We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
Most Effective Way to Lose Weight
cupcakegirl645
Posts: 6 Member
I just started and i’m doing this to lose weight. what’s the biggest thing to
cut back on to help?
cut back on to help?
0
Replies
-
Log food for a few days, not worrying about cutting calories. Review your logs: Which foods "cost" a lot of calories, but weren't that important to you for feeling full, tastiness, convenience, or nutrition? Reduce or eliminate those. Rinse and repeat. Once you're rolling, aim for a calorie target estimated to trigger gradual weight loss, and work your way toward that goal using that "review and revise habits" approach.
Short answer: Calories. That's the thing you need to cut back on to lose weight. Which ones it's easiest/best to cut can be pretty individual.11 -
I second @AnnPT87 on that. Food logging/journalling is a powerful tool. My own journal currently has over 9thousand rows, and is the one thing that helps me keep my energy intake under my "budget". Just make sure to accurately log everything and not leaving anything out.cupcakegirl645 wrote: »I just started and i’m doing this to lose weight. what’s the biggest thing to
cut back on to help?
Then, you can start to figure out ways to reduce your energy intake to a point where you stop gaining weight and start losing weight. Take some time for all of this. There are several factors to consider, but the one that is an absolute necessity is energy intake a.k.a. as calorie or joule intake. It trumps all other considerations. Keep the following in mind:
The only way to lose fat is to ingest less energy than you need to stay alive.
The only way to gain fat is to ingest more energy than you need to stay alive.
There are no exceptions.
Success. You can do it.
3 -
Most diets don't work because people don't like to feel hungry all the time or the new diet is too restrictive and it's basically a monumental quantum shift that most can't adhere to for very long, because it's just too different. I believe if a person was to reduce some ultra processed and hyperpalatable food with some whole foods, ate more vegetables, reduce some refined carbohydrates and ate less sugar, and this change can be a sliding scale, from a very small intervention to increasing greater and greater until you feel more comfortable with the change and more satiated, which is generally the direction this intervention goes, not for everyone, but quite a few. Cheers1
-
BartBVanBockstaele wrote: »The only way to lose fat is to ingest less energy than you need to stay alive use.
The only way to gain fat is to ingest more energy than you need to stay alive use.
There are no exceptions.
FIFY. Ingesting less energy than you need to stay alive will, by definition, kill you. When you're dead, your initial weight loss is water loss and clearing out your bowels, followed, potentially, by being eaten. Some scavengers may selectively consume fatty tissue, but I'm not sure how you ensure that those are the scavengers that get to your corpse.
5 -
It is just a matter of semantics. Ingesting less energy than you use is eating less energy than you need to stay alive. The energy you use IS the energy you need to stay alive. If you ingest more energy, it will (for a large part, usually the most part) go into storage, i.e. fat. If you ingest less, you will lose fat, and indeed, eventually die. We only have to look at the World War II concentration camps to realise that there are no exceptions to that rule. It is also why fat loss is a serious business that comes with its own set of risks. While it is usually not talked about in this way, fat loss is not a benign process. There is a price to pay. It is just that, for most people, the disadvantages are outweighed by the advantages of being less fat.lynn_glenmont wrote: »BartBVanBockstaele wrote: »The only way to lose fat is to ingest less energy than you need to stay alive use.
The only way to gain fat is to ingest more energy than you need to stay alive use.
There are no exceptions.
FIFY. Ingesting less energy than you need to stay alive will, by definition, kill you. When you're dead, your initial weight loss is water loss and clearing out your bowels, followed, potentially, by being eaten. Some scavengers may selectively consume fatty tissue, but I'm not sure how you ensure that those are the scavengers that get to your corpse.
We should, perhaps, also add that deadly consequences can occur some time before death: people can lose, for example, their ability to construct protein from their intake. The result is death, even if actual death only comes weeks later. That too, is something we have seen in the concentration camps. These people are essentially walking dead. It is a perspective people suffering from anorexia nervosa potentially have to deal with.2 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »BartBVanBockstaele wrote: »The only way to lose fat is to ingest less energy than you need to stay alive use.
The only way to gain fat is to ingest more energy than you need to stay alive use.
There are no exceptions.
FIFY. Ingesting less energy than you need to stay alive will, by definition, kill you. When you're dead, your initial weight loss is water loss and clearing out your bowels, followed, potentially, by being eaten. Some scavengers may selectively consume fatty tissue, but I'm not sure how you ensure that those are the scavengers that get to your corpse.
You are both right. When you are burning fat, you are doing so because your body must burn that fat at that time to stay alive. If your body had no fat stores, instead of being able to burn fat, it would at that point die. There was a documentary on a young boy who was born with a disorder in which he was unable to store fat. He always had to have food with him at all times, or risked severe hypoglycemia and death.2 -
For the OP, once you've started logging everything, an easy first step is portion control, elimination e.g. no late night snack, substitution e.g. different sandwich/salad dressing, mashed/baked potato instead of fries, low calorie drink instead of high calorie, etc. Also, exercise. You cannot out-exercise a bad diet, but exercise can help you reach a target deficit, maintain or possibly grow muscle, plus all the health benefits it provides.
It's not semantics. You are wrong, simple as that.BartBVanBockstaele wrote: »The only way to lose fat is to ingest less energy than you need to stay alive.
The only way to gain fat is to ingest more energy than you need to stay alive.
There are no exceptions.
It is just a matter of semantics. Ingesting less energy than you use is eating less energy than you need to stay alive. The energy you use IS the energy you need to stay alive. If you ingest more energy, it will (for a large part, usually the most part) go into storage, i.e. fat. If you ingest less, you will lose fat, and indeed, eventually die.
By your definition, if I eat less than I use today, I will be dead. My wife who fasted all day yesterday would be dead too. We are still here.
The BMR of an obese person is higher than the BMR that person will have at their optimal weight. If that obese person reduced calorie intake to the level the optimal weight version needs (do your TDEE calc here as needed), they will lose weight until that optimal level and then maintain, without dying.
Someone could ingest more energy than their optimal weight version needs to stay alive, that level being less than current TDEE at obesity, and they will lose fat, and also not die! But according to you, they would gain fat.1 -
I want to chime in and reiterate that logging is a great way to find a strategy that will work, because instead of just eating mindlessly you can see where your calories are coming from, what you really like to eat, what you might not miss at all but are just in the habit of eating, etc.
A lot of people love carbs, for example, but I found through logging that I could eliminate rice and pasta and easily keep my deficit without missing them at all. I was just eating them because they were there, and I was used to having them as part of certain meals. If I really liked them, I would have found a way to make them work in my calorie budget, but I was very happy to just axe them and not worry about it anymore, and then have more calories to spend on things I actually really wanted to eat.
I'd also encourage you to stick with a plan for at least a few weeks before deciding it "doesn't work" and moving on to something else. It takes time to build a habit, and then even more time for the habit to start bearing fruit. If you're not accustomed to keeping track of your food intake, give yourself some time with it to get used to doing it and doing it accurately. And then the information you have about yourself will give you some idea of where to go to find more success.
3 -
Ultra processed carbs and alcohol are the main culprits when it comes to destroying a Fatloss diet so minimize those. Lean protein sources and green veggies should be prioritized.1
-
Interesting viewpoint.Retroguy2000 wrote: »
It's not semantics. You are wrong, simple as that.BartBVanBockstaele wrote: »The only way to lose fat is to ingest less energy than you need to stay alive.
The only way to gain fat is to ingest more energy than you need to stay alive.
There are no exceptions.
It is just a matter of semantics. Ingesting less energy than you use is eating less energy than you need to stay alive. The energy you use IS the energy you need to stay alive. If you ingest more energy, it will (for a large part, usually the most part) go into storage, i.e. fat. If you ingest less, you will lose fat, and indeed, eventually die.
By your definition, if I eat less than I use today, I will be dead. My wife who fasted all day yesterday would be dead too. We are still here.
The BMR of an obese person is higher than the BMR that person will have at their optimal weight. If that obese person reduced calorie intake to the level the optimal weight version needs (do your TDEE calc here as needed), they will lose weight until that optimal level and then maintain, without dying.
Someone could ingest more energy than their optimal weight version needs to stay alive, that level being less than current TDEE at obesity, and they will lose fat, and also not die! But according to you, they would gain fat.
By your claim, If you have a car, and it needs 20 liters of gas to function, it will break down if you only put 10 liters in the tank. That is true, but only if there is less than 10 liters left in the tank. If there is still 30 liters in the tank, that car will drive just fine, even if it may be scary.
That is my point: if you ingest less energy than you need to stay alive, you will lose fat and eventually die. The energy you use IS the energy you need to stay alive. There is no difference between the two. It is simply a different word to describe the same thing.
0 -
I wouldn't call facts a "viewpoint". And a car is a terrible analogy here.BartBVanBockstaele wrote: »Interesting viewpoint.
By your claim, If you have a car, and it needs 20 liters of gas to function, it will break down if you only put 10 liters in the tank. That is true, but only if there is less than 10 liters left in the tank. If there is still 30 liters in the tank, that car will drive just fine, even if it may be scary.
That is my point: if you ingest less energy than you need to stay alive, you will lose fat and eventually die. The energy you use IS the energy you need to stay alive. There is no difference between the two. It is simply a different word to describe the same thing.
You still don't understand. This is what you erroneously claim:
"The only way to lose fat is to ingest less energy than you need to stay alive.
The only way to gain fat is to ingest more energy than you need to stay alive.
There are no exceptions."
Here's a sample TDEE calculator below, and some estimates for me:
At target weight 210 pounds: BMR 1867 Sedentary TDEE 2241
At current weight 225 pounds: BMR 1935 Sedentary TDEE 2322 (MFP has 2420)
At original weight 275 pounds: BMR 2162 Sedentary TDEE 2595
The 275 pound me could have gone on a 100 calorie per day deficit and lost weight, yes?
But wait, 2595-100 is higher than my current TDEE, and much higher than my TDEE would be at goal weight. According to you, that's not possible. How can I be ingesting more than I need to stay alive and yet also losing fat? It can't be done! I'm typing from the grave!
You appear to be confusing "maintenance" with "calories needed to stay alive at a healthy weight".
https://tdeecalculator.net/3 -
That is simple: your TDEE is higher than the calculator suggests. These calculators are estimates, guesses, nothing more. That is not only true in weight loss, it is true in biology everywhere. We simply haven't developed the technology to make precise-enough measurements. In the case of calculators, we don't even need to go that far. These calculators are statistical tools, nothing more. They are quite valuable for studying populations, but applying them to individuals is a perversion of the science underlying them. It is –unfortunately– an all-too common problem.Retroguy2000 wrote: »
I wouldn't call facts a "viewpoint". And a car is a terrible analogy here.BartBVanBockstaele wrote: »Interesting viewpoint.
By your claim, If you have a car, and it needs 20 liters of gas to function, it will break down if you only put 10 liters in the tank. That is true, but only if there is less than 10 liters left in the tank. If there is still 30 liters in the tank, that car will drive just fine, even if it may be scary.
That is my point: if you ingest less energy than you need to stay alive, you will lose fat and eventually die. The energy you use IS the energy you need to stay alive. There is no difference between the two. It is simply a different word to describe the same thing.
You still don't understand. This is what you erroneously claim:
"The only way to lose fat is to ingest less energy than you need to stay alive.
The only way to gain fat is to ingest more energy than you need to stay alive.
There are no exceptions."
Here's a sample TDEE calculator below, and some estimates for me:
At target weight 210 pounds: BMR 1867 Sedentary TDEE 2241
At current weight 225 pounds: BMR 1935 Sedentary TDEE 2322 (MFP has 2420)
At original weight 275 pounds: BMR 2162 Sedentary TDEE 2595
The 275 pound me could have gone on a 100 calorie per day deficit and lost weight, yes?
But wait, 2595-100 is higher than my current TDEE, and much higher than my TDEE would be at goal weight. According to you, that's not possible. How can I be ingesting more than I need to stay alive and yet also losing fat? It can't be done! I'm typing from the grave!
You appear to be confusing "maintenance" with "calories needed to stay alive at a healthy weight".
https://tdeecalculator.net/
It is also why any doctor will tell you to use a calculator as a starting point if you really want to use a calculator and then iterate your way towards a relatively safe rate of weight loss by gradually reducing or increasing your intake taking into account that published calorie content of food is also quite imprecise, for essentially the same reasons that TDEE is different for everyone, with the added problem that "nutrition facts" are usually prepared by marketing departments who get them from databases, not by scientists who actually measure and double-check everything.0 -
cupcakegirl645 wrote: »I just started and i’m doing this to lose weight. what’s the biggest thing to
cut back on to help?
Shall we take the thread back to the OP's actual question?
OP, I'll expand on my earlier answer:
I mentioned that I cut back on eating things that were less tasty or filling to me personally, things that didn't contribute enough to my overall nutrition to be worth their calories to me. Like I said, what this is will vary individually.
I found that I was eating more of what I now think of as "filler foods" than I really wanted or needed for those reasons. I reduced portions/frequencies of sides like bread, rice, grains, pasta. I still eat those things, but (for example) I increased the veggies/protein in my pasta meals, and reduced the pasta; and started eating the things I would've put in a sandwich either on a nutrient-dense tortilla (wrap or taco style), or just increased the veggies and made it a salad.
I significantly reduced how often I was frying foods, and experimented to see how little oil I could use (and still get a good result) when I did fry. I explored more roasting, stir-steaming, etc., as cooking methods, finding methods that were tasty to me, but lower calorie.
I paid attention to the calories in condiments. I like mayo, but not enough to justify the dramatically higher calories vs. how much I like mustard, as a trivial example. I re-examined things like salad dressings, dips, and spreads - they're often high in calories, with tasty substitutes available at much lower calorie points.
For snacks, I sought out not necessarily always lower calorie things, but sometimes ones that had more nutrition or that were more filling for the calories. (For example, I found black bean tortilla chips that I like a lot that are more nutrient-dense than regular corn chips.)
I did find that I was eating some things more because they were there or because I was in the habit, rather than because I genuinely enjoyed them. For me, that including boring baked goods (grocery store cookies/cakes) and some candies. Those were easy cuts, pretty painless.
The totality of these kinds of changes was gradual and experimental, over a period of time. That works. Gradually, I was fitting more nutrition into my reduced calories, while staying full and eating things I personally find tasty.
As others have said, reducing calorie-dense beverages can be helpful if you consume those. I did drink less alcohol while losing, but didn't cut it out entirely (and didn't switch from craft IPA to light beer, because I don't enjoy light beer). I didn't drink soda/pop, but going from sugary soda/pop (or sweet tea, etc.) to diet versions or flavored/plain water can be useful for some people. Many people find calories in drinks less filling than calories in foods that require chewing.
Others have mentioned subbing more so-called whole foods (veggies, fruits, lean protein, etc.) for highly processed foods. I agree that that can improve satiation for some people. It's worth the experiment.
You can also experiment with food timing to see if some routine keeps you more full and happy. People here succeed on anything from one meal a day, to all-day grazing on snack-sized things. If it adds up to the same calories, the results will be about the same . . . but you may find one routine easier to stick with than others. That's important.
It's really down to your tastes and preferences, in the end. What's worth the calories to you, in context of your weight management goals?
3 -
Cut calories, not foods. You'll quickly figure out which foods are calorie dense but leave you hungry and which foods fill you up but are lower in calories.
Sometimes I'd rather eat the ice cream/cake/wine and be OK to be hungry for the rest of the evening. Sometimes I just wanna be able to graze all day on low-cal snacks. Or I might "bank" calories for a few days to "spend" them on a treat later in the week.
Information is key, so start by logging what you currently eat. Learn the calorie content for your typical meals and snacks. Then do the math to figure out how many calories you can eat to meet your goals. You don't need to cut anything out, but you may find that certain foods may not be worth it if they make it hard to meet your goals and feel sated at the same time.4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.6K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.5K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 444 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
- 4.1K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.8K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions