After going through some forums where they still believe in calories in and out (i still believe in it for a large part) they came with the explanation that obese people in many studies under report what they eat and so make things look worse then it acutally is.

After reading more and doing my own research i found proof of this independent from the author who suggested it (Lyle mc Donald).

With this being true it invalidates many studies that are not done under 100% control (ie locking people up in a laboratory 24/7 and feeding them instead of letting them eat themselves.)

I found this quite interesting as this does invalidate loads of research. Its scary actually, also sad as the 24/7 laboratory research is both expensive and inconvenient

http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJM199212313272701

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/71/1/130.short

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7072625

http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/29/12/2726.full.pdf.

the calories in and out is also not exactly.

If you eat the same calories in sugar and fat or in protein will make a big difference.

Or if you want it more extreme, if you replace half your calorie intake with vodka, you won't get fat (or only your liver).

It won't be the same if you eat 3000 calorie in one meal or in 5 meals, etc etc

So it is more a general guideline for average situations.

I am not saying calories in and out is exact. I am not that rigid in it plus people burn calories at different rates. What i was going on about was that if people report stuff like this wrong during studies the whole studies are invalid.

I am not that rigid in calories in vs calories out. But i do know that once you know for yourself how many calories you use (logging what you eat and look if your body-weight stays the same or not) and then decrease on that amount you will loose weight.

It is a tool and nothing more as a tool.