Paula Deen Making Diabetes life a Dream

[Anonymous No.14613103]

https://www.eater.com/2012/1/17/6622107/paula-deen-announces-diabetes-diagnosis-justifies-pharma-sponsorship

[Anonymous No.14613322]

Food has consequences.

[Anonymous No.14613337]

>>14613103
reminder that she should've never apologized for saying the n-word.

[Anonymous No.14613359]

>>14613337
That was a lying disgruntled fired employee.

[Anonymous No.14614444]

>>14613103
>2012

Why are you posting old news?

https://youtu.be/rcXb9mt7N4A

[Anonymous No.14614488]

>>14613103
It's actually fucking sick how uninformed Americans are and how to lose weight. It's the last 50 years they've been brainwashed on cico and literally can't let go. local drug dealing doctors don't even know how to properly give advice on losing weight. Medical system is a joke. It's by 2035 over 70% of America is projected to be obese peak fucking clown world. 1.7 trillion a year taxpayers have to pay for the whole countries health crisis. This is unsustainable, this is going to end in slavery or collapse.

[ᛋᛋ SCHUTZSTAFFEL ᛋᛋ !JuN.8Ir9OE No.14614798]

>>14613103
>pic related
Paula Deen is based as heck. She made things that people wanted to eat. Nobody thought what she was making was healthy. People had already known for 20 years before she got cancelled that eating a stick of butter with every meal, or eating super sweets was bad. People don't get to have the excuse of "I didn't know!" here.

>>14613337
There's literally no reason to ever apologize to the mob because the mob can't be satisfied.

>>14614488
>yuropoor
>cico is a lie!!!
400 lb. tubbagoo detected

[Anonymous No.14614892]

>>14614798
>Cico is a lie
Yea I know it works so well, 80 million people haven't had any success or lost any weight long term, so successful!
Go eat your McDonald's fatbody

[ᛋᛋ SCHUTZSTAFFEL ᛋᛋ !JuN.8Ir9OE No.14614908]

>>14614892
CICO absolutely works. The problem is that most fat people underestimate the amount of food that they eat, and underestimate the caloric density of the food that they eat. They'll eyeball potato salad and say "yeah that's 1/4 of a cup!" when it's actually a 1/3 or 1/2 a cup.

Caloric deficits do not work unless you keep a food journal or actually weight what you eat. But if you do and/either you will get results every time.

[Anonymous No.14614919]

i really wonder why this fat bitch got diabetes, LMAOOOOOOOOOOOO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42oUVwyFsZI

[ᛋᛋ SCHUTZSTAFFEL ᛋᛋ !JuN.8Ir9OE No.14614929]

>>14614908
*actually weigh or measure what you eat

[Anonymous No.14614933]

>>14614908
>80 million people just magically all have weak wills and aren't doing the right
do you even hear yourself, forgetting all the hard scientific evidence of fact that says insulin is the determiner of whether you store body fat or burn it, forgetting all that... What you're implying here is that not only CICO works but that nobody should question it or even try something different after 50+ years of continual obesity. News flash, if something doesn't get results on this large of a scale, it doesn't work.

[Anonymous No.14614951]

>>14614919
>a little vegetable

[ᛋᛋ SCHUTZSTAFFEL ᛋᛋ !JuN.8Ir9OE No.14614957]

>>14614933
>insulin is the determiner of whether you store body fat or burn it
So if I eat 10,000 calories worth of lean sirloin steak every day will I gain weight or lose weight?

Post your sources. I'm open to learning new things.

[ᛋᛋ SCHUTZSTAFFEL ᛋᛋ !JuN.8Ir9OE No.14614962]

>>14614957
*10,000 calories worth of lean sirloin steak and ensure that I consume 0 grams/molecules of sugar otherwise

[Anonymous No.14614964]

>>14614488
Or they drink.
Or they have physical reasons they don't exercise.
Or they have a pretty strong family history of it

[Anonymous No.14614974]

>>14614933
And not only this but lets take a real source, a real life study journal peer reviewed and studied by the Journal of the American Medical Association.
They took 30,000 women and put them on a controlled 300 cal reductive diet over the course of 7 years. They should have lost over 150lbs, but in reality their bodies did not lose even a single pound over that 7 years.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7380633_Low-Fat_Dietary_Pattern_and_Weight_Change_Over_7_Years_The_Women's_Health_Initiative_Dietary_Modification_Trial

[Anonymous No.14614980]

>>14614957
>>14614962
all foods raise your insulin, it depends how much, plenty studies like this graph from kevin hall PHD shows different foods and the way they increase insulin response in the body. Steak will raise your insulin, if you eat all day, no matter if it's low carb, your insulin will go up and you will not lose weight.

[ᛋᛋ SCHUTZSTAFFEL ᛋᛋ !JuN.8Ir9OE No.14614984]

>>14614980
Okay, based on your graph butter has the least insulin response. If I eat 10,000 calories worth of butter a day will I gain weight or lose weight?

[Anonymous No.14615000]

>>14614964
you can exercise all you want you, if your body is insulin resistant, it cannot burn fat, it stores it. Without insulin your body cannot store fat, it can only burn it. Do you even understand that insulin inhibits lypolisis. Kids with type 1 mellitus produce no insulin from their pancreas, they can eat all they want, they can eat everything in sight, they will not gain weight, why? because their body is constantly in fat burning mode. They are extremely insulin sensitive and when you have no insulin resistance your metabolism is constantly burning 2000cal all day every day.

[Anonymous No.14615014]

>>14614933
>>14614964
The majority of fat people aren't obese because of injuries, hormonal imbalances or other medical concerns. These are exceptions, not the rule. It's the culture of nihilistic self-indulgence and a life of convenience

[Anonymous No.14615024]

>>14614984
It has the least, that doesn't mean it will produce 0 insulin, if you eat butter all day worth 10,000 cal you will still not access your fat on your body. As long as you have high insulin resistance and you eat, you will not burn fat, at least what's been stored for years. This is literally elementary shit, niggers in the 1850's knew insulin and highly refined foods made you fat.
I think you also don't understand what CICO is. CICO states that you can eat whatever you want all day, as long as it's under a certain amount of calories. This is bad because if you eat constantly, your insulin goes up, when your insulin goes up, you inhibit lypolisis which is the process of your metabolism burning fat. When you stop burning body fat, YOU GET FAT.

[Anonymous No.14615034]

>>14615014
Excuse me? Are you seriously suggesting that incredibly rare hormonal disorders the afflict less than 0.01% of the population AREN'T an excuse for people who don't have those disorders to be fat?

>>14614974
>Women in the intervention group lost weight in the first year (mean of 2.2 kg, P<.001) and maintained lower weight than control women during an average 7.5 years of follow-up (difference, 1.9 kg, P<.001 at 1 year and 0.4 kg, P = .01 at 7.5 years). No tendency toward weight gain was observed in intervention group women overall or when stratified by age, ethnicity, or body mass index
So... The women who ate less calories... lost weight. Bizarre, it's almost as if... CICO works... which is why all empirical evidence says that it is... huh...

[Anonymous No.14615035]

>>14615024
and if you only eat once a day, well that's omad, which is a very short form of fasting, so it's no longer CICO. CICO and fasting are inherently different, One says you can eat all day and the other says you eat in limited eating frequenies.

[Anonymous No.14615046]

>>14615034
are you retarded, the point of the study was that they were supposed to lose 50-60kg+. Did you just forget this part?
>P<.001 at 1 year and 0.4 kg, P = .01 at 7.5 years) THAT MEANS AT THE END OF THE SEVEN YEARS THEY WERE AT 0.4KG
like the graph literally fucking shows it lmao. you are retarded.

[ᛋᛋ SCHUTZSTAFFEL ᛋᛋ !JuN.8Ir9OE No.14615050]

>>14615024
>if you eat butter all day worth 10,000 cal you will still not access your fat on your body
Thought experiment:

Let's assume that my basal metabolic rate is 1700 calories.
I will eat exactly 1700 calories of food daily.
My diet will be exclusively butter as it provokes the lowest level of insulin response.
Do I gain weight or lose weight?

[Anonymous No.14615049]

>>14615046
So... What you're saying... Is that they ate less calories... and lost weight?

[Anonymous No.14615058]

Better than any junkie ever/10

[Anonymous No.14615061]

>>14615050
Since your insulin rises and you consume less calories, your metabolism drops it's rate, you become more insulin resistant and you don't lose weight.

[Anonymous No.14615062]

>>14615050
Not him, you'll lose weight. You can't actually digest that much fat at once, you don't have enough bile. Most of it will go right through you. You can actually try this with olive oil, go drink a quarter of a cup and see what your shits are like.

>>14615049
Not sure if he read the study, but yes, that is what the study is saying. I'm not sure why this dipshit thinks that you can actually chart out a daily-calories/weight ratio for a given person without extensive empirical evidence, however, literally nobody has ever suggested such a thing. Even if you could, it would be non-linear.

[Anonymous No.14615067]

>>14615049
>DURRR THEY LOST 0.4KG AFTER 7.5 YEARS AS THE MEDIAN WOW SO MUCH WEIGHT LOSS DURRRRRRRR
room temperature IQ

[Anonymous No.14615071]

>>14615067
So, they ate less calories, and lost weight?

[Anonymous No.14615077]

>>14615062
>I'm not sure why this dipshit thinks that you can actually chart out a daily-calories/weight ratio for a given person without extensive empirical evidence
>without empirical evidence
>I link a study peered reviewed by doctors that clearly shows after 7 years of CICO with 30,000 women and after all that time they returned to their original weight when they should have lost 50+kg
>durrr it's false.

[Anonymous No.14615080]

>>14615067
>MEDIAN
lmfao you should look up what this word means before using it

[Anonymous No.14615083]

>>14615071
If you think staying at 200lbs and then after 7 years you are 199lbs is "effective weight loss" There is seriously something wrong with you.

[Anonymous No.14615089]

>>14615077
>>14615083
You should read what a study says before acting as if you know what it says, especially because it literally contradicts the point you think you're trying to make. >>14615034 literally quoted from it, demonstrating that in the study, the women who ate less calories lost weight.

[Anonymous No.14615090]

>>14615080
Median is the midpoint for the study at the most women lost 2.2kg after 7 FUCKING YEARS and at the least 0.4kg. WOW BIG FUCKING WEIGHT LOSS. You spent 7 years and you lose 3lbs lmao.

[Anonymous No.14615094]

>>14615090
But, they did eat less calories, and they did lose weight, yes? Because the study says here that the women who ate less calories lost weight.

So, are you saying that the study is wrong? Because if you think it's wrong, why are you using it to support your argument?

[Anonymous No.14615096]

>>14615089
I never said they didn't lose weight, I'm saying the weight they lost for 7 years was abysmal, you fucking retarded gorilla nigger. No wonder you americans are fat, you think 7 years of dieting and then losing 1lb is "weight loss" lmao

[Anonymous No.14615106]

>>14614892
>Yea I know it works so well, 80 million people haven't had any success or lost any weight long term, so successful!
80 million people can't count calories correctly. Makes sense considering most of the population are retards.

[Anonymous No.14615108]

>>14615094
They did not lose enough weight, is that really that hard to understand. Are you so room temperature IQ that you do not understand that 3lbs over 7 years is not weight loss.

[Anonymous No.14615120]

>>14615106
>80 million people can't lose weight correctly, no no it must be everyone, surely it can't be the sugar filled insulin ramping food we are eating! I'm not the one wrong, It's them
As the food industry pats you on the back for such thoughts.

[Anonymous No.14615130]

>>14615108
amerimutts actually believe a study that shows women who lost AT MOST 3lbs over 7 years on CICO is "healthy weight loss". I've seen it all. Please enjoy your dialysis amerimutts. I have no pity for you.

[Anonymous No.14615133]

>>14615090
Actually, they lost the weight in the first year, and maintained that over the seven year period.
>Women in the intervention group lost weight in the first year (mean of 2.2 kg, P<.001) and maintained lower weight than control women during an average 7.5 years of follow-up
They also didn't gain any back while on the reduced calorie diet
>No tendency toward weight gain was observed in intervention group women overall or when stratified by age, ethnicity, or body mass index

2.2kg is 4lbs, so your statement that they didn't lose a single pound is just flat out wrong. I'm not sure where you're getting this "they should have lost over 150lbs" from, anyone from /fit/ could tell you that a caloric deficit will only give you so much. Calories in, calories out. It's a process. A 300 cal deficit only losing 4lbs or so is totally in line with what should be expected. We don't know the kinds of caloric loads these women had before the diet, so yes, a 2,300 to 2,000 calorie change in a woman in her 60s only resulting in a 4lbs change is totally expected (a woman should be eating like, 1500 MAX).

[Anonymous No.14615149]

>>14615133
>2.2kg is 4lbs, so your statement that they didn't lose a single pound is just flat out wrong.
Cry me a river amerimutt, enjoy spending 7 years to burn 3lbs when you can burn 60lbs in 8 weeks with fasting. Like the mental gymanstics and strawmans amerimutts have to use to even make their arguments make sense. I guess you can't accept defeat, such is the way of the fatty. They blame everyone else but can't deal with their own problem.
> anyone from /fit/ could tell you that a caloric deficit will only give you so much. Calories in, calories out.
And that's why there are /fast/ threads to separate the smart healthy people from the fat dirty bulkers, you fucking newfag.

[Anonymous No.14615153]

>>14615133
I'm trying to find where in this you get the "300 calories" figure from, because it literally does not show up anywhere in the paper. However, from the abstract
>Weight loss was greatest among women in either group who decreased their percentage of energy from fat
>A similar but lesser trend was observed with increases in vegetable and fruit servings, and a nonsignificant trend toward weight loss occurred with increasing intake of fiber
which would make sense, fats and oils have a higher calorie concentration, so reducing fats reduces calories, ergo CICO. Adding more fruits and veggies would take up a larger percentage of the food consumed, while decreasing fats and oils consumed, lowering the total calories consumed. Ergo, CICO. This is a cutting trick from /fit/, adding root vegetables, which typically have a much higher volume/calorie ratio than other foods.

The paper ends with
>A low-fat eating pattern does not result in weight gain in postmenopausal women
So, the study you cited literally contradicts your premise (that fat somehow magically causes you to get fat because magic, independent of the actual calories in it).

So, as several people have told you already, you should have read this paper before citing it, because it says that you are wrong.

[ᛋᛋ SCHUTZSTAFFEL ᛋᛋ !JuN.8Ir9OE No.14615154]

>>14615061
So despite eating nothing but the singular food that will not cause an insulin response, and eating an amount of food with energy equivalent equal to my BMR I won't lose weight. I fulfill the requirements of making sure that I don't provoke an insulin response while also making sure that I consume fewer calories than my BMR, yet I do not lose weight.

Was contradicting yourself part your plan?

>>14615062
I'm aware, but am testing him to see if he actually knows what he's talking about. He clearly doesn't and is just baiting for (You)s.

[Anonymous No.14615157]

>>14615133
and you are awfully scared to use the word seven in your paragraph, are you just going to forget about that. Are you going to forget that CICO takes 7 years to "lose weight when most Americans are 300lbs+.

[Anonymous No.14615163]

>>14615154
>So despite eating nothing but the singular food that will not cause an insulin response
False, it will still cause an insulin response I never said it wouldn't. If you eat once a day, it's omad and therefore fasting. If you eat butter all day, you will not lose weight because of the insulin. little insulin doesn't mean 0, you retarded faggot.

[Anonymous No.14615168]

>>14615149
>>14615157
They didn't lose 4lbs over seven years, they lost 4lbs over one year and didn't regain it for seven years. Why do you keep saying this "over seven years"? The study you cited doesn't say it. This will be the third time that someone in this thread has quoted the abstract that you apparently did not read
>Women in the intervention group lost weight in the first year (mean of 2.2 kg, P<.001)
>and maintained lower weight than control women during an average 7.5 years of follow-up
They lost the weight in year one, and kept it off for seven years. So, yes, CICO works. This is demonstrated.

[Anonymous No.14615172]

>>14615154
>I'm aware, but am testing him to see if he actually knows what he's talking about. He clearly doesn't and is just baiting for (You)s.
you guys can actually sit here and think that losing 3lbs at the most and 1lb at the least over 7 years is "weight loss".

[Anonymous No.14615179]

>>14615168
>They didn't lose 4lbs over seven years, they lost 4lbs over one year and didn't regain it for seven years.
False, look again. This graph from that study clearly shows the progress over 7 years. Are you just going to ignore it. They lost 4lbs in the first year, but gained it back, at the end of the 7 years they gained it back at 0.4kg weight loss.

[Anonymous No.14615181]

>>14615133
>We don't know the kinds of caloric loads these women had before the diet
I'd wager it was too fucking much. There's a table in the paper with stats about the women. Average weight was 169lbs, average height was 5'3".

So, the dude's a retard for citing a paper he didn't read, but he's also just flat out wrong about how this went. They cut their calories for a year, lost the weight, kept the calories down, and didn't gain it back. Case closed.

[ᛋᛋ SCHUTZSTAFFEL ᛋᛋ !JuN.8Ir9OE No.14615184]

>>14615163
>eating food causes an insulin response
>if you trigger an insulin response of any kind you will NOT lose weight
So how does someone lose weight?

>>14615172
I "can actually sit here and think it" because I lost a significant amount of weight through calorie restriction alone while barely changing my diet while also counting calories and maintaining a food journal.

[Anonymous No.14615193]

>>14615179
Yes, the dip in the first year occurs. They lose most of their weight in the first year. This is why I said they lose most of their weight in the first year. They then do not gain any weight back, which is why the year-to-year difference decreases, as they lose most of the weight in the first year, and then maintain at a constant weight for seven years. This is why I said that they lost most of the weight in the first year, and then they maintained that weight for seven years.

Are you ESL, by chance? You cited a paper you didn't read, and now you're getting caught on really simply language mistakes. I'm assuming you're not understanding what "mean difference" means?

[Anonymous No.14615194]

>>14615184
>So how does someone lose weight?
they don't they gain it back, as the study showed. At the end of the study they ended up with a total weight loss of 0.4kg, after losing 4lbs in the first year.
>>14615184
You were fasting or doing some routine of 16:8, you weren't CICO. CICO states that you eat all day, as long as it's calorie restricted. You were fasting, you weren't doing CICO, even if you think you were.

[Anonymous No.14615200]

>>14615179
did you seriously just cite a paper without reading it, and then cite a graph that proves you wrong and the guy you're arguing with right, EDIT THAT SAME FUCKING GRAPH, and then type that garbage out, STILL HAVING NOT READ THE PAPER?

did you eat paint chips as a kid?

[ᛋᛋ SCHUTZSTAFFEL ᛋᛋ !JuN.8Ir9OE No.14615211]

>>14615194
>You were fasting or doing some routine of 16:8
I was not. I ate breakfast at 630 am. Lunch at 1130am. Dinner ~530pm. I drank alcohol to excess frequently and had to adjust my normal food intake to account for it.

I did all the things you say WILL NOT WORK.

[Anonymous No.14615212]

>>14615193
>They then do not gain any weight back, which is why the year-to-year difference decreases
The weight chart literally shows them gaining it back, I circled it for you like a child. Maybe some arrow illustration will help you out.

[Anonymous No.14615214]

>>14615154
>protein and fat doesn't cause insulin response
any food with mass causes an insulin response

[ᛋᛋ SCHUTZSTAFFEL ᛋᛋ !JuN.8Ir9OE No.14615217]

>>14615211
Not even just alcohol. I drank beer. Which contains high amounts of sugar.

[Anonymous No.14615223]

>>14615211
You're lying, which cannot be backed up by evidence.

[Anonymous No.14615233]

holy fuck what's going on in this thread? are you faggots actually saying CICO doesn't work?
HAHAHAHAHAHA fucking retarded fatties

During my last cut I lost 16kg in 3,5 months from CICO alone. It's not rocket science

[ᛋᛋ SCHUTZSTAFFEL ᛋᛋ !JuN.8Ir9OE No.14615240]

>>14615223
>You're lying

[Anonymous No.14615241]

>>14615200
>STILL HAVING NOT READ THE PAPER?
I read the paper, it says in the first year they had a mean kg loss of 2.2kg and at the end of the 7 years 0.4kg loss. The graph shows that, which is from the website that I linked.

[Anonymous No.14615245]

>>14615240
Well post some evidence, medical journal, anything other than
>YEA BRO IT TOTALLY WORKS
and not just after 1 month when your glycogen runs out, or shut your piehole mutt.

[Anonymous No.14615249]

>>14615233
nice bait, but fasting isn't CICO.

[Anonymous No.14615260]

>>14615249
I wasn't fasting. You fatties are delusional.
I was eating breakfast, lunch and dinner. Most weekends I skipped lunch though since I wasn't worked and slept longer.
I even have everything logged on myfitnesspal since I wrote down literally every calorie I ate.

You fat fucks are braindead. Keep beliving your fatrolls are because of some fucking "insulin resistance" and not the amount of food you shove into your mouth.

[Anonymous No.14615278]

>>14615260
Go shove a muffin in your mouth at dinner since your so fat, only 400cal so must be healthy, DURRRR
fucking idiot.

[ᛋᛋ SCHUTZSTAFFEL ᛋᛋ !JuN.8Ir9OE No.14615281]

>>14615241
>I read the paper
Then why are you trying to pass of a comparison of normal diet vs. low fat diet as evidence of diet-related insulin resistance>?

[Anonymous No.14615283]

>>14615260
>He thinks insulin resistance isn't influenced by the food you eat
oh my I've heard it all. Please go eat burgers for 20 years and come back to me when your on dialysis.

[ᛋᛋ SCHUTZSTAFFEL ᛋᛋ !JuN.8Ir9OE No.14615290]

>>14615281
Not even just low fat, but low fat-high carbohydrate where the word "insulin" doesn't appear anywhere in the research study itself except in one of the citations?

[Anonymous No.14615293]

>>14615278
Hahaha what? Are you having a stroke?

The fact that you tried to prove a point and say a muffin with """"only 400cal"""", like that's a small amount of calories proves that you're a fat fuck.

[Anonymous No.14615297]

>>14615281
because the study shows that after 7 years, they do not lose weight, at least any reasonable amount. It's very clear, I'm not sure what's so hard to understand about that. The study shows that CICO does clearly not work. But fuck if that's too hard to comprehend, just look at the society you're living in, look at the state of america. If CICO worked everyone would be skinny. But noooooo, everyone ELSE is fat because they just aren't excercising enough....surely it couldn't be the fast food and sugar you eat everyday(which by the way can be solved by fasting).

[Anonymous No.14615304]

>>14615293
my point is that it has sugar, retard. You think that its healthy because it has sugar. CICO fags think that as long as it's low cal the sugar doesn't matter. If you had more than 70 IQ you would understand this.

[Anonymous No.14615305]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Gorske

Cope, retard.

[Anonymous No.14615312]

>>14615305
that doesn't mention anything about his eating frequency. If you eat 3 big macs in 3 hours, and don't eat for the rest of the day, it's fasting. With fasting your insulin is low, therefore you don't gain weight.

[ᛋᛋ SCHUTZSTAFFEL ᛋᛋ !JuN.8Ir9OE No.14615315]

>>14615304
>my point is that it has sugar, retard. You think that its healthy because it has sugar. CICO fags think that as long as it's low cal the sugar doesn't matter.
The study that you keep pointing people to is comparing low-fat/high-carb to a normal diet. The only kind of study that you could choose to represent your argument LESS would be one where someone ate nothing but sugar and managed to lose weight.

[Anonymous No.14615326]

>>14615315
Sugar is only one portion of it, the insulin is more important. Sugar is what makes insulin goes up. Eating sugar 6 times a day and snacking keeps it up permanently, and that's the problem. You are fasting when you sleep, so when you eat right before you go to bed, your insulin is high.

[Anonymous No.14615335]

>>14615326
and as you know from >>14614980 graph, sugar spikes your insulin the highest. if your insulin is always spiked up super high, you cannot lose weight.

[Anonymous No.14615337]

>>14615326
Effect of insulin isn't even within the scope of the study you keep referencing, you nigger.

[Anonymous No.14615345]

>>14615304
>You think that its healthy because it has sugar
nigga what? nobody says this wtf
>CICO fags think that as long as it's low cal the sugar doesn't matter
Nope. The sugar does matter. However, it doesn't matter when it comes to losing or gaining weight as long as you're eating a deficit.

Seriously, you're a delusional fat fuck. I also wanted to bring up the guy who ate McDonalds every day and lost weight, but someone else already did it.

Learn to eat healthy, track your macros and exercise and I promise you can also lose weight :)

[Anonymous No.14615359]

>>14615337
>Effect of insulin isn't even within the scope of the study you keep referencing, you nigger.
The study I linked is the effects of CICO over a 7 year period which resulted in 0.4kg of weight loss in the end, so basically nothing. Insulin inhibits lypolsis, which is the process in which your metabolism breaks down fat. You need to learn more on how the body works. If your insulin is high, your body will not break down fat, it's fact.

[Anonymous No.14615375]

>>14615345
>nigga what? nobody says this wtf
I said that you're a fat fuck who eats muffins before dinner because you think its low cal, muffins at least store bought have sugar, therefore they are inhealthy.
>Nope. The sugar does matter. However, it doesn't matter when it comes to losing or gaining weight as long as you're eating a deficit.
False, sugar spikes insulin, if you eat sugar all day on a CICO diet, your insulin will be spiked, inhibiting lypolisis, therefore you will be unable to burn fat. Scientifically and factually you are wrong.
>Seriously, you're a delusional fat fuck. I also wanted to bring up the guy who ate McDonalds every day and lost weight, but someone else already did it.
And what did I say? I said the wikipedia article says nothing about his eating frequency. If you eat 3 big macs in a 8 hours span and then don't eat for 16 hours you will not gain weight? why because your insulin is low. 16:8 is a form of fasting. Not sure what you are trying to argue here. If you are saying that he eats like a CICO fag, then please provide evidence.

[Anonymous No.14615380]

>>14615035
My God, you're retarded

[Anonymous No.14615390]

>>14615380
>My God, you're retarded
Well please explain, how are CICO and OMAD the same. Because you see one is eating all day and the other is eating in a small 1-2 hour window. So explain how I'm retarded or wrong? I'll wait.

[Anonymous No.14615412]

>>14615375
>I said that you're a fat fuck who eats muffins before dinner because you think its low cal
Hahaha dude what are you even talking about? 400 calories is not low. Nobody except fat fucks like yourself thinks this. Nobody says muffins are healthy
> if you eat sugar all day on a CICO diet, your insulin will be spiked, inhibiting lypolisis, therefore you will be unable to burn fat.
You're simply wrong. Eating nothing but sugar is bad because
1. You won't get all the nutrients your body need.
2. You will develop diabetes.
You'll still lose weight if you eat 1000 calories of sugar a day.

> I said the wikipedia article says nothing about his eating frequency.
I just realized the guy that was linked wasnt the guy I wanted to link.
The guy I thought about was John Cisna who ate nothing but Mcdonalds, 3 meals a day for 6 months and lost 60 lbs

https://www.daytondailynews.com/news/national/meet-the-man-who-lost-pounds-eating-mcdonald-for-six-months/7LFXpuE9z569rHmnOtPf7K/

CICO works. It's worked for me. It's worked for millions other. You're just a fat retard

[Anonymous No.14615467]

>>14615412
>Hahaha dude what are you even talking about? 400 calories is not low. Nobody except fat fucks like yourself thinks this. Nobody says muffins are healthy
If you are on a CICO diet and each meal was lets say 300cal, you could easily fit a muffin or some shit in after dinner and be at 1500 cal for the day. Doesn't mean it's good, because it has sugar, which spikes your insulin, which makes you fucking fat. So go eat your muffin fatass.
>You're simply wrong. Eating nothing but sugar is bad because
>1. You won't get all the nutrients your body need.
That's because it's half fructose and unnatural to the body, stating the obvious there buddy
>2. You will develop diabetes.
What do you think INSULIN RESISTANCE is you dumb stupid faggot. Spiking your insulin to high levels gives you insulin resistance, which is TYPE II diabetes. This complete lack of understanding you just spewed out right here tells me everything I need to know.
>The guy I thought about was John Cisna who ate nothing but Mcdonalds, 3 meals a day for 6 months and lost 60 lbs
Doesn't matter, give me a scientific study by an official organization that is peer reviewed by doctors like I did showing how CICO works or shut your mouth fat mutt.
>CICO works. It's worked for me. It's worked for millions other. You're just a fat retard
If that was the case, the whole 100 million obese in the USA wouldn't exist. Just on this notion alone you are wrong, ignoring all the knowledge of the body and how insulin works in storing fat and burning it with other horomones such as gherlin and the other side effects that make people gain the weight back after CICO. All these people have tried CICO, and it hasn't worked. At least every person in america has tried to exercise more and eat less. The worst part is the myth of
>"YURR GUNNA GAIN THE WEIGHT BACK"
is placed on fasting when fasting does the exact opposite. When you fast your insulin is basically zero.

[Anonymous No.14615469]

>>14613337
What n-word? Nicaragua? Nintendo? Nigger? That word is so unpronounceable, really nigger?

[Anonymous No.14615521]

>>14615390
OMAD is just another form of calorie RESTRICTION, i.e CICO. Also, CICO doesn't say you must eat all day. Right now I'm cutting and only eat twice a day. Fasting, keto, OMAD, etc are all based on CICO

[Anonymous No.14615537]

>>14615521
OMAD is not the same as CICO. It seems the CICO fags here in this thread don't even know what they are talking about.
CICO means calories in, calories out. What this states is that you can eat any amount in the day, as many times as you want, as long as it's under a certain restriction. That means on CICO you can eat all day as long as the TOTAL calories are lets say under 1500 if you are cutting from 2000. OMAD is eating in a 1-2 hour window ONLY, not counting calories, and eating at the same time the next day. They are completely different

[Anonymous No.14615544]

>>14615521
>CICO doesn't say you must eat all day.
If you don't eat all day, then you are not eating for 16 or more hours which is fasting. 16:8 is fasting. Fasting is defined as at least 8 hours without eating so you will have more ketones. When you eat all day, you cannot have the same amount of ketones when you fast.

[Anonymous No.14615562]

>>14615544
and if you eat all day your insulin will be high, and you will not burn your glycogen stores, therefore you are CICO, not fasting. If you fast, your glycogen stores will be low and you will have lots of ketones. THAT is what defines fasting from CICO. ketones aren't high, you aren't fasting.

[Anonymous No.14615573]

>>14615537
>>14615544

Do you honestly believe you'll lose weight by eating one big meal that's x2 your TDEE?

[Anonymous No.14615574]

>>14615467
>So go eat your muffin fatass.
I like how you try to switch it around and call ME a fatass instead because your retarded ass is too gluttonous to lose weight.
>If that was the case, the whole 100 million obese in the USA wouldn't exist.
HAHAHAAHAH, Americans are fat because EAT MORE CALORIES THAN THEY CONSUME.
You are actually fucking braindead.
>"B-BUT THEY GAIN IT BACK"
Yes you know why? Because they go back to their unhealthy lifestyles. Eating healthy and CICO isn't just a diet you can do one time and then go back to normal, you need to eat healthy for the rest of your life. Does the thought of that scare you?

>give me a scientific study by an official organization that is peer reviewed by doctors like I did showing how CICO works or shut your mouth fat mutt.
You didn't even show shit. Also I'm not American for your info lmao.

[Anonymous No.14615602]

>wojak posting
>Doesn't understand that muffins have sugar which makes you fat
>completely ignores his lack of understanding of how the body works
>he thinks people with zero insulin and low gherlin will "gain the weight back" when people that fast keep the weight off for years and CICO is scientifically
>too lazy to scroll up and look at the study by the
Journal of the American Medical Association that scientifically shows over 7 years CICO does not work for effective weight loss

[Anonymous No.14615608]

>>14615573
If you fast for 7 days, it doesn't matter. So that way you can get right back into another 7 days of fasting if you're a fat pig. Obviously if you are doing 16:8 you make a normal fucking meal with normal macros. how hard is that to understand

[Anonymous No.14615635]

>>14615608
>Obviously if you are doing 16:8 you make a normal fucking meal with normal macros
So what you are saying is that you should still follow CICO on 16:8?

[Anonymous No.14615654]

>>14615635
no it means get enough salt and potassium and eat in a small window where your insulin is spiked up for a very short amount of time. CICO states that you can eat all day as long as it's under a certain set amount of calories. Fasting has low eating frequency, CICO does not. If you do CICO you are unable to reach the same level of ketones you get when fasting, hence making them different. You're too retarded to understand such a simple concept so, stay fat.

[Anonymous No.14615667]

>>14615608
Answer the question. Unlike you, I'm not a fatfuck. The reason I gained weight was for muscle hypertrophy. God you are fucking stupid. If you fasted for 7 days, yeah, you can eat a fuck ton and lose weight because you didn't meet you Daily energy intake for the paste week.

[Anonymous No.14615675]

diabetes is one of god's colours

[Anonymous No.14615694]

>>14615654
>ignores the question
So what you're saying is that you still need to follow CICO on 16:8? It's a yes or no question.
>stay fat.
Hahaha

[Anonymous No.14615729]

>>14615694
>So what you're saying is that you still need to follow CICO on 16:8? It's a yes or no question.
No you don't, because they are interily different. If you are producing purple on ketone sticks, you are not on CICO. CICO is not fasting. CICO states you can eat all day as long as it's under a certain amount of calories. If you lower eating window and don't eat all day, it is no longer CICO, it is fasting.

>>14615667
>Answer the question
Well let's seee, from this study of doctor kevin hall it shows that you burn around at least 1000 calories a day while fasting being sedentary, even past the 30 day mark. If you fasted for 7 days that would equate to around 8000-9000 given you are not laying in bed all day, acting like a normal human being. so if you had a meal of lets say 5000cal, it would be fine. You would still be at a deficit. Yes. You fasted, even if you brainwash yourself to think you are actually doing CICO.

[Anonymous No.14615792]

>>14615729
CICO isn't a diet in itself like paleo or keto. CICO is a simplification yet fundamental way living creatures expend energy.

[Anonymous No.14615794]

>>14615729
Aaaaaaaand he dodges the question for the 3rd time.

I'll repeat it for you: do you unironically believe that if you do OMAD (aka fast for the entire day except 1 meal) and eat a mal that's 2x your TDEE, will you lose weight?


I can spoil the answer for you if you want: no you won't. Because even if you fast, you will still need to consume less calories than you burn in order to lose weight.
Keep being delusional brother

[Anonymous No.14615819]

>>14615792
Ok, the millions of american on CICO who are overweight are just living a "lifestyle" hahaha, the delusion. If you are fat and are eating to lose weight, IT IS A DIET.


>>14615794
>Aaaaaaaand he dodges the question for the 3rd time.I'll repeat it for you: do you unironically believe that if you do OMAD (aka fast for the entire day except 1 meal) and eat a mal that's 2x your TDEE, will you lose weight?

yes, low insulin, your body does not store it into fat, it burns it off. CICO you cannot achieve this because you are eating all day, scientifically proven. This is how insulin works. Insulin inhibits lypolisis. If your insulin is spiked all day, you cannot lose weight. The science shows you're wrong, and reality shows you're wrong as well. You seem to be living in some alternate reality where all of america is thin and everyone is on CICO, when the real reality is that everyone has already tried CICO, infact over 100 people million have over 30+ years and the obesity epidemic has gotten worse. From this fact alone your whole argument is wrong. There are no results from CICO, there never was and never will because it's not a sole calorie problem, it is what we eat, and when we eat which CICO does not solve or help.

[Anonymous No.14615827]

>>14615794
>>14615819
and let me clarify your original post >>14615694
was talking about 16:8 fasting, which is not OMAD. OMAD is 1:1 which means you eat in a one hour windows and the next day you eat at that same time period.

[Anonymous No.14615841]

>>14615819
>Diet: A special course of food to which one restricts oneself, either to lose weight or for medical reasons.
"I'm going on a diet"


>he thinks your average Joe is smart enough to track calories

Alright, you won.

[Anonymous No.14615854]

>>14615819
What your peanut brain fail to understand is that those obese people that you claim are doing CICO, are not actually tracking their calories at all and are greatly overeating.

Seriously, I don't even know why I argue with you because you are actually braindead.
And you think someone lose weight by eating 5000 calories on OMAD? LMAO yeah you're definitely batshit crazy.

Keep doing you bro. Guess those 16kg I lost on CICO was just my own hallucination.

[Anonymous No.14615860]

>>14615841
they aren't tracking calories, nor are they tracking their insulin, thanks to CICO, thanks to fast food. Eating all day spikes insulin, when your insulin is high it inhibits lypolisis, the process in which the metabolism breaks down body fat. It's a very medical, scientifical process that is well studied, not a mystery. Why are americans fat? Because they eat too much sugar and they eat too many times a day. CICO does not solve these, fasting does.

[Anonymous No.14615861]

I love Paula Deen. Some of her food is amazing.
If you are fat you are a bad person and should be punished for it. You have nobody to blame but yourself.

[Anonymous No.14615876]

>>14615854
>What your peanut brain fail to understand is that those obese people that you claim are doing CICO, are not actually tracking their calories at all and are greatly overeating.
Usually they eat around 2500-3000 cal a day, but a lot of it has sugar, so their insulin is always very high(since sugar has one of the highest glycemic index) So when your insulin is always high, you cannot lose weight, simple science.

>And you think someone lose weight by eating 5000 calories on OMAD? LMAO yeah you're definitely batshit crazy.
they won't lose weight, they won't gain it either. I said you only lose weight on a 7 day fast if you eat 5000 cal, putting words in my mouth.

>Keep doing you bro. Guess those 16kg I lost on CICO was just my own hallucination.
keep trying to pass CICO off as fasting, bro, You don't even know the difference between 16:8 and OMAD so you don't know what you're talking about.

[Anonymous No.14615902]

>>14615876
>they won't lose weight, they won't gain it either. I said you only lose weight on a 7 day fast if you eat 5000 cal, putting words in my mouth.

Let me quote, I said
>>do you unironically believe that if you do OMAD (aka fast for the entire day except 1 meal) and eat a mal that's 2x your TDEE, will you lose weight?
>will you lose weight?
You said
>yes, low insulin, your body does not store it into fat, it burns it off
>yes
Do I need to repeat myself?

>keep trying to pass CICO off as fasting
I ate breakfast at 6:40, I ate lunch at ~12, and I ate dinner at 19-20.

Kill yourself retard

[Anonymous No.14615922]

>>14615902
>Let me quote, I said
>>>do you unironically believe that if you do OMAD (aka fast for the entire day except 1 meal) and eat a mal that's 2x your TDEE, will you lose weight?
>>will you lose weight?
>You said
>>yes, low insulin, your body does not store it into fat, it burns it off
>>yes
>Do I need to repeat myself?
That's because it's OMAD, If you eat a big meal 2x your TDEE and continue to do omad, you will lose the weight, so yes. You will lose weight, not very much, but you cannot gain weight when your insulin is low all the time.
>I ate breakfast at 6:40, I ate lunch at ~12, and I ate dinner at 19-20.
enjoy the weight gain back, it will be creeping back up very soon.
>Kill yourself retard
no, fatty