There’s no doubt that appetite and everything around dieting and weight loss has a huge range of variation in behavior and what works. In addition to learning to separate exercise from food, the other thing that took me too long to learn is that weight loss is more mental exercise than physical. Figuring out how to trick myself into calorie tracking and habit forming isn’t easy, and my tricks on myself clearly don’t work for everyone.
The result was that I wasn't superhungry when I started eating. I also tried to eat high protein, high fiber meals so I'd stay full for longer.
Vegans live on average 10 year longer!
The hunger you feel the first day btw is not "real" hunger, it's just your stomach growling and you being used to eat. After you ignore hunger for 3 days, your body stops wanting food. That's if you want to do a cleanse. (I've never done one though)
That being said 'clesnding' has been disproven scientifically so many times, I think there must be a Necromancer for bad nutritional myths out there. I just can't understand why this myth (together with others) always comes back from the grave.
Regarding vegans. Yes a primarily plant-based diet has been shown in studies to be beneficial to health. Depending on the environment of the test subjects. For practical purposes in western/northern societies that holds true.
The important word is plant based. Because without either taking extreme care of the (especially) micro nutrients as a vegan you either need to substitute or be extra cautious. And of omnivores with a primarily plant based diet also look at their nutritional balance, caloric intake and such, the difference between diets in the studied groups vanished.
So one could say if eating primarily plant based and being mindful of our diet and nutritional needs, there is no difference scientifically.
The only remaining difference is one of personal values and believes. The question of how (or if) do we want to have animals treated to firm our diet. Personally I would add to look at how do we want the humans in the food production chain treated as well and how do we want our diets to have an ecological impact.
But as said - these are existential because deeply personal value questions that can't be scientifically discussed.
I feel like a non-lethal poison like a flea killer or something would cause a 10 year lifespan drop, so it would be surprising if meat were as deadly as flea killer poison.
But better way for regular people is just do OMAD. You get used to it after first three days, which are brutal. So, strong motivation is required, but still easier than real cut for bodybuilders or fighters.
Interesting if it's actually true. I doubt there are any good studies about that, though.
This is my experience as well. I also had a trainer confirm this.
I used to eat before and after a workout because I bought into the idea of the body needing fuel to power the workout and fuel to recover. I ended up eating when I wasn’t hungry and feeling heavy or sluggish.
She said the appetite suppression after a workout could last 30-120min and to only eat when I felt hungry. I felt much better after adjusting my eating habits.
I think moderate exercise can help with getting used to not over-eating. More strenuous exercise seems to make the body crave larger meals often negating any calories burned.
It doesn't really suppress the urge to eat though. Unfortunately I had to learn the hard way that I must count my calories, I have been counting them for 15+ years now and it has become part of my life.
Whether any one in particular subscribed to that school of though or not, marathon running is an outlier event, and isn't what most people would consider as part of a regular, healthy, exercise regime that one might do many times a week.
And while it is not for most people (and definitely not me), there are people I know who thrive on running marathons and the training for it, while otherwise living perfectly normal lives. There is a hypothesis that cursorial / persistence / endurance hunting was a a stage in our ancestors' evolution, and that we have inherited some of the traits of that lifestyle.
But it's mostly a hand-wavy assertion too, and there's other evidence against it. There are cultures around the world (low populations, to be sure) where repeatedly traversing 26.2 miles a day would not be considered particularly abnormal.
Even marathon runners run marathons only on competitions. The chance of injury or sickness after is too high in order to make it worthy. And after, you are supposed to rest for multiple days even if not injured. Again, 26.2 miles is 8 hours of hiking and you are pretty much guaranteed to be ok after it.
I am not intending to dispute the fact that you ate more to compensate - you say you did, and I don't doubt it. Nor am I doubting that weight gain is a function of net caloric intake; it is just a suggestion of another way exercise may affect this.
FWIW most of my exercise is running, hiking or kayaking. I am not sure (or perhaps that should be 'even more doubtful') that kayaking has the same effect.