eat right and no need to count calories

168101112

Replies

  • ana3067
    ana3067 Posts: 5,623 Member
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    if you replace the word "healthy" with "low calorie dense" foods such as comparing eating pasta with steamed spinach would people agree it's harder to eat 1000 calories on spinach than 1000 calories on pasta because they would get full on less?

    If people truly don't agree with this, I think they are trolling.

    Aside from people (men) who are bulking and/or extremely active, who would be eating 1000 calories of spinach or pasta for a meal? I can eat a loot of pasta if calories aren't concerned, but even I never ate 1000 calories of it in a sitting. Most people don't, they eat a combination of foods, which will of course change how the calories play out for the total meal.
  • RGv2
    RGv2 Posts: 5,789 Member
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    When I began, I was advised to eat healthy, exercise and not worry about anything else. I had special restrictions in addition to that, but could eat all the fruits and veggies my little heart desired.

    Without logging, counting, weighing myself or doing any of the things that are so common for weight loss, I lost my first forty pounds. I was shocked when I found out how much I'd lost. Since my clothes got bigger and too big, I knew I'd lost, but was FLOORED by forty pounds. I literally got off and back on the scale and considered that I might've been weighed wrong in the first place, but it would've required like a dozen people doing it wrong in six or eight different places, so there was no error.

    If you eat only the healthiest of foods - all healthy, all the time - it's really hard to overeat. You'll see people here asking about how to get to 1200 eating only the healthiest of food. While it's theoretically possible, it would be very difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time.
    I completely disagree with this. There are too many high calorie choices that could be considered "healthy". If I ate grass fed steak, eggs, almonds/almond butter, milk, avocados, coconut oil, bananas, natural peanut butter, oats, granola, etc I could easily eat above my maintenance, and my maintenance is over 3000 calories. Someone with a smaller maintenance could do it even easier.
    Healthy eating includes watchingcholesterol, sodium, fat content and sticking to lean, white meats. You won't be able to eat too many of those eggs sticking to All Healthy, All The Time.

    I'm not saying you couldn't gain weight eating whatever you choose to eat, just that people sometimes have a really hard time hitting 1200 when doing All Healthy, All The Time.

    But I respect your opinion and think the boards are better when there are multiple opinions posted. Not trying to start a big fight, just clarify. :)
    Your definition of healthy includes sticking to lean, white, meats. That's not everyone's definition of healthy. I happen to think eating salmon, mackerel, steak, lamb, avocado, almonds, etc is perfectly healthy. This is an inherent problem with trying to "eat healthy". There is no definition of what "healthy" is. I also find no reason to pay much attention to sodium. I do not have hypertension or kidney disease and until I do, I find no problems with eating twice the RDA for sodium some days. Someone who has moderate to severe hypertension really aught to watching their sodium. While it's not necessarily "unhealthy" for me to eat a lot of sodium, it can be quite "unhealthy" for someone else too. This is why it is an exercise in futility to classify individual foods as clean and dirty, or healthy and unhealthy. It's completely subjective and in the end, it's how those foods fit together in a total diet and how that total diet complements the individuals needs that matter.
    It isn't my definition, lol. I take advice from experts.

    I know many MFP people do not trust:
    Doctors, because they're not smart
    CDC, because government lies
    Health associations, like Amercian Heart, because they have an agenda
    Etc.

    I do trust all those people when they all say that eating healthy (as they define it) may help me avoid illness. Avoiding illness is something I'm in favor of doing!

    For various reasons, they suggest avoiding certain foods and keeping the salt lower than most Americans do.

    If you stick to their recommendations and only their recommendations - All Healthy, All The Time - it's hard to gain weight.

    If you add a bunch of stuff that they don't recommend and call it "healthy," that's a different ball game.

    If you overdo it on the sodium, you may end up regretting it later. I'm not sure where you got the info that it's cool to eat "a lot" of sodium until it causes cardiovascular problems and then cut back, but I know it is said here a lot. You may end up wishing you'd done it differently.

    I don't personally care how much sodium you eat. Eat only salt all day, every day. I don't care. I'm not trying to be Right On The Internet because then I feel smarter and more confident. Just a heads up. For whatever it's worth.

    I'm posting this as FYI and not attempting to begin a Link Duel. I'm not suggesting it makes me smarter or right about anything. Just in case you're interested in reading what some people - people who you may or may not trust! People you may or may not wish to hear out! - have to say:
    http://sodiumbreakup.heart.org/sodium-411/sodium-and-your-health/

    Sigh more nonsense

    Truly so, especially about it being difficult to gain weight if you eat "all healthy all the time."

    Kalikel,
    ...
    It's easy to overeat on any type of food.
    I say it's difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time and you say it isn't.

    Were you expecting me to say, "Yuh huh! Is too!"

    I'm not. You disagree. Big deal.

    What? Why the attitude?

    It's no more difficult to gain on "all healthy all the time," as you call it then it is to gain on any other diet.
    You disagree. I get it.

    You can quote me and say it a third time, but I'm not going to fight about it then, either. It's just not that big a deal.

    Wow. I thought we were all discussing. "Fight" is in your perception.

    Looks like you're WK outnumbered. Also debating with her will never get y out anywhere. She'll just keep running in circles.

    what is WK?
    "White Knight." It's name-calling.

    I'd rather be the white knight than the villain and have never considered it an insult. :)

    You don't know what the WK term means, do you?
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    ana3067 wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    if you replace the word "healthy" with "low calorie dense" foods such as comparing eating pasta with steamed spinach would people agree it's harder to eat 1000 calories on spinach than 1000 calories on pasta because they would get full on less?

    If people truly don't agree with this, I think they are trolling.

    Aside from people (men) who are bulking and/or extremely active, who would be eating 1000 calories of spinach or pasta for a meal? I can eat a loot of pasta if calories aren't concerned, but even I never ate 1000 calories of it in a sitting. Most people don't, they eat a combination of foods, which will of course change how the calories play out for the total meal.

    1 serving or 50 grams of dry pasta is 200 calories. That's a lot of cooked pasta in my opinion. With add ins, you can get a big 300 to 400 calorie meal. 2000 calories of prepared pasta would kill my stomach
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    edited January 2015
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    if you replace the word "healthy" with "low calorie dense" foods such as comparing eating pasta with steamed spinach would people agree it's harder to eat 1000 calories on spinach than 1000 calories on pasta because they would get full on less?

    If people truly don't agree with this, I think they are trolling.

    I think you're missing the point, as well as being presumptuous calling someone a troll if they don't agree with your statement. Those two foods are so vastly different in calories that the comparison is ludicrous. I couldn't eat 1000 calories in either food, and I wouldn't even want to try. Moderation in all foods.

    Why all the extremes?
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    since nobody can agree on what's considered healthy and have extended healthy to mean chips and cupcakes *rollseyes*

    No. You're projecting your own issues into the conversation.
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    Seriously?
    Who is in charge of what is eating right (or whatever you want to call it)
    You become overweight by eating more calories than you burn, consequently, you lose weight by eating less calories than you burn.
    Do what is sustainable and RIGHT for you.

    This.
  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    if you replace the word "healthy" with "low calorie dense" foods such as comparing eating pasta with steamed spinach would people agree it's harder to eat 1000 calories on spinach than 1000 calories on pasta because they would get full on less?

    If people truly don't agree with this, I think they are trolling.

    What you are failing to see is that feeling full isn't the only objective to eating. Either pasta or spinach can make sense in a diet based on context - if I am planning a long hard ride in the next days - a plate of pasta might make more sense than the calorie equivalent plate of spinach. Both are healthy, both are good.
    If the only interest was to eat "low calorie dense food" we'd all be eating only cauliflower. So no, a "healthy diet" isn't eating only "low calorie dense" food.

    Not trolling at all - just believe that healthy depends on contextual elements - some things are evident - variety to assure micronutrient needs, balance in macro nutrients, freshness, etc... But it doesn't necessarily exclude x or y foods. And personally, I like to commit to things like low packaging, proximity sourcing, low environment impact as part of "healthy" (socially) eating. But in terms of weight loss - given that adherence is one of the most important barriers and that the actual extra weight is the unhealthiest thing you can have then "healthy" eating is whatever brings to best adherence, IMHO. It is a personal context.

    I specifically said I was not talking about the word "healthy" anymore. does anyone read my posts prior to responding?

    I'm talking purely about weight loss. With weight loss, low calorie dense foods makes it easier to lose weight.
  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    ana3067 wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    When I began, I was advised to eat healthy, exercise and not worry about anything else. I had special restrictions in addition to that, but could eat all the fruits and veggies my little heart desired.

    Without logging, counting, weighing myself or doing any of the things that are so common for weight loss, I lost my first forty pounds. I was shocked when I found out how much I'd lost. Since my clothes got bigger and too big, I knew I'd lost, but was FLOORED by forty pounds. I literally got off and back on the scale and considered that I might've been weighed wrong in the first place, but it would've required like a dozen people doing it wrong in six or eight different places, so there was no error.

    If you eat only the healthiest of foods - all healthy, all the time - it's really hard to overeat. You'll see people here asking about how to get to 1200 eating only the healthiest of food. While it's theoretically possible, it would be very difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time.
    I completely disagree with this. There are too many high calorie choices that could be considered "healthy". If I ate grass fed steak, eggs, almonds/almond butter, milk, avocados, coconut oil, bananas, natural peanut butter, oats, granola, etc I could easily eat above my maintenance, and my maintenance is over 3000 calories. Someone with a smaller maintenance could do it even easier.
    Healthy eating includes watchingcholesterol, sodium, fat content and sticking to lean, white meats. You won't be able to eat too many of those eggs sticking to All Healthy, All The Time.

    I'm not saying you couldn't gain weight eating whatever you choose to eat, just that people sometimes have a really hard time hitting 1200 when doing All Healthy, All The Time.

    But I respect your opinion and think the boards are better when there are multiple opinions posted. Not trying to start a big fight, just clarify. :)
    Your definition of healthy includes sticking to lean, white, meats. That's not everyone's definition of healthy. I happen to think eating salmon, mackerel, steak, lamb, avocado, almonds, etc is perfectly healthy. This is an inherent problem with trying to "eat healthy". There is no definition of what "healthy" is. I also find no reason to pay much attention to sodium. I do not have hypertension or kidney disease and until I do, I find no problems with eating twice the RDA for sodium some days. Someone who has moderate to severe hypertension really aught to watching their sodium. While it's not necessarily "unhealthy" for me to eat a lot of sodium, it can be quite "unhealthy" for someone else too. This is why it is an exercise in futility to classify individual foods as clean and dirty, or healthy and unhealthy. It's completely subjective and in the end, it's how those foods fit together in a total diet and how that total diet complements the individuals needs that matter.
    It isn't my definition, lol. I take advice from experts.

    I know many MFP people do not trust:
    Doctors, because they're not smart
    CDC, because government lies
    Health associations, like Amercian Heart, because they have an agenda
    Etc.

    I do trust all those people when they all say that eating healthy (as they define it) may help me avoid illness. Avoiding illness is something I'm in favor of doing!

    For various reasons, they suggest avoiding certain foods and keeping the salt lower than most Americans do.

    If you stick to their recommendations and only their recommendations - All Healthy, All The Time - it's hard to gain weight.

    If you add a bunch of stuff that they don't recommend and call it "healthy," that's a different ball game.

    If you overdo it on the sodium, you may end up regretting it later. I'm not sure where you got the info that it's cool to eat "a lot" of sodium until it causes cardiovascular problems and then cut back, but I know it is said here a lot. You may end up wishing you'd done it differently.

    I don't personally care how much sodium you eat. Eat only salt all day, every day. I don't care. I'm not trying to be Right On The Internet because then I feel smarter and more confident. Just a heads up. For whatever it's worth.

    I'm posting this as FYI and not attempting to begin a Link Duel. I'm not suggesting it makes me smarter or right about anything. Just in case you're interested in reading what some people - people who you may or may not trust! People you may or may not wish to hear out! - have to say:
    http://sodiumbreakup.heart.org/sodium-411/sodium-and-your-health/

    Sigh more nonsense

    Truly so, especially about it being difficult to gain weight if you eat "all healthy all the time."

    Kalikel,
    ...
    It's easy to overeat on any type of food.
    I say it's difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time and you say it isn't.

    Were you expecting me to say, "Yuh huh! Is too!"

    I'm not. You disagree. Big deal.

    What? Why the attitude?

    It's no more difficult to gain on "all healthy all the time," as you call it then it is to gain on any other diet.

    it's certainly more difficult to gain on a healthy diet than on a diet of junk food for me. i simply do not consume as many calories if i eat low carb foods rather than eating pasta every day like i used to.
    So, you're saying low carb foods are healthy and pasta is not healthy, or as healthy?

    I disgree.

    I gained lots of weight eating what I perceived as healthy- no refined sugar, low fat, lots of fresh fruits and vegetables, lots of other foods on my avoid list.

    I lost 44 pound seating foods I love, including plenty of carbs, and have been maintaining for a year.
    I found it easy to lose, and easy to maintain, because I don't feel deprived.

    no, that isn't what i'm saying. if you disagree with me, you disagree that eating 2000 calories in pasta for lunch every day is bad? good to know. *rollseyes*

    do people even read my posts when they disagree with them?

    Yeah, I read your post. 2000 calories of pasta is an extreme. How about 200 calories, maybe 300?

    200 calories in pasta would be tiny and would not be filling.

    I can eat 200 cals worth of pasta, which is probably what I usually eat now anyways for servings. I'm just smart and pair it with other food, because a 200 calorie meal itself is not filling unless it's all protein. Even that only lasts so long for me.

    pasta is a meal all by itself where i'm from. nothing to do with being "smart".
  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    ana3067 wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    if you replace the word "healthy" with "low calorie dense" foods such as comparing eating pasta with steamed spinach would people agree it's harder to eat 1000 calories on spinach than 1000 calories on pasta because they would get full on less?

    If people truly don't agree with this, I think they are trolling.

    Aside from people (men) who are bulking and/or extremely active, who would be eating 1000 calories of spinach or pasta for a meal? I can eat a loot of pasta if calories aren't concerned, but even I never ate 1000 calories of it in a sitting. Most people don't, they eat a combination of foods, which will of course change how the calories play out for the total meal.

    it was a simplification. my point is, if you load up more on foods that aren't calorie dense it's easier to lose weight.
  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    if you replace the word "healthy" with "low calorie dense" foods such as comparing eating pasta with steamed spinach would people agree it's harder to eat 1000 calories on spinach than 1000 calories on pasta because they would get full on less?

    If people truly don't agree with this, I think they are trolling.

    I think you're missing the point, as well as being presumptuous calling someone a troll if they don't agree with your statement. Those two foods are so vastly different in calories that the comparison is ludicrous. I couldn't eat 1000 calories in either food, and I wouldn't even want to try. Moderation in all foods.

    Why all the extremes?

    i'm not missing the point at all. you are. it was a simplification to illustrate my point.
  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    since nobody can agree on what's considered healthy and have extended healthy to mean chips and cupcakes *rollseyes*

    No. You're projecting your own issues into the conversation.

    no i'm not
  • tomatoey
    tomatoey Posts: 5,446 Member
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    ana3067 wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    if you replace the word "healthy" with "low calorie dense" foods such as comparing eating pasta with steamed spinach would people agree it's harder to eat 1000 calories on spinach than 1000 calories on pasta because they would get full on less?

    If people truly don't agree with this, I think they are trolling.

    Aside from people (men) who are bulking and/or extremely active, who would be eating 1000 calories of spinach or pasta for a meal? I can eat a loot of pasta if calories aren't concerned, but even I never ate 1000 calories of it in a sitting. Most people don't, they eat a combination of foods, which will of course change how the calories play out for the total meal.

    1 serving or 50 grams of dry pasta is 200 calories. That's a lot of cooked pasta in my opinion. With add ins, you can get a big 300 to 400 calorie meal. 2000 calories of prepared pasta would kill my stomach

    It's really not. That's like 2/3rds of a cup cooked. 85 grams dry is one cup cooked, usually - about 300 cals. I find that's not enough for a meal, I need more like 1.5 cups.
  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    edited January 2015
    if you are eating this tiny portion of pasta and mixing it with other foods that are not calorie dense, then that is pretty much exactly what i said makes it easier to lose weight.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    edited January 2015
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    tomatoey wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Straw man is routinely done on this board. It starts with "So..." or "So you're saying..."

    You'll see it done here all the time. Look for replies that begin with the word "So." Read the rest of that sentence and then compare it to what was actually said, lol. It's almost never the same thing. :)

    Haha, yes! It feels like MFP is full of clever but annoying teen boys sometimes (even though they look like middle aged men and women). Lots of distortions, lots of extremes, insistence on impossible-to-meet standards, yup yup.

    You mean the people who respond to eat what you want in moderation with "so what you are saying is it's healthy to eat Twinkies 24/7?"

    Oh the irony.... :smiley:

    To the point, I suspect the poster means posters who give "you can get fat if all you eat is broccoli" as an example proving all "all calories are equal".
  • jofjltncb6
    jofjltncb6 Posts: 34,415 Member
    Kalikel wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    When I began, I was advised to eat healthy, exercise and not worry about anything else. I had special restrictions in addition to that, but could eat all the fruits and veggies my little heart desired.

    Without logging, counting, weighing myself or doing any of the things that are so common for weight loss, I lost my first forty pounds. I was shocked when I found out how much I'd lost. Since my clothes got bigger and too big, I knew I'd lost, but was FLOORED by forty pounds. I literally got off and back on the scale and considered that I might've been weighed wrong in the first place, but it would've required like a dozen people doing it wrong in six or eight different places, so there was no error.

    If you eat only the healthiest of foods - all healthy, all the time - it's really hard to overeat. You'll see people here asking about how to get to 1200 eating only the healthiest of food. While it's theoretically possible, it would be very difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time.
    I completely disagree with this. There are too many high calorie choices that could be considered "healthy". If I ate grass fed steak, eggs, almonds/almond butter, milk, avocados, coconut oil, bananas, natural peanut butter, oats, granola, etc I could easily eat above my maintenance, and my maintenance is over 3000 calories. Someone with a smaller maintenance could do it even easier.
    Healthy eating includes watchingcholesterol, sodium, fat content and sticking to lean, white meats. You won't be able to eat too many of those eggs sticking to All Healthy, All The Time.

    I'm not saying you couldn't gain weight eating whatever you choose to eat, just that people sometimes have a really hard time hitting 1200 when doing All Healthy, All The Time.

    But I respect your opinion and think the boards are better when there are multiple opinions posted. Not trying to start a big fight, just clarify. :)
    Your definition of healthy includes sticking to lean, white, meats. That's not everyone's definition of healthy. I happen to think eating salmon, mackerel, steak, lamb, avocado, almonds, etc is perfectly healthy. This is an inherent problem with trying to "eat healthy". There is no definition of what "healthy" is. I also find no reason to pay much attention to sodium. I do not have hypertension or kidney disease and until I do, I find no problems with eating twice the RDA for sodium some days. Someone who has moderate to severe hypertension really aught to watching their sodium. While it's not necessarily "unhealthy" for me to eat a lot of sodium, it can be quite "unhealthy" for someone else too. This is why it is an exercise in futility to classify individual foods as clean and dirty, or healthy and unhealthy. It's completely subjective and in the end, it's how those foods fit together in a total diet and how that total diet complements the individuals needs that matter.
    It isn't my definition, lol. I take advice from experts.

    I know many MFP people do not trust:
    Doctors, because they're not smart
    CDC, because government lies
    Health associations, like Amercian Heart, because they have an agenda
    Etc.

    I do trust all those people when they all say that eating healthy (as they define it) may help me avoid illness. Avoiding illness is something I'm in favor of doing!

    For various reasons, they suggest avoiding certain foods and keeping the salt lower than most Americans do.

    If you stick to their recommendations and only their recommendations - All Healthy, All The Time - it's hard to gain weight.

    If you add a bunch of stuff that they don't recommend and call it "healthy," that's a different ball game.

    If you overdo it on the sodium, you may end up regretting it later. I'm not sure where you got the info that it's cool to eat "a lot" of sodium until it causes cardiovascular problems and then cut back, but I know it is said here a lot. You may end up wishing you'd done it differently.

    I don't personally care how much sodium you eat. Eat only salt all day, every day. I don't care. I'm not trying to be Right On The Internet because then I feel smarter and more confident. Just a heads up. For whatever it's worth.

    I'm posting this as FYI and not attempting to begin a Link Duel. I'm not suggesting it makes me smarter or right about anything. Just in case you're interested in reading what some people - people who you may or may not trust! People you may or may not wish to hear out! - have to say:
    http://sodiumbreakup.heart.org/sodium-411/sodium-and-your-health/

    Sigh more nonsense

    Truly so, especially about it being difficult to gain weight if you eat "all healthy all the time."

    Kalikel,
    ...
    It's easy to overeat on any type of food.
    I say it's difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time and you say it isn't.

    Were you expecting me to say, "Yuh huh! Is too!"

    I'm not. You disagree. Big deal.

    What? Why the attitude?

    It's no more difficult to gain on "all healthy all the time," as you call it then it is to gain on any other diet.
    You disagree. I get it.

    You can quote me and say it a third time, but I'm not going to fight about it then, either. It's just not that big a deal.

    Wow. I thought we were all discussing. "Fight" is in your perception.

    Looks like you're WK outnumbered. Also debating with her will never get y out anywhere. She'll just keep running in circles.

    what is WK?
    "White Knight." It's name-calling.

    I'd rather be the white knight than the villain and have never considered it an insult. :)

    Wait, what?

    C'mon...words matter...and they have meaning. You can't just make up definitions like this. It makes a discussion completely impossib...

    ...oh, wait. Perhaps this is kind of like what has been going on during the last eight pages.
  • jofjltncb6
    jofjltncb6 Posts: 34,415 Member
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    When I began, I was advised to eat healthy, exercise and not worry about anything else. I had special restrictions in addition to that, but could eat all the fruits and veggies my little heart desired.

    Without logging, counting, weighing myself or doing any of the things that are so common for weight loss, I lost my first forty pounds. I was shocked when I found out how much I'd lost. Since my clothes got bigger and too big, I knew I'd lost, but was FLOORED by forty pounds. I literally got off and back on the scale and considered that I might've been weighed wrong in the first place, but it would've required like a dozen people doing it wrong in six or eight different places, so there was no error.

    If you eat only the healthiest of foods - all healthy, all the time - it's really hard to overeat. You'll see people here asking about how to get to 1200 eating only the healthiest of food. While it's theoretically possible, it would be very difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time.
    I completely disagree with this. There are too many high calorie choices that could be considered "healthy". If I ate grass fed steak, eggs, almonds/almond butter, milk, avocados, coconut oil, bananas, natural peanut butter, oats, granola, etc I could easily eat above my maintenance, and my maintenance is over 3000 calories. Someone with a smaller maintenance could do it even easier.
    Healthy eating includes watchingcholesterol, sodium, fat content and sticking to lean, white meats. You won't be able to eat too many of those eggs sticking to All Healthy, All The Time.

    I'm not saying you couldn't gain weight eating whatever you choose to eat, just that people sometimes have a really hard time hitting 1200 when doing All Healthy, All The Time.

    But I respect your opinion and think the boards are better when there are multiple opinions posted. Not trying to start a big fight, just clarify. :)
    Your definition of healthy includes sticking to lean, white, meats. That's not everyone's definition of healthy. I happen to think eating salmon, mackerel, steak, lamb, avocado, almonds, etc is perfectly healthy. This is an inherent problem with trying to "eat healthy". There is no definition of what "healthy" is. I also find no reason to pay much attention to sodium. I do not have hypertension or kidney disease and until I do, I find no problems with eating twice the RDA for sodium some days. Someone who has moderate to severe hypertension really aught to watching their sodium. While it's not necessarily "unhealthy" for me to eat a lot of sodium, it can be quite "unhealthy" for someone else too. This is why it is an exercise in futility to classify individual foods as clean and dirty, or healthy and unhealthy. It's completely subjective and in the end, it's how those foods fit together in a total diet and how that total diet complements the individuals needs that matter.
    It isn't my definition, lol. I take advice from experts.

    I know many MFP people do not trust:
    Doctors, because they're not smart
    CDC, because government lies
    Health associations, like Amercian Heart, because they have an agenda
    Etc.

    I do trust all those people when they all say that eating healthy (as they define it) may help me avoid illness. Avoiding illness is something I'm in favor of doing!

    For various reasons, they suggest avoiding certain foods and keeping the salt lower than most Americans do.

    If you stick to their recommendations and only their recommendations - All Healthy, All The Time - it's hard to gain weight.

    If you add a bunch of stuff that they don't recommend and call it "healthy," that's a different ball game.

    If you overdo it on the sodium, you may end up regretting it later. I'm not sure where you got the info that it's cool to eat "a lot" of sodium until it causes cardiovascular problems and then cut back, but I know it is said here a lot. You may end up wishing you'd done it differently.

    I don't personally care how much sodium you eat. Eat only salt all day, every day. I don't care. I'm not trying to be Right On The Internet because then I feel smarter and more confident. Just a heads up. For whatever it's worth.

    I'm posting this as FYI and not attempting to begin a Link Duel. I'm not suggesting it makes me smarter or right about anything. Just in case you're interested in reading what some people - people who you may or may not trust! People you may or may not wish to hear out! - have to say:
    http://sodiumbreakup.heart.org/sodium-411/sodium-and-your-health/

    Sigh more nonsense

    Truly so, especially about it being difficult to gain weight if you eat "all healthy all the time."

    Kalikel,
    ...
    It's easy to overeat on any type of food.
    I say it's difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time and you say it isn't.

    Were you expecting me to say, "Yuh huh! Is too!"

    I'm not. You disagree. Big deal.

    What? Why the attitude?

    It's no more difficult to gain on "all healthy all the time," as you call it then it is to gain on any other diet.

    it's certainly more difficult to gain on a healthy diet than on a diet of junk food for me. i simply do not consume as many calories if i eat low carb foods rather than eating pasta every day like i used to.
    So, you're saying low carb foods are healthy and pasta is not healthy, or as healthy?

    I disgree.

    I gained lots of weight eating what I perceived as healthy- no refined sugar, low fat, lots of fresh fruits and vegetables, lots of other foods on my avoid list.

    I lost 44 pound seating foods I love, including plenty of carbs, and have been maintaining for a year.
    I found it easy to lose, and easy to maintain, because I don't feel deprived.

    no, that isn't what i'm saying. if you disagree with me, you disagree that eating 2000 calories in pasta for lunch every day is bad? good to know. *rollseyes*

    do people even read my posts when they disagree with them?

    Yeah, I read your post. 2000 calories of pasta is an extreme. How about 200 calories, maybe 300?

    200 calories in pasta would be tiny and would not be filling.

    It would be, and is, plenty for me. :)

    *shrug* maybe it's a weakness i have then. it doesn't help that the portions are usually huge with pasta where i am from.

    Well, let me tell you,its because of our interaction I've added pasta to my dinner menu for tomorrow night. Can't wait. :D

    2000 calories of it or bust. There is no other way.
  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    edited January 2015
    jofjltncb6 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    When I began, I was advised to eat healthy, exercise and not worry about anything else. I had special restrictions in addition to that, but could eat all the fruits and veggies my little heart desired.

    Without logging, counting, weighing myself or doing any of the things that are so common for weight loss, I lost my first forty pounds. I was shocked when I found out how much I'd lost. Since my clothes got bigger and too big, I knew I'd lost, but was FLOORED by forty pounds. I literally got off and back on the scale and considered that I might've been weighed wrong in the first place, but it would've required like a dozen people doing it wrong in six or eight different places, so there was no error.

    If you eat only the healthiest of foods - all healthy, all the time - it's really hard to overeat. You'll see people here asking about how to get to 1200 eating only the healthiest of food. While it's theoretically possible, it would be very difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time.
    I completely disagree with this. There are too many high calorie choices that could be considered "healthy". If I ate grass fed steak, eggs, almonds/almond butter, milk, avocados, coconut oil, bananas, natural peanut butter, oats, granola, etc I could easily eat above my maintenance, and my maintenance is over 3000 calories. Someone with a smaller maintenance could do it even easier.
    Healthy eating includes watchingcholesterol, sodium, fat content and sticking to lean, white meats. You won't be able to eat too many of those eggs sticking to All Healthy, All The Time.

    I'm not saying you couldn't gain weight eating whatever you choose to eat, just that people sometimes have a really hard time hitting 1200 when doing All Healthy, All The Time.

    But I respect your opinion and think the boards are better when there are multiple opinions posted. Not trying to start a big fight, just clarify. :)
    Your definition of healthy includes sticking to lean, white, meats. That's not everyone's definition of healthy. I happen to think eating salmon, mackerel, steak, lamb, avocado, almonds, etc is perfectly healthy. This is an inherent problem with trying to "eat healthy". There is no definition of what "healthy" is. I also find no reason to pay much attention to sodium. I do not have hypertension or kidney disease and until I do, I find no problems with eating twice the RDA for sodium some days. Someone who has moderate to severe hypertension really aught to watching their sodium. While it's not necessarily "unhealthy" for me to eat a lot of sodium, it can be quite "unhealthy" for someone else too. This is why it is an exercise in futility to classify individual foods as clean and dirty, or healthy and unhealthy. It's completely subjective and in the end, it's how those foods fit together in a total diet and how that total diet complements the individuals needs that matter.
    It isn't my definition, lol. I take advice from experts.

    I know many MFP people do not trust:
    Doctors, because they're not smart
    CDC, because government lies
    Health associations, like Amercian Heart, because they have an agenda
    Etc.

    I do trust all those people when they all say that eating healthy (as they define it) may help me avoid illness. Avoiding illness is something I'm in favor of doing!

    For various reasons, they suggest avoiding certain foods and keeping the salt lower than most Americans do.

    If you stick to their recommendations and only their recommendations - All Healthy, All The Time - it's hard to gain weight.

    If you add a bunch of stuff that they don't recommend and call it "healthy," that's a different ball game.

    If you overdo it on the sodium, you may end up regretting it later. I'm not sure where you got the info that it's cool to eat "a lot" of sodium until it causes cardiovascular problems and then cut back, but I know it is said here a lot. You may end up wishing you'd done it differently.

    I don't personally care how much sodium you eat. Eat only salt all day, every day. I don't care. I'm not trying to be Right On The Internet because then I feel smarter and more confident. Just a heads up. For whatever it's worth.

    I'm posting this as FYI and not attempting to begin a Link Duel. I'm not suggesting it makes me smarter or right about anything. Just in case you're interested in reading what some people - people who you may or may not trust! People you may or may not wish to hear out! - have to say:
    http://sodiumbreakup.heart.org/sodium-411/sodium-and-your-health/

    Sigh more nonsense

    Truly so, especially about it being difficult to gain weight if you eat "all healthy all the time."

    Kalikel,
    ...
    It's easy to overeat on any type of food.
    I say it's difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time and you say it isn't.

    Were you expecting me to say, "Yuh huh! Is too!"

    I'm not. You disagree. Big deal.

    What? Why the attitude?

    It's no more difficult to gain on "all healthy all the time," as you call it then it is to gain on any other diet.

    it's certainly more difficult to gain on a healthy diet than on a diet of junk food for me. i simply do not consume as many calories if i eat low carb foods rather than eating pasta every day like i used to.
    So, you're saying low carb foods are healthy and pasta is not healthy, or as healthy?

    I disgree.

    I gained lots of weight eating what I perceived as healthy- no refined sugar, low fat, lots of fresh fruits and vegetables, lots of other foods on my avoid list.

    I lost 44 pound seating foods I love, including plenty of carbs, and have been maintaining for a year.
    I found it easy to lose, and easy to maintain, because I don't feel deprived.

    no, that isn't what i'm saying. if you disagree with me, you disagree that eating 2000 calories in pasta for lunch every day is bad? good to know. *rollseyes*

    do people even read my posts when they disagree with them?

    Yeah, I read your post. 2000 calories of pasta is an extreme. How about 200 calories, maybe 300?

    200 calories in pasta would be tiny and would not be filling.

    It would be, and is, plenty for me. :)

    *shrug* maybe it's a weakness i have then. it doesn't help that the portions are usually huge with pasta where i am from.

    Well, let me tell you,its because of our interaction I've added pasta to my dinner menu for tomorrow night. Can't wait. :D

    2000 calories of it or bust. There is no other way.

    not what i meant.

    but if you go to a restaurant this is basically what they give you.
  • lucys1225
    lucys1225 Posts: 597 Member
    ana3067 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    When I began, I was advised to eat healthy, exercise and not worry about anything else. I had special restrictions in addition to that, but could eat all the fruits and veggies my little heart desired.

    Without logging, counting, weighing myself or doing any of the things that are so common for weight loss, I lost my first forty pounds. I was shocked when I found out how much I'd lost. Since my clothes got bigger and too big, I knew I'd lost, but was FLOORED by forty pounds. I literally got off and back on the scale and considered that I might've been weighed wrong in the first place, but it would've required like a dozen people doing it wrong in six or eight different places, so there was no error.

    If you eat only the healthiest of foods - all healthy, all the time - it's really hard to overeat. You'll see people here asking about how to get to 1200 eating only the healthiest of food. While it's theoretically possible, it would be very difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time.
    I completely disagree with this. There are too many high calorie choices that could be considered "healthy". If I ate grass fed steak, eggs, almonds/almond butter, milk, avocados, coconut oil, bananas, natural peanut butter, oats, granola, etc I could easily eat above my maintenance, and my maintenance is over 3000 calories. Someone with a smaller maintenance could do it even easier.
    Healthy eating includes watchingcholesterol, sodium, fat content and sticking to lean, white meats. You won't be able to eat too many of those eggs sticking to All Healthy, All The Time.

    I'm not saying you couldn't gain weight eating whatever you choose to eat, just that people sometimes have a really hard time hitting 1200 when doing All Healthy, All The Time.

    But I respect your opinion and think the boards are better when there are multiple opinions posted. Not trying to start a big fight, just clarify. :)

    Why would non-lean meats not be healthy? Does that make fish not healthy? As was pointed out, nuts (and fish) are very healthy in most people's eyes but they are very calorie (fat) dense.

    Bigger picture must be examined, not single items as you are eating them.

    Since when are fish "calorie (fat) dense?"
  • jofjltncb6
    jofjltncb6 Posts: 34,415 Member
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    jofjltncb6 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    When I began, I was advised to eat healthy, exercise and not worry about anything else. I had special restrictions in addition to that, but could eat all the fruits and veggies my little heart desired.

    Without logging, counting, weighing myself or doing any of the things that are so common for weight loss, I lost my first forty pounds. I was shocked when I found out how much I'd lost. Since my clothes got bigger and too big, I knew I'd lost, but was FLOORED by forty pounds. I literally got off and back on the scale and considered that I might've been weighed wrong in the first place, but it would've required like a dozen people doing it wrong in six or eight different places, so there was no error.

    If you eat only the healthiest of foods - all healthy, all the time - it's really hard to overeat. You'll see people here asking about how to get to 1200 eating only the healthiest of food. While it's theoretically possible, it would be very difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time.
    I completely disagree with this. There are too many high calorie choices that could be considered "healthy". If I ate grass fed steak, eggs, almonds/almond butter, milk, avocados, coconut oil, bananas, natural peanut butter, oats, granola, etc I could easily eat above my maintenance, and my maintenance is over 3000 calories. Someone with a smaller maintenance could do it even easier.
    Healthy eating includes watchingcholesterol, sodium, fat content and sticking to lean, white meats. You won't be able to eat too many of those eggs sticking to All Healthy, All The Time.

    I'm not saying you couldn't gain weight eating whatever you choose to eat, just that people sometimes have a really hard time hitting 1200 when doing All Healthy, All The Time.

    But I respect your opinion and think the boards are better when there are multiple opinions posted. Not trying to start a big fight, just clarify. :)
    Your definition of healthy includes sticking to lean, white, meats. That's not everyone's definition of healthy. I happen to think eating salmon, mackerel, steak, lamb, avocado, almonds, etc is perfectly healthy. This is an inherent problem with trying to "eat healthy". There is no definition of what "healthy" is. I also find no reason to pay much attention to sodium. I do not have hypertension or kidney disease and until I do, I find no problems with eating twice the RDA for sodium some days. Someone who has moderate to severe hypertension really aught to watching their sodium. While it's not necessarily "unhealthy" for me to eat a lot of sodium, it can be quite "unhealthy" for someone else too. This is why it is an exercise in futility to classify individual foods as clean and dirty, or healthy and unhealthy. It's completely subjective and in the end, it's how those foods fit together in a total diet and how that total diet complements the individuals needs that matter.
    It isn't my definition, lol. I take advice from experts.

    I know many MFP people do not trust:
    Doctors, because they're not smart
    CDC, because government lies
    Health associations, like Amercian Heart, because they have an agenda
    Etc.

    I do trust all those people when they all say that eating healthy (as they define it) may help me avoid illness. Avoiding illness is something I'm in favor of doing!

    For various reasons, they suggest avoiding certain foods and keeping the salt lower than most Americans do.

    If you stick to their recommendations and only their recommendations - All Healthy, All The Time - it's hard to gain weight.

    If you add a bunch of stuff that they don't recommend and call it "healthy," that's a different ball game.

    If you overdo it on the sodium, you may end up regretting it later. I'm not sure where you got the info that it's cool to eat "a lot" of sodium until it causes cardiovascular problems and then cut back, but I know it is said here a lot. You may end up wishing you'd done it differently.

    I don't personally care how much sodium you eat. Eat only salt all day, every day. I don't care. I'm not trying to be Right On The Internet because then I feel smarter and more confident. Just a heads up. For whatever it's worth.

    I'm posting this as FYI and not attempting to begin a Link Duel. I'm not suggesting it makes me smarter or right about anything. Just in case you're interested in reading what some people - people who you may or may not trust! People you may or may not wish to hear out! - have to say:
    http://sodiumbreakup.heart.org/sodium-411/sodium-and-your-health/

    Sigh more nonsense

    Truly so, especially about it being difficult to gain weight if you eat "all healthy all the time."

    Kalikel,
    ...
    It's easy to overeat on any type of food.
    I say it's difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time and you say it isn't.

    Were you expecting me to say, "Yuh huh! Is too!"

    I'm not. You disagree. Big deal.

    What? Why the attitude?

    It's no more difficult to gain on "all healthy all the time," as you call it then it is to gain on any other diet.

    it's certainly more difficult to gain on a healthy diet than on a diet of junk food for me. i simply do not consume as many calories if i eat low carb foods rather than eating pasta every day like i used to.
    So, you're saying low carb foods are healthy and pasta is not healthy, or as healthy?

    I disgree.

    I gained lots of weight eating what I perceived as healthy- no refined sugar, low fat, lots of fresh fruits and vegetables, lots of other foods on my avoid list.

    I lost 44 pound seating foods I love, including plenty of carbs, and have been maintaining for a year.
    I found it easy to lose, and easy to maintain, because I don't feel deprived.

    no, that isn't what i'm saying. if you disagree with me, you disagree that eating 2000 calories in pasta for lunch every day is bad? good to know. *rollseyes*

    do people even read my posts when they disagree with them?

    Yeah, I read your post. 2000 calories of pasta is an extreme. How about 200 calories, maybe 300?

    200 calories in pasta would be tiny and would not be filling.

    It would be, and is, plenty for me. :)

    *shrug* maybe it's a weakness i have then. it doesn't help that the portions are usually huge with pasta where i am from.

    Well, let me tell you,its because of our interaction I've added pasta to my dinner menu for tomorrow night. Can't wait. :D

    2000 calories of it or bust. There is no other way.

    not what i meant.

    but if you go to a restaurant this is basically what they give you.

    I wish.

    Please name a restaurant with a pasta dish that is 2000 calories. I'll add it to my "places where I like to dine" list.
  • PikaKnight
    PikaKnight Posts: 34,971 Member
    edited January 2015
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    jofjltncb6 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    When I began, I was advised to eat healthy, exercise and not worry about anything else. I had special restrictions in addition to that, but could eat all the fruits and veggies my little heart desired.

    Without logging, counting, weighing myself or doing any of the things that are so common for weight loss, I lost my first forty pounds. I was shocked when I found out how much I'd lost. Since my clothes got bigger and too big, I knew I'd lost, but was FLOORED by forty pounds. I literally got off and back on the scale and considered that I might've been weighed wrong in the first place, but it would've required like a dozen people doing it wrong in six or eight different places, so there was no error.

    If you eat only the healthiest of foods - all healthy, all the time - it's really hard to overeat. You'll see people here asking about how to get to 1200 eating only the healthiest of food. While it's theoretically possible, it would be very difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time.
    I completely disagree with this. There are too many high calorie choices that could be considered "healthy". If I ate grass fed steak, eggs, almonds/almond butter, milk, avocados, coconut oil, bananas, natural peanut butter, oats, granola, etc I could easily eat above my maintenance, and my maintenance is over 3000 calories. Someone with a smaller maintenance could do it even easier.
    Healthy eating includes watchingcholesterol, sodium, fat content and sticking to lean, white meats. You won't be able to eat too many of those eggs sticking to All Healthy, All The Time.

    I'm not saying you couldn't gain weight eating whatever you choose to eat, just that people sometimes have a really hard time hitting 1200 when doing All Healthy, All The Time.

    But I respect your opinion and think the boards are better when there are multiple opinions posted. Not trying to start a big fight, just clarify. :)
    Your definition of healthy includes sticking to lean, white, meats. That's not everyone's definition of healthy. I happen to think eating salmon, mackerel, steak, lamb, avocado, almonds, etc is perfectly healthy. This is an inherent problem with trying to "eat healthy". There is no definition of what "healthy" is. I also find no reason to pay much attention to sodium. I do not have hypertension or kidney disease and until I do, I find no problems with eating twice the RDA for sodium some days. Someone who has moderate to severe hypertension really aught to watching their sodium. While it's not necessarily "unhealthy" for me to eat a lot of sodium, it can be quite "unhealthy" for someone else too. This is why it is an exercise in futility to classify individual foods as clean and dirty, or healthy and unhealthy. It's completely subjective and in the end, it's how those foods fit together in a total diet and how that total diet complements the individuals needs that matter.
    It isn't my definition, lol. I take advice from experts.

    I know many MFP people do not trust:
    Doctors, because they're not smart
    CDC, because government lies
    Health associations, like Amercian Heart, because they have an agenda
    Etc.

    I do trust all those people when they all say that eating healthy (as they define it) may help me avoid illness. Avoiding illness is something I'm in favor of doing!

    For various reasons, they suggest avoiding certain foods and keeping the salt lower than most Americans do.

    If you stick to their recommendations and only their recommendations - All Healthy, All The Time - it's hard to gain weight.

    If you add a bunch of stuff that they don't recommend and call it "healthy," that's a different ball game.

    If you overdo it on the sodium, you may end up regretting it later. I'm not sure where you got the info that it's cool to eat "a lot" of sodium until it causes cardiovascular problems and then cut back, but I know it is said here a lot. You may end up wishing you'd done it differently.

    I don't personally care how much sodium you eat. Eat only salt all day, every day. I don't care. I'm not trying to be Right On The Internet because then I feel smarter and more confident. Just a heads up. For whatever it's worth.

    I'm posting this as FYI and not attempting to begin a Link Duel. I'm not suggesting it makes me smarter or right about anything. Just in case you're interested in reading what some people - people who you may or may not trust! People you may or may not wish to hear out! - have to say:
    http://sodiumbreakup.heart.org/sodium-411/sodium-and-your-health/

    Sigh more nonsense

    Truly so, especially about it being difficult to gain weight if you eat "all healthy all the time."

    Kalikel,
    ...
    It's easy to overeat on any type of food.
    I say it's difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time and you say it isn't.

    Were you expecting me to say, "Yuh huh! Is too!"

    I'm not. You disagree. Big deal.

    What? Why the attitude?

    It's no more difficult to gain on "all healthy all the time," as you call it then it is to gain on any other diet.

    it's certainly more difficult to gain on a healthy diet than on a diet of junk food for me. i simply do not consume as many calories if i eat low carb foods rather than eating pasta every day like i used to.
    So, you're saying low carb foods are healthy and pasta is not healthy, or as healthy?

    I disgree.

    I gained lots of weight eating what I perceived as healthy- no refined sugar, low fat, lots of fresh fruits and vegetables, lots of other foods on my avoid list.

    I lost 44 pound seating foods I love, including plenty of carbs, and have been maintaining for a year.
    I found it easy to lose, and easy to maintain, because I don't feel deprived.

    no, that isn't what i'm saying. if you disagree with me, you disagree that eating 2000 calories in pasta for lunch every day is bad? good to know. *rollseyes*

    do people even read my posts when they disagree with them?

    Yeah, I read your post. 2000 calories of pasta is an extreme. How about 200 calories, maybe 300?

    200 calories in pasta would be tiny and would not be filling.

    It would be, and is, plenty for me. :)

    *shrug* maybe it's a weakness i have then. it doesn't help that the portions are usually huge with pasta where i am from.

    Well, let me tell you,its because of our interaction I've added pasta to my dinner menu for tomorrow night. Can't wait. :D

    2000 calories of it or bust. There is no other way.

    not what i meant.

    but if you go to a restaurant this is basically what they give you.

    TIL that every restaurant's pasta options are 2000 calories. :indifferent:
  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    jofjltncb6 wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    jofjltncb6 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    When I began, I was advised to eat healthy, exercise and not worry about anything else. I had special restrictions in addition to that, but could eat all the fruits and veggies my little heart desired.

    Without logging, counting, weighing myself or doing any of the things that are so common for weight loss, I lost my first forty pounds. I was shocked when I found out how much I'd lost. Since my clothes got bigger and too big, I knew I'd lost, but was FLOORED by forty pounds. I literally got off and back on the scale and considered that I might've been weighed wrong in the first place, but it would've required like a dozen people doing it wrong in six or eight different places, so there was no error.

    If you eat only the healthiest of foods - all healthy, all the time - it's really hard to overeat. You'll see people here asking about how to get to 1200 eating only the healthiest of food. While it's theoretically possible, it would be very difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time.
    I completely disagree with this. There are too many high calorie choices that could be considered "healthy". If I ate grass fed steak, eggs, almonds/almond butter, milk, avocados, coconut oil, bananas, natural peanut butter, oats, granola, etc I could easily eat above my maintenance, and my maintenance is over 3000 calories. Someone with a smaller maintenance could do it even easier.
    Healthy eating includes watchingcholesterol, sodium, fat content and sticking to lean, white meats. You won't be able to eat too many of those eggs sticking to All Healthy, All The Time.

    I'm not saying you couldn't gain weight eating whatever you choose to eat, just that people sometimes have a really hard time hitting 1200 when doing All Healthy, All The Time.

    But I respect your opinion and think the boards are better when there are multiple opinions posted. Not trying to start a big fight, just clarify. :)
    Your definition of healthy includes sticking to lean, white, meats. That's not everyone's definition of healthy. I happen to think eating salmon, mackerel, steak, lamb, avocado, almonds, etc is perfectly healthy. This is an inherent problem with trying to "eat healthy". There is no definition of what "healthy" is. I also find no reason to pay much attention to sodium. I do not have hypertension or kidney disease and until I do, I find no problems with eating twice the RDA for sodium some days. Someone who has moderate to severe hypertension really aught to watching their sodium. While it's not necessarily "unhealthy" for me to eat a lot of sodium, it can be quite "unhealthy" for someone else too. This is why it is an exercise in futility to classify individual foods as clean and dirty, or healthy and unhealthy. It's completely subjective and in the end, it's how those foods fit together in a total diet and how that total diet complements the individuals needs that matter.
    It isn't my definition, lol. I take advice from experts.

    I know many MFP people do not trust:
    Doctors, because they're not smart
    CDC, because government lies
    Health associations, like Amercian Heart, because they have an agenda
    Etc.

    I do trust all those people when they all say that eating healthy (as they define it) may help me avoid illness. Avoiding illness is something I'm in favor of doing!

    For various reasons, they suggest avoiding certain foods and keeping the salt lower than most Americans do.

    If you stick to their recommendations and only their recommendations - All Healthy, All The Time - it's hard to gain weight.

    If you add a bunch of stuff that they don't recommend and call it "healthy," that's a different ball game.

    If you overdo it on the sodium, you may end up regretting it later. I'm not sure where you got the info that it's cool to eat "a lot" of sodium until it causes cardiovascular problems and then cut back, but I know it is said here a lot. You may end up wishing you'd done it differently.

    I don't personally care how much sodium you eat. Eat only salt all day, every day. I don't care. I'm not trying to be Right On The Internet because then I feel smarter and more confident. Just a heads up. For whatever it's worth.

    I'm posting this as FYI and not attempting to begin a Link Duel. I'm not suggesting it makes me smarter or right about anything. Just in case you're interested in reading what some people - people who you may or may not trust! People you may or may not wish to hear out! - have to say:
    http://sodiumbreakup.heart.org/sodium-411/sodium-and-your-health/

    Sigh more nonsense

    Truly so, especially about it being difficult to gain weight if you eat "all healthy all the time."

    Kalikel,
    ...
    It's easy to overeat on any type of food.
    I say it's difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time and you say it isn't.

    Were you expecting me to say, "Yuh huh! Is too!"

    I'm not. You disagree. Big deal.

    What? Why the attitude?

    It's no more difficult to gain on "all healthy all the time," as you call it then it is to gain on any other diet.

    it's certainly more difficult to gain on a healthy diet than on a diet of junk food for me. i simply do not consume as many calories if i eat low carb foods rather than eating pasta every day like i used to.
    So, you're saying low carb foods are healthy and pasta is not healthy, or as healthy?

    I disgree.

    I gained lots of weight eating what I perceived as healthy- no refined sugar, low fat, lots of fresh fruits and vegetables, lots of other foods on my avoid list.

    I lost 44 pound seating foods I love, including plenty of carbs, and have been maintaining for a year.
    I found it easy to lose, and easy to maintain, because I don't feel deprived.

    no, that isn't what i'm saying. if you disagree with me, you disagree that eating 2000 calories in pasta for lunch every day is bad? good to know. *rollseyes*

    do people even read my posts when they disagree with them?

    Yeah, I read your post. 2000 calories of pasta is an extreme. How about 200 calories, maybe 300?

    200 calories in pasta would be tiny and would not be filling.

    It would be, and is, plenty for me. :)

    *shrug* maybe it's a weakness i have then. it doesn't help that the portions are usually huge with pasta where i am from.

    Well, let me tell you,its because of our interaction I've added pasta to my dinner menu for tomorrow night. Can't wait. :D

    2000 calories of it or bust. There is no other way.

    not what i meant.

    but if you go to a restaurant this is basically what they give you.

    I wish.

    Please name a restaurant with a pasta dish that is 2000 calories. I'll add it to my "places where I like to dine" list.

    might have been an exaggeration. i don't know EXACTLY how many calories was in it. just that it's a lot.

    geez

  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    PikaKnight wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    jofjltncb6 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    When I began, I was advised to eat healthy, exercise and not worry about anything else. I had special restrictions in addition to that, but could eat all the fruits and veggies my little heart desired.

    Without logging, counting, weighing myself or doing any of the things that are so common for weight loss, I lost my first forty pounds. I was shocked when I found out how much I'd lost. Since my clothes got bigger and too big, I knew I'd lost, but was FLOORED by forty pounds. I literally got off and back on the scale and considered that I might've been weighed wrong in the first place, but it would've required like a dozen people doing it wrong in six or eight different places, so there was no error.

    If you eat only the healthiest of foods - all healthy, all the time - it's really hard to overeat. You'll see people here asking about how to get to 1200 eating only the healthiest of food. While it's theoretically possible, it would be very difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time.
    I completely disagree with this. There are too many high calorie choices that could be considered "healthy". If I ate grass fed steak, eggs, almonds/almond butter, milk, avocados, coconut oil, bananas, natural peanut butter, oats, granola, etc I could easily eat above my maintenance, and my maintenance is over 3000 calories. Someone with a smaller maintenance could do it even easier.
    Healthy eating includes watchingcholesterol, sodium, fat content and sticking to lean, white meats. You won't be able to eat too many of those eggs sticking to All Healthy, All The Time.

    I'm not saying you couldn't gain weight eating whatever you choose to eat, just that people sometimes have a really hard time hitting 1200 when doing All Healthy, All The Time.

    But I respect your opinion and think the boards are better when there are multiple opinions posted. Not trying to start a big fight, just clarify. :)
    Your definition of healthy includes sticking to lean, white, meats. That's not everyone's definition of healthy. I happen to think eating salmon, mackerel, steak, lamb, avocado, almonds, etc is perfectly healthy. This is an inherent problem with trying to "eat healthy". There is no definition of what "healthy" is. I also find no reason to pay much attention to sodium. I do not have hypertension or kidney disease and until I do, I find no problems with eating twice the RDA for sodium some days. Someone who has moderate to severe hypertension really aught to watching their sodium. While it's not necessarily "unhealthy" for me to eat a lot of sodium, it can be quite "unhealthy" for someone else too. This is why it is an exercise in futility to classify individual foods as clean and dirty, or healthy and unhealthy. It's completely subjective and in the end, it's how those foods fit together in a total diet and how that total diet complements the individuals needs that matter.
    It isn't my definition, lol. I take advice from experts.

    I know many MFP people do not trust:
    Doctors, because they're not smart
    CDC, because government lies
    Health associations, like Amercian Heart, because they have an agenda
    Etc.

    I do trust all those people when they all say that eating healthy (as they define it) may help me avoid illness. Avoiding illness is something I'm in favor of doing!

    For various reasons, they suggest avoiding certain foods and keeping the salt lower than most Americans do.

    If you stick to their recommendations and only their recommendations - All Healthy, All The Time - it's hard to gain weight.

    If you add a bunch of stuff that they don't recommend and call it "healthy," that's a different ball game.

    If you overdo it on the sodium, you may end up regretting it later. I'm not sure where you got the info that it's cool to eat "a lot" of sodium until it causes cardiovascular problems and then cut back, but I know it is said here a lot. You may end up wishing you'd done it differently.

    I don't personally care how much sodium you eat. Eat only salt all day, every day. I don't care. I'm not trying to be Right On The Internet because then I feel smarter and more confident. Just a heads up. For whatever it's worth.

    I'm posting this as FYI and not attempting to begin a Link Duel. I'm not suggesting it makes me smarter or right about anything. Just in case you're interested in reading what some people - people who you may or may not trust! People you may or may not wish to hear out! - have to say:
    http://sodiumbreakup.heart.org/sodium-411/sodium-and-your-health/

    Sigh more nonsense

    Truly so, especially about it being difficult to gain weight if you eat "all healthy all the time."

    Kalikel,
    ...
    It's easy to overeat on any type of food.
    I say it's difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time and you say it isn't.

    Were you expecting me to say, "Yuh huh! Is too!"

    I'm not. You disagree. Big deal.

    What? Why the attitude?

    It's no more difficult to gain on "all healthy all the time," as you call it then it is to gain on any other diet.

    it's certainly more difficult to gain on a healthy diet than on a diet of junk food for me. i simply do not consume as many calories if i eat low carb foods rather than eating pasta every day like i used to.
    So, you're saying low carb foods are healthy and pasta is not healthy, or as healthy?

    I disgree.

    I gained lots of weight eating what I perceived as healthy- no refined sugar, low fat, lots of fresh fruits and vegetables, lots of other foods on my avoid list.

    I lost 44 pound seating foods I love, including plenty of carbs, and have been maintaining for a year.
    I found it easy to lose, and easy to maintain, because I don't feel deprived.

    no, that isn't what i'm saying. if you disagree with me, you disagree that eating 2000 calories in pasta for lunch every day is bad? good to know. *rollseyes*

    do people even read my posts when they disagree with them?

    Yeah, I read your post. 2000 calories of pasta is an extreme. How about 200 calories, maybe 300?

    200 calories in pasta would be tiny and would not be filling.

    It would be, and is, plenty for me. :)

    *shrug* maybe it's a weakness i have then. it doesn't help that the portions are usually huge with pasta where i am from.

    Well, let me tell you,its because of our interaction I've added pasta to my dinner menu for tomorrow night. Can't wait. :D

    2000 calories of it or bust. There is no other way.

    not what i meant.

    but if you go to a restaurant this is basically what they give you.

    TIL that every restaurant's pasta options are 2000 calories. :indifferent:

    they are very high in calories at most of the restaurants i go to, yes. i don't know the exact count. this is BEYOND THE POINT OF THE THREAD.
  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    Is this entire forum all about nit picking now? it's fantastic.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    The fact that you (/or I, not a personal attack) regained the weight and then some puts to question any method used for maintenance. Some introspection when we fail and restart should result in "well, whatever I did, didn't really work in the long term."

    Of course, and I totally agree with this.

    However, I have thought about it a lot, because I'd like to prevent it this time (of course). I don't have any answers, but I do know it wasn't due to not knowing my calories.

    What happened was that I maintained for 5 years while being very active, lots of stuff happened in my life (which are not worth getting into, but were relevant), I stopped being active and did not adjust my calories down, and -- the big one -- I stopped caring enough for several years for one reason or another.

    What I see as the question to answer is why didn't I care enough and what would prevent that from happening again? My current thought is that if I didn't care enough to eat well or weigh myself or take action when my clothes were getting tighter (yet I knew what to do and did briefly get back on the wagon successfully for a period of time), I also wouldn't care enough to log, so the logging can't be the issue.

    I do plan to force myself to weigh in regularly, no matter what, as I think this will help, and right now logging and playing with my diet helps, and always I find that thinking of it as about eating healthy helps (for me, but is not enough on its own without the other rules I used or some similar thing).

    I say all this not because I perceived you as being critical or am defensive about it (although I might be, I suppose), but because it fleshes out my position on this.

    I don't think my participation in this thread is anti-calorie-counting, though. My feeling is that it's a great tool, one that fits my personality and which I'm using now, but one which is not necessary if you are someone who dislikes doing it or finds it burdensome. (Back in the day it would have been more burdensome to me as I wasn't aware of anything like MFP if it even existed. Even now I wouldn't count if it meant looking stuff up and keeping a written log.)
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    if you replace the word "healthy" with "low calorie dense" foods such as comparing eating pasta with steamed spinach would people agree it's harder to eat 1000 calories on spinach than 1000 calories on pasta because they would get full on less?

    If people truly don't agree with this, I think they are trolling.

    Yes, I personally would (of course) agree with that.

    The problem with arguing that you thus can lose just by "eating healthy," though, is that other than under the most restrictive definitions people tend to include plenty of high calorie items in "eating healthy." For example, back when I just ate healthy (and was successful for a time, when I ALSO had other rules I followed, and then was not), I would have considered pasta perfectly healthy and a whole grain pasta with veggies and a little cheese (and sometimes with meat too) was a staple of my diet. It's not even really one of the big culprits in why I overate, since I don't typically overeat pasta except at a restaurant with huge portions sometimes. I eat pasta for the sauce.

    There were other foods I ate and considered healthy that I was more likely to overeat on, however.

    I know one of the credos of the low carb lifestyle is that people don't overeat on fat and protein, but I can easily, including, specifically, meat, cheese, and nuts. (I also can incorporate these foods into my diet without overeating and am currently--for other reasons I do better on 30-40% carbs and no more--but carb's aren't really my main temptation, except for certain foods I eat somewhat rarely, like mashed potatoes with butter.)
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    I know one of the credos of the low carb lifestyle is that people don't overeat on fat and protein, but I can easily, including, specifically, meat, cheese, and nuts.

    You're not alone. I can, too. And the various paleo(ish) forums are full of people who don't understand why they're gaining weight.


  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited January 2015
    tomatoey wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    ana3067 wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    if you replace the word "healthy" with "low calorie dense" foods such as comparing eating pasta with steamed spinach would people agree it's harder to eat 1000 calories on spinach than 1000 calories on pasta because they would get full on less?

    If people truly don't agree with this, I think they are trolling.

    Aside from people (men) who are bulking and/or extremely active, who would be eating 1000 calories of spinach or pasta for a meal? I can eat a loot of pasta if calories aren't concerned, but even I never ate 1000 calories of it in a sitting. Most people don't, they eat a combination of foods, which will of course change how the calories play out for the total meal.

    1 serving or 50 grams of dry pasta is 200 calories. That's a lot of cooked pasta in my opinion. With add ins, you can get a big 300 to 400 calorie meal. 2000 calories of prepared pasta would kill my stomach

    It's really not. That's like 2/3rds of a cup cooked. 85 grams dry is one cup cooked, usually - about 300 cals. I find that's not enough for a meal, I need more like 1.5 cups.

    Pasta was one food where I didn't modify my serving size when dieting, and I never have (or want) more than 200 calories of pasta at a time unless it's like some kind of ravioli where the calorie count includes cheese and other add-ins. People just (apparently) vary on this.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    edited January 2015
    jofjltncb6 wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    jofjltncb6 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    When I began, I was advised to eat healthy, exercise and not worry about anything else. I had special restrictions in addition to that, but could eat all the fruits and veggies my little heart desired.

    Without logging, counting, weighing myself or doing any of the things that are so common for weight loss, I lost my first forty pounds. I was shocked when I found out how much I'd lost. Since my clothes got bigger and too big, I knew I'd lost, but was FLOORED by forty pounds. I literally got off and back on the scale and considered that I might've been weighed wrong in the first place, but it would've required like a dozen people doing it wrong in six or eight different places, so there was no error.

    If you eat only the healthiest of foods - all healthy, all the time - it's really hard to overeat. You'll see people here asking about how to get to 1200 eating only the healthiest of food. While it's theoretically possible, it would be very difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time.
    I completely disagree with this. There are too many high calorie choices that could be considered "healthy". If I ate grass fed steak, eggs, almonds/almond butter, milk, avocados, coconut oil, bananas, natural peanut butter, oats, granola, etc I could easily eat above my maintenance, and my maintenance is over 3000 calories. Someone with a smaller maintenance could do it even easier.
    Healthy eating includes watchingcholesterol, sodium, fat content and sticking to lean, white meats. You won't be able to eat too many of those eggs sticking to All Healthy, All The Time.

    I'm not saying you couldn't gain weight eating whatever you choose to eat, just that people sometimes have a really hard time hitting 1200 when doing All Healthy, All The Time.

    But I respect your opinion and think the boards are better when there are multiple opinions posted. Not trying to start a big fight, just clarify. :)
    Your definition of healthy includes sticking to lean, white, meats. That's not everyone's definition of healthy. I happen to think eating salmon, mackerel, steak, lamb, avocado, almonds, etc is perfectly healthy. This is an inherent problem with trying to "eat healthy". There is no definition of what "healthy" is. I also find no reason to pay much attention to sodium. I do not have hypertension or kidney disease and until I do, I find no problems with eating twice the RDA for sodium some days. Someone who has moderate to severe hypertension really aught to watching their sodium. While it's not necessarily "unhealthy" for me to eat a lot of sodium, it can be quite "unhealthy" for someone else too. This is why it is an exercise in futility to classify individual foods as clean and dirty, or healthy and unhealthy. It's completely subjective and in the end, it's how those foods fit together in a total diet and how that total diet complements the individuals needs that matter.
    It isn't my definition, lol. I take advice from experts.

    I know many MFP people do not trust:
    Doctors, because they're not smart
    CDC, because government lies
    Health associations, like Amercian Heart, because they have an agenda
    Etc.

    I do trust all those people when they all say that eating healthy (as they define it) may help me avoid illness. Avoiding illness is something I'm in favor of doing!

    For various reasons, they suggest avoiding certain foods and keeping the salt lower than most Americans do.

    If you stick to their recommendations and only their recommendations - All Healthy, All The Time - it's hard to gain weight.

    If you add a bunch of stuff that they don't recommend and call it "healthy," that's a different ball game.

    If you overdo it on the sodium, you may end up regretting it later. I'm not sure where you got the info that it's cool to eat "a lot" of sodium until it causes cardiovascular problems and then cut back, but I know it is said here a lot. You may end up wishing you'd done it differently.

    I don't personally care how much sodium you eat. Eat only salt all day, every day. I don't care. I'm not trying to be Right On The Internet because then I feel smarter and more confident. Just a heads up. For whatever it's worth.

    I'm posting this as FYI and not attempting to begin a Link Duel. I'm not suggesting it makes me smarter or right about anything. Just in case you're interested in reading what some people - people who you may or may not trust! People you may or may not wish to hear out! - have to say:
    http://sodiumbreakup.heart.org/sodium-411/sodium-and-your-health/

    Sigh more nonsense

    Truly so, especially about it being difficult to gain weight if you eat "all healthy all the time."

    Kalikel,
    ...
    It's easy to overeat on any type of food.
    I say it's difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time and you say it isn't.

    Were you expecting me to say, "Yuh huh! Is too!"

    I'm not. You disagree. Big deal.

    What? Why the attitude?

    It's no more difficult to gain on "all healthy all the time," as you call it then it is to gain on any other diet.

    it's certainly more difficult to gain on a healthy diet than on a diet of junk food for me. i simply do not consume as many calories if i eat low carb foods rather than eating pasta every day like i used to.
    So, you're saying low carb foods are healthy and pasta is not healthy, or as healthy?

    I disgree.

    I gained lots of weight eating what I perceived as healthy- no refined sugar, low fat, lots of fresh fruits and vegetables, lots of other foods on my avoid list.

    I lost 44 pound seating foods I love, including plenty of carbs, and have been maintaining for a year.
    I found it easy to lose, and easy to maintain, because I don't feel deprived.

    no, that isn't what i'm saying. if you disagree with me, you disagree that eating 2000 calories in pasta for lunch every day is bad? good to know. *rollseyes*

    do people even read my posts when they disagree with them?

    Yeah, I read your post. 2000 calories of pasta is an extreme. How about 200 calories, maybe 300?

    200 calories in pasta would be tiny and would not be filling.

    It would be, and is, plenty for me. :)

    *shrug* maybe it's a weakness i have then. it doesn't help that the portions are usually huge with pasta where i am from.

    Well, let me tell you,its because of our interaction I've added pasta to my dinner menu for tomorrow night. Can't wait. :D

    2000 calories of it or bust. There is no other way.

    not what i meant.

    but if you go to a restaurant this is basically what they give you.

    I wish.

    Please name a restaurant with a pasta dish that is 2000 calories. I'll add it to my "places where I like to dine" list.

    I think Olive Garden comes close. The build-yer-own menu has...

    Rigatoni (430 cal) + Five cheese Marinara (500 cal) + Sausage (470 cal) -> ~1500 calories

    The pre-built has spaghetti w/ Italian sausage for 1400+ calories. There are lower calorie pasta-based options as well, of course.

    Then again, Olive Garden is to Italian food what spinach is to football....
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    jofjltncb6 wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    jofjltncb6 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    When I began, I was advised to eat healthy, exercise and not worry about anything else. I had special restrictions in addition to that, but could eat all the fruits and veggies my little heart desired.

    Without logging, counting, weighing myself or doing any of the things that are so common for weight loss, I lost my first forty pounds. I was shocked when I found out how much I'd lost. Since my clothes got bigger and too big, I knew I'd lost, but was FLOORED by forty pounds. I literally got off and back on the scale and considered that I might've been weighed wrong in the first place, but it would've required like a dozen people doing it wrong in six or eight different places, so there was no error.

    If you eat only the healthiest of foods - all healthy, all the time - it's really hard to overeat. You'll see people here asking about how to get to 1200 eating only the healthiest of food. While it's theoretically possible, it would be very difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time.
    I completely disagree with this. There are too many high calorie choices that could be considered "healthy". If I ate grass fed steak, eggs, almonds/almond butter, milk, avocados, coconut oil, bananas, natural peanut butter, oats, granola, etc I could easily eat above my maintenance, and my maintenance is over 3000 calories. Someone with a smaller maintenance could do it even easier.
    Healthy eating includes watchingcholesterol, sodium, fat content and sticking to lean, white meats. You won't be able to eat too many of those eggs sticking to All Healthy, All The Time.

    I'm not saying you couldn't gain weight eating whatever you choose to eat, just that people sometimes have a really hard time hitting 1200 when doing All Healthy, All The Time.

    But I respect your opinion and think the boards are better when there are multiple opinions posted. Not trying to start a big fight, just clarify. :)
    Your definition of healthy includes sticking to lean, white, meats. That's not everyone's definition of healthy. I happen to think eating salmon, mackerel, steak, lamb, avocado, almonds, etc is perfectly healthy. This is an inherent problem with trying to "eat healthy". There is no definition of what "healthy" is. I also find no reason to pay much attention to sodium. I do not have hypertension or kidney disease and until I do, I find no problems with eating twice the RDA for sodium some days. Someone who has moderate to severe hypertension really aught to watching their sodium. While it's not necessarily "unhealthy" for me to eat a lot of sodium, it can be quite "unhealthy" for someone else too. This is why it is an exercise in futility to classify individual foods as clean and dirty, or healthy and unhealthy. It's completely subjective and in the end, it's how those foods fit together in a total diet and how that total diet complements the individuals needs that matter.
    It isn't my definition, lol. I take advice from experts.

    I know many MFP people do not trust:
    Doctors, because they're not smart
    CDC, because government lies
    Health associations, like Amercian Heart, because they have an agenda
    Etc.

    I do trust all those people when they all say that eating healthy (as they define it) may help me avoid illness. Avoiding illness is something I'm in favor of doing!

    For various reasons, they suggest avoiding certain foods and keeping the salt lower than most Americans do.

    If you stick to their recommendations and only their recommendations - All Healthy, All The Time - it's hard to gain weight.

    If you add a bunch of stuff that they don't recommend and call it "healthy," that's a different ball game.

    If you overdo it on the sodium, you may end up regretting it later. I'm not sure where you got the info that it's cool to eat "a lot" of sodium until it causes cardiovascular problems and then cut back, but I know it is said here a lot. You may end up wishing you'd done it differently.

    I don't personally care how much sodium you eat. Eat only salt all day, every day. I don't care. I'm not trying to be Right On The Internet because then I feel smarter and more confident. Just a heads up. For whatever it's worth.

    I'm posting this as FYI and not attempting to begin a Link Duel. I'm not suggesting it makes me smarter or right about anything. Just in case you're interested in reading what some people - people who you may or may not trust! People you may or may not wish to hear out! - have to say:
    http://sodiumbreakup.heart.org/sodium-411/sodium-and-your-health/

    Sigh more nonsense

    Truly so, especially about it being difficult to gain weight if you eat "all healthy all the time."

    Kalikel,
    ...
    It's easy to overeat on any type of food.
    I say it's difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time and you say it isn't.

    Were you expecting me to say, "Yuh huh! Is too!"

    I'm not. You disagree. Big deal.

    What? Why the attitude?

    It's no more difficult to gain on "all healthy all the time," as you call it then it is to gain on any other diet.

    it's certainly more difficult to gain on a healthy diet than on a diet of junk food for me. i simply do not consume as many calories if i eat low carb foods rather than eating pasta every day like i used to.
    So, you're saying low carb foods are healthy and pasta is not healthy, or as healthy?

    I disgree.

    I gained lots of weight eating what I perceived as healthy- no refined sugar, low fat, lots of fresh fruits and vegetables, lots of other foods on my avoid list.

    I lost 44 pound seating foods I love, including plenty of carbs, and have been maintaining for a year.
    I found it easy to lose, and easy to maintain, because I don't feel deprived.

    no, that isn't what i'm saying. if you disagree with me, you disagree that eating 2000 calories in pasta for lunch every day is bad? good to know. *rollseyes*

    do people even read my posts when they disagree with them?

    Yeah, I read your post. 2000 calories of pasta is an extreme. How about 200 calories, maybe 300?

    200 calories in pasta would be tiny and would not be filling.

    It would be, and is, plenty for me. :)

    *shrug* maybe it's a weakness i have then. it doesn't help that the portions are usually huge with pasta where i am from.

    Well, let me tell you,its because of our interaction I've added pasta to my dinner menu for tomorrow night. Can't wait. :D

    2000 calories of it or bust. There is no other way.

    not what i meant.

    but if you go to a restaurant this is basically what they give you.

    I wish.

    Please name a restaurant with a pasta dish that is 2000 calories. I'll add it to my "places where I like to dine" list.

    I think Olive Garden comes close. The build-yer-own menu has...

    Rigatoni (430 cal) + Five cheese Marinara (500 cal) + Sausage (470 cal) -> ~1500 calories

    The pre-built has spaghetti w/ Italian sausage for 1400+ calories. There are lower calorie pasta-based options as well, of course.

    Then again, Olive Garden is to Italian food what spinach is to football....

    Hadn't eaten there in like 6 years, got a gift card for Christmas, ate there during the holiday, will not be eating there again (barring another gift card). Place is horrible. Even worse than I remembered.

    And just to vent a bit...on their menu it says "Ask us about our local micro brews". Not a single person including the bartender or manager knew what I was talking about. They offered up Stella Artois as local....I'm in Oklahoma....

  • FatFreeFrolicking
    FatFreeFrolicking Posts: 4,252 Member
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    ana3067 wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Aviva92 wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    vismal wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    When I began, I was advised to eat healthy, exercise and not worry about anything else. I had special restrictions in addition to that, but could eat all the fruits and veggies my little heart desired.

    Without logging, counting, weighing myself or doing any of the things that are so common for weight loss, I lost my first forty pounds. I was shocked when I found out how much I'd lost. Since my clothes got bigger and too big, I knew I'd lost, but was FLOORED by forty pounds. I literally got off and back on the scale and considered that I might've been weighed wrong in the first place, but it would've required like a dozen people doing it wrong in six or eight different places, so there was no error.

    If you eat only the healthiest of foods - all healthy, all the time - it's really hard to overeat. You'll see people here asking about how to get to 1200 eating only the healthiest of food. While it's theoretically possible, it would be very difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time.
    I completely disagree with this. There are too many high calorie choices that could be considered "healthy". If I ate grass fed steak, eggs, almonds/almond butter, milk, avocados, coconut oil, bananas, natural peanut butter, oats, granola, etc I could easily eat above my maintenance, and my maintenance is over 3000 calories. Someone with a smaller maintenance could do it even easier.
    Healthy eating includes watchingcholesterol, sodium, fat content and sticking to lean, white meats. You won't be able to eat too many of those eggs sticking to All Healthy, All The Time.

    I'm not saying you couldn't gain weight eating whatever you choose to eat, just that people sometimes have a really hard time hitting 1200 when doing All Healthy, All The Time.

    But I respect your opinion and think the boards are better when there are multiple opinions posted. Not trying to start a big fight, just clarify. :)
    Your definition of healthy includes sticking to lean, white, meats. That's not everyone's definition of healthy. I happen to think eating salmon, mackerel, steak, lamb, avocado, almonds, etc is perfectly healthy. This is an inherent problem with trying to "eat healthy". There is no definition of what "healthy" is. I also find no reason to pay much attention to sodium. I do not have hypertension or kidney disease and until I do, I find no problems with eating twice the RDA for sodium some days. Someone who has moderate to severe hypertension really aught to watching their sodium. While it's not necessarily "unhealthy" for me to eat a lot of sodium, it can be quite "unhealthy" for someone else too. This is why it is an exercise in futility to classify individual foods as clean and dirty, or healthy and unhealthy. It's completely subjective and in the end, it's how those foods fit together in a total diet and how that total diet complements the individuals needs that matter.
    It isn't my definition, lol. I take advice from experts.

    I know many MFP people do not trust:
    Doctors, because they're not smart
    CDC, because government lies
    Health associations, like Amercian Heart, because they have an agenda
    Etc.

    I do trust all those people when they all say that eating healthy (as they define it) may help me avoid illness. Avoiding illness is something I'm in favor of doing!

    For various reasons, they suggest avoiding certain foods and keeping the salt lower than most Americans do.

    If you stick to their recommendations and only their recommendations - All Healthy, All The Time - it's hard to gain weight.

    If you add a bunch of stuff that they don't recommend and call it "healthy," that's a different ball game.

    If you overdo it on the sodium, you may end up regretting it later. I'm not sure where you got the info that it's cool to eat "a lot" of sodium until it causes cardiovascular problems and then cut back, but I know it is said here a lot. You may end up wishing you'd done it differently.

    I don't personally care how much sodium you eat. Eat only salt all day, every day. I don't care. I'm not trying to be Right On The Internet because then I feel smarter and more confident. Just a heads up. For whatever it's worth.

    I'm posting this as FYI and not attempting to begin a Link Duel. I'm not suggesting it makes me smarter or right about anything. Just in case you're interested in reading what some people - people who you may or may not trust! People you may or may not wish to hear out! - have to say:
    http://sodiumbreakup.heart.org/sodium-411/sodium-and-your-health/

    Sigh more nonsense

    Truly so, especially about it being difficult to gain weight if you eat "all healthy all the time."

    Kalikel,
    ...
    It's easy to overeat on any type of food.
    I say it's difficult to gain weight eating All Healthy, All The Time and you say it isn't.

    Were you expecting me to say, "Yuh huh! Is too!"

    I'm not. You disagree. Big deal.

    What? Why the attitude?

    It's no more difficult to gain on "all healthy all the time," as you call it then it is to gain on any other diet.

    it's certainly more difficult to gain on a healthy diet than on a diet of junk food for me. i simply do not consume as many calories if i eat low carb foods rather than eating pasta every day like i used to.
    So, you're saying low carb foods are healthy and pasta is not healthy, or as healthy?

    I disgree.

    I gained lots of weight eating what I perceived as healthy- no refined sugar, low fat, lots of fresh fruits and vegetables, lots of other foods on my avoid list.

    I lost 44 pound seating foods I love, including plenty of carbs, and have been maintaining for a year.
    I found it easy to lose, and easy to maintain, because I don't feel deprived.

    no, that isn't what i'm saying. if you disagree with me, you disagree that eating 2000 calories in pasta for lunch every day is bad? good to know. *rollseyes*

    do people even read my posts when they disagree with them?

    Yeah, I read your post. 2000 calories of pasta is an extreme. How about 200 calories, maybe 300?

    200 calories in pasta would be tiny and would not be filling.

    I can eat 200 cals worth of pasta, which is probably what I usually eat now anyways for servings. I'm just smart and pair it with other food, because a 200 calorie meal itself is not filling unless it's all protein. Even that only lasts so long for me.

    pasta is a meal all by itself where i'm from. nothing to do with being "smart".

    But that is because it's a giant serving of pasta, like you said. Pasta is not filling for me- not even in large servings. It actually leaves me hungrier unless I pair it with other foods. When I eat pasta, I always have it with a veggie and a meat. Usually asparagus tips or mushrooms. Sometimes spinach and diced tomatoes. I'll make meatballs or throw in diced chicken or ground beef.

    She isn't saying your way isn't smart. She is saying the smarter option would be to eat a serving of pasta which is 200 calories, add something satiating to it, like veggies and meat.
This discussion has been closed.