A complete and total repudiation of all the people who bleat "calories in, calories out"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing CICO is good for is that it is a handy shortcut for identifying people who aren’t too bright.

It depends on how they are using it. If they follow it up with "duh, just eat less and exercise more" then yes.

If only they had the intelligence to be coddled by the New York Times to validate their life choices.

The original post was so dumb it hurts anybody with a brain. Nobody thinks CICO standing alone as a rigid idea is a solution. But a general framework of don’t eat piles of garbage and actually move instead sitting in front of a computer all day is a good idea.

Okay so here we have:

1) ad hominem
2) ad hominem again
3) generalization
4) straw man
5) false dichotomy

It's amazing that every single sentence in your comment contains at least one logical fallacy.

I don't want to insult anybody's intelligence, so I will just say that I believe you can do better here.

Funny this is a response to a response to the same kind of comment concerning reference to CICO and people “not being too bright.”

Look, if you want to be a victim yourself or try to make it out as if there are all these elaborate external factors for everybody, go right ahead. It’s just a form of gatekeeping. People can lead healthy lives and lose excess weight. It’s possible. And, they can keep the weight off and change their lifestyle. All of these things are possible.

Then why do 9/10 dieters regain all the weight?

Obesity is a health condition. New medications hold a lot of promise for treatment. Or we could tax junk food. But in 50 years, the blame and shame conversation will have moved on. Enjoy while you can I guess.

They regain because they go back eating the same foods.


Bluezone diets for example japan, diet consist of sweet potato, seafood, green veggies, and pork on holidays. Obesity is low.

The Japanese don’t eat pork only on holidays. Not sure where you got that from. There is metric tons of junk food in Japan. The difference is they learn from an early age to eat real food. You can find a lot of food you don’t want to eat in Japan. But none of will be low quality. Even the junk food isn’t low quality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing CICO is good for is that it is a handy shortcut for identifying people who aren’t too bright.

It depends on how they are using it. If they follow it up with "duh, just eat less and exercise more" then yes.

Honestly, I’ve so rarely seen intelligent and perceptive conversation follow when people talk about CICO that I’m comfortable using it as a heuristic for stupidity. Occasionally CICO is used thoughtfully by research scientists but in everyday life, it’s a spot-on heuristic.

PP here. That's good to know! I now understand why people I largely agree with respond very negatively to me when I use the phrase.

Yeah, there isn’t a great history of that phrase being used in a cogent and intellectually rigorous manner. I would honestly avoid it. I tend to immediately associate the use of CICO in health-related conversation with scientific illiteracy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing CICO is good for is that it is a handy shortcut for identifying people who aren’t too bright.

It depends on how they are using it. If they follow it up with "duh, just eat less and exercise more" then yes.

Honestly, I’ve so rarely seen intelligent and perceptive conversation follow when people talk about CICO that I’m comfortable using it as a heuristic for stupidity. Occasionally CICO is used thoughtfully by research scientists but in everyday life, it’s a spot-on heuristic.

PP here. That's good to know! I now understand why people I largely agree with respond very negatively to me when I use the phrase.

Yeah, there isn’t a great history of that phrase being used in a cogent and intellectually rigorous manner. I would honestly avoid it. I tend to immediately associate the use of CICO in health-related conversation with scientific illiteracy.

Why? If you are packing on the pounds it has to be the fed the energy to produce the extra weight. The only way the body can possibly make that much extra fat is from excessive caloric intake that isn’t utilized. It is impossible for your body to produce extra weight to the point of obesity without you feeding it the extra energy to do so

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing CICO is good for is that it is a handy shortcut for identifying people who aren’t too bright.

It depends on how they are using it. If they follow it up with "duh, just eat less and exercise more" then yes.

Honestly, I’ve so rarely seen intelligent and perceptive conversation follow when people talk about CICO that I’m comfortable using it as a heuristic for stupidity. Occasionally CICO is used thoughtfully by research scientists but in everyday life, it’s a spot-on heuristic.

PP here. That's good to know! I now understand why people I largely agree with respond very negatively to me when I use the phrase.

Yeah, there isn’t a great history of that phrase being used in a cogent and intellectually rigorous manner. I would honestly avoid it. I tend to immediately associate the use of CICO in health-related conversation with scientific illiteracy.

Why? If you are packing on the pounds it has to be the fed the energy to produce the extra weight. The only way the body can possibly make that much extra fat is from excessive caloric intake that isn’t utilized. It is impossible for your body to produce extra weight to the point of obesity without you feeding it the extra energy to do so

You are trying to be an object lesson, I take it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing CICO is good for is that it is a handy shortcut for identifying people who aren’t too bright.

It depends on how they are using it. If they follow it up with "duh, just eat less and exercise more" then yes.

If only they had the intelligence to be coddled by the New York Times to validate their life choices.

The original post was so dumb it hurts anybody with a brain. Nobody thinks CICO standing alone as a rigid idea is a solution. But a general framework of don’t eat piles of garbage and actually move instead sitting in front of a computer all day is a good idea.

Okay so here we have:

1) ad hominem
2) ad hominem again
3) generalization
4) straw man
5) false dichotomy

It's amazing that every single sentence in your comment contains at least one logical fallacy.

I don't want to insult anybody's intelligence, so I will just say that I believe you can do better here.

Funny this is a response to a response to the same kind of comment concerning reference to CICO and people “not being too bright.”

Look, if you want to be a victim yourself or try to make it out as if there are all these elaborate external factors for everybody, go right ahead. It’s just a form of gatekeeping. People can lead healthy lives and lose excess weight. It’s possible. And, they can keep the weight off and change their lifestyle. All of these things are possible.

Then why do 9/10 dieters regain all the weight?

Obesity is a health condition. New medications hold a lot of promise for treatment. Or we could tax junk food. But in 50 years, the blame and shame conversation will have moved on. Enjoy while you can I guess.

They regain because they go back eating the same foods.


Bluezone diets for example japan, diet consist of sweet potato, seafood, green veggies, and pork on holidays. Obesity is low.

The Japanese don’t eat pork only on holidays. Not sure where you got that from. There is metric tons of junk food in Japan. The difference is they learn from an early age to eat real food. You can find a lot of food you don’t want to eat in Japan. But none of will be low quality. Even the junk food isn’t low quality.

The bluezone in Japan is Okinawa.

The diet there has nothing I would consider a treat or something that would ever satisfy a food craving.

No 5guys, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, gummi bears, Hagen daz ice cream, caramel lattes, McGriddles, etc…

[Anonymous]

It seems one big issue is physical hunger (as opposed to an emotional desire to eat, which is also a problem), and I’m surprised more people aren’t talking about that. That’s why semaglutides are so successful. As someone upthread described, eating 1800 calories for an obese person might feel like eating 700 calories for you. Yes, possible, but incredibly difficult to do day after day without intervention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing CICO is good for is that it is a handy shortcut for identifying people who aren’t too bright.

It depends on how they are using it. If they follow it up with "duh, just eat less and exercise more" then yes.

Honestly, I’ve so rarely seen intelligent and perceptive conversation follow when people talk about CICO that I’m comfortable using it as a heuristic for stupidity. Occasionally CICO is used thoughtfully by research scientists but in everyday life, it’s a spot-on heuristic.

PP here. That's good to know! I now understand why people I largely agree with respond very negatively to me when I use the phrase.

Yeah, there isn’t a great history of that phrase being used in a cogent and intellectually rigorous manner. I would honestly avoid it. I tend to immediately associate the use of CICO in health-related conversation with scientific illiteracy.

You keep accusing anyone who uses CICO, even in limited ways, of scientific illiteracy. I have been on this board 2 years and the same topic appears every few months and people go on and on for 70-80 ages about the same things. The same insults are hurled. If CICO doesn’t work in certain situations for certain people, then why is there a whole forum (this one) devoted to diet and exercise? Real people are looking for support, ideas, experiences, tips, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing CICO is good for is that it is a handy shortcut for identifying people who aren’t too bright.

It depends on how they are using it. If they follow it up with "duh, just eat less and exercise more" then yes.

If only they had the intelligence to be coddled by the New York Times to validate their life choices.

The original post was so dumb it hurts anybody with a brain. Nobody thinks CICO standing alone as a rigid idea is a solution. But a general framework of don’t eat piles of garbage and actually move instead sitting in front of a computer all day is a good idea.

Okay so here we have:

1) ad hominem
2) ad hominem again
3) generalization
4) straw man
5) false dichotomy

It's amazing that every single sentence in your comment contains at least one logical fallacy.

I don't want to insult anybody's intelligence, so I will just say that I believe you can do better here.

Funny this is a response to a response to the same kind of comment concerning reference to CICO and people “not being too bright.”

Look, if you want to be a victim yourself or try to make it out as if there are all these elaborate external factors for everybody, go right ahead. It’s just a form of gatekeeping. People can lead healthy lives and lose excess weight. It’s possible. And, they can keep the weight off and change their lifestyle. All of these things are possible.

Then why do 9/10 dieters regain all the weight?

Obesity is a health condition. New medications hold a lot of promise for treatment. Or we could tax junk food. But in 50 years, the blame and shame conversation will have moved on. Enjoy while you can I guess.

They regain because they go back eating the same foods.


Bluezone diets for example japan, diet consist of sweet potato, seafood, green veggies, and pork on holidays. Obesity is low.

The Japanese don’t eat pork only on holidays. Not sure where you got that from. There is metric tons of junk food in Japan. The difference is they learn from an early age to eat real food. You can find a lot of food you don’t want to eat in Japan. But none of will be low quality. Even the junk food isn’t low quality.

The bluezone in Japan is Okinawa.

The diet there has nothing I would consider a treat or something that would ever satisfy a food craving.

No 5guys, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, gummi bears, Hagen daz ice cream, caramel lattes, McGriddles, etc…

I hate to be the one to correct you, but you are wrong about Okinawa. They have plenty of fast food options. Go ahead and google McDonald’s or KFC using maps and it will show you. Every single convenience store in Japan sells Hagen Daz ice cream and Piles of other junk food. The portions may be small at the conbini but if you are bell bent on a larger portion you just buy more.

You want sugary coffee? Starbucks locations are all over Okinawa.

The Japanese (although Okinawans are their own subset) have what Americans don’t - discipline.

The japanese are also quick to point out how fat you are. I know, I lived there and managed to stay fat and got fatter between trips.

Amazingly the available food isn’t an external factor to them. There are obese people in japan, and it’s on the rise, but it’s erase compared to the numbers in the west.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing CICO is good for is that it is a handy shortcut for identifying people who aren’t too bright.

It depends on how they are using it. If they follow it up with "duh, just eat less and exercise more" then yes.

Honestly, I’ve so rarely seen intelligent and perceptive conversation follow when people talk about CICO that I’m comfortable using it as a heuristic for stupidity. Occasionally CICO is used thoughtfully by research scientists but in everyday life, it’s a spot-on heuristic.

PP here. That's good to know! I now understand why people I largely agree with respond very negatively to me when I use the phrase.

Yeah, there isn’t a great history of that phrase being used in a cogent and intellectually rigorous manner. I would honestly avoid it. I tend to immediately associate the use of CICO in health-related conversation with scientific illiteracy.

You keep accusing anyone who uses CICO, even in limited ways, of scientific illiteracy. I have been on this board 2 years and the same topic appears every few months and people go on and on for 70-80 ages about the same things. The same insults are hurled. If CICO doesn’t work in certain situations for certain people, then why is there a whole forum (this one) devoted to diet and exercise? Real people are looking for support, ideas, experiences, tips, etc.

The answer evidently is to figure out a way to be employed studying obesity, make it as complicated as possible, convince people it’s all external factors, convince people it’s impossible to fix on their own, and motivate people with a lot of buying power to soak up drugs intended for people with type 2 diabetes so the supply is constrained and people that actually need those drugs cannot get them.

I think I got it right.

[Anonymous]

For anyone interested, there are a few fitness professionals I follow on instagram who are really helpful in getting a handle on all this. Two are personal trainers who have gotten or are getting advanced degree specializing in obesity/weight loss, another is a personal trainer and I believe he has an advanced degree too but I am not sure.

They loathe the way people use the phrase calories in calories out. In separate IG posts they have all pointed out that saying "you need to focus on calories in calories out" is like a financial adviser saying "okay here is what you need to do: save more and spend less. You're welcome." Or a coach team saying "score more, don't let them score as many goals."

They have great fitness and nutrition advice, including weight loss advice for those who want it, but do a good job balancing weight loss goals and general health. And they drag people who give crap advice.


I don't love getting expert advice from instagram (I wish they had blogs) but they do include studies in their posts. Links:

Ben Carpenter
https://www.instagram.com/bdccarpenter/

Luke Hanna
https://www.instagram.com/lukehannanutrition

Sohee Lee
/https://www.instagram.com/soheefit/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems one big issue is physical hunger (as opposed to an emotional desire to eat, which is also a problem), and I’m surprised more people aren’t talking about that. That’s why semaglutides are so successful. As someone upthread described, eating 1800 calories for an obese person might feel like eating 700 calories for you. Yes, possible, but incredibly difficult to do day after day without intervention.

The people who bleat on about CICO hate the existence and shocking success of the semaglutides because those provide hard evidence that obesity is not a moral failing. If a medication can immediately and profoundly remove the desire to overeat, it means overeating is a medical problem, not an issue of willpower, and the anti-fat moralists lose their platform. That’s why they don’t want to talk about the semaglutides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing CICO is good for is that it is a handy shortcut for identifying people who aren’t too bright.

It depends on how they are using it. If they follow it up with "duh, just eat less and exercise more" then yes.

If only they had the intelligence to be coddled by the New York Times to validate their life choices.

The original post was so dumb it hurts anybody with a brain. Nobody thinks CICO standing alone as a rigid idea is a solution. But a general framework of don’t eat piles of garbage and actually move instead sitting in front of a computer all day is a good idea.

Okay so here we have:

1) ad hominem
2) ad hominem again
3) generalization
4) straw man
5) false dichotomy

It's amazing that every single sentence in your comment contains at least one logical fallacy.

I don't want to insult anybody's intelligence, so I will just say that I believe you can do better here.

Funny this is a response to a response to the same kind of comment concerning reference to CICO and people “not being too bright.”

Look, if you want to be a victim yourself or try to make it out as if there are all these elaborate external factors for everybody, go right ahead. It’s just a form of gatekeeping. People can lead healthy lives and lose excess weight. It’s possible. And, they can keep the weight off and change their lifestyle. All of these things are possible.

Then why do 9/10 dieters regain all the weight?

Obesity is a health condition. New medications hold a lot of promise for treatment. Or we could tax junk food. But in 50 years, the blame and shame conversation will have moved on. Enjoy while you can I guess.

They regain because they go back eating the same foods.


Bluezone diets for example japan, diet consist of sweet potato, seafood, green veggies, and pork on holidays. Obesity is low.

The Japanese don’t eat pork only on holidays. Not sure where you got that from. There is metric tons of junk food in Japan. The difference is they learn from an early age to eat real food. You can find a lot of food you don’t want to eat in Japan. But none of will be low quality. Even the junk food isn’t low quality.

The bluezone in Japan is Okinawa.

The diet there has nothing I would consider a treat or something that would ever satisfy a food craving.

No 5guys, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, gummi bears, Hagen daz ice cream, caramel lattes, McGriddles, etc…

I hate to be the one to correct you, but you are wrong about Okinawa. They have plenty of fast food options. Go ahead and google McDonald’s or KFC using maps and it will show you. Every single convenience store in Japan sells Hagen Daz ice cream and Piles of other junk food. The portions may be small at the conbini but if you are bell bent on a larger portion you just buy more.

You want sugary coffee? Starbucks locations are all over Okinawa.

The Japanese (although Okinawans are their own subset) have what Americans don’t - discipline.

The japanese are also quick to point out how fat you are. I know, I lived there and managed to stay fat and got fatter between trips.

Amazingly the available food isn’t an external factor to them. There are obese people in japan, and it’s on the rise, but it’s erase compared to the numbers in the west.

The point I was getting across is that if a diet primarily composed of the below, chances of being obese is low. The reason I was obese was because of my diet and overeating the above.


https://blogs.furman.edu/wellness/2016/02/12/the-blue-zones-discovering-the-secrets-of-longevity/
"Interestingly, the macronutrient distribution ranges and accessory foods do vary. For example, the Traditional Okinawan diet is very high in carbohydrate (85%), low in protein (9%), and very low in fat (6%) (7). The carbohydrates tend to come from large portions of low energy density, high nutrient density foods such as green and yellow vegetables, soy products like tofu, seaweed, and purple sweet potatoes that are common to the region."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing CICO is good for is that it is a handy shortcut for identifying people who aren’t too bright.

It depends on how they are using it. If they follow it up with "duh, just eat less and exercise more" then yes.

Honestly, I’ve so rarely seen intelligent and perceptive conversation follow when people talk about CICO that I’m comfortable using it as a heuristic for stupidity. Occasionally CICO is used thoughtfully by research scientists but in everyday life, it’s a spot-on heuristic.

PP here. That's good to know! I now understand why people I largely agree with respond very negatively to me when I use the phrase.

Yeah, there isn’t a great history of that phrase being used in a cogent and intellectually rigorous manner. I would honestly avoid it. I tend to immediately associate the use of CICO in health-related conversation with scientific illiteracy.

You keep accusing anyone who uses CICO, even in limited ways, of scientific illiteracy. I have been on this board 2 years and the same topic appears every few months and people go on and on for 70-80 ages about the same things. The same insults are hurled. If CICO doesn’t work in certain situations for certain people, then why is there a whole forum (this one) devoted to diet and exercise? Real people are looking for support, ideas, experiences, tips, etc.

Uh, can you really not figure this out? You are actually being serious?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing CICO is good for is that it is a handy shortcut for identifying people who aren’t too bright.

It depends on how they are using it. If they follow it up with "duh, just eat less and exercise more" then yes.

Honestly, I’ve so rarely seen intelligent and perceptive conversation follow when people talk about CICO that I’m comfortable using it as a heuristic for stupidity. Occasionally CICO is used thoughtfully by research scientists but in everyday life, it’s a spot-on heuristic.

PP here. That's good to know! I now understand why people I largely agree with respond very negatively to me when I use the phrase.

Yeah, there isn’t a great history of that phrase being used in a cogent and intellectually rigorous manner. I would honestly avoid it. I tend to immediately associate the use of CICO in health-related conversation with scientific illiteracy.

You keep accusing anyone who uses CICO, even in limited ways, of scientific illiteracy. I have been on this board 2 years and the same topic appears every few months and people go on and on for 70-80 ages about the same things. The same insults are hurled. If CICO doesn’t work in certain situations for certain people, then why is there a whole forum (this one) devoted to diet and exercise? Real people are looking for support, ideas, experiences, tips, etc.

The answer evidently is to figure out a way to be employed studying obesity, make it as complicated as possible, convince people it’s all external factors, convince people it’s impossible to fix on their own, and motivate people with a lot of buying power to soak up drugs intended for people with type 2 diabetes so the supply is constrained and people that actually need those drugs cannot get them.

I think I got it right.

You are proving my point about your scientific illiteracy quite well. Thank you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems one big issue is physical hunger (as opposed to an emotional desire to eat, which is also a problem), and I’m surprised more people aren’t talking about that. That’s why semaglutides are so successful. As someone upthread described, eating 1800 calories for an obese person might feel like eating 700 calories for you. Yes, possible, but incredibly difficult to do day after day without intervention.

The people who bleat on about CICO hate the existence and shocking success of the semaglutides because those provide hard evidence that obesity is not a moral failing. If a medication can immediately and profoundly remove the desire to overeat, it means overeating is a medical problem, not an issue of willpower, and the anti-fat moralists lose their platform. That’s why they don’t want to talk about the semaglutides.

Oh the huge manatee. Nobody is losing a platform and nobody is spending time talking or thinking about this outside of this exchange. I’m sorry you think people are lording over you in that way. It’s really sad you spend the time to think that way.

I think the new drugs are great, especially for their target population. What I don’t think is great is the prolific off label use that is eating up supply for those that actually need those drugs. I think also it’s an easier fix with unknown long term side effects. The goal in life is to avoid pharmaceuticals.

Desire to overeat is 100% a medical problem by definition. But it’s a medical problem a much higher percentage of people can overcome than what you believe. They can do all that without some exotic drug intervention.