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.

Is CICO the new Keto?

RuNaRoUnDaFiEld
RuNaRoUnDaFiEld Posts: 5,864 Member
edited November 22 in Debate Club
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5076033/Internet-goes-mad-latest-diet-CICO-regime.html

The new It diet - the CICO diet - is a model of the old calories in calories out
It has proven popular on Reddit forums in recent weeks, as people eulogise it
FEMAIL spoke to Sydney-based nutritionist and dietitian, Lyndi Cohen, about it
She said that while CICO might work, it also isn't highly safe or sustainable
Ms Cohen said CICO encourages you to become obsessed with numbers

[edited by mods]
They had a chance to write an article about the science behind CICO but instead report this drivel.
«13

Replies

  • RuNaRoUnDaFiEld
    RuNaRoUnDaFiEld Posts: 5,864 Member
    kommodevaran wrote: »
    I'm torn between "I want to hit someone" and "what did you expect" :(

    This is bad even for it being in the Daily Fail.

    I'm with I want to hit her and the editor.
  • jesspen91
    jesspen91 Posts: 1,383 Member
    Damn you. You made me give traffic to the Daily Mail! I wanted to laugh at the craziness!
  • nani7722
    nani7722 Posts: 25 Member
    Where did this dietitian study?

    It seen to me, they all know only one thing "veggie, fruit, junk food, bla bla".
  • bpetrosky
    bpetrosky Posts: 3,911 Member
    Weird, the same thing popped up in my feeds this morning from other sites. The Yahoo byline seems to be the first one, but no author is attributed. There's a theme here: the "sudden" popularity on Reddit and the assumption that anyone using CICO is eating mostly junk.

    https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/diet-blowing-reddit-why-nutritionists-231701026.html
    http://www.foxnews.com/lifestyle/2017/11/12/most-popular-weight-loss-diet-on-reddit-would-never-be-recommended-by-nutritionists.amp.html
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    The article makes perfect sense. The "nutritionist" has something to sell, so it's basically an ad piece.
  • kommodevaran
    kommodevaran Posts: 17,890 Member
    bpetrosky wrote: »
    Weird, the same thing popped up in my feeds this morning from other sites. The Yahoo byline seems to be the first one, but no author is attributed. There's a theme here: the "sudden" popularity on Reddit and the assumption that anyone using CICO is eating mostly junk.

    https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/diet-blowing-reddit-why-nutritionists-231701026.html
    http://www.foxnews.com/lifestyle/2017/11/12/most-popular-weight-loss-diet-on-reddit-would-never-be-recommended-by-nutritionists.amp.html

    FOLLOW US ON FACEBOOK FOR MORE FAUX LIFESTYLE NEWS :#
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,011 Member
    So I clicked through on the yahoo link posted later in the thread, and if it's any consolation, most of the comments below the article are pro-CICO and pointing out the obvious fallacies. I mean there's some derp down there of course, but the majority sound like our people.
  • RuNaRoUnDaFiEld
    RuNaRoUnDaFiEld Posts: 5,864 Member
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    The article makes perfect sense. The "nutritionist" has something to sell, so it's basically an ad piece.

    She is scarily a dietitian according to the article.
  • VintageFeline
    VintageFeline Posts: 6,771 Member
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    The article makes perfect sense. The "nutritionist" has something to sell, so it's basically an ad piece.

    She is scarily a dietitian according to the article.

    Dr. Oz and Dr. Mercola are doctors too. Titles don't mean anything. Dietitians can be woo peddlers too (as evidenced by that article). What a load of *kitten*.

    [ETA:] And I thought Intermittent Fasting was the new Keto. It has just about the same amount of magical pseudoscientific woo claims going for it.

    Daily Fail love the 5:2 diet though, the "doctor" (who is a doctor but has actually been a journalist for most of his career) is on their payroll I think. So they're all about singing that particular fads' praises.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    Unsurprisingly, Dave Asprey (Mr. Bulletproof Derp, errrr, Coffee) shared this on his website also, with his own take on how "CICO doesn't work". It was shared and widely mocked/derided in a couple of the evidence-based FB fitness/nutrition groups I follow.
  • VintageFeline
    VintageFeline Posts: 6,771 Member
    sijomial wrote: »
    VintageFeline wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    The article makes perfect sense. The "nutritionist" has something to sell, so it's basically an ad piece.

    She is scarily a dietitian according to the article.

    Dr. Oz and Dr. Mercola are doctors too. Titles don't mean anything. Dietitians can be woo peddlers too (as evidenced by that article). What a load of *kitten*.

    [ETA:] And I thought Intermittent Fasting was the new Keto. It has just about the same amount of magical pseudoscientific woo claims going for it.

    Daily Fail love the 5:2 diet though, the "doctor" (who is a doctor but has actually been a journalist for most of his career) is on their payroll I think. So they're all about singing that particular fads' praises.

    @VintageFeline

    When the 5:2 diet came out the Daily Mail were very much against it - well thought out editorials like ohmygodyougonna die if you don't eat for a few hours!
    And then as the popularity increased they flipped their stance and were all for it and serialised the book.
    It's all about headlines and readership.

    As for the CICO "article" I was quite reassured they had to go all the way to the other side of the world to find a dietician quite so dopey.

    The pictures were really helpful, now I know what fruit looks like! ;)


    Ah. I don't follow DM that closely, my contempt is too strong but I do enjoy their daily completely contradictory diet articles from various trainers and nutritionists. Nearly all of them utter nonsense.
  • jjpptt2
    jjpptt2 Posts: 5,650 Member
    I don't see what's so horrible about the article. In many cases, it's very similar to many MFP threads (maybe THAT'S what's so horrible about the article) - most of the points made do have some merit, but the lack of context is the problem.

    Yes, there are some buzzwords/clickbait/hot buttons in there to generate reaction, but that doesn't invalidate the points being made. Chances are, the people who did the interview and edited the article don't know enough about health/diet/weight loss to know (or care) when they are misleading vs misinforming vs helping vs hurting the reader.
  • VintageFeline
    VintageFeline Posts: 6,771 Member
    jjpptt2 wrote: »
    I don't see what's so horrible about the article. In many cases, it's very similar to many MFP threads (maybe THAT'S what's so horrible about the article) - most of the points made do have some merit, but the lack of context is the problem.

    Yes, there are some buzzwords/clickbait/hot buttons in there to generate reaction, but that doesn't invalidate the points being made. Chances are, the people who did the interview and edited the article don't know enough about health/diet/weight loss to know (or care) when they are misleading vs misinforming vs helping vs hurting the reader.

    Can you elaborate? Hard to counter/agree without specifics.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories