Calories in vs calories out

nomorebingesgirl2014

Well ... I totally do not get dieting ! Did Atkins gained 2lb , pigged out nite and lost a pound !?????? Atkins says calories in vs calories out is a myth . Anyone disagree ?

tennisdude2004

Well ... I totally do not get dieting ! Did Atkins gained 2lb , pigged out nite and lost a pound !?????? Atkins says calories in vs calories out is a myth . Anyone disagree ?

disagree - for just weight loss its calories in vs calories out. Eat in a calorie deficit and you will loss weight.

If you're also focusing on health then it's more about what you eat, as well as how much.

edit - my bad (confusing response - I meant I do not disagree with cals in vs cals out)

999tigger

Do you read the firums and what people say time and again?
Whats your explanation other than if you eat at a deficit you will lose weight and at a surplus you will gain?

Your example is very non scientific and annectodal. You weight fluctuates for many reasons. How do we know what else you ate that day as well as what exercise you were doing. One day is a reflection of one day and not soemthing to be relied upon. Look at weight loss over a longer period and then you might get it. Talk to the people who have lost 50lb plus and ask if they get it.

_Zardoz_

Well ... I totally do not get dieting ! Did Atkins gained 2lb , pigged out nite and lost a pound !?????? Atkins says calories in vs calories out is a myth . Anyone disagree ?

Yes Science does. Dr Atkins and it's advocates grasp of science was/is shaky at best.

kommodevaran

Calories in - calories out determines only the amount of fatty tissue, and amount of fatty tissue is determined only by calories in - calories out. Your body consists of around 70% water, and that, and the contents inside your stomach and intestines, varies quite a lot. You have to understand and accept those natural fluctuations in order to keep your sanity.

Cryptonomnomicon

A LOT of diet books; too many frankly. Most follow a fairly standard organization (the first chapter always explaining that YOUR FAT IS NOT YOUR FAULT) and, with very very few exceptions, most will tell you that ‘calorie restricted diets don’t work for weight loss’ and that whatever magic they are selling is the key to quick, easy (and of course permanent) weight loss.

Whether it’s insulin, dietary fat, the protein:carbohydrate or insulin:glucagon ratio, partitioning or whatever other BS, they will make it sound like caloric intake is not the key aspect in whether or not someone gains weight.

In almost all cases, the idea that food intake must be restricted in any fashion is dismissed; if it is mentioned it is generally as a short aside late in the book that nobody pays any attention to.

This is purely a psychological ploy; it sucks to have to consciously restrict food intake and this causes mental stress. Simply knowing that you can’t eat what you want when you want it blows; I hate it as much as the next person. Many people will feel hungrier simply because they know that they can’t eat what they want when they want it.

Yet the fundamental fact is that the body will NOT have any need to tap into stored body fat unless the individual is burning more calories than they are taking in. Of course this means that either energy expenditure has to go up, caloric intake has to go down, or both have to occur.

So how can these books make this claim? It’s simple: they all hide basic caloric restriction in whatever they happen to be proposing. Basically, this is Lyle’s Rule #1 of Diet books:

All diet books tell you that you won’t have to restrict calories, and then trick you into doing it anyway.

Source:http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/all-diets-work-the-importance-of-calories.html

neanderthin

Pigging out is obviously working for you, so do that.

TavistockToad

Well ... I totally do not get dieting ! Did Atkins gained 2lb , pigged out nite and lost a pound !?????? Atkins says calories in vs calories out is a myth . Anyone disagree ?

yes, i disagree!

Cryptonomnomicon

In case you missed my point earlier...

Liftng4Lis

Well ... I totally do not get dieting ! Did Atkins gained 2lb , pigged out nite and lost a pound !?????? Atkins says calories in vs calories out is a myth . Anyone disagree ?

Yes Science does. Dr Atkins and it's advocates grasp of science was/is shaky at best.

+1^

Unknown

This content has been removed.

jeffpettis

Whether Atkins or any other diet wants to admit it or not the fact is if their diet works it is because of a calorie deficit.

Atkins will have you believe that weight loss on their plan is directly caused by reducing carbs, when in truth it is caused by a calorie reduction as a result of reducing carbs. In other words if you eat less carbs you will automatically eat less calories.

amylbowden

I saw an article on BBC news today on this point. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-29031985

The article describes a study which found that all diets (including Atkins) gave similar weight loss results long term if adhered to.

I quote 'Obesity experts said all diets cut calories to a similar level, which may explain the results.'

J72FIT

I quote 'Obesity experts said all diets cut calories to a similar level, which may explain the results.'

Yep... Just pick the plan you enjoy and can stick with. Also, don't get caught up in all the dogma and be flexible and willing to change what you are doing if and when you plateau.

maidentl

All diet books tell you that you won’t have to restrict calories, and then trick you into doing it anyway.

These forums have ruined diet books for me. I used to love to read them for some reason, whether I intended to do the diet or not. I picked up one from the library the other day and just flipped through it with a few "bah, humbugs" before returning it. I'll never be the same now. :sad:

kommodevaran

I saw an article on BBC news today on this point. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-29031985

The article describes a study which found that all diets (including Atkins) gave similar weight loss results long term if adhered to.

The range of diets covered included, Atkins, South Beach, Zone, Biggest Loser, Jenny Craig, Nutrisystem, Volumetrics, Weight Watchers, Ornish and Rosemary Conley.

I don't follow any plan but my own, but incidentally, to a certain degree, I use some of the principles from some of those, and other diet plans. But I don't like to be told when and what to eat :mad: I get that some people like and need the structure and rigidity of a commercial plan, but it doesn't help in the long run, if the plan doesn't have room for *real* real life situations and doesn't teach you how and what to eat without any special equipment or rituals. (I'm not sure if scales and weighing are special equipment and rituals )

Yep... Just pick the plan you enjoy and can stick with. Also, don't get caught up in all the dogma and be flexible and willing to change what you are doing if and when you plateau.

Yes, you need a plan that makes things easy, if it doesn't, it's a bad plan. And flexibility is very important, in fact, crucial, and most commercial diet plans are not flexible. They don't teach you the overall principles, so that you can be independant, and why should they :devil:

aarnwine2013

I quote 'Obesity experts said all diets cut calories to a similar level, which may explain the results.'

Yep... Just pick the plan you enjoy and can stick with. Also, don't get caught up in all the dogma and be flexible and willing to change what you are doing if and when you plateau.

I like this. I was eating mainly low carb until about a month ago and my needs are changing and I've added carbs but stayed at a deficit. I also think you have to be willing to change.

Also, hate to admit this, but I don't know if Atkins is a life long lifestyle. I did and can feel my food needs changing.
(that probably makes no sense...I've no idea how to descibe it)

El_Cunado

I disagree too.

MelRC117

Seeing as how you are 2 pounds to your goal weight according to your ticker, you need to have a diet that is how you want to eat for the rest of your life.

It may be .5 pound a week for you, but unless if you're planning on continuing with Atkins (which truly is about creating a deficit, and that deficit is created by not feeling as hungry by eating mainly fats and moderate protein). You wouldn't even be starting in the "induction" phase for Atkins.

RheneeB

I just read a great book called "Metabolism Reset Diet" and the author is very against the whole concept of it being about calorie in/calorie out because our bodies are all different and that calories are different. For example, eating a 250 calorie brownie is going to have a different affect on your body than eating a 250 calorie salad with protein. How your body reacts to that food and what it does with it is what she says will determine your weight loss. She is big into not counting calories but making sure you are fueling your metabolism properly. It is a hard concept to fathem....eat more to lose but I have been following her 28 day metabolism reset for 9 days now and have lost 8 pounds. This is after months and months are eating 1200 calories and working out hard 5 days a week. I almost panic on some days because I feel like I am stuffing myself but the scale has continuously moved down. The book was a great find for me!!

eric_sg61

All diet books tell you that you won’t have to restrict calories, and then trick you into doing it anyway.

Source:http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/all-diets-work-the-importance-of-calories.html

Exactly! Every fad diet or diet book have the same method--either eliminate an entire food group or eliminate a list of certain foods/ingredients or severely limit them.

martinel2099

Well ... I totally do not get dieting ! Did Atkins gained 2lb , pigged out nite and lost a pound !?????? Atkins says calories in vs calories out is a myth . Anyone disagree ?

Not sure if trolling or not.

I don't care which diet you take up, you will only lose weight if you create a calorie deficit. It's not theory, it's science. Pigging out might seemed to have worked for you last night but keep it up and see what happens over time.

Weight loss is a tricky thing and there's lots of factors that disguise weight loss/weight gains. You might have pigged out last night and lost a pound but you could have just as easily lost a lot of water weight between the time when you ate and when you weighed yourself.

Daily measuring on the scale is not an effective tool for measuring progress unless you realize weight loss is not linear and average your results each week. If your trending downward in a 4-6 week cycle you are doing something right and eating at a decifict, if you are consistently gaining over that cycle you are eating at a surplus.

ninerbuff

All diet books tell you that you won’t have to restrict calories, and then trick you into doing it anyway.

These forums have ruined diet books for me. I used to love to read them for some reason, whether I intended to do the diet or not. I picked up one from the library the other day and just flipped through it with a few "bah, humbugs" before returning it. I'll never be the same now. :sad:

Well you saved some money! But diet books are written for one main reason...............profit. Granted there are some for people will health/hormonal issues, but for the general population who's just overweight, it's going to come down to basic math.

A.C.E. Certified Group Fitness and Personal Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Branstin

Did Atkins not realize that his weight loss plan was built on CICO? Either a person manually count calories or pay some program like Atkins to do it for him/her. I would love for someone to explain to me the manner in which eating more than needed for maintenance causes weight loss.

Commander_Keen

http://www.awlr.org/blog/a-calorie-is-a-calorie-unless-of-course-they-derive-from-an-atkins-diet

Interesting article.

Commander_Keen

Another interesting artical

http://www.fitday.com/fitness-articles/fitness/weight-loss/counting-carbs-vs-counting-calories-whats-better-for-weight-loss.html#b

Unknown

This content has been removed.

vismal

http://www.awlr.org/blog/a-calorie-is-a-calorie-unless-of-course-they-derive-from-an-atkins-diet

Interesting article.

From the article:

According to traditional logic, if you want to lose weight, there must be a calorie deficit. In other words, you should find out how many calories your body uses each day, then eat 500 calories less each day and you will lose 1 pound per week. According to PhotoCalorie.com (which employs the widely used mifflin-St Jeor basal metabolic rate equations), for a 5'3" 160 pound woman to lose one pound per week she should eat about 1,480 calories a day. If this person went on the Atkins diet summarized in Consumer Reports, they would be predicted to GAIN a pound each week! And those consuming the Zone diet would be predicted to lose the most weight since they allow the least calories per day.

Yet this doesn't seem to be the case. In this review of diets and the scientific literature supporting them, calories don't predict weight loss.

SO A CALORIE IS NOT A CALORIE??

A calorie is a unit of measurement. A calorie is always a calorie in the same way that an inch is always an inch. The problem with fad diets as well as pure calorie counting is human error. People either consciously or unconsciously are not compliant with diets. They have cheat meals/days, miscount calories, don't weigh food, don't track intake accurately, etc. Anyone not losing weight is simply eating more calories then they burn in a day. Certain metabolic conditions exist that make burning calories much more difficult and might require calories in to be so low that compliance is nearly impossible. Conditions like these are rare and are the exception, not the rule. Long story short, if in the long run you are not losing weight, you are eating too much/burning too little.

silentKayak

Atkins and other extremely low-carb diets contain a metabolic "cheat" to pure CICO.

If you don't eat carbs, you go into ketosis. The body burns fat for fuel, but it does it really inefficiently. Half-burned fat-cells are excreted through the urine (as well as through the skin and breath, which is why you get bad breath on that diet). This means that for every calorie you "burn" you also lose some fat by literally peeing it out. So yes, you can eat more calories and still lose weight on a high-fat, high protein diet because you're shedding fat cells you didn't have to burn.

The catch is that you can't have a cheat day. You can't eat a piece of birthday cake or your mom's Christmas cookies or so much as a single saltine cracker with your vegetable soup. Carbs above about 20-30 g/day will knock you out of ketosis for days.

vismal

Atkins and other extremely low-carb diets contain a metabolic "cheat" to pure CICO.

If you don't eat carbs, you go into ketosis. The body burns fat for fuel, but it does it really inefficiently. Half-burned fat-cells are excreted through the urine (as well as through the skin and breath, which is why you get bad breath on that diet). This means that for every calorie you "burn" you also lose some fat by literally peeing it out. So yes, you can eat more calories and still lose weight on a high-fat, high protein diet because you're shedding fat cells you didn't have to burn.

The catch is that you can't have a cheat day. You can't eat a piece of birthday cake or your mom's Christmas cookies or so much as a single saltine cracker with your vegetable soup. Carbs above about 20-30 g/day will knock you out of ketosis for days.

This is highly scientifically inaccurate. CICO still applies even in ketosis. The reason for rapid weight loss while in ketosis is due to the extreme amount of water weight/glycogen the dieter loses in the first few weeks. This is why a similar rapid gain is seen when the dieters returns to eating mixed meals.

lindsey1979

I personally think we're missing something in the pure CICO world -- either our understanding of it is incomplete or the CO aspect fluctuates so greatly do to CI and hormonal balances that it's of limited usefulness. Yes, calorie is a unit of measure, but it has a limited application when we're talking about it in the context of weight loss and the body's metabolism. In many ways, think about other simple measurements. Yes a mile is a mile is a mile. But how hard it is to traverse that mile will depend on other factors -- whether swimming a mile, hiking up hill a mile at a 10% incline or sliding down a mile on a sled. All a mile -- but all very different outputs on your personal exertion.

Just the body composition of tissue lost (whether fat vs. muscle) is going to change your actual weight seen on the scale since 1 lb of fat releases 3500 calories whereas 1 lb of muscle releases far fewer (somewhere between 600-1700). You'll see studies where people of different insulin sensitivities fare better on different macronutrient levels. Some lose more weight with higher fat/lower carbs, some lose more weight with higher carbs. If it were all the same, then the macro levels shouldn't matter -- but they do.

That being said, I do think CICO is a really useful starting point for most people. If someone is tracking all of their food intake faithfully (weighing everything) and is falling outside of those expected CICO weight loss results, then it's time to start digging into other reasons. If you're one of those people that would benefit from shifting of macros (like reducing carbs) or there is an underlying medical condition (thyroid, PCOS, insulin resistance, etc.).

I just don't think it's so black and white as some on this site seem to believe -- that CICO is 100% the answer or others that think that it has no useful purpose I think there are some limitations and some caveats, many of which we don't fully understand (yet). I do think the quality of your calories is also important in addition to just the sheer quantity. How important that is varies for the individual.