Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ChocoTaco369, this is for you:

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by Timthetaco View Post
    Glad we're all in agreement that CICO is true and influenced by a number of factors, despite the people who end up disappointed when their "calorie math" doesn't end up working. But...

    You don't need thermodynamics to explain why he gained more weight from the second experiment. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe his primary source of carbohydrate was white flour, which is very quickly and easily absorbed, unlike almonds, which was his primary source of fat in the first experiment.
    really? I would have thought that the bulk of his calories came from the eggs, salmon, mackerel and steak that he was eating.

    And if almonds are 'poorly absorbed', then does that mean a calorie is not a calorie when you ingest it?

    Originally posted by Timthetaco View Post
    Add that to the fact that he ate something like 130 grams of fat along with it, which all ends up in adipose tissue in the context of overeating carbohydrates.
    Why did he put on the fat when eaten with carbs, but not when eating with other fat?

    Originally posted by Timthetaco View Post
    So not only was he glycogen replete the entire time, which surely led to a decent amount of gluconeogenesis, he stored a quarter pound of dietary fat every day, guaranteed. As opposed to eating "5000 calories" of poorly absorbed almonds on a ketogenic diet, which leads to loss of water weight as well.
    I think that the water weight thing is a red herring since that won't last for the whole month.

    Originally posted by Timthetaco View Post
    It's easy to get the results you want when you know how insulin works. It's really only fair to compare an extremely low carb diet with an extremely low fat diet with an experiment like that. Or maybe he doesn't know how insulin works and it just happened to work out to his advantage anyway.
    But isn't the whole point of CICO that it doesn't matter what the source of the calories is? A calorie is a calorie is a calorie?
    Disclaimer: I eat 'meat and vegetables' ala Primal, although I don't agree with the carb curve. I like Perfect Health Diet and WAPF Lactofermentation a lot.

    Griff's cholesterol primer
    5,000 Cal Fat <> 5,000 Cal Carbs
    Winterbike: What I eat every day is what other people eat to treat themselves.
    TQP: I find for me that nutrition is much more important than what I do in the gym.
    bloodorchid is always right

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by not on the rug View Post
      You're not going to do very well here.
      First off, I wasn't flaming.

      Definition from Wiki: "Flaming, also known as bashing, is hostile and insulting interaction between Internet users, often involving the use of profanity."

      I wasn't bashing, hostile, or swearing at Choco. I was stating that I DISAGREED with his variety of posts where he claims that CICO is the sole reason for gaining and losing weight. And furthermore, perhaps I DON'T wanna stick around these forums if it means conversing with people like you who say things like I should be BANNED for DISAGREEING with a member of this community. What does an internet forum exist for if not for debate and the proliferation of knowledge and understanding? BANNED? REALLY? A little touchy, aren't we?! And it wasn't even directed at you. It's to Choco. You need to chill out, Rug.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Eureka5280 View Post
        Please enlighten me with your metaphysical view of how our bodies magically disobey the laws of thermodynamics. Do our calories sail away into the ether when we eat nothing but steak and eggs and liver?
        The problem with this is that a calorie is not a calorie. Go look up the article on gnolls.org about it. If you eat, oh, powdered food you will put on weight even if it has the exact same caloric composition as regular food. That was one of the things I remember from it. Also, a calorie is the energy derived from a unit of food burned in a fire. We do not have a fire in our bellies, so calories are always a grossly inaccurate way to measure food units. It's just the best we have. So please stop with the law of thermodynamics, the human body is just too complex to be trotting that out.
        Out of context quote for the day:

        Clearly Gorbag is so awesome he should be cloned, reproducing in the normal manner would only dilute his awesomeness. - Urban Forager

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by magicmerl View Post
          really? I would have thought that the bulk of his calories came from the eggs, salmon, mackerel and steak that he was eating.

          And if almonds are 'poorly absorbed', then does that mean a calorie is not a calorie when you ingest it?
          So I misspoke about the almonds. My bad. But to answer your question, yes, a calorie is not a calorie when you ingest it, because the food you eat is not in the form of calories. A calorie is a measure of heat, so a calorie doesn't come into play until your food is broken down, absorbed and oxidized.

          Why did he put on the fat when eaten with carbs, but not when eating with other fat?
          Because of insulin's effect on the body's fuel selection. In a mixed diet, the body preferentially oxidizes carbohydrates for energy, and the effect is upregulated when overeating carbohydrates. When you restrict carbohydrates, your body uses more dietary fat for energy, and you don't have glycogen reserves to draw on. Seems likely to me he was oxidizing and excreting more fat than he was storing.

          I think that the water weight thing is a red herring since that won't last for the whole month.
          Fair enough, but it might have had an effect on his body composition.

          But isn't the whole point of CICO that it doesn't matter what the source of the calories is? A calorie is a calorie is a calorie?
          It doesn't matter the source of the calorie once the energy in the food reaches the TCA cycle. Which is why calorie math doesn't always work, especially for people who know nothing about nutrition. But we're all a bit past that at this point, aren't we?

          Comment


          • #65
            calories do count. you have to get enough -- not too much, not too little. Just right. Goldilocks style.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Timthetaco View Post
              Because of insulin's effect on the body's fuel selection. In a mixed diet, the body preferentially oxidizes carbohydrates for energy, and the effect is upregulated when overeating carbohydrates. When you restrict carbohydrates, your body uses more dietary fat for energy, and you don't have glycogen reserves to draw on. Seems likely to me he was oxidizing and excreting more fat than he was storing.
              His high fat diet still included 85g of carbs a day. Wouldn't anything south of 500g fail to fill glycogen stores?

              At what point do carbs make you store fat? Why did the excess fat not get stored by the body?

              Does this mean that the carb curve is .... right? (please say no)
              Last edited by magicmerl; 12-11-2013, 08:59 PM.
              Disclaimer: I eat 'meat and vegetables' ala Primal, although I don't agree with the carb curve. I like Perfect Health Diet and WAPF Lactofermentation a lot.

              Griff's cholesterol primer
              5,000 Cal Fat <> 5,000 Cal Carbs
              Winterbike: What I eat every day is what other people eat to treat themselves.
              TQP: I find for me that nutrition is much more important than what I do in the gym.
              bloodorchid is always right

              Comment


              • #67
                I can't quantify it, and ultimately it doesn't matter, because stored dietary fat doesn't stay in adipose tissue forever. The carb curve is wrong because Mark was operating under Taubes's false insulin theory when he created it (I think?). Insulin does have an effect on fat storage and energy selection, but it's not what most people claim. Don't take my word for it; there's lots of free information on Pubmed.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Many moons ago before the "carb wars" there was the "CICO wars", a new monster thread would pop up every few days which would split the MDA user base in half over calories. Choco used to go into bat for the "CICO is king" side, others used to argue him on the "CICO = fail" side. These raged veheminously for months until on one monster thread I made a STAND...

                  not for either side but for the middle ground. I said...

                  The first law of thermodynamics is absolutely irrefutable. but. While CI is fairly easy to calculate and control, The CO portion of the equation is very fluid and the human body will often move the CO goal posts. The human body has ways of balancing CICO (all mathematical equations need to be balanced) that we cant even imagine or observe.

                  Choco tried to argue it with me for a few weeks, but that middle ground ideal stuck, and both "sides" basically agreed to adopt it as a good understanding of the calorie situation. Now CICO wars don't exist, Thank god.

                  I can see where the OP might get the idea that choco was all for CICO because he did defend it fairly strongly in his own way I would say that now choco would agree with the statement I made above. The only thing I see him disputing is that he was strongly in favor of CICO. he would say he originated the whole idea of a variable CICO.
                  A little primal gem - My Success Story
                  Weight lost in 4 months - 29kg (64 lbs)

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    It gets funny around here
                    OK, here is my view on this not so important matter:
                    Using CICO for weight management is like using a wet finger to measure an outdoor temperature. You can certainly say whether it is colder or warmer than last time you did it (more or less, depends on your own finger temp as well) but you cannot really be precise. Moreover, one has to measure or appreciate the CICO principle over a long period of time because the metabolism is not a strictly predictable engine that always give the same output. It depends on your body state (sleep, stress, etc), on whether your are digesting or not, on the hormonal messaging, work-out intensity, etc. If I eat X amount of foods, yeah, I can roughly guess (just like with a wet finger and temp) using the kCal figures whether I have a chance to maintain or not. But that's about it: I can at best guesstimate. If I keep eating a lot of kCals over a certain amount of time without changing anything else, my guesstimate will probably be better. CICO must be used with precaution on a too narrow timeline.

                    And to finish, I don't think it is important at all. Some find it a useful tool, I personally don't care about it. If I find myself gaining bad weight, I would know what to do: potato hack diet for a few days

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by sbhikes View Post
                      Did anybody post Gnolls.org's series on calories yet? It's really interesting (as are his other series.)

                      Scroll down a bit to get links to all of his posts about calories so far. It's under the heading No Such Thing As A “Calorie”

                      Index (Start Here) - GNOLLS.ORG
                      Yes, thank you! I was going to post a link to this also. I think anyone who wants to start a calorie debate thread should have to read through that series of posts first. I think it covers pretty much any argument that might be discussed in such threads.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Calories must be a myth. Because the 15 months it took me of eating 1200 calories five days a week and 1500 calories two days a week got me from 236 pounds to 118 pounds.

                        Now I average about 1500 calories per day and I've leveled off at 140 (very light infrequent exercise). So, it can be a myth to everyone else, but I'm a believer.
                        "Right is right, even if no one is doing it; wrong is wrong, even if everyone is doing it." - St. Augustine

                        B*tch-lite

                        Who says back fat is a bad thing? Maybe on a hairy guy at the beach, but not on a crab.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          This thread is getting a bit ridiculous with people saying they came up with the concept of a non-linear cico equation first....

                          You know, I invented the lightning. I really did. I am the first one on mda to claim it as my invention.
                          ------
                          HCLF: lean red meat, eggs, low-fat dairy, bone broth/gelatin, fruits, seafood, liver, small amount of starch (oatmeal, white rice, potatoes, carrots), small amount of saturated fat (butter/ghee/coconut/dark chocolate/cheese).

                          My Journal: gelatin experiments, vanity pictures, law school rants, recipe links


                          Food blog: GELATIN and BONE BROTH recipes

                          " The best things in life are free and the 2nd best are expensive!" - Coco Chanel

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by dilberryhoundog View Post
                            Many moons ago before the "carb wars" there was the "CICO wars", a new monster thread would pop up every few days which would split the MDA user base in half over calories. Choco used to go into bat for the "CICO is king" side, others used to argue him on the "CICO = fail" side. These raged veheminously for months until on one monster thread I made a STAND...

                            not for either side but for the middle ground. I said...

                            The first law of thermodynamics is absolutely irrefutable. but. While CI is fairly easy to calculate and control, The CO portion of the equation is very fluid and the human body will often move the CO goal posts. The human body has ways of balancing CICO (all mathematical equations need to be balanced) that we cant even imagine or observe.

                            Choco tried to argue it with me for a few weeks, but that middle ground ideal stuck, and both "sides" basically agreed to adopt it as a good understanding of the calorie situation. Now CICO wars don't exist, Thank god.

                            I can see where the OP might get the idea that choco was all for CICO because he did defend it fairly strongly in his own way I would say that now choco would agree with the statement I made above. The only thing I see him disputing is that he was strongly in favor of CICO. he would say he originated the whole idea of a variable CICO.
                            Thank you Dilberryhoungdog for providing me with a bit of history and context, some useful information, and a stance on CICO that we should probably all live by on this forum. Although I would have preferred to discuss this with Choco himself, it seems that he is not going to be making an appearance here. Anyway, I appreciate your reasoned and non-hostile response. I never once wanted to start a war here, and I can see now that the topic of CICO IS VERY controversial and inflammatory on MDA. If I was more aware of the situation, I never would have made the original post. Clearly it's this forum's hot button.

                            I hope this can put an end to the thread--I really don't want to drag this out anymore. Now that I am better educated, let's just call this CICO argument a compromise and leave it at that. Thanks all.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Low Carb is awesome. I eat low carb, but realize that you are losing water when you lose quickly.

                              Here is my diet history:
                              I used to do CICO, just like you, but the foods never satisfied so I binged. I also exercised too much. I was protein and fat starved and thus had a lot of nutrient deficiencies.

                              When I started Primal Blueprint, I did really well. At some point I got curious about calorie intake and tracked. I was around 1500 calories a day, but with no binging. It's a little more than I used to eat old CICO style, but I wasn't having bi-weekly binges. I stalled on PB at about 185.

                              Then I ate Whole 30 which was a further restriction on foods and calories and got down to 178 or so. Then I added CrossFit and lost fat/gained muscle on about 1400-1500 calories a day of primal foods.

                              My latest has been eating VLC. The restricted mix of foods limits my calories to 1200-1400 a day, then I eat whatever 1 night a week. I'd say I'm down 5 lbs of fat. When I eat carbs, my weight immediately bounces up 5lbs, the next day when I restrict carbs, I basically piss out 5 lbs. Eating carbs makes me thirsty.

                              So when you started PB, you probably lost a bunch of weight as you cut carbs and peed out water over time. If you are eating too many calories, this will stop when your body reaches a balance point of retained water for how many carbs you consume. Your actual fat loss will end up being based on calorie restriction, which you may or may not notice. My VLC days feels like a lot of food, but it doesn't add up to a lot. I drink 300 calories of creamy coffee in the am, eat a 300 calorie lunch, then have a big steak at dinner. It looks and feels like a shit ton of food. But calorically? Not so much.

                              You will find a LOT of people that eat Primal that can't lose weight without eating below satiation or needing to cut/count calories once the lose the initial water weight from the carb restriction. You also tend to start seeing calorie creep. "Oh, I can have this. Oh and more butter please". Then weight stalls.

                              These are not magic foods. For most people, if you want the fat gone, you can't eat as much as you want.

                              http://maggiesfeast.wordpress.com/
                              Check out my blog. Hope to share lots of great recipes and ideas!

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                And calling out Choco was a giant asshole thing to do. The guy is smart, well read and A LOT of people here agree with him. He's the one who helps people who post things like "Hey, I eat 10 pieces of bacon, a cup of cream, a rib eye and broccoli with 1/2 cup of butter but have to have 5 blueberries a day and I can't lose weight now WTF? Should I cut the blueberries and eat more fat" start to lose weight.

                                He has never advocated for diet coke, lean cuisine or starvation, just common sense.

                                http://maggiesfeast.wordpress.com/
                                Check out my blog. Hope to share lots of great recipes and ideas!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X