Is 'eating at deficit' enough?
cgarand
Posts: 541 Member
If you look through the forums there is always talk about 'eating at deficit'. But, really it's more than just eating fewer calories than you burn. It's also about what you eat. Your body needs fuel. You can eat garbage and be at a calorie deficit, but you aren't going to feel good and it will probably hinder your weight loss/fitness goals.
Pay attention to those macro's and work on adding veggies and lean protein. Drink lots of water and move your body. If you 'eat at deficit' and the scale still isn't moving then it may not be how much you are eating but what you are eating that is holding you back.
Pay attention to those macro's and work on adding veggies and lean protein. Drink lots of water and move your body. If you 'eat at deficit' and the scale still isn't moving then it may not be how much you are eating but what you are eating that is holding you back.
0
Replies
-
If you look through the forums there is always talk about 'eating at deficit'. But, really it's more than just eating fewer calories than you burn. It's also about what you eat. Your body needs fuel. You can eat garbage and be at a calorie deficit, but you aren't going to feel good and it will probably hinder your weight loss/fitness goals.
Pay attention to those macro's and work on adding veggies and lean protein. Drink lots of water and move your body. If you 'eat at deficit' and the scale still isn't moving then it may not be how much you are eating but what you are eating that is holding you back.
It matters what your goals are. If weight loss is your only goal then Yes eating at a deficit is enough. If you are looking for overall health then some of what you say has merit. Macros are vital but all food is fuel and I do not believe there is any "garbage" foods as you say.0 -
No if your not losing weight and eating at a deficit your not really eating at a deficit. Stop trying to muddy the water. Yes nutrition is important and depending on personal goals we should all keep an eye on what those calories are and what they contain. This smoke and mirrors approach that people take to weight loss is just a way to avoid the fact that they are eating too much. I just don't get why people insist on making what is a simple biological process (losing weight) so damm complicated.If you 'eat at deficit' and the scale still isn't moving then it may not be how much you are eating but what you are eating that is holding you back.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
If you look through the forums there is always talk about 'eating at deficit'. But, really it's more than just eating fewer calories than you burn. It's also about what you eat. Your body needs fuel. You can eat garbage and be at a calorie deficit, but you aren't going to feel good and it will probably hinder your weight loss/fitness goals.
Pay attention to those macro's and work on adding veggies and lean protein. Drink lots of water and move your body. If you 'eat at deficit' and the scale still isn't moving then it may not be how much you are eating but what you are eating that is holding you back.
Nope, for weight loss, calorie deficit only. Like someone above said, these kind of threads just muddy the water. This is your opinion.0 -
I agree. I have never counted a macro, although KUDOS to those who choose to, seems like a lot of work. The only thing I do is try to make sure I have protein at every meal.
No if your not losing weight and eating at a deficit your not really eating at a deficit. Stop trying to muddy the water. Yes nutrition is important and depending on personal goals we should all keep an eye on what those calories are and what they contain. This smoke and mirrors approach that people take to weight loss is just a way to avoid the fact that they are eating too much. I just don't get why people insist on making what is a simple biological process (losing weight) so damm complicated.If you 'eat at deficit' and the scale still isn't moving then it may not be how much you are eating but what you are eating that is holding you back.
My sister has lost 50 labs and she is just eating at a deficit. Hasn't done any exercise either, although she is starting to, she realizes she is not toned or very strong.0 -
Ok here's an anecdotal and awkward take on the whole situation. Weekend before this past one I was visiting some family and gorged myself on everything in sight. My [estimated] logging showed like 3500 calories over one day and maybe 2000 over the next. But when I came home and weighed my weight had gone up 11lbs from my last "lowest" weight. It's taken the whole week to come back to to pre-inhaling everything in sight levels. Well the point is kind of moot because if I did this every week I wouldn't actually lose weight over time. Just wondering if one were too eat too many carbs or or too much food or something on a smaller scale, perhaps the body consistently retains water to the point of making the individual look like they're not losing any weight, despite being in a deficit? Yeah I'm stupid. I just woke up I'm gonna get breakfast going and get ready for work0
-
If you look through the forums there is always talk about 'eating at deficit'. But, really it's more than just eating fewer calories than you burn. It's also about what you eat. Your body needs fuel. You can eat garbage and be at a calorie deficit, but you aren't going to feel good and it will probably hinder your weight loss/fitness goals.
Pay attention to those macro's and work on adding veggies and lean protein. Drink lots of water and move your body. If you 'eat at deficit' and the scale still isn't moving then it may not be how much you are eating but what you are eating that is holding you back.
Who eats garbage?
Who proposes eating garbage?
NO ONE
If the scale isn't moving over the long term you aren't eating at a deficit over the long term.0 -
Nope, eating at a deficit really is enough. If you are "stuck" it's because you are eating the same as, or more than, your body is burning.0
-
Pay attention to those macro's and work on adding veggies and lean protein.
Macros make up ALL foods... So you contradict yourself by saying on the one hand that it might be "what you're eating", then to turn around and say watch your macros. At the end of the day, weight (fat) loss is dependent on cals in vs out.0 -
102.5lbs off eating what I wanted but in moderation including 'garbage' (your words not mine as I think classifying food like that is part of the unhealthy relationship I had with food) so have to disagree. Eating at a calorie deficit is all its taken. I exercise for health & fitness which has the bonus of allowing me to eat more and maintain a deficit but I eat what I fancy which is a mixture of lean meat, lots of veg and a fair bit of beer & chocolate!0
-
If you look through the forums there is always talk about 'eating at deficit'. But, really it's more than just eating fewer calories than you burn. It's also about what you eat. Your body needs fuel. You can eat garbage and be at a calorie deficit, but you aren't going to feel good and it will probably hinder your weight loss/fitness goals.
Pay attention to those macro's and work on adding veggies and lean protein. Drink lots of water and move your body. If you 'eat at deficit' and the scale still isn't moving then it may not be how much you are eating but what you are eating that is holding you back.
No it really is just about eating less than you burn.
As for garbage yah I don't dumpster dive and feel for those who have to in order to eat...that's awful.0 -
Black and white thinking regarding food. You don't want to set yourself up for food obsessions and binges by restricting.
It's a case of balance. Lots of athletes and healthy slim people eat all foods. It's a good idea to eat adequate protein colourful fruits and veg and fats. Bulk and cut at appropriate excess and deficit.
Juicy steak, sweet potatoes, spinach in butter, red wine and chocolate. In the best shape, health and athletic performance of my life.0 -
Eating crappy food might hinder your fitness goals, but it won't hinder your weight loss goals. Nope.0
-
After seeing how everyone was jumping on the OP, I was going to step in and try to give some validation to some of the points she made.
But I decided to check out her diary first, and NAHHHHH, she is on her own with this one.
In my opinion, Shakeology would fall under the garbage category. And I think even Jonny -'McDonalds'-than eats more veggies than OP does,0 -
In for the lively debate that's sure to follow.0
-
Many people can lose just by eating at a deficit. As you get closer to your goals it becomes less easy. If you're very big and you can eat 2,000 cals of bread a day and still create a deficit that's going to be enough food to keep you going. However, as you lose and you have to drop your calories, the same food often becomes less satiating. If you're not getting enough protein you're going to lose more muscle than if you're eating enough for your body, if you have hormonal issues you're going to need to create a larger deficit if you insist on getting most of your calories from carbs and are sedentary, if you have thyroid problems you're going to lose at a slower rate than completely healthy people, if you have blood sugar issues you're going to have problems with high sugar foods, if you're stressing your body out your cortisol is going to be raised and signal your body to store fat and you'll have a harder time losing....there's a lot more to it than just calories for a lot of people. It's great for those who can eat whatever they want as long as they're eating at a deficit and reach their goal weight and feel good at the same time, but that is absolutely not the case for everyone.0
-
For overall health and feeling good, sure it matters what you eat.
For weight loss alone? Nope. Just a calorie deficit.
There was a professor that ate pure junk food (mostly twinkies) at a calorie deficit and lost 27 pounds in two months:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/0 -
After seeing how everyone was jumping on the OP, I was going to step in and try to give some validation to some of the points she made.
But I decided to check out her diary first, and NAHHHHH, she is on her own with this one.
In my opinion, Shakeology would fall under the garbage category. And I think even Jonny -'McDonalds'-than eats more veggies than OP does,
I don't see many jumping but because of this post I did look at her diary...
I want to find that bacon that is 69 calories for 1.5 slices...:laugh:0 -
Everyone is different. Personally carbs are my downfall. I can eat clean and lose all kinds of weight even over my caloric intake. The best ides is to do a body fat % and see what works for you. Losing weight isn't a cookie cutter situation. Some people need different way to attack it.
End of0 -
After seeing how everyone was jumping on the OP, I was going to step in and try to give some validation to some of the points she made.
But I decided to check out her diary first, and NAHHHHH, she is on her own with this one.
In my opinion, Shakeology would fall under the garbage category. And I think even Jonny -'McDonalds'-than eats more veggies than OP does,
OK I had to go and look. 626 calories for the day!!! There is one shake and there seem to be quite a few veggies but I would starve to death on only 626 calories a day.
A deficit is all you need to lose weight yes indeedy but if you want to be fit, healthy and have enough energy to excersise and live life you need to eat to fuel your body and get the micronutrients.0 -
Ok here's an anecdotal and awkward take on the whole situation. Weekend before this past one I was visiting some family and gorged myself on everything in sight. My [estimated] logging showed like 3500 calories over one day and maybe 2000 over the next. But when I came home and weighed my weight had gone up 11lbs from my last "lowest" weight. It's taken the whole week to come back to to pre-inhaling everything in sight levels. Well the point is kind of moot because if I did this every week I wouldn't actually lose weight over time. Just wondering if one were too eat too many carbs or or too much food or something on a smaller scale, perhaps the body consistently retains water to the point of making the individual look like they're not losing any weight, despite being in a deficit? Yeah I'm stupid. I just woke up I'm gonna get breakfast going and get ready for work
Yes, water retention can make you look like you haven't lost weight, but there's a limit to how much water a reasonably healthy person will retain. In other words, it may mask a 2-3 lb loss, but it won't mask a 25 lb loss (unless you have a serious medical issue that causes THAT much water retention, in which case you should see a physician). Don't forget that that 11 lbs included not just water retention but your gut and intestines being full of loads of food as well.0 -
After seeing how everyone was jumping on the OP, I was going to step in and try to give some validation to some of the points she made.
But I decided to check out her diary first, and NAHHHHH, she is on her own with this one.
In my opinion, Shakeology would fall under the garbage category. And I think even Jonny -'McDonalds'-than eats more veggies than OP does,
I don't see many jumping but because of this post I did look at her diary...
I want to find that bacon that is 69 calories for 1.5 slices...:laugh:
Hmm? My bacon says 80 calories for two "pan fried" slices. For this reason I try to be careful to soak up the juices/fat with a paper towel once the bacon has cooked (I then throw in eggs so I usually don't drain them on a paper towel). The brand I'm using now is "Farmland lower sodium" I had one slice with dinner last night 40 calories. I would have preferred them to just list the calories with the fat that liquefies off and all, but I guess this is the latest marketing thing0 -
I wonder what the point of this post is, because you don't seem to be asking a question.
Weight loss is solely determined by caloric deficit. Do you know what /weight/ really is? It's your relationship with gravity. It tells you your relative mass according to the planet that you're standing on. It honestly has nothing to do with your health.
If you want to be FIT and HEALTHY you have to pay attention to what you eat. If you want to WEIGH LESS you only need a caloric deficit.0 -
I don't have as big of goals as other people do, so I can't just shove fistfuls of food in my mouth and still eat at a deficit. I have to eat friggin air to lose any weight, and I don't feel like eating air, so I'm just letting the weight come off if it wants to. If I ate too much chocolate, I'll cut down on dinner to make up for it. Not everyone lives in this perfect world where everyone supports your eating habits.0
-
Everyone is different. Personally carbs are my downfall. I can eat clean and lose all kinds of weight even over my caloric intake. The best ides is to do a body fat % and see what works for you. Losing weight isn't a cookie cutter situation. Some people need different way to attack it.
End of
Sorry but, no. No one can eat above TDEE and lose weight. That would defy the laws of thermodynamics. It really is just calories.0 -
Everyone is different. Personally carbs are my downfall. I can eat clean and lose all kinds of weight even over my caloric intake. The best ides is to do a body fat % and see what works for you. Losing weight isn't a cookie cutter situation. Some people need different way to attack it.
End of
Sorry but, no. No one can eat above TDEE and lose weight. That would defy the laws of thermodynamics. It really is just calories.
Technically you are right. However, it's extremely difficult to know EXACTLY how many calories you're taking in because even food labels are often incorrect, it's extremely difficult to know EXACTLY how much you're burning per day and therefore it could appear as if you're eating over your TDEE and losing weight but your body is obviously either burning more than you realise or you are taking in less than you realise. And this is when it can appear as though you are not creating a deficit and still losing weight. What the person you quoted is probably experiencing is that their body functions more effectively on a clean diet and they end up expending more energy than they were previously which could be for a number of reasons. The body is a complicated vessel.0 -
Not technically right, absolutely right. A "clean" diet (I still haven't found 2 people who can agree on what that even is) or any other diet will perform EXACTLY the same given the same energy balance in terms of WEIGHT LOSS. Again, these types of arguments only muddy the water for people just starting out. WHAT you eat makes NO difference in terms of WEIGHT loss......NONE. 2000 calories of Twinkies or 2000 calories of kale at the same level of calorie burn will produce the same results for weight loss.Everyone is different. Personally carbs are my downfall. I can eat clean and lose all kinds of weight even over my caloric intake. The best ides is to do a body fat % and see what works for you. Losing weight isn't a cookie cutter situation. Some people need different way to attack it.
End of
Sorry but, no. No one can eat above TDEE and lose weight. That would defy the laws of thermodynamics. It really is just calories.
Technically you are right. However, it's extremely difficult to know EXACTLY how many calories you're taking in because even food labels are often incorrect, it's extremely difficult to know EXACTLY how much you're burning per day and therefore it could appear as if you're eating over your TDEE and losing weight but your body is obviously either burning more than you realise or you are taking in less than you realise. And this is when it can appear as though you are not creating a deficit and still losing weight. What the person you quoted is probably experiencing is that their body functions more effectively on a clean diet and they end up expending more energy than they were previously which could be for a number of reasons. The body is a complicated vessel.0 -
For weight loss, absolutely. See the prior responses above for further clarification.0
-
Everyone is different. Personally carbs are my downfall. I can eat clean and lose all kinds of weight even over my caloric intake. The best ides is to do a body fat % and see what works for you. Losing weight isn't a cookie cutter situation. Some people need different way to attack it.
End of
Sorry but, no. No one can eat above TDEE and lose weight. That would defy the laws of thermodynamics. It really is just calories.
Saying a calorie is just a calorie violates the 2nd law of Thermodynamics.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC506782/0 -
Not technically right, absolutely right. A "clean" diet (I still haven't found 2 people who can agree on what that even is) or any other diet will perform EXACTLY the same given the same energy balance in terms of WEIGHT LOSS. Again, these types of arguments only muddy the water for people just starting out. WHAT you eat makes NO difference in terms of WEIGHT loss......NONE. 2000 calories of Twinkies or 2000 calories of kale at the same level of calorie burn will produce the same results for weight loss.Everyone is different. Personally carbs are my downfall. I can eat clean and lose all kinds of weight even over my caloric intake. The best ides is to do a body fat % and see what works for you. Losing weight isn't a cookie cutter situation. Some people need different way to attack it.
End of
Sorry but, no. No one can eat above TDEE and lose weight. That would defy the laws of thermodynamics. It really is just calories.
Technically you are right. However, it's extremely difficult to know EXACTLY how many calories you're taking in because even food labels are often incorrect, it's extremely difficult to know EXACTLY how much you're burning per day and therefore it could appear as if you're eating over your TDEE and losing weight but your body is obviously either burning more than you realise or you are taking in less than you realise. And this is when it can appear as though you are not creating a deficit and still losing weight. What the person you quoted is probably experiencing is that their body functions more effectively on a clean diet and they end up expending more energy than they were previously which could be for a number of reasons. The body is a complicated vessel.
Disagree.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions