All calories ARE NOT created equal !!!
Options
Replies
-
You just know these threads are going to turn into trainwrecks.
I don't think there has ever been a productive topic start this way.
Why are you an authority on this topic and why do you feel you're in a position to teach people about this? Why the use of capitals and exclamation marks in the title?
Anyhow, I actually agree 100% with your assertion that calories of fat, protein, or carb all have different effects on weightloss. I agree that eating the same amount of calories low-carb makes me lose more quickly than high-carb.
I understand your wanting to share this knowledge with the world, but trying to sound like an authority on the subject and 'teaching' people your ways is not going to convert anyone and is only going to fuel those who believe that 1800 calories of junk = 1800 calories of healthy food.
OOOPPPSSS! Sorry:sad: :sad: right, could have come at it differently. These are my own opinions of what works and doesn't work for me. After the frustration of the scale disappointment after u feel u have worked so hard, It felt a little good to go back to what works FOR ME (caps for emphasis). I tried what others do and it didn't work for me. I was trying to put something out there that may give an answer to ones like me, Not for the majority, who can do this weight lose thing with ease. Like cut out soda and lose 20 lbs.:huh:0 -
Blah blah blah sucrose, calories, carbs, rodents, sugar, protein... People get fat because they eat too much and don't exercise.
LOL :laugh: Sooooo True!0 -
calories in/ calories out is the only thing that works.....weight watcher is the TOP leading diet plan and that is what they live by.......just heard that on TV
But can't you eat unlimited vegetables on weight watchers? If that is the case, how can they believe a calorie is a calorie?
An AMEN to that!!!! the SCIENCE that weight watchers is following is eat less bad stuff (more points) VS. eat more good stuff (less points) So it's not the amount of calories you take in, sometimes it has to do with WHAT you take in.
True there are lots of factors that come into play like what makes you fuller, have more energy, etc. But some are looking at only the surface of this discussion. We are not talking about science. We are talking about what works for some does not work for ALL. Depending on each person's life style, preferences, etc.
Wrong again. WW keeps their customers at an extremely low calories count. Each point is approximately 40-50 calories depending on who you ask. That's 1040-1300 calories for a person on 26 daily points, plus an allotted amount of extra weekly points that are optional to use, plus any exercise points they gain. Most of the people I know on WW exercise very little or when they do, they don't add the exercise points back. They also don't eat an amount of vegetables significant enough to cause them to go over their deficit and gain weight back.
That's why WW works so long as you're following it. The second you stop and eat over your maintenance (which MANY people do because they never get to maintenance while in the program and so have no idea how much they should be eating to maintain their loss) you gain weight back and very quickly.
listen up. U are referring to their old out of date system. WW points plus lets u eat unlimited fruit and non starch veggies. their claim is I can eat a 100 bananas (10,000 calories) and STILL lose weight. Come on? I think they do have Research on their side.
Not sure if Srs, you really believe you could eat 10k cals of bananas and lose weight cause weight watchers says so? Appeal to authority0 -
calories in/ calories out is the only thing that works.....weight watcher is the TOP leading diet plan and that is what they live by.......just heard that on TV
But can't you eat unlimited vegetables on weight watchers? If that is the case, how can they believe a calorie is a calorie?
An AMEN to that!!!! the SCIENCE that weight watchers is following is eat less bad stuff (more points) VS. eat more good stuff (less points) So it's not the amount of calories you take in, sometimes it has to do with WHAT you take in.
True there are lots of factors that come into play like what makes you fuller, have more energy, etc. But some are looking at only the surface of this discussion. We are not talking about science. We are talking about what works for some does not work for ALL. Depending on each person's life style, preferences, etc.
Wrong again. WW keeps their customers at an extremely low calories count. Each point is approximately 40-50 calories depending on who you ask. That's 1040-1300 calories for a person on 26 daily points, plus an allotted amount of extra weekly points that are optional to use, plus any exercise points they gain. Most of the people I know on WW exercise very little or when they do, they don't add the exercise points back. They also don't eat an amount of vegetables significant enough to cause them to go over their deficit and gain weight back.
That's why WW works so long as you're following it. The second you stop and eat over your maintenance (which MANY people do because they never get to maintenance while in the program and so have no idea how much they should be eating to maintain their loss) you gain weight back and very quickly.
listen up. U are referring to their old out of date system. WW points plus lets u eat unlimited fruit and non starch veggies. their claim is I can eat a 100 bananas (10,000 calories) and STILL lose weight. Come on? I think they do have Research on their side.
Not sure if Srs, you really believe you could eat 10k cals of bananas and lose weight cause weight watchers says so? Appeal to authority
hey, i am just saying. thats WW claim not mine. I know they are just trying to encourage people to eat healthier instead of using all their points for junk. I am just saying, the calorie is not always the golden rule, sometimes it's what's in the calorie that counts.:glasses:0 -
See, this is the kind of stuff that confuses me. I was under the impression that it didn't really matter WHAT you ate, as long as you stayed in a deficit, you would lose weight? Then I see posts like this and it makes me think I'm doing something wrong. I have very little weight to lose in the first place and since it's coming off so slow (5lbs in 3 months) this post makes me think i'm doing something wrong
It depends. People who struggle with losing weight may have other issues. For example, I had trouble losing weight because my insulin was incredibly high, and for some *insert magic here* reasons I was "unable" to lose weight. I don't know - but the calorie thing now works for me as long as I don't eat many bad carbs because my body as a reflect produces a lot of insulin when I eat carbs. A calorie is a calorie, but there are other things that could interfere with burning such calories I guess!0 -
OP said it's been a week. When you cut carbs, you lose water in the first week due to glycogen depletion. That's all.
Don't worry, OP will be back in a month or so.0 -
See, this is the kind of stuff that confuses me. I was under the impression that it didn't really matter WHAT you ate, as long as you stayed in a deficit, you would lose weight? Then I see posts like this and it makes me think I'm doing something wrong. I have very little weight to lose in the first place and since it's coming off so slow (5lbs in 3 months) this post makes me think i'm doing something wrong
It depends. People who struggle with losing weight may have other issues. For example, I had trouble losing weight because my insulin was incredibly high, and for some *insert magic here* reasons I was "unable" to lose weight. I don't know - but the calorie thing now works for me as long as I don't eat many bad carbs because my body as a reflect produces a lot of insulin when I eat carbs. A calorie is a calorie, but there are other things that could interfere with burning such calories I guess!
That's what I should have said. LOL. :ohwell: oh well :drinker:0 -
OP said it's been a week. When you cut carbs, you lose water in the first week due to glycogen depletion. That's all.
Don't worry, OP will be back in a month or so.
ok, my goodness. It's been more than a week. my mistake... two weeks :yawn: yes, you will see me back, but at my goal weight. :happy: after losing 70 lbs two years ago with this method. me going back to it and me STOP trying to lose weight like everyone else. losing these last 10 lbs of the 28 lbs I gained back will be a breeze, Now that i know what works for me.0 -
Really? This drama again? Smh.0
-
What the hell does 1,200 calories of broccoli look like? :noway:0
-
listen up. U are referring to their old out of date system. WW points plus lets u eat unlimited fruit and non starch veggies. their claim is I can eat a 100 bananas (10,000 calories) and STILL lose weight. Come on? I think they do have Research on their side.
actually you are wrong. They make it clear in their literature that they mean one portion and no more then a certain number of portions (5-7) a day, because they have research on their side and know that overeating fruit and veggies will get you fat too.0 -
calories in/ calories out is the only thing that works.....weight watcher is the TOP leading diet plan and that is what they live by.......just heard that on TV
But can't you eat unlimited vegetables on weight watchers? If that is the case, how can they believe a calorie is a calorie?
An AMEN to that!!!! the SCIENCE that weight watchers is following is eat less bad stuff (more points) VS. eat more good stuff (less points) So it's not the amount of calories you take in, sometimes it has to do with WHAT you take in.
True there are lots of factors that come into play like what makes you fuller, have more energy, etc. But some are looking at only the surface of this discussion. We are not talking about science. We are talking about what works for some does not work for ALL. Depending on each person's life style, preferences, etc.
Wrong again. WW keeps their customers at an extremely low calories count. Each point is approximately 40-50 calories depending on who you ask. That's 1040-1300 calories for a person on 26 daily points, plus an allotted amount of extra weekly points that are optional to use, plus any exercise points they gain. Most of the people I know on WW exercise very little or when they do, they don't add the exercise points back. They also don't eat an amount of vegetables significant enough to cause them to go over their deficit and gain weight back.
That's why WW works so long as you're following it. The second you stop and eat over your maintenance (which MANY people do because they never get to maintenance while in the program and so have no idea how much they should be eating to maintain their loss) you gain weight back and very quickly.
listen up. U are referring to their old out of date system. WW points plus lets u eat unlimited fruit and non starch veggies. their claim is I can eat a 100 bananas (10,000 calories) and STILL lose weight. Come on? I think they do have Research on their side.
Wutdafug? Research/eat 10,000 cals/lose weight?
Damn OP, pass over whatever it is you're drinking, 'cause that is seriously twisted.
Oh yeah, and pass the gassy vegetables.0 -
calories in/ calories out is the only thing that works.....weight watcher is the TOP leading diet plan and that is what they live by.......just heard that on TV
But can't you eat unlimited vegetables on weight watchers? If that is the case, how can they believe a calorie is a calorie?
An AMEN to that!!!! the SCIENCE that weight watchers is following is eat less bad stuff (more points) VS. eat more good stuff (less points) So it's not the amount of calories you take in, sometimes it has to do with WHAT you take in.
True there are lots of factors that come into play like what makes you fuller, have more energy, etc. But some are looking at only the surface of this discussion. We are not talking about science. We are talking about what works for some does not work for ALL. Depending on each person's life style, preferences, etc.
Wrong again. WW keeps their customers at an extremely low calories count. Each point is approximately 40-50 calories depending on who you ask. That's 1040-1300 calories for a person on 26 daily points, plus an allotted amount of extra weekly points that are optional to use, plus any exercise points they gain. Most of the people I know on WW exercise very little or when they do, they don't add the exercise points back. They also don't eat an amount of vegetables significant enough to cause them to go over their deficit and gain weight back.
That's why WW works so long as you're following it. The second you stop and eat over your maintenance (which MANY people do because they never get to maintenance while in the program and so have no idea how much they should be eating to maintain their loss) you gain weight back and very quickly.
listen up. U are referring to their old out of date system. WW points plus lets u eat unlimited fruit and non starch veggies. their claim is I can eat a 100 bananas (10,000 calories) and STILL lose weight. Come on? I think they do have Research on their side.
Nope...it still works the exact same way. Go ahead and try and eat 100 bananas. Heck. Try and eat 10 and only 10 bananas throughout the day for a week and see how you feel.0 -
I know people like to think that McDonald's calories are the same as whole foods calories, but I've also found that this isn't true. Everyone hates hearing it, but when I switched from strict calorie counting to eating whole foods with limited wheat and dairy the pounds finally started coming off. The belly is FINALLY getting flatter after years of trying different tactics! Honestly I may be an exception and have some sort of wheat, dairy, and additive sensitivities. I'm just saying if what you're doing isn't working, try something else!
I hated the paleo promoters for ever (was vegan for 3 years)! But after years of hearing about the success of people eating this way, I've given it a try and it's working for me. As much as I hated to admit it at first, eating (mostly) paleo has worked almost effortlessly. I don't even follow all the rules all the time! Just doing clean eating most of the time with very little wheat or dairy has my body changing shape. Don't knock it until you've tried it I suppose...
:laugh:
Not think, we know.
Because a calorie is a calorie.
Oh for crying out loud. You recently found what works for YOU (because you've obviously struggled) and therefore you KNOW all the answers? What? Since when? A year ago?
<----Actually, been a member since 2010, see?
And I do not claim to know all the answers, but I do know this: A calorie IS a calorie, regardless of what food it comes from.
Crud. I've been gaining and losing weight for almost 30 years. I'm sort of good at both. Listen. I'm not downing the calorie thing. I pretty much subscribe. But I'm not convinced that simple carbs don't cause inflammation. Is that fair? Science evolves...
Wow, this thread took an interesting turn after I left work yesterday.
In response to this, I agree that carbs cause water retention and some weight gain. However, that is not what the OP is saying. There's a difference between saying "Low carb works for me" and "I can eat whatever I want as long as it's not carbs, and I don't have to be in a calorie deficit to lose weight."
No one is debating the fact that eating a diet of all carbs will have different results than a diet of all protein (or at least they shouldn't be debating it). The main sticking point with this thread is that the OP thinks calories don't matter as long as you limit the carbs.0 -
Wow, this thread took an interesting turn after I left work yesterday.
In response to this, I agree that carbs cause water retention and some weight gain. However, that is not what the OP is saying. There's a difference between saying "Low carb works for me" and "I can eat whatever I want as long as it's not carbs, and I don't have to be in a calorie deficit to lose weight."
No one is debating the fact that eating a diet of all carbs will have different results than a diet of all protein (or at least they shouldn't be debating it). The main sticking point with this thread is that the OP thinks calories don't matter as long as you limit the carbs.
What can you expect when you have people who don't understand low carb diets (on both sides of the fence) arguing about calories? The saddest part is when people start talking about when they and others joined MFP, as if making an account on this site gives you any sort of cred when it comes to nutrition. This whole debate should be settled by saying both caloric intake and macronutrient intake matter, but instead it's a pissing contest and people battling over semantics. Then again, it's an argument on the Internet, so no reason to expect anything more from it.
0 -
Wow, this thread took an interesting turn after I left work yesterday.
In response to this, I agree that carbs cause water retention and some weight gain. However, that is not what the OP is saying. There's a difference between saying "Low carb works for me" and "I can eat whatever I want as long as it's not carbs, and I don't have to be in a calorie deficit to lose weight."
No one is debating the fact that eating a diet of all carbs will have different results than a diet of all protein (or at least they shouldn't be debating it). The main sticking point with this thread is that the OP thinks calories don't matter as long as you limit the carbs.
What can you expect when you have people who don't understand low carb diets (on both sides of the fence) arguing about calories? The saddest part is when people start talking about when they and others joined MFP, as if making an account on this site gives you any sort of cred when it comes to nutrition. This whole debate should be settled by saying both caloric intake and macronutrient intake matter, but instead it's a pissing contest and people battling over semantics. Then again, it's an argument on the Internet, so no reason to expect anything more from it.
I'm going to try the "eat 10,000 bananas a day" diet I saw listed above.0 -
Wow, this thread took an interesting turn after I left work yesterday.
In response to this, I agree that carbs cause water retention and some weight gain. However, that is not what the OP is saying. There's a difference between saying "Low carb works for me" and "I can eat whatever I want as long as it's not carbs, and I don't have to be in a calorie deficit to lose weight."
No one is debating the fact that eating a diet of all carbs will have different results than a diet of all protein (or at least they shouldn't be debating it). The main sticking point with this thread is that the OP thinks calories don't matter as long as you limit the carbs.
What can you expect when you have people who don't understand low carb diets (on both sides of the fence) arguing about calories? The saddest part is when people start talking about when they and others joined MFP, as if making an account on this site gives you any sort of cred when it comes to nutrition. This whole debate should be settled by saying both caloric intake and macronutrient intake matter, but instead it's a pissing contest and people battling over semantics. Then again, it's an argument on the Internet, so no reason to expect anything more from it.
I'm going to try the "eat 10,000 bananas a day" diet I saw listed above.
What could go wrong?
0 -
Calories in VS. Calories out is not TRUE! :noway: I was staying under calories (strictly) & working out hard (whats considered hard for me. lol.), but eating whatever I wanted. That didn't work. I was losing really slowly and weight would fluctuate like crazy. ie, gain few lbs, lose them back, then lose half a lb from where i started. It was crazy. I was also crazy hungry all the time. :explode: Ok, cut down a little on the carbs, now I am back on track. :drinker: I am not even working out as hard and still losing more weight :laugh: . Now that I have cut the carbs down to one carb- enriched meal per day, for the last week or so, the weight loss is more steady and consistent. Everyone's body is different. Some people do well eating lots of carbs, and still lose, as long as they stay under their calories. Not me! Some have Weight/ Bloating issues eating a lot of meat, protein, or consuming a lot of sodium.
Considering I am a controlled diabetic (I don't take meds b/c my blood sugar is regulated now that I have lost weight.) my body still does not like a lot of carbohydrates (sugar). It does not process and break them down well. Carbs turn straight to stored fat in our bodies. Our bodies burn a protein for fuel before it will chooses a carb for fuel. It will just store the carb as fat. Now I am consuming more protein. I am not on any low carb plan, I am just eating what for one meal per day, then the other meals are mainly, meat & low carb veggies.
So find out what your body's glitch is. If you are struggling with the scale and you seem to be doing everything right, do a process of elimination to your diet. Not cutting things out, but decreasing your consumption of that particular culprit, whether it be protein (meat), carbs (bread, pasta, rice, wheat, potatoes, corn, sweets, sugar, milk, peas), gassy veggies, etc.
Open your diary and let us look at these lengthy periods of detailed logging with calorie deficit but no weight loss.0 -
See, this is the kind of stuff that confuses me. I was under the impression that it didn't really matter WHAT you ate, as long as you stayed in a deficit, you would lose weight? Then I see posts like this and it makes me think I'm doing something wrong. I have very little weight to lose in the first place and since it's coming off so slow (5lbs in 3 months) this post makes me think i'm doing something wrong
It depends. People who struggle with losing weight may have other issues. For example, I had trouble losing weight because my insulin was incredibly high, and for some *insert magic here* reasons I was "unable" to lose weight. I don't know - but the calorie thing now works for me as long as I don't eat many bad carbs because my body as a reflect produces a lot of insulin when I eat carbs. A calorie is a calorie, but there are other things that could interfere with burning such calories I guess!
what the heck is a bad carb? Are there foods I should be avoiding? I'm asking because I have been creating a deficit and working out and I am still not losing. I am constantly bloated and retaining water. It makes me think the food I'm eating is backfiring on me. I don't eat a lot of junk, but I don't eat clean either. Posts like this make me feel bad for eating fast food on occasion even though i'm still creating a deficit. ughhh. I log every single thing that goes in my mouth and a lot of times I try to OVERESTIMATE to give myself some leeway just in case I am wrong. I am in the green everyday and I am still either putting on water weight, or staying the same. I'm just so frustrated, I don't even know what to do anymore. It makes me want to give up but i know if I do that I won't get anywhere for sure:frown:
0 -
See, this is the kind of stuff that confuses me. I was under the impression that it didn't really matter WHAT you ate, as long as you stayed in a deficit, you would lose weight? Then I see posts like this and it makes me think I'm doing something wrong. I have very little weight to lose in the first place and since it's coming off so slow (5lbs in 3 months) this post makes me think i'm doing something wrong
It depends. People who struggle with losing weight may have other issues. For example, I had trouble losing weight because my insulin was incredibly high, and for some *insert magic here* reasons I was "unable" to lose weight. I don't know - but the calorie thing now works for me as long as I don't eat many bad carbs because my body as a reflect produces a lot of insulin when I eat carbs. A calorie is a calorie, but there are other things that could interfere with burning such calories I guess!
what the heck is a bad carb? Are there foods I should be avoiding? I'm asking because I have been creating a deficit and working out and I am still not losing. I am constantly bloated and retaining water. It makes me think the food I'm eating is backfiring on me. I don't eat a lot of junk, but I don't eat clean either. Posts like this make me feel bad for eating fast food on occasion even though i'm still creating a deficit. ughhh. I log every single thing that goes in my mouth and a lot of times I try to OVERESTIMATE to give myself some leeway just in case I am wrong. I am in the green everyday and I am still either putting on water weight, or staying the same. I'm just so frustrated, I don't even know what to do anymore. It makes me want to give up but i know if I do that I won't get anywhere for sure:frown:
There's no such thing as a bad carb. Carbs can make you retain water, though. How many calories are you eating, and what are your workouts? How long have you not been losing? I noticed you don't have a lot of weight to lose.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions