Can I eat as much broccoli as I want, regardless of max caloric intake?

justinrunner

So I just started using myfitnesspal to count my calories yesterday, as I'm trying to lose 1lb per week (for performance reasons.) It was a tough day, I was constantly hungry and thinking about food. By night time, I only had a few calories left to intake so I found myself googling foods that were low in calories and high in satiation. An article came up about broccoli, how it's low calorie (30 calories per cup), but that it takes 80 calories to burn a cup of ingested broccoli.

Does this mean then that you can eat an unlimited amount of broccoli, and that you'll actually be burning more calories by doing so? All while allowing yourself to feel full? It sounds too good to be true, so I thought I'd ask...

sunfastrose

No. There is no such thing as negative calorie food.

nigelnorris

I'm pretty sure that negative calorie foods are an urban myth.

elsie6hickman

If you really, really like broccoli, I don't see why not. But just keep in mind that while low calorie, it is not "no calorie". Don't pile it up with butter or salt.

ahoy_m8

When I need a high volume, low calorie food to make my day work, I eat tons of broccoli, like 200g. I count it, though. It all counts whether I bother counting or not.

joemac1988

No one flunked out of fat camp from eating too much broccoli.

amusedmonkey

You know the old adage, if it's too good to be true...

WinoGelato

Eating unlimited amounts of broccoli sounds unpleasant for... well... a lot of reasons.

Finding foods that satiate you are important, especially while eating at a deficit. Spend some time thinking about and experimenting with different foods - some people find fat satiating, some find carbs, some find protein, and some (like me) do best with a moderate mix of the above at most meals.

Also, are you exercising? Are you eating back calories burned from running or other activity? If not that could contribute to why you’re so hungry - the MFP goal is a net one meaning that you are supposed to eat back those calories in order to keep at that goal.

justinrunner

So it counts against you when you consume it (towards your daily allowance), but how do we factor in how many calories it takes to digest it? It seems like our formula (daily allowance + exercise - consumed) doesn't factor this in...

callsitlikeiseeit

no.

and aside from the fact i think broccoli is disgusting anyways, that MUCH broccoli is TRULY gross lololol

NovusDies

Be careful ramping up your fiber intake too quickly unless you are already accustomed to eating that way. There are some potentially rather negative side effects if you jump into the deep end of the fiber pool instead of swimming over from the shallow side.

pinuplove

justinrunner wrote: »

So it counts against you when you consume it (towards your daily allowance), but how do we factor in how many calories it takes to digest it? It seems like our formula (daily allowance + exercise - consumed) doesn't factor this in...

The calories burned while digesting are part of your bmr - the number of calories you'd burn lying in bed doing nothing all day. It's majoring in the minors to worry about that. Count all the calories you eat and eat the calories the MFP guided setup gave you. Stick to that a few weeks, reevaluate if necessary. And so on and so forth.

ccrdragon

The amount of calories that it takes to digest foods is very minimal (averages less than 10% of the calories of the food) so worrying about it is majoring in the minors.

And just to answer the question that you originally posed, no, it does not take 80 calories to digest a cup of broccoli. Even celery provides more calories than it takes to digest the celery (celery was the original zero/negative calorie food).

J_Fairfax

Broccoli is great, eat away imho

justinrunner

I guess the article had it wrong then. Sounds like it's too good to be true, and I'll have to suffer through this... If losing 1lb/week were easy, no one would be overweight, right?

pinuplove

justinrunner wrote: »

I guess the article had it wrong then. Sounds like it's too good to be true, and I'll have to suffer through this... If losing 1lb/week were easy, no one would be overweight, right?

Once you dial in on the foods and macro split that best keeps you satiated, it will get easier. Maybe not easy, but easier.

ahoy_m8

No! You do not have to suffer. I don't know if 1lb/week is an appropriate rate of loss for you. I lose at 0.5 lb/wk, but I'm pretty lean to start with. Like Winogelato says, experiment a little to find the foods most satisfying and enjoyable to you that work in your calorie plan. Don't suffer!

WinoGelato

justinrunner wrote: »

I guess the article had it wrong then. Sounds like it's too good to be true, and I'll have to suffer through this... If losing 1lb/week were easy, no one would be overweight, right?

How much weight are you trying to lose? 1 lb/week may not be the right goal for you if you have less than 20 lbs to lose.

Again, are you exercising? Are you eating back this calories?

No one should feel they face yo suffer to be successful. In fact I think eating that much broccoli sounds like unnecessary suffering.

Set a reasonable goal based on the amount of weight you have to lose.
Eat a variety of foods to hit that goal focusing on those that provide nutrition, satiety, and enjoyment.
Log as honestly and accurately as possible, ideally using a food scale.
If you exercise, log and eat back some of those calories..
Be patient, monitor and adjust over time.

Oh and where ever you read that nonsense about negative calorie foods, stop visiting that site or talking to that person. There are no gimmicks. Weight loss is simple, not easy, but there’s no shortcut. At least not one that will provide you long term healthy results.

gallicinvasion

I'm sure your life would be more enjoyable eating a variety of foods at sensible portions rather than eating infinite broccoli until you die. Think about what's truly going to satisfy you in life, unlimited portions of bland food, or limited portions of delicious food.

justinrunner

You might be right that 1lb/week might not be appropriate. I'm already lean (5'8" / 141lbs) but want to get the weight down before my Fall marathon, as each pound equates to roughly a minute gained/lost over the entire 26.2. I'm 10 weeks out and want to lose 6 pounds, so 1lb/week is the only way to hit that goal and still have time to stabilize so I'm not depleted going into the race. However, I run a lot (90-100 miles per week), so my hunger is ravenous. I'll tinker with this a few more days and see how it goes, maybe .5lb/week (like you said) would be more appropriate.

WinoGelato

justinrunner wrote: »

You might be right that 1lb/week might not be appropriate. I'm already lean (5'8" / 141lbs) but want to get the weight down before my Fall marathon, as each pound equates to roughly a minute gained/lost over the entire 26.2. I'm 10 weeks out and want to lose 6 pounds, so 1lb/week is the only way to hit that goal and still have time to stabilize so I'm not depleted going into the race. However, I run a lot (90-100 miles per week), so my hunger is ravenous. I'll tinker with this a few more days and see how it goes, maybe .5lb/week (like you said) would be more appropriate.

What is your calorie goal? Again, are you logging and eating back those running calories?