As you know from my initial post the blog series Slime Mold Time Mold: A Chemical Hunger set me on this path of crazy citizen scientist. As far as I’m concerned they restarted the scientific revolution. And I had to buy new pants 4 times in 6 months.
I've done various N=1s myself to prove/disprove CICO (as is usually told at least) and yeah, I call BS on CICO these days as what the data said vs what my scale and body showed was vastly different, so clearly there's more to it than that, at least for me on an individual level.
Try eating 10Kcal daily of junk food for a week, only to rapidly lose a ton of weight the next week, while still eating ad-lib, just ketogenic, and actually ending up weighing LESS than before the experiment, until it finally equalizes a few weeks later to what it previously was.
Likewise, when I eat a lot, as I do these days, my body burns hot like a furnace, to the point where I can bike comfortably in a tank top and short shorts in negative degree Celsius, and I am guessing that's part of the equation of why I can eat so much yet not become rapidly obese.
Yes CICO and "Food is delicious" aren't actionable, but I am not sure why you have to frame them as wrong or bad or be dismissive of the idea ("CICO bots"). Your diet proves both of these to be true and adds an actionable layer on top. You found a delicious (to you) food and used it to restrict caloric intake so you lost weight. This is great. Why do you have to frame it as going against the scientific consensus on this subject? That distracts from your actual findings.
I've done various N=1s myself to prove/disprove CICO (as is usually told at least) and yeah, I call BS on CICO these days as what the data said vs what my scale and body showed was vastly different, so clearly there's more to it than that, at least for me on an individual level.
Try eating 10Kcal daily of junk food for a week, only to rapidly lose a ton of weight the next week, while still eating ad-lib, just ketogenic, and actually ending up weighing LESS than before the experiment, until it finally equalizes a few weeks later to what it previously was.
Likewise, when I eat a lot, as I do these days, my body burns hot like a furnace, to the point where I can bike comfortably in a tank top and short shorts in negative degree Celsius, and I am guessing that's part of the equation of why I can eat so much yet not become rapidly obese.
Yes CICO and "Food is delicious" aren't actionable, but I am not sure why you have to frame them as wrong or bad or be dismissive of the idea ("CICO bots"). Your diet proves both of these to be true and adds an actionable layer on top. You found a delicious (to you) food and used it to restrict caloric intake so you lost weight. This is great. Why do you have to frame it as going against the scientific consensus on this subject? That distracts from your actual findings.