Do you still think it's all about calories in vs calories out and fat people are not disciplined enough ?

[deebate]

I've been doing a lot of online research over the years around diet/ exercise and what's the answer. How can I keep fit and be healthy.

I've tried various things and I am generally a believer in calories in vs calories out. Which seems to be the favoured method on here.

If anyone complains they're struggling with losing weight, it must be because they're not counting everything etc.

In any case, I've now stumbled across a number of podcasts of different doctors and nutritionists in the field talking about gut microbes and sugar spikes etc and how actually it's really not just about calories at all.

What's the consensus on here about all this ?

I dont believe I mentioned will power.

The OP asked about CICO and the bottom line is, this is what gains or loses weight. How difficult it is to adhere to an amount and th ereasons why we dont, doesnt negate that CICO is the reason people lose or gain weight.

@hippospot @deebate

Could you explain the phrase 'blood fat control' to me please ?

I understand a bit about blood sugar (and think I'm quite sensitive in this respect) but I've never heard of blood fat control before.

CICO has never worked for me. Only low carb/keto works for me. I didn’t feel healthy after being in keto for two years, so went back to eating normal levels of good carbs. It doesn’t matter how little I eat, any amount of carbs start to incrementally increase my weight and despite eating small portions of healthy food, it is next to impossible to shift the weight I put on.

On keto I was a stable size 8. On a normal, good diet with no breakfast to help fast, small portions and exercise I am 10/12 and incrementally increasing and experiencing hunger, which is absent during keto.
As others have said, CICO is too simplistic. Metabolisms differ.

My sympathies, Dottie - and I'll presume to apologise on behalf of all the thin-lipped didacts sneering that meds just make you more or less hungry. That allows them to persist in their supercilious belief that it's only about willpower (which they've got and we haven't?!)

Why the fuck do these people think bodybuilders take meds to bulk them up? They don't need a drug to make them eat more, they'll eat the exact quantities of nutrients prescribed by their coach, irrespective of hunger or cravings.

Anabolic steroids, the most obvious example (of hundreds), travel through the blood stream to the muscle tissue. Once delivered to the muscle cell, the steroid can interact with the cell's DNA and stimulate the protein synthesis process that promotes cell growth.

There's progress in research to develop a class of drugs to mimic the effects of exercise. They flip switches in human cells that would normally be activated by exercise. These switches help maintain and regenerate muscle mass. I'm extremely sorry they'll be too late for me!

Excess thyroid hormone, like well as many other proteins, hormones and drugs, raises the basal metabolic rate which changes your CICO equation. These substances aren't making you more hungry - quite the opposite in most cases - but they make you generate more heat, raise your heart rate and speed up other biological processes, so the calories you consume go into simply being alive with a hyped-up system.

The irritating PPs who dismissed "rare diseases" as irrelevant have purposely missed the point - which is that human biology varies wildly. Diseases which cause fatal accumulations and losses of flesh, regardless of CICO, are the outliers proving we are all within a metabolic spectrum. They prove that some people really do get fat while eating almost nothing, and others can't gain weight no matter how much they eat.

It's not a case of all the same bar a few (so let's ignore them). Rather, human bodies exist at many points above and below the line of "normal" - as with any feature of life. Women's bodies, to be sure, are more likely to move across that line at various times because of our fluctuating hormonal profiles.

If your metabolism is currently "normal" and predictable, be glad of it but don't tell others they can't be different from you.

@5128gap

Il guessing though that with a whole food vegan diet you get a lot more food for your 1700 cals a day than if you were to eat eg a cheeseburger and chips? So aside from the question as to whether all calories are equal or not, you are still getting a bigger plate of food, hence easier to stick to your allowance . Interesting to hear how this approach works for you - thanks .

This is an example of what I mean in one my posts earlier.

You do realise that by eating a particular way, which restricts your calories, even if you yourself are not actively counting them, means that you are simply eating fewer calories, therefore losing weight

Its the whole premise of any weight loss plan, whether it be WW, SW, fasting, whatever it be, you are eating less

So yes, CICO works for you, in that the fewer calories you consume, you'll lose weight if in deficit.

Yes I understand the science behind this, but the problem with slimming world/weight watchers is that they demonise natural foods, yet push crap like pasta mugshots. I honestly think a packet of super noodles is a better option.

A banana mashed into porridge or blended into homemade smoothie is always going to be way healthier than buying the shop-brought premade low fat/low sugar/zero calorie crap. Avocados do not make you fat.

Equally having a big blow out takeaway meal occasionally is not going to make you put on weight. Bloated with water retention- yes. Overweight- no.

I've seen so many woman that are friends/colleagues be brainwashed and have disordered relationships with foods because of the above groups and other fad diets. They end up eating artificial rubbish thinking that low calorie is best.

I didn't ascribe moralvalue to my size. I was simply aware of the health implications. You can be a happy bunny but that's no good when you drop of heart attack before 50 and your leg joints crumble slowly 🤷

I don't ascribe moral value to my own or anyone else's size!

I also think people underestimate the power of habit, and what is normalized to us in childhood. I need to gain some weight - apparently my BMI is in the 17 range now - and my best friend needs to lose. We've been close for over 20 years, since we were children, she's like a sister to me, and I've lived with her. There are lots of reasons and none of them are to do with morality or willpower.

• I'm an anxious and stressy person. If I'm stressed I have zero appetite. None.
• I'm 4in taller than her and require significantly more calories just to exist.
• I like exercise. I like the way it makes me feel. I'm also rather "forced" to exercise by my body because I have hypermobility syndrome and if my core strength is poor I have bad back pain. She doesn't. She is not, in any sense of the word, lazy. She has a very responsible and high stress job and probably contributes more to the world than I do.
• We were brought up with totally different diets. My mum was very into healthy eating and ensured we were exposed to a wide range of fruits and vegetables early. Consequently, I actively like healthy food. I would rather have porridge or fruit and unsweetened peanut butter than croissants for breakfast. She was brought up on beige processed food and really struggles to expand her tastes. She knows she has a bad diet, but its hard to change your tastebuds. Her idea of a treat is highly processed and extremely sweet and does not appeal to me at all - I'm not resisting it, I don't want it.
• When we have lunch together (often) I usually eat more than her. Certainly more in volume and usually more in calories too. But I don't like a heavy evening meal, I feel like it disturbs my sleep.

So I certainly don't think overweight people are lazy, but I also don't believe its possible to eat in a calorie deficit (for YOUR body, which is influenced by a lot of factors) and not lose weight. That contravenes the laws of physics. Its like saying one time I dropped a brick and it didn't fall. If you put an overweight person in a clinical setting, assessed their BMR, and fed them a diet of less than that for a significant period of time, they would lose weight. But the real world doesn't work like that.

I agree about not liking certain foods is an advantage. I am not at all attracted by chocolate or desserts. It’s not that I am resisting them -I am just not attracted or interested in them. I would rather have a savoury than a sweet dish.
I do think a lot of people are affected by the awful syndrome of parents insisting that children ‘clear their plates’. Why? Better to ‘waste food’ or better still, serve smaller portions than engrain a bad habit.
I remember my small son once left one chip on his plate and my mother said to him -‘surely you can manage one more’
I was so annoyed! Delighted the kid knew when he wasn’t hungry any more.

Not for me though. I do get cravings when I eat a carb-heavy diet but they don't fill me up, or at least only for a short period of time. Then I feel famished again.

If I eat protein with a small amount of carbs then I feel fuller for longer so I don't want to snack. The other thing is that I don't get a sugar crash so I feel more energetic so probably exercise more. It was a revelation for me why I used to feel famished periodically then stuff myself and then feel famished and a bit faint before repeating the cycle - I thought previously it was my body chemistry rather than my diet. Also I discovered eating a more balanced diet with fewer carbs and more protein and no longer having those energy slumps.

I'm definitely a CICO believer. I also think that if I exercise and build up more lean muscle I use more energy in a resting state.

There have been a lot of TV programmes about CICO and it's almost always true that those people who are overweight underestimate the amount they eat and don't count late night snacks and takeaways. I'm astonished how many calories takeaway pizza or most curries use up. If you have those a couple of times a week then you're almost bound to put on weight.

There have been a lot of TV programmes about CICO and it's almost always true that those people who are overweight underestimate the amount they eat and don't count late night snacks and takeaways. I'm astonished how many calories takeaway pizza or most curries use up. If you have those a couple of times a week then you're almost bound to put on weight.

They choose people who will make good television! There would be no point in showing an episode of 'Secret Eaters' or other 'let's sneer at the fatties' programme if the subjects were eating exactly what they said they were eating and consuming a balanced, healthy diet.

And who can afford multiple takeaways in a week, these days?

@Spywoman Oh my God, that's just reminded me my (other) housemate used to be obsessed with that stupid Christian Jesson programme where an overweight and an underweight person get their diets scrutinised and the same 'amazing revelation' every week that the overweight person eats more than they think and the underweight person eats less.

Absolute shocker.

Christian Jesson, what a knob.

Supersize versus Superskinny. I remember one unbelievable episode where the 'Superskinny' person was essentially an alcoholic, drinking multiple cans of lager during the day. The poor 'Supersize' woman had to replicate his calorie intake by drinking pints and pints of orange juice (but eating hardly anything).

@2boyzNosleep

I think the problem you have with Slimming World is that many consultants are sharing their own interpretation of it. If you were to read the actual eating information published by SW it is based wholly on natural foods. Sure you have the range in Iceland but there is no need to eat those meals - indeed, they all have the recipe on the back to make them yourself .

The point with the syns and healthy extras is that they are guiding you away from higher calorie food . Eg more calories in avocado pear than normal pear . But if you want to eat one - you absolutely can - use your treat allowance (syns) and have avocado instead of chocolate (or mugshots!) - much better for you anyway .

And yes you can have an occasional blow out meal if you want - it's written into their literature (flexi syns)

And no I don't work for SW. I've followed it in the past and I certainly agree there is a big difference in the consultants . I just get cross that there is a lot of misinformation shared about it .

We were discussing this over Easter. I do think it is calories in calories out, HOWEVER I think the calories out is way more complicated than just height, weight and activity. If it was that simple I would be hugely fat, and other people I know would be skinny. People’s bodies must burn calories differently, even if they just sit on their arse all day and eat the exact same food as each other.

No one is denying that. You have to find your own calorie needs.

@SevenSeasOfRhye
Yeah that's the one. I hate that guy a possibly-unreasonable amount. It bothers me that he is an actual doctor with a real-life medical license 😆

@ShinyAppleDreamingOfTheSea

I admit that I've never used slimming world and have based my opinion on hearing other people's experience.

However, these groups aren't really set up on the best interests of the people that use them.

For example, calling food syns, that sounds like sin. Of course over time subconsciously you will look at food as 'bad'.The weekly weigh-ins, under the pretence of group support, however causes self-consciousness and shame if they did not loose weight that week. At that point they put pressure on themselves which usually backfires, they give up. When in fact, after the initial quick weightloss, it slows down or remains static.

It's ridiculous if the advice given out depends on the consultants interpretation- otherwise you gey advice like a previous poster saying that the only yogurt you can eat is low-fat. There's so much research and evidence now that proves that eating whole fat foods actually keeps you full for longer and is better for you.

I'm not just against slimming world, this is also for all fad diets, including all the protein bars/shakes aimed at the fitness industry. All these products and diet advice/books/groups are a huge money making business.

We all know that we need to eat food in its natural state. However, the food we choose or can afford to eat is a small part of the problem.

The bigger problem is outside our control: genetics, age, life stressors, socioeconomic factors, the quality of food that you can afford & is available to you & the time you actually have to make your own food.

There's a reason why you have more fast food, junk food, sweet shops in deprives areas. It's not a surprise that people in poverty have crap diets, they simply cannot afford healthy food. As a treat its going to be mcdonalds, not miller&carter.

But CICO for each individual is different, so you need to know what is optimum CICO for you.

I saw a similar, if not the same study with twins. The difference was due to one twin being a constant fidget.

Age, someone said you have to limit food intake post meno, but appetite same?

Age, at 18-25 I wasn’t v active and had a 19 inch waist. I could lose half a stone in a week. Now I seem genetically programmed to stack it on.

Smoking. A reason why we were slimmer in past.

Money, the rich are often thin.

I do believe that a calorific deficit is pretty much the only way to loose weight, scientificaaly it makes sense, and personally; it works. And yes, technically if you ate all the allowed calories as chocolate, weight would still be lost as long as there was a deficit, there would just be other negative affects associated with living off of chocolate and you'd be very hungry.
I found that the calorie contents of some foods, such as bread or mayonnaise was astonishing and made me realuse how I was eating so little yet still not loosing weight. As soon as I started a deficit, the weight came off.

The speed it comes off will very though; how much muscle mass there is, how heavily over weight, metabolic disorders etc etc

This is just a way of defending CICO while saying it's useless! We admit that different people have different metabolic rates, different hormonal stuff going on, are variously affected by drugs, diseases and disorders, have different needs and different habits.

So ... there is a CICO equation for you at this particular time in your life but it will not be the same as everyone else's, and it may change next week or next year.

On top of that, we agree calories out is more complicated than just height, weight and activity. So some people's CICO requirement isn't enough to provide adequate nutrition, which is the actual point of food.

Unless you run your life as a continuous scientific experiment, logging all parameters at all times, the idea that there's an optimal CICO equation for you is - particularly if you're female - as useful as a 1924 bus timetable.

It is about calories, because calories are just a common descriptor for a unit of energy. Everyone has a basic metabolic rate, which is the energy or calories we need each day before we do any moving around. This increases depending on how much moving around and exercise we do. Any calories or energy we take in which is more than we use means weight gain, any less means weight loss. There is an average basic calorie rate for females and males, but it does vary from person and sometimes quite a lot depending on our genetics. Also, it depends on things like if you fidget a lot! Fidgets use more calories on a sedentary day than a non fidget would on a sedentary day.

All these fad and popular diets which don’t mention calories still work on the same principle, if followed strictly. Because it’s not “fashionable” to know the calories in each food, most people gain weight through eating too much high calorie food, they may not have huge portions but it’s all high calorie per gram stuff. For example, just 1oz/28grams of cheese, a small cube, is 120 calories! If you want to lose weight without paying to a Diet Club, then finding out metabolic rates and the calorific values of different foods and weighing portions is the best way. Many people don’t want to bother with all that because is IS a faff.

Losing weight isn’t easy and does take self discipline, and feeling hungry often causes people to fail. If you know which foods are low calorie and healthy, you can fill up on those such as loads of vegetables with a meal. Educating yourself on these basic principles and not fooling yourself is the best way.