CICO is not the whole equation

RobynTheresa wrote: »

I've been watching the CICO discussions on this forum with interest. CICO is definitely not a myth, however for optimal health it is not the only consideration for weight loss. Healthy bodies function better, burn calories better, build lean muscle mass better.

CICO has nothing to do with optimal health. It's a written simplification of how the body creates or utilities bodyfat. No more, no less. The only people that confuse this issue are the people who don't understand it.

Those who maintain it is a calorie deficit only that matters and eating Big Macs and Coke will suffice are overlooking the micronutrient balances required for optimal health. Magnesium, potassium, calcium, zinc, the vitamins. While young people may cope without the appropriate nutritional balance, they may pay for those deficits later in life.

Who are these proponents of an all big Mac and coke diet, and where are he people that are following this all big Mac and coke diet?

This is NOT to say one cannot and should not have treats. I certainly do. I have some Lindt dark chocolate in the fridge, a bottle of Black Bacardi lying around and some 140 ml Mars ice-creams in the freezer (131 calories they are). But I have to earn them.

So big macs and coke are out, but chocolate, alcohol and ice cream are in. That's rather arbitrary.

As long as you earn them?

Earning food is rather disordered.

If you are on a 1,200 calorie goal you do need to eat back your exercise calories. Yesterday I did 1.5 hours at the gym including 45 minutes of strength training which Garmin Connect kindly told me was worth 307 calories. I can't fuel that on 1,200 calories. Overall my food intake yesterday was 1,536 calories, but my net was 1,052 (my total active calories was 484). And yes I lost weight on the scales this morning.

So your advice is to net sub 1200 calories. VLCD are not permitted here.

Oh, and drink more water. Most people aren't drinking nearly enough. The ones who are: terrific!!

Have you done an extensive survey of most people?

How about just creating a dietary intake containing foods you enjoy that meets your a calorie, macro and micronutritional goals.

Maybe that includes a big Mac.

RobynTheresa wrote: »

I've been watching the CICO discussions on this forum with interest. CICO is definitely not a myth, however for optimal health it is not the only consideration for weight loss. Healthy bodies function better, burn calories better, build lean muscle mass better.

Those who maintain it is a calorie deficit only that matters and eating Big Macs and Coke will suffice are overlooking the micronutrient balances required for optimal health. Magnesium, potassium, calcium, zinc, the vitamins. While young people may cope without the appropriate nutritional balance, they may pay for those deficits later in life.

If you are on a 1,200 calorie goal you do need to eat back your exercise calories. Yesterday I did 1.5 hours at the gym including 45 minutes of strength training which Garmin Connect kindly told me was worth 307 calories. I can't fuel that on 1,200 calories. Overall my food intake yesterday was 1,536 calories, but my net was 1,052 (my total active calories was 484). And yes I lost weight on the scales this morning.

I have auto-immune conditions, so am on a raft of medications. For months I was physically incapable of doing much due to these conditions. So healthy eating (with treats) has become my mantra. None of us know what our bodies may do in the future, or what is already lurking, waiting to strike. Take care of your bodies.

Oh, and drink more water. Most people aren't drinking nearly enough. The ones who are: terrific!!

This^
I experienced the same thing. I wouldn't have believed it could happen either. Until it happened to me. I came on MFP to try to get answers. Nutrition, fitness, and macros as well as CICO come into play.

People who are saying that it is okay to eat as much sugar and refined flour as you want as long as you are in a deficit will change their tune when they start experiencing auto immune issues, inflammation, fatigue, pre-diabetes, or other health concerns. I'm interested in my health and changing things around now while I'm in my 50s so I can live life pain free.

Wynterbourne wrote: »

DebSozo wrote: »

RobynTheresa wrote: »

I've been watching the CICO discussions on this forum with interest. CICO is definitely not a myth, however for optimal health it is not the only consideration for weight loss. Healthy bodies function better, burn calories better, build lean muscle mass better.

Those who maintain it is a calorie deficit only that matters and eating Big Macs and Coke will suffice are overlooking the micronutrient balances required for optimal health. Magnesium, potassium, calcium, zinc, the vitamins. While young people may cope without the appropriate nutritional balance, they may pay for those deficits later in life.

If you are on a 1,200 calorie goal you do need to eat back your exercise calories. Yesterday I did 1.5 hours at the gym including 45 minutes of strength training which Garmin Connect kindly told me was worth 307 calories. I can't fuel that on 1,200 calories. Overall my food intake yesterday was 1,536 calories, but my net was 1,052 (my total active calories was 484). And yes I lost weight on the scales this morning.

I have auto-immune conditions, so am on a raft of medications. For months I was physically incapable of doing much due to these conditions. So healthy eating (with treats) has become my mantra. None of us know what our bodies may do in the future, or what is already lurking, waiting to strike. Take care of your bodies.

Oh, and drink more water. Most people aren't drinking nearly enough. The ones who are: terrific!!

This^
I experienced the same thing. I wouldn't have believed it could happen either. Until it happened to me. I came on MFP to try to get answers. Nutrition, fitness, and macros as well as CICO come into play.

People who are saying that it is okay to eat as much sugar and refined flour as you want as long as you are in a deficit will change their tune when they start experiencing auto immune issues, inflammation, fatigue, pre-diabetes, or other health concerns. I'm interested in my health and changing things around now while I'm in my 50s so I can live life pain free.

You are confusing health with weight loss. Can you lose weight eating as much sugar and refined flour as you want as long you are in a deficit? Absolutely, the scientific laws of the universe demand it. Is it necessarily the healthiest option? No one is claiming it to be. Two. Separate. Issues.

Stress, poor health, and poor nutrition are contributors, and it can impact weight loss if one develops type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome, sensitivities to food or auto immune troubles.

Those who maintain that only calorie deficit matters often are actually saying the same thing you are in different words. I think these threads are often full of misunderstandings and miscommunications. The only difference is the way people look at certain foods.

Weight loss as a mechanism is a function of calories, and is purely that. This argument is often presented when someone claims that somehow the body can create energy out of thin air if you don't/do eat certain foods. This argument is a very specific reply to a very specific claim. It's meant to describe a mechanism, not a diet.

When it comes to dieting, of course we aren't just energy engines. We have other biological and psychological needs that go beyond storing and burning calories. Even the most avid CICO advocates will agree with you that eating all of your calories in low nutrition foods is 1) a recipe for nutrient deficiency and 2) a recipe for diet adherence fails due to hunger. You will never see anyone advocating that strawman living exclusively on soda. The CICO crowd may actually be the first people to point out the importance of nutrient rich foods. So we're all basically on the same page, but it's lost in misunderstandings.

Where paths do diverge is the way certain groups look at certain foods. One group may eliminate foods or nutrients because they are harmful and a poison and absolutely should not be eaten regardless of the rest of your diet, another group may limit them allowing "treats" because these damaging foods are not as damaging if not eaten as often or if the majority of your intake is healthy, and a third group may limit the amount or frequency of certain foods simply because they don't fit as neatly into their calorie budget or don't work well with their individual hunger patterns without explicit judgement calls and generalizations, so foods are not judged outside of the context of the diet as a whole. It's that third group that often miscommunicates its ideas as "nothing but calories matter" and is often the one misunderstood as saying "eat nothing but candy all day", and sometimes when people advocate eating healthfully they are misunderstood as saying "CICO does not apply".

Everyone is basically saying the same thing: for a healthy and sustainable diet eat reasonable amounts of the foods you like, focusing on nutritious foods and foods that fill you up.

What is this recent obsession with the mythical all Big Mac and soda diets? NO-ONE is advocating that. Ever.

CICO is the basic mathematical equation. And you use real world results to figure out what those two numbers are for yourself.

What you eat matters for health but not purely from a weight loss point of view. Saying that is not the same as "go hog wild on the calorie dense nutrient poor foods because yay CICO!".

Just stop. It's bull.

I've asked this before on threads like this and I'll ask it again.

Please provide evidence that there are regular forum users regularly telling people to eat what they want, regardless of nutrients and meeting macro and micro needs because that doesn't matter. Thus far I've had crickets to this request so fingers crossed this time.........

fr33sia12 wrote: »

VintageFeline wrote: »

I've asked this before on threads like this and I'll ask it again.

Please provide evidence that there are regular forum users regularly telling people to eat what they want, regardless of nutrients and meeting macro and micro needs because that doesn't matter. Thus far I've had crickets to this request so fingers crossed this time.........

Just search "eat what you want" in the forums, there are plenty of replies saying "yes you can eat whatever you want" and there's no mention of other nutrients. Some people do mention nutrients, but a lot don't.

It is your assertion this happens so the burden of proof lies with you. Much the same as when someone makes untrue health claims. Because my experience is the opposite. I see a lot of "you can eat what you want BUT".

RobynTheresa wrote: »

I've been watching the CICO discussions on this forum with interest. CICO is definitely not a myth, however for optimal health it is not the only consideration for weight loss. Healthy bodies function better, burn calories better, build lean muscle mass better.

Those who maintain it is a calorie deficit only that matters and eating Big Macs and Coke will suffice are overlooking the micronutrient balances required for optimal health. Magnesium, potassium, calcium, zinc, the vitamins. While young people may cope without the appropriate nutritional balance, they may pay for those deficits later in life.

This is NOT to say one cannot and should not have treats. I certainly do. I have some Lindt dark chocolate in the fridge, a bottle of Black Bacardi lying around and some 140 ml Mars ice-creams in the freezer (131 calories they are). But I have to earn them.

If you are on a 1,200 calorie goal you do need to eat back your exercise calories. Yesterday I did 1.5 hours at the gym including 45 minutes of strength training which Garmin Connect kindly told me was worth 307 calories. I can't fuel that on 1,200 calories. Overall my food intake yesterday was 1,536 calories, but my net was 1,052 (my total active calories was 484). And yes I lost weight on the scales this morning.

I have auto-immune conditions, so am on a raft of medications. For months I was physically incapable of doing much due to these conditions. So healthy eating (with treats) has become my mantra. None of us know what our bodies may do in the future, or what is already lurking, waiting to strike. Take care of your bodies.

Oh, and drink more water. Most people aren't drinking nearly enough. The ones who are: terrific!!

Are we seriously still talking about this straw man argument? NO ONE is advocating that ones diet consist ONLY of Big Macs, Coke, chocolate, Fritos, gummy worms, ice cream etc etc etc. NO ONE. Or, are you saying that in order to lose weight and improve your health markers you may never eat these things? If that's the case then you're wrong. Plenty of us here continue to eat the foods we enjoy, including the above mentioned, while fitting them into our calorie goals and are losing the weight/have lost the extra weight/are improving our health. That does not meant that's ALL we're eating, just that we've learned how to have a healthy relationship with the foods we like and we've learned how to enjoy them in moderation.

I've been doing this thing for a while now. I've lost the extra weight, I've improved every single health marker that my doctor uses, I'm no longer a pre-diabetic, I take no medications, I have no health issues, I rock my size 4 jeans, look pretty darn good in a bikini, and I've been maintaining the weight loss and better health for several years now. I eat the foods I like in calorie moderation, which includes things like veggies and whole grains, and then things like the Checkers Big Daddy Bacon Double burger and 1/2 order of fries I ate last night. I woke up this morning still in excellent health and still within my maintenance range.

My latest blood work panel/health screening is listed in my profile, from a few weeks ago. Cholesterol, glucose, blood pressure, waist circumference, bmi etc. Sure some disease could be 'lurking' behind a corner, ready to jump out at me, but I could also die in a car accident this morning while driving my daughter to orchestra practice. I'm not going to spend my time worrying about the things I have absolutely no control over and instead focus on having a happy and healthy mindset and enjoying my life

Maybe it would be beneficial to read: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10460011/the-ultimate-guide-to-mfp#latest

You are taking one thread (and in particular one members post) to make an argument. It's wrong. It doesn't discuss context or dosage. It doesn't consider training nor goals. I have been here since 2009 and I can guarantee you, that you are not correct in your assumption, which is one reason I believe the above thread will help you and any other new person to our forums.

RobynTheresa wrote: »

...
Those who maintain it is a calorie deficit only that matters and eating Big Macs and Coke will suffice are overlooking the micronutrient balances required for optimal health. Magnesium, potassium, calcium, zinc, the vitamins. ...

Ironically, a single Big Mac contains 11% US FDA percent daily value of magnesium, 11% potassium, 25% calcium, 28% zinc, significant amounts of various vitamins, and a whopping 52% protein.

cityruss wrote: »

I'm going for a big Mac.

Why waste your time, go for a baconator.