I think a lot of the confusion here is stemming from the fact that "diet" has more that one definition:
Quote:
restrict oneself to small amounts or special kinds of food in order to lose weight.
the kinds of food that a person, animal, or community habitually eats.
You seem to be stuck on the first of these definitions, whereas we moved on to the second one a long time ago. (Also you seem to be blowing up one sentence from some random website that lists some macros and are applying it to everyone on the diet)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluegrassplayer
Dropped the sweet potato, switched out bananas for more berries and almonds for brazil nuts and that was pretty much it.
These were the changes that I made to get into ketosis. As you'll notice that's not particularly restrictive, if it's restrictive at all.
As I mentioned in my last post, a lot of keto friendly foods such as oils, nuts, nut butter, avocado, butter... really anything that is high fat (and keto is a high fat diet)... are not necessarily filling and not restrictive. As I said, if anything it's likely people need to count calories more when eating these foods.
So going back to the two definitions, we passed the "caloric deficit = lose weight" stuff a long time ago and then moved on to what diet (different definition) makes us feel good mentally, physically, and is easier to adhere to. So while you think you're saying "caloric deficit = weight loss" what you're now saying is some IIFYM nonsense where people will feel just as good on the ice cream and protein powder diet as a well balanced diet because all that matters is that you are in a caloric deficit.
Basically:
For a successful diet to work you need to be in a calorific deficit.
A good diet can result in having more energy and feeling better in general.