Calories in and Calories Out. Is it really that simple?
Replies
-
WinoGelato wrote: »I'm glad you quoted my post. I said "telling someone to eat less, move more is completely useless. I'm tired of that advice. " Everyone here keeps saying you have to find your own way. That's why telling someone to "eat less, move more" is useless. It's not helpful. Read all the posts above. Don't make me quote them.
Eat less, move more is not useless. It is a high level summary on how to make CICO work more effectively to achieve the desired result. Eat less, move more should work for everyone.
What you choose to eat, and how you choose to exercise or be more active, is the specific way in which you implement the "eat less, move more" advice. As I said before, there are endless different combinations of what to eat and how to exercise - this is the piece that an individual has to decide for themselves. Moderation may work for one person. Elimination might work for someone else. Paleo, LCHF, Raw Vegan, etc, etc.
I'm not sure it's totally useless, but it is pretty limited. It's fairly Captain Obvious. Now, giving people examples of HOW you managed to eat less and HOW you managed move more, now that's useful, pragmatic advice and information and what I suspect people are actually looking for with such inquiries.
I think that's why people look at others funny when they said, "oh, I just ate less and moved more." Yeah, no sheet Sherlock...
0 -
The problem is that so many people who come to MFP think that there is a specific diet they need to follow, a specific workout they need to do, a specific list of foods they need to avoid, a specific macro breakdown that will make them lose weight.
Telling these people that they can eat anything, and do any exercise they want, in order to get into a deficit is incredible useful information. And that is what CICO is. CICO means - plug in your numbers to find out how many calories you need to eat to be in a deficit, then eat those calories. EVERYTHING else is personal preference, and will work for some people and not for others.
Q: How can I lose this weight?
A: CICO
Q: My goal is 1500 calories, but I am having a tough time staying under that, what can I do?
A: Try getting more protein and fat
A: Try pre-logging
A: Try substituting this for this
A: Try exercising more days in the week
A: Intermittent fasting worked for me
ETC...0 -
Yes, it's that simple. Just CICO.
It may be that simple, but it takes determination, perseverance, diligence and a lot of effort to achieve your weight loss goals and even more to maintain once you achieve.
Simple, but not easy.0 -
Everything past your first Q and A. is useful. The first one is not. It may be true, but it's not helpful. If you left it there, it's useless. It's about as helpful as Nike's slogan "Just Do It"0
-
-
Everything past your first Q and A. is useful. The first one is not. It may be true, but it's not helpful. If you left it there, it's useless. It's about as useless as Nike's slogan "Just Do It"
If someone comes in and asks that question, it's not like that is going to be the single reply they get. Also, we all need to take responsibility for ourselves. If we don't understand the answer, ask more questions!0 -
Vykk, you're saying the same thing as I am. You are just using different semantics.0
-
No, the reason people look at each other funny is they think there HAS to be something more to it.lindsey1979 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »I'm glad you quoted my post. I said "telling someone to eat less, move more is completely useless. I'm tired of that advice. " Everyone here keeps saying you have to find your own way. That's why telling someone to "eat less, move more" is useless. It's not helpful. Read all the posts above. Don't make me quote them.
Eat less, move more is not useless. It is a high level summary on how to make CICO work more effectively to achieve the desired result. Eat less, move more should work for everyone.
What you choose to eat, and how you choose to exercise or be more active, is the specific way in which you implement the "eat less, move more" advice. As I said before, there are endless different combinations of what to eat and how to exercise - this is the piece that an individual has to decide for themselves. Moderation may work for one person. Elimination might work for someone else. Paleo, LCHF, Raw Vegan, etc, etc.
I'm not sure it's totally useless, but it is pretty limited. It's fairly Captain Obvious. Now, giving people examples of HOW you managed to eat less and HOW you managed move more, now that's useful, pragmatic advice and information and what I suspect people are actually looking for with such inquiries.
I think that's why people look at others funny when they said, "oh, I just ate less and moved more." Yeah, no sheet Sherlock...
I really don't know how to explain how I applied Eat Less, Move More to an individual because I didn't follow any magical program. I literally ate the same things I was already eating, in smaller portions and/or less often, and I moved more than I was before. Period. I didn't cut anything out, I didn't follow a certain way of eating, try a special diet, etc. I figured out my numbers, and I used those numbers to make the decisions on a daily basis of how to implement the concept of Eat Less, Move More.
You guys keep saying that is not helpful, but that is the point. ANYONE can do this. That is helpful, to know that anyone can do it, with no special programs to follow. Do it whatever way you want. You can do it with LCHF. You can do it with Paleo. You can be Vegetarian, Pescetarian, Flexitarian. You can eat "clean" or not. You can be a runner, a walker, a cyclist, a yogi, a heavy lifter. In my opinion, Eat Less, Move More is not only simple, it is helpful.
0 -
If someone comes in and asks that question, it's not like that is going to be the single reply they get. Also, we all need to take responsibility for ourselves. If we don't understand the answer, ask more questions!
Hopefully, it's not the single reply they get. By itself, it's useless.
0 -
VykkDraygoVPR wrote: »
Exactly. High Level Description of how to get to California (for me): Head West for ~ 1,500 miles. Low level description would include various options including air travel, car travel, train travel - average cost, time to complete the journey, etc.
Doesn't make "Head West for 1500 Miles" irrelevant information.
0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »I do think telling people "CICO is what is important", and "eat less, move more" is simplistic, but still helpful. What is really necessary, is to understand what your individual energy balance is b/w CI vs CO (both at your current weight and activity level, and then as a result of weight loss, increased activity, etc to understand what that does to the balance).
If more people spent time trying to accurately understand their calorie level to maintain their current weight, then it would be simpler to 1) determine how many calories they need to either cut on the CI side, or 2) increase on the CO side in order to affect that energy balance and achieve the desired weight loss.
Similarly, as others are saying, CICO is the fundamental principal but there are ENDLESS combinations of foods, nutrients, etc that will influence an individual's specific diet and ultimately influence the sustainability and satisfaction level of the process. If people make things too difficult, by cutting out foods they love, or restricting total calories too far - then yes, I think that means that they are more likely to end up getting frustrated and give up on the overall process before achieving their goals, or after they reach a desired weight but think they can go back to their old habits.
I think the other part that people get hung up on is the sustainability portion though - when it comes down to it, what the person ultimately needs to be able to sustain is an appropriate calorie goal and activity level to stay in maintenance after reaching their goal.
But we often see people suggesting that someone not start down a certain path if they can't stick with it long term, particularly when it comes to an eating style. That's just not realistic for most people; our circumstances change over time, and we have to change to adapt to it. I think conversations often get bogged down with specifics and semantics, rather than the big picture, which is do you understand the basics and are you able to apply them when the variables change in a way that keeps you on track?
I think some people get overwhelmed at the idea of "forever," which is why these time-limited diet plans are popular. I don't think it's necessarily a good idea to steer people away from them though, just because they aren't necessarily a sustainable plan. Often having the experience of doing something short term helps a person develop a skill that can help them in the long term in creating a plan that is sustainable for them. I don't know anyone on this site is doing the exact same thing now that they were when they started, but they've figured out what is necessary for them to be able to succeed.
The trick, of course, is helping to guide people to figure out what is necessary for them, which is where I feel that focusing simply on the CICO principal fails the user.
I would agree with most of this. As part of this process, I think many of us make changes, use trial and error, and learn things about ourselves, and what satisfies us, what motivates us, etc - that lead to completely different habits than when we started. I know for me, I am FAR more active now, just with regards to daily movement, not even purposeful exercise than when I started. I also eat more protein now, more vegetables now, and I try to cook more from scratch. I still love eating in restaurants, but I tend to be choosier about which ones I go to and how often. When I started MFP, I had a goal weight in mind, but that is different than where I've ended up. My activity level is higher so my TDEE is higher (possibly even from where I started although I don't know that I ever calculated it at that point). So yeah, I agree, as part of this, our approach evolves and what I did in the first few months of MFP when I was first losing is very different than how I am currently maintaining. So to that end, I do think flexibility and adaptability is important in order to achieve long term success.
I also agree with the idea of setting small, manageable goals for oneself - and if one of those is to look at things in time limits (ie next year at this time I want to be 50 lbs lighter) without regard to whether the plan is a forever plan - I guess that's ok, as long as the tactics you are using are safe, reasonable, and not likely to lead to long term negative effects.
The only time I ever usually mention the whole idea of "are you going to cut XXX out forever" is when people really are being extreme. For example, I don't take issue with people that are trying a LC approach, as I know that there are many people who do find that to be a satisfying and sustainable approach for the long term. There's another thread going on right now though where the OP said she can't ever eat bread because it makes her fall off the wagon, and as such it is giving her anxiety about going out to dinner with her boyfriend. That is the kind of scenario where I would pull out the, "are you going to never eat bread for the rest of your life" comment, because it seems like it is negatively impacting other parts of her social life. I usually have the same reaction when people flip out about going out to a restaurant and "OMG what am I going to order" posts come up. I feel like life is all about adapting to your situation and if you can't figure out how to navigate a restaurant menu and not feel like you are undoing all your progress then I think you've been too restrictive and are likely setting yourself up for failure in the long run.
And see, I don't see that as someone being too restrictive, I just see that as part of the learning process. Especially for people who are having real success with weight loss for the first time in their lives, figuring out what to eat can be very intimidating. I think there is a great sense of relief in seeing the scale and realizing that eating over one day didn't undo everything, but again, that's part of figuring things out. I think sometimes people forget what it was like to have those feelings of anxiety, and while pointing out something that seems really obvious to those who have made it over that hump seems like the thing to do, the person who is in the situation often can't see things objectively at that point in time. It may seem extreme in hindsight, but if the person needs to experience that in order to get to the next level, I don't think the exercise is a waste. We learn more from our challenges than the things that come easily.
The truth is, this is a diet and fitness forum, and there is an entire internet out there full of all kinds of information. We're always going to have people coming in here who don't know a lot about the subject, or who have heard this-or-that from friends or coworkers, or who don't always know how to vet a source. It's not going to change, and that's not necessarily a bad thing. If someone is asking, it means they have a desire to learn more, and I try to answer without applying a judgement value about the topic or the person. I remember how uncomfortable I felt in a lot of aspects in my life when I was overweight, and I wouldn't want to add to that for someone else by just dismissing their concerns as being ridiculous.0 -
Everything past your first Q and A. is useful. The first one is not. It may be true, but it's not helpful. If you left it there, it's useless. It's about as helpful as Nike's slogan "Just Do It"
Maybe to you. But I have seen plenty of threads where the OP asked about carbs, or raspberry ketones, or whatever, and was surprised that they could eat whatever they wanted as long as they stayed under their calorie goal. Giving specifics is useless if they aren't clear on CICO first.
And I've never seen a thread where the ONLY answer they get is CICO.0 -
-
Thank you, wino. That is very well put. There should be a "like" button on here. So I wouldn't have to waste this space.
Lemurcat, you edited your post. You changed "why should I, I had my own reasons". Again, you are making my point.
I guess I'm confused because I thought you were quoting me to disagree.
I said "eat less, move more" WAS good advice, because how to do that was personal and ultimately something we all have to figure out for ourselves. You seemed to think it was crappy advice because it didn't help, so I guess I'm still not sure what point of yours I am making (although if we are agreeing, that's cool).0 -
flippy1234 wrote: »I am so tired of so much diet crap being thrown at us. So many different magic bullets and philosophies. I just want to know, is it really that simple, CICO? If so, then what is all of this other nonsense?
when you understand that a calorie is just a unit of energy and that your body is a machine that utilizes energy just like any other machine, it makes perfect sense. Your machine requires so much energy every day to function optimally...everything from just having the power button on to going about your day to day to working out and exercising. when you consume energy in appropriate quantities to function optimally and maintain the status quo, you maintain...when you consume more energy than is required, that energy is stored for later use in a backup generator (your fat stores). when you consume less energy than is required, that back up generator kicks on to make up the difference.
as for the other nonsense, the diet and fitness industry is just that...it's an industry...all industry exists for one reason...that reason is profit. to profit, they have to sell you something and the population at large is more than willing to pay for the next magic pill because while the concept is simple, actually going about changing your dietary and exercise habits and being disciplined and consistent over months and ultimately years is easier said than done. a simple detox is much more palatable than completely changing your lifestyle to become a healthier person.
also keep in mind that "fad" diets in and of themselves aren't crap necessarily....all of them work on the same premise...all of them function to put you into an energy deficit...you don't have to count calories to put yourself into an energy deficit...low carbing will put most people in an energy deficit...any diet you can think of works on that same premise whether it's known to the individual or not. while i have my qualms with many a diet, i can't necessarily say that they are all crap...the Phase III of the South Beach Diet for example is very close to the way I eat.
detoxes and magic pills though are crap...and people will pay a fortune for that magic pill.0 -
Now there it is. This is a diet and fitness forum. People know what they want. They just don't know how to get there. Maybe, for limited number, CICO is a new concept. But I highly doubt it. As Lindsey put it, they are asking how to do it.0
-
blankiefinder wrote: »Everything past your first Q and A. is useful. The first one is not. It may be true, but it's not helpful. If you left it there, it's useless. It's about as useless as Nike's slogan "Just Do It"
If someone comes in and asks that question, it's not like that is going to be the single reply they get. Also, we all need to take responsibility for ourselves. If we don't understand the answer, ask more questions!
Yes. For me, create a calorie deficit (basically, eat less, move more) IS good advice, because HOW someone does that is individual. I can't assume that what worked for me will work for someone else, and telling them what to do as if I can is obnoxious (i.e., the "cut carbs" or "don't cut out anything ever" type of advice).
What I can do -- and always do try to do -- is share some things that worked for me and why and, probably more important, how I approached the process of figuring out what would work for me.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »
No, the reason people look at each other funny is they think there HAS to be something more to it.lindsey1979 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »I'm glad you quoted my post. I said "telling someone to eat less, move more is completely useless. I'm tired of that advice. " Everyone here keeps saying you have to find your own way. That's why telling someone to "eat less, move more" is useless. It's not helpful. Read all the posts above. Don't make me quote them.
Eat less, move more is not useless. It is a high level summary on how to make CICO work more effectively to achieve the desired result. Eat less, move more should work for everyone.
What you choose to eat, and how you choose to exercise or be more active, is the specific way in which you implement the "eat less, move more" advice. As I said before, there are endless different combinations of what to eat and how to exercise - this is the piece that an individual has to decide for themselves. Moderation may work for one person. Elimination might work for someone else. Paleo, LCHF, Raw Vegan, etc, etc.
I'm not sure it's totally useless, but it is pretty limited. It's fairly Captain Obvious. Now, giving people examples of HOW you managed to eat less and HOW you managed move more, now that's useful, pragmatic advice and information and what I suspect people are actually looking for with such inquiries.
I think that's why people look at others funny when they said, "oh, I just ate less and moved more." Yeah, no sheet Sherlock...
I really don't know how to explain how I applied Eat Less, Move More to an individual because I didn't follow any magical program. I literally ate the same things I was already eating, in smaller portions and/or less often, and I moved more than I was before. Period. I didn't cut anything out, I didn't follow a certain way of eating, try a special diet, etc. I figured out my numbers, and I used those numbers to make the decisions on a daily basis of how to implement the concept of Eat Less, Move More.
You guys keep saying that is not helpful, but that is the point. ANYONE can do this. That is helpful, to know that anyone can do it, with no special programs to follow. Do it whatever way you want. You can do it with LCHF. You can do it with Paleo. You can be Vegetarian, Pescetarian, Flexitarian. You can eat "clean" or not. You can be a runner, a walker, a cyclist, a yogi, a heavy lifter. In my opinion, Eat Less, Move More is not only simple, it is helpful.
And I agree.0 -
Head west for 1500 miles is not irrelevant. CICO is not irrelevant either. But if you told me to head west for 1500 miles I'd give you that blank stare. The same blank stare as people get when they hear the answer to the question how did you lose weight. I ate less, moved more.0
-
Head west for 1500 miles is not irrelevant. CICO is not irrelevant either. But if you told me to head west for 1500 miles I'd give you that blank stare. The same blank stare as people get when they answer the question of how did you lose weight. I ate less, moved more.
Yes it is. If it was good enough for the Pioneers in wagons, it's good enough for us. If they needed help they hired a guide or for us they asked more questions.0 -
But here's the true answer:
I walked more, I worked out a lot more, and I monitored how much I ate.
Am I supposed to say something that's not true, just because people would rather I say "I did South Beach" or "I gave up added sugar" (neither of which is true) or "I did a Whole 30 after which I had no desire to overeat ever again and could effortlessly lose weight without thinking about it (which is what many want to hear).
I can say (and do if someone asks more specific questions) that I had an issue with stress eating and worked on journaling and some other things to deal with it, but most people don't care about that and it's somewhat personal.
Saying "I don't eat between meals" is also accurate, but for many won't be helpful at all and it's no more necessary than I committed to doing a triathlon and decided to learn how to lift (also true).0 -
Head west for 1500 miles is not irrelevant. CICO is not irrelevant either. But if you told me to head west for 1500 miles I'd give you that blank stare. The same blank stare as people get when they hear the answer to the question how did you lose weight. I ate less, moved more.
But that's what I did, so I can't tell them I did anything else. I literally count my calories to eat at a deficit and use my treadmill every day.
That's it. I have nothing else special that I did. No low carbs, no high fat, heck, I didn't even focus on my macros at all to start. Calories only. For me, that very basic information was literally the only thing that finally worked. It's all the other stuff that makes it more confusing for me. I still don't pay too close attention to macros, other than to get enough protein, which I really only started doing in the past 2 months because of learning more. When I hit maintenance, I'll still focus on my calories, but I'll pay more attention to proteins and fats. Sometimes it's the simple phrase, eat less, move more, that can kick start someone's loss. They can start with it, learn they can be successful, and then take that information and add to it any way they like.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »
No, the reason people look at each other funny is they think there HAS to be something more to it.lindsey1979 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »I'm glad you quoted my post. I said "telling someone to eat less, move more is completely useless. I'm tired of that advice. " Everyone here keeps saying you have to find your own way. That's why telling someone to "eat less, move more" is useless. It's not helpful. Read all the posts above. Don't make me quote them.
Eat less, move more is not useless. It is a high level summary on how to make CICO work more effectively to achieve the desired result. Eat less, move more should work for everyone.
What you choose to eat, and how you choose to exercise or be more active, is the specific way in which you implement the "eat less, move more" advice. As I said before, there are endless different combinations of what to eat and how to exercise - this is the piece that an individual has to decide for themselves. Moderation may work for one person. Elimination might work for someone else. Paleo, LCHF, Raw Vegan, etc, etc.
I'm not sure it's totally useless, but it is pretty limited. It's fairly Captain Obvious. Now, giving people examples of HOW you managed to eat less and HOW you managed move more, now that's useful, pragmatic advice and information and what I suspect people are actually looking for with such inquiries.
I think that's why people look at others funny when they said, "oh, I just ate less and moved more." Yeah, no sheet Sherlock...
I really don't know how to explain how I applied Eat Less, Move More to an individual because I didn't follow any magical program. I literally ate the same things I was already eating, in smaller portions and/or less often, and I moved more than I was before. Period. I didn't cut anything out, I didn't follow a certain way of eating, try a special diet, etc. I figured out my numbers, and I used those numbers to make the decisions on a daily basis of how to implement the concept of Eat Less, Move More.
You guys keep saying that is not helpful, but that is the point. ANYONE can do this. That is helpful, to know that anyone can do it, with no special programs to follow. Do it whatever way you want. You can do it with LCHF. You can do it with Paleo. You can be Vegetarian, Pescetarian, Flexitarian. You can eat "clean" or not. You can be a runner, a walker, a cyclist, a yogi, a heavy lifter. In my opinion, Eat Less, Move More is not only simple, it is helpful.
I think some of the confusion comes when someone asks something like "I want to cut carbs" and gets a response like "Not necessary - CICO," people think they are mutually exclusive concepts. I know I've seen you respond to a few posts lately where CICO is being viewed as a way of eating, not as a explanation of the energy balance, so that might be part of the problem right there.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Now there it is. This is a diet and fitness forum. People know what they want. They just don't know how to get there. Maybe, for limited number, CICO is a new concept. But I highly doubt it. As Lindsey put it, they are asking how to do it.
^^and the very simple answer to this is eat less calories than you burn, and that doesn't necessarily mean you even have to move more.
Most weight loss plans/diets have a hook that some people need to motivate themselves, but underneath the hype, it is the same, eat less calories than you burn daily to lose weight.
It is better for most of us to be a "normal" weight. How we get to that point and keep our weight in a normal range is up to us as individuals.
In the long run, sustainability in keeping the weight off after achieving our goal is key to our long term success. The statistics show that over 80% of successful dieters fail at keeping the weight off. Staggering statistics, and none of us who lose weight ever plan, or even think, we will ever regain it. Clearly, the statistics say that a huge percentage of us do regain.
CICO.
0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »I do think telling people "CICO is what is important", and "eat less, move more" is simplistic, but still helpful. What is really necessary, is to understand what your individual energy balance is b/w CI vs CO (both at your current weight and activity level, and then as a result of weight loss, increased activity, etc to understand what that does to the balance).
If more people spent time trying to accurately understand their calorie level to maintain their current weight, then it would be simpler to 1) determine how many calories they need to either cut on the CI side, or 2) increase on the CO side in order to affect that energy balance and achieve the desired weight loss.
Similarly, as others are saying, CICO is the fundamental principal but there are ENDLESS combinations of foods, nutrients, etc that will influence an individual's specific diet and ultimately influence the sustainability and satisfaction level of the process. If people make things too difficult, by cutting out foods they love, or restricting total calories too far - then yes, I think that means that they are more likely to end up getting frustrated and give up on the overall process before achieving their goals, or after they reach a desired weight but think they can go back to their old habits.
I think the other part that people get hung up on is the sustainability portion though - when it comes down to it, what the person ultimately needs to be able to sustain is an appropriate calorie goal and activity level to stay in maintenance after reaching their goal.
But we often see people suggesting that someone not start down a certain path if they can't stick with it long term, particularly when it comes to an eating style. That's just not realistic for most people; our circumstances change over time, and we have to change to adapt to it. I think conversations often get bogged down with specifics and semantics, rather than the big picture, which is do you understand the basics and are you able to apply them when the variables change in a way that keeps you on track?
I think some people get overwhelmed at the idea of "forever," which is why these time-limited diet plans are popular. I don't think it's necessarily a good idea to steer people away from them though, just because they aren't necessarily a sustainable plan. Often having the experience of doing something short term helps a person develop a skill that can help them in the long term in creating a plan that is sustainable for them. I don't know anyone on this site is doing the exact same thing now that they were when they started, but they've figured out what is necessary for them to be able to succeed.
The trick, of course, is helping to guide people to figure out what is necessary for them, which is where I feel that focusing simply on the CICO principal fails the user.
This thinking ignores the emotional/behavioral side of things that comes with the concept of "forever" for some people. It can be a VERY loaded thing that often leads to destructive behavior.
There was a study... I'm pressed for time right now, or I'd dig it up, on binging, and it found it rooted in a cyclical behavior trap of restriction and binging. The thinking that "I'm never going to eat this again, I caved so .... BINGE!!!!" is a studied phenomenon, and that's what those of us who sometimes argue for sustainability worry about when it comes to advising other dieters.
The idea of long-term planning has to be something every dieter thinks about. You might find the occasional person who's okay with the idea of not eating cookies or ice cream during the weight loss phase who does just fine adding them back in, in reasonable, measured portions, during maintenance -- or you might not. Were I such a dieter, I frankly couldn't see the point of denying myself such things if I could fit them in... unless I truly never planned to eat them again. However, were I such a dieter, having the knowledge of how to change horses midstream would be helpful and necessary.
When I low carbed, I low carbed for a very long time. About seven years, IIRC. The thing that did me in? Gluten free oatmeal coming on the market. I decided I just didn't want to live forever without having oatmeal. It was a good lesson for me about food. It wasn't enough, however, for me to know about sustaining energy balance. My low-carb education just stressed counting carbs.
0 -
YESITDOESWORK:
However........I'm sure it will be sub par just like the garbage advice you've been giving out in the weight gain section. You're out of your league kid.
Now for the important question, who's sock puppet are you?
Actually, YESITDOES,I think you have me mixed up with someone else. I have never been to the weight gain section. I suspect that section would do not help me lose weight.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »
No, the reason people look at each other funny is they think there HAS to be something more to it.lindsey1979 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »I'm glad you quoted my post. I said "telling someone to eat less, move more is completely useless. I'm tired of that advice. " Everyone here keeps saying you have to find your own way. That's why telling someone to "eat less, move more" is useless. It's not helpful. Read all the posts above. Don't make me quote them.
Eat less, move more is not useless. It is a high level summary on how to make CICO work more effectively to achieve the desired result. Eat less, move more should work for everyone.
What you choose to eat, and how you choose to exercise or be more active, is the specific way in which you implement the "eat less, move more" advice. As I said before, there are endless different combinations of what to eat and how to exercise - this is the piece that an individual has to decide for themselves. Moderation may work for one person. Elimination might work for someone else. Paleo, LCHF, Raw Vegan, etc, etc.
I'm not sure it's totally useless, but it is pretty limited. It's fairly Captain Obvious. Now, giving people examples of HOW you managed to eat less and HOW you managed move more, now that's useful, pragmatic advice and information and what I suspect people are actually looking for with such inquiries.
I think that's why people look at others funny when they said, "oh, I just ate less and moved more." Yeah, no sheet Sherlock...
I really don't know how to explain how I applied Eat Less, Move More to an individual because I didn't follow any magical program. I literally ate the same things I was already eating, in smaller portions and/or less often, and I moved more than I was before. Period. I didn't cut anything out, I didn't follow a certain way of eating, try a special diet, etc. I figured out my numbers, and I used those numbers to make the decisions on a daily basis of how to implement the concept of Eat Less, Move More.
You guys keep saying that is not helpful, but that is the point. ANYONE can do this. That is helpful, to know that anyone can do it, with no special programs to follow. Do it whatever way you want. You can do it with LCHF. You can do it with Paleo. You can be Vegetarian, Pescetarian, Flexitarian. You can eat "clean" or not. You can be a runner, a walker, a cyclist, a yogi, a heavy lifter. In my opinion, Eat Less, Move More is not only simple, it is helpful.
I think some of the confusion comes when someone asks something like "I want to cut carbs" and gets a response like "Not necessary - CICO," people think they are mutually exclusive concepts. I know I've seen you respond to a few posts lately where CICO is being viewed as a way of eating, not as a explanation of the energy balance, so that might be part of the problem right there.
I'm not sure which threads, they all blur together... good lord this is the second thread today with almost the exact same title! I usually do try to explain to people that CICO is the fundamental principle behind the energy balance, and that how someone creates that calorie deficit is up to them, as long as they aren't saying that they can eat MORE than their maintenance BECAUSE they follow a certain program, then that's fine.
If that is being interepreted as me recommending CICO as a way of eating, well, I'm not sure, I'd have to see a specific quote to jog my addled memory.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
Water weight is noise, fat loss is signal. It is fairly easy to fix the problem by looking at daily weight as a rolling average and track the trend with something like trendweigh.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »flippy1234 wrote: »I am so tired of so much diet crap being thrown at us. So many different magic bullets and philosophies. I just want to know, is it really that simple, CICO? If so, then what is all of this other nonsense?
Yes and no. FAT loss is really all about calories. But it's not always simple. The two biggest variables I can think of that make it seem like it’s about more than calories are:
1. Weight loss and fat loss may not be comparable. Water weight can be a big factor in weight loss.
2. There are many medical conditions that can throw a person outside the average categories making all these online calculators incorrect for them.
All of the other nonsense is mostly about money, but also about tyring to make it easier.
Water weight is not noise, it's weight. It makes you big just like fat does. And "easy" is opinion.
If you can use MFP, you can use trendweight or any of the other apps that do it.
And yes, it is noise, it can only be noise by virtue of being weight. Like if I read an oscilloscope voltage signal, all the jitter is volts - the scope isn't going to read volts and pressure or volts and temperature and combine them. If water wasn't weight, it wouldn't be a problem for determining weight of fat loss, which is the usual goal (signal) people want to measure.
And sure, enough water will make people bigger. Enough muscle will too. Besides bloating, people in physique competitions, or sport weigh-ins, I can't recall people looking to lose water.
Blah, blah, blah. Most people want to get smaller and look lean. Water can prevent that as much as fat can. Especially for some with certain medical conditions.
So they eliminate salt. Very few people have those medical conditions.
0 -
Maybe, for limited number, CICO is a new concept. But I highly doubt it. As Lindsey put it, they are asking how to do it.
I disagree. I have seen multiple threads every day for the year + I have been here where OP can't believe it doesn't matter what they eat. They have magazines, workout programs, supplement commercials, nutritionists, all telling them the 150 rules they need to follow. They post 5 paragraphs of all the hoops they are jumping through to no effect. And it turns out they aren't logging accurately and consistently, because they thought what they were or weren't eating was more important than counting calories.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 432 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions