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.
To Keto or Not To Keto?
Options
Replies
-
Strict keto is hard to do, but is a good way to transition to a low carb eating style. Keto for a couple of months -> relatively low carb permanently. Whatever it takes to get away from too much sugar and eating processed, commercially prepared mixes. Everyone's digestion of carbs differ. Some, like LeavingBusy, "gasp" at the realization that they can start loosing weight without being on a portion restriction plan that leaves them miserable when they try Keto.
The "calorie in-calorie out" method of controlling portions while eating "healthy" is far too simplistic for today's cheap, easy and highly refined standard American diet. The type of calories consumed plays a key role of being able to control portions for many. Any attempt to reduce weight by a change in eating style is doomed to failure if it can not be a permanent, life long change.
So you are equating calorie counting and eating healthfully with the so-called Standard American Diet? That's odd, from my perspective.
And calories don't have "types" any more than miles or kilometers have types. Foods have lots of characteristics: Calorie content is one such characteristic, density of various nutrients are other characteristics, as is how sating a particular person finds a particular food, and there are more.
Some of us - like me - managed to get fat while not eating boatloads of sugar, or commercially prepared mixes, fast food, etc. Go figure. I didn't change the range of foods I eat to lose weight, nor to maintain a healthy weight for 6+ years since, and wasn't "miserable" en route or now.
Low carb and SAD aren't the only two possible ways to eat, and the whole issue is IMO more nuanced than you're implying.
For clarity, if low carb or keto is the right "permanent, life long change" for someone to stay at a healthy weight long term, I'm cheering for them, quite sincerely. Me, I'm happier eating my 200g+ carbs daily.8 -
Strict keto is hard to do, but is a good way to transition to a low carb eating style. Keto for a couple of months -> relatively low carb permanently. Whatever it takes to get away from too much sugar and eating processed, commercially prepared mixes. Everyone's digestion of carbs differ. Some, like LeavingBusy, "gasp" at the realization that they can start loosing weight without being on a portion restriction plan that leaves them miserable when they try Keto.
The "calorie in-calorie out" method of controlling portions while eating "healthy" is far too simplistic for today's cheap, easy and highly refined standard American diet. The type of calories consumed plays a key role of being able to control portions for many. Any attempt to reduce weight by a change in eating style is doomed to failure if it can not be a permanent, life long change.
Along the lines of what @AnnPT77 was saying, I lost 60 pounds and have mostly maintained that loss for a few years now. However, I don't find fat particularly satisfying, so I focus on carbs, which do fill me up, and protein, which is pretty satiating to me as well. More notably, probably 75% of my diet is delivery/takeout/dine-in restaurant food. No problem losing or maintaining and all of my health markers (blood pressure, A1C, resting heart rate, weight, nutrition panel, etc.) are spot on.
I would imagine that I'm pretty much the poster child for what you think of when you refer to the standard American diet. You're absolutely correct that overhauling your eating style isn't likely to lead to sustainable weight loss. There are just a whole lot of eating styles that lead to the same outcome.3 -
Strict keto is hard to do, but is a good way to transition to a low carb eating style. Keto for a couple of months -> relatively low carb permanently. Whatever it takes to get away from too much sugar and eating processed, commercially prepared mixes. Everyone's digestion of carbs differ. Some, like LeavingBusy, "gasp" at the realization that they can start loosing weight without being on a portion restriction plan that leaves them miserable when they try Keto.
The "calorie in-calorie out" method of controlling portions while eating "healthy" is far too simplistic for today's cheap, easy and highly refined standard American diet. The type of calories consumed plays a key role of being able to control portions for many. Any attempt to reduce weight by a change in eating style is doomed to failure if it can not be a permanent, life long change.
Just to point out, regardless of diet preference, failure is extremely high.1 -
I would imagine that I'm pretty much the poster child for what you think of when you refer to the standard American diet. You're absolutely correct that overhauling your eating style isn't likely to lead to sustainable weight loss. There are just a whole lot of eating styles that lead to the same outcome.
COGypsy, I am sincerely happy for you and others like @AnnPT77 who have found ongoing success in weight management. But surely you two aren't suggesting that what has proven to work for you is the only way to lose weight and keep it off for everyone any more than what I have found works for me is. The original question was "to keto or not to keto". The answer differs from person to person, and I am not able to come up with an answer that fits everyone. Heck, I can't even figure out what, "agnostic of diet preference," is suppose to mean.
To be clear: The often repeated advice to eat less and exercise more, to follow the MyPlate or food pyramid guidelines, that CICO is all you have to do for long-term success, has proven to be an utter failure for many that has led to a surge in obesity and chronic diseases. Everybody is different. What works for one might not work for others. The goal is to find what works for you for the rest of your life. If that is strict Keto, fine. Its not easy to do though.0 -
Gypsy and Ann didn't seem to be saying their way was for everyone at all.
not sure how you got that from their posts.
CICO does work for everyone- that bit isn't a failure for anyone.
Whether people can sustain whatever way of eating created their calorie deficit is the question, not whether CICO works.
7 -
Those pesky gut microbiota and hormones are feeling neglected in that sterile world of CICO imo.
1 -
neanderthin wrote: »Those pesky gut microbiota and hormones are feeling neglected in that sterile world of CICO imo.
At a calorie-appropriate plan involving 800 grams plus of veggies/fruits daily, 100g protein (with attention to protein quality), 50g fat with some attention to the ratios of MUFAs/PUFAs to sat fats and O-6 to O-3, not to mention a taste for naturally probiotic foods . . . I don't think my microbiome or hormones feel neglected.
Just believing that calorie balance directly affects body weight doesn't imply that calories are the only thing that matters about food and eating. There are even other factors (like satiation and energy level) that indirectly affect success at calorie balance, especially long term.
Calories, nutrition, satiation, tastiness, practicality, affordability, and more - in the balance that an individual wants and needs: I think that's the picture.I would imagine that I'm pretty much the poster child for what you think of when you refer to the standard American diet. You're absolutely correct that overhauling your eating style isn't likely to lead to sustainable weight loss. There are just a whole lot of eating styles that lead to the same outcome.
COGypsy, I am sincerely happy for you and others like @AnnPT77 who have found ongoing success in weight management. But surely you two aren't suggesting that what has proven to work for you is the only way to lose weight and keep it off for everyone any more than what I have found works for me is. The original question was "to keto or not to keto". The answer differs from person to person, and I am not able to come up with an answer that fits everyone. Heck, I can't even figure out what, "agnostic of diet preference," is suppose to mean.
To be clear: The often repeated advice to eat less and exercise more, to follow the MyPlate or food pyramid guidelines, that CICO is all you have to do for long-term success, has proven to be an utter failure for many that has led to a surge in obesity and chronic diseases. Everybody is different. What works for one might not work for others. The goal is to find what works for you for the rest of your life. If that is strict Keto, fine. Its not easy to do though.
Just out of curiosity, when my previous post said . . .. . . if low carb or keto is the right "permanent, life long change" for someone to stay at a healthy weight long term, I'm cheering for them, quite sincerely.
. . . what part of that came across is my believing that what works for me will work best for everyone?
As an aside, the idea that a large fraction of people are actually following the food pyramid or MyPlate is counterfactual, according to any research I've ever seen. Having been alive and adult since before the "obesity epidemic" purportedly started, I'm more than skeptical that MyPlate, calorie counting, or the food pyramid were key triggers.
Yes, the goal is for each individual to find what works for them for the rest of life, ideally not just for weight management, but IMO also for good health and an enjoyable eating/activity routine. Yes, the question of this thread is "keto or not keto".
My view is that either path may work for an individual (plus other paths not even most meaningfully analyzed on that continuum). I'm willing to consider that I've written unclearly in posts, speaking generically . . . but I don't understand you interpreted my post as anti-keto.
5 -
Yeah, food effects the microbiome and our hormones and each macro has a distinct effect on each, which was kind of my point. I look at CICO as a treatment for the symptom without really treating the root cause and how could it, it's just a measurement of heat. If someone is successful with CICO I'm on board and happy that it works. For me a higher protein diet where satiation was a key factor for my success and lowering highly refined carbs and starches without the need to count calories and if I needed to count calories I would have tried something else until I found what accomplished that, but I've know for over 20 years that a higher protein diet delivers satiation in spades, or at least animal protein, plant proteins didn't do the job for me personally but I would imagine it's because I'm not a growing plant and my physiology best matches the proteins found in animals, but I've never looked into it. Cheers
1 -
Calorie counting and eating high protein (or whatever strategy you choose), these things are not mutually exclusive. Calorie counting means watching how many calories you eat. A person can still tweak their diet (if needed) to improve satiation, gut health, cardiac health etc. at the same time.
Keto works for weight loss if it results in the calorie balance being negative (CICO principle). For some it can work without calorie counting (hunger blunted enough to ensure a calorie deficit), other people will need to count calories since eating 'intuitively' with keto doesn't guarantee a calorie deficit. On top of that, the person obviously needs to enjoy a keto diet, or is just a matter of time before they give up (same goes for any way of eating).
CICO (not as a synonym of calorie counting, but to denote the calorie equation which results in weight loss, maintenance of gain) is valid, whether or not someone actually uses calorie counting as a tool or not.10 -
I'm sure you know that CICO and calorie counting are not the same thing.neanderthin wrote: »Yeah, food effects the microbiome and our hormones and each macro has a distinct effect on each, which was kind of my point. I look at CICO as a treatment for the symptom without really treating the root cause and how could it, it's just a measurement of heat. If someone is successful with CICO I'm on board and happy that it works. For me a higher protein diet where satiation was a key factor for my success and lowering highly refined carbs and starches without the need to count calories and if I needed to count calories I would have tried something else until I found what accomplished that, but I've know for over 20 years that a higher protein diet delivers satiation in spades, or at least animal protein, plant proteins didn't do the job for me personally but I would imagine it's because I'm not a growing plant and my physiology best matches the proteins found in animals, but I've never looked into it. Cheers
You managed your energy balance (CICO) via satiation and I (for a while) managed it via calorie counting.
Regarding the bolded sentence - not everyone has the same root cause.
My root cause was eating too much of a very healthy diet so calorie counting for a time to better estimate and manage my CI and CO was sufficient.
As I don't need to count calories to maintain weight it was just an interlude between maintaining overweight and maintaining at a healthy weight. Probably an atypical experience just like your diet is atypical but both your high animal protein diet and my high carb diet work for us as individuals.
Satiation is also very individual with starchy carbs being my most satiating foods (which isn't that unusual as boiled potatoes often sit at #1 in lists of most satiating foods) and meat not being particularly satiating at all.
7 -
I'm sure you know that CICO and calorie counting are not the same thing.neanderthin wrote: »Yeah, food effects the microbiome and our hormones and each macro has a distinct effect on each, which was kind of my point. I look at CICO as a treatment for the symptom without really treating the root cause and how could it, it's just a measurement of heat. If someone is successful with CICO I'm on board and happy that it works. For me a higher protein diet where satiation was a key factor for my success and lowering highly refined carbs and starches without the need to count calories and if I needed to count calories I would have tried something else until I found what accomplished that, but I've know for over 20 years that a higher protein diet delivers satiation in spades, or at least animal protein, plant proteins didn't do the job for me personally but I would imagine it's because I'm not a growing plant and my physiology best matches the proteins found in animals, but I've never looked into it. Cheers
You managed your energy balance (CICO) via satiation and I (for a while) managed it via calorie counting.
Regarding the bolded sentence - not everyone has the same root cause.
My root cause was eating too much of a very healthy diet so calorie counting for a time to better estimate and manage my CI and CO was sufficient.
As I don't need to count calories to maintain weight it was just an interlude between maintaining overweight and maintaining at a healthy weight. Probably an atypical experience just like your diet is atypical but both your high animal protein diet and my high carb diet work for us as individuals.
Satiation is also very individual with starchy carbs being my most satiating foods (which isn't that unusual as boiled potatoes often sit at #1 in lists of most satiating foods) and meat not being particularly satiating at all.
Yes CICO would be redundant if we didn't actually count them. Funny you mention boiled potatoes and yes they're satiating and I do consume potatoes. It's the carbohydrates that are turned into powders then transformed into highly palatable foods that I try and stay away from. Broccoli doesn't stand a chance against Doritos and I've done the science behind that, lol. Anyway I'm very happy you now found a solution where you don't need to have the chronic noise in your brain to be always calculating to facilitate the accuracy needed to maintain proper caloric intake. It appears by the numbers that most people haven't figured that out yet.0 -
neanderthin wrote: »
I'm sure you know that CICO and calorie counting are not the same thing.neanderthin wrote: »Yeah, food effects the microbiome and our hormones and each macro has a distinct effect on each, which was kind of my point. I look at CICO as a treatment for the symptom without really treating the root cause and how could it, it's just a measurement of heat. If someone is successful with CICO I'm on board and happy that it works. For me a higher protein diet where satiation was a key factor for my success and lowering highly refined carbs and starches without the need to count calories and if I needed to count calories I would have tried something else until I found what accomplished that, but I've know for over 20 years that a higher protein diet delivers satiation in spades, or at least animal protein, plant proteins didn't do the job for me personally but I would imagine it's because I'm not a growing plant and my physiology best matches the proteins found in animals, but I've never looked into it. Cheers
You managed your energy balance (CICO) via satiation and I (for a while) managed it via calorie counting.
Regarding the bolded sentence - not everyone has the same root cause.
My root cause was eating too much of a very healthy diet so calorie counting for a time to better estimate and manage my CI and CO was sufficient.
As I don't need to count calories to maintain weight it was just an interlude between maintaining overweight and maintaining at a healthy weight. Probably an atypical experience just like your diet is atypical but both your high animal protein diet and my high carb diet work for us as individuals.
Satiation is also very individual with starchy carbs being my most satiating foods (which isn't that unusual as boiled potatoes often sit at #1 in lists of most satiating foods) and meat not being particularly satiating at all.
Yes CICO would be redundant if we didn't actually count them. Funny you mention boiled potatoes and yes they're satiating and I do consume potatoes. It's the carbohydrates that are turned into powders then transformed into highly palatable foods that I try and stay away from. Broccoli doesn't stand a chance against Doritos and I've done the science behind that, lol. Anyway I'm very happy you now found a solution where you don't need to have the chronic noise in your brain to be always calculating to facilitate the accuracy needed to maintain proper caloric intake. It appears by the numbers that most people haven't figured that out yet.
Maybe one person's noise is another person's music? I find calorie counting very freeing, not fraught or obsessive, and the idea that I'm "always calculating" kind of makes me LOL. If it's different for you, yeah, you probably shouldn't/needn't do it.
I don't know why it's such a human tendency to feel that the ways we might choose are Right, and that things others prefer are universally worse in some way. You mention the central importance of meat protein to you: I haven't eaten meat - at least not intentionally - in over 48 years, and TBH it sounds kind of disgusting to me at this point. That doesn't mean I need to think it's bad for people, wrong for others, or anything of that nature. Trust me, I haven't spent those 48 years being non-sated, and I haven't spent all of them overweight, either.
CICO is inescapable for all of us, just a specialized version of simple physics, in setting where human bodies are dynamic, i.e., CI affects CO. Calorie counting is optional, and whether it's noise or music is kind of individual, I think.7 -
neanderthin wrote: »Yeah, food effects the microbiome and our hormones and each macro has a distinct effect on each, which was kind of my point. I look at CICO as a treatment for the symptom without really treating the root cause and how could it, it's just a measurement of heat. If someone is successful with CICO I'm on board and happy that it works. For me a higher protein diet where satiation was a key factor for my success and lowering highly refined carbs and starches without the need to count calories and if I needed to count calories I would have tried something else until I found what accomplished that, but I've know for over 20 years that a higher protein diet delivers satiation in spades, or at least animal protein, plant proteins didn't do the job for me personally but I would imagine it's because I'm not a growing plant and my physiology best matches the proteins found in animals, but I've never looked into it. Cheers
Specific foods (and fiber) have an effect on the microbiome. I've not seen any evidence that it is macros that do. In particular, eating lots of different plants tend to result in a more diverse microbiome.4 -
neanderthin wrote: »
I'm sure you know that CICO and calorie counting are not the same thing.neanderthin wrote: »Yeah, food effects the microbiome and our hormones and each macro has a distinct effect on each, which was kind of my point. I look at CICO as a treatment for the symptom without really treating the root cause and how could it, it's just a measurement of heat. If someone is successful with CICO I'm on board and happy that it works. For me a higher protein diet where satiation was a key factor for my success and lowering highly refined carbs and starches without the need to count calories and if I needed to count calories I would have tried something else until I found what accomplished that, but I've know for over 20 years that a higher protein diet delivers satiation in spades, or at least animal protein, plant proteins didn't do the job for me personally but I would imagine it's because I'm not a growing plant and my physiology best matches the proteins found in animals, but I've never looked into it. Cheers
You managed your energy balance (CICO) via satiation and I (for a while) managed it via calorie counting.
Regarding the bolded sentence - not everyone has the same root cause.
My root cause was eating too much of a very healthy diet so calorie counting for a time to better estimate and manage my CI and CO was sufficient.
As I don't need to count calories to maintain weight it was just an interlude between maintaining overweight and maintaining at a healthy weight. Probably an atypical experience just like your diet is atypical but both your high animal protein diet and my high carb diet work for us as individuals.
Satiation is also very individual with starchy carbs being my most satiating foods (which isn't that unusual as boiled potatoes often sit at #1 in lists of most satiating foods) and meat not being particularly satiating at all.
Yes CICO would be redundant if we didn't actually count them.
Not really. It just means that calorie balance is what determines if we gain, lose, or maintain. How to change the calorie balance to support your goals is a different question, and logging is just one way to do so.
Mostly what I did was to look at my overall diet and see why/how I was eating excess cals. Learning how many calories were in things was helpful for that. I logged to keep myself mindful and because I found it interesting (I still do) to see the nutrients from the foods I ate (I find that's easier at another site). Currently I log when I want to get more mindful again.3 -
neanderthin wrote: »
I'm sure you know that CICO and calorie counting are not the same thing.neanderthin wrote: »Yeah, food effects the microbiome and our hormones and each macro has a distinct effect on each, which was kind of my point. I look at CICO as a treatment for the symptom without really treating the root cause and how could it, it's just a measurement of heat. If someone is successful with CICO I'm on board and happy that it works. For me a higher protein diet where satiation was a key factor for my success and lowering highly refined carbs and starches without the need to count calories and if I needed to count calories I would have tried something else until I found what accomplished that, but I've know for over 20 years that a higher protein diet delivers satiation in spades, or at least animal protein, plant proteins didn't do the job for me personally but I would imagine it's because I'm not a growing plant and my physiology best matches the proteins found in animals, but I've never looked into it. Cheers
You managed your energy balance (CICO) via satiation and I (for a while) managed it via calorie counting.
Regarding the bolded sentence - not everyone has the same root cause.
My root cause was eating too much of a very healthy diet so calorie counting for a time to better estimate and manage my CI and CO was sufficient.
As I don't need to count calories to maintain weight it was just an interlude between maintaining overweight and maintaining at a healthy weight. Probably an atypical experience just like your diet is atypical but both your high animal protein diet and my high carb diet work for us as individuals.
Satiation is also very individual with starchy carbs being my most satiating foods (which isn't that unusual as boiled potatoes often sit at #1 in lists of most satiating foods) and meat not being particularly satiating at all.
Yes CICO would be redundant if we didn't actually count them.
Not really. It just means that calorie balance is what determines if we gain, lose, or maintain. How to change the calorie balance to support your goals is a different question, and logging is just one way to do so.
Mostly what I did was to look at my overall diet and see why/how I was eating excess cals. Learning how many calories were in things was helpful for that. I logged to keep myself mindful and because I found it interesting (I still do) to see the nutrients from the foods I ate (I find that's easier at another site). Currently I log when I want to get more mindful again.
Yes, I meant as a tool not that CICO don't matter. Cheers0 -
neanderthin wrote: »Yeah, food effects the microbiome and our hormones and each macro has a distinct effect on each, which was kind of my point. I look at CICO as a treatment for the symptom without really treating the root cause and how could it, it's just a measurement of heat. If someone is successful with CICO I'm on board and happy that it works. For me a higher protein diet where satiation was a key factor for my success and lowering highly refined carbs and starches without the need to count calories and if I needed to count calories I would have tried something else until I found what accomplished that, but I've know for over 20 years that a higher protein diet delivers satiation in spades, or at least animal protein, plant proteins didn't do the job for me personally but I would imagine it's because I'm not a growing plant and my physiology best matches the proteins found in animals, but I've never looked into it. Cheers
Specific foods (and fiber) have an effect on the microbiome. I've not seen any evidence that it is macros that do. In particular, eating lots of different plants tend to result in a more diverse microbiome.
Yeah the microbiome gets more fascinating the more I research it. I just switched from cow yogurt to goat kefir.0 -
neanderthin wrote: »
I'm sure you know that CICO and calorie counting are not the same thing.neanderthin wrote: »Yeah, food effects the microbiome and our hormones and each macro has a distinct effect on each, which was kind of my point. I look at CICO as a treatment for the symptom without really treating the root cause and how could it, it's just a measurement of heat. If someone is successful with CICO I'm on board and happy that it works. For me a higher protein diet where satiation was a key factor for my success and lowering highly refined carbs and starches without the need to count calories and if I needed to count calories I would have tried something else until I found what accomplished that, but I've know for over 20 years that a higher protein diet delivers satiation in spades, or at least animal protein, plant proteins didn't do the job for me personally but I would imagine it's because I'm not a growing plant and my physiology best matches the proteins found in animals, but I've never looked into it. Cheers
You managed your energy balance (CICO) via satiation and I (for a while) managed it via calorie counting.
Regarding the bolded sentence - not everyone has the same root cause.
My root cause was eating too much of a very healthy diet so calorie counting for a time to better estimate and manage my CI and CO was sufficient.
As I don't need to count calories to maintain weight it was just an interlude between maintaining overweight and maintaining at a healthy weight. Probably an atypical experience just like your diet is atypical but both your high animal protein diet and my high carb diet work for us as individuals.
Satiation is also very individual with starchy carbs being my most satiating foods (which isn't that unusual as boiled potatoes often sit at #1 in lists of most satiating foods) and meat not being particularly satiating at all.
Yes CICO would be redundant if we didn't actually count them. Funny you mention boiled potatoes and yes they're satiating and I do consume potatoes. It's the carbohydrates that are turned into powders then transformed into highly palatable foods that I try and stay away from. Broccoli doesn't stand a chance against Doritos and I've done the science behind that, lol. Anyway I'm very happy you now found a solution where you don't need to have the chronic noise in your brain to be always calculating to facilitate the accuracy needed to maintain proper caloric intake. It appears by the numbers that most people haven't figured that out yet.
Maybe one person's noise is another person's music? I find calorie counting very freeing, not fraught or obsessive, and the idea that I'm "always calculating" kind of makes me LOL. If it's different for you, yeah, you probably shouldn't/needn't do it.
I don't know why it's such a human tendency to feel that the ways we might choose are Right, and that things others prefer are universally worse in some way. You mention the central importance of meat protein to you: I haven't eaten meat - at least not intentionally - in over 48 years, and TBH it sounds kind of disgusting to me at this point. That doesn't mean I need to think it's bad for people, wrong for others, or anything of that nature. Trust me, I haven't spent those 48 years being non-sated, and I haven't spent all of them overweight, either.
CICO is inescapable for all of us, just a specialized version of simple physics, in setting where human bodies are dynamic, i.e., CI affects CO. Calorie counting is optional, and whether it's noise or music is kind of individual, I think.
I'm sure that's a pretty common characteristic from someone that's vegetarian and as a chef I hear that a lot. My stint at a boutique health spa and retreat was strictly vegetarian and very enjoyable and also challenged me to better understand the nutritional requirements that varied from guest to guest and day to day. It's helped me be a more complete chef. Like I said I support anyone's journey that works to help them maintain a healthier existence.0 -
neanderthin wrote: »Yes CICO would be redundant if we didn't actually count them.
Nope.
CICO happens whether we count them or not.
My truck burns gasoline when I drive it even if I break open the dashboard and yank off the dial for the fuel gauge.
CICO is just a balance. Calorie counting is something we do to help track where we are with respect to needs for fuel. Calorie counting is analogous to the fuel gauge in my truck. It tells me if I need more fuel or if I have enough. Fortunately when I add gasoline, there's an automatic shutoff in the pump that stops adding fuel when the tank gets close to full. It's a feedback system that doesn't let me keep pumping fuel into a full tank and then spilling it on my shoes.
Some people have an automatic shutoff system for their eating where they can tell when the tank is full. Probably a very small minority. The rest of us can keep putting fuel in.
The difference between me and my truck is, aside from the tank, there's no way to store excess fuel to be turned back into fuel at a later date.
CICO isn't redundant with counting. CICO happens. If CI=CO, mass is maintained. When CI>CO, mass increases through fat accumulation. When CI<CO we burn stored fuel. That happens irrespective of whether or not we write it down.
6 -
neanderthin wrote: »
I'm sure you know that CICO and calorie counting are not the same thing.neanderthin wrote: »Yeah, food effects the microbiome and our hormones and each macro has a distinct effect on each, which was kind of my point. I look at CICO as a treatment for the symptom without really treating the root cause and how could it, it's just a measurement of heat. If someone is successful with CICO I'm on board and happy that it works. For me a higher protein diet where satiation was a key factor for my success and lowering highly refined carbs and starches without the need to count calories and if I needed to count calories I would have tried something else until I found what accomplished that, but I've know for over 20 years that a higher protein diet delivers satiation in spades, or at least animal protein, plant proteins didn't do the job for me personally but I would imagine it's because I'm not a growing plant and my physiology best matches the proteins found in animals, but I've never looked into it. Cheers
You managed your energy balance (CICO) via satiation and I (for a while) managed it via calorie counting.
Regarding the bolded sentence - not everyone has the same root cause.
My root cause was eating too much of a very healthy diet so calorie counting for a time to better estimate and manage my CI and CO was sufficient.
As I don't need to count calories to maintain weight it was just an interlude between maintaining overweight and maintaining at a healthy weight. Probably an atypical experience just like your diet is atypical but both your high animal protein diet and my high carb diet work for us as individuals.
Satiation is also very individual with starchy carbs being my most satiating foods (which isn't that unusual as boiled potatoes often sit at #1 in lists of most satiating foods) and meat not being particularly satiating at all.
Yes CICO would be redundant if we didn't actually count them. Funny you mention boiled potatoes and yes they're satiating and I do consume potatoes. It's the carbohydrates that are turned into powders then transformed into highly palatable foods that I try and stay away from. Broccoli doesn't stand a chance against Doritos and I've done the science behind that, lol. Anyway I'm very happy you now found a solution where you don't need to have the chronic noise in your brain to be always calculating to facilitate the accuracy needed to maintain proper caloric intake. It appears by the numbers that most people haven't figured that out yet.
CICO is a simple expression of calorie balance, it's not a method or a tool. My weight trend gives me enough data to know if I'm in balance, gaining or losing over an extended period of time. Mindful eating is my method but that leverages CICO just as your eating style does.
The bolded made me laugh a bit!
I found my solution 40 years ago - maintenance wasn't a problem as I explained above, losing the excess weight I had gained in a short period of time was the problem that calorie counting helped me address.
When I calorie counted it wasn't remotely "chronic noise", just a very simple counting operation that took little effort or time and no stress. Found it a damn sight easier than the exclusion/restriction/special weight loss diets I sporadically tried and failed with over a number of years.
It's a fallacy people need remarkable accuracy to be successful when it's a game of such huge numbers. My logging was consistent and reasonable but a long way from accurate or obsessively particular.
I've no idea what happens to the majority of people that use calorie counting to get to goal - some for sure carry on tracking and counting whether because they need to, want to, benefit from or simply take the view if it ain't broke don't fix it.
I would imagine the majority of people who don't have to count to maintain tend to drift away from MFP.
5 -
I've no idea what happens to the majority of people that use calorie counting to get to goal - some for sure carry on tracking and counting whether because they need to, want to, benefit from or simply take the view if it ain't broke don't fix it.
I would imagine the majority of people who don't have to count to maintain tend to drift away from MFP.
Counting calories can also be a tool to support mindful eating. If you take the moment to assess what you're about to eat, you are being mindful.
Like yours was when you were counting, my counting is a little on the loose side, but count I do. Both the caloric values of most foods and the caloric expenditures of activity are estimates in the first place. Caloric value of a relatively pure substance, like refined sugar, is probably pretty spot on, but the caloric value of 100 grams of avocado or Top Sirloin are probably pretty squishy because they are complex combinations of different substances.
I still sometimes make food decisions that aren't the healthiest. That's OK too. I just make a note of it.
4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K 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
- 914 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions