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

Options
1234579

Replies

  • comeonnow142857
    comeonnow142857 Posts: 310 Member
    Options
    There IS a lot that you need to get right to enable you to maintain control.optimal health/happiness over diet, but knowing CICO lets you know exactly what the target to aim all that other stuff at (or where it fits around) is.
  • fitmom4lifemfp
    fitmom4lifemfp Posts: 1,575 Member
    edited February 2017
    Options

    "Simple" doesn't always mean "easy". Sometimes the simplest solutions are still difficult to execute in practice. Weight loss is a perfect example.

    Not sure what that has to do with my reply to the OP. I said nothing about anything being "simple" or "easy".

    It has everything to do with your reply. You were trying to make the arguement that weight loss isn't simple because resisting food is hard work. This indicates you believe that simple = easy.

    What?? I was not trying to make any such argument. The OP stated that "all one has to do is shut their piehole". As if that was all there was to it. A piece of cake.
    Anyone that has EVER tried to lose weight, would know differently.

    You completely misunderstood my post.
  • Rebecca0224
    Rebecca0224 Posts: 810 Member
    Options
    ccsernica wrote: »
    I know for a fact people were counting calories 50 years ago. I did it. I had a little book with calories of common foods. Weight watchers has been around a long time. What has skyrocketed in the past 50 years is, the availability of food. Fast food stores, convenience stores with quick & fast foods, grocery stores etc, all open 24 hours per day. Our lives are more sedentary compared to what they were, and we have more demanding schedules on the whole. There are a multitude of reasons that may or may not contribute. But, no one can argue that for many overweight people, we are eating more calories, than we are burning, or at least we were until we found MFP ;)

    Thank you. Of COURSE they were.

    Why would someone think that no one knew what a calorie was, or bothered with it, 40 years ago??? Do they think that there were dinosaurs back then, too?

    Sure there were, but do you have any idea how many calories are in a T-rex drumstick? Just stay away from that stuff!

    If they clone dinosaurs I will try it lol
  • kk_inprogress
    kk_inprogress Posts: 3,077 Member
    Options
    ccsernica wrote: »
    I know for a fact people were counting calories 50 years ago. I did it. I had a little book with calories of common foods. Weight watchers has been around a long time. What has skyrocketed in the past 50 years is, the availability of food. Fast food stores, convenience stores with quick & fast foods, grocery stores etc, all open 24 hours per day. Our lives are more sedentary compared to what they were, and we have more demanding schedules on the whole. There are a multitude of reasons that may or may not contribute. But, no one can argue that for many overweight people, we are eating more calories, than we are burning, or at least we were until we found MFP ;)

    Thank you. Of COURSE they were.

    Why would someone think that no one knew what a calorie was, or bothered with it, 40 years ago??? Do they think that there were dinosaurs back then, too?

    Sure there were, but do you have any idea how many calories are in a T-rex drumstick? Just stay away from that stuff!

    If they clone dinosaurs I will try it lol

    Bet it tastes like chicken.
  • Hello_its_Dan
    Hello_its_Dan Posts: 406 Member
    Options
    The difference from person to person "in general" is not a great deal. If you cut your calories by roughly 500-700 daily (some people do more, some less) even with minimal mislabeled nutrition information, you will lose. Exactly as pointed out above, if you're dropping 500 calories today, from what you were eating before and you're not seeing weight loss, adjust it to 600, or 700, wait a week or two and see if you're losing then. Once you find a good amount of calories to take in, stick to that for a while. Weigh and adjust, its that easy.

    Just poking the hornets nest here a little!
    So you're telling me that my wife who maintains her weight at 1200 calories a day should cut 500-700 calories from her diet to lose weight?

    She's an endometriosis patient on heavy medication throwing hormones out of whack.

    Flag on the play!

    So you're just admitting to trolling at this point? The bolded portions of @mikeisgod83 invalidate your use of your wife's circumstances as an appropriate counter-argument. C'mon man...

    Nah I know she needs more activity and not less calories. :)
  • CafeRacer808
    CafeRacer808 Posts: 2,396 Member
    edited February 2017
    Options

    "Simple" doesn't always mean "easy". Sometimes the simplest solutions are still difficult to execute in practice. Weight loss is a perfect example.

    Not sure what that has to do with my reply to the OP. I said nothing about anything being "simple" or "easy".

    It has everything to do with your reply. You were trying to make the arguement that weight loss isn't simple because resisting food is hard work. This indicates you believe that simple = easy.

    What?? I was not trying to make any such argument. The OP stated that "all one has to do is shut their piehole". As if that was all there was to it. A piece of cake.
    Anyone that has EVER tried to lose weight, would know differently.

    You completely misunderstood my post.

    Sigh...you still don't get it. "Shut your pie hole" is another way of saying "control your eating". There's really nothing more too weight loss than that...it really is that simple, even if it's "HARD", as you say.

    And what does cake have to do with it? I assume you're going to say, "It's hard to turn down a piece of cake." Yeah, that's probably true. But if eating that cake means going over on your calories, the solution is simple: don't eat the cake. Does that make solution easy? Nope.
  • CafeRacer808
    CafeRacer808 Posts: 2,396 Member
    Options

    I think they meant that people who try to lose weight with different mental issues often struggle because of their mental issues, so to say its just a piece of cake and that its easy, that others would know better, at least i think thats what she meant.. which might make my above post make more sense also lol

    They never made any inference to mental issues but sure, whatever... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    My original statement still stands though. The concept of weight loss is really as simple as "eat less". But that's often a very difficult concept to put into practice.
  • BABetter1
    BABetter1 Posts: 618 Member
    edited February 2017
    Options
    OP, I feel ya'. I totally get where you're coming from. But, you just can't post stuff like that here. The diet police WILL call you out on YOUR feelings and YOUR opinions. And then they'll bring all kinds of science into the argument too, sheesh. That being said, I personally try to use my CICO tools as more of a guideline, and recalibrate my limits if it seems like my weight loss is slowing or stopping.

    ETA: A good place for "feeling" posts is in your newsfeed with your hopefully more supportive friends. Need more friends? Look through this post and add the people who seem to take your side or at least get you. I could always use another friend . . . .
  • BABetter1
    BABetter1 Posts: 618 Member
    Options
    She is a grown woman who made a frustrated post about how different people are different. Get over yourself already. You are one of the main ones I see that lurks around on these forums just waiting for someone to post something you can pounce on, correct, and then ride them like a paint horse when they try to explain their meaning and defend what amounts to their own little personally frustrated opinion. I don't do detoxes or cleanses. But, I know that some people, for various health reasons, may lose weight at different rates. So, while it is basically CICO, the equation isn't as simple and static for some as it is for others. Like the OP said, inaccuracies abound in the measurement of CICO. And, sometimes when people get frustrated, what they really need is a sympathetic ear who can offer feedback without the snark.
  • NewyRob
    NewyRob Posts: 22 Member
    Options
    nomorepuke wrote: »

    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" !!!!

    I'm guessing what is happening here is that you have replaced calorie dense processed food, with less calorie dense whole and unprocessed foods. If that's that case, of course you can eat more and lose weight. It's still CICO.

    Peace

  • nvmomketo
    nvmomketo Posts: 12,019 Member
    Options

    I'm skeptical of his claim to have been consuming "about 2000 calories on average daily," unless he's been steadily losing weight -- he doesn't give his stats, but unless he's way below average height for a male, I'm not buying it. Plus, the way he phrased it, it sounds like an eyeballing, recollection-rather-than-real-time-tracking estimate. Bottom-line, without knowing what he burns on maintenance, I don't know how to take the results of his 4,000 calorie a day experiment.

    Confession, I only listened to about half of it, because he rambles and I got bored.

    He is on day 13 now and down a little over a pound.

    There is a thread going on it in the Debate section
This discussion has been closed.