Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Is it the same for everyone ?
healthy491
Posts: 384 Member
So we can all agree that CI<CO leads to weight loss for everyone, which is awesome. BUT when it comes to certain facts ( or myths ? idk ) like sugar being addictive , vegetables are fulfilling etc.. are they the same for everyone ? I am asking this because when I was eating chicken , vegetables etc and no sugar , I used to feel extremely hungry and sad and end up eating more and more. Now I basically eat chocolate and sweet stuff during the day and some proteins at night and I feel happy and full while still staying under my calorie goal.
1
Replies
-
People seem to differ as to what they find satiating. I think that's a combination of physical differences and satiety being largely psychological too.
Sugar being "addictive" is a minefield. I don't happen to think it is, in the sense that we typically use addiction, but eating can be. The evidence (to the extent one accepts the addiction model here) is that highly palatable foods tend to be the triggers (and they vary from person to person), and studies show that the vaulted brain responses to sugar also happen with fat and, especially, combinations of sugar/fat or salt/fat or the like. Related to this, people tend to feel less satiety on mixed foods (like potatoes + fat + salt like fries or chips) vs. plain potatoes without the fat (which tend to score high on satiety tests), even though the plain potatoes have a higher glycemic index and are basically carbs without much fiber.2 -
There is a lot of personal preference in eating patterns. Some people cannot control themselves when it comes to eating sweets and others can. These are also factors that can change over time or under different circumstances. That's why many of us suggest people ditch eating plans or restrictive diets to discover eating patterns that will work for them long term.9
-
CICO is for everyone, how you arrive is for the individual...10
-
healthy491 wrote: »So we can all agree that CI<CO leads to weight loss for everyone, which is awesome. BUT when it comes to certain facts ( or myths ? idk ) like sugar being addictive , vegetables are fulfilling etc.. are they the same for everyone ? I am asking this because when I was eating chicken , vegetables etc and no sugar , I used to feel extremely hungry and sad and end up eating more and more. Now I basically eat chocolate and sweet stuff during the day and some proteins at night and I feel happy and full while still staying under my calorie goal.
lets take them one by one.
sugar is not addictive.
vegetables are dense so they are more filling, and it should be the same for everyone.
if you are curious about CICO just google the twinkie diet. The guy ate a diet of primarily twinkies and lost weight and had improved blood labs.1 -
Maybe going back to chocolate and sweet stuff and smaller amounts of protein is more mental. Meaning perhaps there is a psychological factor there that you are feeling more satisfied with the things you are enjoying and really hated eating chicken, veggies and no sugar.
"we can all agree that CI<CO leads to weight loss for everyone" .. YES
3 -
CI<CO is math and science.
How you get there and how I get there successfully and happily for the sake of longevity isnt debatable because its highly personal.
My food preferences change depending on the days and my activity.
There are things I try to avoid for digestion issues but I sure do wish I didnt have to. But all in all I have success, satiety and happiness eating all the things.5 -
There is a lot of personal preference in eating patterns. Some people cannot control themselves when it comes to eating sweets and others can. These are also factors that can change over time or under different circumstances. That's why many of us suggest people ditch eating plans or restrictive diets to discover eating patterns that will work for them long term.
This. CICO is the bottom line for weight loss, weight gain and weight maintenance. But....we're all different and have varied food preferences, schedules, lifestyles, cultural backgrounds etc. I personally can take or leave sweet stuff. Halloween candy does nothing for me and I won't be tempted at all to skim my kids. However, you put a can of Pringles in my cupboard and that thing is toast! My sister is the complete opposite and has admitted to eating an entire package of oreos by herself before. She loves the sweet stuff like candy and cookies and for her they can be an issue. Figuring out what works/doesn't work for yourself is key, and also realize that what works for you may not work for someone else. But all said and done-regardless of how you decide go about things-CICO is king
2 -
healthy491 wrote: »So we can all agree that CI<CO leads to weight loss for everyone, which is awesome. BUT when it comes to certain facts ( or myths ? idk ) like sugar being addictive , vegetables are fulfilling etc.. are they the same for everyone ? I am asking this because when I was eating chicken , vegetables etc and no sugar , I used to feel extremely hungry and sad and end up eating more and more. Now I basically eat chocolate and sweet stuff during the day and some proteins at night and I feel happy and full while still staying under my calorie goal.
Different people find different foods filling and tasty. Usually if you are meeting your calorie, protein, fat and fiber goal you will feel pretty satisfied. Some people feel they need more carbs than other people. You can use the same calorie goal but eat different foods and get results.
Sweet things taste good to many people. Some people prefer sweet flavors over all else. If you suddenly stop eating sugar food tastes different. You want it because you are used to it and it tastes nice to you. Your tastes could adjust to a lower sugar diet.
Some people prefer other flavors more strongly.
I like salty and sour foods. They taste good to me. I feel happier when I eat foods that taste good to me and less happy when foods are bland. It isn't an addiction. It is habit and preference. I could get used to blander foods or learn to get more flavor from other ingredients.
Fat makes things taste good to a lot of people too. You can find plenty of threads on the forum about people preferring full fat dairy products because they taste better and other people preferring a lower fat alternative.1 -
Different people will have different experience. I do very well on low-carb, satisfied, few cravings, etc. But not everyone has had that experience.
I hold the unpopular opinion that people can be addicted to sugar, because I'm studying Psychology, and I know that by the clinical definition of addiction, it is possible to be entirely psychologically addicted to a substance, with no physical addiction whatsoever. It's the reason people relapse on drugs years after they quit. The reason people don't sell their bodies on the streets to get it is because you can buy it at the store for less than $1 a lb.
Having said that, not everyone who likes or even loves sweets is addicted.6 -
healthy491 wrote: »So we can all agree that CI<CO leads to weight loss for everyone, which is awesome. BUT when it comes to certain facts ( or myths ? idk ) like sugar being addictive , vegetables are fulfilling etc.. are they the same for everyone ? I am asking this because when I was eating chicken , vegetables etc and no sugar , I used to feel extremely hungry and sad and end up eating more and more. Now I basically eat chocolate and sweet stuff during the day and some proteins at night and I feel happy and full while still staying under my calorie goal.
While I don't agree with sugar being addictive, I do agree that people handle it in very different ways. My wife and I are a classic example. I can have sweets in the house and be perfectly satisfied with a small serving of them, put them back away and think nothing of it. A bag of candy, chocolates, cookies, etc. can easily last me a month. My wife, on the other hand, is absolutely incapable of exercising moderation with sweets - if they're in the house, she can't stop thinking about them and when (not if) the container comes down, she will devour the whole thing in one sitting.
If we don't have them in the house she can control her cravings just fine (she won't run out in the middle of the night to buy sweets or anything like that, and she refuses to buy them when we go grocery shopping just so the temptation isn't there), but if she knows they're in the house, they won't last a day. She needs a highly restrictive, regimented, portion controlled diet to lose weight, while I lose quite happily eating anything and everything I want in moderation.
Some people find vegetables filling/satiating all by themselves. I don't. I can eat a huge salad or a whole bag of broccoli, brussels sprouts, cauliflower, etc. and feel "full", but not satiated - there's still a feeling like a gnawing, empty hole in my stomach. If I pair them with a protein (chicken, beef, pork, etc.), then I'm perfectly fine.
CI<CO works for everybody - but there are many different paths on how we arrive there and what works for one person very well may not work at all for another.8 -
I don't buy into the CICO philosophy whole heartedly. ..with so many of us eating at a deficit for weeks and we don't lose? See all those "help" posts.
Or take the show The Biggest Loser.. where they workout 8 hours a day ..eat 1200 calories and contestants gain a pound or only lose one or two pounds..in a week..to if you do the CICO math they should be losing 10 pounds. So.. i think counting calories is a tool..that works most of the time but not all of the time. Boosting metabolism and finding what works for ones nutritional needs all matter.
It isn't a single simple solution. You just have to eat right and move more.. and mix a lot of time into the equation ...that is what works.0 -
elisa123gal wrote: »I don't buy into the CICO philosophy whole heartedly. ..with so many of us eating at a deficit for weeks and we don't lose? See all those "help" posts.
Or take the show The Biggest Loser.. where they workout 8 hours a day ..eat 1200 calories and contestants gain a pound or only lose one or two pounds..in a week..to if you do the CICO math they should be losing 10 pounds. So.. i think counting calories is a tool..that works most of the time but not all of the time. Boosting metabolism and finding what works for ones nutritional needs all matter.
It isn't a single simple solution. You just have to eat right and move more.. and mix a lot of time into the equation ...that is what works.
Most of those "help" posts are from people who don't weigh food or have a cheat day, meaning their calories in is significantly higher than they think. A few have medical issues which means their calories out is actually lower than estimated.10 -
elisa123gal wrote: »I don't buy into the CICO philosophy whole heartedly. ..with so many of us eating at a deficit for weeks and we don't lose? See all those "help" posts.
Or take the show The Biggest Loser.. where they workout 8 hours a day ..eat 1200 calories and contestants gain a pound or only lose one or two pounds..in a week..to if you do the CICO math they should be losing 10 pounds. So.. i think counting calories is a tool..that works most of the time but not all of the time. Boosting metabolism and finding what works for ones nutritional needs all matter.
It isn't a single simple solution. You just have to eat right and move more.. and mix a lot of time into the equation ...that is what works.
If you look at the overall concept of biggest loser, they all lost weight. Weight fluctuates daily. It's just a natural occurrence that is can be influenced by exercise, sodium consumption, TOM, food waste in your GI system, etc.. So just because you don't lose every week, doesn't invalidate CICO. That is why it is important to look at weight loss over long periods to look at net weight change.
Also, not many things actually boost metabolism (at least basal metabolic rate). Exercise will increase expenditure and resistance training (especially can cause increase to resting metabolic rate) but if you want prolonged increase to metabolism, large amounts of muscle gain are required and even than you only burn about 6 calories per day with every lb of muscle gained.4 -
elisa123gal wrote: »I don't buy into the CICO philosophy whole heartedly. ..with so many of us eating at a deficit for weeks and we don't lose? See all those "help" posts.
Or take the show The Biggest Loser.. where they workout 8 hours a day ..eat 1200 calories and contestants gain a pound or only lose one or two pounds..in a week..to if you do the CICO math they should be losing 10 pounds. So.. i think counting calories is a tool..that works most of the time but not all of the time. Boosting metabolism and finding what works for ones nutritional needs all matter.
It isn't a single simple solution. You just have to eat right and move more.. and mix a lot of time into the equation ...that is what works.
In addition to the points already made, there were glaring flaws in the model used to compute the "metabolic damage" done to the Biggest Loser contestants.
I have found that people who say that CICO isn't the whole picture don't understand just how complex CICO is meant to be. It's a simple acronym that covers everything people say it doesn't cover.4 -
CICO governs all weight gain and weight loss...5
-
elisa123gal wrote: »I don't buy into the CICO philosophy whole heartedly. ..with so many of us eating at a deficit for weeks and we don't lose? See all those "help" posts.
Or take the show The Biggest Loser.. where they workout 8 hours a day ..eat 1200 calories and contestants gain a pound or only lose one or two pounds..in a week..to if you do the CICO math they should be losing 10 pounds. So.. i think counting calories is a tool..that works most of the time but not all of the time. Boosting metabolism and finding what works for ones nutritional needs all matter.
It isn't a single simple solution. You just have to eat right and move more.. and mix a lot of time into the equation ...that is what works.
I'm one of the people in the forums helping those people on a regular basis. Most of the people who come in here and say they are eating at a deficit but aren't losing usually fall into one of two categories:
1. They aren't really eating at a deficit, even if they believe they are.
2. They have gained water temporarily which is disguising fat loss
There have been studies done which show how bad people really can be at tracking what they're eating even if they are trying very hard. We're talking differences of up to 40% more calories eaten than tracked. Those people are often eyeballing portions or using measuring cups as well as simply forgetting to track little things they grab and eat during the day. Then there's the calories from exercise. They'll give themselves calories for doing things like "stretching", cleaning the kitchen, vacuuming, etc. They'll use MFP's calorie estimates or do something strange like wear a heart rate monitor all day and then add those calories. Then they'll eat most of those calories they didn't really burn. In the 5 years I've been using MFP I've seen some really odd things in these forums and it's very rare that someone can honestly say they aren't doing any of these types things and are not losing weight.
It's certainly possible that someone might have a much lower than normal metabolism so that they aren't losing at MFP's calorie goal but in that case they still weren't adhering to CI < CO. Those people simply have to eat less than the average person to lose weight.6 -
People *feel* differently and may *react* differently to different foods or types of foods. But all people lose weight on a deficit. It's simple physics and cannot be altered, no matter what "conditions" people believe they have.5
-
elisa123gal wrote: »I don't buy into the CICO philosophy whole heartedly. ..with so many of us eating at a deficit for weeks and we don't lose? See all those "help" posts.
Or take the show The Biggest Loser.. where they workout 8 hours a day ..eat 1200 calories and contestants gain a pound or only lose one or two pounds..in a week..to if you do the CICO math they should be losing 10 pounds. So.. i think counting calories is a tool..that works most of the time but not all of the time. Boosting metabolism and finding what works for ones nutritional needs all matter.
It isn't a single simple solution. You just have to eat right and move more.. and mix a lot of time into the equation ...that is what works.
It's not a philosophy any more than gravity is. Watch Secret Eaters on BBC and see what a "1200" calorie diet can look like.
8 -
elisa123gal wrote: »I don't buy into the CICO philosophy whole heartedly. ..with so many of us eating at a deficit for weeks and we don't lose? See all those "help" posts.
Or take the show The Biggest Loser.. where they workout 8 hours a day ..eat 1200 calories and contestants gain a pound or only lose one or two pounds..in a week..to if you do the CICO math they should be losing 10 pounds. So.. i think counting calories is a tool..that works most of the time but not all of the time. Boosting metabolism and finding what works for ones nutritional needs all matter.
It isn't a single simple solution. You just have to eat right and move more.. and mix a lot of time into the equation ...that is what works.
CICO is not a philosophy it is an establishment mathematical fat..
if you don't believe in it, try eating more calories then you burn and see what happens...
In regards to your biggest loser comment, it takes your body three to four weeks to adapt to any change, and those people go from zero exercise to working out eight hours a day, so they are retaining a massive amount of water in the first few weeks..
has anyone ever ate 1200 calories and exercised 8 hours a day on that show and lost no weight at all??4 -
CICO is the real deal, basic science.
I think if you eat your sweets without any protein or fat, then you will crave it more because of the blood sugar spikes.
Feeling full is usually a combo between fat, protein, carbs and fiber. If you're only having high protein (chicken has very little fat) and low carb/fiber (veggies) you'll still feel hungry. Also related to blood sugar levels, cravings and overall feeling of satisfaction.
There's also so much more in play... like stress levels (hello, cortisol!), hormonal imbalances etc. But if you're healthy, CICO plus watching your Macros should work just fine.
0 -
Do you.0
-
It's definitely not the same for everyone. There are going to be some general concepts that will be mostly true for most people ("foods with a high fiber/water content will fill you up faster" "protein and fiber help you feel full for longer" "eating a large amount of starch/sugar on its own will leave you feeling hungrier sooner"), but there's more to it than that. Physiologically, yes, people are quite similar. But, as a few people have said or alluded to, there's a huge psychological component to satiety, plus people's hormonal responses to food can vary widely.
Once you eat the food, did your body produce the proper type and amount of hormones in response? Did your brain and other organs accept, interpret, and respond to the hormones in the proper way? Did you eat a sufficient amount/type of foods and nutrients but still feel unsatisfied because your meal lacked a food you enjoy the taste of? Is there an issue in your life that drives you to continue to eat even after you physically feel full?
Side note re: CICO - I am a legit, honest-to-god, special snowflake who for YEARS did everything correctly on the logging side, followed my Fitbit, and religiously ate at a calorie goal that, per MFP, should have allowed me to lose 1-2lbs per week, and yet lost basically nothing. Medical testing eventually revealed that my body simply burns ~25-30% fewer calories per day than what would be expected for someone with my stats and activity level - my metabolism is more comparable to someone 11 inches shorter and 65 years older than I am - such that what I thought was a 500-1000/day deficit was really closer to maintenance (which, honestly, I knew already based on the math, but I resisted believing it until a knowledgeable doctor put numbers in front of me). CICO is still true for me, just as it is for everyone else on this planet. It just took me a little more work to nail down the "CO" side - now that I have, I'm finally having slow but steady success by simply eating fewer calories than what I now know I'm actually burning each day.9 -
elisa123gal wrote: »I don't buy into the CICO philosophy whole heartedly. ..with so many of us eating at a deficit for weeks and we don't lose? See all those "help" posts.
Or take the show The Biggest Loser.. where they workout 8 hours a day ..eat 1200 calories and contestants gain a pound or only lose one or two pounds..in a week..to if you do the CICO math they should be losing 10 pounds. So.. i think counting calories is a tool..that works most of the time but not all of the time. Boosting metabolism and finding what works for ones nutritional needs all matter.
It isn't a single simple solution. You just have to eat right and move more.. and mix a lot of time into the equation ...that is what works.
Most of those "help" posts are from people who don't weigh food or have a cheat day, meaning their calories in is significantly higher than they think. A few have medical issues which means their calories out is actually lower than estimated.
Kind of like the post in the main forum right now where someone posted frustrated that she's not losing weight.....aaannnd she's only tracking calorie intake Monday-Friday
I think we'd be hard pressed to find legitimate examples of people who are actually not losing weight, while eating at the correct calorie deficit. Barring medical conditions that affect weight, it's always going to come down to CICO. 6 -
CICO works if your sole goal is to lose weight.
If you're looking to lose weight, stay satiated, and be healthier overall, it's mildly more complex than that.3 -
I think it varies from person to person. Some find carbs more filling than fat etc.
Heck for me it varies from week to week, so who knows.1 -
CipherZero wrote: »CICO works if your sole goal is to lose weight.
If you're looking to lose weight, stay satiated, and be healthier overall, it's mildly more complex than that.
Meh, I eat a pretty typical SAD diet (I do eat veggies every day, but I also eat fast food several times a week, chips every day etc). am satiated with my food choices, and am in excellent health by every marker that my doctor goes by (my triglycerides are in the 40s, for example), and I've found it to be as simple as CICO.0 -
CipherZero wrote: »CICO works if your sole goal is to lose weight.
If you're looking to lose weight, stay satiated, and be healthier overall, it's mildly more complex than that.
If you lost weight, CICO worked. If you gained weight, CICO worked. If losing weight made you healthier, CICO worked...7 -
less calories in than out works
All foods in moderation and staying within my calorie allotment works for me, got me to maintenance, and has kept me there for 3 years.5 -
You all crack me up.. how about plateaus? okay.. Many people on here are stuck for many long weeks..even months ... many months sometimes.. working out and eating at a deficit and don't lose. If CICO worked consistently ... we'd all be at goal by now. there wouldn't be one discouraging post.
I think it works perfectly for some...and those are the ones who point the boney finger at all the others who it doesn't work as well for.. and blame them for not eating at a low enough deficit or that they're dong it wrong.0 -
elisa123gal wrote: »You all crack me up.. how about plateaus? okay.. Many people on here are stuck for many long weeks..even months ... many months sometimes.. working out and eating at a deficit and don't lose. If CICO worked consistently ... we'd all be at goal by now. there wouldn't be one discouraging post.
I think it works perfectly for some...and those are the ones who point the boney finger at all the others who it doesn't work as well for.. and blame them for not eating at a low enough deficit or that they're dong it wrong.
It depends. Is the person still logging accurately? How much weight have they lost up to that point and how rapidly? Are they exercising? Could it be water weight due to workouts, stress, hormones, or other changes? Are they drinking adequate water, getting appropriate vitamins, hitting appropriate macros, and watching electrolyte balance?
There are times where someone needs a diet break after losing weight consistently for many months. Overall it's typically a hormonal issue at that point whether it's psychological or physiological. It still falls within calories in compared to calories out because hormonal changes caused by dieting reduce the calories out portion.11
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
- 232.6K 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