A different approach....
Replies
-
janejellyroll wrote: »
I agree that some pay attention to calories and nothing else. They don't understand nutrition and don't care to understand nutrition. Losing weight, in and of itself, can accomplish a lot health-wise no matter how you get there.TavistockToad wrote: »
To be honest, I see a fair few people who eat to their calories but with little to no fruit and veg. It's not as unheard of as your think.I'm not laughing at the original poster, but it makes me giggle to think about someone logging but giving zero *kittens* about nutrition. I think anyone who cares enough to log regularly also cares about their overall health. Obviously there are people who are further along in their journey and some who are still working to eliminate the "unhealthy" foods or trying balance they're ratio of nutrient dense and fun foods, but the forethought is still there.
People who count calories can cover the whole spectrum from IDGAF about nutrition to hyper-aware of nutrition, macros, and which foods are satiating.
To be fair, these people probably were not understanding nutrition before they began counting calories. So they're still potentially better off not caring about nutrition and losing weight than they are not caring about nutrition and being overweight.
I wouldn't disagree with that.2 -
I agree that some pay attention to calories and nothing else. They don't understand nutrition and don't care to understand nutrition. Losing weight, in and of itself, can accomplish a lot health-wise no matter how you get there.
People who count calories can cover the whole spectrum from IDGAF about nutrition to hyper-aware of nutrition, macros, and which foods are satiating.[/quote]
To be fair, these people probably were not understanding nutrition before they began counting calories. So they're still potentially better off not caring about nutrition and losing weight than they are not caring about nutrition and being overweight.[/quote]
I know they are out there. I had a friend who got weight loss surgery and was told before the surgery that they had to lose X smount of weight before the surgery. They limited they're Callie's but still are mostly pizza and and fried foods. Got the surgery and didn't really change what they are but we're still able to lose the weight. I'm glad that they lost the weight to improve they're health at all so they could be there for their kids.
I know that there are people that legitimately don't know about nutrition. It's like sex ed. There are areas of the US where these things aren't really and misinformation is spread like wildfire. And I know there are people who have access to the information but have issues surrounding food and weight that need to be dealt with, but instead of dealing with it they easy 1200 calories of pizza and French fries every day.
I also want to believe that anyone that makes a genuine effort to get healthier actually makes it happen. I'm a hopeful realist with a cynical, helpful heart. 😔1 -
annamj2000 wrote: »I’ve been reading books by Dr Jason Fung (The Obesity Code) and Dr Micheal Mosley (8 week blood sugar diet) and have to say this way of thinking about food is a breath of fresh air to me. I’m a short girl so shifting this last stone is proving v difficult. I’ve decided instead of CICO eating whatever I want or a particular diet I’m going to focus on more of a low carb, high fat (full fat cheese, cream etc) less processed food and ditching the snacking. Keeping my insulin levels as low as possible.
In fairness to see both sides of the coin, this may be worth a read - it explains why Fung is full of BS and is considered a quack and a laughingstock amongst evidence-based nutrition experts (with plenty of scientific research linked): https://www.myoleanfitness.com/evidence-caloric-restriction/5 -
TavistockToad wrote: »I'm not laughing at the original poster, but it makes me giggle to think about someone logging but giving zero *kittens* about nutrition. I think anyone who cares enough to log regularly also cares about their overall health. Obviously there are people who are further along in their journey and some who are still working to eliminate the "unhealthy" foods or trying balance they're ratio of nutrient dense and fun foods, but the forethought is still there.
To be honest, I see a fair few people who eat to their calories but with little to no fruit and veg. It's not as unheard of as your think.
I thought I had my food diary locked
It's just for today, I swear!! I'll eat some spinach tomorrow. 7 -
WinoGelato wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »annamj2000 wrote: »Thank you for the replies. I just wanted a healthier approach to eating as opposed to the ‘track every calorie regardless of nutritional content’ approach. I want to eat food that won’t have my insulin shooting for the roof and keep me satisfied for longer. I want to lower my carbs but by no means cut them out, I would be miserable! I’m going to carry on tracking as skram01 suggested so as to not go way over my calories with the higher fat foods.
I don't think most people track every calorie without any regard to nutrition. I will be tracking calories forever. I don't think that's unhealthy. I've just been overweight most of my life, so several months of tracking won't "fix" me.
The bolded is important. For some reason, people think that because we don't eat by a specific diet and "just" count calories, this means we don't care about anything else. It's really weird to me! You can eat more than enough lean protein, healthy fat, fiber, and nutrition, and then have a weighed out bowl of ice cream after dinner since nothing is "banned". No one here advocates eating nothing but snack foods purchased at the gas station. Just that you could if for some reason you wanted to and still lose weight. You'd feel like *kitten*, but that's not what we're talking about when we talk about CICO.
If the posts here are any indication, virtually every long-term user who isn't on an official "plan" is still making choices that consider meeting macro- and micro-nutrient needs, what meal timing works best for them, what foods promote satiety, and what works with their lifestyle. Nobody is just pulling up to the Taco Bell drive-through on the regular, ordering 1,800 calories of cinnamon twists, nacho fries, and steak burritos, and calling it a day.
This is the second time today someone has referenced Taco Bell as it pertains to a (misconstrued) dietary staple for those following CICO (which is everyone in the world). I haven't eaten at Taco Bell in probably 5+ years but I feel the Gods are trying to tell me something. Tomorrow, I will likely recall why I haven't eaten at Taco Bell in half a decade or more...
I go maybe once a month, with friends who like it.
Veggie power bowl, minus rice, extra black beans: 380 calories, 15g p, 17g f, 43g c, 17g fiber. Decent vit A, C, calcium, iron. Add pintos & cheese at 190 cal, 10g p, 7g f, 22g c, 7g fiber, and more micros. A boatload of the hottest hot sauce adds negligible calories/nutrition, and sodium is my jam anyway (BP is fine).
I fail to see a problem.
6 -
WinoGelato wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »annamj2000 wrote: »Thank you for the replies. I just wanted a healthier approach to eating as opposed to the ‘track every calorie regardless of nutritional content’ approach. I want to eat food that won’t have my insulin shooting for the roof and keep me satisfied for longer. I want to lower my carbs but by no means cut them out, I would be miserable! I’m going to carry on tracking as skram01 suggested so as to not go way over my calories with the higher fat foods.
I don't think most people track every calorie without any regard to nutrition. I will be tracking calories forever. I don't think that's unhealthy. I've just been overweight most of my life, so several months of tracking won't "fix" me.
The bolded is important. For some reason, people think that because we don't eat by a specific diet and "just" count calories, this means we don't care about anything else. It's really weird to me! You can eat more than enough lean protein, healthy fat, fiber, and nutrition, and then have a weighed out bowl of ice cream after dinner since nothing is "banned". No one here advocates eating nothing but snack foods purchased at the gas station. Just that you could if for some reason you wanted to and still lose weight. You'd feel like *kitten*, but that's not what we're talking about when we talk about CICO.
If the posts here are any indication, virtually every long-term user who isn't on an official "plan" is still making choices that consider meeting macro- and micro-nutrient needs, what meal timing works best for them, what foods promote satiety, and what works with their lifestyle. Nobody is just pulling up to the Taco Bell drive-through on the regular, ordering 1,800 calories of cinnamon twists, nacho fries, and steak burritos, and calling it a day.
This is the second time today someone has referenced Taco Bell as it pertains to a (misconstrued) dietary staple for those following CICO (which is everyone in the world). I haven't eaten at Taco Bell in probably 5+ years but I feel the Gods are trying to tell me something. Tomorrow, I will likely recall why I haven't eaten at Taco Bell in half a decade or more...
I go maybe once a month, with friends who like it.
Veggie power bowl, minus rice, extra black beans: 380 calories, 15g p, 17g f, 43g c, 17g fiber. Decent vit A, C, calcium, iron. Add pintos & cheese at 190 cal, 10g p, 7g f, 22g c, 7g fiber, and more micros. A boatload of the hottest hot sauce adds negligible calories/nutrition, and sodium is my jam anyway (BP is fine).
I fail to see a problem.
It's likely the final outcome that occurs for someone who rarely eats it.
2 -
WinoGelato wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »annamj2000 wrote: »Thank you for the replies. I just wanted a healthier approach to eating as opposed to the ‘track every calorie regardless of nutritional content’ approach. I want to eat food that won’t have my insulin shooting for the roof and keep me satisfied for longer. I want to lower my carbs but by no means cut them out, I would be miserable! I’m going to carry on tracking as skram01 suggested so as to not go way over my calories with the higher fat foods.
I don't think most people track every calorie without any regard to nutrition. I will be tracking calories forever. I don't think that's unhealthy. I've just been overweight most of my life, so several months of tracking won't "fix" me.
The bolded is important. For some reason, people think that because we don't eat by a specific diet and "just" count calories, this means we don't care about anything else. It's really weird to me! You can eat more than enough lean protein, healthy fat, fiber, and nutrition, and then have a weighed out bowl of ice cream after dinner since nothing is "banned". No one here advocates eating nothing but snack foods purchased at the gas station. Just that you could if for some reason you wanted to and still lose weight. You'd feel like *kitten*, but that's not what we're talking about when we talk about CICO.
If the posts here are any indication, virtually every long-term user who isn't on an official "plan" is still making choices that consider meeting macro- and micro-nutrient needs, what meal timing works best for them, what foods promote satiety, and what works with their lifestyle. Nobody is just pulling up to the Taco Bell drive-through on the regular, ordering 1,800 calories of cinnamon twists, nacho fries, and steak burritos, and calling it a day.
This is the second time today someone has referenced Taco Bell as it pertains to a (misconstrued) dietary staple for those following CICO (which is everyone in the world). I haven't eaten at Taco Bell in probably 5+ years but I feel the Gods are trying to tell me something. Tomorrow, I will likely recall why I haven't eaten at Taco Bell in half a decade or more...
I go maybe once a month, with friends who like it.
Veggie power bowl, minus rice, extra black beans: 380 calories, 15g p, 17g f, 43g c, 17g fiber. Decent vit A, C, calcium, iron. Add pintos & cheese at 190 cal, 10g p, 7g f, 22g c, 7g fiber, and more micros. A boatload of the hottest hot sauce adds negligible calories/nutrition, and sodium is my jam anyway (BP is fine).
I fail to see a problem.
My issue is more of the lower GI kind than a concern about the macros! I haven’t tried any of those power bowls - I was always more of a nacho surpreme gal. Maybe that was the issue...2 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »annamj2000 wrote: »Thank you for the replies. I just wanted a healthier approach to eating as opposed to the ‘track every calorie regardless of nutritional content’ approach. I want to eat food that won’t have my insulin shooting for the roof and keep me satisfied for longer. I want to lower my carbs but by no means cut them out, I would be miserable! I’m going to carry on tracking as skram01 suggested so as to not go way over my calories with the higher fat foods.
I don't think most people track every calorie without any regard to nutrition. I will be tracking calories forever. I don't think that's unhealthy. I've just been overweight most of my life, so several months of tracking won't "fix" me.
The bolded is important. For some reason, people think that because we don't eat by a specific diet and "just" count calories, this means we don't care about anything else. It's really weird to me! You can eat more than enough lean protein, healthy fat, fiber, and nutrition, and then have a weighed out bowl of ice cream after dinner since nothing is "banned". No one here advocates eating nothing but snack foods purchased at the gas station. Just that you could if for some reason you wanted to and still lose weight. You'd feel like *kitten*, but that's not what we're talking about when we talk about CICO.
If the posts here are any indication, virtually every long-term user who isn't on an official "plan" is still making choices that consider meeting macro- and micro-nutrient needs, what meal timing works best for them, what foods promote satiety, and what works with their lifestyle. Nobody is just pulling up to the Taco Bell drive-through on the regular, ordering 1,800 calories of cinnamon twists, nacho fries, and steak burritos, and calling it a day.
This is the second time today someone has referenced Taco Bell as it pertains to a (misconstrued) dietary staple for those following CICO (which is everyone in the world). I haven't eaten at Taco Bell in probably 5+ years but I feel the Gods are trying to tell me something. Tomorrow, I will likely recall why I haven't eaten at Taco Bell in half a decade or more...
I go maybe once a month, with friends who like it.
Veggie power bowl, minus rice, extra black beans: 380 calories, 15g p, 17g f, 43g c, 17g fiber. Decent vit A, C, calcium, iron. Add pintos & cheese at 190 cal, 10g p, 7g f, 22g c, 7g fiber, and more micros. A boatload of the hottest hot sauce adds negligible calories/nutrition, and sodium is my jam anyway (BP is fine).
I fail to see a problem.
It's likely the final outcome that occurs for someone who rarely eats it.
LOLZ! Since i eat up to 50+ g fiber daily, and all kinds of hot stuff . . . no issue. Adaptation is a wonderful thing. 1 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »annamj2000 wrote: »Thank you for the replies. I just wanted a healthier approach to eating as opposed to the ‘track every calorie regardless of nutritional content’ approach. I want to eat food that won’t have my insulin shooting for the roof and keep me satisfied for longer. I want to lower my carbs but by no means cut them out, I would be miserable! I’m going to carry on tracking as skram01 suggested so as to not go way over my calories with the higher fat foods.
I don't think most people track every calorie without any regard to nutrition. I will be tracking calories forever. I don't think that's unhealthy. I've just been overweight most of my life, so several months of tracking won't "fix" me.
The bolded is important. For some reason, people think that because we don't eat by a specific diet and "just" count calories, this means we don't care about anything else. It's really weird to me! You can eat more than enough lean protein, healthy fat, fiber, and nutrition, and then have a weighed out bowl of ice cream after dinner since nothing is "banned". No one here advocates eating nothing but snack foods purchased at the gas station. Just that you could if for some reason you wanted to and still lose weight. You'd feel like *kitten*, but that's not what we're talking about when we talk about CICO.
If the posts here are any indication, virtually every long-term user who isn't on an official "plan" is still making choices that consider meeting macro- and micro-nutrient needs, what meal timing works best for them, what foods promote satiety, and what works with their lifestyle. Nobody is just pulling up to the Taco Bell drive-through on the regular, ordering 1,800 calories of cinnamon twists, nacho fries, and steak burritos, and calling it a day.
This is the second time today someone has referenced Taco Bell as it pertains to a (misconstrued) dietary staple for those following CICO (which is everyone in the world). I haven't eaten at Taco Bell in probably 5+ years but I feel the Gods are trying to tell me something. Tomorrow, I will likely recall why I haven't eaten at Taco Bell in half a decade or more...
I go maybe once a month, with friends who like it.
Veggie power bowl, minus rice, extra black beans: 380 calories, 15g p, 17g f, 43g c, 17g fiber. Decent vit A, C, calcium, iron. Add pintos & cheese at 190 cal, 10g p, 7g f, 22g c, 7g fiber, and more micros. A boatload of the hottest hot sauce adds negligible calories/nutrition, and sodium is my jam anyway (BP is fine).
I fail to see a problem.
It's likely the final outcome that occurs for someone who rarely eats it.
LOLZ! Since i eat up to 50+ g fiber daily, and all kinds of hot stuff . . . no issue. Adaptation is a wonderful thing.
I've been increasing my bean consumption lately. My dogs are enjoying the added aroma, I am not.
5 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »annamj2000 wrote: »Thank you for the replies. I just wanted a healthier approach to eating as opposed to the ‘track every calorie regardless of nutritional content’ approach. I want to eat food that won’t have my insulin shooting for the roof and keep me satisfied for longer. I want to lower my carbs but by no means cut them out, I would be miserable! I’m going to carry on tracking as skram01 suggested so as to not go way over my calories with the higher fat foods.
I don't think most people track every calorie without any regard to nutrition. I will be tracking calories forever. I don't think that's unhealthy. I've just been overweight most of my life, so several months of tracking won't "fix" me.
The bolded is important. For some reason, people think that because we don't eat by a specific diet and "just" count calories, this means we don't care about anything else. It's really weird to me! You can eat more than enough lean protein, healthy fat, fiber, and nutrition, and then have a weighed out bowl of ice cream after dinner since nothing is "banned". No one here advocates eating nothing but snack foods purchased at the gas station. Just that you could if for some reason you wanted to and still lose weight. You'd feel like *kitten*, but that's not what we're talking about when we talk about CICO.
If the posts here are any indication, virtually every long-term user who isn't on an official "plan" is still making choices that consider meeting macro- and micro-nutrient needs, what meal timing works best for them, what foods promote satiety, and what works with their lifestyle. Nobody is just pulling up to the Taco Bell drive-through on the regular, ordering 1,800 calories of cinnamon twists, nacho fries, and steak burritos, and calling it a day.
This is the second time today someone has referenced Taco Bell as it pertains to a (misconstrued) dietary staple for those following CICO (which is everyone in the world). I haven't eaten at Taco Bell in probably 5+ years but I feel the Gods are trying to tell me something. Tomorrow, I will likely recall why I haven't eaten at Taco Bell in half a decade or more...
I go maybe once a month, with friends who like it.
Veggie power bowl, minus rice, extra black beans: 380 calories, 15g p, 17g f, 43g c, 17g fiber. Decent vit A, C, calcium, iron. Add pintos & cheese at 190 cal, 10g p, 7g f, 22g c, 7g fiber, and more micros. A boatload of the hottest hot sauce adds negligible calories/nutrition, and sodium is my jam anyway (BP is fine).
I fail to see a problem.
It's likely the final outcome that occurs for someone who rarely eats it.
LOLZ! Since i eat up to 50+ g fiber daily, and all kinds of hot stuff . . . no issue. Adaptation is a wonderful thing.
I've been increasing my bean consumption lately. My dogs are enjoying the added aroma, I am not.
It will pass. And not in an odoriferous way, forever, in my experience. Beans are life, in my world.
2 -
This isn't a different approach, this is the same approach as a boatload of low carb diets we've seen around patented under different names. Low carb just goes through waves of trendiness (remember Atkins and South Beach?) and is lately experiencing the largest trendiness wave. Will it work for you? Who knows. If you find fat filling, then it might. If you don't, it likely wouldn't. It's all about CICO.
If you were eating food without taking into account what actually satisfied your hunger, then you may want to start doing that. What's wonderful about calorie counting is that you get to design your own diet based on your own hunger, habits, and preferences. Instead of focusing on carb numbers, focus on "foods that fill me up", and wherever that takes you macro-wise is your sweet spot.
P.S: Insulin is considered a satiety hormone, not a hunger hormone.4 -
Not different. Every diet is eating less calories than you burn for weight loss. No matter how it is figured out.
As far as sustainability, where is the back up proof for that? It may work for you forever, and that is great dedication!
Everything I have read, says that over 80% of people that lose weight, (no matter how they lost the weight, diet/surgery) gain back the weight they lost (some people gain even more back) within 5 years.
Why do you think the weight loss industry is so huge.
Long term sustainability comes from determination and awareness of not eating more calories than you are burning. Something that a huge percent of people can not maintain, including myself. I've been to this rodeo more than once.
I truly wish you success at this! It isn't easy no matter how you choose to reach, and maintain your goals!
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.4K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 437 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions