Sorry trapper but your entire post here wreaks of someone trying to "bully" the reader. You throw out a lot of esoteric terms w/ little to back it up.
That said - are we even arguing about the same thing? You responded to my post that addressed the "eating at night" myth and you're going off on effects that food has "over the next few months."
Perhaps. I am sick of this "Yes, it is a myth. Calories in versus calories out. It's as simple as that." being portrayed by people as a fact. It's just not so simple, and it's wrong.
I could write long winded responses with references. The problem is you end up explaining most of biochemistry along with it, as the rabbit hole is truly deep. And people still don't get it, because most people even with undergrad degrees in biochem don't (you don't get to see the rabbit hole until you reach postgrad at most unis and read tons of papers).
It's kind of like trying to explain why functional programming is better than OO to someone who just uses excel.
None of the terminology used should be esoteric if you have studied biochemistry. Apologise for the tone, it is really frustrating seeing someone promote the same old myth.
That said - are we even arguing about the same thing? You responded to my post that addressed the "eating at night" myth and you're going off on effects that food has "over the next few months."