why don't the low carb folks believe in CICO?

Options
18911131448

Replies

  • blktngldhrt
    blktngldhrt Posts: 1,053 Member
    Options
    ana3067 wrote: »
    Alliwan wrote: »
    tomatoey wrote: »
    So no, it's not the only way to lose, and it doesn't trump CICO (although I think it does help regulate hormones).

    This is the issue for many on LCHF. There are stories upon stories of ppl who ate a SAD, say 1500 calories a day and exercised and didnt lose weight or gained. Then they ate 1500 calories a day and exercised but ate LCHF and they lost weight in the short and long terms. Insulin is a hormone, if you have high insulin like IR or hormonal weirdness like PCOS, hormones play a HUGE roll in how you process what you eat and the types of food you eat.

    So 1500 is a deficit yes, but what you eat, for many, is more important that how much you eat when it comes to weightloss.

    Most likely because they were not logging or simply not logging accurately.

    Also have someone on my friends list with PCOS and her carbs are often pretty high... she's lost 30lbs iirc.

    Just because you have a friend with pcos who eats high carb and still loses does not mean that everyone is the same. It's not a one size fits all thing where medical conditions are concerned.
  • blktngldhrt
    blktngldhrt Posts: 1,053 Member
    Options
    Alliwan wrote: »
    Alliwan wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    Alliwan wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    Alliwan wrote: »
    tomatoey wrote: »
    So no, it's not the only way to lose, and it doesn't trump CICO (although I think it does help regulate hormones).

    This is the issue for many on LCHF. There are stories upon stories of ppl who ate a SAD, say 1500 calories a day and exercised and didnt lose weight or gained. Then they ate 1500 calories a day and exercised but ate LCHF and they lost weight in the short and long terms. Insulin is a hormone, if you have high insulin like IR or hormonal weirdness like PCOS, hormones play a HUGE roll in how you process what you eat and the types of food you eat.

    So 1500 is a deficit yes, but what you eat, for many, is more important that how much you eat when it comes to weightloss.

    wouldn't medicine for said medical conditions affect the "out" side of CO so at the end of the day, barring a medical condition, they would lose the same as the other person if they were both on 1500….

    Sometimes Yes I would think so. But if you've ever been on Metformin, which is what the most popular IR med is, the more carbs you eat the more things 'run' thru you. Being on the potty all day with LBS (leaky butt syndrome) is horrid. And even then, the meds only control so much insulin production, doesnt fix it. So eating a SAD is still going to cause some insulin problems and spikes even if you are on the max dose of Met.

    IR and PCOS and Metabolic Syndrome are not curable, anymore than diabetes is. You can get rid of some or all of the symptoms if you eat correctly for your condition and keep the weight off. But if you go back to eating carbs, the symptoms come back.

    And I am not sure there are many who would rather medicate themselves on things that 1.quit working with few backup meds to turn to or 2. be on meds the rest of their lives instead of helping their medical condition thru food.

    So yes, the Met changes the CO but you have to know you have that medical condition in the first place, which often comes AFTER you've come here to the mfp or other forums complaining you are weighing and measuring correctly, you are eating (insert low amount of calories here) and you arent losing weight and then get ridiculed by those who firmly believe CICO is the beginning and end of the discussion.

    As i stated before, the LCHF boards have repeatedly confirmed that the majority, but not all, who do LCHF have some sort of medical problem that LCHF helps tremendously.

    thankfully, I have never had to take meds for any kind of insulin or metabolic syndrome..

    usually, when people come back and say they are logging accurately and use a food scale, my next round of advice is to go to DR and get tested for medical condition ….

    Many on here will basically call the person who said this that they were lying and to open their diary for more inspection, etc long BEFORE they are given suggestions on what to ask for from the Doctor. Not saying you do, as I dont know you or your posting history really. But Ive seen that scenario often and some come to the 'haven' of the LCHF boards after being berated here.

    General doctors often dont know what to look for. They run the standard simple thyroid test and usually and A1C and if they are normal, which for IR, PCOS and metabolic syndrome tey usually are, tell to eat less and move more and send you on your way. You have to actually know to ask for a fasting insulin test. With IR and Metabolic syndrome at least, your A1C and glucose levels are almost always dead set normal, it is the insulin that is very high and that's the problem.

    So a little understanding that ppl dont know to ask for these things or are aware of these issues before the SAD fails them helps all of us be more mentally and physically healthy.

    If you have a good endocrinologist, you won't have to ask for anything. Especially not something as simple as a fasting insulin test. .

    Only if you know you need an endorcrinologist to begin with. Who randomly asks to see one unless they know there is a problem first? That can often be the problem they ask their regular doctor and he doesnt know enough to send them to an endocrinologist and their numbers are normal so he figures, like many here, they are lying about what they eat and how much they move and send them home.

    A person who is in-tune with their body typically knows when something is up.

    If a person is eating frequently, ravenously hungry, gaining weight, etc., it's usually pretty apparent that something is going on with their endocrine system.

    A person has to see their PCP for a referral anyways. If a person continues to suffer, most PCP's will refer them to an endo.

    I was diagnosed hypoglycemic by my pcp and not referred to an endocrinologist or a dietician. I actually wasn't given a referral to my endo until eleven years after my diagnosis. I was just told to control it with a low glycemic diet and to eat sugar when i was low. It wasn't until I got older and was able to do my own research that I figured out my pcp sucked. I guess hypoglycemia information has come a long way since I started having problems with it.
  • blktngldhrt
    blktngldhrt Posts: 1,053 Member
    Options
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    Heres an example. Way back when, I was a member of an egg fast-stall breaker diet page. For 1-2 weeks these people ate nothing but eggs and fat (butter, mayo, coconut oil). The rule was 1 TBS fat per egg. The general amount of eggs consumed were 10-12 per day with the added fat alongside.
    The calories were huge and yet the majority lost weigh like crazy!

    at 70 calories an egg that would be 840 calories for 12 eggs …so if you just 12 eggs and some fats not sure you would hit 1500 ????

    But 12 TBS of fat would be at least another 1200 cal or more, if we go by that story. Personally I think people were probably skipping fats however.

    12 tbs of fat a day is insane!!! If I have a 2 tbs of olive oil a day that is ALOT for me...

    How would you even do that unless you were having it in shots? I love eggs but the thought of them swimming in all that oil... gag.

    I do shots of hemp oil occasionally to get my fat macros up. :smile:

    for real?????

    Yes. If it's late and I don't feel like actually making something..i take a shot.
  • strozman
    strozman Posts: 2,623 Member
    Options
    http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/

    There you go OP. You could learn a lot from some of these studies.

    There is a study (which atm I am unable to find), that had subjects lie in bed for 6 weeks (I think 6 weeks) eating their BMR calories, in high protein vs high carb, the high protein people lost less muscle and gained less fat.

    Think about it like this, CICO is the gold standard, but what the calories come from still matters. Dieting and working out while eating 2000 cal of Twinkies vs 2000 cal of steak is going to have a significant impact in body composition which has a cumulative effect in continuing weight loss
  • asdowe13
    asdowe13 Posts: 1,951 Member
    Options
    strozman wrote: »
    http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/

    There you go OP. You could learn a lot from some of these studies.

    There is a study (which atm I am unable to find), that had subjects lie in bed for 6 weeks (I think 6 weeks) eating their BMR calories, in high protein vs high carb, the high protein people lost less muscle and gained less fat.

    Think about it like this, CICO is the gold standard, but what the calories come from still matters. Dieting and working out while eating 2000 cal of Twinkies vs 2000 cal of steak is going to have a significant impact in body composition which has a cumulative effect in continuing weight loss

    Who has ever recommended eating this way?
    No one would ever do this. It's ridiculous.
    And neither of which would be a healthy diet.

  • Alliwan
    Alliwan Posts: 1,245 Member
    Options
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    if any of the low carbers are curious, this is the thread that spawned this thread

    https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/comment/31656383#Comment_31656383

    I think it was stated a few pages ago in this thread, but newbies who come to mfp dont always understand CICO and jump on the low carb bandwagon because of all the hype about it recently. They dont research it, like other diet choices (vegan, vegetarian, meatatarian, etc) and just figure oh, low carb means high protein and so and so told me I didnt have to count calories. They have to be taught, just like anyone else, what macros are and how to tweak them and that they need to find their own weight loss calorie number.

    So dont judge all low carbers by the vocal but uninformed new ones. They will learn and maybe many of them will fall into the category of being able to eat to full and not have to count calories on a LCHF.
  • strozman
    strozman Posts: 2,623 Member
    Options
    adowe wrote: »
    strozman wrote: »
    http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/

    There you go OP. You could learn a lot from some of these studies.

    There is a study (which atm I am unable to find), that had subjects lie in bed for 6 weeks (I think 6 weeks) eating their BMR calories, in high protein vs high carb, the high protein people lost less muscle and gained less fat.

    Think about it like this, CICO is the gold standard, but what the calories come from still matters. Dieting and working out while eating 2000 cal of Twinkies vs 2000 cal of steak is going to have a significant impact in body composition which has a cumulative effect in continuing weight loss

    Who has ever recommended eating this way?
    No one would ever do this. It's ridiculous.
    And neither of which would be a healthy diet.
    What are you responding to? My oversimplification of CICO? No one ever said eat twinkies or steak. Just that body comp is affected by types of food, which in turn manipulates BMR, which can HELP create or slow weight/body fat loss
  • jazzine1
    jazzine1 Posts: 280 Member
    edited March 2015
    Options
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    I am going to throw this one out there, because I got into a debate with someone in another thread and it left me pretty mind blown. The persons basic assumptions where the following:

    1. they were not calorie restricting (however they were losing weight)
    2. if they ate 1200 calories of a regular diet of say 30% carbs they did not lose, but when they ate a 1200 calories "low carb" diet they lost weight.
    3. throughout the course of the thread others came in and made the argument that CICO did not apply when was going low carb.

    Before all my low carb friends come flying in here to say that I am knocking low carb, let me be clear that is not what I am doing. The way that I see it is that low carb, IIFYM, keto, IF, etc are just tools to get one into a calorie deficit, and one is not superior to the other. I just get mind blown when people say "I calorie restricted and lost nothing, but when I went low carb I lost" or "fat loss only happens when one is low carb" or "CICO does not apply to me and only low carb works for me" and on and on….

    I actually tried low carb and it was not for me. My energy in the gym was non-existent and i would end up binging on whatever carbs I had in the house.

    It would be nice if some low carbers came in here and acutely refuted this…

    OR

    if you really believe that CICO does not apply, then I would be curious as to why you think this…

    ETA - I am not referring to people that have to low carb due to a medical condition. However, CICO would still apply in that instance….



    I am doing LC because I have noticed that when I eat too much carbs it make me feel psychically sick. I started MFP weighting all my food, calorie counting, eating 1200 and lost weight. Then I read up on BMR/TDEE and changed my micros to refect that along with a low carb % just to feel better psychically. I continue to weight, count and log. I need to know that I am not over my daily calories allowed because I believe that's how I will keep losing. I have done a lot of reading up on the CiCo and it does makes sense TO ME. So I personally dont discount CiCo. I believe I need a caloric deficit in order to lose weight and if eating LC helps me attain that deficit then awesome. I cannot eat and eat and eat over my TDEE and just expect to lose weight. The only way I have had optimum results losing weight effectively, this time around, has been eating with a deficit and LC but if I feel like I want to eat rice or a cookie or some whole wheat bread then I just fit them in my micros and keep it moving. I am still learning and would like to make this a way of life that is attainable for me and I dont think I could do that if I could NEVER have a piece of chocolate, bread, or pasta in my life.
  • Delilahhhhhh
    Delilahhhhhh Posts: 477 Member
    Options




    gCL5fOMAVijWE.gif
  • strozman
    strozman Posts: 2,623 Member
    edited March 2015
    Options
    herrspoons wrote: »
    strozman wrote: »
    http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/

    There you go OP. You could learn a lot from some of these studies.

    There is a study (which atm I am unable to find), that had subjects lie in bed for 6 weeks (I think 6 weeks) eating their BMR calories, in high protein vs high carb, the high protein people lost less muscle and gained less fat.

    Think about it like this, CICO is the gold standard, but what the calories come from still matters. Dieting and working out while eating 2000 cal of Twinkies vs 2000 cal of steak is going to have a significant impact in body composition which has a cumulative effect in continuing weight loss

    Every time someone posts a link to authoritynutrition (LOL) a kitten dies.

    A kitten also dies every time someone makes a ludicrous argument using extremes as general indicators.

    Think of the kittens.

    The links to the published articles just happened to be on that site. So you can't refute peer reviewed studies, so you ATTEMPt to be funny. Good one bro

    like I said before CICO is the gold standard for weight loss, but what the calories come from matters too
  • asdowe13
    asdowe13 Posts: 1,951 Member
    Options
    strozman wrote: »
    adowe wrote: »
    strozman wrote: »
    http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/

    There you go OP. You could learn a lot from some of these studies.

    There is a study (which atm I am unable to find), that had subjects lie in bed for 6 weeks (I think 6 weeks) eating their BMR calories, in high protein vs high carb, the high protein people lost less muscle and gained less fat.

    Think about it like this, CICO is the gold standard, but what the calories come from still matters. Dieting and working out while eating 2000 cal of Twinkies vs 2000 cal of steak is going to have a significant impact in body composition which has a cumulative effect in continuing weight loss

    Who has ever recommended eating this way?
    No one would ever do this. It's ridiculous.
    And neither of which would be a healthy diet.
    What are you responding to? My oversimplification of CICO? No one ever said eat twinkies or steak. Just that body comp is affected by types of food, which in turn manipulates BMR, which can HELP create or slow weight/body fat loss


    Oversimplification? You didn't oversimplify anything you threw out two bogus diet suggestions that no one would ever eat.

    No one suggested that body comp has nothing to do with what you eat.
    But it does require CICO. whether losing, gaining, maintaining.

    You can recomp on low carb, vegan, Paleo....whatever diet you want.

    What OP is saying is, the most vocal of low carbers seem to think it's the best way to lose weight and that they don't think CICO matter.

  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,139 Member
    Options
    strozman wrote: »
    http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/

    There you go OP. You could learn a lot from some of these studies.

    There is a study (which atm I am unable to find), that had subjects lie in bed for 6 weeks (I think 6 weeks) eating their BMR calories, in high protein vs high carb, the high protein people lost less muscle and gained less fat.

    Think about it like this, CICO is the gold standard, but what the calories come from still matters. Dieting and working out while eating 2000 cal of Twinkies vs 2000 cal of steak is going to have a significant impact in body composition which has a cumulative effect in continuing weight loss

    who is advocating a diet of 2000 twinkies????

    and what does calorie type have to do with my OP???
  • 44flacaflor
    44flacaflor Posts: 2 Member
    Options
    What is CICO?
  • asdowe13
    asdowe13 Posts: 1,951 Member
    Options
    What is CICO?

    Calories In Calories Out
  • MrCoolGrim
    MrCoolGrim Posts: 351 Member
    edited March 2015
    Options
    What is CICO?

    Calories In Calories Out
  • strozman
    strozman Posts: 2,623 Member
    edited March 2015
    Options
    adowe wrote: »
    strozman wrote: »
    adowe wrote: »
    strozman wrote: »
    http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/

    There you go OP. You could learn a lot from some of these studies.

    There is a study (which atm I am unable to find), that had subjects lie in bed for 6 weeks (I think 6 weeks) eating their BMR calories, in high protein vs high carb, the high protein people lost less muscle and gained less fat.

    Think about it like this, CICO is the gold standard, but what the calories come from still matters. Dieting and working out while eating 2000 cal of Twinkies vs 2000 cal of steak is going to have a significant impact in body composition which has a cumulative effect in continuing weight loss

    Who has ever recommended eating this way?
    No one would ever do this. It's ridiculous.
    And neither of which would be a healthy diet.
    What are you responding to? My oversimplification of CICO? No one ever said eat twinkies or steak. Just that body comp is affected by types of food, which in turn manipulates BMR, which can HELP create or slow weight/body fat loss


    Oversimplification? You didn't oversimplify anything you threw out two bogus diet suggestions that no one would ever eat.

    No one suggested that body comp has nothing to do with what you eat.
    But it does require CICO. whether losing, gaining, maintaining.

    You can recomp on low carb, vegan, Paleo....whatever diet you want.

    What OP is saying is, the most vocal of low carbers seem to think it's the best way to lose weight and that they don't think CICO matter.
    Reading comprehension much? I said eating the same cal in twinkies vs steak would have a different effect on body comp and continuing weight loss
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,139 Member
    Options
    Alliwan wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    if any of the low carbers are curious, this is the thread that spawned this thread

    https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/comment/31656383#Comment_31656383

    I think it was stated a few pages ago in this thread, but newbies who come to mfp dont always understand CICO and jump on the low carb bandwagon because of all the hype about it recently. They dont research it, like other diet choices (vegan, vegetarian, meatatarian, etc) and just figure oh, low carb means high protein and so and so told me I didnt have to count calories. They have to be taught, just like anyone else, what macros are and how to tweak them and that they need to find their own weight loss calorie number.

    So dont judge all low carbers by the vocal but uninformed new ones. They will learn and maybe many of them will fall into the category of being able to eat to full and not have to count calories on a LCHF.

    funny, in that thread most of the low carb folks were trying to defend the OP which was driving me nuts; however, in this thread most are agreeing that it is CICO ..

    Based on answer in that thread, I was expecting different ones in this one...

    glad that I posted the topic, as I have learned a lot about low carb lifestyle...
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,139 Member
    Options
    strozman wrote: »
    adowe wrote: »
    strozman wrote: »
    http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/

    There you go OP. You could learn a lot from some of these studies.

    There is a study (which atm I am unable to find), that had subjects lie in bed for 6 weeks (I think 6 weeks) eating their BMR calories, in high protein vs high carb, the high protein people lost less muscle and gained less fat.

    Think about it like this, CICO is the gold standard, but what the calories come from still matters. Dieting and working out while eating 2000 cal of Twinkies vs 2000 cal of steak is going to have a significant impact in body composition which has a cumulative effect in continuing weight loss

    Who has ever recommended eating this way?
    No one would ever do this. It's ridiculous.
    And neither of which would be a healthy diet.
    What are you responding to? My oversimplification of CICO? No one ever said eat twinkies or steak. Just that body comp is affected by types of food, which in turn manipulates BMR, which can HELP create or slow weight/body fat loss

    no one ever said eat twinkies vs steak, yet you used it as a valid comparison point....

    if you agree no one eats that way, then why even bring it up???
  • strozman
    strozman Posts: 2,623 Member
    edited March 2015
    Options
    herrspoons wrote: »
    strozman wrote: »
    herrspoons wrote: »
    strozman wrote: »
    http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/

    There you go OP. You could learn a lot from some of these studies.

    There is a study (which atm I am unable to find), that had subjects lie in bed for 6 weeks (I think 6 weeks) eating their BMR calories, in high protein vs high carb, the high protein people lost less muscle and gained less fat.

    Think about it like this, CICO is the gold standard, but what the calories come from still matters. Dieting and working out while eating 2000 cal of Twinkies vs 2000 cal of steak is going to have a significant impact in body composition which has a cumulative effect in continuing weight loss

    Every time someone posts a link to authoritynutrition (LOL) a kitten dies.

    A kitten also dies every time someone makes a ludicrous argument using extremes as general indicators.

    Think of the kittens.

    The links to the published articles just happened to be on that site. So you can't refute peer reviewed studies, so you ATTEMPt to be funny. Good one bro

    So link direct to the studies, bro.

    I'm well aware of the thermogenic potential of protein, carbs, and fats, as well as their calorie content by gram, however I don't make the ridiculous assumption that people entirely eat steak or twinkies. In fairness, neither to the author of the papers you refer to.

    In fairness, another poster said I was suggesting that. When I NEVER suggested that as a diet. see above post