CICO/cutting calories while insulin is high leads to metabolic slowdown and likely regain (body fat cannot be accessed).
CICO/cutting calories while insulin is low leads to body fat being burned.
Both are CICO/cutting calories but hormones decide how it will go.
It means he contributes financially on a monthly basis towards the running of this site. Patreon is a site where creators can setup a page and people can sign up to have money debited monthly to help fund their ventures.
But, and I think Rob would agree with me here, thatâs not really the important part of his postâŚ
It can work. So when people ask about CICO, they shouldnât be instantly rammed with 8 paragraphs of rubbish, telling them everything they donât want to know, but nothing about what vthey asked.
Itâs very typical of this site, itâs great unless someone asks about CICO. Then all of a sudden it changes. The pitch forks come out and self proclaimed experts tell the world that CICO doesnât work or it has to be avoided or even if you do lose weight youâll put it all back on straight away.
Itâs all a load of crap, peddled by sensationalists who want to believe that calories donât count with keto.
They are wrong.
No, they just have a timeframe longer than 14 weeks, and a belief that ân+1â isnât the same as ân=many plus a lot of research and experience.â
Then let those who are only interested in weight loss, ask what ever questions they like AND MAYBE GET AN ANSWER ON THAT. Without have to be lectured about something they havenât asked about.
They did. It wasnât an answer you like. That doesnât mean itâs not the right answer.
Remember that âeat less and exercise moreâ sounds just as bad around here as âcut off your armâ to lose weight.
It has been tried for decades and does not work until you make the hormones work with it.
Not to mention a solidly-documented mechanistic explanation of how the body works under such circumstances.
Even though it clashes with what weâve been taught by researchers in the Harvard School of Public Healthâs Nutrition Department, which was founded with and has been sustained by, over the years, money from the sugar industry. Sugar is good for you! (insert sarcasm emoji here)
As I said before, CICO is not my focus, itâs simply a byproduct to my WOE. Thereâs so much more to having healthy weight loss than CICO. Not all calories are created equal and I honestly donât care if my calories are âhighâ. Itâs all about quality, not quantity.
You keep cherrypicking parts of what I say to validate your beliefs and thatâs fine but you continue to miss the overall picture I am try to present. I honestly donât think you will see it because you are so hung up on just CICO, and thatâs ok too. I wonât waste your time any further. Apologies if this is upsetting to you.
Carl, you (and the other guys) are not upsetting me. Please keep posting/contributing to this debate.
It is a debate, nothing else.
The debate started about people being lectured at when they ask about calories. It has snow balled into something else now!
It is much more than 14 weeks experience. I first started low carb dieting in the mid 90s with Atkins. So 20 something years of experience with low carb (varying kinds), qualifies me as at least, somewhat experienced.
Thatâs a funny way to spell âanswered in such a way as to help correct their misconceptions about calories.â
They have no misconceptions. CICO works.
Just because you and others donât want to follow it, doesnât mean you/they have to ram it down peoples throat every time CICO is mentioned.
You/they are ramming it down throats, I am protecting their right to ask, and be answered. Thereâs a difference.
Your way is not the only way.
No, youâre not. Nobody has tried to stop questions about it. There are any number of actual answers in this, and other, threads. As a result, itâs entirely clear that no âprotectionsâ are needed.
Youâre actively attempting to stop people who donât agree with your generally proven incorrect assertion from answering, seemingly based on a belief that your n=1 is more useful for everyone than n=many over a long period of time, and with plenty of science to back it up.
Mirror, anyone?
You need to go back and re read the first few posts. The op had 8 paragraphs of rubbish that she hadnât asked for. But no attempt to answer her question. I had the front to point that out⌠⌠⌠⌠and all this ensued.
This entire thread is about the right of people to have a question on CICO answered without a constant barrage of abuse about the way they want to approach things.
As usual, this isnât acceptable to most here. So they have to make it about me. Well, thatâs ok, I donât mind.
Your way is not the only way.
There are plenty of threads started for your way of thinking about CICO. I have never once told anyone in them that their way is wrong. I have tried to help them with the way THEY WANT to go about things though.
Itâs a pity you guys canât do the same, for someone who has a different approach to you.
Like I said, your way is not the only way.