In addition to the other answers, I gather protein affects blood glucose about half (53%) as much as carbs, so excess protein can increase insulin levels sufficiently to prevent weight loss.So in theory, I could live on streaky bacon and no matter how many calories I consumed eating the rashers, insulin wouldn't be triggered. If no insulin is triggered then no weight gain? Streaky bacon is more or less one part protein to two parts fat.
I actively ate more calories and still lost weight at diagnosis and starting low carb.All I know is that I am eating far more calories than I did in all my pre-diagnosis dieting days, and I haven't put on any weight since I began lower carbing.
Yes, good thread. I think the point of this thread is that the claim that CICO adequately and completely explains weight loss is untrue: the real situation is more subtle than that.I think this is one of the best threads recently. There's the view and practical experience that CICO worked for one of the contributors, then there are others who would swear by the hormone influence.
Reminds me of a meme where a doctor is saying "I remember when patients used to hang on my every word. That wretched Internet has destroyed the doctor/patient relationship!"Pleased we've now got the internet and can communicate widely.
This study discusses the lipid overdose hypothesis. As a hypo it is not proven. The paper also discusses the pathways used by which insulin controls fat metabolism.No. Dietary fat can be stored as body fat without a requirement for insulin. Insulin is needed to make fat from glucose derived from dietary carbohydrate, unused amino acids (protein) or both. But...your appetite is far more likely to prevent you overeating the fat and protein than it would carbohydrate.
I can agree with your sentiment. I am not an expert and it is clear that CICO is part of the variable equation; but even the word equation is wrong, as again this would be repeatable and exact. CICO is no different to investing on the stock exchange for the majority. People have to decide what works for them, knowledge is key.Yes, good thread. I think the point of this thread is that the claim that CICO adequately and completely explains weight loss is untrue: the real situation is more subtle than that.
Surely no one would claim the amount they eat is irrelevant to their weight, but the composition of what they eat, and consequently the way their unique body responds to it, is a factor too significant to ignore. Over simplifying things to CICO is the error... Agree?
I can agree with your sentiment. I am not an expert and it is clear that CICO is part of the variable equation; but even the word equation is wrong, as again this would be repeatable and exact. CICO is no different to investing on the stock exchange for the majority. People have to decide what works for them, knowledge is key.
On my walk with resistance exercise after my meal, I was listening to Gary Taubes and Jason Fung, perhaps worth a listen as they express some views on topic.
Since using a Low Calorie diet automatically reduces your resting metabolic rate (the biggest consumption of calories in the body), anybody actually losing weight that way has to reduce calories even more to compensate for that.The word choice is based on an overwhelming opinion of CICO dieters (across the web) that something must be wrong with you if you're not losing weight e.g. you're lying about what you eat or unable to accurately measure your intake.
For me I did not eat more but it would not mattered if I had. The foods I crave when I am high are the foods that are toxic because there is insufficient insulin to use that food i.e. high carb. If you look at photos of kids with type 1 prior to 1922 it is evident that they are starving despite eating sufficient calories.Out of curiosity I have a question for Type 1's who have been through that stage before diagnosis where they are losing weight....
Did you eat more trying to maintain your weight or did you lose your appetite and find that you didn't want to eat as much as usual?
...and you can't keep reducing calories forever. You can't live on 0 calories for long, but you can live on 0g carbs for as long as you want to do so.Since using a Low Calorie diet automatically reduces your resting metabolic rate (the biggest consumption of calories in the body), anybody actually losing weight that way has to reduce calories even more to compensate for that.
Then that extra calorie restriction causes the resting metabolic rate to drop further. and around it goes.
It is like a young puppy chasing its tail !
I can agree with your sentiment. I am not an expert and it is clear that CICO is part of the variable equation; but even the word equation is wrong, as again this would be repeatable and exact. CICO is no different to investing on the stock exchange for the majority. People have to decide what works for them, knowledge is key.
On my walk with resistance exercise after my meal, I was listening to Gary Taubes and Jason Fung, perhaps worth a listen as they express some views on topic.
Since using a Low Calorie diet automatically reduces your resting metabolic rate (the biggest consumption of calories in the body), anybody actually losing weight that way has to reduce calories even more to compensate for that.
Then that extra calorie restriction causes the resting metabolic rate to drop further. and around it goes.
It is like a young puppy chasing its tail !
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?