• Zorque@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    Also still not convinced CICO is even a thing.

    So… you don’t even agree with the crux of your own argument?

    Maybe I’m misinterpreting CICO, as I assumed it could be taken as just it’s initialism without having to be associated with any more complex fad diet.

    I understand that when people reference something, interpretation is not universal. There’s always going to be variance. I just hadn’t had that experience.

    I also know it’s a very hard metric to track. It will vary depending on body type, metabolism, and even psychology. I don’t recall that being disputed, though. Just that, at it’s core, it’s more about reducing caloric intake than increasing caloric use.

    • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      I mean for a start calories themselves are a bad unit to use. A human body is not a fire or an engine. It doesn’t actually burn stuff.

      As I explained the whole Calories Out portion of CICO doesn’t actually work, because the body can adjust it’s various metabolic processes. Only the CI part has any real use.