Why the calorie is broken

Options
trjjoy
trjjoy Posts: 666 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
My boyfriend and I debated this article earlier today. I found it a frustrating read because the writers do not tell us whether the two obese people weigh their food or whether they ''eyeball'' their food. We know nothing about how often they eat out at restaurants. We hear nothing about how big their portion sizes are. And so on and so on. We just hear excuses for why they can't lose weight, BUT then we also hear the calorie can be a useful weight-loss tool. So which is it?

Replies

  • dewd2
    dewd2 Posts: 2,449 Member
    Options
    The problems begin when you take what MFP, your fitness tracker, and the calories printed for your food literately. They are indeed 'best guesses' and may not be accurate for you. They serve as a starting point to help you learn about yourself. You start with the information given here at MFP and adjust your intake up or down based on your results. If you gain you are eating too much. Over time you can use tools like MFP to learn how to eat. Once you learn this, you will be set for life.

    In the end it is pretty simple but the diet industry tries as hard as it can to make it confusing. If everyone simply burned more than they consume there would be no 'diet industry'.

    Good luck.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,874 Member
    Options
    meh...lost 40 Lbs...worked pretty well for me.

    i think people put too much stock into these calculators and other devices though rather than using them as reasonably good starting points and making adjustments as necessary.
  • Yi5hedr3
    Yi5hedr3 Posts: 2,696 Member
    Options
    Ain't broken - people are.
  • emdeesea
    emdeesea Posts: 1,823 Member
    Options
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    meh...lost 40 Lbs...worked pretty well for me.

    Same here. Fifty pounds gone. I'm somewhat skeptical when people say "well, it just doesn't work!"
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,344 Member
    Options
    It's another clickbait article because nobody will pay attention to "eat less, move more". It doesn't invalidate CI<CO, it just says there are factors which complicate that. As the posters above said, use things like MFP and fitness trackers as a starting point and adjust from there.

    The calorie isn't a "useful weight loss tool", it's a unit of measure. Nonetheless, calories are king when it comes to weight loss. If you're taking in less than you're expending, you lose weight. A lot of fad diets and supplements would have people believe that they somehow defy the laws of thermodynamics/energy balance, but the irrefutable fact is that CI<CO is the only way weight loss happens.
  • SunnyDayzMomma
    SunnyDayzMomma Posts: 114 Member
    edited January 2016
    Options
    No system is perfect because it's dealing with humans, who are all imperfect. I didn't finish the article, I got frustrated because I had so many interjections and no one to listen, lol. MFP has many articles stating the only people who should eat back their exercise calories are those who are maintaining or gaining weight, or building significant muscle mass. They recognize the system of calories in vs out is broken for those seeking a loss. Maybe it's the start of an accepted understanding in the weight loss community, that your workout makes you fit but won't make you lose weight. In my MFP friend base, the ones who consistently eat back exercise calories, generally have smaller weight losses each week. I don't eat them back because I'm a self professed exercise hater, and I instead lead an active lifestyle and I don't track it.

    I've lost 52 pounds since starting to count calories. But I was ready. I woke up one day and and haven't looked back since. I believe had I decided to do weight watchers, like some friends, I'd have had similar success out of the gate, but I had MFP at my fingertips and I liked the anonymity of it at the start. But what I now love about calorie counting, is it's on every package, and the Internet has most whole foods listed somewhere. It's sustainable (so important!) because of society's support of listing calories, fat, protein and carbs. I've learned the life skill of knowing portion sizes and roughly how many calories are in what, but I still choose to weigh and measure my food, because I have 37 more pounds to go. But once I'm there I'll have to maintain, and then I'll probably still weigh my food, because I like knowing how much I'm consuming. The biggest skill I've gained from counting calories, is an internal rubric as to what gets the privilege of being eaten. Yes you could eat doritos and chocolate every day, but you'd be starving by afternoon because you'd be done your calories quickly. Having a calorie limit, and weighing yourself regularly (weekly as per MFP) teaches you what works for your body and mind. Nothing will work for everyone, but I find calorie counting a good general guideline to support a LIFESTYLE of healthy food consumption, instead of just a diet as a means to an end.
  • diannethegeek
    diannethegeek Posts: 14,776 Member
    Options
    "I think ponies are better than cats" is an opinion. "I think ponies are better than cats because cats kill peole with their laser beam eyes" is still an opinion, but it's one based on misinformation or a misunderstanding of the facts. And that's fine. We've all had opinions like that over the years. The important thing is what you do when you find out that cats don't have laser beam eyes. Do you stop and reassess your opinions? Or do you jump up and down and insist that's what you were told?
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    Options
    What the article author fails to realise is that biological processes are complex. Weight loss isn't just fat - it can be a variety of other things completely unrelated to the calorie content. But the long term loss of fat (an energy store) remains directly correlated to calories in and the amount of movement in your life.

    It isn't complicated, it is fuzzy. Understanding that and the rest follows.
  • diannethegeek
    diannethegeek Posts: 14,776 Member
    Options
    Were posts removed from this thread or did I get confused and post in the wrong place again?
  • Test_Ryder
    Test_Ryder Posts: 231 Member
    Options
    WTF where is everything
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,874 Member
    Options
    diannethegeek wrote: »
    Were posts removed from this thread or did I get confused and post in the wrong place again?

    looks that way....
  • richln
    richln Posts: 809 Member
    Options
    I haven't noticed any broken calories around. Still seem to work the same, just as they always have. On the other hand, disappearing posts and disappearing people are a mystery.
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    Options
    diannethegeek wrote: »
    Were posts removed from this thread or did I get confused and post in the wrong place again?

    48933216.jpg
  • emdeesea
    emdeesea Posts: 1,823 Member
    Options
    So now we'll never find out how salt is transferred directly into fat. ;)
  • Carlos_421
    Carlos_421 Posts: 5,132 Member
    Options
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    It's another clickbait article because nobody will pay attention to "eat less, move more". It doesn't invalidate CI<CO, it just says there are factors which complicate that. As the posters above said, use things like MFP and fitness trackers as a starting point and adjust from there.

    The calorie isn't a "useful weight loss tool", it's a unit of measure. Nonetheless, calories are king when it comes to weight loss. If you're taking in less than you're expending, you lose weight. A lot of fad diets and supplements would have people believe that they somehow defy the laws of thermodynamics/energy balance, but the irrefutable fact is that CI<CO is the only way weight loss happens.

    Yup
    diannethegeek wrote: »
    "I think ponies are better than cats" is an opinion. "I think ponies are better than cats because cats kill peole with their laser beam eyes" is still an opinion, but it's one based on misinformation or a misunderstanding of the facts. And that's fine. We've all had opinions like that over the years. The important thing is what you do when you find out that cats don't have laser beam eyes. Do you stop and reassess your opinions? Or do you jump up and down and insist that's what you were told?

    Yup again
  • veganbaum
    veganbaum Posts: 1,865 Member
    edited January 2016
    Options
    SunnyDayzMomma wrote: »
    No system is perfect because it's dealing with humans, who are all imperfect. I didn't finish the article, I got frustrated because I had so many interjections and no one to listen, lol. MFP has many articles stating the only people who should eat back their exercise calories are those who are maintaining or gaining weight, or building significant muscle mass. They recognize the system of calories in vs out is broken for those seeking a loss. Maybe it's the start of an accepted understanding in the weight loss community, that your workout makes you fit but won't make you lose weight. In my MFP friend base, the ones who consistently eat back exercise calories, generally have smaller weight losses each week. I don't eat them back because I'm a self professed exercise hater, and I instead lead an active lifestyle and I don't track it.

    What?

    The only people who should fuel their bodies appropriately are those who are trying to maintain or gain? That's absurd. Do you know how many people on this site do enough regular exercise that they should be eating them back, or they are increasing their deficit in an unhealthy manner? Let alone those who do intense exercise.

    To say that those of your MFP friends who eat back their exercise calories generally have smaller weekly losses has nothing to do with whether the calorie is "broken" or not. To start with, do you know what each of your friends weekly loss goal is? If you don't, then you don't know if your friends are meeting their goals or not. Exercise increases your deficit. So if some aren't eating those calories, of course they'll lose more weight. As experienced members will say until they're blue in the face, that's not all it's about. It's about creating a healthy and sustainable deficit that allows an individual to meet their nutritional needs, fuel their bodies for daily life and exercise so one doesn't burn out or injure themselves, and hopefully maintain as much muscle mass as possible. Additionally, the less accurate one is in food logging, the more likely that eating exercise calories will decrease their chosen deficit. But that's due to human error, not the calorie.

    Your comment about exercise calories and losses doesn't mean anything. Smaller losses could mean a person has a lower goal or it could relate to accuracy (in logging and exercise calorie estimates). Additionally, as several have said, those are estimates. A person's estimated goal for loss is a starting point, and they need to give it time to see where they fall. I don't understand how you think anything you said means "They recognize the system of calories in vs out is broken for those seeking a loss."
  • jennifer_417
    jennifer_417 Posts: 12,344 Member
    Options
    *wonders if broken calories taste like chicken*

Categories