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
Replies
-
Therealobi1 wrote: »I don't like big macs
Me either.1 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »NatureOfMan wrote: »For the most part CICO works. Using CICO can transform someone from being overweight to someone being healthy, however anyone who believe CICO is the be all and end all needs to up their knowledge on how hormones in the body operate.
If you believe that, then you dont know actually understand CICO is. Its an energy balance equation. Hormones effect metabolism and other factors which fall into CICO.
I think this is the main thing people who complain about CICO don't understand. Things like health issues, TEF, etc. are still part of the CICO equation. The number MFP spits out for you might not work for you, but that doesn't mean CICO doesn't work for you. It just means you don't know all of the variables in the equation.
I agree. CICO cannot be wrong. However in no way does it explain Why we tend to overeat.
Maybe it would be beneficial to go live in a 3rd world country for awhile and it will be apparent?
Energy balance is a difference topic then: the behavioral, psychological and societal impacts of food abundance in a low exercise environment.
Damn you beat me to it.2 -
WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »NatureOfMan wrote: »For the most part CICO works. Using CICO can transform someone from being overweight to someone being healthy, however anyone who believe CICO is the be all and end all needs to up their knowledge on how hormones in the body operate.
If you believe that, then you dont know actually understand CICO is. Its an energy balance equation. Hormones effect metabolism and other factors which fall into CICO.
I think this is the main thing people who complain about CICO don't understand. Things like health issues, TEF, etc. are still part of the CICO equation. The number MFP spits out for you might not work for you, but that doesn't mean CICO doesn't work for you. It just means you don't know all of the variables in the equation.
I agree. CICO cannot be wrong. However in no way does it explain Why we tend to overeat.
Maybe it would be beneficial to go live in a 3rd world country for awhile and it will be apparent?
Energy balance is a difference topic then: the behavioral, psychological and societal impacts of food abundance in a low exercise environment.
Damn you beat me to it.
Ha. And i am on the phone so i am slower than usual.0 -
BrunetteRunner87 wrote: »Therealobi1 wrote: »I don't like big macs
Me either.
I've never had one. I remember someone telling me that the special sauce is Thousand Island dressing, and I'm not a fan, so I've never ordered one.0 -
ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »BrunetteRunner87 wrote: »Therealobi1 wrote: »I don't like big macs
Me either.
I've never had one. I remember someone telling me that the special sauce is Thousand Island dressing, and I'm not a fan, so I've never ordered one.
In high school, i used to be able to eat 3 in one sitting with a supersized soda. And i never broke 175 lbs like i am now.1 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »NatureOfMan wrote: »For the most part CICO works. Using CICO can transform someone from being overweight to someone being healthy, however anyone who believe CICO is the be all and end all needs to up their knowledge on how hormones in the body operate.
If you believe that, then you dont know actually understand CICO is. Its an energy balance equation. Hormones effect metabolism and other factors which fall into CICO.
I think this is the main thing people who complain about CICO don't understand. Things like health issues, TEF, etc. are still part of the CICO equation. The number MFP spits out for you might not work for you, but that doesn't mean CICO doesn't work for you. It just means you don't know all of the variables in the equation.
I agree. CICO cannot be wrong. However in no way does it explain Why we tend to overeat.
Because food is delicious and abundant in a large part of the world.
But that fact doesn't make CICO wrong.
Of course not. And I didn't say that it did.1 -
ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »BrunetteRunner87 wrote: »Therealobi1 wrote: »I don't like big macs
Me either.
I've never had one. I remember someone telling me that the special sauce is Thousand Island dressing, and I'm not a fan, so I've never ordered one.
Pretty sure it's 1000 Island. I had my first one last year and I think the meat to bread ratio is wildly out of whack. Quarter pounders for life.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »NatureOfMan wrote: »For the most part CICO works. Using CICO can transform someone from being overweight to someone being healthy, however anyone who believe CICO is the be all and end all needs to up their knowledge on how hormones in the body operate.
If you believe that, then you dont know actually understand CICO is. Its an energy balance equation. Hormones effect metabolism and other factors which fall into CICO.
I think this is the main thing people who complain about CICO don't understand. Things like health issues, TEF, etc. are still part of the CICO equation. The number MFP spits out for you might not work for you, but that doesn't mean CICO doesn't work for you. It just means you don't know all of the variables in the equation.
I agree. CICO cannot be wrong. However in no way does it explain Why we tend to overeat.
Maybe it would be beneficial to go live in a 3rd world country for awhile and it will be apparent?
Energy balance is a difference topic then: the behavioral, psychological and societal impacts of food abundance in a low exercise environment.
This.
For the majority of our history, those who ate up when they had the chance were those who had a better chance to survive. Those who were peckish or ate exactly what they needed and no more (despite the fact that they may not find food the next day) just wouldn't do as well. It's not surprising that so many of us, when left to our instincts, repeat the behavior of our successful ancestors.3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »NatureOfMan wrote: »For the most part CICO works. Using CICO can transform someone from being overweight to someone being healthy, however anyone who believe CICO is the be all and end all needs to up their knowledge on how hormones in the body operate.
If you believe that, then you dont know actually understand CICO is. Its an energy balance equation. Hormones effect metabolism and other factors which fall into CICO.
I think this is the main thing people who complain about CICO don't understand. Things like health issues, TEF, etc. are still part of the CICO equation. The number MFP spits out for you might not work for you, but that doesn't mean CICO doesn't work for you. It just means you don't know all of the variables in the equation.
I agree. CICO cannot be wrong. However in no way does it explain Why we tend to overeat.
Nor is it designed to do so.
This observation is like saying that understanding how a car works doesn't explain why someone would want to drive to a Nickleback concert.
To pick up chicks. That's the only acceptable reason to drive to a Nickelback concert.9 -
janejellyroll wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »NatureOfMan wrote: »For the most part CICO works. Using CICO can transform someone from being overweight to someone being healthy, however anyone who believe CICO is the be all and end all needs to up their knowledge on how hormones in the body operate.
If you believe that, then you dont know actually understand CICO is. Its an energy balance equation. Hormones effect metabolism and other factors which fall into CICO.
I think this is the main thing people who complain about CICO don't understand. Things like health issues, TEF, etc. are still part of the CICO equation. The number MFP spits out for you might not work for you, but that doesn't mean CICO doesn't work for you. It just means you don't know all of the variables in the equation.
I agree. CICO cannot be wrong. However in no way does it explain Why we tend to overeat.
Nor is it designed to do so.
This observation is like saying that understanding how a car works doesn't explain why someone would want to drive to a Nickleback concert.
To pick up chicks. That's the only acceptable reason to drive to a Nickelback concert.
0 -
The CICO is wrong because.. hormones... argument makes me nuts.
Hormones can affect your calorie out (CO), either increasing or decreasing it.
Hormones can make you hungry, or not hungry, affecting CI.
CICO still applies. Yes, your hormones can make figuring out your TDEE slightly more challenging then just reading it off of a table (so..you have to adjust it, big deal).
What you eat can affect your hormones...yes.
This still has absolutely nothing to do with the actual CICO equation.9 -
NM0
-
"Why am I Still Fat?" I watched this video last night and found it interesting.
https://youtu.be/w3ghP-26CLg
From the video description:
"Have you ever tried to lose weight, and when you did, you put it all back on again? Ever wonder ……
Australia is quickly becoming one of the fattest countries in the world. Almost two thirds of us are now overweight or obese, with poor diets and high BMIs the major causes of disease.
New discoveries are overturning the conventional wisdom that beating obesity is all about eating less and exercising more. Why do the vast majority of weight loss diets fail? Is it because of the so-called famine response? Can obesity be treated as a chronic inflammatory disease? Does chronic exposure to synthetic chemicals in our home environment affect the obesity risk for our kids?
To answer the question - Why am I still fat? – Mark Horstman explores these emerging fields of science, and meets ordinary people in their daily struggle with obesity."
Since I don't want to waste 28 minutes of my life, can someone Cliffs Notes this for me? Is it talking about how obesity is causing diseases? that chemicals make us fat?0 -
I"Why am I Still Fat?" I watched this video last night and found it interesting.https://youtu.be/w3ghP-26CLg
From the video description:
"Have you ever tried to lose weight, and when you did, you put it all back on again? Ever wonder ……
Australia is quickly becoming one of the fattest countries in the world. Almost two thirds of us are now overweight or obese, with poor diets and high BMIs the major causes of disease.
New discoveries are overturning the conventional wisdom that beating obesity is all about eating less and exercising more. Why do the vast majority of weight loss diets fail? Is it because of the so-called famine response? Can obesity be treated as a chronic inflammatory disease? Does chronic exposure to synthetic chemicals in our home environment affect the obesity risk for our kids?
To answer the question - Why am I still fat? – Mark Horstman explores these emerging fields of science, and meets ordinary people in their daily struggle with obesity."
Since I don't want to waste 28 minutes of my life, can someone Cliffs Notes this for me? Is it talking about how obesity is causing diseases? that chemicals make us fat?
I edited it off my post because it left some questions unanswered. They are still doing studies. I think it is interesting though. After thinking about it I probably should not have linked it, but you captured it before I erased it.
0 -
wow, still going..
CICO is MATH ..it is not hormones, it is not a way of eating, it is not eating oreos all day, it is not negated by a medical condition, etc, etc,etc..
it is a math formula that says calories consumed - calories burned = calorie deficit/maintenance/surplus
wow6 -
wow, still going..
CICO is MATH ..it is not hormones, it is not a way of eating, it is not eating oreos all day, it is not negated by a medical condition, etc, etc,etc..
it is a math formula that says calories consumed - calories burned = calorie deficit/maintenance/surplus
wow
We agree in this subject...not sure why people try to turn it in to any more than what it is.0 -
wow, still going..
CICO is MATH ..it is not hormones, it is not a way of eating, it is not eating oreos all day, it is not negated by a medical condition, etc, etc,etc..
it is a math formula that says calories consumed - calories burned = calorie deficit/maintenance/surplus
wow
We agree in this subject...not sure why people try to turn it in to any more than what it is.
because it can't possible be that easy to lose weight...3 -
ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »BrunetteRunner87 wrote: »Therealobi1 wrote: »I don't like big macs
Me either.
I've never had one. I remember someone telling me that the special sauce is Thousand Island dressing, and I'm not a fan, so I've never ordered one.
In high school, i used to be able to eat 3 in one sitting with a supersized soda. And i never broke 175 lbs like i am now.
those were the days lol.1 -
wow, still going..
CICO is MATH ..it is not hormones, it is not a way of eating, it is not eating oreos all day, it is not negated by a medical condition, etc, etc,etc..
it is a math formula that says calories consumed - calories burned = calorie deficit/maintenance/surplus
wow
We agree in this subject...not sure why people try to turn it in to any more than what it is.
They are desperately seeking anything...anything that points away from personal responsibility and accountability.7 -
"Why am I Still Fat?" I watched this video last night and found it interesting.https://youtu.be/w3ghP-26CLg
From the video description:
"Have you ever tried to lose weight, and when you did, you put it all back on again? Ever wonder ……
Australia is quickly becoming one of the fattest countries in the world. Almost two thirds of us are now overweight or obese, with poor diets and high BMIs the major causes of disease.
New discoveries are overturning the conventional wisdom that beating obesity is all about eating less and exercising more. Why do the vast majority of weight loss diets fail? Is it because of the so-called famine response? Can obesity be treated as a chronic inflammatory disease? Does chronic exposure to synthetic chemicals in our home environment affect the obesity risk for our kids?
To answer the question - Why am I still fat? – Mark Horstman explores these emerging fields of science, and meets ordinary people in their daily struggle with obesity."
Since I don't want to waste 28 minutes of my life, can someone Cliffs Notes this for me? Is it talking about how obesity is causing diseases? that chemicals make us fat?
Don't waste your time. The first part is an infomercial for bariatric surgeons, then a hit piece on environmental toxins - obesogens.5 -
janejellyroll wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »NatureOfMan wrote: »For the most part CICO works. Using CICO can transform someone from being overweight to someone being healthy, however anyone who believe CICO is the be all and end all needs to up their knowledge on how hormones in the body operate.
If you believe that, then you dont know actually understand CICO is. Its an energy balance equation. Hormones effect metabolism and other factors which fall into CICO.
I think this is the main thing people who complain about CICO don't understand. Things like health issues, TEF, etc. are still part of the CICO equation. The number MFP spits out for you might not work for you, but that doesn't mean CICO doesn't work for you. It just means you don't know all of the variables in the equation.
I agree. CICO cannot be wrong. However in no way does it explain Why we tend to overeat.
Nor is it designed to do so.
This observation is like saying that understanding how a car works doesn't explain why someone would want to drive to a Nickleback concert.
To pick up chicks. That's the only acceptable reason to drive to a Nickelback concert.
But they would be chicks that like Nickelback. Why would you do that to yourself?
14 -
The Facts:
1. Losing weight is easy - Heck, I've probably lost a thousand pounds in my lifetime
2. It ultimately does come down to calories consumed vs calories burned
3. Maintaining weight loss is extremely difficult
4. There is MUCH more to this than simply CICO
CICO is the black and white answer. It's just the equation. It's kind of like this, the formula for the atomic bomb is E=MC2 and now go and make one.
I'm on my 13th year of over 100 lbs lost and to be honest, it's been rather easy.
What you want to do is look at your calories not so much day to day but as a weekly balance sheet. Vary your days based on how you need/want them.
For long-term success;
*Be in control of your hunger and cravings
You do this by not depriving yourself and building a positive relationship with food. Don't call foods you enjoy "bad" or "junk". This will lead to an "abusive relationship" (love and hate & shame and guilt)
*Make having a strong metabolism a priority
5 -
wow, still going..
CICO is MATH ..it is not hormones, it is not a way of eating, it is not eating oreos all day, it is not negated by a medical condition, etc, etc,etc..
it is a math formula that says calories consumed - calories burned = calorie deficit/maintenance/surplus
wow
We agree in this subject...not sure why people try to turn it in to any more than what it is.
One thing I have learned as an adult is how many people cannot follow a simple logical thread.3 -
wow, still going..
CICO is MATH ..it is not hormones, it is not a way of eating, it is not eating oreos all day, it is not negated by a medical condition, etc, etc,etc..
it is a math formula that says calories consumed - calories burned = calorie deficit/maintenance/surplus
wow
We agree in this subject...not sure why people try to turn it in to any more than what it is.
They are desperately seeking anything...anything that points away from personal responsibility and accountability.
sad, but true...2 -
Russellb97 wrote: »The Facts:
1. Losing weight is easy - Heck, I've probably lost a thousand pounds in my lifetime
2. It ultimately does come down to calories consumed vs calories burned
3. Maintaining weight loss is extremely difficult
4. There is MUCH more to this than simply CICO
CICO is the black and white answer. It's just the equation. It's kind of like this, the formula for the atomic bomb is E=MC2 and now go and make one.
I'm on my 13th year of over 100 lbs lost and to be honest, it's been rather easy.
What you want to do is look at your calories not so much day to day but as a weekly balance sheet. Vary your days based on how you need/want them.
For long-term success;
*Be in control of your hunger and cravings
You do this by not depriving yourself and building a positive relationship with food. Don't call foods you enjoy "bad" or "junk". This will lead to an "abusive relationship" (love and hate & shame and guilt)
*Make having a strong metabolism a priority
Great points.
Until I got in charge of my hunger and Cravings by cutting out all processed foods and keepiing total carbs under 50 grams a day losing weight and keeping it off was impossible0 -
Except you do eat processed food under any reasonable definition.4
-
Russellb97 wrote: »CICO is the black and white answer. It's just the equation. It's kind of like this, the formula for the atomic bomb is E=MC2 and now go and make one.
My understanding from many of these conversations on MFP is that when people say "it's just CICO," they mean just that. Everything else is important to, but that will be individual. To figure out how to keep my calories under my output (or at my output, for maintenance), I need to figure out a strategy that will work FOR ME. There is no diet that everyone needs to follow or foods that we need to avoid (except if we personally do for some reason) or meal timing that I need to learn. Instead, I know what is mathematically required, and now I need to figure out, for myself, what strategies work for me.
I think that's what you are saying, and also what people here are (mostly) saying.
The argument is with those insisting that to lose weight people must "eat low carb" or "eat low fat" (not common anymore) or "avoid white foods" or "avoid processed foods" or "eat clean" or "eat only low GI foods" or "eat good foods, not bad foods" or "never eat after 7 pm" or "always eat breakfast" or "eat 6 mini meals" or on and on and on.
Nope, what I need to do is eat CI=CO (to maintain). How I do that is something I should figure out, based on me.4 -
wow, still going..
CICO is MATH ..it is not hormones, it is not a way of eating, it is not eating oreos all day, it is not negated by a medical condition, etc, etc,etc..
it is a math formula that says calories consumed - calories burned = calorie deficit/maintenance/surplus
wow
We agree in this subject...not sure why people try to turn it in to any more than what it is.
They are desperately seeking anything...anything that points away from personal responsibility and accountability.
sad, but true...
Maybe true for some but I think the majority are doing the best they can and with good intentions.3 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Russellb97 wrote: »CICO is the black and white answer. It's just the equation. It's kind of like this, the formula for the atomic bomb is E=MC2 and now go and make one.
My understanding from many of these conversations on MFP is that when people say "it's just CICO," they mean just that. Everything else is important to, but that will be individual. To figure out how to keep my calories under my output (or at my output, for maintenance), I need to figure out a strategy that will work FOR ME. There is no diet that everyone needs to follow or foods that we need to avoid (except if we personally do for some reason) or meal timing that I need to learn. Instead, I know what is mathematically required, and now I need to figure out, for myself, what strategies work for me.
I think that's what you are saying, and also what people here are (mostly) saying.
The argument is with those insisting that to lose weight people must "eat low carb" or "eat low fat" (not common anymore) or "avoid white foods" or "avoid processed foods" or "eat clean" or "eat only low GI foods" or "eat good foods, not bad foods" or "never eat after 7 pm" or "always eat breakfast" or "eat 6 mini meals" or on and on and on.
Nope, what I need to do is eat CI=CO (to maintain). How I do that is something I should figure out, based on me.
That is exactly right. I've lost weight doing the low-fat diets the early 90's, low carb, no carb and what I do now which is basically a 33-33-33 split with 1% leftover for some vodka
5 -
ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »BrunetteRunner87 wrote: »Therealobi1 wrote: »I don't like big macs
Me either.
I've never had one. I remember someone telling me that the special sauce is Thousand Island dressing, and I'm not a fan, so I've never ordered one.
Pretty sure it's 1000 Island. I had my first one last year and I think the meat to bread ratio is wildly out of whack. Quarter pounders for life.
Double QP or gtfo.
Better yet, Jimmy John's Gargantuan. 0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions