It’s more to weight loss and gain then calories

Chic_geek31

If that was true why are some people able to eat as much food as they want and remain thin, while others (like myself) can eat in moderation and still gain weight.

Maxematics

There is so much wrong with that statement.

• Who do you know that eats as much food as they want and remains thin? Are you with them 24/7 to watch them eat?
• What does eating "in moderation" mean to you?
• Some people claim they can eat and eat and eat and never gain weight, but they actually overestimate their caloric intake and/or underestimate their activity level just like people who are overweight or obese tend to underestimate their caloric intake and/or overestimate their activity level.
• Food volume is one thing and calories are another. I can eat a huge salad for 50 calories or half of an avocado for 200 calories yet visually the salad will seem like I'm eating more. By volume yes, by calories no.
• Different people have different calorie needs. I'm 5'3" and 110 pounds but I maintain on 2000+ calories because I'm very active. Someone else with my stats may only maintain on 1500 because they are extremely sedentary.

NadNight

I think genetics plays a huge factor in how easy it is for someone to lose/gain/maintain weight but with some exceptions (for example people with under/overactive thyroids who may need medical help to stabilise their weight) the calories in being less that calories out will result in weight loss and vice versa. Our BMRs may vary quite a lot and combined with varying levels of activity means we all have different nutritional requirements.

Perhaps the people that eat whatever they want don’t actually eat as much as it seems? Maybe they snack a lot but their meals aren’t that big. Or they don’t snack or don’t eat into the evenings like a lot of people do. Perhaps they’re very active or they’re quite anxious people. I suffered with anxiety at uni and lost a fair bit of weight even though I still ate a lot because I was so ‘active’ through my nervous energy meaning I was moving non-stop. (I wouldn’t recommend anxiety as a weight loss technique though!)

One way of eating won’t suit us all, I think we each have to find our own way of tipping the balance towards overall weight loss or gain depending on goals. I think more research into the genetic influence on weight will be really interesting and I’m excited to see what scientists come out with over the next few years. My opinion is that genetics do have a large impact but ultimately we are in control of what we put in to and do with our bodies and some people do need to put in more effort.

In short, calories in vs calories out really is as simple as it sounds, it’s just some people naturally have it easier and some have to work harder but weight loss/gain is totally possible.

The only other thing I would add is if you’re struggling to lose weight and you’re counting calories then look into sauces, portion size, cooking oils etc? Or if you drink things besides water, black coffee or herbal teas what goes into them?

Redordeadhead

For some people, "as much as they want" equates to an appropriate calorie amount to maintain their weight. So as much as they want, is not too much.

jaymijones

My husband looks at a glance like a person who can eat as much as he wants and never gain. He has maintained the same weight since high school.

We actually tracked his calorie intake while he wore an activity tracker for a few days, because I can watch him eat half a pizza and wonder where he puts it as the scale never budges for him.

Myth busted. He averages a 2400 calorie burn. Those numbers track with several different online calculators and the Fitbit. And he eats an average of 2400 calories a day. If he eats a whole pizza for dinner one night, he’ll usually not be hungry till lunchtime the next day so he skips breakfast entirely.

It’s not that he can eat whatever he wants, it’s that he’s one of those people who can effortlessly eat at maintenance. It is frustrating to watch him eat 3 servings of ice cream in a single sitting, but I also now pay enough attention to know he probably had a light salad for lunch and therefore has the calorie deficit to fit it in.

His big thing now is that he has a family history of diabetes (not weight related) and IBS. He has historically eaten a lot of sugar, and junk, so while I’m counting calories and trying to improve my fitness, he’s paying more attention to how much sugar and processed junk he eats.

Which is just proof that skinny doesn’t always mean healthy.

MikePTY

It's always all about the calories. People can have wildly different calorie needs based on their size and activity. A male who is bigger than you and active may be able to maintain on 1000+ calories a day more than you. That's a whole burger and fries per day. Also, other people may not eat as much as you think. You may think that the food they are eating is high in calories, but unless you follow them around all day and track everything they eat, you may realize they don't eat as much as you think. Some people naturally just eat as much as their body needs to fuel it. It'd be nice to be one of those people, but in their situation, it's still all about the calories.

It's true that there can be small metabolic differences between people of the same stats and activity level due to genetics and health factors. These affects can be small but still impactful. Lets say that two similar people had a maintenance calorie difference of 100 calories a day due to these type of factors. That's not enough for one to eat whole pizzas every day while the other is stuck on salads. In fact, that's barely a cookie. But it does add up. If they both eat the exact same amount of calories a day, one will maintain, while the other will gain 10 pounds a year. So even small changes can add up. The calories out estimate provided to you by MFP or a Fitbit or other calculator is an estimate. It is close to accurate for the vast majority of people, but there will be some personalized individual tweaking required, that can be done after you have done this for a while and have your own observable set of data for your energy needs.

No matter how you try to spin it, it is still all about calories in vs. calories out.

njitaliana

I used to be very thin. I weighed 104 lbs from age 14 to age 36. On certain days, it looked like I ate a lot. My friends and I might be having pizza at night once in a while, when I was hungry and hadn't had dinner. So, I'd eat a good amount. Or maybe at lunch time at work once in a while I'd eat a whole hoagie (sub or whatever they call them where you live) because I had only a slice of toast for breakfast at 6 AM and it was now 1 PM. But, the majority of the time, I didn't even finish my meals.

Not only that, I walked everywhere. I had an 8 year old car with only 8,000 miles on it when I got married because I walked and walked rather than drive. I walked up and down stairs rather than take an elevator. On top of always walking, I did a 1/2 hour exercise show each day. And I took dance class 3 X a week. I didn't do these things to stay thin. I did them because I loved them. Exercise and walking were my hobbies.

So, yes, it might have appeared to the people who saw me eat a hoagie on a rare, hungry day, or to the people who saw me eat pizza late at night on a day when I hadn't had dinner, as though I ate a lot. But, I really didn't. And for snacks, I liked things like pickles and cucumbers and salads. Again, not to be thin, but because it was what I enjoyed.

Then I became disabled and my eating habits changed. I couldn't stand up to cook anymore. I couldn't exercise anymore. I had to take meds that put weight on. And out of frustration and boredom, I'd eat a lot of non-healthy snacks every night. And here I am, overweight. But, even on the meds, I can lose weight well as long as I don't overeat.

So, it all comes down to calories in vs. calories out, even when it doesn't appear to.

kimny72

Unless you are following another person around 24/7 weighing all their food, and monitoring their activity tracker, you have no idea what their cals in or out are.

People can look like they don't eat much, and in fact believe they don't eat much, but actually consume a lot of calories. Being a generally active person without going to the gym can actually burn a ton of calories.

People can eat a ton of low cal food or a small amount of really cal dense stuff to get to the same calories.

When I first started, I felt hopeless because I was eating diet foods, avoiding splurges, sure I was eating 1400 cals and more active than most, and couldn't lose weight. Then I got a Fitbit and discovered I was barely getting 5000 steps a day. Then I got a food scale and realized I was actually eating 1800 cals a day. And as i increased my activity level and decreased my calorie level, no one around me noticed anything change, other than that i started losing weight.

We as humans are awful at perceiving our own intake and output, and doubly awful at perceiving others'.

"Moderation" is a word that relies on perception. Two people with different upbringing and lifestyle will visualize a moderate diet and good activity level very differently. For me, and many of us here, the truth came out of months (and years) of accurate and consistent logging, number crunching, and lesson learning.

lemurcat2

Chic_geek31 wrote: »

If that was true why are some people able to eat as much food as they want and remain thin, while others (like myself) can eat in moderation and still gain weight.

Many people can eat what they want and not gain, because what they want to eat is in line with what they burn (combination of body size and activity).

Many people limit food choice without dieting. Most people think my sister is effortlessly thin, but she is mindful of what she eats, tends to cut back if her clothes get at all tight, and exercises a lot). Many people are very active without conscious exercise too.

Many people do not have a good idea of how much they eat. When I was originally gaining I felt out of control since I'd always eaten what I wanted and stayed the same weight and I was sure I did not eat a lot. When I made myself take stock, I realized that I'd reduced activity quite a bit (crazy job hours instead), and that when I wrote down what I ate and considered the calories, it was more than I thought. Plus, I'm 5'3 and probably have a smaller build, so it's not that hard to eat too much if I'm not active.

Once I started eating mindfully and limiting calories and got my activity level back up, the weight came off just as expected.

Most importantly, comparing yourself to others is not useful. I think a lot of people have in their head that overeating = some personal failing so are very resistant to admitting that that's necessarily the problem. Overeating doesn't mean you area glutton or greedy or not feminine or whatever people worry about, it's just something that can be addressed (often while increasing the actual volume of food and without being hungry).

Mouse_Potato

I found out recently that to some people I am one of those who appears to eat whatever she wants and not gain weight. My coworker's exact words to me were "you probably couldn't gain weight if you tried!" He doesn't know that I've been on MFP since 2012. He's never seen me overweight. He doesn't know that there are many days I do the entirety of my eating while at work. All he sees is me fixing breakfast, lunch, and sometimes dinner in the breakroom. He also doesn't see my near constant movement once I get home. I don't sit down in front of the TV. I am walking my dog, lifting weights in my garage, or taking a fitness class almost every night. I only sit down to work, eat, or read my book for an hour at the end of the night.

BattyKnitter

jaymijones wrote: »

My husband looks at a glance like a person who can eat as much as he wants and never gain. He has maintained the same weight since high school.

We actually tracked his calorie intake while he wore an activity tracker for a few days, because I can watch him eat half a pizza and wonder where he puts it as the scale never budges for him.

Myth busted. He averages a 2400 calorie burn. Those numbers track with several different online calculators and the Fitbit. And he eats an average of 2400 calories a day. If he eats a whole pizza for dinner one night, he’ll usually not be hungry till lunchtime the next day so he skips breakfast entirely.

It’s not that he can eat whatever he wants, it’s that he’s one of those people who can effortlessly eat at maintenance. It is frustrating to watch him eat 3 servings of ice cream in a single sitting, but I also now pay enough attention to know he probably had a light salad for lunch and therefore has the calorie deficit to fit it in.

His big thing now is that he has a family history of diabetes (not weight related) and IBS. He has historically eaten a lot of sugar, and junk, so while I’m counting calories and trying to improve my fitness, he’s paying more attention to how much sugar and processed junk he eats.

Which is just proof that skinny doesn’t always mean healthy.

Mine is the exact same, he started wearing an activity tracker and tracking calories because he wanted to put on more muscle and while it looked like he was always eating, and he was, he just wasn't taking in that many calories. Like yours my hubby is just one of those people that are able to naturally regulate their calorie intake an maintain. My whatever that is is broken so I have to track and watch what I eat, which I plan to do for a long while if not forever after I reach maintenance.

HereToLose50

One of my daughters is tiny looking and people mistakenly think this about her.

She can eat a ton of food in one sitting. Like twice as much as other people. What everyone else doesn't see is that is all she eats the entire day. Some days she barely eats at all.

She has some kind of naturally occurring intermittent fasting thing happening. *She's not underweight FYI. She is very fit/kinda muscular in a feminine way, active, and it's funny to see people's reactions when she gets on a scale and weighs 30-40 lbs more than they expect.

apullum

"As much as they want" is relative. I expect for someone who doesn't want large quantities of high calorie foods, weight management isn't as hard as it is for those of us who want all the chocolate.

AnnPT77

Know what? Even if some people do burn more than others, it's still all about calories.

Turns out that I burn more calories than predicted for my size: Quite a few more, around 25-30% more than MFP predicts. That's very unusual. Lucky me! Wheeee!

Guess what? It's super easy to eat that extra bit, and beyond. It's maybe an extra slice of bread with cheese, or some ice cream.

I was obese for decades, thinking I had a slow metabolism because (for the last decade, plus) I was very active, working out hard 6 days most weeks, even competing as an athlete (not without success, either). I was the near-mythical pretty-fit fat person. I'm severely hypothyroid (medicated), besides. And old (59 then, 63 now). And post-menopausal. I had a sedentary, stressful job. Lots of kinds of "metabolic doom".

Then I started calorie counting, and found I was simply eating too much.

I feel lucky, certainly, to have a higher calorie burn than some. But it's not magical. It's in the low hundreds extra, not thousands. I'd guess that my hunger and appetite align with my needs (i.e. I'm not as full at 1500 calories or whatever compared to someone who needs less).

When we eat fewer calories than our very own personal body needs, we lose weight. When we eat more than that, we gain. We can't build body fat (or muscle) without food as construction material, and we can't move around in life without burning fuel. That's just physics. How many calories . . . that's a little individual. But large scale research says the range is narrow, among medically normal people. And everyone who's still alive is burning calories.

Self-delusion about it - like mine - is common. Other people's needs and lifestyles don't matter to my weight management, only mine. So that's a good place to focus our energy, on figuring out our own needs, and changing our own habits: It's where our power lies.

Best wishes! :flowerforyou:

SideSteel

Briefly, we obtain energy from the food we consume and we expend energy moving, exercising, and through all the metabolic processes that keep us alive.

If we consume an excess of that energy beyond the amounts we utilize, we store that excess energy for later use in the form of body fat.

If we don't consume enough energy, we utilize stored energy to make up that difference.

It's a nifty survival mechanism that probably got us through periods of low energy availability.

The problem is that people think its a simple arithmetic equation when in reality it's not.

Food intake directly influences energy expenditure in more ways than one. For starters, the composition of your diet including both the macronutrient content of the diet and the total energy intake of the diet will change the energy cost of digestion. Diets higher in protein for example, tend to increase the thermogenic effect of food.


Additionally, energy intake can cause changes to non exercise activity thermogenesis or in other words the energy output you incur by fidgeting and randomly moving around.

Genetics also matter a great deal in that there are people who are more resistant to weight gain than other people because when they are overfed they naturally upregulate NEAT. Essentially when given excess energy they naturally burn off a large portion of the energy excess.

And so there certainly are a myriad of complex factors that go into the energy balance equation and both sides of that equation interact with each other. There are genetic factors that make some people resistant to weight gain and other people seem to gain more easily.

But despite all of these things, the energy balance equation holds true.

It's still about the calories.