More CICO Science
Azdak
Posts: 8,281 Member
Because you love it....
http://m.ajpendo.physiology.org/content/early/2017/07/31/ajpendo.00156.2017
Here is the abstract:
One of the central tenets in obesity prevention and management is caloric restriction. This perspective presents salient features of how calories and energy balance matter, also called the "calories in, calories out paradigm." Determinants of energy balance and relationships to dietary macronutrient content are reviewed. The rationale and features of the carbohydrate-insulin hypothesis postulate that carbohydrate restriction confers a metabolic advantage. According to this model, a large amount of fat intake is enabled without weight gain. Evidence concerning this possibility is detailed. The relationship and application of the laws of thermodynamics are then clarified with current primary research. Strong data indicate that energy balance is not materially changed during isocaloric substitution of dietary fats for carbohydrates. Results from a number of sources refute both the theory and effectiveness of the carbohydrate-insulin hypothesis. Instead, risk for obesity is primarily determined by total calorie intake
http://m.ajpendo.physiology.org/content/early/2017/07/31/ajpendo.00156.2017
Here is the abstract:
One of the central tenets in obesity prevention and management is caloric restriction. This perspective presents salient features of how calories and energy balance matter, also called the "calories in, calories out paradigm." Determinants of energy balance and relationships to dietary macronutrient content are reviewed. The rationale and features of the carbohydrate-insulin hypothesis postulate that carbohydrate restriction confers a metabolic advantage. According to this model, a large amount of fat intake is enabled without weight gain. Evidence concerning this possibility is detailed. The relationship and application of the laws of thermodynamics are then clarified with current primary research. Strong data indicate that energy balance is not materially changed during isocaloric substitution of dietary fats for carbohydrates. Results from a number of sources refute both the theory and effectiveness of the carbohydrate-insulin hypothesis. Instead, risk for obesity is primarily determined by total calorie intake
15
Replies
-
Love it.
What does this mean for diabetics on low-carb diets?0 -
It's always amusing to hear from people that it's NOT just about calories in/out. And yet it is.
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
4 -
Love it.
What does this mean for diabetics on low-carb diets?
It doesn't really change anything. A low-carb diet is prescribed for diabetics for medical reasons to compensate for lack of insulin sensitivity (type 2). It is not prescribed for weight loss.
Type 2 diabetics usually benefit greatly by losing weight (fat). Obviously fat loss can be achieved via a low-carb diet. What the study is reaffirming is that there is no weight loss benefit for a low-carb diet vs non low-carb when calories are equal.
It is not saying that low-carb is not effective; just that low-carb does not work because of what is often referred to as the "insulin fairy", meaning it doesn't work because of its effects on insulin. It "works" for a number of behavioral and perhaps psychological reasons (all of which are valid).
4 -
This of course is what regulars always say. My curiosity is about PCOS and those that say they cannot lose weight and therefore try low carb and voila, they start losing despite calories having been the same prior.0
-
I think as a diabetic you have to believe both. I have lost weight at a calorie deficit, but my blood sugar has not been optimal. For every research study you find, you can find another to dispute it. I don't think you can lose weight if you aren't at a deficit to some extent. I do think if you are a type 2 and eating high sugar foods but at deficit you also won't lose weight as sugar will be stored as fat. You have to find the formula that works for you.5
-
I think as a diabetic you have to believe both. I have lost weight at a calorie deficit, but my blood sugar has not been optimal. For every research study you find, you can find another to dispute it. I don't think you can lose weight if you aren't at a deficit to some extent. I do think if you are a type 2 and eating high sugar foods but at deficit you also won't lose weight as sugar will be stored as fat. You have to find the formula that works for you.
You don't seem to understand what eating at a deficit means.6 -
Sure I do. I'm just saying there is more to it for a diabetic than CICO.4
-
Sure I do. I'm just saying there is more to it for a diabetic than CICO.
No you don't. Or else you wouldn't say a sentence like "if you are a type 2 and eating high sugar foods but at deficit you also won't lose weight as sugar will be stored as fat".
That's a clear misunderstanding of the basics.11 -
I think as a diabetic you have to believe both. I have lost weight at a calorie deficit, but my blood sugar has not been optimal. For every research study you find, you can find another to dispute it. I don't think you can lose weight if you aren't at a deficit to some extent. I do think if you are a type 2 and eating high sugar foods but at deficit you also won't lose weight as sugar will be stored as fat. You have to find the formula that works for you.
No one is questioning the use of a low-carb approach to regulate blood sugar. But there is no metabolic pathway by which "sugar will be stored as fat" independent of a calorie surplus.
And, no, this isn't an issue of competing research theories. This study is: a) a meta analysis involving thousands of subjects; b) one of numerous studies that have come out in the past few years, all saying the same thing. The current literature OVERWHELMINGLY supports CICO. Guys like Lustig, Fung, Taubes, et al are increasingly becoming the "flat earth society" of nutrition science.5 -
This content has been removed.
-
VintageFeline wrote: »This of course is what regulars always say. My curiosity is about PCOS and those that say they cannot lose weight and therefore try low carb and voila, they start losing despite calories having been the same prior.
I'm inclined to doubt their calories were the same prior.
Nearly all the people I see here with PCOS are all newbies who don't know the first thing about calorie counting.3 -
VintageFeline wrote: »This of course is what regulars always say. My curiosity is about PCOS and those that say they cannot lose weight and therefore try low carb and voila, they start losing despite calories having been the same prior.
I'm inclined to doubt their calories were the same prior.
Nearly all the people I see here with PCOS are all newbies who don't know the first thing about calorie counting.
This has always been my thought though I don't weigh into those threads. And as I don't have PCOS I'm not in any of the support groups here to see what the general chat around it is there either.1 -
And I am evidence that high carb/ high sugar/ calorie deficit works, eat very low fat as awaiting gallbladder removal and can't tolerate much at all, always over on sugars and meet carb macro goals, lost 54lbs using this combination since Jan 2017. I have in the past had a diagnosis of PCOS, though I doubted its validity, however if it was true it hasn't had any implications for my weight loss. And just in case anyone questions the sugars, I have been advised to eat this way by a registered dietician to ensure I meet my calorific needs.1
-
In a weight loss sense, I've always followed CICO because I'm a foodie and enjoy eating.
From a healthy perspective, I tend to eat 80/20 meaning 80% of the foods I choose are healthy so I can get vitamins and minerals.1 -
QFT and overall awesomeness.I think as a diabetic you have to believe both. I have lost weight at a calorie deficit, but my blood sugar has not been optimal. For every research study you find, you can find another to dispute it. I don't think you can lose weight if you aren't at a deficit to some extent. I do think if you are a type 2 and eating high sugar foods but at deficit you also won't lose weight as sugar will be stored as fat. You have to find the formula that works for you.
No one is questioning the use of a low-carb approach to regulate blood sugar. But there is no metabolic pathway by which "sugar will be stored as fat" independent of a calorie surplus.
And, no, this isn't an issue of competing research theories. This study is: a) a meta analysis involving thousands of subjects; b) one of numerous studies that have come out in the past few years, all saying the same thing. The current literature OVERWHELMINGLY supports CICO. Guys like Lustig, Fung, Taubes, et al are increasingly becoming the "flat earth society" of nutrition science.
1 -
You gotta love the flat earthers. If you haven't ever looked up a diagram of flat earth cosmology, go and Google it. Completely awesome. I wish we lived in a world like that, with giant ice walls and the sun on a rotating pole.
I also wish we lived in a world where maintaining a healthy weight was all about eating the right kind of food in unlimited quantities, instead of this tedious calorie stuff.
But we don't.2
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
- 426 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