Fed up of dieting...want to start enjoying
Replies
-
Not everything. Too many carbs (not paired with protein and fat) will indeed leave you starving. I'm all for carbs, believe me, but more often than not, if I have one of those snack bags, I will indeed be starving later and probably end up craving more carbs.
But that's YOU. YOU YOU YOU! Stop attributing YOUR physiological response to everyone else! Every single BODY is different in how it reacts to certain nutrients and combinations of nutrients. Just because YOU are starving with JUST carbs doesn't mean everyone else is. Jesus. This thread is ridiculous.
0 -
Not everything. Too many carbs (not paired with protein and fat) will indeed leave you starving. I'm all for carbs, believe me, but more often than not, if I have one of those snack bags, I will indeed be starving later and probably end up craving more carbs.
But that's YOU. YOU YOU YOU! Stop attributing YOUR physiological response to everyone else! Every single BODY is different in how it reacts to certain nutrients and combinations of nutrients. Just because YOU are starving with JUST carbs doesn't mean everyone else is. Jesus. This thread is ridiculous.
Haha, +1.
there's also a huge satiety difference between eating a bagel and a big bowl of vegetables with equivalent calories. Both are carbs. There is absolutely nothing wrong with carbs! Just pick the foods that make you feel full if you have problems with that. Again, it has nothing to do with carbs. I need to keep my carb macros near 50% to feel the best and most satiated, maybe you need 25%, just do what works for you and don't blame the macronutrients.0 -
My feeling is that we blame ourselves for not being able to lose weight when it is our whole society that is bingeing on calorie stuffed food. A slim figure is now a rarety in most Western societies and then it is usually the wealthy with time and money to devote to being slim. Those with the discipljne to both lose it and then keep it off are very much the exceptions. All of us on MFP want to be the exception. Few of us will be because we have to daily face the onslaught of a society whose approach to food is distorted. To turn against peer pressure and a never ending temptation of processed food thrown in your face requires a lot of self love and ability to stand up to others.
I lost 58 pounds over 18 months by counting calories and significantly stepping up my exercise. I have kept it off for another 18 months. I don't always feel like it, but I do it anyway. Fortunately I am a good cook, so my food is delicious. It is still a matter of choosing my hard. I sincerely hope I can stick with it as vanity and health are telling me it is DEFINITELY worth it.
I am 65 and have never felt better.0 -
cityjaneLondon wrote: »A slim figure is now a rarety in most Western societies and then it is usually the wealthy with time and money to devote to being slim.
The weird thing is that it's cheaper to be slim than to be fat, because you're going to be buying less food.
0 -
galgenstrick wrote: »Not everything. Too many carbs (not paired with protein and fat) will indeed leave you starving. I'm all for carbs, believe me, but more often than not, if I have one of those snack bags, I will indeed be starving later and probably end up craving more carbs.
But that's YOU. YOU YOU YOU! Stop attributing YOUR physiological response to everyone else! Every single BODY is different in how it reacts to certain nutrients and combinations of nutrients. Just because YOU are starving with JUST carbs doesn't mean everyone else is. Jesus. This thread is ridiculous.
Haha, +1.
there's also a huge satiety difference between eating a bagel and a big bowl of vegetables with equivalent calories. Both are carbs. There is absolutely nothing wrong with carbs! Just pick the foods that make you feel full if you have problems with that. Again, it has nothing to do with carbs. I need to keep my carb macros near 50% to feel the best and most satiated, maybe you need 25%, just do what works for you and don't blame the macronutrients.
Precisely. If this thread has illustrated anything, it's that each individual must find a macro combination that works best for him or her.
0 -
Here is one article I have found about rapid weight loss...
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20443094
CONCLUSION:
Collectively, findings indicate both short- and long-term advantages to fast initial weight loss. Fast weight losers obtained greater weight reduction and long-term maintenance, and were not more susceptible to weight regain than gradual weight losers.
***
I am not an advocate of "extreme" fast weight loss.
For myself I still have have 37lbs to go before I am in the high range of what is normal for someone with my stats. I am still trying for 2lbs a week and will continue to do so for another 20lbs. I am set for 1400 calories. I usually meet my macro/micro amounts before I hit the 1200 mark. If I am still hungry...I eat something else...if I am not...I don't. No...I don't eat back exercise calories. I use those mainly to reach my activity level.
This works for me. I am sure that someone could find fault with it but...oh well.
Weight loss /= fat loss.
But yeah, I admit I just don't get at all how people are not hangry eating 1400 calories a day. There's no way I could ever do it. Even if it was just whole foods, no treats etc... just not happening, lol!
ETA: Ok, you're 62. That's way more appropriate for you than for a 20yo who probably has a TDEE of 2600 or something...
Okay...I was just guessing at her stats...
Age 20
5'6"
140lb
Moderately Active
To maintain...2200+
To lose 2lbs a week...1200
Which fits what her calorie level is
For myself using the same calculator
Age 62
5'6"
191lb
Moderately Active
To maintain...2200+
To lose 2lbs...1200
While the age and weight are drastically different the calorie goals are the same. My calorie level is 200 above hers but I don't always eat that much. I average about 1325 daily. Yesterday...I was finished eating for the day until I looked at my food diary...I was sitting at a thousand. I had dessert to bump it up a little.
Simply because of age doesn't mean it is okay if I under eat. Actually...I think the older you get the more important it is to reach the recommended nutrient levels.
Some people think that it is harder for an older person to lose. I don't think that way. The only thing that might be "harder" for us is the fitness. Our joints on some days just have no interest in being a part of a HIIT routine.
0 -
Not everything. Too many carbs (not paired with protein and fat) will indeed leave you starving. I'm all for carbs, believe me, but more often than not, if I have one of those snack bags, I will indeed be starving later and probably end up craving more carbs.
But that's YOU. YOU YOU YOU! Stop attributing YOUR physiological response to everyone else! Every single BODY is different in how it reacts to certain nutrients and combinations of nutrients. Just because YOU are starving with JUST carbs doesn't mean everyone else is. Jesus. This thread is ridiculous.
+10 -
Not everything. Too many carbs (not paired with protein and fat) will indeed leave you starving. I'm all for carbs, believe me, but more often than not, if I have one of those snack bags, I will indeed be starving later and probably end up craving more carbs.
But that's YOU. YOU YOU YOU! Stop attributing YOUR physiological response to everyone else! Every single BODY is different in how it reacts to certain nutrients and combinations of nutrients. Just because YOU are starving with JUST carbs doesn't mean everyone else is. Jesus. This thread is ridiculous.
Kind of a rude response. She only stated what works for her and I agree with her with a healthy balance of carbs/protein/fat.....chill out with the Cap Locks Lady!0 -
ChristinaFilip wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »Faithful_Chosen wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »FatFreeFrolicking wrote: »KisforKrista wrote: »Well as long as you are sure you are being accurate, although its going to be hard for people to help you if one day you need it because they wont be able to see that in your logging and will assume you don't know what you are consuming and eating more then you think you are.
My diary and logging are for me, I don't mind other people looking at them, but that's how recipes are logged. There's nothing I can do about that. I weigh every single thing I put in my mouth unless I just don't have access to a scale, I am EXTREMELY accurate. I don't really need help as far as what I eat, and if I decided that I needed help I would probably mention in my post that "servings" are either based off a recipe or something actually weighed exactly what the serving size says.
Sorry but 3 servings of 'sweet crepes with strawberry filling' has way more than 309 calories and 39 grams of carbs.
Same goes for meatloaf. 3 servings for 284 calories? I don't think so.
I'm sorry but did you read the rest of my comments? I guarantee all of that is completely accurate.
Do you mind sending the recipes for the crepes and meatloaf you made?
Sure:
Meatloaf: 6 servings (I ate 3)
208 grams ground beef
70 grams white onion
5 grams shredded carrot
46 gram egg (a medium sized egg)
40 grams bread crumbs (Great value whole wheat)
a little garlic, salt, and pepper (not enough to even show up on the scale)
Potatoes: 2 servings (I ate 1)
231 grams potatoes
23 grams butter (about 2 tbs)
1/3 cup 1% milk
plus a little salt and garlic for flavor
Crepes: 4 servings (I ate 3 because I burned one)
62 grams enriched wheat flour
49 gram egg (medium sized egg)
1/4 cup 1% milk
1/4 cup water
a tiny bit of salt
12 grams butter
3 grams raw sugar
Thanks for the recipes! The calorie counts are more believable after seeing the recipes. Each serving is obviously on the small side.
If you think those servings are small then you probably have a very skewed view of how much you should be eating. I can't see how anyone could eat more than 3 crepes with filling. The meatloaf was a total of 210 grams, and the potatoes were about 153 grams. Of course, I ate some other things for dessert... but I honestly wouldn't have eaten more than that even when I wasn't trying to lose weight.
Based on your diary, your diet is mainly comprised of carbs. You eat very little protein from what I can see. For example, crepes would never be satisfying or filling for me because they are made up of entirely carbs and little to no protein. You ate 3 breadsticks for dinner one night… I personally wouldn't call that a dinner. I like well-balanced meals with a similar ratio of carbs, protein, and fat.
I can make assumptions too.
Wow, with that attitude, please feel free to stay out of my diary
People like that is why mine is private.
No one asked for a review of their diet...I guess they got one anyway.
Kind of like how I didn't ask for her to assume my view of portion sizes is skewed
This got out of hand when you went after her meatloaf muffins and crepes. I am not sure why that upset you so much that you ask to see the recipes to verify that she was telling the truth. Then you went in to her diary and started picking it apart.
Her recipes wasn't the topic of this thread until you made it so.
The OP hasn't been back but it would be my guess that she is eating cardboard diet food or trying to exist just eating lettuce and carrots.
I hate to see someone give up but we all make our own choices.
SHE willingly, all on her own, provided a sample of what she eats- so no, I didn't make her diet the topic of this thread.
Also, in case you missed it, I wasn't the only one who 'went after' her calorie count for 3 servings of crepes and 3 servings of meatloaf. Until she clarified and provided the recipes, it was unclear.
I put it up as an encouragement to the OP that you can still eat delicious things and things you love. Yes, other people questioned me, but YOU'RE the one who pushed the issue even though I explained a couple of times that my calorie count was completely accurate. YOU'RE the one who said I wasn't eating enough protein even though that wasn't the topic of discussion and you don't actually seem to know what you're talking about when it comes to that. and YOU'RE the one who is continuing to insist that my diet is crap even though it obviously isn't.
Just because eating what makes you happy works for you doesn't mean it's going to work for everyone else. Good for you for having awesome metabolism that allows you to even have that many carbs, some people can't lose weight that easily and they actually have to do a "boring" diet. You think you're encouraging people but honestly it sounds more like bragging. You account for everything except the fact that everyones bodies work differently. If I had that many carbs, even if I worked out and had smaller portions, I'd still gain weight. So enjoy your lovely little world of sweets and carbs but I hope you realize that you're just blessed and some people can't do that. If you don't want people criticizing your diary then maybe you should make it private.
Weight loss is all about CICO. My metabolism doesn't have anything to do with it. ANYONE could eat nothing but carbs and still lose weight if their intake is less than outtake, but it wouldn't necessarily be healthy. I'm sorry, but this post is incredibly rude and uneducated. None of what I have said is anywhere close to bragging, it is all scientific FACT.
0 -
Not everything. Too many carbs (not paired with protein and fat) will indeed leave you starving. I'm all for carbs, believe me, but more often than not, if I have one of those snack bags, I will indeed be starving later and probably end up craving more carbs.
But that's YOU. YOU YOU YOU! Stop attributing YOUR physiological response to everyone else! Every single BODY is different in how it reacts to certain nutrients and combinations of nutrients. Just because YOU are starving with JUST carbs doesn't mean everyone else is. Jesus. This thread is ridiculous.
Apparently the OP has issues with being hungry as well, which is why people recommended less carbs and more protein and fat (which, by the way, is not just ME, but a few people, and is a pretty common piece of advice on these forums). I understand your confusion though, it's probably shocking at this point that someone actually posted something that could be relevant to the original post!0 -
Is there any evidence that the OP has even revisited this thread? Or are you all just arguing between yourselves?0
-
daniwilford wrote: »Is there any evidence that the OP has even revisited this thread? Or are you all just arguing between yourselves?
I don't know about anyone else, but I am having a discussion not an argument. Even if OP isn't visiting this thread there are plenty of other people on here that could benefit from the edification this "argument" may provide.0 -
daniwilford wrote: »Is there any evidence that the OP has even revisited this thread? Or are you all just arguing between yourselves?
Welcome to the argument. You've just included yourself. I imagine when the mods get back to work tomorrow, this thread will be cleaned up or closed.0 -
daniwilford wrote: »Is there any evidence that the OP has even revisited this thread? Or are you all just arguing between yourselves?
I don't know about anyone else, but I am having a discussion not an argument. Even if OP isn't visiting this thread there are plenty of other people on here that could benefit from the edification this "argument" may provide.
I find arguing enlightening, as long as it doesn't become personal. I enjoy a healthy debate. Discussion implies that you do not have differing points of view. I see plenty differing points of view. But if you feel better calling it a discussion, by all means I don't want to argue with you.0 -
daniwilford wrote: »daniwilford wrote: »Is there any evidence that the OP has even revisited this thread? Or are you all just arguing between yourselves?
I don't know about anyone else, but I am having a discussion not an argument. Even if OP isn't visiting this thread there are plenty of other people on here that could benefit from the edification this "argument" may provide.
I find arguing enlightening, as long as it doesn't become personal. I enjoy a healthy debate. Discussion implies that you do not have differing points of view. I see plenty differing points of view. But if you feel better calling it a discussion, by all means I don't want to argue with you.
dis·cus·sion
dəˈskəSH(ə)n/
noun
the action or process of talking about something, typically in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas.
a conversation or debate about a certain topic.
I don't mean to argue with you, either. However, based on the fact that you felt the need to "correct" me even though you knew what I meant, it seems that you would very much like to argue. Would you have felt better if I called it a debate? Arguing implies that you are being rude or fighting, and while a number of FatFreeFrolicking's posts have been deleted due to her argument, I think it is worth noting that no one else's have.
0 -
_incogNEATo_ wrote: »@gloria286 is all of this making sense to you? It should be perfectly clear what you need to do. You need to eat enough to lose weight slowly but also as quickly as you can. You need to eat back all of your exercise calories, but understand that there are inaccuracies in the numbers MFP gives for calories burned so DO NOT eat all of them back (or any of them for that matter). You should cook your meatloaf in a muffin pan and enter each ingredient separately so that when others make their meatloaf muffins, they can use your database entries. And when it's all said and done, just have fun! Don't make this complicated.
It was sooo worth reading through this topic to find this gem. Single handedly woke me up out of my weekend slump! :bigsmile:
0 -
I am new. I have given up the notion of dieting & restrictions & replaced it w/clean eating & enjoyment...this way my weight loss is permanent, no more yo-yo!0
-
kdylinda_com wrote: »I am new. I have given up the notion of dieting & restrictions & replaced it w/clean eating & enjoyment...this way my weight loss is permanent, no more yo-yo!
I fail to see 1) how clean eating isn't 'dieting' and not restrictive , 2) what kind of enjoyment you can get by 'clean eating', and 3) what clean eating is anyway.
But oh wait, I guess this could be seen as arguing too. My bad.0 -
daniwilford wrote: »Discussion implies that you do not have differing points of view.
Not according to the dictionary the rest of the planet is using...
0 -
kdylinda_com wrote: »I am new. I have given up the notion of dieting & restrictions & replaced it w/clean eating & enjoyment...this way my weight loss is permanent, no more yo-yo!
I fail to see 1) how clean eating isn't 'dieting' and not restrictive , 2) what kind of enjoyment you can get by 'clean eating', and 3) what clean eating is anyway.
But oh wait, I guess this could be seen as arguing too. My bad.
I see this a lot too... I find "clean eating" to be confusing... I guess the idea is that chemicles are bad for you, most of the people I've seen go with this have some sort of notion that the FDA is allowing things into our food that make us fat and sick so that we spend more money on healthcare, conspiracy stuff. Clean eating is a great way to lose weight because, like every other DIET out there it cuts out calorie dense foods. As far as being healthy, I guess it's kind of a good thing because it forces you to eat nutrient dense foods for the most part... but frankly I like a lot of food that isn't "clean"... and if I was doing clean eating I would probably end up just like OP: hating eating because of all the thought that goes into it.0 -
kdylinda_com wrote: »I am new. I have given up the notion of dieting & restrictions & replaced it w/clean eating & enjoyment...this way my weight loss is permanent, no more yo-yo!
I fail to see 1) how clean eating isn't 'dieting' and not restrictive , 2) what kind of enjoyment you can get by 'clean eating', and 3) what clean eating is anyway.
But oh wait, I guess this could be seen as arguing too. My bad.
I see this a lot too... I find "clean eating" to be confusing... I guess the idea is that chemicles are bad for you, most of the people I've seen go with this have some sort of notion that the FDA is allowing things into our food that make us fat and sick so that we spend more money on healthcare, conspiracy stuff. Clean eating is a great way to lose weight because, like every other DIET out there it cuts out calorie dense foods. As far as being healthy, I guess it's kind of a good thing because it forces you to eat nutrient dense foods for the most part... but frankly I like a lot of food that isn't "clean"... and if I was doing clean eating I would probably end up just like OP: hating eating because of all the thought that goes into it.
Clean eating is eating foods which have not been contaminated or tossed with dirt. Dirty eating is the opposite. And might include food with insect or rodents' nests in them. Although I just watched an episode on Chopped! that included actual cricket flour as an ingredient. They mentioned that insects were a very important protein in some parts of the world. I supposed clean eating could also include stuff like washing your hands before handling food, or wearing latex gloves.0 -
atypicalsmith wrote: »kdylinda_com wrote: »I am new. I have given up the notion of dieting & restrictions & replaced it w/clean eating & enjoyment...this way my weight loss is permanent, no more yo-yo!
I fail to see 1) how clean eating isn't 'dieting' and not restrictive , 2) what kind of enjoyment you can get by 'clean eating', and 3) what clean eating is anyway.
But oh wait, I guess this could be seen as arguing too. My bad.
I see this a lot too... I find "clean eating" to be confusing... I guess the idea is that chemicles are bad for you, most of the people I've seen go with this have some sort of notion that the FDA is allowing things into our food that make us fat and sick so that we spend more money on healthcare, conspiracy stuff. Clean eating is a great way to lose weight because, like every other DIET out there it cuts out calorie dense foods. As far as being healthy, I guess it's kind of a good thing because it forces you to eat nutrient dense foods for the most part... but frankly I like a lot of food that isn't "clean"... and if I was doing clean eating I would probably end up just like OP: hating eating because of all the thought that goes into it.
Clean eating is eating foods which have not been contaminated or tossed with dirt. Dirty eating is the opposite. And might include food with insect or rodents' nests in them. Although I just watched an episode on Chopped! that included actual cricket flour as an ingredient. They mentioned that insects were a very important protein in some parts of the world. I supposed clean eating could also include stuff like washing your hands before handling food, or wearing latex gloves.
bahahahahahahahahahaha this is lovely0 -
daniwilford wrote: »Is there any evidence that the OP has even revisited this thread? Or are you all just arguing between yourselves?
I don't know about anyone else, but I am having a discussion not an argument. Even if OP isn't visiting this thread there are plenty of other people on here that could benefit from the edification this "argument" may provide.
I think taking a look at why some people just throw in the towel and quit is an interesting subject. In the case of the OP the only thing that we know is that food got boring and she wanted to start enjoying herself.
I think many people give up because they get "bored" with their foods. People used to think that they had to eat lettuce and carrots all the time. Some still do obviously.
No matter what eating plan that you follow food does not have to be boring nor do you have to eat the same thing day in and day out.
Hopefully...the discussion or whatever anyone wants to call it...maybe someone will come along and realize that if your food is boring...then change it.
0 -
atypicalsmith wrote: »kdylinda_com wrote: »I am new. I have given up the notion of dieting & restrictions & replaced it w/clean eating & enjoyment...this way my weight loss is permanent, no more yo-yo!
I fail to see 1) how clean eating isn't 'dieting' and not restrictive , 2) what kind of enjoyment you can get by 'clean eating', and 3) what clean eating is anyway.
But oh wait, I guess this could be seen as arguing too. My bad.
I see this a lot too... I find "clean eating" to be confusing... I guess the idea is that chemicles are bad for you, most of the people I've seen go with this have some sort of notion that the FDA is allowing things into our food that make us fat and sick so that we spend more money on healthcare, conspiracy stuff. Clean eating is a great way to lose weight because, like every other DIET out there it cuts out calorie dense foods. As far as being healthy, I guess it's kind of a good thing because it forces you to eat nutrient dense foods for the most part... but frankly I like a lot of food that isn't "clean"... and if I was doing clean eating I would probably end up just like OP: hating eating because of all the thought that goes into it.
Clean eating is eating foods which have not been contaminated or tossed with dirt. Dirty eating is the opposite. And might include food with insect or rodents' nests in them. Although I just watched an episode on Chopped! that included actual cricket flour as an ingredient. They mentioned that insects were a very important protein in some parts of the world. I supposed clean eating could also include stuff like washing your hands before handling food, or wearing latex gloves.
bahahahahahahahahahaha this is lovely
Agreed. Chopped is also lovely.0 -
atypicalsmith wrote: »kdylinda_com wrote: »I am new. I have given up the notion of dieting & restrictions & replaced it w/clean eating & enjoyment...this way my weight loss is permanent, no more yo-yo!
I fail to see 1) how clean eating isn't 'dieting' and not restrictive , 2) what kind of enjoyment you can get by 'clean eating', and 3) what clean eating is anyway.
But oh wait, I guess this could be seen as arguing too. My bad.
I see this a lot too... I find "clean eating" to be confusing... I guess the idea is that chemicles are bad for you, most of the people I've seen go with this have some sort of notion that the FDA is allowing things into our food that make us fat and sick so that we spend more money on healthcare, conspiracy stuff. Clean eating is a great way to lose weight because, like every other DIET out there it cuts out calorie dense foods. As far as being healthy, I guess it's kind of a good thing because it forces you to eat nutrient dense foods for the most part... but frankly I like a lot of food that isn't "clean"... and if I was doing clean eating I would probably end up just like OP: hating eating because of all the thought that goes into it.
Clean eating is eating foods which have not been contaminated or tossed with dirt. Dirty eating is the opposite. And might include food with insect or rodents' nests in them. Although I just watched an episode on Chopped! that included actual cricket flour as an ingredient. They mentioned that insects were a very important protein in some parts of the world. I supposed clean eating could also include stuff like washing your hands before handling food, or wearing latex gloves.
bahahahahahahahahahaha this is lovely
Agreed. Chopped is also lovely.
It really bugged me that there were 299 comments on this, so I've made it an even 300. Have a lovely day, everyone 0 -
301 comments now :-) I just have to add Therese comments were pretty entertaining....also I'm craving crepes now:-)0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions