5 ms·

CICO is a very simple model that doesn't account for a lot of complexity in the human body and its nutrition. Consider the following: 1500 calories worth of Sn

CICO is a very simple model that doesn't account for a lot of complexity in the human body and its nutrition. Consider the following: 1500 calories worth of Snickers bar would not have the same effects as 1500 calories worth of beans and legumes or 1500 calories of pure soda. Satiety, nutrient and calorie availability, hormones (insulin), all differ depending on what you're eating -- and how often and how much you're eating. Even the combination of macro nutrients will have different effects: for example, fats + simple carbs is way worse than fats + proteins + fiber. And exercise, mood, sunshine also factor in. In the end, of course, thermodynamics holds and if you eat 1000 calories (no matter what form they take) when you need at a minimum 1500 then 100% yoi will lose weight. But how fast, how easy or how healthy that would be is a different story depending on what you're eating.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 3y ago
> Consider the following: 1500 calories worth of Snickers bar would not have the same effects as 1500 calories worth of beans and legumes or 1500 calories of pure soda. How sure of that are you? Mark Haub, Nutrition Professor, famously ate a diet made entirely of "convenience store food" like Twinkies and chips for 10wks at a caloric deficit. Despite a diet based on pure junk food, all of his health metrics improved and he lost 27lbs[0]. As someone who has lost well over 100lbs and who struggles constantly to deal with their weight, I can say from my experience that how many calories you eat is practically the only thing that matters. I have tried all the fad diets over the years and not a one of them has managed to lose me any weight and perform any better without strict calorie counting. [0] http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/...
- GeoAtreides 3y ago
  I already address this point in my original comment: "In the end, of course, thermodynamics holds and if you eat 1000 calories (no matter what form they take) when you need at a minimum 1500 then 100% yoi will lose weight. But how fast, how easy or how healthy that would be is a different story depending on what you're eating."
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 3y ago
    Except that's what I'm addressing: there is evidence that it really doesn't matter what you are eating, as long as you eat less.
    - GeoAtreides 3y ago
      Yes, I agree with you, I said: "if you eat 1000 calories (no matter what form they take) when you need at a minimum 1500 then 100% you will lose weight" And then I added: "how fast, how easy or how healthy that would be is a different story depending on what you're eating." You can lose weight (or maintain weight) only drinking 1000 calories worth of soda everyday. But it will be harder, way harder, than losing weight by eating 1000 calories of baked cauliflower with some nuts and some parmesan.
- yodelshady 3y ago
  > for 10wks at a caloric deficit. A human lifespan is not 10 weeks. Did he do that for the next 50 years? Because that's what's necessary. IIRC the average American gains weight equivalent to a 50 kCal / day surplus, or 2.5%. By that same logic, going by weight gain and activity, I've started eating 70% more over the last two weeks, and I can't agree that's what happened. I eat out rarely and my groceries bill and cart contents have not changed. I might believe the claim in isolation but, if all of his health metrics improved - sorry, I'm going to need a replication. Over 40 weeks. > However, he did admit to eating veggies around his kids. Oh look.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 3y ago

> Consider the following: 1500 calories worth of Snickers bar would not have the same effects as 1500 calories worth of beans and legumes or 1500 calories of pure soda. How sure of that are you? Mark Haub, Nutrition Professor, famously ate a diet made entirely of "convenience store food" like Twinkies and chips for 10wks at a caloric deficit. Despite a diet based on pure junk food, all of his health metrics improved and he lost 27lbs[0]. As someone who has lost well over 100lbs and who struggles constantly to deal with their weight, I can say from my experience that how many calories you eat is practically the only thing that matters. I have tried all the fad diets over the years and not a one of them has managed to lose me any weight and perform any better without strict calorie counting. [0] http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/...

GeoAtreides 3y ago
I already address this point in my original comment: "In the end, of course, thermodynamics holds and if you eat 1000 calories (no matter what form they take) when you need at a minimum 1500 then 100% yoi will lose weight. But how fast, how easy or how healthy that would be is a different story depending on what you're eating."
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 3y ago
  Except that's what I'm addressing: there is evidence that it really doesn't matter what you are eating, as long as you eat less.
  - GeoAtreides 3y ago
    Yes, I agree with you, I said: "if you eat 1000 calories (no matter what form they take) when you need at a minimum 1500 then 100% you will lose weight" And then I added: "how fast, how easy or how healthy that would be is a different story depending on what you're eating." You can lose weight (or maintain weight) only drinking 1000 calories worth of soda everyday. But it will be harder, way harder, than losing weight by eating 1000 calories of baked cauliflower with some nuts and some parmesan.
yodelshady 3y ago
> for 10wks at a caloric deficit. A human lifespan is not 10 weeks. Did he do that for the next 50 years? Because that's what's necessary. IIRC the average American gains weight equivalent to a 50 kCal / day surplus, or 2.5%. By that same logic, going by weight gain and activity, I've started eating 70% more over the last two weeks, and I can't agree that's what happened. I eat out rarely and my groceries bill and cart contents have not changed. I might believe the claim in isolation but, if all of his health metrics improved - sorry, I'm going to need a replication. Over 40 weeks. > However, he did admit to eating veggies around his kids. Oh look.