4 ms·

I know that CICO has been debunked, but I've never seen such a wonderfully clear example as in your last sentence. Thank you!

by hilux 2y ago

hodder 2y ago
CICO has not been debunked at all. If you take it to the extremes like eating 30k cals in a day yes your body will pass much of it undigested, but that doesn’t debunk it at all but rather adjust one of the 2 inputs into the equation, and for the vast vast majority of people following anything resembling a sane diet, CICO is the determinant of weight loss. You can eat straight sugar in a caloric deficit and body weight will fall off of you. You can eat straight fat or protein and it’ll do the same. You can eat in one meal or 20 meals. It still holds in every single study ever done.
kbelder 2y ago
And yet, increasing calories will cause you to gain weight; cutting calories will cause you to lose weight; increasing activity will cause you to lose weight; and decreasing activity will cause you to gain weight. Yes, it's complicated and there's subtleties; but CICO is the main truth of dieting, and trying to downplay its primacy is misguided or deceptive.
- hilux 2y ago
  Do you follow this field at all? (I do - very closely.) Did you bother to google before replying? Obviously not. Why do you (and the other guy above you) feel the need to argue even when some topic is completely outside your expertise? Why not open your mind to a new idea and learn something? > but CICO is the main truth of dieting It's certainly what most physicians and most >25 BMI people believe. And how's that working out? (Think about it before you hit the trigger finger: how. is. CICO. working. out?)
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - kbelder 2y ago
    >how. is. CICO. working. out? Fine!
    - hodder 2y ago
      Yes it’s literally the only thing that causes weight loss over time outside of water fluctuations etc. The poster above you is the kind of clueless huckster I mentioned in my main post. No evidence. All BS. Hitchens principle applies: that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

I know that CICO has been debunked, but I've never seen such a wonderfully clear example as in your last sentence. Thank you!

by hilux 2y ago

I know that CICO has been debunked, but I've never seen such a wonderfully clear example as in your last sentence. Thank you!

hodder 2y ago

CICO has not been debunked at all. If you take it to the extremes like eating 30k cals in a day yes your body will pass much of it undigested, but that doesn’t debunk it at all but rather adjust one of the 2 inputs into the equation, and for the vast vast majority of people following anything resembling a sane diet, CICO is the determinant of weight loss. You can eat straight sugar in a caloric deficit and body weight will fall off of you. You can eat straight fat or protein and it’ll do the same. You can eat in one meal or 20 meals. It still holds in every single study ever done.

kbelder 2y ago

And yet, increasing calories will cause you to gain weight; cutting calories will cause you to lose weight; increasing activity will cause you to lose weight; and decreasing activity will cause you to gain weight. Yes, it's complicated and there's subtleties; but CICO is the main truth of dieting, and trying to downplay its primacy is misguided or deceptive.

hilux 2y ago
Do you follow this field at all? (I do - very closely.) Did you bother to google before replying? Obviously not. Why do you (and the other guy above you) feel the need to argue even when some topic is completely outside your expertise? Why not open your mind to a new idea and learn something? > but CICO is the main truth of dieting It's certainly what most physicians and most >25 BMI people believe. And how's that working out? (Think about it before you hit the trigger finger: how. is. CICO. working. out?)
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- kbelder 2y ago
  >how. is. CICO. working. out? Fine!
  - hodder 2y ago
    Yes it’s literally the only thing that causes weight loss over time outside of water fluctuations etc. The poster above you is the kind of clueless huckster I mentioned in my main post. No evidence. All BS. Hitchens principle applies: that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.