Sugar - possibly the easiest thing to cut back on for weight loss!
Replies
-
Yeah, he's a peach.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
Right. You and your friend MrM are just friends having fun with no nastiness intended because there is no nastiness on the boards. Any perceived nastiness is done to help others.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
I gave you the benefit of the doubt before. My mistake.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
Edited.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
Silly me, offering congratulations when the pictures were posted to be nasty.
Should've known, since MrM was involved. I couldn't figure it out, why the posting of pics for no obvious reason, but thought it seemed appropriate to congratulate when congratulations seemed in order.
You got me, I guess, lol. I fell for it.
I didn't post my photos to be nasty. Photos were asked for, so I (obviously stupidly) posted them, because I'm proud of how much I've accomplished.
It feels crappier than I would have thought to be accused otherwise.
Some might believe you're an unwitting pawn in MrM's nastiness. Not me.
I'm not sure what I've done to bring you to that conclusion. I'm sorry you feel the way you do. I'm not a cruel person, nor am I a pawn.
Best of luck to you.
Go sing it to someone else. I've heard the tune before.
Let me make myself crystal clear.
Unless I'm directly quoting you, my post(s) have nothing to do with you. I don't do passive aggression. I much prefer aggression.
MrM and I barely speak and when we do, it's on the public forums - for all to see. We've never, ever had a private message exchange, nor do we make nefarious plans together revolving around you in some other mythical place. In fact, most of the time when we do post to each other, we're disagreeing. Much like you and I. The difference is he doesn't make character judgements against me when I disagree with him. Nor does he assume that a totally innocuous post is all part of a plan to make him feel bad/stupid/insert word here.
I wasn't having fun when I posted my pictures, I was feeling pride (yesterday marked the date I made it into the 160's). So you can think whatever you wish of me, but the only thing I'm guilty of here is, perhaps, being egotistical. Which I'll gladly own.
I think we're done here.
There is no nastiness on the boards. Just friends having fun. Anything that appears rude or nasty is just people trying to help others.
And this was just a big coincidence. #2. You were unwittingly drawn into his little game with absolutely no knowledge. I'll believe that.
But all the same, there won't be a #3.
Would you *please* stop putting words into my mouth? There is plenty of nastiness on the forums. I never said there wasn't.
Where did I say MrM was a peach? Most of the times I disagree with him are times I feel he's overly aggressive towards people. My thoughts on him aren't any of your business though. I'm no more willing to talk about him behind his back than I am to talk about you behind yours.
He said "everyone post progress photos" and so I did - that's not a coincidence - that's me responding directly to a post made in this thread. And I wasn't the only one to post progress photos.
I have no idea what you think #1 is. I'm not sure I care anymore.
If your aim was to make me feel stupid and shameful for posting a photo of my body, then consider it a job well done.0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »It was still a poor example because it doesn't scale appropriately anyway.
I don't know what this sentence means. I thought I understood scaling to mean I get a specific number of calories and you get a different number of calories because of weight and activity level.
As I get smaller but don't change my activity level, I have to eat less of my example menu, which would suck for me. That's why I though it was a good example.
I might be misunderstanding what scaling means.
See my example about the cookies.0 -
LolBroScience wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »
But it's a calorie counting app. Isn't the huge overage in red letters (numbers, actually) a pretty awesome clue? Some things go without saying, or the tool tells you. When you mark your diary complete with a 1,000 calorie overage it will also tell you that if you ate like this everyday, you would weigh 10 lbs more in five weeks. These things are built into the MFP app. Everyone will see it whether or not it is spelled out on the forums... The advice is being given with the assumption and context that the reader is a calorie counting MFP member. Is this not correct?
The first junk food in moderation menu I posted was way over with lots of red numbers.
The second menu I posted was half a dount and a latte, 1/2 a slice of pizza and a salad, 7 oz of KFC chicken, and green beans.
It met my numbers (1400 calories / day). It was actually under by 200 cal, over fat by 11 grams, but very close for carbs, protein, and sugar. I could have added two pats of butter, or a tablespoon of coconut oil and hit my numbers exactly.
My point was and is that by eating junk food in moderation, I'd be really hungry and I'd overeat. On that menu, I'd be hungry.
It might be enough for other people. I don't know. No one stepped up and said they could eat like that every day and be fine.
I mentioned that it needs to scale to individual TDEE back on like page 5.
I think... they're saying that if your calorie target is super low, you'd want to spend them making sure your hunger pangs don't bore a hole through your stomach and there would be little to no room left for sugary treats. Just nutritious, possibly great tasting, lower calorie, high volume hunger satisfying food
Now accepting this obviously means one has agreed that the calories must be set that low...
Yes, and I understand that with the lower calorie number that it would be more wise to eat more nutrient dense foods (more bang for your buck) for greater satiation. It was still a poor example because it doesn't scale appropriately anyway. You can still eat in moderation even on 1200 calories (select one of the items as opposed to all of them per the examples, even if they were smaller portions). Whereas someone like myself could select 2-3 and still have a good portion of calories left for the day since my needs are greater.
You could be 100% right on the scaling idea for all we know, but since you'll never ever have to deal with such a reduced calorie diet, it's all theory and does not yet demonstrably pass the practicality bar. What's 1200 calories, like a bite for you? :laugh:
That's not necessarily true. Natural bodybuilders can get quite low with calories when contest prepping. Do I compete currently? No. Is it out of the question? No.
It's still a percentage of calories though when it comes to scaling.
6 cookies for 600 calories with 1200 calories - 50% of calories (a dumb example)
6 cookies for 600 calories with 3500 calories - 17% of calories (something I could get away with)
2 cookies for 200 calories with 1200 calories - 17% of calories
Might have to cut it down to a single cookie, but you get the point.
No way, You've done 1200 calories before? When? For how long?
I have no need to eat 1200, I've made mistakes of eating 1600 calories though many moons ago though.
Hmm, well
I also wonder, is it also easier to be successful eating lower calories, treats and all, if you knew that in X weeks you could go back to eating half a pint of icecream per day (example) with no negative ramifications?
0 -
LolBroScience wrote: »
There are certainly sacrifices that need to be made when dieting down on low calories. However, it doesn't mean that foods need to be eliminated completely... just means you need to be better with budgeting calories.
I agree -- no foods need to be eliminated, just planned for.
0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »It was still a poor example because it doesn't scale appropriately anyway.
I don't know what this sentence means. I thought I understood scaling to mean I get a specific number of calories and you get a different number of calories because of weight and activity level.
As I get smaller but don't change my activity level, I have to eat less of my example menu, which would suck for me. That's why I though it was a good example.
I might be misunderstanding what scaling means.
Seems to me you two are basically agreeing.
Fewer cookies to keep a consistent "treat" percentage.
Makes sense to me too, and it's also why activity is very important to me. Not so much for sugar (although I enjoy some desserts) but various savory foods that also happen to have more calories than, say broccoli and boneless skinless chicken breast.0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »
I mentioned that it needs to scale to individual TDEE back on like page 5.
Yes -- I agree. That's another factor that needs to be taken into consideration when thinking about how much of one's diet can come from high calorie, low nutrition foods.
Isn't this exactly why a lot of people become overweight to begin with? As teenagers, their TDEE is quite high, so they can eat tons of food and not gain weight. But as they age and their activity slows, they don't scale back and start packing on the pounds?LolBroScience wrote: »Yes, and I understand that with the lower calorie number that it would be more wise to eat more nutrient dense foods (more bang for your buck) for greater satiation. It was still a poor example because it doesn't scale appropriately anyway. You can still eat in moderation even on 1200 calories (select one of the items as opposed to all of them per the examples, even if they were smaller portions). Whereas someone like myself could select 2-3 and still have a good portion of calories left for the day since my needs are greater.
Yes, I agree, someone can eat these foods, but they need to fit them in where they can over days or weeks, as opposed to eating them all in one day. I'd never advocate eating that diet in one day or on a daily basis.
For me, I'd rather meet my macros by eating more nutrient dense foods than by being more active than I already am. However, my daily calorie target just ticked down to 1390 and I weigh 162. When I get down to 150, I'll probably be in the 1200 range, and at that point, I'll have to seriously consider upping my activity level. I was considering tyrying to see if I could get to 125 (the last time I weighed that, I was in the seventh grade), but I will have to learn a lot more to get there.
I have much greater respect now for thin people in their 40s and up. They are either eating very little, or exercising a lot.
edited to change "you" to "they"
After doing some light reading on MFP forums, one of the first things I did when I started logging seriously was to change my weekly loss target from 1 lb per week to .5. I needed those extra 250 calories. Bad. At the minimum it bought me time to figure out more nutrition options. I hope you're not set that low already!
0 -
LolBroScience wrote: »
See my example about the cookies.
Nope, still not getting it. I'll go Google it, though, and figure it out.
Cheers!
0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »
See my example about the cookies.
Nope, still not getting it. I'll go Google it, though, and figure it out.
Cheers!
I was under the impression that you would be looking to eat all of the items listed on the menu (in both examples) on the same day.
Menu 1 doesn't work because you're over total calories.
Menu 2 doesn't work because while you're at calories you'd be more apt to overeat due to lack of satiation, adherence issues etc.
So, when I say moderation must scale to your TDEE. It means, select one or two of the items instead of all of that. That way, you still have 80% of your calories to utilize towards more nutrient dense foods.
Someone with my activity level could eat all of Menu example 1 with calories left over and lose at a rate of over 1/lb a week.. Or, I could eat all of Menu 2 and have even more food left to consume.0 -
STOP talking about donuts!! I love those little suckers but they make me feel sick and I certainly don't have the time to make GF ones.
You don't need to make them, I just buy them. Kinnikinnick is a fantastic GF brand if it's available outside of Canada if it is the glutinous aspect that bothers your stomach.0 -
If you haven't claimed that the boards aren't nasty and didn't say that it was just people having fun, then I owe you an apology. I'm sorry. If that is the case, I have confused you with someone else.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
Yeah, he's a peach.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
Right. You and your friend MrM are just friends having fun with no nastiness intended because there is no nastiness on the boards. Any perceived nastiness is done to help others.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
I gave you the benefit of the doubt before. My mistake.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
Edited.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
Silly me, offering congratulations when the pictures were posted to be nasty.
Should've known, since MrM was involved. I couldn't figure it out, why the posting of pics for no obvious reason, but thought it seemed appropriate to congratulate when congratulations seemed in order.
You got me, I guess, lol. I fell for it.
I didn't post my photos to be nasty. Photos were asked for, so I (obviously stupidly) posted them, because I'm proud of how much I've accomplished.
It feels crappier than I would have thought to be accused otherwise.
Some might believe you're an unwitting pawn in MrM's nastiness. Not me.
I'm not sure what I've done to bring you to that conclusion. I'm sorry you feel the way you do. I'm not a cruel person, nor am I a pawn.
Best of luck to you.
Go sing it to someone else. I've heard the tune before.
Let me make myself crystal clear.
Unless I'm directly quoting you, my post(s) have nothing to do with you. I don't do passive aggression. I much prefer aggression.
MrM and I barely speak and when we do, it's on the public forums - for all to see. We've never, ever had a private message exchange, nor do we make nefarious plans together revolving around you in some other mythical place. In fact, most of the time when we do post to each other, we're disagreeing. Much like you and I. The difference is he doesn't make character judgements against me when I disagree with him. Nor does he assume that a totally innocuous post is all part of a plan to make him feel bad/stupid/insert word here.
I wasn't having fun when I posted my pictures, I was feeling pride (yesterday marked the date I made it into the 160's). So you can think whatever you wish of me, but the only thing I'm guilty of here is, perhaps, being egotistical. Which I'll gladly own.
I think we're done here.
There is no nastiness on the boards. Just friends having fun. Anything that appears rude or nasty is just people trying to help others.
And this was just a big coincidence. #2. You were unwittingly drawn into his little game with absolutely no knowledge. I'll believe that.
But all the same, there won't be a #3.
Would you *please* stop putting words into my mouth? There is plenty of nastiness on the forums. I never said there wasn't.
Where did I say MrM was a peach? Most of the times I disagree with him are times I feel he's overly aggressive towards people. My thoughts on him aren't any of your business though. I'm no more willing to talk about him behind his back than I am to talk about you behind yours.
He said "everyone post progress photos" and so I did - that's not a coincidence - that's me responding directly to a post made in this thread. And I wasn't the only one to post progress photos.
I have no idea what you think #1 is. I'm not sure I care anymore.
If your aim was to make me feel stupid and shameful for posting a photo of my body, then consider it a job well done.
His point of asking for progress photos was to, once again, lash out at me, which he and ana have been doing on quite a regular basis for quite a while, though he's done it for much longer.
On a daily basis, MrM lashes out at the world by attacking people on these boards...a variety of people, but he has especially focused on me. Day after day, for months, he has tried to bait me into fights. I do not participate in it, so that's one more difference between him and me.
If you really were unwittingly drawn into it, I apologize for accusing you of purposely participating.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
Not a lot of donuts in that "clean" logSabine_Stroehm wrote: »
Except for the part where she thinks donuts are a good way to meet ones macros lol.DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »
Oh jeez. I feel like it'd just be easier to teach people how to understand caloric values of food types so they can make better choices to meet their caloric intake needs.
All those little portion sizing tips and tricks only got me so far 4-5 years ago, and I was spinning my wheels trying to lose another 10-15lbs that I never lost.
But I also knew nothing of proper macro balance or calories at the time, and was trying to get out of my skinny-fatness. Never happened!
Ana, you are exactly right. Teaching people how to make good food choices is excellent advice. All those tips and tricks that let people eat what they want, but in little portions, only gets you so far. Learning about proper macro balance and calories is much more valuable information.
You could have just agreed with me 20 pages and and saved us all a lot of trouble.
They definitely are if that's what you are craving or if you are also in need of more sugar in your system. Or if you are in a position where you need to eat to your goals but you aren't starving, or perhaps you are eating late at night and want something low volume so as not to upset your stomach.
eating a donut in these situations is a great way to meet my carb and fat macros. It will be a great way to meet my carb and fat macros when I'm in maintenance and when I start my first bulk some time next year, and since I do not plan on eating any differently in any of these situations other than with respect to caloric intake, there is no need for me to not utilize donuts to fulfill macro needs if it's what I'm desiring on that day. That's the beauty of moderation and eating a balanced diet: you don't see anything wrong or bad about eating something you want to eat.
Of yours.
Of course not, because I don't eat clean (anymore). I also practice moderation, which means I eat things that fit into my goals when I feel like eating them. We haven't bought donuts in a while, as I don't do the grocery shopping and I never remember to ask for them - probably because at hte time I don't crave them. I have at times eaten junk many days in a row, sometimes rarely, because I eat foods I enjoy and foods I feel like eating at that time in moderation and to fit my goals.
Moderation doesn't mean eating "crap" every day just because you can. It means eating what you desire eating, within your caloric goals, and potentially within your macro targets if this is of concern to you. I didn't realize that I failed to meet some donut-eating criteria based on the position I hold, since donuts are not the only "crap" I eat. I ate chocolate yesterday. Ate a muffin and half a mars bar (one that I had started on weeks ago and forgot about) on the 12th. Ate potato pancakes (which I'm sure some would consider to be junky) on the 8th, skittles nad a tootsie pop on the 7th (as well as banana bread, homemade with protein powder but I'm sure some people would still consider banana bread to be less than ideal), pizza (takeout) at breakfast and lunch on the 6th, pizza before that on the 5th along with two tootsie pops, a few chips and probably my last remaining donut on the 4th, a 2oz acloholic drink at a restaurant on the 3rd, and on Dec 1st I ate a muffin and a donut (and two carby bars if people consider those junk - Dole and Enjoy Life brands). This is all for December so far. I've also made meals like butter chicken adn sloppy joes with jarred sauces/mixes, which I'm sure some people would not consider to be okay in one's diet.
I ate all of this in a month because moderation and because I felt like eating them. I don't just eat something for the sake of eating it, unless it's protein when I'm needing to reach my protein needs.0 -
TheVirgoddess wrote: »
Yeah, he's a peach.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
Right. You and your friend MrM are just friends having fun with no nastiness intended because there is no nastiness on the boards. Any perceived nastiness is done to help others.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
I gave you the benefit of the doubt before. My mistake.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
Edited.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
Silly me, offering congratulations when the pictures were posted to be nasty.
Should've known, since MrM was involved. I couldn't figure it out, why the posting of pics for no obvious reason, but thought it seemed appropriate to congratulate when congratulations seemed in order.
You got me, I guess, lol. I fell for it.
I didn't post my photos to be nasty. Photos were asked for, so I (obviously stupidly) posted them, because I'm proud of how much I've accomplished.
It feels crappier than I would have thought to be accused otherwise.
Some might believe you're an unwitting pawn in MrM's nastiness. Not me.
I'm not sure what I've done to bring you to that conclusion. I'm sorry you feel the way you do. I'm not a cruel person, nor am I a pawn.
Best of luck to you.
Go sing it to someone else. I've heard the tune before.
Let me make myself crystal clear.
Unless I'm directly quoting you, my post(s) have nothing to do with you. I don't do passive aggression. I much prefer aggression.
MrM and I barely speak and when we do, it's on the public forums - for all to see. We've never, ever had a private message exchange, nor do we make nefarious plans together revolving around you in some other mythical place. In fact, most of the time when we do post to each other, we're disagreeing. Much like you and I. The difference is he doesn't make character judgements against me when I disagree with him. Nor does he assume that a totally innocuous post is all part of a plan to make him feel bad/stupid/insert word here.
I wasn't having fun when I posted my pictures, I was feeling pride (yesterday marked the date I made it into the 160's). So you can think whatever you wish of me, but the only thing I'm guilty of here is, perhaps, being egotistical. Which I'll gladly own.
I think we're done here.
There is no nastiness on the boards. Just friends having fun. Anything that appears rude or nasty is just people trying to help others.
And this was just a big coincidence. #2. You were unwittingly drawn into his little game with absolutely no knowledge. I'll believe that.
But all the same, there won't be a #3.
Would you *please* stop putting words into my mouth? There is plenty of nastiness on the forums. I never said there wasn't.
Where did I say MrM was a peach? Most of the times I disagree with him are times I feel he's overly aggressive towards people. My thoughts on him aren't any of your business though. I'm no more willing to talk about him behind his back than I am to talk about you behind yours.
He said "everyone post progress photos" and so I did - that's not a coincidence - that's me responding directly to a post made in this thread. And I wasn't the only one to post progress photos.
I have no idea what you think #1 is. I'm not sure I care anymore.
If your aim was to make me feel stupid and shameful for posting a photo of my body, then consider it a job well done.
If i were you, I'd never feel ashamed of my accomplishments and possibly showing them to the people reading this thread in response to a question posted on this thread. I have no idea where the nastiness came from in regards to you posting some progress pictures (it seems childish, petty, and ridiculous to me), but allow me to say CONGRATULATIONS! you're doing great! better than i am, since i have stopped actively trying to lose weight since my car accident, and better than a lot of people here, most likely.
I just wish there were a block button on here like there is on fb....but since i know none of these people in real life, i guess it really doesn't matter.
Congrats on your hard work and dedication, Virgoddess! It's paying off in spades.0 -
TheVirgoddess wrote: »
Yeah, he's a peach.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
Right. You and your friend MrM are just friends having fun with no nastiness intended because there is no nastiness on the boards. Any perceived nastiness is done to help others.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
I gave you the benefit of the doubt before. My mistake.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
Edited.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
Silly me, offering congratulations when the pictures were posted to be nasty.
Should've known, since MrM was involved. I couldn't figure it out, why the posting of pics for no obvious reason, but thought it seemed appropriate to congratulate when congratulations seemed in order.
You got me, I guess, lol. I fell for it.
I didn't post my photos to be nasty. Photos were asked for, so I (obviously stupidly) posted them, because I'm proud of how much I've accomplished.
It feels crappier than I would have thought to be accused otherwise.
Some might believe you're an unwitting pawn in MrM's nastiness. Not me.
I'm not sure what I've done to bring you to that conclusion. I'm sorry you feel the way you do. I'm not a cruel person, nor am I a pawn.
Best of luck to you.
Go sing it to someone else. I've heard the tune before.
Let me make myself crystal clear.
Unless I'm directly quoting you, my post(s) have nothing to do with you. I don't do passive aggression. I much prefer aggression.
MrM and I barely speak and when we do, it's on the public forums - for all to see. We've never, ever had a private message exchange, nor do we make nefarious plans together revolving around you in some other mythical place. In fact, most of the time when we do post to each other, we're disagreeing. Much like you and I. The difference is he doesn't make character judgements against me when I disagree with him. Nor does he assume that a totally innocuous post is all part of a plan to make him feel bad/stupid/insert word here.
I wasn't having fun when I posted my pictures, I was feeling pride (yesterday marked the date I made it into the 160's). So you can think whatever you wish of me, but the only thing I'm guilty of here is, perhaps, being egotistical. Which I'll gladly own.
I think we're done here.
There is no nastiness on the boards. Just friends having fun. Anything that appears rude or nasty is just people trying to help others.
And this was just a big coincidence. #2. You were unwittingly drawn into his little game with absolutely no knowledge. I'll believe that.
But all the same, there won't be a #3.
Would you *please* stop putting words into my mouth? There is plenty of nastiness on the forums. I never said there wasn't.
Where did I say MrM was a peach? Most of the times I disagree with him are times I feel he's overly aggressive towards people. My thoughts on him aren't any of your business though. I'm no more willing to talk about him behind his back than I am to talk about you behind yours.
He said "everyone post progress photos" and so I did - that's not a coincidence - that's me responding directly to a post made in this thread. And I wasn't the only one to post progress photos.
I have no idea what you think #1 is. I'm not sure I care anymore.
If your aim was to make me feel stupid and shameful for posting a photo of my body, then consider it a job well done.
If you haven't claimed that the boards aren't nasty and didn't say that it was just people having fun, then I owe you an apology. I'm sorry. If that is the case, I have confused you with someone else.
His point of asking for progress photos was to, once again, lash out at me, which he and ana have been doing on quite a regular basis for quite a while, though he's done it for much longer.
On a daily basis, MrM lashes out at the world by attacking people on these boards...a variety of people, but he has especially focused on me. Day after day, for months, he has tried to bait me into fights. I do not participate in it, so that's one more difference between him and me.
If you really were unwittingly drawn into it, I apologize for accusing you of purposely participating.
I appreciate the apology.
0 -
Some of us have to average 1200 calories and exercise to lose weight. Not even lose quickly. Slowly lose!DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »
But it's a calorie counting app. Isn't the huge overage in red letters (numbers, actually) a pretty awesome clue? Some things go without saying, or the tool tells you. When you mark your diary complete with a 1,000 calorie overage it will also tell you that if you ate like this everyday, you would weigh 10 lbs more in five weeks. These things are built into the MFP app. Everyone will see it whether or not it is spelled out on the forums... The advice is being given with the assumption and context that the reader is a calorie counting MFP member. Is this not correct?
The first junk food in moderation menu I posted was way over with lots of red numbers.
The second menu I posted was half a dount and a latte, 1/2 a slice of pizza and a salad, 7 oz of KFC chicken, and green beans.
It met my numbers (1400 calories / day). It was actually under by 200 cal, over fat by 11 grams, but very close for carbs, protein, and sugar. I could have added two pats of butter, or a tablespoon of coconut oil and hit my numbers exactly.
My point was and is that by eating junk food in moderation, I'd be really hungry and I'd overeat. On that menu, I'd be hungry.
It might be enough for other people. I don't know. No one stepped up and said they could eat like that every day and be fine.
"Satiety and preference" is a pretty common caveat I've seen attached to calorie counting advice. If your tummy is still grumbling, chances are something could stand to be tweaked. The 1200 calorie menu, for starters :bigsmile: That's the main reason I personally wouldn't implement that sample menu, followed by I don't drink my calories in general (black coffee, anyone?), but I do indeed prefer a sugary breakfast - muffins, donuts, bagels, that sort of thing. I do not practice IIFYM
I'm happy for all the people who get to eat lots and lots and can easily work in yummy treats...well, happy for them until that start bragging about it, lol...but it's just not possible for everyone.
I have the occasional 1400-1500 day and the occasional 900-100 day, but every month averages out to like 1225 or something close to 1200.
It's really hard to work 400 calorie muffins into a 1200 calorie day.
If you were craving a muffin, you could easily either make your own low-cal version (I make my own protein-enhanced versions of baked goods all the time, especially banana bread and pancakes), or simply buy lower calorie versions, or simply not eat the whole muffin. Which is what moderation is about, learning how to work appropriate amounts of food one likes into the diet while meeting overall goals.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »It was still a poor example because it doesn't scale appropriately anyway.
I don't know what this sentence means. I thought I understood scaling to mean I get a specific number of calories and you get a different number of calories because of weight and activity level.
As I get smaller but don't change my activity level, I have to eat less of my example menu, which would suck for me. That's why I though it was a good example.
I might be misunderstanding what scaling means.
Seems to me you two are basically agreeing.
Fewer cookies to keep a consistent "treat" percentage.
Makes sense to me too, and it's also why activity is very important to me. Not so much for sugar (although I enjoy some desserts) but various savory foods that also happen to have more calories than, say broccoli and boneless skinless chicken breast.
Precisely0 -
LolBroScience wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »
But it's a calorie counting app. Isn't the huge overage in red letters (numbers, actually) a pretty awesome clue? Some things go without saying, or the tool tells you. When you mark your diary complete with a 1,000 calorie overage it will also tell you that if you ate like this everyday, you would weigh 10 lbs more in five weeks. These things are built into the MFP app. Everyone will see it whether or not it is spelled out on the forums... The advice is being given with the assumption and context that the reader is a calorie counting MFP member. Is this not correct?
The first junk food in moderation menu I posted was way over with lots of red numbers.
The second menu I posted was half a dount and a latte, 1/2 a slice of pizza and a salad, 7 oz of KFC chicken, and green beans.
It met my numbers (1400 calories / day). It was actually under by 200 cal, over fat by 11 grams, but very close for carbs, protein, and sugar. I could have added two pats of butter, or a tablespoon of coconut oil and hit my numbers exactly.
My point was and is that by eating junk food in moderation, I'd be really hungry and I'd overeat. On that menu, I'd be hungry.
It might be enough for other people. I don't know. No one stepped up and said they could eat like that every day and be fine.
I mentioned that it needs to scale to individual TDEE back on like page 5.
I think... they're saying that if your calorie target is super low, you'd want to spend them making sure your hunger pangs don't bore a hole through your stomach and there would be little to no room left for sugary treats. Just nutritious, possibly great tasting, lower calorie, high volume hunger satisfying food
Now accepting this obviously means one has agreed that the calories must be set that low...
Yes, and I understand that with the lower calorie number that it would be more wise to eat more nutrient dense foods (more bang for your buck) for greater satiation. It was still a poor example because it doesn't scale appropriately anyway. You can still eat in moderation even on 1200 calories (select one of the items as opposed to all of them per the examples, even if they were smaller portions). Whereas someone like myself could select 2-3 and still have a good portion of calories left for the day since my needs are greater.
You could be 100% right on the scaling idea for all we know, but since you'll never ever have to deal with such a reduced calorie diet, it's all theory and does not yet demonstrably pass the practicality bar. What's 1200 calories, like a bite for you? :laugh:
That's not necessarily true. Natural bodybuilders can get quite low with calories when contest prepping. Do I compete currently? No. Is it out of the question? No.
It's still a percentage of calories though when it comes to scaling.
6 cookies for 600 calories with 1200 calories - 50% of calories (a dumb example)
6 cookies for 600 calories with 3500 calories - 17% of calories (something I could get away with)
2 cookies for 200 calories with 1200 calories - 17% of calories
Might have to cut it down to a single cookie, but you get the point.
No way, You've done 1200 calories before? When? For how long?
I have no need to eat 1200, I've made mistakes of eating 1600 calories though many moons ago though.
Hmm, well
I also wonder, is it also easier to be successful eating lower calories, treats and all, if you knew that in X weeks you could go back to eating half a pint of icecream per day (example) with no negative ramifications?
I think it depends upon the person. I tend to prefer mostly nutrient dense food anyway, so it's not that big of a deal for me cutting down my 300g serving of ice cream down to 150g.0 -
Thank you for your advice, Oh Wise and All-Knowing One.
Some of us have to average 1200 calories and exercise to lose weight. Not even lose quickly. Slowly lose!DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »
But it's a calorie counting app. Isn't the huge overage in red letters (numbers, actually) a pretty awesome clue? Some things go without saying, or the tool tells you. When you mark your diary complete with a 1,000 calorie overage it will also tell you that if you ate like this everyday, you would weigh 10 lbs more in five weeks. These things are built into the MFP app. Everyone will see it whether or not it is spelled out on the forums... The advice is being given with the assumption and context that the reader is a calorie counting MFP member. Is this not correct?
The first junk food in moderation menu I posted was way over with lots of red numbers.
The second menu I posted was half a dount and a latte, 1/2 a slice of pizza and a salad, 7 oz of KFC chicken, and green beans.
It met my numbers (1400 calories / day). It was actually under by 200 cal, over fat by 11 grams, but very close for carbs, protein, and sugar. I could have added two pats of butter, or a tablespoon of coconut oil and hit my numbers exactly.
My point was and is that by eating junk food in moderation, I'd be really hungry and I'd overeat. On that menu, I'd be hungry.
It might be enough for other people. I don't know. No one stepped up and said they could eat like that every day and be fine.
"Satiety and preference" is a pretty common caveat I've seen attached to calorie counting advice. If your tummy is still grumbling, chances are something could stand to be tweaked. The 1200 calorie menu, for starters :bigsmile: That's the main reason I personally wouldn't implement that sample menu, followed by I don't drink my calories in general (black coffee, anyone?), but I do indeed prefer a sugary breakfast - muffins, donuts, bagels, that sort of thing. I do not practice IIFYM
I'm happy for all the people who get to eat lots and lots and can easily work in yummy treats...well, happy for them until that start bragging about it, lol...but it's just not possible for everyone.
I have the occasional 1400-1500 day and the occasional 900-100 day, but every month averages out to like 1225 or something close to 1200.
It's really hard to work 400 calorie muffins into a 1200 calorie day.
If you were craving a muffin, you could easily either make your own low-cal version (I make my own protein-enhanced versions of baked goods all the time, especially banana bread and pancakes), or simply buy lower calorie versions, or simply not eat the whole muffin. Which is what moderation is about, learning how to work appropriate amounts of food one likes into the diet while meeting overall goals.
I'll be sure to give it all the consideration it is due when making my decisions.-3 -
LolBroScience wrote: »I was under the impression that you would be looking to eat all of the items listed on the menu (in both examples) on the same day.
Menu 1 doesn't work because you're over total calories.
Menu 2 doesn't work because while you're at calories you'd be more apt to overeat due to lack of satiation, adherence issues etc.
So, when I say moderation must scale to your TDEE. It means, select one or two of the items instead of all of that. That way, you still have 80% of your calories to utilize towards more nutrient dense foods.
Someone with my activity level could eat all of Menu example 1 with calories left over and lose at a rate of over 1/lb a week.. Or, I could eat all of Menu 2 and have even more food left to consume.
Yes, those menus were intended to be eaten all in one day. I used my food diary to make the menus, but I don't actually want to eat that way. I was using them to call bs on the oft repeated advice "to lose weight, eat what you want, just in moderation."
I wanted to show that if someone followed that advice and ate what they wanted -- high calorie, low nutrient foods -- they would wind up overeating due to lack of satiation, etc., as you have pointed out.
Based on what you and Tigger a couple of posts ago and other people have pointed out, "eat what you want, just in moderation" is actually doable for people whose calorie goal and macros are much larger than mine -- the vast majority of men and women who are taller and / or more active than me, for example. And as Lemurcat pointed out, many people who are overweight do already eat a well balanced menu, just too much of it, so the advice would work as well for the men and women who aren't already covered by the first category.
So, now that the mantra has been fully clarified for me, I'm happy to change my original position. "Eat what you want, only in moderation" is perfectly fine advice for many people.
Someone many pages ago said they thought I must be joking because someone couldn't be that obtuse. No, I wasn't joking -- I really was bothered by the advice. Now that I've had the chance to have a proper conversation about it, I can see why the advice is given. That's all I was ever after in the first place.
0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »I was under the impression that you would be looking to eat all of the items listed on the menu (in both examples) on the same day.
Menu 1 doesn't work because you're over total calories.
Menu 2 doesn't work because while you're at calories you'd be more apt to overeat due to lack of satiation, adherence issues etc.
So, when I say moderation must scale to your TDEE. It means, select one or two of the items instead of all of that. That way, you still have 80% of your calories to utilize towards more nutrient dense foods.
Someone with my activity level could eat all of Menu example 1 with calories left over and lose at a rate of over 1/lb a week.. Or, I could eat all of Menu 2 and have even more food left to consume.
Yes, those menus were intended to be eaten all in one day. I used my food diary to make the menus, but I don't actually want to eat that way. I was using them to call bs on the oft repeated advice "to lose weight, eat what you want, just in moderation."
I wanted to show that if someone followed that advice and ate what they wanted -- high calorie, low nutrient foods -- they would wind up overeating due to lack of satiation, etc., as you have pointed out.
Based on what you and Tigger a couple of posts ago and other people have pointed out, "eat what you want, just in moderation" is actually doable for people whose calorie goal and macros are much larger than mine -- the vast majority of men and women who are taller and / or more active than me, for example. And as Lemurcat pointed out, many people who are overweight do already eat a well balanced menu, just too much of it, so the advice would work as well for the men and women who aren't already covered by the first category.
So, now that the mantra has been fully clarified for me, I'm happy to change my original position. "Eat what you want, only in moderation" is perfectly fine advice for many people.
Someone many pages ago said they thought I must be joking because someone couldn't be that obtuse. No, I wasn't joking -- I really was bothered by the advice. Now that I've had the chance to have a proper conversation about it, I can see why the advice is given. That's all I was ever after in the first place.
I would go on to say "so long as you are still within a caloric deficit at the end of the day" (which should be a given) as well. Sure, you won't be able to eat ALL items while on that low of calories, but one or two provided it doesn't make up a huge percentage of total calories. Also, the satiation thing will impact everyone differently as well, but for you it may be a larger factor and bigger piece to the overall puzzle.
- quick edit.0 -
After doing some light reading on MFP forums, one of the first things I did when I started logging seriously was to change my weekly loss target from 1 lb per week to .5. I needed those extra 250 calories. Bad. At the minimum it bought me time to figure out more nutrition options. I hope you're not set that low already!
I'm set at 1 pound per week. I've been doing it for three months and have lost 19 pounds. Every time I update my weight, my calories decrease the next day (lol so I don't update my weight very often).
I started at 1460 and now I'm at 1390. In about 10 pounds, I'll be close to 1300 and will have to seriously consider adding exercise.
0 -
Wow. Just. Wow. I don't even....Sorry but if that's moderation... Wow. "all of that in a month". wow. then, well alright then. You ate part of a donut on the 4th and 2 ounces of booze on the 3rd and *A* tootsie pop....and....Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
Not a lot of donuts in that "clean" logSabine_Stroehm wrote: »
Except for the part where she thinks donuts are a good way to meet ones macros lol.DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »
Oh jeez. I feel like it'd just be easier to teach people how to understand caloric values of food types so they can make better choices to meet their caloric intake needs.
All those little portion sizing tips and tricks only got me so far 4-5 years ago, and I was spinning my wheels trying to lose another 10-15lbs that I never lost.
But I also knew nothing of proper macro balance or calories at the time, and was trying to get out of my skinny-fatness. Never happened!
Ana, you are exactly right. Teaching people how to make good food choices is excellent advice. All those tips and tricks that let people eat what they want, but in little portions, only gets you so far. Learning about proper macro balance and calories is much more valuable information.
You could have just agreed with me 20 pages and and saved us all a lot of trouble.
They definitely are if that's what you are craving or if you are also in need of more sugar in your system. Or if you are in a position where you need to eat to your goals but you aren't starving, or perhaps you are eating late at night and want something low volume so as not to upset your stomach.
eating a donut in these situations is a great way to meet my carb and fat macros. It will be a great way to meet my carb and fat macros when I'm in maintenance and when I start my first bulk some time next year, and since I do not plan on eating any differently in any of these situations other than with respect to caloric intake, there is no need for me to not utilize donuts to fulfill macro needs if it's what I'm desiring on that day. That's the beauty of moderation and eating a balanced diet: you don't see anything wrong or bad about eating something you want to eat.
Of yours.
Of course not, because I don't eat clean (anymore). I also practice moderation, which means I eat things that fit into my goals when I feel like eating them. We haven't bought donuts in a while, as I don't do the grocery shopping and I never remember to ask for them - probably because at hte time I don't crave them. I have at times eaten junk many days in a row, sometimes rarely, because I eat foods I enjoy and foods I feel like eating at that time in moderation and to fit my goals.
Moderation doesn't mean eating "crap" every day just because you can. It means eating what you desire eating, within your caloric goals, and potentially within your macro targets if this is of concern to you. I didn't realize that I failed to meet some donut-eating criteria based on the position I hold, since donuts are not the only "crap" I eat. I ate chocolate yesterday. Ate a muffin and half a mars bar (one that I had started on weeks ago and forgot about) on the 12th. Ate potato pancakes (which I'm sure some would consider to be junky) on the 8th, skittles nad a tootsie pop on the 7th (as well as banana bread, homemade with protein powder but I'm sure some people would still consider banana bread to be less than ideal), pizza (takeout) at breakfast and lunch on the 6th, pizza before that on the 5th along with two tootsie pops, a few chips and probably my last remaining donut on the 4th, a 2oz acloholic drink at a restaurant on the 3rd, and on Dec 1st I ate a muffin and a donut (and two carby bars if people consider those junk - Dole and Enjoy Life brands). This is all for December so far. I've also made meals like butter chicken adn sloppy joes with jarred sauces/mixes, which I'm sure some people would not consider to be okay in one's diet.
I ate all of this in a month because moderation and because I felt like eating them. I don't just eat something for the sake of eating it, unless it's protein when I'm needing to reach my protein needs.
okay then. Have a good evening folks, and Ana, best of luck on that journey. And let's pretend my involvement in this entire thread never happened. yowsa.
Walking away, because. Wow.
0 -
0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »
After doing some light reading on MFP forums, one of the first things I did when I started logging seriously was to change my weekly loss target from 1 lb per week to .5. I needed those extra 250 calories. Bad. At the minimum it bought me time to figure out more nutrition options. I hope you're not set that low already!
I'm set at 1 pound per week. I've been doing it for three months and have lost 19 pounds. Every time I update my weight, my calories decrease the next day (lol so I don't update my weight very often).
I started at 1460 and now I'm at 1390. In about 10 pounds, I'll be close to 1300 and will have to seriously consider adding exercise.
Yep. Exercise or adjusting weekly weight loss targets are pretty much standard methods for getting more calories and ultimately not feeling so restricted. With exercise and changing to 0.5 lb per week, You could be at 1390+500 calories per day which I assume would be quite a bit more food. But I understand if you'd want to ease into things
Personally I partly blame the MFP forums update. You can't really tell who's set in their ways and just having a discussion, vs who maybe started out rather recently and is really just exploring and asking questions. The join date used to be prominently displayed below each user's profile photo...
0 -
image
This thread has over 1 thousand posts! Is that very unusual? I keep posting mostly because we seem to be at a point now where the lightweights have drifted off and a more serious and less naming-calling conversation can actually take place without being hijacked by a bunch of "yes you did no you didn't" posts (some of which I know I'm responsible for
)
Personally I partly blame the MFP forums update. You can't really tell who's set in their ways and just having a discussion, vs who maybe started out rather recently and is really just exploring and asking questions. The join date used to be prominently displayed below each user's profile photo...
And I gather from MrM27's comments that a lot of people who are posting aren't even losing weight? Not that he or any of us could truly know whether or not people are losing weight, but is that commonly accepted knowledge, that some or a lot of people are just talking the talk without walking the walk?
0 -
Thank you for your advice, Oh Wise and All-Knowing One.
Some of us have to average 1200 calories and exercise to lose weight. Not even lose quickly. Slowly lose!DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »
But it's a calorie counting app. Isn't the huge overage in red letters (numbers, actually) a pretty awesome clue? Some things go without saying, or the tool tells you. When you mark your diary complete with a 1,000 calorie overage it will also tell you that if you ate like this everyday, you would weigh 10 lbs more in five weeks. These things are built into the MFP app. Everyone will see it whether or not it is spelled out on the forums... The advice is being given with the assumption and context that the reader is a calorie counting MFP member. Is this not correct?
The first junk food in moderation menu I posted was way over with lots of red numbers.
The second menu I posted was half a dount and a latte, 1/2 a slice of pizza and a salad, 7 oz of KFC chicken, and green beans.
It met my numbers (1400 calories / day). It was actually under by 200 cal, over fat by 11 grams, but very close for carbs, protein, and sugar. I could have added two pats of butter, or a tablespoon of coconut oil and hit my numbers exactly.
My point was and is that by eating junk food in moderation, I'd be really hungry and I'd overeat. On that menu, I'd be hungry.
It might be enough for other people. I don't know. No one stepped up and said they could eat like that every day and be fine.
"Satiety and preference" is a pretty common caveat I've seen attached to calorie counting advice. If your tummy is still grumbling, chances are something could stand to be tweaked. The 1200 calorie menu, for starters :bigsmile: That's the main reason I personally wouldn't implement that sample menu, followed by I don't drink my calories in general (black coffee, anyone?), but I do indeed prefer a sugary breakfast - muffins, donuts, bagels, that sort of thing. I do not practice IIFYM
I'm happy for all the people who get to eat lots and lots and can easily work in yummy treats...well, happy for them until that start bragging about it, lol...but it's just not possible for everyone.
I have the occasional 1400-1500 day and the occasional 900-100 day, but every month averages out to like 1225 or something close to 1200.
It's really hard to work 400 calorie muffins into a 1200 calorie day.
If you were craving a muffin, you could easily either make your own low-cal version (I make my own protein-enhanced versions of baked goods all the time, especially banana bread and pancakes), or simply buy lower calorie versions, or simply not eat the whole muffin. Which is what moderation is about, learning how to work appropriate amounts of food one likes into the diet while meeting overall goals.
I'll be sure to give it all the consideration it is due when making my decisions.
Well you said that it's hard to work in a 400-cal muffin on a 1200 cal diet. So I offered suggestions on how it can be done if you are craving a muffin.
I will just repost this
0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
Wow. Just. Wow. I don't even....Sorry but if that's moderation... Wow. "all of that in a month". wow. then, well alright then. You ate part of a donut on the 4th and 2 ounces of booze on the 3rd and *A* tootsie pop....and....Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
Not a lot of donuts in that "clean" logSabine_Stroehm wrote: »
Except for the part where she thinks donuts are a good way to meet ones macros lol.DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »
Oh jeez. I feel like it'd just be easier to teach people how to understand caloric values of food types so they can make better choices to meet their caloric intake needs.
All those little portion sizing tips and tricks only got me so far 4-5 years ago, and I was spinning my wheels trying to lose another 10-15lbs that I never lost.
But I also knew nothing of proper macro balance or calories at the time, and was trying to get out of my skinny-fatness. Never happened!
Ana, you are exactly right. Teaching people how to make good food choices is excellent advice. All those tips and tricks that let people eat what they want, but in little portions, only gets you so far. Learning about proper macro balance and calories is much more valuable information.
You could have just agreed with me 20 pages and and saved us all a lot of trouble.
They definitely are if that's what you are craving or if you are also in need of more sugar in your system. Or if you are in a position where you need to eat to your goals but you aren't starving, or perhaps you are eating late at night and want something low volume so as not to upset your stomach.
eating a donut in these situations is a great way to meet my carb and fat macros. It will be a great way to meet my carb and fat macros when I'm in maintenance and when I start my first bulk some time next year, and since I do not plan on eating any differently in any of these situations other than with respect to caloric intake, there is no need for me to not utilize donuts to fulfill macro needs if it's what I'm desiring on that day. That's the beauty of moderation and eating a balanced diet: you don't see anything wrong or bad about eating something you want to eat.
Of yours.
Of course not, because I don't eat clean (anymore). I also practice moderation, which means I eat things that fit into my goals when I feel like eating them. We haven't bought donuts in a while, as I don't do the grocery shopping and I never remember to ask for them - probably because at hte time I don't crave them. I have at times eaten junk many days in a row, sometimes rarely, because I eat foods I enjoy and foods I feel like eating at that time in moderation and to fit my goals.
Moderation doesn't mean eating "crap" every day just because you can. It means eating what you desire eating, within your caloric goals, and potentially within your macro targets if this is of concern to you. I didn't realize that I failed to meet some donut-eating criteria based on the position I hold, since donuts are not the only "crap" I eat. I ate chocolate yesterday. Ate a muffin and half a mars bar (one that I had started on weeks ago and forgot about) on the 12th. Ate potato pancakes (which I'm sure some would consider to be junky) on the 8th, skittles nad a tootsie pop on the 7th (as well as banana bread, homemade with protein powder but I'm sure some people would still consider banana bread to be less than ideal), pizza (takeout) at breakfast and lunch on the 6th, pizza before that on the 5th along with two tootsie pops, a few chips and probably my last remaining donut on the 4th, a 2oz acloholic drink at a restaurant on the 3rd, and on Dec 1st I ate a muffin and a donut (and two carby bars if people consider those junk - Dole and Enjoy Life brands). This is all for December so far. I've also made meals like butter chicken adn sloppy joes with jarred sauces/mixes, which I'm sure some people would not consider to be okay in one's diet.
I ate all of this in a month because moderation and because I felt like eating them. I don't just eat something for the sake of eating it, unless it's protein when I'm needing to reach my protein needs.
okay then. Have a good evening folks, and Ana, best of luck on that journey. And let's pretend my involvement in this entire thread never happened. yowsa.
Walking away, because. Wow.
Yes, this is moderation. Out of 1900-2400 calories, each of those things took up no more than about 10% of my caloric intake on average (my intake today comprised only 6% of my total intake). I successfully met my macro goals while also eating a variety of other food. I know that Lis for instance will make room for a treat every day (I believe it was chocolate?). That's basically what I've done in the last 2 weeks, with some days having no "treats" at all because I wasn't craving them.
And my weekly treat intake comprised of 4% of my total weekly calories. Which seems pretty reasonable and in no way excessive.0 -
So I just wanted to come in and mention I had both cherry pie and a bear claw today.
Love that sugar.
0 -
Just grind away and hit the salt lick to make sure it's clean.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions