Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What are the real weight loss benefits of going primal?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I think that problem with the cico advice is that it's true, but as practical advice for many people it is meaningless. On the ci side, people just think reduce and so they cut healthy nutrient dense food in favor of flavorless made up food, and the co side is highly individual and complicated and dependent in ci.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by sbhikes View Post
      Here is an interesting blog that cites a lot of studies.
      The poor, misunderstood calorie | calories proper
      Yeah, another blogger cherry picking stuff to "disprove" that the rock bottom of hundred of years of scientific knowlegde must be wrong...
      "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

      - Schopenhauer

      Comment


      • 2012
        Pro-CICO argument: "A calorie is a calorie is a calorie, and all calories are used identically by the body for purpose of weight loss or gain."
        Anti-CICO argument: "It's really complicated metabolically."

        2013 Pro-CICO argument: "It's really complicated metabolically. Hey, stop stealing our argument!"

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
          Yeah, another blogger cherry picking stuff to "disprove" that the rock bottom of hundred of years of scientific knowlegde must be wrong...
          He's not really arguing against CICO per say. He's expanding and talking about nuances of energy expenditure and how it doesn't even out on a daily basis, but more in terms of months and years based on evidence he's presenting from the 1950's! So well within the past hundred years of scientific knowledge you are citing

          Just further proof that CICO is incalculable and even if it was it wouldn't match up in any meaningful and useful manner.
          Last edited by Neckhammer; 07-23-2013, 05:44 PM.

          Comment


          • Ok here's the wrap...

            CICO is a generalised term for the "conservation of energy" hypothesis that is commonly written as the first law of thermodynamics.

            Conservation of energy basically means that as energy changes form, it is fully converted to the new form, no energy is ever lost. Although as energy changes from one form, it can split into 2 or more forms of an equal amount of energy, ie chemical energy splits into heat and kinetic when converted in muscle cells.

            Ultimately we (an organism) are a massive ball of energy conversion. Heat, kinetic, potential, electrical & chemical energies are constantly being converted in billions of cells in our bodies at any particular moment and also being lost to the environment. These energy conversions are an incredibly complex process, tho over billions of years of evolution our cells have evolved to a kind of homeostasis where the system just work together.

            The major problem happens when our conscious brain reads an Internet piece and decides to start "controlling" the energy conversion processes from its very limited linear thought process.

            Do you get this? Our conscious minds have a singular thought train. It can only think of one thing at once. Our bodies have billions of energy conversion processes happening at any 1 time. It is almost impossible to subjugate the sub conscious body systems with your conscious mind. Ie impose cico.

            "We" do have some control over the environment and conditions this massive ball of energy conversion (our body) operates in. So in effect we can "encourage" and "influence" CICO, but if you think you can control it, your dreaming.


            Sent from my iPhone
            A little primal gem - My Success Story
            Weight lost in 4 months - 29kg (64 lbs)

            Comment


            • The human body is not a closed system.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by eKatherine View Post
                The human body is not a closed system.
                For sure, heat and kinetic energy are the end of the line, if your body produces these forms of energy they are not retrievable by us, they are lost to the environment, to get more heat or kinetic energy we have to convert more higher forms of energy like chemical energy unless we physically expose our selfs to a higher heat gradient like sitting in the sun.
                But yeah in general we are constantly losing heat energy all the time to the environment


                Sent from my iPhone
                A little primal gem - My Success Story
                Weight lost in 4 months - 29kg (64 lbs)

                Comment


                • Originally posted by TheyCallMeLazarus View Post
                  @exotec

                  I like to say that any food requires 3 things be taken into account, in this order.

                  1) Hormonal impact
                  2) Macro and micronutrient composition....everything from protein to zinc.
                  3) Calorie count

                  Now, I realize that studies all show that you can get equal outcomes with equal calories, but that is not the point at all....the point is satiety, nutritional value, and what behavioral changes the food will cause down the line. (I.E. 500cal of pure sugar will make you feel much differently than 500cal of steak)

                  Most nutritional studies are done where foods are FORCED onto people and mathematically tabulated...that is not real life.
                  in fact, most nutritional "studies" are done through self-reporting because it's too expensive to coop people up and feed them an actual measured diet.

                  as for your 3 points? that can't be right, because clearly so many women are simply too stoopid to use a food scale correctly and just lie on the internetz about their personal experiences.
                  As I ate the oysters with their strong taste of the sea and their faint metallic taste that the cold white wine washed away, leaving only the sea taste and the succulent texture, and as I drank their cold liquid from each shell and washed it down with the crisp taste of the wine, I lost the empty feeling and began to be happy and to make plans.

                  Ernest Hemingway

                  Comment


                  • "in fact, most nutritional "studies" are done through self-reporting because it's too expensive to coop people up and feed them an actual measured diet."

                    You are 100% right. I stand corrected.

                    My point was that most of them rely on either self-reporting or were done by the military (forced) a long time ago. In doing this, it's all reduced to "calories only" because this method lends itself to graphical analysis....how would one make a study on eating carrots or liver pate in place of x or y, over many months, completely throwing math out the window?

                    It would just end up being called "subjective" in the scientific community, or in other words, irrelevant. We think in calories because those are the only terms that are quantifiable statistically. That does not make it the correct way to conceptualize nutrition; it just makes it the most scientifically convenient.
                    "The soul that does not attempt flight; does not notice its chains."

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by TheyCallMeLazarus View Post
                      Most nutritional studies are done where foods are FORCED onto people and mathematically tabulated...that is not real life.
                      Agreed, but what study is "real life".

                      Metabolic ward studies are done for the purposes of what determines weight loss in healthy individuals, and the case overwhelmingly seems to side with energy intake vs. energy expenditure.
                      My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by noodletoy View Post
                        as for your 3 points? that can't be right, because clearly so many women are simply too stoopid to use a food scale correctly and just lie on the internetz about their personal experiences.
                        Who said this was the case?
                        My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
                          Hahah Awesomeness:

                          "There was absolutely no relationship between CI & CO at any time point during the entire study. Shotgun > broad side of a barn? The subjects were free to eat as much of whatever they wanted the entire time. CICO expects you to walk on the orange line. Good luck!"

                          Like I said Neo.... there is no spoon.
                          I know, crazy huh? There was another one with people eating ad libitum and the calories they ate followed a graph of the calories they expended but by two days later. Crazy stuff. We don't know everything.
                          Female, 5'3", 50, Max squat: 202.5lbs. Max deadlift: 225 x 3.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by jakejoh10 View Post
                            Metabolic ward studies are done for the purposes of what determines weight loss in healthy individuals, and the case overwhelmingly seems to side with energy intake vs. energy expenditure.
                            Most of the studies I have read use not healthy but obese individuals. The money is in treating people with health issues, not keeping people healthy.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by eKatherine View Post
                              Most of the studies I have read use not healthy but obese individuals. The money is in treating people with health issues, not keeping people healthy.
                              You're right, the majority of studies are done in obese individuals. However, you're moving past the realm of this thread by talking directly about health instead of the efficacy of the energy balance equation and weight loss.
                              My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by eKatherine View Post
                                2012
                                Pro-CICO argument: "A calorie is a calorie is a calorie, and all calories are used identically by the body for purpose of weight loss or gain."
                                Anti-CICO argument: "It's really complicated metabolically."

                                2013 Pro-CICO argument: "It's really complicated metabolically. Hey, stop stealing our argument!"
                                CICO never said that. CICO says "you need an energy deficit to lose weight and you need an energy surplus to gain weight."

                                You are confusing CICO with IIFYM - If It Fits Your Macros.
                                Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X