Can you really eat a burger?
Replies
-
Yep, had 1 last night with bun, tomatoes, ketchup and mustard, complete with Lays bbq chips, salad and ranch dressing (all,measured carefully of course) on the side all while not going over my daily calories *GASP*
Plan for a burger and enjoy the crap out of it. Life is not worth living if you cant enjoy things like bacon, burgers and cheesecake (all in moderation)0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Only chiming in to say that if willpower over hunger is an issue for you, as it seems to be with your move to appetite suppressants, etc., then setting calorie goals based on a goal weight maintenance level, which is further reduced by your anticipated 15%-20% reduction due to long-term obesity, is one of the most self-defeating approaches I can imagine to getting down to a goal weight where you'll actually get to see what your maintenance calories are in reality.
To be clear here, I am not setting my current caloric intake to be based on the hypothetical discussion of what my maintenance intake might be. That was another tangent. My current caloric intake is defined by MFP for a goal of 2 pounds per week at 1770 per day.
This has always resulted in hunger for me. Any amount of caloric restriction that results in weight loss results in hunger for me. I can always tell when I am losing weight without ever getting on the scale - I'm hungry and I'm cold.I hate evangelical videos, even if the presenter is wearing a lab coat. I'm essentially a captive audience until the end, waiting for the punch line. Give me something to read and I can zip through it in no time, at my own pace. Any woo "science" however and I am out of there.
@maillemaker , you would honor me by reading a blog by a premier obesity expert here in Canada. I'd be interested in your opinion.
http://www.drsharma.ca/running-down-the-up-escalator.html
I'm not sure what you mean by an "evangelical video". The video I linked to is a medical lecture given by a doctor to other doctors and clinical researchers. It's pretty easy to follow along in spite of the medical jargon.
But anyway the escalator analogy seems loosely correct. I'm not sure what they are meaning by describing the escalator as moving faster as you move down it.And have you even listened to the people who have lost and who are maintaining without this 10-15% reduction in calories you keep banging on about?
I hear them, but all I can deduce is that the study findings don't apply to everyone, even though they seemed to apply to everyone studied thus far. Even the scientists involved admit they cannot say that it applies to everyone. And the scientists involved admit they do not understand all the mechanisms currently involved.
All I can tell you is that based on the symptoms, I'm pretty sure that what they are describing is happening to me. Also, based on what they describe, it would be a perfectly logical explanation for why most people fail at losing weight.It also doesn't talk about how, as the escalator gets faster (you lose weight and your TDEE slowly drops accordingly), you too should get more comfortable running at a steady pace (eating at a certain amount of calories).
For at least some people, the science is saying that this is not the case. Some people never get comfortable eating the new amount of calories.You do realize that I was obese also right? For over 12 years. And I lost almost 80 lbs. So I think I kind of have an idea of how it works. Don't you think?
Have you watched the video?
How do you reconcile your situation with what is presented in the video?
Serious question.
Because in the studies I presented from Liebel and Hirsh, everyone they studied exhibited the behavior that I have spoken about.
It's entirely likely, given the number of people who fail at weight loss, that people like you are special.
Either you are a special biological case and you are not affected in the manner described in the studies I have presented or you have particularly strong willpower.
To quote Dr. Hirsh:
"So what of free will? Regardless of genes or early experiences, there are saints and heroes who can conquer eating behavior by self-imposed starvation for religious or political ends. Lesser souls may respond to injunctions for brief fasts or diets, but for the great majority of us, exercising our will is no long-term answer to the worsening problem of obesity."
0 -
Liftng4Lis wrote: »
Your definition seems to include chicken burgers too.
2. A similar sandwich with a nonbeef filling. Often used in combination: a crab burger; a tofu burger.
non beef as in a chicken fillet?
Just a guess here but your american, I'm Australian, seems perfectly reasonable that we have different definitions for a burger.
Your definition is narrow and mine isn't.
Burger to me is less about the meat and how it is processed and more about the type of bread it is encased in.
Take one of your burgers and replace it the meat with a chicken fillet, still a burger, still a burger to just about anyone I asked here. Replace it with a veggie patty, still a burger. Replace it with a minute steak, still a burger.
NOPE, here in America, to be called a burger it must have "ground" meat or meat substitute (veggie people). What you are describing is called a sandwich.
Any one else hearing Denis Leary's Rescue Me rant about the difference between a sub, hero and grinder? It's a sandwich!0 -
Yes! You can eat whatever you want. I find when you that nice juicy fatty burger with cheese you get over your craving! You feel satisfied. If I ate some diet burger substitute I would be sad lol. Work out and then go eat your burger!0
-
Now I want a double bacon cheeseburger with fries....From Cook Out. Too bad I'm not in Knoxville anymore!0
-
maillemaker wrote: »[. . . snip . . .]
To be clear here, I am not setting my current caloric intake to be based on the hypothetical discussion of what my maintenance intake might be. That was another tangent. My current caloric intake is defined by MFP for a goal of 2 pounds per week at 1770 per day.
This has always resulted in hunger for me. Any amount of caloric restriction that results in weight loss results in hunger for me. I can always tell when I am losing weight without ever getting on the scale - I'm hungry and I'm cold.
[. . . snip . . .]
Hunger is something almost all of us have to deal with when restricting calories. There are a number of strategies to help mitigate this challenge (changes in diet to increase satiety without increasing total caloric intake, for example, but there are many others, including your gravitation to appetite suppressors). But occasional hunger is not necessarily something that can be eliminated.
There's no rule that you need to be at 2 lbs a week target deficit. Some people can do that and adhere to their diet plan; some can't. If 2lbs a week is too much for you to adhere to your intake goals, you'd be much better off setting a target deficit that you can meet or mostly meet, and that still results in weight loss. Why don't you add back in another 500 calories a day? You'll still be expecting 1lb per week lost, so it will take longer to reach your ultimate goal, but much better to do something you can sustain than simply setting yourself up for failure.
Based on your posts just in this thread (I don't think we've interacted in other threads) it feels like you're intensely interested in the NEAT / TDEE effects that long-term obesity may cause when one moves to maintenance. Why don't you give yourself a more realistic chance to get to that point where you're ready to try maintenance and see for yourself whether your NEAT / TDEE appears to be negatively affected by long-term obesity? Seems it would tie in nicely with your interest in that particular subject. And you'll not really know for sure how it may impact *you* until you actually get there, which you won't ever do if you set unrealistic goals that you can't possibly adhere to over the course of your efforts to lose weight and ultimately hit that maintenance point.
0 -
maillemaker wrote: »How many people are going to eat a Wendy's single and be satisfied? 300 calorie burger at home is also very unlikely. I make burgers (albeit turkey) at home fairly regularly and by the time you add a bun and toppings....a lot of calories. And am I going to want just the burger for lunch? Nope. I don't think most people are that different.
Exactly.
There's burgers, and then there's burgers.
A burger to me is a Little Bacon Cheesburger "All The Way" from Five Guys. That's 783 calories.
Can you eat it? Of course you can. It's about half my daily allotment of calories. So yeah, you can eat it - if you want to eat nothing else for half the day.
The sad reality of weight loss is that this kind of eating that we have grown accustomed to as normal is preposterous and absurd. It's heartbreaking to realize that in the future my entire maintenance allotment of calories is going to be the equivalent of a few handfuls of nuts. A Wendy's single is going to be an extravagance.
*binks*
783 cals is half of what appears to be a fairly decent sized guy's daily allotment of calories? How the heck many pounds are you trying to lose a week?
783 cals is (slightly) under half of my daily cals and I'm a 117 lb 40 yr old woman who sits on her *kitten* all day at work - and that's if I don't exercise at all.0 -
Why don't you give yourself a more realistic chance to get to that point where you're ready to try maintenance and see for yourself whether your NEAT / TDEE appears to be negatively affected by long-term obesity? Seems it would tie in nicely with your interest in that particular subject. And you'll not really know for sure how it may impact *you* until you actually get there, which you won't ever do if you set unrealistic goals that you can't possibly adhere to over the course of your efforts to lose weight and ultimately hit that maintenance point.
This is true. Also, I know there are other studies on the topic like that one heybales used to (still does?) have on his profile and link from time to time, where people losing weight based on different deficits and with and without exercise were compared, which indicated a higher TDEE after weightloss for those with a lower deficit plus exercise than otherwise, with a strong rebound effect. Even if I didn't already know that exercise would be key for me for maintaining, that would have caused me to use exercise to help achieve my deficit, and to be cautious about the effect of a too low deficit. I did do 2 lbs/week for quite a while, but only while monitoring my overall TDEE to watch for reductions beyond what was expected by the lost lbs.
As it is, I don't know what my final maintenance level will be (I'm hoping for the best, but it is what it is), but so far at 125 it seems quite a bit higher than maillemaker's projections for himself, as I know I can lose at 1750. (I was certainly obese, also.)
My suspicion is that people don't have trouble maintaining because they have lower maintenance levels, although that may also be so. They have trouble maintaining for the same reasons they gained in the first place, and because keeping up the motivation is tough. Thus my main strategy is finding ways to make motivation easier for myself, not to convince myself I can't help it or can't do it.0 -
783 cals is half of what appears to be a fairly decent sized guy's daily allotment of calories? How the heck many pounds are you trying to lose a week?
783 cals is (slightly) under half of my daily cals and I'm a 117 lb 40 yr old woman who sits on her *kitten* all day at work - and that's if I don't exercise at all.
I am set up for 2 pounds per week weight loss and MFP has me at an allotment of 1770 calories per day. A 783 calorie hamburger is 44% of my daily allotment.
My diary is open.
0 -
Like most people said, yes, you can still eat a cheeseburger. I've lost 77 pounds and eat a wonderful burger (with bacon & cheese) every 2-3 weeks. Make it fit into your day. Weight loss shouldn't mean deprivation.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
Like others have said, yes you can. But if you're like me one burger turns into one burger 3 times a week...LOL
0 -
Hunger is something almost all of us have to deal with when restricting calories. There are a number of strategies to help mitigate this challenge (changes in diet to increase satiety without increasing total caloric intake, for example, but there are many others, including your gravitation to appetite suppressors). But occasional hunger is not necessarily something that can be eliminated.
I have mostly eliminated it currently with appetite suppressants (phentermine/topomax).There's no rule that you need to be at 2 lbs a week target deficit. Some people can do that and adhere to their diet plan; some can't. If 2lbs a week is too much for you to adhere to your intake goals, you'd be much better off setting a target deficit that you can meet or mostly meet, and that still results in weight loss. Why don't you add back in another 500 calories a day? You'll still be expecting 1lb per week lost, so it will take longer to reach your ultimate goal, but much better to do something you can sustain than simply setting yourself up for failure.
My fear is that if the studies I have read are correct then hunger is caused by lower leptin levels caused by lower fat levels, and not by the amount of calorie deficit. So I'm going to be hungry regardless of the level of caloric deficit. Might as well go whole hog in that case.
In any case, I'm on the appetite suppressant, so it's not an issue - for now.Based on your posts just in this thread (I don't think we've interacted in other threads) it feels like you're intensely interested in the NEAT / TDEE effects that long-term obesity may cause when one moves to maintenance.
Not really - the topic only came up when I was lamenting how few calories will be available to eat once I get there. Really I don't concern myself with maintenance as never in my entire life have I ever successfully lost enough weigh to achieve it. To me the idea of maintenance is a distant dream.
0 -
I'll watch the video when you stop being lazy and go exercise.
Challenge accepted.If you think I'm special then so are many of the others on this site that did it. @vismal @CyberEd312, some in this thread and many many more must also be special then in your opinion. We are not special biological cases but you are correct that we have strong willpower, something you lack.
I do not dispute that you and others succeed at weight loss. Do you dispute that most people do not succeed at weight loss?0 -
doesn't matter what you eat...just don't eat the fries and soda if you want burgers at a joint.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
Eh, sorry, I don’t really want to read 16 pages of comments. I just wanted to throw my 2 cents in: IMO, you can definitely eat whatever you want. I don’t restrict myself from anything (including cake, mmm cake), but I do try to hit my macros (especially protein) and count the calories. I eat anything, but less of it.
And in regard to burgers, I love me a good one. I like to get them with no cheese and with mustard / pickles / tomatoes instead of mayo or other calorie-heavy sauces. And of course, with bacon.0 -
maillemaker wrote: »Hunger is something almost all of us have to deal with when restricting calories. There are a number of strategies to help mitigate this challenge (changes in diet to increase satiety without increasing total caloric intake, for example, but there are many others, including your gravitation to appetite suppressors). But occasional hunger is not necessarily something that can be eliminated.
I have mostly eliminated it currently with appetite suppressants (phentermine/topomax).There's no rule that you need to be at 2 lbs a week target deficit. Some people can do that and adhere to their diet plan; some can't. If 2lbs a week is too much for you to adhere to your intake goals, you'd be much better off setting a target deficit that you can meet or mostly meet, and that still results in weight loss. Why don't you add back in another 500 calories a day? You'll still be expecting 1lb per week lost, so it will take longer to reach your ultimate goal, but much better to do something you can sustain than simply setting yourself up for failure.
My fear is that if the studies I have read are correct then hunger is caused by lower leptin levels caused by lower fat levels, and not by the amount of calorie deficit. So I'm going to be hungry regardless of the level of caloric deficit. Might as well go whole hog in that case.
In any case, I'm on the appetite suppressant, so it's not an issue - for now.Based on your posts just in this thread (I don't think we've interacted in other threads) it feels like you're intensely interested in the NEAT / TDEE effects that long-term obesity may cause when one moves to maintenance.
Not really - the topic only came up when I was lamenting how few calories will be available to eat once I get there. Really I don't concern myself with maintenance as never in my entire life have I ever successfully lost enough weigh to achieve it. To me the idea of maintenance is a distant dream.
You have a terrible mindset. My caloric intake will probably be around what I eat now to lose weight. Yes, it will be a struggle. The good thing is is that exercising allows you to eat more! Exercising takes time to get into the habit, it's not something you just jump into. Do you plan on trying to get exercise into your life?0 -
maillemaker wrote: »[. . . snip . . .]There's no rule that you need to be at 2 lbs a week target deficit. Some people can do that and adhere to their diet plan; some can't. If 2lbs a week is too much for you to adhere to your intake goals, you'd be much better off setting a target deficit that you can meet or mostly meet, and that still results in weight loss. Why don't you add back in another 500 calories a day? You'll still be expecting 1lb per week lost, so it will take longer to reach your ultimate goal, but much better to do something you can sustain than simply setting yourself up for failure.
My fear is that if the studies I have read are correct then hunger is caused by lower leptin levels caused by lower fat levels, and not by the amount of calorie deficit. So I'm going to be hungry regardless of the level of caloric deficit. Might as well go whole hog in that case.
In any case, I'm on the appetite suppressant, so it's not an issue - for now.
Well, I'd question that strategy. You're worried that some studies imply that the amount of caloric deficit doesn't matter to your hunger challenges, so you'll set calorie goals that make the hunger unbearable, or nearly so, at least without additional appetite suppressants? I personally would think through that a bit more.Really I don't concern myself with maintenance as never in my entire life have I ever successfully lost enough weigh to achieve it. To me the idea of maintenance is a distant dream.
Dreams are realized by setting a plan that has a realistic change of success, and then executing on that plan. Sometimes the distance is long and sometimes short, but you don't cover that distance without a plan that you can execute. Good luck!
0 -
I'm pretty sure that obesity, within reasonable limits, is less dangerous than long term use of appetite suppressants.maillemaker wrote: »(...)
I have mostly eliminated it (hunger) currently with appetite suppressants (phentermine/topomax).
(...)
If you genuinely feel you can't beat it... embrace and enjoy it. This dude's living it up:
ETA:
I'm not reading 475 posts.
Cliffs? Can you eat a burger?0 -
I'm pretty sure that obesity, within reasonable limits, is less dangerous than long term use of appetite suppressants.maillemaker wrote: »(...)
I have mostly eliminated it (hunger) currently with appetite suppressants (phentermine/topomax).
(...)
If you genuinely feel you can't beat it... embrace and enjoy it. This dude's living it up:
GROSS!0 -
Also, this is a fantastic burger:
And while I was there, I had half a apple pie shake (half was still a full glass). Next time, it will be a kitchen sink:
Damn, that does look good - though I'm not a fan of chili. And I know there is a Grub nearby ... off to Google locations. Maybe I can swing a burger from there in the next couple of days.0 -
Here's what I've gotten so far, I think. Tell me if I've missed something:
1. The definition of the word "burger" is sacred
2. Hamburgers have calories
3. If you haven't burned off your breakfast before you eat lunch you'll get fat
4. Food has chemicals
5. 12 pages is my limit0 -
This content has been removed.
-
-
maillemaker wrote: »783 cals is half of what appears to be a fairly decent sized guy's daily allotment of calories? How the heck many pounds are you trying to lose a week?
783 cals is (slightly) under half of my daily cals and I'm a 117 lb 40 yr old woman who sits on her *kitten* all day at work - and that's if I don't exercise at all.
I am set up for 2 pounds per week weight loss and MFP has me at an allotment of 1770 calories per day. A 783 calorie hamburger is 44% of my daily allotment.
My diary is open.
And there's your problem. Set a reasonable goal, cease being miserable. When you adjust to a moderate deficit, then maybe decrease it further. Drugs are not going to get you where you want to go, which is sustainable weight loss. When you come off of them, back comes the appetite, and back comes the weight.
Oh, and do make sure you read up on the potential side effects of phentermine and topomax. Not nice.0 -
This thread needs less drama and MORE BURGERS!
0 -
jennifershoo wrote: »
Definitely not worth the extra money when Carl's Jr pretty much makes the same quality of food for less.0 -
I'm pretty sure that obesity, within reasonable limits, is less dangerous than long term use of appetite suppressants.maillemaker wrote: »(...)
I have mostly eliminated it (hunger) currently with appetite suppressants (phentermine/topomax).
(...)
If you genuinely feel you can't beat it... embrace and enjoy it. This dude's living it up:
ETA:
I'm not reading 475 posts.
Cliffs? Can you eat a burger?
...this is disturbing....
__________________________________________________________________
As for maillemaker, well good luck to you with all that.
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
- 426 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