General Weight Loss Advice Beyond Calories In and Calories Out
Replies
-
As many people have noted, my suggestions are just that: suggestions. They work for me, and I hope that some other people might find them useful as well.
A couple other tips:
1. I chew gum when I cook, so that I am not tempted to snack while cooking.
2. I find food in single serving portions helpful. I don’t mind paying extra for food in single serving portions, or I weigh and divide portions into plastic bags myself. When I cook, I divide everything into single or double (for my husband) portion containers. I always have food that I can easily pull from the freezer for quick meals. – Yes, I am a little OCD, but I am okay with that.
3. I avoid alcohol when I am actively losing weight. I make bad food choices when I drink, and alcohol has lots of extra calories.
4. Drink plenty of water. Yes, I know that everyone brings this one up.
5. Sleep.
6. I did not give up my favorite treats. I just ate them in moderation (and compensated to stay within my total daily calories).
7. I do not eat with the television on.0 -
Awesome. thanks for this!0
-
Helen71017 wrote: »As many people have noted, my suggestions are just that: suggestions. They work for me, and I hope that some other people might find them useful as well.
A couple other tips:
1. I chew gum when I cook, so that I am not tempted to snack while cooking.
2. I find food in single serving portions helpful. I don’t mind paying extra for food in single serving portions, or I weigh and divide portions into plastic bags myself. When I cook, I divide everything into single or double (for my husband) portion containers. I always have food that I can easily pull from the freezer for quick meals. – Yes, I am a little OCD, but I am okay with that.
3. I avoid alcohol when I am actively losing weight. I make bad food choices when I drink, and alcohol has lots of extra calories.
4. Drink plenty of water. Yes, I know that everyone brings this one up.
5. Sleep.
6. I did not give up my favorite treats. I just ate them in moderation (and compensated to stay within my total daily calories).
7. I do not eat with the television on.
these i like. except i am too cheap for single serving portions. i do bag things myself though. and i eat in front of the tv though. i alo keep a bottle of water with me at night in front of the tv so i can feel like i have something good while i watch. i like water.
0 -
Helen71017 wrote: »As many people have noted, my suggestions are just that: suggestions. They work for me, and I hope that some other people might find them useful as well.
A couple other tips:
1. I chew gum when I cook, so that I am not tempted to snack while cooking.
2. I find food in single serving portions helpful. I don’t mind paying extra for food in single serving portions, or I weigh and divide portions into plastic bags myself. When I cook, I divide everything into single or double (for my husband) portion containers. I always have food that I can easily pull from the freezer for quick meals. – Yes, I am a little OCD, but I am okay with that.
3. I avoid alcohol when I am actively losing weight. I make bad food choices when I drink, and alcohol has lots of extra calories.
4. Drink plenty of water. Yes, I know that everyone brings this one up.
5. Sleep.
6. I did not give up my favorite treats. I just ate them in moderation (and compensated to stay within my total daily calories).
7. I do not eat with the television on.
Great tips/reminders. I would add the importance of strength training to the list. Although we all talk about "weight loss", what we really want is a reduction in body fat %. Meaning, the scales may not move as quickly if you are "recomposing" your body to increase muscle and lose fat, but so what? And in my humble opinion, almost every body looks better with more muscle.
0 -
Can someone please explain how water helps us lose weight?0
-
Christine,christinev297 wrote: »Can someone please explain how water helps us lose weight?
Water does not literally help a person lose weight. However, keeps us hydrated and helps get rid of water retention, and if we are drinking water we are not eating food. The result is eating less calories, and if we are drinking water and eating less than our TDEE, then we get to lose weight.
0 -
Christine,christinev297 wrote: »Can someone please explain how water helps us lose weight?
Water does not literally help a person lose weight. However, keeps us hydrated and helps get rid of water retention, and if we are drinking water we are not eating food. The result is eating less calories, and if we are drinking water and eating less than our TDEE, then we get to lose weight.
Also, if you regularly drink sugary or high-calories drinks with your meals (like a glass of soda, fruit juice, or wine) and you simply replace those drinks with water instead, you'll be consuming even less calories.0 -
Thanks SLLRunner 0
-
LeadingMuscle wrote: »Good tips OP. I'll offer one too. Incorporate refeed days. It's been shown to make calories in calories out even more effective with fat loss.
http://suppversity.blogspot.de/2014/11/calorie-shifting-refeeding-for-max-fat.html
Thanks, I found that article very informative. It further justifies my much needed periodic diet breaks!0 -
in for laughs0
-
Good list OP. Clearly CICO fundamentally works for most people, but then there are many who swear by 5-2 or LCHF as well and have proved it without needing to count calories. From my experience CICO works fine with a sensible diet but the closer you get to optimum weight the more the details do matter, eg reduce sugar, fat:protein:carb ratios, type of exercise, etc etc.
If people can't discuss the different nuances of weight control on these pages where can they?0 -
The fact that most of America is overweight is proof enough that knowing CICO isn't all that is needed for many people. They aren't fat because they're too stupid to understand it. Everyone understands it. Ten year old kids understand it when it's explained to them. Grasping that concept isn't difficult, lol.
Everyone gets it. Yet, many remain fat.
OP, it's great to share what works for you and it may help someone who reads it. Helpful and supportive info isn't welcomed by all, but what can you do there.
If you'd like to share your list of low-cal, high protein items, I'd love to read it. Protein is a struggle for me. Always looking for more!
Brilliantly Written!!! I wish more people would read this, good sound advice!!0 -
Paul_Collyer wrote: »Good list OP. Clearly CICO fundamentally works for most people, but then there are many who swear by 5-2 or LCHF as well and have proved it without needing to count calories.
5-2 and LCHF are tactics that people use to get a deficit without having to count. When I lost weight back in '03 and maintained for some years after that, before I knew about calorie counting websites, I just focused on exercising a lot and eating three balanced meals with lots of veggies and not going over my understanding of a proper portion size for meat or starches and snacking between meals/having dessert only rarely (I also cut out bread to make room for wine, but that's another story and was not actually healthy in practice, although it didn't stop my weight loss). Based on my lifestyle at the time that served to create a deficit, but doesn't mean that CICO wasn't underlying what I was doing, even though I couldn't have said how many calories I was eating.
0 -
Helen71017 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Iwishyouwell wrote: »Some of the tips in the OP work for me, some don't apply.
Agreed.Some of us are very well equipped and able to just get down to business, find what works for us, and move toward our goals. But plenty of people need more guidance, tips and examples. There is absolutely nothing wrong with what the OP did.
For some reason, and as I said I might be misreading tone, it felt somewhat condescending to me. There's a difference between saying "these are things I did" in response to an actual question vs. a post that purports to tell everyone what we must do (which should be what OP did). Especially when it's stuff that largely seems like rather obvious common sense, and when it was clarified by a post that in essence said that lots of people are fat, so they must not know these things. But I admit my reaction to this is not the only legitimate one, and as I said before I expect it was well-intentioned. It just read a bit like "anyone fat must also be a moron."
I apologize if my tone came off as condescending.
I'm sorry I jumped to conclusions and misread the tone.
0 -
PrettyPearl88 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »PrettyPearl88 wrote: »I definitely agree with you that while the calories in versus calories out concept is a basic fundamental principle for weight loss, there's a little more to it than simply eating less than you burn. I've found that while it's definitely possible to lose weight eating all junk food but limiting your calorie intake, it's harder to keep that up because it doesn't leave you feeling as full and satisfied.
Why do people say stuff like this? I'm honestly not trying to be argumentative, but genuinely curious. When you started, did you think that losing weight eating "all junk food" would be a good idea? Do you assume that others trying to lose weight typically follow that approach unless advised otherwise?
I think I was probably a bit too quick assume condescension in the OP's post and I feel a little bad about that, but this is the kind of thing that led to me seeing it--I tend to assume that others are generally as knowledgeable about stuff as I am (since why would I be so special), so if something seems like common sense or basic knowledge to me I don't typically assume that others are operating without such insight. If someone asks questions that indicate that they are seeking such information, that's (of course) different.
But then I also find it odd that people want to be told what to eat and seem not to have an understanding of what a basic healthy diet would be sometimes (although of course there's a tremendous variation of possibilities within this category and room for debate), so it's entirely possible I'm the weird one here.
No, I didn't think that losing weight eating ALL junk food would be a good idea when I started...but honestly, I did think that I could still eat a decent portion of junk food (just lower calorie junk food or smaller amounts of junk food) and that that would be perfectly okay and healthy.
That's interesting (and not a bad thing). I guess I tend to see more people who think that you must do all or nothing--cut out all junk food (and even things I don't think are junk food) or give up. Even in my social circle, which is probably disproportionally educated (and not overweight) and filled with people into healthy foods who get excited about stuff like raising chickens, the tendency is to get into weird restrictive diets. Atkins was all the rage at one point, and now gluten free is, of course, but people have a whole slew of dietary things like that. So to me "you can eat whatever" (ideally in moderation, of course) seems a nice contrast and more similar to my own view, which is that generally eating a sensible balanced diet is good.I said what I said purely for argument's sake though, for the sole purpose of refuting the opposing argument. The opposing argument (the version I hear too often) is basically this: You don't have to restrict any foods; eat whatever you want as long as you're eating less than you burn and you'll lose weight. To help their argument, they often use extreme examples, such as "Eating only Oreos while still consuming less calories than you burn will result in weight loss." They seem to focus on the question of whether it's POSSIBLE to eat junk food and lose weight, instead of whether it's ADVISABLE to do so. My comment was specifically addressing people who make these kind of arguments.
This is simply a difference of perception, I think, because my reading of the forums is that the "eat only Oreo" arguments are typically made by "clean" eaters--who contrast their elimination diets to how everyone else (strawman!) eats junk 24/7, as if anyone did--or on occasion to counter a claim that the same person would gain more weight eating 1400 calories of the SAD (whatever that even is) vs. 3000 calories of chicken breast, sweet potatoes, broccoli, bananas, and coconut oil (although the thought of a 3000 calorie day made up of those foods--all of which I like--is not appealing).
I actually think that people who debate in the forums mostly eat pretty healthy, and the widespread claim that people are promoting eating junk for a huge portion of your calories is more based on the fact that many dislike the term "junk" than what's really recommended. Obviously, I don't read every post, though.
On the whole, when people are clear that they are not saying that 1800 calories of cake would cause someone with maintenance of 2400 to gain, but that very few people would feel good or be able to sustain a diet made up of 1800 calories of cake, there's no disagreement.And believe it or not, there are actually people who think that a healthy plan for weight loss includes an average day such as this:
-A Fiber One bar for breakfast
-4 oz of chicken plus a lettuce salad with Walden Farms 0-calorie Caesar dressing for lunch
-Snacks of: one banana, one little pudding cup of Jello sugar-free chocolate pudding, and one serving of Lays Salt and Vinegar potato chips
-4 oz of chicken with steamed broccoli for dinner
Not only are these people all over MFP, but I, myself, used to be one of them. I used to strive to eat a diet pretty much exactly like that at first.
I agree, but don't you think that person doesn't think she can lose on "junk," but that she's eating healthy and perhaps eliminating the "junk" she used to eat? I think that plan is sad, but not because it has too much "junk"--based on what's traditionally considered "junk"--but because it is too depressingly diet and about cutting calories at the expense of satisfaction, interest, and taste. But I'm also conscious that just because I'd find something dull and impossible to stick to, not everyone else would.
Related "things that worked for me" I'd give, though:
Learn to cook vegetables well, experiment with different ones, find ways to get yourself excited about them.
Don't think that you must eat diet foods. There are usually (not always, but IMO mostly) alternatives that will be more satisfying and fit in your calories. Also, consider experimenting with mustards and vinegars and learning to mix up a salad dressing.
A huge variety of meats will fit in your calories--you don't need to limit yourself to boneless, skinless chicken breast. Also, fish is great, so if you aren't experienced with it or aren't comfortable cooking it, that's a great thing to learn.0 -
LeadingMuscle wrote: »Good tips OP. I'll offer one too. Incorporate refeed days. It's been shown to make calories in calories out even more effective with fat loss.
http://suppversity.blogspot.de/2014/11/calorie-shifting-refeeding-for-max-fat.html
Thanks, I found that article very informative. It further justifies my much needed periodic diet breaks!
Not sure how that was so informative but ok.
Not sure how my post was addressing you, but ok.-1 -
Paul_Collyer wrote: »Clearly CICO fundamentally works for most people, but then there are many who swear by 5-2 or LCHF as well and have proved it without needing to count calories.
How are 5-2 or LCHF not CICO?
0 -
LeadingMuscle wrote: »Good tips OP. I'll offer one too. Incorporate refeed days. It's been shown to make calories in calories out even more effective with fat loss.
http://suppversity.blogspot.de/2014/11/calorie-shifting-refeeding-for-max-fat.html
Thanks, I found that article very informative. It further justifies my much needed periodic diet breaks!
Not sure how that was so informative but ok.
Not sure how my post was addressing you, but ok.
You posted in a public forum - your post addressed everyone who read it, by definition.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »PrettyPearl88 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »PrettyPearl88 wrote: »I definitely agree with you that while the calories in versus calories out concept is a basic fundamental principle for weight loss, there's a little more to it than simply eating less than you burn. I've found that while it's definitely possible to lose weight eating all junk food but limiting your calorie intake, it's harder to keep that up because it doesn't leave you feeling as full and satisfied.
Why do people say stuff like this? I'm honestly not trying to be argumentative, but genuinely curious. When you started, did you think that losing weight eating "all junk food" would be a good idea? Do you assume that others trying to lose weight typically follow that approach unless advised otherwise?
I think I was probably a bit too quick assume condescension in the OP's post and I feel a little bad about that, but this is the kind of thing that led to me seeing it--I tend to assume that others are generally as knowledgeable about stuff as I am (since why would I be so special), so if something seems like common sense or basic knowledge to me I don't typically assume that others are operating without such insight. If someone asks questions that indicate that they are seeking such information, that's (of course) different.
But then I also find it odd that people want to be told what to eat and seem not to have an understanding of what a basic healthy diet would be sometimes (although of course there's a tremendous variation of possibilities within this category and room for debate), so it's entirely possible I'm the weird one here.
No, I didn't think that losing weight eating ALL junk food would be a good idea when I started...but honestly, I did think that I could still eat a decent portion of junk food (just lower calorie junk food or smaller amounts of junk food) and that that would be perfectly okay and healthy.
That's interesting (and not a bad thing). I guess I tend to see more people who think that you must do all or nothing--cut out all junk food (and even things I don't think are junk food) or give up. Even in my social circle, which is probably disproportionally educated (and not overweight) and filled with people into healthy foods who get excited about stuff like raising chickens, the tendency is to get into weird restrictive diets. Atkins was all the rage at one point, and now gluten free is, of course, but people have a whole slew of dietary things like that. So to me "you can eat whatever" (ideally in moderation, of course) seems a nice contrast and more similar to my own view, which is that generally eating a sensible balanced diet is good.I said what I said purely for argument's sake though, for the sole purpose of refuting the opposing argument. The opposing argument (the version I hear too often) is basically this: You don't have to restrict any foods; eat whatever you want as long as you're eating less than you burn and you'll lose weight. To help their argument, they often use extreme examples, such as "Eating only Oreos while still consuming less calories than you burn will result in weight loss." They seem to focus on the question of whether it's POSSIBLE to eat junk food and lose weight, instead of whether it's ADVISABLE to do so. My comment was specifically addressing people who make these kind of arguments.
This is simply a difference of perception, I think, because my reading of the forums is that the "eat only Oreo" arguments are typically made by "clean" eaters--who contrast their elimination diets to how everyone else (strawman!) eats junk 24/7, as if anyone did--or on occasion to counter a claim that the same person would gain more weight eating 1400 calories of the SAD (whatever that even is) vs. 3000 calories of chicken breast, sweet potatoes, broccoli, bananas, and coconut oil (although the thought of a 3000 calorie day made up of those foods--all of which I like--is not appealing).
I actually think that people who debate in the forums mostly eat pretty healthy, and the widespread claim that people are promoting eating junk for a huge portion of your calories is more based on the fact that many dislike the term "junk" than what's really recommended. Obviously, I don't read every post, though.
On the whole, when people are clear that they are not saying that 1800 calories of cake would cause someone with maintenance of 2400 to gain, but that very few people would feel good or be able to sustain a diet made up of 1800 calories of cake, there's no disagreement.And believe it or not, there are actually people who think that a healthy plan for weight loss includes an average day such as this:
-A Fiber One bar for breakfast
-4 oz of chicken plus a lettuce salad with Walden Farms 0-calorie Caesar dressing for lunch
-Snacks of: one banana, one little pudding cup of Jello sugar-free chocolate pudding, and one serving of Lays Salt and Vinegar potato chips
-4 oz of chicken with steamed broccoli for dinner
Not only are these people all over MFP, but I, myself, used to be one of them. I used to strive to eat a diet pretty much exactly like that at first.
I agree, but don't you think that person doesn't think she can lose on "junk," but that she's eating healthy and perhaps eliminating the "junk" she used to eat? I think that plan is sad, but not because it has too much "junk"--based on what's traditionally considered "junk"--but because it is too depressingly diet and about cutting calories at the expense of satisfaction, interest, and taste. But I'm also conscious that just because I'd find something dull and impossible to stick to, not everyone else would.
Related "things that worked for me" I'd give, though:
Learn to cook vegetables well, experiment with different ones, find ways to get yourself excited about them.
Don't think that you must eat diet foods. There are usually (not always, but IMO mostly) alternatives that will be more satisfying and fit in your calories. Also, consider experimenting with mustards and vinegars and learning to mix up a salad dressing.
A huge variety of meats will fit in your calories--you don't need to limit yourself to boneless, skinless chicken breast. Also, fish is great, so if you aren't experienced with it or aren't comfortable cooking it, that's a great thing to learn.
I actually think I do eat a good portion of "junk," and still lose weight. I'd say it's 50/50, if you include things like pizza and fast food chicken salads as junk. The other half of my diet is mostly homemade, organic, lean meats, dairy, and high in fiber. But everyone defines "junk" differently, which is where the problem lies with labeling foods as healthy or unhealthy.
0 -
LeadingMuscle wrote: »Good tips OP. I'll offer one too. Incorporate refeed days. It's been shown to make calories in calories out even more effective with fat loss.
http://suppversity.blogspot.de/2014/11/calorie-shifting-refeeding-for-max-fat.html
Thanks, I found that article very informative. It further justifies my much needed periodic diet breaks!
Not sure how that was so informative but ok.
Not sure how my post was addressing you, but ok.
You posted in a public forum - your post addressed everyone who read it, by definition.
I am aware of where I am posting. His response to my post still had no point.-1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.7K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.8K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 415 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.6K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions