It is NOT as simple as Calories In Calories Out (CICO)

Ann262 wrote: »

When people say it is as simple as CICO, they are referring to the math...which is simple. Simple doesn't make it necessarily easy and I've rarely heard anyone say it's easy...but the basic premise of weight management is simple math.

It would be simple math if one really knew how many calories they are burning. Garmin and fitbit help but it still varies from person to person. While one can meticulously weigh and measure to get fairly accurate on calories in...often we are still dependent on the accuracy of labels, it is impossible to know how much we really burn. I am a 61 year old 5'4" tall woman who sits at a desk all day. I doubt my daily burn doing that is exactly the same as every other 61 year old 5'4" woman sitting at a desk all day. In fact, we KNOW that people with more muscle mass burn more calories at rest than those with less. We know that people who don't eat enough, start burning fewer calories while at rest. While the mathematical equation might be simple, getting the accurate numbers to plug into the equation isn't so easy. Perhaps, you have figured out the right numbers for you. I am glad for you for that.

While yes, we need a calorie deficit to lose weight, how to do that is complicated. Not all calories are created equal either. If my 1400 calorie per day budget is made up of fruits, vegetable and lean protein, I will be able to eat 3 meals, 2 snacks and go to bed without hunger pangs. If my 1400 calories are made up of things like bagels, chips and soda pop, I am probably going to out of calorie budget by mid afternoon and will go to bed hungry, unless is eat more which is what I will probably do. Most people have days are neither of those extremes, of course.

Yes, CICO is important but how you use your calorie budget matters.

Then there is the psychology of dealing with emotions around food. The struggle is real. If you have never had to cope with it, you have no idea.

Food is not our enemy. Shaming people because they haven't yet figured out their math is not supportive or helpful.

Perhaps your experience differs, but in my experience here, threads where it's relevant don't go on very long without someone mentioning that nutrition is important for health, that satiation is a big deal but individual (plus suggestions of things to try), mentioning the role of things like sleep/stress/emotions/boredom/habit (and offering ideas to deal with them), and describing how to run a 4-6 week experiment to figure out one's reasonably-correct calorie needs level after starting with MFP's (or another calculator's) estimate as a starting point. I've typed those kinds of things myself, too many times to count. (Telling people that fitness trackers only give *estimates*, not "truth", is one of my personal missions.)

In any thread, there are going to be both simplistic and nuanced answers. In some threads, one or the other may take over. But if someone reads here for a while, without getting offended when some people put things in ways they don't find diplomatic, I think one can get a decent idea of how to go about the process in a way that will work for the overwhelming majority of people. It still won't be easy, necessarily, psychologically or for practical reasons (cost, time constraints, whatever). And yes, there will be a few people who are truly unusual, who may need a medical consult or other professional help.

(I'd point out that MFP's calorie estimate for me is wildly incorrect, that I have various conditions other say make weight loss impossible (hypothyroid, old, menopausal, etc.). I admit that emotional eating is not one of my personal big challenges, but I do have empathy for others, and recognize that as a key challenge for many people.)

CICO, the calorie balance equation, is a fact, and it is a key foundation piece. It's not the whole edifice, by far. It's true for everyone, but of course that's not all there is to it. The other pieces get discussed here day in and day out.

Calorie counting (as distinct from CICO) is a weight loss method, one favored here because it's a calorie counting site, after all. But calorie counting is not the only method or universally the best method for everyone. For a few people, it really can't work at all, as a practical matter. (Example: Those with cycling thyroid conditions that unpredictably take them from hypo to hyper and back again). Those people need help that us experienced amateurs can't offer. A certain amount of back and forth may need to happen before folks understand that that's what the problem is. Basic problems are common, so discussion starts there. It needn't stop there, if the conversation keeps going.

It's common for a thread to start with the basics of calorie balance and calorie counting, but if the OP is patient and forthcoming about what they're struggling with, there are folks here who'll delve into potentially relevant but more narrowly applicable things like adaptive thermogenesis, the effect of various metabolic conditions, the potential results of previous rounds of yo-yo dieting on calorie needs and what some options are, the effects of appetite hormones and what to do about them, arcane details of exercise calorie estimating, resources and experiential tips for the emotional/psychological challenges, and much, much more.

Yes, this whole picture is not easy. The basic mathematical foundation is pretty simple, and that's where advice starts, often. It's not necessarily where the advice ends, IME.

The best way for people to get decent advice, is for people who think that's important to give what they consider decent advice. (We won't all agree on what that is.) I sometimes learn from people who criticize my or others' advice, but I'm not sure that critique is really is the best way to improve the average advice quality on the site.

P.S. Yes, the person who posted a reply on a particular thread that just said "CICO" was not especially helpful. There was a lot of other stuff on that thread, some of it much more nuanced.