[E6300]

The only diet that works is caloric restriction. You can follow any fad diet you want, but if you don't expend more calories than you ingest you're not going to lose weight. Replace all the carbs in your equilibrium diet with the same amount of fat per mass and you're going to start gaining weight. It's as simple as that.

[jonnathanson]

You're missing the point of the low-carb theory. It's not claiming that you should eat above a deficit. It's arguing that a pure energy-deficit view of dieting is wildly impractical. Longitudinal evidence of dieters over 2-20+ year windows will routinely point out that people cannot stick to calorie-deficit diets, cannot estimate calories, etc.

Modern nutritional science is also showing that the way food is digested and metabolized in the body is strongly influenced by a complex hormonal interchange -- and whether organs like the liver or the gut are predominantly responsible for macronutrient metabolism has a significant effect on, for lack of a better word, "effective calorie counts" in foods. The macronutrient composition of what we eat clearly affects our hormonal reaction, which clearly affects feelings of hunger and satiety. To ignore these feedback loops in favor of strict energy-deficit reductionism is a bit like saying that anyone not programming in binary is wasting his or her time.

[jshevek]

Yes, this is a great post. I've known many in the keto community who have a dismissive attitude towards the calories in calories out mentality. Too often they simply say "CICO is nonsense!" without explaining what they really mean.

Sometimes science literate ppl think these ketoers just don't understand the 2nd law of thermodynamics, but that's not the point. Its true that the 2nd law determines weight loss, but changing your hormonal response is how you really achieve a healthy lifestyle.

[jshevek]

Not everyone changes their diet exclusively to lose weight. Some people would rather prevent medical issues, and or increase their well-being. This fixation on the calories in - calories out ignores all of this and is detrimental to people's health.

Further, many people would rather not have to track their calories everyday for the rest of their lives in order to maintain a healthy diet. They'd rather condition their body to prefer healthy foods, and to prefer healthy quantities of healthy foods. To do that you have to look at the source of the calories, not just the amount of calories.

[hossbeast]

This position is specifically addressed in the article. The author believes it's hormonal, instead.