Clearly CICO has no bearing on my recent weight loss
Newgoals1966
Posts: 9 Member
I am a 51yo with a strong family history of Celiac Disease, and saw so many things change for the better once I dropped gluten. No more migraines, better sleep, no sugar cravings and better moods in general.
After a month of eating what I want sans gluten, I am down 6 pounds and find my clothing is significantly baggier - I have dropped a jean size in four weeks! So while MFP suggested me keeping my calories down to 1200 to meet a 20 pound weight loss goal, I am eating hundreds more each day and losing at a healthy pace.
Logic would have it that by watching sugar, eating enough protein and choosing healthy carbs for the most part, my body is shedding fat with no need for restrictive caloric intake. I do not have a perfect diet by any stretch, but my body seems to respond better to letting go of the extra pounds since I kicked gluten from my diet.
So after following outdated and restrictive weight loss paths, I have finally found the one way to lose the stubborn pounds that refused to budge. Just wanted to post for anyone frustrated by watching the calories like a hawk, only to see no real progress for their trouble.
After a month of eating what I want sans gluten, I am down 6 pounds and find my clothing is significantly baggier - I have dropped a jean size in four weeks! So while MFP suggested me keeping my calories down to 1200 to meet a 20 pound weight loss goal, I am eating hundreds more each day and losing at a healthy pace.
Logic would have it that by watching sugar, eating enough protein and choosing healthy carbs for the most part, my body is shedding fat with no need for restrictive caloric intake. I do not have a perfect diet by any stretch, but my body seems to respond better to letting go of the extra pounds since I kicked gluten from my diet.
So after following outdated and restrictive weight loss paths, I have finally found the one way to lose the stubborn pounds that refused to budge. Just wanted to post for anyone frustrated by watching the calories like a hawk, only to see no real progress for their trouble.
108
Replies
-
Oh my this should get interesting.48
-
You found a different way to create a calorie deficit, that's all. And if you reduced carb intake in the process, then some of that is water weight.
Without knowing your stats, it's also quite possible that 1200 was too aggressive for you and your body was holding on to water weight from that too. Add to that that inflammation often equals water retention as well...
It's great that you are feeling better and seeing progress, but it does not negate CICO.51 -
This is the least restrictive method to lose weight.
You are still clearly eating in a calorie deficit to lose weight, there is no defying that fact it comes down to a calorie deficit. Can't lose weight without being in one. Good for you for finding something that worked for you!14 -
Congratulations on finding an eating style that works for you. It's hard to assess your CICO assertion since you didn't give any data, but perhaps the calories you are no longer eating with wheat products have not been entirely replaced by what you ARE eating
leading to less water retention and enough of a deficit to lose 6 pounds in a month. 13 -
Ah yes, we have yet another medical miracle in the house. *Yawn* I'll be sure to alert the media34
-
If your losing weight then your in a caloric deficit. This will become more apparent as you continue to lose weight and your rate of loss slows or stalls completely if you are not adjusting your calories during the process. Regardless of diet, calories in/out is the foundation of weight loss.18
-
So you ate more than 1200 but lost 14 lbs less than if you ate 1200 so this proves CICO doesn't work?12
-
As an example of removing things that cause an inflammatory response in an individual, I eliminated some stuff that was triggering my eczema earlier in the year. Dropped 2 kg (4.4 lb) in a week (and skin magically improved), eating at a 500 cal per day deficit. I didn't defy CICO, I just shed a bunch of water weight my poor, stressed wee body was holding on to.26
-
Congrats on your weight loss. I'm interested in learning a little more about your circumstances if you're willing to share.
How many calories do you need to consume to maintain your weight (based on your weight, height, age, activity level) and how many have you been logging each day? Or more importantly, what are the net calories you have been logging each day?0 -
Low-carb diets is the basic idea behind keto diets (long story short, foods with healthy fats supposedly increase metabolism), so what you're saying isn't new, although there's no end-goal difference between keto diets and high carb low fat diets. It doesn't negate CICO, because you're absolutely still at a caloric deficit. If you ate over your TDEE, you'd gain weight no matter what diet you're on.1
-
Low-carb diets is the basic idea behind keto diets (long story short, foods with healthy fats supposedly increase metabolism), so what you're saying isn't new, although there's no end-goal difference between keto diets and high carb low fat diets. It doesn't negate CICO, because you're absolutely still at a caloric deficit. If you ate over your BMR, you'd gain weight no matter what diet you're on.
If you ate over TDEE you'd gain weight. BMR is just the calories your body burns in order to live.7 -
Low-carb diets is the basic idea behind keto diets (long story short, foods with healthy fats supposedly increase metabolism), so what you're saying isn't new, although there's no end-goal difference between keto diets and high carb low fat diets. It doesn't negate CICO, because you're absolutely still at a caloric deficit. If you ate over your BMR, you'd gain weight no matter what diet you're on.
I think you mean TDEE - total daily energy expenditure. BMR is your basal metabolic rate, how many calories you burn just being alive, basically in a coma. I eat over my BMR every day. Losing weight just fine, because I eat under my TDEE.2 -
OP.. i totally believe you. just read the bazillion posts about how people can't lose even though they're logging every bite and exercising.. precisely. They lament on and on. oh?..and those on those plateaus that last six months or even a year. If CICO always worked we'd all be at goal.59
-
Logging is not the same as measuring and logging. It is very easy to log precisely but that doesn’t mean one is accurately counting their calories.22
-
Logging is not the same as measuring and logging. It is very easy to log precisely but that doesn’t mean one is accurately counting their calories.
seconded.
I've hit plateaus twice in the last 4 months, and both times it was because I got lax in my measuring. As soon as I tightened up my counting, the weight loss resumed IMMEDIATELY.19 -
This is the least restrictive method to lose weight.
You are still clearly eating in a calorie deficit to lose weight, there is no defying that fact it comes down to a calorie deficit. Can't lose weight without being in one. Good for you for finding something that worked for you!
There is a big difference between "MUST lose in a calorie deficit" and "can't lose unless you have a calorie deficit". The 1st statement is a fact, then second, not as much so. If the second were true, then no weight loss drugs would ever work and I do think there are some out there that do work, maybe with really bad side effects, but it shows that it can be possible to lose some without the CICO calculated deficits.41 -
This is the least restrictive method to lose weight.
You are still clearly eating in a calorie deficit to lose weight, there is no defying that fact it comes down to a calorie deficit. Can't lose weight without being in one. Good for you for finding something that worked for you!
There is a big difference between "MUST lose in a calorie deficit" and "can't lose unless you have a calorie deficit". The 1st statement is a fact, then second, not as much so. If the second were true, then no weight loss drugs would ever work and I do think there are some out there that do work, maybe with really bad side effects, but it shows that it can be possible to lose some without the CICO calculated deficits.
any weight loss pill that actually worked would be affecting the "CO" side of the equation, so you'd still be in a deficit while eating calories that would normally be maintenance level.10 -
This is the least restrictive method to lose weight.
You are still clearly eating in a calorie deficit to lose weight, there is no defying that fact it comes down to a calorie deficit. Can't lose weight without being in one. Good for you for finding something that worked for you!
There is a big difference between "MUST lose in a calorie deficit" and "can't lose unless you have a calorie deficit". The 1st statement is a fact, then second, not as much so. If the second were true, then no weight loss drugs would ever work and I do think there are some out there that do work, maybe with really bad side effects, but it shows that it can be possible to lose some without the CICO calculated deficits.
any weight loss pill that actually worked would be affecting the "CO" side of the equation, so you'd still be in a deficit while eating calories that would normally be maintenance level.
People who say you can't lose more than CICO predicts will lump those losses to more CO, but is the CO based on a metabolic need to support the activity and bmr or is the fat just released (with a possible raise in body temp that is independent of workload) without a need for it to be released?19 -
This is the least restrictive method to lose weight.
You are still clearly eating in a calorie deficit to lose weight, there is no defying that fact it comes down to a calorie deficit. Can't lose weight without being in one. Good for you for finding something that worked for you!
There is a big difference between "MUST lose in a calorie deficit" and "can't lose unless you have a calorie deficit". The 1st statement is a fact, then second, not as much so. If the second were true, then no weight loss drugs would ever work and I do think there are some out there that do work, maybe with really bad side effects, but it shows that it can be possible to lose some without the CICO calculated deficits.
Those pills that really do help are amphetamines. They reduce appetite and cause restlessness. CICO.20 -
This is the least restrictive method to lose weight.
You are still clearly eating in a calorie deficit to lose weight, there is no defying that fact it comes down to a calorie deficit. Can't lose weight without being in one. Good for you for finding something that worked for you!
There is a big difference between "MUST lose in a calorie deficit" and "can't lose unless you have a calorie deficit". The 1st statement is a fact, then second, not as much so. If the second were true, then no weight loss drugs would ever work and I do think there are some out there that do work, maybe with really bad side effects, but it shows that it can be possible to lose some without the CICO calculated deficits.
any weight loss pill that actually worked would be affecting the "CO" side of the equation, so you'd still be in a deficit while eating calories that would normally be maintenance level.
People who say you can't lose more than CICO predicts will lump those losses to more CO, but is the CO based on a metabolic need to support the activity and bmr or is the fat just released (with a possible raise in body temp that is independent of workload) without a need for it to be released?
If your body is burning more calories to keep you alive, usually raising your body temperature and making your restless, then you’re expensing more calories. CO
I’ve had good results with a diet pill called ShredJym. Not because it’s magical, but because it lowers my appetite and helps me skip breakfast (CI) and makes me more active and less lethargic in the morning (CO.)9 -
JustRobby1 wrote: »Ah yes, we have yet another medical miracle in the house. *Yawn* I'll be sure to alert the media
Had to smile at this. Well done OP for shedding some weight, finding something that works for you and feeling better about yourself. But weight loss in the end, all comes down to a calorie deficit, which you are clearly in.7 -
PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »This is the least restrictive method to lose weight.
You are still clearly eating in a calorie deficit to lose weight, there is no defying that fact it comes down to a calorie deficit. Can't lose weight without being in one. Good for you for finding something that worked for you!
There is a big difference between "MUST lose in a calorie deficit" and "can't lose unless you have a calorie deficit". The 1st statement is a fact, then second, not as much so. If the second were true, then no weight loss drugs would ever work and I do think there are some out there that do work, maybe with really bad side effects, but it shows that it can be possible to lose some without the CICO calculated deficits.
Those pills that really do help are amphetamines. They reduce appetite and cause restlessness. CICO.
I believe there are catabolic drugs that work directly on fat reduction due to other mechanisms besides reduced hunger. I think it is foolish to use them also but it proves a point.17 -
PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »This is the least restrictive method to lose weight.
You are still clearly eating in a calorie deficit to lose weight, there is no defying that fact it comes down to a calorie deficit. Can't lose weight without being in one. Good for you for finding something that worked for you!
There is a big difference between "MUST lose in a calorie deficit" and "can't lose unless you have a calorie deficit". The 1st statement is a fact, then second, not as much so. If the second were true, then no weight loss drugs would ever work and I do think there are some out there that do work, maybe with really bad side effects, but it shows that it can be possible to lose some without the CICO calculated deficits.
Those pills that really do help are amphetamines. They reduce appetite and cause restlessness. CICO.
Don't they also tend to damage the heart? Or am I misremembering?3 -
PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »This is the least restrictive method to lose weight.
You are still clearly eating in a calorie deficit to lose weight, there is no defying that fact it comes down to a calorie deficit. Can't lose weight without being in one. Good for you for finding something that worked for you!
There is a big difference between "MUST lose in a calorie deficit" and "can't lose unless you have a calorie deficit". The 1st statement is a fact, then second, not as much so. If the second were true, then no weight loss drugs would ever work and I do think there are some out there that do work, maybe with really bad side effects, but it shows that it can be possible to lose some without the CICO calculated deficits.
Those pills that really do help are amphetamines. They reduce appetite and cause restlessness. CICO.
I believe there are catabolic drugs that work due to other mechanisms besides reduced hunger.
Like the one that is illegal in the US and caused that chick in the UK to cook to death? I'll pass.6 -
PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »This is the least restrictive method to lose weight.
You are still clearly eating in a calorie deficit to lose weight, there is no defying that fact it comes down to a calorie deficit. Can't lose weight without being in one. Good for you for finding something that worked for you!
There is a big difference between "MUST lose in a calorie deficit" and "can't lose unless you have a calorie deficit". The 1st statement is a fact, then second, not as much so. If the second were true, then no weight loss drugs would ever work and I do think there are some out there that do work, maybe with really bad side effects, but it shows that it can be possible to lose some without the CICO calculated deficits.
Those pills that really do help are amphetamines. They reduce appetite and cause restlessness. CICO.
Don't they also tend to damage the heart? Or am I misremembering?
yes. that's why they had to pull the OG Hydroxicut off shelves, and new Hydroxicut is just caffeine and capsaicine, like every other diet pill.2 -
PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »This is the least restrictive method to lose weight.
You are still clearly eating in a calorie deficit to lose weight, there is no defying that fact it comes down to a calorie deficit. Can't lose weight without being in one. Good for you for finding something that worked for you!
There is a big difference between "MUST lose in a calorie deficit" and "can't lose unless you have a calorie deficit". The 1st statement is a fact, then second, not as much so. If the second were true, then no weight loss drugs would ever work and I do think there are some out there that do work, maybe with really bad side effects, but it shows that it can be possible to lose some without the CICO calculated deficits.
Those pills that really do help are amphetamines. They reduce appetite and cause restlessness. CICO.
Don't they also tend to damage the heart? Or am I misremembering?
Lil' bit.
I believe there's at least one regular poster with permanent heart damage from Phentermine. Don't know who it is, though. 1 -
What would be the point of logging if it didn't include your calories and macros? I assumed common sense would lead people to include those metrics in their log. And for ppl who plateau at 6 months or whatever though logging calories, they are either not being accurate or they are not accounting for the fact that the less they weigh, the fewer calories they need, so if they haven't been adjusting their intake accordingly they will notice a decline in weight loss and will eventually see it stop altogether.
I don't believe I have ever seen anyone claim that keto increases metabolism. All I have ever seen is that it curbs appetite and causes the body to burn fat and protein for fuel instead of carbs. It may increase metabolism with increased physical activity, but more than that it changes how the metabolism functions.
Everything short of liposuction is based on a caloric deficit. Different paths to the same goal. CICO is it, barring some disease or condition. Even then CICO is it, the condition may just modify the whole process in some way which would change the requirements for that person.6 -
I don't think people should take the drugs either but it makes a point that other mechanisms can cause fat loss. if that is true then why are people dismissive that LC or IF can ever have an effect. Some things obviously do make a difference. Some are safe others are not.19
-
What would be the point of logging if it didn't include your calories and macros? I assumed common sense would lead people to include those metrics in their log. And for ppl who plateau at 6 months or whatever though logging calories, they are either not being accurate or they are not accounting for the fact that the less they weigh, the fewer calories they need, so if they haven't been adjusting their intake accordingly they will notice a decline in weight loss and will eventually see it stop altogether.
I don't believe I have ever seen anyone claim that keto increases metabolism. All I have ever seen is that it curbs appetite and causes the body to burn fat and protein for fuel instead of carbs. It may increase metabolism with increased physical activity, but more than that it changes how the metabolism functions.
Everything short of liposuction is based on a caloric deficit. Different paths to the same goal. CICO is it, barring some disease or condition.
Baring some disease? CICO is immutable or it isn't.10
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
- 427 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