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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve read two people here who said they don’t weigh themselves, like it’s a bad thing. I weigh myself every day. As soon as it goes up a bit I cut back. It’s so much better than suddenly realizing you’ve gained 25 pounds and now you have to lose all that.

Good for you. But It is a bad thing for some people. It’s a bad thing for me. My mind doesn’t handle it well. If I have gained weight, I try to change things but then I am thinking so much about food I wind up eating more, it messes with my self esteem, that makes me eat more, and then I gain even more weight. If I have lost weight, I tend to think “oh wow I lost weight even though I ate donuts, I guess donuts are fine for me.” And then I gain wright because I’m eating more donuts, and thinking more about food.

You could say “well just don’t be like that.” But i am like that. That is what *my* brain does. Every time I’ve tried to lose weight I gain weight. If I don’t try to lose weight, I make healthier choices because I’m focusing instead on how those choices make me feel.

And I can’t imagine gaining 25 lbs without noticing it (I weighed 125 at a recent doctors visit), but no, if you gain 25 lbs you actually don’t *have* to lose it. There is no rule that says you cannot gain weight. People should go for the easiest, most realistic path to health and for many that is not going to include weight loss.

Ok. You don’t have to lose it, but if you’ve put on 25 lbs and don’t curb what you are eating, it is highly likely to keep climbing. It only take only a few hundred extra calories per week to slowly put on weights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve read two people here who said they don’t weigh themselves, like it’s a bad thing. I weigh myself every day. As soon as it goes up a bit I cut back. It’s so much better than suddenly realizing you’ve gained 25 pounds and now you have to lose all that.

Good for you. But It is a bad thing for some people. It’s a bad thing for me. My mind doesn’t handle it well. If I have gained weight, I try to change things but then I am thinking so much about food I wind up eating more, it messes with my self esteem, that makes me eat more, and then I gain even more weight. If I have lost weight, I tend to think “oh wow I lost weight even though I ate donuts, I guess donuts are fine for me.” And then I gain wright because I’m eating more donuts, and thinking more about food.

You could say “well just don’t be like that.” But i am like that. That is what *my* brain does. Every time I’ve tried to lose weight I gain weight. If I don’t try to lose weight, I make healthier choices because I’m focusing instead on how those choices make me feel.

And I can’t imagine gaining 25 lbs without noticing it (I weighed 125 at a recent doctors visit), but no, if you gain 25 lbs you actually don’t *have* to lose it. There is no rule that says you cannot gain weight. People should go for the easiest, most realistic path to health and for many that is not going to include weight loss.

Ok. You don’t have to lose it, but if you’ve put on 25 lbs and don’t curb what you are eating, it is highly likely to keep climbing. It only take only a few hundred extra calories per week to slowly put on weights.

Cool. Any other ground-breaking advice you want to share? Maybe “if you want a clean house, just clean?” Or “if you want to not be depressed, just think happy thoughts?”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

A lot of people want a second piece of pie…

Should we all be on meds for that? Many of us know what “enough” is and then are able to say no to continuous eating. Even if we want a second helping or a triple scoop ice cream cone.

Congrats on being part of the 25% who can. But the norm for humans is to seek food. We just have too much of it now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

A lot of people want a second piece of pie…

Should we all be on meds for that? Many of us know what “enough” is and then are able to say no to continuous eating. Even if we want a second helping or a triple scoop ice cream cone.

Congrats on being part of the 25% who can. But the norm for humans is to seek food. We just have too much of it now.

I just want to add to this and say that while there are some, say, inherent, fixed factors involved in self-control over a piece of food, like genetics, a lot of what contributes to being unable to resist a second piece of pie is based on life circumstances. So the difference between somebody who can and can’t might be how many demands are on their time, how depressed they are, how much lean protein and vegetables they are able to consume, whether or not they are in stress/anxiety/boredom eating mode, etc. So just because one person can in one contest doesn’t mean they could in another. So they shouldn’t be so smug about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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/

So pretty similar to CICO in that the advice is actually correct, but some people need extra hand-holding to implement it for themselves.

Ah. So professional athletes are just having their hands held. Good to know.

Aren’t you the one arguing that people need extra help to stay fit?

I don't call requiring professional help "hand-holding." My husband was not having his hand held by his oncologists. What a terrible, sneering phrase.

You seem like the sort of person who really goes out of their way to be offended. You are saying in post after post after post how obese people need extra help, special help, how CICO on its own is not nearly enough. And when that same thing is repeated back to you, you act shocked and insulted. You’re exhausting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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/

So pretty similar to CICO in that the advice is actually correct, but some people need extra hand-holding to implement it for themselves.

Ah. So professional athletes are just having their hands held. Good to know.

Aren’t you the one arguing that people need extra help to stay fit?

I don't call requiring professional help "hand-holding." My husband was not having his hand held by his oncologists. What a terrible, sneering phrase.

You seem like the sort of person who really goes out of their way to be offended. You are saying in post after post after post how obese people need extra help, special help, how CICO on its own is not nearly enough. And when that same thing is repeated back to you, you act shocked and insulted. You’re exhausting.

You have no idea who I am or what I've posted before in this thread. Stay exhausted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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/

So pretty similar to CICO in that the advice is actually correct, but some people need extra hand-holding to implement it for themselves.

Ah. So professional athletes are just having their hands held. Good to know.

Aren’t you the one arguing that people need extra help to stay fit?

I don't call requiring professional help "hand-holding." My husband was not having his hand held by his oncologists. What a terrible, sneering phrase.

You seem like the sort of person who really goes out of their way to be offended. You are saying in post after post after post how obese people need extra help, special help, how CICO on its own is not nearly enough. And when that same thing is repeated back to you, you act shocked and insulted. You’re exhausting.

You have no idea who I am or what I've posted before in this thread. Stay exhausted.

Sure thing. Stay offended at your own opinions 👋

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

A lot of people want a second piece of pie…

Should we all be on meds for that? Many of us know what “enough” is and then are able to say no to continuous eating. Even if we want a second helping or a triple scoop ice cream cone.

Okay, good for you? Many others are being helped with medication. Is that a particular issue for you?

[Anonymous]

What is interesting to me is that in my real life, the people I know who are the most obnoxious about “it’s just CICO” or “People just need to put down the fork” or “just don’t eat dessert” are also all on anti-depressants and/or have their kids medicated from an early age for ADHD. And they are loud about “brain differences” and find it incredibly offensive if people say their kids just need to focus or they just need to be happy.

I understand it’s their psychological pain and misery speaking, but the cognitive dissonance is still shocking to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

A lot of people want a second piece of pie…

Should we all be on meds for that? Many of us know what “enough” is and then are able to say no to continuous eating. Even if we want a second helping or a triple scoop ice cream cone.

Congrats on being part of the 25% who can. But the norm for humans is to seek food. We just have too much of it now.

Only 25% of the population has control over their ability to limit their intake? Good thing we have our savior big pharma to swoop in and solve all these problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

A lot of people want a second piece of pie…

Should we all be on meds for that? Many of us know what “enough” is and then are able to say no to continuous eating. Even if we want a second helping or a triple scoop ice cream cone.

Congrats on being part of the 25% who can. But the norm for humans is to seek food. We just have too much of it now.

Only 25% of the population has control over their ability to limit their intake? Good thing we have our savior big pharma to swoop in and solve all these problems.

Unfortunately for you, Big Pharma can’t fix gaping ignorance. It would be nice if you could take a pill to alleviate some of your deficiencies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

A lot of people want a second piece of pie…

Should we all be on meds for that? Many of us know what “enough” is and then are able to say no to continuous eating. Even if we want a second helping or a triple scoop ice cream cone.

Congrats on being part of the 25% who can. But the norm for humans is to seek food. We just have too much of it now.

Only 25% of the population has control over their ability to limit their intake? Good thing we have our savior big pharma to swoop in and solve all these problems.

Well 75% of Americans are at least overweight so….

You know I’m good with money but I don’t go around saying poor people just need to try harder to save their nickels. That’s because I’m a nice person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

A lot of people want a second piece of pie…

Should we all be on meds for that? Many of us know what “enough” is and then are able to say no to continuous eating. Even if we want a second helping or a triple scoop ice cream cone.

Congrats on being part of the 25% who can. But the norm for humans is to seek food. We just have too much of it now.

Only 25% of the population has control over their ability to limit their intake? Good thing we have our savior big pharma to swoop in and solve all these problems.

Well 75% of Americans are at least overweight so….

You know I’m good with money but I don’t go around saying poor people just need to try harder to save their nickels. That’s because I’m a nice person.

And a lot of people just don’t care. You really think 75% of people have zero ability to regulate their food intake without pharmaceutical help?

There are some people that absolutely need assistance and great for them to be able to get that help. But I’m not buying into the idea that the rest of the population has no choice but to be gluttons and can’t save themselves

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

A lot of people want a second piece of pie…

Should we all be on meds for that? Many of us know what “enough” is and then are able to say no to continuous eating. Even if we want a second helping or a triple scoop ice cream cone.

Congrats on being part of the 25% who can. But the norm for humans is to seek food. We just have too much of it now.

Only 25% of the population has control over their ability to limit their intake? Good thing we have our savior big pharma to swoop in and solve all these problems.

Well 75% of Americans are at least overweight so….

You know I’m good with money but I don’t go around saying poor people just need to try harder to save their nickels. That’s because I’m a nice person.

And a lot of people just don’t care. You really think 75% of people have zero ability to regulate their food intake without pharmaceutical help?

There are some people that absolutely need assistance and great for them to be able to get that help. But I’m not buying into the idea that the rest of the population has no choice but to be gluttons and can’t save themselves

Stop the presses, obesity researchers. DCUM Amy has figured it all out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the person obsessed with the idea of obesity as a "moral failing" who posts about it constantly is also the "skinny" obsessed poster who was outed as a troll recently. They are very similar.

Maybe. Personally I think she is one of those MLM weight loss shake shills who is worried she can’t scam her suburban neighbors any more.