(Calories in vs Calories out) vs dont eat crap ( aka semi low carb)

WarningTheHermit

So a common school of thought is, if you're eating at a calorie defecit you will lose weight. No matter the discussion im reading there is always someone commenting in with this same mantra and not a whole lot of anything else added to their argument.

But, using myself as an example, I ate like crap until recently, at a caloric defecit, and didnt lose weight whatsoever. But stayed at a constant weight. ( very overweight)

Where as when I eat a higher amount of calories, but I eat better food for me ( low carb in this case ), I actually lose weight.

Discuss

psuLemon

Energy balance controls weight, specific foods effect hunger, nutrition, sustainability, and body composition/metabolism (protein). If someone tells you CICO is wrong (cough Dr. Fung), it's because they don't understand it or use dumb examples like broccoli vs donuts.

cwolfman13

TEF...insulin resistance...logging inaccuracies and bad estimates?

I don't eat crap...I eat very healthy...I gain weight every winter eating very healthy...calories matter.

Also, why would CICO = eating crap...CICO is just the math...

janejellyroll

If you didn't lose weight, you weren't in a calorie deficit. Something was off -- either with how you were estimating how much you were taking in or how much your body was using (or, possibly, a bit of both).

kshama2001

I have seen so many threads in which people said they were eating at a calorie deficit and not losing weight and then it turned out they weren't logging properly.

The only scientific explanation for your experience is that you were under-counting calories in and/or over-counting calories out when you were not losing weight when you thought you were in a calorie deficit. Can you share your diary and indicate what time period that was?

Change your Diary Sharing settings to Public: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/account/diary_settings

jjpptt2

1. Over what period of time were these 2 things true (eating less and not losing vs eating more and losing)?
2. Were the methods of tracking intake the same for both scenarios?

Until those questions are answered, I can only guess... but it's probably safe to say that what you thought was happening wasn't what was actually happening.

mbaker566

cico is an equation. calorie deficit leads to losing weight.
don't eat like crap still led to me gaining weight. because i wasn't in a deficit.

pinuplove

Calorie counting (vs CICO) /= eating crap, as your thread title implies. This has been addressed many times here.

I would agree with the others that you probably had some logging errors previously and weren't in a deficit. That, and dropping carbs will result in a water weight whoosh that people often assume is fat loss.

NorthCascades

WarningTheHermit wrote: »

So a common school of thought is, if you're eating at a calorie defecit you will lose weight. No matter the discussion im reading there is always someone commenting in with this same mantra and not a whole lot of anything else added to their argument.

But, using myself as an example, I ate like crap until recently, at a caloric defecit, and didnt lose weight whatsoever. But stayed at a constant weight. ( very overweight)

Where as when I eat a higher amount of calories, but I eat better food for me ( low carb in this case ), I actually lose weight.

Discuss

You are a scientific anomaly and need to be studied so humanity can unlock your secret of creating matter from nothing.

WinoGelato

Why are "CICO" and "Don't Eat Crap" mutually exclusive in your title and your example?

CICO is an energy balance equation. It has nothing to do with the type of foods you choose to eat. You can eat a nutrient dense, whole food "non-crap" diet and eat in a calorie surplus and gain weight.

You can eat primarily processed "junk" foods and eat in a calorie deficit and lose weight.

Most sensible and successful people I know strive to fit somewhere in the middle. They know nutrition is important. They want to eat foods that satiate them, but they also try not to demonize foods and still indulge in 'treats' in moderation.

To your belief that you weren't losing eating one way, and then started losing eating a different way - we would need a lot more information to be able to help explain this - likely it comes down to your logging or what you "thought" you were eating.

missysippy930

You need to consult with your health care professional.

Barring any medical condition, weight loss occurs when you eat less calories than your body burns.
Regardless of where those calories come from.

Great advice from the others on this thread. Most likely, you are not tracking your calories correctly.

psuLemon

Also, when you trend to eat like crap, it's very easy to get more calories in than expect. It's also possible you weren't adequately fueling your body, so you could have moved less or burnt less calories through exercise.

psychod787

I could regain a monkey ton of weight eating so called healthy food. People will lose weight on general if they switch to a "healthy" diet. Not because the food is magic, but because generally "healthy" food tends to be less calories dense. It is higher in protein and fiber. Fill you up better. If you are trying to lose 10 lbs, sure eating "healthy" will do it. If you are trying to lose more, well research shows that portions will creep over time and you will regain. I believe lower carb diets work in 2 ways. They limit an entire macro food group and tend to knock out many calorie dense, non filling foods, that is often loaded with fat as well, and increases protein that is proven to fill people up better. Wooo me if you will, but someone mentioned Dr. Fung. I actually at one point contacted them after I lost my weight to talk to them about metabolic slowing. Well, they were eager to take my money for a consult, until they learned I had already lost the weight. Then, they had no interest. Hmmmm....

ritzvin

WarningTheHermit wrote: »

So a common school of thought is, if you're eating at a calorie defecit you will lose weight. No matter the discussion im reading there is always someone commenting in with this same mantra and not a whole lot of anything else added to their argument.

But, using myself as an example, I ate like crap until recently, at a caloric defecit, and didnt lose weight whatsoever. But stayed at a constant weight. ( very overweight)

Where as when I eat a higher amount of calories, but I eat better food for me ( low carb in this case ), I actually lose weight.

Discuss

People usually suck at guessing the correct portions of "crap food" which is generally calorie-dense. People almost always over-serve & under-estimate things like cereal, bread, pasta, rice, peanut butter by a HUGE amount.

glassyo

ritzvin wrote: »

WarningTheHermit wrote: »

So a common school of thought is, if you're eating at a calorie defecit you will lose weight. No matter the discussion im reading there is always someone commenting in with this same mantra and not a whole lot of anything else added to their argument.

But, using myself as an example, I ate like crap until recently, at a caloric defecit, and didnt lose weight whatsoever. But stayed at a constant weight. ( very overweight)

Where as when I eat a higher amount of calories, but I eat better food for me ( low carb in this case ), I actually lose weight.

Discuss

People usually suck at guessing the correct portions of "crap food" which is generally calorie-dense. People almost always over-serve & under-estimate things like cereal, bread, pasta, rice, peanut butter by a HUGE amount.

*pets her scale*

I lost over 100 lbs eating "crap". I ate chocolate and breads and cookies (oh so many cookies) so, yeah, the calories in can be any type as long as they're less than what you burn.

AnvilHead

WarningTheHermit wrote: »

Discuss

Another binary argument which completely disregards the middle and demonstrates a misunderstanding of what CICO is.

That's about all I've got.

estherdragonbat

Another one eating treats in moderation, around 50% carbs, and reasonably healthy. Down 105lbs, fitting in chocolate, ice cream, cookies, potato kugel, bread, pasta, etc., within the context of a balanced diet.

try2again

Uh-huh. I, for one, would require the documentation to support your assertion (all your stats, starting & end periods, access to your diary clearly indicating you were weighing your food during that time, etc and a breakdown of your daily activity & exercise). But that's actually not necessary, because you say your low-carb diet is a recent thing, and new low-carb diets produce a quick drop of water weight. And if your low-carb diet continues to result in weight loss, congratulations!... you are in a calorie deficit!

Edited to add: BTW, your low-carb diet is fine, if you enjoy eating that way. But be aware that the initial water weight you dropped will come back when you reintroduce/raise your carbs.

jemhh

You specifically state that you are eating low carb now. That hints at you eating higher carb previously. Most high carb tasty treats are loaded with fat (because carb+fat, sugar+butter=delicious) and extremely easy to overeat even when you think they're in check. I don't believe for a second that you were eating "crap" ("junk food") at a deficit and not losing. Whether your math shows it or not, the results speak for themselves and no loss, over a long term period, means no deficit.

kimny72

pinuplove wrote: »

Calorie counting (vs CICO) /= eating crap, as your thread title implies. This has been addressed many times here.

I would agree with the others that you probably had some logging errors previously and weren't in a deficit. That, and dropping carbs will result in a water weight whoosh that people often assume is fat loss.

And to add to the bolded, "don't eat crap" /= low carb necessarily. You can eat a healthy diet full of unprocessed nutritious food and eat relatively high carb (see the Blue Zones).

OP, I would agree with 2 points others have made:

If you were not carefully logging and weighing portions of your previous crap food, you could easily have been eating more than you thought. What the package says is a serving by volume compared to by weight can be way off, as can be the reported number of servings per package.

And, eating better can often make you more energetic and therefore more active throughout the day, and putting more effort into workouts, without your realizing it. So you eat the same amount of calories, but you are burning more without even trying.

People who are "just" counting calories aren't all eating nothing but crap. Most of us learned by logging that eating a decent amount of nutrient dense food made sticking to our goal easier. I eat nutritious food AND "crap", it's not an either/or proposition. I also eat @ 50% carb, and get a lot of those carbs from whole grains, beans, fruit, and dairy - not crap.

AliceDark

I just finished a long weight cut earlier this year, and now I'm slowly trying to gain. Literally the only difference between my way of eating in these two phases has been the amount of food -- I have an easier time fitting in guacamole now than I did six months ago. I WISH it were as simple as "eat healthy and lose; eat junk and gain."