Dark Horse
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,840
Yes, it's worth reading. I think it illustrates the different meanings people seem to be ascribing to CICO. What he describes as 'Current Dogma' equates to what many of the LCHF posters on here describe as CICO. When he later says that what you eat can affect both calories out (e.g. activity) and future calories in (via appetite), this is closer to what a scientist would consider CICO to mean. A lot of the disagreements in this thread do seem to be because people are using the term CICO to mean different things.Okay, I just got this link in my email from my husband. From Peter Attia...
Am assuming he believes it worthy of posting and sharing here, but I'm at work and haven't read it, though I vaguely remember reading it previously, and it was likely above my ability to comprehend, both then and now, but perhaps you all can...
https://peterattiamd.com/do-calories-matter/
He's right that 1kcal = 1000 calories. However, when we informally talk about food intake, we talk about Calories (with a capital C) which is the same as a kilocalorie. In other words 1 Calorie = 1000 calories. Confusing. (Maybe we should use the scientific units, kilojoules.)