A Call for a Low-Carb Diet

snikkins

Personally, being hypothyroid reaffirmed CICO and CICO helped me get to my proper med dosage, so I really don't understand the push against CICO in the name of hypothyroidism.

I did get the bad genetics hand. Every woman on my mom's side of the family is hypothyroid at the very least. I am fortunate enough that it seems that's where my bad hand ends. When I decided to lose weight, I got bloodwork done early on to see if my dosage was correct. It wasn't and in fact my doctor asked me if I was even taking it, which I was. Up went the dosage and off came the weight but not only was it coming off, it was falling off. I was losing 3-4lbs a week every week, despite my 2lb per week setting. I was definitely not surprised when the next bloodwork results showed that the new dosage had made me slightly hyperthyroid. Down went the dosage and everything stopped. I gained and lost the same 3-5lbs for the next three months, despite weighing my food and exercising. It was extraordinarily frustrating, but I knew it was likely that the meds were off. So, when my doctor called after the next tests saying that I was in the high "normal" range and that she would be keeping my dosage the same, I asked if there was a dosage between the two. There was! Hooray! Because guess what happened? Everything clicked and started working like it should and it was awesome.

Does that mean I lose exactly 1lb every week when that's what my setting is? Nope - there's some variation in there because of quite a few things but that's normal.

TL;DR: CICO and understanding that that's basically how it works helped me get my thyroid dosage in check so I really don't get the push against it because CICO is what happens.

Brilliant! So you can tell what your thyroid is doing based on your metabolic response?

That is what happened for me, yes. I am a bit concerned about there being more to it since my aunt had Hashimoto's and my grandmother has Grave's so when things are more than they should be, I pay more attention but as of yet, it ends up evening out, e.g. I'm at .5lbs setting right now and sometimes I'll drop 1.5-2lb but then I won't lose for a few weeks.

It's actually pretty neat, though (because science!), and I'm so glad I lurked in the forums to learn about CICO while this was going on!

That sounds like normal variation. I'll keep my fingers crossed for you!

Exactly! :drinker: And thanks! :flowerforyou:

margarita344

Hey

secret to lasting weight loss does not come down to complicated calorie counting and weight loss gimmicks. Instead, it's about working with your body naturally.

Try It Out http://tinyurl.com/o68mj2p

likitisplit

Hey

secret to lasting weight loss does not come down to complicated calorie counting and weight loss gimmicks. Instead, it's about working with your body naturally.

Try It Out http://tinyurl.com/o68mj2p

I prefer uncomplicated calorie counting, using the bar code scanner on my phone, and automatic uploads of my activity - check it out:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/

Fit_Housewife

Some of these people simply don't understand basic (and not so basic) biology. When you have a metabolic disorder, your body isn't doing what it's supposed to, and the extent of its deviation from the norm can vary greatly. So, if someone with a metabolic disorder eats food, it isn't metabolized in the same way. They can get a lot less of the energy that one usually would -- you see this in insulin resistance for example. Rather than using the food for energy, they get to use only part of it and part of it gets stored as fat. So to fulfill their "normal" energy needs, they need to eat more, which also results in greater fat storage -- and being overweight. Eating less isn't an option in the same way it is for "normal" people because they can't access their fat stores for energy the same way people with normal metabolisms can. They'll get crazy hunger pangs, headaches, terrible fatigue, etc. That is not normal or within the normal parameters of self-control. Thyroid stuff can get even crazier with extreme fatigue, losing your hair, skin going haywire, etc.

When your options are to eat less but sleep 14 hours a day to combat the fatigue that isn't really a viable, meaningful choice. Nor should it be.

Others who have had have less severe symptoms do a great disservice to others by proclaiming "I had that and did Y, so it's totally possible". Yes, it's totally possible for YOU and your symptoms. Not totally possible for everyone with that disorder or disease -- not everyone experiences the same symptoms, severity or reacts to medication the same way. Do we tell insulin dependent diabetics that if they'd just modify their food choices, they'd be fine? Of course not. That's absurd. The same is true for some others with similar disorders -- whether it's insulin resistance, thyroid, PCOS, etc. Each person is fighting their own battle in that regard and to make comments about how it's really all in their control by eating less just shows the person's extreme ignorance in how these disorders and diseases can affect people.

Having been on both sides of the battle, I can tell you once I got the proper medication for my issues, eating was extremely easy. It took about 1/100th of the effort that it previously did. If you haven't been on the other side of that battle, you have no idea what you're talking about.

Thank you

Catter_05

Hey

secret to lasting weight loss does not come down to complicated calorie counting and weight loss gimmicks. Instead, it's about working with your body naturally.

Try It Out http://tinyurl.com/o68mj2p

I prefer uncomplicated calorie counting, using the bar code scanner on my phone, and automatic uploads of my activity - check it out:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/

I use the bar code scanner too. How do you do keep your measurements accurate. A lot of times I end up having to go back in and tweak everything. It can be a little tedious. Just wondering if you have any tips. I'm new to this so I'm still getting the hang of weighing everything. Right now I weigh everything in grams, but so much is in oz. I find it time consuming to go and calculate all the measurements but I know this is the more accurate reading. Any advice would be appreciated

likitisplit

Hey

secret to lasting weight loss does not come down to complicated calorie counting and weight loss gimmicks. Instead, it's about working with your body naturally.

Try It Out http://tinyurl.com/o68mj2p

I prefer uncomplicated calorie counting, using the bar code scanner on my phone, and automatic uploads of my activity - check it out:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/

I use the bar code scanner too. How do you do keep your measurements accurate. A lot of times I end up having to go back in and tweak everything. It can be a little tedious. Just wondering if you have any tips. I'm new to this so I'm still getting the hang of weighing everything. Right now I weigh everything in grams, but so much is in oz. I find it time consuming to go and calculate all the measurements but I know this is the more accurate reading. Any advice would be appreciated

Honestly, I'm not all that accurate, so I'm a bad adviser. My scale needed new batteries when I started, but I was so desperate that I just decided to forge ahead and guesstimate. It worked well enough that I haven't felt the need to change. You, however, are doing it right.

Some of the biggest time savers for me are the "my foods" and especially the "Meals" functions. When you add a meal it will list all the ingredients to your diary, allowing you to tweak the measurements or delete things. I LOVE salad bars and eat all the foods. That's like 20 ingredients. So I have a "salad" meal with all 20 ingredients and I just play around with what I had that day.

I use the "recipe" function a lot too. Once you've built up a nice library eating your standard meals gets faster.

After you've been doing this for awhile, the app will store your last measurement and all of your most commonly used foods will be at the top and you'll be able to pull in common meals, so it becomes a few clicks instead of arduously digging through the grape entries trying to find the ones with potassium, etc.

Some people spend some time pre-logging in the morning, so they can just jimmy stuff based on reality at the last minute.

You'll also be able to dollop some sour cream on top of your taco on the plate on the scale and find that you've measured out an exact serving.

lemurcat12

And threads like this one are why I don't often participate in these forums. The amount of ignorance and lack of compassion is a huge turnoff.

Feel free to identify specific posts. Otherwise, you might be making innocent participants wonder if they said something objectionable, and that's not very compassionate.

After all, chances are the people inclined to feel worried or bad based on a drive-by post like that are the nicer ones.

Personally, having participated in this whole long thread about the meaning of a study in which none of us participated, I find it odd that your takeaway from the thread has to do with how people might personally feel about it. Is the strong view that carbs are or are not satiating or that a low carb diet does or does not, on average, lead to more compliance with reduced calories or some such supposed to be personally hurtful to others? And if so, are people somehow supposed to know that and avoid expressing opinions on those topics for that reason?

Good thing we aren't talking politics!

lindsey1979

Some of these people simply don't understand basic (and not so basic) biology. When you have a metabolic disorder, your body isn't doing what it's supposed to, and the extent of its deviation from the norm can vary greatly. So, if someone with a metabolic disorder eats food, it isn't metabolized in the same way. They can get a lot less of the energy that one usually would -- you see this in insulin resistance for example. Rather than using the food for energy, they get to use only part of it and part of it gets stored as fat. So to fulfill their "normal" energy needs, they need to eat more, which also results in greater fat storage -- and being overweight. Eating less isn't an option in the same way it is for "normal" people because they can't access their fat stores for energy the same way people with normal metabolisms can. They'll get crazy hunger pangs, headaches, terrible fatigue, etc. That is not normal or within the normal parameters of self-control. Thyroid stuff can get even crazier with extreme fatigue, losing your hair, skin going haywire, etc.

When your options are to eat less but sleep 14 hours a day to combat the fatigue that isn't really a viable, meaningful choice. Nor should it be.

Others who have had have less severe symptoms do a great disservice to others by proclaiming "I had that and did Y, so it's totally possible". Yes, it's totally possible for YOU and your symptoms. Not totally possible for everyone with that disorder or disease -- not everyone experiences the same symptoms, severity or reacts to medication the same way. Do we tell insulin dependent diabetics that if they'd just modify their food choices, they'd be fine? Of course not. That's absurd. The same is true for some others with similar disorders -- whether it's insulin resistance, thyroid, PCOS, etc. Each person is fighting their own battle in that regard and to make comments about how it's really all in their control by eating less just shows the person's extreme ignorance in how these disorders and diseases can affect people.

Having been on both sides of the battle, I can tell you once I got the proper medication for my issues, eating was extremely easy. It took about 1/100th of the effort that it previously did. If you haven't been on the other side of that battle, you have no idea what you're talking about.

A couple of things come to mind. For one, I don't know many people here that advocate against someone consulting their primary care physician or even a specialist as needed to diagnose and treat medical conditions. You can be tested to assess your thyroid function as well as for conditions like prediabetes and PCOS (although, and I'm no expert, but that's a conclusion drawn from multiple tests from what I understand). So if you think there's something wrong, you should get checked out and I don't know anyone here that would tell you otherwise. So, no, that's not what I'd tell an insulin dependent diabetic - I'd tell them to go talk to their doctor and, if they're dependent on injectable insulin, they should probably get some injectable insulin.

But at the end of the day, most people do not have a condition that prevents them from losing weight through diet and exercise, and I think the assumption here is that people with actual medical conditions will deal with their medical conditions through their doctors. You can't just assume that everyone who isn't losing weight has some sort of undiagnosed medical condition and blaming genetics for a lack of weight loss should probably be the last resort in terms of probability, not the first. For the vast majority of people, they are the reason that they are losing not losing weight, whether it's due to inaccurate logging, not adjusting their caloric intake frequently enough, and so on - in short, factors that are entirely within their control. And for the minority of people that truly are victims of crappy genetics and have some sort of medical condition, then the MFP forums are the last place they should go for diagnosis and treatment.

In terms of insulin resistance, even if you make the case that prediabetics as well as many overweight and obese people who are sedentary tend to be insulin resistant (which I'd buy), that's still something that can largely be addressed through diet and exercise. And it might be hard - but then again, it might be hard for people who really struggle financially, it might be hard for people with kids to take care of, it might be hard for people who work long hours, it might be hard for people who have to commute a long way to the gym, and on and on. Yeah, it could be hard for a lot of reasons, but that's life. But I will say, if some of those people (particularly with insulin resistance) find that a low carb diet works better for them or they just prefer it, that's great. They should go for it - and I'm not really one to push a low carb diet on other people, although I do try and answer questions about them when I feel I can. But if the diet doesn't work for them, whether due to restrictiveness or how they feel on the diet, then they should stay far away from it and never look back. But ultimately people just need to focus on doing what works for them and care less about what works for other people.

For the most part I agree. A lot of people do not have medical issues that keep them from losing weight. That it's difficult to lose weight due to many different circumstances is true too. But, the problem is, it can be very difficult and time consuming to get Drs. To take your concerns seriously.
One of the reasons I made the remarks I made was because of this comment;
"There is one person and one person alone that is responsible for your health as an adult and that is you. Your health is your responsibility and if you become overweight or obese it is because you have neglected your health. You may have reasons for that neglect associated with job or family but that does not mean you did not neglect that one aspect of your life. You may have various medical conditions that make your metabolism different than that of the population (hyper- hypothyroidism, PCOS etc) but then it is your responsibility to recognize that, understand your maintenance level and adjust accordingly. Placing blame on something beyond your control is just acceptance that being unhealthy is somehow your destiny and that is NOT the kind of mindset that is going to improve your life.

Harsh reality time. If you are obese, if you are overweight, that is a self-infliicted condition regardless of what your life or medical situation may be. If there is a condition that forces you to gain weight to an unhealthy level regardless of what you do I have not heard of it.

There CAN be things outside of your control that make you scrawny, or skinny, or unhealthily thin...but there isn't such a thing for being overweight."

I'm not sure why being scrawny is any more beyond your control than being overweight, especially when there are medical conditions involved. It took me years to get my conditions diagnosed. Years of being treated like a hypochondriac and being in terrible pain. Do I have it under control now? Yep, through medical intervention, hard work, and sacrifice. So maybe I am a little defensive, but it has been rough. I am also outspoken about it because there are people out there going through what I went through and they don't know what's wrong with their bodies. I would like to save others from experiencing as much of the physical and emotional pain that I have suffered. Comments like, "If you are obese, if you are overweight, that is a self-infliicted condition regardless of what your life or medical situation may be.", really bother me because they dismiss a lot of what I have experienced. And I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one.

+1

I suspected one of very issues I was diagnosed with over 10 years prior -- and saw a doctor at that time. I saw 4 doctors in total before finally paying out of pocket for a specialist that finally got the proper tests and diagnosis. From what I've seen on other boards, my experience is not that extraordinary, sadly. And getting the message out about these issue is important. I wish I'd known 10 years ago what I know today -- would have saved me a LOT of heartache in the meantime.

Aaron_K123

and when step A proves, on multiple data points and calculations, that my "maintenance" level is drastically below my expected calculated BMR, and that the deficits have to be so low as to be in the realm of dangerous (both mentally and physically), then my first priority has to be determining what medical factors are impeding proper weight loss.

As for your efficiency comment if you are saying your BMR is much LOWER than expected that means your body is actually EXTREMELY efficient, much more so than the average population. So I am not sure why you are saying operating at low efficiency.

what i mean is that at a 500-calorie deficit, the daily amount needed to lose one pound per week, i will only lose about .7lbs. it puts my BMR under 1,200 calories a day, which means to lose weight i have to drop down to less than 1,000 calories a day. it's unsustainable and borders on dangerous.

Then exercise more or lose weight at a slower rate, I guess I don't get it. Nothing says you have to lose weight based solely on your BMR nor do you have to lose weight at the rate of 1 pound per week. Nothing here makes CICO wrong or weight loss impossible so I guess what is the point here...that it is hard? Yeah of course it is hard.

Calculators tell me that I maintain at 3000 calories a day, but I don't...I maintain at more like 2500 calories a day. So what do I do about that? Well I adjust to what my body actually does and go off of that and I ignore the calculators. The calculators are based on population averages and assumptions. Just because the calculator says I could be eating 500 calories more when I found that I can't doesn't make me mope about it though nor does it make me think there is something wrong with me.

To be honest, I have had this disorder for a very long time and have never been obese. I have probably been at the high end of healthy to slightly overweight since puberty. During my high school years I was on the track team, exercising constantly and I could never lose weight. I barely ate. It wasn't that I wanted to be skinny, I just wanted to be thinner.
I went to the Dr. and no one could tell me what was wrong. It wasn't until fertility issues became a problem that I was diagnosed. This was mostly because we moved to a metropolitan area that had specialists who could diagnose and treat me. From what I've read, I am actually pretty lucky that I have managed to stay in a healthy bmi range as most people who have PCOS can't. There is a lot more information out there now though. In the 80's and 90's when I was suffering, information about diets and disorders were not as readily available.
I guess my point is that it's easy to point your finger at people and say it's their fault, but I think it can be rather discouraging, at least it was to me, when people tell you it's in your head or it's in your control. When your body doesn't work right it really isn't your fault. Especially, when no one has told you what you can do to fix it. I have finally been able to lose some of the 20 lbs that has been clinging to me with medical intervention and a low carb approach.
But, for people who are undiagnosed the frustration and pointlessness that is felt when you are exercising and barely eating and still the scale won't move, telling them it's their fault is just cruel and damaging.

Thank you, and congrats on your success despite your hurdle. I think the main issue IMO is the way people say things sometimes on here. It seems more of pointing a finger than trying to help. Also lumping everyone as " fatties" just making excuses. Some of us are determined DESPITE difficulties we may have to overcome. Telling people they are incapable of weighing measuring and logging accurately is insulting. Granted there are those that are not weighting and should be told to go here first BUT if this is not the issue being told you're a fat liar isn't constructive.

Exaggerating what people say to the point of insult isn't helpful either. I certainly never called anyone a "fat liar".

lindsey1979

and when step A proves, on multiple data points and calculations, that my "maintenance" level is drastically below my expected calculated BMR, and that the deficits have to be so low as to be in the realm of dangerous (both mentally and physically), then my first priority has to be determining what medical factors are impeding proper weight loss.

As for your efficiency comment if you are saying your BMR is much LOWER than expected that means your body is actually EXTREMELY efficient, much more so than the average population. So I am not sure why you are saying operating at low efficiency.

what i mean is that at a 500-calorie deficit, the daily amount needed to lose one pound per week, i will only lose about .7lbs. it puts my BMR under 1,200 calories a day, which means to lose weight i have to drop down to less than 1,000 calories a day. it's unsustainable and borders on dangerous.

Then exercise more or lose weight at a slower rate, I guess I don't get it. Nothing says you have to lose weight based solely on your BMR nor do you have to lose weight at the rate of 1 pound per week. Nothing here makes CICO wrong or weight loss impossible so I guess what is the point here...that it is hard? Yeah of course it is hard.

Calculators tell me that I maintain at 3000 calories a day, but I don't...I maintain at more like 2500 calories a day. So what do I do about that? Well I adjust to what my body actually does and go off of that and I ignore the calculators. The calculators are based on population averages and assumptions. Just because the calculator says I could be eating 500 calories more when I found that I can't doesn't make me mope about it though nor does it make me think there is something wrong with me.

To be honest, I have had this disorder for a very long time and have never been obese. I have probably been at the high end of healthy to slightly overweight since puberty. During my high school years I was on the track team, exercising constantly and I could never lose weight. I barely ate. It wasn't that I wanted to be skinny, I just wanted to be thinner.
I went to the Dr. and no one could tell me what was wrong. It wasn't until fertility issues became a problem that I was diagnosed. This was mostly because we moved to a metropolitan area that had specialists who could diagnose and treat me. From what I've read, I am actually pretty lucky that I have managed to stay in a healthy bmi range as most people who have PCOS can't. There is a lot more information out there now though. In the 80's and 90's when I was suffering, information about diets and disorders were not as readily available.
I guess my point is that it's easy to point your finger at people and say it's their fault, but I think it can be rather discouraging, at least it was to me, when people tell you it's in your head or it's in your control. When your body doesn't work right it really isn't your fault. Especially, when no one has told you what you can do to fix it. I have finally been able to lose some of the 20 lbs that has been clinging to me with medical intervention and a low carb approach.
But, for people who are undiagnosed the frustration and pointlessness that is felt when you are exercising and barely eating and still the scale won't move, telling them it's their fault is just cruel and damaging.

Thank you, and congrats on your success despite your hurdle. I think the main issue IMO is the way people say things sometimes on here. It seems more of pointing a finger than trying to help. Also lumping everyone as " fatties" just making excuses. Some of us are determined DESPITE difficulties we may have to overcome. Telling people they are incapable of weighing measuring and logging accurately is insulting. Granted there are those that are not weighting and should be told to go here first BUT if this is not the issue being told you're a fat liar isn't constructive.

Exaggerating what people say to the point of insult isn't helpful either. I certainly never called anyone a "fat liar".

I think she was more describing her own experiences with doctors and others on the boards than you in particular Aaron_K123. Though I definitely have seen people say that very same thing to others on these boards.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

wellnessjunkie

That's cool. I'm fine with low-carb if that works for people. Some people do better with fewer carbs. Personally, though, it's easier for ME to eat what I want and eat within a calorie goal than it is to cut out my favorite foods. (It's basically how I've maintained over the years as I've aged.) It needs to be sustainable and life-long for me, and that means plenty of pasta to keep me sane. I've never had weight problems and I've always eaten plenty of carbs. Do what works for YOU! :flowerforyou:

I agree we are all different and one diet definitely does not work for all. However, I do believe (and know for a fact) that not all calories are created equal. But if counting calories works for you then who cares what some NYT article says!

how can it be a fact if it is not a fact?

A calorie is just a unit of energy. Therefore they are all the same in that regards.

All diets work, If it puts you in a caloric deficit.
I don't care what you eat, i don't care if you count calories, It means nothing to me.

I just find it ridiculous when people tote falsities as facts, and promote the diet they are on as the best diet, or only diet.

I'm not promoting any kind of diet. All I'm saying is that not all calories are created equal. And yes that's a fact. You can't argue that 100 calories of cookies has the same effect to your body as 100 calories of celery would.

Aaron_K123

Some of these people simply don't understand basic (and not so basic) biology. When you have a metabolic disorder, your body isn't doing what it's supposed to, and the extent of its deviation from the norm can vary greatly. So, if someone with a metabolic disorder eats food, it isn't metabolized in the same way. They can get a lot less of the energy that one usually would -- you see this in insulin resistance for example. Rather than using the food for energy, they get to use only part of it and part of it gets stored as fat.

That makes no sense. If someone had a metabolic disorder that caused them to get considerably less energy from consumed food and they had to eat more as a result that would not result in excess fat storage. That does not follow at all. If someone had an inefficient metabolism then their body would have to process MORE food to yield the same amount of energy and in processing it utilize it...not store it. A person with an inneficient metabolism like the one you describe would struggle to eat enough to not be underweight, they wouldn't struggle with being overweight.

Aaron_K123

and when step A proves, on multiple data points and calculations, that my "maintenance" level is drastically below my expected calculated BMR, and that the deficits have to be so low as to be in the realm of dangerous (both mentally and physically), then my first priority has to be determining what medical factors are impeding proper weight loss.

As for your efficiency comment if you are saying your BMR is much LOWER than expected that means your body is actually EXTREMELY efficient, much more so than the average population. So I am not sure why you are saying operating at low efficiency.

what i mean is that at a 500-calorie deficit, the daily amount needed to lose one pound per week, i will only lose about .7lbs. it puts my BMR under 1,200 calories a day, which means to lose weight i have to drop down to less than 1,000 calories a day. it's unsustainable and borders on dangerous.

Then exercise more or lose weight at a slower rate, I guess I don't get it. Nothing says you have to lose weight based solely on your BMR nor do you have to lose weight at the rate of 1 pound per week. Nothing here makes CICO wrong or weight loss impossible so I guess what is the point here...that it is hard? Yeah of course it is hard.

Calculators tell me that I maintain at 3000 calories a day, but I don't...I maintain at more like 2500 calories a day. So what do I do about that? Well I adjust to what my body actually does and go off of that and I ignore the calculators. The calculators are based on population averages and assumptions. Just because the calculator says I could be eating 500 calories more when I found that I can't doesn't make me mope about it though nor does it make me think there is something wrong with me.

To be honest, I have had this disorder for a very long time and have never been obese. I have probably been at the high end of healthy to slightly overweight since puberty. During my high school years I was on the track team, exercising constantly and I could never lose weight. I barely ate. It wasn't that I wanted to be skinny, I just wanted to be thinner.
I went to the Dr. and no one could tell me what was wrong. It wasn't until fertility issues became a problem that I was diagnosed. This was mostly because we moved to a metropolitan area that had specialists who could diagnose and treat me. From what I've read, I am actually pretty lucky that I have managed to stay in a healthy bmi range as most people who have PCOS can't. There is a lot more information out there now though. In the 80's and 90's when I was suffering, information about diets and disorders were not as readily available.
I guess my point is that it's easy to point your finger at people and say it's their fault, but I think it can be rather discouraging, at least it was to me, when people tell you it's in your head or it's in your control. When your body doesn't work right it really isn't your fault. Especially, when no one has told you what you can do to fix it. I have finally been able to lose some of the 20 lbs that has been clinging to me with medical intervention and a low carb approach.
But, for people who are undiagnosed the frustration and pointlessness that is felt when you are exercising and barely eating and still the scale won't move, telling them it's their fault is just cruel and damaging.

Thank you, and congrats on your success despite your hurdle. I think the main issue IMO is the way people say things sometimes on here. It seems more of pointing a finger than trying to help. Also lumping everyone as " fatties" just making excuses. Some of us are determined DESPITE difficulties we may have to overcome. Telling people they are incapable of weighing measuring and logging accurately is insulting. Granted there are those that are not weighting and should be told to go here first BUT if this is not the issue being told you're a fat liar isn't constructive.

Exaggerating what people say to the point of insult isn't helpful either. I certainly never called anyone a "fat liar".

I think she was more describing her own experiences with doctors and others on the boards than you in particular Aaron_K123. Though I definitely have seen people say that very same thing to others on these boards.

Fair enough, I suppose other than it being originally a response to one of my posts there was nothing to indicate she was refering to me in particular.

Aaron_K123

That's cool. I'm fine with low-carb if that works for people. Some people do better with fewer carbs. Personally, though, it's easier for ME to eat what I want and eat within a calorie goal than it is to cut out my favorite foods. (It's basically how I've maintained over the years as I've aged.) It needs to be sustainable and life-long for me, and that means plenty of pasta to keep me sane. I've never had weight problems and I've always eaten plenty of carbs. Do what works for YOU! :flowerforyou:

I agree we are all different and one diet definitely does not work for all. However, I do believe (and know for a fact) that not all calories are created equal. But if counting calories works for you then who cares what some NYT article says!

how can it be a fact if it is not a fact?

A calorie is just a unit of energy. Therefore they are all the same in that regards.

All diets work, If it puts you in a caloric deficit.
I don't care what you eat, i don't care if you count calories, It means nothing to me.

I just find it ridiculous when people tote falsities as facts, and promote the diet they are on as the best diet, or only diet.

I'm not promoting any kind of diet. All I'm saying is that not all calories are created equal. And yes that's a fact. You can't argue that 100 calories of cookies has the same effect to your body as 100 calories of celery would.

It is energetically equivalent yes and in terms of weight gain or loss it does have the same effect. So I very much can and would say that in terms of weight loss 100 calories of celery and 100 calories of cookies are equivalent. If you want to take it to the level of health or satiety then that is a different story.

lindsey1979

and when step A proves, on multiple data points and calculations, that my "maintenance" level is drastically below my expected calculated BMR, and that the deficits have to be so low as to be in the realm of dangerous (both mentally and physically), then my first priority has to be determining what medical factors are impeding proper weight loss.

As for your efficiency comment if you are saying your BMR is much LOWER than expected that means your body is actually EXTREMELY efficient, much more so than the average population. So I am not sure why you are saying operating at low efficiency.

what i mean is that at a 500-calorie deficit, the daily amount needed to lose one pound per week, i will only lose about .7lbs. it puts my BMR under 1,200 calories a day, which means to lose weight i have to drop down to less than 1,000 calories a day. it's unsustainable and borders on dangerous.

Then exercise more or lose weight at a slower rate, I guess I don't get it. Nothing says you have to lose weight based solely on your BMR nor do you have to lose weight at the rate of 1 pound per week. Nothing here makes CICO wrong or weight loss impossible so I guess what is the point here...that it is hard? Yeah of course it is hard.

Calculators tell me that I maintain at 3000 calories a day, but I don't...I maintain at more like 2500 calories a day. So what do I do about that? Well I adjust to what my body actually does and go off of that and I ignore the calculators. The calculators are based on population averages and assumptions. Just because the calculator says I could be eating 500 calories more when I found that I can't doesn't make me mope about it though nor does it make me think there is something wrong with me.

To be honest, I have had this disorder for a very long time and have never been obese. I have probably been at the high end of healthy to slightly overweight since puberty. During my high school years I was on the track team, exercising constantly and I could never lose weight. I barely ate. It wasn't that I wanted to be skinny, I just wanted to be thinner.
I went to the Dr. and no one could tell me what was wrong. It wasn't until fertility issues became a problem that I was diagnosed. This was mostly because we moved to a metropolitan area that had specialists who could diagnose and treat me. From what I've read, I am actually pretty lucky that I have managed to stay in a healthy bmi range as most people who have PCOS can't. There is a lot more information out there now though. In the 80's and 90's when I was suffering, information about diets and disorders were not as readily available.
I guess my point is that it's easy to point your finger at people and say it's their fault, but I think it can be rather discouraging, at least it was to me, when people tell you it's in your head or it's in your control. When your body doesn't work right it really isn't your fault. Especially, when no one has told you what you can do to fix it. I have finally been able to lose some of the 20 lbs that has been clinging to me with medical intervention and a low carb approach.
But, for people who are undiagnosed the frustration and pointlessness that is felt when you are exercising and barely eating and still the scale won't move, telling them it's their fault is just cruel and damaging.

Thank you, and congrats on your success despite your hurdle. I think the main issue IMO is the way people say things sometimes on here. It seems more of pointing a finger than trying to help. Also lumping everyone as " fatties" just making excuses. Some of us are determined DESPITE difficulties we may have to overcome. Telling people they are incapable of weighing measuring and logging accurately is insulting. Granted there are those that are not weighting and should be told to go here first BUT if this is not the issue being told you're a fat liar isn't constructive.

Exaggerating what people say to the point of insult isn't helpful either. I certainly never called anyone a "fat liar".

I think she was more describing her own experiences with doctors and others on the boards than you in particular Aaron_K123. Though I definitely have seen people say that very same thing to others on these boards.

Please provide examples of these instances where the person saying "you're a fat liar" was not outright trolling. I have been here 3 years and never once have seen a poster respond to a query in such a way.

I've definitely seen such disrespectful comments and not more than a handful of times. The other poster has had similar experiences. Are you calling us liars?

Aaron_K123

and when step A proves, on multiple data points and calculations, that my "maintenance" level is drastically below my expected calculated BMR, and that the deficits have to be so low as to be in the realm of dangerous (both mentally and physically), then my first priority has to be determining what medical factors are impeding proper weight loss.

As for your efficiency comment if you are saying your BMR is much LOWER than expected that means your body is actually EXTREMELY efficient, much more so than the average population. So I am not sure why you are saying operating at low efficiency.

what i mean is that at a 500-calorie deficit, the daily amount needed to lose one pound per week, i will only lose about .7lbs. it puts my BMR under 1,200 calories a day, which means to lose weight i have to drop down to less than 1,000 calories a day. it's unsustainable and borders on dangerous.

Then exercise more or lose weight at a slower rate, I guess I don't get it. Nothing says you have to lose weight based solely on your BMR nor do you have to lose weight at the rate of 1 pound per week. Nothing here makes CICO wrong or weight loss impossible so I guess what is the point here...that it is hard? Yeah of course it is hard.

Calculators tell me that I maintain at 3000 calories a day, but I don't...I maintain at more like 2500 calories a day. So what do I do about that? Well I adjust to what my body actually does and go off of that and I ignore the calculators. The calculators are based on population averages and assumptions. Just because the calculator says I could be eating 500 calories more when I found that I can't doesn't make me mope about it though nor does it make me think there is something wrong with me.

To be honest, I have had this disorder for a very long time and have never been obese. I have probably been at the high end of healthy to slightly overweight since puberty. During my high school years I was on the track team, exercising constantly and I could never lose weight. I barely ate. It wasn't that I wanted to be skinny, I just wanted to be thinner.
I went to the Dr. and no one could tell me what was wrong. It wasn't until fertility issues became a problem that I was diagnosed. This was mostly because we moved to a metropolitan area that had specialists who could diagnose and treat me. From what I've read, I am actually pretty lucky that I have managed to stay in a healthy bmi range as most people who have PCOS can't. There is a lot more information out there now though. In the 80's and 90's when I was suffering, information about diets and disorders were not as readily available.
I guess my point is that it's easy to point your finger at people and say it's their fault, but I think it can be rather discouraging, at least it was to me, when people tell you it's in your head or it's in your control. When your body doesn't work right it really isn't your fault. Especially, when no one has told you what you can do to fix it. I have finally been able to lose some of the 20 lbs that has been clinging to me with medical intervention and a low carb approach.
But, for people who are undiagnosed the frustration and pointlessness that is felt when you are exercising and barely eating and still the scale won't move, telling them it's their fault is just cruel and damaging.

Thank you, and congrats on your success despite your hurdle. I think the main issue IMO is the way people say things sometimes on here. It seems more of pointing a finger than trying to help. Also lumping everyone as " fatties" just making excuses. Some of us are determined DESPITE difficulties we may have to overcome. Telling people they are incapable of weighing measuring and logging accurately is insulting. Granted there are those that are not weighting and should be told to go here first BUT if this is not the issue being told you're a fat liar isn't constructive.

Exaggerating what people say to the point of insult isn't helpful either. I certainly never called anyone a "fat liar".

I think she was more describing her own experiences with doctors and others on the boards than you in particular Aaron_K123. Though I definitely have seen people say that very same thing to others on these boards.

Please provide examples of these instances where the person saying "you're a fat liar" was not outright trolling. I have been here 3 years and never once have seen a poster respond to a query in such a way.

I've definitely seen such disrespectful comments and not more than a handful of times. The other poster has had similar experiences. Are you calling us liars?

Catch-22!

lindsey1979

Some of these people simply don't understand basic (and not so basic) biology. When you have a metabolic disorder, your body isn't doing what it's supposed to, and the extent of its deviation from the norm can vary greatly. So, if someone with a metabolic disorder eats food, it isn't metabolized in the same way. They can get a lot less of the energy that one usually would -- you see this in insulin resistance for example. Rather than using the food for energy, they get to use only part of it and part of it gets stored as fat.

That makes no sense. If someone had a metabolic disorder that caused them to get considerably less energy from consumed food and they had to eat more as a result that would not result in excess fat storage. That does not follow at all. If someone had an inefficient metabolism then their body would have to process MORE food to yield the same amount of energy and in processing it utilize it...not store it. A person with an inneficient metabolism like the one you describe would struggle to eat enough to not be underweight, they wouldn't struggle with being overweight.

You should read up on how insulin resistance works. Because that's exactly what happens effectively.

The cells are insulin resistant. They don't allow the energy to enter them. The pancreas excretes more insulin to compensate. The energy moves into the cells. What isn't used at that time is stored as fat. Blood glucose drops. Hunger ensues. Cycle continues...

Unknown

This content has been removed.

lindsey1979

That's cool. I'm fine with low-carb if that works for people. Some people do better with fewer carbs. Personally, though, it's easier for ME to eat what I want and eat within a calorie goal than it is to cut out my favorite foods. (It's basically how I've maintained over the years as I've aged.) It needs to be sustainable and life-long for me, and that means plenty of pasta to keep me sane. I've never had weight problems and I've always eaten plenty of carbs. Do what works for YOU! :flowerforyou:

I agree we are all different and one diet definitely does not work for all. However, I do believe (and know for a fact) that not all calories are created equal. But if counting calories works for you then who cares what some NYT article says!

how can it be a fact if it is not a fact?

A calorie is just a unit of energy. Therefore they are all the same in that regards.

All diets work, If it puts you in a caloric deficit.
I don't care what you eat, i don't care if you count calories, It means nothing to me.

I just find it ridiculous when people tote falsities as facts, and promote the diet they are on as the best diet, or only diet.

I'm not promoting any kind of diet. All I'm saying is that not all calories are created equal. And yes that's a fact. You can't argue that 100 calories of cookies has the same effect to your body as 100 calories of celery would.

A calorie is a calorie. If you're talking about micronutrients, vitamins and minerals that's something different. But a calorie still equals a calorie.

As far as the energy required to heat a certain amount of water a single degree through burning.

Unfortunately, our metabolism doesn't work the same way a fire does and why we can't eat everything that fire can burn.

Aaron_K123

Some of these people simply don't understand basic (and not so basic) biology. When you have a metabolic disorder, your body isn't doing what it's supposed to, and the extent of its deviation from the norm can vary greatly. So, if someone with a metabolic disorder eats food, it isn't metabolized in the same way. They can get a lot less of the energy that one usually would -- you see this in insulin resistance for example. Rather than using the food for energy, they get to use only part of it and part of it gets stored as fat.

That makes no sense. If someone had a metabolic disorder that caused them to get considerably less energy from consumed food and they had to eat more as a result that would not result in excess fat storage. That does not follow at all. If someone had an inefficient metabolism then their body would have to process MORE food to yield the same amount of energy and in processing it utilize it...not store it. A person with an inneficient metabolism like the one you describe would struggle to eat enough to not be underweight, they wouldn't struggle with being overweight.

You should read up on how insulin resistance works. Because that's exactly what happens effectively.

The cells are insulin resistant. They don't allow the energy to enter them. The pancreas excretes more insulin to compensate. The energy moves into the cells. What isn't used at that time is stored as fat. Blood glucose drops. Hunger ensues. Cycle continues...

Explain to me how someone with an inneficient metabolism (meaning they yield less energy per calorie consumed) would gain fat as a result of that inefficiency. That does not follow. You seem to be saying that someone with an inefficient metabolism not only eats more but eats so much more that they not only compensate for their inneficient metabolism but overshoot to the point that they gain weight. Why? Apparently because "they are hungry"? Are we talking 4000 calories a day? This is not anything that I have heard of with regards to type II diabetics which honestly is largely caused by obesity not the other way around.

Aaron_K123

That's cool. I'm fine with low-carb if that works for people. Some people do better with fewer carbs. Personally, though, it's easier for ME to eat what I want and eat within a calorie goal than it is to cut out my favorite foods. (It's basically how I've maintained over the years as I've aged.) It needs to be sustainable and life-long for me, and that means plenty of pasta to keep me sane. I've never had weight problems and I've always eaten plenty of carbs. Do what works for YOU! :flowerforyou:

I agree we are all different and one diet definitely does not work for all. However, I do believe (and know for a fact) that not all calories are created equal. But if counting calories works for you then who cares what some NYT article says!

how can it be a fact if it is not a fact?

A calorie is just a unit of energy. Therefore they are all the same in that regards.

All diets work, If it puts you in a caloric deficit.
I don't care what you eat, i don't care if you count calories, It means nothing to me.

I just find it ridiculous when people tote falsities as facts, and promote the diet they are on as the best diet, or only diet.

I'm not promoting any kind of diet. All I'm saying is that not all calories are created equal. And yes that's a fact. You can't argue that 100 calories of cookies has the same effect to your body as 100 calories of celery would.

A calorie is a calorie. If you're talking about micronutrients, vitamins and minerals that's something different. But a calorie still equals a calorie.

As far as the energy required to heat a certain amount of water a single degree through burning.

Unfortunately, our metabolism doesn't work the same way a fire does and why we can't eat everything that fire can burn.

Actually our metabolism works pretty much exactly like fire, converting hydrocarbons to carbon dioxide and water. Protein, carbs, fat...all hydrocarbons for a chemical engine.

You might say that our metabolism isn't 100% efficient and you would be correct but that inefficiency applies equally and therefore that 100 calories becomes the energetic equivalent of 75 calories regardless. Your claim seems to be that this is macro-centric on the basis of insulin resistance but I am sorry if you are eating from all three macros (which everyone does) that inefficiency would be distributed equally. If your body was terribly inneficient at processing carbohydrates then its response would be to burn additional carbohydrates to compensate or burn from the other macro groups in a way that compensated for that innefficiency...in otherwords you would burn MORE food to generate a similar amount of energy which mean that you would be prone to being thin, not overweight.

Type II diabeties is often caused by obesity. You seem to be claiming that obesity is caused by being type II diabetic. That is totally backwards.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Pixydin

Calories count but when you have insulin sensitivity, keeping carbs low in my diet helps with not wanting more and more carbs.

lindsey1979

Some of these people simply don't understand basic (and not so basic) biology. When you have a metabolic disorder, your body isn't doing what it's supposed to, and the extent of its deviation from the norm can vary greatly. So, if someone with a metabolic disorder eats food, it isn't metabolized in the same way. They can get a lot less of the energy that one usually would -- you see this in insulin resistance for example. Rather than using the food for energy, they get to use only part of it and part of it gets stored as fat.

That makes no sense. If someone had a metabolic disorder that caused them to get considerably less energy from consumed food and they had to eat more as a result that would not result in excess fat storage. That does not follow at all. If someone had an inefficient metabolism then their body would have to process MORE food to yield the same amount of energy and in processing it utilize it...not store it. A person with an inneficient metabolism like the one you describe would struggle to eat enough to not be underweight, they wouldn't struggle with being overweight.

You should read up on how insulin resistance works. Because that's exactly what happens effectively.

The cells are insulin resistant. They don't allow the energy to enter them. The pancreas excretes more insulin to compensate. The energy moves into the cells. What isn't used at that time is stored as fat. Blood glucose drops. Hunger ensues. Cycle continues...

Explain to me how someone with an inneficient metabolism (meaning they yield less energy per calorie consumed) would gain fat as a result of that inefficiency. That does not follow. You seem to be saying that someone with an inefficient metabolism not only eats more but eats so much more that they not only compensate for their inneficient metabolism but overshoot to the point that they gain weight. Why? Apparently because "they are hungry"? Are we talking 4000 calories a day? This is not anything that I have heard of with regards to type II diabetics which honestly is largely caused by obesity not the other way around.

I think that is going to depend on how you define "inefficient". I can imagine definitions that function in both directions, depending on the perspective. I prefer to look at it as abnormal metabolism rather than efficiency based. People's bodies that are not acting within the "normal" parameters for food metabolism, fat storage, etc. So the normal rules don't apply in the same ways.

Aaron_K123

Some of these people simply don't understand basic (and not so basic) biology. When you have a metabolic disorder, your body isn't doing what it's supposed to, and the extent of its deviation from the norm can vary greatly. So, if someone with a metabolic disorder eats food, it isn't metabolized in the same way. They can get a lot less of the energy that one usually would -- you see this in insulin resistance for example. Rather than using the food for energy, they get to use only part of it and part of it gets stored as fat.

That makes no sense. If someone had a metabolic disorder that caused them to get considerably less energy from consumed food and they had to eat more as a result that would not result in excess fat storage. That does not follow at all. If someone had an inefficient metabolism then their body would have to process MORE food to yield the same amount of energy and in processing it utilize it...not store it. A person with an inneficient metabolism like the one you describe would struggle to eat enough to not be underweight, they wouldn't struggle with being overweight.

You should read up on how insulin resistance works. Because that's exactly what happens effectively.

The cells are insulin resistant. They don't allow the energy to enter them. The pancreas excretes more insulin to compensate. The energy moves into the cells. What isn't used at that time is stored as fat. Blood glucose drops. Hunger ensues. Cycle continues...

Explain to me how someone with an inneficient metabolism (meaning they yield less energy per calorie consumed) would gain fat as a result of that inefficiency. That does not follow. You seem to be saying that someone with an inefficient metabolism not only eats more but eats so much more that they not only compensate for their inneficient metabolism but overshoot to the point that they gain weight. Why? Apparently because "they are hungry"? Are we talking 4000 calories a day? This is not anything that I have heard of with regards to type II diabetics which honestly is largely caused by obesity not the other way around.

I think that is going to depend on how you define "inefficient". I can imagine definitions that function in both directions, depending on the perspective. I prefer to look at it as abnormal metabolism rather than efficiency based. People's bodies that are not acting within the "normal" parameters for food metabolism, fat storage, etc. So the normal rules don't apply in the same ways.

I was using your definition as stated in your post.

So, if someone with a metabolic disorder eats food, it isn't metabolized in the same way. They can get a lot less of the energy that one usually would

By that definition they would have to consume more food to get equivalent energy and therefore their predisposition would be to be thinner not fatter and they would have to consume more than average to maintain their weight. Math applies regardless. If they get less energy from food that means they either have to eat much more than normal or they lose weight. Such a person would not struggle with obesity, quite the opposite.

lindsey1979

That's cool. I'm fine with low-carb if that works for people. Some people do better with fewer carbs. Personally, though, it's easier for ME to eat what I want and eat within a calorie goal than it is to cut out my favorite foods. (It's basically how I've maintained over the years as I've aged.) It needs to be sustainable and life-long for me, and that means plenty of pasta to keep me sane. I've never had weight problems and I've always eaten plenty of carbs. Do what works for YOU! :flowerforyou:

I agree we are all different and one diet definitely does not work for all. However, I do believe (and know for a fact) that not all calories are created equal. But if counting calories works for you then who cares what some NYT article says!

how can it be a fact if it is not a fact?

A calorie is just a unit of energy. Therefore they are all the same in that regards.

All diets work, If it puts you in a caloric deficit.
I don't care what you eat, i don't care if you count calories, It means nothing to me.

I just find it ridiculous when people tote falsities as facts, and promote the diet they are on as the best diet, or only diet.

I'm not promoting any kind of diet. All I'm saying is that not all calories are created equal. And yes that's a fact. You can't argue that 100 calories of cookies has the same effect to your body as 100 calories of celery would.

A calorie is a calorie. If you're talking about micronutrients, vitamins and minerals that's something different. But a calorie still equals a calorie.

As far as the energy required to heat a certain amount of water a single degree through burning.

Unfortunately, our metabolism doesn't work the same way a fire does and why we can't eat everything that fire can burn.

Actually our metabolism works pretty much exactly like fire, converting hydrocarbons to carbon dioxide and water. Protein, carbs, fat...all hydrocarbons for a chemical engine.

You might say that our metabolism isn't 100% efficient and you would be correct but that inefficiency applies equally and therefore that 100 calories becomes the energetic equivalent of 75 calories regardless. Your claim seems to be that this is macro-centric on the basis of insulin resistance but I am sorry if you are eating from all three macros (which everyone does) that inefficiency would be distributed equally. If your body was terribly inneficient at processing carbohydrates then its response would be to burn additional carbohydrates to compensate or burn from the other macro groups in a way that compensated for that innefficiency...in otherwords you would burn MORE food to generate a similar amount of energy which mean that you would be prone to being thin, not overweight.

Type II diabeties is often caused by obesity. You seem to be claiming that obesity is caused by being type II diabetic. That is totally backwards.

It's much more detailed than that. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of different chemical reactions involved. Far more than simply burning by fire would be.

Look at the difference between the mere binding of fructose and glucose in both sucrose and HFCS. The fructose are unbound in HFCS whereas they are bound to glucose in sucrose. So, it actually takes on more step to unbind them in sucrose -- one of the reasons some posit that HFCS has a different reaction on weight gain in the body (though the mechanism is far from understood). And that's a difference in a extremely similar molecule. You talk about different molecules in the same macro and there is great variation, even more so between different macros.

lindsey1979

snip

Thank you, and congrats on your success despite your hurdle. I think the main issue IMO is the way people say things sometimes on here. It seems more of pointing a finger than trying to help. Also lumping everyone as " fatties" just making excuses. Some of us are determined DESPITE difficulties we may have to overcome. Telling people they are incapable of weighing measuring and logging accurately is insulting. Granted there are those that are not weighting and should be told to go here first BUT if this is not the issue being told you're a fat liar isn't constructive.

Exaggerating what people say to the point of insult isn't helpful either. I certainly never called anyone a "fat liar".

I think she was more describing her own experiences with doctors and others on the boards than you in particular Aaron_K123. Though I definitely have seen people say that very same thing to others on these boards.

Please provide examples of these instances where the person saying "you're a fat liar" was not outright trolling. I have been here 3 years and never once have seen a poster respond to a query in such a way.

I've definitely seen such disrespectful comments and not more than a handful of times. The other poster has had similar experiences. Are you calling us liars?

Catch-22!

Yeah nice try L....I didn't think you had a rebuttal for my question.
BTW, the most common advice I see here is along the lines of "you are likely not measuring your intake and exercise properly, which is probably the reason you're not losing weight at the rate you desire", which is not remotely the same as calling someone a fat liar. But again, nice try.


Edit: Quote failures...ahh F it.

Well, it was an incredibly asinine thing to ask for. Who keeps an index of insults in various MFP threads? That's ridiculous. Ask for less ridiculous things and maybe we can talk.

If you don't think such insults happen on MFP, I think you're either in denial or lack considerable reading comprehension. It's rare I don't see a thread with some such insult.

Aaron_K123

That's cool. I'm fine with low-carb if that works for people. Some people do better with fewer carbs. Personally, though, it's easier for ME to eat what I want and eat within a calorie goal than it is to cut out my favorite foods. (It's basically how I've maintained over the years as I've aged.) It needs to be sustainable and life-long for me, and that means plenty of pasta to keep me sane. I've never had weight problems and I've always eaten plenty of carbs. Do what works for YOU! :flowerforyou:

I agree we are all different and one diet definitely does not work for all. However, I do believe (and know for a fact) that not all calories are created equal. But if counting calories works for you then who cares what some NYT article says!

how can it be a fact if it is not a fact?

A calorie is just a unit of energy. Therefore they are all the same in that regards.

All diets work, If it puts you in a caloric deficit.
I don't care what you eat, i don't care if you count calories, It means nothing to me.

I just find it ridiculous when people tote falsities as facts, and promote the diet they are on as the best diet, or only diet.

I'm not promoting any kind of diet. All I'm saying is that not all calories are created equal. And yes that's a fact. You can't argue that 100 calories of cookies has the same effect to your body as 100 calories of celery would.

A calorie is a calorie. If you're talking about micronutrients, vitamins and minerals that's something different. But a calorie still equals a calorie.

As far as the energy required to heat a certain amount of water a single degree through burning.

Unfortunately, our metabolism doesn't work the same way a fire does and why we can't eat everything that fire can burn.

Actually our metabolism works pretty much exactly like fire, converting hydrocarbons to carbon dioxide and water. Protein, carbs, fat...all hydrocarbons for a chemical engine.

You might say that our metabolism isn't 100% efficient and you would be correct but that inefficiency applies equally and therefore that 100 calories becomes the energetic equivalent of 75 calories regardless. Your claim seems to be that this is macro-centric on the basis of insulin resistance but I am sorry if you are eating from all three macros (which everyone does) that inefficiency would be distributed equally. If your body was terribly inneficient at processing carbohydrates then its response would be to burn additional carbohydrates to compensate or burn from the other macro groups in a way that compensated for that innefficiency...in otherwords you would burn MORE food to generate a similar amount of energy which mean that you would be prone to being thin, not overweight.

Type II diabeties is often caused by obesity. You seem to be claiming that obesity is caused by being type II diabetic. That is totally backwards.

It's much more detailed than that. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of different chemical reactions involved. Far more than simply burning by fire would be.

Look at the difference between the mere binding of fructose and glucose in both sucrose and HFCS. The fructose are unbound in HFCS whereas they are bound to glucose in sucrose. So, it actually takes on more step to unbind them in sucrose -- one of the reasons some posit that HFCS has a different reaction on weight gain in the body (though the mechanism is far from understood). And that's a difference in a extremely similar molecule. You talk about different molecules in the same macro and there is great variation, even more so between different macros.

Yeah...I know....biochemist here. You are just waving the flag of "complicated" to say that anything is possible and therefore your version of reality is correct. That is not hard to do but it also holds no value or informational content. Saying to someone "it is to complicated to understand, so here is exactly how it works" is clearly flawed.

Fact is though that although the actual network of metabolic interactions is very complex the general process is quite simple. Hydrocarbons are converted to water and carbon dioxide yielding energy in the form of chemical bonds which can be used to perform work.

mrbyte

Everyone argues that the article sucks yet I eat 4000+ calories a day, do no cardio, lift some weights and my bf is 10% and I'm going to be 50 in a few months. I don't watch my calories. I keep my carbs at 20% and I eat as much as I want. Sorry you nay sayers can't beleive it but that's the way it is. Carb restriction works for some people regarding of how many calories they eat. My tdee is 2900, I've been eating 4000+ calories for months and lost weight which was fat. I'm getting leaner so I don't hold any merit in CICO anymore because it isn't as simple as that.