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.
"No calorie-counting needed, just "eat intuitively" folks!"
Replies
-
Aaron_K123 wrote: »concordancia wrote: »PiperGirl08 wrote: »I don’t have a problem with the statements. But a lot of people who wind up dieting don’t know how to eat instinctively so it won’t work absent a tool that helps them learn. She is also correct in that a mostly plant based diet allows for increased volumes with far fewer calories. For example, a plateful of spinach vs a couple of crackers.
You do know that grains are plants, right?
Maybe they were animal crackers.
You people....arguing with scientists and what not. *disapproving head shake* If you keep that up...
8 -
There are many things factually wrong about eating intuitively to either lose weight, or maintain your current size, that it's kind of hard to know where to start. But giving it a go...
The main issue seems to be the faulty premise that intuitively eating will help you get to, or stay at, a healthy weight. but that presumes the body will naturally gravitate to a certain 'healthy' weight if we just paid attention to our hunger signals, and made certain eating choices.
This is simply flat out wrong, or at least, the presumption of what weight our body's gravitate towards is wrong. The human body is always trying to prevent the loss of calories, and best case scenario (far as our bodies are concerned) it's trying to GAIN them. Which is why it is so much easier to gain weight than to lose it for most of us; we are going against our body's natural impulses when we do so.
Because as far as the body is concerned, the goal is to be 'fat enough to survive the famine that would, if we didn't live in a first world country, hit during the winter when food is scarce.' The research out there seems to support this. I mean, heck, just look at leptins. They go down when we lose weight. When they go down, our hunger and appetite go UP. Listening to hunger impulses in this case just means we stop ourselves from losing more weight, that's all.
Since we don't have that yearly, or even periodic, scarcity, then our body's goals and our goals (if we want a healthy weight) are not the same.
And that's not even touching on a lot of the factual issues with this diet, among them the presumption that everyone has a functional hunger impulse system (which is like people believing that the ONLY way to get healthy is to walk, and then ignoring how many people in the world have mobility issues).
Which in the end is kind of sad, because paying more attention to our bodies is, IMHO, perfectly valid in many cases. It actually has helped in some cases when it comes to trying to get certain nutrients, or how people want to kind of hole up when they are very ill. But we can't assume that our bodies will react in ways that are always valid in the society we live in now, even if we'd like that to be true.10 -
eleonora1809 wrote: »I think it works for some people but definitely not me. If I eat intuitively, I don’t lose weight but maintain instead.
This is me totally also.2 -
when I'm PMSing... I Intuitively want to eat 14 donuts, 3 bags of chips and a crap tonne of salsa / sour cream.
I don't think I intuit very well.
Maybe my intuit is broken?
This also applies... when I'm emotionally frustrated, angry, celebrating, sad, depressed...
and maybe also when I'm breathing, awake, sleeping... oh, and also when my kids have leftovers... that's when practicality and "starving kids in africa" mentality sneaks in.
ok ok... my entire consciousness is screaming for too much food.
nope.. intuit is not an advisable method for me.
Good for those who can do it, though!19 -
If I ate intuitively I would hardly ever eat at all. I don't have an appetite or hunger signals atm (thanks to gastroparesis)6
-
singingflutelady wrote: »If I ate intuitively I would hardly ever eat at all. I don't have an appetite or hunger signals atm (thanks to gastroparesis)
Same here due to Crohn's. I'm only able to eat without counting now because I figured out correct portions, not because of intuition.5 -
If I did not log and weigh everything I ate I would not of lost 100lbs, I went through a stupid thing of not logging Saturdays as its my cheat day and would gain a stupid amount, I know 90% of it was water weight but still sucks, I cannot trust myself to eat intuitively, It also annoys me when people say that logging calories in and out is boring hence they don't do it then they wonder why they have not lost in the past few months, each to their own and all that but calorie counting is the best method and its free.3
-
I tried managing my weight without calorie counting for 15 years. I did lose weight sometimes and the regained it. My hunger/full signals are not trustworthy tools. Calorie counting/tracking has been the easiest most consistant way I've found to manage my weight. It has freed me from doing strict diets and a lot of frustration. For a lot of people tracking calorie intake is a very valuable tool to figuring out how much they should be eating for their activity level. It really is not a tedious habit any more than regular exercise or brushing your teeth.
I don't think everyone needs to count calories to lose weight. My dh did not. He also did not change to a plant based diet or remove processed foods or exercise a bunch. He just ate less. Calorie counting, switching to eating lower calorie foods, eating smaller portions, eating once a day, eating 6 times a day, not eating after dinner, changing activity level, paying more attention to hunger cues are all ways you might change your CICO. I really doubt that someone counting calories is sabatoging their progress even if it is tedious for them.
I think the article is buying into the idea that people gain weight only by eating certain foods or binge eating. You can gain weight by consistantly eating or drinking a couple hundred calories over your maintenance level though. That could be one fancy coffee a day. You might not feel full until after you have overeaten that small amount.3 -
BishopWankapin wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »concordancia wrote: »PiperGirl08 wrote: »I don’t have a problem with the statements. But a lot of people who wind up dieting don’t know how to eat instinctively so it won’t work absent a tool that helps them learn. She is also correct in that a mostly plant based diet allows for increased volumes with far fewer calories. For example, a plateful of spinach vs a couple of crackers.
You do know that grains are plants, right?
Maybe they were animal crackers.
You people....arguing with scientists and what not. *disapproving head shake* If you keep that up...
Speaking as a professional scientist one should never rest on the letters behind their name. You either present a cogent, rational, objective evidence based argument...or you have an uninformed opinion. Like the seven stages of grief there's a similar process one's mind goes through when proven wrong.10 -
I don’t disagree with those statements and i do think logging calories is tedious and I don’t like the idea of keeping a food diary for the rest of my life. But when I try to eat “intuitively” I eat like everything in the house. I would love to be able to eat reasonably and sensibly without tracking. Maybe I will get there some day.2
-
no meat 6 -
smoothies....fruits and veggies and calorie bombs waiting to happen to the unaware
and you can't have my steak. mine!1 -
I will do what works for me to maintain my weight (which happens to be calorie counting).
I just wish others were not so insistent that I'm not doing it right and I should be doing it their way.9 -
-
Meh. One person's "indefinitely tethered to tedious habits and inflexible rules" is another person's liberating habit.
A health and fitness blogger's got to preach something, though . . . and if they don't say their way is the one true way, they're not going to draw as many acolytes. Acolytes = eyeballs = ad revenue = income.
"Do what works for you; here are 10 options." doesn't sell nearly as well.
12 -
I was counting calories for the last 3 months on this leg of my weight loss. I was weighing & logging every single morsel that went into my mouth. And, even though I'm a toss a bit of this and a bit of that into a pot type of cook, I was weighing and counting that too. But it got to a point recently where I was constantly thinking about calories and getting borderline obsessive with it. I actually had a dream that I was entering calories into MFP all night long. It was getting to be too tedious and kind of was getting to me. I just can't picture that being my life forever. Maybe it's just because I'm not a huge numbers person, but it kind of stresses me out. I was also finding myself eating extra calories because they were available, and not because I was hungry or felt I needed them. Which did not help me out on days where my appetite spiked and I ate over goal. Enter intuitive eating. I have lost successfully before using a "hunger scale" to rate my hunger or satiety levels when I eat something. Usually when I'm not successful it's because I'm paying more attention to my what my mind wants, and not what my body actually needs. Like eating because I want it or finishing my meal because it's in front of me & not because I'm full. I can post what I use if anyone is interested. But, you can find some different variations of the hunger scale online. For weight loss, you want to eat until you are slightly satisfied instead of full. And rarely (or never) eat until you're sickly full. Try not to eat if you're not very hungry, but don't wait until you're starving either. I'm trying this out for a while to see how I do. If the weight creeps back up, or I find I'm not holding myself accountable and just eating food because I want to I'll be back to calorie counting. It does bother me that calorie counting is often made out to be some fad diet made to guarantee failure though. It is an invaluable tool to find out what exactly you are eating, where you're macros are at, and what proper portions should look like.
5 -
BishopWankapin wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »concordancia wrote: »PiperGirl08 wrote: »I don’t have a problem with the statements. But a lot of people who wind up dieting don’t know how to eat instinctively so it won’t work absent a tool that helps them learn. She is also correct in that a mostly plant based diet allows for increased volumes with far fewer calories. For example, a plateful of spinach vs a couple of crackers.
You do know that grains are plants, right?
Maybe they were animal crackers.
You people....arguing with scientists and what not. *disapproving head shake* If you keep that up...
Speaking as a professional scientist one should never rest on the letters behind their name. You either present a cogent, rational, objective evidence based argument...or you have an uninformed opinion. Like the seven stages of grief there's a similar process one's mind goes through when proven wrong.
The only mail I get with "Dr." in front of my name is junk mail. Anyone who actually wants to talk to me doesn't bother with that shite.7 -
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K 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
- 387 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
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 901 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions