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.
Research suggests there is more to it than simply CICO for obese people. More study needed.
Replies
-
@haybales that comment about the knights who say nee made this entire thread worth reading😂2
-
NorthCascades wrote: »MargaretYakoda wrote: »goal06082021 wrote: »Oh, absolutely. It's always going to be easier to deal with the "CI" half of the equation, since there is no direct way to measure CO - even laboratory-grade heart-rate monitors are still only measuring heart rate, which is like a third-hand approximation of calorie burn. And if an obese person does burn significantly fewer calories than someone else doing the same exercise, the CI piece is going to be even more important. But it still comes down to CI<CO for weight loss - if that's not happening, either CI is too high, CO is too low, or both.
This is a calorie-counting website, so naturally MFP is best utilized as a tool to help you dial in the CI portion of the equation; and furthermore, human beings are just...really incredibly bad at estimating how much they eat. It used to be an adaptation, being able to eat more than we strictly needed at a given time, but it's not anymore now that we have, you know, McDonald's and grocery stores and UberEats. There's science about that, too. A person who is already overweight or obese has a clear and obvious track record of underestimating how much they eat; the way to correct that is to eat less, but you need to know how much you're starting with to make any lasting changes.
Yes. I think this is the key bit for MFP and helping people.
Maybe acknowledge the possibility that yes it might be a bit harder for morbidly obese people. As the article suggests, it might be harder but we don’t yet know for sure, or what the mechanism is. But the solution is not to give up, but to be even more precise with the part we can control.
Carbs in. And counted as precise as possible by a lay person.
Who doesn't acknowledge that people who have difficulty controlling their weight have a hard time losing it? Most people don't want to be morbidly obese and struggle walking up 2 steps to the bakery. If it wasn't hard, most would have already done it.
Honestly?
I have seen exactly that on these forums. Multiple times. And I’ve only been here a short while.
It isn’t everyone. But it happens. Too frequently.
Also? Not every morbidly obese person struggles with two steps.
And cilantro tastes like soap. I forgot to put that in the OP. Which explains the disagree.
5 -
MargaretYakoda wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »MargaretYakoda wrote: »goal06082021 wrote: »Oh, absolutely. It's always going to be easier to deal with the "CI" half of the equation, since there is no direct way to measure CO - even laboratory-grade heart-rate monitors are still only measuring heart rate, which is like a third-hand approximation of calorie burn. And if an obese person does burn significantly fewer calories than someone else doing the same exercise, the CI piece is going to be even more important. But it still comes down to CI<CO for weight loss - if that's not happening, either CI is too high, CO is too low, or both.
This is a calorie-counting website, so naturally MFP is best utilized as a tool to help you dial in the CI portion of the equation; and furthermore, human beings are just...really incredibly bad at estimating how much they eat. It used to be an adaptation, being able to eat more than we strictly needed at a given time, but it's not anymore now that we have, you know, McDonald's and grocery stores and UberEats. There's science about that, too. A person who is already overweight or obese has a clear and obvious track record of underestimating how much they eat; the way to correct that is to eat less, but you need to know how much you're starting with to make any lasting changes.
Yes. I think this is the key bit for MFP and helping people.
Maybe acknowledge the possibility that yes it might be a bit harder for morbidly obese people. As the article suggests, it might be harder but we don’t yet know for sure, or what the mechanism is. But the solution is not to give up, but to be even more precise with the part we can control.
Carbs in. And counted as precise as possible by a lay person.
Who doesn't acknowledge that people who have difficulty controlling their weight have a hard time losing it? Most people don't want to be morbidly obese and struggle walking up 2 steps to the bakery. If it wasn't hard, most would have already done it.
Honestly?
I have seen exactly that on these forums. Multiple times. And I’ve only been here a short while.
It isn’t everyone. But it happens. Too frequently.
Also? Not every morbidly obese person struggles with two steps.
And cilantro tastes like soap. I forgot to put that in the OP. Which explains the disagree.
A little while ago you posted that soap tastes like cilantro, rather than the other way around, which made me think you should probably keep your mouth closed while washing your face!
OT but it does have a pertinent moral, the flavor of cilantro is something they have isolated the gene for. If you have the gene, cilantro tastes like soap to you, if not, it doesn’t. Just like two people, identical in BMI and other statistics, may have completely different experiences when trying to lose weight. Incidentally I like cilantro and it doesn’t taste like soap to me.8 -
MargaretYakoda wrote: »
Honestly?
I have seen exactly that on these forums. Multiple times. And I’ve only been here a short while.
It isn’t everyone. But it happens. Too frequently.
Also? Not every morbidly obese person struggles with two steps.
And cilantro tastes like soap. I forgot to put that in the OP. Which explains the disagree.
That is certainly my experience. And I find that it is not only when an obese person posts asking for advice, but moreso in the discussion threads where the tone can be more difficult. I have definitely seen people write that the discussion threads do no need to be supportive and that people should look elsewhere for support.
@AnnPT77 Your advice is always welcome and I have found it well considered, and I absolutely agree that monitoring progress is critical to success. I find the approach of trying something and measuring its outcome after 4-6 weeks highly accessible, and reassuring that, no matter what I can make an assessment and adjust. This paper clearly shouldn't change your advice, not least because you have experienced the inexactness of these estimations and build that into your advice.
My concern is on a wider level: while these things aren't individually hugely difficult there's a degree of technical proficiency and independent motivation that are a barrier to uptake, and a major accessibility problem. The majority of people will not look at or read the forums. They wont correct the overestimation of calories from the machine in the gym or from plugging the raw numbers into MFP, but they will have been told that the route to weight loss is eating less and exercising more. This paper adds that further to that: even if someone has got to the stage of inputting all that information and working extremely hard, they are still likely to be overestimating their deficit-by-exercise by 50%.
This is compounded by the fact that this is not likely to be the experience of people who are not obese: so even if they reach a forum like here or r/loseit on reddit they are (and I have seen a lot of this) likely to get a response that says "that is not my experience" and at worst be told that they can't break the laws of physics and must be misrepresenting their CICO balance. And for every single time that happens there are a hundred obese people reading who have waning motivation and feelings of hopelessness, who are experiencing a real let down that their weight loss is slower than expected. When, in fact, they were let down by the tools they were supposed to use, and into which they have invested a lot of money, time and emotional energy.
Of course the reality is everyone can lose weight. The calorie deficit required to achieve weight loss is difficult to predict, but is the exists for everyone. And in the context of highly available nutritionally complete food (with or without micronutrient supplementation, in the absence of a reason for failing to absorb nutrients, this calorie deficit can be obtained safely for almost everyone (with the exclusion being those with a significant metabolic disorder, but including people with mild or controlled hypothyroidism, many people with PCOS etc). It's just the actual resources needed to achieve this (time, money, emotional capacity) are wildly different.
5 -
MargaretYakoda wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »MargaretYakoda wrote: »goal06082021 wrote: »Oh, absolutely. It's always going to be easier to deal with the "CI" half of the equation, since there is no direct way to measure CO - even laboratory-grade heart-rate monitors are still only measuring heart rate, which is like a third-hand approximation of calorie burn. And if an obese person does burn significantly fewer calories than someone else doing the same exercise, the CI piece is going to be even more important. But it still comes down to CI<CO for weight loss - if that's not happening, either CI is too high, CO is too low, or both.
This is a calorie-counting website, so naturally MFP is best utilized as a tool to help you dial in the CI portion of the equation; and furthermore, human beings are just...really incredibly bad at estimating how much they eat. It used to be an adaptation, being able to eat more than we strictly needed at a given time, but it's not anymore now that we have, you know, McDonald's and grocery stores and UberEats. There's science about that, too. A person who is already overweight or obese has a clear and obvious track record of underestimating how much they eat; the way to correct that is to eat less, but you need to know how much you're starting with to make any lasting changes.
Yes. I think this is the key bit for MFP and helping people.
Maybe acknowledge the possibility that yes it might be a bit harder for morbidly obese people. As the article suggests, it might be harder but we don’t yet know for sure, or what the mechanism is. But the solution is not to give up, but to be even more precise with the part we can control.
Carbs in. And counted as precise as possible by a lay person.
Who doesn't acknowledge that people who have difficulty controlling their weight have a hard time losing it? Most people don't want to be morbidly obese and struggle walking up 2 steps to the bakery. If it wasn't hard, most would have already done it.
Honestly?
I have seen exactly that on these forums. Multiple times. And I’ve only been here a short while.
It isn’t everyone. But it happens. Too frequently.
Also? Not every morbidly obese person struggles with two steps.
And cilantro tastes like soap. I forgot to put that in the OP. Which explains the disagree.
Seltzer water tastes like tv static. 🙂
You have to keep in mind that different people come to the forums for different reasons, and get different things out of the experience. Which means we all see different things here, and we bring different attitudes and assumptions. That broad range of ideas and interactions you find in a place like this is part of its strength. Maybe part of its weakness too.
I'm here to share the info I've learned, pick more up, and to shoot the breeze with people like me. I'm a cyclist who likes to eat, a lot of cyclists are built like concentration camp survivors, and on the level of being hungry and appreciation of food, we don't relate. People here know the struggle.
I'm not here to hand out encouragement or motivation. If somebody else wants to lose weight, knows how, and makes it their priority they will. Sadly there's a lot of misinformation, so I'll pop into those threads, be one of the many people saying "this is how it works, this is what you have to do, this is what my experience was like or what my results were" to counteract the "all you need to do is keto your fat away." For the most part though, I'm here for the debate forum to expose myself to new ideas and points of view, and the exercise forum to talk about how to be fast on a bike and stuff like that.
I think it's almost universally understood that weight loss is hard. I've never met anyone who didn't think it's even harder for obese people. I think most people believe in something like "set points" and think obese people naturally gravitate to obesity, that's how they got obese, and that it takes constant effort to go against that. I personally think the world we live in is full of incredibly delicious, inexpensive, high calorie food everywhere and we have machines to do almost everything for us so we don't need to burn many calories day to day. But that observation or belief or whatever on my part doesn't make other people consistently eat fewer calories than they burn over a long term so they'll lose weight.7 -
autobahn66 wrote: »MargaretYakoda wrote: »
Honestly?
I have seen exactly that on these forums. Multiple times. And I’ve only been here a short while.
It isn’t everyone. But it happens. Too frequently.
Also? Not every morbidly obese person struggles with two steps.
And cilantro tastes like soap. I forgot to put that in the OP. Which explains the disagree.
That is certainly my experience. And I find that it is not only when an obese person posts asking for advice, but moreso in the discussion threads where the tone can be more difficult. I have definitely seen people write that the discussion threads do no need to be supportive and that people should look elsewhere for support.
@AnnPT77 Your advice is always welcome and I have found it well considered, and I absolutely agree that monitoring progress is critical to success. I find the approach of trying something and measuring its outcome after 4-6 weeks highly accessible, and reassuring that, no matter what I can make an assessment and adjust. This paper clearly shouldn't change your advice, not least because you have experienced the inexactness of these estimations and build that into your advice.
My concern is on a wider level: while these things aren't individually hugely difficult there's a degree of technical proficiency and independent motivation that are a barrier to uptake, and a major accessibility problem. The majority of people will not look at or read the forums. They wont correct the overestimation of calories from the machine in the gym or from plugging the raw numbers into MFP, but they will have been told that the route to weight loss is eating less and exercising more. This paper adds that further to that: even if someone has got to the stage of inputting all that information and working extremely hard, they are still likely to be overestimating their deficit-by-exercise by 50%.
This is compounded by the fact that this is not likely to be the experience of people who are not obese: so even if they reach a forum like here or r/loseit on reddit they are (and I have seen a lot of this) likely to get a response that says "that is not my experience" and at worst be told that they can't break the laws of physics and must be misrepresenting their CICO balance. And for every single time that happens there are a hundred obese people reading who have waning motivation and feelings of hopelessness, who are experiencing a real let down that their weight loss is slower than expected. When, in fact, they were let down by the tools they were supposed to use, and into which they have invested a lot of money, time and emotional energy.
Of course the reality is everyone can lose weight. The calorie deficit required to achieve weight loss is difficult to predict, but is the exists for everyone. And in the context of highly available nutritionally complete food (with or without micronutrient supplementation, in the absence of a reason for failing to absorb nutrients, this calorie deficit can be obtained safely for almost everyone (with the exclusion being those with a significant metabolic disorder, but including people with mild or controlled hypothyroidism, many people with PCOS etc). It's just the actual resources needed to achieve this (time, money, emotional capacity) are wildly different.
Yes, people have been told to "eat less and exercise more", in unhelpful ways.
They've also been told, "calorie counting doesn't work" (or "CICO doesn't work" by people who equate CICO with calorie counting).
They've been told that weight loss efforts will always fail (statistically, most will), so "diet culture" is toxic, and no one should even try to lose weight.
They've been told about the vital importance of a bunch of stuff - superfoods, and EPOC, and more - things that at best have only minor impact.
They've been told nonsense about how sugar intake will always be stored as fat (or trigger other food to be stored as fat, no exceptions), that you have to exercise in "the fat burning zone" or you won't burn fat, that it's important to "confuse" or "shock" your body to make progress.
They've been told that "the type of calories matters" which only makes sense if understood as employing a figure of speech (metonymy, say), because it's certainly nonsense taken literally. (That wouldn't be a problem if it didn't obscure what actually matters about food choice, but it does.)
They've been exhorted to "lose 20 pounds in 4 weeks on the Dr. XYZ diet", and buy the latest magical supplement (with ". . . when following the recommended diet and exercise program" in the fine print no one reads).
They've been encouraged to think of eating as some kind of epic battle between good and evil, and think of "dieting" as something like a punishment for the sin of being fat. They've been encouraged to see being fat as a personal failing, character fault, something that should cause shame or guilt.
And more.
It's insane. It's dysfunctional. It's confusing.
It's a miracle that anyone succeeds, really.16 -
This just makes me stand by my point even more that weight loss happens in the kitchen and fitness happens in gym... I have it right on my profile, even.
I work out because I enjoy it. Its good for my body. Its good for my heart, my muscles, my other organs. It's good for my brain and my mood. It burns calories, sure, but not as much as when I weighed almost 400 pounds (quite the bummer at less than half that weight now LOL). And almost all of us suggest for people starting to increase their activity level by some degree at least. I know I do. But an hour of any cardio does not burn nearly the calories that any of us wish it did. And the less you weigh... the less it burns. Cause ... physics.
And we all know you can't out exercise a bad (surplus calorie) diet.
And Ann is absolutely (as always lol) correct in how crazy and dysfunctional diet culture is. We moved to this area 4 years ago. No one here knows me as being fat. well, not almost 400 pounds fat (i still do have weight to lose, lets not kid myself. But needing to lose 40 pounds plus maybe some vanity weight is a far cry from whatever it is i started needing to lose). Even my HUSBAND has never known me as being 'fat'. And when people find out how big I used to be, the first thing they almost always say is ' How did you lose all that weight' and when you say 'eat less move more' their eyes glaze over. They want a quick fix a magic pill, a shake they can drink 3 times a day or saran wrap voodoo to shrink away their fat cells. Drink apple cider vinegar and put butter in your coffee (what? why? lol) Being an ACTIVE PARTICIPANT well, that takes effort. and time. and isn't... instant.
They think hours at the gym eat eating lettuce all day and boiled chicken. They think no more pizza or burgers or dessert. And sure, some people choose to do it that way. I certainly didn't.
The way I see it, losing weight IS easy. It is simple math, at the end of the day. What is HARD? Is the COMMITMENT it takes to stick with it. Because it takes TIME. I've been at this since 2014. YOU have to be more stubborn than the weight. More stubborn than the plateaus. When what you are doing stops working, you start doing something else, or figure out what you may be doing wrong. If you need to take a break, take a break- but eat at maintenance. Not above. I did it for 2 years? Maybe a bit more. I needed that break. And came back, in a good place mentally at the end of last year, to take on the rest of it. Hopefully, by this time next year... I'm at goal. And if not, thats okay. It's not a race. But a lot of people view it as one. And that, I think is why they fail. Because they don't see themselves as 'winning', even though, they are. They just don't have the 'pace time' that they want.12 -
-
you had my husband laughing so hard he almost couldnt breathe LOLOLOL3 -
Here's a good breakdown of the research. I appreciate the aspect of SOME compensation - not totally.
While watching, with our knowledge of common recommendation on logging MFP exercise - see if something catches your attention that may explain why the recommendation works for some people, not needed for others.
https://youtu.be/qACj-9Y-8T4
3 -
I don't get it.
BEE is 'to keep the lights on' so doesn't include NEAT, so how could a reduction in NEAT explain a lower BEE?
I mean, I totally get how exercising could lead to a lower NEAT, but that doesn't seem to be what this research is talking about, since they're talking about a lower BEE.
Nothing scientific, just my n=1 experience, but it seems like a miracle I managed to lose weight (and faster than predicted even) eating back all of my exercise calories, considering I started at a BMI of 34. Perhaps more research can determine the how and why of this mechanism so individuals can tailor their weight loss strategy to their situation.1 -
I think he went off study and was explaining other reasons that are also valid for the fact exercise could not have the NET increase to the day one might think.
And prior study, studies actually I recall others that seemed to confirm the NEAT decrease - then again those always had diet in the mix.
I'd be curious if they measured from the employees for the database some of the common hormones related to fat loss and hunger and such, seems like it would be interesting how those play into it since I'm betting they do.
Since it was a point in time static measurement too - I wonder if they polled people if they were currently losing weight or in the last 6 months had been. For actual research studies on diet, that always seems to be a requirement to be a participant of no diet attempts recently - because they know how it could skew the results.
Like did the higher compensation on higher BMI result from greater % of those folks being in a diet at the time?
I recall years ago researching why 1 study had huge variances in measured BMR to calculated - they took people in any situation and didn't ask about diet. Another study excluded people on a diet or recently, and got measured within 5% of calculated.
I dug into the NASA employee data study because a lot of fitness related info came from it, I'll have to see if I can find the time for this.
Because of course, the results is only as good as the data - and if they don't check some things, actually leaves you wondering. I'm sure still something there, just to what degree.2 -
Personally it a guessing game with the finer points.0
-
Knowledge is power. If I know I am not likely to expend as much energy as calculated, I can adjust for that. If I know my weight probably won’t melt off, I can stop comparing myself to others and getting discouraged. I don’t find these studies disheartening.13
-
Knowledge is power. If I know I am not likely to expend as much energy as calculated, I can adjust for that. If I know my weight probably won’t melt off, I can stop comparing myself to others and getting discouraged. I don’t find these studies disheartening.
Same here.
Knowledge is power. Exactly.2 -
As someone who comes from a line of women weighing 200-300+ lbs one one side of the family (before processed foods was a thing) and barely 100 lbs on the other…you can’t tell me there’s no genetic component somehow influencing weight and weight loss It’s still going to come down to CICO but since I inherited from the wrong side of the family, I appreciate insight into methods that may work better for me.5
-
As someone who comes from a line of women weighing 200-300+ lbs one one side of the family (before processed foods was a thing) and barely 100 lbs on the other…you can’t tell me there’s no genetic component somehow influencing weight and weight loss It’s still going to come down to CICO but since I inherited from the wrong side of the family, I appreciate insight into methods that may work better for me.
There is definitely a genetic component to weight, body size and our resting muscle tone and muscle mass. If people say otherwise, they are seriously misguided. There's also the environmental impact from our families in terms of the types of foods that were normally served, how food was viewed (e.g., as a means to express "love", rewards, etc.), and how food was used to cope with stress (which I believe ability to handle stress appropriately is both genetic and learned, as well).
The good news is that I don't think anyone is "doomed" to be obese based on genetics alone. I think the key is finding something that works for you and your body for life, being realistic with your expectations and changing your mindset into someone who can have success with weight loss vs. someone who is "doomed" to be big because of genetics.14 -
I don’t have access to the full article. But here’s another one that may be saying something similar.
https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ajcn/nqab270/6369073?redirectedFrom=fulltext0 -
That study again starts off with a premise I don't believe is true. And then goes down the same rat hole of foolishness with contradictions against what they are suggesting.
"However, obesity rates remain at historic highs, despite a persistent focus on eating less and moving more, as guided by the energy balance model (EBM). This public health failure may arise from a fundamental limitation of the EBM itself."
I guess these Dr's never were in patient practice to see there is a huge difference between advice given and advice followed. Shoot - and that's a Dr talking straight to a patient.
Never mind government advice given to the masses.
Now - if people actually followed the advice in general to no effect - then perhaps they have something to talk about.
8 -
That study again starts off with a premise I don't believe is true. And then goes down the same rat hole of foolishness with contradictions against what they are suggesting.
"However, obesity rates remain at historic highs, despite a persistent focus on eating less and moving more, as guided by the energy balance model (EBM). This public health failure may arise from a fundamental limitation of the EBM itself."
I guess these Dr's never were in patient practice to see there is a huge difference between advice given and advice followed. Shoot - and that's a Dr talking straight to a patient.
Never mind government advice given to the masses.
Now - if people actually followed the advice in general to no effect - then perhaps they have something to talk about.
But then they couldn't create a career for themselves doing research and applying for grants to try to prove a negative.
4 -
I do believe just saying CICO is oversimplified. Many factors can affect it. That said, if you want to lose fat, it's hard to get around it....4
-
MargaretYakoda wrote: »I don’t have access to the full article. But here’s another one that may be saying something similar.
That's the same study from your other thread:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10843627/journal-article-root-causes-of-the-obesity-epidemic-are-more-related-to-what-we-eat0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »MargaretYakoda wrote: »I don’t have access to the full article. But here’s another one that may be saying something similar.
That's the same study from your other thread:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10843627/journal-article-root-causes-of-the-obesity-epidemic-are-more-related-to-what-we-eat
Aw kitten.
I got fooled by the fact it was repackaged and sent back to me in a new link.
Sorry.2 -
MargaretYakoda wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »MargaretYakoda wrote: »I don’t have access to the full article. But here’s another one that may be saying something similar.
That's the same study from your other thread:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10843627/journal-article-root-causes-of-the-obesity-epidemic-are-more-related-to-what-we-eat
Aw kitten.
I got fooled by the fact it was repackaged and sent back to me in a new link.
Sorry.
Np. I was confused because I thought that was the thread I was on 0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »MargaretYakoda wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »MargaretYakoda wrote: »I don’t have access to the full article. But here’s another one that may be saying something similar.
That's the same study from your other thread:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10843627/journal-article-root-causes-of-the-obesity-epidemic-are-more-related-to-what-we-eat
Aw kitten.
I got fooled by the fact it was repackaged and sent back to me in a new link.
Sorry.
Np. I was confused because I thought that was the thread I was on
I’ve come to the conclusion that there’s a few studies on this. And that the science may or may not be completely settled. (yes, CICO, don’t @ me LOL) but in any case I do enjoy hearing the discussion and viewpoints of the longer term forum members on this issue. And I think I’ll try to remember to post them in this one spot when I run into one.
Or if I forget, maybe the other discussion.
Point being: I won’t start another discussion. I think keeping the info mostly in one or two discussions would be best in the long run.1
https://youtu.be/_BWOnUMBhFE
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions