Why Calories In and Calories Out... It really ISN'T that simple.....
Replies
-
Please. The majority of people who've had successful weight loss don't disagree on the quality of food for it's nutrient density. Weight loss comes down to CICO regardless of approach. What someone does to fulfill that is a matter of choice. You will NEVER find a weight loss program or diet that doesn't use a form of CICO for weight loss.nuttynanners wrote: »Ooooh, I wouldn't say a single word against CICO on MFP.....
As much as I agree that higher quality foods are going to be better for weight loss in the long run, MFP forums are not the place for that kind of thinking. They just don't want see it from that perspective.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Of course you can find them. It's the ones that don't work for more than water weight at best.0 -
I see what you did there @TheBeachgod hee hee.0
-
CICO is an umbrella. If you are counting calories, you are following CICO. If you don't count calories, you are still following CICO. CICO is overarching and never goes away. How you get there is your own preference.
If you think otherwise you have some "learnin" to do.0 -
robs_ready wrote: »
No joke! But it proves that if you eat in a deficit you will lose weight. Healthy food or not.robs_ready wrote: »http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
....but it really is
God I could not think of anything more ghastly
Absolutely, you've given me a great idea for a macdonalds diet, chicken nuggets anyone?
I lost a boat load on the Jaegger and mcnugget diet! My blood pressure only went through the roof, it was totes ok.0 -
Like it or not, our bodies are machines. No matter how much you resist understanding physics or chemistry, your body understands it. Your body does science all day, erry day. Your body does not care whether the carbs, fats, and proteins comes from a burger at McDonald's or a homemade, grass-fed, daily-massaged burger on Jehovah's Witness bread with organic non-pasteurized cheese (with a side of listeria) and organic lettuce, heirloom tomatoes, and hand-churned butter.
Your body takes what it needs and uses it, throwing away the trash like a $20 prostitute. You may "feel" like you did better by eating the fancy burger, but your body literally doesn't care.0 -
mrs_justice wrote: »Dr. Mark Hyman... maker of the movie Fed Up (you need to see it if you haven't) addresses the real reason that NOT ALL CALORIES ARE THE SAME....
"Fed Up!" was a whole bunch of bunkum, wrapped in delusion. I saw it, and couldn't believe the deflection away from person responsibility to manage your own weight.
"Whine! Obesity is caused by X, Y, and Z! Nothing I do can fix it! WAAAHHH!" is basically the entire movie.0 -
CICO is an umbrella. If you are counting calories, you are following CICO. If you don't count calories, you are still following CICO. CICO is overarching and never goes away. How you get there is your own preference.
If you think otherwise you have some "learnin" to do.
This. And do I remember a graphic posted long ago with a CICO umbrella and drops of rain labeled for every possible diet under the sun, or am I imagining that?
0 -
That's awesome!! Nobody wants to be on a "diet" their whole life.http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
....but it really is
This was literally my turning point. I've tried every thing on the planet to lose weight - for about a week at a time, until the rules, the hunger, or the rebellion got too much. But this dude a) lost weight on Twinkies and a multivitamin, and b) had better health indicators because the weight came off, not because he was eating antioxidants or superfoods or whatever.
So now, I'm staying under my calories almost all the time. I'm trying to reach my protein and not go crazy with sodium because those two factors contribute to my "feeling good" more than any others. I'm moving more to get more calories. That's it. And, at least for the past five weeks or so, it's been working. It's not complicated, I have nothing to rebel against, and I don't have to become a short-order cook to fix my diet food and everyone else's regular food. I just eat less than I used to of what they're eating.
0 -
There are studies where a man ate nothing but hostess snacks and Doritos for 10 weeks while maintaining a calorie deficit and managed to steadily lose weight.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
Sure if he had 1800 calories of healthy nutritious food everyday rather than snack cakes I am sure it would have been better, he may have lost more weight but this does put stock in CICO being fairly simple. I think many try to over complicate it to either A) Sell something or
Find a reason why their results do not align with their expectation. 0 -
+1. It's primary goal is just to keep alive and has a system in place on how to achieve that. It doesn't care if you ate something bitter, sour, sweet, etc, it just takes in whatever calories and nutrients provided and doles it out to the cells.Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Like it or not, our bodies are machines. No matter how much you resist understanding physics or chemistry, your body understands it. Your body does science all day, erry day. Your body does not care whether the carbs, fats, and proteins comes from a burger at McDonald's or a homemade, grass-fed, daily-massaged burger on Jehovah's Witness bread with organic non-pasteurized cheese (with a side of listeria) and organic lettuce, heirloom tomatoes, and hand-churned butter.
Your body takes what it needs and uses it, throwing away the trash like a $20 prostitute. You may "feel" like you did better by eating the fancy burger, but your body literally doesn't care.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
enterdanger wrote: »Doctah hymen...still funny.
I'm dying.0 -
Let's not forget Jared either on his Subway diet.
No matter how it is packaged the results from eating less calories than you burn is weight loss.0 -
enterdanger wrote: »Doctah hymen...still funny.
The name of someone I would not go on a date with. I know it's unfair. Still couldn't do it.0 -
There are studies where a man ate nothing but hostess snacks and Doritos for 10 weeks while maintaining a calorie deficit and managed to steadily lose weight.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
Sure if he had 1800 calories of healthy nutritious food everyday rather than snack cakes I am sure it would have been better, he may have lost more weight but this does put stock in CICO being fairly simple. I think many try to over complicate it to either A) Sell something or Find a reason why their results do not align with their expectation.
Please explain how, specifically, he would have lost more weight eating 1800 calories of something other than snack cakes. If the calories are the same, how would he have lost more weight?0 -
snowflake930 wrote: »Let's not forget Jared either on his Subway diet.
No matter how it is packaged the results from eating less calories than you burn is weight loss.
I wanted to be the Jared of McChickens, until all that... other stuff happened. Had to abort the mission.0 -
ClosetBayesian wrote: »There are studies where a man ate nothing but hostess snacks and Doritos for 10 weeks while maintaining a calorie deficit and managed to steadily lose weight.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
Sure if he had 1800 calories of healthy nutritious food everyday rather than snack cakes I am sure it would have been better, he may have lost more weight but this does put stock in CICO being fairly simple. I think many try to over complicate it to either A) Sell something or Find a reason why their results do not align with their expectation.
Please explain how, specifically, he would have lost more weight eating 1800 calories of something other than snack cakes. If the calories are the same, how would he have lost more weight?
He wouldn't0 -
There are studies where a man ate nothing but hostess snacks and Doritos for 10 weeks while maintaining a calorie deficit and managed to steadily lose weight.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
Sure if he had 1800 calories of healthy nutritious food everyday rather than snack cakes I am sure it would have been better, he may have lost more weight but this does put stock in CICO being fairly simple. I think many try to over complicate it to either A) Sell something or Find a reason why their results do not align with their expectation.
If he's eating the same amount of calories how would he have lost more weight?0 -
There are studies where a man ate nothing but hostess snacks and Doritos for 10 weeks while maintaining a calorie deficit and managed to steadily lose weight.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
Sure if he had 1800 calories of healthy nutritious food everyday rather than snack cakes I am sure it would have been better, he may have lost more weight but this does put stock in CICO being fairly simple. I think many try to over complicate it to either A) Sell something or Find a reason why their results do not align with their expectation.
If he's eating the same amount of calories how would he have lost more weight?
What if, because of the more nutritious foods, he feels more energetic and causes the CO end of the equation to be larger? That's the only possibility I can come up with.0 -
There are studies where a man ate nothing but hostess snacks and Doritos for 10 weeks while maintaining a calorie deficit and managed to steadily lose weight.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
Sure if he had 1800 calories of healthy nutritious food everyday rather than snack cakes I am sure it would have been better, he may have lost more weight but this does put stock in CICO being fairly simple. I think many try to over complicate it to either A) Sell something or Find a reason why their results do not align with their expectation.
If he's eating the same amount of calories how would he have lost more weight?
Magic, of course.0 -
A side note on “hormonal” imbalances, from someone diagnosed with 2 over the course of my lifetime; CICO still applies. The only thing my hormonal imbalance did to affect weight loss was REDUCE my TDEE below where it SHOULD have been for my age/height/weight/gender, because my body wasn’t working properly – it was burning fewer calories than it should have. Once I got the hormones balanced and my metabolism fixed, I started losing again while maintaining my caloric intake. Again, this is because THE MATH WAS WRONG FOR C/O, not because the calories didn’t matter.0
-
quiksylver296 wrote: »There are studies where a man ate nothing but hostess snacks and Doritos for 10 weeks while maintaining a calorie deficit and managed to steadily lose weight.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
Sure if he had 1800 calories of healthy nutritious food everyday rather than snack cakes I am sure it would have been better, he may have lost more weight but this does put stock in CICO being fairly simple. I think many try to over complicate it to either A) Sell something or Find a reason why their results do not align with their expectation.
If he's eating the same amount of calories how would he have lost more weight?
What if, because of the more nutritious foods, he has more energy and causes the CO end of the equation to be larger? That's the only possibility I can come up with.
I think you're on to something Quik
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »There are studies where a man ate nothing but hostess snacks and Doritos for 10 weeks while maintaining a calorie deficit and managed to steadily lose weight.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
Sure if he had 1800 calories of healthy nutritious food everyday rather than snack cakes I am sure it would have been better, he may have lost more weight but this does put stock in CICO being fairly simple. I think many try to over complicate it to either A) Sell something or Find a reason why their results do not align with their expectation.
If he's eating the same amount of calories how would he have lost more weight?
Magic, of course.
I thought so!0 -
Heh, the original poster fled this thread like a sinking ship. hahaha0
-
Yes your body knows the difference between natural sugar and processed sugar0
-
mrs_justice wrote: »Dr. Mark Hyman... maker of the movie Fed Up (you need to see it if you haven't) addresses the real reason that NOT ALL CALORIES ARE THE SAME....
Why I will choose....
100 calories of almonds vs. a processed 100 calorie granola bar.......
100 calories of berries vs. 100 calories of sugar added yogurt.......
drhyman.com/blog/2014/04/10/calories-dont-matter/
The more this place changes the more it stays the same0 -
quiksylver296 wrote: »Yes. It really is that simple. If I eat more than ~2200 calories per day, I will gain weight. If I eat less than ~ 2200 calories per day I will lose weight.
What those calories come from may affect my mood, energy level, hunger level, etc, but it will not change the math.
Same. (Except that my number is ~3100.)
Also, yay this thread (but it's only Wednesday).
And I hit my protein and fat minimums, don't care much where the other calories land, and manage to reach my micro nutritional targets along the way...(but I don't pretend like a banana is nutritionally superior to a candy bar once my nutritional targets are met).0 -
Floridaman789 wrote: »Yes your body knows the difference between natural sugar and processed sugar
proof?0 -
Floridaman789 wrote: »Yes your body knows the difference between natural sugar and processed sugar
No. It doesn't.0 -
CICO is that simple. The only reason I've been able to keep this weight off is because I don't restrict myself from foods like I use to. I love that I can eat pizza, French fries and and drink booze. I splurge probably once a day with something small and the rest of the time I eat what some people would call, "clean," or whatever the buzz word is now.0
-
Floridaman789 wrote: »Yes your body knows the difference between natural sugar and processed sugar
How? I'm totally serious, I'd really love to know how your body knows the difference between sugar and sugar.0 -
Floridaman789 wrote: »Yes your body knows the difference between natural sugar and processed sugar
How? I'm totally serious, I'd really love to know how your body knows the difference between sugar and sugar.
I was trying to think of an unprocessed sugar. Because in order to be sugar, you have to process it. Otherwise, you are gnawing on a sugar beet (and I don't think that meets @Floridaman789's 'natural sugar').0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions