Calories in, calories out? It's not quite so simple

[Anonymous]

Stumbled across this article and thought I'd share:

https://www.thedailymeal.com/healthy-eating/reddit-s-favorite-diet-trend-horrifically-outdated-nutritionists-say/111317

[Anonymous]

I agree! I had a nutritionist tell me years ago that counting calories is pointless because of what is discussed in the article. The only solution to long term weight loss and sustainability is fresh healthy food.

[Anonymous]

It's so true. The "calories in, calories out, simple" advice is super outdated. Recently they even found that people digest alcohol calories very differently, which explains all those stick thin socialites that are pounding drink after drink each night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's so true. The "calories in, calories out, simple" advice is super outdated. Recently they even found that people digest alcohol calories very differently, which explains all those stick thin socialites that are pounding drink after drink each night.

How is it digested?

Every time I drink the food just sticks to me!

[Anonymous]

I assume the stick thin socialites are replacing their food calories with alcohol calories. Whereas the rest of us have a few drinks and then order the nachos because nachos are f'ing delicious.

My friends and I were debating this the other day, though - the alcohol calories. I like my wine, but I recognize that wine is basically empty calories, so ideally I would drink less of it. A couple of my friends insist that alcohol calories are ONLY problematic because of the poor food choices you make when under the influence. But I don't think that's actually true. I eat about the same whether I'm sober or drinking because I choose my food when I order that first drink. I think that alcohol, sweets and nutritionally empty snacks are in the same category - things you should consume minimal amounts of if you want to be truly healthy and keep an eye on your weight.

[Anonymous]

Calories in / calories out only matters if you want to lose weight and keep if off.

Sure, there are a lot of factors that make energy balance different from one person to another, but the basic fact is that if you consume fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight. Different people burn at different rates, different people get different amounts of energy from the same foods, and different factors affect appetite, but the basic physics remains the same. Also, it's been shown in thousands of clinical studies.

Most people who claim that CICO is invalid:

1) Wildly overestimate calories burned from exercise.
2) Wildly underestimate their calories consumed because they eyeball quantities rather than measuring liquids and weighing solids.
3) Don't log all their food.
4) Think that somehow "cheat days" or "cheat meals" don't count.
5) Don't stick to a calorie deficit long enough to see true trends (which can be masked by water weight gain from exercise, period weight, normal day to day fluctuations, etc.)

Personally, I use myfitnesspal and when I log, weigh and measure, weight comes off exactly as the model predicts. When I stop logging, weighing and measuring, I tend to regain weight. I currently weigh 50 pounds less than my max (from a dozen years ago), I'm in the 7th percentile for my age and gender in body fat and I expect to keep logging for many years to come.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's so true. The "calories in, calories out, simple" advice is super outdated. Recently they even found that people digest alcohol calories very differently, which explains all those stick thin socialites that are pounding drink after drink each night.

How is it digested?

Every time I drink the food just sticks to me!

I cant remember exactly as I saw it a couple weeks back. Something about how the calories in drinks matter less! Which is I guess uplifting news. I wish I could remember exactly. Getting blackout and ordering pizza definitely works against it though haha

[Anonymous]

Point three is probably the most critical: people and bodies and metabolisms are all different. The same diet is metabolized differently by different people, and thus has different effects on weight. Which is why some people can drink alcohol and not gain weight, whereas others do gain from alcohol. Or why, while breastfeeding, some women eat enormous amounts of food and are rail thin, while others can't lose weight to save their lives, even when not eating a ton, until they wean.

Bodies are different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Point three is probably the most critical: people and bodies and metabolisms are all different. The same diet is metabolized differently by different people, and thus has different effects on weight. Which is why some people can drink alcohol and not gain weight, whereas others do gain from alcohol. Or why, while breastfeeding, some women eat enormous amounts of food and are rail thin, while others can't lose weight to save their lives, even when not eating a ton, until they wean.

Bodies are different.

Or someone can eat a ton of carbs and be thin, others blow up after eating an English muffin (me!). Meanwhile there are other things I eat that I know my carb loving friends might not process as well. Like I firmly believe I need lots of red meat in my diet to be healthy, despite not really loving it at this moment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Point three is probably the most critical: people and bodies and metabolisms are all different. The same diet is metabolized differently by different people, and thus has different effects on weight. Which is why some people can drink alcohol and not gain weight, whereas others do gain from alcohol. Or why, while breastfeeding, some women eat enormous amounts of food and are rail thin, while others can't lose weight to save their lives, even when not eating a ton, until they wean.

Bodies are different.

People metabolize calories differently, but not by so much that it is the difference between slim and obese. It's estimated that the vast majority of people are within 200 calories of one another (a.k.a. 3 Oreo cookies or 2 tablespoons of peanut butter).

https://examine.com/nutrition/does-metabolism-vary-between-two-people/

"Metabolic rate does vary, and technically there could be large variance. However, statistically speaking it is unlikely the variance would apply to you. The majority of the population exists in a range of 200-300kcal from each other and do not possess hugely different metabolic rates."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Point three is probably the most critical: people and bodies and metabolisms are all different. The same diet is metabolized differently by different people, and thus has different effects on weight. Which is why some people can drink alcohol and not gain weight, whereas others do gain from alcohol. Or why, while breastfeeding, some women eat enormous amounts of food and are rail thin, while others can't lose weight to save their lives, even when not eating a ton, until they wean.

Bodies are different.

People metabolize calories differently, but not by so much that it is the difference between slim and obese. It's estimated that the vast majority of people are within 200 calories of one another (a.k.a. 3 Oreo cookies or 2 tablespoons of peanut butter).

https://examine.com/nutrition/does-metabolism-vary-between-two-people/

"Metabolic rate does vary, and technically there could be large variance. However, statistically speaking it is unlikely the variance would apply to you. The majority of the population exists in a range of 200-300kcal from each other and do not possess hugely different metabolic rates."

200-300 calories daily is huge...

[Anonymous]

Bodies are different and metabolize differently, but fundamentally, it's still calories in and calories out (even if those calories have a different impact on different bodies).

Now, where it's NOT so simple is satiety and blood sugar. There is plenty of evidence indicated that the types of food can impact satiety and help people feel full, and hence eat fewer calories.

But CICO is still fundamentally correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's so true. The "calories in, calories out, simple" advice is super outdated. Recently they even found that people digest alcohol calories very differently, which explains all those stick thin socialites that are pounding drink after drink each night.

I know a lot of stick thin heavy drinkers and a lot of them make themselves throw up after a night of drinking (sometimes they don't even have to make themselves).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bodies are different and metabolize differently, but fundamentally, it's still calories in and calories out (even if those calories have a different impact on different bodies).

Now, where it's NOT so simple is satiety and blood sugar. There is plenty of evidence indicated that the types of food can impact satiety and help people feel full, and hence eat fewer calories.

But CICO is still fundamentally correct.

No, it's not and that's the point.

You types are so determined, clinging to what you want to be true even when confronted with facts saying no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's so true. The "calories in, calories out, simple" advice is super outdated. Recently they even found that people digest alcohol calories very differently, which explains all those stick thin socialites that are pounding drink after drink each night.

I know a lot of stick thin heavy drinkers and a lot of them make themselves throw up after a night of drinking (sometimes they don't even have to make themselves).

And I know MANY stick thin heavy drinkers who don't throw up at the end of the night. I also know many overweight bulimics.