5 ms·

The biggest challenges I've observed with people trying to lose weight with CICO (calories in, calories out) it getting a reliable estimate of how much your eat

The biggest challenges I've observed with people trying to lose weight with CICO (calories in, calories out) it getting a reliable estimate of how much your eating and how many calories your body is truly burning. Being off by 100 calories translates into roughly 12 pounds per year. I know you can use a food scale to get a more accurate estimate of calories in but I'm still at a loss to determine an accurate estimate of calories out.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
arnjerobben 8y ago
Simple, if you gain 12 pounds in a year you're burning 100 calories less than you need to.
Retric 8y ago
You don't need extreme precision with counting calories. 500-1000 calories is a lot of food each day as long as your rounding up you can get good enough. The trick IMO is to simply eat the same thing every day. That way you can remove things as needed to maintain weight loss. But, also adjust based on what you actually eat not just your goals.
- pbhjpbhj 8y ago
  >simply eat the same thing every day // And die from boredom removing the problem of obesity completely ...
  - Ntrails 8y ago
    Losing weight is not without cost. Be it hunger, time/effort, boredom, or unmet cravings. Everyone has the right to choose which kind of cost they are willing to endure in order to lose weight - this includes refusing to pay any cost at all (and not losing weight). Nothing comes for free.
  - magic_beans 8y ago
    You don't have to eat the same thing every day, but you DO have to cook food yourself. You cannot trust the cooking practices of restaurants.
EpicEng 8y ago
It's really not that complicated. If after some amount of time you're not losing/gaining what you expect per your numbers you tweak said numbers a bit. That's all. You don't need to be accurate to the calorie, or even to ~100. If you're on a deficit most days you will absolutely lose weight. Calorie counting works and eating fewer calories than you burn is the only way to lose weight. Far too many people start exercising a bit, continue to eat in the manner they've become accustomed to, and wonder why they don't lose weight. It's not rocket science; you just need to eat less and (probably) eat better.
- dalore 8y ago
  It's not so simple. What you eat and your hormones determine the fat storage on your body. 1 calorie of carbs is different to 1 calorie of fat and 1 calorie of protein. Just because they give the same amount of energy, your body uses them in different ways and required different hormones (like insulin) to regulate the consumption of them. It's like saying electric energy is the same as mechanical energy, they produce energy but we consume them in different ways. Counting calories doesn't really work. What's working is restricting insulin in your system which allows your body to burn fat. When you have insulin it's impossible to burn fat. Suggest having a ready of some of Gary Taubes and something like https://www.dietdoctor.com/first-law-thermodynamics-utterly-irrelevant https://www.dietdoctor.com/first-law-thermodynamics-utterly-...
  - EpicEng 8y ago
    >It's not so simple. What you eat and your hormones determine the fat storage on your body. It is, for the most part, but you're right; insulin spikes are a problem and you should not be gorging yourself on simple carbohydrates when on a diet. Of course, protein and fats can also contribute (ask any keto fan), so you have to eat in moderation and be mindful of your macros. >Counting calories doesn't really work Utter and complete nonsense. I have been actively monitoring and modifying my weight via calorie counting for more than two decades. I started boxing at 10, playing football and wrestling at 13, and to this day I still count calories and strength train at an intermediate competitive level ('competitive' in terms of what I lift in the big three at my weight, not to imply that I actually compete.) I have helped many other people lose weight via calorie counting. It works, and to claim otherwise is simply ignorant. Of course quality of food is the next subject you broach with anyone trying to lose weight. No one should expect to lose weight and be healthy by eating 1200 calories of cake and another 500 in potato chips each day. When you eat good food (increase your fat and protein as a % of your macros, stay away from processed sugars/carbs, increase your intake of vegetables, etc.) and limit calorie intake you lose weight. Speaking to most people in terms of insulin is a waste of time. They have no simple way to measure that, but if they eat under maintenance and eat generally good food they _will_ lose fat, and that's the goal.
refurb 8y ago
I’ve had the same issue and how I approached it was to watch the scale. If I wasn’t losing weight, knock another 100 calories off my diet each day. Eventually you’ll find the sweet spot. The other challenge is estimating how many calories you burn each day. There can be a large variation in resting metabolic rate let alone how many calories you burn with exercise.
nradov 8y ago
A good quality fitness tracker with a built-in heart rate monitor like a Garmin Forerunner will give you a reasonably accurate estimate of calories out. Your can also get an occasional DXA scan (low dosage x-ray) to measure body composition; the report will include an estimate of your baseline resting calorie consumption per day. Remember that as you lose weight your daily calorie consumption will also drop because you have less fat to carry around and keep alive.
- Pimpus 8y ago
  > A good quality fitness tracker with a built-in heart rate monitor like a Garmin Forerunner will give you a reasonably accurate estimate of calories out. These aren't accurate at all. How would they be? All they have to work with is height, weight, and BPM. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-fitness-tracker-accuracy/how-good-are-activity-trackers-at-counting-calories-burned-idUSKBN18L2OZ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-fitness-tracker-ac...
  - nradov 8y ago
    That's why I specified a good quality fitness tracker like a Garmin Forerunner. If you use something cheap like a Fitbit then of course it won't be accurate.
    - brlewis 8y ago
      Got a cite for Garmin having more accurate HR than Fitbit? All I could find was someone on Garmin forums opining that cheap Fitbit did better - https://forums.garmin.com/forum/on-the-trail/wrist-worn/fenix-5-5s/154233-hr-accuracy https://forums.garmin.com/forum/on-the-trail/wrist-worn/feni... Disclosure: I work for Fitbit, but don't speak for Fitbit. I concede that Garmin integrates with chest straps that are more accurate, but who's going to wear one of those for around-the-clock calorie counting?
    - Pimpus 8y ago
      I still don't see how it can be accurate for tracking calories.
koliber 8y ago
I've done calorie counting a while back. It does not have to be very accurate. Getting more accurate is easier and more efficient after you do it for a while. I realized that what I eat is fairly stable. There may be 20 different things I eat regularly. Eventually, I started memorizing the most often used ones. I noticed that there is a pattern to which types of foods have what amounts of calories. For example, fresh fruit and many non-starchy veggies tend to be at around 50kcal/100gr. Starchy veggies got for about 100kcal/100gr. Meats are at around 250kcal/100gr. And so on. Using this, I was able to get estimates for things I don't eat often without needing to Google everything. I did look up things I ate a few times in order to test my estimates. It is not super-accurate. However, writing it down is more important that writing it down accurately to the last calories. Many parts of this process were not accurate. I weighed things roughly using an analog scale. I often estimated portion size by eye, as I got a sense of how much 200grams of meat is. I counted the calories using estimates a lot of time. It worked nonetheless. After 6 months, my weight loss vs. estimated weight loss from calories spreadsheet was within 1kg! I was blown away by how close this was. It makes sense since things like your base metabolic rate and actual calories expenditure also varies, so super-accurate record keeping of food-in was not necessary. You're right that being off by 100 calories systematically will force a bias. The trick is to be off in one direction one day, and in the other the other day. This way, the error mostly cancels out.
meowzero 8y ago
I think people who try to lose weight be serious about CICO. They do need to get a food scale and log everything they eat. It at least opens their eyes on how much they are eating and how quickly little snacks and calories can add up.
adrianmonk 8y ago
Calories out can't be directly measured, BUT you can compute it pretty accurately anyway. Measure your weight. Track your calorie consumption for N days, then measure your weight again. Then use the 3500 calories per pound conversion to figure out what calories out must have been to cause that. For example, if over 30 days you ate 2000 calories per day and lost 3 pounds, then you must have burned 3500 * 3 excess calories total. That averages out to 350 calorie deficit per day, so your calories out must have been 2350. Or if you ate 2000 calories per day for 30 days and your weight remained the same, then your calories out was 2000 as well. I've been calorie counting for a long time (initially to lose weight, now just habit), and I do this sort of calculation every month or two in order to maintain my weight within a ~5 pound range.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

arnjerobben 8y ago

Simple, if you gain 12 pounds in a year you're burning 100 calories less than you need to.

Retric 8y ago

You don't need extreme precision with counting calories. 500-1000 calories is a lot of food each day as long as your rounding up you can get good enough. The trick IMO is to simply eat the same thing every day. That way you can remove things as needed to maintain weight loss. But, also adjust based on what you actually eat not just your goals.

pbhjpbhj 8y ago
>simply eat the same thing every day // And die from boredom removing the problem of obesity completely ...
- Ntrails 8y ago
  Losing weight is not without cost. Be it hunger, time/effort, boredom, or unmet cravings. Everyone has the right to choose which kind of cost they are willing to endure in order to lose weight - this includes refusing to pay any cost at all (and not losing weight). Nothing comes for free.
- magic_beans 8y ago
  You don't have to eat the same thing every day, but you DO have to cook food yourself. You cannot trust the cooking practices of restaurants.

EpicEng 8y ago

It's really not that complicated. If after some amount of time you're not losing/gaining what you expect per your numbers you tweak said numbers a bit. That's all. You don't need to be accurate to the calorie, or even to ~100. If you're on a deficit most days you will absolutely lose weight. Calorie counting works and eating fewer calories than you burn is the only way to lose weight. Far too many people start exercising a bit, continue to eat in the manner they've become accustomed to, and wonder why they don't lose weight. It's not rocket science; you just need to eat less and (probably) eat better.

dalore 8y ago
It's not so simple. What you eat and your hormones determine the fat storage on your body. 1 calorie of carbs is different to 1 calorie of fat and 1 calorie of protein. Just because they give the same amount of energy, your body uses them in different ways and required different hormones (like insulin) to regulate the consumption of them. It's like saying electric energy is the same as mechanical energy, they produce energy but we consume them in different ways. Counting calories doesn't really work. What's working is restricting insulin in your system which allows your body to burn fat. When you have insulin it's impossible to burn fat. Suggest having a ready of some of Gary Taubes and something like https://www.dietdoctor.com/first-law-thermodynamics-utterly-irrelevant https://www.dietdoctor.com/first-law-thermodynamics-utterly-...
- EpicEng 8y ago
  >It's not so simple. What you eat and your hormones determine the fat storage on your body. It is, for the most part, but you're right; insulin spikes are a problem and you should not be gorging yourself on simple carbohydrates when on a diet. Of course, protein and fats can also contribute (ask any keto fan), so you have to eat in moderation and be mindful of your macros. >Counting calories doesn't really work Utter and complete nonsense. I have been actively monitoring and modifying my weight via calorie counting for more than two decades. I started boxing at 10, playing football and wrestling at 13, and to this day I still count calories and strength train at an intermediate competitive level ('competitive' in terms of what I lift in the big three at my weight, not to imply that I actually compete.) I have helped many other people lose weight via calorie counting. It works, and to claim otherwise is simply ignorant. Of course quality of food is the next subject you broach with anyone trying to lose weight. No one should expect to lose weight and be healthy by eating 1200 calories of cake and another 500 in potato chips each day. When you eat good food (increase your fat and protein as a % of your macros, stay away from processed sugars/carbs, increase your intake of vegetables, etc.) and limit calorie intake you lose weight. Speaking to most people in terms of insulin is a waste of time. They have no simple way to measure that, but if they eat under maintenance and eat generally good food they _will_ lose fat, and that's the goal.

refurb 8y ago

I’ve had the same issue and how I approached it was to watch the scale. If I wasn’t losing weight, knock another 100 calories off my diet each day. Eventually you’ll find the sweet spot. The other challenge is estimating how many calories you burn each day. There can be a large variation in resting metabolic rate let alone how many calories you burn with exercise.

nradov 8y ago

A good quality fitness tracker with a built-in heart rate monitor like a Garmin Forerunner will give you a reasonably accurate estimate of calories out. Your can also get an occasional DXA scan (low dosage x-ray) to measure body composition; the report will include an estimate of your baseline resting calorie consumption per day. Remember that as you lose weight your daily calorie consumption will also drop because you have less fat to carry around and keep alive.

Pimpus 8y ago
> A good quality fitness tracker with a built-in heart rate monitor like a Garmin Forerunner will give you a reasonably accurate estimate of calories out. These aren't accurate at all. How would they be? All they have to work with is height, weight, and BPM. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-fitness-tracker-accuracy/how-good-are-activity-trackers-at-counting-calories-burned-idUSKBN18L2OZ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-fitness-tracker-ac...
- nradov 8y ago
  That's why I specified a good quality fitness tracker like a Garmin Forerunner. If you use something cheap like a Fitbit then of course it won't be accurate.
  - brlewis 8y ago
    Got a cite for Garmin having more accurate HR than Fitbit? All I could find was someone on Garmin forums opining that cheap Fitbit did better - https://forums.garmin.com/forum/on-the-trail/wrist-worn/fenix-5-5s/154233-hr-accuracy https://forums.garmin.com/forum/on-the-trail/wrist-worn/feni... Disclosure: I work for Fitbit, but don't speak for Fitbit. I concede that Garmin integrates with chest straps that are more accurate, but who's going to wear one of those for around-the-clock calorie counting?
  - Pimpus 8y ago
    I still don't see how it can be accurate for tracking calories.

koliber 8y ago

I've done calorie counting a while back. It does not have to be very accurate. Getting more accurate is easier and more efficient after you do it for a while. I realized that what I eat is fairly stable. There may be 20 different things I eat regularly. Eventually, I started memorizing the most often used ones. I noticed that there is a pattern to which types of foods have what amounts of calories. For example, fresh fruit and many non-starchy veggies tend to be at around 50kcal/100gr. Starchy veggies got for about 100kcal/100gr. Meats are at around 250kcal/100gr. And so on. Using this, I was able to get estimates for things I don't eat often without needing to Google everything. I did look up things I ate a few times in order to test my estimates. It is not super-accurate. However, writing it down is more important that writing it down accurately to the last calories. Many parts of this process were not accurate. I weighed things roughly using an analog scale. I often estimated portion size by eye, as I got a sense of how much 200grams of meat is. I counted the calories using estimates a lot of time. It worked nonetheless. After 6 months, my weight loss vs. estimated weight loss from calories spreadsheet was within 1kg! I was blown away by how close this was. It makes sense since things like your base metabolic rate and actual calories expenditure also varies, so super-accurate record keeping of food-in was not necessary. You're right that being off by 100 calories systematically will force a bias. The trick is to be off in one direction one day, and in the other the other day. This way, the error mostly cancels out.

meowzero 8y ago

I think people who try to lose weight be serious about CICO. They do need to get a food scale and log everything they eat. It at least opens their eyes on how much they are eating and how quickly little snacks and calories can add up.

adrianmonk 8y ago

Calories out can't be directly measured, BUT you can compute it pretty accurately anyway. Measure your weight. Track your calorie consumption for N days, then measure your weight again. Then use the 3500 calories per pound conversion to figure out what calories out must have been to cause that. For example, if over 30 days you ate 2000 calories per day and lost 3 pounds, then you must have burned 3500 * 3 excess calories total. That averages out to 350 calorie deficit per day, so your calories out must have been 2350. Or if you ate 2000 calories per day for 30 days and your weight remained the same, then your calories out was 2000 as well. I've been calorie counting for a long time (initially to lose weight, now just habit), and I do this sort of calculation every month or two in order to maintain my weight within a ~5 pound range.