CICO is the most retarded theory that treats body as a black box and looks at just input/ouput while we have already understanding of the human body. But CICOtards don't want to listen to it so I will just debunk you dum dums so you can shut up about CICOI will first debunk the CI then the CO>Calories in2 apples growing next to each other on a field get different nutrients from the ground, the air and the sun exposure, how the fuck can you say that all apples have same amount of calories AND YOU KNOW THEM PER GRAM? Furthermore, 2 different people will eat those 2 different apples and digest them completely differently, some people won't even digest it properly and shit it out, like what happens with milk/dairy and lactose intolerant people. But CICOtards imply that every food has same nutritional value and that people absorb it 100%? Give it a fucking break. And on top of it you did those nutritional studies based on nitrogen amount? At best you guy guesstimate shit. Which you fuckers go against it with weighing and counting your calories like you are doing exact fucking science>Calories outIs running 1 kilometer burning the same amount of calories as walking 1 kilometer? The treadmill will say it is, the calculations say it is, but normal human intuition asks "well how fast are you running?" Same goes with fucking metabolism. To assume "basal metabolic rate" is to be a dunce that AGAIN guesstimates. Mind you, the scientists did studies on Wim Hoff and his breathing meditation and shown that he can increase his core body temperature (and with it the BMR). So, if simple breathing exercise can increase your metabolism whos to say you spend always the same amount? In fact, most studies suggest that your BMR slows down when you start working out, to keep the body expendature the same. So why even workout and not just breathe better?
>>75389448You literally have guesstimations on both ends and call it a "hard hitting science backed by 2nd law of thermodynamics". You guys are masochistic ex fatties that want to offload their self hatred to everyone else.Ps, I am not fat and no I will not show my body
>>75389448If you want to lose weight then eat less.
ITT: Fatty really hates the fact that he just has to eat less to lose weight and making up excuses again
>>75389578Except cico is fatties that think all they have to do is eat less and burn more and can continue consuming the food that made them fat
>>75389448>2 apples growing next to each other on a field get different nutrients from the ground, the air and the sun exposure, how the fuck can you say that all apples have same amount of calories AND YOU KNOW THEM PER GRAM?calories aren't nutrients. the claim isn't they have the same amount of calories. do you understand how averages work?>2 different people will eat those 2 different apples and digest them completely differently, some people won't even digest it properly and shit it out, like what happens with milk/dairy and lactose intolerant people.>completely differentlyso they'll poop out the entire apple, undigested? your stomach has acid which breaks the food down.>CICOtards imply that every food has same nutritional value and that people absorb it 100%?if you listened instead of seething, you'd understand that is not what proponents of CICO argue. to wit:>At best you guy guesstimateno. we count. meticulously weighing food, using an app that counts calories per gram. dynamically updating the target. if what you say is true, bodybuilders would never succeed.>Is running 1 kilometer burning the same amount of calories as walking 1 kilometer?yes. this is shown by research from Pontzer, who, btw, you're referencing with your arguments without even understanding it. in other words, he's the one who talks about the metabolic ceiling and other concepts that fatties like you glom on to. >but normal human intuition asks "well how fast are you running?"you burn the calories faster. it's not complicated. >So why even workout and not just breathe better?you did it. you solved the mystery. if fat people breathe harder they'll lose weight... wait a minute, they huff and heave all day and yet get fatter? it's almost like they're consuming too many calories...op. please. delete yourself from existence.
>>75389580Fatties that do that actually lose weight. The ones that don't pretend cico doesn't work when it's just their lack of willpower.
>>75389448Both your examples are just issues with measuring calories in vs calories out. You haven't come up with any reason why they don't work.
>>75389448that's not even the start of it kekwe don't use calories to do metabolic work, you can just end it there, companies are allowed a +/-20% error in stating caloric content which is beyond retarded, the only way to make it work is to vastly, grosslt under or over-eat and that's dumb.on the CO side good luck calculating the amount of calories you shit and piss out as well.even with the above it still doesn't make sense because there are people eating 2 pounds of meat a day and losing weight
>>75389618lol not fat uh-huh, you are just another sloppy slop slurper defending sneed oils aren’t you
>OP casually outplaying thermodynamics by sheer power of will>people ITT making fun of a literal wizard
>>75389638>companies are allowed a +/-20% error in stating caloric contentWhat kind of slop are you eating lmao
>>75389638>there are people eating 2 pounds of meat a day and losing weightThat's like 2000kcal which is enough of a deficit for most adult men to lose weight on, especially if you take the thermic effect of protein (calories out) into the equation.
>>75389640I've never been fat in my life, but I do regularly cut from around 15% to close to 10% once or twice a year.
>>75389448not gonna read all that and continue to count calories and stay lean sexy heh
>>75389638>2 pounds of meat a day and losing weight2 pounds of 80% ground beef is 2300 calories. Unless you are hyperturbomanlet or underweight why would you not lose weight on 2300 cals? You "people" are on the same level as flat earthers
>>75389650protein thermic effect is not CO you dumb cunt, it's heat lost to entropy, not calories you are using (CO). not that animals use calories for anything anyway
>>75389647and how does your cookie cutter calorie counter app calculate your calories kek do you think they accurate in any way>inb4 i count myselfno you don't
>>75389687No, it's part of the "CO" in CICO. Everyone knows that.
>>75389696I weigh my food.
>>75389702cool then it's mass in mass out?that at least makes slightly more sense, do you weight your shit?you know you eat mass and not calories right? and your body does NOT convert mass in calories (heat), at best heat is something that goes out of a given chemical reaction, and your body does not use that heat in any way.
>>75389738You are so retarded lmfao
I've been counting calories and losing 1kg per week. When I didn't and just tried to eat healthy it didn't work. It's working so I'll stick to it.
look fags all i'm saying is that CICO is VASTLY inaccurate, and if you follow the basic principles of >eating enough for muscle buildingie the necessary amount of fats carbs and proteins (not calories, but mass ffs)>po>good technique>enough restyou will grow muscle, period, if you're getting fat and want to cut down on fat storage then you eat less and figure out how to use a scale and a goddamn mirror and you track your progress, it's not hard at all.anyone with two braincells can see when you eat something you react in different ways, storing fat, stomach pains, you get the runs and so on.so if you just stick to that you'll figure it out.given that it is that easy and that CICO is extremely inaccurate and people following it get shit results and often rebound like those retards on Biggest Loser i can't understand why the fuck anyone would do that.
You cico vs diet guys are beyond mentally ill. It has literally been known for decades that limiting your fat and carb intake (diet) + limiting your portion size in relation to activity level (cico) is the way to get in shape. Yet you keep yapping every fucking day like the two methods are diametrically opposed world views, when in reality everyone not mentally unstable knows that they work best when used together.
>>75389580No one except fat fucks and youtube grifters do these autistic carnivore/raw dairy/zero-carb/non-PUFA/etc. fad diets. Fat fucks and DYELs are always looking for magic pills. Actual healthy people have no need for that bullshit.
>>75389738The majority of mass in food is just water, that doesn't effect fat/muscle gain in any way. Calories are a better method to measure the nutrients that do effect weight gain than measuring mass. This should be obvious.
>>75389783>if you're getting fat and want to cut down on fat storage then you eat less and figure out how to use a scale and a goddamn mirror and you track your progress, it's not hard at all.This is literally just cico while pretending it isn't
>>75389597>calories aren't nutrients. the claim isn't they have the same amount of calories. do you understand how averages work?Then goes on to say that you meticulously weight everything to the gram as some kind of precise science, you debunked yourself in one post man lmao
>>75389629Because both of methods of measuring calories are innacurate you can't say that CICO is reason you lost weight
>>75389664>>75389650>2 pounds of 80% ground beef is 2300 caloriesThats a guesstimation at bestYou guys cant say 2 pounds of beef from one seller is the same calories content as another, you are just lying and estimating
Calorie counting is just very inaccurate. When counting calories for beef, for instance, one doesn't even consider that beef has water in it, so when you cook it, you burn some of the calories, water, and nutrients. So, the estimation might be even more inaccurate. Also, regarding beef, sellers INJECT WATER to the beef anyway. You could be eating less or more than you are eating>>75389965True, cows raised differently might have different nutritional values.
>>75389597>so they'll poop out the entire apple, undigested?No, not entire. Nobody said entire apple. There maybe 2% of apple you didn't digest. Yet you counted whole apple of calories.>your stomach has acid which breaks the food down.Doesn't mean your digestive tract absorbed it all.>no. we count. meticulously weighing food, using an app that counts calories per gram. dynamically updating the targetYet few lines before you said>calories aren't nutrients. the claim isn't they have the same amount of calories. do you understand how averages workSo what is it? Do you know the calories of every apple individually or is it an average?
>>75389965It doesn't matter. Regression towards the mean essentially makes it so that you're ultimately averaging to meet your calorie goals over a period of time, assuming that you're tracking.
>>75389448People are literally dumb enough to argue against the laws of thermodynamics. The science we have tested experimentally more than any other in the history of ever. "Oh, but the literal underpinnings of reality don't apply to me." Shut the fuck up and lift.
>>75390015So guesstimation of calories, got it
>>75389991Retard take, all of the online calorie databases account for water which is why you always use PRECOOKED weight.
>>75389448When I bulk I eat a little bit more of everything I eat normally and I gain weight. When I cut I eat less then when I bulk and I lose weight. That works every time. That's it. Also too long didn't read.
>>75389800Cringe, eating seed oil is no better than being vaccinated
>>75389448Hey man, I'm losing weight at pretty much exactly the rate my CICO computations say I should. I started out with a pretty balanced diet, good mix of macros etc, and then adjusted portions according to my TDEE minus 500. Lo and behold, over the course of 30 weeks I've averaged 1lb lost a week, exactly what CICO says I should. Debunk that for us.You're in here fatting up the place with your fat-scuses while CICO is out there changing lives.
Anti-cico posters are the dumbest motherfuckers on this board.
How do I calculate required calories for gain then is there an app or site?
just leaving it here. no horse or cow or goat got obese eating grass ever
>>75389580>Except cico is fatties that think all they have to do is eat less and burn more and can continue consuming the food that made them fatYou can. I went from 250 to 175 by just eating less and exercising more.
>>75390262uou can count and measure everything you put into mouth. have to choose between constant hunger or losing human form. or yo can embrace the potato. set yourself free.
>>75389448The variations are quite insignificant and cancel out.
>>75390555>no horse or cow or goat got obese eating grass ever>t. has never kept a ruminant animalMy family keeps horses and this happens all the time. We have "starvation paddocks" for the exact purpose of stopping them from overgrazing.
>>75390537One pound is about 3500 calories. There is a maximum amount of calories your body can take in in a day, however (your large intestine only has so much surface area so any excess beyond what it can process just passes through, undigested). While it varies from person to person and varies from what you eat, it's about TDEE +1200. So even at a maximum bulk you're not going to gain more than a pound about every three days, and even then you'd probably feel nauseous eating that much continuously. Like weight loss, just stick to 500 a day and gain a pound a week,
>>75390565modern grains cause it. for humans grains are not really issue as our natural diet is tuber centred which is close enough to grains at least rice. worst you can get McDougalling is skinnyfat if your sedentary af.
>>75390606No, it happens to horses overeating grass in the summer. You obviously don't own a horse and have no idea what you're talking about so why embarrass yourself like this?
>>75389783>calories in calories out doesnt work>if you want to lose weight, eat less, thus consuming less caloriesMake up your mind nigga
Every day same utter retardation>not understanding difference between nutrients and calories>not understanding difference between mass and calories>not understanding why we need oxygen and breathe out carbon while simultaneously insisting metabolism is chemistry not physicsThen make a bunch of idiot strawmen out of those three.Rinse and repeat.Every day.This gotta be some paid keto shill farm in India. No single person can possibly be that fucking stupid with zero memory.
>>75389448This is sorta fatty cope. CICO is a decent way to induce weight loss. But what you eat is also very important. Increasing protein consumption from minimally processed animal products increases satiety so you eat less anyway. They are also lower calorie and more nutritionally dense compared to processed foods.As an aside I'm trying to increase glp-1 production by having coffee and eggs for breakfast. It seems like its working. Anyone else doing something like this or have any info?
>>75389448You are a double nigger and you fuck children. I know this because you lie about basic bitch dieting. One day we will stop sending you money. But for now you bomb Iran for us.
cico is all that matters in weight loss but for fat loss and increasing ffmi its more intricate obviously which is what you should be doing
>>75389580https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vTi5ugF9BdkGo on then
why do i click on these retarded bait threads
>>75390175Problem, fatty?
>>75389580>Be fat and consuming X calories per day>Start eating <X calories per day>Start working out and burning Y calories per day>lose weightWTF IS THIS PSEUDO-SCIENTIFIC BULLSHIT?!?!?!?
>>75389800Coping fatties and baiters ITT have absolutely nothing to say to this.
>>75389448If CICO isn't true, then why do starving africans stay skinny and gluttonous westoids stay fat? If you eat a tsp of pure lard a day and dig holes for 8 hours, will you gain more weight than someone who eats 4lbs of pure sugar and doesn't move at all? CICO is once again proven true. CICO bros, we keep winning.
>>75389618They lose weight and also lose their hair, muscle, energy, focus, they hurt all over, and then they end up caving because they feel horribly ill all the time. Teach them to eat more filling meals with adequate nutrition and they're golden