CICO, It's a math formula

Options
145791031

Replies

  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    Options
    AliceDark wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    ndj1979 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.

    If you are on a medication that inhibits digestion and absorption of nutrients, I'd watch out, because the result would be massive diarrhea.

    @psuLemon where did you come up with the massive diarrhea story?

    Pycnogenol is just French Maritime Pine Bark produced under a patented set of controls and standards with 40 years of lab studies that most anyone have access to at some level.

    The first link below is just an overview of Pycnogenol for those not interested in the science behind the supplement Pycnogenol yet the story does have links to the science.

    https://draxe.com/pine-bark-extract/
    7 Pine Bark Extract Benefits, Including for Skin, Hearing & Diabetes

    Below is for the health geeks that are hooked on the behind the scenes science. 113 Abstracts with Pycnogenol (Pine Bark) Research including 106 diseases researched for pine bark (Pycnogenol).

    greenmedinfo.com/substance/pycnogenol-pine-bark

    If your body cannot digest a nutrient, it would pass through you and be excreted, like insoluble fiber... It's why things like carb blocks and fat blockers always have side effects of diarrhea. If it's digestible, the body would convert calories to energy.


    https://examine.com/supplements/pycnogenol/

    Thanks for the link. It seems like most all humans can benefit from using this pine bark extract safely. My n=3 supports the same so far.

    Do you agree that CICO in no way addresses what causes humans to lose the ability to stop eating when they eat their daily required food needs?

    https://quora.com/What-percent-of-calories-from-food-are-actually-absorbed-when-we-eat

    The above article covers why CICO is only a fraction of the equation to good health since CICO in a scientific sense is not actually knowable to any of us posting.

    Until we work to learn WHY we eat more calories than we burn then CICO is only a theoretical concept as far as science goes.

    I don't understand the bolded part. The result of the comparison of calories in to calories out is knowable to anyone with a scale and enough time to observe a weight trend. Not being able to quantify either CI or CO to 100% accuracy is irrelevant.

    @AliceDark all I am saying is no one posting has the data to determine their net CICO results before we weigh after the fact as you correctly stated as I understand your last post.

    The value of the concept of CICO that while we can never fully know its accuracy it at least gives us two places we can tweak if we are not gaining/losing to meet our expectations as I think was your last point.

    For some CICO seems to take on a mystical air. The lack of counting calories (requirement of CICO) is not the cause of the obesity epidemic going on in much of the world today.

    In my case I remember getting off the school bus in the fourth grade and limping due to knee joint pain. I think I made getting my dopamine rush early in life for pain management perhaps. As sugar makes inflammation worse I guess I worked to eat more sweet carbs over time until I spiraled down into the ground over the years. Profound movement limitations were in place by my mid 20's when I learned I had Ankylosing Spondylitis.

    I would say this eating disorder was set in stone in my brain years before. I am convinced very few people ever become obese prior to developing physical/mental health problems to some degree.

    Below Dr. Nicole Avena describes how I got married to sweet carbs 50+ years ago.

    npr.org/sections/thesalt/2014/01/15/262741403/why-sugar-makes-us-feel-so-good

    drnicoleavena.com/

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=lEXBxijQREo&feature=youtu.be



  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    Options
    @3bambi3 CICO works fine for say a closed loop system like a steam engine but of very limited day to day value for humans unless you are looking at it just as a concept and not valid science to explain why some of us became obese.

    Calories are just one part of obesity.

    foxnews.com/story/2006/06/28/10-causes-obesity-other-than-over-eating-inactivity.html

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=lEXBxijQREo&feature=youtu.be
    It is just 5 minutes and with CC on no speakers are needed.

    drnicoleavena.com/

  • AliceDark
    AliceDark Posts: 3,886 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    For some CICO seems to take on a mystical air.

    You seem to be misunderstanding the posts. No one has said anything mystical about it.
    The lack of counting calories (requirement of CICO) is not the cause of the obesity epidemic going on in much of the world today.

    Didn't someone just explain that CICO is not the same thing as counting calories? Counting calories is one way to keep CICO balanced as you want them, but hardly the only way.

    For many, counting or understanding CICO and addressing it in other ways is a helpful response to the environmental changes (relating to food availability and activity) that lead to the current increase in obesity.

    Plus, our understanding of calories as units of energy is relatively recent (mid-1800s). No one could seriously argue that people didn't figure out how to manipulate weight by changing CI or CO until 200 years ago. We've understood the concept of CICO for much longer that we've understood the concept of calorie counting; we just didn't articulate it quite as well until more recently.
  • endlessfall16
    endlessfall16 Posts: 932 Member
    Options
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    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.
    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.

    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.
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    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.
    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.

    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...

    The math really isn't even that hard though. I'm a stay at home mom with an English/political science degree and I can't even help my 6th grader with her math homework. Somehow I still figured out CICO and lost 50lbs. If I can do it, then everyone can do it :p

    No, the math isn't hard at all...when I'm talking about people in those fields and similar, I'm not really talking about the math...this is about as simple from a math standpoint as you get...but typically people in those fields and similar like data...they're a bit OCD in analyzing such data and other things...they like keeping ledgers and spreadsheets for everything...they tend to be very detail oriented and analytical, etc.

    Anyone can do this for sure...the math is super easy...but I think in general there's a certain type of personality that does well with calorie counting in particular...it's definitely not for everyone which is why there are so many different diet plans out there...for a lot of people, those are easier even though CICO is still in play whether they know it or not.

    This is what I was talking about in my first post in this thread. CICO loving arguers are stuck in the same crude gear arguing on a nonargument. As someone else put it...majoring in minor? Trolling? :)

    There's no argument from me re CICO. I have no problem or misunderstanding with it. Nothing complex about it. I just don't care for the jargon. It's crude as a term used for describing something. "Eat less, move more", "Eat less, exercise more" are better language, but none of these, CICO included, is significant a piece of info. or any real revelation for me.

    It would be million times better if someone posted new insights, ways to make dieting better, more effortless, even that would only help a handful of people... That would be worthwhile.
    Lol, you have that now. It's advertised all over the internet. Nutrisystem, paleo, Weight watchers, Atkins, etc. are ALL "insights" on how easy and effortless it is to do THEIR DIET PLAN. All it really is is CICO hidden behind a money making scheme. Tell me, how is that a million times better than just figuring out that you need to eat less than you burn?


    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

    9285851.png

    I'm not going to speak for those systems. I rather keep an open mind and extract useful elements if there's any from anything.

    I, and many people I know, already figured out the fact that I need to eat less than I burn, just as I figured out fire is hot. That piece of knowledge alone doesn't help anyone or anything.


  • brittyn3
    brittyn3 Posts: 481 Member
    edited April 2017
    Options
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    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.
    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.

    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.
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    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.
    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.

    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...

    The math really isn't even that hard though. I'm a stay at home mom with an English/political science degree and I can't even help my 6th grader with her math homework. Somehow I still figured out CICO and lost 50lbs. If I can do it, then everyone can do it :p

    No, the math isn't hard at all...when I'm talking about people in those fields and similar, I'm not really talking about the math...this is about as simple from a math standpoint as you get...but typically people in those fields and similar like data...they're a bit OCD in analyzing such data and other things...they like keeping ledgers and spreadsheets for everything...they tend to be very detail oriented and analytical, etc.

    Anyone can do this for sure...the math is super easy...but I think in general there's a certain type of personality that does well with calorie counting in particular...it's definitely not for everyone which is why there are so many different diet plans out there...for a lot of people, those are easier even though CICO is still in play whether they know it or not.

    This is what I was talking about in my first post in this thread. CICO loving arguers are stuck in the same crude gear arguing on a nonargument. As someone else put it...majoring in minor? Trolling? :)

    There's no argument from me re CICO. I have no problem or misunderstanding with it. Nothing complex about it. I just don't care for the jargon. It's crude as a term used for describing something. "Eat less, move more", "Eat less, exercise more" are better language, but none of these, CICO included, is significant a piece of info. or any real revelation for me.

    It would be million times better if someone posted new insights, ways to make dieting better, more effortless, even that would only help a handful of people... That would be worthwhile.
    Lol, you have that now. It's advertised all over the internet. Nutrisystem, paleo, Weight watchers, Atkins, etc. are ALL "insights" on how easy and effortless it is to do THEIR DIET PLAN. All it really is is CICO hidden behind a money making scheme. Tell me, how is that a million times better than just figuring out that you need to eat less than you burn?


    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

    9285851.png

    I'm not going to speak for those systems. I rather keep an open mind and extract useful elements if there's any from anything.

    I, and many people I know, already figured out the fact that I need to eat less than I burn, just as I figured out fire is hot. That piece of knowledge alone doesn't help anyone or anything.


    But why? That piece of knowledge helps out the vast majority of people trying to lose weight. Many people believe that if they eat foods that are low calorie and considered healthy and cut out "junk", they'll lose weight. Failing to eat less than they burn. Healthy food in excess will make you just as fat as "junk" food in excess. Aka CICO solve that riddle. Again.
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    edited April 2017
    Options



    I can promise you that the bolded part is much more opinion than fact. I have quite a few obese members in my family, and they are neither physically restricted or suffering from a mental health issue with food. They simply do not monitor what they eat or how much. They eat out of boredom and hunger. They enjoy eating large amounts because they like the tastes of many foods and do not know when enough is enough.

    @klaar 11 does that not sound like disordered eating to you? Are you making it sounds like they are eating perhaps for a hit of dopamine?

    Obese people are always at risk of a more premature death when compared to their normal weight peers.

    healthland.time.com/2013/12/02/you-cant-be-fit-and-fat/
  • French_Peasant
    French_Peasant Posts: 1,639 Member
    Options
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    FitJulian wrote: »
    third pedant here ... it is Maths (with an s) not Math . >:)
    I am from ENGland where we speak (and write) proper ENGlish** (see what i did there!!) and don't throw away the letter u from a lot of words. :D
    Although to be fair i did have a American IT teacher in the early 80's who summed it up with " we Americans speak proper english because there are 250 million of us and only 50 million of you and that's how democracy works!!"

    As for the actual literary content "Cracking post Gromit !!" <3


    **well most of the time anyway ...
    Lol, some of the best "proper speaking" from transplanted Brits to the US I've heard:

    "I've got to "hoover" the carpet today."- translation............"I have to vacuum."

    "Your friend is in her Majesty's pleasure?"-translation........."Your friend is in jail?"

    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

    9285851.png


    You probably know this but "at Her Majesty's Pleasure" is in every prison name. For example, HMP Pentonville, HMP Wandsworth. So it does make sense.

    The hoover thing bugs me. I resist correcting everyone.

    I found the concept of "bathing costume" to be hilarious, till I realized we call it a bathing SUIT which is even more hilarious.

    I do like "maths" over "math." It makes me think of a bespectacled, tousle-haired genius at Oxford.

    I can understand the protectiveness over the poor u's. I will fight to the death over "doughnut" vs. "donut" in any item going to print unless it was a citation of a brand or shop name (fortunately I am backed by the AP Stylebook). I also have VERY strong opinions on the Oxford comma (regrettably, not backed by the AP).
  • endlessfall16
    endlessfall16 Posts: 932 Member
    Options
    TR0berts wrote: »
    "Eat less, move more" is generally a fine way of helping people to lose weight. That said, one could easily argue that it's inherently less helpful than explaining CICO. With the former, the questions then become, "eat how much less?" And "move how much more?"

    That's where explaining the concept of CICO becomes better. It tells the person, "eat however much less and move however much more so that you end up burning more Calories/energy than you consume."

    I'm not against any language that helps people. The difference between you and me is that I don't make a Rocky Mountain out of an anthill with a particular concept.

    As to your question, the adviser could easily tell the dieter to cut back 1/4 anytime he eats, for example. Go about your day the same, don't mind any calorie or equation, eat your usual foods but push 1/4 of the amount aside. I guarantee that will work.

    Btw, I know quite many elder people who would never read label for calories and nutrition info. Luckily they don't have to.
  • Debmal77
    Debmal77 Posts: 4,770 Member
    edited April 2017
    Options
    To the OP!

    Meryl-Streep.gif
This discussion has been closed.