Would a quality over quantity mindset help us maintain a healthy weight?

AdahPotatah2024

Typically, we apply this idea to things we can buy. When someone uses this principle with their spending habits, it simply means that a person is willing to spend more on one higher-cost, quality item than make a cheaper purchase that will need to be replaced sooner.

It could also mean that someone is content with one high-quality item and doesn’t need 5 less expensive ones. It’s the “value over volume” outlook. This could pertain to a person’s wardrobe, electronics, gadgets, tools, etc.

However, the quality over quantity mentality can also be applied to other areas of daily living. Here are a few examples:

Believing that having a few close friendships is more satisfying than many acquaintances.
Thinking that being an expert in one or two skills is better than being adequate at several.
Understanding that you can spend less time doing a job and achieve better results than using up more time.
Filling up on smaller portions of nutrient-dense foods rather than filling up on junk food that is less filling

Each of these beliefs leads to more meaningful, fulfilling, and intentional living.
(Copied from https://financeoverfifty.com/quality-over-quantity/)

sollyn23l2

Some people do this and find it satisfying. Others try it and end up going on a binge of all the "junk" they told themselves they wouldn't eat. It's very individual.

AdahPotatah2024

That's true. But if I were able embrace a quality over quantity mindset and not revert back to the quantity over quality mindset, would I maintain a healthy weight? I think some of it would depend on our individual definitions/opinions of quality.

AdahPotatah2024

The Key to Weight Loss Is Diet Quality, Not Quantity, a New Study Finds


Credit...Andrew Sondern/The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/20/well/eat/counting-calories-weight-loss-diet-dieting-low-carb-low-fat.html

By Anahad O’Connor
Feb. 20, 2018

Anyone who has ever been on a diet knows that the standard prescription for weight loss is to reduce the amount of calories you consume.
But a new study, published Tuesday in JAMA, may turn that advice on its head. It found that people who cut back on added sugar, refined grains and highly processed foods while concentrating on eating plenty of vegetables and whole foods — without worrying about counting calories or limiting portion sizes — lost significant amounts of weight over the course of a year.

The strategy worked for people whether they followed diets that were mostly low in fat or mostly low in carbohydrates. And their success did not appear to be influenced by their genetics or their insulin-response to carbohydrates, a finding that casts doubt on the increasingly popular idea that different diets should be recommended to people based on their DNA makeup or on their tolerance for carbs or fat.

The research lends strong support to the notion that diet quality, not quantity, is what helps people lose and manage their weight most easily in the long run. It also suggests that health authorities should shift away from telling the public to obsess over calories and instead encourage Americans to avoid processed foods that are made with refined starches and added sugar, like bagels, white bread, refined flour and sugary snacks and beverages, said Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, a cardiologist and dean of the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University.

“This is the road map to reducing the obesity epidemic in the United States,” said Dr. Mozaffarian, who was not involved in the new study. “It’s time for U.S. and other national policies to stop focusing on calories and calorie counting.”

The new research was published in JAMA and led by Christopher D. Gardner, the director of nutrition studies at the Stanford Prevention Research Center. It was a large and expensive trial, carried out on more than 600 people with $8 million in funding from the National Institutes of Health, the Nutrition Science Initiative and other groups.

Dr. Gardner and his colleagues designed the study to compare how overweight and obese people would fare on low-carbohydrate and low-fat diets. But they also wanted to test the hypothesis — suggested by previous studies — that some people are predisposed to do better on one diet over the other depending on their genetics and their ability to metabolize carbs and fat. A growing number of services have capitalized on this idea by offering people personalized nutrition advice tailored to their genotypes.

The researchers recruited adults from the Bay Area and split them into two diet groups, which were called “healthy” low carb and “healthy” low fat. Members of both groups attended classes with dietitians where they were trained to eat nutrient-dense, minimally processed whole foods, cooked at home whenever possible.

Soft drinks, fruit juice, muffins, white rice and white bread are technically low in fat, for example, but the low-fat group was told to avoid those things and eat foods like brown rice, barley, steel-cut oats, lentils, lean meats, low-fat dairy products, quinoa, fresh fruit and legumes. The low-carb group was trained to choose nutritious foods like olive oil, salmon, avocados, hard cheeses, vegetables, nut butters, nuts and seeds, and grass-fed and pasture-raised animal foods.

The participants were encouraged to meet the federal guidelines for physical activity but did not generally increase their exercise levels, Dr. Gardner said. In classes with the dietitians, most of the time was spent discussing food and behavioral strategies to support their dietary changes.

The new study stands apart from many previous weight-loss trials because it did not set extremely restrictive carbohydrate, fat or caloric limits on people and emphasized that they focus on eating whole or “real” foods — as much as they needed to avoid feeling hungry.

“The unique thing is that we didn’t ever set a number for them to follow,” Dr. Gardner said.

Of course, many dieters regain what they lose, and this study cannot establish whether participants will be able to sustain their new habits. While people on average lost a significant amount of weight in the study, there was also wide variability in both groups. Some people gained weight, and some lost as much as 50 to 60 pounds. Dr. Gardner said that the people who lost the most weight reported that the study had “changed their relationship with food.” They no longer ate in their cars or in front of their television screens, and they were cooking more at home and sitting down to eat dinner with their families, for example.

Image

In a new study, people who ate lots of vegetables and whole foods rather than processed ones lost weight without worrying about calories or portion size.Credit...Andrew Scrivani for The New York Times

“We really stressed to both groups again and again that we wanted them to eat high-quality foods,” Dr. Gardner said. “We told them all that we wanted them to minimize added sugar and refined grains and eat more vegetables and whole foods. We said, ‘Don’t go out and buy a low-fat brownie just because it says low fat. And those low-carb chips — don’t buy them, because they’re still chips and that’s gaming the system.’”

Dr. Gardner said many of the people in the study were surprised — and relieved — that they did not have to restrict or even think about calories.

“A couple weeks into the study people were asking when we were going to tell them how many calories to cut back on,” he said. “And months into the study they said, ‘Thank you! We’ve had to do that so many times in the past.’”

Calorie counting has long been ingrained in the prevailing nutrition and weight loss advice. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, for example, tells people who are trying to lose weight to “write down the foods you eat and the beverages you drink, plus the calories they have, each day,” while making an effort to restrict the amount of calories they eat and increasing the amount of calories they burn through physical activity.

“Weight management is all about balancing the number of calories you take in with the number your body uses or burns off,” the agency says.

Yet the new study found that after one year of focusing on food quality, not calories, the two groups lost substantial amounts of weight. On average, the members of the low-carb group lost just over 13 pounds, while those in the low-fat group lost about 11.7 pounds. Both groups also saw improvements in other health markers, like reductions in their waist sizes, body fat, and blood sugar and blood pressure levels.

The researchers took DNA samples from each subject and analyzed a group of genetic variants that influence fat and carbohydrate metabolism. Ultimately the subjects’ genotypes did not appear to influence their responses to the diets.

The researchers also looked at whether people who secreted higher levels of insulin in response to carbohydrate intake — a barometer of insulin resistance — did better on the low-carb diet. Surprisingly, they did not, Dr. Gardner said, which was somewhat disappointing.

“It would have been sweet to say we have a simple clinical test that will point out whether you’re insulin resistant or not and whether you should eat more or less carbs,” he added.

Dr. Walter Willett, chairman of the nutrition department at the Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, said the study did not support a “precision medicine” approach to nutrition, but that future studies would be likely to look at many other genetic factors that could be significant. He said the most important message of the study was that a “high quality diet” produced substantial weight loss and that the percentage of calories from fat or carbs did not matter, which is consistent with other studies, including many that show that eating healthy fats and carbs can help prevent heart disease, diabetes and other diseases.

“The bottom line: Diet quality is important for both weight control and long-term well-being,” he said.

Dr. Gardner said it is not that calories don’t matter. After all, both groups ultimately ended up consuming fewer calories on average by the end of the study, even though they were not conscious of it. The point is that they did this by focusing on nutritious whole foods that satisfied their hunger.

“I think one place we go wrong is telling people to figure out how many calories they eat and then telling them to cut back on 500 calories, which makes them miserable,” he said. “We really need to focus on that foundational diet, which is more vegetables, more whole foods, less added sugar and less refined grains.”

A version of this article appears in print on Feb. 21, 2018, Section A, Page 9 of the New York editi

Corina1143

My very wise dietician told me one hint or help to control grabbing a candy bar or chips at the vending machine or when you stop for gas is to have a higher opinion of yourself and what you deserve--pick the one best and eat only that, nothing else will do. Lindt dark chocolate for me.
I'm not tempted by chips.
It didn't stop me from eating all the candy. But it did slow down my eating all the candy all the time. I would stop and think "do I really want this, or do I want to wait for the good stuff? "

PAV8888

So what happens when I load up on the good stuff? Because it is good stuff right? So why not load up on it?

My own opinion is that it is person dependent and I It may even depend on circumstances and morph over time.

I don't know why the minimally processed long quotation above falls under the quality versus quantity discussion.

There do exist many findings where a minimally processed diet is harder to overdo and promotes a healthier weight level. Yes, adhering to such will be helpful. But is it realistic to expect 100% compliance? Maybe. Maybe not.

I for one eat large amounts of minimally processed quantity (say 750g of frozen vegetables) which I supplement with relatively smaller % of my tdee than in the past quantity of more processed (and less nutrients for the calories) food

sollyn23l2

AdahPotatah2024 wrote: »

That's true. But if I were able embrace a quality over quantity mindset and not revert back to the quantity over quality mindset, would I maintain a healthy weight? I think some of it would depend on our individual definitions/opinions of quality.

I would say yes, you probably would, because overall they are generally more difficult to overeat. But, once again, that would be dependent on adherence. Just like with any diet. Most diets will work for weight loss, it's just wether or not the individual can adhere to it long term.

AnnPT77

AdahPotatah2024 wrote: »

That's true. But if I were able embrace a quality over quantity mindset and not revert back to the quantity over quality mindset, would I maintain a healthy weight? I think some of it would depend on our individual definitions/opinions of quality.

I think it would also depend on our individual responses. These kinds of studies generally assume the person is switching from the "Standard American Diet (SAD)" with quite a lot of sugar, refined flour, highly-processed foods, fast foods.

While I ate some of those foods occasionally, most of the eating style that got me overweight then obese was whole grains, veggies, fruits, etc. I'm absolutely capability of eating filling, nutritious food in excess of my TDEE - way in excess of my TDEE. I've been able to make some changes in my eating style to feel mostly full and happy while maintaining, but I could easily get fat again sticking entirely to healthy whole foods, eating ad libitum of whatever of those foods I wanted, even if completely restricting calorie-dense treat foods.

Based on reading others' posts here, this is not true for everyone, but it's true for me. I'm a hedonist, and food is tasty. I can eat a lot of it.

I'm sure it's true that most people will find whole foods more filling, and they tend to be less calorie dense, so it's not surprising that people who switch from SAD may consume fewer calories.

I admit, I'm strongly biased toward believing that there are few - maybe no - universals when it comes to tactics that will result in a healthier body weight. It's all individual, IMO.

And I agree that compliance is vital: Mysteriously to me, some people don't enjoy eating nutritionally high quality food. They call things "hyperpalatable" that I think are close to inedible, not even really food. Statistically speaking, this is me being weird, I know: I think Oreos are horrid rounds of brown fiberboard with denatured dollar-store toothpaste inside. But some people (who aren't me) like them, and other foods that are IMO unpleasant. And some people say they hate veggies. I can't even imagine.

If someone doesn't enjoy eating higher-quality food, they're not going to stick with it, generally.

AdahPotatah2024

I'm an advocate for a quality over quantity lifestyle in general. I just find it difficult to live my life overconsuming willy nilly, while knowing doing that plays a part in other's suffering and not having enough. Anyhow, MY version of a quality food day would be a chocolate croissant and coffee in the morning, sushi for lunch with extra sodium, and maybe a steak and lobster with a baked potato with extra butter and sour cream and side salad and a few glasses of wine...quality food, for me, is tasty and well made food, not necessarily the healthiest. So it probably would not help me lose weight.

ninerbuff

I think it's dependent on the person. For instance when it comes to clothing, and since the majority of the time I'm in gym clothing, I don't necessarily need the better quality because my physical output doesn't depend on a brand of clothing I wear. The exception is SHOES.
When it comes to food, I'm from a culture that grew up eating SPAM, eggs and white rice for breakfast, high sodium lunches and dinners and the majority of my family and relatives are of normal body weight. We just don't eat large portions with exceptions on holidays together. And trust me Filipino foods aren't the healthiest especially when we make pork dishes.
I'm for quality of food when I eat out. I won't go to an all you can eat sushi for $15.99 because I know the quality of sushi is likely bottom tier.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

sollyn23l2

AdahPotatah2024 wrote: »

I'm an advocate for a quality over quantity lifestyle in general. I just find it difficult to live my life overconsuming willy nilly, while knowing doing that plays a part in other's suffering and not having enough. Anyhow, MY version of a quality food day would be a chocolate croissant and coffee in the morning, sushi for lunch with extra sodium, and maybe a steak and lobster with a baked potato with extra butter and sour cream and side salad and a few glasses of wine...quality food, for me, is tasty and well made food, not necessarily the healthiest. So it probably would not help me lose weight.

Agreed. That style of quality... while I love it too, would be less likely to lead to weight loss without calorie monitoring.

AdahPotatah2024

This isn't much of a debate, haha..
@ninerbuff -a few of my family members in OK live on bologna sandwiches as most of their caloric intake and aren't extremely overweight. ??? I did a research paper, though, in college with 3/4 of the participants being my mom and her siblings and interestingly, those who considered themselves following a traditional diet according to their culture tended to be healthier and slimmer. For my family, a traditional diet is primarily "greens, beans, and sardines"

Corina1143

I'm in OK and a fried bologna sandwich is a rare and treasured treat! With mustard and plain chips. And a coke.

AdahPotatah2024

Yum!:D

tulips_and_tea

Re: this part: "“I think one place we go wrong is telling people to figure out how many calories they eat and then telling them to cut back on 500 calories, which makes them miserable,” he said. “We really need to focus on that foundational diet, which is more vegetables, more whole foods, less added sugar and less refined grains.” " Why not BOTH?

I'm definitely a quality over quantity person in most aspects of my life and definitely with food. I love good food, but I don't need mass quantities of it. I eat small portions of the foods I really like and then I know I'll get to eat again soon because I'll be hungry again soon. Works for me personally, but we're all different.

Anyway, yes, I do agree with most of the study you posted, but completely forgetting about calorie counting is not a good idea. Yes, we need to educate people as far as quality food, but we also need to know the general calorie (and macro) content as well. Well-balanced information is important.

kshama2001

AnnPT77 wrote: »

AdahPotatah2024 wrote: »

That's true. But if I were able embrace a quality over quantity mindset and not revert back to the quantity over quality mindset, would I maintain a healthy weight? I think some of it would depend on our individual definitions/opinions of quality.

I think it would also depend on our individual responses. These kinds of studies generally assume the person is switching from the "Standard American Diet (SAD)" with quite a lot of sugar, refined flour, highly-processed foods, fast foods.

While I ate some of those foods occasionally, most of the eating style that got me overweight then obese was whole grains, veggies, fruits, etc. I'm absolutely capability of eating filling, nutritious food in excess of my TDEE - way in excess of my TDEE. I've been able to make some changes in my eating style to feel mostly full and happy while maintaining, but I could easily get fat again sticking entirely to healthy whole foods, eating ad libitum of whatever of those foods I wanted, even if completely restricting calorie-dense treat foods.

Based on reading others' posts here, this is not true for everyone, but it's true for me. I'm a hedonist, and food is tasty. I can eat a lot of it.

I'm sure it's true that most people will find whole foods more filling, and they tend to be less calorie dense, so it's not surprising that people who switch from SAD may consume fewer calories.

I admit, I'm strongly biased toward believing that there are few - maybe no - universals when it comes to tactics that will result in a healthier body weight. It's all individual, IMO.

And I agree that compliance is vital: Mysteriously to me, some people don't enjoy eating nutritionally high quality food. They call things "hyperpalatable" that I think are close to inedible, not even really food. Statistically speaking, this is me being weird, I know: I think Oreos are horrid rounds of brown fiberboard with denatured dollar-store toothpaste inside. But some people (who aren't me) like them, and other foods that are IMO unpleasant. And some people say they hate veggies. I can't even imagine.

If someone doesn't enjoy eating higher-quality food, they're not going to stick with it, generally.

I don't like Oreos nearly as much as my own apple or carrot cake. But I can have a piece of my baked goods and feel satisfied. It's like a switch is flipped when I eat Oreos and I feel compelled to eat and eat and eat them. So even though I don't like them as much, because they are hyperpalatable, my brain's reward system is triggered:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperpalatable_food

Hyperpalatable food (HPF) combines high levels of fat, sugar, sodium, or carbohydrates to trigger the brain's reward system, encouraging excessive eating.[1] The concept of hyperpalatability is foundational to ultra-processed foods, which are usually engineered to have enjoyable qualities of sweetness, saltiness, or richness.[2] Hyperpalatable foods can stimulate the release of metabolic, stress, and appetite hormones that play a role in cravings and may interfere with the body's ability to regulate appetite and satiety.[3][4]

kshama2001

AdahPotatah2024 wrote: »

I'm an advocate for a quality over quantity lifestyle in general. I just find it difficult to live my life overconsuming willy nilly, while knowing doing that plays a part in other's suffering and not having enough. Anyhow, MY version of a quality food day would be a chocolate croissant and coffee in the morning, sushi for lunch with extra sodium, and maybe a steak and lobster with a baked potato with extra butter and sour cream and side salad and a few glasses of wine...quality food, for me, is tasty and well made food, not necessarily the healthiest. So it probably would not help me lose weight.

I think you could eat that way, as long as you were mindful of portions sizes and also got exercise.

That makes me think of the French. (There's more obesity now, but they've probably added in junk food and are more sedentary.)

The French Paradox refers specifically to "low incidence of coronary heart disease while having a diet relatively rich in saturated fats," but I also think of it in terms of low obesity despite lots of yummy foods.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_paradox

In "Lifestyle in France and the United States" (2010), one study reviewed identifies three major factors likely to be involved in the paradox:

• Walking (On average, French people walk briskly much more often than Americans.)
• Water (On average, French people drink more water and fewer sweetened drinks than Americans.)
• Fruit and vegetables (On average, French people consume more fresh fruits and vegetables than Americans do.)[13]

In his 2003 book, The Fat Fallacy: The French Diet Secrets to Permanent Weight Loss, Will Clower suggests the French paradox may be narrowed down to a few key factors, namely:

• Good fats versus bad fats – French people get up to 80% of their fat intake from dairy and vegetable sources, including whole milk, cheeses, and whole milk yogurt.
• Higher quantities of fish (at least three times a week).
• Smaller portions, eaten more slowly and divided among courses that let the body begin to digest food already consumed before more food is added.
• Lower sugar intake – American low-fat and no-fat foods often contain high concentrations of sugar. French diets avoid these products preferring full-fat versions without added sugar.
• Low incidence of snacks between meals.
• Avoidance of common American food items, such as soda, deep-fried foods, snack foods, and especially prepared foods which can typically make up a large percentage of the foods found in American grocery stores.

...Guiliano suggests that the key factors are:

• Smaller portion sizes: – she advocates the 50% rule, i.e. asking for half of whatever food one is offered, "la moitié, s'il vous plaît" in French[16]
• Savoring food to increase the feeling of satisfaction, choosing a small amount of high quality food rather than larger amounts of low quality food
• Eating 3 meals a day and not snacking
• Taking in plenty of liquid such as water, herbal tea and soup
• Sitting down and eating mindfully (no multitasking and eating while standing up, watching TV, or reading)
• Emphasizing freshness, variety, balance, and, above all, pleasure[15]

neanderthin

Chronic daily engagement of elevated insulin is what I'm trying to avoid for my overall health and as far as this thread is concerned, quality trumps quantity imo.