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.
You dont need to calorie count
Options
Replies
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »To clarify a few things from my post that seem to be misinterpreted
Should find/eat foods that are hard to overindulge on does not mean never eating other foods that you may like/love that are calorie dense. It just means this using this tactic makes it easier to not overeat since you aren't tracking every calorie. Then when you are faced with a food you have to be more cautious around, you are aware of that and take whatever steps necessary, probably eating a smaller portion, or limiting frequency.
How do you know if you are eating more/less. Several ways...the scale will trend up or down, your hunger will be higher/lower or you can know look at the foods you eat...a lot of low calorie foods eaten means you're eating less than if you were eating a lot of high calorie foods. If you've been tracking calories you know the high calorie bombs, and you know what's not.
Here is the problem. Eating food that are hard to overindulge in mean (to me) eating food I dont like that much. I've tried that twice before. I got bored after 2 months and gave up. If I tend to avoid foods that I'm more likely to eat, like samoosas, how will I know to intuitively eat less when I am faced with them since I have no idea what their nutritional make up is?
Oh use the hunger test you say? As already stated that doesn't work for me either. I'm permanently hungry. To give you idea, I can literally eat entire dish of cream and cheese rich lasagna and still be hungry. So no!
This part of your post confuses me. How does the scale help you not overindulge? I mean, you know 12 cookies is too much whether you weigh it or not. And calorie/nutrition information will be on the box of cookies. And after the lasagna you will still be hungry whether you measure or not.
I'm not saying you shouldn't log, I'm just not sure how these examples back up the need.
Firstly, no-one weighs a cookie when the box gives the the nutritional value per cookie do they? You look at 12 cookies and say "this is way too much". I look at 12 cookies and say "I'm just going to have 1" then I say "just 1 more" then I eat all 12. Logging tells me I can fit 1 or 2 or 12 cookies into my daily calorie allowance and how it fits into my macros. It visually helps me put into perspective (and limit) what I put into my body.
Yes I will still be hungry whether I weigh or not BUT weighing and portioning the lasagna, AGAIN, tells me how much of it I can have before I should stop. Again, a visual representation of what my body and brain should be telling me, but are not.
It's like putting fuel into a car. You know (from experience) that you get 15km on a liter of fuel so if you put in 4 liters you can drive 60kms. Makes the fuel gauge redundant according to your way of thinking and yet we all still look at it dont we.
That's one of the sillier things I've read on this site. You obviously have no idea of my way of thinking, nor I yours. And that's okay. At least it's okay with me.
Ditto, so how about you move along, happy in the knowledge that your way is best and that anybody that disagrees with it is silly.7 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »To clarify a few things from my post that seem to be misinterpreted
Should find/eat foods that are hard to overindulge on does not mean never eating other foods that you may like/love that are calorie dense. It just means this using this tactic makes it easier to not overeat since you aren't tracking every calorie. Then when you are faced with a food you have to be more cautious around, you are aware of that and take whatever steps necessary, probably eating a smaller portion, or limiting frequency.
How do you know if you are eating more/less. Several ways...the scale will trend up or down, your hunger will be higher/lower or you can know look at the foods you eat...a lot of low calorie foods eaten means you're eating less than if you were eating a lot of high calorie foods. If you've been tracking calories you know the high calorie bombs, and you know what's not.
Here is the problem. Eating food that are hard to overindulge in mean (to me) eating food I dont like that much. I've tried that twice before. I got bored after 2 months and gave up. If I tend to avoid foods that I'm more likely to eat, like samoosas, how will I know to intuitively eat less when I am faced with them since I have no idea what their nutritional make up is?
Oh use the hunger test you say? As already stated that doesn't work for me either. I'm permanently hungry. To give you idea, I can literally eat entire dish of cream and cheese rich lasagna and still be hungry. So no!
This part of your post confuses me. How does the scale help you not overindulge? I mean, you know 12 cookies is too much whether you weigh it or not. And calorie/nutrition information will be on the box of cookies. And after the lasagna you will still be hungry whether you measure or not.
I'm not saying you shouldn't log, I'm just not sure how these examples back up the need.
Firstly, no-one weighs a cookie when the box gives the the nutritional value per cookie do they? You look at 12 cookies and say "this is way too much". I look at 12 cookies and say "I'm just going to have 1" then I say "just 1 more" then I eat all 12. Logging tells me I can fit 1 or 2 or 12 cookies into my daily calorie allowance and how it fits into my macros. It visually helps me put into perspective (and limit) what I put into my body.
Yes I will still be hungry whether I weigh or not BUT weighing and portioning the lasagna, AGAIN, tells me how much of it I can have before I should stop. Again, a visual representation of what my body and brain should be telling me, but are not.
It's like putting fuel into a car. You know (from experience) that you get 15km on a liter of fuel so if you put in 4 liters you can drive 60kms. Makes the fuel gauge redundant according to your way of thinking and yet we all still look at it dont we.
That's one of the sillier things I've read on this site. You obviously have no idea of my way of thinking, nor I yours. And that's okay. At least it's okay with me.
Ditto, so how about you move along, happy in the knowledge that your way is best and that anybody that disagrees with it is silly.
Just wanted to say, Morgaen, I loved your fuel tank analogy. I often know the car has about 1/4 to 1/3 tank in it because I filled it last weekend and it was driven a normal amount. But then I look at the fuel gauge and see exactly where it is.
That is often how calories may work for me. I know approximately how many calories were in the oz. of nuts, chicken breast and salad I had for lunch but when I enter them on MFP I know exactly ( well as close as I can) where I stand that day/week.5 -
\Thank you very muchNeed2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »To clarify a few things from my post that seem to be misinterpreted
Should find/eat foods that are hard to overindulge on does not mean never eating other foods that you may like/love that are calorie dense. It just means this using this tactic makes it easier to not overeat since you aren't tracking every calorie. Then when you are faced with a food you have to be more cautious around, you are aware of that and take whatever steps necessary, probably eating a smaller portion, or limiting frequency.
How do you know if you are eating more/less. Several ways...the scale will trend up or down, your hunger will be higher/lower or you can know look at the foods you eat...a lot of low calorie foods eaten means you're eating less than if you were eating a lot of high calorie foods. If you've been tracking calories you know the high calorie bombs, and you know what's not.
Here is the problem. Eating food that are hard to overindulge in mean (to me) eating food I dont like that much. I've tried that twice before. I got bored after 2 months and gave up. If I tend to avoid foods that I'm more likely to eat, like samoosas, how will I know to intuitively eat less when I am faced with them since I have no idea what their nutritional make up is?
Oh use the hunger test you say? As already stated that doesn't work for me either. I'm permanently hungry. To give you idea, I can literally eat entire dish of cream and cheese rich lasagna and still be hungry. So no!
This part of your post confuses me. How does the scale help you not overindulge? I mean, you know 12 cookies is too much whether you weigh it or not. And calorie/nutrition information will be on the box of cookies. And after the lasagna you will still be hungry whether you measure or not.
I'm not saying you shouldn't log, I'm just not sure how these examples back up the need.
Firstly, no-one weighs a cookie when the box gives the the nutritional value per cookie do they? You look at 12 cookies and say "this is way too much". I look at 12 cookies and say "I'm just going to have 1" then I say "just 1 more" then I eat all 12. Logging tells me I can fit 1 or 2 or 12 cookies into my daily calorie allowance and how it fits into my macros. It visually helps me put into perspective (and limit) what I put into my body.
Yes I will still be hungry whether I weigh or not BUT weighing and portioning the lasagna, AGAIN, tells me how much of it I can have before I should stop. Again, a visual representation of what my body and brain should be telling me, but are not.
It's like putting fuel into a car. You know (from experience) that you get 15km on a liter of fuel so if you put in 4 liters you can drive 60kms. Makes the fuel gauge redundant according to your way of thinking and yet we all still look at it dont we.
That's one of the sillier things I've read on this site. You obviously have no idea of my way of thinking, nor I yours. And that's okay. At least it's okay with me.
Ditto, so how about you move along, happy in the knowledge that your way is best and that anybody that disagrees with it is silly.
Just wanted to say, Morgaen, I loved your fuel tank analogy. I often know the car has about 1/4 to 1/3 tank in it because I filled it last weekend and it was driven a normal amount. But then I look at the fuel gauge and see exactly where it is.
That is often how calories may work for me. I know approximately how many calories were in the oz. of nuts, chicken breast and salad I had for lunch but when I enter them on MFP I know exactly ( well as close as I can) where I stand that day/week.
2 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »To clarify a few things from my post that seem to be misinterpreted
Should find/eat foods that are hard to overindulge on does not mean never eating other foods that you may like/love that are calorie dense. It just means this using this tactic makes it easier to not overeat since you aren't tracking every calorie. Then when you are faced with a food you have to be more cautious around, you are aware of that and take whatever steps necessary, probably eating a smaller portion, or limiting frequency.
How do you know if you are eating more/less. Several ways...the scale will trend up or down, your hunger will be higher/lower or you can know look at the foods you eat...a lot of low calorie foods eaten means you're eating less than if you were eating a lot of high calorie foods. If you've been tracking calories you know the high calorie bombs, and you know what's not.
Here is the problem. Eating food that are hard to overindulge in mean (to me) eating food I dont like that much. I've tried that twice before. I got bored after 2 months and gave up. If I tend to avoid foods that I'm more likely to eat, like samoosas, how will I know to intuitively eat less when I am faced with them since I have no idea what their nutritional make up is?
Oh use the hunger test you say? As already stated that doesn't work for me either. I'm permanently hungry. To give you idea, I can literally eat entire dish of cream and cheese rich lasagna and still be hungry. So no!
This part of your post confuses me. How does the scale help you not overindulge? I mean, you know 12 cookies is too much whether you weigh it or not. And calorie/nutrition information will be on the box of cookies. And after the lasagna you will still be hungry whether you measure or not.
I'm not saying you shouldn't log, I'm just not sure how these examples back up the need.
Firstly, no-one weighs a cookie when the box gives the the nutritional value per cookie do they? You look at 12 cookies and say "this is way too much". I look at 12 cookies and say "I'm just going to have 1" then I say "just 1 more" then I eat all 12. Logging tells me I can fit 1 or 2 or 12 cookies into my daily calorie allowance and how it fits into my macros. It visually helps me put into perspective (and limit) what I put into my body.
Yes I will still be hungry whether I weigh or not BUT weighing and portioning the lasagna, AGAIN, tells me how much of it I can have before I should stop. Again, a visual representation of what my body and brain should be telling me, but are not.
It's like putting fuel into a car. You know (from experience) that you get 15km on a liter of fuel so if you put in 4 liters you can drive 60kms. Makes the fuel gauge redundant according to your way of thinking and yet we all still look at it dont we.
That's one of the sillier things I've read on this site. You obviously have no idea of my way of thinking, nor I yours. And that's okay. At least it's okay with me.
Ditto, so how about you move along, happy in the knowledge that your way is best and that anybody that disagrees with it is silly.
I never said you were silly. I said your post is silly. I can't see the gas tank, I can't feel when it's empty. I need the fuel gauge. If I couldn't feel when my body was running out fuel then it would make sense. But I can. So it doesn't.
I don't even know what you mean by "my way" being best. My way of what?6 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »To clarify a few things from my post that seem to be misinterpreted
Should find/eat foods that are hard to overindulge on does not mean never eating other foods that you may like/love that are calorie dense. It just means this using this tactic makes it easier to not overeat since you aren't tracking every calorie. Then when you are faced with a food you have to be more cautious around, you are aware of that and take whatever steps necessary, probably eating a smaller portion, or limiting frequency.
How do you know if you are eating more/less. Several ways...the scale will trend up or down, your hunger will be higher/lower or you can know look at the foods you eat...a lot of low calorie foods eaten means you're eating less than if you were eating a lot of high calorie foods. If you've been tracking calories you know the high calorie bombs, and you know what's not.
Here is the problem. Eating food that are hard to overindulge in mean (to me) eating food I dont like that much. I've tried that twice before. I got bored after 2 months and gave up. If I tend to avoid foods that I'm more likely to eat, like samoosas, how will I know to intuitively eat less when I am faced with them since I have no idea what their nutritional make up is?
Oh use the hunger test you say? As already stated that doesn't work for me either. I'm permanently hungry. To give you idea, I can literally eat entire dish of cream and cheese rich lasagna and still be hungry. So no!
This part of your post confuses me. How does the scale help you not overindulge? I mean, you know 12 cookies is too much whether you weigh it or not. And calorie/nutrition information will be on the box of cookies. And after the lasagna you will still be hungry whether you measure or not.
I'm not saying you shouldn't log, I'm just not sure how these examples back up the need.
Firstly, no-one weighs a cookie when the box gives the the nutritional value per cookie do they? You look at 12 cookies and say "this is way too much". I look at 12 cookies and say "I'm just going to have 1" then I say "just 1 more" then I eat all 12. Logging tells me I can fit 1 or 2 or 12 cookies into my daily calorie allowance and how it fits into my macros. It visually helps me put into perspective (and limit) what I put into my body.
Yes I will still be hungry whether I weigh or not BUT weighing and portioning the lasagna, AGAIN, tells me how much of it I can have before I should stop. Again, a visual representation of what my body and brain should be telling me, but are not.
It's like putting fuel into a car. You know (from experience) that you get 15km on a liter of fuel so if you put in 4 liters you can drive 60kms. Makes the fuel gauge redundant according to your way of thinking and yet we all still look at it dont we.
That's one of the sillier things I've read on this site. You obviously have no idea of my way of thinking, nor I yours. And that's okay. At least it's okay with me.
Ditto, so how about you move along, happy in the knowledge that your way is best and that anybody that disagrees with it is silly.
I never said you were silly. I said your post is silly. I can't see the gas tank, I can't feel when it's empty. I need the fuel gauge. If I couldn't feel when my body was running out fuel then it would make sense. But I can. So it doesn't.
I don't even know what you mean by "my way" being best. My way of what?
... and that is my point. I cant tell when my body runs out of fuel because it constantly feels like my body is out of fuel no matter how much I put in it. It's 4pm now and I've eaten 1800 calories today already yet I still feel as hungry as I did this morning at 9am when all I had was a cup of coffee.
But I'm happy for you and I will aspire to be as awesome as you.7 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »To clarify a few things from my post that seem to be misinterpreted
Should find/eat foods that are hard to overindulge on does not mean never eating other foods that you may like/love that are calorie dense. It just means this using this tactic makes it easier to not overeat since you aren't tracking every calorie. Then when you are faced with a food you have to be more cautious around, you are aware of that and take whatever steps necessary, probably eating a smaller portion, or limiting frequency.
How do you know if you are eating more/less. Several ways...the scale will trend up or down, your hunger will be higher/lower or you can know look at the foods you eat...a lot of low calorie foods eaten means you're eating less than if you were eating a lot of high calorie foods. If you've been tracking calories you know the high calorie bombs, and you know what's not.
Here is the problem. Eating food that are hard to overindulge in mean (to me) eating food I dont like that much. I've tried that twice before. I got bored after 2 months and gave up. If I tend to avoid foods that I'm more likely to eat, like samoosas, how will I know to intuitively eat less when I am faced with them since I have no idea what their nutritional make up is?
Oh use the hunger test you say? As already stated that doesn't work for me either. I'm permanently hungry. To give you idea, I can literally eat entire dish of cream and cheese rich lasagna and still be hungry. So no!
This part of your post confuses me. How does the scale help you not overindulge? I mean, you know 12 cookies is too much whether you weigh it or not. And calorie/nutrition information will be on the box of cookies. And after the lasagna you will still be hungry whether you measure or not.
I'm not saying you shouldn't log, I'm just not sure how these examples back up the need.
Firstly, no-one weighs a cookie when the box gives the the nutritional value per cookie do they? You look at 12 cookies and say "this is way too much". I look at 12 cookies and say "I'm just going to have 1" then I say "just 1 more" then I eat all 12. Logging tells me I can fit 1 or 2 or 12 cookies into my daily calorie allowance and how it fits into my macros. It visually helps me put into perspective (and limit) what I put into my body.
Yes I will still be hungry whether I weigh or not BUT weighing and portioning the lasagna, AGAIN, tells me how much of it I can have before I should stop. Again, a visual representation of what my body and brain should be telling me, but are not.
It's like putting fuel into a car. You know (from experience) that you get 15km on a liter of fuel so if you put in 4 liters you can drive 60kms. Makes the fuel gauge redundant according to your way of thinking and yet we all still look at it dont we.
One of the things I love about the calorie counting process is that is increases awareness. It forces you to review your behavior and thinking of food as fuel and the relationship with exercise.
I began this process much as you describe with the box of cookies. After three years of this my self awareness has increased - I'm not going to feel so good on the 10k if I eat a box of cookies, but oatmeal and eggs works for me. I'll budget in the cookies and a beer post run.
Love the car analogies - not logging, weighing your intake, monitoring your output, checking the scale, measuring your body, etc. You'd consider this stupid if we were talking about maintaining your driving and not checking the fuel gauge, speedometer, etc. Same with finances.
Bottom line if you want to succeed, you need to develop a strategy for success. Just "winging it" doesn't work.6 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »To clarify a few things from my post that seem to be misinterpreted
Should find/eat foods that are hard to overindulge on does not mean never eating other foods that you may like/love that are calorie dense. It just means this using this tactic makes it easier to not overeat since you aren't tracking every calorie. Then when you are faced with a food you have to be more cautious around, you are aware of that and take whatever steps necessary, probably eating a smaller portion, or limiting frequency.
How do you know if you are eating more/less. Several ways...the scale will trend up or down, your hunger will be higher/lower or you can know look at the foods you eat...a lot of low calorie foods eaten means you're eating less than if you were eating a lot of high calorie foods. If you've been tracking calories you know the high calorie bombs, and you know what's not.
Here is the problem. Eating food that are hard to overindulge in mean (to me) eating food I dont like that much. I've tried that twice before. I got bored after 2 months and gave up. If I tend to avoid foods that I'm more likely to eat, like samoosas, how will I know to intuitively eat less when I am faced with them since I have no idea what their nutritional make up is?
Oh use the hunger test you say? As already stated that doesn't work for me either. I'm permanently hungry. To give you idea, I can literally eat entire dish of cream and cheese rich lasagna and still be hungry. So no!
This part of your post confuses me. How does the scale help you not overindulge? I mean, you know 12 cookies is too much whether you weigh it or not. And calorie/nutrition information will be on the box of cookies. And after the lasagna you will still be hungry whether you measure or not.
I'm not saying you shouldn't log, I'm just not sure how these examples back up the need.
Firstly, no-one weighs a cookie when the box gives the the nutritional value per cookie do they? You look at 12 cookies and say "this is way too much". I look at 12 cookies and say "I'm just going to have 1" then I say "just 1 more" then I eat all 12. Logging tells me I can fit 1 or 2 or 12 cookies into my daily calorie allowance and how it fits into my macros. It visually helps me put into perspective (and limit) what I put into my body.
Yes I will still be hungry whether I weigh or not BUT weighing and portioning the lasagna, AGAIN, tells me how much of it I can have before I should stop. Again, a visual representation of what my body and brain should be telling me, but are not.
It's like putting fuel into a car. You know (from experience) that you get 15km on a liter of fuel so if you put in 4 liters you can drive 60kms. Makes the fuel gauge redundant according to your way of thinking and yet we all still look at it dont we.
That's one of the sillier things I've read on this site. You obviously have no idea of my way of thinking, nor I yours. And that's okay. At least it's okay with me.
Ditto, so how about you move along, happy in the knowledge that your way is best and that anybody that disagrees with it is silly.
I never said you were silly. I said your post is silly. I can't see the gas tank, I can't feel when it's empty. I need the fuel gauge. If I couldn't feel when my body was running out fuel then it would make sense. But I can. So it doesn't.
I don't even know what you mean by "my way" being best. My way of what?
... and that is my point. I cant tell when my body runs out of fuel because it constantly feels like my body is out of fuel no matter how much I put in it. It's 4pm now and I've eaten 1800 calories today already yet I still feel as hungry as I did this morning at 9am when all I had was a cup of coffee.
But I'm happy for you and I will aspire to be as awesome as you.
It is an interesting disconnect- and such varied experiences. My body 'fuel gauge' generally ( except when restricting calories very low) feels fine until it really really doesn't. Like I have to eat way more than I should or way under-eat before I could feel anything at all. I'm finding that If I wait til my body signals me to eat, I've gone too far. Same if I ate til I felt full.
Using MFP for months of tracking has me helped know how much portions should be, and how I should eat something even when not particularly hungry "now" or else I'm likely to pay for it later. It seems my body only signals me too late and only at the extremes. I have to keep my eye on the body 'fuel gauge' in the middle! So unless that changes I expect some form of calorie watching will always be in my future.3 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »To clarify a few things from my post that seem to be misinterpreted
Should find/eat foods that are hard to overindulge on does not mean never eating other foods that you may like/love that are calorie dense. It just means this using this tactic makes it easier to not overeat since you aren't tracking every calorie. Then when you are faced with a food you have to be more cautious around, you are aware of that and take whatever steps necessary, probably eating a smaller portion, or limiting frequency.
How do you know if you are eating more/less. Several ways...the scale will trend up or down, your hunger will be higher/lower or you can know look at the foods you eat...a lot of low calorie foods eaten means you're eating less than if you were eating a lot of high calorie foods. If you've been tracking calories you know the high calorie bombs, and you know what's not.
Here is the problem. Eating food that are hard to overindulge in mean (to me) eating food I dont like that much. I've tried that twice before. I got bored after 2 months and gave up. If I tend to avoid foods that I'm more likely to eat, like samoosas, how will I know to intuitively eat less when I am faced with them since I have no idea what their nutritional make up is?
Oh use the hunger test you say? As already stated that doesn't work for me either. I'm permanently hungry. To give you idea, I can literally eat entire dish of cream and cheese rich lasagna and still be hungry. So no!
This part of your post confuses me. How does the scale help you not overindulge? I mean, you know 12 cookies is too much whether you weigh it or not. And calorie/nutrition information will be on the box of cookies. And after the lasagna you will still be hungry whether you measure or not.
I'm not saying you shouldn't log, I'm just not sure how these examples back up the need.
Firstly, no-one weighs a cookie when the box gives the the nutritional value per cookie do they? You look at 12 cookies and say "this is way too much". I look at 12 cookies and say "I'm just going to have 1" then I say "just 1 more" then I eat all 12. Logging tells me I can fit 1 or 2 or 12 cookies into my daily calorie allowance and how it fits into my macros. It visually helps me put into perspective (and limit) what I put into my body.
Yes I will still be hungry whether I weigh or not BUT weighing and portioning the lasagna, AGAIN, tells me how much of it I can have before I should stop. Again, a visual representation of what my body and brain should be telling me, but are not.
It's like putting fuel into a car. You know (from experience) that you get 15km on a liter of fuel so if you put in 4 liters you can drive 60kms. Makes the fuel gauge redundant according to your way of thinking and yet we all still look at it dont we.
That's one of the sillier things I've read on this site. You obviously have no idea of my way of thinking, nor I yours. And that's okay. At least it's okay with me.
Ditto, so how about you move along, happy in the knowledge that your way is best and that anybody that disagrees with it is silly.
I never said you were silly. I said your post is silly. I can't see the gas tank, I can't feel when it's empty. I need the fuel gauge. If I couldn't feel when my body was running out fuel then it would make sense. But I can. So it doesn't.
I don't even know what you mean by "my way" being best. My way of what?
... and that is my point. I cant tell when my body runs out of fuel because it constantly feels like my body is out of fuel no matter how much I put in it. It's 4pm now and I've eaten 1800 calories today already yet I still feel as hungry as I did this morning at 9am when all I had was a cup of coffee.
But I'm happy for you and I will aspire to be as awesome as you.
You should see a doctor if this is true. It is a sign of disease. But I suspect more likely you are confusing want with hunger. It's not uncommon and can take time to learn, but there is a difference.7 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »To clarify a few things from my post that seem to be misinterpreted
Should find/eat foods that are hard to overindulge on does not mean never eating other foods that you may like/love that are calorie dense. It just means this using this tactic makes it easier to not overeat since you aren't tracking every calorie. Then when you are faced with a food you have to be more cautious around, you are aware of that and take whatever steps necessary, probably eating a smaller portion, or limiting frequency.
How do you know if you are eating more/less. Several ways...the scale will trend up or down, your hunger will be higher/lower or you can know look at the foods you eat...a lot of low calorie foods eaten means you're eating less than if you were eating a lot of high calorie foods. If you've been tracking calories you know the high calorie bombs, and you know what's not.
Here is the problem. Eating food that are hard to overindulge in mean (to me) eating food I dont like that much. I've tried that twice before. I got bored after 2 months and gave up. If I tend to avoid foods that I'm more likely to eat, like samoosas, how will I know to intuitively eat less when I am faced with them since I have no idea what their nutritional make up is?
Oh use the hunger test you say? As already stated that doesn't work for me either. I'm permanently hungry. To give you idea, I can literally eat entire dish of cream and cheese rich lasagna and still be hungry. So no!
This part of your post confuses me. How does the scale help you not overindulge? I mean, you know 12 cookies is too much whether you weigh it or not. And calorie/nutrition information will be on the box of cookies. And after the lasagna you will still be hungry whether you measure or not.
I'm not saying you shouldn't log, I'm just not sure how these examples back up the need.
Firstly, no-one weighs a cookie when the box gives the the nutritional value per cookie do they? You look at 12 cookies and say "this is way too much". I look at 12 cookies and say "I'm just going to have 1" then I say "just 1 more" then I eat all 12. Logging tells me I can fit 1 or 2 or 12 cookies into my daily calorie allowance and how it fits into my macros. It visually helps me put into perspective (and limit) what I put into my body.
Yes I will still be hungry whether I weigh or not BUT weighing and portioning the lasagna, AGAIN, tells me how much of it I can have before I should stop. Again, a visual representation of what my body and brain should be telling me, but are not.
It's like putting fuel into a car. You know (from experience) that you get 15km on a liter of fuel so if you put in 4 liters you can drive 60kms. Makes the fuel gauge redundant according to your way of thinking and yet we all still look at it dont we.
That's one of the sillier things I've read on this site. You obviously have no idea of my way of thinking, nor I yours. And that's okay. At least it's okay with me.
Ditto, so how about you move along, happy in the knowledge that your way is best and that anybody that disagrees with it is silly.
I never said you were silly. I said your post is silly. I can't see the gas tank, I can't feel when it's empty. I need the fuel gauge. If I couldn't feel when my body was running out fuel then it would make sense. But I can. So it doesn't.
I don't even know what you mean by "my way" being best. My way of what?
... and that is my point. I cant tell when my body runs out of fuel because it constantly feels like my body is out of fuel no matter how much I put in it. It's 4pm now and I've eaten 1800 calories today already yet I still feel as hungry as I did this morning at 9am when all I had was a cup of coffee.
But I'm happy for you and I will aspire to be as awesome as you.
It is an interesting disconnect- and such varied experiences. My body 'fuel gauge' generally ( except when restricting calories very low) feels fine until it really really doesn't. Like I have to eat way more than I should or way under-eat before I could feel anything at all. I'm finding that If I wait til my body signals me to eat, I've gone too far. Same if I ate til I felt full.
Using MFP for months of tracking has me helped know how much portions should be, and how I should eat something even when not particularly hungry "now" or else I'm likely to pay for it later. It seems my body only signals me too late and only at the extremes. I have to keep my eye on the body 'fuel gauge' in the middle! So unless that changes I expect some form of calorie watching will always be in my future.
Sorry to reply to myself... but thought of one more thing.
My body doesn't give me any clue of how many calories I've consumed - only if it 'feels full'. So I can happily ( according to my body) eat however many calories of potato chips, cake, roast beef, potatoes ( with or without butter) avocado's etc until I feel full. But feeling full on roast beef and potatoes and salad for dinner is way different calorie wise from feeling full on guacamole and nachos. Maybe even a 1000 calories of difference. I often thank my lucky stars that I do not have a sweet tooth so I've never truly had to face a full on binge eating situation.
The thinnest time of my life ( size 2 jeans just after college) was also most likely my unhealthiest. I ate one meal a day, and often (3 or 4 times a week) it was a family bag of lays BBQ potato chips (coffee, water, and diet soda the rest of the day). I wasn't dieting, and I never felt hungry, I just ate what I liked, when I wanted to eat. (I never liked sugary sodas, so I think I happily lucked out there).
I am NOT saying this is normal, but it is my normal. So tracking calories to one degree or another is probably always going to be a must for ME.0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »KANGOOJUMPS wrote: »I do not calorie count or own a scale, I am a maintainer and very happy,,, here today, gone tomorrow!, I am enjoying life to the fullest. if I want a drink, I drink. If I want a burger. I eat it!, and then I work it off.
I do too, but there is this thing with intuitive eating, though. Some people can have that burger or that drink with just built habits and simple awareness, and trust their natural calorie regulating mechanisms to do most of the heavy lifting like spontaneously increased NEAT, reduced calorie intake after a high calorie day, being uncomfortable with being full, satiety that correlates with proper calories...etc. I don't know if you belong to that group, but that's basically what some people think everyone should strive to achieve.
I can eat the burger, but I need mimic these mechanisms manually by exercising extra, taking the calories of the burger into account when trying to decide what else I can/can't have that day, being aware of the temptation of being joyfully overfull, consciously reasoning with hunger if present or putting more effort into filling foods... and so on. I need more than just simple awareness. I need strategies and tools. I need a clear "if...then" plan for many situations. I need a mindful and calculated approach. To say that I should strive to function on autopilot because someone else does it successfully is like throwing a bunch of clothes in a manual washing machine (or even semi automatic) and expecting it to function like a fully automatic one, then blaming it for "not striving hard enough" when clothes don't get washed properly.
@amusedmonkey, I really like this post. You've managed to condense many of my half-formed thoughts into a cogent whole.
I'll restate something I've said before. I act as if I have a condition, or an illness (whether I actually have one or not is beside the point.) I have to constantly be on top of it. "Fat Jruzer" is always lurking just below the surface, making false promises of happiness by eating entire rolls of cookie dough, or second and third breakfast. I've battled this condition for my entire adult life, and it has frequently made me miserable and unhealthy.
I've discovered a tool, an easy-to-use readily-understandable tool, which has given me great success in controlling my condition when nothing else has. I would be a fool to abandon it, when it has been the only thing that works.
Edited: I accidentally a word7 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »To clarify a few things from my post that seem to be misinterpreted
Should find/eat foods that are hard to overindulge on does not mean never eating other foods that you may like/love that are calorie dense. It just means this using this tactic makes it easier to not overeat since you aren't tracking every calorie. Then when you are faced with a food you have to be more cautious around, you are aware of that and take whatever steps necessary, probably eating a smaller portion, or limiting frequency.
How do you know if you are eating more/less. Several ways...the scale will trend up or down, your hunger will be higher/lower or you can know look at the foods you eat...a lot of low calorie foods eaten means you're eating less than if you were eating a lot of high calorie foods. If you've been tracking calories you know the high calorie bombs, and you know what's not.
Here is the problem. Eating food that are hard to overindulge in mean (to me) eating food I dont like that much. I've tried that twice before. I got bored after 2 months and gave up. If I tend to avoid foods that I'm more likely to eat, like samoosas, how will I know to intuitively eat less when I am faced with them since I have no idea what their nutritional make up is?
Oh use the hunger test you say? As already stated that doesn't work for me either. I'm permanently hungry. To give you idea, I can literally eat entire dish of cream and cheese rich lasagna and still be hungry. So no!
This part of your post confuses me. How does the scale help you not overindulge? I mean, you know 12 cookies is too much whether you weigh it or not. And calorie/nutrition information will be on the box of cookies. And after the lasagna you will still be hungry whether you measure or not.
I'm not saying you shouldn't log, I'm just not sure how these examples back up the need.
Firstly, no-one weighs a cookie when the box gives the the nutritional value per cookie do they? You look at 12 cookies and say "this is way too much". I look at 12 cookies and say "I'm just going to have 1" then I say "just 1 more" then I eat all 12. Logging tells me I can fit 1 or 2 or 12 cookies into my daily calorie allowance and how it fits into my macros. It visually helps me put into perspective (and limit) what I put into my body.
Yes I will still be hungry whether I weigh or not BUT weighing and portioning the lasagna, AGAIN, tells me how much of it I can have before I should stop. Again, a visual representation of what my body and brain should be telling me, but are not.
It's like putting fuel into a car. You know (from experience) that you get 15km on a liter of fuel so if you put in 4 liters you can drive 60kms. Makes the fuel gauge redundant according to your way of thinking and yet we all still look at it dont we.
That's one of the sillier things I've read on this site. You obviously have no idea of my way of thinking, nor I yours. And that's okay. At least it's okay with me.
Ditto, so how about you move along, happy in the knowledge that your way is best and that anybody that disagrees with it is silly.
I never said you were silly. I said your post is silly. I can't see the gas tank, I can't feel when it's empty. I need the fuel gauge. If I couldn't feel when my body was running out fuel then it would make sense. But I can. So it doesn't.
I don't even know what you mean by "my way" being best. My way of what?
... and that is my point. I cant tell when my body runs out of fuel because it constantly feels like my body is out of fuel no matter how much I put in it. It's 4pm now and I've eaten 1800 calories today already yet I still feel as hungry as I did this morning at 9am when all I had was a cup of coffee.
But I'm happy for you and I will aspire to be as awesome as you.
You should see a doctor if this is true. It is a sign of disease. But I suspect more likely you are confusing want with hunger. It's not uncommon and can take time to learn, but there is a difference.
I doubt I'm confusing want and hunger. I ALWAYS (almost) want to eat. Except when I'm dieting at 1200 Cals a day, I'm rarely hungry. This is the way I've been since as long as I can remember, no Dr has ever noticed a problem. I've been overweight a couple of times in adulthood but usually was at the highest end of 'normal' bmi. The first time I strayed into obese is what got me moving 6 months ago ( tho was prob obese for 6 mos to a year beforehand ) to make myself better.
It is true! Not sure what disease it is a sign of, but thank you for your concern. My recent blood work ( end of August) was normal.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »To clarify a few things from my post that seem to be misinterpreted
Should find/eat foods that are hard to overindulge on does not mean never eating other foods that you may like/love that are calorie dense. It just means this using this tactic makes it easier to not overeat since you aren't tracking every calorie. Then when you are faced with a food you have to be more cautious around, you are aware of that and take whatever steps necessary, probably eating a smaller portion, or limiting frequency.
How do you know if you are eating more/less. Several ways...the scale will trend up or down, your hunger will be higher/lower or you can know look at the foods you eat...a lot of low calorie foods eaten means you're eating less than if you were eating a lot of high calorie foods. If you've been tracking calories you know the high calorie bombs, and you know what's not.
Here is the problem. Eating food that are hard to overindulge in mean (to me) eating food I dont like that much. I've tried that twice before. I got bored after 2 months and gave up. If I tend to avoid foods that I'm more likely to eat, like samoosas, how will I know to intuitively eat less when I am faced with them since I have no idea what their nutritional make up is?
Oh use the hunger test you say? As already stated that doesn't work for me either. I'm permanently hungry. To give you idea, I can literally eat entire dish of cream and cheese rich lasagna and still be hungry. So no!
This part of your post confuses me. How does the scale help you not overindulge? I mean, you know 12 cookies is too much whether you weigh it or not. And calorie/nutrition information will be on the box of cookies. And after the lasagna you will still be hungry whether you measure or not.
I'm not saying you shouldn't log, I'm just not sure how these examples back up the need.
Firstly, no-one weighs a cookie when the box gives the the nutritional value per cookie do they? You look at 12 cookies and say "this is way too much". I look at 12 cookies and say "I'm just going to have 1" then I say "just 1 more" then I eat all 12. Logging tells me I can fit 1 or 2 or 12 cookies into my daily calorie allowance and how it fits into my macros. It visually helps me put into perspective (and limit) what I put into my body.
Yes I will still be hungry whether I weigh or not BUT weighing and portioning the lasagna, AGAIN, tells me how much of it I can have before I should stop. Again, a visual representation of what my body and brain should be telling me, but are not.
It's like putting fuel into a car. You know (from experience) that you get 15km on a liter of fuel so if you put in 4 liters you can drive 60kms. Makes the fuel gauge redundant according to your way of thinking and yet we all still look at it dont we.
That's one of the sillier things I've read on this site. You obviously have no idea of my way of thinking, nor I yours. And that's okay. At least it's okay with me.
Ditto, so how about you move along, happy in the knowledge that your way is best and that anybody that disagrees with it is silly.
I never said you were silly. I said your post is silly. I can't see the gas tank, I can't feel when it's empty. I need the fuel gauge. If I couldn't feel when my body was running out fuel then it would make sense. But I can. So it doesn't.
I don't even know what you mean by "my way" being best. My way of what?
... and that is my point. I cant tell when my body runs out of fuel because it constantly feels like my body is out of fuel no matter how much I put in it. It's 4pm now and I've eaten 1800 calories today already yet I still feel as hungry as I did this morning at 9am when all I had was a cup of coffee.
But I'm happy for you and I will aspire to be as awesome as you.
You should see a doctor if this is true. It is a sign of disease. But I suspect more likely you are confusing want with hunger. It's not uncommon and can take time to learn, but there is a difference.
*sigh*
Okay, I'll bite. What are you talkin' about?
Do you know of a disease or are you just arguing to argue?4 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »To clarify a few things from my post that seem to be misinterpreted
Should find/eat foods that are hard to overindulge on does not mean never eating other foods that you may like/love that are calorie dense. It just means this using this tactic makes it easier to not overeat since you aren't tracking every calorie. Then when you are faced with a food you have to be more cautious around, you are aware of that and take whatever steps necessary, probably eating a smaller portion, or limiting frequency.
How do you know if you are eating more/less. Several ways...the scale will trend up or down, your hunger will be higher/lower or you can know look at the foods you eat...a lot of low calorie foods eaten means you're eating less than if you were eating a lot of high calorie foods. If you've been tracking calories you know the high calorie bombs, and you know what's not.
Here is the problem. Eating food that are hard to overindulge in mean (to me) eating food I dont like that much. I've tried that twice before. I got bored after 2 months and gave up. If I tend to avoid foods that I'm more likely to eat, like samoosas, how will I know to intuitively eat less when I am faced with them since I have no idea what their nutritional make up is?
Oh use the hunger test you say? As already stated that doesn't work for me either. I'm permanently hungry. To give you idea, I can literally eat entire dish of cream and cheese rich lasagna and still be hungry. So no!
This part of your post confuses me. How does the scale help you not overindulge? I mean, you know 12 cookies is too much whether you weigh it or not. And calorie/nutrition information will be on the box of cookies. And after the lasagna you will still be hungry whether you measure or not.
I'm not saying you shouldn't log, I'm just not sure how these examples back up the need.
Firstly, no-one weighs a cookie when the box gives the the nutritional value per cookie do they? You look at 12 cookies and say "this is way too much". I look at 12 cookies and say "I'm just going to have 1" then I say "just 1 more" then I eat all 12. Logging tells me I can fit 1 or 2 or 12 cookies into my daily calorie allowance and how it fits into my macros. It visually helps me put into perspective (and limit) what I put into my body.
Yes I will still be hungry whether I weigh or not BUT weighing and portioning the lasagna, AGAIN, tells me how much of it I can have before I should stop. Again, a visual representation of what my body and brain should be telling me, but are not.
It's like putting fuel into a car. You know (from experience) that you get 15km on a liter of fuel so if you put in 4 liters you can drive 60kms. Makes the fuel gauge redundant according to your way of thinking and yet we all still look at it dont we.
That's one of the sillier things I've read on this site. You obviously have no idea of my way of thinking, nor I yours. And that's okay. At least it's okay with me.
Ditto, so how about you move along, happy in the knowledge that your way is best and that anybody that disagrees with it is silly.
I never said you were silly. I said your post is silly. I can't see the gas tank, I can't feel when it's empty. I need the fuel gauge. If I couldn't feel when my body was running out fuel then it would make sense. But I can. So it doesn't.
I don't even know what you mean by "my way" being best. My way of what?
... and that is my point. I cant tell when my body runs out of fuel because it constantly feels like my body is out of fuel no matter how much I put in it. It's 4pm now and I've eaten 1800 calories today already yet I still feel as hungry as I did this morning at 9am when all I had was a cup of coffee.
But I'm happy for you and I will aspire to be as awesome as you.
You should see a doctor if this is true. It is a sign of disease. But I suspect more likely you are confusing want with hunger. It's not uncommon and can take time to learn, but there is a difference.
I doubt I'm confusing want and hunger. I ALWAYS (almost) want to eat. Except when I'm dieting at 1200 Cals a day, I'm rarely hungry. This is the way I've been since as long as I can remember, no Dr has ever noticed a problem. I've been overweight a couple of times in adulthood but usually was at the highest end of 'normal' bmi. The first time I strayed into obese is what got me moving 6 months ago ( tho was prob obese for 6 mos to a year beforehand ) to make myself better.
It is true! Not sure what disease it is a sign of, but thank you for your concern. My recent blood work ( end of August) was normal.
My reply was not to you and what you describe is not feeling hunger all the time even when overeating.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »To clarify a few things from my post that seem to be misinterpreted
Should find/eat foods that are hard to overindulge on does not mean never eating other foods that you may like/love that are calorie dense. It just means this using this tactic makes it easier to not overeat since you aren't tracking every calorie. Then when you are faced with a food you have to be more cautious around, you are aware of that and take whatever steps necessary, probably eating a smaller portion, or limiting frequency.
How do you know if you are eating more/less. Several ways...the scale will trend up or down, your hunger will be higher/lower or you can know look at the foods you eat...a lot of low calorie foods eaten means you're eating less than if you were eating a lot of high calorie foods. If you've been tracking calories you know the high calorie bombs, and you know what's not.
Here is the problem. Eating food that are hard to overindulge in mean (to me) eating food I dont like that much. I've tried that twice before. I got bored after 2 months and gave up. If I tend to avoid foods that I'm more likely to eat, like samoosas, how will I know to intuitively eat less when I am faced with them since I have no idea what their nutritional make up is?
Oh use the hunger test you say? As already stated that doesn't work for me either. I'm permanently hungry. To give you idea, I can literally eat entire dish of cream and cheese rich lasagna and still be hungry. So no!
This part of your post confuses me. How does the scale help you not overindulge? I mean, you know 12 cookies is too much whether you weigh it or not. And calorie/nutrition information will be on the box of cookies. And after the lasagna you will still be hungry whether you measure or not.
I'm not saying you shouldn't log, I'm just not sure how these examples back up the need.
Firstly, no-one weighs a cookie when the box gives the the nutritional value per cookie do they? You look at 12 cookies and say "this is way too much". I look at 12 cookies and say "I'm just going to have 1" then I say "just 1 more" then I eat all 12. Logging tells me I can fit 1 or 2 or 12 cookies into my daily calorie allowance and how it fits into my macros. It visually helps me put into perspective (and limit) what I put into my body.
Yes I will still be hungry whether I weigh or not BUT weighing and portioning the lasagna, AGAIN, tells me how much of it I can have before I should stop. Again, a visual representation of what my body and brain should be telling me, but are not.
It's like putting fuel into a car. You know (from experience) that you get 15km on a liter of fuel so if you put in 4 liters you can drive 60kms. Makes the fuel gauge redundant according to your way of thinking and yet we all still look at it dont we.
That's one of the sillier things I've read on this site. You obviously have no idea of my way of thinking, nor I yours. And that's okay. At least it's okay with me.
Ditto, so how about you move along, happy in the knowledge that your way is best and that anybody that disagrees with it is silly.
I never said you were silly. I said your post is silly. I can't see the gas tank, I can't feel when it's empty. I need the fuel gauge. If I couldn't feel when my body was running out fuel then it would make sense. But I can. So it doesn't.
I don't even know what you mean by "my way" being best. My way of what?
... and that is my point. I cant tell when my body runs out of fuel because it constantly feels like my body is out of fuel no matter how much I put in it. It's 4pm now and I've eaten 1800 calories today already yet I still feel as hungry as I did this morning at 9am when all I had was a cup of coffee.
But I'm happy for you and I will aspire to be as awesome as you.
You should see a doctor if this is true. It is a sign of disease. But I suspect more likely you are confusing want with hunger. It's not uncommon and can take time to learn, but there is a difference.
I doubt I'm confusing want and hunger. I ALWAYS (almost) want to eat. Except when I'm dieting at 1200 Cals a day, I'm rarely hungry. This is the way I've been since as long as I can remember, no Dr has ever noticed a problem. I've been overweight a couple of times in adulthood but usually was at the highest end of 'normal' bmi. The first time I strayed into obese is what got me moving 6 months ago ( tho was prob obese for 6 mos to a year beforehand ) to make myself better.
It is true! Not sure what disease it is a sign of, but thank you for your concern. My recent blood work ( end of August) was normal.
My reply was to you and what you describe is not feeling hunger all the time even when overeating.
Perhaps I wasn't clear.
I am rarely hungry. Except when I was on my 1200 cal a day diet. I was hungry most of the time then.
I almost always want food.
Therefore I do not think I am mistaking hunger for want.
ETA - I just realized we are hijacking this thread. Enough about me. I am just one of those people who will probably always count calories1 -
cmriverside wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »To clarify a few things from my post that seem to be misinterpreted
Should find/eat foods that are hard to overindulge on does not mean never eating other foods that you may like/love that are calorie dense. It just means this using this tactic makes it easier to not overeat since you aren't tracking every calorie. Then when you are faced with a food you have to be more cautious around, you are aware of that and take whatever steps necessary, probably eating a smaller portion, or limiting frequency.
How do you know if you are eating more/less. Several ways...the scale will trend up or down, your hunger will be higher/lower or you can know look at the foods you eat...a lot of low calorie foods eaten means you're eating less than if you were eating a lot of high calorie foods. If you've been tracking calories you know the high calorie bombs, and you know what's not.
Here is the problem. Eating food that are hard to overindulge in mean (to me) eating food I dont like that much. I've tried that twice before. I got bored after 2 months and gave up. If I tend to avoid foods that I'm more likely to eat, like samoosas, how will I know to intuitively eat less when I am faced with them since I have no idea what their nutritional make up is?
Oh use the hunger test you say? As already stated that doesn't work for me either. I'm permanently hungry. To give you idea, I can literally eat entire dish of cream and cheese rich lasagna and still be hungry. So no!
This part of your post confuses me. How does the scale help you not overindulge? I mean, you know 12 cookies is too much whether you weigh it or not. And calorie/nutrition information will be on the box of cookies. And after the lasagna you will still be hungry whether you measure or not.
I'm not saying you shouldn't log, I'm just not sure how these examples back up the need.
Firstly, no-one weighs a cookie when the box gives the the nutritional value per cookie do they? You look at 12 cookies and say "this is way too much". I look at 12 cookies and say "I'm just going to have 1" then I say "just 1 more" then I eat all 12. Logging tells me I can fit 1 or 2 or 12 cookies into my daily calorie allowance and how it fits into my macros. It visually helps me put into perspective (and limit) what I put into my body.
Yes I will still be hungry whether I weigh or not BUT weighing and portioning the lasagna, AGAIN, tells me how much of it I can have before I should stop. Again, a visual representation of what my body and brain should be telling me, but are not.
It's like putting fuel into a car. You know (from experience) that you get 15km on a liter of fuel so if you put in 4 liters you can drive 60kms. Makes the fuel gauge redundant according to your way of thinking and yet we all still look at it dont we.
That's one of the sillier things I've read on this site. You obviously have no idea of my way of thinking, nor I yours. And that's okay. At least it's okay with me.
Ditto, so how about you move along, happy in the knowledge that your way is best and that anybody that disagrees with it is silly.
I never said you were silly. I said your post is silly. I can't see the gas tank, I can't feel when it's empty. I need the fuel gauge. If I couldn't feel when my body was running out fuel then it would make sense. But I can. So it doesn't.
I don't even know what you mean by "my way" being best. My way of what?
... and that is my point. I cant tell when my body runs out of fuel because it constantly feels like my body is out of fuel no matter how much I put in it. It's 4pm now and I've eaten 1800 calories today already yet I still feel as hungry as I did this morning at 9am when all I had was a cup of coffee.
But I'm happy for you and I will aspire to be as awesome as you.
You should see a doctor if this is true. It is a sign of disease. But I suspect more likely you are confusing want with hunger. It's not uncommon and can take time to learn, but there is a difference.
*sigh*
Okay, I'll bite. What are you talkin' about?
Do you know of a disease or are you just arguing to argue?
I prefer debate
, though all we're really debating is whether I can understand one poster's situation. I don't. I'm not suggesting nor have I ever suggested that she or anyone else change what they are doing.
Prader-Willi syndrome can cause a feeling of permanent hunger. But, as I noted above, I do not believe that's what is happening here.0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »KANGOOJUMPS wrote: »I do not calorie count or own a scale, I am a maintainer and very happy,,, here today, gone tomorrow!, I am enjoying life to the fullest. if I want a drink, I drink. If I want a burger. I eat it!, and then I work it off.
I do too, but there is this thing with intuitive eating, though. Some people can have that burger or that drink with just built habits and simple awareness, and trust their natural calorie regulating mechanisms to do most of the heavy lifting like spontaneously increased NEAT, reduced calorie intake after a high calorie day, being uncomfortable with being full, satiety that correlates with proper calories...etc. I don't know if you belong to that group, but that's basically what some people think everyone should strive to achieve.
I can eat the burger, but I need mimic these mechanisms manually by exercising extra, taking the calories of the burger into account when trying to decide what else I can/can't have that day, being aware of the temptation of being joyfully overfull, consciously reasoning with hunger if present or putting more effort into filling foods... and so on. I need more than just simple awareness. I need strategies and tools. I need a clear "if...then" plan for many situations. I need a mindful and calculated approach. To say that I should strive to function on autopilot because someone else does it successfully is like throwing a bunch of clothes in a manual washing machine (or even semi automatic) and expecting it to function like a fully automatic one, then blaming it for "not striving hard enough" when clothes don't get washed properly.
@amusedmonkey, I really like this post. You've managed to condense many of my half-formed thoughts into a cogent whole.
I'll restate something I've said before. I act as if I have a condition, or an illness (whether I actually have one or not is beside the point.) I have to constantly be on top of it. "Fat Jruzer" is always lurking just below the surface, making false promises of happiness by eating entire rolls of cookie dough, or second and third breakfast. I've battled this condition for my entire adult life, and it has frequently made me miserable and unhealthy.
I've discovered a tool, an easy-to-use readily-understandable tool, which has gave me great success in controlling my condition when nothing else has. I would be a fool to abandon it, when it has been the only thing that works.
I love that, and I think it's true for many of us.
You don't have to overeat by much to gain weight, and I doubt there's any reason for humans to have developed an ability (on average) to sense exactly how much we need to eat to maintain our weights. Most of human history overeating was not a concern, and when it was there were already cultural restrictions in place that limited eating for most. People weren't in an environment where they were relatively sedentary with food around them deciding whether or not they were hungry enough to eat.
For me, and I think for a lot of people, then, tools are necessary. Calorie counting is one such tool, and I think the idea that it's weirder or harder or more burdensome than all other tools is odd -- clearly it is going to depend on personality.
The tool that I primarily employ, and that works for me, is eating to a schedule (no snacking, and if I want to cut calories lately, no breakfast, or no breakfast unless I work out in the morning (and then I eat something afterwards, as otherwise I get hungrier than I like for lunch). My mind and preferences work with this, I don't really like snacking. Others use other tools like limiting the foods they eat (which might make spur of the moment eating more difficult) or thinking about eating according to certain nutritional rules (the DASH plan, where you have a certain amount of certain kinds of foods). I don't think any of these things, including what I do -- the schedule, and thinking about how much I eat -- are more "intuitive" than calorie counting. If I have a schedule and standard way of eating in place I can easily eat less, since I know how much I have been eating, but I CANNOT "intuitively" eat less and I honestly think many people beat themselves up and feel like something is wrong with them because they think they should be able to just think "eat less" and do it. For me it's freeing to realize I need something external (a plan and a schedule and an idea of what the right amount is) and should not assume my body will just know.
Calorie counting, in my mind, is one such external tool, and no better or worse than the others, except for how it works for you personally.3 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »To clarify a few things from my post that seem to be misinterpreted
Should find/eat foods that are hard to overindulge on does not mean never eating other foods that you may like/love that are calorie dense. It just means this using this tactic makes it easier to not overeat since you aren't tracking every calorie. Then when you are faced with a food you have to be more cautious around, you are aware of that and take whatever steps necessary, probably eating a smaller portion, or limiting frequency.
How do you know if you are eating more/less. Several ways...the scale will trend up or down, your hunger will be higher/lower or you can know look at the foods you eat...a lot of low calorie foods eaten means you're eating less than if you were eating a lot of high calorie foods. If you've been tracking calories you know the high calorie bombs, and you know what's not.
Here is the problem. Eating food that are hard to overindulge in mean (to me) eating food I dont like that much. I've tried that twice before. I got bored after 2 months and gave up. If I tend to avoid foods that I'm more likely to eat, like samoosas, how will I know to intuitively eat less when I am faced with them since I have no idea what their nutritional make up is?
Oh use the hunger test you say? As already stated that doesn't work for me either. I'm permanently hungry. To give you idea, I can literally eat entire dish of cream and cheese rich lasagna and still be hungry. So no!
This part of your post confuses me. How does the scale help you not overindulge? I mean, you know 12 cookies is too much whether you weigh it or not. And calorie/nutrition information will be on the box of cookies. And after the lasagna you will still be hungry whether you measure or not.
I'm not saying you shouldn't log, I'm just not sure how these examples back up the need.
Firstly, no-one weighs a cookie when the box gives the the nutritional value per cookie do they? You look at 12 cookies and say "this is way too much". I look at 12 cookies and say "I'm just going to have 1" then I say "just 1 more" then I eat all 12. Logging tells me I can fit 1 or 2 or 12 cookies into my daily calorie allowance and how it fits into my macros. It visually helps me put into perspective (and limit) what I put into my body.
Yes I will still be hungry whether I weigh or not BUT weighing and portioning the lasagna, AGAIN, tells me how much of it I can have before I should stop. Again, a visual representation of what my body and brain should be telling me, but are not.
It's like putting fuel into a car. You know (from experience) that you get 15km on a liter of fuel so if you put in 4 liters you can drive 60kms. Makes the fuel gauge redundant according to your way of thinking and yet we all still look at it dont we.
That's one of the sillier things I've read on this site. You obviously have no idea of my way of thinking, nor I yours. And that's okay. At least it's okay with me.
Ditto, so how about you move along, happy in the knowledge that your way is best and that anybody that disagrees with it is silly.
I never said you were silly. I said your post is silly. I can't see the gas tank, I can't feel when it's empty. I need the fuel gauge. If I couldn't feel when my body was running out fuel then it would make sense. But I can. So it doesn't.
I don't even know what you mean by "my way" being best. My way of what?
... and that is my point. I cant tell when my body runs out of fuel because it constantly feels like my body is out of fuel no matter how much I put in it. It's 4pm now and I've eaten 1800 calories today already yet I still feel as hungry as I did this morning at 9am when all I had was a cup of coffee.
But I'm happy for you and I will aspire to be as awesome as you.
You should see a doctor if this is true. It is a sign of disease. But I suspect more likely you are confusing want with hunger. It's not uncommon and can take time to learn, but there is a difference.
I doubt I'm confusing want and hunger. I ALWAYS (almost) want to eat. Except when I'm dieting at 1200 Cals a day, I'm rarely hungry. This is the way I've been since as long as I can remember, no Dr has ever noticed a problem. I've been overweight a couple of times in adulthood but usually was at the highest end of 'normal' bmi. The first time I strayed into obese is what got me moving 6 months ago ( tho was prob obese for 6 mos to a year beforehand ) to make myself better.
It is true! Not sure what disease it is a sign of, but thank you for your concern. My recent blood work ( end of August) was normal.
My reply was to you and what you describe is not feeling hunger all the time even when overeating.
Perhaps I wasn't clear.
I am rarely hungry. Except when I was on my 1200 cal a day diet. I was hungry most of the time then.
I almost always want food.
Therefore I do not think I am mistaking hunger for want.
ETA - I just realized we are hijacking this thread. Enough about me. I am just one of those people who will probably always count calories
I would agree that you are not making that mistake. Nor have I been talking about you at all.0 -
I am now 5 pounds from goal and been at this racket for a year now. This has all come from counting. Is it possible at this point that I could still flourish without this? I suppose. I tend to eat the same things a lot where I know the counts already anyway, but even if I was not logging it here at MFP I would be doing the arithmetic in my head. I am an analytical type of person and counting appeals to my intrinsic nature. I doubt I will leave MFP when I hit goal. It's as deeply ingrained in my life now as breathing.
I guess I should also mention that there is another facet of the dieting world that feel as though their food choices will save them from calorie counting. So those who think shopping at Whole Foods, restricting or indulging in certain macros, or following whatever other flavor of the week diet will provide weight loss in spite of CICO. This mindset is a one way ticket to frustration and failure, and one I know well as I followed a few fad diets in the early stages. If people still wanna go this route? Be my guest, but don't come crying to me when the scale is not moving in the direction you want.4 -
KANGOOJUMPS wrote: »I do not calorie count or own a scale, I am a maintainer and very happy,,, here today, gone tomorrow!, I am enjoying life to the fullest. if I want a drink, I drink. If I want a burger. I eat it!, and then I work it off.
I too am a maintainer and very happy. I am enjoying my life. If I want a drink, I drink. If I want a burger, I eat it. And I often work it off. But I do calorie count and use a food scale.
This is the sentiment I think bothers some of us. The insinuation that if you are calorie counting, you are a hungry miserable person struggling to find this mystical oneness with food that you other more enlightened folks have reached. Calorie counting does not cause me one nano-second of worry, or stress, or guilt. It freed me from it. I eat a better, more varied, more enjoyable diet now that I count. I don't have to use the Jedi Force on my WOE to be happy.
It's great that you found a way to enjoy your diet and maintain your weight! I did too, it's just a different way 13 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »rileysowner wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »I'm one who feels people should strive to eat without counting. In some situations and as a learning tool, counting can be invaluable, but I don't understand the accepted reliance on daily calorie counting for life.
If after a period of time counting, surely you understand how much food you need and are ingesting without measuring every gram? If you have a trend up, eat less. If you are trending down, eat more. I know that relying on hunger cues can be dangerous, sometimes you follow your hunger & eat, sometimes you have to know when to ignore it. I also think that individuals should find foods that they enjoy that are difficult to overindulge on.
OK, I'm going to expose why Mrs Jruzer sometimes calls me "Sheldon."
How do you know if you're eating less, or more? How much less? How much more? If you're not measuring, how do you know?
I'm all for developing healthy habits, and I'm much better and thoughtful about what I eat than I used to be. But the whole "less/more" thing is confusing to me.
The scale tells you...
I typically put on about 8-10 Lbs over the winter due in large part to an overall decrease in activity...both NEAT and EAT. I take it off in Spring when I get back on the bike and I give it another nudge with doing things like not having grains or starches with my dinner most nights (not every night)...scaling back a snack...reducing the size of my breakfast, etc.
I don't count calories, as it was pretty bad mentally for me...I still weigh and measure certain things though, particularly if they're calorie dense and particularly if I'm trying to lose weight...maintenance is far less of an issue and I don't have to think about it too much except in winter when my activity dips.
Most of my diet is also whole foods based which is more of a health thing and keeping my blood work in line...but it also helps me not overeat or at least not overeat often enough to change anything...
That works for you. When I do that, it doesn't work for me. For me it is count calories so I can enjoy life. For others calorie counting doesn't put them in a good place, and if they have success intuitively eating, good for them.
Yeah, whatever works...I'm just hard pressed to believe the vast majority will actually, realistically count calories into perpetuity. I'm hoping to be around for another 40 - 50 years...the thought of counting every calorie for the next 50 years doesn't seem particularly realistic to me.
I'd wager the number of people who count calories for life are very few...
I tend to agree with this. Especially counting every single calorie / bite. And really, at some point would you not learn what 80 g of rice or a large egg vs. a medium egg looks like? When paying that much attention I just don't get how it wouldn't become obvious after a while.
But a lot o things people do seem crazy to me, so IDK why this should be different. I probably seem crazy to others.
Whenever I stop paying attention for more than a week or so, my eyeballed portions start to get bigger and bigger. My brain telling me that I've done well today and totally have room for a handful of chocolate covered peanuts becomes harder to argue with. My between meals snacking in general becomes more prominent. Maybe that just means I'm weak or easily deluded by the voices in my head
but it is what it is.
If you asked me right now to pour a serving of cereal into a bowl, I could probably eyeball to within a couple of grams. If you asked me to do the same thing after a month of not logging, it would be substantially more and I would honestly not realize it. I wouldn't be a glutton or anything, but I would eventually end up back at 15 lbs heavier, swearing I hadn't changed a thing.
I've been on MFP for ten years. I didn't always count and log during that time, but when I've stopped I've found my experience to be like @kimney72. Maybe not right away, but in time I start agreeing with that little voice in my head at the grocery store which says, "Yeah. Little Debbie. Mmm. Lays." I need to see it in writing. Otherwise I start having 40 grams of cheese and 100 grams of sausage and etc. It just sneaks up.
I'm curious about @cwolfman13, though. He has often stated that the logging wasn't good for him, but not sure why that was. I can get obsessive about stuff and I was in the beginning but I've learned to relax about things quite a bit in Maintenance and I don't weigh everything, but my food scale is on the counter and I used it several times a day as a little self-check. I can eyeball a lot of stuff, BUT like kimney72 says - that would fly out the window if I stepped away from logging for any amount of time.
I tried to be an intuitive eater a few times. It's just not worth it to me to have to lose those same 8-10 pounds over and over. I've lost them three times in total now, and it's a pain.
The interesting thing is how my CICO has changed over the years I've been tracking and logging. Right after my initial 70 pound loss I had to stay low for quite a while. Like 1500-low. Now I've reset to a good amount of food and can eat 1900-2300 every day with no scale movement. My lifestyle hasn't changed drastically, either. I wouldn't have known that without logging for all these years. I need those numbers.4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions