250 calories per day on chocolate?
Replies
-
I think this is why everybody was careful to say that meeting macros was first and then chocolate.
If somebody is meeting their macro targets and still in a deficit, will a small amount of sugar and fat cause a noticible change in the ability to lose weight?
Not at all. You may not get to where your going as quick, but you will still get there.
Define quick?
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1201887-a-love-song-for-my-barbell-50-lbs-down0 -
Wrong wrong wrong wrong !!
Yes eat within your calories sure that's fine but all that sugar is going to be burnt before the fat is so the more sugar intake you have the less fat you will burn overall it goes like this
Sugar---- carbs----fat
The less sugar you have the quiker carbs are burnt for energy the wuicker fat is birnt so sure eat tons of sugar but don't exoect a huge fat loss anytime soon
Um..... Sugar is a carb....
Everybody loves the semantics that enable them to feel better about their choices.
Yes, both sugar and carbs are each a sugar and a carb, but that doesn't make him incorrect in his assertion that the body burns "simple" sugars, then carb "sugars," then fat, and later protein.
But, by all means, assert the unimportant minutia. It's always sooo helpful.
Ok. The body burn simple carbs. Then complex carbs. Then blah blah blah. And then, being in a 250 calorie deficit, what does it do? And how does the order of the energy that the body uses before it commits to using body fat matter?
Eat a balanced diet. Stay at a reasonable deficit. Get exercise that included resistance training.
If you have 100 pounds to lose, everything else is over complicating the situation.
No, basic biology is not overcomplicating the situation, though I can see why someone with 100 lbs. to lose might be of the view that any progress toward a healthy weight, even without a healthy body composition, is an improvement.
A 250 calorie deficit will create weight loss at a rate of about 1/2 lb. of weight per week. The composition of the calories taken in by the body and the exercise performed dictate whether that loss will be in body fat, muscle mass, etc.
Lots of obese and morbidly obese people focus solely on the calories and nothing else. If all you want to do is move the number on the scale, yes, that will do it. But, when you do it without hitting a decent protein target (usually at least twice the MFP recommendation for someone exercising even moderately) you're losing weight by catabolizing muscle and making youself more injury prone. The fastest way to drop weight quickly is cardio, calorie deficit, and deficient protein levels. You drop muscle fast and lose a lot more weight than if you were losing body fat. It makes you weigh less, it doesn't make you healthier.
The order in which your body prioritizes fuel usage matters if you want to be healthy. It, and the food you take in, determines whether the body is losing primarily fat or primarily muscle mass.
Okay, so are you saying I have been losing muscle mass and not fat, because I consume sugar?
I eat about 1g protein per lb of lean body mass, do three days a week of HITT running intervals and walk an hour a day. I also do about 35 minutes of circuits three times a week with weights. On my "rest" days I am still pretty active walking and doing yoga/mobility exercises (I have poor mobility in my hips due to being overweight for so long).
I have been doing this (or some variation of) for about two years. I meet my macronutrients and I eat chocolate, candy, honey, fruit. I cook with sugar (I make a lot of Japanese food) and it always fits into my carb macro allowance.
I have lost 70lbs.
Was that whole 70lbs muscle? If so, I must look like the Michelin man!!
-checks profile pic-
Nope, looks like I have pretty muscular legs and much less fat.
Explain again, I clearly missed the part where you're right.
With one gram of protein per lb of lean mass and all that training sounds spot on (are you limiting your other carbs and eating enough fat)?0 -
Wrong wrong wrong wrong !!
Yes eat within your calories sure that's fine but all that sugar is going to be burnt before the fat is so the more sugar intake you have the less fat you will burn overall it goes like this
Sugar---- carbs----fat
The less sugar you have the quiker carbs are burnt for energy the wuicker fat is birnt so sure eat tons of sugar but don't exoect a huge fat loss anytime soon
Um..... Sugar is a carb....
Everybody loves the semantics that enable them to feel better about their choices.
Yes, both sugar and carbs are each a sugar and a carb, but that doesn't make him incorrect in his assertion that the body burns "simple" sugars, then carb "sugars," then fat, and later protein.
But, by all means, assert the unimportant minutia. It's always sooo helpful.
Ok. The body burn simple carbs. Then complex carbs. Then blah blah blah. And then, being in a 250 calorie deficit, what does it do? And how does the order of the energy that the body uses before it commits to using body fat matter?
Eat a balanced diet. Stay at a reasonable deficit. Get exercise that included resistance training.
If you have 100 pounds to lose, everything else is over complicating the situation.
No, basic biology is not overcomplicating the situation, though I can see why someone with 100 lbs. to lose might be of the view that any progress toward a healthy weight, even without a healthy body composition, is an improvement.
A 250 calorie deficit will create weight loss at a rate of about 1/2 lb. of weight per week. The composition of the calories taken in by the body and the exercise performed dictate whether that loss will be in body fat, muscle mass, etc.
Lots of obese and morbidly obese people focus solely on the calories and nothing else. If all you want to do is move the number on the scale, yes, that will do it. But, when you do it without hitting a decent protein target (usually at least twice the MFP recommendation for someone exercising even moderately) you're losing weight by catabolizing muscle and making youself more injury prone. The fastest way to drop weight quickly is cardio, calorie deficit, and deficient protein levels. You drop muscle fast and lose a lot more weight than if you were losing body fat. It makes you weigh less, it doesn't make you healthier.
The order in which your body prioritizes fuel usage matters if you want to be healthy. It, and the food you take in, determines whether the body is losing primarily fat or primarily muscle mass.
I think this is why everybody was careful to say that meeting macros was first and then chocolate.
If somebody is meeting their macro targets and still in a deficit, will a small amount of sugar and fat cause a noticible change in the ability to lose weight?
Not at all. You may not get to where your going as quick, but you will still get there.
Define quick?
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1201887-a-love-song-for-my-barbell-50-lbs-down
No.0 -
Figures. I guess 8 months is too long. All that sugar, right? Rats.0
-
The order in which your body prioritizes fuel usage matters if you want to be healthy. It, and the food you take in, determines whether the body is losing primarily fat or primarily muscle mass.
No. Priority of fuel usage doesn't mean a thing in a consistent deficit. Adequate protein and protein-sparing stimulus do, but splitting hairs between different types of carbs is pointless if you are maintaining a consistent moderate deficit.0 -
Wrong wrong wrong wrong !!
Yes eat within your calories sure that's fine but all that sugar is going to be burnt before the fat is so the more sugar intake you have the less fat you will burn overall it goes like this
Sugar---- carbs----fat
The less sugar you have the quiker carbs are burnt for energy the wuicker fat is birnt so sure eat tons of sugar but don't exoect a huge fat loss anytime soon
Um..... Sugar is a carb....
Everybody loves the semantics that enable them to feel better about their choices.
Yes, both sugar and carbs are each a sugar and a carb, but that doesn't make him incorrect in his assertion that the body burns "simple" sugars, then carb "sugars," then fat, and later protein.
But, by all means, assert the unimportant minutia. It's always sooo helpful.
Ok. The body burn simple carbs. Then complex carbs. Then blah blah blah. And then, being in a 250 calorie deficit, what does it do? And how does the order of the energy that the body uses before it commits to using body fat matter?
Eat a balanced diet. Stay at a reasonable deficit. Get exercise that included resistance training.
If you have 100 pounds to lose, everything else is over complicating the situation.
No, basic biology is not overcomplicating the situation, though I can see why someone with 100 lbs. to lose might be of the view that any progress toward a healthy weight, even without a healthy body composition, is an improvement.
A 250 calorie deficit will create weight loss at a rate of about 1/2 lb. of weight per week. The composition of the calories taken in by the body and the exercise performed dictate whether that loss will be in body fat, muscle mass, etc.
Lots of obese and morbidly obese people focus solely on the calories and nothing else. If all you want to do is move the number on the scale, yes, that will do it. But, when you do it without hitting a decent protein target (usually at least twice the MFP recommendation for someone exercising even moderately) you're losing weight by catabolizing muscle and making youself more injury prone. The fastest way to drop weight quickly is cardio, calorie deficit, and deficient protein levels. You drop muscle fast and lose a lot more weight than if you were losing body fat. It makes you weigh less, it doesn't make you healthier.
The order in which your body prioritizes fuel usage matters if you want to be healthy. It, and the food you take in, determines whether the body is losing primarily fat or primarily muscle mass.
Okay, so are you saying I have been losing muscle mass and not fat, because I consume sugar?
I eat about 1g protein per lb of lean body mass, do three days a week of HITT running intervals and walk an hour a day. I also do about 35 minutes of circuits three times a week with weights. On my "rest" days I am still pretty active walking and doing yoga/mobility exercises (I have poor mobility in my hips due to being overweight for so long).
I have been doing this (or some variation of) for about two years. I meet my macronutrients and I eat chocolate, candy, honey, fruit. I cook with sugar (I make a lot of Japanese food) and it always fits into my carb macro allowance.
I have lost 70lbs.
Was that whole 70lbs muscle? If so, I must look like the Michelin man!!
-checks profile pic-
Nope, looks like I have pretty muscular legs and much less fat.
Explain again, I clearly missed the part where you're right.
With one gram of protein per lb of lean mass and all that training sounds spot on (are you limiting your other carbs and eating enough fat)?
I'm on a 40/30/30 split. I do very well. I just don't understand how the "expert" on this post is trying to explain that by eating processed sugars (which I actually CANNOT track as they're not listed separately on most foods in this country) I cannot be burning fat. Everyone in the post has said, if it fits your calories and macros, eat it. This is a sensible approach.
I honestly can't see why there is any argument here.0 -
So, I think we're all in agreement that it is important to pay attention to your calorie sources to ensure that you are getting sufficient amounts of protein, fat and carbs
How much energy sources matter after "sufficient" has been reached (and probably how to define sufficient) is something we could argue until the thread gets shut down.0 -
Figures. I guess 8 months is too long. All that sugar, right? Rats.
The pikachu in your ticker has the right idea. I got some carbs left, wanna split a lollipop?0 -
So, I think we're all in agreement that it is important to pay attention to your calorie sources to ensure that you are getting sufficient amounts of protein, fat and carbs
How much energy sources matter after "sufficient" has been reached (and probably how to define sufficient) is something we could argue until the thread gets shut down.
Or until the end of time, whichever comes first!0 -
Figures. I guess 8 months is too long. All that sugar, right? Rats.
The pikachu in your ticker has the right idea. I got some carbs left, wanna split a lollipop?
Haha absolutely! Though chocolate tootsie pops are my favorite
0 -
Is it acceptable to eat 250 calories worth of chocolate per day when you are trying to lose weight, as long as you are still in your calorie limit? I have tried to have just one small piece or swap it for dark but it just isnt working and i keep failing! I was reading somewhere that eating chocolate or other junk food is really bad for weight loss as a calorie is not just a calorie, but i always thought it didn't matter in terms of weight loss as long as you are at a calorie deficit. Have any of you had chocolate daily and managed to use a significant amount of weight? I have 100 pounds to lose and chocolate is my nemesis
I eat chocolate almost every day, anywhere from 125-300 calories worth. I will not give it up! I have lost a total of 42 pounds so far! Since November of 2012. I say make it fit! Find more protein in other sources and it all balances out in the end. I have also managed to maintain muscle mass. Diary is open - see photos in profile of said muscles...0 -
Yes, eat chocolate, within your calorie limit.
I buy dark chocolate and savor a couple squares as dessert. . . or, at Costco, I buy the two-pound bag of chocolate chips. One serving is 70 calories and if you nibble chip by chip it lasts a long time and you get a lot of chocolate bang for your buck.0 -
You can literally eat whatever you want, just maintain your calorie deficit.
I have ice cream every single day. Hasn't hindered my loss one bit.
I second this. I lost 48 pounds eating chocolate, taco bell, ice cream, etc...
Just stay under your calories, exercise, and stay away from trans fat.0 -
Ok. The body burn simple carbs. Then complex carbs. Then blah blah blah. And then, being in a 250 calorie deficit, what does it do? And how does the order of the energy that the body uses before it commits to using body fat matter?
Eat a balanced diet. Stay at a reasonable deficit. Get exercise that included resistance training.
If you have 100 pounds to lose, everything else is over complicating the situation.
No, basic biology is not overcomplicating the situation, though I can see why someone with 100 lbs. to lose might be of the view that any progress toward a healthy weight, even without a healthy body composition, is an improvement.
A 250 calorie deficit will create weight loss at a rate of about 1/2 lb. of weight per week. The composition of the calories taken in by the body and the exercise performed dictate whether that loss will be in body fat, muscle mass, etc.
Lots of obese and morbidly obese people focus solely on the calories and nothing else. If all you want to do is move the number on the scale, yes, that will do it. But, when you do it without hitting a decent protein target (usually at least twice the MFP recommendation for someone exercising even moderately) you're losing weight by catabolizing muscle and making youself more injury prone. The fastest way to drop weight quickly is cardio, calorie deficit, and deficient protein levels. You drop muscle fast and lose a lot more weight than if you were losing body fat. It makes you weigh less, it doesn't make you healthier.
The order in which your body prioritizes fuel usage matters if you want to be healthy. It, and the food you take in, determines whether the body is losing primarily fat or primarily muscle mass.
I think this is why everybody was careful to say that meeting macros was first and then chocolate.
If somebody is meeting their macro targets and still in a deficit, will a small amount of sugar and fat cause a noticible change in the ability to lose weight?
It's also why you should have actually read what I wrote rather than responding to the "chocolate is evil" statement you presumed I was making, which I was not.
Again, weight loss and fat loss are not equivalent. Weight? No. Proportion of fat lost? Yes.0 -
If you can control it to that 250 and stay within your calorie goals for the day, it's perfectly fine. Just be sure that you are able to stop at 250 calories worth of chocolate. For me, Reese's Peanut Butter Cups of any shape or size are my kryptonite. If I start, I can't stop, so unless I have a limited amount available, or a lot of extra calories, I can't even get started with eating them.0
-
And you appear to be masterfully adept at being condescending and avoiding the question.
Please explain what I am burning to lose weight if I am not burning fat.
And you are either masterfully adept at being disingenuous, or very, very obtuse.
Read my first two posts again. It answers the question.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
That truly depends on your goals.
If your goal is to lose weight only, then go ahead and eat whatever you want "if it fits your macros" - eat chocolate each day
If you have other goals that include improved body composition, improved overall health etc., then you may want to re-think that strategy.0 -
If you can control it to that 250 and stay within your calorie goals for the day, it's perfectly fine. Just be sure that you are able to stop at 250 calories worth of chocolate. For me, Reese's Peanut Butter Cups of any shape or size are my kryptonite. If I start, I can't stop, so unless I have a limited amount available, or a lot of extra calories, I can't even get started with eating them.
Have you tried buying the single cup servings they sell around holidays and storing them in the freezer? Having them wrapped individually can help with teaching your brain to note portions, and that can help with control. It migth not work now, but you can use it as a tool.0 -
And you appear to be masterfully adept at being condescending and avoiding the question.
Please explain what I am burning to lose weight if I am not burning fat.
And you are either masterfully adept at being disingenuous, or very, very obtuse.
Read my first two posts again. It answers the question.
I am obviously far too dense to understand your response, then. I provided you with a full rundown of my diet and exercise, my macronutrient ratios and I stick to them or near as dammit. So why, if I eat refined sugar, am I not burning fat? I just want you to explain that to me. I have clearly not lost 70lbs of muscle, but I couldn't possibly have burned fat according to your ideas.0 -
And you appear to be masterfully adept at being condescending and avoiding the question.
Please explain what I am burning to lose weight if I am not burning fat.
And you are either masterfully adept at being disingenuous, or very, very obtuse.
Read my first two posts again. It answers the question.
I am obviously far too dense to understand your response, then. I provided you with a full rundown of my diet and exercise, my macronutrient ratios and I stick to them or near as dammit. So why, if I eat refined sugar, am I not burning fat? I just want you to explain that to me. I have clearly not lost 70lbs of muscle, but I couldn't possibly have burned fat according to your ideas.
You want me to defend an assertion I didn't make. you either did not read what I wrote and just assumed, or you don't understand. Neither of those things are within my power to change.0 -
That truly depends on your goals.
If your goal is to lose weight only, then go ahead and eat whatever you want "if it fits your macros" - eat chocolate each day
If you have other goals that include improved body composition, improved overall health etc., then you may want to re-think that strategy.
What? Iifym is about body comp and health... I don't get how these two things are different. I do this every day and will for the rest of my life. If you like a different approach, that's fine but that doesn't make iifyn any less applicable to reach the same goals....0 -
@ Guitar gerry
This is why we have freedom of choice to be part of them or not.
As you have chosen to do.
The problem with carbs is we have not always had them so readily available - and so many of them deficient of the essential nutrients we would normally get from better choices of calories.
But as mention above we have freedom of choice to eat them (all we really need is the correct information about how good, bad or neutral they are)0 -
And you appear to be masterfully adept at being condescending and avoiding the question.
Please explain what I am burning to lose weight if I am not burning fat.
And you are either masterfully adept at being disingenuous, or very, very obtuse.
Read my first two posts again. It answers the question.
I am obviously far too dense to understand your response, then. I provided you with a full rundown of my diet and exercise, my macronutrient ratios and I stick to them or near as dammit. So why, if I eat refined sugar, am I not burning fat? I just want you to explain that to me. I have clearly not lost 70lbs of muscle, but I couldn't possibly have burned fat according to your ideas.
You want me to defend an assertion I didn't make. you either did not read what I wrote and just assumed, or you don't understand. Neither of those things are within my power to change.
I actually give up. I've asked you over and over to restate your point in a way that makes sense, and you have refused to repeatedly. If you have such a wonderful understanding of nutrition, why are you here? To help us poor, less educated folk how to eat better and save our lean body mass? You're a saint.
PS: If a person is meeting their macronutrient requirements, eating a sensible deficit and doing at least some form of strength training, they should maintain a healthy level of lean body mass. Meeting your macronutrients and then eating a chocolate bar will not affect lean body mass or weight loss at all, you seem very confused.0 -
I actually give up. I've asked you over and over to restate your point in a way that makes sense, and you have refused to repeatedly. If you have such a wonderful understanding of nutrition, why are you here? To help us poor, less educated folk how to eat better and save our lean body mass? You're a saint.
PS: If a person is meeting their macronutrient requirements, eating a sensible deficit and doing at least some form of strength training, they should maintain a healthy level of lean body mass. Meeting your macronutrients and then eating a chocolate bar will not affect lean body mass or weight loss at all, you seem very confused.
I am here as part of a solidarity effort with a group of women using the site to try to lose fat and improve their body composition.
Posted again for anyone else who is confused:
Caloric deficit will always result in weight loss absent a metabolic or specific health condition interfering. And that may very well be the goal for many overeaters without a history of health and fitness since they have a tendency to focus exclusively on losing weight ratehr than a healthy body composition or remaining injury free.
Caloric deficit will cause weight loss, yes. If you want to lose existing body fat, you have to be conscious of how much of your dietary intake with further or thwart those goals. Your body will burn the sugars, then the carbs before it ever gets to burning more than a small amount of fat, let alone the bodyfat one is already carrying.
The original person who posted the general order in which the body burns sugar, the complex carbs, then fat (and then protein) was making a very good point about how the more sugar and carbs you eat, the more dietary intake of energy your body must burn before it gets to using the fat in your diet or the fat on your body. The more you make the body burn before it gets to burning fat, the more you undermine your efforts to lose body fat.0 -
I know there is another side discussion going on, but OP,
YES. I was losing 1-2 lbs per week while eating 230 cals worth of chocolate everyday (usually with breakfast lol). But it was the 90% dark, and I was also not really eating much sugar/carbs from anywhere else but veggies, protein powder, nut butters, yogurt, and oatmeal. Total cals were around 1700.0 -
alwaysinmotion - you're absolutely right. it's best for everyone involved if the chocolate is consumed.0
-
I have about 100 calories of chocolate for the past two weeks with no change. The only reason it became a problem is if I went over my sugar limit which causes me to bloat - that's usually in drinks which I hope to have not started a habit out of.0
-
Be careful of your fat and sugar intake too! You might be within your calorie target, but if you are significantly over your fat and sugar intake on a regular basis you probably won't see the results.
I am over my fat and sugar intake almost DAILY and so far, I have ONLY seen results (see weight loss tracker at bottom of post for more information!). Caloric deficit causes weight loss, not any magical combination of macro nutrients or food restrictions. If you look through my diary (please do) you will see that yesterday, I had 3 cupcakes, the day before I had ANOTHER cupcake and on Thursday, I had a cupcake AND 300 calories worth of Cadbury mini chocolate eggs. Thursday was 530 calories from sweets. I went over my fat and sugar and felt AWESOME.
EAT. THE. CHOCOLATE.0 -
Average of around 350cals a day for me and I've lost 96lbs in 11 months so its working for me. As you can see from my diary I also eat lots of veg and lean meat and feel I have a routine that I can sustain.
And as an aside my body fat as a percentage of body mass is decreasing and muscle mass as a percentage of body mass is increasing ie I'm retaining as much muscle as I can whilst losing fat (I do 1-2 weights sessions a week and 4-5 cardio).0
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