Why calorie counting is ridiculous
Replies
-
"Don't count calories, it'll make you fatter! However, if you purchase The Biggest Loser protein shakes, snacks, and workout DVDs, all of your wildest dreams will come true."
NICE!!!!0 -
Nothing to discuss. It is ridiculous... ridiculous that I've lost over fifty pounds doing it on here. Speaks for itself!
0 -
Also, no fat animals??? Never seen a UK native pony then, unless their grass intake is restricted they get really fat, to the point where they are ill as a result and still stuffing their faces, even the ones in Wales on the moors with no addtional food whatsoever.
And my dog would be fat if I let her eat as much as she wanted.
Well clearly that grass is processed toxic crap.
:flowerforyou:
Now why did I not think of that? lol0 -
retox detox theiry..............anyone familiar??0
-
there is another factor that no one mentioned. Back in the 1970s the plates were smaller. Since then the manufacturers have been making plates bigger so as we look at our plates and they look empty we pile more on thinking that we are eating the correct amount. I also agree that in the 1970s we as a society were a lot more active than we are now. Also parents and others are penalized for making our children go outside and play! Ive actually kicked my kids outside and had them complain that they are bored!!!! Makes me mad as all heck! Those of us who grew up in the 70s and 80s had the actual ability to go outside play and not come home till our parents yelled for us. Now I look around and all I see are people who complain that they dont have time to exercise but can sit on their smartphone and tablets for hours on end then go home and sit on the computer WHILE watching tv and eating junk food and take out. smhl
Pretty sure that the crappy Corelle ware with the orange flowers on it that my mother had in the 70s is the same size as the crappy Corelle that I have with the blue flowers from the 90s. It isn't plates.
Activity? Yes. I agree on that. We didn't have a choice. TV sucked.0 -
You know, my copy of the Joy of Cooking from pre-world-war II has a section on advice for the slimming housewife including how to count calories.
So much for nobody doing it before 1970.0 -
Also, no fat animals??? Never seen a UK native pony then, unless their grass intake is restricted they get really fat, to the point where they are ill as a result and still stuffing their faces, even the ones in Wales on the moors with no addtional food whatsoever.
And my dog would be fat if I let her eat as much as she wanted.
Well clearly that grass is processed toxic crap.
:flowerforyou:
Umm, processed grass . . .
Shush you, you didn't even read the article.
:flowerforyou:
What article? Does this mean I don't get the grass?0 -
Uhmmmmm pre1970 people barely knew what a calorie was? WTF? I found an interesting article about the calorie which was first discovered back in the mid 1800's. Here's just one paragraph I found to totally dispute her stupid claim people didn't know what calories were or that we cared about how many we were shoving in our mouths. This article has a long list of references. And here's my reference to the article for all you referency type people. http://jn.nutrition.org/content/136/12/2957.full
The Calorie began to enter popular American vocabulary after Atwater explained the unit in his 1887 article in Century magazine. The most important avenue was probably the USDA Farmers' Bulletins (61,62), which provided the first U.S. food databases to be used in dietetics. Then, as now, American audiences were interested in managing weight, and the Calorie was soon introduced in articles and books. For example, Dr. Lulu Hunt Peters' best-selling “Diet and Health with Key to the Calories” specifically cited Farmers' Bulletin 142 as a source of information (65). Eventually, the Calorie was adopted for the nutrition facts panels on U.S. food labels. At present, there does not seem to be a movement by policy makers in the US to replace the Calorie with the kJ on nutrition information panels.0 -
Also, no fat animals??? Never seen a UK native pony then, unless their grass intake is restricted they get really fat, to the point where they are ill as a result and still stuffing their faces, even the ones in Wales on the moors with no addtional food whatsoever.
And my dog would be fat if I let her eat as much as she wanted.
Well clearly that grass is processed toxic crap.
:flowerforyou:
Umm, processed grass . . .
Shush you, you didn't even read the article.
:flowerforyou:
What article? Does this mean I don't get the grass?
:laugh:0 -
I wish I would have heard this before I wasted the last year and a half of my life.
^^This, but almost 2 years of my life. Half my body weight lost counting calories.
Doesn't work huh?
0 -
:noway:0
-
Uhmmmmm pre1970 people barely knew what a calorie was? WTF? I found an interesting article about the calorie which was first discovered back in the mid 1800's. Here's just one paragraph I found to totally dispute her stupid claim people didn't know what calories were or that we cared about how many we were shoving in our mouths. This article has a long list of references. And here's my reference to the article for all you referency type people. http://jn.nutrition.org/content/136/12/2957.full
The Calorie began to enter popular American vocabulary after Atwater explained the unit in his 1887 article in Century magazine. The most important avenue was probably the USDA Farmers' Bulletins (61,62), which provided the first U.S. food databases to be used in dietetics. Then, as now, American audiences were interested in managing weight, and the Calorie was soon introduced in articles and books. For example, Dr. Lulu Hunt Peters' best-selling “Diet and Health with Key to the Calories” specifically cited Farmers' Bulletin 142 as a source of information (65). Eventually, the Calorie was adopted for the nutrition facts panels on U.S. food labels. At present, there does not seem to be a movement by policy makers in the US to replace the Calorie with the kJ on nutrition information panels.
BURN!!!! :drinker:0 -
I wish I would have heard this before I wasted the last year and a half of my life.
^^This, but almost 2 years of my life. Half my body weight lost counting calories.
Doesn't work huh?
Yeah, you guys are so "ridiculous".....
RIDICULOUSLY SUCCESSFUL!!! :laugh: :smokin: :drinker:
0 -
Correlation does not equal causation. It's also true that French people tend to weigh less than Americans. So, speaking French makes you lose weight!:huh:0
-
0/10
Would not bang. Ever.0 -
LOL Awesome!"Don't count calories, it'll make you fatter! However, if you purchase The Biggest Loser protein shakes, snacks, and workout DVDs, all of your wildest dreams will come true."0 -
I feel like a lot of her points are just her opinions backed up by metaphors. While it is true that we ate better food back in the day, there really is nothing wrong with having a piece of chocolate or a piece of pizza in moderation. Yeah, our body will have to deal with the toxins, but that's why we eat in moderation. Even though, it wasn't smart for big fast food companies to come out with their crappy food... well, smart for them, they are rich, but we shouldn't have to completely restrict ourselves from it. I really like vegetables and fruit, but I also like a slice of pizza every now and then. I really don't think there is anything wrong with it.
Just my thoughts.0 -
Obviously the science is wrong. When I was a pilot evidently I was wasting my time watching my fuel consumption rate--I'm surprised I didn't flameout because of my preoccupation with my fuel tanks.0
-
Corrélation n'est pas égal de causalitéCorrelation does not equal causation. It's also true that French people tend to weigh less than Americans. So, speaking French makes you lose weight!:huh:0 -
The OP uses flawed logic to give her argument merit. Counting calories is essential in understand what your true calorie intake is per day. Most people tend to misrepresent the amount of food they eat when not tracking calories and believe with commen sense as the poster mentions they are doing it right.0
-
I feel like a lot of her points are just her opinions backed up by metaphors. While it is true that we ate better food back in the day, there really is nothing wrong with having a piece of chocolate or a piece of pizza in moderation. Yeah, our body will have to deal with the toxins, but that's why we eat in moderation. Even though, it wasn't smart for big fast food companies to come out with their crappy food... well, smart for them, they are rich, but we shouldn't have to completely restrict ourselves from it. I really like vegetables and fruit, but I also like a slice of pizza every now and then. I really don't think there is anything wrong with it.
Just my thoughts.
My aunt would get along with her.0 -
Correlation does not equal causation. It's also true that French people tend to weigh less than Americans. So, speaking French makes you lose weight!:huh:
Mais bien sure!!!!!0 -
lol what a moron. obviously nobody here is going to ever agree with her and this threads a giant circlejerk but dear lord
"Let's look at the facts. Not even the scientific facts."
this sentence about sums it up
all her examples:
-animals in the wild are overweight but our pets aren't
-tribes in africa hunting a wild boar
Hunting a wild boar is clearly a lot more physical activity than driving your car to walmart and then taking your HoverRound scooter over to the candy aisle for a chocolate bar. Wild animals are out running around for their food and our pets get let out on a walk once a day maybe. Also scarcity but that's a different issue.
We are the only species that count them because animals can't do math. Animals also don't use toilets, wear clothes, buy houses, and write stupid blogs on the internet. I guess she should stop doing those too. especially the last one.
If you eat 6 avocados a day and then an entire jar of unblanched non-GMO peanut butter and then an entire box of fair trade organic quinoa, you're definitely not going to lose weight either.
Oh also she's a dumbass for ruining her friends truck. Unleaded instead of diesel, that's pretty rich. Someone that blonde doesn't need to be talking about Science and Health.
this girl needs to take a seat.
brb gonna go eat 1200 calories of chocolate bars and still gonna be looking better than she does0 -
This one of the dumbest things I've ever read.
I second that. Can I get a third and motion to move this post?
Aye!0 -
Charlotte Ord (of Biggest Loser UK fame) says:
I'll be sure to get all of my information from a t.v. personality. After Ms. Ord I'll start taking Dr. Oz's advice, he's full of weight loss information. And on top of being a t.v. personality, he's even a...doctor!
Ms. Ord is predjudiced and has closed her mind to thoughts and weight loss programs that don't benefit her ($$$).0 -
I do agree with Quality over Quantity. But I still count my calories.0
-
I ate 1lb of round stop steak last night..............yumm0
-
The problem is that people don't really learn anything while they're trimming down...they get to some arbitrary goal weight and they're "done"...they've crossed some finish line or sorts.
You can't go back to "normal" unrestricted eating...the only difference between my cut and maintenance is a few hundred calories...that's it. I just don't see how people don't get this. If you go back to "normal" eating then of course you're going to put the weight back on, and then some. There has to be a new "normal"...which is what "lifestyle change" is all about...but that is apparently lost a about 95% of people who have issues maintaining weight after they've lost it.
Reaching your goal weight is just the beginning...you haven't arrived at the finish line...you've just arrived at the starting line of a very long race called, "maintenance." That's where the real work happens...too bad so many people fail to realize this.
I'm sure this chick will put her weight back on too...because she sound like a moron and obviously doesn't really get it.
THIS! This has always been MY issue as a very "goal oriented" person. Not this time, though!
I agree this woman doesn't get it. To say that eating a small amount of "****FOOD" will mess up your entire metabolic homeostasis and send you into a spiral of depression, weight gain, and full on body rebellion (hyperbole added) ignores the fact that our bodies are AMAZING. They can withstand a LOT and (assuming you don't have some underlying health condition like diabetes) can accommodate a huge variety of foods. If losing weight is the goal, it really is calories in-calories out.
Now, I think it's true that eating whole and healthier foods will make you FEEL better (physically, mentally, emotionally), and your body will be happier with you... but eating whole foods should be the majority of your food - not necessarily ALL of your food (unless you're super into it and it makes you happy to eat that kind of food all the time).
And I dunno about this idea that folks in the 70s (and prior) ate better than us. Have you seen the cookbooks from back then? They made EVERYTHING into loaves and gross looking molds... used a ton of fat (sour cream, butter, cream cheese, etc.) Now, go back to our hunter/gatherer ancestors - yes, she has a point I suppose...0 -
Let's look at the facts. Not even the scientific facts. Just the plain old glaringly obvious ones.
Right here is when the article went from just plain dumb to ultra retard mode.
Yeah, lets just ignore all that sciencey stuff...0 -
I don't even know where to start on this... Okay, of course natural foods = weighing less. If you live off of fresh, natural foods you probably do not need to watch your calories, but I don't live on a farm. I have to rely on the junk in grocery stores and in restaurants. Our diets today are so calorie dense, and our portions are so out of control that calorie counting is simply a method of teaching ourselves correct portions. And anyone who counts calories will figure out really quickly that you can eat a lot more if you fill up on natural foods than if you eat candy and french fries all day.
PS... I have been a typical american fast-food omnivore, I am now vegetarian, and have been vegan in phases, and through all of my diets I have had to count calories. Preparation of fresh fruits and vegetables can work against you too. I have used calorie counting to teach myself how much I should be eating whether my diet consisted mainly of burgers and fries, broccoli and cheese, or quinoa and nutritional yeast. It is just a tool. Use it if it works for you.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
- 424 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