ChocoTaco369, this is for you:
I have been reading Mark's Daily Apple for a year now and I just wanted to say that I COULD NOT DISAGREE WITH YOU MORE regarding losing weight by lowering caloric intake.
I think you are DEAD WRONG about calories determining your weight-loss progress. About 2 years ago, my wife and I decided to try losing weight by calorie counting and using the helpful app LoseIt. We strove to lose a pound a week by denying ourselves 500 calories from our maintenance amount of calories. We kept our diet exactly the same as we always did (typically breakfast and dinner meals made at home, and lunches we went out for food). The only thing we did differently is accurately count up every calorie we ate and then made sure to stop before we exceeded it. We also exercised by bike riding for an hour every other day. On days we rode, we counted up exactly how much we burned and made sure to eat so that we were always under 500 calories.
Well, this worked for about 3 months and VERY slowly started to lose weight. Some weeks we hit our 1 pound goal, some weeks we did not. After 3 months, we both hit a plateau and did not lose weight for 2 entire months. This didn't make any sense to us because the CICO method SHOULD in theory be working. But it did not. We couldn't explain it until we found out about paleo/primal and how even though we were watching our calories, we were not watching WHAT we were eating. Once we started primal, the weight started shedding off MUCH faster than when we were using LoseIt. And we were eating more than we ever had in the past. We just ate more real, wholesome food.
I don't think that you are taking into account that terrible food choices can have a profound effect on weight loss (or the lack thereof). Furthermore, diet foods, and drinks that contain aspartame technically have 0 calories, but they wreck havoc upon your system, screwing with your insulin levels among other things. My friend tried losing weight by watching calories, but she was guzzling diet soda by the gallon. Needless to say, her weight loss went horribly and she eventually gave up calorie counting too.
Man overestimates his TDEE. Rants about it to a stranger on the internet. News at 11.
Last edited by Eureka5280; 12-11-2013 at 01:51 PM.
Wha? Did you even read what I wrote, Eureka? I never over or underestimated my TDEE. My point is that the CICO strategy doesn't work if you don't watch what you eat. You can't just eat fast food and Cheetos all day, be 500 calories under your maintenance weight, and assume everything's gonna be fine.
I don't think Choco is taking into account that there is much more to weight loss than calorie counting. He states this many, many times in the various posts I've seen, and I want his opinion on the matter in this discussion.
Humans: Laws of physics don't apply.
Choco and others have stated many times that there are things that affect both sides of the CICO equation but at the end of the day calories still count. If (I am making this up for an example) diet coke f*cks up your metabolism to the point where you burn less calories this would have an effect on the CO part. If you have a jacked up thyroid this might have an effect on the CO part. If you underestimate what you eat this matters to the CI part etc.
So yes CICO is not as simple as X in - y out = weightloss but that does not mean the whole concept is flawed.
The guy who got me into primal lost 50 pounds eating primally. He then gained 30 pounds eating primally with more calories. Same foods different amounts. Yes, he weighed everything, kept a log etc. Yes, he did it on purpose.
My wife has lost 90+ pounds. She eats carbs. She eats wheat. She drinks 6-8 diet cokes a day. She cut calories. It worked.
Does that mean it works for everyone as written? No. But that does not make the premise false.
Edit: Responding to OP...
Thermodynamics would disagree with you. If you eat 500 calories below maintenance every day for a week, you will lose one pound. If you didn't lose a pound per week, you have either overestimated your daily burn rate, or underestimated your actual calorie intake.
The laws of physics are not flexible.
Also I'm pretty sure you have completely misunderstood ChocoTaco's position on this - he does not advocate eating junk food, particularly junk food with high fat content alongside high carbs.
So yeah, you are tilting at windmills here.
Last edited by Eureka5280; 12-11-2013 at 02:07 PM.
Haha, laws of physics. Right. The human being is not a closed system.
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?
Originally Posted by eKatherine
That's really what I'm trying to say. CICO is not the end-all be-all of weight loss, which SO MANY PEOPLE fall into following conventional wisdom. There are other factors involved. Obviously, the entire concept is not flawed, I just think additional considerations need to be made. I also subscribe to Mark's belief that eating too many carbs results in fat gain--and it's very easy to go overboard with primal fruits, nuts, and vegetables.
Originally Posted by canio6
Okay, you're a lawnmower! Congratulations, the laws of thermodynamics apply to you, oh special snowflake!
Originally Posted by Eureka5280