"Clean" eating vs. Moderation- what works for you?
Replies
-
People who like to label themselves as "clean" eaters are essentially the same as the IIFYMers. However, the label makes them feel so much better about themselves and a lot of times is used to make themselves feel superior to others.
This is such absolute *kitten*.
That entitlement goes both ways. Search for how many threads talking about giving something up have a reply along the lines of "lol" or "no" on the first page.0 -
I eat clean most of the time, but in the beginning I had to do it ALL the time until my body learned how to deal with not eating processed overly sweet/savory/salty foods. I am down 40 pounds and I only recently have learned to start adding small treats back into my day. I don't usually have a lot of calories left over, but if I do from some awesome exercise then I will eat ONE piece of quality dark chocolate and/or some red wine. I just feel like clean foods help me stay full longer and offer me more nutrition. When you only have so many calories to work with, that beats out eating less-clean foods. The more processed it is the ickier and more bloated I feel if I have too much so there is another reason to stay in small amounts (if not away completely). However if I can't have a homemade gingerbread cookie every once and a while - that is sad.
0 -
LOLTrying to think of the most non-offensive way to put this so pre-apologies if I offend, truly not meaning to do so.
From my time on MFP I have personally noticed:
Those who solely preach just the moderation aspect, like the "I eat fast food 3 times a week but under my caloric yada yada..." seem to be in reasonably ok shape . They are usually healthy, good head on their shoulders and so on. It seems a good mix of people who were once overweight and fought their way back and some that have just been actively maintaining for years and so on. Good people, great advice, great support for people actively trying to lose weight but body type is usually 'meh.
I just haven't met many in this camp with the body type or competition accomplishments that really impress or inspire me.
I have found the people that I do really look up to and reach out for advice and instruction both preach moderation but put most of their emphasis on clean eating. Not so much that they have to get organic everything but more in terms of packing as much nutritional value as possible into every single calorie they digest. Like, they make their pizza at home instead of buying papa john's. They don't eat fast food except on very rare occasions and so on. They plain out do not eat food designed to have an extended shelf life. It is either fresh or they do not consume it (with the exception of workout supplements.)
So, yeah, in short, it's the clean eaters (people who do not consume designer food is my definition) that have always impressed me and have the results I want. I am striving to be more like them and find that I overall feel better when I do.
Just my 2 cents, doesn't mean much but there it is.
ETA: Noticed you changed your photo real quick like. LOL0 -
Trying to think of the most non-offensive way to put this so pre-apologies if I offend, truly not meaning to do so.
From my time on MFP I have personally noticed:
Those who solely preach just the moderation aspect, like the "I eat fast food 3 times a week but under my caloric yada yada..." seem to be in reasonably ok shape. They are usually healthy, good head on their shoulders and so on. It seems a good mix of people who were once overweight and fought their way back and some that have just been actively maintaining for years and so on. Good people, great advice, great support for people actively trying to lose weight but body type is usually 'meh.
I just haven't met many in this camp with the body type or competition accomplishments that really impress or inspire me.
I have found the people that I do really look up to and reach out for advice and instruction both preach moderation but put most of their emphasis on clean eating. Not so much that they have to get organic everything but more in terms of packing as much nutritional value as possible into every single calorie they digest. Like, they make their pizza at home instead of buying papa john's. They don't eat fast food except on very rare occasions and so on. They plain out do not eat food designed to have an extended shelf life. It is either fresh or they do not consume it (with the exception of workout supplements.)
So, yeah, in short, it's the clean eaters (people who do not consume designer food is my definition) that have always impressed me and have the results I want. I am striving to be more like them and find that I overall feel better when I do.
Just my 2 cents, doesn't mean much but there it is.
LOL ..
OK - so your experience invalidates everyone elses?
I have plenty of people on my friends list that eat some fast food, but they hit their macros/micors/calorie goal and are absolutely shredded...
conversely - the ones that are always complaining about restricting food seem to be in the worst shape and binge the most... < see what I did there...0 -
LoupGarouTFTs wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Yep, they read some article about certain foods causing inflammation and BAM, they're bloated after eating said food. And omg they feel soooo much better since cutting it out. Clearly that particular food is the root of all evil.
I also have to wonder about the magical food that doesn't bother them when it's organic, even though the store-bought, commercial version will "tear up" their insides. Come on, people. It's an egg or an apple or a cut of beef. A "yard egg" (as we call them around here) will taste and digest the same way as an egg from the grocery store or from Walmart. I've had both on my counter and in my food at the same time and cannot tell the difference except for color and firmness of the white as it comes out of the shell.
Maybe for you, but they definitely are not the same. I can tell when there is egg in food I've eaten because of how my body reacts. But there are a bunch of yard eggs I can't have either. I've actually only found 2 local sources of eggs that I can eat without a problem (one is non-gmo fed, the other is fed regular layer feed). I don't know why, but I do know that they're not the same.0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
Arf0 -
I eat clean most of the time, but in the beginning I had to do it ALL the time until my body learned how to deal with not eating processed overly sweet/savory/salty foods. I am down 40 pounds and I only recently have learned to start adding small treats back into my day. I don't usually have a lot of calories left over, but if I do from some awesome exercise then I will eat ONE piece of quality dark chocolate and/or some red wine. I just feel like clean foods help me stay full longer and offer me more nutrition. When you only have so many calories to work with, that beats out eating less-clean foods. The more processed it is the ickier and more bloated I feel if I have too much so there is another reason to stay in small amounts (if not away completely). However if I can't have a homemade gingerbread cookie every once and a while - that is sad.
lol there is definitely room for pizza, but I would rather make my own English Muffin pizzas instead
0 -
Trying to think of the most non-offensive way to put this so pre-apologies if I offend, truly not meaning to do so.
From my time on MFP I have personally noticed:
Those who solely preach just the moderation aspect, like the "I eat fast food 3 times a week but under my caloric yada yada..." seem to be in reasonably ok shape. They are usually healthy, good head on their shoulders and so on. It seems a good mix of people who were once overweight and fought their way back and some that have just been actively maintaining for years and so on. Good people, great advice, great support for people actively trying to lose weight but body type is usually 'meh.
I just haven't met many in this camp with the body type or competition accomplishments that really impress or inspire me.
I have found the people that I do really look up to and reach out for advice and instruction both preach moderation but put most of their emphasis on clean eating. Not so much that they have to get organic everything but more in terms of packing as much nutritional value as possible into every single calorie they digest. Like, they make their pizza at home instead of buying papa john's. They don't eat fast food except on very rare occasions and so on. They plain out do not eat food designed to have an extended shelf life. It is either fresh or they do not consume it (with the exception of workout supplements.)
So, yeah, in short, it's the clean eaters (people who do not consume designer food is my definition) that have always impressed me and have the results I want. I am striving to be more like them and find that I overall feel better when I do.
Just my 2 cents, doesn't mean much but there it is.
Basically what I got from this is that preservatives somehow inhibit muscle gainz.
K.0 -
I eat clean most of the time, but in the beginning I had to do it ALL the time until my body learned how to deal with not eating processed overly sweet/savory/salty foods. I am down 40 pounds and I only recently have learned to start adding small treats back into my day. I don't usually have a lot of calories left over, but if I do from some awesome exercise then I will eat ONE piece of quality dark chocolate and/or some red wine. I just feel like clean foods help me stay full longer and offer me more nutrition. When you only have so many calories to work with, that beats out eating less-clean foods. The more processed it is the ickier and more bloated I feel if I have too much so there is another reason to stay in small amounts (if not away completely). However if I can't have a homemade gingerbread cookie every once and a while - that is sad.
lol there is definitely room for pizza, but I would rather make my own English Muffin pizzas instead
I am just messing around..
and I really wanted to use that Jennifer Lawerence gif....
0 -
Trying to think of the most non-offensive way to put this so pre-apologies if I offend, truly not meaning to do so.
From my time on MFP I have personally noticed:
Those who solely preach just the moderation aspect, like the "I eat fast food 3 times a week but under my caloric yada yada..." seem to be in reasonably ok shape. They are usually healthy, good head on their shoulders and so on. It seems a good mix of people who were once overweight and fought their way back and some that have just been actively maintaining for years and so on. Good people, great advice, great support for people actively trying to lose weight but body type is usually 'meh.
I just haven't met many in this camp with the body type or competition accomplishments that really impress or inspire me.
I have found the people that I do really look up to and reach out for advice and instruction both preach moderation but put most of their emphasis on clean eating. Not so much that they have to get organic everything but more in terms of packing as much nutritional value as possible into every single calorie they digest. Like, they make their pizza at home instead of buying papa john's. They don't eat fast food except on very rare occasions and so on. They plain out do not eat food designed to have an extended shelf life. It is either fresh or they do not consume it (with the exception of workout supplements.)
So, yeah, in short, it's the clean eaters (people who do not consume designer food is my definition) that have always impressed me and have the results I want. I am striving to be more like them and find that I overall feel better when I do.
Just my 2 cents, doesn't mean much but there it is.
0 -
Trying to think of the most non-offensive way to put this so pre-apologies if I offend, truly not meaning to do so.
From my time on MFP I have personally noticed:
Those who solely preach just the moderation aspect, like the "I eat fast food 3 times a week but under my caloric yada yada..." seem to be in reasonably ok shape. They are usually healthy, good head on their shoulders and so on. It seems a good mix of people who were once overweight and fought their way back and some that have just been actively maintaining for years and so on. Good people, great advice, great support for people actively trying to lose weight but body type is usually 'meh.
I just haven't met many in this camp with the body type or competition accomplishments that really impress or inspire me.
I have found the people that I do really look up to and reach out for advice and instruction both preach moderation but put most of their emphasis on clean eating. Not so much that they have to get organic everything but more in terms of packing as much nutritional value as possible into every single calorie they digest. Like, they make their pizza at home instead of buying papa john's. They don't eat fast food except on very rare occasions and so on. They plain out do not eat food designed to have an extended shelf life. It is either fresh or they do not consume it (with the exception of workout supplements.)
So, yeah, in short, it's the clean eaters (people who do not consume designer food is my definition) that have always impressed me and have the results I want. I am striving to be more like them and find that I overall feel better when I do.
Just my 2 cents, doesn't mean much but there it is.
C'est la vie. I personally find competitive body builders yucky to look at. I don't think I've seen any of them impress me with their skillz tending goats or running in dog agility, which are the things that are important to me.
Just because my goals differ from yours or my standards of dietary success are different from yours, neither my standards nor your standards are better than the other.0 -
Trying to think of the most non-offensive way to put this so pre-apologies if I offend, truly not meaning to do so.
From my time on MFP I have personally noticed:
Those who solely preach just the moderation aspect, like the "I eat fast food 3 times a week but under my caloric yada yada..." seem to be in reasonably ok shape. They are usually healthy, good head on their shoulders and so on. It seems a good mix of people who were once overweight and fought their way back and some that have just been actively maintaining for years and so on. Good people, great advice, great support for people actively trying to lose weight but body type is usually 'meh.
I just haven't met many in this camp with the body type or competition accomplishments that really impress or inspire me.
I have found the people that I do really look up to and reach out for advice and instruction both preach moderation but put most of their emphasis on clean eating. Not so much that they have to get organic everything but more in terms of packing as much nutritional value as possible into every single calorie they digest. Like, they make their pizza at home instead of buying papa john's. They don't eat fast food except on very rare occasions and so on. They plain out do not eat food designed to have an extended shelf life. It is either fresh or they do not consume it (with the exception of workout supplements.)
So, yeah, in short, it's the clean eaters (people who do not consume designer food is my definition) that have always impressed me and have the results I want. I am striving to be more like them and find that I overall feel better when I do.
Just my 2 cents, doesn't mean much but there it is.
What even is designer food anyway?
0 -
Moderation. Though if I was only eating 1200 calories, I wouldn't choose cereal to eat. It doesn't fill me up long enough. I do occasionally eat it now but I'm eating 1600-1800 calories, and sometimes I'm sorry I ate the cereal because later in the day it is harder to fit in other things I would rather have. And it also doesn't have enough protein for me to meet my protein goal.0
-
LOL ..
OK - so your experience invalidates everyone elses?
I have plenty of people on my friends list that eat some fast food, but they hit their macros/micors/calorie goal and are absolutely shredded...
conversely - the ones that are always complaining about restricting food seem to be in the worst shape and binge the most... < see what I did there...
Doesn't invalidate anything. Just said it was my personal experience, if yours is different than so be it. It's all subjective on a personal level, doesn't mean ones view is right while the others is wrong when you are talking about personal observations.
0 -
People who like to label themselves as "clean" eaters are essentially the same as the IIFYMers. However, the label makes them feel so much better about themselves and a lot of times is used to make themselves feel superior to others.
This is such absolute *kitten*.
That entitlement goes both ways. Search for how many threads talking about giving something up have a reply along the lines of "lol" or "no" on the first page.
Hardly any. Most of them ask why. Perfectly reasonable question given the fact that a lot of people are n00b's, like the OP, who aren't quite satisfied with their intake and think they HAVE to give something up. Getting to the bottom of their reasoning enables the people asking to provide them with targeted advice.
Speaking for myself, I have have experience to share with giving things up, doing without, and with doing moderation. I ask why a lot. I'm interested in helping others succeed in their goals. I suspect most of the other posters asking "why?" are as well. Informing the misinformed is a good thing.
I've never seen so much push-back against correcting wrong assumptions.
0 -
OP...my advice:
Eat a well rounded and balanced diet that is rich in whole food nutrition...eat lots of veg...some fruit..plenty of lean proteins, healthy fats, and some whole grains. On occasion, indulge in something that maybe does not fit this bill if you wish...just make sure your moderation is truly moderation.
I try to do the above and I try to eat a really nutritious diet most of the time and I'm generally pretty good about moderating my "treats"...but sometimes I also catch myself slipping and moderation is no longer moderation and I have to reel it back in. As someone who does not logged (except I did log today and might log for a few weeks here to get into my cut) it is a lot easier to lose weight and maintain weight and hit on calorie goals when you're eating primarily whole foods...the more of the other stuff that creeps into your diet, the harder it is IMO. But there's no way I'm never going to eat pizza or have some cake or ice cream or never have a beer again...just not realistic.
0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
Basically what I got from this is that preservatives somehow inhibit muscle gainz.
K.
Your reading comprehension and sarcastic ability are both D students.
0 -
One step at a time - looking to make more friends and share lots of motivation and tips with you all - the more friends the happier!0
-
The definitions of eating clean change depending on what camp is presenting it (and from person to person), but eating clean as far as I am concerned means eating less processed foods, and eating more whole foods. So, for me, reducing processed foods with artificial sweeteners, artificial colors/flavours, refined grains and added sugars, and preparing my own foods would be a way of eating "cleaner".
I don't eat clean, and don't think eating completely clean would be sustainable for me. That being said, I have "cleaned up" my diet considerably to help me lose weight. I have diabetes. I need to eat proteins with carbs to avoid blood glucose spikes. Before I started using MFP and tracking protein, I could easily eat less than 30 grams of protein a day. I needed to radically increase both my protein and fiber intake in order to feel full with less calories and successfully lose weight. The processed foods I was eating had lots of carbs and fats, and little protein or fiber. Eating "clean" (whole foods, prepared at home), consiously chosing to include more protein, and including more "super foods" (chia seeds, spinach) makes it easier for me to meet my macro targets, especially fiber.
I have a hard time eating sugary treats moderately. One is too many, and 200 is never enough.... For the first 7 months of my diet, I found I was better off having no sugary treats. Otherwise I would binge, and go over my calories. Now I've gone from morbidly obese to overweight (and hope to be a healthy BMI by early April), I want my weight loss to slow (I was losing 3-4/lbs a week until this month), so I am increasing my calorie intake. I have decided to try to incorporate sugary treats in my diet to do so, and have successfully slowed my weight loss (partially due to topping up my glycogen stores). This is trickly, though, as the treats still trigger binges. It's a real tight-rope walk to figure out how to eat them and have it not be a disaster. I try to have a treat right before a run. The exercise helps quell the subsequent cravings.
I know I'm going on and on here. What I'm trying to say, is, for me, clean eating is a paradigm that assists with weight loss and healthier eating, not a blugeon to hit other people with (it's all about me ). Reducing added sugars helped me quell cravings and binges that would derail my diet. Reducing added sugars helped me lose a lot of weight fairly quickly. So, now I've lost 123 lbs in 9 months (20 before MFP), I'm looking at researching what it would mean to eat moderately, which would still mean eating less-processed, whole foods prepared at home most of the time. When I figure it out, I'll be ready for when I need to increase my calorie intake for maintenance.
And another note - Professor Mark Haub ate more than twinkies during his diet. While 66% of his diet was processed foods (Twinkies, Little Debbie Snacks, Doritos, sugary cereals and Oreos), he also had protein shakes, took multivitamins, and ensured he was getting fiber from beans and other vegetables. He ate healthy foods in front of his children so he wouldn't set a bad example . Sadly, if I had no concerns for my healthy, I would eat only processed foods like twinkies and frozen cookie dough all the time..... 0 -
Personally, moderation works best for me. In my opinion and just mine, life is way too short to let go of everything I enjoy. But for most part, I rather have vegetables and lean proteins because it fills me up better and keeps me satisfied.
But I enjoy ice cream, vodka, pasta..... So, I eat it...
0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
Basically what I got from this is that preservatives somehow inhibit muscle gainz.
K.
Your reading comprehension and sarcastic ability are both D students.
Granted I skimmed what you wrote because that has not been my experience at all (there are some hard bodied people on here who don't eat "clean" by your definition), but you did say this:They don't eat fast food except on very rare occasions and so on. They plain out do not eat food designed to have an extended shelf life. It is either fresh or they do not consume it (with the exception of workout supplements.)
Foods have shelf lives because of preservatives. You implied that these would somehow inhibit someone's progress. Which is false.0 -
Thanks to everyone for sharing so much awesome insight! I am re-evaluating the way I have been looking at things. I have basically reached a point where I can barely enjoy any of the foods I love because I feel so much guilt surrounding the few times I have allowed myself to indulge. There are very few foods in my pantry that I inherently enjoy. Everything I buy is based on nutrition/macros/ingredients. And as I said before, it's getting me nowhere in terms of my goals. I think some readjusting of my philosophy is in order.
I know it can be tough sometimes finding what works for you. I used to feel like I had to completely eliminate some of the "junk food" and when I'd snack on some cookies, I'd feel SO guilty! It took reading a thread like this one to get me to reevaluate my relationship with food. Personally, I've found a balance in making room for treats and look forward to said treats without guilt.
As one poster said, everything in moderation....including moderation 0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »I eat a whole lot of whole foods...but I'm not scared of white carbs (note that potatoes are whole foods) and I'm not afraid of some pizza now and then or some ice cream either.
You can get awesome nutrition and eat very healthfully and still have indulgences.
"Indulgences" is a great word. Yes, by all means.0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Trying to think of the most non-offensive way to put this so pre-apologies if I offend, truly not meaning to do so.
From my time on MFP I have personally noticed:
Those who solely preach just the moderation aspect, like the "I eat fast food 3 times a week but under my caloric yada yada..." seem to be in reasonably ok shape. They are usually healthy, good head on their shoulders and so on. It seems a good mix of people who were once overweight and fought their way back and some that have just been actively maintaining for years and so on. Good people, great advice, great support for people actively trying to lose weight but body type is usually 'meh.
I just haven't met many in this camp with the body type or competition accomplishments that really impress or inspire me.
I have found the people that I do really look up to and reach out for advice and instruction both preach moderation but put most of their emphasis on clean eating. Not so much that they have to get organic everything but more in terms of packing as much nutritional value as possible into every single calorie they digest. Like, they make their pizza at home instead of buying papa john's. They don't eat fast food except on very rare occasions and so on. They plain out do not eat food designed to have an extended shelf life. It is either fresh or they do not consume it (with the exception of workout supplements.)
So, yeah, in short, it's the clean eaters (people who do not consume designer food is my definition) that have always impressed me and have the results I want. I am striving to be more like them and find that I overall feel better when I do.
Just my 2 cents, doesn't mean much but there it is.
What even is designer food anyway?
Oh and these....
(edited for size)0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Foods have shelf lives because of preservatives. You implied that these would somehow inhibit someone's progress. Which is false.
Actually, what you said is this:
"Basically what I got from this is that preservatives somehow inhibit muscle gainz.
I never implied preservatives would inhibit "gainz" or progress.
Look, I appreciate that you are now seemingly trying to have a rational conversation about the content in my post but we both know it is just a poor attempt to construct a facade around that lame attempt for you to be edgy and funny. I think you need less internet time today.
0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Foods have shelf lives because of preservatives. You implied that these would somehow inhibit someone's progress. Which is false.
Actually, what you said is this:
"Basically what I got from this is that preservatives somehow inhibit muscle gainz.
I never implied preservatives would inhibit "gainz" or progress.
Look, I appreciate that you are now seemingly trying to have a rational conversation about the content in my post but we both know it is just a poor attempt to construct a facade around that lame attempt for you to be edgy and funny. I think you need less internet time today.
If you had read the rest of this thread, and the thousands of other threads debating this exact topic, you would see that this is a discussion that has been done to death, and plenty of people on here have proved with science and their own progress that eating "clean" by your definition is not totally necessary for becoming lean or losing fat. Pardon my sarcasm, but the horse was dead when you came in and you didn't change the laws of physics by making your statements.
Maybe for getting down to 4-8% bf, as mentioned by herrspoons, it would make a difference to pay more attention to the quality of your food, but for the average person and even most athletes who are not judged on the appearance of their bodies, it is absolutely not necessary.
Saying that people who eat food that has a shelf life doesn't have your "ideal" body does not somehow prove that eating clean is necessary for health and fat loss, which is what is being discussed in this thread.0 -
tedboosalis7 wrote: »DebHutton55 wrote: »Eat the right carbs, proteins and fats. Watch the quantity. Move! There's the key to healthy living and an outcome in your later years that has you with your memory and the ability to move around with ease. If you are just eating for your weight, wise up. It's taken me most of my life to figure that out.
Someone said, sugar is nothing unless you have a medical condition. So wrong! Read, read, read. What all this stuff is doing to your brain, is more important than what it is doing to your butt.
Of course, eat an occasional bad but if you start eating correctly, you don't have that desire anymore.
This is awesome. I love this statement: "What all this stuff is doing to your brain, is more important than what it is doing to your butt." Very well put. ♥
Some people tolerate a high carb diet better than others, certainly I am not in the lot of that kind of tolerance. I was borderline Type II and have an auto-immune disorder and had to change my diet completely - I lost the weight, gained muscle and strength, lost many of the symptoms of the auto-immune disorder (not all), and now awaiting my physical this week to check my blood work one year after I made this change.
I can say I have cheated maybe 5 times in one year - and during that time, it was morsels - I still eat chocolate but it has to be pure dark chocolate. I know what is good because I was a chocolatier at one time - successfully owned a business and sold it 5 years ago. I know what goes into confections and there's no way I would eat any of them now unless its pure dark chocolate. Chocolate has fiber - that makes it palatable to eat.
There's a real difference calorie for calorie between different foods - meat <> broccoli, for example. Both provide specific nutrients (or densities of nutrients) the other doesn't have. Further, to achieve the caloric equivalent of meat, it takes a hellalot of broccoli. Say an 8oz hamburger or salmon or tenderloin - take those three calorically and you would need to eat ALOT of broccoli - in fact, all three meats contain differences in nutrition unto themselves.
I do believe CICO matters but it matters within the context of your macros. For instance, not all fiber is digestible (insoluble v. soluble). Not all soluble fiber is digestible - those calories can essentially be thrown out - fiber is used by the body in a much different way than the "net" carb of that food. You can't store fiber (or most of it) because it's not made to be stored. It's made to be moved through the body and aids in the elimination process.
Protein requires protein calories to process it - then some protein is used for muscle synthesis and hypertrophy:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11255140
"Resistance exercise improves muscle protein balance, but, in the absence of food intake, the balance remains negative (i.e., catabolic)."
So one can "move around" but if one doesn't eat the required macro, one creates a catabolic state that in essence wipes out the whole concept of "moving around"!
The remaining protein is then "storable." So figure 33% of your protein calories are convertible to fat.
I don't think there's a magic number when it comes to weight loss - for instance, many purport that eating 1500 calories would garner weight loss - but 1500 calories of what - does that figure exercise into it, and is that enough to sustain muscles over the long-term? Does that raise the metabolic set point to where you need to eat even less once your metabolism slows to 1500?
That's the problem with looking at things from just the CICO perspective. I do agree (and often get mislabeled on here) that CICO matters, but it matters within the perspective of your macros, the kinds of foods you are eating, the processing (or lack thereof) of that food, and your body's metabolic resistance (or lack thereof) to certain macros and foods.
Agree, agree, agree! I am working at losing weight and at the same time doing resistance training and cardio. It is so important for me to eat the right foods so that the weight I do lose is not coming from muscle and so that I keep my metabolism up all day long. The whole idea of clean food eating is to provide you with the best nutrients for your body no matter what your goals are!0 -
Your training will ensure you do not lose muscle more so then your diet...tedboosalis7 wrote: »DebHutton55 wrote: »Eat the right carbs, proteins and fats. Watch the quantity. Move! There's the key to healthy living and an outcome in your later years that has you with your memory and the ability to move around with ease. If you are just eating for your weight, wise up. It's taken me most of my life to figure that out.
Someone said, sugar is nothing unless you have a medical condition. So wrong! Read, read, read. What all this stuff is doing to your brain, is more important than what it is doing to your butt.
Of course, eat an occasional bad but if you start eating correctly, you don't have that desire anymore.
This is awesome. I love this statement: "What all this stuff is doing to your brain, is more important than what it is doing to your butt." Very well put. ♥
Some people tolerate a high carb diet better than others, certainly I am not in the lot of that kind of tolerance. I was borderline Type II and have an auto-immune disorder and had to change my diet completely - I lost the weight, gained muscle and strength, lost many of the symptoms of the auto-immune disorder (not all), and now awaiting my physical this week to check my blood work one year after I made this change.
I can say I have cheated maybe 5 times in one year - and during that time, it was morsels - I still eat chocolate but it has to be pure dark chocolate. I know what is good because I was a chocolatier at one time - successfully owned a business and sold it 5 years ago. I know what goes into confections and there's no way I would eat any of them now unless its pure dark chocolate. Chocolate has fiber - that makes it palatable to eat.
There's a real difference calorie for calorie between different foods - meat <> broccoli, for example. Both provide specific nutrients (or densities of nutrients) the other doesn't have. Further, to achieve the caloric equivalent of meat, it takes a hellalot of broccoli. Say an 8oz hamburger or salmon or tenderloin - take those three calorically and you would need to eat ALOT of broccoli - in fact, all three meats contain differences in nutrition unto themselves.
I do believe CICO matters but it matters within the context of your macros. For instance, not all fiber is digestible (insoluble v. soluble). Not all soluble fiber is digestible - those calories can essentially be thrown out - fiber is used by the body in a much different way than the "net" carb of that food. You can't store fiber (or most of it) because it's not made to be stored. It's made to be moved through the body and aids in the elimination process.
Protein requires protein calories to process it - then some protein is used for muscle synthesis and hypertrophy:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11255140
"Resistance exercise improves muscle protein balance, but, in the absence of food intake, the balance remains negative (i.e., catabolic)."
So one can "move around" but if one doesn't eat the required macro, one creates a catabolic state that in essence wipes out the whole concept of "moving around"!
The remaining protein is then "storable." So figure 33% of your protein calories are convertible to fat.
I don't think there's a magic number when it comes to weight loss - for instance, many purport that eating 1500 calories would garner weight loss - but 1500 calories of what - does that figure exercise into it, and is that enough to sustain muscles over the long-term? Does that raise the metabolic set point to where you need to eat even less once your metabolism slows to 1500?
That's the problem with looking at things from just the CICO perspective. I do agree (and often get mislabeled on here) that CICO matters, but it matters within the perspective of your macros, the kinds of foods you are eating, the processing (or lack thereof) of that food, and your body's metabolic resistance (or lack thereof) to certain macros and foods.
Agree, agree, agree! I am working at losing weight and at the same time doing resistance training and cardio. It is so important for me to eat the right foods so that the weight I do lose is not coming from muscle and so that I keep my metabolism up all day long. The whole idea of clean food eating is to provide you with the best nutrients for your body no matter what your goals are!
0 -
tedboosalis7 wrote: »DebHutton55 wrote: »Eat the right carbs, proteins and fats. Watch the quantity. Move! There's the key to healthy living and an outcome in your later years that has you with your memory and the ability to move around with ease. If you are just eating for your weight, wise up. It's taken me most of my life to figure that out.
Someone said, sugar is nothing unless you have a medical condition. So wrong! Read, read, read. What all this stuff is doing to your brain, is more important than what it is doing to your butt.
Of course, eat an occasional bad but if you start eating correctly, you don't have that desire anymore.
This is awesome. I love this statement: "What all this stuff is doing to your brain, is more important than what it is doing to your butt." Very well put. ♥
Some people tolerate a high carb diet better than others, certainly I am not in the lot of that kind of tolerance. I was borderline Type II and have an auto-immune disorder and had to change my diet completely - I lost the weight, gained muscle and strength, lost many of the symptoms of the auto-immune disorder (not all), and now awaiting my physical this week to check my blood work one year after I made this change.
I can say I have cheated maybe 5 times in one year - and during that time, it was morsels - I still eat chocolate but it has to be pure dark chocolate. I know what is good because I was a chocolatier at one time - successfully owned a business and sold it 5 years ago. I know what goes into confections and there's no way I would eat any of them now unless its pure dark chocolate. Chocolate has fiber - that makes it palatable to eat.
There's a real difference calorie for calorie between different foods - meat <> broccoli, for example. Both provide specific nutrients (or densities of nutrients) the other doesn't have. Further, to achieve the caloric equivalent of meat, it takes a hellalot of broccoli. Say an 8oz hamburger or salmon or tenderloin - take those three calorically and you would need to eat ALOT of broccoli - in fact, all three meats contain differences in nutrition unto themselves.
I do believe CICO matters but it matters within the context of your macros. For instance, not all fiber is digestible (insoluble v. soluble). Not all soluble fiber is digestible - those calories can essentially be thrown out - fiber is used by the body in a much different way than the "net" carb of that food. You can't store fiber (or most of it) because it's not made to be stored. It's made to be moved through the body and aids in the elimination process.
Protein requires protein calories to process it - then some protein is used for muscle synthesis and hypertrophy:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11255140
"Resistance exercise improves muscle protein balance, but, in the absence of food intake, the balance remains negative (i.e., catabolic)."
So one can "move around" but if one doesn't eat the required macro, one creates a catabolic state that in essence wipes out the whole concept of "moving around"!
The remaining protein is then "storable." So figure 33% of your protein calories are convertible to fat.
I don't think there's a magic number when it comes to weight loss - for instance, many purport that eating 1500 calories would garner weight loss - but 1500 calories of what - does that figure exercise into it, and is that enough to sustain muscles over the long-term? Does that raise the metabolic set point to where you need to eat even less once your metabolism slows to 1500?
That's the problem with looking at things from just the CICO perspective. I do agree (and often get mislabeled on here) that CICO matters, but it matters within the perspective of your macros, the kinds of foods you are eating, the processing (or lack thereof) of that food, and your body's metabolic resistance (or lack thereof) to certain macros and foods.
Agree, agree, agree! I am working at losing weight and at the same time doing resistance training and cardio. It is so important for me to eat the right foods so that the weight I do lose is not coming from muscle and so that I keep my metabolism up all day long. The whole idea of clean food eating is to provide you with the best nutrients for your body no matter what your goals are!
That is the goal of moderation as well. Along with not having to deprive yourself of the things you love. Both work IMO. Whichever works better is up to the individual...
0 -
tedboosalis7 wrote: »DebHutton55 wrote: »Eat the right carbs, proteins and fats. Watch the quantity. Move! There's the key to healthy living and an outcome in your later years that has you with your memory and the ability to move around with ease. If you are just eating for your weight, wise up. It's taken me most of my life to figure that out.
Someone said, sugar is nothing unless you have a medical condition. So wrong! Read, read, read. What all this stuff is doing to your brain, is more important than what it is doing to your butt.
Of course, eat an occasional bad but if you start eating correctly, you don't have that desire anymore.
This is awesome. I love this statement: "What all this stuff is doing to your brain, is more important than what it is doing to your butt." Very well put. ♥
Some people tolerate a high carb diet better than others, certainly I am not in the lot of that kind of tolerance. I was borderline Type II and have an auto-immune disorder and had to change my diet completely - I lost the weight, gained muscle and strength, lost many of the symptoms of the auto-immune disorder (not all), and now awaiting my physical this week to check my blood work one year after I made this change.
I can say I have cheated maybe 5 times in one year - and during that time, it was morsels - I still eat chocolate but it has to be pure dark chocolate. I know what is good because I was a chocolatier at one time - successfully owned a business and sold it 5 years ago. I know what goes into confections and there's no way I would eat any of them now unless its pure dark chocolate. Chocolate has fiber - that makes it palatable to eat.
There's a real difference calorie for calorie between different foods - meat <> broccoli, for example. Both provide specific nutrients (or densities of nutrients) the other doesn't have. Further, to achieve the caloric equivalent of meat, it takes a hellalot of broccoli. Say an 8oz hamburger or salmon or tenderloin - take those three calorically and you would need to eat ALOT of broccoli - in fact, all three meats contain differences in nutrition unto themselves.
I do believe CICO matters but it matters within the context of your macros. For instance, not all fiber is digestible (insoluble v. soluble). Not all soluble fiber is digestible - those calories can essentially be thrown out - fiber is used by the body in a much different way than the "net" carb of that food. You can't store fiber (or most of it) because it's not made to be stored. It's made to be moved through the body and aids in the elimination process.
Protein requires protein calories to process it - then some protein is used for muscle synthesis and hypertrophy:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11255140
"Resistance exercise improves muscle protein balance, but, in the absence of food intake, the balance remains negative (i.e., catabolic)."
So one can "move around" but if one doesn't eat the required macro, one creates a catabolic state that in essence wipes out the whole concept of "moving around"!
The remaining protein is then "storable." So figure 33% of your protein calories are convertible to fat.
I don't think there's a magic number when it comes to weight loss - for instance, many purport that eating 1500 calories would garner weight loss - but 1500 calories of what - does that figure exercise into it, and is that enough to sustain muscles over the long-term? Does that raise the metabolic set point to where you need to eat even less once your metabolism slows to 1500?
That's the problem with looking at things from just the CICO perspective. I do agree (and often get mislabeled on here) that CICO matters, but it matters within the perspective of your macros, the kinds of foods you are eating, the processing (or lack thereof) of that food, and your body's metabolic resistance (or lack thereof) to certain macros and foods.
Agree, agree, agree! I am working at losing weight and at the same time doing resistance training and cardio. It is so important for me to eat the right foods so that the weight I do lose is not coming from muscle and so that I keep my metabolism up all day long. The whole idea of clean food eating is to provide you with the best nutrients for your body no matter what your goals are!
please give me a list of the "right foods" that will prevent muscle loss in a deficit? As I am cutting right now, this would be a useful list to have...
If you are eating in a deficit it does not matter what you eat you are going to lose some muscle mass...
unless you are an untrained beginner or high performance athlete, then you may be able to add some muscle or maintain existing while in a deficit.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions