Myfitnesspal

Message Boards General Health, Fitness and Diet
You are currently viewing the message boards in:

It is more than a simple "CICO" - why can't we just admit it?

2456789

Replies

  • snowflake954snowflake954 Member Posts: 6,768 Member Member Posts: 6,768 Member
    Why do people say that it is all down to CICO as if it is really that simple? Why does dieting not work, then, if all we have to do is shut our pie holes every in a while? Now, before anyone gets snarky, yes one needs to burn more than they eat, but saying that it is all " CICO" is very misleading. You take 2 different 200 pound women. Give them a month, have then do the same level if activity and eat the exact same food, and I guarantee they will not have the same weight loss. This leaves people frustrated.

    It is so very hard to figure out what our CO" is as our bodies affect how we process the same foods. Tom might use more energy digesting his peanut butter sandwich than Hank, even though they ate the exact same amount. That's more "CO" for Tom. It's also hard to figure out our "CI"; since, by law, packaged foods are allowed to be "off" a certain amount on what the companies that is the nutritional balance, etc. All we can do is our best educated guess and that's just is not perfect enough to boil everything down to CICO.

    It is so tiring to see people just boil complex biological functions down to a half-baked formula. Yes, what you eat does matter (and you may not even know it [your Big Mac may be your weekly treat but it could very well be someone else's poison]) and what you do does matter (exercise has been shown to to do so many things that affect this CICO over-used jargon).

    I think a good answer here is, yes there can be a bit of variability, but in reality those two women are likely NOT really eating the exact same amount of food. What people eat and what they report that they eat can be very different, whether it's a conscious thing or not.

    It's also true that you could have a tall 200 lb woman, 65 yrs old, and a short 200lb woman, 30 yrs old. Yes, they will lose weight at different rates.
  • 3rdof7sisters3rdof7sisters Member Posts: 486 Member Member Posts: 486 Member
    As so many others here tried to explain, weight loss is as simple as CICO. The rate of weight loss is a huge variable from person to person, depending on many other factors, but it all comes down to calories in vs calories out. The rate of loss is the variable for each individual.
  • neldabgneldabg Member Posts: 1,447 Member Member Posts: 1,447 Member
    Why do people say that it is all down to CICO as if it is really that simple? Why does dieting not work, then, if all we have to do is shut our pie holes every in a while? Now, before anyone gets snarky, yes one needs to burn more than they eat, but saying that it is all " CICO" is very misleading. You take 2 different 200 pound women. Give them a month, have then do the same level if activity and eat the exact same food, and I guarantee they will not have the same weight loss. This leaves people frustrated.

    It is so very hard to figure out what our CO" is as our bodies affect how we process the same foods. Tom might use more energy digesting his peanut butter sandwich than Hank, even though they ate the exact same amount. That's more "CO" for Tom. It's also hard to figure out our "CI"; since, by law, packaged foods are allowed to be "off" a certain amount on what the companies that is the nutritional balance, etc. All we can do is our best educated guess and that's just is not perfect enough to boil everything down to CICO.

    It is so tiring to see people just boil complex biological functions down to a half-baked formula. Yes, what you eat does matter (and you may not even know it [your Big Mac may be your weekly treat but it could very well be someone else's poison]) and what you do does matter (exercise has been shown to to do so many things that affect this CICO over-used jargon).

    "It is more than a simple "CICO" - why can't we just admit it?"-Because it's unnecessary.

    Some people need to work in a laboratory and see that ideal calculations are not exactly the same in the real world. There's a margin of error for everything. For example, in the laboratories of my electronics courses, we calculate ideal values and obtain measured values. Sure, the voltages or currents are *supposed* to be a certain value, but when measured in real life, the numbers are NEVER perfect. Maybe the measuring devices are not entirely precise or the voltage supplies are off, etc, etc. However, they are close enough such that the theorems and laws learned are reliable for building and designing hardware.
    Similarly, online calculators and fitness devices help calculate ideal numbers for weight loss and calorie burns. However, in real life, the numbers will vary from person to person and should be tweaked as necessary. Either way, the simple, underlying science behind it, CICO, is good enough to get results.
    It's really not that hard to understand.
    edited February 2017
  • nomorepukenomorepuke Member Posts: 320 Member Member Posts: 320 Member
    nomorepuke wrote: »
    If you figured it out that weight loss is not as simple as CICO like most people think, you've just won the lottery. There's no need for you to come in here and try to explain it to everyone. All you will get is angry people, try to prove you wrong like they're all experts. People don't want to admit that the weight loss isn't that simple. People don't want to give up their nasty junk food. People are deeply addicted to junk food and have overeating problems. Those people take care of their cars more than their bodies. They use the most efficient and expensive products such oil, gas, sea foam...etc to keep their cars work well. But when it comes to diet, all they want is weight loss. Health is none of their concern. Eating less is the most miserable way to lose weight.

    Eh? Aside from the strawmen, eating less is the ONLY way to lose weight, unless your magical mythical unicorn. And I'm not in the least bit miserable, in fact I bloody love seeing my body transform and don't deprive myself at all (unless we call no longer eating until painfully stuffed miserable).

    I feel very sorry for you. I've lost 21lbs in little over a month by eating more. I don't count calories because I stop when I'm full. Simply, I had gained weight because of not being able to eat. All I ate was fast/frozen/processed junk on the go.
    Majority of the people think like you. Thus, weight loss is one of the most lucrative industries. They want you to think that way. They want you to yo-yo. They don't want you to get educated on how nutrition works in your system.
    Look at the most attractive thread in here "Serial Starters" !!!!
This discussion has been closed.