>calories in calories out doesn't work for me
Do people unironically believe this? Are there people on this earth that actually reject the concept of energy in vs. energy out?
>calories in calories out doesn't work for me
>calories in calories out doesn't work for me
Do people unironically believe this? Are there people on this earth that actually reject the concept of energy in vs. energy out?
Doesn't work for all. I eat about 1500 cals a day and am stuck at 221lb (5'11) for the past 2 years.
nah
No you don't. Lol. Buy a food scale and quit snacking.
you've been diligently tracking your calories for 2 years straight, not once missing a day's calorie intake, and you've been stuck at 221 lbs? you're either moronic or as physically active as a sea slug.
An adult male needs around 2500 KCal per day, not counting the extra energy burnt from gym or sports. There's no way that moron is consuming only 1500.
You fricked up your metabolism by not eating enough for too long.
>cicotards who think the humain body is a calculator will disagree
You're missing the forest for the trees you moron.
>Hurr durr the human body isn't a calculator
JUST CONSUME LESS CALORIES THAN YOU EXPEND I AM TRYING TO HELP YOU
Cicotards are so predictable
It's because the average fatty has no idea just how.many calories they are consuming. 6 oz angus beef patty, 440 calories. You wanted a slice of cheese, add another 120 calories. Bun, another 110. 2oz bag of chips, 220 calories. That cheeseburger and chips just cost 890 calories. That's almost half of your calories on the day.
Unironically posting about "starvation mode" lol. Pic related
wrong, sorry fatty
>counting calories for 2 years
>not changing a single thing
>proceed to complain when the output doesn't change despite not changing anything
1,500 kcal is below maintenance level for a man of your size.
You are certainly overeating.
then eat less than 1500 calories a day you fat moron
>And here is a test, one of rational and logic about the implications about this anon
>Occam's razor stipulates that the simplest explanation is the most probable
>Could Anon have a Body that defies the conventional observations about the universe that we describe with the laws of thermodynamics?
>Or...
>He is lying, confused or stupid?
>You decide with your Reasoning skills
Pic related is probably your staple.
You guys are probably insulin resistant. Your body can't use fat for fuel, only carbs. Try low carb diet and zone 2 cardio.
Fatties will think they are eating 1500cal a day
But they don't count snacks, or thickshakes, or the fries with their burger meal, or extra large soft drinks, or all the maple syrup and chocolate sauce they use etc
This is my 120 day cut from this year. Top row is daily weigh-in reading, then daily calorie intake, daily protein intake in grams, then the difference compared to last day. 183 cm/6'0. Average kcal intake ended up being 1762 kcal. Get fricked.
CICO works for me, for about 8 weeks, and then it stops
>uhhh no it didn't stop working, you just lost weight and now need eat less
Nope, my CICO calculator says I should still be losing weight on the calories im on, its just that after a few months my body adapts to the calorie intake and then stops losing fat.
I know its sounds moronic but it always fricking happens to me, its why I stopped bothering with CICO and just starve myself if I want to lose some fat.
Honestly you admitting it sounds moronic makes me empathize but it is moronic anon.
Just eat less calories. You think you won't lose weight if you eat less?
To give more information on this.
I would start at cut at 200lbs and eat 1500 calories
I should be able to lose weight on 1500 calories until im like 130lb.
But after 8 weeks on 1500 Ill go down to like 180lbs and then ill get stuck at 180lbs on 1500 and it wont budge anymore, despite the fact 1500 calories maintains a weight of 130lbs
So im still eating a calorie amount that should have me still losing weight for another 50lbs, but it stops anyway.
This is what I believe to be a function of the body that adapts your body to be able to exist on less calories so you dont suddenly start starving to death. This adaptation feature of the body I believe is what causes CICO to stop working
That said... if you refeed the body for several weeks/months, you can escape this, and fix your CICO again, and then CICO will work again.
The problem is CICO doesn't seem to want to work permanently as your body adapts to maintain itself on the lower calorie intake which occurs when you're in a prolonged calorie deficit.
It for the most part is true. Your body is a fricking fine-tuned machine with self-calibration functions. Your body can easily drop T3 and T4 levels just to "slow down" your metabolism. I know, it can't be slowed down in a sense of this word but thyroid levels and insulin response are few ways how your body adapts to your current diet.
>It for the most part is true.
No, it's true for the least part. Changes in metabolism cause by body self-regulating have minimal bearing on kcal requirements. The body can conserve energy by saving on things like thermoregulation (you will feel more cold/hot) but not much else. You'd need to suffer from a very rare and very crippling disease for the body to actually straight up ignore a huge chunk of bioavailable energy.
Either your calories in changed or more likely your calories out changed. Have you tried moving more?
Im not OP im just explaining my personal experience with CICOing over the years.
Like I said, the CICO works for like 8 weeks, and then it stops working, even when im on calories that are well under my maintenance.
Like I said
>start cut at 200lbs - on 1500 calories
>1500 calories is the maintenance of about 130lbs, so I should never stop losing weight on 150lbs until about 130lbs
>get down to 180lbs over 8 weeks or so
>weightless comes to a complete stop on 1500 calories despite still being 50lbs over what is maintenance for 1500 calorie intake
I have no other explanation for this other than the body adapts to the calorie intake after a few months no matter if youre still well above what those calories should maintain.
The fact I have experienced this 20+ times over the last 10 years when I cut indicates to me that there is some kind of adaptive response in the body when you force yourself on a specific calorie number.
To extend on this again.
The only way I can get CICO to work again is if I start eating more calories again for a few months, I think that is what "fixes" the adaptive response
I was 245 lbs and put the app on maintenance for 180 and left it there. Been bouncing between 165-170 for the last couple months and like this range so will just stay here as I’m pretty lean, app still on maintenance for 180lbs. CICO seems to work for really well for me, maybe you should try dramatically increasing your activity levels.
i have the same. i will make insane progress for like a month or a bit more, then it will slow down till it basically just stops on literally the exact same diet. i lost more than a kg per week easy the first few weeks but after like 6 or 8 weeks i barely lose a kilo in a month.
when we describe cico as thermodynamics at work, you have to compare it with other thermodynamics systems, like stars. If you've payed attention in middle school sci you might have heard that larger stars die faster than smaller ones comparitivly. this is due to them expending more energy.
as someone who lost mass, you are expending less calories by default, your body had to work harder to deal with all the extra mass, your co level was higher.
always remember, the 2000 calorie marker was built for a specific height and activity level for men. Women and people taller or shorter need to alter accordingly.
this is the reason people recommend lifting weights to the obese, activity increases co level, as does having higher muscle mass.
dont forget the other o ending words of micro and macro either, getting the micro nutrients and macro nutrients.
>Thermodynamics doesn’t apply to me
People are good at lying to themselves.
in calories out doesn't work for me
This means you can eat 3000+ ccal a day without getting fat. Lucky bastard.
ITT: fatasses legitimately trying to argue that eating less calories than you burn doesn't make you lose weight. All I can say is shiggy.
I'm guessing a bunch of these morons don't put in bf% or don't adjust for their weight loss too.
>hurr I put in the weight I wanted to get to at maintenance but it doesn't work!
>ignoring the bf% changes
Thats irrelevant for energy in vs energy out when you simply just want to lower you total bodyweight
Worrying about muscle mass in that factor is pointless, if you lift weights youre going to have extra muscle anyway, and that only serves to allow you to cut on slightly higher calories, so taking it into account is pointless, it doesn't matter
The fact you have yet to argue over is what i explained about me eating 1500 calories for 8 weeks, going from 200 to 180, but then suddenly experiencing a point where the weight loss stalls completely despite 1500 calories still being a large calorie deficit for a 180lb lifter
You're a moron, you need the extra calories maintaining the fat as well. Since you're losing the fat it is less calories to maintain it and you're going to lose some muscle too which requires even more calories than fat. You have to adjust the TDEE for what you lost and your new body fat percentage.
Again.
1500 calories is still a big deficit for 180lbs bodyweight no matter what the bodyfat% is at 180lbs whether its 15% BF or 30% BF its still a big deficit
Dude, putting in no body fat percentage in the calculator vs. putting in low / high body fat can change the calculation by like +/- 200 calories. It sounds like you're just a no muscle moron. You also put sedimentary for the tdee calculator and aren't trying to estimate your calories burned, right? I've seen some morons here thinking they were burning 500 calories just from lifting weights for an hour a day so they eat 2,000 calories thinking they netted out to 1,500 when the reality is they were at 1,800-1,900.
>Sedimentary
I'm busy, sedentary or BMR or whatever you want to say. I'm guessing not since you got fixated on the wrong word like a redditor.
ITT: Anons who don't understand what its like to have metabolic disprivilege
homie you got a fission reactor in there somewhere? Where is the energy coming from?
Any comments suggesting diet or exercise will be deleted.
>CICO deniers when faced with an objective scientific principle
>CICO deniers
No one here denies CICO. However, you only have control of "calories in" and "calories out" is a complex multivariable function. The ultimate question for CICO is not how determine your basal metabolic rate accurately. It's non trivial.
>you only have control of "calories in"
Have you heard of physical acitivity?
>It's non trivial.
It doesn't have to be accurate though, you don't need an exact number. If you're eating at 2000 kcal and still gaining weight, reduce what you eat or increase the amount of physical acitivty. Repeat until weight starts going down.
Well some people identify as CICO not working for them OP.
You're not going to deny them their right to self-actualization and their sense of self are you Anon? Because that would be very hateful and I can tell you the feds would be right on to you.
Ok, shitposting aside, can you share more details about your situation? For example:
1) How active you are, how do you excersize?
2) Share your food log for a last week.
I have an experience of getting from 98 kg to 72kg 7% bodyfat, and I'm genuinely want to help.
Only fat and muscles store energy. You only get energy from food.
Explain yourself, OP.
No, you're being baited because this board is dogshit
calories in calories out =/= fat to adipose fat out of adipose
also, conservation of mass > thermodynamics
Cico deniers don't forget about plateaus aight? Your metabolism doesn't slow down 1000 calories a day out of nowhere