Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Cals are NOT created equal. CICO isn't the whole story.
Options
joemac1988
Posts: 1,021 Member
in Debate Club
Full disclosure; I DO follow IIFYM and incorporate "comfort/dirty/whatever" foods daily. But, I'm not addressing IIFYM (whole 'nother story), just CICO.
Saying "CICO is all you need to pay attention to" and "a calorie is a calorie" isn't telling the whole story. If you're a beginner with tracking macros/have a lot to lose/are really experienced and know your body, then yes; you'll do ok with CICO.
That being said, CICO makes no allowance for Macros, Micros, Circadian Rhythm, blood sugar levels, etc. Without the right macros, fat loss, muscle gain and performance will all suffer.
Bottom line: will you lose weight on a caloric deficit? Yes. Will your body composition be as optimal as if your macros were correct and you stuck to whole foods? NO.
P.S. If you disagree, your argument is with scientific research, not me.
This should be interesting
Saying "CICO is all you need to pay attention to" and "a calorie is a calorie" isn't telling the whole story. If you're a beginner with tracking macros/have a lot to lose/are really experienced and know your body, then yes; you'll do ok with CICO.
That being said, CICO makes no allowance for Macros, Micros, Circadian Rhythm, blood sugar levels, etc. Without the right macros, fat loss, muscle gain and performance will all suffer.
Bottom line: will you lose weight on a caloric deficit? Yes. Will your body composition be as optimal as if your macros were correct and you stuck to whole foods? NO.
P.S. If you disagree, your argument is with scientific research, not me.
This should be interesting
57
Replies
-
This debate has been done to death. Please exit to the right everyone.86
-
15
-
Conflating nutrition and health with an energy formula does not score you extra points... exit stage center.38
-
I don't believe I've read anything to suggest that anyone disagrees with you; there is a lot of recommendations around macro breakdown and its impact on body composition (especially in regards to sufficient protein along with resistance training for maintaining muscle in a deficit), and that a nutrient dense diet is important for health.
That said, there is no one "correct" macro breakdown. Some people manage better on higher carb, others on higher fat. There are many ways of eating a "healthy" diet.
33 -
there are calories for nutrition and calories for health - they are completely different and conflating the 2 doesn't help...9
-
21
-
Didn't we do this last week(with the same subject line)?17
-
stanmann571 wrote: »Didn't we do this last week(with the same subject line)?
And last month...and last year...24 -
Should we go to the lemon water detox thread?Chef_Barbell wrote: »This debate has been done to death. Please exit to the right everyone.
Only for an awesome lemon drop recipe... :laugh:12 -
livingleanlivingclean wrote: »I don't believe I've read anything to suggest that anyone disagrees with you; there is a lot of recommendations around macro breakdown and its impact on body composition (especially in regards to sufficient protein along with resistance training for maintaining muscle in a deficit), and that a nutrient dense diet is important for health.
That said, there is no one "correct" macro breakdown. Some people manage better on higher carb, others on higher fat. There are many ways of eating a "healthy" diet.
Couldn't agree more. But, you don't have to go into forums too deep here to find plenty of "CICO is all you need to worry about" people.25 -
stanmann571 wrote: »Didn't we do this last week(with the same subject line)?
If so, was a coincidence and I didn't see it. Mah bad.7 -
joemac1988 wrote: »livingleanlivingclean wrote: »I don't believe I've read anything to suggest that anyone disagrees with you; there is a lot of recommendations around macro breakdown and its impact on body composition (especially in regards to sufficient protein along with resistance training for maintaining muscle in a deficit), and that a nutrient dense diet is important for health.
That said, there is no one "correct" macro breakdown. Some people manage better on higher carb, others on higher fat. There are many ways of eating a "healthy" diet.
Couldn't agree more. But, you don't have to go into forums too deep here to find plenty of "CICO is all you need to worry about" people.
Please point out where there is one person who fits that description?12 -
joemac1988 wrote: »Full disclosure; I DO follow IIFYM and incorporate "comfort/dirty/whatever" foods daily. But, I'm not addressing IIFYM (whole 'nother story), just CICO.
Saying "CICO is all you need to pay attention to" and "a calorie is a calorie" isn't telling the whole story. If you're a beginner with tracking macros/have a lot to lose/are really experienced and know your body, then yes; you'll do ok with CICO.
That being said, CICO makes no allowance for Macros, Micros, Circadian Rhythm, blood sugar levels, etc. Without the right macros, fat loss, muscle gain and performance will all suffer.
Bottom line: will you lose weight on a caloric deficit? Yes. Will your body composition be as optimal as if your macros were correct and you stuck to whole foods? NO.
P.S. If you disagree, your argument is with scientific research, not me.
This should be interesting
Everyone has different goals though. I have no interest in a specific body composition. I am interested though in having a normal glucose number, since I used to be a prediabetic. Just focusing on CICO during my weight loss phase kept things simple and sustainable for me, (I did not track macros/micros at all). Lost the extra weight and improved all my health markers, including normalizing that glucose number into the 80s.
Now I'm a few years into maintenance and I still don't have fitness/body comp goals because that's just not important to me. I'm in excellent health, look good in my clothes and my husband of almost 15 years can't keep his hands off of me. My body composition is 'optimal' for me and I'm quite happy with where I'm at, and I still keep things simple (no tracking of macros, micros or circadian rhythm). To each their own!
eta: my before pics are in my profile area, along with one that I took yesterday. My body comp may not be desirable to others, but I'm pretty darn pleased with where I'm at today
21 -
livingleanlivingclean wrote: »joemac1988 wrote: »livingleanlivingclean wrote: »I don't believe I've read anything to suggest that anyone disagrees with you; there is a lot of recommendations around macro breakdown and its impact on body composition (especially in regards to sufficient protein along with resistance training for maintaining muscle in a deficit), and that a nutrient dense diet is important for health.
That said, there is no one "correct" macro breakdown. Some people manage better on higher carb, others on higher fat. There are many ways of eating a "healthy" diet.
Couldn't agree more. But, you don't have to go into forums too deep here to find plenty of "CICO is all you need to worry about" people.
Please point out where there is one person who fits that description?
I just tagged you on 3 of such people.11 -
OliveGirl128 wrote: »joemac1988 wrote: »Full disclosure; I DO follow IIFYM and incorporate "comfort/dirty/whatever" foods daily. But, I'm not addressing IIFYM (whole 'nother story), just CICO.
Saying "CICO is all you need to pay attention to" and "a calorie is a calorie" isn't telling the whole story. If you're a beginner with tracking macros/have a lot to lose/are really experienced and know your body, then yes; you'll do ok with CICO.
That being said, CICO makes no allowance for Macros, Micros, Circadian Rhythm, blood sugar levels, etc. Without the right macros, fat loss, muscle gain and performance will all suffer.
Bottom line: will you lose weight on a caloric deficit? Yes. Will your body composition be as optimal as if your macros were correct and you stuck to whole foods? NO.
P.S. If you disagree, your argument is with scientific research, not me.
This should be interesting
Everyone has different goals though. I have no interest in a specific body composition. I am interested though in having a normal glucose number, since I used to be a prediabetic. Just focusing on CICO during my weight loss phase kept things simple and sustainable for me, (I did not track macros/micros at all). Lost the extra weight and improved all my health markers, including normalizing that glucose number into the 80s.
Now I'm a few years into maintenance and I still don't have fitness/body comp goals because that's just not important to me. I'm in excellent health, look good in my clothes and my husband of almost 15 years can't keep his hands off of me. My body composition is 'optimal' for me and I'm quite happy with where I'm at, and I still keep things simple (no tracking of macros, micros or circadian rhythm). To each their own!
eta: my before pics are in my profile area, along with one that I took yesterday. My body comp may not be desirable to others, but I'm pretty darn pleased with where I'm at today
Good reply!3 -
joemac1988 wrote: »livingleanlivingclean wrote: »joemac1988 wrote: »livingleanlivingclean wrote: »I don't believe I've read anything to suggest that anyone disagrees with you; there is a lot of recommendations around macro breakdown and its impact on body composition (especially in regards to sufficient protein along with resistance training for maintaining muscle in a deficit), and that a nutrient dense diet is important for health.
That said, there is no one "correct" macro breakdown. Some people manage better on higher carb, others on higher fat. There are many ways of eating a "healthy" diet.
Couldn't agree more. But, you don't have to go into forums too deep here to find plenty of "CICO is all you need to worry about" people.
Please point out where there is one person who fits that description?
I just tagged you on 3 of such people.joemac1988 wrote: »livingleanlivingclean wrote: »joemac1988 wrote: »livingleanlivingclean wrote: »I don't believe I've read anything to suggest that anyone disagrees with you; there is a lot of recommendations around macro breakdown and its impact on body composition (especially in regards to sufficient protein along with resistance training for maintaining muscle in a deficit), and that a nutrient dense diet is important for health.
That said, there is no one "correct" macro breakdown. Some people manage better on higher carb, others on higher fat. There are many ways of eating a "healthy" diet.
Couldn't agree more. But, you don't have to go into forums too deep here to find plenty of "CICO is all you need to worry about" people.
Please point out where there is one person who fits that description?
I just tagged you on 3 of such people.joemac1988 wrote: »livingleanlivingclean wrote: »joemac1988 wrote: »livingleanlivingclean wrote: »I don't believe I've read anything to suggest that anyone disagrees with you; there is a lot of recommendations around macro breakdown and its impact on body composition (especially in regards to sufficient protein along with resistance training for maintaining muscle in a deficit), and that a nutrient dense diet is important for health.
That said, there is no one "correct" macro breakdown. Some people manage better on higher carb, others on higher fat. There are many ways of eating a "healthy" diet.
Couldn't agree more. But, you don't have to go into forums too deep here to find plenty of "CICO is all you need to worry about" people.
Please point out where there is one person who fits that description?
I just tagged you on 3 of such people.
3 people stating that CICO is all that matters for weight loss. Which is true.22 -
A CALORIE is a CALORIE. A unit of measure doesn't change just because what it's made of differs from something else.
A foot is a foot. A liter is a liter. A pound is a pound. You'll NEVER find any scientific journal stating that those actual measurements differ.
Now you can have a foot of grass and a foot of dirt, a liter of milk and a liter of water, or a pound of gold or a pound of feathers. Different materials, but MEASUREMENT is still the same for all.
So tell me, how is 10 calories of protein more in calorie measurement than 10 calories of fat? Or 10 calories of carbs? Again, focusing on the actual 10 calories. How is 10 different than 10?
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
28 -
Calories don't tell me what lottery numbers to play. Lottery numbers aren't weight loss, neither is nutrition, general health, or athletic performance. Most of these things are connected, but calories are only the trump card for weight.15
-
The best diet for rapid weight loss is the raw chicken diet. No matter how much you eat you are guaranteed to lose a lot of weight.27
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 913 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions