Which works best counting carbs or counting calories
angelaquiggins
Posts: 2 Member
Im new here and confused on which to count? Any advise is appriciated.
0
Replies
-
Unless you have some type of medical condition, calories. Foods high in carbs are often calorie-dense, so cutting those will cut calories. If you can just cut back, instead of eliminate, that's great. Start with CICO.0
-
You gain weight from excess calories, not excess carbs.0
-
What is CICO?0
-
Regardless if you have a medical condition or not, calories is what weight loss is about. Some people tend to eat fewer calories when they are on a low carb diet and end up losing weight, but some are unaware they are overeating even on a low carb diet and end up not losing weight because they eat too many calories.0
-
Calories. Watching carbs is only needed with a medical condition. You lose weight by making sure your calories in are less than your calories out (CICO).0
-
angelaquiggins wrote: »What is CICO?
CICO = calories in, calories out
Basically, if you eat eat less calories (in) than you burn (out) you lose weight.0 -
Eating less carbs and more protein helps me stay in a calorie deficit. I just reduced baked goods and added sugar and focus on total calories.0
-
angelaquiggins wrote: »What is CICO?
Calories in/Calories out = CICO0 -
angelaquiggins wrote: »Im new here and confused on which to count? Any advise is appriciated.
The best one is the one you can do forever. Low carb works for lots of people, but most cannot stick to it causing them to gain back the weight. You need to pick the one that you an stick with.angelaquiggins wrote: »What is CICO?
Calories In vs. Calories Out
0 -
angelaquiggins wrote: »What is CICO?
Calories in - Calories out
For me this is about lifestyle changes - If I make a temporary change (low carb) to lose weight - then when I want to maintain that weight loss....how do I do that?0 -
calories for me,
and only eating 1 serving of each food group. and if still hungry, only 1 serving more at a time, with a glass of water between
0 -
angelaquiggins wrote: »What is CICO?
Calories In Calories Out0 -
Counting calorie. But don't be so crazy of logging everything in an extreme way. I only logged my food for 1 month and let go after. Logging is a strategy to learn the knowledge of what the current diet structure is how much are you eating. After all, you should know what to eat to lose, maintain or bulk.0
-
XavierNusum wrote: »angelaquiggins wrote: »Im new here and confused on which to count? Any advise is appriciated.
The best one is the one you can do forever. Low carb works for lots of people, but most cannot stick to it causing them to gain back the weight. You need to pick the one that you an stick with.angelaquiggins wrote: »What is CICO?
Calories In vs. Calories Out
With regard to the bolded, I would restate that as "low carb works for lots of people as a way of maintaining a caloric deficit". Picking the one you can stick with doesn't matter if CI is not less than CO.0 -
Start with counting calories.
You may find it helps you stay in a deficit to change your diet a bit and the guidelines for protein, carbs, and fat (which you can change) help with that. It's not uncommon for people to find they are less hungry if they up their protein a bit, for example, and many women seem to find that they are way low on protein compared even with the default MFP numbers (although this was not the case for me).
As you log you will be able to compare days where you are hungrier and days when you are not and also just generally look over your diet and see what easy places to cut are. Personally, I cut carbs some because I was eating some (rice, sandwiches, larger portions of pasta) that I didn't much care about, just because they were there or convenient. Decreasing my serving of pasta and leaving the sauce (made from lean meat and veggies) that I like best anyway was an entirely painless way for me to cut calories. But others, with different preferences, will find it easier to focus on other things. (And I also cut my fat some, as I had to cut across the board to get down to a calorie deficit.)0 -
As the others have said.
It's a false dichotomy...it's not carbs OR calories.
It's calories. Period.
HOW you get to the appropriate number of calories is up to your personal preference...low-carb, low-fat, plant-based, IIFYM, etc are all simply different ways of eating. But none work if calories are not set correctly.0 -
mantium999 wrote: »XavierNusum wrote: »angelaquiggins wrote: »Im new here and confused on which to count? Any advise is appriciated.
The best one is the one you can do forever. Low carb works for lots of people, but most cannot stick to it causing them to gain back the weight. You need to pick the one that you an stick with.angelaquiggins wrote: »What is CICO?
Calories In vs. Calories Out
With regard to the bolded, I would restate that as "low carb works for lots of people as a way of maintaining a caloric deficit". Picking the one you can stick with doesn't matter if CI is not less than CO.
Fair enough0 -
XavierNusum wrote: »
The best one is the one you can do forever. Low carb works for lots of people, but most cannot stick to it causing them to gain back the weight. You need to pick the one that you can stick with.
This ^
I'm doing low carb because my husband and I have medical reasons and it was suggested by a Doctor. I however am finding low carb to be very easy to stick too and really don't miss them. To each his own however and if cutting out sugar and starches isn't sustainable to you for life, then stick with CICO. CICO works just as well.
Edit: And yes, both ways still lead to a calorie deficit which leads to weight loss.0 -
I have quit counting but I did well when I reduced or cut carbs like potatoes & breads AND counted calories. Not to say its better or right, it just worked for me. Even without counting any more I continue with limiting my pasta, potato, bread carbs but its a free for all when it involves fruits and veggies.0
-
chaoticdreams wrote: »I'm doing low carb because my husband and I have medical reasons and it was suggested by a Doctor. I however am finding low carb to be very easy to stick too and really don't miss them. To each his own however and if cutting out sugar and starches isn't sustainable to you for life, then stick with CICO. CICO works just as well.
Just to clarify, low carb is not different from CICO, as you seem to be saying. It's simply one of many possible ways to get a calorie deficit (or in maintenance, to stick at maintenance, etc.).0 -
low carbing is just one of many ways of reducing calories...reducing calories is how you lose weight.
a calorie is a unit of energy...your body runs on this energy...when you consume energy in excess of what you need to maintain the status quot, that energy is stored for later use...your backup generator. When you consume less energy than is required to maintain the status quot, your backup generator kicks on and you use your energy reserves (body fat) to make up that deficit.
weight management has nothing to do with carbohydrates other than it is one of many modalities used to reduce overall calorie intake. That said, most people who eat anything remotely resembling the SAD could stand to moderate their carbohydrate intake and make better overall choices as to the carbohydrates they are eating...i.e. less 40 ounce big gulps and more nutritionally qualified carbohydrates.0 -
MFP is about counting calories. How many of those calories that come from carbs is up to you.0
-
chaoticdreams wrote: »XavierNusum wrote: »
The best one is the one you can do forever. Low carb works for lots of people, but most cannot stick to it causing them to gain back the weight. You need to pick the one that you can stick with.
This ^
I'm doing low carb because my husband and I have medical reasons and it was suggested by a Doctor. I however am finding low carb to be very easy to stick too and really don't miss them. To each his own however and if cutting out sugar and starches isn't sustainable to you for life, then stick with CICO. CICO works just as well.
Edit: And yes, both ways still lead to a calorie deficit which leads to weight loss.
Just to emphasize a point here, it's not an either/or question. All roads lead to CICO. Low carb, like any other choice, only works within the confines of CICO. You don't have to count calories to be in a caloric deficit, but CICO happens regardless.0 -
Meh0
-
0
-
Science is beginning to realise that calories in, calories out isn't a valid approach to losing or maintaining weight, and that "a calorie is a calorie" is a falsehood. Our bodies can tell the difference between different types of foods even when the calorie counts are identical. A lot of research - I recommend Dr Robert Lustig, a professor of paediatric endrocronology - has pointed to the low fat, high sugar diet as the primary if not sole cause of the obesity epidemic in the West, and numerous studies have shown people eating the same calories losing different amounts of weight.
If you want an accurate picture of what caused you to put the pounds on, eat normally for a few weeks but log it accurately. After a few weeks, you'll be able to see what kind of diet you're eating and to notice where changes need to be made. For instance, you might see you're eating far too many calories, though the likelihood is you'll be eating more carbs, sugar and salt from processed food. Current science is advocating for a return to a more moderate fat diet (35-40%) with higher protein (20-25%) and fewer carbohydrates, and it really does leave you feeling full, sometimes to the point where you can't consume all the calories you're meant to.
I'm trying to maintain my weight, and was recommended to eat 1,600-1,800 calories/day by both my doctor and this website's calculator. Most days, I'm hard pressed to eat that much, but if I eat a lot of sugary or carb-rich foods, I can very easily go over and still feel hungry. I also lose 1-2 pounds/week on a low sugar, higher fat and higher protein diet, even eating upwards of 2,000 calories/day, but if I eat the same calories in processed bread (added sugar), pasta with tomato sauce (lots of added sugar) and processed soup (lots of added sugar) I'd gain.0 -
Science is beginning to realise that calories in, calories out isn't a valid approach to losing or maintaining weight, and that "a calorie is a calorie" is a falsehood.
No..."science" is not. Some derpy woo peddlers (aka Lustig) are, but science is not.
Disregarded rest of post, since first sentence was inherently false.
0 -
ceoverturf wrote: »Science is beginning to realise that calories in, calories out isn't a valid approach to losing or maintaining weight, and that "a calorie is a calorie" is a falsehood.
No..."science" is not. Some derpy woo peddlers (aka Lustig) are, but science is not.
Disregarded rest of post, since first sentence was inherently false.
Yup0 -
-
Science is beginning to realise that calories in, calories out isn't a valid approach to losing or maintaining weight, and that "a calorie is a calorie" is a falsehood. Our bodies can tell the difference between different types of foods even when the calorie counts are identical. A lot of research - I recommend Dr Robert Lustig, a professor of paediatric endrocronology - has pointed to the low fat, high sugar diet as the primary if not sole cause of the obesity epidemic in the West, and numerous studies have shown people eating the same calories losing different amounts of weight.
If you want an accurate picture of what caused you to put the pounds on, eat normally for a few weeks but log it accurately. After a few weeks, you'll be able to see what kind of diet you're eating and to notice where changes need to be made. For instance, you might see you're eating far too many calories, though the likelihood is you'll be eating more carbs, sugar and salt from processed food. Current science is advocating for a return to a more moderate fat diet (35-40%) with higher protein (20-25%) and fewer carbohydrates, and it really does leave you feeling full, sometimes to the point where you can't consume all the calories you're meant to.
I'm trying to maintain my weight, and was recommended to eat 1,600-1,800 calories/day by both my doctor and this website's calculator. Most days, I'm hard pressed to eat that much, but if I eat a lot of sugary or carb-rich foods, I can very easily go over and still feel hungry. I also lose 1-2 pounds/week on a low sugar, higher fat and higher protein diet, even eating upwards of 2,000 calories/day, but if I eat the same calories in processed bread (added sugar), pasta with tomato sauce (lots of added sugar) and processed soup (lots of added sugar) I'd gain.
If people cannot easily maintain weight on a diet without processed food, how did our species come to be? We didn't have access to bread, pasta, tomato sauce, or soups for most of our history, yet we still managed to put on weight and maintain it. What you are saying doesn't make much sense to me.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.7K 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
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions