Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Why do people deny CICO ?
Replies
-
WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »terryritter1 wrote: »The fact is that the principle of CICO for weight loss is effective in practice. Recording what you eat and keeping a calorie deficit, which is, at the fundamental level, what causes weight loss, is highly effective process for someone with that goal. But, it's also way too simplistic. Though it is a "simple scientific concept", the body isn't. When you have a biological environment that has higher insulin, that does change how people's bodies manage metabolism.
So, at one level, CICO is a good tool. At deeper level, it's not that simple. Anyone that has a deeper understanding of biology knows this, or should. Just because it is a good methodology doesn't mean it's all things. We argue about this because we want to live in a binary world. Calories matter, not doubt. But, composition does, too.
Ultimately, who's more right isn't important. If CICO works for someone's quest to lose weight, it just doesn't matter (and no blog of an anecdotal nature will convince me otherwise, though I will cheer your success nonetheless).
yeah. I'm finding that there is a cult of conformity around here, that wants to force this idea that calories is the only thing that matters. If that's the case why track nutrients and macros, at all? Yes CICO is great for weight management, but what about your actual health. Your body weight isn't the only thing matters.
Find a thread, any thread (if it happens as often as you say then it shouldn't be hard) where someone asks about challenges with losing weight, and all the responses say that "eat whatever you want, CICO is all that matters" and no one mentions health, nutrition, and satiety.
People constantly suggest that this happens and I've yet to have someone come back with an actual thread where it does.
I know there is one somewhere.
Cuz I posted it to make a point
I thought I found it but no, not this one. http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10451302/eat-whatever-you-want-and-lose-weight/p1
Still looking, I know it is out there.
LOL. Thanks for proving my point.
The poster you were quoting was trying to find a thread where no one brought up the importance of good nutrition in the context of using CICO (energy balance) to lose weight. They are saying that they still can't find it after searching. I notice you haven't posted an example either, even though you said it happens all the time in this "culture of conformity".
I didn't need to. There are two prime examples linked in this thread. The one you mention here. Literally, no valuable discussion regarding nutrition and health in either one. Just a bunch of, yay I can eat pizza, ice cream, and drink wine.17 -
WinoGelato wrote: »Eating processed foods, carbs and sugar really do make me feel like garbage. I don't think I am alone in this. It is WAY easier to eat vegetables, eggs, lean meat and water only if you are going for a steep cut (2lbs+ per week). With a clean diet I can go to bed full on 1700 calories easy (1200 cal deficit). I can't imagine getting through a day after having a 400+ calorie sugary snack. I would wake up the next day with a sugar hangover unable to move. Whatever keeps you sane though.
Calories in-- calories out means everything though. I maintain and gain weight on the same foods, just more volume (and a lot of added butter!)
Nope - my greek yogurt with prepackaged granola and berries, my soup made with frozen vegetables, boxed chicken broth, lean ground beef, dried pasta and canned tomatoes do not make me feel like garbage. Nor does pizza, wine, and ice cream; eaten in moderation as part of an overall calorie appropriate diet. Nor is a 1200 calorie deficit appropriate for me or for most people - I'm already at a healthy weight, and even when I was losing, 0.5lb-1 lb /week was the rate of loss appropriate for my goals.
yogurt, broth, frozen veggies and beef certainly are not junk foods nor are they processed-- just canned, frozen etc. I am glad that you can enjoy ice cream and pizza. You're on point on that we all have differing goals. On the flip side, if I was trying to gain weight aggressively (3,500 cals) then I would have to eat junk food.
13 -
WinoGelato wrote: »Eating processed foods, carbs and sugar really do make me feel like garbage. I don't think I am alone in this. It is WAY easier to eat vegetables, eggs, lean meat and water only if you are going for a steep cut (2lbs+ per week). With a clean diet I can go to bed full on 1700 calories easy (1200 cal deficit). I can't imagine getting through a day after having a 400+ calorie sugary snack. I would wake up the next day with a sugar hangover unable to move. Whatever keeps you sane though.
Calories in-- calories out means everything though. I maintain and gain weight on the same foods, just more volume (and a lot of added butter!)
Nope - my greek yogurt with prepackaged granola and berries, my soup made with frozen vegetables, boxed chicken broth, lean ground beef, dried pasta and canned tomatoes do not make me feel like garbage. Nor does pizza, wine, and ice cream; eaten in moderation as part of an overall calorie appropriate diet. Nor is a 1200 calorie deficit appropriate for me or for most people - I'm already at a healthy weight, and even when I was losing, 0.5lb-1 lb /week was the rate of loss appropriate for my goals.
yogurt, broth, frozen veggies and beef certainly are not junk foods nor are they processed-- just canned, frozen etc. I am glad that you can enjoy ice cream and pizza. You're on point on that we all have differing goals. On the flip side, if I was trying to gain weight aggressively (3,500 cals) then I would have to eat junk food.
Canning and freezing are processing. By definition. As is fermenting, blending or chopping.18 -
mutantspicy wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »terryritter1 wrote: »The fact is that the principle of CICO for weight loss is effective in practice. Recording what you eat and keeping a calorie deficit, which is, at the fundamental level, what causes weight loss, is highly effective process for someone with that goal. But, it's also way too simplistic. Though it is a "simple scientific concept", the body isn't. When you have a biological environment that has higher insulin, that does change how people's bodies manage metabolism.
So, at one level, CICO is a good tool. At deeper level, it's not that simple. Anyone that has a deeper understanding of biology knows this, or should. Just because it is a good methodology doesn't mean it's all things. We argue about this because we want to live in a binary world. Calories matter, not doubt. But, composition does, too.
Ultimately, who's more right isn't important. If CICO works for someone's quest to lose weight, it just doesn't matter (and no blog of an anecdotal nature will convince me otherwise, though I will cheer your success nonetheless).
yeah. I'm finding that there is a cult of conformity around here, that wants to force this idea that calories is the only thing that matters. If that's the case why track nutrients and macros, at all? Yes CICO is great for weight management, but what about your actual health. Your body weight isn't the only thing matters.
Find a thread, any thread (if it happens as often as you say then it shouldn't be hard) where someone asks about challenges with losing weight, and all the responses say that "eat whatever you want, CICO is all that matters" and no one mentions health, nutrition, and satiety.
People constantly suggest that this happens and I've yet to have someone come back with an actual thread where it does.
I know there is one somewhere.
Cuz I posted it to make a point
I thought I found it but no, not this one. http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10451302/eat-whatever-you-want-and-lose-weight/p1
Still looking, I know it is out there.
LOL. Thanks for proving my point.
The poster you were quoting was trying to find a thread where no one brought up the importance of good nutrition in the context of using CICO (energy balance) to lose weight. They are saying that they still can't find it after searching. I notice you haven't posted an example either, even though you said it happens all the time in this "culture of conformity".
I didn't need to. There are two prime examples linked in this thread. The one you mention here. Literally, no valuable discussion regarding nutrition and health in either one. Just a bunch of, yay I can eat pizza, ice cream, and drink wine.
So, you didn't actually read the thread. That explains things.21 -
stanmann571 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Eating processed foods, carbs and sugar really do make me feel like garbage. I don't think I am alone in this. It is WAY easier to eat vegetables, eggs, lean meat and water only if you are going for a steep cut (2lbs+ per week). With a clean diet I can go to bed full on 1700 calories easy (1200 cal deficit). I can't imagine getting through a day after having a 400+ calorie sugary snack. I would wake up the next day with a sugar hangover unable to move. Whatever keeps you sane though.
Calories in-- calories out means everything though. I maintain and gain weight on the same foods, just more volume (and a lot of added butter!)
Nope - my greek yogurt with prepackaged granola and berries, my soup made with frozen vegetables, boxed chicken broth, lean ground beef, dried pasta and canned tomatoes do not make me feel like garbage. Nor does pizza, wine, and ice cream; eaten in moderation as part of an overall calorie appropriate diet. Nor is a 1200 calorie deficit appropriate for me or for most people - I'm already at a healthy weight, and even when I was losing, 0.5lb-1 lb /week was the rate of loss appropriate for my goals.
yogurt, broth, frozen veggies and beef certainly are not junk foods nor are they processed-- just canned, frozen etc. I am glad that you can enjoy ice cream and pizza. You're on point on that we all have differing goals. On the flip side, if I was trying to gain weight aggressively (3,500 cals) then I would have to eat junk food.
Canning and freezing are processing. By definition. As is fermenting, blending or chopping.
so what is unprocessed food? Foraged mushrooms, dandelions and cattails?7 -
mutantspicy wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »terryritter1 wrote: »The fact is that the principle of CICO for weight loss is effective in practice. Recording what you eat and keeping a calorie deficit, which is, at the fundamental level, what causes weight loss, is highly effective process for someone with that goal. But, it's also way too simplistic. Though it is a "simple scientific concept", the body isn't. When you have a biological environment that has higher insulin, that does change how people's bodies manage metabolism.
So, at one level, CICO is a good tool. At deeper level, it's not that simple. Anyone that has a deeper understanding of biology knows this, or should. Just because it is a good methodology doesn't mean it's all things. We argue about this because we want to live in a binary world. Calories matter, not doubt. But, composition does, too.
Ultimately, who's more right isn't important. If CICO works for someone's quest to lose weight, it just doesn't matter (and no blog of an anecdotal nature will convince me otherwise, though I will cheer your success nonetheless).
yeah. I'm finding that there is a cult of conformity around here, that wants to force this idea that calories is the only thing that matters. If that's the case why track nutrients and macros, at all? Yes CICO is great for weight management, but what about your actual health. Your body weight isn't the only thing matters.
Find a thread, any thread (if it happens as often as you say then it shouldn't be hard) where someone asks about challenges with losing weight, and all the responses say that "eat whatever you want, CICO is all that matters" and no one mentions health, nutrition, and satiety.
People constantly suggest that this happens and I've yet to have someone come back with an actual thread where it does.
I know there is one somewhere.
Cuz I posted it to make a point
I thought I found it but no, not this one. http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10451302/eat-whatever-you-want-and-lose-weight/p1
Still looking, I know it is out there.
LOL. Thanks for proving my point.
The poster you were quoting was trying to find a thread where no one brought up the importance of good nutrition in the context of using CICO (energy balance) to lose weight. They are saying that they still can't find it after searching. I notice you haven't posted an example either, even though you said it happens all the time in this "culture of conformity".
I didn't need to. There are two prime examples linked in this thread. The one you mention here. Literally, no valuable discussion regarding nutrition and health in either one. Just a bunch of, yay I can eat pizza, ice cream, and drink wine.
So, you didn't actually read the thread. That explains things.
I totally read both, Unless you consider diabetes, and high cholesterol a worthy health goal, then no nothing of value there.23 -
Today’s word of the day, ironically, is Myopic.25
-
stanmann571 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Eating processed foods, carbs and sugar really do make me feel like garbage. I don't think I am alone in this. It is WAY easier to eat vegetables, eggs, lean meat and water only if you are going for a steep cut (2lbs+ per week). With a clean diet I can go to bed full on 1700 calories easy (1200 cal deficit). I can't imagine getting through a day after having a 400+ calorie sugary snack. I would wake up the next day with a sugar hangover unable to move. Whatever keeps you sane though.
Calories in-- calories out means everything though. I maintain and gain weight on the same foods, just more volume (and a lot of added butter!)
Nope - my greek yogurt with prepackaged granola and berries, my soup made with frozen vegetables, boxed chicken broth, lean ground beef, dried pasta and canned tomatoes do not make me feel like garbage. Nor does pizza, wine, and ice cream; eaten in moderation as part of an overall calorie appropriate diet. Nor is a 1200 calorie deficit appropriate for me or for most people - I'm already at a healthy weight, and even when I was losing, 0.5lb-1 lb /week was the rate of loss appropriate for my goals.
yogurt, broth, frozen veggies and beef certainly are not junk foods nor are they processed-- just canned, frozen etc. I am glad that you can enjoy ice cream and pizza. You're on point on that we all have differing goals. On the flip side, if I was trying to gain weight aggressively (3,500 cals) then I would have to eat junk food.
Canning and freezing are processing. By definition. As is fermenting, blending or chopping.
so what is unprocessed food? Foraged mushrooms, dandelions and cattails?
Pretty much yeah.
Unless you picked, or killed it yourself, someone else processed it for you. A steak, or an ear of corn or apple/banana is minimally processed.8 -
mutantspicy wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »terryritter1 wrote: »The fact is that the principle of CICO for weight loss is effective in practice. Recording what you eat and keeping a calorie deficit, which is, at the fundamental level, what causes weight loss, is highly effective process for someone with that goal. But, it's also way too simplistic. Though it is a "simple scientific concept", the body isn't. When you have a biological environment that has higher insulin, that does change how people's bodies manage metabolism.
So, at one level, CICO is a good tool. At deeper level, it's not that simple. Anyone that has a deeper understanding of biology knows this, or should. Just because it is a good methodology doesn't mean it's all things. We argue about this because we want to live in a binary world. Calories matter, not doubt. But, composition does, too.
Ultimately, who's more right isn't important. If CICO works for someone's quest to lose weight, it just doesn't matter (and no blog of an anecdotal nature will convince me otherwise, though I will cheer your success nonetheless).
yeah. I'm finding that there is a cult of conformity around here, that wants to force this idea that calories is the only thing that matters. If that's the case why track nutrients and macros, at all? Yes CICO is great for weight management, but what about your actual health. Your body weight isn't the only thing matters.
Find a thread, any thread (if it happens as often as you say then it shouldn't be hard) where someone asks about challenges with losing weight, and all the responses say that "eat whatever you want, CICO is all that matters" and no one mentions health, nutrition, and satiety.
People constantly suggest that this happens and I've yet to have someone come back with an actual thread where it does.
I know there is one somewhere.
Cuz I posted it to make a point
I thought I found it but no, not this one. http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10451302/eat-whatever-you-want-and-lose-weight/p1
Still looking, I know it is out there.
LOL. Thanks for proving my point.
The poster you were quoting was trying to find a thread where no one brought up the importance of good nutrition in the context of using CICO (energy balance) to lose weight. They are saying that they still can't find it after searching. I notice you haven't posted an example either, even though you said it happens all the time in this "culture of conformity".
I didn't need to. There are two prime examples linked in this thread. The one you mention here. Literally, no valuable discussion regarding nutrition and health in either one. Just a bunch of, yay I can eat pizza, ice cream, and drink wine.
So, you didn't actually read the thread. That explains things.
I totally read both, Unless you consider diabetes, and high cholesterol a worthy health goal, then no nothing of value there.
So the improvement of health markers doesn't mean much to you...
OR
You didn't actually read the thread.
An overweight Paleo vegan is at much higher risk of diabetes and high cholesterol than a very active Factory worker/ powerlifter who is within "normal weight range" who eats McDonald's 3 meals a day, 7 days a week.22 -
stanmann571 wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »terryritter1 wrote: »The fact is that the principle of CICO for weight loss is effective in practice. Recording what you eat and keeping a calorie deficit, which is, at the fundamental level, what causes weight loss, is highly effective process for someone with that goal. But, it's also way too simplistic. Though it is a "simple scientific concept", the body isn't. When you have a biological environment that has higher insulin, that does change how people's bodies manage metabolism.
So, at one level, CICO is a good tool. At deeper level, it's not that simple. Anyone that has a deeper understanding of biology knows this, or should. Just because it is a good methodology doesn't mean it's all things. We argue about this because we want to live in a binary world. Calories matter, not doubt. But, composition does, too.
Ultimately, who's more right isn't important. If CICO works for someone's quest to lose weight, it just doesn't matter (and no blog of an anecdotal nature will convince me otherwise, though I will cheer your success nonetheless).
yeah. I'm finding that there is a cult of conformity around here, that wants to force this idea that calories is the only thing that matters. If that's the case why track nutrients and macros, at all? Yes CICO is great for weight management, but what about your actual health. Your body weight isn't the only thing matters.
Find a thread, any thread (if it happens as often as you say then it shouldn't be hard) where someone asks about challenges with losing weight, and all the responses say that "eat whatever you want, CICO is all that matters" and no one mentions health, nutrition, and satiety.
People constantly suggest that this happens and I've yet to have someone come back with an actual thread where it does.
I know there is one somewhere.
Cuz I posted it to make a point
I thought I found it but no, not this one. http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10451302/eat-whatever-you-want-and-lose-weight/p1
Still looking, I know it is out there.
LOL. Thanks for proving my point.
The poster you were quoting was trying to find a thread where no one brought up the importance of good nutrition in the context of using CICO (energy balance) to lose weight. They are saying that they still can't find it after searching. I notice you haven't posted an example either, even though you said it happens all the time in this "culture of conformity".
I didn't need to. There are two prime examples linked in this thread. The one you mention here. Literally, no valuable discussion regarding nutrition and health in either one. Just a bunch of, yay I can eat pizza, ice cream, and drink wine.
So, you didn't actually read the thread. That explains things.
I totally read both, Unless you consider diabetes, and high cholesterol a worthy health goal, then no nothing of value there.
So the improvement of health markers doesn't mean much to you...
OR
You didn't actually read the thread.
An overweight Paleo vegan is at much higher risk of diabetes and high cholesterol than a very active Factory worker/ powerlifter who is within "normal weight range" who eats McDonald's 3 meals a day, 7 days a week.
And/or have funny (aka incorrect) ideas about what causes diabetes and high cholesterol.
And/or didn't understand when people mentioned eating healthy, nutritious foods - especially in the OP, which would indicate that not much (if any) additional discussion is required. Even though it was present.6 -
stanmann571 wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »terryritter1 wrote: »The fact is that the principle of CICO for weight loss is effective in practice. Recording what you eat and keeping a calorie deficit, which is, at the fundamental level, what causes weight loss, is highly effective process for someone with that goal. But, it's also way too simplistic. Though it is a "simple scientific concept", the body isn't. When you have a biological environment that has higher insulin, that does change how people's bodies manage metabolism.
So, at one level, CICO is a good tool. At deeper level, it's not that simple. Anyone that has a deeper understanding of biology knows this, or should. Just because it is a good methodology doesn't mean it's all things. We argue about this because we want to live in a binary world. Calories matter, not doubt. But, composition does, too.
Ultimately, who's more right isn't important. If CICO works for someone's quest to lose weight, it just doesn't matter (and no blog of an anecdotal nature will convince me otherwise, though I will cheer your success nonetheless).
yeah. I'm finding that there is a cult of conformity around here, that wants to force this idea that calories is the only thing that matters. If that's the case why track nutrients and macros, at all? Yes CICO is great for weight management, but what about your actual health. Your body weight isn't the only thing matters.
Find a thread, any thread (if it happens as often as you say then it shouldn't be hard) where someone asks about challenges with losing weight, and all the responses say that "eat whatever you want, CICO is all that matters" and no one mentions health, nutrition, and satiety.
People constantly suggest that this happens and I've yet to have someone come back with an actual thread where it does.
I know there is one somewhere.
Cuz I posted it to make a point
I thought I found it but no, not this one. http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10451302/eat-whatever-you-want-and-lose-weight/p1
Still looking, I know it is out there.
LOL. Thanks for proving my point.
The poster you were quoting was trying to find a thread where no one brought up the importance of good nutrition in the context of using CICO (energy balance) to lose weight. They are saying that they still can't find it after searching. I notice you haven't posted an example either, even though you said it happens all the time in this "culture of conformity".
I didn't need to. There are two prime examples linked in this thread. The one you mention here. Literally, no valuable discussion regarding nutrition and health in either one. Just a bunch of, yay I can eat pizza, ice cream, and drink wine.
So, you didn't actually read the thread. That explains things.
I totally read both, Unless you consider diabetes, and high cholesterol a worthy health goal, then no nothing of value there.
So the improvement of health markers doesn't mean much to you...
OR
You didn't actually read the thread.
An overweight Paleo vegan is at much higher risk of diabetes and high cholesterol than a very active Factory worker/ powerlifter who is within "normal weight range" who eats McDonald's 3 meals a day, 7 days a week.
And/or have funny (aka incorrect) ideas about what causes diabetes and high cholesterol.
And/or didn't understand when people mentioned eating healthy, nutritious foods - especially in the OP, which would indicate that not much (if any) additional discussion is required. Even though it was present.
I should be dead with my low fiber, low fat,mostly ensure/boost, white bread, white pasta, white everything intake. Oh and cole zero for the extra naol in my coffin
13 -
stanmann571 wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »terryritter1 wrote: »The fact is that the principle of CICO for weight loss is effective in practice. Recording what you eat and keeping a calorie deficit, which is, at the fundamental level, what causes weight loss, is highly effective process for someone with that goal. But, it's also way too simplistic. Though it is a "simple scientific concept", the body isn't. When you have a biological environment that has higher insulin, that does change how people's bodies manage metabolism.
So, at one level, CICO is a good tool. At deeper level, it's not that simple. Anyone that has a deeper understanding of biology knows this, or should. Just because it is a good methodology doesn't mean it's all things. We argue about this because we want to live in a binary world. Calories matter, not doubt. But, composition does, too.
Ultimately, who's more right isn't important. If CICO works for someone's quest to lose weight, it just doesn't matter (and no blog of an anecdotal nature will convince me otherwise, though I will cheer your success nonetheless).
yeah. I'm finding that there is a cult of conformity around here, that wants to force this idea that calories is the only thing that matters. If that's the case why track nutrients and macros, at all? Yes CICO is great for weight management, but what about your actual health. Your body weight isn't the only thing matters.
Find a thread, any thread (if it happens as often as you say then it shouldn't be hard) where someone asks about challenges with losing weight, and all the responses say that "eat whatever you want, CICO is all that matters" and no one mentions health, nutrition, and satiety.
People constantly suggest that this happens and I've yet to have someone come back with an actual thread where it does.
I know there is one somewhere.
Cuz I posted it to make a point
I thought I found it but no, not this one. http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10451302/eat-whatever-you-want-and-lose-weight/p1
Still looking, I know it is out there.
LOL. Thanks for proving my point.
The poster you were quoting was trying to find a thread where no one brought up the importance of good nutrition in the context of using CICO (energy balance) to lose weight. They are saying that they still can't find it after searching. I notice you haven't posted an example either, even though you said it happens all the time in this "culture of conformity".
I didn't need to. There are two prime examples linked in this thread. The one you mention here. Literally, no valuable discussion regarding nutrition and health in either one. Just a bunch of, yay I can eat pizza, ice cream, and drink wine.
So, you didn't actually read the thread. That explains things.
I totally read both, Unless you consider diabetes, and high cholesterol a worthy health goal, then no nothing of value there.
So the improvement of health markers doesn't mean much to you...
OR
You didn't actually read the thread.
An overweight Paleo vegan is at much higher risk of diabetes and high cholesterol than a very active Factory worker/ powerlifter who is within "normal weight range" who eats McDonald's 3 meals a day, 7 days a week.
And/or have funny (aka incorrect) ideas about what causes diabetes and high cholesterol.
And/or didn't understand when people mentioned eating healthy, nutritious foods - especially in the OP, which would indicate that not much (if any) additional discussion is required. Even though it was present.
Obviously it's better to have lower quantities of highly saturated fat and refined sugars in your diet, but ultimately a person with a healthy BW or BF% is at radically lower disease risk than someone with elevated BW or BF%.
I avoid HFCS, because of how it affects my emotional and mental metabolism. And yes, I've done double blind testing to confirm that it's HFCS that is causing the effects. But YMMV, and I wouldn't suggest you avoid HFCS unless you have similar symptoms. AND if cutting it out doesn't work, by all means go back to drinking or eating foods with it.2 -
L1zardQueen wrote: »Today’s word of the day, ironically, is Myopic.
Or Presbyopic perhaps for some.5 -
mutantspicy wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »terryritter1 wrote: »The fact is that the principle of CICO for weight loss is effective in practice. Recording what you eat and keeping a calorie deficit, which is, at the fundamental level, what causes weight loss, is highly effective process for someone with that goal. But, it's also way too simplistic. Though it is a "simple scientific concept", the body isn't. When you have a biological environment that has higher insulin, that does change how people's bodies manage metabolism.
So, at one level, CICO is a good tool. At deeper level, it's not that simple. Anyone that has a deeper understanding of biology knows this, or should. Just because it is a good methodology doesn't mean it's all things. We argue about this because we want to live in a binary world. Calories matter, not doubt. But, composition does, too.
Ultimately, who's more right isn't important. If CICO works for someone's quest to lose weight, it just doesn't matter (and no blog of an anecdotal nature will convince me otherwise, though I will cheer your success nonetheless).
yeah. I'm finding that there is a cult of conformity around here, that wants to force this idea that calories is the only thing that matters. If that's the case why track nutrients and macros, at all? Yes CICO is great for weight management, but what about your actual health. Your body weight isn't the only thing matters.
Find a thread, any thread (if it happens as often as you say then it shouldn't be hard) where someone asks about challenges with losing weight, and all the responses say that "eat whatever you want, CICO is all that matters" and no one mentions health, nutrition, and satiety.
People constantly suggest that this happens and I've yet to have someone come back with an actual thread where it does.
I know there is one somewhere.
Cuz I posted it to make a point
I thought I found it but no, not this one. http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10451302/eat-whatever-you-want-and-lose-weight/p1
Still looking, I know it is out there.
LOL. Thanks for proving my point.
The poster you were quoting was trying to find a thread where no one brought up the importance of good nutrition in the context of using CICO (energy balance) to lose weight. They are saying that they still can't find it after searching. I notice you haven't posted an example either, even though you said it happens all the time in this "culture of conformity".
I didn't need to. There are two prime examples linked in this thread. The one you mention here. Literally, no valuable discussion regarding nutrition and health in either one. Just a bunch of, yay I can eat pizza, ice cream, and drink wine.
Um, did you see what I quoted from the very first post in that thread?
It directly contradicts your claim that the party line is that nothing matters, for any purpose, but calories.8 -
Eating processed foods, carbs and sugar really do make me feel like garbage. I don't think I am alone in this. It is WAY easier to eat vegetables, eggs, lean meat and water only if you are going for a steep cut (2lbs+ per week). With a clean diet I can go to bed full on 1700 calories easy (1200 cal deficit). I can't imagine getting through a day after having a 400+ calorie sugary snack. I would wake up the next day with a sugar hangover unable to move. Whatever keeps you sane though.
Calories in-- calories out means everything though. I maintain and gain weight on the same foods, just more volume (and a lot of added butter!)
Vegetables have carbohydrates.12 -
Me thinks it's a waste of time to argue with someone who stands on your green lawn and insists it's purple.
Whatever. We're all unhealthy, diabetic, heart-disease ridden couch potatoes trying to lure unsuspecting innocent souls into our web of deceit. In our spare time, for free. Just because our dark hearts enjoy it.
I'm off to find another healthy, slim well-educated newbie and convince them to eat nothing but fast food and doughnuts because nutrition doesn't matter, like I do everyday. :drinker:35 -
Me thinks it's a waste of time to argue with someone who stands on your green lawn and insists it's purple.
Whatever. We're all unhealthy, diabetic, heart-disease ridden couch potatoes trying to lure unsuspecting innocent souls into our web of deceit. In our spare time, for free. Just because our dark hearts enjoy it.
I'm off to find another healthy, slim well-educated newbie and convince them to eat nothing but fast food and doughnuts because nutrition doesn't matter, like I do everyday. :drinker:
Right behind you.9 -
WinoGelato wrote: »Eating processed foods, carbs and sugar really do make me feel like garbage. I don't think I am alone in this. It is WAY easier to eat vegetables, eggs, lean meat and water only if you are going for a steep cut (2lbs+ per week). With a clean diet I can go to bed full on 1700 calories easy (1200 cal deficit). I can't imagine getting through a day after having a 400+ calorie sugary snack. I would wake up the next day with a sugar hangover unable to move. Whatever keeps you sane though.
Calories in-- calories out means everything though. I maintain and gain weight on the same foods, just more volume (and a lot of added butter!)
Nope - my greek yogurt with prepackaged granola and berries, my soup made with frozen vegetables, boxed chicken broth, lean ground beef, dried pasta and canned tomatoes do not make me feel like garbage. Nor does pizza, wine, and ice cream; eaten in moderation as part of an overall calorie appropriate diet. Nor is a 1200 calorie deficit appropriate for me or for most people - I'm already at a healthy weight, and even when I was losing, 0.5lb-1 lb /week was the rate of loss appropriate for my goals.
yogurt, broth, frozen veggies and beef certainly are not junk foods nor are they processed-- just canned, frozen etc.
Of course they are processed. What do you think processed means?I am glad that you can enjoy ice cream and pizza.
I'll note that neither of these is necessarily more processed than yogurt or smoked salmon or butter.
I make pizza at home on occasion, and while I don't grind the grain myself you can get a home grinder if you are that into "no processed." Beyond that, the ingredients are water and yeast (the crust), olive oil (processed, of course, but you could find a way to do without), garlic, tomatoes, whatever vegetables you add, whatever meat you add (I don't like meat on pizza, so don't, but have made pizzas for others with chicken, gotten them with shrimp at a cool local pizza place, so on). Oh, and usually cheese, which is about as processed as butter or yogurt.
Ice cream is even easier, as you can make it with cream, fruit, perhaps an egg, perhaps some milk, and whatever spices you want. Yes, it normally has sugar (although I used to make some low carb ice cream without it), but you can use honey or syrup for the sweetener.
So the focus on "processed food" seems kind of irrelevant to nutrients or whether food is high cal for the satiety or whatever.
I, like WinoGelato, don't find ice cream makes me feel bad at all, in a reasonable amount. I ate about 200 cal worth regularly when losing (I had exercise calories and otherwise ate a ton of vegetables and kept my protein up, so why not?).
Pizza is exactly as healthy/nutrient dense/caloric as you make it. I don't find it too different from pasta the way I make it (lots of vegetables), except not having meat on mine makes it harder to get enough protein so I usually have something else with it (also often have salad with it) or have extra protein in my other meals that day. (I do like an egg and ham and arugula on pizza, usually with something like asparagus or artichoke hearts).
Anyway, it doesn't make me feel bad.
Lower nutrient pizza choices in excess, without a sufficiently varied diet otherwise? Sure that would make me feel bad, but nothing unique about pizza.10 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Eating processed foods, carbs and sugar really do make me feel like garbage. I don't think I am alone in this. It is WAY easier to eat vegetables, eggs, lean meat and water only if you are going for a steep cut (2lbs+ per week). With a clean diet I can go to bed full on 1700 calories easy (1200 cal deficit). I can't imagine getting through a day after having a 400+ calorie sugary snack. I would wake up the next day with a sugar hangover unable to move. Whatever keeps you sane though.
Calories in-- calories out means everything though. I maintain and gain weight on the same foods, just more volume (and a lot of added butter!)
Vegetables have carbohydrates.
Also, fruit is one of the foods highest in carbs by percentage, and yet few people claim to feel like garbage because they eat fruit. So yeah, I do think that's kind of unusual, although there are others who claim carbs in general make them feel bad.
Of course, most of the healthiest human diets (the blue zones) are reasonably high carb.8 -
Me thinks it's a waste of time to argue with someone who stands on your green lawn and insists it's purple.
Whatever. We're all unhealthy, diabetic, heart-disease ridden couch potatoes trying to lure unsuspecting innocent souls into our web of deceit. In our spare time, for free. Just because our dark hearts enjoy it.
I'm off to find another healthy, slim well-educated newbie and convince them to eat nothing but fast food and doughnuts because nutrition doesn't matter, like I do everyday. :drinker:
I pictured you typing this from the back of your windowless van. :laugh:11 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »terryritter1 wrote: »The fact is that the principle of CICO for weight loss is effective in practice. Recording what you eat and keeping a calorie deficit, which is, at the fundamental level, what causes weight loss, is highly effective process for someone with that goal. But, it's also way too simplistic. Though it is a "simple scientific concept", the body isn't. When you have a biological environment that has higher insulin, that does change how people's bodies manage metabolism.
So, at one level, CICO is a good tool. At deeper level, it's not that simple. Anyone that has a deeper understanding of biology knows this, or should. Just because it is a good methodology doesn't mean it's all things. We argue about this because we want to live in a binary world. Calories matter, not doubt. But, composition does, too.
Ultimately, who's more right isn't important. If CICO works for someone's quest to lose weight, it just doesn't matter (and no blog of an anecdotal nature will convince me otherwise, though I will cheer your success nonetheless).
yeah. I'm finding that there is a cult of conformity around here, that wants to force this idea that calories is the only thing that matters. If that's the case why track nutrients and macros, at all? Yes CICO is great for weight management, but what about your actual health. Your body weight isn't the only thing matters.
Find a thread, any thread (if it happens as often as you say then it shouldn't be hard) where someone asks about challenges with losing weight, and all the responses say that "eat whatever you want, CICO is all that matters" and no one mentions health, nutrition, and satiety.
People constantly suggest that this happens and I've yet to have someone come back with an actual thread where it does.
I know there is one somewhere.
Cuz I posted it to make a point
I thought I found it but no, not this one. http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10451302/eat-whatever-you-want-and-lose-weight/p1
Still looking, I know it is out there.
LOL. Thanks for proving my point.
The poster you were quoting was trying to find a thread where no one brought up the importance of good nutrition in the context of using CICO (energy balance) to lose weight. They are saying that they still can't find it after searching. I notice you haven't posted an example either, even though you said it happens all the time in this "culture of conformity".
I didn't need to. There are two prime examples linked in this thread. The one you mention here. Literally, no valuable discussion regarding nutrition and health in either one. Just a bunch of, yay I can eat pizza, ice cream, and drink wine.
Um, did you see what I quoted from the very first post in that thread?
It directly contradicts your claim that the party line is that nothing matters, for any purpose, but calories.
16 -
mutantspicy wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »terryritter1 wrote: »The fact is that the principle of CICO for weight loss is effective in practice. Recording what you eat and keeping a calorie deficit, which is, at the fundamental level, what causes weight loss, is highly effective process for someone with that goal. But, it's also way too simplistic. Though it is a "simple scientific concept", the body isn't. When you have a biological environment that has higher insulin, that does change how people's bodies manage metabolism.
So, at one level, CICO is a good tool. At deeper level, it's not that simple. Anyone that has a deeper understanding of biology knows this, or should. Just because it is a good methodology doesn't mean it's all things. We argue about this because we want to live in a binary world. Calories matter, not doubt. But, composition does, too.
Ultimately, who's more right isn't important. If CICO works for someone's quest to lose weight, it just doesn't matter (and no blog of an anecdotal nature will convince me otherwise, though I will cheer your success nonetheless).
yeah. I'm finding that there is a cult of conformity around here, that wants to force this idea that calories is the only thing that matters. If that's the case why track nutrients and macros, at all? Yes CICO is great for weight management, but what about your actual health. Your body weight isn't the only thing matters.
Find a thread, any thread (if it happens as often as you say then it shouldn't be hard) where someone asks about challenges with losing weight, and all the responses say that "eat whatever you want, CICO is all that matters" and no one mentions health, nutrition, and satiety.
People constantly suggest that this happens and I've yet to have someone come back with an actual thread where it does.
I know there is one somewhere.
Cuz I posted it to make a point
I thought I found it but no, not this one. http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10451302/eat-whatever-you-want-and-lose-weight/p1
Still looking, I know it is out there.
LOL. Thanks for proving my point.
The poster you were quoting was trying to find a thread where no one brought up the importance of good nutrition in the context of using CICO (energy balance) to lose weight. They are saying that they still can't find it after searching. I notice you haven't posted an example either, even though you said it happens all the time in this "culture of conformity".
I didn't need to. There are two prime examples linked in this thread. The one you mention here. Literally, no valuable discussion regarding nutrition and health in either one. Just a bunch of, yay I can eat pizza, ice cream, and drink wine.
Do you have any idea, how many people in this world think that if you eat pizza, ice cream, and wine, you can't possibly lose weight? Who have been fed so much misinformation about how hard weight loss is, how you have to cut out your favorite foods in order to succeed, how you must eat healthy all the time or you won't be healthy - and therefore, they either start and give up or they never even try to lose weight.
For those countless people, who stumble onto these forums, who have this misconception that they can never eat a ice cream again, or enjoy pizza night with their kids, or have a glass of wine at book club - it is tremendously important that they understand that those things are not true - that you can lose weight and still enjoy your favorite foods, that one of the biggest improvements in health markers comes from being at a healthy weight, regardless of the type of foods you are eating. And then do you know how many of those people find that information liberating, and finally are able to succeed in something they've struggled with for years, or decades? Do you know how many of those people then go on to try to improve their nutrition, their fitness level, their overall health?
Because I do... I've seen them, time and again on these boards. I've seen the ones who felt defeated and finally feel optimistic. Who lose weight AND get to keep eating their favorite foods, AND focus on nutrition also.
I've also seen people like you time and again, who think that anyone who isn't encouraging people to eat a perfect diet, nothing but clean foods, nothing processed, no junk - telling people they should kill it in the gym, get shredded, why waste time walking for exercise, or that if we tell someone exercise isn't required to lose weight then we are encouraging laziness. As if we are all just cultivating this lifestyle of unhealthy, donut eating couch potatoes who happen to lose weight but have no interest in health in the process. People like you think that every single post made on these boards needs to focus on encouraging perfection, because heaven forbid someone just wants to improve, but they also want to enjoy life.
Funny enough, the ones who stick around, and are trying to really help others, are the ones in the first category. The people like you who suggest that anyone not bringing optimal nutrition into every single "is a calorie just a calorie" post is part of some cult... never seem to stick around.
So yeah, I'll continue to eat ice cream and pizza, and drink wine in moderation as part of an overall balanced diet, after achieving my weight loss goals and maintaining that healthy weight - get my 15K steps in at a slow pace, play with my kids instead of killing it at the gym, and continue to try to find fulfillment here as part of a member of this community.
Enjoy your broscience up there on your high horse. I'm sure the view is quite nice.
46 -
WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »terryritter1 wrote: »The fact is that the principle of CICO for weight loss is effective in practice. Recording what you eat and keeping a calorie deficit, which is, at the fundamental level, what causes weight loss, is highly effective process for someone with that goal. But, it's also way too simplistic. Though it is a "simple scientific concept", the body isn't. When you have a biological environment that has higher insulin, that does change how people's bodies manage metabolism.
So, at one level, CICO is a good tool. At deeper level, it's not that simple. Anyone that has a deeper understanding of biology knows this, or should. Just because it is a good methodology doesn't mean it's all things. We argue about this because we want to live in a binary world. Calories matter, not doubt. But, composition does, too.
Ultimately, who's more right isn't important. If CICO works for someone's quest to lose weight, it just doesn't matter (and no blog of an anecdotal nature will convince me otherwise, though I will cheer your success nonetheless).
yeah. I'm finding that there is a cult of conformity around here, that wants to force this idea that calories is the only thing that matters. If that's the case why track nutrients and macros, at all? Yes CICO is great for weight management, but what about your actual health. Your body weight isn't the only thing matters.
Find a thread, any thread (if it happens as often as you say then it shouldn't be hard) where someone asks about challenges with losing weight, and all the responses say that "eat whatever you want, CICO is all that matters" and no one mentions health, nutrition, and satiety.
People constantly suggest that this happens and I've yet to have someone come back with an actual thread where it does.
I know there is one somewhere.
Cuz I posted it to make a point
I thought I found it but no, not this one. http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10451302/eat-whatever-you-want-and-lose-weight/p1
Still looking, I know it is out there.
LOL. Thanks for proving my point.
The poster you were quoting was trying to find a thread where no one brought up the importance of good nutrition in the context of using CICO (energy balance) to lose weight. They are saying that they still can't find it after searching. I notice you haven't posted an example either, even though you said it happens all the time in this "culture of conformity".
I didn't need to. There are two prime examples linked in this thread. The one you mention here. Literally, no valuable discussion regarding nutrition and health in either one. Just a bunch of, yay I can eat pizza, ice cream, and drink wine.
Do you have any idea, how many people in this world think that if you eat pizza, ice cream, and wine, you can't possibly lose weight? Who have been fed so much misinformation about how hard weight loss is, how you have to cut out your favorite foods in order to succeed, how you must eat healthy all the time or you won't be healthy - and therefore, they either start and give up or they never even try to lose weight.
For those countless people, who stumble onto these forums, who have this misconception that they can never eat a ice cream again, or enjoy pizza night with their kids, or have a glass of wine at book club - it is tremendously important that they understand that those things are not true - that you can lose weight and still enjoy your favorite foods, that one of the biggest improvements in health markers comes from being at a healthy weight, regardless of the type of foods you are eating. And then do you know how many of those people find that information liberating, and finally are able to succeed in something they've struggled with for years, or decades? Do you know how many of those people then go on to try to improve their nutrition, their fitness level, their overall health?
Because I do... I've seen them, time and again on these boards. I've seen the ones who felt defeated and finally feel optimistic. Who lose weight AND get to keep eating their favorite foods, AND focus on nutrition also.
I've also seen people like you time and again, who think that anyone who isn't encouraging people to eat a perfect diet, nothing but clean foods, nothing processed, no junk - telling people they should kill it in the gym, get shredded, why waste time walking for exercise, or that if we tell someone exercise isn't required to lose weight then we are encouraging laziness. As if we are all just cultivating this lifestyle of unhealthy, donut eating couch potatoes who happen to lose weight but have no interest in health in the process. People like you think that every single post made on these boards needs to focus on encouraging perfection, because heaven forbid someone just wants to improve, but they also want to enjoy life.
Funny enough, the ones who stick around, and are trying to really help others, are the ones in the first category. The people like you who suggest that anyone not bringing optimal nutrition into every single "is a calorie just a calorie" post is part of some cult... never seem to stick around.
So yeah, I'll continue to eat ice cream and pizza, and drink wine in moderation as part of an overall balanced diet, after achieving my weight loss goals and maintaining that healthy weight - get my 15K steps in at a slow pace, play with my kids instead of killing it at the gym, and continue to try to find fulfillment here as part of a member of this community.
Enjoy your broscience up there on your high horse. I'm sure the view is quite nice.
It was revolutionary for me when I realized that I could reach my weight and fitness goals while still sometimes enjoying pizza and wine. It wasn't an either/or.
I have no doubt that I am healthier now, 40 pounds lighter and exercising more consistently, than I was when cycling back and forth between food restriction and eating too much (because why bother if I can't be perfect?).
So yeah, I tell new people that. Because I needed to hear it. There are so many voices in our society spouting pseudo-science about weight loss or making people think they shouldn't even try if they can't eliminate all their favorite foods. There are people saying that if you sometimes have ice cream, you must not care about nutrition. That's why these things need to be said.17 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Eating processed foods, carbs and sugar really do make me feel like garbage. I don't think I am alone in this. It is WAY easier to eat vegetables, eggs, lean meat and water only if you are going for a steep cut (2lbs+ per week). With a clean diet I can go to bed full on 1700 calories easy (1200 cal deficit). I can't imagine getting through a day after having a 400+ calorie sugary snack. I would wake up the next day with a sugar hangover unable to move. Whatever keeps you sane though.
Calories in-- calories out means everything though. I maintain and gain weight on the same foods, just more volume (and a lot of added butter!)
Nope - my greek yogurt with prepackaged granola and berries, my soup made with frozen vegetables, boxed chicken broth, lean ground beef, dried pasta and canned tomatoes do not make me feel like garbage. Nor does pizza, wine, and ice cream; eaten in moderation as part of an overall calorie appropriate diet. Nor is a 1200 calorie deficit appropriate for me or for most people - I'm already at a healthy weight, and even when I was losing, 0.5lb-1 lb /week was the rate of loss appropriate for my goals.
yogurt, broth, frozen veggies and beef certainly are not junk foods nor are they processed-- just canned, frozen etc.
Of course they are processed. What do you think processed means?I am glad that you can enjoy ice cream and pizza.
I'll note that neither of these is necessarily more processed than yogurt or smoked salmon or butter.
I make pizza at home on occasion, and while I don't grind the grain myself you can get a home grinder if you are that into "no processed." Beyond that, the ingredients are water and yeast (the crust), olive oil (processed, of course, but you could find a way to do without), garlic, tomatoes, whatever vegetables you add, whatever meat you add (I don't like meat on pizza, so don't, but have made pizzas for others with chicken, gotten them with shrimp at a cool local pizza place, so on). Oh, and usually cheese, which is about as processed as butter or yogurt.
Ice cream is even easier, as you can make it with cream, fruit, perhaps an egg, perhaps some milk, and whatever spices you want. Yes, it normally has sugar (although I used to make some low carb ice cream without it), but you can use honey or syrup for the sweetener.
So the focus on "processed food" seems kind of irrelevant to nutrients or whether food is high cal for the satiety or whatever.
I, like WinoGelato, don't find ice cream makes me feel bad at all, in a reasonable amount. I ate about 200 cal worth regularly when losing (I had exercise calories and otherwise ate a ton of vegetables and kept my protein up, so why not?).
Pizza is exactly as healthy/nutrient dense/caloric as you make it. I don't find it too different from pasta the way I make it (lots of vegetables), except not having meat on mine makes it harder to get enough protein so I usually have something else with it (also often have salad with it) or have extra protein in my other meals that day. (I do like an egg and ham and arugula on pizza, usually with something like asparagus or artichoke hearts).
Anyway, it doesn't make me feel bad.
Lower nutrient pizza choices in excess, without a sufficiently varied diet otherwise? Sure that would make me feel bad, but nothing unique about pizza.
Our disagreement is in semantics.
Half the threads on here are about people falling off the wagon after following IIFYM. I wonder why?
Strong cope on here. Enjoy your mediocrity goals of 2018.23 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Eating processed foods, carbs and sugar really do make me feel like garbage. I don't think I am alone in this. It is WAY easier to eat vegetables, eggs, lean meat and water only if you are going for a steep cut (2lbs+ per week). With a clean diet I can go to bed full on 1700 calories easy (1200 cal deficit). I can't imagine getting through a day after having a 400+ calorie sugary snack. I would wake up the next day with a sugar hangover unable to move. Whatever keeps you sane though.
Calories in-- calories out means everything though. I maintain and gain weight on the same foods, just more volume (and a lot of added butter!)
Vegetables have carbohydrates.
Also, fruit is one of the foods highest in carbs by percentage, and yet few people claim to feel like garbage because they eat fruit. So yeah, I do think that's kind of unusual, although there are others who claim carbs in general make them feel bad.
Of course, most of the healthiest human diets (the blue zones) are reasonably high carb.
and high in fiber.2 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Eating processed foods, carbs and sugar really do make me feel like garbage. I don't think I am alone in this. It is WAY easier to eat vegetables, eggs, lean meat and water only if you are going for a steep cut (2lbs+ per week). With a clean diet I can go to bed full on 1700 calories easy (1200 cal deficit). I can't imagine getting through a day after having a 400+ calorie sugary snack. I would wake up the next day with a sugar hangover unable to move. Whatever keeps you sane though.
Calories in-- calories out means everything though. I maintain and gain weight on the same foods, just more volume (and a lot of added butter!)
Nope - my greek yogurt with prepackaged granola and berries, my soup made with frozen vegetables, boxed chicken broth, lean ground beef, dried pasta and canned tomatoes do not make me feel like garbage. Nor does pizza, wine, and ice cream; eaten in moderation as part of an overall calorie appropriate diet. Nor is a 1200 calorie deficit appropriate for me or for most people - I'm already at a healthy weight, and even when I was losing, 0.5lb-1 lb /week was the rate of loss appropriate for my goals.
yogurt, broth, frozen veggies and beef certainly are not junk foods nor are they processed-- just canned, frozen etc.
Of course they are processed. What do you think processed means?I am glad that you can enjoy ice cream and pizza.
I'll note that neither of these is necessarily more processed than yogurt or smoked salmon or butter.
I make pizza at home on occasion, and while I don't grind the grain myself you can get a home grinder if you are that into "no processed." Beyond that, the ingredients are water and yeast (the crust), olive oil (processed, of course, but you could find a way to do without), garlic, tomatoes, whatever vegetables you add, whatever meat you add (I don't like meat on pizza, so don't, but have made pizzas for others with chicken, gotten them with shrimp at a cool local pizza place, so on). Oh, and usually cheese, which is about as processed as butter or yogurt.
Ice cream is even easier, as you can make it with cream, fruit, perhaps an egg, perhaps some milk, and whatever spices you want. Yes, it normally has sugar (although I used to make some low carb ice cream without it), but you can use honey or syrup for the sweetener.
So the focus on "processed food" seems kind of irrelevant to nutrients or whether food is high cal for the satiety or whatever.
I, like WinoGelato, don't find ice cream makes me feel bad at all, in a reasonable amount. I ate about 200 cal worth regularly when losing (I had exercise calories and otherwise ate a ton of vegetables and kept my protein up, so why not?).
Pizza is exactly as healthy/nutrient dense/caloric as you make it. I don't find it too different from pasta the way I make it (lots of vegetables), except not having meat on mine makes it harder to get enough protein so I usually have something else with it (also often have salad with it) or have extra protein in my other meals that day. (I do like an egg and ham and arugula on pizza, usually with something like asparagus or artichoke hearts).
Anyway, it doesn't make me feel bad.
Lower nutrient pizza choices in excess, without a sufficiently varied diet otherwise? Sure that would make me feel bad, but nothing unique about pizza.
Our disagreement is in semantics.
Half the threads on here are about people falling off the wagon after following IIFYM. I wonder why?
Strong cope on here. Enjoy your mediocrity goals of 2018.
Because all types of diet plans, including plans like yours that require you to eliminate wide swaths of food, have relatively poor adherence rates?
Do you really think people are *more likely* to stay on a plan that requires them to never have pizza or ice cream again?16 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Eating processed foods, carbs and sugar really do make me feel like garbage. I don't think I am alone in this. It is WAY easier to eat vegetables, eggs, lean meat and water only if you are going for a steep cut (2lbs+ per week). With a clean diet I can go to bed full on 1700 calories easy (1200 cal deficit). I can't imagine getting through a day after having a 400+ calorie sugary snack. I would wake up the next day with a sugar hangover unable to move. Whatever keeps you sane though.
Calories in-- calories out means everything though. I maintain and gain weight on the same foods, just more volume (and a lot of added butter!)
Nope - my greek yogurt with prepackaged granola and berries, my soup made with frozen vegetables, boxed chicken broth, lean ground beef, dried pasta and canned tomatoes do not make me feel like garbage. Nor does pizza, wine, and ice cream; eaten in moderation as part of an overall calorie appropriate diet. Nor is a 1200 calorie deficit appropriate for me or for most people - I'm already at a healthy weight, and even when I was losing, 0.5lb-1 lb /week was the rate of loss appropriate for my goals.
yogurt, broth, frozen veggies and beef certainly are not junk foods nor are they processed-- just canned, frozen etc.
Of course they are processed. What do you think processed means?I am glad that you can enjoy ice cream and pizza.
I'll note that neither of these is necessarily more processed than yogurt or smoked salmon or butter.
I make pizza at home on occasion, and while I don't grind the grain myself you can get a home grinder if you are that into "no processed." Beyond that, the ingredients are water and yeast (the crust), olive oil (processed, of course, but you could find a way to do without), garlic, tomatoes, whatever vegetables you add, whatever meat you add (I don't like meat on pizza, so don't, but have made pizzas for others with chicken, gotten them with shrimp at a cool local pizza place, so on). Oh, and usually cheese, which is about as processed as butter or yogurt.
Ice cream is even easier, as you can make it with cream, fruit, perhaps an egg, perhaps some milk, and whatever spices you want. Yes, it normally has sugar (although I used to make some low carb ice cream without it), but you can use honey or syrup for the sweetener.
So the focus on "processed food" seems kind of irrelevant to nutrients or whether food is high cal for the satiety or whatever.
I, like WinoGelato, don't find ice cream makes me feel bad at all, in a reasonable amount. I ate about 200 cal worth regularly when losing (I had exercise calories and otherwise ate a ton of vegetables and kept my protein up, so why not?).
Pizza is exactly as healthy/nutrient dense/caloric as you make it. I don't find it too different from pasta the way I make it (lots of vegetables), except not having meat on mine makes it harder to get enough protein so I usually have something else with it (also often have salad with it) or have extra protein in my other meals that day. (I do like an egg and ham and arugula on pizza, usually with something like asparagus or artichoke hearts).
Anyway, it doesn't make me feel bad.
Lower nutrient pizza choices in excess, without a sufficiently varied diet otherwise? Sure that would make me feel bad, but nothing unique about pizza.
Our disagreement is in semantics.
Half the threads on here are about people falling off the wagon after following IIFYM. I wonder why?
Strong cope on here. Enjoy your mediocrity goals of 2018.
I would argue that those that are overly strict as you suggest are the ones that fall off the wagon at a much higher rate, due to feeling deprived.
You realize what you are arguing over the IIFYM people is very minuscule and at best may push you 0.5-1% closer to your goals then if you were more lenient but still hit the same calories and macros. You seem to be majoring in the minors, when most of the people on this journey would be much better off by focusing on and understanding the "majors"14 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Eating processed foods, carbs and sugar really do make me feel like garbage. I don't think I am alone in this. It is WAY easier to eat vegetables, eggs, lean meat and water only if you are going for a steep cut (2lbs+ per week). With a clean diet I can go to bed full on 1700 calories easy (1200 cal deficit). I can't imagine getting through a day after having a 400+ calorie sugary snack. I would wake up the next day with a sugar hangover unable to move. Whatever keeps you sane though.
Calories in-- calories out means everything though. I maintain and gain weight on the same foods, just more volume (and a lot of added butter!)
Vegetables have carbohydrates.
Also, fruit is one of the foods highest in carbs by percentage, and yet few people claim to feel like garbage because they eat fruit. So yeah, I do think that's kind of unusual, although there are others who claim carbs in general make them feel bad.
Of course, most of the healthiest human diets (the blue zones) are reasonably high carb.
and high in fiber.
What does this have to do with you claiming that carbohydrates make you feel like garbage?7 -
Everyone agrees (or should) that you can only lose weight if you achieve an energy deficit. Anything else is literally impossible. No argument there. My objection is to those who reflexively respond with comments like “you’re eating more than you think you are” in response to requests for help from individuals who are having difficulty losing weight. This quote from the post quoted above captures what I’ve been trying to say:
“The research, however, is very clear: not everybody has it as easy as some folks do. Some people’s bodies are, in fact, demonstrably more resistant to weight loss (or gain) than others. Not that they can’t lose (or gain) weight but it comes off or on more slowly. More accurately, their bodies fight back harder.
Researchers call these folks Diet Resistant and the reasons behind this resistance is just starting to be determined. It probably has to do with how these individuals brains perceive changes in caloric intake which determines how their brains react to those changes. Some people’s bodies simply increase metabolic rate more quickly (or drop it more quickly) in response to increased or decreased calories. You can see similar variations in terms of what’s lost during dieting; given the same diet and exercise program, some people will lose a lot more muscle than another.”
So given that individuals respond differently to identical levels of energy deficit, suggestions to cut calories further, or increase exercise significantly, can be unhelpful. The research is pretty clear that the metabolic adaptation to weight loss is proportional to the energy deficit. In other words, the greater the caloric restriction or energy deficit, the harder the body will fight back to maintain weight. And some individual’s bodies will simply fight back harder than others. Even if they manage to lose weight, those metabolic adaptations will make it extremely difficult to maintain the weight loss. For those individuals a slower weight loss at less of an energy deficit will be more effective, more likely to be tolerated, and hopefully result in sustained weight loss. So suggestions to 230 pound men with a BMR of 1800 and TDEE of 2500 to cut calories to 1500/day are not only dangerous, they are also likely unhelpful. And unfortunately I’ve seen this advice on this forum more than once, with CICO as the justification. It might be more helpful to suggest that they measure and weigh carefully for a week and ensure that they’re eating what they think they are, and if they actually are eating consistently below their BMR, try increasing calories to 500 below TDEE for a month and see how it goes.
Look, I'm sure there are unfortunately threads that only get one ore two newbie replies and then sink down the recent posts list with no good advice, especially in the Introductions and Getting Started threads. But the overall stance of this community is that the key is to tighten up your logging, reconsider your exercise burns, open your diary for help, and consider diet breaks. Mis-characterizing what goes on here doesn't seem like a great choice, considering this thread in particular is full of posters who give the very advice you're claiming is lacking.
I apologize for quoting myself
but I felt the bolded bears repeating as this train wreck evolves. 13 -
janejellyroll wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Eating processed foods, carbs and sugar really do make me feel like garbage. I don't think I am alone in this. It is WAY easier to eat vegetables, eggs, lean meat and water only if you are going for a steep cut (2lbs+ per week). With a clean diet I can go to bed full on 1700 calories easy (1200 cal deficit). I can't imagine getting through a day after having a 400+ calorie sugary snack. I would wake up the next day with a sugar hangover unable to move. Whatever keeps you sane though.
Calories in-- calories out means everything though. I maintain and gain weight on the same foods, just more volume (and a lot of added butter!)
Vegetables have carbohydrates.
Also, fruit is one of the foods highest in carbs by percentage, and yet few people claim to feel like garbage because they eat fruit. So yeah, I do think that's kind of unusual, although there are others who claim carbs in general make them feel bad.
Of course, most of the healthiest human diets (the blue zones) are reasonably high carb.
and high in fiber.
What does this have to do with you claiming that carbohydrates make you feel like garbage?
The main difference between eating bread and broccoli is the fiber. It is a lot about glucose spikes. It has also been shown that diets absent of fiber create breeding grounds for an unhealthy micro-biome. A lot of it comes down to inflammation.26
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K 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
- 426 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
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions