Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Is CICO the new Keto?
Options
Replies
-
I can't seem to get the nested quoting to work right, so I'm going to try to respond this way... hopefully it works.
- I didn't take it as suggesting of a conflict. It implies the aren't necessarily correlated, which they aren't. Yes, for some, simply being more mindful of how much they eat will lead them to being more mindful of what they eat. But that's certainly not the case for everyone.
- I don't think it's exclusive of other diets at all. Cohen was interviewed relative to CICO, so that's what her comments are about. I didn't take her comments as at all relative/relevant to other diets/approaches. About =/= exclusive to.
- Again, I didn't take her comments as exclusive to CICO, only relevant to.
- Again, not exclusive to.
Cohen repeatedly used words like "can" and "may" rather than "do" or "will". She was asked questions about CICO, not how CICO compared to other diets (as near as I can tell). Her comments were an assessment of CICO, not the pros/cons of CICO vs other diets.1 -
But the basic problem with the entire article is that CICO is NOT a diet... it is an energy formula that relates calorie intake to calorie expenditure.14
-
-
She repeatedly said if you calorie count you will do this (become obsessed with counting, for example), and it's not sustainable. I don't think a reading of "like any diet people could fall into negative habits" is really a correct reading of what she said and certainly not how it's presented. The point is that CICO is a bad way to lose weight because you will (supposedly) do all these dumb thing (like stop paying attention to nutrients).
And the article is about CICO vs. other ways to diet (Cohen's preferred way to diet is stated: don't count, fill up on fruits and veg, eat lots of small meals/snacks). I'm pro vegetables and fruits (one reason I like counting or logging is it's easy to insure you are getting plenty) but I also found counting helpful for a while and I have always hated and could not stand lots of small meals. Which is fine, since following CICO (which is not a diet plan or the same thing as counting, another dumb thing about how it was presented), one can arrange calories as one likes.7 -
Agree to disagree, I guess. I've read the article a few times and fail to see Cohen say any of those things will happen all of the time to every one. I read it as, "CICO is the new fad diet, but here are some of the potential pitfalls"... not "CICO, failure waiting to happen."
To me, reading this thread, it feels like there are some people emotionally tied to CICO which impacts how they read and react to things that question or criticize CICO.3 -
The problem is that it conflates CICO - which is a fact of physics under which all fat loss happens always for everyone regardless of how you do it - with calorie counting. And isn't even correct in most of the things it says as it's a mish-mash of two different things, to the endeffect as amusedmonkey pointed out that some of the things it claims specifically about CICO could be said equally about her approach, or any approach for that matter, because they're all governed by CICO, whether the advocate of the approach admits it or not.11 -
stevencloser wrote: »
The problem is that it conflates CICO - which is a fact of physics under which all fat loss happens always for everyone regardless of how you do it - with calorie counting. And isn't even correct in most of the things it says as it's a mish-mash of two different things.
Can you elaborate? I understand your point about CICO being the fundamental determinant of fat loss, but you lose me after that.0 -
She says you "often stop counting nutrients" -- I'd like to know the number of people focusing on nutrients before who stop, to support that "often." Plus, admittedly, this is a pet peeve of mine, since it's so common on MFP for people to make false claims that CICO means not caring about nutrient.
More clearly, she says: "you become obsessed with numbers." This sounds unquestionably like a claim that this WILL happen to everyone.
She then goes on to say: "it's not sustainable." Again, a broad "this will happen" kind of statement -- not it might not be sustainable for everyone, but "it's not sustainable."
She adds to that: "People who cut calories and lose weight think they'll be able to eat normally again afterwards, when it actual fact cutting calories means it needs to keep happening."
No, you don't need to keep cutting calories. You can't eat like you were when gaining weight, of course, but doing calorie counting does not -- as she claims -- mean you think you can.
She's thus either an idiot or just saying what it takes to get a Daily Mail spread (which might make her worse than an idiot). My opinion, anyway.10 -
stevencloser wrote: »
The problem is that it conflates CICO - which is a fact of physics under which all fat loss happens always for everyone regardless of how you do it - with calorie counting. And isn't even correct in most of the things it says as it's a mish-mash of two different things.
Can you elaborate? I understand your point about CICO being the fundamental determinant of fat loss, but you lose me after that.
Edited in a bit afterwards.1 -
The only thing I can think of that makes any sense to the "people who cut calories and lose weight think they'll be able to eat normally again afterwards, when it actual fact cutting calories means it needs to keep happening" bit is that she meant that one's maintenance Calories will almost certainly be lower (provided one doesn't up his/her TDEE via movement/exercise) than they were before losing weight.
But, that's not actually what she said. And, with the other head-scratching/shaking bits, I'm not sure that's really what she meant, anyway.3 -
Sadly, it's now getting picked up by more "mainstream" sources as well:
http://www.foxnews.com/lifestyle/2017/11/12/most-popular-weight-loss-diet-on-reddit-would-never-be-recommended-by-nutritionists.html
Even the title just irks me to no end!2 -
-
The author is dismissive simply because she is expecting a more specific diet to accomplish her goals. She is also confusing calorie counting with the principle of CICO. Some need to be told specifically what to do. Others want the freedom of flexibility to play with calories and macros.
Overall shows a lack of understanding of CICO and overwhelming bias. Extremely poor reporting.8 -
The main problem I see is what others have said, that CICO is not calorie counting. Calorie counting is often not sustainable for many but CICO is how everyone loses weight.... of course CI<CO really isn't sustainable either in most cases. Most people regain the weight.
The title irks me. What does keto have to do with anything here? Unless she is implying her misunderstanding of CICO is like many people's misunderstanding of keto? Ignorance all around?
Dumb article.6 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »She says you "often stop counting nutrients" -- I'd like to know the number of people focusing on nutrients before who stop, to support that "often." Plus, admittedly, this is a pet peeve of mine, since it's so common on MFP for people to make false claims that CICO means not caring about nutrient.
More clearly, she says: "you become obsessed with numbers." This sounds unquestionably like a claim that this WILL happen to everyone.
She then goes on to say: "it's not sustainable." Again, a broad "this will happen" kind of statement -- not it might not be sustainable for everyone, but "it's not sustainable."
She adds to that: "People who cut calories and lose weight think they'll be able to eat normally again afterwards, when it actual fact cutting calories means it needs to keep happening."
No, you don't need to keep cutting calories. You can't eat like you were when gaining weight, of course, but doing calorie counting does not -- as she claims -- mean you think you can.
She's thus either an idiot or just saying what it takes to get a Daily Mail spread (which might make her worse than an idiot). My opinion, anyway.
Again, sorry for my crappy quoting skills...- Here is the complete sentence: "When people calorie count, they often stop counting nutrients and instead just look at the numbers." I saw often as the key word, which is subjective. You saw stop as they key word, which barely even registered for me because of my own bias.
- The complete sentence: "CICO might be weight loss 101, but it's not sustainable. People who cut calories and lose weight think they'll be able to eat normally again afterwards, when it actual fact cutting calories means it needs to keep happening" I'll give you that one. That is more of an absolute statement. I don't disagree with what I believe her sentiment was, but it's a bad statement.
- I read it as people think they will be able to return their original ways of eating, which they can't/won't. So the way I read it, her statement made perfect sense.
2 -
stevencloser wrote: »
The problem is that it conflates CICO - which is a fact of physics under which all fat loss happens always for everyone regardless of how you do it - with calorie counting. And isn't even correct in most of the things it says as it's a mish-mash of two different things, to the endeffect as amusedmonkey pointed out that some of the things it claims specifically about CICO could be said equally about her approach, or any approach for that matter, because they're all governed by CICO, whether the advocate of the approach admits it or not.
Again, I didn't read her comments as exclusive of other approaches, only relevant to CICO within the context of the article/interview.0 -
The author is dismissive simply because she is expecting a more specific diet to accomplish her goals. She is also confusing calorie counting with the principle of CICO. Some need to be told specifically what to do. Others want the freedom of flexibility to play with calories and macros.
Overall shows a lack of understanding of CICO and overwhelming bias. Extremely poor reporting.
How many people with weight problems can lose weight (principle of CICO) without some degree of calorie counting? While I agree they aren't the same thing, they certainly go hand in hand much of the time.**
** full disclaimer, I'm a biased calorie counter.3 -
I dread the influx of people misunderstanding what CICO means. The willful misrepresentation of a simple energy balance equation to conflate it with a bunch of things it has absolutely nothing to do with only confounds the weight loss process and I can't help but feel that it's intentional on the part of people looking to sell their own brand of weight loss magic.12
-
The author is dismissive simply because she is expecting a more specific diet to accomplish her goals. She is also confusing calorie counting with the principle of CICO. Some need to be told specifically what to do. Others want the freedom of flexibility to play with calories and macros.
Overall shows a lack of understanding of CICO and overwhelming bias. Extremely poor reporting.
How many people with weight problems can lose weight (principle of CICO) without some degree of calorie counting? While I agree they aren't the same thing, they certainly go hand in hand much of the time.**
** full disclaimer, I'm a biased calorie counter.
(1) Many. There are other ways to reduce calories (make CO greater than CI) without counting them.
(2) If you find calorie counting helpful, I am mystified as to why you are defending Cohen, who claims it is a bad method. (And yes, I continue to think it is clear from the piece that she is claiming that CICO -- which she confuses with calorie counting -- is worse than the method she advocates, namely eating a bunch of meals, filling up on fruit and veg, and not counting calories.)5
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 392 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 926 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions