Is it this simple?

ChriJMitch

Calorie deficit leads to weight loss. You can cut out whatever you want, if you eat at a calorie surplus you will gain weight, even if it's all broccoli, all the time.

It's important to clear these things up. The topic is "Is it this simple?" And it really is. It's people who go around saying the things you do that confuse the issue.

You are so right. What was I thinking. I'm definitely skipping all that healthy stuff, it tastes horrible anyways. I'm just gonna stick with a half dozen doughnuts a day. I mean, It's technically under my calorie goal, so I should go for it, right? Simple!

You can lose weight eating whatever, yes, but is it healthy or sustainable? No. Somebody can easily run away with the notion that they can eat pizza and burgers for most of their meals, be happy they lost weight eating at that deficit, and then wake up one day and wonder why they have cholesterol problems/high blood pressure/etc. Who is really giving the bad advice here? Its about healthy weight loss, not just end results.

lindsey1979

See? Diet myths everywhere.

Our bodies don't need an evolutionary change to eat processed foods. People do it on a daily basis and the body has no problem processing it. But you gotta sell Paleo books somehow...

People trolling my post about paleo; I mentioned it because its basically a natural food diet. I don't follow a paleo diet, I like the convenience of supplements too much and I would need to eat so much meat to meet my protein goals every day that it would turn into a part time job.

My point was to show me somebody gaining weight eating mostly veggies, you will have a hard time. The gist is just to stick to the produce isle. Not a bad concept. And I'm sorry, but we truly aren't evolved to deal with some of the crap they put in processed foods. I have pretty bad digestive issues, and if you ask any gastro, they will tell you the digestive system is the least evolved of our organs.

Paleo is a low carb diet disguised as a "natural food" diet. Our bodies retain more water when we eat carbs. People who follow low carb diets in a calorie deficit lose more weight faster than if they just ate at a deficit, but they gain the water weight back as soon as they reintroduce carbs.

Actually Paleo is carb-neutral. Some do both -- eat Paleo (or Primal) and restrict carbs. Others eat quite a bit of carbs, especially if they're very active. They just don't get them from bread, pasta, etc. -- they get them from vegetables and fruits. If they want more carbs, they tend to eat more starchy vegetables like sweet potatoes that are loaded with carbs.

lindsey1979

I think the answer is that it's not that simple, but can be for some people. I've found that Americans like simple things, and that includes things like eating philosophies. CICO is a great guideline and works really well for a lot of people, but for others, it's not that simple. Calories are important and creating a deficit is important, but how one chooses to create that deficit can be essential depending on the individual. I think touting oversimplications can be very dangerous, regardless of how intellectually comforting such simplicity may be.

I personally think CICO is a great place to start. But, if an individual is not noticing the expected results, then he/she needs to dig deeper and look at the greater complexity of the human body. And it's simply not true that CICO applies optimally to 97%+ of the population.

There are significant amounts of the population that have health/digestion issues for which CICO will not work optimally. Over 40% of the US adults have insulin resistance at pre-diabetic or diabetic levels -- not the mere 3% one of the earlier posters mentions. That's a HUGE number for just one issue! And, I imagine for the overweight population, it's even higher than that as insulin resistance makes it more difficult to lose weight and very easy to gain weight. For those people, restricting carbs is likely going to be quite important as their bodies metabolize glucose differently.

There is something like 8-12% of the US population that has a thyroid disorder, over half of which are undiagnosed. Once again, quite significant. There is quite a large part of the population that has issues with gluten, lactose or casein. And these (along with lectins) are the four most highly suspected culprits for those with digestive and auto-immune issues -- whether it be celiacs, IBS, joint pain, etc.

So, CICO is a great guideline. Just be aware of its limitations. Sadly, there are quite a few "special snowflakes" in the population.

Aaron_K123

It is as simple as a calorie deficit. Everything else is just a means of keeping you entertained and engaged while you do it.

For many people simply telling themselves "oh I need to eat less" is not interesting enough to keep them focused and on track. They need hoops to jump through to keep their mind on the task. So there are diets that invent hoops. Only eat this number of grams of this, avoid these certain foods, only eat before 7pm or after 10am, and on and on and on.

Honestly I DO some of those things but I'm fully aware that it is just a means to keep myself in a routine that allows me to stay focused and stick to what is actually effective which is the calorie deficit.

lthames0810

CICO. Simple, but not easy.

Discipline, delayed gratification, needs vs wants. All these are learned early in life. Those who completed their education had to employ these concepts. Likewise, people successfuly holding down a job use them every day. These same people go home and can't apply them to their food intake.

Simple calorie counting is working for me...slowly. I'm satisfied with that, but I had to experiment with various ways to achieve a deficit without it making me suffer too much. Eventually, I got it.

But someone else that I know, can't figure out any way to accomplish this consistently enough to lose even a small amount of weight. She has no health problems or metabolic issues that interfere with eating at a reasonable deficit. She simply is miserable restricting calories even a little. (Not surprisingly my comments about sucking it up and putting on her big girl panties were not well received.)

I wonder if those so called fad diets that cut out whole categories of food to acheive a calorie deficit have a place in the weight loss world for someone like her. If she could eat whatever she wanted as long as it wasn't, say carbs, for example, might she have greater success?

lindsey1979

CICO. Simple, but not easy.

Discipline, delayed gratification, needs vs wants. All these are learned early in life. Those who completed their education had to employ these concepts. Likewise, people successfuly holding down a job use them every day. These same people go home and can't apply them to their food intake.

Simple calorie counting is working for me...slowly. I'm satisfied with that, but I had to experiment with various ways to achieve a deficit without it making me suffer too much. Eventually, I got it.

But someone else that I know, can't figure out any way to accomplish this consistently enough to lose even a small amount of weight. She has no health problems or metabolic issues that interfere with eating at a reasonable deficit. She simply is miserable restricting calories even a little. (Not surprisingly my comments about sucking it up and putting on her big girl panties were not well received.)

I wonder if those so called fad diets that cut out whole categories of food to acheive a calorie deficit have a place in the weight loss world for someone like her. If she could eat whatever she wanted as long as it wasn't, say carbs, for example, might she have greater success?

It's posts like this that confuse me the most. He gives an example of someone that has shown consistency, discipline, personal responsibility, etc. in other areas of life but somehow isn't able to apply those same traits to food intake. Doesn't that seem to imply that it's about more than that? Whether nutritionally or psychologically?

Aaron_K123

CICO. Simple, but not easy.

Discipline, delayed gratification, needs vs wants. All these are learned early in life. Those who completed their education had to employ these concepts. Likewise, people successfuly holding down a job use them every day. These same people go home and can't apply them to their food intake.

Simple calorie counting is working for me...slowly. I'm satisfied with that, but I had to experiment with various ways to achieve a deficit without it making me suffer too much. Eventually, I got it.

But someone else that I know, can't figure out any way to accomplish this consistently enough to lose even a small amount of weight. She has no health problems or metabolic issues that interfere with eating at a reasonable deficit. She simply is miserable restricting calories even a little. (Not surprisingly my comments about sucking it up and putting on her big girl panties were not well received.)

I wonder if those so called fad diets that cut out whole categories of food to acheive a calorie deficit have a place in the weight loss world for someone like her. If she could eat whatever she wanted as long as it wasn't, say carbs, for example, might she have greater success?

It's posts like this that confuse me the most. He gives an example of someone that has shown consistency, discipline, personal responsibility, etc. in other areas of life but somehow isn't able to apply those same traits to food intake. Doesn't that seem to imply that it's about more than that? Whether nutritionally or psychologically?

What you have to do is simple, but psychology complicates everything.

lindsey1979

CICO. Simple, but not easy.

Discipline, delayed gratification, needs vs wants. All these are learned early in life. Those who completed their education had to employ these concepts. Likewise, people successfuly holding down a job use them every day. These same people go home and can't apply them to their food intake.

Simple calorie counting is working for me...slowly. I'm satisfied with that, but I had to experiment with various ways to achieve a deficit without it making me suffer too much. Eventually, I got it.

But someone else that I know, can't figure out any way to accomplish this consistently enough to lose even a small amount of weight. She has no health problems or metabolic issues that interfere with eating at a reasonable deficit. She simply is miserable restricting calories even a little. (Not surprisingly my comments about sucking it up and putting on her big girl panties were not well received.)

I wonder if those so called fad diets that cut out whole categories of food to acheive a calorie deficit have a place in the weight loss world for someone like her. If she could eat whatever she wanted as long as it wasn't, say carbs, for example, might she have greater success?

It's posts like this that confuse me the most. He gives an example of someone that has shown consistency, discipline, personal responsibility, etc. in other areas of life but somehow isn't able to apply those same traits to food intake. Doesn't that seem to imply that it's about more than that? Whether nutritionally or psychologically?

What you have to do is simple, but psychology complicates everything.

Depending on the circumstances, I totally agree with you. But, then by definition, isn't it not so simple...

ChaplainHeavin

So if the answer to losing weight is to eat within a deficit, why do so many people opt for such radical diets? Why limit yourself to only getting your carbs from leafy greens, or on another diet limit yourself to not fat all, or on another, eat 70% of your intake from protein? If all it takes is careful calorie watching?

Why, common sense isn't always so common and folks want to quick fixes without maintaining much self-control

Aaron_K123

CICO. Simple, but not easy.

Discipline, delayed gratification, needs vs wants. All these are learned early in life. Those who completed their education had to employ these concepts. Likewise, people successfuly holding down a job use them every day. These same people go home and can't apply them to their food intake.

Simple calorie counting is working for me...slowly. I'm satisfied with that, but I had to experiment with various ways to achieve a deficit without it making me suffer too much. Eventually, I got it.

But someone else that I know, can't figure out any way to accomplish this consistently enough to lose even a small amount of weight. She has no health problems or metabolic issues that interfere with eating at a reasonable deficit. She simply is miserable restricting calories even a little. (Not surprisingly my comments about sucking it up and putting on her big girl panties were not well received.)

I wonder if those so called fad diets that cut out whole categories of food to acheive a calorie deficit have a place in the weight loss world for someone like her. If she could eat whatever she wanted as long as it wasn't, say carbs, for example, might she have greater success?

It's posts like this that confuse me the most. He gives an example of someone that has shown consistency, discipline, personal responsibility, etc. in other areas of life but somehow isn't able to apply those same traits to food intake. Doesn't that seem to imply that it's about more than that? Whether nutritionally or psychologically?

What you have to do is simple, but psychology complicates everything.

Depending on the circumstances, I totally agree with you. But, then by definition, isn't it not so simple...

We have different definitions of simple then. Simple to me is that the solution is easily determined not that people as a whole aren't likely to bungle it up.

1 + 1 = 2 is simple

Calories in - calories out is also simple.

Just because people might hem and haw over it and "doubt" it and try to complicate it further doesn't make it not simple it makes people difficult, not weight loss.

Aaron_K123

IMO people in general do NOT like things to be simple. They might be lazy, they might not want to expend much effort but that is not the same thing as wanting things to be simple. I think psychologically people tend to want things they wish to attain to have a complex path to success. They want to feel that that thing they want is hard to get and so often they make it hard, much harder than it needs to be.

That is one reason why things like P90X ior Insanity or other popular fad-ish exercise programs that have you exercising every day in intense routines are so popular when honestly just going for regular walks would probably be just as effective for most of the people doing them. It can't be as simple as just going for a walk, I mean look at all these people jumping around like crazy lifting dumbells all over the place...it must REQUIRE that to lose weight so I will do that as well.

lindsey1979

IMO people in general do NOT like things to be simple. They might be lazy, they might not want to expend much effort but that is not the same thing as wanting things to be simple. I think psychologically people tend to want things they wish to attain to have a complex path to success. They want to feel that that thing they want is hard to get and so often they make it hard, much harder than it needs to be.

That is one reason why things like P90X ior Insanity or other popular fad-ish exercise programs that have you exercising every day in intense routines are so popular when honestly just going for regular walks would probably be just as effective for most of the people doing them. It can't be as simple as just going for a walk, I mean look at all these people jumping around like crazy lifting dumbells all over the place...it must REQUIRE that to lose weight so I will do that as well.

Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I see people wanting very simple explanations -- you see it in the news, on facebook, politics, etc. 2-3 sentence explanations max.

It's so much easier to chalk up people's lack of success to lack of willpower, self-discipline, etc. than to look deeper into the underlying issues -- whether nutritional or psychological. Just try harder! Man up! Put your big girl panties on! Stop whining!

bcattoes

So if the answer to losing weight is to eat within a deficit, why do so many people opt for such radical diets? Why limit yourself to only getting your carbs from leafy greens, or on another diet limit yourself to not fat all, or on another, eat 70% of your intake from protein? If all it takes is careful calorie watching?

Why, common sense isn't always so common and folks want to quick fixes without maintaining much self-control

A structured or restrictive diet requires as much or more self control than simply eating less of what you normally eat. BOTH of these solutions, eating less of what you've always eaten and following a structured diet, fail most of the time. Regardless of the method used, MOST people regain weight after losing it.

Given the statistics on the failure of all diet types, common sense should tell us not to climb on our high horse re: dieting.

Aaron_K123

So if the answer to losing weight is to eat within a deficit, why do so many people opt for such radical diets? Why limit yourself to only getting your carbs from leafy greens, or on another diet limit yourself to not fat all, or on another, eat 70% of your intake from protein? If all it takes is careful calorie watching?

Why, common sense isn't always so common and folks want to quick fixes without maintaining much self-control

A structured or restrictive diet requires as much or more self control than simply eating less of what you normally eat. BOTH of these solutions, eating less of what you've always eaten and following a structured diet, fail most of the time. Regardless of the method used, MOST people regain weight after losing it.

Given the statistics on the failure of all diet types, common sense should tell us not to climb on our high horse re: dieting.

Yeah I agree with that. Just because CICO is simple and in my opinion true does not mean that weight loss and subsequent maintenance is easily accomplished.

GothyFaery

Counting calories, even without apps like MFP, doesn't cost anything. It's hard to make money on that. So that's why we have all these crazy diet fads. Dieting is a big money making market and they sell you on all the BS so they can get you to buy thier product.

lthames0810

IMO people in general do NOT like things to be simple. They might be lazy, they might not want to expend much effort but that is not the same thing as wanting things to be simple. I think psychologically people tend to want things they wish to attain to have a complex path to success. They want to feel that that thing they want is hard to get and so often they make it hard, much harder than it needs to be.

That is one reason why things like P90X ior Insanity or other popular fad-ish exercise programs that have you exercising every day in intense routines are so popular when honestly just going for regular walks would probably be just as effective for most of the people doing them. It can't be as simple as just going for a walk, I mean look at all these people jumping around like crazy lifting dumbells all over the place...it must REQUIRE that to lose weight so I will do that as well.

Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I see people wanting very simple explanations -- you see it in the news, on facebook, politics, etc. 2-3 sentence explanations max.

It's so much easier to chalk up people's lack of success to lack of willpower, self-discipline, etc. than to look deeper into the underlying issues -- whether nutritional or psychological. Just try harder! Man up! Put your big girl panties on! Stop whining!

I suspect underlying psychological issues are the biggest thing keeping otherwise responsible people from successful weight loss. In my own case I had several past failed attempts to lose weight. After I was treated for depression I found it easier (not easy, just easier) to resist the urge to eat the donuts in the breakroom. The woman I mentioned that can't tolerate calorie restricting has more stress in her life that I do. Maybe that's her big problem with sticking to a goal that she seems otherwise motivated to achieve.

lindsey1979

IMO people in general do NOT like things to be simple. They might be lazy, they might not want to expend much effort but that is not the same thing as wanting things to be simple. I think psychologically people tend to want things they wish to attain to have a complex path to success. They want to feel that that thing they want is hard to get and so often they make it hard, much harder than it needs to be.

That is one reason why things like P90X ior Insanity or other popular fad-ish exercise programs that have you exercising every day in intense routines are so popular when honestly just going for regular walks would probably be just as effective for most of the people doing them. It can't be as simple as just going for a walk, I mean look at all these people jumping around like crazy lifting dumbells all over the place...it must REQUIRE that to lose weight so I will do that as well.

Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I see people wanting very simple explanations -- you see it in the news, on facebook, politics, etc. 2-3 sentence explanations max.

It's so much easier to chalk up people's lack of success to lack of willpower, self-discipline, etc. than to look deeper into the underlying issues -- whether nutritional or psychological. Just try harder! Man up! Put your big girl panties on! Stop whining!

That's where you're wrong. People DO want something complex or new or mysterious...that way it's a "secret" that they didn't know about.

You see it all the time. "What's your secret?" "Tell me your secret!" "How did you do it?"

You tell them diet and exercise and they just stare at you. Like you answered in a foreign language.

Because it can't be that simple. It has to be harder than that. Otherwise what's their excuse?? And they desperately need an excuse. You see plenty of it in this thread alone. It's age or insulin resistance or gluten sensitivity or SOME reason why eating less simply won't work for them. They're special snowflakes, magical creatures who manage to gain weight even though they're barely eating. And calorie counting can't possibly work for them. No.

What about the 40%+ of the population that does have some sort of issue that pure calorie counting/restriction won't work for or won't optimize results?

Pretending that reality doesn't exist doesn't help those that actually have those issues. But, man, would it be a simpler world if that were true.

lindsey1979

What about the 40%+ of the population that does have some sort of issue that pure calorie counting/restriction won't work for or won't optimize results?

Pretending that reality doesn't exist doesn't help those that actually have those issues. But, man, would it be a simpler world if that were true.

Never heard that statistic in my life. Feel free to back it up.

Gladly. From the CDC: 8.3% of Americans have diabetes (27% are undiagnosed). 35% of US adults age 20+ have pre-diabetic levels of insulin resistance. That's over 104 million Americans.

http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pubs/pdf/ndfs_2011.pdf

And this is ONLY insulin resistance/diabetes issues. Thyroid is another 8%+ of the population according to the American Thyroid Association (though there may be some overlap between the groups, of course) and 12% of the population will have a thyroid condition at some point in their life.

http://www.thyroid.org/media-main/about-hypothyroidism/