CICO, It's a math formula
Replies
-
Wait, MFP can tell you approximately how much to eat to lose weight based on information one inputs. Now all one has to do is FOLLOW it.endlessfall16 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »endlessfall16 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
See my post upthread. One doesn't need to know CICO exactly, to the tenth of a calorie. That there are variables for some people does not invalidate the entire concept. It's not only helpful at the beginning, it is the overarching principle behind the entire weight management process.
I get that you have medical conditions that you've managed/mitigated through a change in your way of eating and resulting weight loss. Do you acknowledge that no matter how you ate, all the coffee with 8 creamers and round eggs at McDonalds... it's CICO that governed your weight loss? And that was a contributing factor to your health improvements? If you hadn't lost a single pound, but changed your diet, do you think you would have had the same results? What if you had lost weight but hadn't changed to a LCHF diet?
This "entire concept" of CICO is so vague that it might not be helpful at all. It's a jargon for many. If you are going for concepts there are others that may be more helpful than it such as "eat less, move more" since it is layman's terms. I would bet less people would incline to argue about "eat less, move more".
But its not. It's an equation. The fact that some people seem unable to wrap their heads around it, or seem to willfully resist conceding that it exists doesn't change that.
You don't understand. Wino put it correctly, it's [just] a concept.
For it to be some sort of useful equation, let a lone a math formula, it would need alot more elements.
Lol, you can be dimissive and they can roll their eyes all they want, because it's really that simple. I go through this with people who complain about all the exercise they do 4-5 days a week and the weight ain't coming off on a daily basis. I tell them they eat too much and then they come back with "but I eat healthy". I repeat it again and then ask if they know how much they actually eat calorie wise in a day. Guess how many of those that don't lose actually know?People like me get dismissive of it because it's no good at being specific but it's patronizing to be understood at its crude level. Go out and discuss diet with struggling fat adults. They might give you some initial interest when you mention CICO. If you break it down to essentially they are fat because they eat more than they use, which is all there is about CICO, see if they roll their eyes at you or not.
People don't want to hear the simple answer. It's somehow gotta be some enigma they can't seem to solve.
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
24 -
Wait, MFP can tell you approximately how much to eat to lose weight based on information one inputs. Now all one has to do is FOLLOW it.endlessfall16 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »endlessfall16 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
See my post upthread. One doesn't need to know CICO exactly, to the tenth of a calorie. That there are variables for some people does not invalidate the entire concept. It's not only helpful at the beginning, it is the overarching principle behind the entire weight management process.
I get that you have medical conditions that you've managed/mitigated through a change in your way of eating and resulting weight loss. Do you acknowledge that no matter how you ate, all the coffee with 8 creamers and round eggs at McDonalds... it's CICO that governed your weight loss? And that was a contributing factor to your health improvements? If you hadn't lost a single pound, but changed your diet, do you think you would have had the same results? What if you had lost weight but hadn't changed to a LCHF diet?
This "entire concept" of CICO is so vague that it might not be helpful at all. It's a jargon for many. If you are going for concepts there are others that may be more helpful than it such as "eat less, move more" since it is layman's terms. I would bet less people would incline to argue about "eat less, move more".
But its not. It's an equation. The fact that some people seem unable to wrap their heads around it, or seem to willfully resist conceding that it exists doesn't change that.
You don't understand. Wino put it correctly, it's [just] a concept.
For it to be some sort of useful equation, let a lone a math formula, it would need alot more elements.
Implementation wise, it wasn't that simple. I needed to make several adjustments. No way to get accurate "calorie out" numbers. My days are different. Calories from foods were also rough estimates for me.
0 -
endlessfall16 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »endlessfall16 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
See my post upthread. One doesn't need to know CICO exactly, to the tenth of a calorie. That there are variables for some people does not invalidate the entire concept. It's not only helpful at the beginning, it is the overarching principle behind the entire weight management process.
I get that you have medical conditions that you've managed/mitigated through a change in your way of eating and resulting weight loss. Do you acknowledge that no matter how you ate, all the coffee with 8 creamers and round eggs at McDonalds... it's CICO that governed your weight loss? And that was a contributing factor to your health improvements? If you hadn't lost a single pound, but changed your diet, do you think you would have had the same results? What if you had lost weight but hadn't changed to a LCHF diet?
This "entire concept" of CICO is so vague that it might not be helpful at all. It's a jargon for many. If you are going for concepts there are others that may be more helpful than it such as "eat less, move more" since it is layman's terms. I would bet less people would incline to argue about "eat less, move more".
But its not. It's an equation. The fact that some people seem unable to wrap their heads around it, or seem to willfully resist conceding that it exists doesn't change that.
You don't understand. Wino put it correctly, it's [just] a concept.
For it to be some sort of useful equation, let a lone a math formula, it would need alot more elements.
People like me get dismissive of it because it's no good at being specific but it's patronizing to be understood at its crude level. Go out and discuss diet with struggling fat adults. They might give you some initial interest when you mention CICO. If you break it down to essentially they are fat because they eat more than they use, which is all there is about CICO, see if they roll their eyes at you or not.
Denial of one's failings does not invalidate physical laws.34 -
endlessfall16 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »endlessfall16 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
See my post upthread. One doesn't need to know CICO exactly, to the tenth of a calorie. That there are variables for some people does not invalidate the entire concept. It's not only helpful at the beginning, it is the overarching principle behind the entire weight management process.
I get that you have medical conditions that you've managed/mitigated through a change in your way of eating and resulting weight loss. Do you acknowledge that no matter how you ate, all the coffee with 8 creamers and round eggs at McDonalds... it's CICO that governed your weight loss? And that was a contributing factor to your health improvements? If you hadn't lost a single pound, but changed your diet, do you think you would have had the same results? What if you had lost weight but hadn't changed to a LCHF diet?
This "entire concept" of CICO is so vague that it might not be helpful at all. It's a jargon for many. If you are going for concepts there are others that may be more helpful than it such as "eat less, move more" since it is layman's terms. I would bet less people would incline to argue about "eat less, move more".
But its not. It's an equation. The fact that some people seem unable to wrap their heads around it, or seem to willfully resist conceding that it exists doesn't change that.
You don't understand. Wino put it correctly, it's [just] a concept.
For it to be some sort of useful equation, let a lone a math formula, it would need alot more elements.
People like me get dismissive of it because it's no good at being specific but it's patronizing to be understood at its crude level. Go out and discuss diet with struggling fat adults. They might give you some initial interest when you mention CICO. If you break it down to essentially they are fat because they eat more than they use, which is all there is about CICO, see if they roll their eyes at you or not.
If I give you directions to my place, do you need to know exactly every single bump in the road and every single step you're supposed to take? No, I tell you the vague directions ('go in that direction until you see the x, then turn left...') knowing you have a brain and can get the specifics for you following them ('oh, this road is closed, I should go around and meet back up with the road I need to go to') by yourself.
In other words, don't expect others to chew your food for you.46 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
Easy. Results over time. Personal data. You make it sound like rocket science or something. But no. Track your intake for 8 weeks and see what happens to your weight. Adjust as necessary for desired results. Reassess on a regular basis.
I don't know why you're so obsessed with making out like this is all so hard. It's not.
Why do you say it is hard to know your net CICO?
One only has to step on a set of bathroom scales and record the number.
Now if the number is not going in the desired direction one needs to stop and guessimate CI from time to time.
One that counts on gym time to lose weight can count on yo yoing weight because many things can and will keep one out of the gym for months at a time almost without fail. I know of one case right now when in 3 months the person has regained the weight lost over the last three years due to a very serious leg injury.
She didn't say it's hard. She said you're the one making it sound like it's hard.
Why do you think she said that?
I had just stated the only way we have to compute our true CICO numbers is to step on the scales, read the readout, record and repeat over and over using the same method/timing. There is nothing hard about that if an old crippled man can do it. I do understand there are physical limits that would make it hard for some.
Why does she think I said that? Because I did say that! I said it's not hard. Scale results over time tell you how your CICO balance is going. And now you are saying the exact same thing but came in here saying it's impossible to work out your own personal CICO.13 -
Engineer here. Numbers and stat guy to some extent also. Minor point to add only on an otherwise brilliant post with many equally brilliant inputs.
I look at CICO as math also. As a previous poster mentioned, there are many variables on each side of the "equation". I quoted the word equation, because to me it is a simple one, but the variables make it much more complex. Things like varying rates of change in the body's complex processes, like digestion efficiency, water retention, effects of sleep, stress, and many others. In engineering, you can calculate things out to a minute level of detail and find all sorts of ways to be more accurate. Many applications, you can go through all of that, only to find out that when you reach the top of the mountain, waiting at the top is the approximation with its estimates and fudge factors and everything else.
Said all that to say that although in reality CICO is complex, in its application it is quite simple because we have no need to focus on the complexities. We just need to give it enough time.
Then here on the forums, we end up arguing about things that do not matter in the long run. We look at time windows that are not long enough to establish the accuracy of CICO (estimates) and then make decisions without enough data.
CICO comes easy to me also and it's the first time I've ever been anywhere near consistent in weight loss. I'm not consistent day-to-day, but I am over time and this totally works.14 -
Best post ever.
I tend to find (WARNING - sweeping generalisation coming here!
) those with a problem with CICO a) don't accurately measure the CI (no scales, not recording EVERYTHING they eat) and b) over-estimate the CO ("but I'm running about all day so it doesn't matter I don't go to the gym").
I have a co-worker (trying to lose weight to fit into a special occasion dress) who is constantly saying "oh, but I can't do this or that exercise at the moment because of the pain in my hip/back/knee" and blaming that on her inability to lose weight, rather than reducing her CI further until she can resume her routine (which, TBH, was only ever intermittent!). While she was telling us this, she absent-mindedly ate 7 sweets from a bag someone had left on a desk10 -
I am not a book keeper not an accountant nor any other type of maths geek. I dont even know how to make a spreadsheet.
And I have always tracked very loosely - this accuracy to the last calorie stuff is not for me.
But I dont then say CICO does not work. Of course it does.
Or Eat Less, Move More if you prefer -same concept.
Just like one can have a bank account and track and spreadsheet incomings and outgoings to the last cent.
or one can loosely budget by withdrawing x amount on payday and just spending that till its gone and leaving rest in savings.
Either way if one sends more than they earn they will go into debt, If they keep more than they earn, they will save.
How you create the financial or calorie deficit is up to you - but the basic incoming v outgoing equation still works.
and you will be equally in debt regardless of what you spent the money on.
19 -
endlessfall16 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
See my post upthread. One doesn't need to know CICO exactly, to the tenth of a calorie. That there are variables for some people does not invalidate the entire concept. It's not only helpful at the beginning, it is the overarching principle behind the entire weight management process.
I get that you have medical conditions that you've managed/mitigated through a change in your way of eating and resulting weight loss. Do you acknowledge that no matter how you ate, all the coffee with 8 creamers and round eggs at McDonalds... it's CICO that governed your weight loss? And that was a contributing factor to your health improvements? If you hadn't lost a single pound, but changed your diet, do you think you would have had the same results? What if you had lost weight but hadn't changed to a LCHF diet?
This "entire concept" of CICO is so vague that it might not be helpful at all. It's a jargon for many. If you are going for concepts there are others that may be more helpful than it such as "eat less, move more" since it is layman's terms. I would bet less people would incline to argue about "eat less, move more".
What is vague about eat less than you burn???12 -
crazyycatlady1 wrote: »Best post ever.
I second this.
The number of times I've heard "CICO doesn't work, I do Keto" drives me mad!
8 -
Best post ever.
I tend to find (WARNING - sweeping generalisation coming here! ) those with a problem with CICO a) don't accurately measure the CI (no scales, not recording EVERYTHING they eat) and b) over-estimate the CO ("but I'm running about all day so it doesn't matter I don't go to the gym").
I have a co-worker (trying to lose weight to fit into a special occasion dress) who is constantly saying "oh, but I can't do this or that exercise at the moment because of the pain in my hip/back/knee" and blaming that on her inability to lose weight, rather than reducing her CI further until she can resume her routine (which, TBH, was only ever intermittent!). While she was telling us this, she absent-mindedly ate 7 sweets from a bag someone had left on a desk
I agree with your example of the types of people who have an issue with CICO. To further expound I think there are a few types:
1. People who have been told about the concept, but have failed to successfully implement it for themselves (as you describe)
2. People who don't want to believe that something as simple as managing a basic math equation is what is responsible for their weight issues all these years. If it were that simple, then they have no excuse for not losing the weight sooner.
3. People who have recently begun to evangelically follow a particular way of eating in order (kept, paleo, vegan, clean eating) to achieve results. They want to credit the way of eating for the weight loss, because of all the other perceived benefits they've encountered, and not suggest that any thing as simple as calories should take the credit away from this magical way of eating.
4. People who want to major in the minors and nitpick the details of the numbers as a reason to suggest that the entire formula won't work because it can't be precisely measured. Throwing the baby out with the bath water if you will...
15 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
If you are on a medication that inhibits digestion and absorption of nutrients, I'd watch out, because the result would be massive diarrhea.7 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »
And I'm the exact opposite. I math well, so figuring this out and learning to count calories has made weight loss very simple for me. If I go over, I don't lose what I want. It's a math problem for me. I find this way easier than cutting out foods.The issue for many people IMO, is that some just don't math well or as mentioned are just inaccurate in their calories eaten and burned. But it works PERIOD. Without it weight gain/loss/maintenance doesn't happen.
Yeah, I'm an accountant...it was a no brainer for me. I just had to keep another ledger to track it...I keep lots of ledgers.
Geek.
Oh, wait. I'm an accountant too.
Through my years here, I've noticed that a great many people who have success calorie counting and otherwise keeping track of their CICO are in professions such as accounting and engineering and/or are otherwise a bit anal retentive about things.French_Peasant wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »
And I'm the exact opposite. I math well, so figuring this out and learning to count calories has made weight loss very simple for me. If I go over, I don't lose what I want. It's a math problem for me. I find this way easier than cutting out foods.The issue for many people IMO, is that some just don't math well or as mentioned are just inaccurate in their calories eaten and burned. But it works PERIOD. Without it weight gain/loss/maintenance doesn't happen.
Yeah, I'm an accountant...it was a no brainer for me. I just had to keep another ledger to track it...I keep lots of ledgers.
Geek.
Oh, wait. I'm an accountant too.
Can I join the math club? I get lots of spreadsheets from actuaries and listen very attentively while they 'splain it to me...twice.* CICO is a snap once you grapple with Monte Carlo simulations...plus it has the added benefit of dealing with food, not with death. YAY.
*I will swan about in actuary-land with my free calculator I got from a local arts organization. VERY IMPRESSIVE.
I'll allow it...
The math really isn't even that hard though. I'm a stay at home mom with an English/political science degree and I can't even help my 6th grader with her math homework. Somehow I still figured out CICO and lost 50lbs. If I can do it, then everyone can do it
18 -
crazyycatlady1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »
And I'm the exact opposite. I math well, so figuring this out and learning to count calories has made weight loss very simple for me. If I go over, I don't lose what I want. It's a math problem for me. I find this way easier than cutting out foods.The issue for many people IMO, is that some just don't math well or as mentioned are just inaccurate in their calories eaten and burned. But it works PERIOD. Without it weight gain/loss/maintenance doesn't happen.
Yeah, I'm an accountant...it was a no brainer for me. I just had to keep another ledger to track it...I keep lots of ledgers.
Geek.
Oh, wait. I'm an accountant too.
Through my years here, I've noticed that a great many people who have success calorie counting and otherwise keeping track of their CICO are in professions such as accounting and engineering and/or are otherwise a bit anal retentive about things.French_Peasant wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »
And I'm the exact opposite. I math well, so figuring this out and learning to count calories has made weight loss very simple for me. If I go over, I don't lose what I want. It's a math problem for me. I find this way easier than cutting out foods.The issue for many people IMO, is that some just don't math well or as mentioned are just inaccurate in their calories eaten and burned. But it works PERIOD. Without it weight gain/loss/maintenance doesn't happen.
Yeah, I'm an accountant...it was a no brainer for me. I just had to keep another ledger to track it...I keep lots of ledgers.
Geek.
Oh, wait. I'm an accountant too.
Can I join the math club? I get lots of spreadsheets from actuaries and listen very attentively while they 'splain it to me...twice.* CICO is a snap once you grapple with Monte Carlo simulations...plus it has the added benefit of dealing with food, not with death. YAY.
*I will swan about in actuary-land with my free calculator I got from a local arts organization. VERY IMPRESSIVE.
I'll allow it...
The math really isn't that hard though. I'm a stay at home mom with an English/political science degree and I can't even help my 6th grader with her math homework. Somehow I still figured out CICO and lost 50lbs. If I can do it, then everyone can do it
To be fair, it's much easier for those who do not have medical issues to calculate CICO as they don't have additional variables that impact CO.9 -
crazyycatlady1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »
And I'm the exact opposite. I math well, so figuring this out and learning to count calories has made weight loss very simple for me. If I go over, I don't lose what I want. It's a math problem for me. I find this way easier than cutting out foods.The issue for many people IMO, is that some just don't math well or as mentioned are just inaccurate in their calories eaten and burned. But it works PERIOD. Without it weight gain/loss/maintenance doesn't happen.
Yeah, I'm an accountant...it was a no brainer for me. I just had to keep another ledger to track it...I keep lots of ledgers.
Geek.
Oh, wait. I'm an accountant too.
Through my years here, I've noticed that a great many people who have success calorie counting and otherwise keeping track of their CICO are in professions such as accounting and engineering and/or are otherwise a bit anal retentive about things.French_Peasant wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »
And I'm the exact opposite. I math well, so figuring this out and learning to count calories has made weight loss very simple for me. If I go over, I don't lose what I want. It's a math problem for me. I find this way easier than cutting out foods.The issue for many people IMO, is that some just don't math well or as mentioned are just inaccurate in their calories eaten and burned. But it works PERIOD. Without it weight gain/loss/maintenance doesn't happen.
Yeah, I'm an accountant...it was a no brainer for me. I just had to keep another ledger to track it...I keep lots of ledgers.
Geek.
Oh, wait. I'm an accountant too.
Can I join the math club? I get lots of spreadsheets from actuaries and listen very attentively while they 'splain it to me...twice.* CICO is a snap once you grapple with Monte Carlo simulations...plus it has the added benefit of dealing with food, not with death. YAY.
*I will swan about in actuary-land with my free calculator I got from a local arts organization. VERY IMPRESSIVE.
I'll allow it...
The math really isn't that hard though. I'm a stay at home mom with an English/political science degree and I can't even help my 6th grader with her math homework. Somehow I still figured out CICO and lost 50lbs. If I can do it, then everyone can do it
To be fair, it's much easier for those who do not have medical issues to calculate CICO as they don't have additional variables that impact CO.
True, but even people with medical issues can use trial and error over time to figure out how their particular variables fit into the equation to make it work for them. It's the "over time" part that I find most people struggle with.
Great post, OP.11 -
crazyycatlady1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »
And I'm the exact opposite. I math well, so figuring this out and learning to count calories has made weight loss very simple for me. If I go over, I don't lose what I want. It's a math problem for me. I find this way easier than cutting out foods.The issue for many people IMO, is that some just don't math well or as mentioned are just inaccurate in their calories eaten and burned. But it works PERIOD. Without it weight gain/loss/maintenance doesn't happen.
Yeah, I'm an accountant...it was a no brainer for me. I just had to keep another ledger to track it...I keep lots of ledgers.
Geek.
Oh, wait. I'm an accountant too.
Through my years here, I've noticed that a great many people who have success calorie counting and otherwise keeping track of their CICO are in professions such as accounting and engineering and/or are otherwise a bit anal retentive about things.French_Peasant wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »
And I'm the exact opposite. I math well, so figuring this out and learning to count calories has made weight loss very simple for me. If I go over, I don't lose what I want. It's a math problem for me. I find this way easier than cutting out foods.The issue for many people IMO, is that some just don't math well or as mentioned are just inaccurate in their calories eaten and burned. But it works PERIOD. Without it weight gain/loss/maintenance doesn't happen.
Yeah, I'm an accountant...it was a no brainer for me. I just had to keep another ledger to track it...I keep lots of ledgers.
Geek.
Oh, wait. I'm an accountant too.
Can I join the math club? I get lots of spreadsheets from actuaries and listen very attentively while they 'splain it to me...twice.* CICO is a snap once you grapple with Monte Carlo simulations...plus it has the added benefit of dealing with food, not with death. YAY.
*I will swan about in actuary-land with my free calculator I got from a local arts organization. VERY IMPRESSIVE.
I'll allow it...
The math really isn't that hard though. I'm a stay at home mom with an English/political science degree and I can't even help my 6th grader with her math homework. Somehow I still figured out CICO and lost 50lbs. If I can do it, then everyone can do it
To be fair, it's much easier for those who do not have medical issues to calculate CICO as they don't have additional variables that impact CO.
I started this whole process as a prediabetic, and come from a family tree filled with obesity and obesity related diseases, (I was told by my former doctor that my high glucose numbers were most likely genetic-nope, they were caused because I was overweight). We all have individual variables, but I do think the math is still pretty simple
4 -
This need's to be stickied and referenced on a daily basis!!!!
Great work5 -
Good post OP. Four pages and only two pedantic's, that tells you something.5
-
As far as the math goes, I do not think it is that hard.
1. Go to a TDEE calculator, input stats, and say that you want to maintain your current weight.
2. subract 500 calories from maintence and set MFP to that number.
3. Eat to that number and track progress for four weeks.
4. If weight loss is not at one pound per week then make adjustment until it is where you want it to be.
within these steps make sure that you:
1. Log everything into MFP.
2. use a food scale
3. use accurate DB entries.
I find that once I have my maintenance level pegged i can gain and cut fairly easily...13 -
third pedant here ... it is Maths (with an s) not Math .
I am from ENGland where we speak (and write) proper ENGlish** (see what i did there!!) and don't throw away the letter u from a lot of words.
Although to be fair i did have a American IT teacher in the early 80's who summed it up with " we Americans speak proper english because there are 250 million of us and only 50 million of you and that's how democracy works!!"
As for the actual literary content "Cracking post Gromit !!"
**well most of the time anyway ...
17 -
CynthiasChoice wrote: »I'm one of those people who gets annoyed with the statement that CICO is simple. Yes the equation is simple, but the application of it is a puzzle for many people, especially for those who are impatient to get it right immediately so they see the pounds start to drop off.
There are so many unknowns, and then add to that the complete disarray of the MFP database. It can take up to an hour to research every food entry for the day to make sure it matches the USDA database. So many packaged foods under-report calorie content, and are likely 20% higher in calories than the package states. And one banana can be way sweeter than another and likely 25 calories more. It's impossible to know how many calories you are truly consuming. And CI is the "easiest" part to track.
It's the word "simple" that annoys me. And when people throw out the CICO comment, they are sometimes completely ignoring the significant part of the conversation, i.e. how to deal with cravings, satiety, nutrition, etc. It sometimes comes off sounding smug and condescending.
Simple =/= easy.19 -
Sounds like an excuse. There are several other sites to measure this and get a decent approximation within 10-20 calories.endlessfall16 wrote: »
Wait, MFP can tell you approximately how much to eat to lose weight based on information one inputs. Now all one has to do is FOLLOW it.endlessfall16 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »endlessfall16 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
See my post upthread. One doesn't need to know CICO exactly, to the tenth of a calorie. That there are variables for some people does not invalidate the entire concept. It's not only helpful at the beginning, it is the overarching principle behind the entire weight management process.
I get that you have medical conditions that you've managed/mitigated through a change in your way of eating and resulting weight loss. Do you acknowledge that no matter how you ate, all the coffee with 8 creamers and round eggs at McDonalds... it's CICO that governed your weight loss? And that was a contributing factor to your health improvements? If you hadn't lost a single pound, but changed your diet, do you think you would have had the same results? What if you had lost weight but hadn't changed to a LCHF diet?
This "entire concept" of CICO is so vague that it might not be helpful at all. It's a jargon for many. If you are going for concepts there are others that may be more helpful than it such as "eat less, move more" since it is layman's terms. I would bet less people would incline to argue about "eat less, move more".
But its not. It's an equation. The fact that some people seem unable to wrap their heads around it, or seem to willfully resist conceding that it exists doesn't change that.
You don't understand. Wino put it correctly, it's [just] a concept.
For it to be some sort of useful equation, let a lone a math formula, it would need alot more elements.
Implementation wise, it wasn't that simple. I needed to make several adjustments. No way to get accurate "calorie out" numbers.
Math still applies. Even if you DIDN'T exercise, if you ate the target calories, weight loss should occur.My days are different.
Because you didn't want to accurately measure it? The numbers do matter, so why just estimate it (if you're not losing weight)?Calories from foods were also rough estimates for me.
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
10 -
quiksylver296 wrote: »CynthiasChoice wrote: »I'm one of those people who gets annoyed with the statement that CICO is simple. Yes the equation is simple, but the application of it is a puzzle for many people, especially for those who are impatient to get it right immediately so they see the pounds start to drop off.
There are so many unknowns, and then add to that the complete disarray of the MFP database. It can take up to an hour to research every food entry for the day to make sure it matches the USDA database. So many packaged foods under-report calorie content, and are likely 20% higher in calories than the package states. And one banana can be way sweeter than another and likely 25 calories more. It's impossible to know how many calories you are truly consuming. And CI is the "easiest" part to track.
It's the word "simple" that annoys me. And when people throw out the CICO comment, they are sometimes completely ignoring the significant part of the conversation, i.e. how to deal with cravings, satiety, nutrition, etc. It sometimes comes off sounding smug and condescending.
Simple =/= easy.
So true. It's like getting abs.. you need adequate body composition and low body fat (simple), but achieving that is very difficult and takes a lot of dedication.10 -
Yep. It simple's to set an alarm clock to get up in the morning. For me, it's easy to get up and go, but I know lots of people who need to get dragged out of bed to start the day.quiksylver296 wrote: »CynthiasChoice wrote: »I'm one of those people who gets annoyed with the statement that CICO is simple. Yes the equation is simple, but the application of it is a puzzle for many people, especially for those who are impatient to get it right immediately so they see the pounds start to drop off.
There are so many unknowns, and then add to that the complete disarray of the MFP database. It can take up to an hour to research every food entry for the day to make sure it matches the USDA database. So many packaged foods under-report calorie content, and are likely 20% higher in calories than the package states. And one banana can be way sweeter than another and likely 25 calories more. It's impossible to know how many calories you are truly consuming. And CI is the "easiest" part to track.
It's the word "simple" that annoys me. And when people throw out the CICO comment, they are sometimes completely ignoring the significant part of the conversation, i.e. how to deal with cravings, satiety, nutrition, etc. It sometimes comes off sounding smug and condescending.
Simple =/= easy.
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
9 -
Yep. It simple's to set an alarm clock to get up in the morning. For me, it's easy to get up and go, but I know lots of people who need to get dragged out of bed to start the day.quiksylver296 wrote: »CynthiasChoice wrote: »I'm one of those people who gets annoyed with the statement that CICO is simple. Yes the equation is simple, but the application of it is a puzzle for many people, especially for those who are impatient to get it right immediately so they see the pounds start to drop off.
There are so many unknowns, and then add to that the complete disarray of the MFP database. It can take up to an hour to research every food entry for the day to make sure it matches the USDA database. So many packaged foods under-report calorie content, and are likely 20% higher in calories than the package states. And one banana can be way sweeter than another and likely 25 calories more. It's impossible to know how many calories you are truly consuming. And CI is the "easiest" part to track.
It's the word "simple" that annoys me. And when people throw out the CICO comment, they are sometimes completely ignoring the significant part of the conversation, i.e. how to deal with cravings, satiety, nutrition, etc. It sometimes comes off sounding smug and condescending.
Simple =/= easy.
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
That would be me. I have 3 alarm clocks set up around my room to somehow get myself moving. It's simple enough to do.
Doesn't mean it's easy to get me going (or always successful). Even after I'm up, there's no guarantee that my eyes are fully open or, as the French would say, aligned with the holes...
Same applies to CICO. It's simple if you use the tools available, but you still have to use the tools consistently (and not throw a pillow at them) over a long time period to get to the results you want. And that's anything but easy at times.8 -
I just lost 14 lbs in seven weeks while eating at a 1000 calorie per day deficit. Exactly as CICO predicts (could not have done it without MFP). Yes, CICO works.
But the numbers are not going to match up every single day. Lots of undulations in my chart; I did not lose exactly 2/7 of a lb every day. Gotta be that "lots of variables" bit so many have cited. But over the long run: perfect.7 -
crazyycatlady1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »
And I'm the exact opposite. I math well, so figuring this out and learning to count calories has made weight loss very simple for me. If I go over, I don't lose what I want. It's a math problem for me. I find this way easier than cutting out foods.The issue for many people IMO, is that some just don't math well or as mentioned are just inaccurate in their calories eaten and burned. But it works PERIOD. Without it weight gain/loss/maintenance doesn't happen.
Yeah, I'm an accountant...it was a no brainer for me. I just had to keep another ledger to track it...I keep lots of ledgers.
Geek.
Oh, wait. I'm an accountant too.
Through my years here, I've noticed that a great many people who have success calorie counting and otherwise keeping track of their CICO are in professions such as accounting and engineering and/or are otherwise a bit anal retentive about things.French_Peasant wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »
And I'm the exact opposite. I math well, so figuring this out and learning to count calories has made weight loss very simple for me. If I go over, I don't lose what I want. It's a math problem for me. I find this way easier than cutting out foods.The issue for many people IMO, is that some just don't math well or as mentioned are just inaccurate in their calories eaten and burned. But it works PERIOD. Without it weight gain/loss/maintenance doesn't happen.
Yeah, I'm an accountant...it was a no brainer for me. I just had to keep another ledger to track it...I keep lots of ledgers.
Geek.
Oh, wait. I'm an accountant too.
Can I join the math club? I get lots of spreadsheets from actuaries and listen very attentively while they 'splain it to me...twice.* CICO is a snap once you grapple with Monte Carlo simulations...plus it has the added benefit of dealing with food, not with death. YAY.
*I will swan about in actuary-land with my free calculator I got from a local arts organization. VERY IMPRESSIVE.
I'll allow it...
The math really isn't even that hard though. I'm a stay at home mom with an English/political science degree and I can't even help my 6th grader with her math homework. Somehow I still figured out CICO and lost 50lbs. If I can do it, then everyone can do it
This. Nobody is worse at math than me and once I read a few decent threads here, I was able to understand all the math I needed to make it work.4 -
ladyreva78 wrote: »
Yep. It simple's to set an alarm clock to get up in the morning. For me, it's easy to get up and go, but I know lots of people who need to get dragged out of bed to start the day.quiksylver296 wrote: »CynthiasChoice wrote: »I'm one of those people who gets annoyed with the statement that CICO is simple. Yes the equation is simple, but the application of it is a puzzle for many people, especially for those who are impatient to get it right immediately so they see the pounds start to drop off.
There are so many unknowns, and then add to that the complete disarray of the MFP database. It can take up to an hour to research every food entry for the day to make sure it matches the USDA database. So many packaged foods under-report calorie content, and are likely 20% higher in calories than the package states. And one banana can be way sweeter than another and likely 25 calories more. It's impossible to know how many calories you are truly consuming. And CI is the "easiest" part to track.
It's the word "simple" that annoys me. And when people throw out the CICO comment, they are sometimes completely ignoring the significant part of the conversation, i.e. how to deal with cravings, satiety, nutrition, etc. It sometimes comes off sounding smug and condescending.
Simple =/= easy.
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
That would be me. I have 3 alarm clocks set up around my room to somehow get myself moving. It's simple enough to do.
Doesn't mean it's easy to get me going (or always successful). Even after I'm up, there's no guarantee that my eyes are fully open or, as the French would say, aligned with the holes...
Same applies to CICO. It's simple if you use the tools available, but you still have to use the tools consistently (and not throw a pillow at them) over a long time period to get to the results you want. And that's anything but easy at times.
Me too, I'm a night owl and I've been suffering because I've changed jobs, which requires an earlier start. Radio on, lights on, and my phone alarm, I can just about get out of bed but not quickly.
Several of my failed attempts involved me trying to work out in the morning before work. Just get up earlier it's easy part of the current success has boiling it down to Maths. Working out what suits me best rather than trying to be perfect believing all the myths (I drink my calories, I eat breakfast sometimes, a banana is grim and I will never eat one, I eat late at night, I'm useless in the mornings, along with other things).
It's not always easy, but it is simple. I tracked my food for months, looked at my weight trends, established that my fitbit slightly underestimates my burn so I eat all the exercise. It is simple, but the emotional connection and guilt around food is still not easy at times. But using calorie counting as a tool for CI<CO has been working for me.
I'm a Clinical Data Analyst, can I join the club?6 -
ladyreva78 wrote: »
Yep. It simple's to set an alarm clock to get up in the morning. For me, it's easy to get up and go, but I know lots of people who need to get dragged out of bed to start the day.quiksylver296 wrote: »CynthiasChoice wrote: »I'm one of those people who gets annoyed with the statement that CICO is simple. Yes the equation is simple, but the application of it is a puzzle for many people, especially for those who are impatient to get it right immediately so they see the pounds start to drop off.
There are so many unknowns, and then add to that the complete disarray of the MFP database. It can take up to an hour to research every food entry for the day to make sure it matches the USDA database. So many packaged foods under-report calorie content, and are likely 20% higher in calories than the package states. And one banana can be way sweeter than another and likely 25 calories more. It's impossible to know how many calories you are truly consuming. And CI is the "easiest" part to track.
It's the word "simple" that annoys me. And when people throw out the CICO comment, they are sometimes completely ignoring the significant part of the conversation, i.e. how to deal with cravings, satiety, nutrition, etc. It sometimes comes off sounding smug and condescending.
Simple =/= easy.
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
That would be me. I have 3 alarm clocks set up around my room to somehow get myself moving. It's simple enough to do.
Doesn't mean it's easy to get me going (or always successful). Even after I'm up, there's no guarantee that my eyes are fully open or, as the French would say, aligned with the holes...
Same applies to CICO. It's simple if you use the tools available, but you still have to use the tools consistently (and not throw a pillow at them) over a long time period to get to the results you want. And that's anything but easy at times.
Me too, I'm a night owl and I've been suffering because I've changed jobs, which requires an earlier start. Radio on, lights on, and my phone alarm, I can just about get out of bed but not quickly.
Several of my failed attempts involved me trying to work out in the morning before work. Just get up earlier it's easy part of the current success has boiling it down to Maths. Working out what suits me best rather than trying to be perfect believing all the myths (I drink my calories, I eat breakfast sometimes, a banana is grim and I will never eat one, I eat late at night, I'm useless in the mornings, along with other things).
It's not always easy, but it is simple. I tracked my food for months, looked at my weight trends, established that my fitbit slightly underestimates my burn so I eat all the exercise. It is simple, but the emotional connection and guilt around food is still not easy at times. But using calorie counting as a tool for CI<CO has been working for me.
I'm a Clinical Data Analyst, can I join the club?
One thing I have learned over the past couple years is that trying to force yourself to be someone else in order to lose weight or maintain weight loss is a road to frustration and failure (at least for me). This doesn't mean that I can't sometimes change habits or try new things. But I have to understand what works for me rather than trying to force myself to resemble someone else.
9
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
- 424 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