CICO, It's a math formula

endlessfall16 wrote: »

@lynn,

"nd if I had to eat "the same foods in a cycle," always dishing out the same 25% less than some amount I think I remember from years ago as what I used to eat, I wouldn't be able to fully enjoy it."

If I understand it correctly, you don't eat the same foods in years?

No, years comes from the fact that I've been tracking for years, so if I had been using your method (or that of your imaginary "advisor"), I would have to rely on extremely fallible human memory to know how much I ate of this food three-plus years ago -- which again assumes I had some one specific amount that I ate of that food every time I ate it.

You keep moving the goal posts. In your post that I was responding to (and it would make it a lot easier for anyone reading this to follow the discussion if you used the quote function, rather than cutting and pasting or retyping), you said that most people eat the same foods within a cycle of at most 10 days.

How many types of meats, fishes and vegetables do you include in your diet?

If I try really hard, my list of vegetables is about two dozens. And about 5 meats, just different cuts.

Not everyone has a diet that limited.

For meat, I mostly eat beef, pork, and lamb, but I won't turn down bison, antelope, rabbit, or goat. But that's dozens of different types of meat, if you recognize the difference in calorie levels that different cuts and fat levels can make, including organ meats. Plus I eat different prepared sausages -- I frequently buy things I've never had before. About a dozen kinds of fin fish, six different kinds of shellfish, three different kinds of poultry (again in different cuts that make a difference to calories) plus organ meats. Plus tofu, tempeh, seitan, and different manufacturers' various "faux meat" products, each prepared to its own recipe, with vary levels of fats, different amounts of vegetables, etc.

At least three dozen different kinds of vegetables. Plus at least 16 different kinds of fresh fruit.

Probably a different cheese every week. Dairy milk at different fat levels, traditional and greek yogurt, usually plain, at different fat levels. Cream cheese, butter, buttermilk, cottage cheese at different fat levels. Eggs, usually large chicken eggs, but sometimes medium, extra large, or jumbo; sometimes duck eggs.

I eat probably a dozen different kinds of beans and half a dozen different kinds of nuts. I have at least half a dozen different grains (for breakfast and sides) in my pantry, at least half a dozen different kinds of grain and nut flours in my kitchen for baking, four or five different kinds of seeds. Pasta, rice, quinoa. Three different kinds of commercially prepared nuts butters, plus occasionally I whip up my own nut butters and hummuses with different ingredients every time.

Dried fruits, dried mushrooms, dried seaweed.

I prefer to cook from scratch, but also buy frozen, packaged, canned and fresh prepared foods (burritos, soup, waffles, salsas, crackers, etc.), which I don't eat often, and don't buy the same ones over and over.

When I do cook, I very seldom have a stand-alone piece of meat, with a starch on the side and a veg. I make stir-fries, casseroles, stews, soups; I construct layered bowls of various ingredients that are never the same twice. If it's something that's going to last more than one meal, I generally use the recipe function.

I eat at dozens of different fast, fast-casual, and full-service restaurants, plus occasionally at places I've never been before and likely never will be again. Calories can vary wildly, sometimes even for foods that seem similar.

Unless I'm really obsessed over eating, a rough amount of, say, 2 handfuls of green beans or 2 large zuchinni and one chicken breast suffice. If my day's activity is more than usual -- who wouldn't be able to tell? -- I'll add two cups of rice.

The point is, it's usually the same meats, same vegetables, albeit made into different dishes. I would think most people know their typical size of beef, pork, to consume healthily, give or take a few oz different. A person would be in trouble if she fluctuated from 8 oz to 20 oz and couldn't tell!!! Even that is hard to happen as you can ask your local butcher to cut and wrap any size you want.

This seems to be a recurring source of your inability to comprehend why accurate tracking and logging work better for some people than just eye-balling and trying to eat the same amount of every day. I do not have a "typical size of beef, pork to consume healthily." Some meals the appropriate amount might only be two ounces, almost as a topping or condiment. Some meals I might have four to six ounces as my main source of protein. Occasionally, I might have a eight or 10 ounce serving. Many of my meals don't include any meat, fish, or poultry.

Also, You can also lose 1.5 lbs in two weeks and then gain .8 lbs in the third week. The margin is large enough that no one should be able to miss.

Actually, I lost my weight at a pretty steady 2 lbs a week for three months, until I decided to reduce my deficit. It was and has continued to be very reassuring to have the tracking data that tells me what my maintenance level is, and makes it easy to know what to expect when I step on the scale. I've never been remotely tempted to post one of those "HELP -- I've been eating right and exercising and I gained two pounds!!!" threads.

If you are still so worried about unhealthily undereating, which takes a lot actually, keep some favorite snacks nearby.

Where does this come from? I never said one thing about being worried about unealthily undereating.

But if someone were worried about that, perhaps having data to make an informed decision about which of their favorite snacks might be the best choice wouldn't be a horrible thing.

"I just don't understand your insistence that there's something crazy complicated about actually tracking the calories one consumes."

Tracking is not complicated or burdensome for me at all. It's akin to separating beans by different colors -- boring, unnecessary and time consuming. In fact I got very good at tracking that that was all I saw and thought of when I looked at foods. LOL.

When I'm offered a donut at the office, I want to pick one most appealing and enjoy it unrestraintly instead of juggling the calorie balance or having the calorie decide my taste which is never good. That's just one simple example. There are group lunches, family potlucks, etc..

The way you describe your meals, from a limited set of foods, with the same size piece of the same meat with a handful of one of just a dozen vegetables on the side, and maybe rice... that to me would be "boring" and "unnecessary." I'll admit it's not precisely "time consuming," but it would feel like a waste of time, when I could be eating a wide variety of delicious foods that I know absolutely are meeting my energy and nutritional requirements.

If I'm offered a treat at the office (we don't really do doughnuts, but other things occasionally show up), I eat it if I want it and decide it's worth the calories. The calories don't "decide my taste." How is my choosing whether or not to have the cookie or cake or whatever it is based on whether I think it's worth it a bad thing, but it's a good thing when you decide to have a piece of meat that you believe is your "typical size" and no more because you've decided that's a healthy choice for you is a good thing? And if your eye-balling and inner knowledge of what you need to eat is so accurate that it allows you to maintain your weight, how is that different from using a different set of tools for those of us who aren't as gifted as you to decide what to eat to maintain our weight?

We all have to make choices. You've chosen to eyeball and not track, because measuring and tracking is boring and unnecessary to you. I've chosen to measure and track, so that I can confidently eat from the wide range of wonderful foods that I am so fortunate to have available to me in the 21st century in a wealthy country with a great distribution system, global trade, in a multi-ethnic metropolitan area with nearby local farms, prepared differently almost every time I eat, without having to wonder where that extra 20 pounds came from since last year.

Why do some people who don't consciously calorie count and have lost weight get so judgey about those of us who just like the accuracy (within the limitations of energy expenditure estimates etc) of tracking? Or they think our way of eating is deeply flawed because we sometimes need or want to keep tracking in maintenance.

You do you boo and I'll do me.

CICO is the science, calorie counting/tracking is the method of implementing.

This is not a discussion about the obesity crisis. This is not a discussion about various methods of not counting calories and still losing. This is not a discussion about mental or physical illness that some experience which contributed to behaviours that lead to weight gain. This is not a discussion about your feels on varying methods or ways of eating. This is not a discussion about socio-economic factors in weight management.

In short, this is not a debate, take it to the debate forum if you want to do that. It is simply an explanation of the scientific principle at play that is behind all methods of weight loss/maintenance/gain.

VintageFeline wrote: »

Why do some people who don't consciously calorie count and have lost weight get so judgey about those of us who just like the accuracy (within the limitations of energy expenditure estimates etc) of tracking? Or they think our way of eating is deeply flawed because we sometimes need or want to keep tracking in maintenance.

You do you boo and I'll do me.

CICO is the science, calorie counting/tracking is the method of implementing.

This is not a discussion about the obesity crisis. This is not a discussion about various methods of not counting calories and still losing. This is not a discussion about mental or physical illness that some experience which contributed to behaviours that lead to weight gain. This is not a discussion about your feels on varying methods or ways of eating. This is not a discussion about socio-economic factors in weight management.

In short, this is not a debate, take it to the debate forum if you want to do that. It is simply an explanation of the scientific principle at play that is behind all methods of weight loss/maintenance/gain.

I totally agree with you. If not counting works for someone, good for them. For me, it's more sustainable than anything else and I thoroughly enjoy the numbers game, having concrete data for troubleshooting, the control, the jigsaw action, all of it.

It still baffles me what any of this has to do with the matter of the topic, though. What simply states "understand the science in order to know what to do if your chosen way stops working for some reason - that is, tweak your chosen way to produce a calorie deficit" does not dismiss anyone's dieting preferences.

To those who say this info is not useful, it's the difference between gravitating towards something like "low carb helps me eat less, I stopped losing, I may need to reduce my carbs further to see if this helps me achieve a deficit again" vs "it doesn't matter how much I eat on low carb, if I'm not losing it must be the artificial sweeteners kicking off my insulin response."

GaleHawkins wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

His point about finding the cause of obesity rather than just say I know why you are fat because you pig out too much is a great one.

The CAUSE of obesity is obvious -- you eat more than you should given your activity.

The real question is not why you are fat, but how to lose weight.

If you accept CICO, then the question becomes why am I eating more than I burn, and how do I stop that. The only person (for most of us) who can think through and answer that question, and it might have a lot of parts, is us.

This is all important stuff, but it really has nothing to do with OP's post, which was talking about getting to that first point which is true for all. Many people are there already, always were, never needed to say "okay, I need to cut calories and move more, how to do that." Perhaps that is true. But like others have said, it seems true that many, many are not, and even some of us who theoretically understood it needed to be practical in acknowledging that it applied to us and figuring it out.

What helps us eat less is not the same for everyone. For example, you say that not eating grains and sugar has been important for you. I cut out added sugar for a while and found it easy but not especially significant to weight loss. Cutting out snacking and focusing on other things was more important to me. I don't care much about grains, so cutting them out would be meaningless to me, except as part of mindful eating being important (don't waste calories on things that are just there).

Others struggle with habits of relying on fast food or not liking vegetables, which never applied to me, and still others struggle with hunger, which I didn't. On the other hand, I struggle with emotional eating, which many people have no issues with. CICO is significant to all of us; what to do after that will differ.

And no, I don't think I got fat because I was ill. I gained weight because I ate more than I burned. I also understand why I did not, but that's my story, not something that I claim must apply to everyone else.

@lemurcat12 while you have the cart before the horse as to what the importance however one may work on losing weight as one learns to address the all important question of "Why am I fat/why did I over eat?"

People that never addresses why they are fat will be the masses that will do a 100%+ regain down the road.

Remember humans that are healthy in all ways are not controlled by cravings plus they stop eating before they become obese. The concept of CICO is fine to keep in mind but it never will fully cover why I was obese in 2014 and several times over the past 40 years.

I have maintained for the last two years without cravings while keeping my face poked full of awesome tasting food for the first time in the last 40 years after I found my correct macro. The CICO is tracked and managed without daily monitoring by myself. My brain now tells me when to eat and when to stop eating on my current macro. I just modified it to 5% carbs, now 25% protein having reduced my fats down to 70% after learning old men need more protein than middle age men per some research. I got to a meal late this evening and had 6 pork chops that remained to play protein catch up.

This is a new thing with people following ketogenic. You act like we are not doing the same thing. Hell, my wife and I don't go out as much because of how good of a cook I am and she prefers my cooking over many restaurants. And I live in one of the richest places in the US and have new restaurants open weekly.


Here is why I went from 175 to 220.... it's called college. I ate and drink like complete crap. In fact, I had a whole month where I ate burgers every night because a few of my friends and I supported our dance team and bought cards which allowed buy one get one at McDonalds. I frequently drank alcohol, had cheesesteaks pretty much 2 to 3 nights a week, chinese several nights a week and much more. I got fat because I stopped playing soccer and ice hockey, and still ate like I used to.

psuLemon wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

His point about finding the cause of obesity rather than just say I know why you are fat because you pig out too much is a great one.

The CAUSE of obesity is obvious -- you eat more than you should given your activity.

The real question is not why you are fat, but how to lose weight.

If you accept CICO, then the question becomes why am I eating more than I burn, and how do I stop that. The only person (for most of us) who can think through and answer that question, and it might have a lot of parts, is us.

This is all important stuff, but it really has nothing to do with OP's post, which was talking about getting to that first point which is true for all. Many people are there already, always were, never needed to say "okay, I need to cut calories and move more, how to do that." Perhaps that is true. But like others have said, it seems true that many, many are not, and even some of us who theoretically understood it needed to be practical in acknowledging that it applied to us and figuring it out.

What helps us eat less is not the same for everyone. For example, you say that not eating grains and sugar has been important for you. I cut out added sugar for a while and found it easy but not especially significant to weight loss. Cutting out snacking and focusing on other things was more important to me. I don't care much about grains, so cutting them out would be meaningless to me, except as part of mindful eating being important (don't waste calories on things that are just there).

Others struggle with habits of relying on fast food or not liking vegetables, which never applied to me, and still others struggle with hunger, which I didn't. On the other hand, I struggle with emotional eating, which many people have no issues with. CICO is significant to all of us; what to do after that will differ.

And no, I don't think I got fat because I was ill. I gained weight because I ate more than I burned. I also understand why I did not, but that's my story, not something that I claim must apply to everyone else.

@lemurcat12 while you have the cart before the horse as to what the importance however one may work on losing weight as one learns to address the all important question of "Why am I fat/why did I over eat?"

People that never addresses why they are fat will be the masses that will do a 100%+ regain down the road.

Remember humans that are healthy in all ways are not controlled by cravings plus they stop eating before they become obese. The concept of CICO is fine to keep in mind but it never will fully cover why I was obese in 2014 and several times over the past 40 years.

I have maintained for the last two years without cravings while keeping my face poked full of awesome tasting food for the first time in the last 40 years after I found my correct macro. The CICO is tracked and managed without daily monitoring by myself. My brain now tells me when to eat and when to stop eating on my current macro. I just modified it to 5% carbs, now 25% protein having reduced my fats down to 70% after learning old men need more protein than middle age men per some research. I got to a meal late this evening and had 6 pork chops that remained to play protein catch up.

This is a new thing with people following ketogenic. You act like we are not doing the same thing. Hell, my wife and I don't go out as much because of how good of a cook I am and she prefers my cooking over many restaurants. And I live in one of the richest places in the US and have new restaurants open weekly.


Here is why I went from 175 to 220.... it's called college. I ate and drink like complete crap. In fact, I had a whole month where I ate burgers every night because a few of my friends and I supported our dance team and bought cards which allowed buy one get one at McDonalds. I frequently drank alcohol, had cheesesteaks pretty much 2 to 3 nights a week, chinese several nights a week and much more. I got fat because I stopped playing soccer and ice hockey, and still ate like I used to.

That assumption always baffles me. Why do some people think that if you're not doing low carb you're constantly starving, craving and torturing yourself with minuscule amounts of food. The minuscule amounts of food is one reason I DID NOT do well on low carb and I was constantly starving, craving and torturing myself. Stuffing my face poked full of awesome tasting food would have required me to eat twice my maintenance calories. Mileage may vary, you know.

psuLemon wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

His point about finding the cause of obesity rather than just say I know why you are fat because you pig out too much is a great one.

The CAUSE of obesity is obvious -- you eat more than you should given your activity.

The real question is not why you are fat, but how to lose weight.

If you accept CICO, then the question becomes why am I eating more than I burn, and how do I stop that. The only person (for most of us) who can think through and answer that question, and it might have a lot of parts, is us.

This is all important stuff, but it really has nothing to do with OP's post, which was talking about getting to that first point which is true for all. Many people are there already, always were, never needed to say "okay, I need to cut calories and move more, how to do that." Perhaps that is true. But like others have said, it seems true that many, many are not, and even some of us who theoretically understood it needed to be practical in acknowledging that it applied to us and figuring it out.

What helps us eat less is not the same for everyone. For example, you say that not eating grains and sugar has been important for you. I cut out added sugar for a while and found it easy but not especially significant to weight loss. Cutting out snacking and focusing on other things was more important to me. I don't care much about grains, so cutting them out would be meaningless to me, except as part of mindful eating being important (don't waste calories on things that are just there).

Others struggle with habits of relying on fast food or not liking vegetables, which never applied to me, and still others struggle with hunger, which I didn't. On the other hand, I struggle with emotional eating, which many people have no issues with. CICO is significant to all of us; what to do after that will differ.

And no, I don't think I got fat because I was ill. I gained weight because I ate more than I burned. I also understand why I did not, but that's my story, not something that I claim must apply to everyone else.

@lemurcat12 while you have the cart before the horse as to what the importance however one may work on losing weight as one learns to address the all important question of "Why am I fat/why did I over eat?"

People that never addresses why they are fat will be the masses that will do a 100%+ regain down the road.

Remember humans that are healthy in all ways are not controlled by cravings plus they stop eating before they become obese. The concept of CICO is fine to keep in mind but it never will fully cover why I was obese in 2014 and several times over the past 40 years.

I have maintained for the last two years without cravings while keeping my face poked full of awesome tasting food for the first time in the last 40 years after I found my correct macro. The CICO is tracked and managed without daily monitoring by myself. My brain now tells me when to eat and when to stop eating on my current macro. I just modified it to 5% carbs, now 25% protein having reduced my fats down to 70% after learning old men need more protein than middle age men per some research. I got to a meal late this evening and had 6 pork chops that remained to play protein catch up.

This is a new thing with people following ketogenic. You act like we are not doing the same thing. Hell, my wife and I don't go out as much because of how good of a cook I am and she prefers my cooking over many restaurants. And I live in one of the richest places in the US and have new restaurants open weekly.

Yeah, but you aren't building tons of muscle walking a quarter of a mile to your mailbox every day.

GaleHawkins wrote: »

@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/

YOu are listing variables on either side of the equation.

Making either side of the equation more complex? DOes not change the fact that it is an equation.

x+y=z is an equation.
ax +by = z is ALSO an equation.

sin(x) - cos(y)^2 + 42 = z is ALSO an equation.

And even 42x + log(y) = (sqrt)z - cos(b) + q^x-1.

Adding variables and calculations on eithe rside of the equal sign doesn't change the inherent equation-ness. It just indicates that you need more information on both sides of the equal sign in order to find the solution.

It's just a way to describe a function, its not a lifestyle choice.

amusedmonkey wrote: »

psuLemon wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

His point about finding the cause of obesity rather than just say I know why you are fat because you pig out too much is a great one.

The CAUSE of obesity is obvious -- you eat more than you should given your activity.

The real question is not why you are fat, but how to lose weight.

If you accept CICO, then the question becomes why am I eating more than I burn, and how do I stop that. The only person (for most of us) who can think through and answer that question, and it might have a lot of parts, is us.

This is all important stuff, but it really has nothing to do with OP's post, which was talking about getting to that first point which is true for all. Many people are there already, always were, never needed to say "okay, I need to cut calories and move more, how to do that." Perhaps that is true. But like others have said, it seems true that many, many are not, and even some of us who theoretically understood it needed to be practical in acknowledging that it applied to us and figuring it out.

What helps us eat less is not the same for everyone. For example, you say that not eating grains and sugar has been important for you. I cut out added sugar for a while and found it easy but not especially significant to weight loss. Cutting out snacking and focusing on other things was more important to me. I don't care much about grains, so cutting them out would be meaningless to me, except as part of mindful eating being important (don't waste calories on things that are just there).

Others struggle with habits of relying on fast food or not liking vegetables, which never applied to me, and still others struggle with hunger, which I didn't. On the other hand, I struggle with emotional eating, which many people have no issues with. CICO is significant to all of us; what to do after that will differ.

And no, I don't think I got fat because I was ill. I gained weight because I ate more than I burned. I also understand why I did not, but that's my story, not something that I claim must apply to everyone else.

@lemurcat12 while you have the cart before the horse as to what the importance however one may work on losing weight as one learns to address the all important question of "Why am I fat/why did I over eat?"

People that never addresses why they are fat will be the masses that will do a 100%+ regain down the road.

Remember humans that are healthy in all ways are not controlled by cravings plus they stop eating before they become obese. The concept of CICO is fine to keep in mind but it never will fully cover why I was obese in 2014 and several times over the past 40 years.

I have maintained for the last two years without cravings while keeping my face poked full of awesome tasting food for the first time in the last 40 years after I found my correct macro. The CICO is tracked and managed without daily monitoring by myself. My brain now tells me when to eat and when to stop eating on my current macro. I just modified it to 5% carbs, now 25% protein having reduced my fats down to 70% after learning old men need more protein than middle age men per some research. I got to a meal late this evening and had 6 pork chops that remained to play protein catch up.

This is a new thing with people following ketogenic. You act like we are not doing the same thing. Hell, my wife and I don't go out as much because of how good of a cook I am and she prefers my cooking over many restaurants. And I live in one of the richest places in the US and have new restaurants open weekly.


Here is why I went from 175 to 220.... it's called college. I ate and drink like complete crap. In fact, I had a whole month where I ate burgers every night because a few of my friends and I supported our dance team and bought cards which allowed buy one get one at McDonalds. I frequently drank alcohol, had cheesesteaks pretty much 2 to 3 nights a week, chinese several nights a week and much more. I got fat because I stopped playing soccer and ice hockey, and still ate like I used to.

That assumption always baffles me. Why do some people think that if you're not doing low carb you're constantly starving, craving and torturing yourself with minuscule amounts of food. The minuscule amounts of food is one reason I DID NOT do well on low carb and I was constantly starving, craving and torturing myself. Stuffing my face poked full of awesome tasting food would have required me to eat twice my maintenance calories. Mileage may vary, you know.

Yeah, this is probably my number one pet peeve on MFP. No, Gale, people who aren't keto aren't all suffering from cravings and starving. Not all of us got fat because of uncontrollable hunger (I suspect most did not). Not everyone who eats carbs eats a ton of low nutrient carbs, either. Sigh.

lemurcat12 wrote: »

Yeah, this is probably my number one pet peeve on MFP. No, Gale, people who aren't keto aren't all suffering from cravings and starving. Not all of us got fat because of uncontrollable hunger (I suspect most did not). Not everyone who eats carbs eats a ton of low nutrient carbs, either. Sigh.

I got fat because I enjoy food and ate when bored too often. Hell, I still do. Had an apple last night just cuz. But it wasn't a family sized bag of chips.

GaleHawkins wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

His point about finding the cause of obesity rather than just say I know why you are fat because you pig out too much is a great one.

The CAUSE of obesity is obvious -- you eat more than you should given your activity.

The real question is not why you are fat, but how to lose weight.

If you accept CICO, then the question becomes why am I eating more than I burn, and how do I stop that. The only person (for most of us) who can think through and answer that question, and it might have a lot of parts, is us.

This is all important stuff, but it really has nothing to do with OP's post, which was talking about getting to that first point which is true for all. Many people are there already, always were, never needed to say "okay, I need to cut calories and move more, how to do that." Perhaps that is true. But like others have said, it seems true that many, many are not, and even some of us who theoretically understood it needed to be practical in acknowledging that it applied to us and figuring it out.

What helps us eat less is not the same for everyone. For example, you say that not eating grains and sugar has been important for you. I cut out added sugar for a while and found it easy but not especially significant to weight loss. Cutting out snacking and focusing on other things was more important to me. I don't care much about grains, so cutting them out would be meaningless to me, except as part of mindful eating being important (don't waste calories on things that are just there).

Others struggle with habits of relying on fast food or not liking vegetables, which never applied to me, and still others struggle with hunger, which I didn't. On the other hand, I struggle with emotional eating, which many people have no issues with. CICO is significant to all of us; what to do after that will differ.

And no, I don't think I got fat because I was ill. I gained weight because I ate more than I burned. I also understand why I did not, but that's my story, not something that I claim must apply to everyone else.

@lemurcat12 while you have the cart before the horse as to what the importance however one may work on losing weight as one learns to address the all important question of "Why am I fat/why did I over eat?"

How so? Like I said, once you realize/accept that your CICO and decide how to fix it, one thing to consider is WHY is it out of balance. Many people (I was once one of them) think they really don't eat much, so thinking it through is a good plan. My main issue was that I ate mindlessly and more than I realized, from many foods that I didn't care that much about. I was able to improve my cooking methods (use less high cal additions without losing flavor, do some subbing with other sources of flavor that did not add calories) and cut portions or cut out some things that aren't that exciting to me, but were part of my normal means (basically cut way down on starch portions, while not being low carb at all, and eating more of some kinds of carbs -- increasing veg portions, more fruit than I used to eat), and not eating stupid things that I'd sometimes eat just because they were there (lots of the stuff that gets brought in at work, higher cal work lunches that aren't my favorites). Other common sense things like that. Result: I never felt hunger or deprived or like I was changing my eating style much at all (I already cooked a lot), and yet far fewer calories.

Not sure what this has to do with being sick, but maybe you will tell me.

People that never addresses why they are fat will be the masses that will do a 100%+ regain down the road.

People who don't UNDERSTAND how they happened to overeat are perhaps in more danger of doing it again, yes. I think most people here agree with that; it's not some magical thing only you understand.

Remember humans that are healthy in all ways are not controlled by cravings plus they stop eating before they become obese.

Saying something over and over with no evidence makes it no more true.

Now, "controlled by cravings" is a loaded term. I don't believe that most people are controlled by cravings for food. (I don't actually believe you were either, but whatever it pleases you to believe, I guess.) I do think bad habit can lead to cravings and that changes those habits can help. I also think it's NORMAL to crave food when tired or hungry or stressed and that what you are used to eating in those circumstances often defines what you crave. In my late 20s I'd work super late and then order Indian. I of course would crave Indian when tired and hungry (after having skipped lunch and waited until 10 for dinner, say.) I'd also not feel like cooking when tired and overhungry. When I decided to change my habits I made it easier on myself not to skip meals and to make something fast when tired, and now in those situations I usually crave the kinds of things I normally eat, not the higher cal delivery sorts of things. Again, when I did have those cravings as a result of my bad habits, I was not ill. It was normal.

As for overeating, people commonly do it for food that is tasty and in situations where they have no cues to eat less. Social eating is an example, or food on the table rather than in portions. I often overeat at a family style restaurant or if eating chips and guac from a common bowl at a Mexican place. If I ate that way at home I'd do it too. It's also quite common for people to eat stupid amounts at a restaurant if the food is tasty (or of tasty food prepared at home because they are in the HABIT of cleaning their plates and put too much on it) or to want dessert after a filling meal. Humans naturally are able to eat when not hungry -- as janejellyroll pointed out, this would have been evolutionarily advantageous -- and we naturally (or many of us naturally) tend to be hedonistic eaters.

That I have to be somewhat mindful not to overeat and can't just let my eyes and taste buds and stomach decide doesn't mean that there's something wrong with me. It's a normal human thing. Sure, there are exceptions, but that doesn't mean that the likely majority, even significant majority, of humans who can overeat easily are screwed up or sick. That's just bizarre.

The concept of CICO is fine to keep in mind but it never will fully cover why I was obese in 2014 and several times over the past 40 years.

Of course it does -- you ate more than you should have. WHY you did that is a separate question that no one was claiming to answer, since that's individual to you.

I have maintained for the last two years without cravings while keeping my face poked full of awesome tasting food for the first time in the last 40 years after I found my correct macro.

What is your "correct macro"? Surely you eat more than one. You mean the macro ratio that you think works best for you? Great, but for many of us counting macros is not that important, and traditionally people ate a wide variety of macros, changing over the course of the year, so this idea that there's OneTrueMacro that we should eat or that individuals should eat seems obviously wrong to me, although I think individuals should do what helps them cope with the current food environment the best. If what works for you is eating lots of McD's but without the carbs, that's totally cool, but it is NOT what would work for me.

Also, I apologize if I am remembering this incorrectly, but haven't you said that you are still overweight and have been maintaining?

The CICO is tracked and managed without daily monitoring by myself. My brain now tells me when to eat and when to stop eating on my current macro. I just modified it to 5% carbs, now 25% protein having reduced my fats down to 70% after learning old men need more protein than middle age men per some research. I got to a meal late this evening and had 6 pork chops that remained to play protein catch up.

Tracking your macros like that isn't intuitive eating, from what it sounds, but that's cool, I don't think intuitive eating works for lots of people.

I don't usually count calories or macros, but I sure do know CICO is what matters. I focus on eating a healthful diet, watch portions, and am mindful about how I eat and, most important for me, largely avoid eating outside of mealtime (I might include a dessert as part of my dinner mealtime, though). However, this is MY strategy based on what I tended to do when gaining weight and my own satiety cues. Since it's personal, I don't pretend that others should do the same thing or that it isn't simply MY way of making sure CICO is where I want it. Your strategy is YOUR way of making CICO where you want it. Nothing to do with obesity being caused by some sort of mental illness or whatever.