Does CICO result in slower weight loss than low carb?
Microscopes
Posts: 92 Member
When I was on low carb in the past, within a couple weeks my pants would get real lose, etc.
I've been doing CICO for almost a month now along with 3 days per week of heavy weight lifting with a personal trainer. Weighing every single thing that goes into my mouth that isn't pre-portioned. Staying at the calorie goal MFP gave me, and not even eating back my exercise calories.
Yet, I haven't noticed any difference in my pants. Still very snug.
So - obviously CICO works and it is a lifestyle change, but is it a bit slower to see changes with CICO than with low carb, for example?
I've been doing CICO for almost a month now along with 3 days per week of heavy weight lifting with a personal trainer. Weighing every single thing that goes into my mouth that isn't pre-portioned. Staying at the calorie goal MFP gave me, and not even eating back my exercise calories.
Yet, I haven't noticed any difference in my pants. Still very snug.
So - obviously CICO works and it is a lifestyle change, but is it a bit slower to see changes with CICO than with low carb, for example?
0
Replies
-
Others may disagree with me, but here is my take.
People starting low-carb, especially programs like Atkins in which the first couple weeks are highly restrictive of carbs, lose a lot of weight initially by accidentally dropping to really low calorie diets without realizing it. The last time my dad started Atkins he was losing really quickly. After a few weeks, he decided to count his calories for a couple days just out curiosity. He realized that he was only eating ~700-800 calories per day while doing manual labor out in the heat all day.
In cases like this, CICO would be slower because you may actually be eating more calories using CICO than you would doing low-carb without realizing it. In the end, all diets that cause weight loss are following CICO whether or not people realize it.
You don't mention whether you have lost any pounds, but if you maintain a deficit, the inches will start disappearing and your pants will get looser.0 -
I agree with puffbrat...are you losing pounds instead of inches...sometimes mfp cals arent as acurate...i usually take a couple of calculators and see what they say. ..also weigh your preportion food out...alot of times ill buy something and it says it weighs 20g but i weigh it and its 30g...that will effect calorie count0
-
Weight? Maybe.
Fat? That's another question altogether.
I lost 4lbs in 90 minutes over the weekend. My secret? I like to call it...running.
Don't miss the wood for the trees here.0 -
By CICO, I'm going to assume that you mean "counting calories without altering your macros" since weall know that weight loss only ocurs when CI is less than CO.
For some with insulin resistance, going low carb is more helpful for weight loss; those people will lose a bit more weight (and not just water weight which is a maximum of about 4 lbs). For thos without any insulin resistance, counting calories without changing macros or going LCHF seems to make no real difference.
There are benefits to both diets.
Counting calories without changing macros allows more food options. Some find it more sustainable and easier to stick to.
LCHF can improve blood glucose within days. Many find it satiating, and that it reduces carb/sugar cravings, which makes it easier to cut calories (CI). Some find it more sustainable and easier to stick to. Some find their CO goes up and they can lose weight at a slightly lower caloric deficit (this seems more true for those with IR).
If you are happy with counting calories and not changing macros, stick with it. If you find it isn't working for you, try LCHF.0 -
The first dump in the atkins diet is mostly water weight, because you shed water weight when you reduce carbs. puffbrat is probably also right in that you might accidentally start eating at a deficit because you aren't really replacing the carbs you cut with much.
I noticed a change in terms of clothes fitting within the first couple of weeks of CICO.-1 -
Perhaps............for some, depends on what you truly believe is working for you.
When it comes right down to it though, it depends on the person and how strictly they are adhering to the program. In either case, it is CICO, whether or not you call it that. That is really true of any program. Tally up the calories you are actually eating and compare that.
Your brain needs carbs to function, just saying.
and what is sustainable for a lifetime? for me it is moderation in all foods and keeping within the correct amount of calories for maintenance.
Stats: SW 290
CW 130
Starting date 3/12/12. Maintenance 11/3/13 and have been there ever since. No foods are off limit. Moderation, portion control and moving more is key for me.
We all are "snowflakes".0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Microscopes wrote: »When I was on low carb in the past, within a couple weeks my pants would get real lose, etc.
I've been doing CICO for almost a month now along with 3 days per week of heavy weight lifting with a personal trainer. Weighing every single thing that goes into my mouth that isn't pre-portioned. Staying at the calorie goal MFP gave me, and not even eating back my exercise calories.
Yet, I haven't noticed any difference in my pants. Still very snug.
So - obviously CICO works and it is a lifestyle change, but is it a bit slower to see changes with CICO than with low carb, for example?
Assuming CICO means calorie counting, and calorie counting means a diet that is higher in carbs, it can be slower, particularly at first because low carb diets cause you to drop water weight quickly, which tends to reappear the next time one consumes high enough levels of carbs.
Starting a new exercise routine does the opposite - causes water retention as water is needed by any sore muscles to do repair and recovery.
Beyond that there is the question of what if your calorie goal is reasonable, and if you're actually achieving the calories out versus in for that goal.
Even pre-portioned foods need to be weight. If a manufacture is pouring chips into a bag to get to 3 oz's, they don't stop the machine and slice a chip in half, they go over the 3 oz's instead. Usually the only prepackaged foods I've found that hit their listed weight are things that are liquid like yogurt (maybe it is an amorphous solid? regardless, it can be easily dispensed in fixed amounts).0 -
snowflake930 wrote: »Perhaps............for some, depends on what you truly believe is working for you.
When it comes right down to it though, it depends on the person and how strictly they are adhering to the program. In either case, it is CICO, whether or not you call it that. That is really true of any program. Tally up the calories you are actually eating and compare that.
Your brain needs carbs to function, just saying.
and what is sustainable for a lifetime? for me it is moderation in all foods and keeping within the correct amount of calories for maintenance.
Stats: SW 290
CW 130
Starting date 3/12/12. Maintenance 11/3/13 and have been there ever since. No foods are off limit. Moderation, portion control and moving more is key for me.
We all are "snowflakes".
How do those who eat low carb (under 20 grams) for years and year function if your brain needs carbs to function?0 -
Microscopes wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »Perhaps............for some, depends on what you truly believe is working for you.
When it comes right down to it though, it depends on the person and how strictly they are adhering to the program. In either case, it is CICO, whether or not you call it that. That is really true of any program. Tally up the calories you are actually eating and compare that.
Your brain needs carbs to function, just saying.
and what is sustainable for a lifetime? for me it is moderation in all foods and keeping within the correct amount of calories for maintenance.
Stats: SW 290
CW 130
Starting date 3/12/12. Maintenance 11/3/13 and have been there ever since. No foods are off limit. Moderation, portion control and moving more is key for me.
We all are "snowflakes".
How do those who eat low carb (under 20 grams) for years and year function if your brain needs carbs to function?
They don't have to be dietary carbs.0 -
CICO always applies no matter what diet you are doing, low carb included.
My advice would be to take a long hard look at your logging and see how accurate it may or may not be. That is where I would look to make changes.
It is perfectly accurate. Down the to 10th of a gram.
I am absolutely anal about things like this.
Even bought a weight calibrater to make sure my scale is working properly on daily basis.
I weigh every single thing that goes in my mouth. I weigh up to the serving size (28 grams for example), then I take away 1 gram, just for variance purposes.
NOTHING is eyeballed. Peanut butter is weighed. Lettuce is weighed. Meat is weighed. A single grape - when I choose to eat one - is weighed, and logged.
0 -
Microscopes wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »Perhaps............for some, depends on what you truly believe is working for you.
When it comes right down to it though, it depends on the person and how strictly they are adhering to the program. In either case, it is CICO, whether or not you call it that. That is really true of any program. Tally up the calories you are actually eating and compare that.
Your brain needs carbs to function, just saying.
and what is sustainable for a lifetime? for me it is moderation in all foods and keeping within the correct amount of calories for maintenance.
Stats: SW 290
CW 130
Starting date 3/12/12. Maintenance 11/3/13 and have been there ever since. No foods are off limit. Moderation, portion control and moving more is key for me.
We all are "snowflakes".
How do those who eat low carb (under 20 grams) for years and year function if your brain needs carbs to function?
They don't have to be dietary carbs.
What other carbs are there? (This is all new to me)0 -
Microscopes wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »Perhaps............for some, depends on what you truly believe is working for you.
When it comes right down to it though, it depends on the person and how strictly they are adhering to the program. In either case, it is CICO, whether or not you call it that. That is really true of any program. Tally up the calories you are actually eating and compare that.
Your brain needs carbs to function, just saying.
and what is sustainable for a lifetime? for me it is moderation in all foods and keeping within the correct amount of calories for maintenance.
Stats: SW 290
CW 130
Starting date 3/12/12. Maintenance 11/3/13 and have been there ever since. No foods are off limit. Moderation, portion control and moving more is key for me.
We all are "snowflakes".
How do those who eat low carb (under 20 grams) for years and year function if your brain needs carbs to function?
The body can produce glucose and other carbs from other nutrients.0 -
Microscopes wrote: »CICO always applies no matter what diet you are doing, low carb included.
My advice would be to take a long hard look at your logging and see how accurate it may or may not be. That is where I would look to make changes.
It is perfectly accurate. Down the to 10th of a gram.
I am absolutely anal about things like this.
Even bought a weight calibrater to make sure my scale is working properly on daily basis.
I weigh every single thing that goes in my mouth. I weigh up to the serving size (28 grams for example), then I take away 1 gram, just for variance purposes.
NOTHING is eyeballed. Peanut butter is weighed. Lettuce is weighed. Meat is weighed. A single grape - when I choose to eat one - is weighed, and logged.
Are you using USDA data for produce if you're at the weighing the single grape level?0 -
Microscopes wrote: »CICO always applies no matter what diet you are doing, low carb included.
My advice would be to take a long hard look at your logging and see how accurate it may or may not be. That is where I would look to make changes.
It is perfectly accurate. Down the to 10th of a gram.
I am absolutely anal about things like this.
Even bought a weight calibrater to make sure my scale is working properly on daily basis.
I weigh every single thing that goes in my mouth. I weigh up to the serving size (28 grams for example), then I take away 1 gram, just for variance purposes.
NOTHING is eyeballed. Peanut butter is weighed. Lettuce is weighed. Meat is weighed. A single grape - when I choose to eat one - is weighed, and logged.
Are you using USDA data for produce if you're at the weighing the single grape level?
Thats what I was told to do.
Should I use another source?0 -
Microscopes wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »Perhaps............for some, depends on what you truly believe is working for you.
When it comes right down to it though, it depends on the person and how strictly they are adhering to the program. In either case, it is CICO, whether or not you call it that. That is really true of any program. Tally up the calories you are actually eating and compare that.
Your brain needs carbs to function, just saying.
and what is sustainable for a lifetime? for me it is moderation in all foods and keeping within the correct amount of calories for maintenance.
Stats: SW 290
CW 130
Starting date 3/12/12. Maintenance 11/3/13 and have been there ever since. No foods are off limit. Moderation, portion control and moving more is key for me.
We all are "snowflakes".
How do those who eat low carb (under 20 grams) for years and year function if your brain needs carbs to function?
The body can produce glucose and other carbs from other nutrients.
Ahh! Very cool.0 -
Here is my experience, which may differ from the experience of others:
For more than 2 years, I've been trying to lose weight using CICO. It happens slowly and is very inconsistent (i.e. I'll lose some times when expected, but not lose sometimes when expected). Every time I hit a plateau (a real plateau, meaning that I'm eating less than I'm burning and still not losing), I get frustrated and try different things to get that loss. Every time so far, the plateau has eventually ended (with a big whoosh), but only once can I identify what I actually did to cause the plateau to end. I've had a lot of frustration with weight loss. I have health issues, including both type 1 and type 2 diabetes (I don't make any insulin - type 1; and I'm insulin resistant - type 2) so I have issues related to that. My endocrinologist has low expectations for me to lose weight and I have exceeded his expectations, but have lost so slowly and failed what I would expect and what MFP projects based on calories. For the past 1.5 years, I've used a food scale and a Fitbit (with HRM for just over a year). Despite measuring fairly accurately, I just can't lose at the rate MFP says I should be. My endocrinologist has an explanation as to why I can't lose very fast, but it annoys me anyway. In more than 2 years, I've lost just over 30 lbs.
Almost a month ago, I switched to low carb in an effort to better control blood glucose. During the past month (a couple days shy), I've been losing faster and faster to where I'm not losing 2 lbs. / week (MFP is set for 1 lb. / week). I have not changed calories at all, but I've changed macros. The intent was not to lose weight any faster, but to improve BG's. I have a theory as to why low carb is making a difference for me for weight loss, which is based on my knowledge and understanding of the different energy sources in my body and how and when different macros get converted to energy... but that is a topic for another thread.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »Here is my experience, which may differ from the experience of others:
For more than 2 years, I've been trying to lose weight using CICO. It happens slowly and is very inconsistent (i.e. I'll lose some times when expected, but not lose sometimes when expected). Every time I hit a plateau (a real plateau, meaning that I'm eating less than I'm burning and still not losing), I get frustrated and try different things to get that loss. Every time so far, the plateau has eventually ended (with a big whoosh), but only once can I identify what I actually did to cause the plateau to end. I've had a lot of frustration with weight loss. I have health issues, including both type 1 and type 2 diabetes (I don't make any insulin - type 1; and I'm insulin resistant - type 2) so I have issues related to that. My endocrinologist has low expectations for me to lose weight and I have exceeded his expectations, but have lost so slowly and failed what I would expect and what MFP projects based on calories. For the past 1.5 years, I've used a food scale and a Fitbit (with HRM for just over a year). Despite measuring fairly accurately, I just can't lose at the rate MFP says I should be. My endocrinologist has an explanation as to why I can't lose very fast, but it annoys me anyway. In more than 2 years, I've lost just over 30 lbs.
Almost a month ago, I switched to low carb in an effort to better control blood glucose. During the past month (a couple days shy), I've been losing faster and faster to where I'm not losing 2 lbs. / week (MFP is set for 1 lb. / week). I have not changed calories at all, but I've changed macros. The intent was not to lose weight any faster, but to improve BG's. I have a theory as to why low carb is making a difference for me for weight loss, which is based on my knowledge and understanding of the different energy sources in my body and how and when different macros get converted to energy... but that is a topic for another thread.
holy crap.
that goes against what is being preached by many here. not sure what to believe0 -
Microscopes wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Here is my experience, which may differ from the experience of others:
For more than 2 years, I've been trying to lose weight using CICO. It happens slowly and is very inconsistent (i.e. I'll lose some times when expected, but not lose sometimes when expected). Every time I hit a plateau (a real plateau, meaning that I'm eating less than I'm burning and still not losing), I get frustrated and try different things to get that loss. Every time so far, the plateau has eventually ended (with a big whoosh), but only once can I identify what I actually did to cause the plateau to end. I've had a lot of frustration with weight loss. I have health issues, including both type 1 and type 2 diabetes (I don't make any insulin - type 1; and I'm insulin resistant - type 2) so I have issues related to that. My endocrinologist has low expectations for me to lose weight and I have exceeded his expectations, but have lost so slowly and failed what I would expect and what MFP projects based on calories. For the past 1.5 years, I've used a food scale and a Fitbit (with HRM for just over a year). Despite measuring fairly accurately, I just can't lose at the rate MFP says I should be. My endocrinologist has an explanation as to why I can't lose very fast, but it annoys me anyway. In more than 2 years, I've lost just over 30 lbs.
Almost a month ago, I switched to low carb in an effort to better control blood glucose. During the past month (a couple days shy), I've been losing faster and faster to where I'm not losing 2 lbs. / week (MFP is set for 1 lb. / week). I have not changed calories at all, but I've changed macros. The intent was not to lose weight any faster, but to improve BG's. I have a theory as to why low carb is making a difference for me for weight loss, which is based on my knowledge and understanding of the different energy sources in my body and how and when different macros get converted to energy... but that is a topic for another thread.
holy crap.
that goes against what is being preached by many here. not sure what to believe
Because you have complications of metabolic disorders that make gauging your calories out difficult?0 -
If you're losing weight, then you are following CICO.
CICO is a simplification of the process used by humans to either create or consume bodyfat.
No matter how you choose to eat you are still at the mercy of this process.
I assume the OP is really meaning slower weight loss of a balanced macronutritional intake compared to a low carbohydrate dietary intake.
This is an important distinction to make as it always leads to people believing the laws of the known physical universe are wrong.0 -
If you're losing weight, then you are following CICO.
CICO is a simplification of the process used by humans to either create or consume bodyfat.
No matter how you choose to eat you are still at the mercy of this process.
I assume the OP is really meaning slower weight loss of a balanced macronutritional intake compared to a low carbohydrate dietary intake.
This is an important distinction to make as it always leads to people believing the laws of the known physical universe are wrong.
Yes thats what I mean. Thank you.0 -
From my own experience flirting with low carb-yeah, I lost a lot of weight (around 10lbs), in just a few days. But it was 95% water weight and it came right back on when I began eating more carbs. I don't consider that weight loss success.
However, with CICO I've lost over 50lbs and have maintained the loss for around 3 years now (dealing with some weight creep right now, due to loss of focus/stopped tracking, back to tracking as of today!). Within the parameters of CICO I can eat all the foods I enjoy, just in moderation/portion control. There's no way a low carb diet is sustainable for me, for any length of time. This whole thing is hard enough as it is, no sense in making it any harder!
Also, if low carb worked so well for you in the past, why aren't you still doing it? I'm going to take a guess that it wasn't very sustainable for you either?0 -
Low carb is a form of controlling your CICO. Just like this website counts calories to control CICO.
Low carb does not automatically equal weight loss. You could very well gain weight by having your CI greater than your CO while low carbing (because butter, yum).
CICO is not a diet- It is an equation.0 -
Midwesterner85 has a medical condition that is known to be better managed by going low carb. Do you have a medical, Microscopes? If not the general recommendation applies, however if you have a medical condition then I sagest you talk to your doctor and a dietitian about appropriate macro ratios for your condition.midwesterner85 wrote: »
Here is my experience, which may differ from the experience of others:
For more than 2 years, I've been trying to lose weight using CICO. It happens slowly and is very inconsistent (i.e. I'll lose some times when expected, but not lose sometimes when expected). Every time I hit a plateau (a real plateau, meaning that I'm eating less than I'm burning and still not losing), I get frustrated and try different things to get that loss. Every time so far, the plateau has eventually ended (with a big whoosh), but only once can I identify what I actually did to cause the plateau to end. I've had a lot of frustration with weight loss. I have health issues, including both type 1 and type 2 diabetes (I don't make any insulin - type 1; and I'm insulin resistant - type 2) so I have issues related to that. My endocrinologist has low expectations for me to lose weight and I have exceeded his expectations, but have lost so slowly and failed what I would expect and what MFP projects based on calories. For the past 1.5 years, I've used a food scale and a Fitbit (with HRM for just over a year). Despite measuring fairly accurately, I just can't lose at the rate MFP says I should be. My endocrinologist has an explanation as to why I can't lose very fast, but it annoys me anyway. In more than 2 years, I've lost just over 30 lbs.
Almost a month ago, I switched to low carb in an effort to better control blood glucose. During the past month (a couple days shy), I've been losing faster and faster to where I'm not losing 2 lbs. / week (MFP is set for 1 lb. / week). I have not changed calories at all, but I've changed macros. The intent was not to lose weight any faster, but to improve BG's. I have a theory as to why low carb is making a difference for me for weight loss, which is based on my knowledge and understanding of the different energy sources in my body and how and when different macros get converted to energy... but that is a topic for another thread.
holy crap.
that goes against what is being preached by many here. not sure what to believe0 -
CICO always applies no matter what diet you are doing, low carb included.
My advice would be to take a long hard look at your logging and see how accurate it may or may not be. That is where I would look to make changes.Microscopes wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Here is my experience, which may differ from the experience of others:
For more than 2 years, I've been trying to lose weight using CICO. It happens slowly and is very inconsistent (i.e. I'll lose some times when expected, but not lose sometimes when expected). Every time I hit a plateau (a real plateau, meaning that I'm eating less than I'm burning and still not losing), I get frustrated and try different things to get that loss. Every time so far, the plateau has eventually ended (with a big whoosh), but only once can I identify what I actually did to cause the plateau to end. I've had a lot of frustration with weight loss. I have health issues, including both type 1 and type 2 diabetes (I don't make any insulin - type 1; and I'm insulin resistant - type 2) so I have issues related to that. My endocrinologist has low expectations for me to lose weight and I have exceeded his expectations, but have lost so slowly and failed what I would expect and what MFP projects based on calories. For the past 1.5 years, I've used a food scale and a Fitbit (with HRM for just over a year). Despite measuring fairly accurately, I just can't lose at the rate MFP says I should be. My endocrinologist has an explanation as to why I can't lose very fast, but it annoys me anyway. In more than 2 years, I've lost just over 30 lbs.
Almost a month ago, I switched to low carb in an effort to better control blood glucose. During the past month (a couple days shy), I've been losing faster and faster to where I'm not losing 2 lbs. / week (MFP is set for 1 lb. / week). I have not changed calories at all, but I've changed macros. The intent was not to lose weight any faster, but to improve BG's. I have a theory as to why low carb is making a difference for me for weight loss, which is based on my knowledge and understanding of the different energy sources in my body and how and when different macros get converted to energy... but that is a topic for another thread.
holy crap.
that goes against what is being preached by many here. not sure what to believe
Those with metabolic issues (insulin resistance) tend to lose better on low carb high fat (moderate protein) because insulin levels are lower. When insulin is lower, it is often easier to lose weight. Possibly because insulin is one of the main drivers behind fat storage, or maybe because the extra glucose in the blood (from higher carb diets) has to go somewhere, and fat is where it goes.
My weight loss experience was similar to @midwesterner85 's. I tried to lose by just counting calories; it would work for a while but I felt so hungry I would eventually stop and regain my weight. I went very low carb high fat (less than 20g of carbs per day) and lost 40lbs in just over 4 months even though I was eating 1500 kcals per day. That should have worked out to a pound per week, and not 10 lbs per month while basically sedentary.
Now I have increased my calories to 2000-2500 kcals per day, and I am still losing although at a very very slow rate. My past experiences of cutting calories on a higher carb diet would not have given me the same result. LCHF seems to work for me, but I am someone with insulin resistance (I was prediabetic).0 -
@Microscopes, seriously? Midwesterner85 has diabetes, both type 1 & type 2. Do you? He has a very serious medical condition that requires monitoring. For people with no medical issues, there is absolutely no reason to eliminate carbs, nor should you. Every diet for weight loss is limiting calories, whether or not they come right out and say so. That is the only way for most people (with no medical issues) to lose weight. Eat less calories than your body burns. Long term benefit for all foods in moderation, no re-learning a new way of eating when you reach your goal weight. You just continue on with what you have been doing and increase your calorie intake to maintenance calories.0
-
CICO always applies no matter what diet you are doing, low carb included.
My advice would be to take a long hard look at your logging and see how accurate it may or may not be. That is where I would look to make changes.Microscopes wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Here is my experience, which may differ from the experience of others:
For more than 2 years, I've been trying to lose weight using CICO. It happens slowly and is very inconsistent (i.e. I'll lose some times when expected, but not lose sometimes when expected). Every time I hit a plateau (a real plateau, meaning that I'm eating less than I'm burning and still not losing), I get frustrated and try different things to get that loss. Every time so far, the plateau has eventually ended (with a big whoosh), but only once can I identify what I actually did to cause the plateau to end. I've had a lot of frustration with weight loss. I have health issues, including both type 1 and type 2 diabetes (I don't make any insulin - type 1; and I'm insulin resistant - type 2) so I have issues related to that. My endocrinologist has low expectations for me to lose weight and I have exceeded his expectations, but have lost so slowly and failed what I would expect and what MFP projects based on calories. For the past 1.5 years, I've used a food scale and a Fitbit (with HRM for just over a year). Despite measuring fairly accurately, I just can't lose at the rate MFP says I should be. My endocrinologist has an explanation as to why I can't lose very fast, but it annoys me anyway. In more than 2 years, I've lost just over 30 lbs.
Almost a month ago, I switched to low carb in an effort to better control blood glucose. During the past month (a couple days shy), I've been losing faster and faster to where I'm not losing 2 lbs. / week (MFP is set for 1 lb. / week). I have not changed calories at all, but I've changed macros. The intent was not to lose weight any faster, but to improve BG's. I have a theory as to why low carb is making a difference for me for weight loss, which is based on my knowledge and understanding of the different energy sources in my body and how and when different macros get converted to energy... but that is a topic for another thread.
holy crap.
that goes against what is being preached by many here. not sure what to believe
Those with metabolic issues (insulin resistance) tend to lose better on low carb high fat (moderate protein) because insulin levels are lower. When insulin is lower, it is often easier to lose weight. Possibly because insulin is one of the main drivers behind fat storage, or maybe because the extra glucose in the blood (from higher carb diets) has to go somewhere, and fat is where it goes.
My weight loss experience was similar to @midwesterner85 's. I tried to lose by just counting calories; it would work for a while but I felt so hungry I would eventually stop and regain my weight. I went very low carb high fat (less than 20g of carbs per day) and lost 40lbs in just over 4 months even though I was eating 1500 kcals per day. That should have worked out to a pound per week, and not 10 lbs per month while basically sedentary.
Now I have increased my calories to 2000-2500 kcals per day, and I am still losing although at a very very slow rate. My past experiences of cutting calories on a higher carb diet would not have given me the same result. LCHF seems to work for me, but I am someone with insulin resistance (I was prediabetic).
Turning glucose into triglycerides is not a free energy reaction, it requires energy to do it, which is why grams fattay acids out of de novo lipogensis generally requires 100s to 1000s of excess calories from carbohydrates. If the body was turning glucose into fatty acid, just to turn around and burn those, CO would increased. It would be like taking a laptop and charging the battery to run it off the battery latter instead of just operating the laptop directly from the wall.
If you think operating more efficiently would increase weight loss, you don't understand weight loss as energy systems, numbers, and thermodynamics. You understand it as a belief that being overweight is some kind of bad state that comes out of bad health, so you assume improving one thing (more efficient metabolism) would mean improving (losing weight) another.0 -
CICO always applies no matter what diet you are doing, low carb included.
My advice would be to take a long hard look at your logging and see how accurate it may or may not be. That is where I would look to make changes.Microscopes wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Here is my experience, which may differ from the experience of others:
For more than 2 years, I've been trying to lose weight using CICO. It happens slowly and is very inconsistent (i.e. I'll lose some times when expected, but not lose sometimes when expected). Every time I hit a plateau (a real plateau, meaning that I'm eating less than I'm burning and still not losing), I get frustrated and try different things to get that loss. Every time so far, the plateau has eventually ended (with a big whoosh), but only once can I identify what I actually did to cause the plateau to end. I've had a lot of frustration with weight loss. I have health issues, including both type 1 and type 2 diabetes (I don't make any insulin - type 1; and I'm insulin resistant - type 2) so I have issues related to that. My endocrinologist has low expectations for me to lose weight and I have exceeded his expectations, but have lost so slowly and failed what I would expect and what MFP projects based on calories. For the past 1.5 years, I've used a food scale and a Fitbit (with HRM for just over a year). Despite measuring fairly accurately, I just can't lose at the rate MFP says I should be. My endocrinologist has an explanation as to why I can't lose very fast, but it annoys me anyway. In more than 2 years, I've lost just over 30 lbs.
Almost a month ago, I switched to low carb in an effort to better control blood glucose. During the past month (a couple days shy), I've been losing faster and faster to where I'm not losing 2 lbs. / week (MFP is set for 1 lb. / week). I have not changed calories at all, but I've changed macros. The intent was not to lose weight any faster, but to improve BG's. I have a theory as to why low carb is making a difference for me for weight loss, which is based on my knowledge and understanding of the different energy sources in my body and how and when different macros get converted to energy... but that is a topic for another thread.
holy crap.
that goes against what is being preached by many here. not sure what to believe
Those with metabolic issues (insulin resistance) tend to lose better on low carb high fat (moderate protein) because insulin levels are lower. When insulin is lower, it is often easier to lose weight. Possibly because insulin is one of the main drivers behind fat storage, or maybe because the extra glucose in the blood (from higher carb diets) has to go somewhere, and fat is where it goes.
My weight loss experience was similar to @midwesterner85 's. I tried to lose by just counting calories; it would work for a while but I felt so hungry I would eventually stop and regain my weight. I went very low carb high fat (less than 20g of carbs per day) and lost 40lbs in just over 4 months even though I was eating 1500 kcals per day. That should have worked out to a pound per week, and not 10 lbs per month while basically sedentary.
Now I have increased my calories to 2000-2500 kcals per day, and I am still losing although at a very very slow rate. My past experiences of cutting calories on a higher carb diet would not have given me the same result. LCHF seems to work for me, but I am someone with insulin resistance (I was prediabetic).
Turning glucose into triglycerides is not a free energy reaction, it requires energy to do it, which is why grams fattay acids out of de novo lipogensis generally requires 100s to 1000s of excess calories from carbohydrates. If the body was turning glucose into fatty acid, just to turn around and burn those, CO would increased. It would be like taking a laptop and charging the battery to run it off the battery latter instead of just operating the laptop directly from the wall.
If you think operating more efficiently would increase weight loss, you don't understand weight loss as energy systems, numbers, and thermodynamics. You understand it as a belief that being overweight is some kind of bad state that comes out of bad health, so you assume improving one thing (more efficient metabolism) would mean improving (losing weight) another.
For me, the following is true: I gain weight at 2000-2500kcals of a higher carb diet. I lose very small amount of weight (or maybe it is now maintain) at 2000-2500 kcal of a LCHF diet. That's just the way it is for me. Happily I consider giving up high carb foods for better health and weight management a fair trade.. It is my n=1. That's it. No need to tell me what I think... What you think that I think.
0 -
Microscopes wrote: »When I was on low carb in the past, within a couple weeks my pants would get real lose, etc.
I've been doing CICO for almost a month now along with 3 days per week of heavy weight lifting with a personal trainer. Weighing every single thing that goes into my mouth that isn't pre-portioned. Staying at the calorie goal MFP gave me, and not even eating back my exercise calories.
Yet, I haven't noticed any difference in my pants. Still very snug.
So - obviously CICO works and it is a lifestyle change, but is it a bit slower to see changes with CICO than with low carb, for example?
MFP tracked people who lost the most weight, and it turned out high carb (specifically, high fiber, which is a carb) led to the most weight loss success.
-Rob0
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
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K 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