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.
Does calories in vs calories out really matter?
Options
Replies
-
geneticexpectations wrote: »I know a few people who absolutely need to count calories for weight management success, but the vast majority of people that I know in real life (as well as in the clinic) with sustained significant success all seem to have whole food based diets and don't have the need to count calories.
But "counting calories" and "CICO" aren't the same thing. CICO is the scientific formula that determines weightloss. Counting calories, switching to a whole food diet, LCHF, Atkins, Weight Watchers, portion control, intermittent fasting are all possible ways of getting to "calories in less than calories out". They each work, when they do, because of CICO. People often lose weight when switching to a whole food diet because it causes them to be in a calorie deficit - CICO. The fact that they didn't count calories doesn't mean they weren't in a deficit, it just means that way of eating got them to a deficit without them looking at the numbers.
I never said otherwise. I just was expressing that I really hate spending time looking at more numbers than I have to, and I have found that I'm not alone. And I'm just referring to methods that I have found to be successful. Im sure others have different experiences with success on a broad scale as well.1 -
diannethegeek wrote: »geneticexpectations wrote: »I know a few people who absolutely need to count calories for weight management success, but the vast majority of people that I know in real life (as well as in the clinic) with sustained significant success all seem to have whole food based diets and don't have the need to count calories.
But "counting calories" and "CICO" aren't the same thing. CICO is the scientific formula that determines weightloss. Counting calories, switching to a whole food diet, LCHF, Atkins, Weight Watchers, portion control, intermittent fasting are all possible ways of getting to "calories in less than calories out". They each work, when they do, because of CICO. People often lose weight when switching to a whole food diet because it causes them to be in a calorie deficit - CICO. The fact that they didn't count calories doesn't mean they weren't in a deficit, it just means that way of eating got them to a deficit without them looking at the numbers.
^Exactly. And it was explained to @geneticexpectations earlier this month in this same thread and they're still conflating cico and calorie counting. I wish I knew why these two concepts are so difficult to separate for many people.
It may have been explained, but I don't need explaining. I was making a point that CICO may not really be something people have to care about if counting isn't your thing (regardless of the fact that the equation is there in the background).
It may be that you have difficulty identifying who is thinking what.1 -
Not agreed. Quality means nothing as far as weight loss. Perhaps you meant quantity?4
-
-
Not agreed. Quality means nothing as far as weight loss. Perhaps you meant quantity?
I personally focus on quality and quality alone. Quantity seems to always resolve itself. Right now I'm eating wild salmon cooked in wild boar bacon fat (and some wild boar bacon too) with a big bowl of carrot soup. It's ridiculously delicious, but despite that, I'm filling up so fast that I realize I'm going to have a really hard time finishing this. And I probably won't be hungry for dinner, like the last 5 nights.0 -
geneticexpectations wrote: »Not agreed. Quality means nothing as far as weight loss. Perhaps you meant quantity?
I personally focus on quality and quality alone. Quantity seems to always resolve itself. Right now I'm eating wild salmon cooked in wild boar bacon fat (and some wild boar bacon too) with a big bowl of carrot soup. It's ridiculously delicious, but despite that, I'm filling up so fast that I realize I'm going to have a really hard time finishing this. And I probably won't be hungry for dinner, like the last 5 nights.
Whereas I only focus on quantity (calories), and then eat whatever I'm in the mood for. This works well for me and my weight/health goals.
The important thing is that we've both found a path that works for us and our health, lifestyles and preferences
5 -
True. I have to have protein in my breakfast for me to feel satiated until lunch.
0 -
crzycatlady1 wrote: »geneticexpectations wrote: »Not agreed. Quality means nothing as far as weight loss. Perhaps you meant quantity?
I personally focus on quality and quality alone. Quantity seems to always resolve itself. Right now I'm eating wild salmon cooked in wild boar bacon fat (and some wild boar bacon too) with a big bowl of carrot soup. It's ridiculously delicious, but despite that, I'm filling up so fast that I realize I'm going to have a really hard time finishing this. And I probably won't be hungry for dinner, like the last 5 nights.
Whereas I only focus on quantity (calories), and then eat whatever I'm in the mood for. This works well for me and my weight/health goals.
The important thing is that we've both found a path that works for us and our health, lifestyles and preferences
For sure. N of 1 is the most important study.1 -
True. I have to have protein in my breakfast for me to feel satiated until lunch.
I try to have protein in each meal since it has the highest satiety levels. This shouldn't be confused with energy balance though, which is what CICO is. CICO is the mathematical equation that determines weight adjustments (negative, positive, or balanced). Food quality, volume and macronutrient adjustments support goals, energy, satiety and helps manage compliance.0 -
geneticexpectations wrote: »Not agreed. Quality means nothing as far as weight loss. Perhaps you meant quantity?
I personally focus on quality and quality alone. Quantity seems to always resolve itself. Right now I'm eating wild salmon cooked in wild boar bacon fat (and some wild boar bacon too) with a big bowl of carrot soup. It's ridiculously delicious, but despite that, I'm filling up so fast that I realize I'm going to have a really hard time finishing this. And I probably won't be hungry for dinner, like the last 5 nights.
You know, you are ignoring some very real factors that come into play in causing obesity in your reach to find a solution here.
Obesity is multifactorial often having both physiological and psychological issues coming into play. People who ignore this don't really understand a good portion of people who struggle with ongoing weight problems and take a dogmatic approach based solely on a devotion to an ideology that sounds appealing to them.
I fell prey to the idea that there was some simplistic answer like "quality" and quality alone to my diet for years and ate that way and never reached an ideal weight for my height because I still ate too much food. Why? because I had emotional aspects to my eating that I was never addressing.
Your paradigm doesn't allow for people like me. And unfortunately, I'm not a lone. A lot of the very obese have emotional baggage with food. Your breezy assumption that "quality will resolve itself" is way, way off the mark.
Emotional eaters have broken satiety signals. Quality of food doesn't matter to them in the least.8 -
I personally focus on quality and quality alone. Quantity seems to always resolve itself. Right now I'm eating wild salmon cooked in wild boar bacon fat (and some wild boar bacon too) with a big bowl of carrot soup. It's ridiculously delicious, but despite that, I'm filling up so fast that I realize I'm going to have a really hard time finishing this. And I probably won't be hungry for dinner, like the last 5 nights.For sure. N of 1 is the most important study.
2 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »geneticexpectations wrote: »Not agreed. Quality means nothing as far as weight loss. Perhaps you meant quantity?
I personally focus on quality and quality alone. Quantity seems to always resolve itself. Right now I'm eating wild salmon cooked in wild boar bacon fat (and some wild boar bacon too) with a big bowl of carrot soup. It's ridiculously delicious, but despite that, I'm filling up so fast that I realize I'm going to have a really hard time finishing this. And I probably won't be hungry for dinner, like the last 5 nights.
You know, you are ignoring some very real factors that come into play in causing obesity in your reach to find a solution here.
Obesity is multifactorial often having both physiological and psychological issues coming into play. People who ignore this don't really understand a good portion of people who struggle with ongoing weight problems and take a dogmatic approach based solely on a devotion to an ideology that sounds appealing to them.
I fell prey to the idea that there was some simplistic answer like "quality" and quality alone to my diet for years and ate that way and never reached an ideal weight for my height because I still ate too much food. Why? because I had emotional aspects to my eating that I was never addressing.
Your paradigm doesn't allow for people like me. And unfortunately, I'm not a lone. A lot of the very obese have emotional baggage with food. Your breezy assumption that "quality will resolve itself" is way, way off the mark.
Emotional eaters have broken satiety signals. Quality of food doesn't matter to them in the least.
I'm not ignoring those factors. I totally believe that.
Because I felt the exact same way. To a T. As a matter of fact, back when I ate "everything", I couldn't go 2 hours without eating. And when I was "not having a good day? " My fridge didn't stand a chance.
And several patients have told me the exact same thing.
Pre quality control that is.
Everyone is different of course, and this may not apply to you, and there are certainly a spectrum of DSM eating conditions in many people that confound this area, but in my experience I haven't heard the same story coming out of me or patients when quality was correctly controlled.
So how can I not acknowledge that? I still acknowledge that it may not work for everyone and I can't possibly know your experience.
But getting back to internet forum fundamentals, let's not forget, that that post of mine that you quoted .... was just about ME and my lunch. Just like your post is just about YOU. So it's not reasonable to extrapolate that anybody's posts are about finding a solution, or that all issues need to be addressed. We're all just expressing ourselves as individuals.1 -
How does food quality control satiety automatically, though?
For reference, I ate paleo or low carb with dairy for ten years. I was never able to get below 150 pounds doing either.
I also managed to binge eat doing both.
I am not alone in this, and this is why I am challenging your assertion that quality is what matters most. It's not.
For the record, I still adhere to mostly quality foods in my diet because I find them to be most satiating, but I find that I need to be mindful of energy balance to achieve the weight I want. This is not an automatic thing for me.
This automatic process is also what I'm challenging.
The reason I challenge this, and I get that you are saying that you are speaking as an individual, but there are diet gurus who promote what you're promoting, and people like me are told we're doing something wrong if we don't experience the miraculous effects that they promise.
That's just wrong. So, I'm not necessarily challenging your experience. I'm challenging the notion that it's universal and that there's something wrong if it doesn't work that way for someone else.
Calories do matter in the end, not food quality. My idea of food quality if likely quite different than yours. I'm a vegetarian, for starters.5 -
To address your post:
I don't claim to know the exact reason why food quality controls satiety. I have many thoughts about different aspects of it, but I really don't care about those.
I just know it controls the satiety of myself and people I have advised.
I think this is becoming clear by what you posted, but I want to make a correction. I did NOT assert that quality matters most. I said "I personally focus on quality and quality alone". I purposely use "I statements" to avoid making generalized assertions eg. "I have experienced this". "I have advised a patient to do this and this happened". "I have found that when I advise patients to do this, this gets the result we are looking for / does not get the result we are looking for".
I understand that you expressed that this isn't the same for you. I understand that you expressed that you have found a method that works for you. You must understand that I cannot be any more clear on this as I've repeated my acknowledgement and understanding of people's individual experiences on numerous posts, including ones that you have been involved with.
I am not a diet guru and have never claimed to be. I express and relay and state opinions (which is a forum's democratic right), but I do not promote. If someone else, guru or not, promotes what I say, ok fine. If someone else, guru or not, promotes the opposite of what I say, ok fine. Either way, they have nothing to do with me in real life. I'm just a guy, who reads, tries, observes, and relays my findings.
So bottom line, I understand that you are challenging the notion that "it's universal", but if that's the case, you should be directing your concerns to someone who is actually saying "it's universal".0 -
If quality alone was the deciding factor or even the more important factor, then husband would be lean and I would be heavy--he eats way higher quality food than I do. He's largely vegetarian and doesn't eat sweets, baked treats or fast food of any kind whereas I eat a sweet of some sort every day and fast food at least twice a week. I'm not vegetarian so I don't eat nearly the amount of fruits and veg he does, and I eat a ton of dairy (which some people consider not high quality food). Yet I am the thin one because I count calories and he's carrying something like an extra 30-40lbs because he doesn't. I tried for 20 years to eat clean like he does in an effort to lose weight but was never successful at getting slimmer until I started counting calories last January. I am now slimmer than I've been since Jr. high while eating all the types of foods I like because I finally know the proper amount to eat--quantity matters far more than quality in my experience.7
-
geneticexpectations wrote: »To address your post:
I don't claim to know the exact reason why food quality controls satiety. I have many thoughts about different aspects of it, but I really don't care about those.
I just know it controls the satiety of myself and people I have advised.
I think this is becoming clear by what you posted, but I want to make a correction. I did NOT assert that quality matters most. I said "I personally focus on quality and quality alone". I purposely use "I statements" to avoid making generalized assertions eg. "I have experienced this". "I have advised a patient to do this and this happened". "I have found that when I advise patients to do this, this gets the result we are looking for / does not get the result we are looking for".
I understand that you expressed that this isn't the same for you. I understand that you expressed that you have found a method that works for you. You must understand that I cannot be any more clear on this as I've repeated my acknowledgement and understanding of people's individual experiences on numerous posts, including ones that you have been involved with.
I am not a diet guru and have never claimed to be. I express and relay and state opinions (which is a forum's democratic right), but I do not promote. If someone else, guru or not, promotes what I say, ok fine. If someone else, guru or not, promotes the opposite of what I say, ok fine. Either way, they have nothing to do with me in real life. I'm just a guy, who reads, tries, observes, and relays my findings.
So bottom line, I understand that you are challenging the notion that "it's universal", but if that's the case, you should be directing your concerns to someone who is actually saying "it's universal".
Here is my general issues with "quality". Comparing two things of equal calories, 8 oz of chicken vs 30g of nuts. One will provide greater satiety than the other. It's not the quality of those, it's the macronutrients that provide greater satiety.1 -
bercyn1291 wrote: »It is agreed upon that quality of the food matters in faster weight loss but ideally calories out-calories in should determine how much weight you lose. Please share your experience.
Apparently not.
1 -
geneticexpectations wrote: »I know a few people who absolutely need to count calories for weight management success, but the vast majority of people that I know in real life (as well as in the clinic) with sustained significant success all seem to have whole food based diets and don't have the need to count calories.
LOL. I've eaten a nutritious, low and no-processed "whole-foods" based diet while primarily cooking from scratch at home for decades. The thing that helped me dropped weight and maintain at goal for almost 6 years now has been CICO. Even training for marathons didn't help, because I wasn't paying attention to calories and was inadvertently eating back all my training calories. Once I started tracking my intake, it was like magic.
The only people I know in real life with sustained significant success are those who maintain awareness of their calorie intake and expenditures.
But that's just my experience, of course.
ETA: I have never actually been technically overweight (which may be due to the whole foods based diet you described) however, I was getting to the age where I was seeing an obvious increase and starting to get up to the upper limits of healthy weight (about 25 pounds heavier than I am now.) So, to stop that "upward slide" and get back down to my ideal weight and body composition, I had to use CICO. I'm sure that simply switching to a whole foods based diet would be adequate for someone heavier who has been eating a highly processed diet. It just won't help someone who is closer to goal and already eating that way - like me.5 -
geneticexpectations wrote: »I know a few people who absolutely need to count calories for weight management success, but the vast majority of people that I know in real life (as well as in the clinic) with sustained significant success all seem to have whole food based diets and don't have the need to count calories.
LOL. I've eaten a nutritious, low and no-processed "whole-foods" based diet while primarily cooking from scratch at home for decades. The thing that helped me dropped weight and maintain at goal for almost 6 years now has been CICO. Even training for marathons didn't help, because I wasn't paying attention to calories and was inadvertently eating back all my training calories. Once I started tracking my intake, it was like magic.
The only people I know in real life with sustained significant success are those who maintain awareness of their calorie intake and expenditures.
But that's just my experience, of course.
Glad you've found something that works for you. And I acknowledge that that's your experience (without the need to add an LOL simply because your experience is different than mine).0 -
geneticexpectations wrote: »geneticexpectations wrote: »I know a few people who absolutely need to count calories for weight management success, but the vast majority of people that I know in real life (as well as in the clinic) with sustained significant success all seem to have whole food based diets and don't have the need to count calories.
LOL. I've eaten a nutritious, low and no-processed "whole-foods" based diet while primarily cooking from scratch at home for decades. The thing that helped me dropped weight and maintain at goal for almost 6 years now has been CICO. Even training for marathons didn't help, because I wasn't paying attention to calories and was inadvertently eating back all my training calories. Once I started tracking my intake, it was like magic.
The only people I know in real life with sustained significant success are those who maintain awareness of their calorie intake and expenditures.
But that's just my experience, of course.
Glad you've found something that works for you. And I acknowledge that that's your experience (without the need to add an LOL simply because your experience is different than mine).
It sounds like you have found something that works for you buy choosing foods you see as higher quality, which probably help you to control your appetite. That's wonderful!
No matter what we do, and setting aside those medical conditions that need a doctor's attention, we must eat at a calorie deficit to lose weight. How you get to the calorie deficit is individual. Some people literally count calories, other people choose to eat only certain types of foods because they know they will be more satiated and eat in a way that causes weight loss.
As to weight loss, the only magic that food quality has is the magic we give it. Nutrition is a whole other story.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions