Gluten. Dairy. Sugar.

I understand the weight part, but if I am measuring the same way I did before, then what explains the weight loss with the whole foods if I am measuring out the same number of calories I ate before. I am using the same measuring method, so the type of food has nothing to do with it.

You asked for an explanation. I gave you one a few posts back. Did you even read it?

Yes I read it, you said if I weighed I would be eating less food. My point is I didn't change how I measure, just the type of food, I am still eating the same amount of calories from my measurements. If all I did was change the type of food, then the measuring is not the whole equation for me. The type of food works for me. I will definitely look into a scale, but I am meausring the same way I did before, eating the same number of calories I measured before and losing now when I didn't before.

sigh.

Double sigh. I said I changed one thing, and you're saying the reason I wasn't losing is something else. You said I must be eating less because I am more satisfied. I said I ate the same amount of calories (which with whole foods I find I get to eat more food) which makes your response a moot point. If I didn't change how I measured or the amount of calories (meauring the same way), then just measuring is not the issue. Your response does not explain why the change in type of food when I am eating the same amount of calories equaled more weight loss for me.

you changed the type of food you were measuring. if you are measuring dense foods like carbs and dairy products, you are going to be farther off than you will on less dense foods like vegetables and fruits. bread and pasta and oats and potatoes weigh more for their mass than a leaf of lettuce. A cup of lettuce will be closer to the calorie count for weight than a cup of potatoes, for instance, which is why you created more of a calorie deficit when you change those foods and measured them the same way. Does that make sense?
One more example: When I measured 1/2 cup of oatmeal, it was 55 grams (206 calories). 40 grams is 150 calories, according to the package label, but it also says that 1/2 cup is 150 calories. If you assume your 1/2 cup is 150 calories, you are already 56 calories over on your calories estimate for the day. If you measure out a cup of lettuce and it's 10 calories, and then weight the grams of lettuce and it's 15 calories, now you're only 5 calories over. Much easier to keep your calorie deficit that way.

**Meanwhile, in my fortress of evil**

I'm glad you've had success but the weight loss isn't purely because you cut those three things. It's because by eliminating those things from your diet, you created a calorie deficit. I wish you the best but have no intention of ever giving up these things. Especially the dairy...ice cream.... Also, 30 lbs in 2 months seems ridiculous and not healthy for most people, so...

The statement of "you created a calorie deficit" is not accurate. It depends on a lot of what the "replacement" foods are that are being ate. I've recently switched up from years of calorie counting - doubled my calories - by adding more high quality fats - and am losing weight and cutting body fat - calories in/calories out - is simply not true.

Wow I am quite amazed at all the responses here. I put the details of my story in a blog post.
I had about 40 lbs to lose. I cannot reply to all these posts, but who ever is interested can look at my story here:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Elevensies

I only wanted to share my experience as I had this extra weight for many years and until I gave up these things, I was not having much success. I thought others may benefit from learning of my experience.

I know consume these three evils on occasion and in only small amounts. And by 'sugar' iI mean primarily processed sugar. I do not hide from raw honey or fruits, or even maple syrup. :-) But gluten, I am now avoiding permanently. I do not feel well after consuming it. And dairy only in very small amounts.

Please, please please stop calling them 'evils'. They are foods. There is no inherent malevalence in them. If they don't work for you, that's fine; they do work for many others.

OP, do what works best for you. I had a problem losing weight too until I found that gluten is a problem for me. Since I cut gluten containing food from my diet, I have lost weight steadily. I have read a lot of posts about calorie deficits and I understand that is how you lose weight. But when I was eating at a deficit, and I still wasn't losing weight, I knew that something wasn't right. So I cut out gluten. I still eat sugar and potatoes and I log them along with the rest of the foods I eat. Since eating gluten free, the "eat at a deficit" is working for me. Best wishes to you!!

so whenver someone posts something that is not accurate we are all just supposed to jump on the bandwagon and say "hooray, great job OP!" even if we know the reasoning/logic behind said post is wrong?

Look people are going to come in here and think that this is a plan for long term success which it is not …so if we are not being "supportive' for blindly supporting every "sugar is the devil" post, then sure, whatever...

Nope, but there's a non-douchie way of correcting people, ndj.

She was obviously replying to your statement, not specifically saying you were the douchie one. She was responding TO you, but not ABOUT you.

The reality is, there are ways to be correct AND helpful. Most people were more focused on being correct, which came across as condescending and aggressive: ie: douchie

Wow! I came here for a little encouragement in my journey. The first thread I look at is in the 'Success Stories' forum and what do I see? Well, if I say 'vicious attacks', many will get defensive and direct those comments toward me, whether I was referring to them or not. Anyway. I see this thread as rather sad.

To the original poster, you know your body. If those foods were hurting you, and obviously they were, you made a good choice. I, too, have eliminated gluten, dairy (mostly), and process/refined sugar/honey/etc. from my diet. I am gluten and lactose intolerant and diabetic. I haven't lost weight but am holding steady and feel better than I have in years. It's just a matter of time till I'm able to exercise more and the pounds will start dropping. Thank you to the original poster for the reminder that weight loss is possible I was beginning to doubt.

Yeah, that's MFP, in a nutshell. This is a hot button topic for MFP'ers. There are others, as well (eating below 1200 calories/day comes to mind).

Stick around, you CAN find supportive people here, too.

so whenver someone posts something that is not accurate we are all just supposed to jump on the bandwagon and say "hooray, great job OP!" even if we know the reasoning/logic behind said post is wrong?

Look people are going to come in here and think that this is a plan for long term success which it is not …so if we are not being "supportive' for blindly supporting every "sugar is the devil" post, then sure, whatever...

Nope, but there's a non-douchie way of correcting people, ndj.

so when your premise falls apart you resort to name calling…legit...

Sensitive much? No one called you any names.

calling someone a douche is not name calling? What, pray tell, is it?

there are some things I could say about the person that said that, but I will take the high road….

Saying "hey, you're a douche"
"Hey you, *kitten*"
"Mr. Douchetastic, pass me that stapler"

is calling someone a douche.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Saying "hey, you're a douche"
"Hey you, *kitten*"
"Mr. Douchetastic, pass me that stapler"

is calling someone a douche.

Implying someone is a douche is no different than blatantly calling someone a douche, just as implying someone is a b!tch is no different than calling someone a b!tch. There are nicer ways to say things.

I didn't imply that. He chose to make the comment about himself. I actually wasn't calling HIM a douche, at all.

you are the one that brought up in response to a comment that I made…if you did not think I was acting in certain way then why did you feel the need to imply it? I could reply in kind, but I will take high road..

If you want to challenge me on what I am saying then point to what you disagree with and call me out on it…no sense in beating around the bushes..

Again, I was NOT actually talking about you! Lol! Yes, you've annoyed me in the past, but I was wrong and admitted as much. You actually haven't been terrible in this thread. Stop making this about you!

you specifically referenced my screename "Nope, but there's a non-douchie way of correcting people, ndj" so yes, you were referring/talking about me. Again, if you have a problem with what I said, or how I called someone out then quote it and say what you disagree with. You do not need to take a round about route to call me out …or just call me out and I will reply in kid. But don't try to be all sly about it and then when you get called out, put your tail between your legs and totally back off the statement like you said nothing…

Hell, you can call me whatever you want…just tell me what you disagree with and we can hash it out...

Oh, christ. Seriously? I currently have NO PROBLEM with you. I was replying to your comment about correcting ppl. My response would have been THE SAME to anyone who said it. I was just discussing the topic. No need to get butthurt over some perceived slight.