You should pair it with fasting methods like OMAD. Overall, CICO is true but a traditional daily deficit will ruin metabolism while fasting will maintain it.
Metabolism gets messed up when you constantly have high insulin but low glucose (usually from a calorie restricted diet that still involves eating carbs throughout the day). High insulin prevents you from burning body fat, which lowers your metabolism. With intermittent fasting you have high insulin and high glucose immediately after eating but then they both drop to stable levels during the majority of the day. The low insulin allows your body to burn body fat.
It's more sustainable long term and gives the body a chance to balance hormones and access reserves.
>If this were true, diabetics with high blood sugar whose pancreas doesn’t put out enough insulin would all be shredded stfu
T2 Diabetics eat too many carbs, which raise their insulin. They then become insulin resistant and produce even more. T1 and T2 diabetics inject themselves with insulin. They have too much but can't use it
But does every meal increase insulin to the same level? Does that insulin spike stay elevated at the same rate independent of the amount of calories I eat?
If I at 500 calories in one meal, do I get the same amount of insulin increase and time of elevated insulin levels as say if I ate 2000 calories in one meal?
I went on a 6 month cut. 500 deficit per day.
I lost the same amount of weight on my last week as I did on my first week. Dropped total of 12kg. (500 deficit = 2kg per month) So it followed that 1:1
My metabolism didn't slow down a single calorie. There is probably some theoretical data suggesting it slows down but the takeaway here is that it's fatty cope. If it does, it's gonna be like 50 calories or maybe 100 AT MOST in extreme scenarios. People just love being superstitious and coming up with excuses for their failure.
because he ate the same amount, which was lower than usual, and lost the same amount of weight. CICO is kinda true, but the laws of thermodynamics is very true, you eat less, you'll lose weight, you eat more, you'll gain weight, simple as, just make sure to lift heavy throughout and keep that muscle. It really is that easy.
Pretty much this, but ‘cope’ doesn’t do a good job explaining the mental process. Obesity is a mental illness, being fat is the most visible side-effect. Fat people are constantly looking for an out. No matter how insensible, when provided an out, they’ll take it. Anything is preferred to CICO, which is the only way to lose weight. So if you say “CICO involves diminishing returns”, while that doesn’t mean CICO doesn’t work, the mental illness will take it the extra mile to “CICO doesn’t work”. They just need that first inch of an out. They want to lose weight. But their psychology gets in their own way.
He doesn't say that CICO doesn't work, he says it doesn't address the issues over the long run at least by itself. His fasting recommendations for weight loss are basically a refined CICO method. Fung argues from the hormonal theory of obesity and diabetes, not caloric. Fung points out that the way our metabolism functions is dependent on what and when we eat, not just how much. If you only look at CICO, you are ignoring all the hormonal processes in the body and how we gain or lose weight is completely determined by our hormones. He says in The Obesity Code that all diets pretty much work for weight loss initially, but if you don't bottom out your insulin levels (i.e. if you are snacking or eating often) your body will undergo metabolic adaptation to the lower calorie level. His work is addressing the obesity issue and he argues that in a widespread mass population basis, CICO by itself doesn’t work and does nothing to address the underlying cause of metabolic disease or adaptation. Is he wrong?
>Is CICO even true?
Yes >I thought that if you restrict your calorie intake that your metabolism will slow down?
No. That's not how the body works. Your BMR or basal metabolic rate actually increases during a deficit because of the thermogenic requirements for lipolysis. What fasting or maintaining a caloric deficit can do however is instigate hormonal changes that will prompt your body to store as much energy as it can upon breaking a fast & returning to a caloric surplus.
>Metabolism will slow down
Ask yourself: where is this "metabolism slowdown" going to come from? Is the body going to magically become more energy efficient? If so, why wouldn't it be in the "doesn't need as much food to survive" mode 100% of the time.
And even if it were true, are you gonna COMPLAIN about becoming more efficient? Your body clearly didn't need all that much food anyway.
Sounds like fatty cope. Stop being greedy and put down the fork, maybe for longer than you at first thought.
>metabolism will slow down?
Yeah if you eat less you will feel less energetic usually so you will move less and burn less kcal than before.
But 99% of the time, you metabolism slow down will cause less calories expenditure difference than the calorie deficit that causes it, so you will still lose weight (usually a pretty good amount too if you arent doing some moron diet).
Yes it's true.
Your metabolism does not slow down. The only thing that fricks your metabolism is fasting.
Consistent low calorie days paired with lifting is the only proven way to drop fat and retain muscle.
I am racist but I would have sex with her
Same
You thought wrong then
Literally hand crafted for bwc she has 5 mixed kids btw with a white guy
Name plz
depends on the deficit, but if you keep physically active your body literally cant restrict it
I dont think thread is about dietary science bros...
You should pair it with fasting methods like OMAD. Overall, CICO is true but a traditional daily deficit will ruin metabolism while fasting will maintain it.
Metabolism gets messed up when you constantly have high insulin but low glucose (usually from a calorie restricted diet that still involves eating carbs throughout the day). High insulin prevents you from burning body fat, which lowers your metabolism. With intermittent fasting you have high insulin and high glucose immediately after eating but then they both drop to stable levels during the majority of the day. The low insulin allows your body to burn body fat.
It's more sustainable long term and gives the body a chance to balance hormones and access reserves.
If this were true, diabetics with high blood sugar whose pancreas doesn’t put out enough insulin would all be shredded stfu
>If this were true, diabetics with high blood sugar whose pancreas doesn’t put out enough insulin would all be shredded stfu
T2 Diabetics eat too many carbs, which raise their insulin. They then become insulin resistant and produce even more. T1 and T2 diabetics inject themselves with insulin. They have too much but can't use it
But does every meal increase insulin to the same level? Does that insulin spike stay elevated at the same rate independent of the amount of calories I eat?
If I at 500 calories in one meal, do I get the same amount of insulin increase and time of elevated insulin levels as say if I ate 2000 calories in one meal?
I went on a 6 month cut. 500 deficit per day.
I lost the same amount of weight on my last week as I did on my first week. Dropped total of 12kg. (500 deficit = 2kg per month) So it followed that 1:1
My metabolism didn't slow down a single calorie. There is probably some theoretical data suggesting it slows down but the takeaway here is that it's fatty cope. If it does, it's gonna be like 50 calories or maybe 100 AT MOST in extreme scenarios. People just love being superstitious and coming up with excuses for their failure.
How do you know your metabolism didn't slow down?
because he ate the same amount, which was lower than usual, and lost the same amount of weight. CICO is kinda true, but the laws of thermodynamics is very true, you eat less, you'll lose weight, you eat more, you'll gain weight, simple as, just make sure to lift heavy throughout and keep that muscle. It really is that easy.
> fatty cope
Pretty much this, but ‘cope’ doesn’t do a good job explaining the mental process. Obesity is a mental illness, being fat is the most visible side-effect. Fat people are constantly looking for an out. No matter how insensible, when provided an out, they’ll take it. Anything is preferred to CICO, which is the only way to lose weight. So if you say “CICO involves diminishing returns”, while that doesn’t mean CICO doesn’t work, the mental illness will take it the extra mile to “CICO doesn’t work”. They just need that first inch of an out. They want to lose weight. But their psychology gets in their own way.
It will, but by frick all.
People who think CICO isn't true aren't operating at a 100kcal/day surplus induced by metabolic adaptation.
I would CICO her thighs if you know what I mean
blabla cico blabla
provide source immediately
Built for Ivory Tower
>CICO IS NOT TRUE. I AM DIABETES DOCTOR. CICO IS A LIE. SUGAR IS THE ENEMY. IF YOU EAT ONE SUGAR MOLECULE YOU WILL BECOME OBESE.
forgot pic. fml. why do i even try?
He doesn't say that CICO doesn't work, he says it doesn't address the issues over the long run at least by itself. His fasting recommendations for weight loss are basically a refined CICO method. Fung argues from the hormonal theory of obesity and diabetes, not caloric. Fung points out that the way our metabolism functions is dependent on what and when we eat, not just how much. If you only look at CICO, you are ignoring all the hormonal processes in the body and how we gain or lose weight is completely determined by our hormones. He says in The Obesity Code that all diets pretty much work for weight loss initially, but if you don't bottom out your insulin levels (i.e. if you are snacking or eating often) your body will undergo metabolic adaptation to the lower calorie level. His work is addressing the obesity issue and he argues that in a widespread mass population basis, CICO by itself doesn’t work and does nothing to address the underlying cause of metabolic disease or adaptation. Is he wrong?
That’s a body.
>Is CICO even true?
Yes
>I thought that if you restrict your calorie intake that your metabolism will slow down?
No. That's not how the body works. Your BMR or basal metabolic rate actually increases during a deficit because of the thermogenic requirements for lipolysis. What fasting or maintaining a caloric deficit can do however is instigate hormonal changes that will prompt your body to store as much energy as it can upon breaking a fast & returning to a caloric surplus.
>Metabolism will slow down
Ask yourself: where is this "metabolism slowdown" going to come from? Is the body going to magically become more energy efficient? If so, why wouldn't it be in the "doesn't need as much food to survive" mode 100% of the time.
And even if it were true, are you gonna COMPLAIN about becoming more efficient? Your body clearly didn't need all that much food anyway.
Sounds like fatty cope. Stop being greedy and put down the fork, maybe for longer than you at first thought.
>Using anecdotal evidence I have concluded that water is not wet and the sun rises from the west
based. how are there so many people doubtful that eating less will cause weight loss on IST? who did this?
>metabolism will slow down?
Yeah if you eat less you will feel less energetic usually so you will move less and burn less kcal than before.
But 99% of the time, you metabolism slow down will cause less calories expenditure difference than the calorie deficit that causes it, so you will still lose weight (usually a pretty good amount too if you arent doing some moron diet).
God I love slavery
Yes it's true.
Your metabolism does not slow down. The only thing that fricks your metabolism is fasting.
Consistent low calorie days paired with lifting is the only proven way to drop fat and retain muscle.