If this was you, how would you proceed?

[Skidude]

Quickest add to cart ever.

Now to figure out if sharpie marks would last long enough to make sure I'm always measuring the same spots.

Amazon Bird tatoos

 

[chmuse]

Raw, I posted after you and want to add a line here-

You have had a great deal of success, despite your fallbacks, but you are not what I would consider the average user.

To be 400lbs and not lose on 1200 calories seems to be an exception to a very well established rule. And you, my friend, are exceptional.

I have seen you very actively, and some times using questionable methods, trying to improve yourself. That is admirable.

Most folks do not deal with the extremes you do and that makes your journey more difficult and more unique.

I think the challenge for the people who comment is the Occam's razor approach, you are outside of the common margins on everything and that is the likely causing your extreme methods and the associated push back.

You weren't responding to raw. A lot of your comment is still correct, but raw is not the one with that particular struggle.

 

[chmuse]

Amazon Bird tatoos

Second quickest add to cart.

I love you

 

[FlowerFairy]

Raw, I posted after you and want to add a line here-

You have had a great deal of success, despite your fallbacks, but you are not what I would consider the average user.

To be 400lbs and not lose on 1200 calories seems to be an exception to a very well established rule. And you, my friend, are exceptional.

I have seen you very actively, and some times using questionable methods, trying to improve yourself. That is admirable.

Most folks do not deal with the extremes you do and that makes your journey more difficult and more unique.

I think the challenge for the people who comment is the Occam's razor approach, you are outside of the common margins on everything and that is the likely causing your extreme methods and the associated push back.

That wasn’t Raw.. but yeah, he is working his tail off.

 

[Skidude]

That wasn’t Raw.. but yeah, he is working his tail off.

So are you!

I apologize for the error.

I feel for you, that is a hell of a ride!

You have likely tried many things so I hate to even comment- but I guess that's why we are here, group fat therapy.. lol

There is a great deal of information about our bodies fighting weight loss, hell we are built to survive food shortages- 3 days no water and we may be done for but 30 days without food-no problem.

Personally, and this is my experience others will vary, when I had a slow few weeks, 2-3, I added calories for a few days tricking my body into thinking i just killed a mastodon, and sure enough it triggered the loss again. It wasn't cake and fried chicken but I loaded up on my normal stuff to 1600-1800+ calories.

If this has not worked for you, you will find something that does, you are way to committed not to win this!

 

[FlowerFairy]

So are you!

I apologize for the error.

I feel for you, that is a hell of a ride!

You have likely tried many things so I hate to even comment- but I guess that's why we are here, group fat therapy.. lol

There is a great deal of information about our bodies fighting weight loss, hell we are built to survive food shortages- 3 days no water and we may be done for but 30 days without food-no problem.

Personally, and this is my experience others will vary, when I had a slow few weeks, 2-3, I added calories for a few days tricking my body into thinking i just killed a mastodon, and sure enough it triggered the loss again. It wasn't cake and fried chicken but I loaded up on my normal stuff to 1600-1800+ calories.

If this has not worked for you, you will find something that does, you are way to committed not to win this!

Thank you-

I’ll try that. I have a roast in my refrigerator, maybe I’ll crock pot it with vegetables.. I’m not big on ice cream, last 3-4 containers I’ve bought ended up going down the sink if chocolate or given to the dogs if not.

Appreciate all of you..

 

[hexagonal]

I would have done so happily, but not even my endocrinologist could explain why CICO stopped working for me.

I don't mean to be rude and I don't want to discount your struggles, because it sounds like the CO is likely just not what it should be due to other issues, but it is impossible for CICO to not work.

In a local frame of reference, energy is always conserved. This is one of the laws governing the physics of the universe. You cannot get energy for free. You were consuming more calories than you were expending if you were gaining fat mass. The human body is simply not capable of creating more energy stores when you are expending more energy than you intake.

CICO can look like it's not working because the CO half can get very complex for a large variety of reasons, and anyone that acts like just because CICO must work losing weight is simple is uninformed or an asshole, but as long as the laws of physics remain what they are, CICO will continue to work.

 

[Calm Logic]

It's time to bust the 'calories in, calories out' weight-loss myth

www.sydney.edu.au

The biggest failing of the “calories in, calories out” formula is it ignores that the body adjusts its control systems when calorie intake is reduced. So while the formula can support people achieving weight loss initially, the reduction in energy intake is counteracted by mechanisms that ensure lost weight is regained.

Namely, when your body registers a sustained decrease in the calories you consume, it believes its survival is threatened. So it automatically triggers a series of physiological responses to protect against the threat, reducing our metabolic rate and burning less energy.

This stems from our hunter-gatherer ancestors, whose bodies developed this response to adapt to periods of deprivation when food was scarce to protect against starvation.

What’s more, calorie counting can do more harm than good, taking the pleasure out of eating and contributing to developing an unhealthy relationship with food. That can make it even harder to achieve and maintain a healthy weight.

 

[Skidude]

It's time to bust the 'calories in, calories out' weight-loss myth

www.sydney.edu.au

I recently read this article when having this same discussion with some friends. It is pretty cool what the body does, no doubt there is a benefit to muscle mass, but there is so much more going on with our bodies that we are just starting to understand.

The TLDR Summary:

The old adage in public health is that “you can’t outrun a bad diet,” and experts know from personal experience and lots of data that just hitting the gym to lose weight is frustratingly ineffective. But the new science helps to explain why exercise is such a poor tool for weight loss. It is not that we are not trying hard enough. Our bodies have been plotting against us from the start.

You still have to exercise. This article is not a note from your mom excusing you from gym class. Exercise has tons of well-documented benefits, from increased heart and immune system health to improved brain function and healthier aging. In fact, I suspect that metabolic adaptation to activity is one of the reasons exercise keeps us healthy, diverting energy away from activities, such as inflammation, that have negative consequences if they go on too long. For example, chronic inflammation has been linked to cardiovascular disease and autoimmune disorders.

The Exercise Paradox

Studies of how the human engine burns calories help to explain why physical activity does little to control weight—and how our species acquired some of its most distinctive traits

www.scientificamerican.com

 

[Calm Logic]

[Imported image pending local asset: attachments-1000001757-webp.7496]

 

[hexagonal]

It's time to bust the 'calories in, calories out' weight-loss myth

www.sydney.edu.au

Except this article just says that calories out gets reduced for a variety of reasons.

Which no one is debating. It doesn't mean that calories in, calories out is wrong.

Because calories in calories out being wrong is physically impossible.

 

[FlowerFairy]

I don't mean to be rude and I don't want to discount your struggles, because it sounds like the CO is likely just not what it should be due to other issues, but it is impossible for CICO to not work.

In a local frame of reference, energy is always conserved. This is one of the laws governing the physics of the universe. You cannot get energy for free. You were consuming more calories than you were expending if you were gaining fat mass. The human body is simply not capable of creating more energy stores when you are expending more energy than you intake.

CICO can look like it's not working because the CO half can get very complex for a large variety of reasons, and anyone that acts like just because CICO must work losing weight is simple is uninformed or an asshole, but as long as the laws of physics remain what they are, CICO will continue to work.

Ok. You don’t mean to be rude but you’re calling me a liar. I find it fascinating when strangers know more about my body than I do. Guess my pediatricians, my mother, and my doctors have all been wrong. I have been obese since I was 3- my weight tripled in a month with no change in diet or activity. And since my mother was cooking, I doubt she suddenly started stuffing me like a foie gras goose. But surely you, a complete and total stranger, know more about the facts in my life than I do, or any of my medical providers. . Of course you do.

 

[hexagonal]

Ok. You don’t mean to be rude but you’re calling me a liar. I find it fascinating when strangers know more about my body than I do. Guess my pediatricians, my mother, and my doctors have all been wrong. I have been obese since I was 3- my weight tripled in a month with no change in diet or activity. And since my mother was cooking, I doubt she suddenly started stuffing me like a foie gras goose. But surely you, a complete and total stranger, know more about the facts in my life than I do, or any of my medical providers. . Of course you do.

I'm not calling you a liar. I am saying you are misunderstanding what calories in, calories out means, or misunderstanding how physics works.

I don't have to know your body because you are claiming that the laws of physics do not apply to you.

If you are expending more calories than you are ingesting, what is being deposited as fat in your body? Your body cannot produce something from nothing. Your energy stores must come from somewhere.

Your weight could definitely increase significantly despite having the same diet and activity level! That's because the majority of calories out do not come from activity, they come from your base metabolism. There are a lot of things that can decrease your metabolism down to levels below the norm - some of them significantly below.

But that means your calories out has been reduced below your calories in. It doesn't mean you got lazy. It doesn't mean your diet was bad. It doesn't mean you did anything wrong. But your body cannot deposit matter from nowhere, and can't create energy from nothing. You have to be in a caloric surplus to add energy stores to your body, because by definition those are your body storing surplus energy.

It is literally physically impossible for calories in calories out to not work.

 

[FlowerFairy]

I'm not calling you a liar. I am saying you are misunderstanding what calories in, calories out means, or misunderstanding how physics works.

I don't have to know your body because you are claiming that the laws of physics do not apply to you.

If you are expending more calories than you are ingesting, what is being deposited as fat in your body? Your body cannot produce something from nothing. Your energy stores must come from somewhere.

Your weight could definitely increase significantly despite having the same diet and activity level! That's because the majority of calories out do not come from activity, they come from your base metabolism. There are a lot of things that can decrease your metabolism down to levels below the norm - some of them significantly below.

But that means your calories out has been reduced below your calories in. It doesn't mean you got lazy. It doesn't mean your diet was bad. It doesn't mean you did anything wrong. But your body cannot deposit matter from nowhere, and can't create energy from nothing. You have to be in a caloric surplus to add energy stores to your body, because by definition those are your body storing surplus energy.

It is literally physically impossible for calories in calories out to not work.

I have been a nurse for 30 years. I have a masters degree and an FNP. I understand “how CICO works.” It is not physically impossible. It’s not common, but it happens. You can literally go fuck yourself.

 

[hexagonal]

I have been a nurse for 30 years. I have a masters degree and an FNP. I understand “how CICO works.” It is not physically impossible. It’s not common, but it happens. You can literally go fuck yourself.

I am explaining why it is physically impossible. You are making a fallacious argument from authority and insulting me.

Can you explain how it is physically possible for something to come from nothing and you to be storing excess energy when you are in an energy deficit? Can you explain why you think this is possible, even if you can't formulate a theory as to where it is coming from for you? Where could this energy be coming from that it can be stored in your body if you are not ingesting it?

This isn't even a medicine or biology thing, this is basic physics. If what you were saying was true, it would be one of the most groundbreaking discoveries in physics in over a hundred years. Physicists from basically every field would be tripping over themselves to study you and try to figure out what is happening and how to replicate it.

Human metabolism does not have a hall pass from thermodynamics. Energy must be conserved. There has never been a single human being that has had CICO not hold up in a metabolic ward study. When every bit of food is measured and energy expenditure is tracked with doubly labeled water or respiratory tracking, CICO holds up, every time. What you are suggesting is effectively no different from a perpetual motion machine.

 

[Calm Logic]

From Gemini:

Yes, it is absolutely possible that a combination of Lipedema, a malabsorption disorder, and hypothyroidism could explain why you are gaining weight despite calorie restrictions. Let's break down how each condition can contribute:

* Hypothyroidism: This is a very common cause of weight gain and difficulty losing weight. Your thyroid gland produces hormones that regulate your metabolism. When your thyroid is underactive (hypothyroidism), your metabolism slows down, meaning your body burns fewer calories at rest. This can lead to weight gain, even with calorie restriction.

Additionally, hypothyroidism can cause fluid retention, which can also contribute to an increase on the scale. Treatment with thyroid hormone replacement (levothyroxine) can often help reverse this weight gain.

* Lipedema: This is a chronic medical condition characterized by the abnormal and symmetrical accumulation of fat, primarily in the legs, thighs, hips, and sometimes arms. A key characteristic of lipedema fat is that it is resistant to diet and exercise. This means that even if you restrict calories and exercise, the fat in these affected areas may not shrink. You might even lose weight from other parts of your body while the lipedema-affected areas remain large or even continue to grow. This can be incredibly frustrating and lead to significant weight gain in specific areas despite efforts to lose weight overall.

* Malabsorption Disorder: While typically associated with weight loss due to the body not absorbing enough nutrients, certain types of malabsorption can paradoxically lead to weight gain. For example, some malabsorption issues, like bile acid malabsorption, can affect how your body processes and stores calories as fat. If your body isn't absorbing essential nutrients efficiently, it might signal your body to hold onto fat reserves more readily, or it could lead to imbalances that impact metabolism. Some people with malabsorption may also experience fluid retention or inflammation, which can contribute to weight.

How they interact:

The combination of these three conditions creates a complex scenario that can make weight management exceptionally challenging:

* Slowed Metabolism (Hypothyroidism) + Resistant Fat (Lipedema): Hypothyroidism already makes it harder to burn calories. When coupled with lipedema, where the fat itself is resistant to traditional weight loss methods, it becomes a double whammy. You're burning fewer calories overall, and the fat that is accumulating is particularly stubborn.

* Malabsorption's Metabolic Impact: If a malabsorption disorder is impacting your nutrient absorption and metabolism in a way that promotes fat storage or causes fluid retention, it further complicates the picture, adding another layer to the weight gain challenge.

* Inflammation and Fluid Retention: Both hypothyroidism and lipedema can contribute to fluid retention and inflammation. This can mask actual fat loss and make you feel heavier.

What to do:

It's crucial to work closely with your healthcare providers (endocrinologist, a doctor knowledgeable about lipedema, and potentially a gastroenterologist or dietitian) to manage these conditions comprehensively.

* Optimizing Thyroid Treatment: Ensure your hypothyroidism is well-managed with appropriate thyroid hormone replacement.

* Lipedema Management: This often involves a multi-faceted approach, including conservative treatments like compression garments, manual lymphatic drainage, and specific exercises. In some cases, surgical interventions (like specialized liposuction) may be considered for severe lipedema.

* Addressing Malabsorption: Your doctor will need to diagnose the specific type of malabsorption and recommend appropriate dietary changes, supplements, or medications.

* Personalized Weight Management: A generic "calorie restriction" might not be effective for you. You'll likely need a highly personalized plan that considers the unique metabolic and fat distribution challenges posed by these conditions. This might involve focusing on nutrient-dense foods, managing inflammation, and finding forms of exercise that are beneficial and don't exacerbate lipedema symptoms.

It's important to remember that this is a complex situation, and it's not a matter of simply "eating less and exercising more." Your body is responding to underlying physiological issues. Seeking specialized medical guidance is essential.

Despite this, FlowerFairy has actually lost about 70 pounds, which is a testament to her, GLPs, and the effective management of her chronic conditions.

if there's one thing I preach like a TV evangelist it's that the weight loss process requires a superhuman amount of patience at times.

Bingo.

Your body cannot produce something from nothing. Your energy stores must come from somewhere.

With that perspective, we might as well take a bunch of downers and go to bed by 6 pm so we don't consume any more calories.

Honestly, I would rather deal with religion and politics than CICO and other savage gods. That's why there are no-diet groups for GLPers on Reddit.

People are tired of these old debates about what is best for weight loss when nothing has worked in the long term for them except medicating their GLP deficiency.

 

[Skidude]

Honestly, I would rather deal religion and politics than CICO and other savage gods. That's why there are no-diet groups for GLPers on Reddit. People are tired of these old debates about what is best for weight loss when nothing has worked for them for decades.

I think you hit the nail on the head with this- We are debating things that people believe to be 100% accurate, which is a challenge to their beliefs.

@hexagonal has been a valued contributor to the community and everything I have seen him comment on has been framed in a productive and respectful tone.

@FlowerFairy has worked hard at her program and has a direct understanding of what has effected her.

Scientifically the physics argument makes sense, anecdotally the FF contention seems accurate.

We are at an impasse.

What is curious, and worth trying to understand better, is what would cause the gains on restricted calories.

As Hex points out the articles about movement discuss the arbitrary reduction in daily activities that impact the massive burns of the hunt- netting a reduced daily calorie burn.

What unknown factors are occurring, albeit infrequent enough to not be common knowledge, that might allow someone to gain or not lose under the CICO model?

Is it a result of no CO (like the less walking between hunts) is it a result of the CI (maybe slowed digestion absorbing and turbo charging the calories, making them stronger).

This needs to be studied and understood better.

here is an example of one such study-

Science Reveals Why Calorie Counts Are All Wrong

Digestion is far too messy a process to accurately convey in neat numbers. The counts on food labels can differ wildly from the calories you actually extract, for many reasons

www.scientificamerican.com

 

[FlowerFairy]

Amazon Bird tatoos

I just realized that was a link and looked. Thank you! I do love birds and flowers

 

[Calm Logic]

This needs to be studied and understood better.

For most of human history, people did not know what a calorie was. So we don't need to think in terms of calories if we mostly avoid ultraprocessed foods and stick more or less to a traditional diet, such as the Mediterranean diet of mostly plants and whole-grain starches.

And there is a lot to be said for not gaining weight back (in net terms) during a stall. Which means someone and/or something is still doing more things right than anything else.

The only debate I have with myself: Do I stay at the same dose of tirz, raise it, or go down? And when do I switch to the reta in my freezer.

I don't even have to figure out why I stall anymore since staying the course or raising the dose will eventually break it. Before GLPs, I was gaining weight back sooner than later and every day I would be irritable or depressed from constantly restricting myself and feeling hungry.

 

[hexagonal]

Despite this, FlowerFairy has actually lost about 70 pounds, which is a testament to her, GLPs, and the effective management of her chronic conditions.

Sure. I'm here too - on retatrutide as well. As I have noted multiple times, none of this is an indictment on her. I am not saying that the fact that CICO must work means there has been any sort of moral failing on anyone's part when they fail to lose weight when attempting to count calories.

What I'm saying is that despite CICO being significantly more complicated than all of the "just count calories lol" people would have you believe, that fundamentally, it must work.

We do not serve any good purpose in denying the fundamental rules of reality though, in particular because of things like stalls, particularly when nearing or reaching maximum doses or when not seeing any improvement from increasing doses in general. We must understand what is happening to understand how to move past these sticking points, and putting our heads in the sand will not change that.

With that perspective, we might as well take a bunch of downers and go to bed by 6 pm so we don't consume any more calories.

Honestly, I would rather deal with religion and politics than CICO and other savage gods. That's why there are no-diet groups for GLPers on Reddit.

People are tired of these old debates about what is best for weight loss when nothing has worked in the long term for them except medicating their GLP deficiency.

I'm not sure how you have gotten this sort of perspective from my posts. I don't know how to make it more clear than what I have repeatedly said - I am not casting judgment on anyone for calorie counting and other forms of weight loss not working. It's no secret that I wasn't successful with it either.

Do not confuse the fact that CICO must work with the idea that we should all be spending our time counting calories. That is not what I am saying. But these drugs fundamentally are about altering our CICO - the appetite suppression and general anti-hunger effects help us reduce our calories in. The metabolism increasing effects help us increase our calories out. That is the fundamental truth of what occurs while on them. They're not magic, though just how effective they can be can certainly make them seem magical.

CICO is the reality we are constrained by. It's not a matter of debating weight loss programs and diets vs. GLP-1s. It's not a matter of advocating for counting calories as your primary method of losing weight. It's just acknowledging that we do still obey the laws of physics. And that understanding helps us understand what is happening when we stall for prolonged periods of time, what our different options actually do, and helps us determine what option to take.