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 have found eating a lot of protein to be the most effective way to avoid snacking throughout the day and stay thin.

Don’t count calories, count grams of protein!

Just look at trends of obesity vs country, it’s unfortunately a lot about unrestricted easy access to ridiculously calorific dense food. You’ll be surprised how little basal calories people really need. Not everyone is a 6 ft man. So I’d still agree it’s about calories in / out, but people have lost all sense of what that should be like.
Claiming that there is some genetic impossibility about losing weight is absolute bollocks. You starve any human, they’ll lose weight.

Calories in vs calories burned is the only way to lose weight. It's basic science. Of course it's not all about weight though, it's about nutrition too. So yes you can lose weight if you only eat chocolate, as long as you burn more calories than what is contained in the chocolate. But you'd be very unhealthy from a nutrition perspective.

I’m so glad you said this. Protein makes me hungry too. But if you say this on here, you’re likely to be viewed as having two heads or something.

My dietician told me that was all nonsense and I trust him! I've done a lot of reading around it too.

It’s nothing to do with sugar spikes. Sugar spikes are bad, yes, but if it was it would mean that type one diabetics with high bloods were never hungry, not the case.

It is about calories. Every one who is overweight I know eats too much. Even the people who cool from scratch vegetarians. The reason is portion size.

Someone mentioned you could lose weight by eating only chocolate, you can if the size of the portion of chocolate was smaller than the amount of calories being used per day.

I lost 2 stone last year by reducing portion size...I've ate exactly the same type of food just less of it AND I have learnt to stop eating when I am full. I have reduced the amount I cook, have more veg than carbs.

I actually take less exercise as I went part time October 22 and retired fully Dec 23 from being a gardener working 70+ hours a week in the summer and 40+ in the winter.

I just try to limit calories, so for example if I go to spoons for a meal, I will still drink cider but will pick rice rather than chips. Or if I fancy comfort food sausage and mash rather than sausage and chips.

I think the calories in/ calories out is broadly scientifically true (because unless you can prove that contrary to accepted laws of physics, energy can be created or destroyed, that's kind of undeniable) BUT I agree with pp about how different people will absorb or burn more calories more easily than others.

It's also undeniable that we live in a very obesogenic environment compared with even 30 years ago. It is harder to be slim in an environment that encourages you to eat a lot and be sedentary than one where cheap, high fat and sugar foods aren't readily available and you have to walk a lot.

There are also just a tonne of other factors, like wealth, education, peer group norms, time to cook and exercise, mental health, propensity to addiction, how much of a dopamine hit you get from food etc.

I think it's important to address obesity as a public health challenge rather than blame fat people for imagined personal failings.

Yes, in an individual calories in Vs out will determine if they maintain, gain or lose weight.

However I believe different people of the same height can eat the same amounts of calories and for one person this will cause weight loss, one to maintain and one to gain. Also the makeup of those calories in terms of protein, carbs etc seems really important.

I definitely have insulin resistance and on the very rare occasion I have bread, cakes or a pastry it's like I've been knocked on the head about an hour afterwards, I can barely keep my eyes open.
Eating different foods really impacts my energy levels (and therefore I assume, how many calories I burn). I am obese but despite appearances do not eat fast food all day long.

Today I had a 200 calorie "fast 800" smoothie for breakfast, a tub of Dahl with sweet potatoes (250 cal) and about 10 strawberries for lunch, and some lettuce, ham and 2 lindor chocolates as a home time snack. My dinner is chicken soup and a handful of mixed nuts.
Overall I am maintaining my weight currently, not losing.

I lost 4.5 stone lat year. I counted calories and walked that was it.

That’s pretty much my diet tbh. I used to be a size 14+. After losing weight I now live on little food, but lots of chocolate, and am a Size 8 because I stick to a Calorie target.
Is it healthy? Absolutely not, but I’m thin.

For me it is CICO, but if I eat too many carbs and not enough protein I am starving and eat too many calories. I also need to chew to feel satiated, blended soup on its own or a smoothie doesn’t touch the sides, even if it is really nutritious.

Broadly I think for the average person, in Vs out is probably a good rule of thumb...

Buuuuuttttttt....

I also think there's a lot of people that don't really keep track of what goes in.
I used to work with a woman, not massively huge but definitely over weight. She'd moan she was fat, moan she couldn't shift it etc.
Shed say,
"I've barely eaten anything all day..."
But anyone watching would see she was constantly grazing on nibbly bits. Nuts, crisps, fruit, crumpets etc.
"Little and often" she'd dismiss it as as, but I just don't think it computed in her head that if she has 50 small 50 calorie snacks a day, that's still 2500 calories.. (not that she had 50, thats a bit extreme)

Plus, drinks, she drank tea every 30 minutes with full fat milk and 2 sugars.. but that didn't count either somehow.

So yeah.

No health issues or medication issues etc I think massively broadly in Vs out is a good guide.

I try to have about 1500 calories a day and burn as.many as I can with walks and exercise etc. I'm not a skinny young thing, but size 14/16 will do.
I'm 45, I've been that since 21..

For me CICO is so simplistic as to be useless. If I restrict my calories too much I become very tired and I start falling asleep at 8pm. If I cut out carbs I feel extremely ill, once I tried low carbing and ended up having to call in sick to work.

Yes if you locked me in a cage on restricted calories I would undoubtedly lose weight, but the aim is to lose weight whilst also being able to go to work, look after the house and be vaguely healthy, and also to maintain the new weight long term once you are living in an environment t with hugh calories food all around.

For me the number one reason for being overweight is stress. When I'm highly stressed I'm overweight.

How does that disprove CICO though?

That is a fact as to how people gain or lose weight

How it affects you is a different matter, it doesnt mean that its not how the body loses or gains weight

And that counts for all the other posts on this thread trying to 'disprove' it by saying that 'two people can eat the same amount but they absorb calories differently'

YES! thats the whole point, what you need and what someone else needs is completely different, even if you're the same height, sex, age etc etc.

But it doesnt take away that if I eat too much compared to what my body actually needs, I will gain weight. I dont need to compare to others, I need to compare with what I need.

Losing weight seems to be mostly about CICO. Bodybuilders have to cut their intake to lose weight. No amount of exercise alone will reduce.

However, the mechanisms behind GAINING weight need more research. Yes, CICO can work, but what we eat and how our bodies process it is clearly much more important than originally thought.

Ozempic and similar seem to be proving that being overweight messes with our hunger cues, so no, it's not just about fatties being undisciplined.

It’s actually less about overeating and more about NEAT- that is, non exercise calorie burn.

think about it. Animals in the wild aren’t obese, because they have to work for their food. Plant eaters roam miles every day eating enough grass and leaves to maintain themselves. Hunters have to find and kill food.

there is evidence that “naturally thin” people simply move more. They’re the people who can’t sit still, who are up and down getting stuff, the people who can’t sit without toes tapping or leg wiggling. It’s less about food and more about constant movement.

i said on another thread now I am older it’s not what I eat so much, but how much I move. If I walk miles every day and eat normally, I lose weight. If I sit at my desk 10 hours a day, do one hours exercise, and eat normally, I gain. Losing weight was easier when I was young because I was more active. No car, no internet shopping, no sitting at work having meetings via zoom and information dropped to my desk. I’d be getting up, walking to other buildings for meetings, or to the library for a paper. It’s not menopause, it’s lifestyle changes.

i have also discovered that exercise drives my appetite. I exercise, I eat. If I quit the gym any focus on walking 10-20k steps instead, I burn more calories, I have much better control of my eating and don’t get ravenously hungry. So I lose weight.

It’s absolutely about eating fewer calories than you need each day if you want to lose weight. Put bluntly, if I was put into a coma weighing 20 stone and had a limited amount of nutrients (calories) fed me each day whilst in my coma, I would, after a period of time, wake up thin. It’s the willpower to eat less every day when I’m not in a coma that prevents me.

I tried Wegovy for three weeks lost nothing at all. Yet I was ravenous for months afterwards!

The reason it didn’t help is I think because I was never a snacker - I eat twice a day but my portions were too big. I also liked to have a drink on a weekend. It did dull my excitement for food admittedly but for me that wasn’t going to work long term!

Nah, no way it's as simple as CICO. Calories are a measure of how much energy a food releases in a controlled environment like a lab. In a body, with Co-processes not all calories/nutrition is equal. And not all bodies are equal.

Genetically, you will have a pile of people who burn calories faster and have less food noise. These people will find it much easier to be slim. Almost effortless.

Environmentally the microbiodome will be different depending on environment, food choices and lifestyle. Add in shame, poverty, disordered eating etc and You can see why people get heavier.

If you are fat, that is a biologically normal response to the environment we live in!

I am obese (BMI of 34 at the mo). I am also on meds that are well known to cause weight gain. I am not eating more... it just happened, and it is fucking distressing. I used to be a total gym bunny and was in good shape.
I could just stop taking them, but they are anti-psychotics and keep me well enough to stop me losing my mind and ending up in hospital.
So, fat and mentally well, or thin and very mentally unwell.

Whilst there's lots of complexity, yes ultimately if you eat less calories than you expend each day you will loose weight. The reason low carb diets work is they are lower in calories.

There are a few factors of course, including how quickly food is broken down etc but overall eat less to be less fat. I'm overweight alas. I eat too much

I also wonder how many people who are overweight have adhd. Some people need the dopamine fix from food. They don't realise why they overeat.

Does the UK, Australia and America have more people with ADHD than EU countries then?

Or emotional problems causing them to overeat? Are more people subject to trauma in the UK/America than in EU countries?