(Why) are people really disappointed to hear they can eat anything they want and still lose weight?
Options
Replies
-
Because it's hard to accept the fact that you have had control over your weight all along. And, also, that food isn't the problem - you are.
It's so much easier to blame food than accept responsibility and take the time to understand portion control. And, it's much easier to forgive yourself for your failings when you believe that fad diets, crash diets and highly restrictive diets are the only way to lose weight. Because, those diets are hard to do comfortably and most people fail at them.
It's also easier to blame food, then to get up and go to the gym every day.
You get the same reaction when you tell them they can eat more than 1200 calories, or they don't have to exercise. You're taking away their excuses.
Exactly. Because, while the theory is easy and it works, it IS hard to cobble together the willpower to make it happen. Much easier to give up before you start.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Because people listen to media. Infomercials, ads in magazines, etc. They assume because of this information that dieting is a struggle and it's a thing you HAVE to do to get weight off.
This, I think, is the truth. And being older, it's something I never realized until I joined MFP. When I grew up, I didn't know anyone that didn't know weight loss was all about eating less calories than you burn. Adults, teens, children, it was just common sense. And maybe that's why the general public was thinner then.
It's truly been an eye opener for me how many people today don't know this. What the heck happened?
I think there's always been a lot of people who didn't know it.
I'm probably about your age, and when I was a kid there were all sorts of fad diets in magazines and stuff like the Scarsdale diet and the Beverly Hills diet (my mother bought the book and lots of diet books, although the only diets I recall her doing were "eating less" based and not faddy). There was also the no fat craze.
I was a senior in high school when the Scarsdale diet was published. I'm not familiar with the Beverly Hills diet.
I read the Beverly Hills Diet, but it was a long time ago. I'm trying to remember. I think you ate a single food all day or something. Or at a meal? Like only pineapple. I remember she really had a lot about pineapple in there. Or only salmon.
It was a crap book and crap diet. My mother and I read the book right after one another and decided we didn't even want to bother trying the diet.
There was, however, one good sentence in there. And I've never forgotten it. Regarding food and wanting the instant gratification of having it your mouth now? "No food is leaving the planet." (Or something to that effect.)
If its the one I'm remembering, you ate papaya first thing in the morning because it had a MIRACLE ENZYME. You then waited a set period of time before eating...something else, I don't remember. It was very big on food timing. I could be remembering the wrong one, I just remember some pinched little middle aged lady on Phil Donahue or some such, saying "PapaYA-PapaYEEEN!" over and over again. I also remember one comment she made that shocked the studio audience but that lots of MFPers would agree with today, "Don't ever buy low-fat or no-fat versions of stuff that is supposed to have fat. Stay away from Fat-free cheese, it's plastic. Eat the real thing." AFTER you've had your magical papaya, of course.
That lady could have been touting a different diet, of course. But, I think it was Beverly Hills.....
The Scarsdale one always makes me think of how the jerkwad doctor that wrote it ended up eating lead.0 -
It's just a case of choose your hard. Food restriction [higher volume of low calorie choices giving you a caloric deficit] or calorie restriction/moderation/portion size control.
I know that at the present moment I can't simply stop at eating one slice of deep dish pizza...
but that's my issue. I don't whine about my issues because I already know the solution. I know my issues pretty well.
I feel like most don't understand how difficult it is for a person to change [well, for me] a 30 year food abundance lifestyle to one of moderation... But, from what I gather from being here a while, the average user here can't relate to a lifetime of being morbidly obese or severely overweight. A lifetime of living in a caloric surplus, eating whatever you desired... generally speaking.
But I understand and agree with your post.
0 -
I think the people who are really disappointed by the CICO answer are the habitual repeat dieters, some anorexics, who think they know how to lose weight by restricting one food or another. After all, they've experienced periodic success following that method.
There's a whole bunch of new people though who genuinely are seeking information and know no more than what the tabloids and the Facebook/Google ads are screaming at them.0 -
I wasn't disappointed - I was ecstatic. But at the same time, for over 30 years I tried losing weight the traditional way. I tried super-low calorie diets (I still can't face cantaloupe!) I suspect people are disappointed and hurt that they absorbed so much bad information.
It's also important to realize how much more accessible good information is. It is, I think, genuinely easier to be better informed about the choices available.
It also takes work to retrain our palate if we haven't grown up with a healthy foundation.
The disappointment may come from a certain amount of "what's the catch". "Oh, great, I can eat potatoes. 4 bites. And now I'm still hungry."
It's a balance, and the tipping point is different for everybody. Eat calorie dense foods in small portions. Eat nutritionally dense foods you like in larger portions. Move more. Celebrate the power you have to choose which things you will eat. Find trade-offs that work and do not leave you feeling cheated. Is a graham cracker with cream cheese as tasty as a piece of cheesecake? Of course not. But it's pretty darn tasty, and filling. For me, it's an acceptable day to day substitute. Will I choose the real cheesecake on occasion? You bet. And now I will share it, or walk more, or make healthier choices before and after, or some combination of the above.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »I read the Beverly Hills Diet, but it was a long time ago. I'm trying to remember. I think you ate a single food all day or something. Or at a meal? Like only pineapple. I remember she really had a lot about pineapple in there. Or only salmon.
Yes, that's it. All about avoiding certain combinations and specific foods (like grapefruit and pineapple) as magical weight loss foods. The idea was that if you ate only, say, pineapple or only, say, salmon (don't recall if salmon was part of it, but it could have been) on a particular day, you wouldn't gain.
Seems obvious now that there's only so much of one food the average person can eat, so it's just a calorie control trick.
At like age 12 I really wanted to do it (I wasn't overweight, but wanted to lose 5-10 lbs for some reason), and talked my mother into buying some grapefruit, but it turned out I hated grapefruit and couldn't manage to eat it, so I failed before having to talk my mom into buying the pineapple (which I loved).
I don't know if my mom ever read the book, and I'm sure she never actually tried it. She had a million diet books, though, and I read lots of them. I never actually did diet, however, as I was lucky enough to be okay with if never satisfied with my weight and lazy/focused on other things. I think that helped me a lot, ultimately, that I didn't ever diet until I was in my 30s and ready to actually learn about how it worked more rationally. I still soaked in some messed up ideas about food and all from my surroundings, the culture, my mom, etc., but in many ways also realized how bothersome they were so tried to resist them (I remember my mother often stopping for a dessert when out shopping with my sister and I--we got a treat too--and then telling us not to tell our dad).0 -
blankiefinder wrote: »I've known people who were in denial about how many calories they were eating. 'It's not fair I'm fat, I don't eat anything!". Accepting that it really comes down to calories would mean admitting that they really didn't live on a single slice of lettuce, that it might have been hitting McDonald's every night on the way home from work for a couple burgers, fries, shake and a couple apple pies. (In this instance, not referring to anyone else!)
Yup, what you eat in private you wear in public. There is no hiding it.
I think another thing is people don't know how to eat the right foods. They end up starving themselves because they continue eating the same food that got them overweight but just in smaller amounts then they fall off the "diet" because there is only so much starving someone can take.
Its all about tricks...Instead of pasta which is 200 cals a serving and a lot of people eat between 1-2 servings in a meal not including sauce, meat and veggies, you can switch it out for spaghetti squash or "zucchini pasta" for 30-45 cals per serving and get full...
A HUGE help for me is eat a huge amount of green/bright colored veggies and limit high starch ones.
On a side not:
Don't give me the bs that veggies don't fill you up. If you eat enough they will
haha 0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »kristen6350 wrote: »Because people listen to media. Infomercials, ads in magazines, etc. They assume because of this information that dieting is a struggle and it's a thing you HAVE to do to get weight off.
This, I think, is the truth. And being older, it's something I never realized until I joined MFP. When I grew up, I didn't know anyone that didn't know weight loss was all about eating less calories than you burn. Adults, teens, children, it was just common sense. And maybe that's why the general public was thinner then.
It's truly been an eye opener for me how many people today don't know this. What the heck happened?
I think there's always been a lot of people who didn't know it.
I'm probably about your age, and when I was a kid there were all sorts of fad diets in magazines and stuff like the Scarsdale diet and the Beverly Hills diet (my mother bought the book and lots of diet books, although the only diets I recall her doing were "eating less" based and not faddy). There was also the no fat craze.
I was a senior in high school when the Scarsdale diet was published. I'm not familiar with the Beverly Hills diet.
I read the Beverly Hills Diet, but it was a long time ago. I'm trying to remember. I think you ate a single food all day or something. Or at a meal? Like only pineapple. I remember she really had a lot about pineapple in there. Or only salmon.
It was a crap book and crap diet. My mother and I read the book right after one another and decided we didn't even want to bother trying the diet.
There was, however, one good sentence in there. And I've never forgotten it. Regarding food and wanting the instant gratification of having it your mouth now? "No food is leaving the planet." (Or something to that effect.)
If its the one I'm remembering, you ate papaya first thing in the morning because it had a MIRACLE ENZYME. You then waited a set period of time before eating...something else, I don't remember. It was very big on food timing. I could be remembering the wrong one, I just remember some pinched little middle aged lady on Phil Donahue or some such, saying "PapaYA-PapaYEEEN!" over and over again. I also remember one comment she made that shocked the studio audience but that lots of MFPers would agree with today, "Don't ever buy low-fat or no-fat versions of stuff that is supposed to have fat. Stay away from Fat-free cheese, it's plastic. Eat the real thing." AFTER you've had your magical papaya, of course.
That lady could have been touting a different diet, of course. But, I think it was Beverly Hills.....
The Scarsdale one always makes me think of how the jerkwad doctor that wrote it ended up eating lead.
That might be it. She was big on enzymes. Pineapple had an enzyme too, I think. Or maybe it was papaya I was thinking of and I'm just remembering it wrong. But I thought a pineapple was on the cover?
I feel so old sometimes with how bad my memory is.
I'm with you on the Scarsdale guy.
0 -
I can't say I've seen anyone on here getting genuinely angry at being told there's no magic foods or bad foods.0
-
I know in my own personal experience, it takes a lot more energy for me to weigh and measure and CICO than it does to simply avoid X category of food (which is much more intuitive). So while in a way it is a LOT more liberating to realize that I can occasionally indulge my cravings if I budget properly, it was a bit of overwhelming and almost disappointing to finally understand that I just had to log everything (possibly forever) every single day, which for my personality is emotionally taxing. It was much easier to just stop eating sugar, or dairy, or grains or whatever the demonized food of the time was. Of course, it didn't work and CICO does, but that's why it took me a little while to really accept the idea.0
-
Because they want a quick fix and doing it the right, healthy way takes a lot longer then some 500 calorie per day cleanse. Also figuring out your TDEE, BMR, and setting your macros is kind of complicated for a newbie who has no idea what those are. Along with tracking every little thing you eat and making sure it fits your macros and calories, it's much more complicated than "oh just eat a 500 calorie stew everyday". Basically it requires hard work, and most people are lazy, especially those that are overweight/obese in the first place.0
-
It's really not. I'm not sure someone need 10 years to say something worked. That's crazy talk.
I respect your opinion but, sorry, I agree with the Knighted One. Based on the statistics of regain after weight loss within a five year period, even using the CICO method, he's right on.
I don't even think he's that crazy
That's not a failing of CICO. That's a failing on the part of the person.
Yes.
Ok. And I think that if a person has had success and lost weight....only to regain it 7 years later...that person saying it works isn't wrong. They just lost control. That doesn't mean they can't reflect on what works, because they know what works because they've done it.
Just because they aren't practicing it, doesn't mean they aren't aware of why they regained the weight.
The issue definitely is control, yes.
And despite the fact that people know why they regain, most of them regain even still. Using any and all methods of weight loss. Including CICO. While eating controlled portions of pop tarts. For 4 years and 364 days, or something like that.
Right, but just because they have regained the weight, doesn't mean they don't understand what works.
The did. But I think the definition of "works" might be viewed as subjective in this case. It works if you work it so to speak. But somehow, most people don't feel like working it anymore at about the five year mark, or well before. Most people regain the weight. It's the awful truth.
But that's a personal choice. It doesn't mean that they don't know what works.
Yeah, any method chosen to lose weight is personal. And anyone is free to choose whatever method they want. But really. Statistically, those who choose CICO are not exempt from the dismal regain statistics within 5 years.
This totally. I find it mind boggling when MFP users jump down someone's throat if they talk about other methods of losing other then CICO. At the end of the day we all want to lose the weight and whatever "diet" we use is a personal choice. I certainly can't drink "diet" shakes forever but I also have a hard time counting calories forever so here I am trying for the umpteenth time.
Well it's only ever going to be CICO. It isn't CICO vs other methods... it's just CICO. Create a deficit over time -- you will never lose weight in a surplus over time. It's calorie counting vs other methods.
Calorie counting is one way to get the CICO working in your favour. And it has a lot of advantages -- it's methodical, and if you're careful and consistent, you'll get it working for sure. If that's triggering or unsustainable for someone, then there are other methods of creating that deficit. However, those methods are more luck and personal -- if "eating clean" with your habits, your food preferences, your appetite, ends up meaning that you feel good and get CI<CO without having to count, then great! (But it's still CICO, and it wouldn't naturally bring everyone into a deficit.)
I am not against other methods, or other methods in conjunction with calorie counting. But I do think it's really important that people understand the science/math behind things and aren't forever chasing magic/wizardry, developing fears of "bad" foods, nursing guilt/shame when they eat those "bad" foods, etc. Ex: If you're drinking breakfast smoothies because you like them, they work for your lifestyle, etc, great! If you're drinking them because you think they are a "weight loss food" then not so great, because you don't really understand, and there are probably better options for you. (And when you fail, you won't understand why, either, which is really important.)0 -
It's really not. I'm not sure someone need 10 years to say something worked. That's crazy talk.
I respect your opinion but, sorry, I agree with the Knighted One. Based on the statistics of regain after weight loss within a five year period, even using the CICO method, he's right on.
I don't even think he's that crazy
That's not a failing of CICO. That's a failing on the part of the person.
Yes.
Ok. And I think that if a person has had success and lost weight....only to regain it 7 years later...that person saying it works isn't wrong. They just lost control. That doesn't mean they can't reflect on what works, because they know what works because they've done it.
Just because they aren't practicing it, doesn't mean they aren't aware of why they regained the weight.
The issue definitely is control, yes.
And despite the fact that people know why they regain, most of them regain even still. Using any and all methods of weight loss. Including CICO. While eating controlled portions of pop tarts. For 4 years and 364 days, or something like that.
Right, but just because they have regained the weight, doesn't mean they don't understand what works.
The did. But I think the definition of "works" might be viewed as subjective in this case. It works if you work it so to speak. But somehow, most people don't feel like working it anymore at about the five year mark, or well before. Most people regain the weight. It's the awful truth.
But that's a personal choice. It doesn't mean that they don't know what works.
Yeah, any method chosen to lose weight is personal. And anyone is free to choose whatever method they want. But really. Statistically, those who choose CICO are not exempt from the dismal regain statistics within 5 years.
This totally. I find it mind boggling when MFP users jump down someone's throat if they talk about other methods of losing other then CICO. At the end of the day we all want to lose the weight and whatever "diet" we use is a personal choice. I certainly can't drink "diet" shakes forever but I also have a hard time counting calories forever so here I am trying for the umpteenth time.
The point, usually, is that every diet (at least every diet that works, which is most, at least for a while) is based on CICO. They are just different methods of getting to a calorie deficit.
I've lost without counting calories and believe I could now. What I don't believe--and would call people on--is the claim that they can lose eating one way at, say 2500 calories, and can't lose eating some other way at something ridiculous like 800 calories. Or some less extreme version of that. (And ignoring the less extreme version that probably is true for people with certain health issues, but does NOT mean that if you eat over maintenance but only "healthy" foods or only protein and veggies or only bananas or no "toxic" foods like bread or whatever the ridiculous claim du jour is that you can't gain.)0 -
justcat206 wrote: »I know in my own personal experience, it takes a lot more energy for me to weigh and measure and CICO than it does to simply avoid X category of food (which is much more intuitive). So while in a way it is a LOT more liberating to realize that I can occasionally indulge my cravings if I budget properly, it was a bit of overwhelming and almost disappointing to finally understand that I just had to log everything (possibly forever) every single day, which for my personality is emotionally taxing. It was much easier to just stop eating sugar, or dairy, or grains or whatever the demonized food of the time was. Of course, it didn't work and CICO does, but that's why it took me a little while to really accept the idea.
Perfect example of different strokes. When I started trying to measure and weigh and log everything I ate, I was miserable. It just seemed like so much work! No way I would succeed with that method.0 -
missomgitsica wrote: »Because the people who ask that want an easy fix. They don't want to hear that they have to log and track or whatever, they want to hear, "Just eat ______ every day and you'll lose weight."
Reminds me of people who ask about cleanses and detoxes.. They just want to have their beliefs/plans reaffirmed by others, they aren't looking for actual advice. At least very rarely...0 -
Suckage is an awesome word.0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »I read the Beverly Hills Diet, but it was a long time ago. I'm trying to remember. I think you ate a single food all day or something. Or at a meal? Like only pineapple. I remember she really had a lot about pineapple in there. Or only salmon.
Yes, that's it. All about avoiding certain combinations and specific foods (like grapefruit and pineapple) as magical weight loss foods. The idea was that if you ate only, say, pineapple or only, say, salmon (don't recall if salmon was part of it, but it could have been) on a particular day, you wouldn't gain.
Seems obvious now that there's only so much of one food the average person can eat, so it's just a calorie control trick.
At like age 12 I really wanted to do it (I wasn't overweight, but wanted to lose 5-10 lbs for some reason), and talked my mother into buying some grapefruit, but it turned out I hated grapefruit and couldn't manage to eat it, so I failed before having to talk my mom into buying the pineapple (which I loved).
I don't know if my mom ever read the book, and I'm sure she never actually tried it. She had a million diet books, though, and I read lots of them. I never actually did diet, however, as I was lucky enough to be okay with if never satisfied with my weight and lazy/focused on other things. I think that helped me a lot, ultimately, that I didn't ever diet until I was in my 30s and ready to actually learn about how it worked more rationally. I still soaked in some messed up ideas about food and all from my surroundings, the culture, my mom, etc., but in many ways also realized how bothersome they were so tried to resist them (I remember my mother often stopping for a dessert when out shopping with my sister and I--we got a treat too--and then telling us not to tell our dad).
I feel the sudden need to call and thank my mother. All she ever did was tell us if we ate too much we'd get fat. And watch Jack LaLane. Portion control and the need for exercise. Genius!0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »rjmudlax13 wrote: »kommodevaran wrote: »For me, it was just so liberating and empowering to know that I could do it by myself.
Not to be a wet blanket, but until someone actually reaches goal weight and successful maintains the weight loss for 5-10 years, they're not really in a position to say that anything in particular "works".
That's kind of like saying an F1 racecar driver needs to win races for at least 10 years to prove that an internal combustion engine actually works.
Why would any race need to be won in order to prove an engine works?
Why would 60+ years of maintaining one's weight be needed to prove that CICO works? a0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »rjmudlax13 wrote: »kommodevaran wrote: »For me, it was just so liberating and empowering to know that I could do it by myself.
Not to be a wet blanket, but until someone actually reaches goal weight and successful maintains the weight loss for 5-10 years, they're not really in a position to say that anything in particular "works".
That's kind of like saying an F1 racecar driver needs to win races for at least 10 years to prove that an internal combustion engine actually works.
Why would any race need to be won in order to prove an engine works?
Why would 60+ years of maintaining one's weight be needed to prove that CICO works? a
No clue0 -
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions