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.
CICO is not the whole equation
Options
Replies
-
It's not the whole equation. It is not simple addition and subtraction. There are other variables that influence the calculations. Change the variables and change the formula.
Nope.
Weight loss -> CICO
Health, Satiety, Compliance, Satisfaction -> Macronutrient Partitioning and selection
Honestly, I gave an analogy about this yesterday.
Go into Home Depot. Pretend you're remodeling your kitchen. Stand there in the tile aisle. And seriously tell the person helping you, when she asks you how many square feet of tile you need, "Well, see, it's not just the amount of tile, it comes down to the type of tile you use."
The yardstick you measure fabric with isn't the fabric.
Additionally: Giant strawman of Big Mac all the time vs. healthy all the time rears its ugly head. Really?27 -
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".16 -
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.........
It all matters. That is the point. Subject of thread is that CICO is not the whole equation.3 -
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
24 -
RobynTheresa wrote: »
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.
You didn't lose a measurable amount of fat in one day.13 -
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.17 -
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.
You are also misinterpreting what others are saying. It is very true, that you can eat whatever you want and still lose weight, but in the context of many discussions, people are struggling to reach nutrient goals due to severe restrictions based on non sense in the fitness community (i.e., bread is bad, fats are bad, don't eat after 7pm, etc...). Everyone still advocates an overall wholesome diet.26 -
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.
43 -
I'm going for a big Mac.19
-
RobinTeresa, this site has been around for many years. There is a deep well of knowledge here. No one who has read more than ten threads on this site would disagree with your basic point, just that it is made many times a day, and once any point is made on an internet forum, it is going to be debated with tweezers down to the last molecule.
This topic has been discussed hundreds of times - in the last three days. The basic point you make is valid, but the discussion must now play out since you've brought it up again. (And yes, eat those exercise calories!) The discussion will happen so that anyone who is not educated who happens upon your post will be able to see all sides of this.
It is difficult to maintain good nutrition even on a maintenance plan - but we all agree it's not necessary to stop eating certain foods or to demonize entire food groups - and that will be the push-back you (and anyone here) will get.
If you make a point that has been made a thousand times, there will also be push-back. Your post just came off a little judgey, that's all. Kind of like "teacher."
Bacon has been invoked.12 -
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.........
It all matters. That is the point. Subject of thread is that CICO is not the whole equation.
For weight loss it is and that is what it is claimed to be by the people who know what it means.
ABSOLUTELY NO ONE except people like Op who don't know what CICO even means claims CICO alone is enough to get adequate nutrition.
Of course on the other hand, just because you could technically eat all your calories in the worst nutrition ever, show me one person on here who actually does and tells others it's totally fine. It's harder to get horrible nutrition than adequate unless you're really trying. Bell curves.19 -
stevencloser 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.........
It all matters. That is the point. Subject of thread is that CICO is not the whole equation.
For weight loss it is and that is what it is claimed to be by the people who know what it means.
ABSOLUTELY NO ONE except people like Op who don't know what CICO even means claims CICO alone is enough to get adequate nutrition.
Of course on the other hand, just because you could technically eat all your calories in the worst nutrition ever, show me one person on here who actually does and tells others it's totally fine. It's harder to get horrible nutrition than adequate unless you're really trying. Bell curves.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10348650/cico-still-skeptical-come-inside-for-a-meticulous-log-that-proves-it/p1
Not all "junk" food, but close.7 -
stevencloser 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.........
It all matters. That is the point. Subject of thread is that CICO is not the whole equation.
For weight loss it is and that is what it is claimed to be by the people who know what it means.
ABSOLUTELY NO ONE except people like Op who don't know what CICO even means claims CICO alone is enough to get adequate nutrition.
Of course on the other hand, just because you could technically eat all your calories in the worst nutrition ever, show me one person on here who actually does and tells others it's totally fine. It's harder to get horrible nutrition than adequate unless you're really trying. Bell curves.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10348650/cico-still-skeptical-come-inside-for-a-meticulous-log-that-proves-it/p1
Not all "junk" food, but close.
To be fair, that OP did not promote that diet, and specifically mentioned that he did it as a temporary experiment. His high level of energy expenditure also ensured that he was not reaching inadequate levels of any macros or micros.9 -
RobynTheresa wrote: »Cityruss, I am not going to dissect your response. If you don't understand where I'm coming from, that's fine. Fell free to ask questions. At no point did I say CICO was not a valid formula. Of course it is simple physics. My point is ALONE it is not NECESSARILY healthy and I read way to many comments on these forums saying it is.
And yes, chocolate, alcohol and ice-cream are perfectly fine IN MODERATION. Yes, earn them - if I have spare calories, I can have a treat. Your objection would be?
Not sure why you think my earning is "disordered", but nevermind.
You didn't want to dissect it, but it's a shame you ignored the extremely valid question of:
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?
13 -
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.
CICO is the whole equation when it comes to weight loss. Not when it comes to health or how to build a sky scraper and maintain the engine in your car.13 -
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!!
CICO has nothing to do with health...CICO is just the math. A calorie deficit is what matters for weight management...health and nutrition are separate matters.
Also, nobody advocates for an all Big Mac and coke diet or whatever...it is generally acknowledged that these things can be part of a well balanced and overall healthy diet...that you can have them...not that your diet solely consist of them.10 -
WinoGelato wrote: »RobynTheresa wrote: »Cityruss, I am not going to dissect your response. If you don't understand where I'm coming from, that's fine. Fell free to ask questions. At no point did I say CICO was not a valid formula. Of course it is simple physics. My point is ALONE it is not NECESSARILY healthy and I read way to many comments on these forums saying it is.
And yes, chocolate, alcohol and ice-cream are perfectly fine IN MODERATION. Yes, earn them - if I have spare calories, I can have a treat. Your objection would be?
Not sure why you think my earning is "disordered", but nevermind.
You didn't want to dissect it, but it's a shame you ignored the extremely valid question of:
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?
Exactly. No one who makes the arguments like the OP ever answers this question. Ever.
Just like no one on these boards ever advises people to eat nothing but donuts and Big Macs within their calorie goals. Ever.
There is a difference in people saying "there are no inherently bad foods - it is overall diet that matters" and people saying "absolutely, eat all Pop-Tarts all the time - it'll be great!"
I am one of the biggest proponents on this board of "There Are No Bad Foods", since a diet of all Big Macs is just as bad as a diet of all broccoli. But no one eats that way, and no one on these boards advises anyone to eat that way. I don't understand where people get this idea from.13 -
I'd also like to point out that while I would not advise doing this, this professor ate Twinkies and junk food and lost weight.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
Not only did he lose weight, butHaub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.
For many people who are obese or overweight, losing weight alone will improve their health, even if they get there without eating a single vegetable. If losing weight is the number one thing they need to focus on to improve their health, and eating the foods they normally eat in smaller portions is the easiest way for them to get there, then they should do it that way. Learning to eat a healthy diet with treats in moderation will come with time.
Yes, nutrition is important. But for some, losing weight is more important.25 -
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.
1) This has probably been said (and ignored by you) at least a hundred times in various threads, but I'll repeat it once more for your benefit: Speaking purely in terms of weight loss, the only requirement is to establish/maintain a sustained caloric deficit. Macros and micros don't matter one bit. When speaking in terms of adherence, satiety, overall health and workout performance, macros and micros matter. "CICO" isn't a diet or a 'way of eating' - it's a simple equation which has been scientifically proven ad nauseum.
2) Nobody is saying that it's okay to eat as much sugar and refined flour as you want to. Show me ONE post where anybody has said that. You're extrapolating your beliefs into a weak, non-existent, overexaggerated binary argument in an attempt to bolster your point.Wynterbourne 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.
Sugar/refined flour does not cause type 2 diabetes. Metabolic syndrome is primarily correlated with obesity, not macro/micronutrient intake. More fearmongering and woo.
[ETA:] Didn't we just have a thread a few days ago where an OP castigated everybody else for eating Big Macs when her diary showed that she was eating pizza, donuts, chocolate and alcohol? But it was okay because she 'knew' they were bad for her while she was eating them? This looks pretty much like an exact rehash of the same argument.28
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 913 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions