All calories may not be equal

12467…24

Replies

  • kermax39
    kermax39 Posts: 149 Member
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    xjessicaxrx wrote: »
    Sounds like Slimming world to me, and people lose massive amounts of weight on that not weighing or counting most of the foods they eat?

    Not according to the people who start Slimming World threads here...

    I lost 2 stone on slimming world, it definetly works.....also did the atkins which I lost around 18lbs very quickly, my problem with both was the lack of bread amongst other food so wasent sustainable for me. I prefer mfp because variety of food is more important to me, but counting calories makes me hungrier. I definitely ate much more calories on slimming world and atkins than im allowed now on mfp (yes I checked) That kinda throws the cico theory out the window. Other methods do work, I just prefer mfp for now. I may go back to slimming world to get rid of my last stone.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • mamadon
    mamadon Posts: 1,422 Member
    bethannien wrote: »
    Tedebearduff wrote: »
    earthakin66 wrote: »
    It just seems obvious to me that 200 calories in almonds vs. 200 calories in a doughnut will not have the same result in your body. It actually seems like people here agree on that so I don't really know what the issue is. Part of the idea is that if we eat 1400 calories worth of nutritionally dense, higher fat foods then we will be less hungry than if we ate 1400 calories of processed, low fat foods.
    I read the review, interesting points.
    I dont trust doctors blindly, just was pointing out that he isn't a stick insect.

    Your body does not react to them the same but the crazy CICO people will go on and on cause the unit of measure is the same. Regardless your body has a different hormonal response to each of the 2 items you just listed even though they are of the same calorie count. (saying you're right)

    Welcome to the MFP community full of know it all's who "call out BS" and don't back any of there knowledge at all.They'll tell you to google it cause there are hundreds of studies out there that they've also never read!

    Also that1 chick mentioned that people selling books are just trying to make money but then references that she also wrote a book... hilarious right? like am I the only person that caught that??

    Remember when you're on here... most people are dicks... more so when it comes to CICO and or being a vegan... and know that for a fact! they are uneducated, unsuccessful people who know nothing at all, cause if they did ... they wouldn't be *kitten* around on the message boards now would they? Like if they are so educated, and so successful what are they doing on here all day?

    Feel free to message me Earth if you want to talk about how stupid cico and how your body doesn't respond the same to 200 calories of doughnuts versus almonds.

    Literally no one is saying that 200 calories of donuts is going to be as satisfying as 200 calories of nutrient dense food.

    Also, calling most people "dicks" and being sarcastic and dismissive of everyone doesn't exactly make you look like a super nice guy, yourself pal.

    If being a ***** means being honest and trying to save a person from a little bit of the heart ache I went through for so many years, and just one persons listens, then I am happy to be one.

  • Dnarules
    Dnarules Posts: 2,081 Member
    Mentali wrote: »
    BillMcKay1 wrote: »
    Mentali wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    Mentali wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    bethannien wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    hjlourenshj wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    Bottom line - if you are counting calories, weighing, measuring and logging religiously, and cannot lose weight (a common complaint on this site), try this approach. Why not? And why would you continue doing something that is not working?
    't

    Its just impossible to not lose weight when you are in a deficit. So the common complaint on this site is 100% the cause of mistakes in counting. Its that simple. Don't spin it towards something else

    How hard is it to count calories? One ounce of cereal with skim milk (the amount is stated on the cereal box) for breakfast. Two cans of tuna fish and whatever the portion of mayonnaise is on the label for lunch. 100-calorie pre-packaged snack. A couple of pre-made burgers on a bun for dinner with a salad and a low-cal dressing.

    This is not exactly rocket science.


    It's not rocket science but if people are using the 1 cup or 1/4 cup suggestions for the measurement instead of weighing it, they're almost definitely eating more than they think. For example. I have some granola I mix into my Greek yogurt. The Greek yogurt says a serving is 1 cup (227 g) and the granola says a serving is 1/4 cup (27g). That's what the packaging gives as a serving size.

    I put my 1/2 cup on my scale to eat half a serving and I filled it about 2/3 full before I reached 113 g. If I had filled it to the top, I'd be eating more than I thought. And when I weighed the granola, 1/4 cup was 1.5 servings.

    So it may not be rocket science but if people are using measuring cups and wondering why they aren't losing weight, it's not what they're eating. It's how much.

    This is exactly what most newbies SHOULD NOT be doing.

    I am eating a Chobani yogurt right now. It contains 140 calories. Not 150 calories and not 130 caloires. There is nothing to weigh and nothing to measure. Forget about weighing granola. It just makes life difficult

    And Chobani has some product where you mix in things (one of them may be granola) into the yogurt. That may contain 200 calories. Not 210 calories and not 190 calories.

    I say KISS (with affection) to all newbies - Keep It Simple Stupid.

    Seriously, have you actually weighed the yogurt before determining it has 140 calories, not 139 or 141?

    Are you being serious?

    Mentali wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    bethannien wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    hjlourenshj wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    Bottom line - if you are counting calories, weighing, measuring and logging religiously, and cannot lose weight (a common complaint on this site), try this approach. Why not? And why would you continue doing something that is not working?
    't

    Its just impossible to not lose weight when you are in a deficit. So the common complaint on this site is 100% the cause of mistakes in counting. Its that simple. Don't spin it towards something else

    How hard is it to count calories? One ounce of cereal with skim milk (the amount is stated on the cereal box) for breakfast. Two cans of tuna fish and whatever the portion of mayonnaise is on the label for lunch. 100-calorie pre-packaged snack. A couple of pre-made burgers on a bun for dinner with a salad and a low-cal dressing.

    This is not exactly rocket science.


    It's not rocket science but if people are using the 1 cup or 1/4 cup suggestions for the measurement instead of weighing it, they're almost definitely eating more than they think. For example. I have some granola I mix into my Greek yogurt. The Greek yogurt says a serving is 1 cup (227 g) and the granola says a serving is 1/4 cup (27g). That's what the packaging gives as a serving size.

    I put my 1/2 cup on my scale to eat half a serving and I filled it about 2/3 full before I reached 113 g. If I had filled it to the top, I'd be eating more than I thought. And when I weighed the granola, 1/4 cup was 1.5 servings.

    So it may not be rocket science but if people are using measuring cups and wondering why they aren't losing weight, it's not what they're eating. It's how much.

    This is exactly what most newbies SHOULD NOT be doing.

    I am eating a Chobani yogurt right now. It contains 140 calories. Not 150 calories and not 130 caloires. There is nothing to weigh and nothing to measure. Forget about weighing granola. It just makes life difficult

    And Chobani has some product where you mix in things (one of them may be granola) into the yogurt. That may contain 200 calories. Not 210 calories and not 190 calories.

    I say KISS (with affection) to all newbies - Keep It Simple Stupid.

    THIS IS NOT TRUE.

    Repeat: THIS IS NOT TRUE. Your yogurt is not guaranteed to contain 140 calories. In fact, in the US it can be up to 20% off ("the label is considered to be out of compliance if the nutrient content of a composite of the product is greater than 20% above the value declared on the label", Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (21 CFR 101.9(g))). That yogurt might be 112 calories....or, more likely, that yogurt may be 168 calories. Now expand that to a frozen dinner, one that's, say....600 calories. That could actually be up to 720. If you eat all your calories from prepackaged food, without weighing the portions, and eat up to your deficit, then you will very likely be consuming more calories than you think, cutting into or stalling your weight loss.

    Seriously, have you actually weighed the yogurt before determining it has 140 calories, not 139 or 141?

    You can't be serious about the calories in the yogurt.

    OK, so here's what you do. The label says 140 calories. To be safe, add 10%, and now it's 154 calories. Problem solved. Or, you can make a breakfast with four or five ingredients where you have to weight and measure, weigh and measure. I would advise sticking with the yogurt.

    So now you're backing out of your "Not 150 calories" claim?

    10% or 20% matters. Especially when it's on every item you eat, all day, and especially if you don't have much wiggle room in your calories. Not to mention your other mistakes are not governed by the FDA requirements, so the consequences of them could be catastrophic to a carefully planned weight loss system.

    For a yogurt, it's 28 more calories. For everything else, it's much more. The only method to be accurate in your calorie counting, which is necessary, is to make sure your food is in the portions that you think they are, which cannot be done by trusting labels to be accurate since we know they're not.

    Although I have to be honest - I don't think I've ever seen someone arguing both "what kind of calories you consume matter, they have to be good calories" and also "people should just be eating all of their food prepackaged!" It's an interesting, if contradictory, set of opinions!

    To be fair though, that up to 20% compliance zone is true even if you are weighing your yogurt. The nutrition label on a my greek yogurt (and most)t container lists it's nutrient/calorie profile by the gram and cup. 120cal per 1/2c or 175g.

    Now I weigh out my 175g to get my 120 cal, but that 20% potential margin of error for calories doesn't disappear just because I weighed it out. Their have the same 20% margin in the calories for the weighted measure as well.

    Yeah definitely, you'd have to go by grams and decide if it's worth the extra calories, if you want all the yogurt, etc. after weighing for sure. Weighing isn't a method to keep in a deficit, just a method to make sure that if you want a deficit you have the tools to get there! :)

    I could be wrong, but I think this poster means that even if you weigh out 175g of yogurt, it will have 120 calories +/- error, because not every batch of yogurt will be identical. The 120 cal is still an estimate. Of course, weighing things out means you are decreasing error and coming closer to the real value, so it is still worth it.
  • BillMcKay1
    BillMcKay1 Posts: 315 Member
    Dnarules wrote: »
    Mentali wrote: »
    BillMcKay1 wrote: »
    Mentali wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    Mentali wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    bethannien wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    hjlourenshj wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    Bottom line - if you are counting calories, weighing, measuring and logging religiously, and cannot lose weight (a common complaint on this site), try this approach. Why not? And why would you continue doing something that is not working?
    't

    Its just impossible to not lose weight when you are in a deficit. So the common complaint on this site is 100% the cause of mistakes in counting. Its that simple. Don't spin it towards something else

    How hard is it to count calories? One ounce of cereal with skim milk (the amount is stated on the cereal box) for breakfast. Two cans of tuna fish and whatever the portion of mayonnaise is on the label for lunch. 100-calorie pre-packaged snack. A couple of pre-made burgers on a bun for dinner with a salad and a low-cal dressing.

    This is not exactly rocket science.


    It's not rocket science but if people are using the 1 cup or 1/4 cup suggestions for the measurement instead of weighing it, they're almost definitely eating more than they think. For example. I have some granola I mix into my Greek yogurt. The Greek yogurt says a serving is 1 cup (227 g) and the granola says a serving is 1/4 cup (27g). That's what the packaging gives as a serving size.

    I put my 1/2 cup on my scale to eat half a serving and I filled it about 2/3 full before I reached 113 g. If I had filled it to the top, I'd be eating more than I thought. And when I weighed the granola, 1/4 cup was 1.5 servings.

    So it may not be rocket science but if people are using measuring cups and wondering why they aren't losing weight, it's not what they're eating. It's how much.

    This is exactly what most newbies SHOULD NOT be doing.

    I am eating a Chobani yogurt right now. It contains 140 calories. Not 150 calories and not 130 caloires. There is nothing to weigh and nothing to measure. Forget about weighing granola. It just makes life difficult

    And Chobani has some product where you mix in things (one of them may be granola) into the yogurt. That may contain 200 calories. Not 210 calories and not 190 calories.

    I say KISS (with affection) to all newbies - Keep It Simple Stupid.

    Seriously, have you actually weighed the yogurt before determining it has 140 calories, not 139 or 141?

    Are you being serious?

    Mentali wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    bethannien wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    hjlourenshj wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    Bottom line - if you are counting calories, weighing, measuring and logging religiously, and cannot lose weight (a common complaint on this site), try this approach. Why not? And why would you continue doing something that is not working?
    't

    Its just impossible to not lose weight when you are in a deficit. So the common complaint on this site is 100% the cause of mistakes in counting. Its that simple. Don't spin it towards something else

    How hard is it to count calories? One ounce of cereal with skim milk (the amount is stated on the cereal box) for breakfast. Two cans of tuna fish and whatever the portion of mayonnaise is on the label for lunch. 100-calorie pre-packaged snack. A couple of pre-made burgers on a bun for dinner with a salad and a low-cal dressing.

    This is not exactly rocket science.


    It's not rocket science but if people are using the 1 cup or 1/4 cup suggestions for the measurement instead of weighing it, they're almost definitely eating more than they think. For example. I have some granola I mix into my Greek yogurt. The Greek yogurt says a serving is 1 cup (227 g) and the granola says a serving is 1/4 cup (27g). That's what the packaging gives as a serving size.

    I put my 1/2 cup on my scale to eat half a serving and I filled it about 2/3 full before I reached 113 g. If I had filled it to the top, I'd be eating more than I thought. And when I weighed the granola, 1/4 cup was 1.5 servings.

    So it may not be rocket science but if people are using measuring cups and wondering why they aren't losing weight, it's not what they're eating. It's how much.

    This is exactly what most newbies SHOULD NOT be doing.

    I am eating a Chobani yogurt right now. It contains 140 calories. Not 150 calories and not 130 caloires. There is nothing to weigh and nothing to measure. Forget about weighing granola. It just makes life difficult

    And Chobani has some product where you mix in things (one of them may be granola) into the yogurt. That may contain 200 calories. Not 210 calories and not 190 calories.

    I say KISS (with affection) to all newbies - Keep It Simple Stupid.

    THIS IS NOT TRUE.

    Repeat: THIS IS NOT TRUE. Your yogurt is not guaranteed to contain 140 calories. In fact, in the US it can be up to 20% off ("the label is considered to be out of compliance if the nutrient content of a composite of the product is greater than 20% above the value declared on the label", Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (21 CFR 101.9(g))). That yogurt might be 112 calories....or, more likely, that yogurt may be 168 calories. Now expand that to a frozen dinner, one that's, say....600 calories. That could actually be up to 720. If you eat all your calories from prepackaged food, without weighing the portions, and eat up to your deficit, then you will very likely be consuming more calories than you think, cutting into or stalling your weight loss.

    Seriously, have you actually weighed the yogurt before determining it has 140 calories, not 139 or 141?

    You can't be serious about the calories in the yogurt.

    OK, so here's what you do. The label says 140 calories. To be safe, add 10%, and now it's 154 calories. Problem solved. Or, you can make a breakfast with four or five ingredients where you have to weight and measure, weigh and measure. I would advise sticking with the yogurt.

    So now you're backing out of your "Not 150 calories" claim?

    10% or 20% matters. Especially when it's on every item you eat, all day, and especially if you don't have much wiggle room in your calories. Not to mention your other mistakes are not governed by the FDA requirements, so the consequences of them could be catastrophic to a carefully planned weight loss system.

    For a yogurt, it's 28 more calories. For everything else, it's much more. The only method to be accurate in your calorie counting, which is necessary, is to make sure your food is in the portions that you think they are, which cannot be done by trusting labels to be accurate since we know they're not.

    Although I have to be honest - I don't think I've ever seen someone arguing both "what kind of calories you consume matter, they have to be good calories" and also "people should just be eating all of their food prepackaged!" It's an interesting, if contradictory, set of opinions!

    To be fair though, that up to 20% compliance zone is true even if you are weighing your yogurt. The nutrition label on a my greek yogurt (and most)t container lists it's nutrient/calorie profile by the gram and cup. 120cal per 1/2c or 175g.

    Now I weigh out my 175g to get my 120 cal, but that 20% potential margin of error for calories doesn't disappear just because I weighed it out. Their have the same 20% margin in the calories for the weighted measure as well.

    Yeah definitely, you'd have to go by grams and decide if it's worth the extra calories, if you want all the yogurt, etc. after weighing for sure. Weighing isn't a method to keep in a deficit, just a method to make sure that if you want a deficit you have the tools to get there! :)

    I could be wrong, but I think this poster means that even if you weigh out 175g of yogurt, it will have 120 calories +/- error, because not every batch of yogurt will be identical. The 120 cal is still an estimate. Of course, weighing things out means you are decreasing error and coming closer to the real value, so it is still worth it.

    Yes, exactly what I meant. We all just guessing. People who measure are just closer to the actual that those that are eyeballing.

    Short of having a medical condition, how good we assess our intake and burn shows up when you get on the scale or do your measurements.
  • Mentali
    Mentali Posts: 352 Member
    edited August 2016
    Dnarules wrote: »
    Mentali wrote: »
    BillMcKay1 wrote: »
    Mentali wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    Mentali wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    bethannien wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    hjlourenshj wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    Bottom line - if you are counting calories, weighing, measuring and logging religiously, and cannot lose weight (a common complaint on this site), try this approach. Why not? And why would you continue doing something that is not working?
    't

    Its just impossible to not lose weight when you are in a deficit. So the common complaint on this site is 100% the cause of mistakes in counting. Its that simple. Don't spin it towards something else

    How hard is it to count calories? One ounce of cereal with skim milk (the amount is stated on the cereal box) for breakfast. Two cans of tuna fish and whatever the portion of mayonnaise is on the label for lunch. 100-calorie pre-packaged snack. A couple of pre-made burgers on a bun for dinner with a salad and a low-cal dressing.

    This is not exactly rocket science.


    It's not rocket science but if people are using the 1 cup or 1/4 cup suggestions for the measurement instead of weighing it, they're almost definitely eating more than they think. For example. I have some granola I mix into my Greek yogurt. The Greek yogurt says a serving is 1 cup (227 g) and the granola says a serving is 1/4 cup (27g). That's what the packaging gives as a serving size.

    I put my 1/2 cup on my scale to eat half a serving and I filled it about 2/3 full before I reached 113 g. If I had filled it to the top, I'd be eating more than I thought. And when I weighed the granola, 1/4 cup was 1.5 servings.

    So it may not be rocket science but if people are using measuring cups and wondering why they aren't losing weight, it's not what they're eating. It's how much.

    This is exactly what most newbies SHOULD NOT be doing.

    I am eating a Chobani yogurt right now. It contains 140 calories. Not 150 calories and not 130 caloires. There is nothing to weigh and nothing to measure. Forget about weighing granola. It just makes life difficult

    And Chobani has some product where you mix in things (one of them may be granola) into the yogurt. That may contain 200 calories. Not 210 calories and not 190 calories.

    I say KISS (with affection) to all newbies - Keep It Simple Stupid.

    Seriously, have you actually weighed the yogurt before determining it has 140 calories, not 139 or 141?

    Are you being serious?

    Mentali wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    bethannien wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    hjlourenshj wrote: »
    gonetothedogs19 wrote: »
    Bottom line - if you are counting calories, weighing, measuring and logging religiously, and cannot lose weight (a common complaint on this site), try this approach. Why not? And why would you continue doing something that is not working?
    't

    Its just impossible to not lose weight when you are in a deficit. So the common complaint on this site is 100% the cause of mistakes in counting. Its that simple. Don't spin it towards something else

    How hard is it to count calories? One ounce of cereal with skim milk (the amount is stated on the cereal box) for breakfast. Two cans of tuna fish and whatever the portion of mayonnaise is on the label for lunch. 100-calorie pre-packaged snack. A couple of pre-made burgers on a bun for dinner with a salad and a low-cal dressing.

    This is not exactly rocket science.


    It's not rocket science but if people are using the 1 cup or 1/4 cup suggestions for the measurement instead of weighing it, they're almost definitely eating more than they think. For example. I have some granola I mix into my Greek yogurt. The Greek yogurt says a serving is 1 cup (227 g) and the granola says a serving is 1/4 cup (27g). That's what the packaging gives as a serving size.

    I put my 1/2 cup on my scale to eat half a serving and I filled it about 2/3 full before I reached 113 g. If I had filled it to the top, I'd be eating more than I thought. And when I weighed the granola, 1/4 cup was 1.5 servings.

    So it may not be rocket science but if people are using measuring cups and wondering why they aren't losing weight, it's not what they're eating. It's how much.

    This is exactly what most newbies SHOULD NOT be doing.

    I am eating a Chobani yogurt right now. It contains 140 calories. Not 150 calories and not 130 caloires. There is nothing to weigh and nothing to measure. Forget about weighing granola. It just makes life difficult

    And Chobani has some product where you mix in things (one of them may be granola) into the yogurt. That may contain 200 calories. Not 210 calories and not 190 calories.

    I say KISS (with affection) to all newbies - Keep It Simple Stupid.

    THIS IS NOT TRUE.

    Repeat: THIS IS NOT TRUE. Your yogurt is not guaranteed to contain 140 calories. In fact, in the US it can be up to 20% off ("the label is considered to be out of compliance if the nutrient content of a composite of the product is greater than 20% above the value declared on the label", Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (21 CFR 101.9(g))). That yogurt might be 112 calories....or, more likely, that yogurt may be 168 calories. Now expand that to a frozen dinner, one that's, say....600 calories. That could actually be up to 720. If you eat all your calories from prepackaged food, without weighing the portions, and eat up to your deficit, then you will very likely be consuming more calories than you think, cutting into or stalling your weight loss.

    Seriously, have you actually weighed the yogurt before determining it has 140 calories, not 139 or 141?

    You can't be serious about the calories in the yogurt.

    OK, so here's what you do. The label says 140 calories. To be safe, add 10%, and now it's 154 calories. Problem solved. Or, you can make a breakfast with four or five ingredients where you have to weight and measure, weigh and measure. I would advise sticking with the yogurt.

    So now you're backing out of your "Not 150 calories" claim?

    10% or 20% matters. Especially when it's on every item you eat, all day, and especially if you don't have much wiggle room in your calories. Not to mention your other mistakes are not governed by the FDA requirements, so the consequences of them could be catastrophic to a carefully planned weight loss system.

    For a yogurt, it's 28 more calories. For everything else, it's much more. The only method to be accurate in your calorie counting, which is necessary, is to make sure your food is in the portions that you think they are, which cannot be done by trusting labels to be accurate since we know they're not.

    Although I have to be honest - I don't think I've ever seen someone arguing both "what kind of calories you consume matter, they have to be good calories" and also "people should just be eating all of their food prepackaged!" It's an interesting, if contradictory, set of opinions!

    To be fair though, that up to 20% compliance zone is true even if you are weighing your yogurt. The nutrition label on a my greek yogurt (and most)t container lists it's nutrient/calorie profile by the gram and cup. 120cal per 1/2c or 175g.

    Now I weigh out my 175g to get my 120 cal, but that 20% potential margin of error for calories doesn't disappear just because I weighed it out. Their have the same 20% margin in the calories for the weighted measure as well.

    Yeah definitely, you'd have to go by grams and decide if it's worth the extra calories, if you want all the yogurt, etc. after weighing for sure. Weighing isn't a method to keep in a deficit, just a method to make sure that if you want a deficit you have the tools to get there! :)

    I could be wrong, but I think this poster means that even if you weigh out 175g of yogurt, it will have 120 calories +/- error, because not every batch of yogurt will be identical. The 120 cal is still an estimate. Of course, weighing things out means you are decreasing error and coming closer to the real value, so it is still worth it.

    I think you're right and I misread - and on further reading of the guidelines you and him are both right because the FDA does go by gram measurements in servings, not serving amounts. Thanks for correcting me, that's good to know!

    Edit: I would say this makes weighing even more important, to reduce the margin of error by any amount you can :D
  • elphie754
    elphie754 Posts: 7,574 Member
    BreezeDoveal wrote: »
    earthakin66 wrote: »
    Actually we aren't talking about Dr. Lustig, but Dr. Ludwig.
    I am going to go ahead and cut sugar, potatoes and processed foods out of my diet for 6 months anyway. I know a lot of you don't agree and to that I say- don't do it then! I spent two years off of sugar and flour and lost 79 pounds. So many people were bothered by this and convinced me that I should be able to eat anything I wanted in moderation. Of course I love sugar and flour and so I gave it a try- and gained back 50 pounds in the process. I am driven to overeat these things. Those of you who can't relate to this don't have that problem and I am happy for you because it really sucks. I know that I was more energetic and overall healthier when I wasn't consuming sugar and flour. Did I insist that everyone else did it? No! I didn't even make my children do that because everyone is allowed to make their own choices.
    I posted this morning looking for likeminded individuals, not looking for reasons not to cut out refined sugars and flour. I found a couple, so thanks to them.
    I'm not a newbie in any sense. I need support to go down the abstinence road because people are constantly telling me how stupid it is. It isn't easy but I know that it is right for me. And yes, eating 4000 calories a day won't end in weight loss.

    You should self experiment like this, and periodically re-testing. Perhaps if you do it long enough you'll reach an equilibirum where you can no longer process carbs as much, so you can eat them in moderation because more of them will pass through you with your weakened carb processing.

    Huh?!?!
  • cgvet37
    cgvet37 Posts: 1,189 Member
    carlenbowie wrote: »
    I haven't read the book, but I am a fitness trainer and all calories are not the same. While trying to loose weight if you eat too many carbs you will still loose weight but you will be loosing muscle and not look as flattering if you loosed the fat. However, not all carbs are bad - stay away from simple carbs (in moderation)

    It has nothing to do with carbs. You're saying that if you eat mostly fats and protein, you will only loose fat, and not muscle? Eating in a deficit and not doing any weight training to maintain the muscle you have, will cause more muscle loss. Not because you are eating a high ammount of carbs.
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,961 Member
    BreezeDoveal wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    carlenbowie wrote: »
    I haven't read the book, but I am a fitness trainer and all calories are not the same.
    Wherever you got your cert from then isn't legit. A calorie is a unit of measurement. Units of measurements don't change because materials are different.
    While trying to loose weight if you eat too many carbs you will still loose weight but you will be loosing muscle and not look as flattering if you loosed the fat.
    You do know that carbs are muscle sparing right? Who certified you?
    However, not all carbs are bad - stay away from simple carbs (in moderation)
    No carbs are "bad". They are different in nutrient density though. All carbs become what once in the body and broken down to simplest form?

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
    9285851.png

    Yeah, you need a tremendous amount of carbs to spare protein and muscle:
    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/how-many-carbohydrates-do-you-need.html/
    50 grams is a lot? Lol, I eat at least 150-200g a day.
    From the article.
    Early research into the topic of starvation and low-carbohydrate dieting found that as few as 15 grams of carbohydrates per day can limit nitrogen loss in the body. And raising carbohydrate intake to 50 grams per day severely limits the need for the body to use amino acids for gluoconeogenesis (which is why I suggested setting daily carbs on the low-carb days of The Ultimate Diet 2.0 at 50 grams).
    And fats are nowhere near as sparing of nitrogen as carbs:
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15173435
    I never mentioned anything about this.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
    9285851.png
  • grinning_chick
    grinning_chick Posts: 765 Member
    singingflutelady wrote: »
    Though cico is not a woe. It's the only way to lose weight except for surgery or a tapeworm or malabsorption or a medical issue

    http://www.vice.com/read/what-happens-if-you-give-yourself-a-tapeworm-to-lose-weight-862
  • bernadettenz
    bernadettenz Posts: 252 Member
    mamadon wrote: »
    earthakin66 wrote: »
    I don't mind hearing criticism, I just wonder why everyone feels the need to offer that. Thanks for the tip, I'll look over in groups.


    Because so very many of us were just like you when it comes to trying to lose weight. Looking for that magical answer that's out there, reading a book and saying "Aha! So that's what is wrong with me, that's why I can't lose weight. This is what I need to do! I need to eat low carb or low fat, I need to eat healthy, I need to cut out refined sugars, or processed foods. I need some raspberry keytones, or I'll do the military diet. The problem is I have to calm down my fat cells, I need to jump start my metabolism.
    I tried it all for twenty years. So did a lot of people on here. I tried Atkins, South Beach, Phen Phen, over the counter pills, I read books and magazine articles, some written by scientists and Dr's.
    Please listen to the people on here, Calories in/ Calories out. That's what causes weight loss.

    Oh my gosh, you look incredible!
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,426 MFP Moderator
    missh1967 wrote: »
    earthakin66 wrote: »
    It just seems obvious to me that 200 calories in almonds vs. 200 calories in a doughnut will not have the same result in your body. It actually seems like people here agree on that so I don't really know what the issue is. Part of the idea is that if we eat 1400 calories worth of nutritionally dense, higher fat foods then we will be less hungry than if we ate 1400 calories of processed, low fat foods.
    I read the review, interesting points.
    I dont trust doctors blindly, just was pointing out that he isn't a stick insect.

    Ugh. Low fat foods do not have to be processed. Higher fat may satiate YOU, but not me. 400 calories of beans and rice (low fat, not processed) is far more filling than 400 calories of cheese, meat, nuts, oil, etc. I can get plenty of nutritionally dense low/moderate fat foods. WTF. So sick of the ignorance 'round here.

    To add, a lot of high fat foods are very processed.

    More examples of low fat whole foods: fruits and veggies, greek yogurt, chicken, pork and many steaks.


    Add me to the fat doesnt fill me club. A 12oz sirloin fills me a lot more than a 20oz ribeye.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    psulemon wrote: »
    missh1967 wrote: »
    earthakin66 wrote: »
    It just seems obvious to me that 200 calories in almonds vs. 200 calories in a doughnut will not have the same result in your body. It actually seems like people here agree on that so I don't really know what the issue is. Part of the idea is that if we eat 1400 calories worth of nutritionally dense, higher fat foods then we will be less hungry than if we ate 1400 calories of processed, low fat foods.
    I read the review, interesting points.
    I dont trust doctors blindly, just was pointing out that he isn't a stick insect.

    Ugh. Low fat foods do not have to be processed. Higher fat may satiate YOU, but not me. 400 calories of beans and rice (low fat, not processed) is far more filling than 400 calories of cheese, meat, nuts, oil, etc. I can get plenty of nutritionally dense low/moderate fat foods. WTF. So sick of the ignorance 'round here.

    To add, a lot of high fat foods are very processed.

    More examples of low fat whole foods: fruits and veggies, greek yogurt, chicken, pork and many steaks.


    Add me to the fat doesnt fill me club. A 12oz sirloin fills me a lot more than a 20oz ribeye.

    Signing on to this also. I tend to eat whole foods, and most of them aren't high in fat. The fat I add (olive oil, butter) is more processed (not that I care), although I also eat nuts and avocados.

    The "junk" I eat (like ice cream) tends to have both sugar and fat.

    I wish fat filled me up, but it doesn't at all.

Categories