Good calories vs bad calories
Replies
-
muscleandbeard wrote: »Omg I officially dislike this app and the poor advice that people on here give. There is more to weight loss than just the number on the scale. Body composition is only determined by the foods you eat. You can lose weight by a calorie deficit but you will not be toned, shredded etc. You will be skinny fat if you eat crap food. Please refer to this link to better understand why what you eat is just as important as how much you eat. You have to be in deficit to lose weight, but you have to have a well balanced diet to lose fat instead of muscle.
http://comfortpit.com/the-truth-about-calories/
You keep saying how much you dislike this app and what the community promotes. I think you keep failing to recognize that the majority of people using this tool are not here to become shredded, elite athletes. Sure there are people here who are more hyper focused and looking to maximize their performance, whether it be competing in an Ironman, training for fitness competitions, getting to sub 10% body fat, etc.
Many people are here with very basic questions about how to lose weight and become a healthier person. This type of question that the OP posed is asked time and again, and the responses she has gotten: that calories are a unit of energy and while you can lose weight with no regard to the nutritional makeup of your food as long as you're in a deficit, that's not advisable for overall health, satiety, etc are wholly accurate and appropriate for the question she asked. People also recommend eating a balanced, nutrient dense diet and most recommend focusing on increasing protein in your diet. I'm sorry you think that advice is terrible.
0 -
muscleandbeard wrote: »Omg I officially dislike this app and the poor advice that people on here give. There is more to weight loss than just the number on the scale. Body composition is only determined by the foods you eat. You can lose weight by a calorie deficit but you will not be toned, shredded etc. You will be skinny fat if you eat crap food. Please refer to this link to better understand why what you eat is just as important as how much you eat. You have to be in deficit to lose weight, but you have to have a well balanced diet to lose fat instead of muscle.
http://comfortpit.com/the-truth-about-calories/
Who said not to eat a well-balanced diet?
We were answering OP's specific question: would she lose more eating 1400 calories of fruits and veg (defined as "good foods") vs. 1200 calories of fried food (defined as bad).
Ironically, the fried food would likely include protein (at least I think fried chicken, fried fish, etc.), fruits and veg wouldn't have much, probably -- neither is a great choice, as many of us said, while encouraging a well-balanced diet.
Also, as rabbit notes, strength training and being active has more to do with maintaining muscle than just eating protein, and very few people are going to be eating super inadequate protein -- especially for someone with lots to lose they are going to be losing primarily fat. Yes, when you have less fat maximizing the chance of retaining muscle becomes more important. This advice is given all over MFP constantly -- how you miss it is beyond me.0 -
1400 calories is 1400 calories. However, for me "bad calories" are calories that don't fill me up (don't provide satiety) so I still feel hungry and crappy and want to eat more. That's why I set my calories and my macros (protein/fat/carbs) at levels where I feel satiated or full, with reduced food cravings. That way I stick to my calorie goal. By the way -- 1400 would not be enough cals for me. I would rather eat more calories and lose weight slower, but feel less hungry (and also taking into account the intense exercise I do).
that does not make them bad0 -
OP - 1400 calories of fried food = 1400 calories of vegetables from an energy standpoint because they each provide the same amount of energy; however, they are not nutritionally the same. Honestly, a diet of either would not be good as it would be impossible to hit your macros on either, and good luck eating 1400 calories of pure vegetables….
what matters is overall dietary choice and not individual foods. There are no bad foods, only bad diets.
0 -
I would expect the OP would want to opt for a diet higher in proteins and carbs from fruit and vegetables. Every one would most likely agree that the less processed foods the better for weight "healthy" weight loss.
I tend to agree with the gentlemen who indicated that if the OP ate a calorie deficit of junk food he/she or anyone for that matter would end up a skinny "fat" person. Yes a calorie is a calorie and a deficit is a deficit but a low calorie diet of calorie loaded unhealthy foods would be one where a trip to McDonald's could use up half or more of your calorie goal. Because that unhealthy food will soon be gone and has done little to nothing to provide your body with its needed nutrition, you are now faced with the balance of the day with a low amount of calories to eat and no ability to get proper nutrition.
As you lose the weight if you can stick with it which I trust you will, you won't be happy IMO with how your body responds to a diet of "empty" calories....especially at a deficit.
Wish you the best, this is NOT an easy transition to make. Maybe an approach is lessening the junk food to once a day or something and easing your way towards healthy choices which your body will love you for.
"disclaimer" This is just my opinion and is not meant to elicit a firestorm of people telling me how stupid I am0 -
Tomk652015 wrote: »I would expect the OP would want to opt for a diet higher in proteins and carbs from fruit and vegetables. Every one would most likely agree that the less processed foods the better for weight "healthy" weight loss.
I tend to agree with the gentlemen who indicated that if the OP ate a calorie deficit of junk food he/she or anyone for that matter would end up a skinny "fat" person. Yes a calorie is a calorie and a deficit is a deficit but a low calorie diet of calorie loaded unhealthy foods would be one where a trip to McDonald's could use up half or more of your calorie goal. Because that unhealthy food will soon be gone and has done little to nothing to provide your body with its needed nutrition, you are now faced with the balance of the day with a low amount of calories to eat and no ability to get proper nutrition.
As you lose the weight if you can stick with it which I trust you will, you won't be happy IMO with how your body responds to a diet of "empty" calories....especially at a deficit.
Wish you the best, this is NOT an easy transition to make. Maybe an approach is lessening the junk food to once a day or something and easing your way towards healthy choices which your body will love you for.
"disclaimer" This is just my opinion and is not meant to elicit a firestorm of people telling me how stupid I am
I wouldn't agree. Some processed foods fit very well into a weight loss plan. I ate canned tomatoes, frozen broccoli, tofu, seitan, protein powder, rolled oats, roasted nuts, and dried beans regularly when I was losing weight. I don't agree that I would have been healthier or lost weight faster if I had eliminated these items. I know I'm not the only person who has experienced successful weight loss while including many processed foods in my diet.
I don't know if anybody is going to tell you that you're stupid -- I do think that dividing foods into "processed - bad" and "unprocessed -- good" is an over-simplification and one that isn't very useful for weight loss purposes.
0 -
muscleandbeard wrote: »I officially dislike your advice which consistently seems to imply that protein is all you need to preserve LBM in defecit in exclusion of any progressive resistance programme
protein is a wonderful macro
most here talk about hitting nutritional goals
Please refer to the article I posted and stop trying to argue with me. I'm only trying to help people and steer them away from misinformation.
I'm not trying to argue with you - I'm pointing out the fallacy in your claim that a macro will preserve muscle tissue in isolation
and heck no .. I gave up reading derp blogs when I found scholar.google.com0 -
Tomk652015 wrote: »Wish you the best, this is NOT an easy transition to make. Maybe an approach is lessening the junk food to once a day or something and easing your way towards healthy choices which your body will love you for.
Why on earth would you jump to the conclusion that OP is eating only "junk food" or that anyone else is saying that that would be a good approach? I find this puzzling and an example of why these threads end up with people talking past each other. Apparently you think what you and "the gentleman" said is somehow vastly different than what others said and, sorry, I don't see that.
(Also, processed foods can't be generalized about. Most foods are processed. Personally I had some processed smoked salmon and steel cut oats this morning, among other things, and it helps me meet my goals.)0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Tomk652015 wrote: »I would expect the OP would want to opt for a diet higher in proteins and carbs from fruit and vegetables. Every one would most likely agree that the less processed foods the better for weight "healthy" weight loss.
I tend to agree with the gentlemen who indicated that if the OP ate a calorie deficit of junk food he/she or anyone for that matter would end up a skinny "fat" person. Yes a calorie is a calorie and a deficit is a deficit but a low calorie diet of calorie loaded unhealthy foods would be one where a trip to McDonald's could use up half or more of your calorie goal. Because that unhealthy food will soon be gone and has done little to nothing to provide your body with its needed nutrition, you are now faced with the balance of the day with a low amount of calories to eat and no ability to get proper nutrition.
As you lose the weight if you can stick with it which I trust you will, you won't be happy IMO with how your body responds to a diet of "empty" calories....especially at a deficit.
Wish you the best, this is NOT an easy transition to make. Maybe an approach is lessening the junk food to once a day or something and easing your way towards healthy choices which your body will love you for.
"disclaimer" This is just my opinion and is not meant to elicit a firestorm of people telling me how stupid I am
I wouldn't agree. Some processed foods fit very well into a weight loss plan. I ate canned tomatoes, frozen broccoli, tofu, seitan, protein powder, rolled oats, roasted nuts, and dried beans regularly when I was losing weight. I don't agree that I would have been healthier or lost weight faster if I had eliminated these items. I know I'm not the only person who has experienced successful weight loss while including many processed foods in my diet.
I don't know if anybody is going to tell you that you're stupid -- I do think that dividing foods into "processed - bad" and "unprocessed -- good" is an over-simplification and one that isn't very useful for weight loss purposes.
Seems like you might be mixing the apples with the oranges. The post was about junk/unhealthy food and only once used the term processed food. I doubt many people would put "canned tomatoes, frozen broccoli, tofu, seitan, protein powder, rolled oats, roasted nuts, and dried beans" in the category of junk food or unhealthy food.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Tomk652015 wrote: »I would expect the OP would want to opt for a diet higher in proteins and carbs from fruit and vegetables. Every one would most likely agree that the less processed foods the better for weight "healthy" weight loss.
I tend to agree with the gentlemen who indicated that if the OP ate a calorie deficit of junk food he/she or anyone for that matter would end up a skinny "fat" person. Yes a calorie is a calorie and a deficit is a deficit but a low calorie diet of calorie loaded unhealthy foods would be one where a trip to McDonald's could use up half or more of your calorie goal. Because that unhealthy food will soon be gone and has done little to nothing to provide your body with its needed nutrition, you are now faced with the balance of the day with a low amount of calories to eat and no ability to get proper nutrition.
As you lose the weight if you can stick with it which I trust you will, you won't be happy IMO with how your body responds to a diet of "empty" calories....especially at a deficit.
Wish you the best, this is NOT an easy transition to make. Maybe an approach is lessening the junk food to once a day or something and easing your way towards healthy choices which your body will love you for.
"disclaimer" This is just my opinion and is not meant to elicit a firestorm of people telling me how stupid I am
I wouldn't agree. Some processed foods fit very well into a weight loss plan. I ate canned tomatoes, frozen broccoli, tofu, seitan, protein powder, rolled oats, roasted nuts, and dried beans regularly when I was losing weight. I don't agree that I would have been healthier or lost weight faster if I had eliminated these items. I know I'm not the only person who has experienced successful weight loss while including many processed foods in my diet.
I don't know if anybody is going to tell you that you're stupid -- I do think that dividing foods into "processed - bad" and "unprocessed -- good" is an over-simplification and one that isn't very useful for weight loss purposes.
Seems like you might be mixing the apples with the oranges. The post was about junk/unhealthy food and only once used the term processed food. I doubt many people would put "canned tomatoes, frozen broccoli, tofu, seitan, protein powder, rolled oats, roasted nuts, and dried beans" in the category of junk food or unhealthy food.
Regardless, if you eat 1400 calories of "good food" and 1200 calories of "bad food", you aren't going to lose more weight, which is what the OP asked.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Tomk652015 wrote: »I would expect the OP would want to opt for a diet higher in proteins and carbs from fruit and vegetables. Every one would most likely agree that the less processed foods the better for weight "healthy" weight loss.
I tend to agree with the gentlemen who indicated that if the OP ate a calorie deficit of junk food he/she or anyone for that matter would end up a skinny "fat" person. Yes a calorie is a calorie and a deficit is a deficit but a low calorie diet of calorie loaded unhealthy foods would be one where a trip to McDonald's could use up half or more of your calorie goal. Because that unhealthy food will soon be gone and has done little to nothing to provide your body with its needed nutrition, you are now faced with the balance of the day with a low amount of calories to eat and no ability to get proper nutrition.
As you lose the weight if you can stick with it which I trust you will, you won't be happy IMO with how your body responds to a diet of "empty" calories....especially at a deficit.
Wish you the best, this is NOT an easy transition to make. Maybe an approach is lessening the junk food to once a day or something and easing your way towards healthy choices which your body will love you for.
"disclaimer" This is just my opinion and is not meant to elicit a firestorm of people telling me how stupid I am
I wouldn't agree. Some processed foods fit very well into a weight loss plan. I ate canned tomatoes, frozen broccoli, tofu, seitan, protein powder, rolled oats, roasted nuts, and dried beans regularly when I was losing weight. I don't agree that I would have been healthier or lost weight faster if I had eliminated these items. I know I'm not the only person who has experienced successful weight loss while including many processed foods in my diet.
I don't know if anybody is going to tell you that you're stupid -- I do think that dividing foods into "processed - bad" and "unprocessed -- good" is an over-simplification and one that isn't very useful for weight loss purposes.
Seems like you might be mixing the apples with the oranges. The post was about junk/unhealthy food and only once used the term processed food. I doubt many people would put "canned tomatoes, frozen broccoli, tofu, seitan, protein powder, rolled oats, roasted nuts, and dried beans" in the category of junk food or unhealthy food.
I was responding to this statement: "Every one would most likely agree that the less processed foods the better for weight 'healthy' weight loss."
I don't agree the less processed foods the better for healthy weight loss. I think processed foods can be a great advantage for those trying to lose weight and maintain or regain health.
I agree that most people wouldn't put the foods I mentioned in the category of junk food or unhealthy food, which is why it doesn't make sense to demonize processed food or say that we should eat less of it if we want to be healthy or lose weight.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Tomk652015 wrote: »I would expect the OP would want to opt for a diet higher in proteins and carbs from fruit and vegetables. Every one would most likely agree that the less processed foods the better for weight "healthy" weight loss.
I tend to agree with the gentlemen who indicated that if the OP ate a calorie deficit of junk food he/she or anyone for that matter would end up a skinny "fat" person. Yes a calorie is a calorie and a deficit is a deficit but a low calorie diet of calorie loaded unhealthy foods would be one where a trip to McDonald's could use up half or more of your calorie goal. Because that unhealthy food will soon be gone and has done little to nothing to provide your body with its needed nutrition, you are now faced with the balance of the day with a low amount of calories to eat and no ability to get proper nutrition.
As you lose the weight if you can stick with it which I trust you will, you won't be happy IMO with how your body responds to a diet of "empty" calories....especially at a deficit.
Wish you the best, this is NOT an easy transition to make. Maybe an approach is lessening the junk food to once a day or something and easing your way towards healthy choices which your body will love you for.
"disclaimer" This is just my opinion and is not meant to elicit a firestorm of people telling me how stupid I am
I wouldn't agree. Some processed foods fit very well into a weight loss plan. I ate canned tomatoes, frozen broccoli, tofu, seitan, protein powder, rolled oats, roasted nuts, and dried beans regularly when I was losing weight. I don't agree that I would have been healthier or lost weight faster if I had eliminated these items. I know I'm not the only person who has experienced successful weight loss while including many processed foods in my diet.
I don't know if anybody is going to tell you that you're stupid -- I do think that dividing foods into "processed - bad" and "unprocessed -- good" is an over-simplification and one that isn't very useful for weight loss purposes.
Seems like you might be mixing the apples with the oranges. The post was about junk/unhealthy food and only once used the term processed food. I doubt many people would put "canned tomatoes, frozen broccoli, tofu, seitan, protein powder, rolled oats, roasted nuts, and dried beans" in the category of junk food or unhealthy food.
I was responding to this statement: "Every one would most likely agree that the less processed foods the better for weight 'healthy' weight loss."
I don't agree the less processed foods the better for healthy weight loss. I think processed foods can be a great advantage for those trying to lose weight and maintain or regain health.
I agree that most people wouldn't put the foods I mentioned in the category of junk food or unhealthy food, which is why it doesn't make sense to demonize processed food or say that we should eat less of it if we want to be healthy or lose weight.
Do you think that's what the post was doing? Demonizing nuts and beans and protein powder?0 -
muscleandbeard wrote: »Omg I officially dislike this app and the poor advice that people on here give. There is more to weight loss than just the number on the scale. Body composition is only determined by the foods you eat. You can lose weight by a calorie deficit but you will not be toned, shredded etc. You will be skinny fat if you eat crap food. Please refer to this link to better understand why what you eat is just as important as how much you eat. You have to be in deficit to lose weight, but you have to have a well balanced diet to lose fat instead of muscle.
http://comfortpit.com/the-truth-about-calories/
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
muscleandbeard wrote: »I officially dislike your advice which consistently seems to imply that protein is all you need to preserve LBM in defecit in exclusion of any progressive resistance programme
protein is a wonderful macro
most here talk about hitting nutritional goals
Please refer to the article I posted and stop trying to argue with me. I'm only trying to help people and steer them away from misinformation.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Tomk652015 wrote: »I would expect the OP would want to opt for a diet higher in proteins and carbs from fruit and vegetables. Every one would most likely agree that the less processed foods the better for weight "healthy" weight loss.
I tend to agree with the gentlemen who indicated that if the OP ate a calorie deficit of junk food he/she or anyone for that matter would end up a skinny "fat" person. Yes a calorie is a calorie and a deficit is a deficit but a low calorie diet of calorie loaded unhealthy foods would be one where a trip to McDonald's could use up half or more of your calorie goal. Because that unhealthy food will soon be gone and has done little to nothing to provide your body with its needed nutrition, you are now faced with the balance of the day with a low amount of calories to eat and no ability to get proper nutrition.
As you lose the weight if you can stick with it which I trust you will, you won't be happy IMO with how your body responds to a diet of "empty" calories....especially at a deficit.
Wish you the best, this is NOT an easy transition to make. Maybe an approach is lessening the junk food to once a day or something and easing your way towards healthy choices which your body will love you for.
"disclaimer" This is just my opinion and is not meant to elicit a firestorm of people telling me how stupid I am
I wouldn't agree. Some processed foods fit very well into a weight loss plan. I ate canned tomatoes, frozen broccoli, tofu, seitan, protein powder, rolled oats, roasted nuts, and dried beans regularly when I was losing weight. I don't agree that I would have been healthier or lost weight faster if I had eliminated these items. I know I'm not the only person who has experienced successful weight loss while including many processed foods in my diet.
I don't know if anybody is going to tell you that you're stupid -- I do think that dividing foods into "processed - bad" and "unprocessed -- good" is an over-simplification and one that isn't very useful for weight loss purposes.
Seems like you might be mixing the apples with the oranges. The post was about junk/unhealthy food and only once used the term processed food. I doubt many people would put "canned tomatoes, frozen broccoli, tofu, seitan, protein powder, rolled oats, roasted nuts, and dried beans" in the category of junk food or unhealthy food.
I was responding to this statement: "Every one would most likely agree that the less processed foods the better for weight 'healthy' weight loss."
I don't agree the less processed foods the better for healthy weight loss. I think processed foods can be a great advantage for those trying to lose weight and maintain or regain health.
I agree that most people wouldn't put the foods I mentioned in the category of junk food or unhealthy food, which is why it doesn't make sense to demonize processed food or say that we should eat less of it if we want to be healthy or lose weight.
Do you think that's what the post was doing? Demonizing nuts and beans and protein powder?
When someone says "the less processed foods the better," I assume they are saying the less processed foods one eats, the better off one will be. If that wasn't what was meant, then there is an opportunity for better communication.
I disagree with that statement, for the reasons that I mentioned. I don't agree the less dried beans I eat, the better off I'll be. I don't agree the less frozen broccoli I eat, the better I'll be. I don't agree the less miso I eat, the better off I'll be.
0 -
stevencloser wrote: »muscleandbeard wrote: »Omg I officially dislike this app and the poor advice that people on here give. There is more to weight loss than just the number on the scale. Body composition is only determined by the foods you eat. You can lose weight by a calorie deficit but you will not be toned, shredded etc. You will be skinny fat if you eat crap food. Please refer to this link to better understand why what you eat is just as important as how much you eat. You have to be in deficit to lose weight, but you have to have a well balanced diet to lose fat instead of muscle.
http://comfortpit.com/the-truth-about-calories/
Body composition is not only determined by the foods you eat. Have you seen a 5% bf bodybuilder who never did any training?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
Tomk652015 wrote: »I would expect the OP would want to opt for a diet higher in proteins and carbs from fruit and vegetables. Every one would most likely agree that the less processed foods the better for weight "healthy" weight loss.
I tend to agree with the gentlemen who indicated that if the OP ate a calorie deficit of junk food he/she or anyone for that matter would end up a skinny "fat" person. Yes a calorie is a calorie and a deficit is a deficit but a low calorie diet of calorie loaded unhealthy foods would be one where a trip to McDonald's could use up half or more of your calorie goal. Because that unhealthy food will soon be gone and has done little to nothing to provide your body with its needed nutrition, you are now faced with the balance of the day with a low amount of calories to eat and no ability to get proper nutrition.
As you lose the weight if you can stick with it which I trust you will, you won't be happy IMO with how your body responds to a diet of "empty" calories....especially at a deficit.
Wish you the best, this is NOT an easy transition to make. Maybe an approach is lessening the junk food to once a day or something and easing your way towards healthy choices which your body will love you for.
"disclaimer" This is just my opinion and is not meant to elicit a firestorm of people telling me how stupid I am
Personally I have junk food at least 2 times a week and maybe more. I'd NOT be viewed as a skinny fat person.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
muscleandbeard wrote: »I officially dislike your advice which consistently seems to imply that protein is all you need to preserve LBM in defecit in exclusion of any progressive resistance programme
protein is a wonderful macro
most here talk about hitting nutritional goals
Please refer to the article I posted and stop trying to argue with me. I'm only trying to help people and steer them away from misinformation.
I'm not trying to argue with you - I'm pointing out the fallacy in your claim that a macro will preserve muscle tissue in isolation
and heck no .. I gave up reading derp blogs when I found scholar.google.com
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
Here is how I think about this scenario.
Lets say on a 1200 calorie diet you eat nothing but snickers bars. Yes you would most likely weigh less, but you would feel like crap. And eating nothing but 4.8 candy bars a day would most likely leave you still hungry, and make you more likely to binge on even more crap, which makes you feel bad about yourself, so you eat even more crap food to cheer yourself up. A vicious cycle.
Now on that same 1200 calories, you eat nothing but boiled chicken breast and steamed broccoli. That's close to a pound of lean protein, and around 4 pounds of plant based nutrients. You will be much more satisfied and energized. Bored to tears, but not hungry.
So yes, a calorie is a calorie. But don't be an idiot. Your diet is your diet for life. Choose to fuel your body in a sustainable and responsible manner and it will treat you well.0 -
Here is how I think about this scenario.
Lets say on a 1200 calorie diet you eat nothing but snickers bars. Yes you would most likely weigh less, but you would feel like crap. And eating nothing but 4.8 candy bars a day would most likely leave you still hungry, and make you more likely to binge on even more crap, which makes you feel bad about yourself, so you eat even more crap food to cheer yourself up. A vicious cycle.
Now on that same 1200 calories, you eat nothing but boiled chicken breast and steamed broccoli. That's close to a pound of lean protein, and around 4 pounds of plant based nutrients. You will be much more satisfied and energized. Bored to tears, but not hungry.
So yes, a calorie is a calorie. But don't be an idiot. Your diet is your diet for life. Choose to fuel your body in a sustainable and responsible manner and it will treat you well.
To be honest, neither of those plans (only Snickers or only boiled chicken and steamed broccoli) sounds very sustainable.
0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Here is how I think about this scenario.
Lets say on a 1200 calorie diet you eat nothing but snickers bars. Yes you would most likely weigh less, but you would feel like crap. And eating nothing but 4.8 candy bars a day would most likely leave you still hungry, and make you more likely to binge on even more crap, which makes you feel bad about yourself, so you eat even more crap food to cheer yourself up. A vicious cycle.
Now on that same 1200 calories, you eat nothing but boiled chicken breast and steamed broccoli. That's close to a pound of lean protein, and around 4 pounds of plant based nutrients. You will be much more satisfied and energized. Bored to tears, but not hungry.
So yes, a calorie is a calorie. But don't be an idiot. Your diet is your diet for life. Choose to fuel your body in a sustainable and responsible manner and it will treat you well.
To be honest, neither of those plans (only Snickers or only boiled chicken and steamed broccoli) sounds very sustainable.
Agreed.0 -
Here is how I think about this scenario.
Lets say on a 1200 calorie diet you eat nothing but snickers bars. Yes you would most likely weigh less, but you would feel like crap. And eating nothing but 4.8 candy bars a day would most likely leave you still hungry, and make you more likely to binge on even more crap, which makes you feel bad about yourself, so you eat even more crap food to cheer yourself up. A vicious cycle.
Now on that same 1200 calories, you eat nothing but boiled chicken breast and steamed broccoli. That's close to a pound of lean protein, and around 4 pounds of plant based nutrients. You will be much more satisfied and energized. Bored to tears, but not hungry.
So yes, a calorie is a calorie. But don't be an idiot. Your diet is your diet for life. Choose to fuel your body in a sustainable and responsible manner and it will treat you well.
The point being that "a" Snickers bar can be PART of a diet plan and weight loss can still occur.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Here is how I think about this scenario.
Lets say on a 1200 calorie diet you eat nothing but snickers bars. Yes you would most likely weigh less, but you would feel like crap. And eating nothing but 4.8 candy bars a day would most likely leave you still hungry, and make you more likely to binge on even more crap, which makes you feel bad about yourself, so you eat even more crap food to cheer yourself up. A vicious cycle.
Now on that same 1200 calories, you eat nothing but boiled chicken breast and steamed broccoli. That's close to a pound of lean protein, and around 4 pounds of plant based nutrients. You will be much more satisfied and energized. Bored to tears, but not hungry.
So yes, a calorie is a calorie. But don't be an idiot. Your diet is your diet for life. Choose to fuel your body in a sustainable and responsible manner and it will treat you well.
To be honest, neither of those plans (only Snickers or only boiled chicken and steamed broccoli) sounds very sustainable.
I was just using these as simple examples to make the math easier. Bad food tends to be very calorie dense and not filling, good food tends to have a very low calorie to mass ratio. Feel free to sub in any lean protein, plant matter, and complex carbs you wish.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Here is how I think about this scenario.
Lets say on a 1200 calorie diet you eat nothing but snickers bars. Yes you would most likely weigh less, but you would feel like crap. And eating nothing but 4.8 candy bars a day would most likely leave you still hungry, and make you more likely to binge on even more crap, which makes you feel bad about yourself, so you eat even more crap food to cheer yourself up. A vicious cycle.
Now on that same 1200 calories, you eat nothing but boiled chicken breast and steamed broccoli. That's close to a pound of lean protein, and around 4 pounds of plant based nutrients. You will be much more satisfied and energized. Bored to tears, but not hungry.
So yes, a calorie is a calorie. But don't be an idiot. Your diet is your diet for life. Choose to fuel your body in a sustainable and responsible manner and it will treat you well.
To be honest, neither of those plans (only Snickers or only boiled chicken and steamed broccoli) sounds very sustainable.
I was just using these as simple examples to make the math easier. Bad food tends to be very calorie dense and not filling, good food tends to have a very low calorie to mass ratio. Feel free to sub in any lean protein, plant matter, and complex carbs you wish.
How about a diet that's varied and not just 1-2 things all day every day?0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Tomk652015 wrote: »I would expect the OP would want to opt for a diet higher in proteins and carbs from fruit and vegetables. Every one would most likely agree that the less processed foods the better for weight "healthy" weight loss.
I tend to agree with the gentlemen who indicated that if the OP ate a calorie deficit of junk food he/she or anyone for that matter would end up a skinny "fat" person. Yes a calorie is a calorie and a deficit is a deficit but a low calorie diet of calorie loaded unhealthy foods would be one where a trip to McDonald's could use up half or more of your calorie goal. Because that unhealthy food will soon be gone and has done little to nothing to provide your body with its needed nutrition, you are now faced with the balance of the day with a low amount of calories to eat and no ability to get proper nutrition.
As you lose the weight if you can stick with it which I trust you will, you won't be happy IMO with how your body responds to a diet of "empty" calories....especially at a deficit.
Wish you the best, this is NOT an easy transition to make. Maybe an approach is lessening the junk food to once a day or something and easing your way towards healthy choices which your body will love you for.
"disclaimer" This is just my opinion and is not meant to elicit a firestorm of people telling me how stupid I am
I wouldn't agree. Some processed foods fit very well into a weight loss plan. I ate canned tomatoes, frozen broccoli, tofu, seitan, protein powder, rolled oats, roasted nuts, and dried beans regularly when I was losing weight. I don't agree that I would have been healthier or lost weight faster if I had eliminated these items. I know I'm not the only person who has experienced successful weight loss while including many processed foods in my diet.
I don't know if anybody is going to tell you that you're stupid -- I do think that dividing foods into "processed - bad" and "unprocessed -- good" is an over-simplification and one that isn't very useful for weight loss purposes.
Seems like you might be mixing the apples with the oranges. The post was about junk/unhealthy food and only once used the term processed food. I doubt many people would put "canned tomatoes, frozen broccoli, tofu, seitan, protein powder, rolled oats, roasted nuts, and dried beans" in the category of junk food or unhealthy food.
I was responding to this statement: "Every one would most likely agree that the less processed foods the better for weight 'healthy' weight loss."
I don't agree the less processed foods the better for healthy weight loss. I think processed foods can be a great advantage for those trying to lose weight and maintain or regain health.
I agree that most people wouldn't put the foods I mentioned in the category of junk food or unhealthy food, which is why it doesn't make sense to demonize processed food or say that we should eat less of it if we want to be healthy or lose weight.
Do you think that's what the post was doing? Demonizing nuts and beans and protein powder?
When someone says "the less processed foods the better," I assume they are saying the less processed foods one eats, the better off one will be. If that wasn't what was meant, then there is an opportunity for better communication.
I disagree with that statement, for the reasons that I mentioned. I don't agree the less dried beans I eat, the better off I'll be. I don't agree the less frozen broccoli I eat, the better I'll be. I don't agree the less miso I eat, the better off I'll be.
I can't tell if you are being purposely obtuse, didn't read past the first sentence before responding or are serious. I don't see how anyone could read that whole post about "unhealthy" "junk" food and McD and think it had anything to do with broccoli and beans. I think you jest.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Here is how I think about this scenario.
Lets say on a 1200 calorie diet you eat nothing but snickers bars. Yes you would most likely weigh less, but you would feel like crap. And eating nothing but 4.8 candy bars a day would most likely leave you still hungry, and make you more likely to binge on even more crap, which makes you feel bad about yourself, so you eat even more crap food to cheer yourself up. A vicious cycle.
Now on that same 1200 calories, you eat nothing but boiled chicken breast and steamed broccoli. That's close to a pound of lean protein, and around 4 pounds of plant based nutrients. You will be much more satisfied and energized. Bored to tears, but not hungry.
So yes, a calorie is a calorie. But don't be an idiot. Your diet is your diet for life. Choose to fuel your body in a sustainable and responsible manner and it will treat you well.
To be honest, neither of those plans (only Snickers or only boiled chicken and steamed broccoli) sounds very sustainable.
I was just using these as simple examples to make the math easier. Bad food tends to be very calorie dense and not filling, good food tends to have a very low calorie to mass ratio. Feel free to sub in any lean protein, plant matter, and complex carbs you wish.
"Bad food" tends to be very calorie dense and not filling? Do you mean there are "bad foods" that aren't calorie dense? Or that are filling?
I'm not sure what you mean by "bad food," but I think I disagree that chocolate is an example of it.
Calorie to mass ratio is one valuable piece of data to consider when planning our diets. But I think using it as a tool to determine "goodness" or "badness" of a food can lead us to some weird places.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Here is how I think about this scenario.
Lets say on a 1200 calorie diet you eat nothing but snickers bars. Yes you would most likely weigh less, but you would feel like crap. And eating nothing but 4.8 candy bars a day would most likely leave you still hungry, and make you more likely to binge on even more crap, which makes you feel bad about yourself, so you eat even more crap food to cheer yourself up. A vicious cycle.
Now on that same 1200 calories, you eat nothing but boiled chicken breast and steamed broccoli. That's close to a pound of lean protein, and around 4 pounds of plant based nutrients. You will be much more satisfied and energized. Bored to tears, but not hungry.
So yes, a calorie is a calorie. But don't be an idiot. Your diet is your diet for life. Choose to fuel your body in a sustainable and responsible manner and it will treat you well.
To be honest, neither of those plans (only Snickers or only boiled chicken and steamed broccoli) sounds very sustainable.
I was just using these as simple examples to make the math easier. Bad food tends to be very calorie dense and not filling, good food tends to have a very low calorie to mass ratio. Feel free to sub in any lean protein, plant matter, and complex carbs you wish.
How about a diet that's varied and not just 1-2 things all day every day?
You must be new here.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Here is how I think about this scenario.
Lets say on a 1200 calorie diet you eat nothing but snickers bars. Yes you would most likely weigh less, but you would feel like crap. And eating nothing but 4.8 candy bars a day would most likely leave you still hungry, and make you more likely to binge on even more crap, which makes you feel bad about yourself, so you eat even more crap food to cheer yourself up. A vicious cycle.
Now on that same 1200 calories, you eat nothing but boiled chicken breast and steamed broccoli. That's close to a pound of lean protein, and around 4 pounds of plant based nutrients. You will be much more satisfied and energized. Bored to tears, but not hungry.
So yes, a calorie is a calorie. But don't be an idiot. Your diet is your diet for life. Choose to fuel your body in a sustainable and responsible manner and it will treat you well.
To be honest, neither of those plans (only Snickers or only boiled chicken and steamed broccoli) sounds very sustainable.
I was just using these as simple examples to make the math easier. Bad food tends to be very calorie dense and not filling, good food tends to have a very low calorie to mass ratio. Feel free to sub in any lean protein, plant matter, and complex carbs you wish.
It's never that simple though. Nuts, for example, have a high calorie to mass ratio but are still a good healthy addition to most diets. Balance is the key. A little junk isn't going to ruin my diet or health.0 -
Well i'm new here and I guess some people just want to argue and post rebuttals on sentences instead of the post as a whole so with that....I bow out...with only saying that I stand behind what I said above as it was it considerate advice that I believe is in the best overall interest of anyone on a path towards better health. I'll take the high road and allow those to each have their opinions and let the OP to weed though for their own on their road to a healthier leaner person.
Best wishes.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Tomk652015 wrote: »I would expect the OP would want to opt for a diet higher in proteins and carbs from fruit and vegetables. Every one would most likely agree that the less processed foods the better for weight "healthy" weight loss.
I tend to agree with the gentlemen who indicated that if the OP ate a calorie deficit of junk food he/she or anyone for that matter would end up a skinny "fat" person. Yes a calorie is a calorie and a deficit is a deficit but a low calorie diet of calorie loaded unhealthy foods would be one where a trip to McDonald's could use up half or more of your calorie goal. Because that unhealthy food will soon be gone and has done little to nothing to provide your body with its needed nutrition, you are now faced with the balance of the day with a low amount of calories to eat and no ability to get proper nutrition.
As you lose the weight if you can stick with it which I trust you will, you won't be happy IMO with how your body responds to a diet of "empty" calories....especially at a deficit.
Wish you the best, this is NOT an easy transition to make. Maybe an approach is lessening the junk food to once a day or something and easing your way towards healthy choices which your body will love you for.
"disclaimer" This is just my opinion and is not meant to elicit a firestorm of people telling me how stupid I am
I wouldn't agree. Some processed foods fit very well into a weight loss plan. I ate canned tomatoes, frozen broccoli, tofu, seitan, protein powder, rolled oats, roasted nuts, and dried beans regularly when I was losing weight. I don't agree that I would have been healthier or lost weight faster if I had eliminated these items. I know I'm not the only person who has experienced successful weight loss while including many processed foods in my diet.
I don't know if anybody is going to tell you that you're stupid -- I do think that dividing foods into "processed - bad" and "unprocessed -- good" is an over-simplification and one that isn't very useful for weight loss purposes.
Seems like you might be mixing the apples with the oranges. The post was about junk/unhealthy food and only once used the term processed food. I doubt many people would put "canned tomatoes, frozen broccoli, tofu, seitan, protein powder, rolled oats, roasted nuts, and dried beans" in the category of junk food or unhealthy food.
I was responding to this statement: "Every one would most likely agree that the less processed foods the better for weight 'healthy' weight loss."
I don't agree the less processed foods the better for healthy weight loss. I think processed foods can be a great advantage for those trying to lose weight and maintain or regain health.
I agree that most people wouldn't put the foods I mentioned in the category of junk food or unhealthy food, which is why it doesn't make sense to demonize processed food or say that we should eat less of it if we want to be healthy or lose weight.
Do you think that's what the post was doing? Demonizing nuts and beans and protein powder?
When someone says "the less processed foods the better," I assume they are saying the less processed foods one eats, the better off one will be. If that wasn't what was meant, then there is an opportunity for better communication.
I disagree with that statement, for the reasons that I mentioned. I don't agree the less dried beans I eat, the better off I'll be. I don't agree the less frozen broccoli I eat, the better I'll be. I don't agree the less miso I eat, the better off I'll be.
I can't tell if you are being purposely obtuse, didn't read past the first sentence before responding or are serious. I don't see how anyone could read that whole post about "unhealthy" "junk" food and McD and think it had anything to do with broccoli and beans. I think you jest.
I read the entire post and I indicated the part that I was responding to. Do you agree the less processed foods the better? If you do, we can just agree to disagree. If you agree with me -- that processed foods can be a valuable part of a healthy diet -- I'm not quite sure what you're wanting to discuss.
Sometimes when responding to a longer post, someone will pull out a specific part they agree or disagree with to discuss. It's a fairly standard part of online communication. Because a specific part is pulled out, going back over sections that aren't called out may not be particularly useful. Since I mentioned the specific part of the post that I disagreed with (the part about processed food), I'm not sure what the rest of the post has to do with it.
So let me be clearer: When I wrote "I was responding to this statement" and then quoted a specific part of the statement, I meant that I was responding to that statement. If you want to discuss the rest of the post, maybe you could find someone who is interested in doing that. I am interested in discussing the statement that we will be better off the less processed food we eat.
You think I'm mixing apples with oranges, but I think that is what I believe the person I am responding to is doing by using "processed" as a way to identify foods that should be targeted for elimination or reduction in the diet. What I'm saying is that the fact that a food is processed is an irrelevant data point when determining whether or not one should eat it. When a category includes frozen broccoli, miso, PopTarts, protein powder, hot sauce, dried beans, heavy cream, Oreos, canned tomatoes, skim milk, raspberry jam, and olive oil, it's not a useful category to decide what -- if anything -- should be eliminated or reduced from the diet.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
- 96.4K 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