Is it really CICO? Calories in, calories out?

mjc8080

Is any “diet” succesful soley based on cico? Whether low carb, keto, weight watchers, low fat, etc? Are all calories equal then? As long as you eat below your number allowed, you will lose weight?

Trying to get all my facts before I decided myfitness pal Or Atkins? Thank you in advance!

quiksylver296

mjc8080

quiksylver296 wrote: »

That basically sums up everything I need to know!

All1971

Or perhaps read about a different take on it...

The Carbohydrate-Insulin Model of Obesity: Beyond “Calories In, Calories Out”
David S. Ludwig, MD, PhD1; Cara B. Ebbeling, PhD1

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/2686146

Unknown

This content has been removed.

estherdragonbat

mjc8080 wrote: »

Is any “diet” succesful soley based on cico? Whether low carb, keto, weight watchers, low fat, etc? Are all calories equal then? As long as you eat below your number allowed, you will lose weight?

Trying to get all my facts before I decided myfitness pal Or Atkins? Thank you in advance!

Calories are equal for weight loss. If your maintenance/break-even point is 2,000 calories and you consistently eat 1500, you will lose weight. (Note: as you shrink, so will your caloric needs. Using myself as an example, when I weighed 254lbs, MFP gave me 1720 calories to lose 1lb/week; I'm a short woman in my 40s. 105 lbs later, I'm on 1360 to lose 1/2lb per week. Because at 149lbs, I don't need as much food.)

For health, energy, satiety, certain fitness goals, and probably other stuff I'm leaving out, what you eat matters. Your body needs adequate nutrition which comes from eating a varied diet. While I haven't given up desserts, eating what I want within my calories doesn't mean that all I eat is cake and candy! (Most people, even on poor diets, don't eat that way unless they're in a situation where they literally have no choice.) That being said, using the person who needs 2,000 calories to maintain as an example? If they are eating 2500 calories worth of nutrient-dense food, they will gain. If they are eating 1500 calories worth of fried food and candy, they will lose. Google "Twinkie Diet" if you want confirmation. That doesn't necessarily follow that there will be no long-term health issues for the person losing weight on a poorer diet, but in general? The single best way to improve one's health markers is to close in on a healthy weight. No matter what you eat to get there, so long as you're not running too aggressive a deficit.

Personally, I pay attention to protein and iron and let the rest fall where it falls. Which is usually moderate to slightly-high carb—I'm a vegetarian; most of my protein sources contain carbs too—and lower (not 'low') fat. Over time (I've been at this for 21 months, now), I find that I'm making more nutrient-dense choices than I used to, but I still make room for cookies and ice cream. Of course, those aren't my dietary staples—they never were, even when I was at my heaviest. But they have a (delicious!) place in my week all the same!

quiksylver296

All1971 wrote: »

Or perhaps read about a different take on it...

The Carbohydrate-Insulin Model of Obesity: Beyond “Calories In, Calories Out”
David S. Ludwig, MD, PhD1; Cara B. Ebbeling, PhD1

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/2686146

But all that's saying is you can cut your calories however you would like. Which means CICO. :huh:

Pending definitive studies, the principles of a low-glycemic load diet offer a practical alternative to the conventional focus on dietary fat and calorie restriction.

DaddieCat

I love it when the laws of physics hold true in our dimension. It's when they don't that I begin to worry.

*edited because auto-correct hates me.

solieco1

Yes.

JeromeBarry1

There's a lot of confusion in the world. Yesterday, I said nothing when I overheard a teenager and his mother speaking in the snack aisle. Teen didn't understand that "sugar" is "calories". Mom insisted "sugar" is "calories".

Well, yes. Sugar, as commonly understood, is a simple carbohydrate that is quickly digested and utilized as energy measured as calories. However, recent developments in food science have given us sugar alcohols, which are complex carbohydrates that are not digested and not utilized as energy, which is still measured as calories even if the scalar value is 0.


Just don't get lost in the weeds. Eat too much = get too fat.

vingogly

"I’ve had countless clients come to me, complaining that Atkins isn’t working. When I ask what they are eating, they list a day's worth of high-protein, high-fat food (which rarely includes vegetables and which typically totals to about 4,000 calories a day)"

Source: https://www.atkins.com/how-it-works/atkins-blogs/colette-heimowitz/the-calorie-conundrum

Bottom line for me: if an approach to eating keeps me motivated, doesn't leave me feeling hungry all the time, and is something I can live with for the rest of my life, it's worth following. I couldn't do paleo for this reason, and although I've done low carb a couple of times (Atkins, South Beach), it's not something I could do for the rest of my life. And I've done low fat multiple times -- if I get below a certain amount of fat in my diet, I feel hungry all the time.

Don't kid yourself -- I've known people who've done low carb, started with enthusiasm, went off the diet when they couldn't live with it any more, and ended up fatter than ever. You can replace low carb with low fat, paleo, etc. in the last sentence and it would be just as true. Most of the battle isn't in your metabolism -- it's in your head.

ceiswyn

Ultimately, weight loss is all about CICO.

However it's also important to consider individual differences, particularly psychological ones. Some people find that keeping carbs low reduces their appetite. Some people (me) would fall off the wagon in a heartbeat if they couldn't have cake and chocolate. Some people need regularly-spaced meals, others find that spending most of the day fasting is easier for them.

Calories are king; but you need to find for yourself what is the most satisfying way for you to consume them.

garystrickland357

Yes, it’s really that simple. People make it complicated. Eat foods that you like and that are satisfying. You know the foods that are good choices. Stay at your target calorie goal and you’ll lose weight. It may take some tweaking, but it works.

RachelElser

Barring medical disorders, CICO is the only way to lose weight.

CaptainJoy

Yes. For weight loss, cico is all it takes. For your individual health, a change in diet helps.

VUA21

Yep. Use more calories than you take in. To lose weight that is all that is needed. It really is that simple.

workinonit1956

It hard to believe, isn’t it, in a world where magazine articles tout things like “no pesky calorie counting necessary” or any similar headline which promises fast weight loss eating “all you want”. Things like this grab people’s attention, true, but it also reinforces the fallacy that counting calories is a terrible chore. I was one of so many that fell for stuff like that more than once!
This time, I was bound and determined to figure out what actually worked and give it a fair try-and wouldn’t you know it-that’s really all there is to it: CICO. I wish I had opened myself up to it years ago, but I’m on the right track now which is what counts. Maybe not always easy, but so simple.
After a lifetime of bouncing between this or that diet and always ending up figuring the heck with it, I’ll just stay fat and not worry about it only to try again with some new unsustainable “plan,” I’m sitting here today at age 62-at a normal BMI for the first time I think since elementary school and still going, albeit slowly now, as I plan to do this forever.
Yep, it works

adomingo426

Hi everyone, I have a question about my calories in and calories out. Here’s a little back story before I begin I’ve been yo-yo dieting for a few years now I get on kicks where I wanna lose weight then I crash. In middle school I had an eating disorder and basically stopped eating I’ve come out of that and am fine now. Now I am 21 5 feet tall and 138 pounds I am putting on weight like crazy and I’ve never been really
Consistent with my diets and that’s probably because I eat around 500 calories a day and then crash. But when I try to eat more the scale ends up going up and through research this has lead me to believe I broke or damage my
Metabolism having me need less than 1000 calories to lose weight. If anyone has any insight on this please let me know thank you !

mamadon

I lost well over 100 pounds almost five years ago. All I did was count calories. I paid zero attention to sugar or fat or carbs.

CarvedTones

RachelElser wrote: »

Barring medical disorders, CICO is the only way to lose weight.

Even with medical issues, CICO would work to cause weight loss, but the CO can be so low that matching it with CI is likely to leave you eating so little that it's difficult or impossible to get enough nutrients.

kami3006

Lost, bulked, cut, bulked, cut, maintained all by manipulating my calories.

BillPar

I believe balancing macros tailored to an individual works by helping maintain a healthy metabolism , as do some diet breaks.

deannalfisher

adomingo426 wrote: »

Hi everyone, I have a question about my calories in and calories out. Here’s a little back story before I begin I’ve been yo-yo dieting for a few years now I get on kicks where I wanna lose weight then I crash. In middle school I had an eating disorder and basically stopped eating I’ve come out of that and am fine now. Now I am 21 5 feet tall and 138 pounds I am putting on weight like crazy and I’ve never been really
Consistent with my diets and that’s probably because I eat around 500 calories a day and then crash. But when I try to eat more the scale ends up going up and through research this has lead me to believe I broke or damage my
Metabolism having me need less than 1000 calories to lose weight. If anyone has any insight on this please let me know thank you !

You should probably start your own thread

motivatedmartha

adomingo426 wrote: »

Hi everyone, I have a question about my calories in and calories out. Here’s a little back story before I begin I’ve been yo-yo dieting for a few years now I get on kicks where I wanna lose weight then I crash. In middle school I had an eating disorder and basically stopped eating I’ve come out of that and am fine now. Now I am 21 5 feet tall and 138 pounds I am putting on weight like crazy and I’ve never been really
Consistent with my diets and that’s probably because I eat around 500 calories a day and then crash. But when I try to eat more the scale ends up going up and through research this has lead me to believe I broke or damage my
Metabolism having me need less than 1000 calories to lose weight. If anyone has any insight on this please let me know thank you !

Eating 500 calories a day will see you crash - quite quickly I'm guessing. Plug your stats into mfp and eat what it tells you to eat - consistently and for a long time. It can take weeks to get moving - or you may lose a lot in a short period (depends on how overweight you are). If you do it consistently and for long enough your body will respond - be patient!! Being more active will do 2 things, make you feel better mentally and secondly, by burning more calories you will either lose quicker or will have a few extra calories to play with. Either way, work out your mfp targets and then measure/weigh your food accurately and log everything that goes into your mouth. I promise you, everyone can lose weigth by doing this - there is almost certainly nothing odd about you that will make it not work. But do stop the crazy yo yoing and drastic eating plans and accept that your body may need to recover from them

LuckyNumbers

adomingo426 wrote: »

Hi everyone, I have a question about my calories in and calories out. Here’s a little back story before I begin I’ve been yo-yo dieting for a few years now I get on kicks where I wanna lose weight then I crash. In middle school I had an eating disorder and basically stopped eating I’ve come out of that and am fine now. Now I am 21 5 feet tall and 138 pounds I am putting on weight like crazy and I’ve never been really
Consistent with my diets and that’s probably because I eat around 500 calories a day and then crash. But when I try to eat more the scale ends up going up and through research this has lead me to believe I broke or damage my
Metabolism having me need less than 1000 calories to lose weight. If anyone has any insight on this please let me know thank you !

Please see a doctor (I'm thinking endocrinologist or the like) if you think you might have a metabolic disorder.

fb47

CICO is all that matters. Now when it comes to what to eat, the lower your calories intake, the more I recommend you getting healthy foods that can keep you satiated. For example, a woman who needs 1200 calories to lose weight at a good rate and eats a Big Mac with fries every day will lose weight, the problem is they will feel hungry all the time and unless they have extreme will power, they will most likely end up eating more after that because of that hunger....and this will also cause other problems like the fact that they will lack adequate protein, fiber and micronutrients on top of that.

Now if you take my example, I am a 5'9 male who needs 2460 calories just to lose 1 lbs per week. I can easily fit fruits and veggies, eat the healthy stuff like chicken, yogurt, cottage cheese, etc...and at the same time, I can easily fit a donut here, a muffin there and still lose weight because 2460 calories is enough for me to lose weight, at the same time I am able to cover my protein, fiber and micronutrients goals and eat junk food at the same time. I can easily get away with it with getting the best of both worlds. The lower your calories are, the harder it is to fit junk food and hit your fiber, micronutrients and protein goals.

mph323

CaptainJoy wrote: »

Yes. For weight loss, cico is all it takes. For your individual health, a change in diet helps.

What change?? Many people are overweight because they eat too much nutrient-dense food. Why should they change what they eat? Changing how much they eat is all that's required.