But they didn’t die immediately and they weren’t mentally compromised, so either they were making a little bit of insulin or insulin isn’t 100% essential for brain function. … o well anyway, not really part of this discussion, is it, just another fascinating rabbit hole.
Peeing out glucose happens with type 2 diabetics as well - it’s why we’re prone to yeast infections (even dudes).
People have a fairly intuitive notion of this in my opinion, though it may not be obvious.
Should you give your kid cake for breakfast? Most people wouldn’t (despite most cake being more nutritional than most kids cereal), people also know you don’t want to give kids soda all the time. Why not? Most will say they get wild, rot your teeth etc. so they know a calorie is not a calorie, they affect you differently. People ‘know’ that 100 calories of vegetables is better than 100 calories of candy. If type of calorie didn’t matter we would all eat blizzards and pizza all day and diets would just be small blizzards to keep calories lower.
But fat makes people fat they might say. People KNOW about beer bellies, beer is almost all carbs so why is it known to everyone to make big fat bellies?
It is almost all brain washing and old wives tales. Soda for breakfast is horrifying but the same amount of orange juice contains about the same amount of what makes soda bad and people consider that a great thing to have at breakfast. Do the vitamins magically make it better?
And for the scorched earth approach, what will happen if I, someone requiring 2,000 calories per day, drink 1,500 calories of vodka everyday instead? You’d lose a little weight on your way to a fairly quick death. What about 1,500 calories of protein? You’d lose a little weight on your way to a fairly quick death from protein poisoning (rabbit starvation). Now what about 1,500 calories of fat? While the muscles would not be in the best shape for the long haul, you could survive decades. And lose a little weight.
All 3 of these have the same calorie input but only one doesn’t kill you.
There’s a limit to how simple it can be, Karen. Why do the type of calories we eat make a difference? Because of our hormonal response. That’s going to require further explanation, even though it’s the most straightforward reason behind the epidemic of obesity, metabolic syndrome, Type 2 diabetes, etc.
A really good analogy I once read that illuminated the difference between carbs and fat with respect to energy partitioning during a keto diet, and I don’t remember who to properly credit, went something like this:
"If you are not insulin sensitive and you eat carbs, it can be like making deposits into a bank account that you can never withdraw from. And the account continues to grow and grow …
Whereas if you eat fat, you can make both deposits and withdrawls from that account."
@kib - here it is, short and sweet: “CICO regulates weight. Hormones regulate CICO. And what and when you eat regulates hormones.”
This is persuasive because you start off with a point of agreement. It’s not either/or. (on the contrary, if you say “calories don’t matter”, they don’t hear anything you say afterwards).
Once you both agree that calories matter, then you can ask them why they think some people’s set point is 150 pounds and others is 400 pounds. That can’t be explained without acknowledging differences in metabolism, appetite, and energy partitioning. Which brings in hormones. Which bring in the behaviors to affect hormones.
Keto WOE —> hormones —> CICO —> weight
Nice, right out of Zig Ziglar sales training 101.
Snappy answer - Kellog, Mars, … big food are spending a lot of money (billions) to convince you CICO makes sense (with studies and advertising). Why would they reduce their profits if they were trying to convince you of something they really thought was true?
This is a valid approach. One could also refer to the fact that the “CICO” acceptance over the past few decades has been accompanied by the ever-growing epidemic of obesity, etc.
@Baytowvin - I can’t tell if you think that is a good or bad thing, but I think if we aim to persuade, it helps to acknowledge points of agreement.
On the other hand, if we wish to alienate the other party or be thought a loon (which I admit I sometimes take perverse pleasure in doing), then all we need to do is to ask them to suspend common sense and accept an absurdity. And to say, “calories don’t matter” is to do just that.
Between us Keto girls, we know what it means to say calories don’t matter – it reflects our attitude towards the futility of counting calories. But for the uninitiated, it reflects the ravings of a lunatic. Of course calories matter. 100% of people who fast for 30 days will lose weight. Why? Because calories matter!
Now, calories may matter differently than many people think. Counting calories may be an unsustainable approach to long term weight maintenance. CICO may be an oversimplified and flawed model of energy balance. But to catagorically assert that calories don’t matter at all is to relegate thyself to loon-status along with flat-earthers, numerologists, and vegan activists. Not exactly the most attractive folks anyone would emulate.
My final point to this interminable lecture – we are already suspected to be loons – spouting nonsense like calories don’t matter just confirms it. If we hope to persuade, we need to polish up our speech.
Definitely agree with this, whatever “snappy line” I go with, it will have to start with a rational point of agreement, i.e. "well yes, calories do matter, but … "
Sorry, the tone in my head was obviously positive, but you can’t hear that.
Definitely positive. It’s jusy as you said. If someone is defensive and/or ready to argue, the quickest way to disarm them is to agree with them. It instantly takes the wind out of their sails.
I think it is a hearts versus minds thing.
Your argument is correct but it is easily refuted with “people are weak willed – they haven’t really been doing CICO” (which I don’t agree with – I think it is more the case that people have average will power which is corroded in this SAD/easy to get/cheap food environment). Anyway, it is a winning of the minds argument – as are many in this thread. To me CICO is just too intuitive to be easily put down this way.
I was shooting for a winning for the hearts argument. If huge companies are spending money trying to convince you that their seemingly addictive products are okay for consumption – that maybe you should have an emotional response to being lied to for profit.
Right on, Robert - hit it from all sides.
This is a great thread. I think CICO “works” for a group of people, most of whom are metabolically healthy and homeostatic - diet never gets to be a problem for them in the first place. There is also a smaller contingent who work at it, with good results.
Regardless of how much will power one has, once one is insulin resistant and overweight, it really gets to be a vicious cycle, and in that SAD/easy to get/cheap food environment you mention, one’s will power will be diluted with the increasing hormonal struggle.
With Karen’s original question, surely it greatly matters who one is talking to. If it’s somebody who is healthy and happy at their weight, who really hasn’t struggled with weight gain or other metabolic problems, that’s one thing, and I don’t see much reason to try and disprove CICO for them.
If it’s somebody who has gained weight, tried many diets without long-term success, then they ought to read this thread. In the short-term, for a fast answer, one probably needs a good read on the personality of the individual, to figure out how to hit them with an answer.
When I speak to skeptics, I try to join them in their disbelief. I can’t believe this is actually working. Or that it took me so long to discover. Or I can’t believe how I lose weight eating bacon and ribeyes. Or, I was bracing myself waiting for blood work and was amazed when, after 10 years, I’m no longer pre-diabetic and my cholesterol profile is crazy good. Or, how I can cycle 60 miles fasted. WTF?!? This is Crazy!
@RobC - I halfway agree with you – beyond the food manufacturers, we also have a healthcare establishment that directly financially benefits from the obesity/diabetes/heart disease epidemic to the tune of an incremental $500B hard-dollars per year. And the “experts” in this field already have the evidence and education to understand what drives obesity, but have no financial incentive to do so. Per Upton Sinclair, “It’s difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it”
However, the “halfway” part is this – about half the country is skeptical of the notion of large-scale, profit-motivated, malevolent conspiracies by governments and corporations. If you broach that “greedy capitalists are lying to you for profit” to them, not only do you NOT win their hearts, you achieve the opposite – they see you as a conspiracy loon or worse, a Democrat.
@OldDoug - to the “obese people are weak-willed” argument, I always ask, “How to you explain the obesity epidemic in toddlers? Did you go to the gym when you were 9 months old? Are today’s toddlers too lazy to toddle?”
Fast answer: ”CICO” a waste of time! Turning a simple hunt and gather eating thing into navigating the space shuttle?
Vagus nerve is slow like this.
@Daves_Not_Here, wanted to thank you for this. I think my Mom and I have our biggest clash over the idea that I “know it all”. I don’t know it all, but I make my best effort to learn! Not sure why this is such a problem, considering how much education was pushed on me. What was I supposed to do, learn only long enough to get the nice report card and be a good little Suzee Kreemcheeze and forget it all again?
Well anyway, this “I’m amazed, it’s so crazy” approach worked like a charm. Thank you !!!