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.
CICO is not the whole equation
Replies
-
Out of interest how are you guys sure you're still in ketosis?
Are you using (less reliable) urine testing strips?
Or testing blood ketones with a monitor and finger pricks?
Or going by how you feel, or breath acetone analysis? Just curious.0 -
3
-
6
-
Out of interest how are you guys sure you're still in ketosis?
Are you using (less reliable) urine testing strips?
Or testing blood ketones with a monitor and finger pricks?
Or going by how you feel, or breath acetone analysis? Just curious.
Stand next to someone in keto in the gym. I assure you, there is no mistaking that smell. My tefeeds were on Friday evening; about 30 minutes into supersetting deadlifts and pullups on Saturday, I smelled like a barrel of nail polish remover. It then stays that way anytime I exert, until the following Friday.
When I am cutting, it's constant after about day 3, as there are no carb refeeds.2 -
Indygirl_81 wrote: »I agree with the OP... CICO is not the end on be all for everyone. I can eat less calories than I expend but if they are loaded with carbs, I will gain- this is because of medical conditions. To those who don't have these, you don't understand that it does affect weight loss.... thank you OP!
Which medical condition leads to the creation of bodyfat in a calorie deficit?
Hop on to nearly any hypothyroid discussion. There are a committed community that believe this despite all evidence to the contrary.
In untreated hypothyroidism the weight gain is complex and multifaceted but not related to a simple calorie deficit derived from food, rather a lowered basal metabolic rate neutralizing or negating reductions of caloric input as the CO is reduced.
Sure a 'deficit' would relate to weigh loss but achieving that deficit is harder to do. People find they eat and move the same but can't create a loss due to the basal metabolic rate being negatively affected by the impaired thyroid function.
Metabolic rate is affected by many things such as age, gender, size, temperature, medications, hormones etc ... thyroid hormones are intricately tied to metabolism.
.................
The root cause of the complexity lies with obesity. Hormones are free cycling, so simply being overweight inhibits hormonal balance as the increase in tissue lessens the chance of the hormones finding receptor sites. The best course of action is to lose weight in a safe responsible manner through a caloric deficit and moderate exercise.
REE is reduced by ~5% based on diagnostic evidence and this is on patients moving from a full thyroid panel in the normal range to complete withdrawal from hormone supplementation. So a person with a calculated maintenance of 2000 kcals/day would then need to reduce this to 1900 kcals/day. 100 kcals/day difference.
What many actually experience is a shift in satiety factors and hunger signals, which causes hypothyroid patients to eat more.4 -
Out of interest how are you guys sure you're still in ketosis?
Are you using (less reliable) urine testing strips?
Or testing blood ketones with a monitor and finger pricks?
Or going by how you feel, or breath acetone analysis? Just curious.
For the first few days I get headaches if I'm not careful about salt intake, and I get low level headaches throughout if I'm again not careful. When eating "normally" for me, headaches are never an issue. I also pee more with the same fluid intake (especially so the first 24 hours) and my breath is.....different, hard to explain! I'm actually not overly fussed about being in ketosis so that's why I don't test in any way. It's just a byproduct of the cutting method being used.0 -
I know they're not real strudels but I might have to try these on my next trip Stateside! In what section of the supermarket are these to be found?
1 -
VintageFeline wrote: »
I know they're not real strudels but I might have to try these on my next trip Stateside! In what section of the supermarket are these to be found?
Freezer section.0 -
VintageFeline wrote: »
I know they're not real strudels but I might have to try these on my next trip Stateside! In what section of the supermarket are these to be found?
Freezer and where ever all the processed foods are found, which allegedly is always in the middle of the store.11 -
WinoGelato wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »
I know they're not real strudels but I might have to try these on my next trip Stateside! In what section of the supermarket are these to be found?
Freezer and where ever all the processed foods are found, which allegedly is always in the middle of the store.
Except when it's on the outside edge, like at my store.
9 -
VintageFeline wrote: »
I know they're not real strudels but I might have to try these on my next trip Stateside! In what section of the supermarket are these to be found?
I haven't been shopping in America for 15 years, so this may not apply, but if you can find the ones with cream cheese in them get those. I also recommend the apple-cinnamon ones.4 -
People fail in diets because of feeling overwhelmed with all they think they have to do to lose weight. There is so much ancillary, minute information thrown around here with supplements, exercise routines, micro nutrients, hormone effects, metabolic rates, and miracle dietary constraints, it is amazing anyone filters through to something useful and practical. You would think if you aren't doing a low carb paleo keto juice diet while mainlining a protein powder base injections with balanced Amino Acid BCAA - EAA ratio, WPI:WPC Ratio, and low filler percentages after doing twice a day 5x5 stronglifts and squatting bish, you will never succeed.
Welcome to the anecdotal hyperbole.
CICO based on TDEE does succeed. Proven over and over. No one denies the equation can be tweaked based on many things, but very few fail to see results doing CICO, and doing it correctly. Look in the success forum. Almost ever person posting there for the last years have a basis of CICO, then many tweak or make enhancements that fit them. Read the scientific papers on CICO. While some other adjusted CICO diets have been seen to provided additional benefits or loss, the basic CICO control groups ALWAYS loses weight, with no fan fare.GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I think this whole thread could have been moot if it had been titled "CICO isn't the only equation".
lol....maybe...
5 -
CICO based on TDEE does succeed. Proven over and over. No one denies the equation can be tweaked based on many things, but very few fail to see results doing CICO, and doing it correctly. Look in the success forum. Almost ever person posting there for the last years have a basis of CICO, then many tweak or make enhancements that fit them. Read the scientific papers on CICO. While some other adjusted CICO diets have been seen to provided additional benefits or loss, the basic CICO control groups ALWAYS loses weight, with no fan fare.
Except CICO <> Calorie counting, which is really what you are talking about. CICO is the underlying reason people lose weight regardless of their method. Calorie counting is the method MFP is based on.
3 -
VintageFeline wrote: »
I know they're not real strudels but I might have to try these on my next trip Stateside! In what section of the supermarket are these to be found?
I haven't been shopping in America for 15 years, so this may not apply, but if you can find the ones with cream cheese in them get those. I also recommend the apple-cinnamon ones.
I do enjoy the enablement culture round these parts. Roll on April!
And thank you too to those telling me where to find them.
Making note in my phone right now to remind me........0 -
Tacklewasher wrote: »CICO based on TDEE does succeed. Proven over and over. No one denies the equation can be tweaked based on many things, but very few fail to see results doing CICO, and doing it correctly. Look in the success forum. Almost ever person posting there for the last years have a basis of CICO, then many tweak or make enhancements that fit them. Read the scientific papers on CICO. While some other adjusted CICO diets have been seen to provided additional benefits or loss, the basic CICO control groups ALWAYS loses weight, with no fan fare.
Except CICO <> Calorie counting, which is really what you are talking about. CICO is the underlying reason people lose weight regardless of their method. Calorie counting is the method MFP is based on.
Erm, how do you determine your calories in (CI) and calories out (CO) without counting calories?
0 -
born_of_fire74 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »CICO based on TDEE does succeed. Proven over and over. No one denies the equation can be tweaked based on many things, but very few fail to see results doing CICO, and doing it correctly. Look in the success forum. Almost ever person posting there for the last years have a basis of CICO, then many tweak or make enhancements that fit them. Read the scientific papers on CICO. While some other adjusted CICO diets have been seen to provided additional benefits or loss, the basic CICO control groups ALWAYS loses weight, with no fan fare.
Except CICO <> Calorie counting, which is really what you are talking about. CICO is the underlying reason people lose weight regardless of their method. Calorie counting is the method MFP is based on.
Erm, how do you determine your calories in (CI) and calories out (CO) without counting calories?
You don't have to determine it to make CICO work for you (although I think counting makes it a lot easier). You could use a method that might help you reach a deficit without counting -- like reducing carbohydrates or IF or a thousand other different plans.
When they work, they work because they help someone consume less than they're burning.
Counting calories is one way -- I think a really reliable way -- to achieve a deficit. But it isn't the only way.4 -
janejellyroll wrote: »born_of_fire74 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »CICO based on TDEE does succeed. Proven over and over. No one denies the equation can be tweaked based on many things, but very few fail to see results doing CICO, and doing it correctly. Look in the success forum. Almost ever person posting there for the last years have a basis of CICO, then many tweak or make enhancements that fit them. Read the scientific papers on CICO. While some other adjusted CICO diets have been seen to provided additional benefits or loss, the basic CICO control groups ALWAYS loses weight, with no fan fare.
Except CICO <> Calorie counting, which is really what you are talking about. CICO is the underlying reason people lose weight regardless of their method. Calorie counting is the method MFP is based on.
Erm, how do you determine your calories in (CI) and calories out (CO) without counting calories?
You don't have to determine it to make CICO work for you (although I think counting makes it a lot easier). You could use a method that might help you reach a deficit without counting -- like reducing carbohydrates or IF or a thousand other different plans.
When they work, they work because they help someone consume less than they're burning.
Counting calories is one way -- I think a really reliable way -- to achieve a deficit. But it isn't the only way.
I would add, that calorie counting is a tool, just like a scale or tape measure. It's provides quantitative data to enable adjustments and modifications.2 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
TEF shouldn't be included in "calorie burns" though. That's majoring in the minors. How many people eat 250 grams of protein a day anyway unless they are doing keto? And when burning calories for physical activity, does the body resort amino acids or energy from carbs (glycogen) first?Russellb97 wrote: »Russellb97 wrote: »I will backtrack a bit by saying that not every calorie is equal.
There's the thermic effect of food (250 grams of protein burns about 250 more calories than 250 grams of sugar)
They also vary in nutrition, fullness, and effect on hormones.
But weight-loss can be had with any type of food/calorie
A calorie is a unit of measurement - the "amount of energy needed to raise the temperature of one gram of water by one degree Celsius at a pressure of one atmosphere". You're mixing up a unit of measurement with food.
No I'm not.
250 grams of protein is approx. 1000 calories protein. It has a TEF of 30-35%, which means for those 1,000 calories "IN" your body will expend about 300-350 calories to metabolize them.
For the same amount of carbs, it would expend about 60
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
Most people eating much over 100 grams of protein daily will be knocked out of ketosis. Keto is NOT a high protein WOE because about half of protein can become glucose like sugar becomes.
It would take a lot more than 100g to knock someone out of Ketosis. And if people restricted themselves to that level of protein, most of people following the diet would be losing a lot of muscle (at least the males) because that won't even remotely address the requirements for many.
One thing I've noticed is that many ketoers freak out over protein, many of them aim for the bare minimum.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »born_of_fire74 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »CICO based on TDEE does succeed. Proven over and over. No one denies the equation can be tweaked based on many things, but very few fail to see results doing CICO, and doing it correctly. Look in the success forum. Almost ever person posting there for the last years have a basis of CICO, then many tweak or make enhancements that fit them. Read the scientific papers on CICO. While some other adjusted CICO diets have been seen to provided additional benefits or loss, the basic CICO control groups ALWAYS loses weight, with no fan fare.
Except CICO <> Calorie counting, which is really what you are talking about. CICO is the underlying reason people lose weight regardless of their method. Calorie counting is the method MFP is based on.
Erm, how do you determine your calories in (CI) and calories out (CO) without counting calories?
You don't have to determine it to make CICO work for you (although I think counting makes it a lot easier). You could use a method that might help you reach a deficit without counting -- like reducing carbohydrates or IF or a thousand other different plans.
When they work, they work because they help someone consume less than they're burning.
Counting calories is one way -- I think a really reliable way -- to achieve a deficit. But it isn't the only way.
I would add, that calorie counting is a tool, just like a scale or tape measure. It's provides quantitative data to enable adjustments and modifications.
This is exactly why I prefer it -- it allows me to make specific adjustments when I don't see the results I would expect.2 -
Christine_72 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »
TEF shouldn't be included in "calorie burns" though. That's majoring in the minors. How many people eat 250 grams of protein a day anyway unless they are doing keto? And when burning calories for physical activity, does the body resort amino acids or energy from carbs (glycogen) first?Russellb97 wrote: »Russellb97 wrote: »I will backtrack a bit by saying that not every calorie is equal.
There's the thermic effect of food (250 grams of protein burns about 250 more calories than 250 grams of sugar)
They also vary in nutrition, fullness, and effect on hormones.
But weight-loss can be had with any type of food/calorie
A calorie is a unit of measurement - the "amount of energy needed to raise the temperature of one gram of water by one degree Celsius at a pressure of one atmosphere". You're mixing up a unit of measurement with food.
No I'm not.
250 grams of protein is approx. 1000 calories protein. It has a TEF of 30-35%, which means for those 1,000 calories "IN" your body will expend about 300-350 calories to metabolize them.
For the same amount of carbs, it would expend about 60
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
Most people eating much over 100 grams of protein daily will be knocked out of ketosis. Keto is NOT a high protein WOE because about half of protein can become glucose like sugar becomes.
It would take a lot more than 100g to knock someone out of Ketosis. And if people restricted themselves to that level of protein, most of people following the diet would be losing a lot of muscle (at least the males) because that won't even remotely address the requirements for many.
One thing I've noticed is that many ketoers freak out over protein, many of them aim for the bare minimum.
Which I find often funny because keto is pushed as muscle sparring based on a lot of research. But that research all has protein as higher levels (often 30% of calories or more). So it would further support the protein doesn't push you out of ketosis as easily. And whats worse, if you have inadequate protein, you would not only increase the chance of muscle loss and a slower metabolic, but you would also negate any potential increase to EE from keto.
It's why I always say, if you dont' follow a diet like it's described in the studies, you can't expect the results. It was a big argument I had the recent SFA studies. Yes, they conclude the SFA do not harm health, but they were at 15% of calories. I would suspect that many on keto have much higher levels. Heck, I think I am at a much higher level.4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 901 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions