A Calorie is NOT just a Calorie
Replies
-
I've been struggling with knowing the truth if it matters where my calories come from.. found this AWESOME article that puts logic to it all. Worth the read
http://authoritynutrition.com/debunking-the-calorie-myth/
Oh, again? How exciting, and this link says 'authority' in it! :grumble:
I feed my cats Authority cat food. I wonder if these are the same people.
In...
...just to see if the meat is for a cat.0 -
All this says is that people tend to have problems keeping a diet. That's not exactly anything new.And science people want science here you go:
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/5/899S.ful
"Thermodynamics dictate that a calorie is a calorie regardless of the macronutrient composition of the diet. Further research on differences in the composition of weight loss and on the influence of satiety on compliance with energy-restricted diets is needed to explain the observed increase in weight loss with diets high in protein and/or low in carbohydrate. "
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/obesity-prevention-source/obesity-causes/diet-and-weight/
"Conventional wisdom says that since a calorie is a calorie, regardless of its source, the best advice for weight control is simply to eat less and exercise more. Yet emerging research suggests that some foods and eating patterns may make it easier to keep calories in check, while others may make people more likely to overeat."
And one of my favorite quotes:
"Thus, studies using extreme diets may be useful for probing biochemical pathways, but they have no relevance to the human diet or to current consumption."
That isn't "all" it says. It says what common sense says. A calorie is a calorie just as a pound is a pound, but that is incomplete information with regard to devising a weight loss plan that is likely to result in success.
really I guess I haven't been successful...my weight loss plan was devised on the premise a calorie is a calorie and as long I eat leas calories than I burn I will lose weight...and as long as I eat my maintenance calories I will stay at the same weight regardless of where those calories come from.
I guess 42lbs and 8% BF loss is not sucess...how much do I have to lose to be considered a success?0 -
You should come over to this thread:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1195099-i-miss-food?page=2
And speak some of your truth!
+10 -
I'm thinking your misread that. Weightloss plans are less successful when you chose food that does not keep you satiated. Mostly because you're still hungry, so you continue to eat until you over eat. IIFYM means that you eat what you want in moderate. What moderation means is different for everyone because they're going to have different caloric needs from one another and satiety is going to be different as well. As I said like 8 pages back, I feel full when I have snacks full of protein, but I have a friend who doesn't; she feels full after carbs. We both eat within our calorie allowance, but what we choose to eat may vary based on what makes us feel full.
All this says is that people tend to have problems keeping a diet. That's not exactly anything new.And science people want science here you go:
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/5/899S.ful
"Thermodynamics dictate that a calorie is a calorie regardless of the macronutrient composition of the diet. Further research on differences in the composition of weight loss and on the influence of satiety on compliance with energy-restricted diets is needed to explain the observed increase in weight loss with diets high in protein and/or low in carbohydrate. "
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/obesity-prevention-source/obesity-causes/diet-and-weight/
"Conventional wisdom says that since a calorie is a calorie, regardless of its source, the best advice for weight control is simply to eat less and exercise more. Yet emerging research suggests that some foods and eating patterns may make it easier to keep calories in check, while others may make people more likely to overeat."
And one of my favorite quotes:
"Thus, studies using extreme diets may be useful for probing biochemical pathways, but they have no relevance to the human diet or to current consumption."
That isn't "all" it says. It says what common sense says. A calorie is a calorie just as a pound is a pound, but that is incomplete information with regard to devising a weight loss plan that is likely to result in success.
really I guess I haven't been successful...my weight loss plan was devised on the premise a calorie is a calorie and as long I eat leas calories than I burn I will lose weight...and as long as I eat my maintenance calories I will stay at the same weight regardless of where those calories come from.
I guess 42lbs and 8% BF loss is not sucess...how much do I have to lose to be considered a success?
I don't think anyone is saying your aren't successful.0 -
I'm thinking your misread that. Weightloss plans are less successful when you chose food that does not keep you satiated. Mostly because you're still hungry, so you continue to eat until you over eat. IIFYM means that you eat what you want in moderate. What moderation means is different for everyone because they're going to have different caloric needs from one another and satiety is going to be different as well. As I said like 8 pages back, I feel full when I have snacks full of protein, but I have a friend who doesn't; she feels full after carbs. We both eat within our calorie allowance, but what we choose to eat may vary based on what makes us feel full.
All this says is that people tend to have problems keeping a diet. That's not exactly anything new.And science people want science here you go:
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/5/899S.ful
"Thermodynamics dictate that a calorie is a calorie regardless of the macronutrient composition of the diet. Further research on differences in the composition of weight loss and on the influence of satiety on compliance with energy-restricted diets is needed to explain the observed increase in weight loss with diets high in protein and/or low in carbohydrate. "
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/obesity-prevention-source/obesity-causes/diet-and-weight/
"Conventional wisdom says that since a calorie is a calorie, regardless of its source, the best advice for weight control is simply to eat less and exercise more. Yet emerging research suggests that some foods and eating patterns may make it easier to keep calories in check, while others may make people more likely to overeat."
And one of my favorite quotes:
"Thus, studies using extreme diets may be useful for probing biochemical pathways, but they have no relevance to the human diet or to current consumption."
That isn't "all" it says. It says what common sense says. A calorie is a calorie just as a pound is a pound, but that is incomplete information with regard to devising a weight loss plan that is likely to result in success.
really I guess I haven't been successful...my weight loss plan was devised on the premise a calorie is a calorie and as long I eat leas calories than I burn I will lose weight...and as long as I eat my maintenance calories I will stay at the same weight regardless of where those calories come from.
I guess 42lbs and 8% BF loss is not sucess...how much do I have to lose to be considered a success?
I don't think anyone is saying your aren't successful.
I bolded the part I was referring to..because in my world weight loss is about calories...and that is a sucess...I have lost weight counting just my calories
The other part is about health...I watch my macros carefully and make sure I hit them...but that is about health not weight loss and that is a success..
I just don't believe people are into health when they get here it's about weight loss and for that...a calories restricted diet is all you need.0 -
All this says is that people tend to have problems keeping a diet. That's not exactly anything new.And science people want science here you go:
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/5/899S.ful
"Thermodynamics dictate that a calorie is a calorie regardless of the macronutrient composition of the diet. Further research on differences in the composition of weight loss and on the influence of satiety on compliance with energy-restricted diets is needed to explain the observed increase in weight loss with diets high in protein and/or low in carbohydrate. "
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/obesity-prevention-source/obesity-causes/diet-and-weight/
"Conventional wisdom says that since a calorie is a calorie, regardless of its source, the best advice for weight control is simply to eat less and exercise more. Yet emerging research suggests that some foods and eating patterns may make it easier to keep calories in check, while others may make people more likely to overeat."
And one of my favorite quotes:
"Thus, studies using extreme diets may be useful for probing biochemical pathways, but they have no relevance to the human diet or to current consumption."
The two links both point out that a calorie is a calorie which disputes some peoples claims in this thread. That mere simple concept alone is makes some people struggle. Many newbs feel they need to diet and do it extreme to make progress. I am clearly showing them it's not true. There are really only two things for weight loss: 1. a calorie deficit and 2. diet adherence. The rest is to support your fitness goals.0 -
Ah, I viewed it as long term success. If you chose a weight loss plan that is low carb because you think it works better, then as long as you are in a calorie deficit, then you will lose weight and succeed. But, if you love carbs, it's not going to be sustainable. And if you are feeling groggy and lacking energy because you don't have carbs to fuel your workouts, then you may end up binging on carbs and overeating, which would not be successful. Other people eat low carb all their life and don't have a problem.
I'm thinking your misread that. Weightloss plans are less successful when you chose food that does not keep you satiated. Mostly because you're still hungry, so you continue to eat until you over eat. IIFYM means that you eat what you want in moderate. What moderation means is different for everyone because they're going to have different caloric needs from one another and satiety is going to be different as well. As I said like 8 pages back, I feel full when I have snacks full of protein, but I have a friend who doesn't; she feels full after carbs. We both eat within our calorie allowance, but what we choose to eat may vary based on what makes us feel full.
All this says is that people tend to have problems keeping a diet. That's not exactly anything new.And science people want science here you go:
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/5/899S.ful
"Thermodynamics dictate that a calorie is a calorie regardless of the macronutrient composition of the diet. Further research on differences in the composition of weight loss and on the influence of satiety on compliance with energy-restricted diets is needed to explain the observed increase in weight loss with diets high in protein and/or low in carbohydrate. "
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/obesity-prevention-source/obesity-causes/diet-and-weight/
"Conventional wisdom says that since a calorie is a calorie, regardless of its source, the best advice for weight control is simply to eat less and exercise more. Yet emerging research suggests that some foods and eating patterns may make it easier to keep calories in check, while others may make people more likely to overeat."
And one of my favorite quotes:
"Thus, studies using extreme diets may be useful for probing biochemical pathways, but they have no relevance to the human diet or to current consumption."
That isn't "all" it says. It says what common sense says. A calorie is a calorie just as a pound is a pound, but that is incomplete information with regard to devising a weight loss plan that is likely to result in success.
really I guess I haven't been successful...my weight loss plan was devised on the premise a calorie is a calorie and as long I eat leas calories than I burn I will lose weight...and as long as I eat my maintenance calories I will stay at the same weight regardless of where those calories come from.
I guess 42lbs and 8% BF loss is not sucess...how much do I have to lose to be considered a success?
I don't think anyone is saying your aren't successful.
I bolded the part I was referring to..because in my world weight loss is about calories...and that is a sucess...I have lost weight counting just my calories
The other part is about health...I watch my macros carefully and make sure I hit them...but that is about health not weight loss and that is a success..
I just don't believe people are into health when they get here it's about weight loss and for that...a calories restricted diet is all you need.
While the over all equation is eat less, move more and calories in< calories out, effective weight loss and the breakdown of macros are going to depend on health goals, satiety, and personal preference. If everyone were forced to eat the exact same amount of foods (proportionate to their caloric needs), macro breakdown or types of food, it wouldn't be successful. Food choice is going to be important because most people like to enjoy what they eat.0 -
All this says is that people tend to have problems keeping a diet. That's not exactly anything new.And science people want science here you go:
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/5/899S.ful
"Thermodynamics dictate that a calorie is a calorie regardless of the macronutrient composition of the diet. Further research on differences in the composition of weight loss and on the influence of satiety on compliance with energy-restricted diets is needed to explain the observed increase in weight loss with diets high in protein and/or low in carbohydrate. "
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/obesity-prevention-source/obesity-causes/diet-and-weight/
"Conventional wisdom says that since a calorie is a calorie, regardless of its source, the best advice for weight control is simply to eat less and exercise more. Yet emerging research suggests that some foods and eating patterns may make it easier to keep calories in check, while others may make people more likely to overeat."
And one of my favorite quotes:
"Thus, studies using extreme diets may be useful for probing biochemical pathways, but they have no relevance to the human diet or to current consumption."
That isn't "all" it says. It says what common sense says. A calorie is a calorie just as a pound is a pound, but that is incomplete information with regard to devising a weight loss plan that is likely to result in success.
Nope. Because I eats what I want (IIFYM) and I've been succeeding.0 -
All this says is that people tend to have problems keeping a diet. That's not exactly anything new.And science people want science here you go:
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/5/899S.ful
"Thermodynamics dictate that a calorie is a calorie regardless of the macronutrient composition of the diet. Further research on differences in the composition of weight loss and on the influence of satiety on compliance with energy-restricted diets is needed to explain the observed increase in weight loss with diets high in protein and/or low in carbohydrate. "
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/obesity-prevention-source/obesity-causes/diet-and-weight/
"Conventional wisdom says that since a calorie is a calorie, regardless of its source, the best advice for weight control is simply to eat less and exercise more. Yet emerging research suggests that some foods and eating patterns may make it easier to keep calories in check, while others may make people more likely to overeat."
And one of my favorite quotes:
"Thus, studies using extreme diets may be useful for probing biochemical pathways, but they have no relevance to the human diet or to current consumption."
That isn't "all" it says. It says what common sense says. A calorie is a calorie just as a pound is a pound, but that is incomplete information with regard to devising a weight loss plan that is likely to result in success.
really I guess I haven't been successful...my weight loss plan was devised on the premise a calorie is a calorie and as long I eat leas calories than I burn I will lose weight...and as long as I eat my maintenance calories I will stay at the same weight regardless of where those calories come from.
I guess 42lbs and 8% BF loss is not sucess...how much do I have to lose to be considered a success?
I guess you like to fight with people on the internet. I guess you like finding a difference of opinion even when none exists.
I don't know if you've been successful or not. I made no commentary on your personal success and really don't know what you're talking about in that regard. Everyone who has ever lost weight has done so by eating fewer calories than they burned. I didn't say, suggest, or imply otherwise. In fact, I said "A calorie is a calorie..."
Why is everyone so interested in internet jousting instead of sharing useful information? We are saying exactly the same thing. Why are you trying to fight with me? As I and several others have said, a calorie is a calorie and weight loss is math. But different foods do different things to us. I know when I eat a lot of sugar, I have a sugar crash and am very vulnerable to making poor decisions that will result in a calorie surplus. So I don't eat a lot of sugar. I eat some. I have a little dark chocolate almost every day. But not a lot.
Does sugar make me fat? Yes. And No. Directly, no, but the result of eating too much if it tends to make me gain weight. Why is it so hard to accept an answer that isn't one extreme or the other? Why is it a surprise that losing weight, like so many things, is a balance? Saying dogmatically that a calorie is a calorie is setting people up to fail just as badly as telling them they can never eat the foods they love. Neither strategy is likely to result in long term, successful weight loss for most people. And presenting either side without acknowledging the other is poor advice.
Do the math. Know how it works. Study strategies that make it more likely for you to be successful at hitting your calorie goals over the long run. Come up with a balance that works for you and is sustainable. Some people are happy eating nothing but salad and tofu. Most aren't. If you aren't, learn how to include the foods you enjoy in proper moderation to achieve your goals.
Leaving it at "a calorie is a calorie" is the "don't do drugs" of weight loss. It's accurate. Of course it's accurate. A calorie is a unit of measure. Knowing how a calorie deficit leads to weight loss is fundamental for losing weight. But knowing how to create a calorie deficit in a diet that you're likely to sustain for the long run and will let you enjoy your life is more complicated. Knowing what different foods do once you eat them can help you do that. And saying so =/= saying a calorie is something other than a calorie.0 -
Just when I thought this thread was slowing down because I've been F5'ing it.
0 -
I don't think you understand what ketones are. When your body doesn't have enough insulin to help it break down glocuse into the blood for energy, it breaks fat down into ketones instead. This is NOT normal and is also VERY dangerous to the body. It's what happens to people with Type I Diabetes that puts them into Diabetic Ketoacidosis and potentially a coma, and even death. It doesn't happen in the NORMAL body.
Please stop with the ketone malarky.
Diabetic ketoacidosis occurs due to a combination of different factors, not simply the presence of ketones in your blood. Mere ketones alone are insufficient to diagnose a state of diabetic ketoacidosis and eating a low carb diet that results in a state of ketosis does not magically lead to diabetic ketoacidosis. Please stop with the fear mongering.
Medical facts: http://www.diabetes.org/living-with-diabetes/complications/ketoacidosis-dka.html
Please read your own link in context so that you'll understand that the mere presence of ketones in the body, without additional factors, does not lead to diabetic ketoacidosis. Yes, ketones are present in the body when diabetic ketoacidosis occurs, but so are a lot of other substances. That doesn't mean those other substances by themselves are "NOT normal and ... VERY dangerous to the body." Ketones in and of themselves do not cause diabetic ketoacidosis, and simply because your body is producing ketones does not mean you will end up in a state of diabetic ketoacidosis.
Having some ketones in your blood/urine when doing a low carb diet is completely different from having a high level of ketones in your blood/urine when you're a diabetic whose body is not producing/getting enough insulin. Equating the two is nonsense.
Please see my response to audii regarding this issue.
Ketoacidosis and dietary ketosis are two very different things. Ketoacidosis primarily happens in type 1 diabetics because their bodies are unable to uptake glucose therefore their livers produce ketones to fuel the brain. In dietary ketosis your liver glycogen stores are depleted and to keep blood sugar levels even your liver produces ketones to fuel the brain and uses gluconeogenisis to produce satisfactory blood glucose levels. Dietary ketosis is a perfectly normal condition when carb consumption is low and ketoacidosis is a medical emergency.0 -
Great article! Thanks for sharing it, the nutrition class that I'm in has touched on a lot of these same points.
drop out now, and find a new school...0 -
I think maybe they get mad because ALL THIS TIME they have struggled, and now they realize that they didn't have to. To all of a sudden accept that losing weight does not have to be torture, that living healthy is not a miserable carrot eating death sentence... that is to acknowledge that years lost being unable to do the things they wanted to do, or feel the ways they wanted to feel... those years didn't need to be lost.
Sometimes it is easier to accept a hard complicated solution, because it doesn't make us feel like we've wasted time.
My mom has struggled for 40 years with her weight. 40 years of crash diets, self loathing, weight watchers, how, u weight loss, 1200 cals a day. When I tell her what I do, and how I eat, she wants to cry. She doesn't want to believe that the last 40 years of struggling were not necessary. She gets mad, and depressed, and reaches for the cake. She's not ready yet.
But, see, you do have to give up things if you want to lose weight. It is a struggle and torture.
If it wasn't, most people would not fail trying to lose weight.
A calorie is a calorie is a calorie.
But not all calories require the same willpower to resist eating.
A calorie of apple is the same as a calorie of ice cream. But last night I ate two bowls of Publix Mint Moose Tracks ice cream - about 1600 calories - nearly my entire daily allotment, on top of everything else I ate that day.
I'd have to eat 20 apples to hit the same caloric intake. Who can eat 20 apples in a day, let a lone at a sitting? Apples don't require nearly as much willpower to resist eating too many of them than ice cream does. They just aren't as pleasurable to eat. So in that regard, a calorie is not a calorie. One kind of calorie requires a lot more self-control to stay in bounds with your caloric intake.
But yes, if you have strong willpower, you can eat absolutely anything and still lose weight. Just like a strong-willed alcoholic can go into a bar and order soda water, or like a someone with a gambling problem can go to Vegas and just sit and watch the games if they have enough willpower.
The bottom line is, if you want to lose weight, you can't eat what you want or as much as you want.
If you have the willpower to only eat a little ice cream, hey! Good for you!0 -
Yup. Most of the time, the reason for the diet failing is the person at the table, not the food on the plate.
All this says is that people tend to have problems keeping a diet. That's not exactly anything new.And science people want science here you go:
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/5/899S.ful
"Thermodynamics dictate that a calorie is a calorie regardless of the macronutrient composition of the diet. Further research on differences in the composition of weight loss and on the influence of satiety on compliance with energy-restricted diets is needed to explain the observed increase in weight loss with diets high in protein and/or low in carbohydrate. "
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/obesity-prevention-source/obesity-causes/diet-and-weight/
"Conventional wisdom says that since a calorie is a calorie, regardless of its source, the best advice for weight control is simply to eat less and exercise more. Yet emerging research suggests that some foods and eating patterns may make it easier to keep calories in check, while others may make people more likely to overeat."
And one of my favorite quotes:
"Thus, studies using extreme diets may be useful for probing biochemical pathways, but they have no relevance to the human diet or to current consumption."
That isn't "all" it says. It says what common sense says. A calorie is a calorie just as a pound is a pound, but that is incomplete information with regard to devising a weight loss plan that is likely to result in success.
Nope. Because I eats what I want (IIFYM) and I've been succeeding.
You can successfully lose weight and go to McDonalds. Daily if you want. As long as you have the willpower to keep within your calories and be aware that eating something really calorie dense will mean you can't eat as much later that day.0 -
I guess you like to fight with people on the internet. I guess you like finding a difference of opinion even when none exists.
I don't know if you've been successful or not. I made no commentary on your personal success and really don't know what you're talking about in that regard. Everyone who has ever lost weight has done so by eating fewer calories than they burned. I didn't say, suggest, or imply otherwise. In fact, I said "A calorie is a calorie..."
Why is everyone so interested in internet jousting instead of sharing useful information? We are saying exactly the same thing. Why are you trying to fight with me? As I and several others have said, a calorie is a calorie and weight loss is math. But different foods do different things to us. I know when I eat a lot of sugar, I have a sugar crash and am very vulnerable to making poor decisions that will result in a calorie surplus. So I don't eat a lot of sugar. I eat some. I have a little dark chocolate almost every day. But not a lot.
Does sugar make me fat? Yes. And No. Directly, no, but the result of eating too much if it tends to make me gain weight. Why is it so hard to accept an answer that isn't one extreme or the other? Why is it a surprise that losing weight, like so many things, is a balance? Saying dogmatically that a calorie is a calorie is setting people up to fail just as badly as telling them they can never eat the foods they love. Neither strategy is likely to result in long term, successful weight loss for most people. And presenting either side without acknowledging the other is poor advice.
Do the math. Know how it works. Study strategies that make it more likely for you to be successful at hitting your calorie goals over the long run. Come up with a balance that works for you and is sustainable. Some people are happy eating nothing but salad and tofu. Most aren't. If you aren't, learn how to include the foods you enjoy in proper moderation to achieve your goals.
Leaving it at "a calorie is a calorie" is the "don't do drugs" of weight loss. It's accurate. Of course it's accurate. A calorie is a unit of measure. Knowing how a calorie deficit leads to weight loss is fundamental for losing weight. But knowing how to create a calorie deficit in a diet that you're likely to sustain for the long run and will let you enjoy your life is more complicated. Knowing what different foods do once you eat them can help you do that. And saying so =/= saying a calorie is something other than a calorie.
That over complicates it as most don't give a flying fart about what food does...all they want it to see the scale number go down.
Do you think someone here on MFP who is eating 1200 calories a day cares how the body processes carbs vs protiens vs fats...nope...
If they did they would be reading the forums and asking questions not making blanket statements that "a calorie is not just a calorie" then backing it up with some stupid blog post from a medical student who knows squat about what he is talking about.
When people start caring about what food does they are getting into their health not weight loss.0 -
Just when I thought this thread was slowing down because I've been F5'ing it.
:laugh:0 -
Great article! Thanks for sharing it, the nutrition class that I'm in has touched on a lot of these same points.
drop out now, and find a new school...
I thought about saying that but have been accused of being mean once this week...0 -
I think maybe they get mad because ALL THIS TIME they have struggled, and now they realize that they didn't have to. To all of a sudden accept that losing weight does not have to be torture, that living healthy is not a miserable carrot eating death sentence... that is to acknowledge that years lost being unable to do the things they wanted to do, or feel the ways they wanted to feel... those years didn't need to be lost.
Sometimes it is easier to accept a hard complicated solution, because it doesn't make us feel like we've wasted time.
My mom has struggled for 40 years with her weight. 40 years of crash diets, self loathing, weight watchers, how, u weight loss, 1200 cals a day. When I tell her what I do, and how I eat, she wants to cry. She doesn't want to believe that the last 40 years of struggling were not necessary. She gets mad, and depressed, and reaches for the cake. She's not ready yet.
But, see, you do have to give up things if you want to lose weight. It is a struggle and torture.
If it wasn't, most people would not fail trying to lose weight.
A calorie is a calorie is a calorie.
But not all calories require the same willpower to resist eating.
A calorie of apple is the same as a calorie of ice cream. But last night I ate two bowls of Publix Mint Moose Tracks ice cream - about 1600 calories - nearly my entire daily allotment, on top of everything else I ate that day.
I'd have to eat 20 apples to hit the same caloric intake. Who can eat 20 apples in a day, let a lone at a sitting? Apples don't require nearly as much willpower to resist eating too many of them than ice cream does. They just aren't as pleasurable to eat. So in that regard, a calorie is not a calorie. One kind of calorie requires a lot more self-control to stay in bounds with your caloric intake.
But yes, if you have strong willpower, you can eat absolutely anything and still lose weight. Just like a strong-willed alcoholic can go into a bar and order soda water, or like a someone with a gambling problem can go to Vegas and just sit and watch the games if they have enough willpower.
The bottom line is, if you want to lose weight, you can't eat what you want or as much as you want.
If you have the willpower to only eat a little ice cream, hey! Good for you!
The CALORIES are the same in that apple or that ice cream...
it's your DESIRE for the ice cream that makes the difference.
You aren't a victim if you don't choose to be. Perhaps you want to abstain for awhile, but you CAN choose to have 'just a bit'0 -
I think maybe they get mad because ALL THIS TIME they have struggled, and now they realize that they didn't have to. To all of a sudden accept that losing weight does not have to be torture, that living healthy is not a miserable carrot eating death sentence... that is to acknowledge that years lost being unable to do the things they wanted to do, or feel the ways they wanted to feel... those years didn't need to be lost.
Sometimes it is easier to accept a hard complicated solution, because it doesn't make us feel like we've wasted time.
My mom has struggled for 40 years with her weight. 40 years of crash diets, self loathing, weight watchers, how, u weight loss, 1200 cals a day. When I tell her what I do, and how I eat, she wants to cry. She doesn't want to believe that the last 40 years of struggling were not necessary. She gets mad, and depressed, and reaches for the cake. She's not ready yet.
But, see, you do have to give up things if you want to lose weight. It is a struggle and torture.
If it wasn't, most people would not fail trying to lose weight.
A calorie is a calorie is a calorie.
But not all calories require the same willpower to resist eating.
A calorie of apple is the same as a calorie of ice cream. But last night I ate two bowls of Publix Mint Moose Tracks ice cream - about 1600 calories - nearly my entire daily allotment, on top of everything else I ate that day.
I'd have to eat 20 apples to hit the same caloric intake. Who can eat 20 apples in a day, let a lone at a sitting? Apples don't require nearly as much willpower to resist eating too many of them than ice cream does. They just aren't as pleasurable to eat. So in that regard, a calorie is not a calorie. One kind of calorie requires a lot more self-control to stay in bounds with your caloric intake.
But yes, if you have strong willpower, you can eat absolutely anything and still lose weight. Just like a strong-willed alcoholic can go into a bar and order soda water, or like a someone with a gambling problem can go to Vegas and just sit and watch the games if they have enough willpower.
The bottom line is, if you want to lose weight, you can't eat what you want or as much as you want.
If you have the willpower to only eat a little ice cream, hey! Good for you!
You might have to give up certain foods to lose weight, but that doesn't mean everyone has to. For me, I learned the hard way that cutting out the foods I really, really enjoyed in order to lose weight only lead me to binge eating and feeling dirty. By eating foods I enjoy, I don't feel deprived which means I don't binge eat and feel dirty.
ETA: I didn't mean to roll it! :sad:0 -
in for the roll, but... meh. not gonna be as good.0
-
I just don't understand why people would rather have 1,500 of junk that in the end will do more harm than good to your health than eating 1,500 of tasty, healthy food that will make you a healthier human being. Why would I like to eat 1,000 at one sitting on McDonalds instead of 1,000 calories of meat, veggies, nuts, and even dessert during the day?
And forgive my english...0 -
Okay, how many times are you going to open the same "part 2" topic? Just wondering...0
-
Nice to learn that I can just eat what I want and lose weight. I want seven cheeseburgers and fries with a milk shake. Every day.
Still say I can eat what I want and lose weight?
It's accurate to say you can incorporate any food you like into a diet that will result in losing weight. It isn't accurate to say you can eat whatever you want. Not the same thing. And I don't know why people are so stuck on that. I eat a Ruben sandwich from Arbys about once every two weeks. Why? Because I want it. But I can't eat whatever I want whenever I want like I used to if I want to lose weight. Just as I don't have to give up eating the foods I love. Both are true. They are not mutually exclusive. This isn't this hard.0 -
But, see, you do have to give up things if you want to lose weight. It is a struggle and torture.
If it wasn't, most people would not fail trying to lose weight.
A calorie is a calorie is a calorie.
But not all calories require the same willpower to resist eating.
A calorie of apple is the same as a calorie of ice cream. But last night I ate two bowls of Publix Mint Moose Tracks ice cream - about 1600 calories - nearly my entire daily allotment, on top of everything else I ate that day.
I'd have to eat 20 apples to hit the same caloric intake. Who can eat 20 apples in a day, let a lone at a sitting? Apples don't require nearly as much willpower to resist eating too many of them than ice cream does. They just aren't as pleasurable to eat. So in that regard, a calorie is not a calorie. One kind of calorie requires a lot more self-control to stay in bounds with your caloric intake.
But yes, if you have strong willpower, you can eat absolutely anything and still lose weight. Just like a strong-willed alcoholic can go into a bar and order soda water, or like a someone with a gambling problem can go to Vegas and just sit and watch the games if they have enough willpower.
The bottom line is, if you want to lose weight, you can't eat what you want or as much as you want.
If you have the willpower to only eat a little ice cream, hey! Good for you!
I think the bigger question you have to ask yourself, are your goals too aggressive causing your to binge. Looking at your diary, it's fairly sporadic at best. So it's possible that either your lack of logging, your lack of protein and fats or the thought process you need to eliminate foods is causing you to fail. Personally,i plan for a Klondike bar every night. If i change my meal plan throughout the day and need extra calories, I will cut it or just go over. It is not uncommon that those with aggressive weight loss goals (2 lbs per week and not eating back exercise calories) are more likely to binge or not success (we see this frequently on the boards). But if you start out with a more reasonable goal and learn how to eat whatever you love, you will probably stop binging. But for men, 1600 calories is rarely enough, especially if you are active. I am 31, 5'11, 185 lbs, desk job and exercise 5-6 hours aweek (WT and HIIT) and eat 2400-2600 calories and lose 1 lb a week. So I ask, do you think 1600 is enough for your goals?0 -
This thread rolled?! Wow...0
-
Nice to learn that I can just eat what I want and lose weight. I want seven cheeseburgers and fries with a milk shake. Every day.
Still say I can eat what I want and lose weight?
It's accurate to say you can incorporate any food you like into a diet that will result in losing weight. It isn't accurate to say you can eat whatever you want. Not the same thing. And I don't know why people are so stuck on that. I eat a Ruben sandwich from Arbys about once every two weeks. Why? Because I want it. But I can't eat whatever I want whenever I want like I used to if I want to lose weight. Just as I don't have to give up eating the foods I love. Both are true. They are not mutually exclusive. This isn't this hard.
Who are you talking to? The only poster I know who claims you can eat whatever you want, however much you want (if you skip breakfast) is Steve0.0 -
Nice to learn that I can just eat what I want and lose weight. I want seven cheeseburgers and fries with a milk shake. Every day.
Still say I can eat what I want and lose weight?
It's accurate to say you can incorporate any food you like into a diet that will result in losing weight. It isn't accurate to say you can eat whatever you want. Not the same thing. And I don't know why people are so stuck on that. I eat a Ruben sandwich from Arbys about once every two weeks. Why? Because I want it. But I can't eat whatever I want whenever I want like I used to if I want to lose weight. Just as I don't have to give up eating the foods I love. Both are true. They are not mutually exclusive. This isn't this hard.
On a site dedicated to logging food though, the assumption with any comments along those lines is that you are meeting your calorie goals.
This is not general forum for why am I gaining weight from someone that just doesn't get it, where some basics must be understood first.
So ya, the phrase eating what you want has an implied within your calorie limits context.0 -
Who are you talking to? The only poster I know who claims you can eat whatever you want, however much you want (if you skip breakfast) is Steve0.
This thread may just become epically epic . . .0 -
Hm, all my replies got deleted, so in for round 2.0
-
Nice to learn that I can just eat what I want and lose weight. I want seven cheeseburgers and fries with a milk shake. Every day.
Still say I can eat what I want and lose weight?
It's accurate to say you can incorporate any food you like into a diet that will result in losing weight. It isn't accurate to say you can eat whatever you want. Not the same thing. And I don't know why people are so stuck on that. I eat a Ruben sandwich from Arbys about once every two weeks. Why? Because I want it. But I can't eat whatever I want whenever I want like I used to if I want to lose weight. Just as I don't have to give up eating the foods I love. Both are true. They are not mutually exclusive. This isn't this hard.
In the grand scheme of things we all agree that there is more to health than just calories. But from a pure weight loss (not caring about the overall picture), you can eat seven cheeseburgers and fries/milkshake and lose weight if your TDEE is high enough. It's why they have diets like the twinkie diet or cookie diet. Heck, there was woman in the news near me that ate nothing but starbucks for one year and lost 60 lbs. She ate 1200 calories worth of starbucks daily.
If you care about health or fitness or adherence, then macros apply0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions