Fun debate about CICO
VintageFeline
Posts: 6,771 Member
The perennial debate has come up with a friend today about the only thing mattering being CICO.
He argues food affects how many calories are stored as fat due hormone interruption. So what you eat matters. As someone who does the moderation thing I refute this.
I argue science and that health contains can affect BMR but 3500 calories remains 1lb for everyone.
Good sources and opinion to back me up or discredit me please!
He argues food affects how many calories are stored as fat due hormone interruption. So what you eat matters. As someone who does the moderation thing I refute this.
I argue science and that health contains can affect BMR but 3500 calories remains 1lb for everyone.
Good sources and opinion to back me up or discredit me please!
0
Replies
-
3500 is a rule of thumb, not a law of nature. http://www.todaysdietitian.com/newarchives/111114p36.shtml
0 -
I strongly agree. I eliminated all health contains from my diet and I've never felt better.VintageFeline wrote: »I argue science and that health contains can affect BMR but 3500 calories remains 1lb for everyone.
0 -
sheldonklein wrote: »3500 is a rule of thumb, not a law of nature. http://www.todaysdietitian.com/newarchives/111114p36.shtml
To piggyback on this: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/3500-calorie-rule.html/
CICO rules the day in the end but I wouldn't build my argument on the 3500 calorie figure.0 -
I argue that dietary compliance trumps everything when it comes to long term weight management.
I reject your parameters of debate and substitute my own!0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »I argue that dietary compliance trumps everything when it comes to long term weight management.
I reject your parameters of debate and substitute my own!
Another competitor throws her hat into the ring...0 -
Food is fuel
Certain fuels are better for certain for certain activities
I'm training for my first sprint triathlon.
So what I eat matters.... A lot.
If you are doing body recomposition what you eat matters.
If you are dieting only and don't eat enough protein you lose muscle and fat. Then it becomes a disaster.
CICO is such a dumbed down saying when tossed about it does the concept injustice.
Of course calories matter and what they are for matters as well.
But this is MFP so anything goes.
Good luck!0 -
KittensMaster wrote: »Food is fuel
Certain fuels are better for certain for certain activities
I'm training for my first sprint triathlon.
So what I eat matters.... A lot.
If you are doing body recomposition what you eat matters.
If you are dieting only and don't eat enough protein you lose muscle and fat. Then it becomes a disaster.
CICO is such a dumbed down saying when tossed about it does the concept injustice.
Of course calories matter and what they are for matters as well.
But this is MFP so anything goes.
Good luck!
Wow. Everyone needs to read this twice and then read it again! The CICO is true and must be followed for weight loss. I am learning there needs to be more then just my daily goal of CICO. Thank you.0 -
3500 calories is just a general guideline, it's not a hard and fast rule.
ultimately CICO is far and away the most important element of weight management, but that doesn't mean that what you eat doesn't matter. your friend is correct in that eating certain things can have an impact on hormones and that can certainly impact weight management and fat storage, but you also have to consider dosage here. eating sugary treats here and there in moderation is completely different than slamming multiple 40 ounce Big Gulps daily to wash down the pie and cookies you had for lunch.
certain foods are also going to have an impact on TEF, though getting all wrapped up in that is majoring in the minors.0 -
Except it may be 7,000 calories per pound instead of 3,500.
As a purely thermodynamic equation performed in a laboratory CICO works and always will. It's inarguable. But there's still much to be learned about how it actually relates to real humans. It's likely much more complicated in real life over months or years than it is in a controlled chemistry experiment done in a lab.0 -
Except it may be 7,000 calories per pound instead of 3,500.
As a purely thermodynamic equation performed in a laboratory CICO works and always will. It's inarguable. But there's still much to be learned about how it actually relates to real humans. It's likely much more complicated in real life over months or years than it is in a controlled chemistry experiment done in a lab.
That article is twisting the things it's talking about. The people who made the weight loss planner did NOT say 3500 is not a pound or that it may be 7000 per pound.
They went (for whatever unfathomable reason) with the assumption you never adjust your calorie goals, so as you lose weight, your weight loss slows down as your maintenance calories drop. You don't change your calorie intake to accomodate for that -> you don't lose as fast as you thought you were and your 500 deficit turns to 400, 300, and lower the longer you lose weight.0 -
I agree with the OP. I have lost around 90 lbs eating less of most foods and counting calories. The food choices I make are if the calories in a certain food is worth the calories. I would also add that seniors can loose weight and although exercise is important to health, weight can still be lost. I have lost 50 lbs in the last five months am 68 years old and this amount of weight was lost with no exercise.
These are only facts that have worked for me. Do what works for you but as the OP says CICO still is the important point.
0 -
I had a look at the Trim Team website and they advocate cutting out certain foods and eating certain foods together because of the way hormone interruption affects fat storage. I couldn't say if this method leads to greater weight loss than CICO but it sure is much more complicated.0
-
suziecue20 wrote: »I had a look at the Trim Team website and they advocate cutting out certain foods and eating certain foods together because of the way hormone interruption affects fat storage. I couldn't say if this method leads to greater weight loss than CICO but it sure is much more complicated.
The only things that can affect your fat loss are things that may change your body's ability to absorb calories or your expenditure. Energy that isn't there can't be stored.0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »I argue that dietary compliance trumps everything when it comes to long term weight management.
I reject your parameters of debate and substitute my own!
^^ most people who don't lose weight, don't diet well
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
CICO is what matters for weight loss/gain/maintenance.
HOW someone prefers to make up those calories will depend on their own fitness/health goals. There really is no wrong way as long as they are meeting their essentials and being consistent with their own personal program.
I don't have any client adhere to any eating style. I let them figure it out for themselves.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
My n=1 would show that one must eat CI<CO to lose weight, but that what I eat can affect the rate of loss. I don't know if it is a calorie for calorie difference between some foods or what, but when I eat in a way that is healthier for my body, I tend to lose more weight than expected. Maybe my body processes certain macros differently. Maybe because I feel so much better, I am moving more than I realize so my CO is increased without realizing it. I don't really know.
I do know that for weight loss for me, it isn't just CI<CO, although that is the major factor.0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »3500 calories is just a general guideline, it's not a hard and fast rule.
ultimately CICO is far and away the most important element of weight management, but that doesn't mean that what you eat doesn't matter. your friend is correct in that eating certain things can have an impact on hormones and that can certainly impact weight management and fat storage, but you also have to consider dosage here. eating sugary treats here and there in moderation is completely different than slamming multiple 40 ounce Big Gulps daily to wash down the pie and cookies you had for lunch.
certain foods are also going to have an impact on TEF, though getting all wrapped up in that is majoring in the minors.
Which is why I argue that compliance matters most for long-term adherence and sustainability. Meh, so this or that macro balance or cooking method doesn't math out optimally for weight loss, but you're still losing and you enjoy what you're eating.
To me, that trumps all the nit-picking.
0 -
danieltsmoke wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I argue that dietary compliance trumps everything when it comes to long term weight management.
I reject your parameters of debate and substitute my own!
^^ most people who don't lose weight, don't diet well
That's not what I meant. I meant eating in a way you enjoy. I really, really don't care if a certain macro balance will lead to accelerated loss if it's not a macro balance/cooking method that works with how I enjoy eating. This isn't a race to a finish line, my run time doesn't matter to me. I'm doing this for life. I really don't care if I'm only burning 2,700 calories and I could be burning 3,000 calories if I didn't eat a banana every night and had something different instead (or something like that).
I like bananas, so I'll keep eating in a way that is sustainable for me.
I've lost 60 pounds in 300 days of logging, I'm doing something right.
0 -
My n=1 would show that one must eat CI<CO to lose weight, but that what I eat can affect the rate of loss. I don't know if it is a calorie for calorie difference between some foods or what, but when I eat in a way that is healthier for my body, I tend to lose more weight than expected. Maybe my body processes certain macros differently. Maybe because I feel so much better, I am moving more than I realize so my CO is increased without realizing it. I don't really know.
I do know that for weight loss for me, it isn't just CI<CO, although that is the major factor.
You haven't been dieting that long. Most long term studies with people with larger amounts to lose show that rate of loss with different macro balances evens out over time.
0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »My n=1 would show that one must eat CI<CO to lose weight, but that what I eat can affect the rate of loss. I don't know if it is a calorie for calorie difference between some foods or what, but when I eat in a way that is healthier for my body, I tend to lose more weight than expected. Maybe my body processes certain macros differently. Maybe because I feel so much better, I am moving more than I realize so my CO is increased without realizing it. I don't really know.
I do know that for weight loss for me, it isn't just CI<CO, although that is the major factor.
You haven't been dieting that long. Most long term studies with people with larger amounts to lose show that rate of loss with different macro balances evens out over time.
That is true. I have only been eating CI<CO for about 10 weeks. I lost about 5 lbs the first week (I'm sure it was water), and I lost 10lbs in both July and August. 25lbs in 10weeks and I am now at a normal BMI.
.... I am guessing it will balance out at a year like those long term studies show. Hopefully I will have been in maintenance for 6 months at that point.0 -
No debate about CICO is fun! Arguing about CICO is like arguing about gravity. People can believe whatever they want, but just like someone who doesn't believe in gravity won't all of a sudden float away, someone who doesn't believe in CICO still won't lose weight if they aren't in a calorie deficit. Any diet ever must have a calorie deficit present in order to see a reduction of weight in the long run. While optimal weight reduction or body recomposition diets require much more thought than simply "create a calorie deficit", they won't work at all if that isn't part of the diet.
Various factors may act on the calories out side of the equation, but there isn't much evidence that eating certain types of foods and banning others has a significant effect. Touching on what @PeachyCarol said about compliance, any effect that restricting of certain foods might have pales in comparison to compliance. If banning all foods containing X or not eating after Y o'clock has any effect at all (not conceding that it does), that effect is certainly not dramatic enough to be more important than compliance. For example, if tomorrow a perfectly designed study proves that eating 50 grams of carbs or less a day yields 15% better weight loss than a calorically equivalent balanced diet, you cannot say eating low carb is the best way for everyone to lose weight. I personally could not remain complaint with a low carb diet, so despite the 15% quicker fat loss, my non-compliance will cause the diet to not work at all.
TLDR If your diet doesn't create a calorie deficit, it won't work. If you diet is so restrictive you can't stick to it, it won't work. The key to success is finding a method of eating that allows you to both create a deficit and be compliant.0 -
KittensMaster wrote: »Food is fuel
Certain fuels are better for certain for certain activities
I'm training for my first sprint triathlon.
So what I eat matters.... A lot.
If you are doing body recomposition what you eat matters.
If you are dieting only and don't eat enough protein you lose muscle and fat. Then it becomes a disaster.
CICO is such a dumbed down saying when tossed about it does the concept injustice.
Of course calories matter and what they are for matters as well.
Well said. Certain calories are used in different ways by the body and held onto for different length of time by the body.0 -
I guess the question is, when these hormones affect fat storage, where does the fat go?VintageFeline wrote: »The perennial debate has come up with a friend today about the only thing mattering being CICO.
He argues food affects how many calories are stored as fat due hormone interruption. So what you eat matters. As someone who does the moderation thing I refute this.
I argue science and that health contains can affect BMR but 3500 calories remains 1lb for everyone.
Good sources and opinion to back me up or discredit me please!
I've seen this argued for insulin as the hormone a lot, and it is a misunderstanding of what it means to say insulin causes fat cells to store fat. The problem with this explanation is, the only way your fat cells have access to fat to store is that they're already in the blood, in circulation. So basically, the mechanism they're discussing is really what keeps your body from having excessively high triglycerides, a good thing. It isn't like a normal person's stomach just ignores fat and other available calories 'cause hormones. The body's goal is always to absorb as much as possible from the foods you eat.0 -
I suppose another problem is, people just don't want to believe in differential equations.
Sure, getting a certain amount of protein is long term required to keep muscle mass, which slightly effects BMR. This just means that CI and CO are in flux and they're altering each other.
Think of a rocket ship: the more fuel it has, the more fuel it takes to rise. Conversely, the more fuel the rocket has burned, the less it needs to keep burning to keep going higher. This doesn't mean rockets violate thermodynamic laws, it just means if you want to calculate the loss, you need a differential equation.
A human body is more complex, but it would be possible to model inputs and outputs affecting each other, and it would still mean that calories in and calories out are what happens.0 -
I guess the question is, when these hormones affect fat storage, where does the fat go?VintageFeline wrote: »The perennial debate has come up with a friend today about the only thing mattering being CICO.
He argues food affects how many calories are stored as fat due hormone interruption. So what you eat matters. As someone who does the moderation thing I refute this.
I argue science and that health contains can affect BMR but 3500 calories remains 1lb for everyone.
Good sources and opinion to back me up or discredit me please!
I've seen this argued for insulin as the hormone a lot, and it is a misunderstanding of what it means to say insulin causes fat cells to store fat. The problem with this explanation is, the only way your fat cells have access to fat to store is that they're already in the blood, in circulation. So basically, the mechanism they're discussing is really what keeps your body from having excessively high triglycerides, a good thing. It isn't like a normal person's stomach just ignores fat and other available calories 'cause hormones. The body's goal is always to absorb as much as possible from the foods you eat.
x10000000 -
This was good to read, I had to go do some work and have just come back.
I guess the discussion, where I kept saying "but science" is that he firmly believes a calorie is not a calorie. I know 3500 isn't an absolute but it's a near enough measure for most people right? His argument is if your diet is crappy then you will lose less weight eating the same calories as someone with a healthier diet. Same everything but calories.
My argument was that I couldn't see how that is true and haven't seen anything that convinces me of this. Aside from pre-existing medical conditions lowering someone's BMR laws of thermodynamics stand.
Anecdotally, my own diet goes through peaks and troughs is so called "healthy" but I maintain my deficit throughout and have consistently lost 5lbs per month on average over 140 days of logging. I appreciate anecdotes aren't to be trusted but my experience and what I have gleaned from reading these forums.0 -
CICO is an absolute for weight management. None of us gets to be special snowflakes.
The type of food you eat is for nutritional purposes. This is where preference comes in.
I feel better when I eat a well balanced diet where my macros are reasonably met. I have my macros set to levels that help me to have enough energy to do my weight lifting, to run, to workout on the elliptical, and to go through my day without feeling drained by the afternoon.
When it comes to CICO, it works the same for everyone, but I would say nutritional needs are very different depending on what you are trying to accomplish.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »
I guess the question is, when these hormones affect fat storage, where does the fat go?VintageFeline wrote: »The perennial debate has come up with a friend today about the only thing mattering being CICO.
He argues food affects how many calories are stored as fat due hormone interruption. So what you eat matters. As someone who does the moderation thing I refute this.
I argue science and that health contains can affect BMR but 3500 calories remains 1lb for everyone.
Good sources and opinion to back me up or discredit me please!
I've seen this argued for insulin as the hormone a lot, and it is a misunderstanding of what it means to say insulin causes fat cells to store fat. The problem with this explanation is, the only way your fat cells have access to fat to store is that they're already in the blood, in circulation. So basically, the mechanism they're discussing is really what keeps your body from having excessively high triglycerides, a good thing. It isn't like a normal person's stomach just ignores fat and other available calories 'cause hormones. The body's goal is always to absorb as much as possible from the foods you eat.
x1000000
Double that.0 -
CICO just is, there is no debate. People arguing it, aren't doing it correctly.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions