05/14/2026
Calorie counting seems to have entered mainstream culture starting in the 1900s. From the 1960s-1990s, the ‘thin ideal’ emerged and the diet industry (the driver of diet culture) promoted calorie counting. This went hand in hand with the formerly discussed ‘Nutrition Labeling and Education Act’ in 1990 where nutrition labels with calorie counts were mandated to be on all food labels (see yesterdays post 🙌🏻)
In the 1980s, the fitness industry started to reinforce the message that exercise can be a way to ‘burn calories.’ Thanks for nothing, Jane Fonda.
In the early 2000s, we entered the digital era and apps were created that simplified calorie counting. I will not name the apps but Im sure you know what they are. This was followed by wearable devices tracking energy expenditure. These wearables have shown some reliability in tracking heart rate while being significantly inaccurate with measuring energy expenditure. Unlike the other metrics, energy expenditure can only be an estimate. It has to be determined by algorithms rather than direct forms of measurement. Stanford medicine estimates there is a 30-80% inaccuracy with these measurements.
Our bodies are complex and caloric equations (CICO) are an attempt to oversimplify our bodies complex systems. Our bodies are not static, they are dynamic. Key factors that explain how this formula fails us:
-caloric data on food labels is an estimate. Food labels legally are allowed to have a 20% margin of error (aka 20% plus or minus accuracy)
-it doesn’t account for how individual bodies absorb food (everybody uses a different amount of energy to break down and absorb different foods)
-metabolic function differs among bodies and bodies metabolically adapt to ensure we survive
-genetics: Set point theory reminds us that our brains work incredibly hard to maintain a range of weight that is protective for our unique bodies
-hormonal differences (ghrelin, leptin, cortisol)
*this post is for educational purposes
