this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2025
308 points (98.1% liked)
Stolen from Facebook
456 readers
6 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Some of it is genetic too. My dad was the healthiest man I ever knew. He exercised 5-days a week, ate healthy, didn’t smoke, and only drank red wine due to its heart benefits. But he still had a high BMI. He just couldn’t shed the belly fat.
It's probably the baseline diet that maintained his high bmi.
The modern food landscape is very different from the evolutionary pattern. Some people can tolerate it better then others.
Lots of the nutritional advice given to people is wrong, not based on real research. Like the wine is good for your heart research, yes there was a observational correlation in a specific population, but that isn't causation.
Spoiler alert, it’s still calories in calories out. Some people burn fewer calories as a baseline, (Called NEAT) which means they can’t eat quite as much without gaining weight.
The biggest issue is most people are absolutely horrible at counting calories. They think they consumed 2000 in a day, but it was actually 3000 because they didn’t count pop, beer, snacks, condiments etc.
If one is truly in a calorie deficit, no amount of bad genetics will keep them from losing weight.
Yeah, but it's hard to count calories in:
And it's hard to count calories out:
And all this misses the biggest weakness of trying to use CICO alone as the framework for managing weight: how we feel ends up driving a lot of our behaviors, including whether we'll stick with our diet or exercise plans. Junk food, alcohol, and even non-food drugs like caffeine or nicotine affect our appetites and our exercise fatigue, and do have a real world effect on whether we will actually do what it takes to manage the calories in or out.
For each person who is measuring their calories wrong, there are probably 10 people who just won't stick with a plan. A good fitness plan accounts for this, and works in ways to keep a person on track. And that might look different for different people: forbidding certain foods, encouraging certain foods, meal timing or intermittent fasting, certain sleep habits, hydration levels, managing what foods are easily available on hand, etc.
It isn't just what you're saying with not counting soda, etc, though. CICO is pretty complicated, especially with newer research about how gut bacteria can alter body weight without changing caloric intake. Burger and pizza calories really aren't the same as broccoli and lentil calories.
It's not really possible to accurately count calories burned either, as metabolism is all over the place. People with energy to spare will engage in more NEAT, and people in a deficit will conserve energy.
I agree it’s not possible to count exactly how many calories you burn. The basic idea is you guess how many you burn and consume that amount of calories each day. If over weeks/months you are gaining weight then you are eating too many calories, and you adjust, until your weight is stable. Now you know roughly how many your burn in a day. It’s literally that simple.
1000 calories of pizza and 1000 calories of broccoli is the exact same from a weight gain point of view. If your maintenance calories are 2000, and you eat exactly 2000 calories of pizza, and only pizza, you will not gain weight. You’ll be extremely unhealthy in other ways due lack of proper vitamins.
Also 2000 calories of pizza is doable in one sitting, and you won’t feel very full so it would be easy to eat more, but good luck eating 2000 calories of broccoli in a day, the volume of food is much higher.
They are not the same because different bacteria eat different things, and some of those bacteria are associated with weight loss and gain. We can quite literally feed mice akkermansia muciniphila and cause them to lose weight without changing their caloric intake.
With this you admit that there's more to it than just CICO. If you eat 2000 calories and still feel like you're starving then of course you're going to fail your diet. What you eat is extremely important for a variety of reasons.
I'm not sure I've ever encountered a dietician that recommended counting calories for weight loss or health. They all say to eat healthy foods, avoid junk, and to eat when you're hungry, stop when you're not. And it turns out eating healthy is exactly what fosters the gut bacteria associated with healthy body composition.
Do you have a link to the mice study? That sounds interesting.
How am I admitting it’s more than CICO? What I said aligns directly with CICO. If you eat junk, you are eating high calorie dense foods, and people tend to eat more because it’s not as filling. That’s literally CICO. You eat more calories, and you gain weight.
The reason dieticians recommend not actually counting calories is because people suck at it, as was mentioned before. By telling them to eat healthy, low calorie foods, it makes it basically impossible to eat too many calories due to the giant volume of food you would need to eat.
In the end it all boils down to calories. You cannot escape the laws of physics. You can’t gain mass without adding mass.