Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Why do people overeat and/or become obese? Is it harder than average for some to lose weight?
Replies
-
Some of us have oral fixations. I know I started buying gum because I had a urge to chew on things even if I wasn't hungry. Weight loss is an uphill battle for me daily because I'll want to gnaw on something even if I am not hungry. Also, salty foods or food right before bed can cause problems in regard to weight loss.0
-
Personally, I eat when I'm bored. I also enjoy food, I LOVE carbs and sugar, and I grew up on a lot of food from boxes and cans. So I didn't have great eating habits as a kid but I was active and my metabolism was chugging right along until I hit about 25, and then I started putting on a few pounds. Around that time I also became a stay-at-home-mom and my lifestyle became quite sedentary - wasn't taking self defense classes or going on all day bike rides anymore. And furthermore, there was about a year where I was having some emotional struggles and that caused me to eat a metric ton of chocolate, which didn't help things.
As for losing weight, I've had great success cutting way back on grains and sugar, increasing proteins and veggies, and simply not eating too much. So that is what works for my body, but I don't want to compare myself to another, because we all have our struggles and pitfalls, and what works for me may not work for someone else. There are too many variables.0 -
BillMcKay1 wrote: »I can relate to this. I am going to Hershey Park next weekend and my 14 year old son wants to do the water park. I put on a bikini and have been going outside to get a little bit of a base tan beforehand so that I don't burn on Saturday. The current physique I have will not work for me in the public in a bikini, so I will settle for a one piece that day.
If all of my peers were thin and able to get into one I would be a bit more concerned. But I know most of the moms at Hershey Park will be my size or larger. Conversely, when I was much thinner most of my friends were my size or smaller so I worked harder to stay slim. Peer pressure has something to do with it for sure.
I do think the bolded can play a BIG part in people's lives. I've rationalized it myself over the years, ya I've gained some pounds but look at old Bob over there, I'm not nearly as big as him. It's a funny phenomenon. I remember comparing myself to inshape dudes, then a bit chubby, then fat, then obese. Like a sliding scale. Feeling like you are smaller than the person you are comparing yourself too to feel ok with yourself is a mental trick. When I stopped to compare myself to a guy older than me but in fantastic shape it stripped away all the pretense and got me to a place where I wanted to make some life style changes.
Exactly. As the "norm" gets larger and larger we don't look so bad. Lol.
It also explains a bit of push back people sometimes (often) get from spouses,friends and family when trying make positive changes. By changing you are forcing them to really see themselves and what they are doing. My sister and brother in law after about 3 years of positive changes to their fitness and health went and trained for and competed in a physique competition. My Brother in Law at 46 (2.5 years older than me) just killed it. Dude was ripped. Won 1st place is 2 categories in his first comp. My sister also 46, who 6 years ago was 230lbs or more at 5'5 had a visible six pack.
I was admittedly not nearly as supportive as I could have been( understatement of the year). It took sometime for me to move past the uneasiness and misplaced anger their changes brought up in me, to a place where I am highly motivated by what they accomplished.8 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lexbubbles wrote: »your post is irrelevant to the op and this isn't a discussion on individuals but those who overeat and those who say it's harder for them to lose that normal people.I think we've lost sight of the original topic of discussion. It was not about the population in general, but about those individuals who say they have a harder time than most to lose weight and what drives them to eat even knowing the harm it's doing to them.
...
Because when someone says "Hi, I maintain on less than 2k" and your immediate response is ARE YOU LOGGING ARE YOU TINY YOU MUST BE SEDENTARY that doesn't imply "I would like clarification" that implies disbelief. If you actually believed Deb when she said she maintained <2k you wouldn't have asked for clarification in the first place. I could question your apparent maintenance because it doesn't line up with my personal experience, but I didn't. Because I believe you, on account of human variance being... varied.I asked a few clarifying questions so what. You seem angry that I went that routeAnd what evidence did you provide your bmr so...mine is 50 above that...proves nothing neither does an arbitrary calculation of 1.3 against it a study of 1 is not gospel.
But your study of 1 is. (Also multiple people on this thread have now pointed out that they maintain on sub-2,000. The only thing I did was back it up with actual numbers as a "hey, look, totally possible to maintain on this number without being a tiny sedentary person")
I mean I also have the evidence of "using that number I am losing exactly the amount of weight I should be losing with the deficit I have against said number" as I'm sure the other low maintainers do also (except that's not my BMR. Mine's below that as I pointed out last time I posted in this thread. I was providing stats for a person my height/age/weight without a metabolic issue)
This just in though: BMR and TDEE calculations prove nothing and are useless.As well you haven't responded once in the 16 pages...seems odd you jump in to post about something that is irrelevant to the OP...
I mean, I have. But I've just been reading for a while because I only post when I have something to contribute to the conversation as it currently stands. The conversation as it stood was about maintenance cals.
If you think maintenance cals are irrelevant to the OP about why certain individuals may have a harder time (or believe they do) than other people then... er...
Whatever, I'm done here.
Those two top statements say the same thing...this is not about individual in this topic posting about themselves per say it's about those who say they have a harder time losing then others...
To your 2nd point...I did ask questions...note the question marks at the end of the sentences to indicate I was asking if she was smaller and/or sedentary etc...and me saying "I have to ask...."
....
and I have to ask if you gain on 2k a day are you totally sedentary? exceptionally short (under 5ft tall) and a very tiny woman?
and I have to ask if you use a food scale and are you sure you only eat 1200 and gain on 2k...
@DebSozo and @lexbubbles es Maintenance calories have nothing to do with why people over eat...or are obese or find it harder to lose weight lack of understanding of what maintenance calories are and how to achieve maintenance maybe but I said that on page 1...lack of education not know how to lose but mostly not knowing how to maintain. Not understand CICO or even what calories/servings mean.
but again not going to further this debate with non on topic debates with how people interpret text with prejudice due to their own issues.
Hunh? You missed the point which is that if a person believes that their maintenance level is higher than it is that the pounds will gradually add up. The overeating is not on purpose. It happens under the radar.
no I didn't...how can you think your maintenance is higher than it is if you understand maintenance? How can someone who knows what maintenance is think it's higher? If they eat over it they gain weight that's a sure sign they are eating above maintenance....
There is a very simple calculation for it...total calories consumed+(lbs lost x 3500)/#days and if you aren't losing but staying the same or gaining you adjust the calculation...hence my statement of lack of knowledge and education...
I know my maintenance within 50-100 calories (nothing is perfect) now that I am educated...4 years ago...had no clue...and guess what I was fat...as soon as I understood what it was and how to calculate it the weight fell off...and I have maintained wonderfully.
Do I understand your posts correctly that you believe most people think they are gaining weight without overeating? That they literally have no clue that they could lose weight if they ate less?
no not at all...
They have no clue how much they can eat to lose/maintain or how many calories are in what they are eating or what a serving size is even tho it's on the package...or what an appropriate serving size is...and if they know that they don't really know how to get an accurate count of calories.
You see it here all the time...I am eating 1200 calories and not losing help...when in fact they are eating about 2000 but because they can't judge portion size are not in a deficit.
1 -
BillMcKay1 wrote: »I can relate to this. I am going to Hershey Park next weekend and my 14 year old son wants to do the water park. I put on a bikini and have been going outside to get a little bit of a base tan beforehand so that I don't burn on Saturday. The current physique I have will not work for me in the public in a bikini, so I will settle for a one piece that day.
If all of my peers were thin and able to get into one I would be a bit more concerned. But I know most of the moms at Hershey Park will be my size or larger. Conversely, when I was much thinner most of my friends were my size or smaller so I worked harder to stay slim. Peer pressure has something to do with it for sure.
I do think the bolded can play a BIG part in people's lives. I've rationalized it myself over the years, ya I've gained some pounds but look at old Bob over there, I'm not nearly as big as him. It's a funny phenomenon. I remember comparing myself to inshape dudes, then a bit chubby, then fat, then obese. Like a sliding scale. Feeling like you are smaller than the person you are comparing yourself too to feel ok with yourself is a mental trick. When I stopped to compare myself to a guy older than me but in fantastic shape it stripped away all the pretense and got me to a place where I wanted to make some life style changes.
I am currently the same weight I was at in college 15 years ago, but I feel much thinner right now. The difference now is where I lie on the weight distribution curve. It's most decidedly moved up in that time.1 -
From my personal experience, some over eating as I am sure its been mentioned within this growing thread. Is the idea that food is good/bad or clean/dirty. Overtime this leads to an unhealthy relationship with food as, eating clean is super restrictive. Most people will start with cheat meals, which lead to cheat days, which are really disused as binges. Where these people eat all the "dirty" foods they deny all week long or for some extended duration.
Over the course of time, things begin to compound and grow more severe. Often turning into a cycle like...restrict, restrict, restrict, binge, punish and repeat. Often leading to metabolic damage from the yo-yo, depression, and so on.
Its a nasty cycle and takes serious dedication to stop it.
2 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lexbubbles wrote: »your post is irrelevant to the op and this isn't a discussion on individuals but those who overeat and those who say it's harder for them to lose that normal people.I think we've lost sight of the original topic of discussion. It was not about the population in general, but about those individuals who say they have a harder time than most to lose weight and what drives them to eat even knowing the harm it's doing to them.
...
Because when someone says "Hi, I maintain on less than 2k" and your immediate response is ARE YOU LOGGING ARE YOU TINY YOU MUST BE SEDENTARY that doesn't imply "I would like clarification" that implies disbelief. If you actually believed Deb when she said she maintained <2k you wouldn't have asked for clarification in the first place. I could question your apparent maintenance because it doesn't line up with my personal experience, but I didn't. Because I believe you, on account of human variance being... varied.I asked a few clarifying questions so what. You seem angry that I went that routeAnd what evidence did you provide your bmr so...mine is 50 above that...proves nothing neither does an arbitrary calculation of 1.3 against it a study of 1 is not gospel.
But your study of 1 is. (Also multiple people on this thread have now pointed out that they maintain on sub-2,000. The only thing I did was back it up with actual numbers as a "hey, look, totally possible to maintain on this number without being a tiny sedentary person")
I mean I also have the evidence of "using that number I am losing exactly the amount of weight I should be losing with the deficit I have against said number" as I'm sure the other low maintainers do also (except that's not my BMR. Mine's below that as I pointed out last time I posted in this thread. I was providing stats for a person my height/age/weight without a metabolic issue)
This just in though: BMR and TDEE calculations prove nothing and are useless.As well you haven't responded once in the 16 pages...seems odd you jump in to post about something that is irrelevant to the OP...
I mean, I have. But I've just been reading for a while because I only post when I have something to contribute to the conversation as it currently stands. The conversation as it stood was about maintenance cals.
If you think maintenance cals are irrelevant to the OP about why certain individuals may have a harder time (or believe they do) than other people then... er...
Whatever, I'm done here.
Those two top statements say the same thing...this is not about individual in this topic posting about themselves per say it's about those who say they have a harder time losing then others...
To your 2nd point...I did ask questions...note the question marks at the end of the sentences to indicate I was asking if she was smaller and/or sedentary etc...and me saying "I have to ask...."
....
and I have to ask if you gain on 2k a day are you totally sedentary? exceptionally short (under 5ft tall) and a very tiny woman?
and I have to ask if you use a food scale and are you sure you only eat 1200 and gain on 2k...
@DebSozo and @lexbubbles es Maintenance calories have nothing to do with why people over eat...or are obese or find it harder to lose weight lack of understanding of what maintenance calories are and how to achieve maintenance maybe but I said that on page 1...lack of education not know how to lose but mostly not knowing how to maintain. Not understand CICO or even what calories/servings mean.
but again not going to further this debate with non on topic debates with how people interpret text with prejudice due to their own issues.
Hunh? You missed the point which is that if a person believes that their maintenance level is higher than it is that the pounds will gradually add up. The overeating is not on purpose. It happens under the radar.
no I didn't...how can you think your maintenance is higher than it is if you understand maintenance? How can someone who knows what maintenance is think it's higher? If they eat over it they gain weight that's a sure sign they are eating above maintenance....
There is a very simple calculation for it...total calories consumed+(lbs lost x 3500)/#days and if you aren't losing but staying the same or gaining you adjust the calculation...hence my statement of lack of knowledge and education...
I know my maintenance within 50-100 calories (nothing is perfect) now that I am educated...4 years ago...had no clue...and guess what I was fat...as soon as I understood what it was and how to calculate it the weight fell off...and I have maintained wonderfully.
Do I understand your posts correctly that you believe most people think they are gaining weight without overeating? That they literally have no clue that they could lose weight if they ate less?
no not at all...
They have no clue how much they can eat to lose/maintain or how many calories are in what they are eating or what a serving size is even tho it's on the package...or what an appropriate serving size is...and if they know that they don't really know how to get an accurate count of calories.
You see it here all the time...I am eating 1200 calories and not losing help...when in fact they are eating about 2000 but because they can't judge portion size are not in a deficit.
This is a big why people want to eat so much. They don't understand how it all works.
I will add that lots of people do not cook. They eat the majority of meals in restaurants. Extremely easy to go over maintenance if you are eating out/takeout a lot.
Of course you can eat out every meal and lose/maintain weight. But you have to be aware of calories. Otherwise, lots of people will gain.
Also, people are eating high calorie foods that aren't filling so they eat more because they are hungry.3 -
Eating too much comes from a lack of knowledge. Most people assume that because you are overweight you eat every minute of the day. Not true. I've been watching what I eat for the last 3 yrs or so. Last week my mom bought me a container of banana nut muffins. I was like great, breakfast on the go. That muffin was 750 calories!!!! The old me would have not looked at any packaging and just ate the muffin. Then continued to eat the rest of my meals. But that muffin is like half of my calories for one item. IMO this is what caused me to be overweight before, just a lack of knowledge.5
-
For me, I was obese because of lack of awareness. I thought I ate fairly healthy and my friends did too, but I was only gaining or maintaining my weight not losing. I would eat salads, yogurt, and fruit all the time. I thought I would never be able to lose weight. It wasn't until I saw what healthy eating really meant and about portion control, I began to see results. My friend that is obese as well and is trying to lose weight said to me," I eat healthy and I don't eat large portions." I said to her you are probably eating more than you realize. I understood CICO but what 1200 calories really look like I had no clue.
I totally agree on the lack of awareness. Due to my healthcare education I had a lot of knowledge but was very short on "awareness". After I started needing help to get out of the car or movie theater seat I became "aware" I was facing a premature death and an ugly time up to the point of my death.
It was only when I stopped trying to lose weight and focused on eating for better health that I lost pain/weight and regained lost mobility.2 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »For me, I was obese because of lack of awareness. I thought I ate fairly healthy and my friends did too, but I was only gaining or maintaining my weight not losing. I would eat salads, yogurt, and fruit all the time. I thought I would never be able to lose weight. It wasn't until I saw what healthy eating really meant and about portion control, I began to see results. My friend that is obese as well and is trying to lose weight said to me," I eat healthy and I don't eat large portions." I said to her you are probably eating more than you realize. I understood CICO but what 1200 calories really look like I had no clue.
I totally agree on the lack of awareness. Due to my healthcare education I had a lot of knowledge but was very short on "awareness". After I started needing help to get out of the car or movie theater seat I became "aware" I was facing a premature death and an ugly time up to the point of my death.
It was only when I stopped trying to lose weight and focused on eating for better health that I lost pain/weight and regained lost mobility.
Ah awareness. I want to add denial too. In my case I denied. I think a lot of people do too.tayter_tot7 wrote: »Eating too much comes from a lack of knowledge. Most people assume that because you are overweight you eat every minute of the day. Not true. I've been watching what I eat for the last 3 yrs or so. Last week my mom bought me a container of banana nut muffins. I was like great, breakfast on the go. That muffin was 750 calories!!!! The old me would have not looked at any packaging and just ate the muffin. Then continued to eat the rest of my meals. But that muffin is like half of my calories for one item. IMO this is what caused me to be overweight before, just a lack of knowledge.
I would eat the 750 calorie muffin, knowing the calories, and tell myself I would watch what I eat "later". Later comes, I am hungry so I eat which puts me over maintenance. Probably would have another muffin plus other foods. Then I know I'm over and feel defeated so may as well have another muffin! UGH!! 2250 calories + whatever else I ate.
I denied that the "muffin" would play put like that. Being aware and admitting this is helpful.
I think this is a common scenario.
5 -
Good point @100df . My awareness did not start until I realized I was in denial that my way of eating was killing me.0
-
When I was overeating I had no idea of how many calories I was eating or should eat. I'd sometimes look at calorie information, sometimes avoid looking or thinking about it, but even when I did look it lacked context. I had no idea what I should be eating or how it fit into the rest of my day.
Of course I knew I was eating too much, though -- I knew I'd gained weight. I just didn't bother to figure out how or why. The question, and I'm not 100% sure of the answer, is why I didn't do that sooner. The first time I gained, I think it was because I honestly didn't think of it -- I had never had to lose weight before or think about what I ate and so I had no idea how to do it. When I approached it as just another problem to solve everything clicked into place. The second time I knew what to do so it was more lifestyle issues/not wanting to bother given other things going on, but I still find it frustrating that it seems to be so easy to just let it go.
I never had any health issues related to weight, so it was an easy thing to put off (or dismiss from my mind, probably denial, yeah, except I knew I should do something about it but just procrastinated).1 -
I like the word "awareness" better than the word "uneducated". Awareness does make the difference for losing weight for the long term.2
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lexbubbles wrote: »your post is irrelevant to the op and this isn't a discussion on individuals but those who overeat and those who say it's harder for them to lose that normal people.I think we've lost sight of the original topic of discussion. It was not about the population in general, but about those individuals who say they have a harder time than most to lose weight and what drives them to eat even knowing the harm it's doing to them.
...
Because when someone says "Hi, I maintain on less than 2k" and your immediate response is ARE YOU LOGGING ARE YOU TINY YOU MUST BE SEDENTARY that doesn't imply "I would like clarification" that implies disbelief. If you actually believed Deb when she said she maintained <2k you wouldn't have asked for clarification in the first place. I could question your apparent maintenance because it doesn't line up with my personal experience, but I didn't. Because I believe you, on account of human variance being... varied.I asked a few clarifying questions so what. You seem angry that I went that routeAnd what evidence did you provide your bmr so...mine is 50 above that...proves nothing neither does an arbitrary calculation of 1.3 against it a study of 1 is not gospel.
But your study of 1 is. (Also multiple people on this thread have now pointed out that they maintain on sub-2,000. The only thing I did was back it up with actual numbers as a "hey, look, totally possible to maintain on this number without being a tiny sedentary person")
I mean I also have the evidence of "using that number I am losing exactly the amount of weight I should be losing with the deficit I have against said number" as I'm sure the other low maintainers do also (except that's not my BMR. Mine's below that as I pointed out last time I posted in this thread. I was providing stats for a person my height/age/weight without a metabolic issue)
This just in though: BMR and TDEE calculations prove nothing and are useless.As well you haven't responded once in the 16 pages...seems odd you jump in to post about something that is irrelevant to the OP...
I mean, I have. But I've just been reading for a while because I only post when I have something to contribute to the conversation as it currently stands. The conversation as it stood was about maintenance cals.
If you think maintenance cals are irrelevant to the OP about why certain individuals may have a harder time (or believe they do) than other people then... er...
Whatever, I'm done here.
Those two top statements say the same thing...this is not about individual in this topic posting about themselves per say it's about those who say they have a harder time losing then others...
To your 2nd point...I did ask questions...note the question marks at the end of the sentences to indicate I was asking if she was smaller and/or sedentary etc...and me saying "I have to ask...."
....
and I have to ask if you gain on 2k a day are you totally sedentary? exceptionally short (under 5ft tall) and a very tiny woman?
and I have to ask if you use a food scale and are you sure you only eat 1200 and gain on 2k...
@DebSozo and @lexbubbles es Maintenance calories have nothing to do with why people over eat...or are obese or find it harder to lose weight lack of understanding of what maintenance calories are and how to achieve maintenance maybe but I said that on page 1...lack of education not know how to lose but mostly not knowing how to maintain. Not understand CICO or even what calories/servings mean.
but again not going to further this debate with non on topic debates with how people interpret text with prejudice due to their own issues.
Hunh? You missed the point which is that if a person believes that their maintenance level is higher than it is that the pounds will gradually add up. The overeating is not on purpose. It happens under the radar.
no I didn't...how can you think your maintenance is higher than it is if you understand maintenance? How can someone who knows what maintenance is think it's higher? If they eat over it they gain weight that's a sure sign they are eating above maintenance....
There is a very simple calculation for it...total calories consumed+(lbs lost x 3500)/#days and if you aren't losing but staying the same or gaining you adjust the calculation...hence my statement of lack of knowledge and education...
I know my maintenance within 50-100 calories (nothing is perfect) now that I am educated...4 years ago...had no clue...and guess what I was fat...as soon as I understood what it was and how to calculate it the weight fell off...and I have maintained wonderfully.
Do I understand your posts correctly that you believe most people think they are gaining weight without overeating? That they literally have no clue that they could lose weight if they ate less?
no not at all...
They have no clue how much they can eat to lose/maintain or how many calories are in what they are eating or what a serving size is even tho it's on the package...or what an appropriate serving size is...and if they know that they don't really know how to get an accurate count of calories.
You see it here all the time...I am eating 1200 calories and not losing help...when in fact they are eating about 2000 but because they can't judge portion size are not in a deficit.
Okay, got it.
I don't know where the whole 1200 calories thing came from but that seems to be a real problem IMO. I'd actually never heard that women should eat 1200 calories when losing before joining MFP. I wonder where that started.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lexbubbles wrote: »your post is irrelevant to the op and this isn't a discussion on individuals but those who overeat and those who say it's harder for them to lose that normal people.I think we've lost sight of the original topic of discussion. It was not about the population in general, but about those individuals who say they have a harder time than most to lose weight and what drives them to eat even knowing the harm it's doing to them.
...
Because when someone says "Hi, I maintain on less than 2k" and your immediate response is ARE YOU LOGGING ARE YOU TINY YOU MUST BE SEDENTARY that doesn't imply "I would like clarification" that implies disbelief. If you actually believed Deb when she said she maintained <2k you wouldn't have asked for clarification in the first place. I could question your apparent maintenance because it doesn't line up with my personal experience, but I didn't. Because I believe you, on account of human variance being... varied.I asked a few clarifying questions so what. You seem angry that I went that routeAnd what evidence did you provide your bmr so...mine is 50 above that...proves nothing neither does an arbitrary calculation of 1.3 against it a study of 1 is not gospel.
But your study of 1 is. (Also multiple people on this thread have now pointed out that they maintain on sub-2,000. The only thing I did was back it up with actual numbers as a "hey, look, totally possible to maintain on this number without being a tiny sedentary person")
I mean I also have the evidence of "using that number I am losing exactly the amount of weight I should be losing with the deficit I have against said number" as I'm sure the other low maintainers do also (except that's not my BMR. Mine's below that as I pointed out last time I posted in this thread. I was providing stats for a person my height/age/weight without a metabolic issue)
This just in though: BMR and TDEE calculations prove nothing and are useless.As well you haven't responded once in the 16 pages...seems odd you jump in to post about something that is irrelevant to the OP...
I mean, I have. But I've just been reading for a while because I only post when I have something to contribute to the conversation as it currently stands. The conversation as it stood was about maintenance cals.
If you think maintenance cals are irrelevant to the OP about why certain individuals may have a harder time (or believe they do) than other people then... er...
Whatever, I'm done here.
Those two top statements say the same thing...this is not about individual in this topic posting about themselves per say it's about those who say they have a harder time losing then others...
To your 2nd point...I did ask questions...note the question marks at the end of the sentences to indicate I was asking if she was smaller and/or sedentary etc...and me saying "I have to ask...."
....
and I have to ask if you gain on 2k a day are you totally sedentary? exceptionally short (under 5ft tall) and a very tiny woman?
and I have to ask if you use a food scale and are you sure you only eat 1200 and gain on 2k...
@DebSozo and @lexbubbles es Maintenance calories have nothing to do with why people over eat...or are obese or find it harder to lose weight lack of understanding of what maintenance calories are and how to achieve maintenance maybe but I said that on page 1...lack of education not know how to lose but mostly not knowing how to maintain. Not understand CICO or even what calories/servings mean.
but again not going to further this debate with non on topic debates with how people interpret text with prejudice due to their own issues.
Hunh? You missed the point which is that if a person believes that their maintenance level is higher than it is that the pounds will gradually add up. The overeating is not on purpose. It happens under the radar.
no I didn't...how can you think your maintenance is higher than it is if you understand maintenance? How can someone who knows what maintenance is think it's higher? If they eat over it they gain weight that's a sure sign they are eating above maintenance....
There is a very simple calculation for it...total calories consumed+(lbs lost x 3500)/#days and if you aren't losing but staying the same or gaining you adjust the calculation...hence my statement of lack of knowledge and education...
I know my maintenance within 50-100 calories (nothing is perfect) now that I am educated...4 years ago...had no clue...and guess what I was fat...as soon as I understood what it was and how to calculate it the weight fell off...and I have maintained wonderfully.
Do I understand your posts correctly that you believe most people think they are gaining weight without overeating? That they literally have no clue that they could lose weight if they ate less?
no not at all...
They have no clue how much they can eat to lose/maintain or how many calories are in what they are eating or what a serving size is even tho it's on the package...or what an appropriate serving size is...and if they know that they don't really know how to get an accurate count of calories.
You see it here all the time...I am eating 1200 calories and not losing help...when in fact they are eating about 2000 but because they can't judge portion size are not in a deficit.
Okay, got it.
I don't know where the whole 1200 calories thing came from but that seems to be a real problem IMO. I'd actually never heard that women should eat 1200 calories when losing before joining MFP. I wonder where that started.
My mother told me about 1200 calories long before I joined MFP - 300 for breakfast, 400 for lunch, 500 for dinner. It's a very common guideline in older diet programs. My wild-kitten guess is that it got so much traction because in the 60s/70s/early 80s women lost weight when self-reporting consuming 1200 calories. They were eating more because they weren't weighing and measuring everything (so in the 1400-1600 cal range). Then as food evolved further into calorie-dense, nutrient-sparse products, the amount people self-report to be 1200 increased... Thus why people don't lose eating "1200" calories.0 -
mskessler89 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lexbubbles wrote: »your post is irrelevant to the op and this isn't a discussion on individuals but those who overeat and those who say it's harder for them to lose that normal people.I think we've lost sight of the original topic of discussion. It was not about the population in general, but about those individuals who say they have a harder time than most to lose weight and what drives them to eat even knowing the harm it's doing to them.
...
Because when someone says "Hi, I maintain on less than 2k" and your immediate response is ARE YOU LOGGING ARE YOU TINY YOU MUST BE SEDENTARY that doesn't imply "I would like clarification" that implies disbelief. If you actually believed Deb when she said she maintained <2k you wouldn't have asked for clarification in the first place. I could question your apparent maintenance because it doesn't line up with my personal experience, but I didn't. Because I believe you, on account of human variance being... varied.I asked a few clarifying questions so what. You seem angry that I went that routeAnd what evidence did you provide your bmr so...mine is 50 above that...proves nothing neither does an arbitrary calculation of 1.3 against it a study of 1 is not gospel.
But your study of 1 is. (Also multiple people on this thread have now pointed out that they maintain on sub-2,000. The only thing I did was back it up with actual numbers as a "hey, look, totally possible to maintain on this number without being a tiny sedentary person")
I mean I also have the evidence of "using that number I am losing exactly the amount of weight I should be losing with the deficit I have against said number" as I'm sure the other low maintainers do also (except that's not my BMR. Mine's below that as I pointed out last time I posted in this thread. I was providing stats for a person my height/age/weight without a metabolic issue)
This just in though: BMR and TDEE calculations prove nothing and are useless.As well you haven't responded once in the 16 pages...seems odd you jump in to post about something that is irrelevant to the OP...
I mean, I have. But I've just been reading for a while because I only post when I have something to contribute to the conversation as it currently stands. The conversation as it stood was about maintenance cals.
If you think maintenance cals are irrelevant to the OP about why certain individuals may have a harder time (or believe they do) than other people then... er...
Whatever, I'm done here.
Those two top statements say the same thing...this is not about individual in this topic posting about themselves per say it's about those who say they have a harder time losing then others...
To your 2nd point...I did ask questions...note the question marks at the end of the sentences to indicate I was asking if she was smaller and/or sedentary etc...and me saying "I have to ask...."
....
and I have to ask if you gain on 2k a day are you totally sedentary? exceptionally short (under 5ft tall) and a very tiny woman?
and I have to ask if you use a food scale and are you sure you only eat 1200 and gain on 2k...
@DebSozo and @lexbubbles es Maintenance calories have nothing to do with why people over eat...or are obese or find it harder to lose weight lack of understanding of what maintenance calories are and how to achieve maintenance maybe but I said that on page 1...lack of education not know how to lose but mostly not knowing how to maintain. Not understand CICO or even what calories/servings mean.
but again not going to further this debate with non on topic debates with how people interpret text with prejudice due to their own issues.
Hunh? You missed the point which is that if a person believes that their maintenance level is higher than it is that the pounds will gradually add up. The overeating is not on purpose. It happens under the radar.
no I didn't...how can you think your maintenance is higher than it is if you understand maintenance? How can someone who knows what maintenance is think it's higher? If they eat over it they gain weight that's a sure sign they are eating above maintenance....
There is a very simple calculation for it...total calories consumed+(lbs lost x 3500)/#days and if you aren't losing but staying the same or gaining you adjust the calculation...hence my statement of lack of knowledge and education...
I know my maintenance within 50-100 calories (nothing is perfect) now that I am educated...4 years ago...had no clue...and guess what I was fat...as soon as I understood what it was and how to calculate it the weight fell off...and I have maintained wonderfully.
Do I understand your posts correctly that you believe most people think they are gaining weight without overeating? That they literally have no clue that they could lose weight if they ate less?
no not at all...
They have no clue how much they can eat to lose/maintain or how many calories are in what they are eating or what a serving size is even tho it's on the package...or what an appropriate serving size is...and if they know that they don't really know how to get an accurate count of calories.
You see it here all the time...I am eating 1200 calories and not losing help...when in fact they are eating about 2000 but because they can't judge portion size are not in a deficit.
Okay, got it.
I don't know where the whole 1200 calories thing came from but that seems to be a real problem IMO. I'd actually never heard that women should eat 1200 calories when losing before joining MFP. I wonder where that started.
My mother told me about 1200 calories long before I joined MFP - 300 for breakfast, 400 for lunch, 500 for dinner. It's a very common guideline in older diet programs. My wild-kitten guess is that it got so much traction because in the 60s/70s/early 80s women lost weight when self-reporting consuming 1200 calories. They were eating more because they weren't weighing and measuring everything (so in the 1400-1600 cal range). Then as food evolved further into calorie-dense, nutrient-sparse products, the amount people self-report to be 1200 increased... Thus why people don't lose eating "1200" calories.
Interesting, and even odder that I'd never heard it since I was born in the 60's.0 -
I googled it..and got to page 8 of articles stating "no one knows where the 1200 calorie myth came from..."
If googled doesn't know we are doomed.8 -
-
that a good amount of calories for women to lose weight on is 1200...and no this has nothing to do with the previous posts about Deb's current calorie goal of 1200.0 -
For me, I learned early to drown the pain of an abusive family in food. Eating made me feel good, and for a long time it was my only comfort. I was obese by the time I was eight, and I have been ever since. The abuse became much, much worse into my teenage years, and I started shoving food down my throat to keep myself from killing myself, and because, quite frankly, my weight was the only tiny piece of control I had over my life. Once I got married and became pregnant, my weight skyrocketed in response to hormonal desire to eat during pregnancy.
A literal lifetime of using food as a negative coping mechanism has been challenging to break. I didn't have ANY other coping mechanisms! At 25, I am just now learning to be okay with the feeling of true hunger. It's a daily battle to eat only when my body is actually hungry, and not when I'm bored or stressed or upset or happy. I imagine it's going to take me many more years to have total control over when I eat and what I eat. I've since developed many positive coping strategies, including exercise, cuddling, reading, and deep breathing to deal with daily stress. I still fall into that trap of shoving food in my mouth, for lack of a better term, and eating anything I can find mindlessly. It's usual an emotional response to something, and it's hard to shut off. I rarely exceed my calorie goal, and I don't binge anymore, which I used to do regularly. I've made a lot of healthy progress! But there are days where it's like my brain wants to snap back into those old habits. I'm now focusing on teaching healthy eating habits to my kids, so that they don't end up falling into the same food trap that I did.
That was probably a much longer answer than you were looking for!
7 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
It comes from Katch and McCardle, sort of. They found that the average female between 23 and 50 has a maintenance level of 2100, and males have 2800. Add in recommendations from organizations like ACSM of a max weight loss of 2 lbs per week, you have a 1000 calorie deficit, giving us 1100 and 1800. Organizations rounded up to 1200 for women from there, as the difference in the 1000 calorie deficit between men and women was more significant with such low numbers.2 -
Panda_Poptarts wrote: »For me, I learned early to drown the pain of an abusive family in food. Eating made me feel good, and for a long time it was my only comfort. I was obese by the time I was eight, and I have been ever since. The abuse became much, much worse into my teenage years, and I started shoving food down my throat to keep myself from killing myself, and because, quite frankly, my weight was the only tiny piece of control I had over my life. Once I got married and became pregnant, my weight skyrocketed in response to hormonal desire to eat during pregnancy.
A literal lifetime of using food as a negative coping mechanism has been challenging to break. I didn't have ANY other coping mechanisms! At 25, I am just now learning to be okay with the feeling of true hunger. It's a daily battle to eat only when my body is actually hungry, and not when I'm bored or stressed or upset or happy. I imagine it's going to take me many more years to have total control over when I eat and what I eat. I've since developed many positive coping strategies, including exercise, cuddling, reading, and deep breathing to deal with daily stress. I still fall into that trap of shoving food in my mouth, for lack of a better term, and eating anything I can find mindlessly. It's usual an emotional response to something, and it's hard to shut off. I rarely exceed my calorie goal, and I don't binge anymore, which I used to do regularly. I've made a lot of healthy progress! But there are days where it's like my brain wants to snap back into those old habits. I'm now focusing on teaching healthy eating habits to my kids, so that they don't end up falling into the same food trap that I did.
That was probably a much longer answer than you were looking for!
That's a darn good answer! You've accomplished a lot to be so young. Great job!
I wish more people would give deep breathing a try for stress control. It has been a life saver for me (and during perimenopause for those around me).3 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Panda_Poptarts wrote: »For me, I learned early to drown the pain of an abusive family in food. Eating made me feel good, and for a long time it was my only comfort. I was obese by the time I was eight, and I have been ever since. The abuse became much, much worse into my teenage years, and I started shoving food down my throat to keep myself from killing myself, and because, quite frankly, my weight was the only tiny piece of control I had over my life. Once I got married and became pregnant, my weight skyrocketed in response to hormonal desire to eat during pregnancy.
A literal lifetime of using food as a negative coping mechanism has been challenging to break. I didn't have ANY other coping mechanisms! At 25, I am just now learning to be okay with the feeling of true hunger. It's a daily battle to eat only when my body is actually hungry, and not when I'm bored or stressed or upset or happy. I imagine it's going to take me many more years to have total control over when I eat and what I eat. I've since developed many positive coping strategies, including exercise, cuddling, reading, and deep breathing to deal with daily stress. I still fall into that trap of shoving food in my mouth, for lack of a better term, and eating anything I can find mindlessly. It's usual an emotional response to something, and it's hard to shut off. I rarely exceed my calorie goal, and I don't binge anymore, which I used to do regularly. I've made a lot of healthy progress! But there are days where it's like my brain wants to snap back into those old habits. I'm now focusing on teaching healthy eating habits to my kids, so that they don't end up falling into the same food trap that I did.
That was probably a much longer answer than you were looking for!
That's a darn good answer! You've accomplished a lot to be so young. Great job!
I wish more people would give deep breathing a try for stress control. It has been a life saver for me (and during perimenopause for those around me).
Thank you! It's a long journey for sure, but I've reached a point where I can say I'm usually okay with my eating habits, and I'm okay with the body I'm in, although I still have a long way to go to undo the damage I did. Deep breathing has been a life saver for me, too. I discovered yoga, which I do at least twice weekly, and it's been hugely beneficial for my mental health. I practice deep breathing techniques used in yoga in my daily life, and it's a huge factor in how I approach food now.3 -
that a good amount of calories for women to lose weight on is 1200...and no this has nothing to do with the previous posts about Deb's current calorie goal of 1200.
Well, most women would probably lose on that number, the same could be said for 1100 or 1000. Or do you mean that people just blindly prescribe 1200 calories to all women? That would be ill-advised. Or do you mean the that 1200 calories being the line drawn where people think it is safe?0 -
mskessler89 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lexbubbles wrote: »your post is irrelevant to the op and this isn't a discussion on individuals but those who overeat and those who say it's harder for them to lose that normal people.I think we've lost sight of the original topic of discussion. It was not about the population in general, but about those individuals who say they have a harder time than most to lose weight and what drives them to eat even knowing the harm it's doing to them.
...
Because when someone says "Hi, I maintain on less than 2k" and your immediate response is ARE YOU LOGGING ARE YOU TINY YOU MUST BE SEDENTARY that doesn't imply "I would like clarification" that implies disbelief. If you actually believed Deb when she said she maintained <2k you wouldn't have asked for clarification in the first place. I could question your apparent maintenance because it doesn't line up with my personal experience, but I didn't. Because I believe you, on account of human variance being... varied.I asked a few clarifying questions so what. You seem angry that I went that routeAnd what evidence did you provide your bmr so...mine is 50 above that...proves nothing neither does an arbitrary calculation of 1.3 against it a study of 1 is not gospel.
But your study of 1 is. (Also multiple people on this thread have now pointed out that they maintain on sub-2,000. The only thing I did was back it up with actual numbers as a "hey, look, totally possible to maintain on this number without being a tiny sedentary person")
I mean I also have the evidence of "using that number I am losing exactly the amount of weight I should be losing with the deficit I have against said number" as I'm sure the other low maintainers do also (except that's not my BMR. Mine's below that as I pointed out last time I posted in this thread. I was providing stats for a person my height/age/weight without a metabolic issue)
This just in though: BMR and TDEE calculations prove nothing and are useless.As well you haven't responded once in the 16 pages...seems odd you jump in to post about something that is irrelevant to the OP...
I mean, I have. But I've just been reading for a while because I only post when I have something to contribute to the conversation as it currently stands. The conversation as it stood was about maintenance cals.
If you think maintenance cals are irrelevant to the OP about why certain individuals may have a harder time (or believe they do) than other people then... er...
Whatever, I'm done here.
Those two top statements say the same thing...this is not about individual in this topic posting about themselves per say it's about those who say they have a harder time losing then others...
To your 2nd point...I did ask questions...note the question marks at the end of the sentences to indicate I was asking if she was smaller and/or sedentary etc...and me saying "I have to ask...."
....
and I have to ask if you gain on 2k a day are you totally sedentary? exceptionally short (under 5ft tall) and a very tiny woman?
and I have to ask if you use a food scale and are you sure you only eat 1200 and gain on 2k...
@DebSozo and @lexbubbles es Maintenance calories have nothing to do with why people over eat...or are obese or find it harder to lose weight lack of understanding of what maintenance calories are and how to achieve maintenance maybe but I said that on page 1...lack of education not know how to lose but mostly not knowing how to maintain. Not understand CICO or even what calories/servings mean.
but again not going to further this debate with non on topic debates with how people interpret text with prejudice due to their own issues.
Hunh? You missed the point which is that if a person believes that their maintenance level is higher than it is that the pounds will gradually add up. The overeating is not on purpose. It happens under the radar.
no I didn't...how can you think your maintenance is higher than it is if you understand maintenance? How can someone who knows what maintenance is think it's higher? If they eat over it they gain weight that's a sure sign they are eating above maintenance....
There is a very simple calculation for it...total calories consumed+(lbs lost x 3500)/#days and if you aren't losing but staying the same or gaining you adjust the calculation...hence my statement of lack of knowledge and education...
I know my maintenance within 50-100 calories (nothing is perfect) now that I am educated...4 years ago...had no clue...and guess what I was fat...as soon as I understood what it was and how to calculate it the weight fell off...and I have maintained wonderfully.
Do I understand your posts correctly that you believe most people think they are gaining weight without overeating? That they literally have no clue that they could lose weight if they ate less?
no not at all...
They have no clue how much they can eat to lose/maintain or how many calories are in what they are eating or what a serving size is even tho it's on the package...or what an appropriate serving size is...and if they know that they don't really know how to get an accurate count of calories.
You see it here all the time...I am eating 1200 calories and not losing help...when in fact they are eating about 2000 but because they can't judge portion size are not in a deficit.
Okay, got it.
I don't know where the whole 1200 calories thing came from but that seems to be a real problem IMO. I'd actually never heard that women should eat 1200 calories when losing before joining MFP. I wonder where that started.
My mother told me about 1200 calories long before I joined MFP - 300 for breakfast, 400 for lunch, 500 for dinner. It's a very common guideline in older diet programs. My wild-kitten guess is that it got so much traction because in the 60s/70s/early 80s women lost weight when self-reporting consuming 1200 calories. They were eating more because they weren't weighing and measuring everything (so in the 1400-1600 cal range). Then as food evolved further into calorie-dense, nutrient-sparse products, the amount people self-report to be 1200 increased... Thus why people don't lose eating "1200" calories.
Also keep in mind that during that time frame the Internet didn't exist, nutrition labels were not required, and the little books you could look up calories counts of common foods were hardly comprehensive - if you ate something that didn't have a label and wasn't in that little book, you were SOL. Calorie counting back in the day was done by guess and by golly, and to get any degree of accuracy it was terribly cumbersome, tedious, and not particularly sustainable. True calorie counting, MFP-style (weighing and measuring and having access to huge databases of every food item imaginable, with algorithms to do all the math for you), hasn't been around very long.... Maybe twenty years.
2 -
that a good amount of calories for women to lose weight on is 1200...and no this has nothing to do with the previous posts about Deb's current calorie goal of 1200.
Well, most women would probably lose on that number, the same could be said for 1100 or 1000. Or do you mean that people just blindly prescribe 1200 calories to all women? That would be ill-advised. Or do you mean the that 1200 calories being the line drawn where people think it is safe?
Yeah, I thought people were talking about it being the default recommendation, as with old diet plans (which I did not know, so found interesting) or doctors just saying "eat 1200" without any real analysis.tlflag1620 wrote: »mskessler89 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lexbubbles wrote: »your post is irrelevant to the op and this isn't a discussion on individuals but those who overeat and those who say it's harder for them to lose that normal people.I think we've lost sight of the original topic of discussion. It was not about the population in general, but about those individuals who say they have a harder time than most to lose weight and what drives them to eat even knowing the harm it's doing to them.
...
Because when someone says "Hi, I maintain on less than 2k" and your immediate response is ARE YOU LOGGING ARE YOU TINY YOU MUST BE SEDENTARY that doesn't imply "I would like clarification" that implies disbelief. If you actually believed Deb when she said she maintained <2k you wouldn't have asked for clarification in the first place. I could question your apparent maintenance because it doesn't line up with my personal experience, but I didn't. Because I believe you, on account of human variance being... varied.I asked a few clarifying questions so what. You seem angry that I went that routeAnd what evidence did you provide your bmr so...mine is 50 above that...proves nothing neither does an arbitrary calculation of 1.3 against it a study of 1 is not gospel.
But your study of 1 is. (Also multiple people on this thread have now pointed out that they maintain on sub-2,000. The only thing I did was back it up with actual numbers as a "hey, look, totally possible to maintain on this number without being a tiny sedentary person")
I mean I also have the evidence of "using that number I am losing exactly the amount of weight I should be losing with the deficit I have against said number" as I'm sure the other low maintainers do also (except that's not my BMR. Mine's below that as I pointed out last time I posted in this thread. I was providing stats for a person my height/age/weight without a metabolic issue)
This just in though: BMR and TDEE calculations prove nothing and are useless.As well you haven't responded once in the 16 pages...seems odd you jump in to post about something that is irrelevant to the OP...
I mean, I have. But I've just been reading for a while because I only post when I have something to contribute to the conversation as it currently stands. The conversation as it stood was about maintenance cals.
If you think maintenance cals are irrelevant to the OP about why certain individuals may have a harder time (or believe they do) than other people then... er...
Whatever, I'm done here.
Those two top statements say the same thing...this is not about individual in this topic posting about themselves per say it's about those who say they have a harder time losing then others...
To your 2nd point...I did ask questions...note the question marks at the end of the sentences to indicate I was asking if she was smaller and/or sedentary etc...and me saying "I have to ask...."
....
and I have to ask if you gain on 2k a day are you totally sedentary? exceptionally short (under 5ft tall) and a very tiny woman?
and I have to ask if you use a food scale and are you sure you only eat 1200 and gain on 2k...
@DebSozo and @lexbubbles es Maintenance calories have nothing to do with why people over eat...or are obese or find it harder to lose weight lack of understanding of what maintenance calories are and how to achieve maintenance maybe but I said that on page 1...lack of education not know how to lose but mostly not knowing how to maintain. Not understand CICO or even what calories/servings mean.
but again not going to further this debate with non on topic debates with how people interpret text with prejudice due to their own issues.
Hunh? You missed the point which is that if a person believes that their maintenance level is higher than it is that the pounds will gradually add up. The overeating is not on purpose. It happens under the radar.
no I didn't...how can you think your maintenance is higher than it is if you understand maintenance? How can someone who knows what maintenance is think it's higher? If they eat over it they gain weight that's a sure sign they are eating above maintenance....
There is a very simple calculation for it...total calories consumed+(lbs lost x 3500)/#days and if you aren't losing but staying the same or gaining you adjust the calculation...hence my statement of lack of knowledge and education...
I know my maintenance within 50-100 calories (nothing is perfect) now that I am educated...4 years ago...had no clue...and guess what I was fat...as soon as I understood what it was and how to calculate it the weight fell off...and I have maintained wonderfully.
Do I understand your posts correctly that you believe most people think they are gaining weight without overeating? That they literally have no clue that they could lose weight if they ate less?
no not at all...
They have no clue how much they can eat to lose/maintain or how many calories are in what they are eating or what a serving size is even tho it's on the package...or what an appropriate serving size is...and if they know that they don't really know how to get an accurate count of calories.
You see it here all the time...I am eating 1200 calories and not losing help...when in fact they are eating about 2000 but because they can't judge portion size are not in a deficit.
Okay, got it.
I don't know where the whole 1200 calories thing came from but that seems to be a real problem IMO. I'd actually never heard that women should eat 1200 calories when losing before joining MFP. I wonder where that started.
My mother told me about 1200 calories long before I joined MFP - 300 for breakfast, 400 for lunch, 500 for dinner. It's a very common guideline in older diet programs. My wild-kitten guess is that it got so much traction because in the 60s/70s/early 80s women lost weight when self-reporting consuming 1200 calories. They were eating more because they weren't weighing and measuring everything (so in the 1400-1600 cal range). Then as food evolved further into calorie-dense, nutrient-sparse products, the amount people self-report to be 1200 increased... Thus why people don't lose eating "1200" calories.
Also keep in mind that during that time frame the Internet didn't exist, nutrition labels were not required, and the little books you could look up calories counts of common foods were hardly comprehensive - if you ate something that didn't have a label and wasn't in that little book, you were SOL. Calorie counting back in the day was done by guess and by golly, and to get any degree of accuracy it was terribly cumbersome, tedious, and not particularly sustainable. True calorie counting, MFP-style (weighing and measuring and having access to huge databases of every food item imaginable, with algorithms to do all the math for you), hasn't been around very long.... Maybe twenty years.
I think these are great points. Back in the day even figuring out TDEE would have been a pain -- no easy estimates from plugging numbers into a calculator online, and 2000 was generally thought of as a standard maintenance number. Add to that that it makes sense to aim low if you can't be that accurate (as with the tools allowed) and it's not surprising. Also not surprising that things like WW became popular.
I never ran into the 1200 number personally pre MFP. My mom dieted, but I don't think she ever did a calorie based plan, and I didn't have weight issues as a teen or read a lot of women's magazines that talked about it. (I did, weirdly, read the Beverly Hills Diet Book, of all silly things.)2 -
I think a lot of people are in denial of how much they eat. I know I've heard lots of times "I don't know why I gain weight, I don't eat practically anything!". That's when I start paying attention to their intake and notice how much they actually are eating. They take 1.5 to 2x the serving size on everything without realizing it. I didn't realize it before either, I only know because I've been weighing my food for so long that I can guess a serving size visually fairly accurately.
A combination of that and a lack of movement adds up quickly. People go from sedentary jobs and drive home to watch tv or play on the computer. People have to fight over the nearest parking spot to every store. They complain when the escalator is broken when there's a flight of stairs right there. I know that many people have disabilities that require that close spot or not using the stairs, but it's more widespread in the general public than just the disabled. Even a 30 minute walk at lunch with all the rest of that sitting all day doesn't help much. My in laws all insist that they are super active and are on their feet all day. I'm friends with them on fitbit and can see how active they are.
It's just a lack of awareness from both the calories in and the calories out.8
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
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K 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