Is calorie-counting different from dieting?

FindingAmy77

If so how?

I've been lurking these forums for a few weeks and I constantly see people telling others, "don't diet! make it a lifestyle change!" But you're all counting your calories? Not to be judgmental but I don't see how it's different from a diet. Is this just a stepping stone to a healthier lifestyle? Or do you plan to count calories forever?

yes forever. but the lucky thing is about it. once you do it long enough you will have the calories memorized and it will just be about being more active and watching the portion control. a diet screams deprivation but a lifestyle change says I am in control of what I eat and not the other way around. it means being more active and never going back to your old ways but finding new ways to be a healthier you. we as human beings are only soposed to be having a certain amount of calories to sustain ourselves each day. your health and your body depends on this.

FlaxMilk

Animals given enough food in the wild will often overeat. It makes sense. They don't know when their next meal is coming. There are plenty of chubby "wildlife" critters in our area, because people put out bird seed and nuts.

I know I feel better when I eat nutritious foods in the "right" amount for me. I know that, but I still tend to overeat and choose the less nutritious food when left to my own devices. Because it's not just about my hunger cues. It's because my emotions and my history and my experiences do play a role in my reactions to food. If they didn't, I'd just blend up all the food I need for the day and drink that as I go. I know I get the food I need, don't have to think about it, plenty of time for the rest of my life. Why don't we do that? Because food is more than just fuel, at least in a human world where we have enough.

Left on my own, I would happily eat carbs, carbs, and all carbs (maybe some fat.) There are very few protein sources I gravitate toward. I have gone through plenty of times when I didn't "count" and didn't restrict and ate way too many carbs and calories and not enough protein.

My maintenance calories are what some others can use to lose weight. I'm still a human, and my body still likes to eat even though it literally needs less than some others. That's why I have to use my brain to manage my body. Intuitive and mindful eating doesn't work for me because I give myself permission to ignore my body and my good senses if I don't have some structure. I wish that weren't true, but it is for me.

Your point stands that the opposite is true for some others. Some will rebel against too many rules and restrictions and binge. It depends, but one approach really doesn't fit all.

Dewymorning

I feel like counting can fall into the "dieting" category. It isn't something that is possible to do the rest of your life. Tons of people lose weight using MFP and come back again because they started eating more than they did when they had something telling them how much to eat.

Why can't I record how much I am eating everyday for the rest of my life?

I keep a record of how much I spend, and I plan to do that for the rest of my life.

redambition

All methods of weight loss have to cause a calorie deficit to work. Simple. How this is achieved is what makes every method different.

Intuitive eating strives to create that deficit by telling people to wait until they're truly hungry to eat, then to stop before they are full. In other words: portion control, wrapped in a blanket of feeling in touch with yourself and without all that nasty restriction that other diets make you do.

If intuitive eating was really as great as all that, there wouldn't be an obesity epidemic. Because it would work, be easy and everyone would be doing it.

I could 'listen to my body' telling me it wants McDonalds every day. Even a small amount of food from there (just enough to satisfy me) would still give me a heft of calories that could lead to me gaining weight if I ate it daily. The resulting insulin crash (from eating a bunch of quickly-digested carbs) could make me hungry for more carbs. So I could eat a lot "intuitively", yet still over eat in terms of how much I'm consuming.

Further: Craving a donut doesn't necessarily mean your body needs a donut.

Something that strikes me as interesting is how intuitive eating is sold as a way to lose weight, but the ebook linked by the OP (and other things I've read) all skirt around the weight loss issue. "We can't tell you how much you'll lose" "only you will know your body" etc etc, but then I'm sure that if it doesn't work for you they'll tell you that "you're doing it wrong! You're eating until you're full, not til you're satisfied!" Or maybe "your body is where it wants to be!"

So of course it "always works", because there's no actual results promised.

Side note: I do wonder about the whole nutrition side of intuitive eating. What if I don't have what I'm hungry for available to me? What if I only decide I'm hungry for certain foods all the time, and hence end up with deficiencies or problems because I miss out on certain nutrients? How does proper variety in what's being eaten get addressed?

So. There's that.

Now, calorie-counting and the idea of IIFYM is essentially a more scientific version of intuitive eating. Being: working out your average calorie needs for the day, then eating what you want, how you want to achieve your nutrition and calorie goals. Nothing is off limits, and if you eat something like a piece of cake, then you work around that to make it fit your day... or maybe go over or a bit under now and then. Pre-planning and logging is used often, but most people will then make changes if something comes up, or they feel like eating something different. Having those numbers in front of you allows you to quantify the food you're eating, and recognise where your nutrition is coming from. Hard numbers can also be a great help in accountability - especially for people who can't trust their hunger and fullness signals.

Is intuitive eating total bunk? I don't think so, and I think it has enormous scope to aid in eating disorder recovery, but anyone whose hunger and fullness response is non-standard (ie, under eaters, over eaters, ANYONE) can't rely on the hunger and satiety response at first. It's hard, hard work to get to the point where the feeling of hunger and being satiated can be trusted. It will also work for some people and not others: much like some people can have a square of chocolate a day, and others can't because they know they will not stop at one... So they budget larger amounts less often.

So at the end of all that... I think intuitive eating is as much of a diet as anything else, including counting calories. It's still a restriction, they've just put some different clothes on it and attached a new set of rules to it.

Dewymorning

You don't have to count calorie if you swap out bad choices for healthier ones, make little substitutes here and there, etc. That's the lifestyle change. That and having a set meal or two oer day that you know is healthy and low in calories helps. I'd like to help anyone on this forum in need. Feel free to email me at vichallenge8222@gmail.com

I find making those 'swaps' much easier when I know how many calories are in my food. :P

pancakehead

I'm not sure if this comment has already been made above, but I'd just say that no, it isn't different at all. The word "diet" has a stigma attached to it now, it's not a "fashionable" term. This is a little absurd because the word is as neutral as they come. EVERYONE is on a diet, unless they don't eat any food at all (and they wouldn't be in that state for very long).

I don't mind stating that I am on a diet, because it's the truth.

Sabine_Stroehm

You don't have to count calorie if you swap out bad choices for healthier ones, make little substitutes here and there, etc. That's the lifestyle change. That and having a set meal or two oer day that you know is healthy and low in calories helps. I'd like to help anyone on this forum in need. Feel free to email me at vichallenge8222@gmail.com

I find making those 'swaps' much easier when I know how many calories are in my food. :P

That's a great point! And at a restaurant I find that I make better decisions when I do a little comparing. If two things look great on the menu, but one is, say, 300 calories less, and I know that, I'm likely to choose it.

Sabine_Stroehm

I'm not sure if this comment has already been made above, but I'd just say that no, it isn't different at all. The word "diet" has a stigma attached to it now, it's not a "fashionable" term. This is a little absurd because the word is as neutral as they come. EVERYONE is on a diet, unless they don't eat any food at all (and they wouldn't be in that state for very long).

I don't mind stating that I am on a diet, because it's the truth.

It has been said, but always bears repeating. I totally agree.

glowgirl14

The point OP wanted to make - and allowed about 6 pages of argument to get to - was that "counting calories" or "dieting" isn't necessary, because we should learn to listen to our bodies. And everyone is all upset now because what is working for them is being criticized. (Because MFP loves to criticize everyone else's way to do this.)

But. OP was suggesting that "counting calories" is really no different from a diet because if we don't learn to live without counting, then eventually the weight comes back on. Because eventually, we'll get to goal, and not need to eat at a deficit, and we'll get comfortable and stop counting.

So, valid point. Except. I've done maintenance - about 15lbs ago. I counted calories to lose 60lbs, and then stopped for two years and maintained. I could do this because counting calories for so long trained me to know what a serving of food looks like. I was trying to "listen to my body" because I learned that not all of the hunger signals I was getting were real hunger. I started looking for these hunger signals when I started trying to lose the first 60lbs, because - counting calories - I couldn't eat every time I thought I was hungry. Does that mean that I don't have "false" hunger cues now? Nope. But I'm more aware of my body.

Those of us who succeed long term are the ones who understand OURSELVES and what WE need. I do not see myself counting calories forever. But I take baby steps away from it. I don't log every day anymore. I know the calories in what I'm eating, I know my goal...Throughout the day, I keep a mental tally...If I'm not losing for a bit, I go back to logging for a few days, paying closer attention. Because whatever you want to say - this is a tool.

My BF is an engineer. He can do things without thinking that blow my mind. Working with him, I've had to learn a lot of the things he does. This was incredibly difficult for me at first. I had to read, and re-read the procedures...constantly use a calculator to check myself. Long after I was proficient at it, I still checked myself with a calculator. Just to be sure. And now, there are a lot of aspects that I can do on my own - without calculators or procedure sheets. The calculator and the procedure sheets were TOOLS, just like counting calories is a TOOL. If someone needs that tool for the rest of their life, and don't mind the effort - who cares?

It's great that some people can relearn how to eat without gaining weight. That's awesome. But most of us need checks and balances. And regardless of how people lived 50 years ago, or 500 years ago...this is where we are now. To say we're weak for using the tools available is like saying that using a cell phone is absurd because 100 years ago, people would have needed to get on their horse and ride to their friend's house to talk. Use what's available, to the extent that you wish. And be happy to have options.