, you should count calories. A lot of failed "diets" are simply fatties who think they were eating below their TDEE but were obviously eating above it.