Intuitive Eating - Hmm?
Replies
-
lol, yeah. If I relied on just hunger signals, I'd be very overweight by now.
After a lot of experimentation over the years of messing with my calorie goals, macro breakdowns, and meal timing, it seems that unless I'm in a decent surplus, I'm going to be hungry at the end of the day (at least a little bit)--and possibly throughout the day, depending. I can minimize the hunger and make it manageable, but it's always there.
Yeah, that's me.
I'm not exactly sure what "intuitive eating" is, but all I can say is it is not at all intuitive to me how many calories are in what you are eating. If you want to get a great idea how easy it is to mis-estimate how many calories are in things relying on your intuition check out this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjKPIcI51lU#t=260
It shows two daily allotments of food that look nearly identical. But one contains about twice as many calories as the other.
I need structure. Others may need different things.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »girlviernes wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »It's a fantastic way for most people who need to lose weight to fail.
I mean think about it: eating intuitively is why you're here in the first place.
That's a misunderstanding of what Intuitive Eating is. Intuitive Eating is NOT eating when you aren't hungry. Do you think most people get to be obese, overweight from never eating for non-hunger reasons?
I think most people who get to be overweight and obese have a hard time distinguishing between hunger and non-hunger or feel hungry when there's no reason they should other than something looking really tasty.
Or that, at least, is my deal.
I think what you eat (nutritionally dense) goes a long way to help intuitive eating (the term makes me want to vomit in my mouth though lol). I think with weight loss plus intuitive it would be a case of elimination as a factor - not a good group but food timing ie no snacks, no breakfast as such....break fast.
I have done it. But I didn't know it was a "thing" - just ate to hunger cues and questioned if something was to fill or just for palate which determined how much of that particular thing I ate. Lost weight in the beginning just doing this but the caveat is that I was MO and I easily automated a calorie deficit.
At THIS end it'd require far more ah, determination/focus/patience than calorie counting gives simply because the data is not as comforting/clear. But I guess as always, it depends on your goal.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »girlviernes wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »It's a fantastic way for most people who need to lose weight to fail.
I mean think about it: eating intuitively is why you're here in the first place.
That's a misunderstanding of what Intuitive Eating is. Intuitive Eating is NOT eating when you aren't hungry. Do you think most people get to be obese, overweight from never eating for non-hunger reasons?
I think most people who get to be overweight and obese have a hard time distinguishing between hunger and non-hunger or feel hungry when there's no reason they should other than something looking really tasty.
Or that, at least, is my deal.
I think what you eat (nutritionally dense) goes a long way to help intuitive eating (the term makes me want to vomit in my mouth though lol). I think with weight loss plus intuitive it would be a case of elimination as a factor - not a good group but food timing ie no snacks, no breakfast as such....break fast.
I have done it. But I didn't know it was a "thing" - just ate to hunger cues and questioned if something was to fill or just for palate which determined how much of that particular thing I ate. Lost weight in the beginning just doing this but the caveat is that I was MO and I easily automated a calorie deficit.
At THIS end it'd require far more ah, determination/focus/patience than calorie counting gives simply because the data is not as comforting/clear. But I guess as always, it depends on your goal.
Not sure if you saw my edit to add to the prior post (immediately before the one you quoted), but I actually agree that one can control how much one eats by eliminating snacks, food timing and so on (as well as a focus on portion size and type of food). I just don't think of that as "intuitive eating," since for me it functions basically like what I'm doing now--I eat to meal time and nutritional needs, not hunger.
I lost 60 lbs and maintained it for 5 years (at a maintenance weight of 120-125) doing just that, but for me it was all about eating to plan (not counting calories) and also being really active.
When I got less active (basically sedentary) and convinced myself I could eat whatever, so long as it was high quality/natural food as I then defined it (ugh to me then), that's when I started regaining.
Not the only reason I regained--lots of other stuff went on for me to get as fat as I did, but it was quite obvious that I was never intuitive eating and don't really operate that way.
I was never fat growing up or in my early 20s, but also then I was active and ate to schedule, based on what seemed proper amounts. I never ate whatever I wanted, really, although I also never felt deprived since it wasn't something I ever expected to do until getting all self-indulgent later in life.0 -
Different things work for different people. I have struggled with eating disorders, so I don't think intuitive eating would work for me. I would either under eat or binge, depending on what I have going on in my life.
I think it's important to do what's right for you. This journey isn't about what other people think, it's about you!
0 -
There are lots of people who do "intuitive" eating. Many are overweight and there are also many who are underweight. This is just another approach that someone is trying to SELL.FeelinTheLove wrote: »I have recently been bombarded with messages through various resources (friends, a therapist, emails, etc.) about Intuitive Eating. This is supposed to be one of the solutions for people with eating issues. Has anybody ever tried this? Isn't the whole point of MFP that we couldn't manage the Intuitive Eating and therefore really need to count the calories of what we put in our faces? This concept goes beyond my understanding of how to fix my food issues. Any thoughts?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
That's my only ssue with it...I think intuitive eating is kind of what we strive for in maintenance without calorie counting but the packaging of it is off putting.
Every instinct is promotional these days.
At my current weight, intuitive eating works for maintaining. If I want to continue to lose (which I do, at least 35 more pounds) to become "not overweight," intuitive eating doesn't work.
Unless, that is, I work out like a fiend, especially running, which also decreases my appetite. Then I under eat.
It would be nice, though, wouldn't it?0 -
herrspoons wrote: »It's a fantastic way for most people who need to lose weight to fail.
I mean think about it: eating intuitively is why you're here in the first place.
I'd guess most of us are here because we ate when not hungry actually.
My main issue with intuitive eating is that it doesn't account for what your calories come from. So I could eat bread every hour and still be hungry and end up eating 4000 calories of bread in a day.
That, and my hunger signals are all over the place depending on what time of the month it is, so if I relied only on my hunger signals I'd probably eat anywhere from 1200 to 4000 calories, pretty much.0 -
Excellent point.lemurcat12 wrote: »
Edit to add: I don't think the choices are intuitive eating vs. calorie counting. There are all sorts of ways to externally monitor how much you eat that don't require calorie counting. I enjoy calorie counting currently, but I think not eating between meals and watching portion sizes and simply eating balanced meals -- really what we did societally until quite recently -- is another way of doing that.Liftng4Lis wrote: »Reading about it, I can say that it wouldn't work for me, MFP does.
When I want to work on intuitive eating, I log my food at the end of the day and see how I did. I don't think I've ever seen anyone else post that they do or have done that here. It seems like the vast majority feel like it's all or nothing-- you either eat 100% right intuitively or you completely ignore your body and let MFP do the food decisions. I don't think that former is what intuitive eating means. You're allowed, encouraged even, to use your knowledge of yourself and nutrition and good portion sizes and your goals. You're allowed to want cake and not choose it.
I'm curious what products people see being sold in this area. I've seen books but that's about it.
0 -
The major reason for my weight was not realizing how many calories were in my favorite foods growing up.
Calorie counting has opened my eyes to that small frozen custard with extra cookie dough is not really a small treat at over 1,200 calories, or opting for a frozen or thin crust pizza over an original crust pizza that I order for delivery can save me up to 50% of my calories on a yummy pizza dinner. Also, it has taught me to sync exercise with food volume/type.
I still eat portions by intuition, but understanding calorie impact has helped me to choose my options more wisely.0 -
Our intuition about eating is what got us into trouble with weight in the first place, right?
Intuitively, we eat too much.
Full. Stop.
Period.0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »When I want to work on intuitive eating, I log my food at the end of the day and see how I did. I don't think I've ever seen anyone else post that they do or have done that here.
I do that sometimes, and although I more often log as I cook since it's easier (I chop, weigh, and log). I don't use MFP to decide what I eat--I know what I'm generally going to eat at the beginning of the day and although I might have a snack/heavier lunch and so a lighter dinner I don't need MFP to let me to do that, although I sometimes decide to adjust a bit because of it. I think I could guess pretty close what my numbers are if I have a normal day, though--home cooked or a restaurant I use often. But I still don't eat to hunger. My hunger occurs at meal time and is satisfied by a meal, mostly.
I often wonder if I have a blind spot in this area that may actually make dieting easier, since I'm pretty good at dictating how much I think I should eat and finding that my perceived hunger follows unless screwed up emotionally (stress eating blah, blah). It means I can easily eat way more than my hunger would actually demand, but also that I never feel like dinner isn't big enough (especially if I add lots of veggies, granted), and that I'm an extreme example of those idiots who will eat to plate size if I let myself, or to whatever portion is on my plate (except I learned by mental effort--not by desire--not to do that in restaurants and at home to serve up a good serving size and not do seconds ever).You're allowed, encouraged even, to use your knowledge of yourself and nutrition and good portion sizes and your goals. You're allowed to want cake and not choose it.
Hmm, my understanding has always been that it means we naturally will eat only what we are truly hungry for, that the dieting industry, etc., has screwed up our signals but there's some natural way we could return to. I think for some people that's true, but I suspect for many it is not, perhaps even for most (explaining perhaps why there seems to be a natural cap on obesity/overweight even in the current environment--some will be intuitive about it). I also think of it as associated with HAES somewhat with the idea that if people stop freaking about losing weight or dieting they will naturally slim down. My thing is that I think the idea that we naturally controlled our eating (as in ate to hunger) is some idealistic world that never existed.
All I've seen are books, though, and magazine articles, and I admit the last I read was some years ago.0 -
I have always been overweight. I don't think I will ever be able to eat intuitively because my bad habits are basically making food an addiction. I can instead intuitively eat as much as a 400lb, 6'4" dude... and that's why I'm here.0
-
Tried it. Only seemed to want to intuitively eat Oreos.
Of course, there's nothing wrong with Oreos. If you aren't intuitively eating like a bag and a half of them a day.0 -
I think to become "intuitive at eating" you need to first have a cold hard shock in regards to how many calories are in ordinary foods that you eat. therefore i completely echo what lots have said already, that intuitive eating is not where i would start. In fact i kind of did start there.... i never used to count calories, and all my healthy stints were based on what is classed as broadly "healthy". however, when i actually counted how many cals were in a me sized portion of oatmeal and berries and nuts in the morning i was flabbergasted! now that ive been counting cals i know what a portion of most things looks like, i also know roughly how many calories i need to feel satisfied at bfast lunch and dinner. Sometime in the distant future i might be ready for intuitive eating (as lets face it, in theory its probably the best long term manageable method of eating healthy), but not now. I have been on MFP for quite a while now, but i still have a LOT to learn.0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »Liftng4Lis wrote: »Reading about it, I can say that it wouldn't work for me, MFP does.
This.
My impression is that people into the concept typically seem to think that intuitive eating is more "natural" and absent something screwing us up human beings would naturally just eat what we need to maintain a healthy weight and thus that doing anything more than listening to hunger signals (or eating/not eating for reasons other than hunger) is unnecessary or wrong.
I not only don't think this works for me, but I'm skeptical of the concept. There has rarely been a time when humans (a) had more than enough food easily available, (b) could as easily acquire food without substantial preparation time like now (even for those of us who mostly cook at home it's super easy these days), and (c) did not have social constraints like social eating times and cultural ideas about the proper way to eat to constrain them. Thus, it seems to me that eating in accordance with external cues like meal times or a planned idea of an amount to eat or way of eating is MORE consistent with human history than any kind of "just follow your hunger" intuitive eating.
Plus, I know quite well that my hunger signals don't work that well and are distorted by all kinds of things, but can easily be trained to follow social cues like meal times and amounts. This was so before I was overweight, when I lost and maintained for 5 years, and when I was losing this time (and now that I'm close to goal). I wish that I could rely on hunger and not bother paying attention to the other things, but that's just not how it is, so be it.
Edit to add: I don't think the choices are intuitive eating vs. calorie counting. There are all sorts of ways to externally monitor how much you eat that don't require calorie counting. I enjoy calorie counting currently, but I think not eating between meals and watching portion sizes and simply eating balanced meals -- really what we did societally until quite recently -- is another way of doing that.
What you said in your third paragraph resonated with me about hunger signals and social cues. We raised our children unconventionally with regards to food to circumvent this. We ignored the conventional advice that "meal times" were some sort of sacrosanct thing. I couldn't wrap my head around that idea, because I knew so much of my own problem with being overweight revolved around not knowing when I was hungry.
I made food, but my kids were able to refuse it if they weren't hungry and I heated it up when they were hungry and asked for it. They'd sit with us and have something to drink if they weren't hungry. We never made them eat if they weren't hungry. Conversely, if dinner wasn't ready, but they were hungry, they were allowed to eat something healthy like cheese sticks or fruit.
I wanted my kids, the children of two obese parents, to become intuitive eaters. So far, it's worked. Neither of them have a weight problem.
0 -
That's really interesting. I think there probably is a broad human range of ability here, and that some people won't become overweight (or do better avoiding it) by being intuitive.0
-
Personally I need the structure of MFP. I have,however,paid a great deal of attention to my body and its cues and determined a reasonable calorie allowance for me and have learned to make small but sustainable lifestyle changes to keep me in that calorie range. In essence I have ditched all diet plans and have found what works for me. Good luck to you in whatever you choose to do.0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »That's really interesting. I think there probably is a broad human range of ability here, and that some people won't become overweight (or do better avoiding it) by being intuitive.
You know what I've noticed with the two of them that varies from their father and I? Appetite, barring illness, for my husband and I, is something that remains at a fairly constant level day-to-day. We take in pretty much the same volume of food daily.
My kids don't. Some days they eat a lot more. Some days they eat a lot less, to the point that my inner Italian grandmother is biting her knuckles with worry. I've learned to ignore her. Now, with my son, sometimes this accounts for growth spurts. My daughter is an adult, though. She still exhibits this behavior. My son still does this between growth spurts too.
0 -
Intuitive eating is actually a concept that helped me immensely to make me realize all the reasons I was eating for. Most of the time - I don't eat because of stomach hunger, I'm eating because of mental hunger. I think there's a certain type of personality that it really speaks to, and to dismiss it as ridiculous and saying that people who are overweight got there because of intuitive eating is actually really incorrect.
Like someone else in the thread already said - people who are severely overweight got there because of MINDLESS eating, not intuitive eating. Not everyone has the same issues with food, though. In my case, I genuinely find it incredibly difficult to understand overeating for anything other than emotional reasons. I have a long history of eating disorders and my weight got to the point it is because I used food as a coping mechanism. Trying to get back in touch with eating foods I naturally crave and want and my hunger cues was something I lost years ago.
Many very fat people will have love/hate relationships with certain types of food and very much demonize a lot of foods. I read a book by Evelyn Tribole called Intuitive Eating, and I can genuinely say that that book is one of two books that will probably be what saved my life. It gave me the tools to start looking at food and how I eat VERY differently. It gave me the tools to learn to recognize hunger and satiety cues, and to learn to appreciate ALL foods.
Do I calorie count? Yes. I will for the rest of my life, most likely. My long-term goal weight is a long time away, so I may re-evaluate when I get there and see if staying there will be very difficult without calorie counting, but for the moment, my medical health needs to be dealt with so I calorie count, but I also very much take cues from intuitive eating. The concepts in it are really wonderful for someone like me, and helped me go from someone who was terrified of anything that wasn't a "healthy" food to actually being able to eat formerly off-limit foods in moderation and within my calorie goals.
There are definitely people who use the guise of intuitive eating to supposedly eat whatever they want all the time as much as they want. This goes against the actual notion of what intuitive eating is. If someone eats an entire cake, it's not intuitive eating, I can assure you. I've noticed a lot of references to overweight women on the blogosphere who hype up intuitive eating as an excuse to stay overweight and unhealthy. I don't mean, 20 or even 50 lbs overweight. I mean, women who are likely 100+lbs morbidly obese and endorse intuitive eating. They are not practicing intuitive eating and are lying to themselves if they think they are.
I understand that it's something that might be hard for some people to understand, but please realize that there are some really wonderful concepts in intuitive eating that have helped a lot of people. Just because it's not quite how you jive doesn't mean that everyone who tries to practice it are all lying to themselves or gain nothing from it.0 -
herrspoons wrote: »Intuitive eating is why most of us are here in the first place.
Bad idea.
Actually, I got to where I am because I was mindlessly eating.
0 -
Intuitive eating is the only way I have been able to maintain successfully. I got fat because I ate to suppress my emotions. There is a difference between mindless eating and intuitive eating. I made the choice I did because counting calories wasn't worth the mental struggle I was facing. Logging for me triggered my OCD so I found IE to be a great alternative for me. Everybody is different and will ahve to find what method works for them.0
-
herrspoons wrote: »LavenderLeaves wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »Intuitive eating is why most of us are here in the first place.
Bad idea.
Actually, I got to where I am because I was mindlessly eating.
And now you calorie count.
Okay? I don't see how that has anything to do with claiming intuitive eating is why people get fat.
0 -
Thinking that people naturally eat according to hunger and that our feelings of hunger are enormously meaningful in a physical sense, and determine whether we need to eat or not is a good way for someone who can't distinguish well between hunger based on needing to eat vs. hunger based on liking for a food or other prompt to get fat.
As I said above, I think a lot of the intuitive eating movement (or whatever) is tied up in ideas that dieting mentality is bad for people and causes many to develop issues about food that lead them to get fatter. (Laura Fraser's book Losing It discusses this some, in a way I actually agree with.) IMO, however, they take it too far by scapegoating society or the diet industry for why people on average don't seem to be good intuitive eaters. My view is that we (or a great many of us) just aren't natural intuitive eaters--nothing in our history would have required us to develop that skill, as it was much more advantageous for us to be able to eat when food was available and historically there have been numerous cultural limits on eating (kind of like sex, really). The situation we are in now in the US and some other places where food is abundant and easily available and there are few cultural limits on eating is the weirdness, every bit as much as the distorted connection of food with morality and such.
That said, I actually do think that many of the ideas behind intuitive eating are sensible or psychologically correct ones. But simply getting rid of dysfunctional ideas about food wouldn't cure obesity or prevent it, IMO, whereas instead returning on average to more cultural limits on eating probably would, and is related to why people were less fat in other recent times and in other countries.*
I think the way humans use food for far more than physical hunger is more fundamental than being taught to fear and love food by the diet industry or the like. I was pretty lucky in my relationship to food growing up and was never forced to eat when not hungry and never actually bothered dieting until my early 30s (after I'd gotten overweight--I was never overweight growing up and was never bothered enough about being thin to diet), and yet I can't intuitive eat either. (I can find some of the relevant ideas helpful, though.)
*Of course, even more fundamental is activity, activity, activity.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »You know what I've noticed with the two of them that varies from their father and I? Appetite, barring illness, for my husband and I, is something that remains at a fairly constant level day-to-day. We take in pretty much the same volume of food daily.
My kids don't. Some days they eat a lot more. Some days they eat a lot less, to the point that my inner Italian grandmother is biting her knuckles with worry. I've learned to ignore her. Now, with my son, sometimes this accounts for growth spurts. My daughter is an adult, though. She still exhibits this behavior. My son still does this between growth spurts too.
Okay, silly comparison, but this is fascinating to me in part because I was just talking about my two cats (one of whom is overweight and resists losing, one of whom regulates his weight perfectly) on another thread.
One thing we've noticed is that the normal weight one is not only more active, but he has hungry days and non-hungry days. The fat one obviously anticipates every meal (and if I get home earlier than usual he starts anticipating his dinner based on that, rather than the time it normally comes) and usually eats until he finishes his food, but the other (pictured) sometimes gets excited about eating and eats as much or more and sometimes couldn't care less--he definitely eats different amounts day to day.
(My fat one also seems to emotionally eat, although I realize this sounds like way too much anthropomorphism. But if his tail gets stepped on he'll run to the dish and start eating and many other examples of that sort.)0 -
I do both. They are not mutually exclusive. I try to eat intuitively and log everything I eat in my diary. Sometimes I go overboard so the diary helps me catch it and correct it with a lower calorie structured day. So why do I do intuitive eating if calorie counting alone works you ask? Because it's easier for me to eat until I'm content instead of stuffing myself just because I'm having a low appetite day and want to meet my calorie goal, or starving myself when I have a high appetite day just to stay under a certain goal. I can manage a hungry day every week or two if it comes to it and I need a "correction day", but having to stress about food at all times is a less appealing option in my case.0
-
I don't see a lot of scapegoating (though some) but we probably have read different books. I haven't read the Laura Fraser one. Here are some I've read, roughly in order of my preference:lemurcat12 wrote: »T... I think a lot of the intuitive eating movement (or whatever) is tied up in ideas that dieting mentality is bad for people and causes many to develop issues about food that lead them to get fatter. (Laura Fraser's book Losing It discusses this some, in a way I actually agree with.) IMO, however, they take it too far by scapegoating society or the diet industry for why people on average don't seem to be good intuitive eaters. ...
Jan Chozen-Bays
Brian Wansink
Marianne Williamson
Geneen Roth
Thich Nhat Nanh
Pavel Somov
Linda Bacon (prob. most 'scapegoating')
Josie Spinardi
Amusedmonkey- Me too.
"Incredibly bad idea"- I think anytime you can learn a skill that teaches you to manage something naturally without relying on an app, or with less reliance, it's a great idea to at least try. Who wouldn't love to go back to the days of knowing intuitively what our body needs to thrive and in what amount? Nearly all were born with the skill and lost it over time. Though many people prefer to claim total helplessness, as if they were born without any hunger/satiety cues at all. And worse, they even project that helplessness onto everyone else.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions