"You can eat whaver you want, as long as you eat at a deficit" is true, but it's garbage advice.
Replies
-
And still others come here to share helpful advice, which the OP labeled "garbage" yet those of us who are responding are admonished and told we need to be "nicer".[/quote]
I now dub myself "GarbageMan". (although I am a little ashamed of myself that I am overeating troll food)
4 -
I agree with you original poster. Those CICO people are full of bunk. The quality of what you eat nutritionally can speed up and cause you to lose weight. Eating junk food and processed foods at a deficit doesn't work for me at all. Eating at a deficit is unnatural for the body... and it is tricky to do it long term. You need to maximize the food you eat and be strategic so you don't get hungry go off and binge.
You are right.. garbage talk!0 -
Is there really an "all pizza' diet? i want in! lol just kidding. You can eat pizza and lose weight, seriously.2
-
You guys just take every single word someone writes literally, to the t. I don't mean that you have to spend the rest of your life not eating things you enjoy. I also don't mean that you can NEVER have things you enjoy, or that are calorie dense. What I do mean, and was obvious in the original post, that is if you aren't just looking for something to complain about, is that dieting under the idea that "you can have whatever, so long as it fits in your calorie count" is not an effective long term solution because MOST people, especially larger people, run out of calories waaaaay before they become satiated. If you are a 135lb woman that's 5'9 which I think was an example somewhere in this thread, and you're only eating at a 500 calorie deficit, no *kitten* you are gonna be full before you run out of calories. You're small, even if you aren't at your "goal" you are going to feel satiated. If you are the kind of person who is accustomed to eating 3500-4000 calories a day and your prescribed amount is 2500, there is absolutely NO WAY that you can eat the calorie dense foods you enjoy, but at a lower quantity, and not be absolutely starving to death. Which will lead to a derailment in most people. Contrary to popular belief, will power is not a dominant trait. So there you go, here's another post for you guys to pick apart to for *kitten* that is obviously not what I meant.
What is the purpose of this thread?
Instead of suggesting what "most" people can and cannot do, which is pointless. Focus on what you can do.
Instead of blaming others for not understanding your posting, focus on your communication.
There's a theme building here.10 -
WinoGelato wrote: »CynthiasChoice wrote: »To be honest I think that the most frustrating thing about this thread is that the OP is so very close to having some good points - they're just coming out all wrong and instead of being helpful it's just coming off as a massive generalization (because no ifs, ands or buts were included in the original post) and a little condescending.
And when someone posts a thread that denounces an entire section of MFP users, whether intentional or not, you have to expect some blowback.
It's more often than not that only the people who disagree with a post will comment on it. Often times when you agree you don't even bother to comment, so of course most people who have responded to this thread have started their rebuttals with, "actually..."
Some people come here for debate, and some come to find like-minded future friends and helpful advice.
And still others come here to share helpful advice, which the OP labeled "garbage" yet those of us who are responding are admonished and told we need to be "nicer".
Some people give advice tactfully and respectfully and others sound like bossy bullies. Why should we expect MFP to be a functional family when most of us have dis-functional families in "real life."3 -
elisa123gal wrote: »I agree with you original poster. Those CICO people are full of bunk. The quality of what you eat nutritionally can speed up and cause you to lose weight. Eating junk food and processed foods at a deficit doesn't work for me at all. Eating at a deficit is unnatural for the body... and it is tricky to do it long term. You need to maximize the food you eat and be strategic so you don't get hungry go off and binge.
You are right.. garbage talk!
So losing weight steadily by implementing the basic rule of CICO is bunk? You're saying it doesn't work, and I haven't actually lost weight due to being at a deficit? I'm a little confused. Because something doesn't work for you ... it's garbage?! What? Is your body superior for not eating processed foods? My body must hate me from all the lean cuisines and goldfish I eat at lunch. Of course eating at a deficit is unnatural. So is being overweight and stressing your body systems.
I'm just confused if you're being serious or not.10 -
CynthiasChoice wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »CynthiasChoice wrote: »To be honest I think that the most frustrating thing about this thread is that the OP is so very close to having some good points - they're just coming out all wrong and instead of being helpful it's just coming off as a massive generalization (because no ifs, ands or buts were included in the original post) and a little condescending.
And when someone posts a thread that denounces an entire section of MFP users, whether intentional or not, you have to expect some blowback.
It's more often than not that only the people who disagree with a post will comment on it. Often times when you agree you don't even bother to comment, so of course most people who have responded to this thread have started their rebuttals with, "actually..."
Some people come here for debate, and some come to find like-minded future friends and helpful advice.
And still others come here to share helpful advice, which the OP labeled "garbage" yet those of us who are responding are admonished and told we need to be "nicer".
Some people give advice tactfully and respectfully and others sound like bossy bullies. Why should we expect MFP to be a functional family when most of us have dis-functional families in "real life."
And still, no comment from you about the OP's choice of words "garbage advice", supported by sweeping generalizations and misunderstanding of what people actually mean when they offer advice of "you can lose weight and still eat the foods you want in a calorie deficit". The rest of us are the bossy bullies?11 -
WinoGelato wrote: »CynthiasChoice wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »CynthiasChoice wrote: »To be honest I think that the most frustrating thing about this thread is that the OP is so very close to having some good points - they're just coming out all wrong and instead of being helpful it's just coming off as a massive generalization (because no ifs, ands or buts were included in the original post) and a little condescending.
And when someone posts a thread that denounces an entire section of MFP users, whether intentional or not, you have to expect some blowback.
It's more often than not that only the people who disagree with a post will comment on it. Often times when you agree you don't even bother to comment, so of course most people who have responded to this thread have started their rebuttals with, "actually..."
Some people come here for debate, and some come to find like-minded future friends and helpful advice.
And still others come here to share helpful advice, which the OP labeled "garbage" yet those of us who are responding are admonished and told we need to be "nicer".
Some people give advice tactfully and respectfully and others sound like bossy bullies. Why should we expect MFP to be a functional family when most of us have dis-functional families in "real life."
And still, no comment from you about the OP's choice of words "garbage advice", supported by sweeping generalizations and misunderstanding of what people actually mean when they offer advice of "you can lose weight and still eat the foods you want in a calorie deficit". The rest of us are the bossy bullies?
^This, I agree with all your comments. People want to sugar coat everything, and if you don't it means you're being mean. I thought sugar was bad for you.
6 -
elisa123gal wrote: »I agree with you original poster. Those CICO people are full of bunk. The quality of what you eat nutritionally can speed up and cause you to lose weight. Eating junk food and processed foods at a deficit doesn't work for me at all. Eating at a deficit is unnatural for the body... and it is tricky to do it long term. You need to maximize the food you eat and be strategic so you don't get hungry go off and binge.
You are right.. garbage talk!
How does food quality "speed up" weight loss if the same total calories are consumed, whether a person eats only whole foods, a mix of whole foods, processed foods, "junk" foods; or nothing but "junk" foods. The calorie deficit is what determines the rate of loss, not the quality of foods. Certainly, as many have said, nutritional quality is important and NO ONE is advocating eating a diet of nothing but "junk".
And has been stated repeatedly in this thread, cutting out foods they love is what causes many to go off and binge.16 -
Lolz.
The idea that you should meet your nutrient requirements and then the remaining calories you can allocate to whatever takes your fancy is a pretty mainstream public health position:
what are discretionary calories
That is the standard advice given on here and is hardly "garbage".20 -
Oh, and further to my previous post it is sometimes the case that long standing members give others advice that they should just concentrate on meeting their calorie goal initially and then transition towards incorporating a "higher quality" intake as time progresses.
This is normally within the context of an individual who is particularly over weight and is feeling overwhelmed by having to make multiple changes all at that same time and therefore is an obstacle to adherence. In that situation getting the individual comfortable with the initial skill of meeting a calorie goal is deemed to outweigh any potential short term negative impact that may arise from lacking nutrients (although in practice minimum nutrient requirements seem ordinarily to be met anyway) as losing weight and therefore reducing overall stress on the body can secure health benefits in of itself.
That is not the standard advice given in most circumstances as far as I can see and it would be a gross mischaracterisation to suggest otherwise.18 -
elisa123gal wrote: »I agree with you original poster. Those CICO people are full of bunk. The quality of what you eat nutritionally can speed up and cause you to lose weight. Eating junk food and processed foods at a deficit doesn't work for me at all. Eating at a deficit is unnatural for the body... and it is tricky to do it long term. You need to maximize the food you eat and be strategic so you don't get hungry go off and binge.
You are right.. garbage talk!
If CICO is bunk and eating at a deficit is unnatural then why are you using a website that is designed for people to use said method to lose weight. Just curious....15 -
One piece of pizza and 7 chips won't keep me full very long and offer very little nutrition. Therefore, "Eat whatever type of food you want in tiny quantities" is not a sustainable lifestyle for me. A couple times a month is ok, but not 24/7.
But I'm not sure how making that decision doesn't = eating what you want within your calories.
This is honestly what I don't get about this discussion.
Now, personally, I have pizza every 2-3 weeks, sometimes homemade, sometimes from a local Italian place, sometimes (more rarely) from a Chicago-style place. Mine always IS decent for nutrition -- I order the kind with vegetables, sometimes proscuitto or other meat options (I don't really care for pepperoni or sausage on pizza), my favorite Chicago-style isn't too bad for calories and has spinach, peppers, and mushrooms, but also is quite filling. And of course I have other food (salad or other vegetables) with it. (I rarely eat chips since they usually aren't worth the calories in my judgment -- I prefer roasted potatoes. The one exception is these housemade chips that come with a sandwich I sometimes get and have the same calories as the almonds I would otherwise get -- almonds are better nutritionally, but as an occasional thing, eh.)
Anyway, the point is that thinking about it like this -- or like you did -- IS exactly deciding to have what you want within your calories. Since calories are limited, sometimes we have to make tradeoffs. This is not inconsistent with eating what you want within your calories. Unless you cut out food as never, ever okay or eat things you don't actually want or like, how is this different from what is being recommended.
Eat what you want within your calories doesn't mean ignore nutrition or satiety.6 -
elisa123gal wrote: »I agree with you original poster. Those CICO people are full of bunk. The quality of what you eat nutritionally can speed up and cause you to lose weight. Eating junk food and processed foods at a deficit doesn't work for me at all. Eating at a deficit is unnatural for the body... and it is tricky to do it long term. You need to maximize the food you eat and be strategic so you don't get hungry go off and binge.
You are right.. garbage talk!
If CICO is bunk and eating at a deficit is unnatural then why are you using a website that is designed for people to use said method to lose weight. Just curious....
There's room on this website for all kinds. Keto, vegan, low carb, clean eaters, pre and post bariatric surgery recipients, various forms of intermittent fasting, vegetarian, paleo, primal, gluten free, meal replacement shakes, etc.
Eat-anything-you-want-in-moderation-while-simply-staying-in-a-deficit may be the main narrative at MFP but it isn't the only one.
The huge variety of threads and most notably, the groups that are started by MFP members, reflect that.
Regardless of the method chosen, which is largely a matter of individual preference, CICO is in play. CICO is not a diet or way of eating. It simply describes the fundamental energy balance that governs weight loss, weight maintenance, or weight gain.11 -
elisa123gal wrote: »I agree with you original poster. Those CICO people are full of bunk. The quality of what you eat nutritionally can speed up and cause you to lose weight. Eating junk food and processed foods at a deficit doesn't work for me at all. Eating at a deficit is unnatural for the body... and it is tricky to do it long term. You need to maximize the food you eat and be strategic so you don't get hungry go off and binge.
You are right.. garbage talk!
If CICO is bunk and eating at a deficit is unnatural then why are you using a website that is designed for people to use said method to lose weight. Just curious....
There's room on this website for all kinds. Keto, vegan, low carb, clean eaters, pre and post bariatric surgery recipients, various forms of intermittent fasting, vegetarian, paleo, primal, gluten free, meal replacement shakes, etc.
Eat-anything-you-want-in-moderation-while-simply-staying-in-a-deficit may be the main narrative at MFP but it isn't the only one.
The huge variety of threads and most notably, the groups that are started by MFP members, reflect that.
No, of course it isn't, and I think that is the point of most of the responses.
You can call it what you want, but losing weight is really just about eating less calories than your body burns.
How you arrive at a calorie deficit is up to each of us, no matter how we get there, or what we call it.
There is not "right" or "wrong" way, and to imply that because someone is successful and not doing it the same way that you are doing it, is not true. No one can possibly know what is right for someone else.
Many of us are just trying to become a more healthy weight, and being a healthy weight is kind of a good thing.
5 -
WinoGelato wrote: »CynthiasChoice wrote: »To be honest I think that the most frustrating thing about this thread is that the OP is so very close to having some good points - they're just coming out all wrong and instead of being helpful it's just coming off as a massive generalization (because no ifs, ands or buts were included in the original post) and a little condescending.
And when someone posts a thread that denounces an entire section of MFP users, whether intentional or not, you have to expect some blowback.
It's more often than not that only the people who disagree with a post will comment on it. Often times when you agree you don't even bother to comment, so of course most people who have responded to this thread have started their rebuttals with, "actually..."
Some people come here for debate, and some come to find like-minded future friends and helpful advice.
And still others come here to share helpful advice, which the OP labeled "garbage" yet those of us who are responding are admonished and told we need to be "nicer".
Indeed.
Or are you saying, Cynthia's Choice, that you see the "other people's advice is garbage" as signalling a certain "like-mindedness" that helps you find friends. I hadn't thought of it as a form of signalling before, but maybe, although it makes me sad that slamming others would be the way to bond. I'm also curious how you think your approach is so different from ours -- are you assuming, like some others, that we don't care about nutrition or satiety?7 -
elisa123gal wrote: »I agree with you original poster. Those CICO people are full of bunk. The quality of what you eat nutritionally can speed up and cause you to lose weight. Eating junk food and processed foods at a deficit doesn't work for me at all. Eating at a deficit is unnatural for the body... and it is tricky to do it long term. You need to maximize the food you eat and be strategic so you don't get hungry go off and binge.
You are right.. garbage talk!
Do you understand what "eating at a deficit" means? It doesn't seem so from this post.8 -
My 35+ pounds of fat loss disagrees.
I eat whatever I want within my calorie limit. I eat a reasonable portion. Just because *you* can't do it doesn't mean others can't. If you can't manage one slice of pizza, then don't eat pizza. If you can't have one cookie, don't have cookies.
If you have no self control, don't come here and bash on people who have succeeded doing something you can't. If you need rules to keep you in line, then feel free to make them and follow them. Don't try to tell others - who are succeeding doing what you can't do - that their way is wrong. You just end up revealing more about yourself than you do about your revelation to the masses who are very happily eating pizza and losing pounds and inches and being fabulous.8 -
elisa123gal wrote: »I agree with you original poster. Those CICO people are full of bunk. The quality of what you eat nutritionally can speed up and cause you to lose weight. Eating junk food and processed foods at a deficit doesn't work for me at all. Eating at a deficit is unnatural for the body... and it is tricky to do it long term. You need to maximize the food you eat and be strategic so you don't get hungry go off and binge.
You are right.. garbage talk!
If CICO is bunk and eating at a deficit is unnatural then why are you using a website that is designed for people to use said method to lose weight. Just curious....
There's room on this website for all kinds. Keto, vegan, low carb, clean eaters, pre and post bariatric surgery recipients, various forms of intermittent fasting, vegetarian, paleo, primal, gluten free, meal replacement shakes, etc.
And if these people are losing weight, they are eating in a deficit.Eat-anything-you-want-in-moderation-while-simply-staying-in-a-deficit may be the main narrative at MFP but it isn't the only one.
I don't see a huge difference between me (who eats what I want in moderation but also follows various personal rules that relate to what I think works for me and nutrition and currently Lent), someone who decides that low carbing makes her feel more satisfied and so eats according to that plan, someone who enjoys and eats a lot more fast food than I do and doesn't really enjoy cooking, but finds a way to eat a healthful, balanced and--important--satisfying diet, or someone who (like janejellyroll) eats what she wants in moderation while following personal ethical concerns that lead her to a vegan lifestyle. We are all eating what we want in moderation and, depending on our goals, eating at a deficit or not.
This idea that you eat way less food and are hungry if you eat what you want in moderation or that you can't ever have personal concerns that affect how you eat doesn't make sense to me (as one example, for me, I typically want to eat what's in season, so eat a lot more of certain things in the summer; I want to eat lots of vegetables, so I include multiple servings per meal, I want to hit a protein goal, so pay attention to that, etc.).7 -
@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
And all I am saying is that IT ISN'T THE SAME FOR EVERYONE.
And it isn't "garbage advice", which the OP is claiming, it is how people lose weight, eating less calories than their bodies burn.
7 -
@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are get like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
I actually thought your response to @Duchy82, which I was quoting and responding to, was related to the poster, @elisa123gal ,who said that CICO is bunk. That poster further went on and said that the quality of food can influence the speed of weight loss, suggesting that the type of foods we eat invalidate the CICO model.
This is why I was stating that regardless of the types of foods a person eats, or a particular way of eating that they engage in, CICO is ever present and governing in the energy balance and what ultimately dictates whether a person loses weight.
This particular point didn't have much to do with the OP, but rather a subsequent response in the thread.4 -
Why is pizza always automatically the boogeyman that makes you fat, and shorthand for "food that no-one can fit into their macros", anyway? At its simplest, it's bread dough, tomato sauce and a cheese topping. Sure, you can put a mountain of other stuff on, and eat ten slices, but you don't have to. It's not actually the Devil's food. That, my friend, would be the deep fried Mars bar.
This supermarket pizza claims to serve 4 people at 256 calories per serving, so realistically, that's half a pizza for two people at 512 calories each. With some sort of vegetation served alongside it, that's a reasonable meal.15 -
elisa123gal wrote: »I agree with you original poster. Those CICO people are full of bunk. The quality of what you eat nutritionally can speed up and cause you to lose weight. Eating junk food and processed foods at a deficit doesn't work for me at all. Eating at a deficit is unnatural for the body... and it is tricky to do it long term. You need to maximize the food you eat and be strategic so you don't get hungry go off and binge.
You are right.. garbage talk!
If CICO is bunk and eating at a deficit is unnatural then why are you using a website that is designed for people to use said method to lose weight. Just curious....
There's room on this website for all kinds. Keto, vegan, low carb, clean eaters, pre and post bariatric surgery recipients, various forms of intermittent fasting, vegetarian, paleo, primal, gluten free, meal replacement shakes, etc.
Eat-anything-you-want-in-moderation-while-simply-staying-in-a-deficit may be the main narrative at MFP but it isn't the only one.
The huge variety of threads and most notably, the groups that are started by MFP members, reflect that.
But all those methods for weightloss involve a calorie deficit. I am not saying there aren't different ways to achieve a deficit and each to their own and are welcome. But she said that calories in vs calories out is bunk and eating at a deficit is unnatural mfp generally is for counting calories so I wondered why, if she doesn't believe counting calories works, she is using mfp. It's a genuine question.1 -
3
-
3rdof7sisters wrote: »@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
And all I am saying is that IT ISN'T THE SAME FOR EVERYONE.
And it isn't "garbage advice, which the OP is claiming.
It is garbage advice for the people it doesn't work for. I don't eat candy bars and ice cream and batter fried shrimp in moderation. Telling me to make them fit my macros is garbage advice for me. I throw that advice in the metaphorical garbage. Apparently OP does too and the many people who liked and awesomed his original post.
Funny how touchy people are about the wording, since many who take issue with it have seemingly solved their overweight problem already.
I don't know exactly what nerves are being touched here or if it's just a keyboard warrior thing. But I know what doesn't work for me, OP knows what doesn't work for him and we're definitely not alone in this.
Again, I think we are getting mixed up here. As I stated above, we were responding to a poster who said CICO is bunk, NOT the OP. You quoted that post and said there are a number of ways a person can be successful, and both @Duchy82 and I agree with you, but want to reinforce (not necessarily to you but to @elisa123gal ) that regardless of the method - CICO is not bunk, it is the fundamental energy balance that drives ALL weight loss.
Again. This is not about the OP and what works for him and what he believes to be "garbage advice".10 -
WinoGelato wrote: »@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are get like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
I actually thought your response to @Duchy82, which I was quoting and responding to, was related to the poster, @elisa123gal ,who said that CICO is bunk. That poster further went on and said that the quality of food can influence the speed of weight loss, suggesting that the type of foods we eat invalidate the CICO model.
This is why I was stating that regardless of the types of foods a person eats, or a particular way of eating that they engage in, CICO is ever present and governing in the energy balance and what ultimately dictates whether a person loses weight.
This particular point didn't have much to do with the OP, but rather a subsequent response in the thread.
EXACTLY!0 -
Really? I have success rates with ALL my clients and I don't preach eating "clean" at all. In fact, I do tell them to eat whatever they like AS LONG AS they don't exceed the calorie intake set for them. Do you know why people fail at diets? Because they usually are restricted from eating things they actually like. If one LEARNS how to control how much of something like eat, then the chances are higher that they will adhere to that habitual behavior.People don't want to eat 1 slice of pizza, or a 1/4 of a plate of Loco Rice, or 7 chili cheese fries. They want to have a meal. If you eat the "right amount" of junk food to stay within your calorie limits, you're going to be starving to death and it's going to cause you to eat more. Eating food that doesn't taste as good as what you want is much better than satisfying a craving and then derailing later because you were so hungry you caved. There are a few people around here who have done their time, lost their weight, and they are in good shape. These people give advice from the "look at me, I lost a ton of weight so I know what I'm doing" stand point, but seem to have forgotten what it was like to ACTUALLY live as a fat person. So when someone tells you you can have junk food, don't listen to them, not because they are lying to you - they aren't, it's true - but because the advice isn't helpful in practice.
Sorry if you can't do it, but that's an issue you deal with that you have to fix. Unless you have some actual peer reviewed clinical study that one CAN'T be taught moderation, you're just opining what you believe.
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
To me this is extremely concerning coming from a 'so-called' Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer. You should be socially responsible and teach your client to aim to eat clean at least 70% of the time. It seems like anyone can become a Certified Trainer these days and most of them are completely out of shape. Where exactly did this notion of eating whatever you want whenever you want as long as it fits in your calorie goals come from? You are being lied to and thank you to the original poster for starting this discussion.4 -
WinoGelato wrote: »3rdof7sisters wrote: »@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
And all I am saying is that IT ISN'T THE SAME FOR EVERYONE.
And it isn't "garbage advice, which the OP is claiming.
It is garbage advice for the people it doesn't work for. I don't eat candy bars and ice cream and batter fried shrimp in moderation. Telling me to make them fit my macros is garbage advice for me. I throw that advice in the metaphorical garbage. Apparently OP does too and the many people who liked and awesomed his original post.
Funny how touchy people are about the wording, since many who take issue with it have seemingly solved their overweight problem already.
I don't know exactly what nerves are being touched here or if it's just a keyboard warrior thing. But I know what doesn't work for me, OP knows what doesn't work for him and we're definitely not alone in this.
Again, I think we are getting mixed up here. As I stated above, we were responding to a poster who said CICO is bunk, NOT the OP. You quoted that post and said there are a number of ways a person can be successful, and both @Duchy82 and I agree with you, but want to reinforce (not necessarily to you but to @elisa123gal ) that regardless of the method - CICO is not bunk, it is the fundamental energy balance that drives ALL weight loss.
Again. This is not about the OP and what works for him and what he believes to be "garbage advice".
Agreed @WinoGelato2 -
WinoGelato wrote: »3rdof7sisters wrote: »@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
And all I am saying is that IT ISN'T THE SAME FOR EVERYONE.
And it isn't "garbage advice, which the OP is claiming.
It is garbage advice for the people it doesn't work for. I don't eat candy bars and ice cream and batter fried shrimp in moderation. Telling me to make them fit my macros is garbage advice for me. I throw that advice in the metaphorical garbage. Apparently OP does too and the many people who liked and awesomed his original post.
Funny how touchy people are about the wording, since many who take issue with it have seemingly solved their overweight problem already.
I don't know exactly what nerves are being touched here or if it's just a keyboard warrior thing. But I know what doesn't work for me, OP knows what doesn't work for him and we're definitely not alone in this.
Again, I think we are getting mixed up here. As I stated above, we were responding to a poster who said CICO is bunk, NOT the OP. You quoted that post and said there are a number of ways a person can be successful, and both @Duchy82 and I agree with you, but want to reinforce (not necessarily to you but to @elisa123gal ) that regardless of the method - CICO is not bunk, it is the fundamental energy balance that drives ALL weight loss.
Again. This is not about the OP and what works for him and what he believes to be "garbage advice".
I'm glad you're okay with what the OP said then. Maybe I think you're alright after all.
At this point I have to think that you aren't even reading what I am writing. I am trying to clarify that you are taking points made to a different poster, as directed at the OP, when they are not.
No, I am not ok with what the OP said, I do not think that "eat what you want within a calorie deficit" is garbage advice, for so many of the reasons listed on this thread.
But this particular discussion (if you can call it that) that you and I are engaging in, IS NOT ABOUT THE OP, or his view points.
But now I have to ask, do you believe that CICO is a fundamental energy balance and that regardless of whether you eat vegan, LCHF, paleo, keto, IIFYM, Twinkie Diet, etc - if you lose weight, then CICO is at work?
Or do you also think that CICO is bunk?8 -
AntoinetteAngus wrote: »
Really? I have success rates with ALL my clients and I don't preach eating "clean" at all. In fact, I do tell them to eat whatever they like AS LONG AS they don't exceed the calorie intake set for them. Do you know why people fail at diets? Because they usually are restricted from eating things they actually like. If one LEARNS how to control how much of something like eat, then the chances are higher that they will adhere to that habitual behavior.People don't want to eat 1 slice of pizza, or a 1/4 of a plate of Loco Rice, or 7 chili cheese fries. They want to have a meal. If you eat the "right amount" of junk food to stay within your calorie limits, you're going to be starving to death and it's going to cause you to eat more. Eating food that doesn't taste as good as what you want is much better than satisfying a craving and then derailing later because you were so hungry you caved. There are a few people around here who have done their time, lost their weight, and they are in good shape. These people give advice from the "look at me, I lost a ton of weight so I know what I'm doing" stand point, but seem to have forgotten what it was like to ACTUALLY live as a fat person. So when someone tells you you can have junk food, don't listen to them, not because they are lying to you - they aren't, it's true - but because the advice isn't helpful in practice.
Sorry if you can't do it, but that's an issue you deal with that you have to fix. Unless you have some actual peer reviewed clinical study that one CAN'T be taught moderation, you're just opining what you believe.
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
To me this is extremely concerning coming from a 'so-called' Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer. You should be socially responsible and teach your client to aim to eat clean at least 70% of the time. It seems like anyone can become a Certified Trainer these days and most of them are completely out of shape. Where exactly did this notion of eating whatever you want whenever you want as long as it fits in your calorie goals come from? You are being lied to and thank you to the original poster for starting this discussion.
Ah...the scientific standard of 70% has been applied...and the source of this woo is what?26
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 421 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions