The CICO juice isn’t worth the squeeze

One of the hardest things to manage as an athlete is nutrition. There are so many variables that go into evaluating nutrition options and protocols to improve performance that any reduction in complexity makes the process more sustainable. The challenges are in finding what works, calculating what’s needed, making adjustments based on results, and the practical application of preparing food to match the plan.

The reality is that focusing on real food and macros is far more effective and sustainable than the calorie-in, calorie-out (CICO) approach. Calories are just a number, an estimation of potential energy that has little to do with how your body actually functions. Food, on the other hand, is real — it has direct impacts on your body composition, energy levels, and recovery. If you want to measure how your nutrition affects your performance, why are you focused on an abstract energy estimation instead of the actual food you’re consuming?

If it’s all about calories, then why do we concern ourselves with macronutrients?

The same people who say it’s just about energy balance will tell you with a straight face that you NEED carbs to build muscle.

Nutrition vs. SWAG

Any scientist will tell you that the more you reduce variables, the better your results. So why rely on calorie estimations when your body doesn’t even recognize calories? It recognizes nutrients, macros and their direct effects on your metabolism. Calories are nothing more than a rough measurement of potential heat output if you were to burn food in a lab. They don’t tell you anything about how your body absorbs, processes, or utilizes that food.

We measure:

• hormones, metabolites, enzymes, and other markers in our bloodwork
• energy substrates in muscle tissue
• amount of oxygen consumed during exercise
• the amount of energy we get from fat or glucose during a workout
• the power, speed, or efficiency of work output and our performance

All of our output is measured in the physical mass of energy transfer, metabolic response, or the work performed, i.e., the actual thing.

Why do we use a scientific wild ass guess (calories), to manage what goes into our bodies?

Sports Nutrition can’t be limited to calories

Any nutrition plan that doesn’t acknowledge the complexities of biological and physiological responses to food will be subpar in its ability to enhance performance. What you eat is one of the main factors in your development as an athlete. It’s right up there with how you train and what your recovery plan is.

Improper nutrition will affect you in ways that have absolutely nothing to do with calories. It will:

• Reduce metabolic flexibility
• Impair strength development
• Increase inflammation
• Heighten Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE)
• Decrease performance

The improvement of metabolic function to meet the demands of your sport is how nutrition enables performance. What metabolic function means is something too many scientists, coaches, and athletes don’t really understand.

Metabolism is about Function and Fuel

When we talk about metabolism 99 out of 100 people will assume that we’re talking about how the body burns fuel. All of them would be wrong.

Metabolism is the complete and entire combination of every function in your body that keeps you alive. This includes:

• Energy metabolism
• Enzyme production
• Endocrine function
• Cellular repair
• Muscle Protein Synthesis
• Major organ functions
• Digestion
• Respiration
• Perspiration
• Lymphatic function
• Inflammatory response
• Electrolyte homeostasis
• …and much more

A successful nutrition methodology must consider the full scope of metabolic function in order to be successful. Calories do not meet this requirement.

There are two functions of nutrition. Nutrition enables and supports the function of the body and it provides the energy to perform those functions. Breaking down food into these roles makes it easier to manage nutrition effectively.

Functional Macros (Protein)

• Protein is directly linked to recovery, and muscle growth
• Amino acids are the building block of the enzymes that enhance energy metabolism in the body
• Amino acids are precursors for several hormones and impact thyroid function
• Examples of Amino Acid Hormones are Epinephrine (adrenaline), Norepinephrine (noradrenaline), Thyroxine, Triiodothyronine (T3), Melatonin, Insulin, Glucagon, and Dopamine
• Proteins are not used as an energy substrate unless there is nothing else available

Table 1 — List of some enzymes and functions (Townley-Tilson, et al., 2015)

Fuel Macros (Fat and Carbs)

• Provide energy to support all metabolic functions.
• Fat does contribute to cellular structure and hormone production as well.
• Fatty acids and Glucose (not carbs) are the main fuel substrates used to generate ATP
• Exogenous carbohydrate consumption is not needed, nor does it provide any additional benefit except in extended endurance events (More about that here)

Image 1 — Basic energy metabolism, no calories involved (Chandel, 2021)

Calories don’t contribute to any of these things. Your body doesn’t process a “calorie”. It processes protein, fats, and carbs each with its own metabolic impact. When you focus on macros, you gain direct control over your body composition and performance.

Food for thought: Have you ever heard an expert discuss how it’s all about being in a caloric surplus? Then, they recommend a specific caloric intake, immediately followed by the statement, “Just make sure you get enough protein.”

Using Macros vs. Counting Calories

In case I haven’t been clear up to this point, if you are basing your nutrition plan on calories or percentage of calories, you aren’t managing nutrition, you’re spinning your wheels focused on energy. Energy intake and nutrition are not the same thing.

It is impossible to consider the impact of nutrition on athletic performance without focusing on individual macronutrient contributions.

The argument that using calorie calculations is the best way to manage nutrition and energy balance is elementary, lazy, and irresponsible. Where else do we create an artificial estimate with multiple, inconsistently derived variables and use it to determine a set outcome? Calorie counting is the antithesis of the scientific method.

Why Counting Calories is Overcomplicated and Inaccurate

Calories aren’t just imprecise , they’re inconsistent and widely variable:

• Calories by macronutrient — Calories per macro was defined in the mid-1800’s. They are not exact or equal across all sources. Macronutrients don’t come in isolated forms. There is variance in the metabolic potential of each macronutrient based on the food it comes from.
• Food estimations are inaccurate — Food labels can be off by 20% or more.
• Wearables are unreliable — Devices that measure calorie burn are wildly inaccurate and provide inconsistent data.
• Thermic effect of food (TEF) is often ignored — Different macros have different energy costs (protein requires more energy to digest than fat or carbs).
• Complex calculations — You need to estimate resting energy expenditure (REE), activity levels, and total daily energy expenditure (TDEE), all of which have wide error margins.
• Completely ignores individual metabolic response — Do you metabolize protein as efficiently as your teammate? Does she have a better aerobic metabolism than you? Do you have more lean mass? Everyone has bio-individual variances that calories are incapable of accounting for.

Trying to manage your nutrition by crunching calorie-based numbers is a nightmare. You’re relying on bad data + bad data x more bad data to make decisions about your health and performance.

Calorie Calculations = Too many variables

Let’s take an example of a person who weighs 185 pounds and has a Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR) of 1950 calories. If they are moderately active, they need to calculate their Total Daily Energy Expenditure (TDEE):

• BMR = 1950 calories
• Activity multiplier for moderate activity (~1.55)
• TDEE = 1950 × 1.55 = 3022.5 calories

Now, if they want to lose weight, they need to create a calorie deficit. But how much? A common recommendation is a 500-calorie deficit per day, so:

• 3022.5–500 = 2522.5 calories per day

Then, they need to break this down into macronutrient ratios. Let’s assume they want to follow a 40% protein, 30% fat, 30% carb split:

• Protein: (2522.5 × 0.4) / 4 = ~252g protein
• Carbs: (2522.5 × 0.3) / 4 = ~189g carbs
• Fat: (2522.5 × 0.3) / 9 = ~84g fat

This is already complex, it assumes a set calorie amount per macro that excludes food source variability, and they haven’t even calculated TEF yet.

To be as accurate as possible they need to factor in an additional energy cost for each macronutrient and recalculate the whole thing.

When you consider variations in daily activity levels or individual goals, you can see how adjusting these numbers weekly gets exhausting.

Question: What’s the end result of a calorie calculation? Why are you going through all of that just to end up with a set of macros you could have figured out in 30 seconds?

Keep it Simple

When you just track macros, the process is simple. You set a starting point and adjust as needed based on real results:

• Pick a baseline (example): 1.25g of protein and 1g of fat/carbs per pound of lean mass.
• Track results: See how your body responds in terms of body composition, energy, recovery, and performance.
• Adjust as needed: Increase protein for muscle growth, adjust fat/carbs for energy balance.

For example, if you have 165 pounds of lean mass, you would start at 206g of protein, 150g of fat, and 15g of carbs per day. If you need more recovery, increase protein. If you need more energy, adjust fat and carbs. It’s that simple. The real-world results tell you what works, and you adjust accordingly.

But how do I know if I’m eating enough?

Great question, what do you think the answer is?

Your body does not have a calorie requirement! It has nutrient requirements.

Once you realize that nutrition drives performance, you begin to see that your performance is the feedback loop for your nutrition. You have the actual results to evaluate and determine what modifications to your plan need to be made.

No more guessing.

The More Effective Approach

If you want to simplify your nutrition, stop using calories as your guide. Whether you follow a ketogenic diet, a high-carb diet, or anything in between, focus on real food and adequate macronutrient intake. It’s about making your routine easier, more sustainable, and more effective.

I’ve seen it work over and over and over. Ditch the calories

I have not used calories, in any form, with my clients in over five years and it has been the most transformative aspect of my practice. The simplicity and valuable insight they gain into how their nutrition works is a true game changer.

Real food fuels real results. Ditch the calorie obsession and focus on what actually matters: quality nutrition that supports your body and performance.

References

1. Townley-Tilson, W. & pi, Xinchun & Xie, Liang. (2015). The Role of Oxygen Sensors, Hydroxylases, and HIF in Cardiac Function and Disease. Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity. 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/676893
2. Chandel NS. Basics of Metabolic Reactions. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2021 Aug 2;13(8):a040527. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a040527. PMID: 34341010; PMCID: PMC8327831. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8327831