Why do people spread lies? CICO has been debunked. Posted on March 30, 2023 by Anonymous Why do people spread lies? CICO has been debunked.
I just bunked it.
How bout that gay.
What is the bodies response to a calorie deficit
thats why keto retards are retards
body is what?
Using stored fat for fuel. Your BMR doesn’t really decrease until you are starting to die of starvation, and that doesn’t happen until you have bf% too low to sustain hormonal processes. You might get tired and move less, but BMR stays the same. It’s already efficient even in a calorie surplus. Your body doesn’t waste energy just because you are eating a lot. It stores it as evolution designed it to do.
No. Your body doesn't deliberately lower anything. It happens to go down because there's less body mass to keep alive. Even your fat cells themselves require energy to stay live because they're still living cells.
>the body is inclined to consume muscles first and then fat.
No. HGH starts increasing when you begin to fast to preserve muscle. "starving" (aka moderate length periods without food) is natural part of an animals existance. Weakening an animal while its already under evolutionary stress in order to preserve fat (whose sole reason for existence is to provide energy to the body) makes no sense.
the picture needs a nintendo switch in the bottom
>"starving" (aka moderate length periods without food) is natural part of an animals existance. Weakening an animal while its already under evolutionary stress in order to preserve fat (whose sole reason for existence is to provide energy to the body) makes no sense.
jesus this post is peak reddit scientism
tapeworms and getting struck by lightning are also natural it doesnt mean its good or desirable
theres no benefit to starvation, full stop
its just harmful like disease
evolutionary arguments are just faith based arguments you can argue literally anything by appealing to evolution
you are a moron
lowering the basal metabolic rate and to compensate for decreased intake
this is why if you want to lose weight you have to really undershoot your maintenance by a lot bc if you do only a small deficit your body will just adjust to burning fewer calories
this is also why DNP works as a fat burner, it keeps the metabolic rate artificially high despite lower intake
That is literally not even close to how DNP works
it is literally how dnp works
it increases the basal energy expenditure of the body (ie the basal metabolic rate) by making mitochondrial metabolism less efficient, ostensibly by making the mitchondrial membrane more permeable for protons (although this explanation is dubious)
in any case you use more energy, the .5-1 lbs fat loss a day is very real
>No. Your body doesn't deliberately lower anything. It happens to go down because there's less body mass to keep alive.
no, you retard
the basal metabolic rate is highest in infancy and declines fairly linearly from birth to death due to environmental factors
the metabolic rate in giga lards proportional to their size is actually very low and it becomes proportionally higher when they lose the weight and become metabolically healthier
it is not a simple size-to-rate ratio
when you fast or go into calories deficit your temperature and pulse go down immediately, even before youve lost significant weight
temperature and pulse are the best measures of basal metabolic rate and they go down immediately
when you go into a calorie deficit your body elevates your cortisol chronically
this is why people have trouble sleeping while in deficit/fast
this alone suppresses thyroid function and lowers your basal metabolic rate
burning fat/amino acids is very inefficient compared to burning sugar
converting fat into ketones and gluconeogenesis are very slow, meanwhile sugar is readily available to be metabolised
which means that when energy demand spikes the availability of fuel lags behind, so the the basal demand becomes lower to compensate
lipolysis and amino acid catabolism are also extremely stressful and elevated in diseased cells (such as cancer) where oxphos metabolism is impaired, burning these as primary fuels contributes to inducing this same impaired metabolic state
having sugar as a main fuel source raises the metabolic rate, fat and protein as fuel sources lower it, this is just empirical fact
To get fatter, the bodie gets scared that it doesn’t have enough food so stores more as fat
Spoken like a true fatass. My mom uses that one all the time then cries when she cant fit in her old dressses
the body cannot store fuel that it does not have
Burning its stored caloric reserves in the form of muscle and fat. If you don't work out and don't watch your macros while on a deficit, the body is inclined to consume muscles first and then fat.
>What is the bodies response to a calorie deficit
CICObros....... not like this....
you realise when people say "burn calories" they're not literally referring to a fire within your body
Kek cico deniers on suicide watch
the joke is that the human body is not a closed thermodynamic system, numbnuts
It doesn't have to be a closed system for the laws of thermodynamics to apply
The joke if fat chicks were right when they say “all i eat is salad and can’t lose weight” you could turn them into a perpetual machine
>lmao le not a closed system!!!
Not quite pereptual machines, they still need that salad, but being able to run on a threadmill for one nuclear powerplants worth of megawattage on small daily salad is impressive nevertheless
CICO deniers absolutely destroyed
Imagine thinking the body shuts down the moment there is a calorie deficit. It is precisely when you have very little to eat that your body is sharper to hunt or machinate new ways of obtaining food. It is when you are on a surplus that your body shuts down. You become lethargic like all fat people.
yeah, you get restless and irritable
Has it been debunked? I don't know, I barely count calories. I have a labor intensive job, lift weights, swim, and run, so I basically just make sure I get enough protein and eat a lot. If I'm not full, I am not eating enough. I also rarely eat junk food.
from what I remember reading some years ago there were some products with high thermal food effects (energy wasted to absorb that), but they would achieve what, -70? -150 at best?
Absolutely no use for fatsos eating fast food and if you are in control of your eating habits, you don't really need it
This is literally the most sustainable way to do it. Motherfuckers who are counting their calories might last a few years at it, but the effort and energy will fucking burn you out. I did it for years and it is miserable, especially when you travel or your schedule/routine somehow gets disrupted which life does a LOT. once you develop a sense of how things are made/cooked and how many calories are in things, you CAN eat intuitively. I do that and only count my protein macros, while trying to eat as healthily as possible. It has worked out great. The trick is to weigh yourself weekly to see if you are gaining, maintaining, or losing weight, and adjust your sense of how much to eat accordingly. It does work if you are even minorly smart and it feels way better
don't know that 90% of this shit means
I envy you anon. Stay blissfully unaware. There's nothing good to be learned from that image
is this "debunked" in the room with us now?
Make diet supplements contain amphetamines again.
The only actual effective way to spike your metabolic rate is to take DNP, which is extremely dangerous, but also extremely effective.
Literally any stimulant and lots of non stimulants spike metabolism. Just wear a smartwatch with HR tracker and you can see for yourself. Metabolism has a linear relationhip to your heart rate. Smoking a joint puts my my RHR from 50 to 110 for the next 6 hours, burning an additional 400-500kcal minimum.
No, heart rate does not correlate with calories burned. Those watches are extremely inaccurate.
Think about it, who burns the most calories:
1: A non fit person who runs x meters in 60 minutes and has a very high heart rate while doing so.
2: A fit person running 2x meters in the same timeframe, and also has the same if not a lower heart rate because he is in better shape.
Both people weigh the same.
If you don't immediately understand that option 2 has burned way more calories you might be retarded.
The calories burned is determined by the energy used. That is determined by distance traveled, the incline, and your weight.
There is some adjustment for inefficient movement and increased heart rate, which is where this poster may be getting their ideas from. But that’s just noise. The main determinant of calories burned is the work performed. It’s a physics equation.
Exactly my point
>The efficacy of heart rate as a surrogate for energy expenditure is rooted in the assumption of a linear function between heart rate and energy expenditure
>Heart rate and energy expenditure were assessed across five levels of exertion in 290 adults participating in the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging.
>Heart rate and energy expenditure were highly correlated (r=0.98) and linear regardless of age or sex.
Another study on HR and energy expenditure:
The tl;dr is that if you know the age, sex, height and weight of a person, then you can predict their energy expenditure from their heart rate to within 5-10%.
Think about it - why does the heart rate increase when you exercise?
>1: A non fit person who runs x meters in 60 minutes and has a very high heart rate while doing so.
>2: A fit person running 2x meters in the same timeframe, and also has the same if not a lower heart rate because he is in better shape.
>Both people weigh the same.
>If you don't immediately understand that option 2 has burned way more calories you might be retarded.
A ridiculous hypothetical that isn't based in reality. Run the experiment.
>person does 2x the work in the same amount of time
>therefore they burned way more calories
>this is somehow ridiculous
You are a certified quadruple moron luddite
>covering 2x the distance in the same time with a lower heart rate whilst being the same weight
Show me an example of this actually happening
I never said anything about their heart rate retards
Fit people do become a little more efficient at moving their bodies than unfit people, leading to slightly lower active heart rates, but nothing like the difference you suggest where they can run twice as fast with an equal heart rate. The primary change in fit people is that their heart rate returns to normal much more quickly than unfit people.
made for BBC
That can’t be real
At what point does an underwear brand sponsor you to not wear their logos in content?
>CICO has been debunked.
Post body ketofag
do you even lift?
>do you even lift
Look mom I posted it again
>he cropped a screenshot of someone else's selfie
Except Arnold was CICO. He ate fruit, rice, and potatoes throughout all his bodybuilding years. Cope more.
he claimed to have eaten that starting in the eighties to appease his ~~*hollywood masters*~~
he actually ate less than 80g of carbs during his Mr Opylmpia days
also cbum posts day of eating videos, you can watch what someone who is current reigning olympia physique champion eats at any second its literally a google search away i dont understand how these conversations still exist.
just get on gear, eat 4000-5000 cals of eggs, oats, fish, chicken, turkey, sweet potatoes and rice, cut to ~2000 cals over time to prep for stage, repeat. older gen bodybuilders ate more red meat but thats literally the whole difference. individual diet differences mostly come down to sauce.
what a weird comparison
cico's best example is fasting, which is a guaranteed weight loss program
keto is good for bulking and maintenance
both serve a purpose so fighting over which one is better is just stupid.
>cico's best example is fasting
Right for the wrong reason, fasting makes the person enter the primary metabolic state, or ketogenesis. Fasting is a keto diet, however "energy balance" folk who eat small amounts of carbs a day and believe it's healthy for them over just starving are absolutely delusional, as their body will enter atrophy instead of ketosis to get its nutrient needs met. Shut the fuck up.
Please leave Mongolians out of this they don't deserve to be associated with keto
CICO is not a diet, it's a statement of fact.
Most who have tried a caloric deficit has met the usual plateaus and weakness that come from atrophy for this reason, as dietary fat is the highest calorie macro, yet readily replaced in low-cal food with sugar. This spikes insulin and causes your body to be unable to tap into adipose tissue for energy.
>CICO is the truth
>Except when it doesn't work because of hormones
You're quite stupid, bro. Sorry.
he's literally in a cult, be patient
No patience with cultists, sorry.
Btw, below 1800 calories means you're starving:
>Hunger is the distress associated with lack of food. The threshold for food deprivation, or undernourishment, is fewer than 1,800 calories per day.
Most of dieters are already and officially starving. Many are eating less than literal KZ inmates. Obesity crisis is still unbroken. Bottom line: CICO doesn't work, for whatever reason.
>going under 1800kcal
Literally who does this? I'm a gigamanlet and the only time I would ever need to go that low would be if I was trying to go below fucking 8% bodyfat, if you're any taller than me you have no business being under 2k lmao. My usual cutting calories are 2200-2400 so most people would be eating more than that
>Literally who does this?
Everyone sedentary going on a diet, really.
I'd say you're lying (badly) and show proof. Well, unless you're like 5' tall ro so lol.
Im 191 cm. The first 10 kg were probably water weight. I weigh myself every day (still do) and came to the conclusion (using linear regression) that my maintenance is ~2800. 1500 was obviously not healthy and i lost weight too quickly, but hey, still keeping it off several years later.
Also, my body composition was absolutely terrible after losing weight. I just ate like a retard and didn't care about macros at all as long as I stayed within 1500 calories. Physically weaker than most women and i still had belly fat. Been working several years at fixing that through eating clean (maintenance calories with enough protein and micronutrients) and working out. Slowly getting there.
Females and manlets
What the fuck are you talking about. This is HAES level retardation. I ate 1500 kcal every day for 8 months and went from 125 kg to 76 kg. What do you say to that?
>I ate 1500 kcal every day for 8 months and went from 125 kg to 76 kg. What do you say to that?
>~110 lbs lost
>lost more than 0.5 pounds every single day, no exceptions
>meaning roundabout a deficit of ~1500 - 2000 calories daily
Nobody's gonna believe you, dumbass. At least make your lies believable holy shit. Or maybe tell the full story.
americans(which includes small kids and old farts) eat on AVERAGE 3700 calories a day you lying MOTHER FUCKER
Strawman me all you like, I agree with you.
Yeah that’s not true, beta oxidation is always happening independent of insulin. I’ve tried sending emails to Jason Fung asking
>why do you not mention beta oxidation at all in your presentations
>considering insulin always exists in blood and is regulated to certain range can you give a hard number on insulin concentration below which fat burning only happens like you claim
Stop believing lies.
Cool, can you give me your sources on this so I can educate myself?
Other anon here but how about you simply bing beta oxidation. Looks like it checks out
>beta oxidation is a process that breaks down fatty acids to produce energy. It happens in the mitochondria of eukaryotic cells and in the cytosol of prokaryotic cells. It involves four steps: dehydrogenation, hydration, oxidation and thiolysis. It produces acetyl-CoA, FADH2 and NADH, which are used in other metabolic pathways
>beta oxidation is not directly stopped by insulin, but insulin can affect the availability of fatty acids for beta oxidation. Insulin inhibits lipolysis, which is the process of breaking down fat stored in adipose tissue into free fatty acids that can enter the mitochondria for beta oxidation
>high insulin does not completely inhibit lipolysis, but it reduces it significantly
Okay, so lipolysis(which is what matters here) is greatly inhibited by high insulin. What is the rate that can be freed from the adipose compared to a low insulin state? This is important to know before declaring it's worthwhile to ignore the inhibition of lipolysis.
>Based on web search results, the difference in FFA levels between high insulin and low insulin states in healthy subjects may depend on the dose and duration of insulin exposure. One study reported that after a 4-hour infusion of lipid or saline, followed by a 2-hour euglycemic insulin clamp, plasma FFA levels were reduced by 22%, 30%, and 34% in healthy subjects who received lipid infusion at 30, 60, and 90 ml/h, respectively, compared with those who received saline infusion1 Another study found that after a 1-year lifestyle intervention, plasma FFA levels were reduced by 24% during a euglycemic insulin clamp in viscerally obese men who improved their glucose tolerance, compared with those who did not
Huh, so squirting subjects full of glucose doesn't even halve fat burning rate. I thought "significantly" meant like 80% reduction.
nevermind it answered poorly, here is one that actually looks at glucose and yes its 50% - 80% reduction
>Based on web search results, the difference in FFA levels between high insulin and low insulin states in healthy subjects after a glucose load may also depend on several factors, such as the degree of obesity, insulin sensitivity, and fasting status. One study reported that after an oral glucose load, plasma FFA levels were suppressed by 80% in healthy lean subjects, but only by 50% in healthy obese subjects1 Another study found that after a 24-hour fast, plasma FFA levels were suppressed by 70% in healthy lean subjects, but only by 40% in healthy obese subjects after an oral glucose load2 These studies suggest that high insulin states can lower FFA levels in healthy subjects after a glucose load, but the extent of the suppression may be reduced in obese or insulin-resistant individuals.
btw interesting VERY interesting how it's the fatties keeping fat burning mode on despite glucose load, I thought it's the opposite
That's very interesting. Thank you.
>Professional trainers with over 50 years combined experience, and 8 years of direct interviews with top fitness scientists
CICO is debunked: https://mindpumppodcast.com/2037-how-eating-too-little-can-make-you-fatter/
>20 year old roid trannies and fat, 40 year old coomers on IST
CICO works because muh thermodynamics.
Who will you believe, young man?
>eating too little can make you fatter
They must have been doing something different in those concentration camps. What's their secret, bruhs?
>average CICO lifter
not many people know about it but CICO was actually invented by the Japanese in Unit 731 as a way to torture prisoners. The sick fucks made the prisoners count their calories obsessively instead of following a more natural ketogenic diet and yes, a lot of them killed themselves.
Yes, but keto was actually the creation of Ketogwande Christopher, a Liberian warlord serving under Charles Taylor, who forced his "boys" to eat nothing but human meat as he terrorized the countryside. He died after choking on a human thighbone.
Yeah I'm thinking keto is based RIP Ketogwande you were a real G
What was their daily calorie deficit?
They ate 800-1500 kcal per day, so around the normal intake of a modern dieting woman.
>reasons eating too little makes you fatter
>1. you lose muscle -> your base metabolic rate decreases, you require less calories so fewer in = more fat (CICO)
>2. slower metabolism -> your base metabolic rate decreases, you require less calories so fewer in = more fat (CICO)
>3. you have less energy to move or exercise -> you expend less calories so you burn less fat (CICO)
>4. hormones shift to fat storage -> this is a fancy way of saying your metabolism slows down, not a new reason, still only at 3
>4. tends to result in binging -> you consume a lot of calories so you gain weight (CICO)
>5. tends to result in nutrient deficiencies -> doesnt really explain how this results in weight gain but can assume its referring again to metabolism, still only at 4.
so your "6 reasons" are just 3 different ways to describe eating too many calories and 1 to describe exercising too little, thereby proving CICO. well done, idiot
CICO is correct but most people who adhere by it yet don't see results don't realize that the body adjusts it's energy output to adapt to a low intake environment. It's why exercise is so important, because it's forcing a deficit.
Fasting is still the best THOUGH
The best fat burner is basically extinct.
Isn't this the one that would cook your cells from the inside out and make you overheat and die?
>18% mortality rate
ah yes 62 deaths in a century of use and millions of people having used it
Still less than vaccine :^)
>Every year, people still use it to lose weight and die
Some people rather ingest poison than putting down their forks...
unlike cico dnp has been proven to be effective for weight loss though
I lost 80 pounds by just counting my fucking calories you schizo
I lost the same without count calories, sounds like my way is easier and better and doesn't require going around saying hurr durr physics
DNP works by increasing CO, brainlet
can't solve all your problems at once, friend
While CO can fluctuate A LOT due to what you eat, as well as your activity levels, and even things out of your control like genetics and hormones, the fact of the matter is the CI side of CICO is 100% under your control. Calories cannot enter your body without your consent. If you want to lose weight, eat less. If you want to lose more weight, eat even less. You are not magic. Even if it takes full fasting, as in eating zero calories, you will eventually lose the weight.
>CI side of CICO is 100% under your control
No, what you eat becomes undigested poop occasionally. You don't have a say in this matter of what you absorb. Calorie counts are just guesses, estimates, of what you can absorb. It depends on the person. For example, you cannot digest dietary fat to any meaningful degree after you've expended the bile you have, therefore the rest will come out in excretions. There are no calorie tracking tools for this.
>Food is magically more calories defense because your shit out fiber
bro, what point are you even tryna make?
every single anti CICO arguement goes
>dude just eat less
>SO I CAN EAT ONLY CAKE AND ICE CREAM BUT IF ITS AT A DEFECIT???
>I mean sure but thats probably not healt-
>OH SO I CANT JUST EAT WHATEVER I WANT THEN GUESS CICO IS BULLSHIT LIKE I THOUGHT
>*goes back to eating inhuman amounts of garbage and making no lifestyle changes anyways*
>SO I CAN EAT ONLY CAKE AND ICE CREAM BUT IF ITS AT A DEFECIT???
>I mean sure but thats probably not healt-
Why wouldn't it be if CICO is all that matters to weight loss? Think, anon, think.
Obviously diet isn't the only factor but it's a big one. A professor actually ate at deficit nothing but twinkies and multivitamins and STILL lost weight.
I dont know where the "CICO is debunked" gays are crawling out of the woodwork from but I'm willing to be it's from HAES twitter. It's literally the most ancient piece of conventional wisdom that to lose weight, eat less.
Fork putdowns x failure. Now.
No, you're conflating starvation and dieting, when they're not the same. Stop being retarded.
You need to be subtle when playing the “merely pretending to be retarded” card or it loses it’s effect
the garden gnomes lost a shit ton of weight on account of not being fed anything in aushwitz. Doesnt mean they were healthy after they got let out all skin and bones
You absolutely can lose weight eating anything in a calorie deficit, even twinkies. The problem is that you will feel like shit and be hungry all the time, due to low volume, low protein, low fiber foods.
Yup. I lost weight eating 1500 kcal a day and some days i ate 1200 kcal worth of whipped cream and 300 kcal of chicken breast. Felt like shit but still lost weight
Breast and cream. Mmmmmm
I would love to see your blood work. No one ever posts it.
….whipped cream? like fucking reddi wip? cool whip? you ate 1200kcal of cool whip?
Any people posting about cico should have to post body with time stamp. Fucking fatties I swear
Only if you post your C-peptides.
You expect me to believe that my priors were debunked, on IST?
just fast you idiots.
I prefer to eat throughout the day. It feels and tastes good. When I need to lose weight, I reduce calories and increase protein slightly. After a few weeks I’m back to being slim and continue eating at maintenance until the holidays return.
i prebunked your mother
Who is going to stop them?
By who, your favorite retarded e-celeb on garden gnometube?
Everyone knows CICO rules over all, unless you're retarded.
Imagine thinking OTC fat burners do jack shit. They haven't done anything since ephedra was banned, that was the last time they had any actual effect, and they DIDN'T BURN FAT, they simply increased caloric expenditure by perhaps 5% maximum.
So, you could get the same effect by simply eating 100 cal./day less on a 2000 cal. diet and not have to be jittery all day long.
OP needs to go to retard jail for being this gay.
>Everyone knows CICO rules over all
literal cult speech LMAOOOO don't forget to drink your 0cal Kool-Aid bro
>I still defend my e-celeb's statement even though all the credible people out there swear by CICO! It's not because the guy I listen to has to have a hook that makes him sound different and smart, it's because he's really telling the truth!
Holy shit, have a nice day.
Is this e-celeb guy in the room with us now, anon?
You tell me, the burden of proof is for you to show that CICO is false beyond just claiming it.
Funny that CICO is what got me to having 6 pack abs for the first time a few years ago, and the meme diet veganfag years and ketofag years I had under my belt didn't do shit. Nor did fat burners, DNP, or other meme garbage.
Cope, I will NOT join your cult, I wlll NOT lose my limbs to diabetes, I will NOT use your outdated units of measurement
You're the fattie with the overworked pancreas.
Post body with timestamp.
You won't. You're skinnyfat and weak.
I'm convinced there is an inverse relationship between weight and IQ.
All CICO deniers are either actual elephants or baiters.
I'm going to get super shredded on carnivore from my (now obese) state, then I'm going to post that it was thanks to being a vegan on semaglutide and no one can stop me from giving this misinformation.
The CICO people I know struggle with their weight and the "CICO deniers" are in better shape
>my genetics are more powerful than the laws of thermodynamics
>>my genetics are more powerful than the laws of thermodynamics
> my genetics are more powerful than the laws of thermodynamics
Thermodynamics have to be satisfied but the body is free to do this in whatever way it wants. It can raise or lower your calories out in ways you can't control. So yes CICO is bunk because no one can measure their calories out without a lab in their house
>durrrr technically you can’t know with 1000% certainty so it’s useless
>bro you can’t know with 100% certainty how much weight your lifting because all plates vary by a thousandth of a microgram so why even bother worrying about how much you’re lifting
This is what you sound like moron. If you track your calories reasonably well and haven’t gained weight in a few weeks congrats you found your TDEE and can adjust from there based on goals. You don’t need a lab you just need to not be retarded
Agreed, metabolism is fat cope.
Why do you fucks think everything needs to be insanely precise? I don't even count calories at all, if I want to lose weight I just slash some food from my diet (remove a food here, reduce the portion size there, etc) and I start losing weight. If I stop losing weight I slash a bit more food and then my weight loss resumes. You don't need to know the exact amount of calories you're eating, you just need to make sure that you're in a negative energy balance, which you can know by just tracking your weight, since if you're losing weight, you have a negative energy balance. If you're not losing weight, you're not in a negative energy balance, so you need to cut more food from your diet. Simple as.
>b-but I don't want to eat the same things every day!
Man up fatty
Checked the trips and this.
Mfers think that CICO means counting everything all the time, sitting on the calculator all day desperately typing numbers. CICO is good at showing people who don't know shit about nutrition how many calories, macros and micros are eating in a day. After a while you can pretty much eyeball it, just by looking at the table if need be.
If CICO doesn't work how can I gain weight and why? Checkmate CICO debunkers.
>If CICO doesn't work how can I gain weight and why?
Hormones, insuline resistance, prediabetes, antinutrients, chemicals, lack of cardio, carbs
This. You cannot lose fat with a system saturated in sugar.
Now, how can I gain exactly 1lb per week and again why, cuz you didn't gave me an answer to that question.
unironically? eat some grains every day and drink lots of water
Anyone who thinks your body can sustain a certain weight when you decrease your average net energy intake is a retarded certified grade A fucking retarded moron and has severe case of dunning-krueger who has never left their mothers basement.
CICO is real
some people are just too efficient and almost don't need to eat.
People assume everyone is around 2000 TDEE but in reality most people are around 800 TDEE, just some blessed people are around 2000.
That's why we have people here complaining they're eating almost nothing and not losing weight: they're not lying, their body is just too efficient, their test is too low...
tldr: CICO is real, assumed TDEE is not
>but in reality most people are around 800 TDEE
The only way you believe this if you aren’t a completely retarded moron is if you’re confusing TDEE with BMR. If you are exercising 3-5 days a week with intensity even if you’re 90 pounds your TDEE is not 800.
Most people don't exercise.
You have anons here claiming you spend 2000 calories daily just to exist, even if you don't leave you bed. That's complete bullshit.
If you buy into that...
Just imagine believing people burn 2000 calories daily if they don't exercise hard.
>You have anons here claiming you spend 2000 calories daily just to exist, even if you don't leave you bed. That's complete bullshit.
My TDEE is easily 2800 calories and I'm a manlet. My NEAT is shit and I barely do cardio, in fact if I improved on both of those my TDEE would probably be over 3000-3200. You have no idea what you're talking about
You’re an idiot. I work out 6 days a week for an hour, I’m 6’ 190lb and have been cutting a pound a week at 2400 cal/day for 6 weeks. You’re telling me my sedentary TDEE is 800 and I’m just magically expending 1600 calories in an hour while I’m exercising?
The reality is that most people have a TDEE double what you’re purporting. The reason they don’t lose weight is because they’re fucking god awful at tracking their calories
he definitely confused BMR with TDEE, but he had to make a whole story because he won't just admit it
>but in reality most people are around 800 TDEE
This is complete bullshit you have no idea what you're talking about like 99% of people in here please have a nice day
i know this is bullshit, but when trying to cut, it sure seems like it's true.
CICO is bunk. Every nutrition documentary has empirically proved it. If you for example eat 200 calories of sugar and nothing else your body will still hold onto fat and you'll die from organ failure due to your body eating away at your own heart before it eats your fat.
That's because of how the body processes certain nutrients. When you consume sugar and corn syrup for some reason it fucks up how your fat cells function, it doesn't release the fat as energy because it thinks the sugar is enough. If you however eat on a ketogenic diet this doesn't happen and your fat cells release the fat and burn it for energy exactly as you'd expect it to
>CICO is bunk because if you poison yourself you die
Pretty sure when you die you turn into a 10 lb skeleton so you still lost weight you retard triple moron
Why don’t you actually learn something you useless sack of shit
And? You would still lose weight, even if none of it came from fat. That's the only thing CICO claims will happen, it doesn't have any claims related to body composition or health. Yes you could cut on 800 calories of candy a day, but your body composition would be shit and your health would be in the gutter. Still doesn't disprove CICO since you would still lose weight.
No one is telling you to cut on candy. You should be cutting (and bulking mind you) on whole foods, no processed junk. Eat meat, dairy, fruits, vegetables, eggs, etc, you know, the healthy stuff. It's not complicated, just eat more of that stuff when you're bulking and less of it when you're cutting.
CICO doesn’t exist without IIFYM stupid moron gay. Why even make this crab argument when you know yourself it’s bullshit.
Everyone following CICO is also calculating macros.
You’re right, IIFYM in combination with CICO is really the way to go.
That way you take your retarded gay “durrr 10 cups of sugar is the same as 40 salads” argument and die you fucking crab
There is no such thing as "cico". It's the starvation diet. What you are doing is forcing a wasting response in your body like a sick animal. This is why the "calories out" portion does not work. If cico was real you could lose obesity by keeping the same caloric intake and just adding more exercise but you can't which is why people "cut" and what they always end up doing is dropping calories to try and edge a wasting action of the body. It's brutally awful, better just to eat healthy.
>If cico was real you could lose obesity by keeping the same caloric intake and just adding more exercise
Because you cannot consistently burn thousands of calories each day you dumbass. It takes hours and lots of hard work to burn a thousand calories, meanwhile it's entirely possible for you to consume a thousand calories in less than two minutes if you're really intent on doing so. Could you technically cut on 5000 calories a day by doing absurd amounts of cardio? Yes actually, but the fact is that no one is going to do that shit because not only do people have lives but even if they didn't doing that much cardio would be nightmarishly difficult, and moreover you would have to do that every single fucking day. Cutting calories by eating less is much more efficient since it actually saves time since you spend less time eating, and cardio is just the icing on top since doing a little will provide other benefits (health, energy levels, work capacity, etc) that are worth acquiring.
Incorrect. You cannot, even at a 2500 calorie a day diet, lose fat if you consume garbage. If you're a clown who thinks you're going to walk around eating cinnamon buns to get your daily calories and lose fat you're delusional beyond measure. The only place it is applicable is if someone who is like donna simpson and you have begun committing suicide with food. This being a fitness board, and expecting people here are trying to hone the bodies they are building for themselves, it'a time to ditch the antiquated baby boomer cico meme that tanks your strength and endurance levels and achieves nothing but waifdom. If you are married to calorie restriction I don't care, but lets not make believe it is even remotely efficient or worth your time unless you are a roid chud.
>You cannot, even at a 2500 calorie a day diet, lose fat if you consume garbage.
Holy shit will you ever get it through your thick fucking skull? CICO HAS NO BEARING ON BODY COMPOSITION. ZERO. ZILCH. NOTHING. The only thing it governs is your WEIGHT. NOTHING ELSE. Yes if you eat like shit you will lose mostly muscle mass and very little fat, BUT YOU WILL STILL LOSE WEIGHT. Do you think ANYONE here advocates for people to lose weight eating junk all day? Fuck no, we advocate for people to lift, do cardio, and eat whole foods, all of which will preserve your muscle, keep your appetite down, and keep your energy levels high. Fucking moron holy shit, you have no idea how any of this stuff works. You have no business giving advice to anyone, I would rather take diet advice from a meth addict than you.
>hahaha it actually makes you lose muscle which is why it works so good. Get it? Lose 'weight'. Duh.
You are one dumb gay
because CICO is not a diet you fucking cretin, it's an AXIOM. Do you even know what that means? CICO does not dictate what foods you are supposed to eat like vegan, carnivore, keto, etc, the ONLY thing it says is that if you have a positive energy balance you will gain weight, and if you have a neutral energy balance you will maintain, and if you have a negative energy balance you will lose weight. THAT'S IT. It has NO bearing on body composition whatsoever BECAUSE IT'S NOT A FUCKING DIET. If you gain or lose weight you're using CICO no matter what because that's the only fucking way to do either of those: you need to be in a positive/negative energy balance for either of those things to happen. ALL the other variables are decided by your other choices: the foods you eat, your sleep, your training, etc. Those decide your body composition. CICO governs your WEIGHT, and ONLY your weight. Nothing else.
Fucking hell, I'm almost certain you're a diet cultist who has mistakenly identified CICO as an enemy camp of diet cultists when CICO is literally a fucking axiom, not a diet. Go back to the rotting hole of whatever camp of diet cultists you belong to and never come out ever again.
this + this thread is full of dyels who never actually committed to cutting and prolly look like shit
I've tried many ways to reduce weight and CICO beats everything by far, everything else is just trying hard to be a half-magical way around tracking your calories
>if this was real you could lose obesity by keeping the same caloric intake and just adding more exercise
you can literally do this moron it’s just near impossible to burn that many calories using cardio if you’re eating like a ham beast
>brutally awful, better to just eat healthy
yes eating 300 calories less a day is “brutally awful”. What a moron. If you’re eating healthy now and not losing weight you need to drop calories. Obviously eating healthy should be the first priority but people who are at 14% BF are already eating healthy and will not drop to 10% continuing to do so.
>edge a washing action
intentionally obtuse verbiage alert. Are you gnomish?
>intentionally obtuse verbiage alert. Are you gnomish?
He probably is, I mean with enough twisting of words you can strawman anyone into sounding retarded. Like in the same vein I could say that "durr hurr bulking doesn't put on muscle because increasing calories is fattening!", it's the exact same shit that he's saying, just with cutting changed to bulking and wasting to fattening
>I can't understand what edging on a wasting response is
No I am not. Are you african?
>ignores entire argument that dismantles you’re moron-brained narrative
>zero’s in on a type
The average fatty consumes over 10K calories a day. A 1 mile walk burns roughly 100 calories. One thing CICO people will ALWAYS tell you is that you can not outwork a bad diet. This is 100% true. The problem isn't that you should be able to add more exercise to counteract your bad diet, is the fact that there literally isn't enough time in the day to counteract it.
To eat 10k a day you have to be literally a truck. That's like 4 days worth of food for me
Are we all going to ignore the fact that fasting proves cico without a shadow of a doubt? It's literally cico in action, no calories in, tdee calories out, you will lose fat and muscle tissue 100% of the time.
>CICO has been debunked
>Doesn't even give any form of rational explanation as to why that is
>Asks why people are spreading lies
Unironically have a nice day you worthless retard.
Fat burners don't disprove CICO they add to the calories out.
Metabolism, muscles, stimulants, and other things contribute to how many calories you burn. That's still CICO.
has anyone here ACTUALLY tried that stuff that fucks with your mitochondrial proton gradient and causes your BMR to rise like 50%?
No, I've never had sex with a woman precisely for that reason.
I'm too pusy to eat dynamite/TNT to get shredded
>not doing BOTH the cico and clean eating
>CICO has been debunked
lots of lazy women around here lately
>CICO has been debunked
I'm not sure if anti-CICO morons are assuming that people expect good results from CICO even if they are just eating potato chips at a calorie deficit. It's common sense that a good diet and exercise is also needed for a nice body composition
this pretentious fuckwit again. stop promoting literal retards.
lean people dont make a science out of eating. they just eat.
anything that requires a conscious decision is unhealthy by default. if you need to force yourself to only eat X or only eat Y amount of Z then its a scam.
healthy peoples bodies instinctively know what to eat and how much of it.
>anything that requires a conscious decision is unheathy by default.
You heard it here first, folks.
Exercise? Unhealthy unless it comes from an epileptic siezure.
Not eating goyslop? Terrible idea.
Doing Nofap? Horrendously unhealthy.
>CICO is debunked
My uncle was a professional fighter for a decade and he ate twinkies on cuts to make weight for fights.
He's dead. Sounds like a winning diet.
So ... are people pretending to be retarded in this thread
If anyone is genuinely wondering and not trolling. This guy debunked CICO (and super size me)
tldr if you want to lose weight just do fucking keto
garden gnome shill spam
Stop drinking soda
stop promoting shite perpetuated by television
I feel like this is pretty obvious though, everyone knows to avoid foods that spike insulin to lose weight
I can't believe this troll bait actually worked. Hats off to you OP.
CICO is chemical process that been proven. Ci & Co are variable but the equation is always the same. This discussion has been settled for decades. Shame on you /fit
And yet if I eat more than I burn I gain weight. Weird huh, I guess CICO has been rebunked.
I HATE LOW TEIR INDIAN FITNESS PAGE GRAPHICS RAHHHHH