Iago McDohl
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 05:41:26 +0000
Humans =/= Bomb Calorimeters
Our metabolic processes are hormonal.
So no, as stated multiple times before, the strict CI/CO model does not work, especially because, at least in my personal experience and (obviously biased) opinion people are looking to lose fat, not necessarily weight, in the most basic sense. Also, the people looking to "gain weight", who really just want muscular hypertrophy.
However, and this has already been said as well (so perhaps I'm only going to fail in my attempts at elucidation) in the strictest sense, a "Calorie In" is a unit of energy that the body is able to process, and a "Calorie out" is a unit of energy that the body has used for some metabolic process. Ergo, by its very nature, the CI/CO model works.
The problem is, again, that the current models used do not accurately depict this. They either fail to accurately count calories taken in and processed, or they fail to accurately measure an individuals metabolic activity. Or likely both. Both of these processes are highly individual, not fully understood, and just confusing as all get out.
So no, using given nutritional info for foods without proper weighing combined with online calculators for metabolic activity (to include BMR, TDEE, calories burned for unit of time for a given exercise) will not be very effective.
This is simplified, as much as I hope is necessary while still getting the point across. We all generally seem to agree here.
Nobody is saying the CI/CO model works in the traditional "fitness guru" sense, those guys never do either, really. Even after emphatically saying that CI/CO is all that matters, they will still often give general guidelines as far as macro ratios go (i.e. "eat more lean protein/get lots of veggies/only eat whole grains/or whatever), nobody ever leaves it at that and just lets their clients eat a caloric deficit of nothing but Doritos or little debbie snack cakes.
As far as actual diet recommendations, it seems beyond the scope of this thread, and everyone already seems fairly well-informed with their own opinion. In light of not seeing anything completely outlandish to me, I will end my fairly long-winded diatribe here.
Our metabolic processes are hormonal.
So no, as stated multiple times before, the strict CI/CO model does not work, especially because, at least in my personal experience and (obviously biased) opinion people are looking to lose fat, not necessarily weight, in the most basic sense. Also, the people looking to "gain weight", who really just want muscular hypertrophy.
However, and this has already been said as well (so perhaps I'm only going to fail in my attempts at elucidation) in the strictest sense, a "Calorie In" is a unit of energy that the body is able to process, and a "Calorie out" is a unit of energy that the body has used for some metabolic process. Ergo, by its very nature, the CI/CO model works.
The problem is, again, that the current models used do not accurately depict this. They either fail to accurately count calories taken in and processed, or they fail to accurately measure an individuals metabolic activity. Or likely both. Both of these processes are highly individual, not fully understood, and just confusing as all get out.
So no, using given nutritional info for foods without proper weighing combined with online calculators for metabolic activity (to include BMR, TDEE, calories burned for unit of time for a given exercise) will not be very effective.
This is simplified, as much as I hope is necessary while still getting the point across. We all generally seem to agree here.
Nobody is saying the CI/CO model works in the traditional "fitness guru" sense, those guys never do either, really. Even after emphatically saying that CI/CO is all that matters, they will still often give general guidelines as far as macro ratios go (i.e. "eat more lean protein/get lots of veggies/only eat whole grains/or whatever), nobody ever leaves it at that and just lets their clients eat a caloric deficit of nothing but Doritos or little debbie snack cakes.
As far as actual diet recommendations, it seems beyond the scope of this thread, and everyone already seems fairly well-informed with their own opinion. In light of not seeing anything completely outlandish to me, I will end my fairly long-winded diatribe here.
Well, so far, my experience with fat loss is that caloric deficit does work, and its the only thing that works- along with skipping dinners. If nothing else, it helps me keep better track of what I eat. I've tried just eating healthy and I fall off the tracks way too easily and I'll delude myself into: 'taco bell burritos have beans, so it must be healthy'.
