It is more than a simple "CICO" - why can't we just admit it?

Why do people say that it is all down to CICO as if it is really that simple? Why does dieting not work, then, if all we have to do is shut our pie holes every in a while? Now, before anyone gets snarky, yes one needs to burn more than they eat, but saying that it is all " CICO" is very misleading. You take 2 different 200 pound women. Give them a month, have then do the same level if activity and eat the exact same food, and I guarantee they will not have the same weight loss. This leaves people frustrated.

It is so very hard to figure out what our CO" is as our bodies affect how we process the same foods. Tom might use more energy digesting his peanut butter sandwich than Hank, even though they ate the exact same amount. That's more "CO" for Tom. It's also hard to figure out our "CI"; since, by law, packaged foods are allowed to be "off" a certain amount on what the companies that is the nutritional balance, etc. All we can do is our best educated guess and that's just is not perfect enough to boil everything down to CICO.

It is so tiring to see people just boil complex biological functions down to a half-baked formula. Yes, what you eat does matter (and you may not even know it [your Big Mac may be your weekly treat but it could very well be someone else's poison]) and what you do does matter (exercise has been shown to to do so many things that affect this CICO over-used jargon).
«13456

Replies

  • size102b
    size102b Posts: 1,370 Member
    Sadly it is cico but as we are all different then some of us lose slower than others
    I lose slowly now as yoyo dieting I so wish I could go back to 1987 and know what I know now those stupid yoyo diets wrecked my life as in I can never eat as much as a persons who's not yoyoed
    Other factors are medication health problems and hormonal
    But on the while it is cico you just have to find the right amount for you
    My friend and I weigh the same we are 3 months in difference in age but she will lose more than me on slimming world than I will on meal replacement plans I've yoyoed she hasn't
  • comeonnow142857
    comeonnow142857 Posts: 310 Member
    zyxst wrote: »
    Every human does not burn the same amount of energy and need the same amount of energy. My caloric intake might be too much/too little for you, but it doesn't mean eating less than you burn is wrong.

    Saying CICO is wrong because people are different is like saying 2+2=4 is wrong because 3+1=4.

    ETA: Saying "It's CICO" because weight loss/gain/maintenance IS that simple. People want to complicate it because if it really is that simple, they'd feel like idiots. I admit to being an idiot when I learned losing weight is just eating less than I burn.

    Ouch!
  • comeonnow142857
    comeonnow142857 Posts: 310 Member
    butcher206 wrote: »
    I just wanted to agree with all the people saying it IS that simple. It really is. I lost 113lbs with ZERO exercise; I know.

    But without realising point in detail manipulation 978 metabolic processes/chemical interactions and feedback loops we know of that in your situation that in a given day conspired to reduce your BMR by 147 calories and the other 743 we know of that conspired to increase it by 119, don't you realise how much optimisation you've lost out on?


    Pareto wept
  • 3rdof7sisters
    3rdof7sisters Posts: 486 Member
    edited February 2017
    It is really that simple. For weight loss, eat less calories than you burn. How you arrive there may be under a different name, but in the final analysis, it comes down to less CI, than CO.
    However, I don't think that most people think it is easy.
  • lightenup2016
    lightenup2016 Posts: 1,055 Member
    edited February 2017
    CICO is really how it works. It might take a little time to figure out your approximate numbers, but what is the alternative? Low-carb? Paleo? Vegan? Whatever other current "diet" is trendy right now? CICO still applies in all those cases...I just prefer to figure out the numbers and then eat what I want within my range. It really does work!

    The only time I gain or can't lose is when I'm eating over my calculated calorie allotment for the amount of exercise I'm doing. Now, the nuances of what makes us overeat can be trickier, but in the end it all comes down to the numbers. If your CO is lower because you "broke your metabolism" or because we're all different, or whatever, then you must reduce your CI for you to see a drop in weight. And that will work.

    The only other thing affecting weight is water, which goes up and down and can mask true fat loss, but this is only water, and simply a fact of life. Two lbs of water gained overnight can be lost over another night.
  • snowflake954
    snowflake954 Posts: 8,399 Member
    Why do people say that it is all down to CICO as if it is really that simple? Why does dieting not work, then, if all we have to do is shut our pie holes every in a while? Now, before anyone gets snarky, yes one needs to burn more than they eat, but saying that it is all " CICO" is very misleading. You take 2 different 200 pound women. Give them a month, have then do the same level if activity and eat the exact same food, and I guarantee they will not have the same weight loss. This leaves people frustrated.

    It is so very hard to figure out what our CO" is as our bodies affect how we process the same foods. Tom might use more energy digesting his peanut butter sandwich than Hank, even though they ate the exact same amount. That's more "CO" for Tom. It's also hard to figure out our "CI"; since, by law, packaged foods are allowed to be "off" a certain amount on what the companies that is the nutritional balance, etc. All we can do is our best educated guess and that's just is not perfect enough to boil everything down to CICO.

    It is so tiring to see people just boil complex biological functions down to a half-baked formula. Yes, what you eat does matter (and you may not even know it [your Big Mac may be your weekly treat but it could very well be someone else's poison]) and what you do does matter (exercise has been shown to to do so many things that affect this CICO over-used jargon).

    I think a good answer here is, yes there can be a bit of variability, but in reality those two women are likely NOT really eating the exact same amount of food. What people eat and what they report that they eat can be very different, whether it's a conscious thing or not.

    It's also true that you could have a tall 200 lb woman, 65 yrs old, and a short 200lb woman, 30 yrs old. Yes, they will lose weight at different rates.
This discussion has been closed.