Am I Eating Enough Food?

2»

Replies

  • rorybees
    rorybees Posts: 9 Member
    I find 45g carbs easy to hit. I ate 161g carbs yesterday without bread, rice, or pasta. Are you not eating any fruits?

    Normally I hadn't (normally as in how I use to eat). But not out of any reason other than I just wasn't ever hungry outside of when I was eating a meal. I never snacked much and I'm adjusting how I eat now to include more snacks that can have more fruits/veggies!
  • rorybees
    rorybees Posts: 9 Member
    I've eaten 50 grams of carbs today in cottage cheese and blackberries. Now granted that's 200 grams of blackberries and 3 servings of cottage cheese, but still.

    ETA: Oh wait some of that came from the two packets of reduced calorie swiss miss from my 2 cups of coffee. So 40 grams of carbs.

    (Yes. That is basically what I've eaten so far today. It's probably what I'll eat the rest of the day. it comes with protein, fat, and fiber, too! IT"S BERRY SEASON. EAT ALL THE BERRIES. With something with protein and fat LOL).

    Yes! I want to incorporate more berries into my diet. I've never eaten much of them in the past. I'm all for getting those carbs from fruits/veggies. Cottage cheese is great to pair with them too! When I had gestational diabetes, my body responded VERY positively to -any- carb/sugar intake if I had a lot of protein with it. So I'm hoping this time around to just incorporate more of that into my diet daily for snacks especially.
  • rorybees
    rorybees Posts: 9 Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    rorybees wrote: »
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    There is a tendency on a calorie counting site to equate "enough food" with CALORIES.

    You're seem to be using the term in your post in regards to VOLUME of food; and not necessarily Calories.

    It is pretty common for people who revamp their food choice with the help of logging to add nutrient dense but lower caloric content foods and reduce calorically dense and less nutrient filled foods.

    Common. Not universal. It is just one strategy that helps people achieve a caloric deficit while feeling less deprived.

    With stimulant medication (which is often prescribed on ADHD) your eating cues may be impacted because many stimulants have appetite suppression effects.

    Your basic question in your OP was whether 1100 Cal (if accurately counted) is a good amount of calories to aim for.

    My resounding answer is no. It would be too little to sustain your effort long term. And from your starting position you should be looking at the long term. In other words you should be thinking in terms of renewable 5 year plans that include both weight loss and maintenance.

    Sometimes the more we know the more complicated we make things.

    Your "big health money" will come from reducing down from morbid obesity.

    Your second "big health money" will come from improving your food choices; but I would do this in conjunction with and NOT in preference of reducing overall weight.

    Whether you achieve this by reducing carbs or not, unless an active diabetic, I would worry less about this and more on how to achieve sustainability of effort.

    Large deficits may be sustainable short term especially if you have adequate reserves of adipose tissue, but longer term they will have side effects.

    Again: while revamping the menu may help achieve and maintain an appropriate caloric deficit, at least initially and until you're well into a groove (and even then) the deficit and caloric balance will come first in terms of achieving weight management. The type of food choices you make WILL, of course, make caloric balance easier or harder to achieve for you, and will contribute, or not, to your long term health by providing you with appropriate nutrients.

    Anytime I see people creating deficits that substantially exceed 25% of their TDEE even while obese... I inwardly cringe as I do believe them to generate more side effects and be less long term sustainable than deficits in the 20% range...

    At your current weight, if you track close to population estimates, I would expect you to be able to lose weight fairly rapidly while eating closer to 2K Calories than 1100.

    Thank you so much for the reply!

    And you're on point with where my mind is at, not sure if I have articulated that well enough in my posts above though! I did not think 1100 was sustainable. But, with Doctor Google, everything I read from any editorial article was suggesting lower caloric intake in that very low 1100-1200 (sometimes lower) count. But some websites suggested a rounded out diet of 1800-2000 calories for someone my size.

    I'm not looking to have a low calorie diet intentionally. I'm big enough that my mere existence requires a pretty high calorie intake just to maintain. I think hitting around 2k will be the way to go. I'm just now trying to figure what I can add to my meals (but probably just snacks) to add 900 more calories. I love beans so I'll probably add more of those to my diet!

    I've been learning this past week that unless I am intentionally eating things like bread, rice or pasta for a meal, it is actually really hard to eat the volume of food it takes to hit my 45 carb limit per meal when its coming primarily from beans and starchy vegetables.

    Do you like, and can you eat, nuts, nut butters, seeds, avocados, full-fat dairy (yogurt, cheese, etc.)? Those tend to be less filling (well, avocados are kind of filling, maybe, because fiber), still have a good nutrient profile, and are a bit more calorie dense from fats/protein.

    Yes! This week I didn't have a lot of those things at my disposal for meals, but with grocery shopping tomorrow I'm planning on incorporating nuts and avocados regularly in my meals. I love avocados, have pumpkin seeds on hand. almons/cashews too. And today I had an apple with natural peanut butter. I haven't recorded my day yet, but I definitely feel like I had a better balance of food today than yesterday.
  • rorybees
    rorybees Posts: 9 Member
    heybales wrote: »
    Ditto to advice given, in which case you probably noticed the amount of deficit is coming off what you likely burn, not some arbitrary low number.
    The volume of "unhealthy" foods wasn't the problem for the weight aspect, merely the calories.
    For sure could have made it easier to overeat though, perhaps, depending on you.
    The weight loss will likely have the much bigger effect on PD than than super careful food choices - but you need other nutrients anyway, so good to go into this realistic and sustainable.

    Being shorter, your calorie and nutritional needs would be lower - but you aren't to the point of playing how-low-can-I-go - which usually causes problems later when daily burn goes down because you weigh less, and then how low do you go to keep making progress.

    How active are you able to be?

    Because even if truly Sedentary according to MFP levels (which is truly more sedentary than many believe), and 2 lb weekly loss, or 1000 cal deficit, which could be reasonable, your eating goal would be right at 1500.

    If you were coming at this easily maintaining current weight, 2 weeks at higher deficit likely wouldn't be bad - but quick back off unless under a diet specialist Dr's care giving blood work on constant basis to confirm not messing the body up.

    Also, if in US - is that nutritionist or RD Registered Dietician?

    You got some realistic goals and realizations - keep it up!

    Hey! Thank you for the thorough reply!

    I'm wanting to be active 2-3 times a week doing light activity. 1-2 times walking at a pace to elevate heart rate for 15-30 minutes and longer sustained walks through nature trails with inclines/terrain at least once a week.

    This is where I plan to start to build up my stamina so I can go on longer, more arduous walks on trails. My husband and I love walking in nature! I can reasonably walk 2 miles on our adventures. Physical activity I do want to increase to more days to include strength training, but for now that's where I'm starting so I don't overwhelm myself.

    I'm in the US and she is a registered dietician!
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,837 Member
    When you say 2-3 times a week Lightly-Active - that is from non-MFP sites that are attempting to give you a TDEE.
    MFP doesn't do that method. It uses NEAT method.
    MFP gives daily burn with no exercise accounted for yet, until actually done and logged - then you eat more that day, instead of a little more every day.
    Either way generally works out to the same result if honest and accurate.

    If a regular weekly workout schedule, that TDEE method works fine in this case - your daily activity outside workouts is sedentary.
    Gives you a set daily goal.

    Just TDEE Please spreadsheet - better than rough 5 level TDEE charts from 1919 study.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1G7FgNzPq3v5WMjDtH0n93LXSMRY_hjmzNTMJb3aZSxM/edit?usp=sharing

    At least you know to account for exercise, which at the start may not be much and may not be a huge impact to calorie burn - eventually it sounds like the desire is more of it - then being unaccounted for would add to deficit and could easily make that unreasonable again.
    Good goal starting reasonable.