Ketogenic diet



  • CharlieBeansmomTracey
    CharlieBeansmomTracey Posts: 7,682 Member
    karl317 wrote: »
    J72FIT wrote: »
    The only thing I disagree with is this idea of "straight CICO". What is that? CICO just is... regardless of the diet you choose.

    That said, congrats on your success...

    Thank you, very much.

    To clarify - "Straight CICO" to me means simply counting calories on both sides of the equation - intake and output - regardless of nutrition source (fat/protein/carbohydrates).

    So, if MFP tells me I have a 2500 calorie "budget" consisting of 2000 calories food and 500 calories from exercise, I can eat 2500 calories a day. This methodology "works" for me in a sense that if I follow it to the letter, I will remain roughly the same weight if I match calories in to calories out (and gain when I go over significantly, and lose when I go under significantly). But that's not what makes CICO a failure for me.

    The reason I call CICO a dismal failure is that I am miserable and hungry throughout, and eventually just say "F it" and fail spectacularly when I give into it. I am certain I am not alone in this, and as Jason Fungs, Gary Taubes and Nina Teicholzes of the world love to point it, they pin this giving-in-to-hunger as a moral failure on my part.

    I am no stranger to weight loss. I have done this countless times in the past. I am a pro! I have gained and lost nearly 1,000lb in my lifetime with yo-yo dieting the "CICO" way, thinking it was THE ONLY WAY. But I concede, when CICO is followed to the letter, it absolutely works for me in the weight loss/weight gain sense.

    But that's the problem - the level of hunger I constantly feel eating that way. If there's one thing the "eating" portion of my lifestyle must not do should I desire to stay thin, it must not let me feel hungry all the time. That is where "straight CICO" (as I define it) fails me. I'm sure there are many physiological reasons that this happens, some having to do with funny words like "Ghrelin" and "Leptin" or what not - and who knows, maybe eating the "keto" way isn't only way to flip those switches. But this keto business is what apparently does the job for me, and I feel fortunate to have it in my life.

    Yes, you are absolutely right that CICO "just is" from a math point of view. But the physiological, mental or whatever level of hunger I feel when eating that way is not what I would consider mathematical. Thankfully eating lots of fat and little to no carbs is the ticket to my success thus far, and like I said before I don't care if it's 100% mental, physiological or pure delusion. This is working, and I see no reason to stop doing it.

    Sorry for the Wall o' Text. But when you finally think you've solved one of the great mysteries in your life, you tend to ramble on about it :)

    the thing is CICO applies to all ways of eating whether its keto,paleo,atkins,etc if you felt hungry its because carbs didnt satiate you when you ate more carbs. for you keto works because the fat satiates you. it does for some and not for others. CICO is an energy balance and keto does not defy that energy balance. even if you were to overeat in keto you would still gain weight.. as for taubes and fung both have been debunked and are quacks when it comes to their "studies" taubes doesnt even have a degree or background in nutrition/diet. no medical degree at all.

    If you yo yo dieted its probably because you werent satiated on what you were eating so you would give in as you say,eat more, then gain then try losing again and yo yo. so if you are losing weight doing keto,or even maintaining its still CICO. CICO is not really counting calories. your body does that anyway whether you do it or =not. if you are losing you are in a deficit,gaining=surplus and maintaining =maintenance or an even energy balance

    I eat higher amounts of carbs/protein because fat doesnt satiate me and I cant do high fat diets due to a health issue.I even lost weight more than 10 years ago without even trying, I wasnt dieting,wasnt counting,nothing like that was even a thought, I wasnt trying to lose weight. I broke my leg and needed surgery and was making less trips to the kitchen therefore that means less calories in. so it was still CICO at play even though I had no idea about it back then. I didnt even know back then you had to eat less than you burned to lose weight. I was told as a kid in the 70s and 80s that if your parents were thin you would be thin, or vice versa that weight had to do with genetics. it doesnt, as both my parents were healthy weights and all of my sisters and myself are overweight.we all got that way eating more and moving less.

  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    I think this idea of someone who counts calories carefully and pays no attention to the fact that he or she is really hungry and having to white knuckle it is mostly a straw man and in a few occasions maybe an issue for people with really limited taste preferences or no common sense.

    I can't imagine the average, sensible person cutting calories and not making sure to eat food that is filling (and for me that has always meant a diet that meets nutritional needs too). Maybe that's why I was never hungry when cutting calories -- focusing on nutrient dense and filling foods seemed obvious.

    I've also never had a Snackwell and don't recall them being other than a joke (ha, ha, people think mediocre cookies won't make them fat because low fat, despite the calories--it's the same mentality that leads to "only carbs make you fat today").

    Being constantly hungry is uncomfortable. Even new dieters know that, evidenced by all the threads and questions being asked about filling foods. What people find filling and sustainable falls on a very wide spectrum, the difference is that some take longer to figure out an eating strategy that works for them. This may as well be keto for some, but not because keto is special. All of these strategies are CICO, it's interesting how it's usually used to mean "just counting calories and haven't found my groove yet".