Perfect weather to enjoy some grass and Red Stripe 
4 Likes
No calories, no cry.
5 Likes
It is CICO
All calories are equal
Predisposition to obesity is genetic
The genetic traits are in the brain
Double processed food is bad
Exercise doesn’t increase your calories out
Think that’s the summary.
6 Likes
how does exercise not increase calories out? does it mean , not by more than the calories actually expended exercising?
1 Like
Theory is that your calorie expenditure when resting is lower, so over a day it balances.
Exercise is not a good method of weight loss, especially as many people over compensate by increasing their intake. When the body is compensating by reducing the resting rate.
3 Likes
interesting and counter intuitive, will have a listen 
I’m thinking it does increase CO, but often people also increase CI. Surely there is no way resting metabolic rate can drop enough to offset the energy expended running a marathon, for example, or cycling 100 miles
1 Like
If BMR is 2000kcal then burning more than 2000kcal in exercise can’t be offset by resting rate reducing.
4 Likes
One thing there is to watch, if you normally burn 100 an hr at rest and exercise is say 400, then that net gain is only 300 but Ive not seen any studies that show you then only burn 50 at rest for next 6 hrs for example. The body still needs to fuel normal function, and the opposite is true as you need to use more to fuel repair and “metabolism” speeds up. Its why HIIT work is best for weightloss, as it also uses more energy in the hours after finishing.
Unless we have new #sciencefact 
2 Likes
I thought it was more the idea people do less unformal activity after exercise, IE we walk around less, or even fidget less.
That doesn’t negate all exercise calories of course, but some of. Which when combined with appetite going up is why exercise isn’t great for weight loss for most until you get to extreme levels.
Although given people can be in REDS and having stress fractures etc without losing much weight suggests the body is using less energy for repair in some circumstances?
3 Likes
personal incredulity…
or special pleading…I can never remember…
Music to my ears…and that sweet music is that of Yusuf Islam, sing it for me, Cat;
The truth has broken, Joe is in mourning
#TheScience has spoken, facts are each word
Praise for them thinking, praise for informing
Praise for them saying, gospel undeterred
5 Likes
Experiment - have 20 people, lock them all in a room, feed them all the same calories, and force the same activity on them, to maintain their weight. After a few weeks, double the CI, maintain the activity. Hypothesis - if it’s simply CICO, then they will all increase weight by the same amount.
Those sorts of experiments have been done. People increased their weight all sorts of different amounts, including none at all, the bodies ability to vary it’s CO is huge, fidgeting, simply a higher temperature, all sorts.
Not as annoying and doesn’t appear to meet any of the evidence as the ultra processed food and “it’s just so damn tasty, we can’t stop eating” argument, but the CICO line is annoying, it’s obviously true on some level, but as a useful measure of how to prevent or “cure” obesity it’s completely useless.
3 Likes
The Minnesota starvation experiment included that I think, in the “rehabilitation” arms.
The main experiment was sort of the opposite:
1570 Kcal per day; 22 miles of walking or running per week, plus a programme of lab based work and education. On the way down I think weight loss was universal they all lost weight, about 25% of body weight over 6 months.
But then the men were divided into 2 groups, one with controlled refeeding at I think 3000Kcal per day and one uncontrolled refeeding. I can’t easily find data for the weight regain of the controlled refeeding group, most articles seem to focus on the weight loss and the psychological effects. but that might be interesting to this discussion.
4 Likes
@buzz – Thanks for the link, I’ll try to listen to that at some point.
I’ve already highly recommended this book over on the Weigh-in thread.
But I certainly think it would add some context to the CICO debate on here too.
4 Likes
he’s one of the guest speakers on the podcast - just listening now. He likes scotch eggs, but the one with the black pudding
1 Like
Is that argument not this? ie complete bollocks, no-one over the age of 10 who has actually been to a restaurant other than McDonald’s, thinks ultra processed food is so damn tasty, they much prefer Poet’s butter etc. If it was just so damn tasty, why would more expensive restaurants exist?
@JibberJim - In a word no.
In lots of words, read the UPF book, the science behind this is scary.
Plus the conflict of interest angle on ‘evidence’ that it is nothing to do with UPF is shocking.
Honestly, the book will do a much better job of explaining this than I ever will.
Cheers, Paul. 
1 Like
So, obesity is cured! People who cook daily, don’t eat UPF won’t get fat?
To clarify, no the science doesn’t say this - the science of obesity doesn’t say much, other than it’s a very complicated problem that cannot possibly have a simple answer - so no UPF is not the answer.
Even if it was, the UPF argument doesn’t actually identify the problem, for example the seed oil believers would also be covered by the UPF hypothesis, how do you say it’s UPF and not Seed Oil from the “evidence” (since all seed oils are UPF, and there are no UPF diets without seed oils)