However, nutrition is chemistry. It is not one-size-fits-all simple addition and subtraction in terms of caloric values. As I pointed out above, if I consumed 3,000 calories a day primarily via sweets and carby processed starches and swam my four or five miles a week, I'd get weak and I'd get pudgy. If I consume those same 3,000 calories a day via very few sweets and mostly animal protein, fats, veggies/fruits, and some very basic carbs, I will be lean and vital. Same amount of calories, same amount of exercise, different outcomes.
Thinking solely calories-in, calories-out, is flawed. It is why DIETS DON'T WORK.
Your comments, unfortunately, don't support what we know to be true about human nutrition and chemistry.
Michael Phelps consumes, on average, 12,000 calories a day when he's in training. He's an admitted junk food junkie who loves processed food. If what you say were true, he'd be obese. But he's not exactly the poster boy for the low carb diet. You can feed a lab rat anything you want, but he won't get fat if you keep him on the treadmill for eight hours a day.
Just a few generations ago, obesity in this country was rare, even though our diet was heavily carbohydrate in make up. As a matter of fact, much of what we ate contained the evil, high GI white flour. But we didn't get fat because we worked like mad. Our genetics haven't changed, but our lifestyle certainly has. This is much simpler than you want to make it. Like I said about there being a serious lack of common sense today.
You can believe what you want to believe, but you cannot not repeal the first law of thermodynamics. And no amount of anecdotes or unscientific examples can make it so.
Finny, you get weak and pudgy because you are not getting adequate protein. You were also losing muscle mass which uses calories at a more rapid rate than fat and some other tissues.