Originally Posted by
Machka
CI<CO isn't starvation. If YOU are losing weight ... it is exactly what you're doing. You're eating fewer calories than you are burning.
And why does weight loss need to be sustainable. I sure hope my current weight loss isn't sustainable!! I have no intention to continue to lose weight forever ... I fully intend to cease losing weight soon.
Yes, reducing food intake below what the body calls for is starving the body. It might be for a good reason, but it is still starving the body.
A big part of the problem is that we have become inundated with high caloric density foods. Foods such as French Fries, DQ Blizzards, CocaColas, and to a lesser extent almost any restaurant foods which are invariably saturated with added fats and sugars. These high caloric density foods provide more than ample calories but fail to trigger the body's various satiation triggers -- such as a full stomach. By the time your stomach is full, you have taken in far too many calories...
For example:
- A pound of potatoes contains 300 - 350 calories (depending on the type)
- A pound of McD's French Fried potatoes contains nearly 1,400 calories
Eating a 300 calorie meal of potatoe will leave you full and satisfied. Eating a 300 calories meal of McD's fries will leave you hungry/starving.
So yes, it is more complicated than CI/CO...
And, for me weight loss needs to be sustainable for two reasons:
-- Restricting myself from eating is uncomfortable -- like an alcoholic trying to quit. It sucks.
-- Being fat, even for a short while is unhealthy
I much prefer an eating plan that sustains and promotes my health. Yo-yo diets cycling between over-eating to deprivation do not do that.