What's the biggest weight-loss lie you've ever heard?
aliceband21
Posts: 15 Member
There's loads flying about. I'll start us off: 'if you eat it in the dark it doesn't count'!
1
Replies
-
Stop eating after 7 PM
To lose weight just stop eating bread, pasta and rice25 -
"You don't need to worry about calories, only sugar!"
My god I could eat 5,000 calories with minimal sugar, doesn't make it magically defy the law of CICO. And this came from someone who knew I have recently lost 12kg doing calorie counting28 -
Broken biscuits don't contain calories!
9 -
You can only eat boring food when on a diet.
I get that a lot and nothing I eat I find boring.12 -
B12 injections help with weightloss
9 -
Starvation mode35
-
If you just eat protein you can't get fat10
-
Therealobi1 wrote: »Stop eating after 7 PM
To lose weight just stop eating bread, pasta and rice
And potatoes! Don't forget about those evil, fattening potatoes!
25 -
If you don't exercise you can't lose weight. Said to me by someone who exercises like a crazy thing but never loses weight...while my fairly sedentary self drops lbs!23
-
Not eating after 6 pm
Dinner has to be pure protein because carbs eating in the evening are automatically stored as fat
Carbs are evil
Fruits make you fat
Eating every 3 hours will help to lose weight
Eating more to lose more because of starvation mode18 -
Stop eating fat to lose fat / better to eat sweets than avocado and cashews
Too much sugar in fruits
Carbs are the devil
If you don't exercise, you won't lose any weight
Breakfast is the most important meal of the day, not eating any is a crime
If you're on a diet, you need to eat lettuce all the time
Liquid calories don't count9 -
dustedwithsugar wrote: »Eating every 3 hours will help to lose weight
This is not a myth actually. If you eat more frequent but little portions, your body has time to digest what you ate and you are less hungry in a process. Also eating when you're NOT hungry helps to fill you up faster leading to eating less at meal time.
6 -
dustedwithsugar wrote: »Eating every 3 hours will help to lose weight
This is not a myth actually. If you eat more frequent but little portions, your body has time to digest what you ate and you are less hungry in a process. Also eating when you're NOT hungry helps to fill you up faster leading to eating less at meal time.
This is a myth as it varies per person. I don't do well on frequent, small meals as they always leave me hungry. This is why many people adopt an IF style of eating, as meal times are a preference. There is nothing special about small, frequent meals in and of itself that would induce weight loss.40 -
-
dustedwithsugar wrote: »Eating every 3 hours will help to lose weight
This is not a myth actually. If you eat more frequent but little portions, your body has time to digest what you ate and you are less hungry in a process. Also eating when you're NOT hungry helps to fill you up faster leading to eating less at meal time.
This is a myth as it varies per person. I don't do well on frequent, small meals as they always leave me hungry. This is why many people adopt an IF style of eating, as meal times are a preference. There is nothing special about small, frequent meals in and of itself that would induce weight loss.
Then you don't eat right macros per meal. It's really that easy. I was of same thought as you before I started to look at meal macros.2 -
Any diet that tells you to cut an entire food group out of your eating plan ... Moderation is the key to weight management success, not discrimination...!!22
-
dustedwithsugar wrote: »Eating every 3 hours will help to lose weight
This is not a myth actually. If you eat more frequent but little portions, your body has time to digest what you ate and you are less hungry in a process. Also eating when you're NOT hungry helps to fill you up faster leading to eating less at meal time.
This is a myth as it varies per person. I don't do well on frequent, small meals as they always leave me hungry. This is why many people adopt an IF style of eating, as meal times are a preference. There is nothing special about small, frequent meals in and of itself that would induce weight loss.
Then you don't eat right macros per meal. It's really that easy. I was of same thought as you before I started to look at meal macros.
For you. There's nothing universally better about small, frequent meals over having larger meals less frequently. Meal timing doesn't matter for weight loss (only the overall deficit) so each person can move their calories around to whatever times they wish.44 -
-sugar is toxic and will cause you to gain weight (without giving proper context as to the hows and whys)
-artificial sweetner is evil and causes weight gain
-diet soda will not only kill you, it will also make you fat
-eating fast food is bad and will cause you to gain weight (again, no context is usually given)
-you must eat a certain macros ratio to lose weight
-calories are not created equal
-you must eat breakfast
-you must eat 6 small meals a day
-you must exercise to lose weight....
And I could go on and on
18 -
dustedwithsugar wrote: »Eating every 3 hours will help to lose weight
This is not a myth actually. If you eat more frequent but little portions, your body has time to digest what you ate and you are less hungry in a process. Also eating when you're NOT hungry helps to fill you up faster leading to eating less at meal time.
No, that's been debunked. There's lots of us who do IF and only eat 1-3 times a day, and are very successful meeting our goals. Meal timing and frequency is a preference thing, nothing more. What does matter is how many calories you've consumed at the end of each day.31 -
dustedwithsugar wrote: »Eating every 3 hours will help to lose weight
This is not a myth actually. If you eat more frequent but little portions, your body has time to digest what you ate and you are less hungry in a process. Also eating when you're NOT hungry helps to fill you up faster leading to eating less at meal time.
This is a myth as it varies per person. I don't do well on frequent, small meals as they always leave me hungry. This is why many people adopt an IF style of eating, as meal times are a preference. There is nothing special about small, frequent meals in and of itself that would induce weight loss.
Then you don't eat right macros per meal. It's really that easy. I was of same thought as you before I started to look at meal macros.
Macros breakdown doesn't matter for weight loss either. In terms of weight loss the only thing that matters is that you're eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals.11 -
This content has been removed.
-
Same as many mentioned above:
You must eat 5-6 mini meals.
You must not eat after [insert time].
If you don't eat enough your body gets nervous and holds on to (or even gains) fat.
Calories don't count.
Fat makes you fat (independent of overall calories).
Carbs make you fat (same).
Sugar makes you fat (same).
Fat cannot make you fat, as your body does not know how to add fat from fat (this is truly bizarre).
Carbs cannot make you fat (courtesy Dr. McDougall).
Sugar is toxic.
Exercise beyond the "fat burning zone" does not aid in losing fat.
Foods with sugar/carbs make you more hungry (maybe true for some, but not me, and this gets stated like it's true for all).
Fat is more satiating than other macros or than carbs (again, not true for me -- fat is not filling for me at all).
Basically anything that would have you ignore your own perceptions of satiety and satisfaction for some "expert" opinion: "no, really, if you eat more meals, more fat, more for breakfast, cut out diet pop, cut out all sugar, so on, you won't be hungry all the time." (But I'm not hungry now, so why?)8 -
ReaderGirl3 wrote: »dustedwithsugar wrote: »Eating every 3 hours will help to lose weight
This is not a myth actually. If you eat more frequent but little portions, your body has time to digest what you ate and you are less hungry in a process. Also eating when you're NOT hungry helps to fill you up faster leading to eating less at meal time.
This is a myth as it varies per person. I don't do well on frequent, small meals as they always leave me hungry. This is why many people adopt an IF style of eating, as meal times are a preference. There is nothing special about small, frequent meals in and of itself that would induce weight loss.
Then you don't eat right macros per meal. It's really that easy. I was of same thought as you before I started to look at meal macros.
Macros breakdown doesn't matter for weight loss either. In terms of weight loss the only thing that matters is that you're eating at the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals.
@ReaderGirl3 I respect your opinions. What do you believe about the thermic effect?0 -
I'm not ReaderGirl3, but it's small within the context of the variety of healthful diets. The major difference is that protein has a higher cost of digestion vs. fat (lowest) or carbs (various depending on the type of carb, but lower than protein). Since there are good reasons not to eat a diet skewed toward super high protein (fat and carbs are better fuels, cost, overall nutrition and satisfaction), you aren't really going to see much difference without sacrificing other things and probably having an unsustainable diet, and also being able to eat the most (on paper) calories doesn't mean the diet itself is more satisfying, so I fail to see the value.
Thermic effect of normal variations from keto (usually a bit higher protein but also much higher fat, so the effects cancel each other out) to vegan aren't going to matter much.7 -
@lemurcat12 Yes, I see your point about higher fat cancelling out the effects of protein from this standpoint.0
-
- diet supplements work
- your metabolism can be kickstarted
- apple cider vinegar is a cure-all
- aspartame is the debbil
- sugar is cocaine 11 -
"You don't need to worry about calories, only sugar!"
My god I could eat 5,000 calories with minimal sugar, doesn't make it magically defy the law of CICO. And this came from someone who knew I have recently lost 12kg doing calorie counting
I agree with you that 5000 calories and no sugar wouldn't do much. But i can say that after lowering my total sugar intake (refined and natural) to 20g or under, my weight loss took off. The body doesn't need more sugar than that. of course, you would have to watch other macros such as carbs and sodium...Even "Fat" content doesn't bother me all that much and I am over (just a little) most days - but I have consistently lost 1-2 lbs since I've started following this rule.
I won't say that I don't care about my calories, but I am not a slave to that number. I don't even have my calories on my dashboard, I have my macros and honestly, If I hit my macros - 99% of the time, I have stayed within my calories when check a the end of the day - a few times i couldn't complete my diary because I hadnt eaten enough calories - so "poor me" - I had to eat more
There is no doubt and plenty of studies that eliminating or drastically lowering your sugar intake will assist in weight loss.
1 -
dustedwithsugar wrote: »Eating every 3 hours will help to lose weight
This is not a myth actually. If you eat more frequent but little portions, your body has time to digest what you ate and you are less hungry in a process. Also eating when you're NOT hungry helps to fill you up faster leading to eating less at meal time.
This is a myth as it varies per person. I don't do well on frequent, small meals as they always leave me hungry. This is why many people adopt an IF style of eating, as meal times are a preference. There is nothing special about small, frequent meals in and of itself that would induce weight loss.
Then you don't eat right macros per meal. It's really that easy. I was of same thought as you before I started to look at meal macros.
Erm, no. My macro breakdown is fine; I've been doing this for quite a long time now. I'm not even actively trying to losing weight anymore. I'm 5'3.5" and 111 pounds, so I'm pretty lean and my macro balance and diet are both of the utmost importance to me to make sure I get the right nutrition and meet my fitness goals. I have a significant amount of muscle for my frame and I'm also a highly active individual, so my needs are going to vary from the next person's.
I will note that I find it interesting that many lean men and women prefer the IF style of eating. I usually eat in an 8 hour window and find I do best on a big breakfast, a small snack, and a bigger dinner. I'm never hungry at other times throughout the day doing this. Does that mean my method is the only way or the absolute correct way? No. Would I recommend everyone else eat in the same fashion? No. However, it is what works for me. I've had zero issues doing so, my body composition continues to improve, and my hunger levels are stable. Again, everyone varies.12 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »I'm not ReaderGirl3, but it's small within the context of the variety of healthful diets. The major difference is that protein has a higher cost of digestion vs. fat (lowest) or carbs (various depending on the type of carb, but lower than protein). Since there are good reasons not to eat a diet skewed toward super high protein (fat and carbs are better fuels, cost, overall nutrition and satisfaction), you aren't really going to see much difference without sacrificing other things and probably having an unsustainable diet, and also being able to eat the most (on paper) calories doesn't mean the diet itself is more satisfying, so I fail to see the value.
Thermic effect of normal variations from keto (usually a bit higher protein but also much higher fat, so the effects cancel each other out) to vegan aren't going to matter much.
Thank you, I was trying to figure out how to word a response but you said it better than I was going to 3 -
LisaClifford731 wrote: »"You don't need to worry about calories, only sugar!"
My god I could eat 5,000 calories with minimal sugar, doesn't make it magically defy the law of CICO. And this came from someone who knew I have recently lost 12kg doing calorie counting
I agree with you that 5000 calories and no sugar wouldn't do much. But i can say that after lowering my total sugar intake (refined and natural) to 20g or under, my weight loss took off. The body doesn't need more sugar than that. of course, you would have to watch other macros such as carbs and sodium...Even "Fat" content doesn't bother me all that much and I am over (just a little) most days - but I have consistently lost 1-2 lbs since I've started following this rule.
I won't say that I don't care about my calories, but I am not a slave to that number. I don't even have my calories on my dashboard, I have my macros and honestly, If I hit my macros - 99% of the time, I have stayed within my calories when check a the end of the day - a few times i couldn't complete my diary because I hadnt eaten enough calories.
There is no doubt and plenty of studies that eliminating or drastically lowering your sugar intake will assist in weight loss.
I'm heading out for the day and really don't have time for another sugar debate, but could you clarify-are you saying that by lowering your sugar intake you're lowering your calorie intake, which helps create the correct calorie deficit for your weight loss goals? Or are you saying that if you lower your sugar intake, but continue eating at your TDEE or even at a calorie surplus over your TDEE, you'll lose weight just because you've cut out/down on sugar?
Also, how did you remove your calories from your dashboard? When I go into my settings calories is the only thing I can't remove (it shows that it's required).1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions