Economist article: Death of the Calorie
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
https://web.archive.org/web/20230827150018/https://www.economist.com/1843/2019/02/28/death-of-the-calorie
Very interested to hear folks’ thoughts on this article. The “calories in, calories out” mantra has always frustrated me. I’m a keto adherent, and I have found that eating a low carb diet is the best (only?) way for me to maintain a healthy weight. I never count calories because I find it difficult - and I suspect that that method of weight control really pushes people away from home cooked meals (which are difficult to weigh/estimate calories) and towards simple, prepackaged foods. The article raises an interesting question: is the calorie a necessary/useful concept for human nutrition? |
Anonymous
|
It is calories in, calories out. But people don't like to count because it's a huge pain to keep track off. We cook from scratch and I've counted calories before. I don't do it now because I can guesstimate, from all the calories-counting I did before.
Low carb, low sugar and/or low fat is an easy, more general way of... reducing calories. Carbs are very caloric. If you eat the fish and the broccoli but don't eat the rice on your plate, then that cuts maybe half the calories, and you don't even need to weigh and count! So that's why these methods are popular. That's all. You do it the hard way or the easy way, but it's always calories in and calories out. |
Anonymous
| I'm ready for the death of the gospel of CICO. It has never been the full story, but science sure can move slowly. |
Anonymous
| PP at 14:37 here. Just read the article. Really great writing. Super interesting. Thanks for posting it. |
Anonymous
| It IS calories in calories out. It’s just that some people seem to have a harder time controlling calories in |
Anonymous
| Bye bye CICO fan boyz. I bet you think the food pyramid is good. In reality the pyramid should be upside down. |
Anonymous
And they don’t understand that just because Larla’s calories out = x doesn’t mean Larly’s calories out might = y despite a similar lifestyle. |
Anonymous
|
I think Keto works for many because the high protein high fat keeps you full and prevents you from overeating in calories
I think IF works for many because the time restrictions keep you from overeating in calories I think most successful diets are actually ways to control cico. I do believe that individuals metabolisms control the rate of that co part. But it's definitely a part of the whole shebang. |
Anonymous
| Most people with any basic knowledge of diet and nutrition don't believe in CICO |
Anonymous
Most people with any basic knowledge of thermodynamics and closed loop systems do… |
Anonymous
| Except the body and our systems are not closed. What in earth would make you think it is? |
Anonymous
That is not what was said. |
Anonymous
Biology isn’t physics. No one who understands biology would say something as stupid as this. But many people can’t tell the difference. |
Anonymous
Yes, I guess my years of biomedical training, and the years of my husband's medical training, are NOTHING. It has always been calories in, calories out. But people who have a hard time controlling the input will not be happy with the output. This is not a judgement, since I've struggled with that part myself. But at least I don't lie to myself. When I reduce calories, I lose weight. It's very simple, and sometimes simple is very hard to do. People don't get that simple might be hard. |
Anonymous
In the context of basic knowledge about nutrition? Yes -- nothing. Or next to nothing. This thread puts me in mind of folks shouting down Galileo; the investment in CICO being the end of the story is overly emotional for some reason, and people can't accept that science is already moving far past that idea. |