Doesn't Counting Calories Count?
Options
Replies
-
Health, inches, appearance, energy levels, joy and somewhere at the bottom of the list scale weight.
Personally, I would be ecstatic with 2 pounds in a week. Sounds like what you are doing is "right". We are all human so some people find very low carb much more effective than low carb. I am almost 4 months in and still learning what is sustainable and fun for me.0 -
jrloveless wrote: »I know every ounce lost is a gain, but it's just difficult to keep that in mind when I've been struggling for so long to lose it and then I see others saying they lost XX amount in such a short span. I'd like to be one of those, lol.
Weight loss can also be cyclical. I'll go 3-4 weeks without losing an ounce, then it will suddenly "fall off" over the course of a couple of days.
Put the scale away for now and go by inches and how you feel.0 -
@FIT_Goat fantastic video. Starts slow but 15 mins in it gets very interesting. Will next looking at your good to read tips:
"Good Calories Bad Calories" By Taubes
"Why We Get Fat" By Taubes
"The Calorie Myth" By Bailor
Thanks again. Really re-enforced what my doctor has been asking me to do.0 -
Here is another personal experiment about eating 5,800 calories on LCHF that supports what @FIT_Goat is saying. End result after eating 5,800 calories on LCHF=very little weight gain vs weight gain with same calories of carbs.
Thought since there were already so many great links about this topic, I'd add this one as well in the Anti-counting column.
http://myhealthlogics.com/what-happens-if-you-eat-5800-calories-daily-on-an-lchf-diet/
Just to balance out the counting, there is the pro-counting link.
http://www.acaloriecounter.com/blog/why-am-i-not-losing-weight/
I think repeating the same thing over and over doesn't merit as convincing an argument as actually doing a diet experiment. I'll leave it there on both to count or not to count.0 -
This is a pretty dumb argument for not counting calories.
Count carbs, but purposefully don't count calories because why? It's too tyrannical? It's not as effective?
No, you're being purposefully obtuse, avoiding the calorie count by using MFP is like closing your eyes to the truth.
Calories matter, whether or not you want to admit it, that's not the point. Carbs matter, and ignoring calories is just as blinding as ignoring carbs.
So manage both, it's not difficult, your life is not damaged by eating 2,000 calories instead of 3,000. You don't live less, you just live more strict, and discipline is a good thing.0 -
Who is this directed to? The OP states calories matter and if you feel more comfortable counting then count. Part of low carb though is that naturally your appetite is reduced causing one to eat less calories. Counting calories doesn't create weight loss, eating at a caloric deficit does. So whether you count or not, if you are eating less calories than your body needs you will lose weight. I didn't see anyone being "deliberately obtuse" on that matter.0
-
This is a pretty dumb argument for not counting calories.
Count carbs, but purposefully don't count calories because why? It's too tyrannical? It's not as effective?
No, you're being purposefully obtuse, avoiding the calorie count by using MFP is like closing your eyes to the truth.
Calories matter, whether or not you want to admit it, that's not the point. Carbs matter, and ignoring calories is just as blinding as ignoring carbs.
So manage both, it's not difficult, your life is not damaged by eating 2,000 calories instead of 3,000. You don't live less, you just live more strict, and discipline is a good thing.
You're missing the point of the original argument. It never says that calories don't matter. Not counting calories does not necessarily equate to eating 3,000 calories (or overeating in general), especially on a low carb, high fat diet. When you restrict carbs, your appetite nearly always levels out to what you need to modulate your weight (lose if you need it, gain if you need it), as long as you listen to and respect it. Study after study has found that when subjects are put on a low carb diet and told to eat what they want as long as they keep their carb intake to a set level, their total caloric intake goes down without them even trying.
In other words, there's a difference between saying "calories don't matter" and "calorie counting doesn't matter."
We actually had a challenge a few months back, where participants turned off the calorie part of their MFP trackers (I built a Greasemonkey script to do this). The end result was that very little actually changed. Most people continued to lose weight at their expected rate, and the ones who were in maintenance continued to maintain. Only a couple of people gained or maintained when they were looking to maintain or lose, respectively, and the ones that gained gained less than 2lb over the month. You can see the results of the challenge here, if you'd like -- http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10149266/ad-lib-april-final-may-1st/p1
Also, this particular thread is to highlight all the reasons for not calorie counting for use in the Launch Pad. There is an equivalent thread that highlights all the reasons for calorie counting, linked in the original post.1 -
This is a pretty dumb argument for not counting calories.
Count carbs, but purposefully don't count calories because why? It's too tyrannical? It's not as effective?
No, you're being purposefully obtuse, avoiding the calorie count by using MFP is like closing your eyes to the truth.
Calories matter, whether or not you want to admit it, that's not the point. Carbs matter, and ignoring calories is just as blinding as ignoring carbs.
So manage both, it's not difficult, your life is not damaged by eating 2,000 calories instead of 3,000. You don't live less, you just live more strict, and discipline is a good thing.
I don't think the idea is just to eat endlessly and ignore calories. But some choose not to specifically track it and take the path of learning to respond to hunger cues without obsessing about calories.
It's not a matter of closing ones eyes to the truth. It's focusing on a different way to know how much is the right amount. To learn to manage food and health for life without specifically tallying and thinking about the numbers.
I personally am more successful and comfortable counting, but I wouldn't suggest that anyone who does it differently is being obtuse or even living any less strict than myself. There is more than one way to have discipline in regards to food and health. Learning to distinguish between actual hunger or boredom or cravings are certainly part of a non calorie counting way of life. Many people are very successful with not counting and they aren't any less disciplined than you.0 -
Awe looking through that old thread makes me sad, there are so many I don't see around much anymore.0
-
auntstephie321 wrote: »Awe looking through that old thread makes me sad, there are so many I don't see around much anymore.
I agree @auntstephie321!0 -
Dragonwolf wrote: »jrloveless wrote: »I know every ounce lost is a gain, but it's just difficult to keep that in mind when I've been struggling for so long to lose it and then I see others saying they lost XX amount in such a short span. I'd like to be one of those, lol.
Weight loss can also be cyclical. I'll go 3-4 weeks without losing an ounce, then it will suddenly "fall off" over the course of a couple of days.
Put the scale away for now and go by inches and how you feel.
This is what's been happening to me since the first two weeks of keto; 2-4 weeks of not losing, maybe gaining a little, and then it seems to "fall off" over 2-5 days. I don't remember experiencing that on a regular basis with any other WOE I've followed. I'll take it though since it adds up over time.
(Although a couple of those times, I did a semi-egg fast or just a bit of a lower calorie day one or two days and then the weight started falling off again. I have some higher cal days in there, too, so it all evens out but a couple days that are closer to 1000 cals seems to get thing going again.) Granted, I've only been doing this for 2.5 months but I've already experienced that cycle 3 times. 0 -
Counting calories only counts if you want to add a layer of stress to your life. that's my experience, anyway.
I don't really count fat or protein either. I'm kinda lackadaisical with most things except carbs and fiber (goal 40-60 total carbs and 25 of that fiber). I'm here to control my blood sugar tho, over losing weight, so maybe that's why.1 -
This is a pretty dumb argument for not counting calories.
Count carbs, but purposefully don't count calories because why? It's too tyrannical? It's not as effective?
No, you're being purposefully obtuse, avoiding the calorie count by using MFP is like closing your eyes to the truth.
Calories matter, whether or not you want to admit it, that's not the point. Carbs matter, and ignoring calories is just as blinding as ignoring carbs.
So manage both, it's not difficult, your life is not damaged by eating 2,000 calories instead of 3,000. You don't live less, you just live more strict, and discipline is a good thing.
My short answer to this remains the same, "So count your calories, if that's how you feel."
It doesn't hurt me that you're counting. Like many things in this life, your choices aren't going to impact my results one way or the other. With that out of the way, I can tell you that I believe you're wrong. That's alright, too. You believe I am wrong. It's not the end of the world for people to disagree about things. I have many friends on my list who disagree with my opinion on this and other things.
I will never claim that not counting calories is more effective than counting them (where counting calories is defined as conscious restriction below an upper limit but not one above a lower limit). You can, to a degree, force your body to do things faster than it might on its own. Whether or not this is the healthiest choice is another matter. If you consciously count and restrict with a hard limit of 1800 calories a day, you're likely going to lose a little faster than someone (with an identical average TDEE) who averages around 1800 calories a day eating ad libitum. That's because your average intake will be equal or lower to 1800 calories/day. Is that desirable? Maybe. If the extra loss is coming from lean body mass or comes with a metabolic/hormonal shift to a negative state, I wouldn't consider it better. If your goal is the highest rate of change on the scale, no matter what the costs, then you obviously would prefer the restricted state.
I don't track. <period> So, I am not being obtuse by intentionally ignoring MFP's calorie counts. There is none. I don't gain weight unless I've been eating carbs (which I have, admittedly been doing the last couple months). When I don't eat carbs, I lose weight until a certain point and then I remain that weight. That's all without counting/tracking or paying attention to anything but the type of foods that go into my mouth.
I have tracked, while eating as much as I want without concern about the numbers, to get an idea. If I am over-weight, I tend to average around 2,000-2,200 calories a day. When I am at my stable weight, I tend to eat around 2,500-2,700 calories a day. All without actively trying. My body directs my hunger to the degree required by my fat stores.0 -
"Dragonwolf wrote: »"You're missing the point of the original argument. It never says that calories don't matter. Not counting calories does not necessarily equate to eating 3,000 calories (or overeating in general), especially on a low carb, high fat diet. When you restrict carbs, your appetite nearly always levels out to what you need to modulate your weight (lose if you need it, gain if you need it), as long as you listen to and respect it. Study after study has found that when subjects are put on a low carb diet and told to eat what they want as long as they keep their carb intake to a set level, their total caloric intake goes down without them even trying.
In other words, there's a difference between saying "calories don't matter" and "calorie counting doesn't matter."
Well today I learned something. Point well proved!0 -
Wow Fit goat way to stick with a thread!! kudos to you!!
Anyway I struggle with the calorie counting thing. I never know what to do, lol. I do log my food in MFP just to keep a record of what and how much I eat. Many days my calories on come to any where from 800 to 1200. I eat LC, whole foods and this is just where my calories end up, I try to avoid a lot of cheese and HWC and cream cheese because it just doesn't agree with my weight loss it seems.
Anyway no point to my post just thought I would add my thoughts
1 -
teresadutton wrote: »Wow Fit goat way to stick with a thread!! kudos to you!!
Well, this is one thing I really feel strongly believe in. The vast majority of original low carb plans do not include calorie restriction as a part of their plan. I meant for this to grow into a mega-thread of information, and there is a lot in here, but got side-tracked over time.
I did start a thread for the counter-point. As people have a right to disagree with me. There's a link to that one in the original post.0 -
I like to enter what I eat. Idea being what gets measured can be managed. I look to see if there is even a vague link between measurable variables on the input side compared to weight loss, measurement reduction or constipation. Recently I will have to say no relationship so there is something else affecting my weight and my guess is stress.0
-
CICO worked for me in the short term, but ultimately led to the all too familiar roller coaster. I hate having to restrict food. That kind of life only lasts for so long. I'm going to up my "calorie goal" to 1,800 a day, which is supposed to be maintenance for me right now, and have faith that low carb will work. Thank you so much for the inspiration. Let's see how it goes!0
-
slimzandra wrote: »Here is another personal experiment about eating 5,800 calories on LCHF that supports what @FIT_Goat is saying. End result after eating 5,800 calories on LCHF=very little weight gain vs weight gain with same calories of carbs.
Thought since there were already so many great links about this topic, I'd add this one as well in the Anti-counting column.
http://myhealthlogics.com/what-happens-if-you-eat-5800-calories-daily-on-an-lchf-diet/
Just to balance out the counting, there is the pro-counting link.
http://www.acaloriecounter.com/blog/why-am-i-not-losing-weight/
I think repeating the same thing over and over doesn't merit as convincing an argument as actually doing a diet experiment. I'll leave it there on both to count or not to count.
Thanks for the link 5800 calorie link. While I do not do that many the summary fits my experience of maintaining at 200 for the past year.
Summary
"There is a difference between overeating and overeating.
When eating bad carbohydrates it’s easy to gain weight quickly. You’ll get plenty of the fat-storing hormone insulin in your blood.
It’s generally hard to gain weight on an LCHF diet. It’s even difficult to eat too much food, as you then usually have to eat more than you want. Even if you force down large amounts of LCHF-food, against your will, the result is usually as it was for Feltham. It’s a constant struggle and weight gain will likely be modest.
Overweight people eating as much as they want on an LCHF diet will typically lose weight."2 -
Yeah. I am trying really hard to not say, "I told you so" to someone on a keto chat that I participate in. For weeks, he had told me that he needed to count calories to lose. He told me that he would gain, if he didn't count. Earlier this week, he decided to go on a bulk (primarily wants to put on muscle) while remaining in keto.
Half of his messages since then have been about how hard it is to eat all these calories, how he isn't hungry but he needs to eat, and how he's struggling to stay above his TDEE in order to put on weight.
It only sounds easy and fun to gain weight on low-carb. It's actually pretty hard unless you're underweight.1
