4 ms·

The other replies to this comment are examples of what I was talking about. Do different foods have difference metabolic properties, including variations in ac

The other replies to this comment are examples of what I was talking about. Do different foods have difference metabolic properties, including variations in accessible calories? Yes. Can we accurately measure calorie intake? Kind of. Even with a food scale, I'm not sure we get to within 10% of the "correct" calorie count because the methods for determining the calorie / lb may have issues. Could people do weird things, like wrap food in cellophane, burnt it before eating, or even just throw it all up? Of course. But so what? We have a real world problem here in that Americans (and others) are suffering a material degradation in quality of life due to health issues related to diet and exercise. There are tons of optimizations possible, but they don't matter to cohort in question. For them, CICO is good enough by far. These optimizations are like trying to teach matrix math to someone who can't add--and doesn't want to learn. Yet, I regularly see these discussions veer into the realm of these optimizations, presumably because the real problems are too hard and/or depressing.

kiba 6y ago
What I am saying that CICO and nutrition labels shouldn't matter because humans aren't supposed to or need to count CICO because our biology should be assisting us to balance it out. The fact it's not working means something's broke. Counting calories absolutely work for weight loss. I haven't done it and reaped the benefit of it, but ultimately it wasn't sustainable for me.
- biren34 6y ago
  Fair. My main point was that people don't want to talk about the main issue, but rather these details. The fact that natural hunger/satiation doesn't seem to work anymore certainly counts as a main issue (and you got some off topic replies). Thinking about "what's broken" though, I have a few hypotheses: 1. We're surrounded by supernormal stimulatants that are hijacking our brain. (While this is possible, most of the worst food was available before the recent spikes in obesity) 2. Economics: calories (in any form) used to be expensive, so only the rich could get fat. The skills required to thrive in a world that doesn't impose calorie restriction at some level are just not widespread. 3. Our internal systems can't function in a world where people get less than 1 hour of vigorous exercise a day (or even a week). It doesn't matter how little you're spending, the body expects you're going need at least, say 1500 calories and for many people that's too many. 4. Something environmental. We're awash in so many new chemicals building up in our environments and bodies, and few have been studied for their long term effects. Maybe there's something in here that's throwing off internal signals or hormones.
- smileypete 6y ago
  >The fact it's not working means something's broke. The brokenness usually comes from a diet high in overly processed food and refined sugar/starch, often coupled with little or no exercise. Here's a paper relevant to the diet aspect: Ultra-Processed Diets Cause Excess Calorie Intake and Weight Gain: An Inpatient Randomized Controlled Trial of Ad Libitum Food Intake: https://www.cell.com/cell-metabolism/pdf/S1550-4131(19)30248-7.pdf https://www.cell.com/cell-metabolism/pdf/S1550-4131(19)30248... I believe a good way to un-break things is gaining an awareness of where the calories are coming from, together with a. lot. of moderate exercise. The above has worked well for me, but it's no quick fix, and wouldn't sell books, tv programmes, or speaking engagements. 'Eat less, move more' is overly simplistic, it's more about how you eat less and how you move more, to help the body's set point to shift back to a healthy level.

kiba 6y ago

What I am saying that CICO and nutrition labels shouldn't matter because humans aren't supposed to or need to count CICO because our biology should be assisting us to balance it out. The fact it's not working means something's broke. Counting calories absolutely work for weight loss. I haven't done it and reaped the benefit of it, but ultimately it wasn't sustainable for me.

biren34 6y ago
Fair. My main point was that people don't want to talk about the main issue, but rather these details. The fact that natural hunger/satiation doesn't seem to work anymore certainly counts as a main issue (and you got some off topic replies). Thinking about "what's broken" though, I have a few hypotheses: 1. We're surrounded by supernormal stimulatants that are hijacking our brain. (While this is possible, most of the worst food was available before the recent spikes in obesity) 2. Economics: calories (in any form) used to be expensive, so only the rich could get fat. The skills required to thrive in a world that doesn't impose calorie restriction at some level are just not widespread. 3. Our internal systems can't function in a world where people get less than 1 hour of vigorous exercise a day (or even a week). It doesn't matter how little you're spending, the body expects you're going need at least, say 1500 calories and for many people that's too many. 4. Something environmental. We're awash in so many new chemicals building up in our environments and bodies, and few have been studied for their long term effects. Maybe there's something in here that's throwing off internal signals or hormones.
smileypete 6y ago
>The fact it's not working means something's broke. The brokenness usually comes from a diet high in overly processed food and refined sugar/starch, often coupled with little or no exercise. Here's a paper relevant to the diet aspect: Ultra-Processed Diets Cause Excess Calorie Intake and Weight Gain: An Inpatient Randomized Controlled Trial of Ad Libitum Food Intake: https://www.cell.com/cell-metabolism/pdf/S1550-4131(19)30248-7.pdf https://www.cell.com/cell-metabolism/pdf/S1550-4131(19)30248... I believe a good way to un-break things is gaining an awareness of where the calories are coming from, together with a. lot. of moderate exercise. The above has worked well for me, but it's no quick fix, and wouldn't sell books, tv programmes, or speaking engagements. 'Eat less, move more' is overly simplistic, it's more about how you eat less and how you move more, to help the body's set point to shift back to a healthy level.