why don't the low carb folks believe in CICO?
Replies
-
firm believer in CICO but some people are more insulin sensitive. firm believer weight loss is not a one fits all.
big believer in the below
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/hormonal-weight-loss/
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/female-effect-hormones-determine-female-fat-patterns/
0 -
CICO is a one size fits all.rachylouise87 wrote: »firm believer in CICO but some people are more insulin sensitive. firm believer weight loss is not a one fits all.
big believer in the below
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/hormonal-weight-loss/
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/female-effect-hormones-determine-female-fat-patterns/
Medical conditions just skew one or the other.
0 -
Regardless of medical dysfunction CICO is always accounted for on the outside of the EBE. It's just trickier for those people to get the right equation that works for them.rachylouise87 wrote: »firm believer in CICO but some people are more insulin sensitive. firm believer weight loss is not a one fits all.
big believer in the below
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/hormonal-weight-loss/
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/female-effect-hormones-determine-female-fat-patterns/
0 -
Firm believer that 86.89% (made that up) of the people on these boards don't understand what CICO means and conflate it with a way of eating.0
-
Wow....didn't read this whole thread.
OP - A lot of LCHF acknowledge CICO. Sorry you only focus on those that don't. Sounds like you're just looking to pick a fight or maybe you should rephrase your title.
Reading some of these posts a lot of people make assumptions about LCHF and just make judgements on that. How about instead of talking about something you don't have a clue about you just don't respond? Or at least double check before you do.
LCHF eaters may eat a lot of meat HOWEVER that would also mean getting higher amount of protein than will fit your ratios. Its low carb, high fat, moderate protein. Not high protein (which many assume). Also, when low carbing I eat a lot more veggies than I would otherwise. That is where the bulk of the carbs are coming from.
if you did not read the thread then how can you assume that I am just looking to "pick a fight"...
If you would of taken ten minutes to read the entire thread you would see that I was not picking a fight, and was generally interested in hearing from people how are into the low carb lifestyle..
but way to make assumptions.
To the bolded part. I made no assumptions. I stated what happened in a previous debate and asked or opinion from people who are low carb. You are the one making assumptions. Funny, you comment on a thread that you have not read and know nothing about; yet, you accuse me of doing the very same thing that you did....hypocrite much?0 -
neanderthin wrote: »
Regardless of medical dysfunction CICO is always accounted for on the outside of the EBE. It's just trickier for those people to get the right equation that works for them.rachylouise87 wrote: »firm believer in CICO but some people are more insulin sensitive. firm believer weight loss is not a one fits all.
big believer in the below
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/hormonal-weight-loss/
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/female-effect-hormones-determine-female-fat-patterns/
This. For example, women with PCOS (with or without IR) have lower BMRs (this study, for example, found that non-PCOSers averaged a bmr of 1868 in the control group, 1590 in PCOSers without insulin resistance and 1116 in PCOSers with insulin resistance.) So, theoretically, a woman with PCOS should have a lower calorie goal than that indicated by the average TDEE calculation or MFP. And that takes it all back to CICO in the end.0 -
Wow....didn't read this whole thread.
OP - A lot of LCHF acknowledge CICO. Sorry you only focus on those that don't. Sounds like you're just looking to pick a fight or maybe you should rephrase your title.
Reading some of these posts a lot of people make assumptions about LCHF and just make judgements on that. How about instead of talking about something you don't have a clue about you just don't respond? Or at least double check before you do.
LCHF eaters may eat a lot of meat HOWEVER that would also mean getting higher amount of protein than will fit your ratios. Its low carb, high fat, moderate protein. Not high protein (which many assume). Also, when low carbing I eat a lot more veggies than I would otherwise. That is where the bulk of the carbs are coming from.
if you did not read the thread then how can you assume that I am just looking to "pick a fight"...
If you would of taken ten minutes to read the entire thread you would see that I was not picking a fight, and was generally interested in hearing from people how are into the low carb lifestyle..
but way to make assumptions.
To the bolded part. I made no assumptions. I stated what happened in a previous debate and asked or opinion from people who are low carb. You are the one making assumptions. Funny, you comment on a thread that you have not read and know nothing about; yet, you accuse me of doing the very same thing that you did....hypocrite much?
You state in your title "Why don't the low carb folks believe in CICO?". You seem pretty focused on those few that may claim that when in actuality most do. Especially the long term LCHF people.
And actually that part your bolded wasn't referring to you.0 -
CICO is a one size fits all.rachylouise87 wrote: »firm believer in CICO but some people are more insulin sensitive. firm believer weight loss is not a one fits all.
big believer in the below
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/hormonal-weight-loss/
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/female-effect-hormones-determine-female-fat-patterns/
Medical conditions just skew one or the other.
i dont believe the human body operates the same in every individual. however i can say CICO has worked for me but this time i increased calories by 200 and lost weight. not sure how i can explain. always been a 1200 cal day kinda girl. tried low carb, found it difficult to stick to, i dont believe eating low carb and as many calories as you want being the correct method of doing things because the bottom line CICO, the basic weight loss tool. i can understand doing 1200 calories per day and adjusting macros for your needs but as long as your in deficit you should lose. maybe these people are either eating too many calories, not being consistant with logging or just experiencing normal plateau's? i have just come through one. the body has fixed points with weight it sticks to when gaining and losing so it makes sense.
0 -
Wow....didn't read this whole thread.
OP - A lot of LCHF acknowledge CICO. Sorry you only focus on those that don't. Sounds like you're just looking to pick a fight or maybe you should rephrase your title.
Reading some of these posts a lot of people make assumptions about LCHF and just make judgements on that. How about instead of talking about something you don't have a clue about you just don't respond? Or at least double check before you do.
LCHF eaters may eat a lot of meat HOWEVER that would also mean getting higher amount of protein than will fit your ratios. Its low carb, high fat, moderate protein. Not high protein (which many assume). Also, when low carbing I eat a lot more veggies than I would otherwise. That is where the bulk of the carbs are coming from.
if you did not read the thread then how can you assume that I am just looking to "pick a fight"...
If you would of taken ten minutes to read the entire thread you would see that I was not picking a fight, and was generally interested in hearing from people how are into the low carb lifestyle..
but way to make assumptions.
To the bolded part. I made no assumptions. I stated what happened in a previous debate and asked or opinion from people who are low carb. You are the one making assumptions. Funny, you comment on a thread that you have not read and know nothing about; yet, you accuse me of doing the very same thing that you did....hypocrite much?
You state in your title "Why don't the low carb folks believe in CICO?". You seem pretty focused on those few that may claim that when in actuality most do. Especially the long term LCHF people.
And actually that part your bolded wasn't referring to you.
General message board suggestion: If you see a thread with 9 pages, read them through before writing a comment based on the title alone. Chances are a lot has been discussed in those 9 pages.0 -
Wow....didn't read this whole thread.
OP - A lot of LCHF acknowledge CICO. Sorry you only focus on those that don't. Sounds like you're just looking to pick a fight or maybe you should rephrase your title.
Reading some of these posts a lot of people make assumptions about LCHF and just make judgements on that. How about instead of talking about something you don't have a clue about you just don't respond? Or at least double check before you do.
LCHF eaters may eat a lot of meat HOWEVER that would also mean getting higher amount of protein than will fit your ratios. Its low carb, high fat, moderate protein. Not high protein (which many assume). Also, when low carbing I eat a lot more veggies than I would otherwise. That is where the bulk of the carbs are coming from.
if you did not read the thread then how can you assume that I am just looking to "pick a fight"...
If you would of taken ten minutes to read the entire thread you would see that I was not picking a fight, and was generally interested in hearing from people how are into the low carb lifestyle..
but way to make assumptions.
To the bolded part. I made no assumptions. I stated what happened in a previous debate and asked or opinion from people who are low carb. You are the one making assumptions. Funny, you comment on a thread that you have not read and know nothing about; yet, you accuse me of doing the very same thing that you did....hypocrite much?
You state in your title "Why don't the low carb folks believe in CICO?". You seem pretty focused on those few that may claim that when in actuality most do. Especially the long term LCHF people.
And actually that part your bolded wasn't referring to you.
well there is always one..
this thread was going along fine until you came in here guns blazing trying to call me out...0 -
rachylouise87 wrote: »
CICO is a one size fits all.rachylouise87 wrote: »firm believer in CICO but some people are more insulin sensitive. firm believer weight loss is not a one fits all.
big believer in the below
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/hormonal-weight-loss/
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/female-effect-hormones-determine-female-fat-patterns/
Medical conditions just skew one or the other.
i dont believe the human body operates the same in every individual. however i can say CICO has worked for me but this time i increased calories by 200 and lost weight. not sure how i can explain. always been a 1200 cal day kinda girl. tried low carb, found it difficult to stick to, i dont believe eating low carb and as many calories as you want being the correct method of doing things because the bottom line CICO, the basic weight loss tool. i can understand doing 1200 calories per day and adjusting macros for your needs but as long as your in deficit you should lose. maybe these people are either eating too many calories, not being consistant with logging or just experiencing normal plateau's? i have just come through one. the body has fixed points with weight it sticks to when gaining and losing so it makes sense.
CICO applies to all.
how long were you eating 1200 for? If you were a long time dieter then you could have been suffering from metabolic adaption and when you started eating more it reset your maintenance level to a higher point...
or it could of been that you thought you were eating 1200 but were actually consuming more? Were you using a food scale to weigh your foods?0 -
http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/
There you go OP. You could learn a lot from some of these studies.
There is a study (which atm I am unable to find), that had subjects lie in bed for 6 weeks (I think 6 weeks) eating their BMR calories, in high protein vs high carb, the high protein people lost less muscle and gained less fat.
Think about it like this, CICO is the gold standard, but what the calories come from still matters. Dieting and working out while eating 2000 cal of Twinkies vs 2000 cal of steak is going to have a significant impact in body composition which has a cumulative effect in continuing weight loss
How many of those studies matched protein intake? I am guessing NONE
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0100652
Guessing NONE? The studies varied over a wide range of topics. I've researched this stuff for years, unfortunately I did not save those links for this one glorious post. But with all human studies you can usually find a study to counter every argument. You can argue with science if you want.
BTW, do you have a link for a study that matched protein intake AND overall calories (or adjusted for BMR)? I would love to read it, no matter what the outcome of the research showed
edit reading your article now0 -
http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/
There you go OP. You could learn a lot from some of these studies.
There is a study (which atm I am unable to find), that had subjects lie in bed for 6 weeks (I think 6 weeks) eating their BMR calories, in high protein vs high carb, the high protein people lost less muscle and gained less fat.
Think about it like this, CICO is the gold standard, but what the calories come from still matters. Dieting and working out while eating 2000 cal of Twinkies vs 2000 cal of steak is going to have a significant impact in body composition which has a cumulative effect in continuing weight loss
How many of those studies matched protein intake? I am guessing NONE
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0100652
Guessing NONE? The studies varied over a wide range of topics. I've researched this stuff for years, unfortunately I did not save those links for this one glorious post. But with all human studies you can usually find a study to counter every argument. You can argue with science if you want.
BTW, do you have a link for a study that matched protein intake AND overall calories (or adjusted for BMR)? I would love to read it, no matter what the outcome of the research showed
I don't have access to it right now...but there was one that came out showing that there was zero difference between High Protein vs LCHF diet....I don't have the specifics right now, but I can try to dig it up ...0 -
http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/
There you go OP. You could learn a lot from some of these studies.
There is a study (which atm I am unable to find), that had subjects lie in bed for 6 weeks (I think 6 weeks) eating their BMR calories, in high protein vs high carb, the high protein people lost less muscle and gained less fat.
Think about it like this, CICO is the gold standard, but what the calories come from still matters. Dieting and working out while eating 2000 cal of Twinkies vs 2000 cal of steak is going to have a significant impact in body composition which has a cumulative effect in continuing weight loss
How many of those studies matched protein intake? I am guessing NONE
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0100652
Guessing NONE? The studies varied over a wide range of topics. I've researched this stuff for years, unfortunately I did not save those links for this one glorious post. But with all human studies you can usually find a study to counter every argument. You can argue with science if you want.
BTW, do you have a link for a study that matched protein intake AND overall calories (or adjusted for BMR)? I would love to read it, no matter what the outcome of the research showed
I don't have access to it right now...but there was one that came out showing that there was zero difference between High Protein vs LCHF diet....I don't have the specifics right now, but I can try to dig it up ...
Much appreciated. I do love learning0 -
Wow....didn't read this whole thread.
OP - A lot of LCHF acknowledge CICO. Sorry you only focus on those that don't. Sounds like you're just looking to pick a fight or maybe you should rephrase your title.
Reading some of these posts a lot of people make assumptions about LCHF and just make judgements on that. How about instead of talking about something you don't have a clue about you just don't respond? Or at least double check before you do.
LCHF eaters may eat a lot of meat HOWEVER that would also mean getting higher amount of protein than will fit your ratios. Its low carb, high fat, moderate protein. Not high protein (which many assume). Also, when low carbing I eat a lot more veggies than I would otherwise. That is where the bulk of the carbs are coming from.
if you did not read the thread then how can you assume that I am just looking to "pick a fight"...
If you would of taken ten minutes to read the entire thread you would see that I was not picking a fight, and was generally interested in hearing from people how are into the low carb lifestyle..
but way to make assumptions.
To the bolded part. I made no assumptions. I stated what happened in a previous debate and asked or opinion from people who are low carb. You are the one making assumptions. Funny, you comment on a thread that you have not read and know nothing about; yet, you accuse me of doing the very same thing that you did....hypocrite much?
You state in your title "Why don't the low carb folks believe in CICO?". You seem pretty focused on those few that may claim that when in actuality most do. Especially the long term LCHF people.
And actually that part your bolded wasn't referring to you.
well there is always one..
this thread was going along fine until you came in here guns blazing trying to call me out...
I think the 10 people that first posted with their popcorn also were in because of the title so don't single me out. It also not that unheard of for you to do that.
1 -
Wow....didn't read this whole thread.
OP - A lot of LCHF acknowledge CICO. Sorry you only focus on those that don't. Sounds like you're just looking to pick a fight or maybe you should rephrase your title.
Reading some of these posts a lot of people make assumptions about LCHF and just make judgements on that. How about instead of talking about something you don't have a clue about you just don't respond? Or at least double check before you do.
LCHF eaters may eat a lot of meat HOWEVER that would also mean getting higher amount of protein than will fit your ratios. Its low carb, high fat, moderate protein. Not high protein (which many assume). Also, when low carbing I eat a lot more veggies than I would otherwise. That is where the bulk of the carbs are coming from.
if you did not read the thread then how can you assume that I am just looking to "pick a fight"...
If you would of taken ten minutes to read the entire thread you would see that I was not picking a fight, and was generally interested in hearing from people how are into the low carb lifestyle..
but way to make assumptions.
To the bolded part. I made no assumptions. I stated what happened in a previous debate and asked or opinion from people who are low carb. You are the one making assumptions. Funny, you comment on a thread that you have not read and know nothing about; yet, you accuse me of doing the very same thing that you did....hypocrite much?
You state in your title "Why don't the low carb folks believe in CICO?". You seem pretty focused on those few that may claim that when in actuality most do. Especially the long term LCHF people.
And actually that part your bolded wasn't referring to you.
well there is always one..
this thread was going along fine until you came in here guns blazing trying to call me out...
I think the 10 people that first posted with their popcorn also were in because of the title so don't single me out. It also not that unheard of for you to do that.
Marketing....
Come up with a great title to bring people in.
Then present your stance in the OP.
Those that came in with popcorn had nothing to read and were expecting this thread to go an entirely different way than it started.....
You are turning it into what they were expecting.0 -
Wow....didn't read this whole thread.
OP - A lot of LCHF acknowledge CICO. Sorry you only focus on those that don't. Sounds like you're just looking to pick a fight or maybe you should rephrase your title.
Reading some of these posts a lot of people make assumptions about LCHF and just make judgements on that. How about instead of talking about something you don't have a clue about you just don't respond? Or at least double check before you do.
LCHF eaters may eat a lot of meat HOWEVER that would also mean getting higher amount of protein than will fit your ratios. Its low carb, high fat, moderate protein. Not high protein (which many assume). Also, when low carbing I eat a lot more veggies than I would otherwise. That is where the bulk of the carbs are coming from.
if you did not read the thread then how can you assume that I am just looking to "pick a fight"...
If you would of taken ten minutes to read the entire thread you would see that I was not picking a fight, and was generally interested in hearing from people how are into the low carb lifestyle..
but way to make assumptions.
To the bolded part. I made no assumptions. I stated what happened in a previous debate and asked or opinion from people who are low carb. You are the one making assumptions. Funny, you comment on a thread that you have not read and know nothing about; yet, you accuse me of doing the very same thing that you did....hypocrite much?
You state in your title "Why don't the low carb folks believe in CICO?". You seem pretty focused on those few that may claim that when in actuality most do. Especially the long term LCHF people.
And actually that part your bolded wasn't referring to you.
well there is always one..
this thread was going along fine until you came in here guns blazing trying to call me out...
I think the 10 people that first posted with their popcorn also were in because of the title so don't single me out. It also not that unheard of for you to do that.
way to fulfill their expectations....
0 -
Wow....didn't read this whole thread.
OP - A lot of LCHF acknowledge CICO. Sorry you only focus on those that don't. Sounds like you're just looking to pick a fight or maybe you should rephrase your title.
Reading some of these posts a lot of people make assumptions about LCHF and just make judgements on that. How about instead of talking about something you don't have a clue about you just don't respond? Or at least double check before you do.
LCHF eaters may eat a lot of meat HOWEVER that would also mean getting higher amount of protein than will fit your ratios. Its low carb, high fat, moderate protein. Not high protein (which many assume). Also, when low carbing I eat a lot more veggies than I would otherwise. That is where the bulk of the carbs are coming from.
if you did not read the thread then how can you assume that I am just looking to "pick a fight"...
If you would of taken ten minutes to read the entire thread you would see that I was not picking a fight, and was generally interested in hearing from people how are into the low carb lifestyle..
but way to make assumptions.
To the bolded part. I made no assumptions. I stated what happened in a previous debate and asked or opinion from people who are low carb. You are the one making assumptions. Funny, you comment on a thread that you have not read and know nothing about; yet, you accuse me of doing the very same thing that you did....hypocrite much?
You state in your title "Why don't the low carb folks believe in CICO?". You seem pretty focused on those few that may claim that when in actuality most do. Especially the long term LCHF people.
And actually that part your bolded wasn't referring to you.
well there is always one..
this thread was going along fine until you came in here guns blazing trying to call me out...
I think the 10 people that first posted with their popcorn also were in because of the title so don't single me out. It also not that unheard of for you to do that.
way to fulfill their expectations....
And this whole thread based on an OP that had 34 posts, insists it was eating low carb and not the 1200 daily calories she was eating? And then in the total of almost 15 pages of the whole thread had maybe 3 people agree with her that maybe have a total of 50 posts between them? I mean really, you can't really think that represents a majority of LCHF eaters, especially those on MFP?
0 -
http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/
There you go OP. You could learn a lot from some of these studies.
There is a study (which atm I am unable to find), that had subjects lie in bed for 6 weeks (I think 6 weeks) eating their BMR calories, in high protein vs high carb, the high protein people lost less muscle and gained less fat.
Think about it like this, CICO is the gold standard, but what the calories come from still matters. Dieting and working out while eating 2000 cal of Twinkies vs 2000 cal of steak is going to have a significant impact in body composition which has a cumulative effect in continuing weight loss
How many of those studies matched protein intake? I am guessing NONE
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0100652
Guessing NONE? The studies varied over a wide range of topics. I've researched this stuff for years, unfortunately I did not save those links for this one glorious post. But with all human studies you can usually find a study to counter every argument. You can argue with science if you want.
BTW, do you have a link for a study that matched protein intake AND overall calories (or adjusted for BMR)? I would love to read it, no matter what the outcome of the research showed
I don't have access to it right now...but there was one that came out showing that there was zero difference between High Protein vs LCHF diet....I don't have the specifics right now, but I can try to dig it up ...
Much appreciated. I do love learning
I don't have access to the full article but there is the link and the basics...pretty interesting...
food for thought anyway...
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031938412002806
Abstract
Background
‘Low-carb’ diets have been suggested to be effective in body weight (BW) management. However, these diets are relatively high in protein as well.
Objective
To unravel whether body-weight loss and weight-maintenance depends on the high-protein or the ‘low-carb’ component of the diet.
Design
Body-weight (BW), fat mass (FM), blood- and urine-parameters of 132 participants (age = 50 ± 12 yr; BW = 107 ± 20 kg; BMI = 37 ± 6 kg/m2; FM = 47.5 ± 11.9 kg) were compared after 3 and 12 months between four energy-restricted diets with 33% of energy requirement for the first 3 months, and 67% for the last 9 months: normal-protein normal-carbohydrate (NPNC), normal-protein low-carbohydrate (NPLC); high-protein normal-carbohydrate (HPNC), high-protein low-carbohydrate (HPLC); 24 h N-analyses confirmed daily protein intakes for the normal-protein diets of 0.7 ± 0.1 and for the high-protein diets of 1.1 ± 0.2 g/kg BW (p < 0.01).
Results
BW and FM decreased over 3 months (p < 0.001): HP (− 14.1 ± 4 kg; − 11.9 ± 1.7 kg) vs. NP (− 11.5 ± 4 kg; − 9.3 ± 0.7 kg) (p < 0.001); LC (− 13.5 ± 4 kg; − 11.0 ± 1.2 kg) vs. NC (− 12.3 ± 3 kg; − 10.3 ± 1.1 kg) (ns). Diet × time interaction showed HPLC (− 14.7 ± 5 kg; − 11.9 ± 1.6 kg) vs. HPNC (− 13.8 ± 3 kg; − 11.9 ± 1.8 kg) (ns); NPLC (− 12.2 ± 4 kg; − 10.0 ± 0.8 kg) vs. NPNC (− 10.7 ± 4 kg; − 8.6 ± 0.7 kg) (ns); HPLC vs. NPLC (p < 0.001); HPNC vs. NPNC (p < 0.001). Decreases over 12 months (p < 0.001) showed HP (− 12.8 ± 4 kg; − 9.1 ± 0.8 kg) vs. NP (− 8.9 ± 3 kg; − 7.7 ± 0.6 kg) (p < 0.001); LC (− 10.6 ± 4 kg; − 8.3 ± 0.7 kg) vs. NC (11.1 ± 3 kg; 9.3 ± 0.7 kg) (ns). Diet × time interaction showed HPLC (− 11.6 ± 5 kg ; − 8.2 ± 0.7 kg) vs. HPNC (− 14.1 ± 4 kg; − 10.0 ± 0.9 kg) (ns); NPNC (− 8.2 ± 3 kg; − 6.7 ± 0.6 kg) vs. NPLC (− 9.7 ± 3 kg; − 8.5 ± 0.7 kg) (ns); HPLC vs. NPLC (p < 0.01); HPNC vs. NPNC (p < 0.01). HPNC vs. all other diets reduced diastolic blood pressure more. Relationships between changes in BW, FM, FFM or metabolic parameters and energy percentage of fat in the diet were not statistically significant. Metabolic profile and fat-free-mass were improved following weight-loss.
Conclusion
Body-weight loss and weight-maintenance depends on the high-protein, but not on the ‘low-carb’ component of the diet, while it is unrelated to the concomitant fat-content of the diet.
Highlights
► The research unmasks the success of ‘low-carb’ diets for body weight management. ► Similar protein contents, similar body-weight management irrespective of carbohydrate content. ► High- vs. normal-protein diets show the favorable effects on body-weight management. ► A high-protein normal-carbohydrate diet reduces diastolic blood pressure more.
0 -
Honestly, one of the reasons I do keto is because I dont fart anymore. I fart if I have too many carbs, but i dont fart if I have very little carbs. I dont like being gassy...Just saying.
I think people may be indicating that the need to count calories is not there on a lchf diet, as the diet will regulate hunger. I often will not eat until dinnertime, or have very little until then. I have my coffee with hwc @ 0700 and that will last me until after 1500. So when on lchf, the calories will regulate themselves, and having to control your urges to indulge goes away, for the most part. I think that is what some people mean by "I dont need to count calories." I count calories bc I like knowing.0 -
http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/
There you go OP. You could learn a lot from some of these studies.
There is a study (which atm I am unable to find), that had subjects lie in bed for 6 weeks (I think 6 weeks) eating their BMR calories, in high protein vs high carb, the high protein people lost less muscle and gained less fat.
Think about it like this, CICO is the gold standard, but what the calories come from still matters. Dieting and working out while eating 2000 cal of Twinkies vs 2000 cal of steak is going to have a significant impact in body composition which has a cumulative effect in continuing weight loss
How many of those studies matched protein intake? I am guessing NONE
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0100652
Guessing NONE? The studies varied over a wide range of topics. I've researched this stuff for years, unfortunately I did not save those links for this one glorious post. But with all human studies you can usually find a study to counter every argument. You can argue with science if you want.
BTW, do you have a link for a study that matched protein intake AND overall calories (or adjusted for BMR)? I would love to read it, no matter what the outcome of the research showed
I don't have access to it right now...but there was one that came out showing that there was zero difference between High Protein vs LCHF diet....I don't have the specifics right now, but I can try to dig it up ...
i would be interested in that, as well. do you mean just high protein vs lchf or high protein low carb?
eta//nvm late0 -
Wow....didn't read this whole thread.
OP - A lot of LCHF acknowledge CICO. Sorry you only focus on those that don't. Sounds like you're just looking to pick a fight or maybe you should rephrase your title.
Reading some of these posts a lot of people make assumptions about LCHF and just make judgements on that. How about instead of talking about something you don't have a clue about you just don't respond? Or at least double check before you do.
LCHF eaters may eat a lot of meat HOWEVER that would also mean getting higher amount of protein than will fit your ratios. Its low carb, high fat, moderate protein. Not high protein (which many assume). Also, when low carbing I eat a lot more veggies than I would otherwise. That is where the bulk of the carbs are coming from.
if you did not read the thread then how can you assume that I am just looking to "pick a fight"...
If you would of taken ten minutes to read the entire thread you would see that I was not picking a fight, and was generally interested in hearing from people how are into the low carb lifestyle..
but way to make assumptions.
To the bolded part. I made no assumptions. I stated what happened in a previous debate and asked or opinion from people who are low carb. You are the one making assumptions. Funny, you comment on a thread that you have not read and know nothing about; yet, you accuse me of doing the very same thing that you did....hypocrite much?
You state in your title "Why don't the low carb folks believe in CICO?". You seem pretty focused on those few that may claim that when in actuality most do. Especially the long term LCHF people.
And actually that part your bolded wasn't referring to you.
well there is always one..
this thread was going along fine until you came in here guns blazing trying to call me out...
I think it started earlier than that. People woke up this morning grumpy and oversenstive... It was a nice thread.0 -
Wow....didn't read this whole thread.
OP - A lot of LCHF acknowledge CICO. Sorry you only focus on those that don't. Sounds like you're just looking to pick a fight or maybe you should rephrase your title.
Reading some of these posts a lot of people make assumptions about LCHF and just make judgements on that. How about instead of talking about something you don't have a clue about you just don't respond? Or at least double check before you do.
LCHF eaters may eat a lot of meat HOWEVER that would also mean getting higher amount of protein than will fit your ratios. Its low carb, high fat, moderate protein. Not high protein (which many assume). Also, when low carbing I eat a lot more veggies than I would otherwise. That is where the bulk of the carbs are coming from.
if you did not read the thread then how can you assume that I am just looking to "pick a fight"...
If you would of taken ten minutes to read the entire thread you would see that I was not picking a fight, and was generally interested in hearing from people how are into the low carb lifestyle..
but way to make assumptions.
To the bolded part. I made no assumptions. I stated what happened in a previous debate and asked or opinion from people who are low carb. You are the one making assumptions. Funny, you comment on a thread that you have not read and know nothing about; yet, you accuse me of doing the very same thing that you did....hypocrite much?
You state in your title "Why don't the low carb folks believe in CICO?". You seem pretty focused on those few that may claim that when in actuality most do. Especially the long term LCHF people.
And actually that part your bolded wasn't referring to you.
well there is always one..
this thread was going along fine until you came in here guns blazing trying to call me out...
I think the 10 people that first posted with their popcorn also were in because of the title so don't single me out. It also not that unheard of for you to do that.
way to fulfill their expectations....
And this whole thread based on an OP that had 34 posts, insists it was eating low carb and not the 1200 daily calories she was eating? And then in the total of almost 15 pages of the whole thread had maybe 3 people agree with her that maybe have a total of 50 posts between them? I mean really, you can't really think that represents a majority of LCHF eaters, especially those on MFP?
I started this thread because other low carbers came flying in to defend the OP and then when I asked them to clarify about CICO and calorie restriction they refused to do so. So rather then keep hijacking that thread, I decided to start my own thread and pose the question.
I don't assume anything, that is why I posed the question. The debate was respectful and cordial until you entered the frey.0 -
CICO is a one size fits all.rachylouise87 wrote: »firm believer in CICO but some people are more insulin sensitive. firm believer weight loss is not a one fits all.
big believer in the below
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/hormonal-weight-loss/
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/female-effect-hormones-determine-female-fat-patterns/
Medical conditions just skew one or the other.
CICO is one size fits all, but the macro ratios that work best for you will differ person to person. Like I said above, one thing that occasionally annoys me about some low carb people here (not the sensible ones, which are most of those in this thread) is the assertion that EVERYONE would do better on lower carbs or that everyone finds that carbs trigger their hunger in the same way, etc. But the same is, of course, true in reverse when people insist that low carb is unhealthy or can't work or would be too depressing. Depends on the person.0 -
blktngldhrt wrote: »http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/
There you go OP. You could learn a lot from some of these studies.
There is a study (which atm I am unable to find), that had subjects lie in bed for 6 weeks (I think 6 weeks) eating their BMR calories, in high protein vs high carb, the high protein people lost less muscle and gained less fat.
Think about it like this, CICO is the gold standard, but what the calories come from still matters. Dieting and working out while eating 2000 cal of Twinkies vs 2000 cal of steak is going to have a significant impact in body composition which has a cumulative effect in continuing weight loss
How many of those studies matched protein intake? I am guessing NONE
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0100652
Guessing NONE? The studies varied over a wide range of topics. I've researched this stuff for years, unfortunately I did not save those links for this one glorious post. But with all human studies you can usually find a study to counter every argument. You can argue with science if you want.
BTW, do you have a link for a study that matched protein intake AND overall calories (or adjusted for BMR)? I would love to read it, no matter what the outcome of the research showed
I don't have access to it right now...but there was one that came out showing that there was zero difference between High Protein vs LCHF diet....I don't have the specifics right now, but I can try to dig it up ...
i would be interested in that, as well. do you mean just high protein vs lchf or high protein low carb?
eta//nvm late
I posted it above...but I don't have access to the full study ..if anyone can find the full study that would be great...0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »Firm believer that 86.89% (made that up) of the people on these boards don't understand what CICO means and conflate it with a way of eating.
Either that or with the silly idea that everyone will lose weight eating less than 2000 and gain eating more or some such. That's why some like to point to metabolism differences or the fact their grandma eats very little as if it were a counterpoint.
Or to a claim that foods do not differ in the nutrients they contain, which no one has ever said ever.
It's maddening!0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
CICO is a one size fits all.rachylouise87 wrote: »firm believer in CICO but some people are more insulin sensitive. firm believer weight loss is not a one fits all.
big believer in the below
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/hormonal-weight-loss/
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/female-effect-hormones-determine-female-fat-patterns/
Medical conditions just skew one or the other.
CICO is one size fits all, but the macro ratios that work best for you will differ person to person. Like I said above, one thing that occasionally annoys me about some low carb people here (not the sensible ones, which are most of those in this thread) is the assertion that EVERYONE would do better on lower carbs or that everyone finds that carbs trigger their hunger in the same way, etc. But the same is, of course, true in reverse when people insist that low carb is unhealthy or can't work or would be too depressing. Depends on the person.
And this is where IIFYMM comes into play.
It holds true for keto, vegan, paleo, veg, LCHF, we all have Macros and Micros just how we fill them differs.
I always find it funny when people hate on IIFYM yet they actually follow it.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
CICO is a one size fits all.rachylouise87 wrote: »firm believer in CICO but some people are more insulin sensitive. firm believer weight loss is not a one fits all.
big believer in the below
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/hormonal-weight-loss/
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/female-effect-hormones-determine-female-fat-patterns/
Medical conditions just skew one or the other.
CICO is one size fits all, but the macro ratios that work best for you will differ person to person. Like I said above, one thing that occasionally annoys me about some low carb people here (not the sensible ones, which are most of those in this thread) is the assertion that EVERYONE would do better on lower carbs or that everyone finds that carbs trigger their hunger in the same way, etc. But the same is, of course, true in reverse when people insist that low carb is unhealthy or can't work or would be too depressing. Depends on the person.
True. I do it because I have a tough stomach. It can handle the added dairy and meat. Some people have ibs or some cockameemy disease that will prevent them from doing lchf. So, it is not for everyone.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
CICO is a one size fits all.rachylouise87 wrote: »firm believer in CICO but some people are more insulin sensitive. firm believer weight loss is not a one fits all.
big believer in the below
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/hormonal-weight-loss/
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/female-effect-hormones-determine-female-fat-patterns/
Medical conditions just skew one or the other.
CICO is one size fits all, but the macro ratios that work best for you will differ person to person. Like I said above, one thing that occasionally annoys me about some low carb people here (not the sensible ones, which are most of those in this thread) is the assertion that EVERYONE would do better on lower carbs or that everyone finds that carbs trigger their hunger in the same way, etc. But the same is, of course, true in reverse when people insist that low carb is unhealthy or can't work or would be too depressing. Depends on the person.
And this is where IIFYMM comes into play.
It holds true for keto, vegan, paleo, veg, LCHF, we all have Macros and Micros just how we fill them differs.
I always find it funny when people hate on IIFYM yet they actually follow it.
Yes, I agree with all that. I interpret IIFYM as just meaning that you watch your macros, basically. By definition low carb folks do, at least low carb folks who also try to hit a general ballpark or better for their fat percentage.0 -
What are you responding to? My oversimplification of CICO? No one ever said eat twinkies or steak. Just that body comp is affected by types of food, which in turn manipulates BMR, which can HELP create or slow weight/body fat losshttp://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/
There you go OP. You could learn a lot from some of these studies.
There is a study (which atm I am unable to find), that had subjects lie in bed for 6 weeks (I think 6 weeks) eating their BMR calories, in high protein vs high carb, the high protein people lost less muscle and gained less fat.
Think about it like this, CICO is the gold standard, but what the calories come from still matters. Dieting and working out while eating 2000 cal of Twinkies vs 2000 cal of steak is going to have a significant impact in body composition which has a cumulative effect in continuing weight loss
Who has ever recommended eating this way?
No one would ever do this. It's ridiculous.
And neither of which would be a healthy diet.
Oversimplification? You didn't oversimplify anything you threw out two bogus diet suggestions that no one would ever eat.
No one suggested that body comp has nothing to do with what you eat.
But it does require CICO. whether losing, gaining, maintaining.
You can recomp on low carb, vegan, Paleo....whatever diet you want.
What OP is saying is, the most vocal of low carbers seem to think it's the best way to lose weight and that they don't think CICO matter.
This is exactly what I'm pointing out. A lot of low carbers DO think CICO matters. But the focus seems to be on those that have a handful of posts and, at least from what I see, very new to that WOE. All those that came in to defend the OP in the thread that started this seem new to not only MFP, but also to low carb/keto/Atkins/LCHF. Which, one of those people did post her own thread earlier this morning confirming she was new to low carbing. The majority of low carbers are actually doing opposite of what people assume.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions