CICO, It's a math formula
Replies
-
I also want to mention that there are lots of variables that make up both sides of that equation (particularly CO). Just because someone isn't getting the results some online calculator predicts they should be getting doesn't mean that the CICO formula is invalid.
agree, it is still trial and error...
I think this is one of the things that leads to people going batshit crazy over the CICO idea in the forums. It's not that CICO is an incorrect equation, it's that you're not accurately calculating one of the many variables on either side.14 -
I also want to mention that there are lots of variables that make up both sides of that equation (particularly CO). Just because someone isn't getting the results some online calculator predicts they should be getting doesn't mean that the CICO formula is invalid.
agree, it is still trial and error...
I think this is one of the things that leads to people going batshit crazy over the CICO idea in the forums. It's not that CICO is an incorrect equation, it's that you're not accurately calculating one of the many variables on either side.
true...however, once you peg it down it really does work well...2 -
The issue for many people IMO, is that some just don't math well or as mentioned are just inaccurate in their calories eaten and burned. But it works PERIOD. Without it weight gain/loss/maintenance doesn't happen.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
8 -
And I'm the exact opposite. I math well, so figuring this out and learning to count calories has made weight loss very simple for me. If I go over, I don't lose what I want. It's a math problem for me. I find this way easier than cutting out foods.The issue for many people IMO, is that some just don't math well or as mentioned are just inaccurate in their calories eaten and burned. But it works PERIOD. Without it weight gain/loss/maintenance doesn't happen.
15 -
Can't argue with math! I appreciate that clarity. I must confess that when I first happened upon this community, I thought CICO meant "Salads are for suckers! Lose weight eating frozen pizza and beer that you've carefully measured on your food scale!"
I get it now, thanks. :-)11 -
I also want to mention that there are lots of variables that make up both sides of that equation (particularly CO). Just because someone isn't getting the results some online calculator predicts they should be getting doesn't mean that the CICO formula is invalid.
agree, it is still trial and error...
I think this is one of the things that leads to people going batshit crazy over the CICO idea in the forums. It's not that CICO is an incorrect equation, it's that you're not accurately calculating one of the many variables on either side.
true...however, once you peg it down it really does work well...
Oh, I'm totally agreeing with you! It's the difference between adjusting your inputs based on real-world results (which is what we all should be doing) vs. not getting the results you expect and then screaming at people about how the equation sucks. It's impossible to quantify every individual variable, so if you accept that the equation is valid, you just observe the results and make changes accordingly.6 -
Great post, especially with the influx of disputes lately.
0 -
THANK YOU!
2 -
I also want to mention that there are lots of variables that make up both sides of that equation (particularly CO). Just because someone isn't getting the results some online calculator predicts they should be getting doesn't mean that the CICO formula is invalid.
agree, it is still trial and error...
I think this is one of the things that leads to people going batshit crazy over the CICO idea in the forums. It's not that CICO is an incorrect equation, it's that you're not accurately calculating one of the many variables on either side.
The other thing that I see frequently, especially lately, is this idea that there are these subtleties like Thermic Effect of Food that contribute significantly to, or even invalidate the basic principle of CICO. People also get hung up on this idea that if they can't calculate it to the tenth of a calorie, then the whole equation must be bunk. They don't get the idea of "majoring in the minors" and that ALL of it is an estimate. There are ways to improve precision and accuracy, but the basic estimates are reliable enough for virtually all weight management goals. Like you said, that there are some variables that might need to be dialed in doesn't invalidate the f your concept.18 -
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »
And I'm the exact opposite. I math well, so figuring this out and learning to count calories has made weight loss very simple for me. If I go over, I don't lose what I want. It's a math problem for me. I find this way easier than cutting out foods.The issue for many people IMO, is that some just don't math well or as mentioned are just inaccurate in their calories eaten and burned. But it works PERIOD. Without it weight gain/loss/maintenance doesn't happen.
Yeah, I'm an accountant...it was a no brainer for me. I just had to keep another ledger to track it...I keep lots of ledgers.
Geek.
Oh, wait. I'm an accountant too.
Through my years here, I've noticed that a great many people who have success calorie counting and otherwise keeping track of their CICO are in professions such as accounting and engineering and/or are otherwise a bit anal retentive about things.French_Peasant wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »
And I'm the exact opposite. I math well, so figuring this out and learning to count calories has made weight loss very simple for me. If I go over, I don't lose what I want. It's a math problem for me. I find this way easier than cutting out foods.The issue for many people IMO, is that some just don't math well or as mentioned are just inaccurate in their calories eaten and burned. But it works PERIOD. Without it weight gain/loss/maintenance doesn't happen.
Yeah, I'm an accountant...it was a no brainer for me. I just had to keep another ledger to track it...I keep lots of ledgers.
Geek.
Oh, wait. I'm an accountant too.
Can I join the math club? I get lots of spreadsheets from actuaries and listen very attentively while they 'splain it to me...twice.* CICO is a snap once you grapple with Monte Carlo simulations...plus it has the added benefit of dealing with food, not with death. YAY.
*I will swan about in actuary-land with my free calculator I got from a local arts organization. VERY IMPRESSIVE.
I'll allow it...
Eek! I'm an artist. I don't play well with maths.
I must be a freak of nature.
Fortunately, quite early on I figure out my own numbers to work with.
Now, I rarely count, have never owned a fitness/step tracker, and weigh myself occasionally- I go by the visuals.
7 years maintenance isn't bad for a non-accountant
Cheers, h.
Edit, not retentive either- the opposite whatever that is.16 -
I also want to mention that there are lots of variables that make up both sides of that equation (particularly CO). Just because someone isn't getting the results some online calculator predicts they should be getting doesn't mean that the CICO formula is invalid.
. . .I think this is one of the things that leads to people going batshit crazy over the CICO idea in the forums. It's not that CICO is an incorrect equation, it's that you're not accurately calculating one of the many variables on either side.
. . .Oh, I'm totally agreeing with you! It's the difference between adjusting your inputs based on real-world results (which is what we all should be doing) vs. not getting the results you expect and then screaming at people about how the equation sucks. It's impossible to quantify every individual variable, so if you accept that the equation is valid, you just observe the results and make changes accordingly.
Very succinctly said, especially for covering some complex concepts.
I too believe that there are a *lot* of variables (particularly on the CO side), and that they change for us as individuals pretty regularly. To add to the complexity, we're very often not aware of the variables, or the changes to the variables over time.
For those struggling to manage their weight: consistently (1) trying to track CICO accurately as best one can; and (2) looking at actual real-world results compared to expectations, and adjusting as needed . . . will get one a long way to weight management goals. Failing to do so may just give birth to a "CICO is totally wrong and here's why" thread in the forum, and more tragically someone who is unprepared and unable to manage his / her own weight.
Again - well said AliceDark (and ndj1979 too!)3 -
The simple beauty of math! Thank you!2
-
I also want to mention that there are lots of variables that make up both sides of that equation (particularly CO). Just because someone isn't getting the results some online calculator predicts they should be getting doesn't mean that the CICO formula is invalid.
That. Also, the impression I get from most CICO-related arguments is that so called "against" people aren't so much interested in this super vague, open end formula as they are in what to do with it. You know CICO but you still have to implement an approach that effectively creates a deficit. This is where it is significant, the whole challenge of any diet. Then arguments are ensured over different approaches. When things get mixed up and heated you get people coming in saying it's all CICO or something to that effect as if being dismissive of whatever approaches being argued. It's a dog chasing its tail.
2 -
I'm not great at math. Right in the middle of upper average I'd say. Was HORRIBLE at physics. Although I was very good at equations. Maybe that's why I CICO math well.
Anyway, long story short, even the mathematically challenged can do this easily!7 -
Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.3 -
BINGO!9
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
Easy. Results over time. Personal data. You make it sound like rocket science or something. But no. Track your intake for 8 weeks and see what happens to your weight. Adjust as necessary for desired results. Reassess on a regular basis.
I don't know why you're so obsessed with making out like this is all so hard. It's not.43 -
VintageFeline wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
Easy. Results over time. Personal data. You make it sound like rocket science or something. But no. Track your intake for 8 weeks and see what happens to your weight. Adjust as necessary for desired results. Reassess on a regular basis.
I don't know why you're so obsessed with making out like this is all so hard. It's not.
Why do you say it is hard to know your net CICO?
One only has to step on a set of bathroom scales and record the number.
Now if the number is not going in the desired direction one needs to stop and guessimate CI from time to time.
One that counts on gym time to lose weight can count on yo yoing weight because many things can and will keep one out of the gym for months at a time almost without fail. I know of one case right now when in 3 months the person has regained the weight lost over the last three years due to a very serious leg injury.3 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
Easy. Results over time. Personal data. You make it sound like rocket science or something. But no. Track your intake for 8 weeks and see what happens to your weight. Adjust as necessary for desired results. Reassess on a regular basis.
I don't know why you're so obsessed with making out like this is all so hard. It's not.
Why do you say it is hard to know your net CICO?
One only has to step on a set of bathroom scales and record the number.
Now if the number is not going in the desired direction one needs to stop and guessimate CI from time to time.
One that counts on gym time to lose weight can count on yo yoing weight because many things can and will keep one out of the gym for months at a time almost without fail. I know of one case right now when in 3 months the person has regained the weight lost over the last three years due to a very serious leg injury.
She didn't say it's hard. She said you're the one making it sound like it's hard.21 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
See my post upthread. One doesn't need to know CICO exactly, to the tenth of a calorie. That there are variables for some people does not invalidate the entire concept. It's not only helpful at the beginning, it is the overarching principle behind the entire weight management process.
I get that you have medical conditions that you've managed/mitigated through a change in your way of eating and resulting weight loss. Do you acknowledge that no matter how you ate, all the coffee with 8 creamers and round eggs at McDonalds... it's CICO that governed your weight loss? And that was a contributing factor to your health improvements? If you hadn't lost a single pound, but changed your diet, do you think you would have had the same results? What if you had lost weight but hadn't changed to a LCHF diet?11 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
Easy. Results over time. Personal data. You make it sound like rocket science or something. But no. Track your intake for 8 weeks and see what happens to your weight. Adjust as necessary for desired results. Reassess on a regular basis.
I don't know why you're so obsessed with making out like this is all so hard. It's not.
Why do you say it is hard to know your net CICO?
One only has to step on a set of bathroom scales and record the number.
Now if the number is not going in the desired direction one needs to stop and guessimate CI from time to time.
One that counts on gym time to lose weight can count on yo yoing weight because many things can and will keep one out of the gym for months at a time almost without fail. I know of one case right now when in 3 months the person has regained the weight lost over the last three years due to a very serious leg injury.
She didn't say it's hard. She said you're the one making it sound like it's hard.
Why do you think she said that?
I had just stated the only way we have to compute our true CICO numbers is to step on the scales, read the readout, record and repeat over and over using the same method/timing. There is nothing hard about that if an old crippled man can do it. I do understand there are physical limits that would make it hard for some.
4 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
Easy. Results over time. Personal data. You make it sound like rocket science or something. But no. Track your intake for 8 weeks and see what happens to your weight. Adjust as necessary for desired results. Reassess on a regular basis.
I don't know why you're so obsessed with making out like this is all so hard. It's not.
Why do you say it is hard to know your net CICO?
One only has to step on a set of bathroom scales and record the number.
Now if the number is not going in the desired direction one needs to stop and guessimate CI from time to time.
FYI: CICO is not equal to scale weight. It sort of seems that's what you are suggesting.4 -
WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
See my post upthread. One doesn't need to know CICO exactly, to the tenth of a calorie. That there are variables for some people does not invalidate the entire concept. It's not only helpful at the beginning, it is the overarching principle behind the entire weight management process.
I get that you have medical conditions that you've managed/mitigated through a change in your way of eating and resulting weight loss. Do you acknowledge that no matter how you ate, all the coffee with 8 creamers and round eggs at McDonalds... it's CICO that governed your weight loss? And that was a contributing factor to your health improvements? If you hadn't lost a single pound, but changed your diet, do you think you would have had the same results? What if you had lost weight but hadn't changed to a LCHF diet?
Do you agree when we work our way back to good physical and mental health that our CICO balance can become self managed without us giving it any daily thought?
I can and have forced weight loss by going hungry on my old macros but I gave that up to prevent yo yoing weight of the last 40 years.
Since I changed my macro to manage my pain I stay stuffed on all the food I want to eat daily and my weight manages itself without any counting on my part. While I try to eat around 50 carbs max daily I do not count them typically. I just blow daily into a meter that lets me know if I am in nutritional ketosis or not.
ebay.com/itm/Police-Digital-Breath-Alcohol-Analyzer-Breathalyzer-Tester-LCD-Detector-Test-Hot-/371361274194?_trksid=p2385738.m2548.l4275
I am reversing cataracts that started developing when I was eating high carb, managing my joint pain, working to prevent type 2 diabetes, cancer, dementia so I can hopefully live to be 110 walking and talking the entire way.
As you know I am for everyone eating the way they prefer and expect the same from others. At age 63 I realized I was eating my way to a premature death and now I think I am eating for a extended life of a better quality than the last 40 years on the SAD WOE. The way I now can move and lab tests my LCHF macro is working to give me improving general health.
After much research starting back in 2014 I have found the least common denominator for weight management in my case.
That is to just simply eat and move in a way that lowers my C-Reactive Protein test results year after year. No counting and no weight goals are required as long as my CRP results are approaching in the direction of ZERO each CRP test after CRP test. I try to buy some when they are on sale for $30-$35 each since this service is available in my area.
lifeextension.com/Vitamins-Supplements/itemLC120766/C-Reactive-Protein-CRP-Cardiac-Blood-Test
For people where these services are available that want to privately monitor their on health conditions here is the full scope of testing services. A local pharmacist told me about this service that he uses.
lifeextension.com/Vitamins-Supplements/Blood-Tests/Blood-Tests
3 -
I'm one of those people who gets annoyed with the statement that CICO is simple. Yes the equation is simple, but the application of it is a puzzle for many people, especially for those who are impatient to get it right immediately so they see the pounds start to drop off.
There are so many unknowns, and then add to that the complete disarray of the MFP database. It can take up to an hour to research every food entry for the day to make sure it matches the USDA database. So many packaged foods under-report calorie content, and are likely 20% higher in calories than the package states. And one banana can be way sweeter than another and likely 25 calories more. It's impossible to know how many calories you are truly consuming. And CI is the "easiest" part to track.
It's the word "simple" that annoys me. And when people throw out the CICO comment, they are sometimes completely ignoring the significant part of the conversation, i.e. how to deal with cravings, satiety, nutrition, etc. It sometimes comes off sounding smug and condescending.
10 -
Sorry - What I forgot to say was thanks for posting this helpful explanation of CICO!1
-
WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
See my post upthread. One doesn't need to know CICO exactly, to the tenth of a calorie. That there are variables for some people does not invalidate the entire concept. It's not only helpful at the beginning, it is the overarching principle behind the entire weight management process.
I get that you have medical conditions that you've managed/mitigated through a change in your way of eating and resulting weight loss. Do you acknowledge that no matter how you ate, all the coffee with 8 creamers and round eggs at McDonalds... it's CICO that governed your weight loss? And that was a contributing factor to your health improvements? If you hadn't lost a single pound, but changed your diet, do you think you would have had the same results? What if you had lost weight but hadn't changed to a LCHF diet?
This "entire concept" of CICO is so vague that it might not be helpful at all. It's a jargon for many. If you are going for concepts there are others that may be more helpful than it such as "eat less, move more" since it is layman's terms. I would bet less people would incline to argue about "eat less, move more".
4 -
endlessfall16 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
See my post upthread. One doesn't need to know CICO exactly, to the tenth of a calorie. That there are variables for some people does not invalidate the entire concept. It's not only helpful at the beginning, it is the overarching principle behind the entire weight management process.
I get that you have medical conditions that you've managed/mitigated through a change in your way of eating and resulting weight loss. Do you acknowledge that no matter how you ate, all the coffee with 8 creamers and round eggs at McDonalds... it's CICO that governed your weight loss? And that was a contributing factor to your health improvements? If you hadn't lost a single pound, but changed your diet, do you think you would have had the same results? What if you had lost weight but hadn't changed to a LCHF diet?
This "entire concept" of CICO is so vague that it might not be helpful at all. It's a jargon for many. If you are going for concepts there are others that may be more helpful than it such as "eat less, move more" since it is layman's terms. I would bet less people would incline to argue about "eat less, move more".
But its not. It's an equation. The fact that some people seem unable to wrap their heads around it, or seem to willfully resist conceding that it exists doesn't change that.18 -
CynthiasChoice wrote: »I'm one of those people who gets annoyed with the statement that CICO is simple. Yes the equation is simple, but the application of it is a puzzle for many people, especially for those who are impatient to get it right immediately so they see the pounds start to drop off.
There are so many unknowns, and then add to that the complete disarray of the MFP database. It can take up to an hour to research every food entry for the day to make sure it matches the USDA database. So many packaged foods under-report calorie content, and are likely 20% higher in calories than the package states. And one banana can be way sweeter than another and likely 25 calories more. It's impossible to know how many calories you are truly consuming. And CI is the "easiest" part to track.
It's the word "simple" that annoys me. And when people throw out the CICO comment, they are sometimes completely ignoring the significant part of the conversation, i.e. how to deal with cravings, satiety, nutrition, etc. It sometimes comes off sounding smug and condescending.
Yet despite all those confounding factors, millions of people have successfully lost weight by eating less calories than they expend over time. Because it's the only way weight loss happens.
CICO isn't a "diet plan" or "weight loss formula" or "way of eating" - it's the scientifically proven, physical law of energy balance simplified into an acronym. Based upon my observations over the last 5 years on MFP, the people who have the most trouble losing weight are often the ones who fail to grasp (or refuse to acknowledge) this simple truth.21 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »endlessfall16 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Just want to put this out there for some of the newbies, and others that may be a bit confused about the whole concept of "CICO"- Calories in VS Calories Out.
First, CICO is a math formula that will tell you one of three things.
If you want to lose weight, then you need to make your Calories In less than Out = calorie deficit to lose weight.
Second, if you want to maintain then you need of make your calories in = calories out = maintenance to maintain current weight.
Finally, if you want to gain, then you need to make your calories in greater than your calories out = caloric surplus.
CICO is not a way of eating, I repeat CICO is not a way of eating. If you are doing Keto, low carb, moderate protein/moderate carbs, IIFYM, etc and you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight then you are using the fundamental principle of CICO.
CICO is not eating a diet of 100% "junk," or ignoring nutrition, or not caring about body composition, it is just a math formula that tells you to reach a goal. The formula is not perfect and it requires trial and error, but in the end it works for everyone, period.
If your goal is straight weight loss then you can just apply CICO, and eat less than you burn.
If your goal is to be more lean, or have advanced body composition goals, then you are going to need macro/micro adherence + a structured exercise regimen.
Finally, all calories are equal in that they provide the same measure of energy; however, they do not all contain the same nutritional profile.
Yes it is a math formula yet we have no way of knowing our own CICO short of going to an expensive lab. What if one is taking Pycnogenol, etc that is blocking some complex carbs from being used as energy? How do you know how many calories to subtract from CI? CICO does not factor in efficiency of digestion. What about people with health conditions that lower their metabolism?
I give you even though it is nothing precise CICO guessimations may be helpful as we start to order our disordered WOE's.
There is one way that any of us can determine our true net CICO results and that is to weigh our body say the first thing each morning before we eat or drink anything and track those numbers. One could do it once a week or month if she wishes.
See my post upthread. One doesn't need to know CICO exactly, to the tenth of a calorie. That there are variables for some people does not invalidate the entire concept. It's not only helpful at the beginning, it is the overarching principle behind the entire weight management process.
I get that you have medical conditions that you've managed/mitigated through a change in your way of eating and resulting weight loss. Do you acknowledge that no matter how you ate, all the coffee with 8 creamers and round eggs at McDonalds... it's CICO that governed your weight loss? And that was a contributing factor to your health improvements? If you hadn't lost a single pound, but changed your diet, do you think you would have had the same results? What if you had lost weight but hadn't changed to a LCHF diet?
This "entire concept" of CICO is so vague that it might not be helpful at all. It's a jargon for many. If you are going for concepts there are others that may be more helpful than it such as "eat less, move more" since it is layman's terms. I would bet less people would incline to argue about "eat less, move more".
But its not. It's an equation. The fact that some people seem unable to wrap their heads around it, or seem to willfully resist conceding that it exists doesn't change that.
You don't understand. Wino put it correctly, it's [just] a concept.
For it to be some sort of useful equation, let a lone a math formula, it would need alot more elements.
People like me get dismissive of it because it's no good at being specific but it's patronizing to be understood at its crude level. Go out and discuss diet with struggling fat adults. They might give you some initial interest when you mention CICO. If you break it down to essentially they are fat because they eat more than they use, which is all there is about CICO, see if they roll their eyes at you or not.9
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
- 424 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