why don't the low carb folks believe in CICO?
Options
Replies
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
CICO is a one size fits all.rachylouise87 wrote: »firm believer in CICO but some people are more insulin sensitive. firm believer weight loss is not a one fits all.
big believer in the below
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/hormonal-weight-loss/
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/female-effect-hormones-determine-female-fat-patterns/
Medical conditions just skew one or the other.
CICO is one size fits all, but the macro ratios that work best for you will differ person to person. Like I said above, one thing that occasionally annoys me about some low carb people here (not the sensible ones, which are most of those in this thread) is the assertion that EVERYONE would do better on lower carbs or that everyone finds that carbs trigger their hunger in the same way, etc. But the same is, of course, true in reverse when people insist that low carb is unhealthy or can't work or would be too depressing. Depends on the person.
And this is where IIFYMM comes into play.
It holds true for keto, vegan, paleo, veg, LCHF, we all have Macros and Micros just how we fill them differs.
I always find it funny when people hate on IIFYM yet they actually follow it.
Yes, I agree with all that. I interpret IIFYM as just meaning that you watch your macros, basically. By definition low carb folks do, at least low carb folks who also try to hit a general ballpark or better for their fat percentage.
And from my view, most low carbers focus on their macro ratios. Just their macros look a little different than the SAD.
Anyone who cares about their diet is going to have a diet that looks a lot different than the SAD...you don't have to low carb. My diary is open...my nutritional profile is outstanding and a far cry from the SAD, and I don't low carb at all.
Simply having a balanced diet is going to be a far cry from the SAD. To me, the comment:And from my view, most low carbers focus on their macro ratios. Just their macros look a little different than the SAD.
Implies that carbs = SAD = junk. There are a whole lot of highly nutritious carbs out there that aren't "junk"...carbs go well beyond 40 ounce Big Gulps.
I never once said junk. Never once.
I didn't say that you said it...it would appear to be implied in the statement and it's an implication that is made often by low carbers...I know a few personally, and they all think carbs are satan...they all think carbs are killing people...they're nutty.
It's ok...I'll enjoy my legumes and my whole grain oats and my brown rice and my potatoes and sweet potatoes and my fruit and my copious amounts of daily vegetables and I'll be happy.
That wasn't what I was implying at all. I know there are nutritous carbs out there. Again another assumption that because there are a few low carbers that make certain claims that all of them do. Which leads you to assuming I was implying that people who don't eat low carb only eat junk?
I think this has more to do with sensitivity to the term "SAD" and what is usually meant by it. You can see this somewhat in the post from the paleo person I replied to, talking about the SAD and "processed carbs."0 -
beccyleigh wrote: »beccyleigh wrote: »I suppose the only question you need to ask yourself is "Is what I am doing, working for me?" If the answer is yes give no *kitten* what other people do. It seems to get some of you all twisted in your knickers over other peoples decisions. Chill. Pill.
And if what you are doing isn't working, then find something else.
you seem to have your knickers pretty twisted up right about now...
I'm not wearing any love.
so you are calling people out for what you are doing...interesting..0 -
No, not a problem at all, IF it can be done without all the preachy judgment coming off both sides on this thread.0
-
yopeeps025 wrote: »beccyleigh wrote: »I suppose the only question you need to ask yourself is "Is what I am doing, working for me?" If the answer is yes give no *kitten* what other people do. It seems to get some of you all twisted in your knickers over other peoples decisions. Chill. Pill.
And if what you are doing isn't working, then find something else.
Hmm so educating people on what not needs to be done is a problem?
I guess this poster just believes that we should 100% validate everything on MFP no matter how crazy the topic0 -
@lemurcat12 That is my frustration that people are making assumptions on those that are newbies, whether one or off MFP, to low carb.
I don't know if its for everybody who started eating low carb and has made it long term, but I would have insisted cutting carbs was the answer. It wasn't until I started using MFP and tracking and reading that I saw what was happening. It was a learning process and a lot of that happened in the low carb forums, not on the regular forums.
Perhaps you are a sensible one and if you are I apologize if I offend, but honestly you would be one of the few. I am very active in the fitness community and industry at large, and by and large the current prevailing derp is that indeed carbs are the devil. I'm literally seeing trainers at my gym tell clients not to eat things like sweet peas or carrots...it's stupid...and it's rampant derp, it's not just a few newbs on MFP.
Hell, if it wasn't so rampant you wouldn't have threads and posts asking if potatoes are "good" or "bad"...it's a flippin' whole food.0 -
beccyleigh wrote: »beccyleigh wrote: »I suppose the only question you need to ask yourself is "Is what I am doing, working for me?" If the answer is yes give no *kitten* what other people do. It seems to get some of you all twisted in your knickers over other peoples decisions. Chill. Pill.
And if what you are doing isn't working, then find something else.
you seem to have your knickers pretty twisted up right about now...
I'm not wearing any love.
so you are calling people out for what you are doing...interesting..
What, are you all not wearing knickers either? Commando all the way hey?0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »I know it will require people to buy the book but what got me into LCHF was "the art and science of low carbohydrate performance" buy it on a kindle for 10$. Most of the book points to the fact we can run on very little carbs and perform just as well as if we were on them. A one/two week phase is needed to get started. Think like cutting coffee out. Your body hates you but after a while it was just a habit. I look at our body's as has tanks the amount of fat and carbs we can hold. From the book, please excuse the lack of exact data, we can store up to 2000 calories of carbs. Whereas fat can be stored in the 10000s. Why not learn to use that instead? Following a keto diet allows the fat to burn and consume the energy we are carrying around our waist/hips/arms etc.
Because fruit is good and healthy...because legumes are good and healthy...because whole grains are awesome and healthy...because sweet potatoes and potatoes kick *kitten*....and because you can simply burn that fat by eating a balanced and healthy diet and simply consuming less calories than your body requires.
This is what really irks me about keto folk...you all act like the only way you're going to use fat as fuel and burn that fat off your body is if you're keto...I don't know why you all act like this when you're so obviously wrong as evidenced by the *kitten* load of fit and trim and healthy people not doing keto....
See again, there are those assumptions that "all act like this".
The way people get to a calorie deficit for some people is to eat LCHF Who are you to determine how they get to a calorie deficit? Great that works for you, but it doesn't work for everybody.
I wasn't making any assumption...I was quoting someone making that claim...I've been in several discussions all week in regards to the same...and I've been here over 2.5 years and this is nothing new. You can believe that it's just a few, but it's not...it's the overwhelming majority...keto is some kind of religion I think, not a diet.
So, next time a fight breaks out, and people want to insist, " nobody EVER says that," here's your boilerplate. " It's everyone, it's a religion, they all say the same thing". If you ever want to know why people resent non-lc people hijacking a newbie's thread instead of letting people direct them to the lc group, this is why.
The pages last night were helpful. Today it's gone where it always go, people who ignore what's said, to instead argue with their preferred stereotype.0 -
beccyleigh wrote: »beccyleigh wrote: »beccyleigh wrote: »I suppose the only question you need to ask yourself is "Is what I am doing, working for me?" If the answer is yes give no *kitten* what other people do. It seems to get some of you all twisted in your knickers over other peoples decisions. Chill. Pill.
And if what you are doing isn't working, then find something else.
you seem to have your knickers pretty twisted up right about now...
I'm not wearing any love.
so you are calling people out for what you are doing...interesting..
What, are you all not wearing knickers either? Commando all the way hey?
yawn ...now you are just seeking attention ...0 -
I actually feel bad for the sensible Low Carbers on MFP sometimes. They come in, all rational with their, "it's the way to make CICO work best for me" or their, "of course, I have a particular medical concern that makes eating this way a priority...." and then some nut comes in and shouts over their sanity with the "THE REFINED SUGARZ WILL KILL YOU BULLETPROOF COFFEE 4 LYFE!!!!!" business and the result is....sigh.
It must be exhausting.
I agree ...
however, it is probably the same feeling that some of us get when the clean eaters say that moderation is all about eating 2000 calories of twinkies all the time...
That is so dumb. Everyone knows we eat 2000 calories of ice cream.
Except on Sundays. Sundays are now Peep Cleanse Day.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »Firm believer that 86.89% (made that up) of the people on these boards don't understand what CICO means and conflate it with a way of eating.
Numerous posts in this thread support this theory.
0 -
yopeeps025 wrote: »beccyleigh wrote: »I suppose the only question you need to ask yourself is "Is what I am doing, working for me?" If the answer is yes give no *kitten* what other people do. It seems to get some of you all twisted in your knickers over other peoples decisions. Chill. Pill.
And if what you are doing isn't working, then find something else.
Hmm so educating people on what not needs to be done is a problem?
I guess this poster just believes that we should 100% validate everything on MFP no matter how crazy the topic
Nope, not at all but don't let your total lack of knowledge on what I think, feel or believe stop you from making claims of it. I think the discussion can be had but not with people so unable to concede to another's view as yourself. Just try to lower the righteous preaching & you might have a worthy topic.
0 -
A doc did a nutrition talk with the a group of us a fews days back. She said low carb is fantastic if you're doing a lot of low impact fat burning exercise and this will definitely accelerate weight lose. However, if you're doing a lot of high intensity exercise more cards are definitely needed. So it just requires an intelligent approach based you personally. Well that's what I took from it anyways.0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
CICO is a one size fits all.rachylouise87 wrote: »firm believer in CICO but some people are more insulin sensitive. firm believer weight loss is not a one fits all.
big believer in the below
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/hormonal-weight-loss/
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/female-effect-hormones-determine-female-fat-patterns/
Medical conditions just skew one or the other.
CICO is one size fits all, but the macro ratios that work best for you will differ person to person. Like I said above, one thing that occasionally annoys me about some low carb people here (not the sensible ones, which are most of those in this thread) is the assertion that EVERYONE would do better on lower carbs or that everyone finds that carbs trigger their hunger in the same way, etc. But the same is, of course, true in reverse when people insist that low carb is unhealthy or can't work or would be too depressing. Depends on the person.
And this is where IIFYMM comes into play.
It holds true for keto, vegan, paleo, veg, LCHF, we all have Macros and Micros just how we fill them differs.
I always find it funny when people hate on IIFYM yet they actually follow it.
Yes, I agree with all that. I interpret IIFYM as just meaning that you watch your macros, basically. By definition low carb folks do, at least low carb folks who also try to hit a general ballpark or better for their fat percentage.
And from my view, most low carbers focus on their macro ratios. Just their macros look a little different than the SAD.
Anyone who cares about their diet is going to have a diet that looks a lot different than the SAD...you don't have to low carb. My diary is open...my nutritional profile is outstanding and a far cry from the SAD, and I don't low carb at all.
Simply having a balanced diet is going to be a far cry from the SAD. To me, the comment:And from my view, most low carbers focus on their macro ratios. Just their macros look a little different than the SAD.
Implies that carbs = SAD = junk. There are a whole lot of highly nutritious carbs out there that aren't "junk"...carbs go well beyond 40 ounce Big Gulps.
I never once said junk. Never once.
I didn't say that you said it...it would appear to be implied in the statement and it's an implication that is made often by low carbers...I know a few personally, and they all think carbs are satan...they all think carbs are killing people...they're nutty.
It's ok...I'll enjoy my legumes and my whole grain oats and my brown rice and my potatoes and sweet potatoes and my fruit and my copious amounts of daily vegetables and I'll be happy.
That wasn't what I was implying at all. I know there are nutritous carbs out there. Again another assumption that because there are a few low carbers that make certain claims that all of them do. Which leads you to assuming I was implying that people who don't eat low carb only eat junk?
I think this has more to do with sensitivity to the term "SAD" and what is usually meant by it. You can see this somewhat in the post from the paleo person I replied to, talking about the SAD and "processed carbs."
And to me, from the people I see in LCHF, they don't give a crap if the carbs are from an organic, non GMO apple or from a Snickers bar. And that's not to say that carbs are "evil", but that at the end of the day it doesn't matter if it comes from fruit or from a candy bar, sugar is sugar. I'm sure there are your paleo, LCHF people, but that isn't necessarily general LCHF.
To clarify my comment, it meant that the RATIO of carbs and fat are going to be different from the SAD. Meaning more carbs, less fat.
0 -
blktngldhrt wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »blktngldhrt wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
CICO is a one size fits all.rachylouise87 wrote: »firm believer in CICO but some people are more insulin sensitive. firm believer weight loss is not a one fits all.
big believer in the below
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/hormonal-weight-loss/
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/female-effect-hormones-determine-female-fat-patterns/
Medical conditions just skew one or the other.
CICO is one size fits all, but the macro ratios that work best for you will differ person to person. Like I said above, one thing that occasionally annoys me about some low carb people here (not the sensible ones, which are most of those in this thread) is the assertion that EVERYONE would do better on lower carbs or that everyone finds that carbs trigger their hunger in the same way, etc. But the same is, of course, true in reverse when people insist that low carb is unhealthy or can't work or would be too depressing. Depends on the person.
And this is where IIFYMM comes into play.
It holds true for keto, vegan, paleo, veg, LCHF, we all have Macros and Micros just how we fill them differs.
I always find it funny when people hate on IIFYM yet they actually follow it.
Yes, I agree with all that. I interpret IIFYM as just meaning that you watch your macros, basically. By definition low carb folks do, at least low carb folks who also try to hit a general ballpark or better for their fat percentage.
And from my view, most low carbers focus on their macro ratios. Just their macros look a little different than the SAD.
Anyone who cares about their diet is going to have a diet that looks a lot different than the SAD...you don't have to low carb. My diary is open...my nutritional profile is outstanding and a far cry from the SAD, and I don't low carb at all.
Simply having a balanced diet is going to be a far cry from the SAD. To me, the comment:And from my view, most low carbers focus on their macro ratios. Just their macros look a little different than the SAD.
Implies that carbs = SAD = junk. There are a whole lot of highly nutritious carbs out there that aren't "junk"...carbs go well beyond 40 ounce Big Gulps.
I never once said junk. Never once.
I didn't say that you said it...it would appear to be implied in the statement and it's an implication that is made often by low carbers...I know a few personally, and they all think carbs are satan...they all think carbs are killing people...they're nutty.
It's ok...I'll enjoy my legumes and my whole grain oats and my brown rice and my potatoes and sweet potatoes and my fruit and my copious amounts of daily vegetables and I'll be happy.
you are so defensive when it comes to low carbers... in every thread. just relax. not everyone is out to call carbs junk or satan.
my body doesn't take well to them. doesn't make them bad for everyone. i know that. you don't want people to say all carbs are bad but you usually come in insinuating that all low carbers are...
i enjoy sweet potatoes, fruit, legumes, and vegetables, too.
I've been around here for over 2.5 years and frankly, low carbers and keto folks in general are the preachiest of the bunch...
Not to mention, I"m pretty active in the fitness community and industry in general and I'm actually witnessing dill hole trainers and the like telling their clients not to eat sweet peas for example...'cuz carbs. It's hard not to be a little defensive when derp is this abundant...
I'm just an old fashioned guys I guess...I simply believe in eating a balanced and varied diet that is rich in nutrition...guess that's just not cool and apparently I'm going to die from sweet peas now...
guy who hates preaching gets preachy
Yup...someone's gotta fight the power...
Srsly can't wait for this derp to just go away...
0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »I know it will require people to buy the book but what got me into LCHF was "the art and science of low carbohydrate performance" buy it on a kindle for 10$. Most of the book points to the fact we can run on very little carbs and perform just as well as if we were on them. A one/two week phase is needed to get started. Think like cutting coffee out. Your body hates you but after a while it was just a habit. I look at our body's as has tanks the amount of fat and carbs we can hold. From the book, please excuse the lack of exact data, we can store up to 2000 calories of carbs. Whereas fat can be stored in the 10000s. Why not learn to use that instead? Following a keto diet allows the fat to burn and consume the energy we are carrying around our waist/hips/arms etc.
Because fruit is good and healthy...because legumes are good and healthy...because whole grains are awesome and healthy...because sweet potatoes and potatoes kick *kitten*....and because you can simply burn that fat by eating a balanced and healthy diet and simply consuming less calories than your body requires.
This is what really irks me about keto folk...you all act like the only way you're going to use fat as fuel and burn that fat off your body is if you're keto...I don't know why you all act like this when you're so obviously wrong as evidenced by the *kitten* load of fit and trim and healthy people not doing keto....
See again, there are those assumptions that "all act like this".
The way people get to a calorie deficit for some people is to eat LCHF Who are you to determine how they get to a calorie deficit? Great that works for you, but it doesn't work for everybody.
I wasn't making any assumption...I was quoting someone making that claim...I've been in several discussions all week in regards to the same...and I've been here over 2.5 years and this is nothing new. You can believe that it's just a few, but it's not...it's the overwhelming majority...keto is some kind of religion I think, not a diet.
So, next time a fight breaks out, and people want to insist, " nobody EVER says that," here's your boilerplate. " It's everyone, it's a religion, they all say the same thing". If you ever want to know why people resent non-lc people hijacking a newbie's thread instead of letting people direct them to the lc group, this is why.
The pages last night were helpful. Today it's gone where it always go, people who ignore what's said, to instead argue with their preferred stereotype.
it was bound to go off rails...
However, I do understand where wolfman is coming from. If you read through the threads you will see people saying "carbs make me fat" or "carbs are bad' or "carbs spike insulin which causes fat to store" OR out in the real world I talk to people about health and fitness and the first thing they usually say is "oh, I really can't eat that many carbs because they are bad..."0 -
I actually feel bad for the sensible Low Carbers on MFP sometimes. They come in, all rational with their, "it's the way to make CICO work best for me" or their, "of course, I have a particular medical concern that makes eating this way a priority...." and then some nut comes in and shouts over their sanity with the "THE REFINED SUGARZ WILL KILL YOU BULLETPROOF COFFEE 4 LYFE!!!!!" business and the result is....sigh.
It must be exhausting.
I agree ...
however, it is probably the same feeling that some of us get when the clean eaters say that moderation is all about eating 2000 calories of twinkies all the time...
That is so dumb. Everyone knows we eat 2000 calories of ice cream.
Except on Sundays. Sundays are now Peep Cleanse Day.
I stand corrected.0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »blktngldhrt wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »blktngldhrt wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
CICO is a one size fits all.rachylouise87 wrote: »firm believer in CICO but some people are more insulin sensitive. firm believer weight loss is not a one fits all.
big believer in the below
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/hormonal-weight-loss/
http://www.metaboliceffect.com/female-effect-hormones-determine-female-fat-patterns/
Medical conditions just skew one or the other.
CICO is one size fits all, but the macro ratios that work best for you will differ person to person. Like I said above, one thing that occasionally annoys me about some low carb people here (not the sensible ones, which are most of those in this thread) is the assertion that EVERYONE would do better on lower carbs or that everyone finds that carbs trigger their hunger in the same way, etc. But the same is, of course, true in reverse when people insist that low carb is unhealthy or can't work or would be too depressing. Depends on the person.
And this is where IIFYMM comes into play.
It holds true for keto, vegan, paleo, veg, LCHF, we all have Macros and Micros just how we fill them differs.
I always find it funny when people hate on IIFYM yet they actually follow it.
Yes, I agree with all that. I interpret IIFYM as just meaning that you watch your macros, basically. By definition low carb folks do, at least low carb folks who also try to hit a general ballpark or better for their fat percentage.
And from my view, most low carbers focus on their macro ratios. Just their macros look a little different than the SAD.
Anyone who cares about their diet is going to have a diet that looks a lot different than the SAD...you don't have to low carb. My diary is open...my nutritional profile is outstanding and a far cry from the SAD, and I don't low carb at all.
Simply having a balanced diet is going to be a far cry from the SAD. To me, the comment:And from my view, most low carbers focus on their macro ratios. Just their macros look a little different than the SAD.
Implies that carbs = SAD = junk. There are a whole lot of highly nutritious carbs out there that aren't "junk"...carbs go well beyond 40 ounce Big Gulps.
I never once said junk. Never once.
I didn't say that you said it...it would appear to be implied in the statement and it's an implication that is made often by low carbers...I know a few personally, and they all think carbs are satan...they all think carbs are killing people...they're nutty.
It's ok...I'll enjoy my legumes and my whole grain oats and my brown rice and my potatoes and sweet potatoes and my fruit and my copious amounts of daily vegetables and I'll be happy.
you are so defensive when it comes to low carbers... in every thread. just relax. not everyone is out to call carbs junk or satan.
my body doesn't take well to them. doesn't make them bad for everyone. i know that. you don't want people to say all carbs are bad but you usually come in insinuating that all low carbers are...
i enjoy sweet potatoes, fruit, legumes, and vegetables, too.
I've been around here for over 2.5 years and frankly, low carbers and keto folks in general are the preachiest of the bunch...
Not to mention, I"m pretty active in the fitness community and industry in general and I'm actually witnessing dill hole trainers and the like telling their clients not to eat sweet peas for example...'cuz carbs. It's hard not to be a little defensive when derp is this abundant...
I'm just an old fashioned guys I guess...I simply believe in eating a balanced and varied diet that is rich in nutrition...guess that's just not cool and apparently I'm going to die from sweet peas now...
guy who hates preaching gets preachy
Yup...someone's gotta fight the power...
Srsly can't wait for this derp to just go away...
We will long dead before the derp has any chance of going away0 -
....and this thread was going so good0
-
yopeeps025 wrote: »beccyleigh wrote: »I suppose the only question you need to ask yourself is "Is what I am doing, working for me?" If the answer is yes give no *kitten* what other people do. It seems to get some of you all twisted in your knickers over other peoples decisions. Chill. Pill.
And if what you are doing isn't working, then find something else.
Hmm so educating people on what not needs to be done is a problem?
I guess this poster just believes that we should 100% validate everything on MFP no matter how crazy the topic
Makes me wonder why this poster is posting if they don't want to give factual information. We all know how to lose weight incorrectly. It works right so why bother when people come in say the are netting some ridiculous low amount of calories to lose weight? Why tell them the correct way to lose weight without restricting anything?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.8K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 396 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 967 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions