But wouldn't any typical adult experience significant weight loss on only 1000 calories per day ? Are you saying that this is not the case, or maybe you are saying that B5 causes fat-loss rather than protein-loss ???
The difference is that most people would go into ketosis - an "energy wasting" state. Not only is ketosis avoided, but so is hunger. (You have to read Leung's paper, or the Jeffrey Dach article for the details. Leung claims that ketosis is the reason most diets fail - and people gain the weight back.
But, only when carbs are involved, right?. I wish I understood exactly how the body differentiates between a high carb meal and a high fat/protein meal, but it seems to.Weight loss is still fundamentally linked to insulin and the body's sensitivity thereof.
I guess if those 1000 calories were all from white sugar, ie. refined carbs, then you will not lose as much weight as if it were vegetables, good fat and protein.
Just watched a sales video for a fat-loss program which claims this isn't true. Calories are all that matters - not the nutrients in the foods. Cites an experiment.
I think you are correct, that with limited food intake in general, there is "enough" B5 which is ubiquitous in most foods. Just not enough to cover how much food we in modern civilization consume.Maybe the paleo diet delivers sufficient B5 to facilitate the dramatic weigh-loss experienced by most, if not all who stay committed to it over an extended period of time. I have never seen anyone fail to drop weight (fat) when they start paleo and continue for at least 30 days, granted my sample group is limited.
But equally as important as nutrition, are sleep and exercise (HIIT and strength), though now I'm starting to get off-topic !
Maybe - this has turned into a long topic, so you may have missed much of the lead in. Again, consistent slow weight loss - without hunger and/or ketosis. Overcoming the reason most diets fail.