CICO, It's a math formula
Replies
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins 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.
If you are on a medication that inhibits digestion and absorption of nutrients, I'd watch out, because the result would be massive diarrhea.
@psuLemon where did you come up with the massive diarrhea story?
Pycnogenol is just French Maritime Pine Bark produced under a patented set of controls and standards with 40 years of lab studies that most anyone have access to at some level.
The first link below is just an overview of Pycnogenol for those not interested in the science behind the supplement Pycnogenol yet the story does have links to the science.
https://draxe.com/pine-bark-extract/
7 Pine Bark Extract Benefits, Including for Skin, Hearing & Diabetes
Below is for the health geeks that are hooked on the behind the scenes science. 113 Abstracts with Pycnogenol (Pine Bark) Research including 106 diseases researched for pine bark (Pycnogenol).
greenmedinfo.com/substance/pycnogenol-pine-bark
If your body cannot digest a nutrient, it would pass through you and be excreted, like insoluble fiber... It's why things like carb blocks and fat blockers always have side effects of diarrhea. If it's digestible, the body would convert calories to energy.
https://examine.com/supplements/pycnogenol/
Thanks for the link. It seems like most all humans can benefit from using this pine bark extract safely. My n=3 supports the same so far.
Do you agree that CICO in no way addresses what causes humans to lose the ability to stop eating when they eat their daily required food needs?
Assumes facts not in evidence.Until we work to learn WHY we eat more calories than we burn then CICO is only a theoretical concept as far as science goes.
The person best able to understand why you eat more calories than you burn is you. For many people understanding that this is something they need to figure out and fix is a step forward.
And it's still a practical thing, not a "theoretical" one, because it helps you quantify. Think of all the "how much do I eat to lose" questions that seem to think there's some number you need to figure out and that if you pick badly it won't work. Understanding that you need to eat under maintenance, that if you aren't gaining or losing you are likely at maintenance, and that if you lose or gain for a period of time you can figure out what you need to do to change it are quite practical things, especially if you track and do some simple math.7 -
Lol, you have that now. It's advertised all over the internet. Nutrisystem, paleo, Weight watchers, Atkins, etc. are ALL "insights" on how easy and effortless it is to do THEIR DIET PLAN. All it really is is CICO hidden behind a money making scheme. Tell me, how is that a million times better than just figuring out that you need to eat less than you burn?endlessfall16 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »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
No, the math isn't hard at all...when I'm talking about people in those fields and similar, I'm not really talking about the math...this is about as simple from a math standpoint as you get...but typically people in those fields and similar like data...they're a bit OCD in analyzing such data and other things...they like keeping ledgers and spreadsheets for everything...they tend to be very detail oriented and analytical, etc.
Anyone can do this for sure...the math is super easy...but I think in general there's a certain type of personality that does well with calorie counting in particular...it's definitely not for everyone which is why there are so many different diet plans out there...for a lot of people, those are easier even though CICO is still in play whether they know it or not.
This is what I was talking about in my first post in this thread. CICO loving arguers are stuck in the same crude gear arguing on a nonargument. As someone else put it...majoring in minor? Trolling?
There's no argument from me re CICO. I have no problem or misunderstanding with it. Nothing complex about it. I just don't care for the jargon. It's crude as a term used for describing something. "Eat less, move more", "Eat less, exercise more" are better language, but none of these, CICO included, is significant a piece of info. or any real revelation for me.
It would be million times better if someone posted new insights, ways to make dieting better, more effortless, even that would only help a handful of people... That would be worthwhile.
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
20 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins 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.
If you are on a medication that inhibits digestion and absorption of nutrients, I'd watch out, because the result would be massive diarrhea.
@psuLemon where did you come up with the massive diarrhea story?
Pycnogenol is just French Maritime Pine Bark produced under a patented set of controls and standards with 40 years of lab studies that most anyone have access to at some level.
The first link below is just an overview of Pycnogenol for those not interested in the science behind the supplement Pycnogenol yet the story does have links to the science.
https://draxe.com/pine-bark-extract/
7 Pine Bark Extract Benefits, Including for Skin, Hearing & Diabetes
Below is for the health geeks that are hooked on the behind the scenes science. 113 Abstracts with Pycnogenol (Pine Bark) Research including 106 diseases researched for pine bark (Pycnogenol).
greenmedinfo.com/substance/pycnogenol-pine-bark
If your body cannot digest a nutrient, it would pass through you and be excreted, like insoluble fiber... It's why things like carb blocks and fat blockers always have side effects of diarrhea. If it's digestible, the body would convert calories to energy.
https://examine.com/supplements/pycnogenol/
Thanks for the link. It seems like most all humans can benefit from using this pine bark extract safely. My n=3 supports the same so far.
Do you agree that CICO in no way addresses what causes humans to lose the ability to stop eating when they eat their daily required food needs?
https://quora.com/What-percent-of-calories-from-food-are-actually-absorbed-when-we-eat
The above article covers why CICO is only a fraction of the equation to good health since CICO in a scientific sense is not actually knowable to any of us posting.
Until we work to learn WHY we eat more calories than we burn then CICO is only a theoretical concept as far as science goes.
I don't understand the bolded part. The result of the comparison of calories in to calories out is knowable to anyone with a scale and enough time to observe a weight trend. Not being able to quantify either CI or CO to 100% accuracy is irrelevant.
@AliceDark all I am saying is no one posting has the data to determine their net CICO results before we weigh after the fact as you correctly stated as I understand your last post.
The value of the concept of CICO that while we can never fully know its accuracy it at least gives us two places we can tweak if we are not gaining/losing to meet our expectations as I think was your last point.
For some CICO seems to take on a mystical air. The lack of counting calories (requirement of CICO) is not the cause of the obesity epidemic going on in much of the world today.
In my case I remember getting off the school bus in the fourth grade and limping due to knee joint pain. I think I made getting my dopamine rush early in life for pain management perhaps. As sugar makes inflammation worse I guess I worked to eat more sweet carbs over time until I spiraled down into the ground over the years. Profound movement limitations were in place by my mid 20's when I learned I had Ankylosing Spondylitis.
I would say this eating disorder was set in stone in my brain years before. I am convinced very few people ever become obese prior to developing physical/mental health problems to some degree.
Below Dr. Nicole Avena describes how I got married to sweet carbs 50+ years ago.
npr.org/sections/thesalt/2014/01/15/262741403/why-sugar-makes-us-feel-so-good
drnicoleavena.com/
https://youtube.com/watch?v=lEXBxijQREo&feature=youtu.be
1 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins 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.
If you are on a medication that inhibits digestion and absorption of nutrients, I'd watch out, because the result would be massive diarrhea.
@psuLemon where did you come up with the massive diarrhea story?
Pycnogenol is just French Maritime Pine Bark produced under a patented set of controls and standards with 40 years of lab studies that most anyone have access to at some level.
The first link below is just an overview of Pycnogenol for those not interested in the science behind the supplement Pycnogenol yet the story does have links to the science.
https://draxe.com/pine-bark-extract/
7 Pine Bark Extract Benefits, Including for Skin, Hearing & Diabetes
Below is for the health geeks that are hooked on the behind the scenes science. 113 Abstracts with Pycnogenol (Pine Bark) Research including 106 diseases researched for pine bark (Pycnogenol).
greenmedinfo.com/substance/pycnogenol-pine-bark
If your body cannot digest a nutrient, it would pass through you and be excreted, like insoluble fiber... It's why things like carb blocks and fat blockers always have side effects of diarrhea. If it's digestible, the body would convert calories to energy.
https://examine.com/supplements/pycnogenol/
Thanks for the link. It seems like most all humans can benefit from using this pine bark extract safely. My n=3 supports the same so far.
Do you agree that CICO in no way addresses what causes humans to lose the ability to stop eating when they eat their daily required food needs?
https://quora.com/What-percent-of-calories-from-food-are-actually-absorbed-when-we-eat
The above article covers why CICO is only a fraction of the equation to good health since CICO in a scientific sense is not actually knowable to any of us posting.
Until we work to learn WHY we eat more calories than we burn then CICO is only a theoretical concept as far as science goes.
I don't understand the bolded part. The result of the comparison of calories in to calories out is knowable to anyone with a scale and enough time to observe a weight trend. Not being able to quantify either CI or CO to 100% accuracy is irrelevant.
@AliceDark all I am saying is no one posting has the data to determine their net CICO results before we weigh after the fact as you correctly stated as I understand your last post.
The value of the concept of CICO that while we can never fully know its accuracy it at least gives us two places we can tweak if we are not gaining/losing to meet our expectations as I think was your last point.
For some CICO seems to take on a mystical air. The lack of counting calories (requirement of CICO) is not the cause of the obesity epidemic going on in much of the world today.
In my case I remember getting off the school bus in the fourth grade and limping due to knee joint pain. I think I made getting my dopamine rush early in life for pain management perhaps. As sugar makes inflammation worse I guess I worked to eat more sweet carbs over time until I spiraled down into the ground over the years. Profound movement limitations were in place by my mid 20's when I learned I had Ankylosing Spondylitis.
I would say this eating disorder was set in stone in my brain years before. I am convinced very few people ever become obese prior to developing physical/mental health problems to some degree.
Below Dr. Nicole Avena describes how I got married to sweet carbs 50+ years ago.
npr.org/sections/thesalt/2014/01/15/262741403/why-sugar-makes-us-feel-so-good
drnicoleavena.com/
https://youtube.com/watch?v=lEXBxijQREo&feature=youtu.be
I can promise you that the bolded part is much more opinion than fact. I have quite a few obese members in my family, and they are neither physically restricted or suffering from a mental health issue with food. They simply do not monitor what they eat or how much. They eat out of boredom and hunger. They enjoy eating large amounts because they like the tastes of many foods and do not know when enough is enough.8 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins 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.
If you are on a medication that inhibits digestion and absorption of nutrients, I'd watch out, because the result would be massive diarrhea.
@psuLemon where did you come up with the massive diarrhea story?
Pycnogenol is just French Maritime Pine Bark produced under a patented set of controls and standards with 40 years of lab studies that most anyone have access to at some level.
The first link below is just an overview of Pycnogenol for those not interested in the science behind the supplement Pycnogenol yet the story does have links to the science.
https://draxe.com/pine-bark-extract/
7 Pine Bark Extract Benefits, Including for Skin, Hearing & Diabetes
Below is for the health geeks that are hooked on the behind the scenes science. 113 Abstracts with Pycnogenol (Pine Bark) Research including 106 diseases researched for pine bark (Pycnogenol).
greenmedinfo.com/substance/pycnogenol-pine-bark
If your body cannot digest a nutrient, it would pass through you and be excreted, like insoluble fiber... It's why things like carb blocks and fat blockers always have side effects of diarrhea. If it's digestible, the body would convert calories to energy.
https://examine.com/supplements/pycnogenol/
Thanks for the link. It seems like most all humans can benefit from using this pine bark extract safely. My n=3 supports the same so far.
Do you agree that CICO in no way addresses what causes humans to lose the ability to stop eating when they eat their daily required food needs?
https://quora.com/What-percent-of-calories-from-food-are-actually-absorbed-when-we-eat
The above article covers why CICO is only a fraction of the equation to good health since CICO in a scientific sense is not actually knowable to any of us posting.
Until we work to learn WHY we eat more calories than we burn then CICO is only a theoretical concept as far as science goes.
I don't understand the bolded part. The result of the comparison of calories in to calories out is knowable to anyone with a scale and enough time to observe a weight trend. Not being able to quantify either CI or CO to 100% accuracy is irrelevant.
@AliceDark all I am saying is no one posting has the data to determine their net CICO results before we weigh after the fact as you correctly stated as I understand your last post.
The value of the concept of CICO that while we can never fully know its accuracy it at least gives us two places we can tweak if we are not gaining/losing to meet our expectations as I think was your last point.
For some CICO seems to take on a mystical air. The lack of counting calories (requirement of CICO) is not the cause of the obesity epidemic going on in much of the world today.
In my case I remember getting off the school bus in the fourth grade and limping due to knee joint pain. I think I made getting my dopamine rush early in life for pain management perhaps. As sugar makes inflammation worse I guess I worked to eat more sweet carbs over time until I spiraled down into the ground over the years. Profound movement limitations were in place by my mid 20's when I learned I had Ankylosing Spondylitis.
I would say this eating disorder was set in stone in my brain years before. I am convinced very few people ever become obese prior to developing physical/mental health problems to some degree.
Below Dr. Nicole Avena describes how I got married to sweet carbs 50+ years ago.
npr.org/sections/thesalt/2014/01/15/262741403/why-sugar-makes-us-feel-so-good
drnicoleavena.com/
https://youtube.com/watch?v=lEXBxijQREo&feature=youtu.be
CICO does not require calorie counting. Everyone who has ever lost weight has done so by burning more than they consume, whether they consciously count calories or not.
And no, everyone who is overweight or obese does not have a mental or physical disorder.
What makes more sense? That people overeat because food is delicious, readily available and cheap? Or that there is an unidentified mental health epidemic sweeping the world.
Hoof beats and zebras and all that.13 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »For some CICO seems to take on a mystical air.
You seem to be misunderstanding the posts. No one has said anything mystical about it.The lack of counting calories (requirement of CICO) is not the cause of the obesity epidemic going on in much of the world today.
Didn't someone just explain that CICO is not the same thing as counting calories? Counting calories is one way to keep CICO balanced as you want them, but hardly the only way.
For many, counting or understanding CICO and addressing it in other ways is a helpful response to the environmental changes (relating to food availability and activity) that lead to the current increase in obesity.
I'm glad you have managed to diagnose all of us who ever became overweight as being ill, but IME and from what I've read, that's not a credible claim. It's extremely easy for many or most humans (and many other animals) to gain weight given the right environment, as we had no particular reason to naturally select against the ability to do so over time.15 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »For some CICO seems to take on a mystical air.
You seem to be misunderstanding the posts. No one has said anything mystical about it.The lack of counting calories (requirement of CICO) is not the cause of the obesity epidemic going on in much of the world today.
Didn't someone just explain that CICO is not the same thing as counting calories? Counting calories is one way to keep CICO balanced as you want them, but hardly the only way.
For many, counting or understanding CICO and addressing it in other ways is a helpful response to the environmental changes (relating to food availability and activity) that lead to the current increase in obesity.
I'm glad you have managed to diagnose all of us who ever became overweight as being ill, but IME and from what I've read, that's not a credible claim. It's extremely easy for many or most humans (and many other animals) to gain weight given the right environment, as we had no particular reason to naturally select against the ability to do so over time.
When, in fact, for most of our history, the *opposite* pressures applied. The early humans who only ate exactly what they needed each day to maintain their weight would have been poorly poised to compete with those who ate good when they had surplus food. When one faces lean times in hunting and gathering, the innate desire to eat up when you can is a profound advantage.
It's no mystery to me why humans find it so easy to eat more than we need. It's exactly what I would expect to see given the circumstances in which we evolved.8 -
@3bambi3 CICO works fine for say a closed loop system like a steam engine but of very limited day to day value for humans unless you are looking at it just as a concept and not valid science to explain why some of us became obese.
Calories are just one part of obesity.
foxnews.com/story/2006/06/28/10-causes-obesity-other-than-over-eating-inactivity.html
https://youtube.com/watch?v=lEXBxijQREo&feature=youtu.be
It is just 5 minutes and with CC on no speakers are needed.
drnicoleavena.com/
1 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »@3bambi3 CICO works fine for say a closed loop system like a steam engine but of very limited day to day value for humans unless you are looking at it just as a concept and not valid science to explain why some of us became obese.
Calories are just one part of obesity.
foxnews.com/story/2006/06/28/10-causes-obesity-other-than-over-eating-inactivity.html
https://youtube.com/watch?v=lEXBxijQREo&feature=youtu.be
It is just 5 minutes and with CC on no speakers are needed.
drnicoleavena.com/
wrong again ..
The cause of obesity is overeating calories coupled with inactivity. Please list additional ways, absent a caloric surplus, that one gains weight. So again, it is CICO, which is a math formula.10 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »For some CICO seems to take on a mystical air.
You seem to be misunderstanding the posts. No one has said anything mystical about it.The lack of counting calories (requirement of CICO) is not the cause of the obesity epidemic going on in much of the world today.
Didn't someone just explain that CICO is not the same thing as counting calories? Counting calories is one way to keep CICO balanced as you want them, but hardly the only way.
For many, counting or understanding CICO and addressing it in other ways is a helpful response to the environmental changes (relating to food availability and activity) that lead to the current increase in obesity.
Plus, our understanding of calories as units of energy is relatively recent (mid-1800s). No one could seriously argue that people didn't figure out how to manipulate weight by changing CI or CO until 200 years ago. We've understood the concept of CICO for much longer that we've understood the concept of calorie counting; we just didn't articulate it quite as well until more recently.4 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »@3bambi3 CICO works fine for say a closed loop system like a steam engine but of very limited day to day value for humans unless you are looking at it just as a concept and not valid science to explain why some of us became obese.
Calories are just one part of obesity.
foxnews.com/story/2006/06/28/10-causes-obesity-other-than-over-eating-inactivity.html
https://youtube.com/watch?v=lEXBxijQREo&feature=youtu.be
It is just 5 minutes and with CC on no speakers are needed.
drnicoleavena.com/
That Fox News article is ridiculous; it in no way refutes CICO. It simply gives reasons why adjustments would need to be made in certain circumstances; it also uses the most vague terms possible while trying to stretch the list out to 10 so that it wasn't a random number.7 -
Lol, you have that now. It's advertised all over the internet. Nutrisystem, paleo, Weight watchers, Atkins, etc. are ALL "insights" on how easy and effortless it is to do THEIR DIET PLAN. All it really is is CICO hidden behind a money making scheme. Tell me, how is that a million times better than just figuring out that you need to eat less than you burn?endlessfall16 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »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
No, the math isn't hard at all...when I'm talking about people in those fields and similar, I'm not really talking about the math...this is about as simple from a math standpoint as you get...but typically people in those fields and similar like data...they're a bit OCD in analyzing such data and other things...they like keeping ledgers and spreadsheets for everything...they tend to be very detail oriented and analytical, etc.
Anyone can do this for sure...the math is super easy...but I think in general there's a certain type of personality that does well with calorie counting in particular...it's definitely not for everyone which is why there are so many different diet plans out there...for a lot of people, those are easier even though CICO is still in play whether they know it or not.
This is what I was talking about in my first post in this thread. CICO loving arguers are stuck in the same crude gear arguing on a nonargument. As someone else put it...majoring in minor? Trolling?
There's no argument from me re CICO. I have no problem or misunderstanding with it. Nothing complex about it. I just don't care for the jargon. It's crude as a term used for describing something. "Eat less, move more", "Eat less, exercise more" are better language, but none of these, CICO included, is significant a piece of info. or any real revelation for me.
It would be million times better if someone posted new insights, ways to make dieting better, more effortless, even that would only help a handful of people... That would be worthwhile.
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
I'm not going to speak for those systems. I rather keep an open mind and extract useful elements if there's any from anything.
I, and many people I know, already figured out the fact that I need to eat less than I burn, just as I figured out fire is hot. That piece of knowledge alone doesn't help anyone or anything.
4 -
endlessfall16 wrote: »
Lol, you have that now. It's advertised all over the internet. Nutrisystem, paleo, Weight watchers, Atkins, etc. are ALL "insights" on how easy and effortless it is to do THEIR DIET PLAN. All it really is is CICO hidden behind a money making scheme. Tell me, how is that a million times better than just figuring out that you need to eat less than you burn?endlessfall16 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »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
No, the math isn't hard at all...when I'm talking about people in those fields and similar, I'm not really talking about the math...this is about as simple from a math standpoint as you get...but typically people in those fields and similar like data...they're a bit OCD in analyzing such data and other things...they like keeping ledgers and spreadsheets for everything...they tend to be very detail oriented and analytical, etc.
Anyone can do this for sure...the math is super easy...but I think in general there's a certain type of personality that does well with calorie counting in particular...it's definitely not for everyone which is why there are so many different diet plans out there...for a lot of people, those are easier even though CICO is still in play whether they know it or not.
This is what I was talking about in my first post in this thread. CICO loving arguers are stuck in the same crude gear arguing on a nonargument. As someone else put it...majoring in minor? Trolling?
There's no argument from me re CICO. I have no problem or misunderstanding with it. Nothing complex about it. I just don't care for the jargon. It's crude as a term used for describing something. "Eat less, move more", "Eat less, exercise more" are better language, but none of these, CICO included, is significant a piece of info. or any real revelation for me.
It would be million times better if someone posted new insights, ways to make dieting better, more effortless, even that would only help a handful of people... That would be worthwhile.
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
I'm not going to speak for those systems. I rather keep an open mind and extract useful elements if there's any from anything.
I, and many people I know, already figured out the fact that I need to eat less than I burn, just as I figured out fire is hot. That piece of knowledge alone doesn't help anyone or anything.
The existence of daily questions à la "Can I still lose weight if I eat X???" determined this to be wrong.10 -
endlessfall16 wrote: »
Lol, you have that now. It's advertised all over the internet. Nutrisystem, paleo, Weight watchers, Atkins, etc. are ALL "insights" on how easy and effortless it is to do THEIR DIET PLAN. All it really is is CICO hidden behind a money making scheme. Tell me, how is that a million times better than just figuring out that you need to eat less than you burn?endlessfall16 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »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
No, the math isn't hard at all...when I'm talking about people in those fields and similar, I'm not really talking about the math...this is about as simple from a math standpoint as you get...but typically people in those fields and similar like data...they're a bit OCD in analyzing such data and other things...they like keeping ledgers and spreadsheets for everything...they tend to be very detail oriented and analytical, etc.
Anyone can do this for sure...the math is super easy...but I think in general there's a certain type of personality that does well with calorie counting in particular...it's definitely not for everyone which is why there are so many different diet plans out there...for a lot of people, those are easier even though CICO is still in play whether they know it or not.
This is what I was talking about in my first post in this thread. CICO loving arguers are stuck in the same crude gear arguing on a nonargument. As someone else put it...majoring in minor? Trolling?
There's no argument from me re CICO. I have no problem or misunderstanding with it. Nothing complex about it. I just don't care for the jargon. It's crude as a term used for describing something. "Eat less, move more", "Eat less, exercise more" are better language, but none of these, CICO included, is significant a piece of info. or any real revelation for me.
It would be million times better if someone posted new insights, ways to make dieting better, more effortless, even that would only help a handful of people... That would be worthwhile.
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
I'm not going to speak for those systems. I rather keep an open mind and extract useful elements if there's any from anything.
I, and many people I know, already figured out the fact that I need to eat less than I burn, just as I figured out fire is hot. That piece of knowledge alone doesn't help anyone or anything.
But why? That piece of knowledge helps out the vast majority of people trying to lose weight. Many people believe that if they eat foods that are low calorie and considered healthy and cut out "junk", they'll lose weight. Failing to eat less than they burn. Healthy food in excess will make you just as fat as "junk" food in excess. Aka CICO solve that riddle. Again.1 -
I can promise you that the bolded part is much more opinion than fact. I have quite a few obese members in my family, and they are neither physically restricted or suffering from a mental health issue with food. They simply do not monitor what they eat or how much. They eat out of boredom and hunger. They enjoy eating large amounts because they like the tastes of many foods and do not know when enough is enough.
@klaar 11 does that not sound like disordered eating to you? Are you making it sounds like they are eating perhaps for a hit of dopamine?
Obese people are always at risk of a more premature death when compared to their normal weight peers.
healthland.time.com/2013/12/02/you-cant-be-fit-and-fat/1 -
VintageFeline wrote: »
Lol, some of the best "proper speaking" from transplanted Brits to the US I've heard: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 ...
"I've got to "hoover" the carpet today."- translation............"I have to vacuum."
"Your friend is in her Majesty's pleasure?"-translation........."Your friend is in jail?"
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
You probably know this but "at Her Majesty's Pleasure" is in every prison name. For example, HMP Pentonville, HMP Wandsworth. So it does make sense.
The hoover thing bugs me. I resist correcting everyone.
I found the concept of "bathing costume" to be hilarious, till I realized we call it a bathing SUIT which is even more hilarious.
I do like "maths" over "math." It makes me think of a bespectacled, tousle-haired genius at Oxford.
I can understand the protectiveness over the poor u's. I will fight to the death over "doughnut" vs. "donut" in any item going to print unless it was a citation of a brand or shop name (fortunately I am backed by the AP Stylebook). I also have VERY strong opinions on the Oxford comma (regrettably, not backed by the AP).4 -
"Eat less, move more" is generally a fine way of helping people to lose weight. That said, one could easily argue that it's inherently less helpful than explaining CICO. With the former, the questions then become, "eat how much less?" And "move how much more?"
That's where explaining the concept of CICO becomes better. It tells the person, "eat however much less and move however much more so that you end up burning more Calories/energy than you consume."
I'm not against any language that helps people. The difference between you and me is that I don't make a Rocky Mountain out of an anthill with a particular concept.
As to your question, the adviser could easily tell the dieter to cut back 1/4 anytime he eats, for example. Go about your day the same, don't mind any calorie or equation, eat your usual foods but push 1/4 of the amount aside. I guarantee that will work.
Btw, I know quite many elder people who would never read label for calories and nutrition info. Luckily they don't have to.1 -
To the OP!
4 -
endlessfall16 wrote: »
Lol, you have that now. It's advertised all over the internet. Nutrisystem, paleo, Weight watchers, Atkins, etc. are ALL "insights" on how easy and effortless it is to do THEIR DIET PLAN. All it really is is CICO hidden behind a money making scheme. Tell me, how is that a million times better than just figuring out that you need to eat less than you burn?endlessfall16 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »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
No, the math isn't hard at all...when I'm talking about people in those fields and similar, I'm not really talking about the math...this is about as simple from a math standpoint as you get...but typically people in those fields and similar like data...they're a bit OCD in analyzing such data and other things...they like keeping ledgers and spreadsheets for everything...they tend to be very detail oriented and analytical, etc.
Anyone can do this for sure...the math is super easy...but I think in general there's a certain type of personality that does well with calorie counting in particular...it's definitely not for everyone which is why there are so many different diet plans out there...for a lot of people, those are easier even though CICO is still in play whether they know it or not.
This is what I was talking about in my first post in this thread. CICO loving arguers are stuck in the same crude gear arguing on a nonargument. As someone else put it...majoring in minor? Trolling?
There's no argument from me re CICO. I have no problem or misunderstanding with it. Nothing complex about it. I just don't care for the jargon. It's crude as a term used for describing something. "Eat less, move more", "Eat less, exercise more" are better language, but none of these, CICO included, is significant a piece of info. or any real revelation for me.
It would be million times better if someone posted new insights, ways to make dieting better, more effortless, even that would only help a handful of people... That would be worthwhile.
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
I'm not going to speak for those systems. I rather keep an open mind and extract useful elements if there's any from anything.
I, and many people I know, already figured out the fact that I need to eat less than I burn, just as I figured out fire is hot. That piece of knowledge alone doesn't help anyone or anything.
It seems quite rude to me to say that this knowledge can't help anyone or anything when people in this thread have acknowledged how it helped them. I don't know why you have such a strong reaction to a post meant to clarify an oft misunderstood point, but dehumanizing these people doesn't feel cool to me.21 -
Isn't it great that there are so many different ways to implement CICO and we have a board here where people share a wide variety of them?10
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »@3bambi3 CICO works fine for say a closed loop system like a steam engine but of very limited day to day value for humans unless you are looking at it just as a concept and not valid science to explain why some of us became obese.
Calories are just one part of obesity.
foxnews.com/story/2006/06/28/10-causes-obesity-other-than-over-eating-inactivity.html
https://youtube.com/watch?v=lEXBxijQREo&feature=youtu.be
It is just 5 minutes and with CC on no speakers are needed.
drnicoleavena.com/
wrong again ..
The cause of obesity is overeating calories coupled with inactivity. Please list additional ways, absent a caloric surplus, that one gains weight. So again, it is CICO, which is a math formula.
OK then what do you say causes people to overeat?
I hope #7 in the first link below and #8 in the second link will help you see why CICO can not be a valid math formula.
caloriegate.com/calories-in-calories-out/11-experts-demolish-the-calories-in-calories-out-cico-model-of-obesity
caloriegate.com/calories-in-calories-out/9-more-experts-lay-waste-to-the-calories-in-calories-out-cico-model-of-obesity
1 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »@3bambi3 CICO works fine for say a closed loop system like a steam engine but of very limited day to day value for humans unless you are looking at it just as a concept and not valid science to explain why some of us became obese.
Calories are just one part of obesity.
foxnews.com/story/2006/06/28/10-causes-obesity-other-than-over-eating-inactivity.html
https://youtube.com/watch?v=lEXBxijQREo&feature=youtu.be
It is just 5 minutes and with CC on no speakers are needed.
drnicoleavena.com/
wrong again ..
The cause of obesity is overeating calories coupled with inactivity. Please list additional ways, absent a caloric surplus, that one gains weight. So again, it is CICO, which is a math formula.
OK then what do you say causes people to overeat?
I hope #7 in the first link below and #8 in the second link will help you see why CICO can not be a valid math formula.
caloriegate.com/calories-in-calories-out/11-experts-demolish-the-calories-in-calories-out-cico-model-of-obesity
caloriegate.com/calories-in-calories-out/9-more-experts-lay-waste-to-the-calories-in-calories-out-cico-model-of-obesity
But that's NOT what this thread is about. You are the one who keeps bringing it up. CICO explains how the body adds or loses weight. WHY some people overeat is an entirely different question and it seems like an effort to derail that you keep bringing this up here.23 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »@3bambi3 CICO works fine for say a closed loop system like a steam engine but of very limited day to day value for humans unless you are looking at it just as a concept and not valid science to explain why some of us became obese.
Calories are just one part of obesity.
foxnews.com/story/2006/06/28/10-causes-obesity-other-than-over-eating-inactivity.html
https://youtube.com/watch?v=lEXBxijQREo&feature=youtu.be
It is just 5 minutes and with CC on no speakers are needed.
drnicoleavena.com/
wrong again ..
The cause of obesity is overeating calories coupled with inactivity. Please list additional ways, absent a caloric surplus, that one gains weight. So again, it is CICO, which is a math formula.
OK then what do you say causes people to overeat?
I hope #7 in the first link below and #8 in the second link will help you see why CICO can not be a valid math formula.
caloriegate.com/calories-in-calories-out/11-experts-demolish-the-calories-in-calories-out-cico-model-of-obesity
caloriegate.com/calories-in-calories-out/9-more-experts-lay-waste-to-the-calories-in-calories-out-cico-model-of-obesity
https://flatearthscienceandbible.wordpress.com/2016/02/08/top-ten-undeniable-flat-earth-proofs/
I hope #7 will help you see why the earth can't be round.18 -
I don't know enough to debate #7 in the first link, but #8 in the second link is complete nonsense - "a calorie excess is weight gain" isn't the issue, it's a calorie excess causes weight gain. If he can't even get that simple statement correct, I have no confidence in his input on anything else.8
-
Sorry @stevencloser I could not find the numbering system.
0 -
endlessfall16 wrote: »
Lol, you have that now. It's advertised all over the internet. Nutrisystem, paleo, Weight watchers, Atkins, etc. are ALL "insights" on how easy and effortless it is to do THEIR DIET PLAN. All it really is is CICO hidden behind a money making scheme. Tell me, how is that a million times better than just figuring out that you need to eat less than you burn?endlessfall16 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »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
No, the math isn't hard at all...when I'm talking about people in those fields and similar, I'm not really talking about the math...this is about as simple from a math standpoint as you get...but typically people in those fields and similar like data...they're a bit OCD in analyzing such data and other things...they like keeping ledgers and spreadsheets for everything...they tend to be very detail oriented and analytical, etc.
Anyone can do this for sure...the math is super easy...but I think in general there's a certain type of personality that does well with calorie counting in particular...it's definitely not for everyone which is why there are so many different diet plans out there...for a lot of people, those are easier even though CICO is still in play whether they know it or not.
This is what I was talking about in my first post in this thread. CICO loving arguers are stuck in the same crude gear arguing on a nonargument. As someone else put it...majoring in minor? Trolling?
There's no argument from me re CICO. I have no problem or misunderstanding with it. Nothing complex about it. I just don't care for the jargon. It's crude as a term used for describing something. "Eat less, move more", "Eat less, exercise more" are better language, but none of these, CICO included, is significant a piece of info. or any real revelation for me.
It would be million times better if someone posted new insights, ways to make dieting better, more effortless, even that would only help a handful of people... That would be worthwhile.
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
I'm not going to speak for those systems. I rather keep an open mind and extract useful elements if there's any from anything.
I, and many people I know, already figured out the fact that I need to eat less than I burn, just as I figured out fire is hot. That piece of knowledge alone doesn't help anyone or anything.
Just yesterday there was a post from a woman who thought you had to be in ketosis to lose weight. There was another post from a young man who wanted to know if eating right before bed would make him gain weight. And at least one reply told him that yes, you should stop eating hours before going to sleep to lose weight. There are post every day from people who believe you need to eat "clean" to lose weight, regardless of calories. The current Nutrisystem plan includes "Belly Buster" shakes that they say will burn away your belly fat.
It would seem logical that you have to eat less than you burn to lose weight would be common knowledge. But some time in this forum should tell you differently. Many many people think it is way more complicated than that. That's why we keep saying it, as annoying as it may be to someone who never questioned it in the first place.27 -
* ducks in *
@GaleHawkins:
I think this article from a peer-reviewed journal is probably better for your purposes. The link was included in the Time magazine article you mentioned.
https://nutritionj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1475-2891-3-9
Also, in your second list on the Caloriegate website, I think #5 (Dr. Attia's post) makes a better point, namely that it's important to figure out why someone is overeating calories and try to address it, not just to know that they are. Knowing that you're doing something can be helpful, but it isn't the same as controlling it. NB: I'm not endorsing Dr. Attia or anything else he might have said. Just that I think he makes a helpful point here. And I'm not disputing anything in the OP.
* ducks out *2 -
* ducks in *
@GaleHawkins:
I think this article from a peer-reviewed journal is probably better for your purposes. The link was included in the Time magazine article you mentioned.
https://nutritionj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1475-2891-3-9
Also, in your the second list on the Caloriegate website, I think #5 (Dr. Attia's post) makes a better point, namely that it's important to figure out why someone is overeating calories and try to address it, not just to know that they are. Knowing that you're doing something can be helpful, but it isn't the same as controlling it. NB: I'm not endorsing Dr. Attia or anything else he might have said. Just that I think he makes a helpful point here. And I'm not disputing anything in the OP.
* ducks out *
Thanks for the great link: A calorie is a calorie" violates the second law of thermodynamics
Dr. Peter Attia blog was how I learned to do nutritional ketosis back in 2014 but now he is eating more like 100 carbs daily. The man knows his stuff and is a true professional in my experience as are the others.
His point about finding the cause of obesity rather than just say I know why you are fat because you pig out too much is a great one.2 -
diannethegeek wrote: »endlessfall16 wrote: »
Lol, you have that now. It's advertised all over the internet. Nutrisystem, paleo, Weight watchers, Atkins, etc. are ALL "insights" on how easy and effortless it is to do THEIR DIET PLAN. All it really is is CICO hidden behind a money making scheme. Tell me, how is that a million times better than just figuring out that you need to eat less than you burn?endlessfall16 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »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
No, the math isn't hard at all...when I'm talking about people in those fields and similar, I'm not really talking about the math...this is about as simple from a math standpoint as you get...but typically people in those fields and similar like data...they're a bit OCD in analyzing such data and other things...they like keeping ledgers and spreadsheets for everything...they tend to be very detail oriented and analytical, etc.
Anyone can do this for sure...the math is super easy...but I think in general there's a certain type of personality that does well with calorie counting in particular...it's definitely not for everyone which is why there are so many different diet plans out there...for a lot of people, those are easier even though CICO is still in play whether they know it or not.
This is what I was talking about in my first post in this thread. CICO loving arguers are stuck in the same crude gear arguing on a nonargument. As someone else put it...majoring in minor? Trolling?
There's no argument from me re CICO. I have no problem or misunderstanding with it. Nothing complex about it. I just don't care for the jargon. It's crude as a term used for describing something. "Eat less, move more", "Eat less, exercise more" are better language, but none of these, CICO included, is significant a piece of info. or any real revelation for me.
It would be million times better if someone posted new insights, ways to make dieting better, more effortless, even that would only help a handful of people... That would be worthwhile.
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
I'm not going to speak for those systems. I rather keep an open mind and extract useful elements if there's any from anything.
I, and many people I know, already figured out the fact that I need to eat less than I burn, just as I figured out fire is hot. That piece of knowledge alone doesn't help anyone or anything.
It seems quite rude to me to say that this knowledge can't help anyone or anything when people in this thread have acknowledged how it helped them. I don't know why you have such a strong reaction to a post meant to clarify an oft misunderstood point, but dehumanizing these people doesn't feel cool to me.
And I think you are rude to think so negatively about people you don't know.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »His point about finding the cause of obesity rather than just say I know why you are fat because you pig out too much is a great one.
The CAUSE of obesity is obvious -- you eat more than you should given your activity.
The real question is not why you are fat, but how to lose weight.
If you accept CICO, then the question becomes why am I eating more than I burn, and how do I stop that. The only person (for most of us) who can think through and answer that question, and it might have a lot of parts, is us.
This is all important stuff, but it really has nothing to do with OP's post, which was talking about getting to that first point which is true for all. Many people are there already, always were, never needed to say "okay, I need to cut calories and move more, how to do that." Perhaps that is true. But like others have said, it seems true that many, many are not, and even some of us who theoretically understood it needed to be practical in acknowledging that it applied to us and figuring it out.
What helps us eat less is not the same for everyone. For example, you say that not eating grains and sugar has been important for you. I cut out added sugar for a while and found it easy but not especially significant to weight loss. Cutting out snacking and focusing on other things was more important to me. I don't care much about grains, so cutting them out would be meaningless to me, except as part of mindful eating being important (don't waste calories on things that are just there).
Others struggle with habits of relying on fast food or not liking vegetables, which never applied to me, and still others struggle with hunger, which I didn't. On the other hand, I struggle with emotional eating, which many people have no issues with. CICO is significant to all of us; what to do after that will differ.
And no, I don't think I got fat because I was ill. I gained weight because I ate more than I burned. I also understand why I did not, but that's my story, not something that I claim must apply to everyone else.7
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.4K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 437 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions