Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Interesting way that people excuse their overweight / obesity

Options
1…1618202122

Replies

  • CanadianStephen
    CanadianStephen Posts: 11 Member
    Options
    extra_medium wrote: »
    ruzz3ii wrote: »
    CICO -- simple solution to a complex problem. Getting metabolism burning is more important than simply cutting calories. Otherwise, I agree that people like to make excuses.

    No, it's all about calories. Your metabolism never stops burning, or you'd be dead.

    And winning a game is all about scoring more points than the other team?
  • CanadianStephen
    CanadianStephen Posts: 11 Member
    Options
    gothchiq wrote: »
    Calories Out can get very complicated. If your body doesn't correctly process what you eat, because of hypothyroidism, diabetes, and other conditions, it can be important to change your macros as directed by your doctor, for example if your body does icky things with simple carbohydrates. I don't know the precise medical science but the calories out will be reduced by eating too many carbs when you have certain conditions. If you cut those down and increase protein, calories out will be much more normal. Some people haven't tested positive for a condition (yet?) but still have this kind of experience.

    And calories in isn't so simple either.
    Portions and carbs have 4 calories per gram but it makes a difference which of those two you eat.
  • JaneSnowe
    JaneSnowe Posts: 1,283 Member
    Options
    CanadianStephen wrote: »
    ammo7 wrote: »
    Galadrial60 wrote: »
    What i find interesting is the implied snark and judgement. People who are here are trying. Give them credit. If our bodies were all identical, and worked all the same, then we could all take the same treatments for illness...with identical results.

    I work with special needs adults, in supervised group home settings. They all eat the same diet, with identical portions, but their weights are all over the place. I have had people suggest to us that we STARVE them til they are fit...."for their own good." So lay off the interesting comments unless you happen to be a MD with a background in endocrine studies. You are expert about your own body....period.

    Snark is not really intended - please note that you are in the "debate" section of the forums where members are not trying to sugar coat their discussions.

    That is a very interesting point that you make about the special needs adults that you work with. People of different heights, ages and activity levels need different amounts of calories to maintain their weight - and men/women have quite significant differences in their caloric needs. It is absolutely expected that giving these adults all the same number of calories would result in their weights being all over the place, because the number of calories each individual requires will differ by quite a lot.

    There are not just differences in needs. There are differences in abilities to absorb calories.
    The most obvious example would people who do not produce lactase.
    There are also differences in calorie expenditure.

    Your first two lines can only contribute to Calories In being lower than expected, which will contribute to weight loss.

    Your last line means that one's individual caloric intake must match one's individual caloric needs. There are ways to measure it accurately if one wants.
  • JaneSnowe
    JaneSnowe Posts: 1,283 Member
    Options
    CanadianStephen wrote: »
    gothchiq wrote: »
    Calories Out can get very complicated. If your body doesn't correctly process what you eat, because of hypothyroidism, diabetes, and other conditions, it can be important to change your macros as directed by your doctor, for example if your body does icky things with simple carbohydrates. I don't know the precise medical science but the calories out will be reduced by eating too many carbs when you have certain conditions. If you cut those down and increase protein, calories out will be much more normal. Some people haven't tested positive for a condition (yet?) but still have this kind of experience.

    And calories in isn't so simple either.
    Portions and carbs have 4 calories per gram but it makes a difference which of those two you eat.

    Not for everyone. Know thyself.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    CanadianStephen wrote: »
    Do you count calories in olestra? It contains as much chemical energy as any other fat but you can not absorb it.
    If not then what about lactose calories in people who do not produce lactase?
    How do you count the extra calories burned after resistance training?

    I agree with the comment that this is majoring in minors.

    I don't consume olestra. People who don't produce lactase probably should not consume lactose (unless with lactase, I guess, not my issue). Calories after resistance training are bonus, or adjust if you are losing more than you want -- I don't count exercise calories but estimate TDEE based on results.
  • Frankenklein
    Frankenklein Posts: 29 Member
    Options
    I would think she's probably referring to genetics which I agree does have a hand in your ability to gain and lose weight and weight distribution. But that's only part of the problem.
  • kronin23
    kronin23 Posts: 59 Member
    Options
    chel325 wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    chel325 wrote: »

    Yup, weight loss isn't about WHAT you eat rather HOW MUCH.

    You can only eat twinkies but eat under your TDEE calorie amount and you will lose weight.

    Absolutely agree B)
  • breez83
    breez83 Posts: 5 Member
    Options
    Before kids my body would always stay at 180...I could lose weight, gain weight... With no effort, my weight would be 180 again. I wore a medium/size 10 jeans loose so I wasn't that chubby...I just seemed stuck. After I had kids...no matter how much I gain with my pregnancies, I drop to 215, but it seems to be impossible to get below 205 no matter how much I follow my personal trainers and nutritionists. Stockiness runs in my family in the men and occasionally the women, and I am pretty muscular...so I am pretty sure that it may be my genetics working against me. I have seen an endocrinologist and have been diagnosed with PCOS, which is a endocrine syndrome that messes with your hormones.
  • LINIA
    LINIA Posts: 1,137 Member
    Options
    I have always believed it is not simply CICO, up until about 10 years ago i could eat anything and everything and my weight remained low and stable, little did i know that wouldn't last forever.
    The CICO is likely 80% of ppl and the other 20%, for a myriad of reasons, will never have cico be applicable to them----hopefully you are finding ways to control your weight that work for you.

    midwesterner85 wrote: »
    It is really easy, especially for those who found the path to success is easy (or they are done and forgot how difficult it was), to assume that absolutely everybody will find the path to successful weight loss just as easily. It is also easy to blame everyone who hasn't found success for being lazy and making excuses. So here is my explanation for how I became heavy to begin with... if you think this is my fault, I would ask for an explanation as to how you arrived at that conclusion:

    When I was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes, I was underweight for my height and age (by about 10 lbs.). At that time, the treatment for type 1 was not nearly as advanced as it is today. Basically, the treatment was insulin shots for both a basal and bolus (some today still are on MDI, though many of us are on pumps that allow greater flexibility) and a rigid meal plan. The meal plan was setup to eat exactly the same amount of the same types of foods at exactly the same times every single day.

    Within the first month, I gained 20 lbs. and was overweight. Within the first year, I had doubled my weight. Over the next 2 years (3 total), I had more than tripled my weight and was obese. This was on the insulin and meal plan given to me by a CDE and dietition working for an endocrinologist. Though I had more training on type 1 diabetes by the time I was 10 years old than most U.S. physicians (according to those who spent weeks training me), and though there was an even better educated healthcare team involved, a way to stop gaining didn't come until I went to a pump several years later - the pump allowed much more flexibility for timing and quantities of meals.

    I started out taking pork insulin before things like Apidra, Humalog, Lantus, Levemir, and other newer insulins were available - you can forget about Symlin until much later. As technology, medications, and treatment methods improved, I was able to finally start losing weight... slowly. I had some pretty good losses at first, but then had serious low BG's. During the 4th month (so after 3.5 months), I had a serious low BG day. For about 14 hours, without taking a single bolus and while using a temp. basal of 0 during part of that time, I needed over 600g of carbs to treat persistent low BG. Things like that make it extremely difficult to lose weight. Sure, you could argue that I could just eat less... but that also means that I could die.

    I've had unusual experiences with weight loss - times where I had long plateaus followed by large "whooshes" and a time where I've gained weight after cutting calories further (when losing weight slowly prior to cutting calories). I've seen huge increases in losses by changing macros without changing total calories. CICO is just not that simple for me.

    So my point is that there are some of us who are not fat because we are lazy, but because of circumstances over which we have little or no control; and that CICO is not as straight-forward as many here believe.

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    How could CICO not apply to people? I don't even understand what that is supposed to mean.

    It's common for people to gain weight with age -- the equilibrium changes.
  • T1DCarnivoreRunner
    T1DCarnivoreRunner Posts: 11,502 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    How could CICO not apply to people? I don't even understand what that is supposed to mean.

    It's common for people to gain weight with age -- the equilibrium changes.

    What that means is that CICO just plain does not work. I understand the science behind some of why it hasn't worked for me, but other experiences I've had are things that I don't understand. It may be that experts who research such things understand it, and it may be that the current body of scientific knowledge is lacking on some specific instances. For example, there was a time that I was losing at a very slow rate (less than 1/2 lb. / week) and wanted to increase the rate of loss. CICO purists would suggest cutting calorie intake or increasing calorie expenditure. So I cut calorie intake by 500 / day. For the next 3 weeks, I started gaining rapidly (almost 2 lbs. / week) until I raised calories to the previous level. Someone who does not want to believe that result might suggest that my scale stopped being accurate at the exact time that I cut calories and started working again at the exact time I raised calories. That doesn't make a lot of sense, of course, but to someone who is unwilling to accept the fact that a reduced calorie level caused a shift from a small loss to a fast gain, they will convince themselves that there is an explanation that fits within CICO. It is just that some people reject the possibility that there is something they don't understand.

Categories