A Calorie is NOT just a Calorie
Replies
-
I just don't understand why people woudoesn'her have 1,500 of junk that in the end will do more harm than good to your health than eating 1,500 of tasty, healthy food that will make you a healthier human being. Why would I like to eat 1,000 at one sitting on McDonalds instead of 1,000 calories of meat, veggies, nuts, and even dessert during the day?
And forgive my english...
I think what people are failing to understand is that we're not talking about eating one thing all day. We are not taking about eating 10 cheeseburgers a day we're talking a cheeseburger, salad, some fruit, maybe fish Greek yogurt, ice cream, quinoa. It's about balance and sustainability. We're not saying "eat 100 cookies and lose weight". You could, but you'd feel like junk. Instead, focus on nutrient density of foods proteins, fats, carbs, and fiber. Get those targets in line and yes, enjoy your big Mac. Eric Helms I Believe said, "You don't get extra credit for getting more nutrients than your body requires. " . So, while I understand wanting to healthy, that doesn't mean slapping trivial labels on something simple. Food.0 -
This thread rolled?! Wow...
0 -
Nice to learn that I can just eat what I want and lose weight. I want seven cheeseburgers and fries with a milk shake. Every day.
Still say I can eat what I want and lose weight?
It's accurate to say you can incorporate any food you like into a diet that will result in losing weight. It isn't accurate to say you can eat whatever you want. Not the same thing. And I don't know why people are so stuck on that. I eat a Ruben sandwich from Arbys about once every two weeks. Why? Because I want it. But I can't eat whatever I want whenever I want like I used to if I want to lose weight. Just as I don't have to give up eating the foods I love. Both are true. They are not mutually exclusive. This isn't this hard.
In the grand scheme of things we all agree that there is more to health than just calories. But from a pure weight loss (not caring about the overall picture), you can eat seven cheeseburgers and fries/milkshake and lose weight if your TDEE is high enough. It's why they have diets like the twinkie diet or cookie diet. Heck, there was woman in the news near me that ate nothing but starbucks for one year and lost 60 lbs. She ate 1200 calories worth of starbucks daily.
If you care about health or fitness or adherence, then macros apply
Which is all I've been saying. Why can't we just say what we mean? You can incorporate any food you love into a diet plan that will result in you losing weight. And doing so is will likely make your effort more successful in the long run. Why does that have to get morphed into something that could so easy be misunderstood?
As I said in another thread, it may be possible to lose weight on the twinkie diet, but I know *I* couldn't do it. I get it. Some people are at the other extreme and say you must eat only "healthy" food to lose weight. But why do we have to run to the opposite extreme to point out that they're wrong? Why can't we just offer some real, practical advice? Would you recommend that anyone trying to lose weight should go on the Twinkie diet? Or get all their calories at McDonalds? It's fine to point out that it is possible to do it. But you do that to make a point. After you make the point you should really follow up by explaining why most people who are successful at losing weight and keeping it off make some changes to their diet.
(edit) And no, I couldn't eat all that and lose weight. I'm not physically capable of doing enough exercise to offset all those calories. Even if I was, I'd have to quit my job to have time to do it.0 -
Nice to learn that I can just eat what I want and lose weight. I want seven cheeseburgers and fries with a milk shake. Every day.
Still say I can eat what I want and lose weight?
It's accurate to say you can incorporate any food you like into a diet that will result in losing weight. It isn't accurate to say you can eat whatever you want. Not the same thing. And I don't know why people are so stuck on that. I eat a Ruben sandwich from Arbys about once every two weeks. Why? Because I want it. But I can't eat whatever I want whenever I want like I used to if I want to lose weight. Just as I don't have to give up eating the foods I love. Both are true. They are not mutually exclusive. This isn't this hard.
Yup...
as long as your TDEE is around 3500 and that is McDonalds...7 cheeseburgers=2100 calories, fries=300 calories, shake is 660 calories...
My son could eat that everyday and lose weight...husband would maintain.0 -
Nice to learn that I can just eat what I want and lose weight. I want seven cheeseburgers and fries with a milk shake. Every day.
Still say I can eat what I want and lose weight?
It's accurate to say you can incorporate any food you like into a diet that will result in losing weight. It isn't accurate to say you can eat whatever you want. Not the same thing. And I don't know why people are so stuck on that. I eat a Ruben sandwich from Arbys about once every two weeks. Why? Because I want it. But I can't eat whatever I want whenever I want like I used to if I want to lose weight. Just as I don't have to give up eating the foods I love. Both are true. They are not mutually exclusive. This isn't this hard.
In the grand scheme of things we all agree that there is more to health than just calories. But from a pure weight loss (not caring about the overall picture), you can eat seven cheeseburgers and fries/milkshake and lose weight if your TDEE is high enough. It's why they have diets like the twinkie diet or cookie diet. Heck, there was woman in the news near me that ate nothing but starbucks for one year and lost 60 lbs. She ate 1200 calories worth of starbucks daily.
If you care about health or fitness or adherence, then macros apply
Which is all I've been saying. Why can't we just say what we mean? You can incorporate any food you love into a diet plan that will result in you losing weight. And doing so is will likely make your effort more successful in the long run. Why does that have to get morphed into something that could so easy be misunderstood?
As I said in another thread, it may be possible to lose weight on the twinkie diet, but I know *I* couldn't do it. I get it. Some people are at the other extreme and say you must eat only "healthy" food to lose weight. But why do we have to run to the opposite extreme to point out that they're wrong? Why can't we just offer some real, practical advice? Would you recommend that anyone trying to lose weight should go on the Twinkie diet? Or get all their calories at McDonalds? It's fine to point out that it is possible to do it. But you do that to make a point. After you make the point you should really follow up by explaining why most people who are successful at losing weight and keeping it off make some changes to their diet.
(edit) And no, I couldn't eat all that and lose weight. I'm not physically capable of doing enough exercise to offset all those calories. Even if I was, I'd have to quit my job to have time to do it.
Actually, if you planned carefully you could probably hit your macros with McDonald's :laugh:
But I get your point0 -
Nice to learn that I can just eat what I want and lose weight. I want seven cheeseburgers and fries with a milk shake. Every day.
Still say I can eat what I want and lose weight?
It's accurate to say you can incorporate any food you like into a diet that will result in losing weight. It isn't accurate to say you can eat whatever you want. Not the same thing. And I don't know why people are so stuck on that. I eat a Ruben sandwich from Arbys about once every two weeks. Why? Because I want it. But I can't eat whatever I want whenever I want like I used to if I want to lose weight. Just as I don't have to give up eating the foods I love. Both are true. They are not mutually exclusive. This isn't this hard.
Yup...
as long as your TDEE is around 3500 and that is McDonalds...7 cheeseburgers=2100 calories, fries=300 calories, shake is 660 calories...
My son could eat that everyday and lose weight...husband would maintain.
:grumble: 0 -
0
-
It can be done in theory:Nice to learn that I can just eat what I want and lose weight. I want seven cheeseburgers and fries with a milk shake. Every day.
Still say I can eat what I want and lose weight?
It's accurate to say you can incorporate any food you like into a diet that will result in losing weight. It isn't accurate to say you can eat whatever you want. Not the same thing. And I don't know why people are so stuck on that. I eat a Ruben sandwich from Arbys about once every two weeks. Why? Because I want it. But I can't eat whatever I want whenever I want like I used to if I want to lose weight. Just as I don't have to give up eating the foods I love. Both are true. They are not mutually exclusive. This isn't this hard.
In the grand scheme of things we all agree that there is more to health than just calories. But from a pure weight loss (not caring about the overall picture), you can eat seven cheeseburgers and fries/milkshake and lose weight if your TDEE is high enough. It's why they have diets like the twinkie diet or cookie diet. Heck, there was woman in the news near me that ate nothing but starbucks for one year and lost 60 lbs. She ate 1200 calories worth of starbucks daily.
If you care about health or fitness or adherence, then macros apply
Which is all I've been saying. Why can't we just say what we mean? You can incorporate any food you love into a diet plan that will result in you losing weight. And doing so is will likely make your effort more successful in the long run. Why does that have to get morphed into something that could so easy be misunderstood?
As I said in another thread, it may be possible to lose weight on the twinkie diet, but I know *I* couldn't do it. I get it. Some people are at the other extreme and say you must eat only "healthy" food to lose weight. But why do we have to run to the opposite extreme to point out that they're wrong? Why can't we just offer some real, practical advice? Would you recommend that anyone trying to lose weight should go on the Twinkie diet? Or get all their calories at McDonalds? It's fine to point out that it is possible to do it. But you do that to make a point. After you make the point you should really follow up by explaining why most people who are successful at losing weight and keeping it off make some changes to their diet.
(edit) And no, I couldn't eat all that and lose weight. I'm not physically capable of doing enough exercise to offset all those calories. Even if I was, I'd have to quit my job to have time to do it.
Actually, if you planned carefully you could probably hit your macros with McDonald's :laugh:
But I get your point
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1172842-a-decent-2000kcal-day-with-40-30-30-macros-from-mcdonalds0 -
Nice to learn that I can just eat what I want and lose weight. I want seven cheeseburgers and fries with a milk shake. Every day.
Still say I can eat what I want and lose weight?
It's accurate to say you can incorporate any food you like into a diet that will result in losing weight. It isn't accurate to say you can eat whatever you want. Not the same thing. And I don't know why people are so stuck on that. I eat a Ruben sandwich from Arbys about once every two weeks. Why? Because I want it. But I can't eat whatever I want whenever I want like I used to if I want to lose weight. Just as I don't have to give up eating the foods I love. Both are true. They are not mutually exclusive. This isn't this hard.
Yup...
as long as your TDEE is around 3500 and that is McDonalds...7 cheeseburgers=2100 calories, fries=300 calories, shake is 660 calories...
My son could eat that everyday and lose weight...husband would maintain.
Congratulations. You win.
I get your point. But this "debate" is beyond pointless and certainly beyond any practical, useful advice. Every thread on this forum ends up in some stupid fight about things people know are nonsensical. I'll let you and the paleo fans duke it out. I'm going to kind of tip toe out of here now and get back to losing weight. Which involves eating some of the things I used to eat, and some things that are more "healthy".
I know. Crazy. Neither extreme. Somehow it's working. Go figure.
Useful information can be found on the internet... in theory.
This place is worse than Congress.0 -
Double post.0
-
Nice to learn that I can just eat what I want and lose weight. I want seven cheeseburgers and fries with a milk shake. Every day.
Still say I can eat what I want and lose weight?
It's accurate to say you can incorporate any food you like into a diet that will result in losing weight. It isn't accurate to say you can eat whatever you want. Not the same thing. And I don't know why people are so stuck on that. I eat a Ruben sandwich from Arbys about once every two weeks. Why? Because I want it. But I can't eat whatever I want whenever I want like I used to if I want to lose weight. Just as I don't have to give up eating the foods I love. Both are true. They are not mutually exclusive. This isn't this hard.
Yup...
as long as your TDEE is around 3500 and that is McDonalds...7 cheeseburgers=2100 calories, fries=300 calories, shake is 660 calories...
My son could eat that everyday and lose weight...husband would maintain. :grumble:
Brats aren't they...0 -
Yep, this spot on.Nice to learn that I can just eat what I want and lose weight. I want seven cheeseburgers and fries with a milk shake. Every day.
Still say I can eat what I want and lose weight?
It's accurate to say you can incorporate any food you like into a diet that will result in losing weight. It isn't accurate to say you can eat whatever you want. Not the same thing. And I don't know why people are so stuck on that. I eat a Ruben sandwich from Arbys about once every two weeks. Why? Because I want it. But I can't eat whatever I want whenever I want like I used to if I want to lose weight. Just as I don't have to give up eating the foods I love. Both are true. They are not mutually exclusive. This isn't this hard.
On a site dedicated to logging food though, the assumption with any comments along those lines is that you are meeting your calorie goals.
This is not general forum for why am I gaining weight from someone that just doesn't get it, where some basics must be understood first.
So ya, the phrase eating what you want has an implied within your calorie limits context.0 -
Yep, this spot on.Nice to learn that I can just eat what I want and lose weight. I want seven cheeseburgers and fries with a milk shake. Every day.
Still say I can eat what I want and lose weight?
It's accurate to say you can incorporate any food you like into a diet that will result in losing weight. It isn't accurate to say you can eat whatever you want. Not the same thing. And I don't know why people are so stuck on that. I eat a Ruben sandwich from Arbys about once every two weeks. Why? Because I want it. But I can't eat whatever I want whenever I want like I used to if I want to lose weight. Just as I don't have to give up eating the foods I love. Both are true. They are not mutually exclusive. This isn't this hard.
On a site dedicated to logging food though, the assumption with any comments along those lines is that you are meeting your calorie goals.
This is not general forum for why am I gaining weight from someone that just doesn't get it, where some basics must be understood first.
So ya, the phrase eating what you want has an implied within your calorie limits context.
I think it's a cult.0 -
No one is saying that McDonald's should be eaten all day everyday. I have no idea why someone decided to do a macro split for an entire day, but they did. And good luck ordering a packet of walnuts from there.Nice to learn that I can just eat what I want and lose weight. I want seven cheeseburgers and fries with a milk shake. Every day.
Still say I can eat what I want and lose weight?
It's accurate to say you can incorporate any food you like into a diet that will result in losing weight. It isn't accurate to say you can eat whatever you want. Not the same thing. And I don't know why people are so stuck on that. I eat a Ruben sandwich from Arbys about once every two weeks. Why? Because I want it. But I can't eat whatever I want whenever I want like I used to if I want to lose weight. Just as I don't have to give up eating the foods I love. Both are true. They are not mutually exclusive. This isn't this hard.
Yup...
as long as your TDEE is around 3500 and that is McDonalds...7 cheeseburgers=2100 calories, fries=300 calories, shake is 660 calories...
My son could eat that everyday and lose weight...husband would maintain.
Congratulations. You win.
I get your point. But this "debate" is beyond pointless and certainly beyond any practical, useful advice. Every thread on this forum ends up in some stupid fight about things people know are nonsensical. I'll let you and the paleo fans duke it out. I'm going to kind of tip toe out of here now and get back to losing weight. Which involves eating some of the things I used to eat, and some things that are more "healthy".
I know. Crazy. Neither extreme. Somehow it's working. Go figure.
Useful information can be found on the internet... in theory.
This place is worse than Congress.
I agree with you. The original article was mostly crap, but did bring up the rather relevant and good point that satiety is highly influenced by the types of foods you eat. If you aren't feeling satiated, you are likely to overeat, which will defeat attempts at weight loss. I really don't understand the people with their fingers in their ears denying that what you eat impacts your ability to maintain your eating plan. Everyone says it doesn't matter to them, they eat what they want and still lose weight. But, what they want likely affects what they eat. They want a large bowl of ice cream? They plan their day for that. I doubt it means they have a huge bowl of ice cream and nothing else throughout the day.
Typically you compensate for calorically dense food with nutritionally dense food (like salad, vegetables, and lean protein) to get more volume of food for the day. Why? Because no one likes being hungry and having their stomach growling all day. Maybe it's not a conscious decision on their part, maybe it's just because they like to argue.
But I think you and I are in agreement on this.0 -
In, just because...0
-
No one is saying that McDonald's should be eaten all day everyday. I have no idea why someone decided to do a macro split for an entire day, but they did. And good luck ordering a packet of walnuts from there.Nice to learn that I can just eat what I want and lose weight. I want seven cheeseburgers and fries with a milk shake. Every day.
Still say I can eat what I want and lose weight?
It's accurate to say you can incorporate any food you like into a diet that will result in losing weight. It isn't accurate to say you can eat whatever you want. Not the same thing. And I don't know why people are so stuck on that. I eat a Ruben sandwich from Arbys about once every two weeks. Why? Because I want it. But I can't eat whatever I want whenever I want like I used to if I want to lose weight. Just as I don't have to give up eating the foods I love. Both are true. They are not mutually exclusive. This isn't this hard.
Yup...
as long as your TDEE is around 3500 and that is McDonalds...7 cheeseburgers=2100 calories, fries=300 calories, shake is 660 calories...
My son could eat that everyday and lose weight...husband would maintain.
Congratulations. You win.
I get your point. But this "debate" is beyond pointless and certainly beyond any practical, useful advice. Every thread on this forum ends up in some stupid fight about things people know are nonsensical. I'll let you and the paleo fans duke it out. I'm going to kind of tip toe out of here now and get back to losing weight. Which involves eating some of the things I used to eat, and some things that are more "healthy".
I know. Crazy. Neither extreme. Somehow it's working. Go figure.
Useful information can be found on the internet... in theory.
This place is worse than Congress.
I agree with you. The original article was mostly crap, but did bring up the rather relevant and good point that satiety is highly influenced by the types of foods you eat. If you aren't feeling satiated, you are likely to overeat, which will defeat attempts at weight loss. I really don't understand the people with their fingers in their ears denying that what you eat impacts your ability to maintain your eating plan. Everyone says it doesn't matter to them, they eat what they want and still lose weight. But, what they want likely affects what they eat. They want a large bowl of ice cream? They plan their day for that. I doubt it means they have a huge bowl of ice cream and nothing else throughout the day.
Typically you compensate for calorically dense food with nutritionally dense food (like salad, vegetables, and lean protein) to get more volume of food for the day. Why? Because no one likes being hungry and having their stomach growling all day. Maybe it's not a conscious decision on their part, maybe it's just because they like to argue.
But I think you and I are in agreement on this.
Exactly.
Honestly, between the people who are just dead nuts sure they can burn 1,000 calories doing 10 minutes of yoga (because their hrm said so), and the people who swear they only eat 200 calories a day and are still gaining weight, and the billion threads where everyone is sure that they'll lose more weight if they eat more because they're starving (even though they don't own a food scale, but they're sure they are recording right), this forum is kind of a train wreck. Add in the Church of "calorie is a calorie" zealots and it really turns into something borderline useless.
"But it could be done!" So what? You could save a million dollars if you kept your job but lived like a homeless person for a few years. Why don't people do that? Because it would suck, that's why. And the people railing against the health food Nazis (who I haven't really seen on here anyway) don't realize they're just as cult like in their devotion as the people they're complaining about.0 -
Overeating is not your food's fault but no one's but your own. If you absolutely possibly can't eat something calorie dense without gobbling it down like there's no tomorrow, then don't.0
-
Exactly.
Honestly, between the people who are just dead nuts sure they can burn 1,000 calories doing 10 minutes of yoga (because their hrm said so), and the people who swear they only eat 200 calories a day and are still gaining weight, and the billion threads where everyone is sure that they'll lose more weight if they eat more because they're starving (even though they don't own a food scale, but they're sure they are recording right), this forum is kind of a train wreck. Add in the Church of "calorie is a calorie" zealots and it really turns into something borderline useless.
"But it could be done!" So what? You could save a million dollars if you kept your job but lived like a homeless person for a few years. Why don't people do that? Because it would suck, that's why. And the people railing against the health food Nazis (who I haven't really seen on here anyway) don't realize they're just as cult like in their devotion as the people they're complaining about.
I came to the conclusion long ago that the majority of all forums of all types are train wrecks, for the most part. That is because most people always want to believe that what they believe about anything is the absolute truth, and that who ever doesn't believe what they believe is stupid. Arrogance makes a ton of people prone to never admitting they are wrong, and therefore makes them close their minds to ideas and opinions that are not their own. Today Google makes it SOOOOO easy for one to learn EVERYTHING about anything (yes, I am definitely being sarcastic), therefore most public forums just become a place for people to belittle people they don't agree with and bombard them with random links from random pages that other random people made with random "information" that they believe it's true. It's silly the amount of time some people will spend behind a keyboard talking down to others who may not agree with or understand a point they are trying to make, while also being as rude as they could possibly be.
I swore off message boards years ago because I could not get past the number of supposed adults who constantly behaved like 15- year- old bullies, however I recently joined in here because I thought it would be nice to read sincere advice from others who may be, or may have been, where I am currently at this point of my "weight- loss journey." I was not at all surprised that the typical BS that goes on in most forums goes on here as well, but even after just a couple of days I have learned that if you can sift through and ignore the BS, you may actually find some people who are genuinely kind, helpful, and open to learning what may help them and others when it comes to losing weight/ getting fit. As for those who just love trying to prove how awesomely all- knowing and amazing they are at the cost of being total *kitten*, well, just keep on scrolling past them.
0 -
sigh...
I haven't really seen ANYONE seriously advocate ONLY eating big macs. That is not the intention.
It isn't all or nothing.
It's about balance. Moderation. Finding a happy medium.
Eat healthy, YES. DAMMIT, YES.
But the occasional treat is ok too!
That is the point many are making.
It is not going to keep you fat forever if you have a burger from time to time.
It is not going to keep you fat forever if you enjoy half a cup of ice cream at bed time.
PROVIDED your calories in are less than your calories out on average.
The passionate "pro junk food" people (myself included) are saying...
JEEZE... DON'T MAKE IT SO HARD FOR YOURSELF.
Enjoy your life how you want it. If you wanna eat veggies all day, and are getting enough protein. Go for it.
If you wanna eat paleo... go for it.
If you wanna eat primal... go for it.
Just aim to hit your fats / carbs / proteins at a healthy calorie limit, and you should be fine! *insert medical anomaly disclaimer here*
ETA... just don't ask me about raspberry ketones or HCG diets. lol0 -
Exactly.
Honestly, between the people who are just dead nuts sure they can burn 1,000 calories doing 10 minutes of yoga (because their hrm said so), and the people who swear they only eat 200 calories a day and are still gaining weight, and the billion threads where everyone is sure that they'll lose more weight if they eat more because they're starving (even though they don't own a food scale, but they're sure they are recording right), this forum is kind of a train wreck. Add in the Church of "calorie is a calorie" zealots and it really turns into something borderline useless.
"But it could be done!" So what? You could save a million dollars if you kept your job but lived like a homeless person for a few years. Why don't people do that? Because it would suck, that's why. And the people railing against the health food Nazis (who I haven't really seen on here anyway) don't realize they're just as cult like in their devotion as the people they're complaining about.
Most of us feel very strong with semantics; such as a calorie is a calorie and calories in < out = weight loss. But at the same time, understand that macronutrients matter for other reasons; satiety, lean body mass retention, energy, health, etc... Maybe the way the information is delivered needs to be refined to demonstrate that as things get lost in translation.
Where these threads get derailed, is when people make bogus claims based on lack of research from unbiased results or just new to fitness. In many ways, these kinds of threads can become useful. If you sort through the crap post, you will find a handful of people who know a lot of information and can provide unbiased studies. Heck, I can't even tell you how many times I have had said something that was wrong to be proven wrong. Guess what? I learned from it and documented the study. If I don't believe the source, I continue to research and rebuttal. You just have to remember, people are in different places in their weight loss journey and may have been misguided early or they see a "Documentary" and believe in it's science.
So while threads like this upset you or at least appear to, there are a handful of post, that make me smarter and I appreciate that.0 -
sigh...
I haven't really seen ANYONE seriously advocate ONLY eating big macs. That is not the intention.
It isn't all or nothing.
It's about balance. Moderation. Finding a happy medium.
Eat healthy, YES. DAMMIT, YES.
But the occasional treat is ok too!
That is the point many are making.
It is not going to keep you fat forever if you have a burger from time to time.
It is not going to keep you fat forever if you enjoy half a cup of ice cream at bed time.
PROVIDED your calories in are less than your calories out on average.
The passionate "pro junk food" people (myself included) are saying...
JEEZE... DON'T MAKE IT SO HARD FOR YOURSELF.
Enjoy your life how you want it. If you wanna eat veggies all day, and are getting enough protein. Go for it.
If you wanna eat paleo... go for it.
If you wanna eat primal... go for it.
Just aim to hit your fats / carbs / proteins at a healthy calorie limit, and you should be fine! *insert medical anomaly disclaimer here*
Bravo.
Just say it exactly the way you just did. The problem I see is a LOT of people are NOT saying "But the occasional treat is okay too!" They're just saying "A calorie is a calorie so eat whatever you want". And to prove the point we get the anecdote of one guy in Uraguay who lost weight eating nothing but Cinnabon. And even when they begrudgingly, breaking cult rules, admit it's not a great idea, they say it's because it wouldn't be healthy. Well yeah. But no. It's because you couldn't do it. You'd burn though that sugar in no time and be starving for the rest of the day. Normal people couldn't maintain that very long.
As you said, it isn't all or nothing. In other words, neither extreme is appropriate. And advocating one extreme is no better than advocating the other. So let's stop doing it.
"It's about balance. Moderation. Finding a happy medium."
Well said. And that implies that you need to be at least SOMEWHAT selective in your diet choices. And another way of saying that might be that all foods are not equal. Or yet another way of saying that might be "a calorie is NOT a calorie". And yet, if someone dare suggest such heresy against the cult, the members rally to shun the unbeliever!
It's become some kind of self feeding echo chamber of weirdness on here. I get it. Just take it down a notch. Or 100.0 -
sigh...
I haven't really seen ANYONE seriously advocate ONLY eating big macs. That is not the intention.
It isn't all or nothing.
It's about balance. Moderation. Finding a happy medium.
Eat healthy, YES. DAMMIT, YES.
But the occasional treat is ok too!
That is the point many are making.
It is not going to keep you fat forever if you have a burger from time to time.
It is not going to keep you fat forever if you enjoy half a cup of ice cream at bed time.
PROVIDED your calories in are less than your calories out on average.
The passionate "pro junk food" people (myself included) are saying...
JEEZE... DON'T MAKE IT SO HARD FOR YOURSELF.
Enjoy your life how you want it. If you wanna eat veggies all day, and are getting enough protein. Go for it.
If you wanna eat paleo... go for it.
If you wanna eat primal... go for it.
Just aim to hit your fats / carbs / proteins at a healthy calorie limit, and you should be fine! *insert medical anomaly disclaimer here*
Bravo.
Just say it exactly the way you just did. The problem I see is a LOT of people are NOT saying "But the occasional treat is okay too!" They're just saying "A calorie is a calorie so eat whatever you want". And to prove the point we get the anecdote of one guy in Uraguay who lost weight eating nothing but Cinnabon. And even when they begrudgingly, breaking cult rules, admit it's not a great idea, they say it's because it wouldn't be healthy. Well yeah. But no. It's because you couldn't do it. You'd burn though that sugar in no time and be starving for the rest of the day. Normal people couldn't maintain that very long.
As you said, it isn't all or nothing. In other words, neither extreme is appropriate. And advocating one extreme is no better than advocating the other. So let's stop doing it.
"It's about balance. Moderation. Finding a happy medium."
Well said. And that implies that you need to be at least SOMEWHAT selective in your diet choices. And another way of saying that might be that all foods are not equal. Or yet another way of saying that might be "a calorie is NOT a calorie". And yet, if someone dare suggest such heresy against the cult, the members rally to shun the unbeliever!
It's become some kind of self feeding echo chamber of weirdness on here. I get it. Just take it down a notch. Or 100.
So I cannot eat my Klondike bar every night?
Like I posted above, semantics matter. Also, we are all saying the same thing.. so I don't even know why we all keep responding to each other, why cant this thread die:laugh:0 -
sigh...
I haven't really seen ANYONE seriously advocate ONLY eating big macs. That is not the intention.
It isn't all or nothing.
It's about balance. Moderation. Finding a happy medium.
Eat healthy, YES. DAMMIT, YES.
But the occasional treat is ok too!
That is the point many are making.
It is not going to keep you fat forever if you have a burger from time to time.
It is not going to keep you fat forever if you enjoy half a cup of ice cream at bed time.
PROVIDED your calories in are less than your calories out on average.
The passionate "pro junk food" people (myself included) are saying...
JEEZE... DON'T MAKE IT SO HARD FOR YOURSELF.
Enjoy your life how you want it. If you wanna eat veggies all day, and are getting enough protein. Go for it.
If you wanna eat paleo... go for it.
If you wanna eat primal... go for it.
Just aim to hit your fats / carbs / proteins at a healthy calorie limit, and you should be fine! *insert medical anomaly disclaimer here*
Bravo.
Just say it exactly the way you just did. The problem I see is a LOT of people are NOT saying "But the occasional treat is okay too!" They're just saying "A calorie is a calorie so eat whatever you want". And to prove the point we get the anecdote of one guy in Uraguay who lost weight eating nothing but Cinnabon. And even when they begrudgingly, breaking cult rules, admit it's not a great idea, they say it's because it wouldn't be healthy. Well yeah. But no. It's because you couldn't do it. You'd burn though that sugar in no time and be starving for the rest of the day. Normal people couldn't maintain that very long.
As you said, it isn't all or nothing. In other words, neither extreme is appropriate. And advocating one extreme is no better than advocating the other. So let's stop doing it.
"It's about balance. Moderation. Finding a happy medium."
Well said. And that implies that you need to be at least SOMEWHAT selective in your diet choices. And another way of saying that might be that all foods are not equal. Or yet another way of saying that might be "a calorie is NOT a calorie". And yet, if someone dare suggest such heresy against the cult, the members rally to shun the unbeliever!
It's become some kind of self feeding echo chamber of weirdness on here. I get it. Just take it down a notch. Or 100.
QFT0 -
sigh...
I haven't really seen ANYONE seriously advocate ONLY eating big macs. That is not the intention.
It isn't all or nothing.
It's about balance. Moderation. Finding a happy medium.
Eat healthy, YES. DAMMIT, YES.
But the occasional treat is ok too!
That is the point many are making.
It is not going to keep you fat forever if you have a burger from time to time.
It is not going to keep you fat forever if you enjoy half a cup of ice cream at bed time.
PROVIDED your calories in are less than your calories out on average.
The passionate "pro junk food" people (myself included) are saying...
JEEZE... DON'T MAKE IT SO HARD FOR YOURSELF.
Enjoy your life how you want it. If you wanna eat veggies all day, and are getting enough protein. Go for it.
If you wanna eat paleo... go for it.
If you wanna eat primal... go for it.
Just aim to hit your fats / carbs / proteins at a healthy calorie limit, and you should be fine! *insert medical anomaly disclaimer here*
Bravo.
Just say it exactly the way you just did. The problem I see is a LOT of people are NOT saying "But the occasional treat is okay too!" They're just saying "A calorie is a calorie so eat whatever you want". And to prove the point we get the anecdote of one guy in Uraguay who lost weight eating nothing but Cinnabon. And even when they begrudgingly, breaking cult rules, admit it's not a great idea, they say it's because it wouldn't be healthy. Well yeah. But no. It's because you couldn't do it. You'd burn though that sugar in no time and be starving for the rest of the day. Normal people couldn't maintain that very long.
As you said, it isn't all or nothing. In other words, neither extreme is appropriate. And advocating one extreme is no better than advocating the other. So let's stop doing it.
"It's about balance. Moderation. Finding a happy medium."
Well said. And that implies that you need to be at least SOMEWHAT selective in your diet choices. And another way of saying that might be that all foods are not equal. Or yet another way of saying that might be "a calorie is NOT a calorie". And yet, if someone dare suggest such heresy against the cult, the members rally to shun the unbeliever!
It's become some kind of self feeding echo chamber of weirdness on here. I get it. Just take it down a notch. Or 100.
[
So I cannot eat my Klondike bar every night?
Like I posted above, semantics matter. Also, we are all saying the same thing.. so I don't even know why we all keep responding to each other, why cant this thread die:laugh:
you sure can... I on the otherhand will likely be having a tuna salad sammich, because I had chocolate and nachos today and I ONLY have just shy of 700 cals left for dinner/bedtime snack...
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/food/diary/MireyGal76
Oh, and ETA...
I still got twitchy when fast eddie said that a calorie is NOT a calorie.0 -
Wow, didn't realize my rolling post would piss off people. I'll leave the arguing to Jonnythan, DamePiglet, and Stef.
0 -
Oh, and ETA...
I still got twitchy when fast eddie said that a calorie is NOT a calorie.
It's okay. It took you a long time to get indoctrinated in to the cult. It will take a while for you to be deprogrammed. There's still hope for you. I got here just in time.0 -
sigh...
I haven't really seen ANYONE seriously advocate ONLY eating big macs. That is not the intention.
It isn't all or nothing.
It's about balance. Moderation. Finding a happy medium.
Eat healthy, YES. DAMMIT, YES.
But the occasional treat is ok too!
That is the point many are making.
It is not going to keep you fat forever if you have a burger from time to time.
It is not going to keep you fat forever if you enjoy half a cup of ice cream at bed time.
PROVIDED your calories in are less than your calories out on average.
The passionate "pro junk food" people (myself included) are saying...
JEEZE... DON'T MAKE IT SO HARD FOR YOURSELF.
Enjoy your life how you want it. If you wanna eat veggies all day, and are getting enough protein. Go for it.
If you wanna eat paleo... go for it.
If you wanna eat primal... go for it.
Just aim to hit your fats / carbs / proteins at a healthy calorie limit, and you should be fine! *insert medical anomaly disclaimer here*
Bravo.
Just say it exactly the way you just did. The problem I see is a LOT of people are NOT saying "But the occasional treat is okay too!" They're just saying "A calorie is a calorie so eat whatever you want". And to prove the point we get the anecdote of one guy in Uraguay who lost weight eating nothing but Cinnabon. And even when they begrudgingly, breaking cult rules, admit it's not a great idea, they say it's because it wouldn't be healthy. Well yeah. But no. It's because you couldn't do it. You'd burn though that sugar in no time and be starving for the rest of the day. Normal people couldn't maintain that very long.
As you said, it isn't all or nothing. In other words, neither extreme is appropriate. And advocating one extreme is no better than advocating the other. So let's stop doing it.
"It's about balance. Moderation. Finding a happy medium."
Well said. And that implies that you need to be at least SOMEWHAT selective in your diet choices. And another way of saying that might be that all foods are not equal. Or yet another way of saying that might be "a calorie is NOT a calorie". And yet, if someone dare suggest such heresy against the cult, the members rally to shun the unbeliever!
It's become some kind of self feeding echo chamber of weirdness on here. I get it. Just take it down a notch. Or 100.
I vote for all the above ^0 -
"I guess 42lbs and 8% BF loss is not sucess...how much do I have to lose to be considered a success?"
First, to be a success, by your own criteria, you would have to meet your goals. From what I remember, you are 8 lbs away from your goal, and thus still short of success, as you yourself define it.
Second, and more important, losing the weight is the easy part. I wouldn't call anyone a success until they had maintained a healthy goal weight for at least two years, and three years would be better. If you still think of yourself as being in a maintenance phase, then you haven't yet succeeded. Success is actually when you reach the point where you have stabilized your weight at a desired level, and you stop thinking of yourself as dieting.
Short of that, I would say that you are on track and doing very well. But, alas, success is still a long way off.0 -
"I guess 42lbs and 8% BF loss is not sucess...how much do I have to lose to be considered a success?"
First, to be a success, by your own criteria, you would have to meet your goals. From what I remember, you are 8 lbs away from your goal, and thus still short of success, as you yourself define it.
Second, and more important, losing the weight is the easy part. I wouldn't call anyone a success until they had maintained a healthy goal weight for at least two years, and three years would be better. If you still think of yourself as being in a maintenance phase, then you haven't yet succeeded. Success is actually when you reach the point where you have stabilized your weight at a desired level, and you stop thinking of yourself as dieting.
Short of that, I would say that you are on track and doing very well. But, alas, success is still a long way off.
So if someone enjoys tracking their calories and like knowing what goes in their body, or possibly enjoy playing with their intake and perfecting their body for whatever their passion is, they can't have succeeded? Can Mr. Olympia say he succeeded? Should he stop tracking his intake once he has won? How about a triathlete who is at the top of her game? Or is it since these are elite athletes that it's okay? Us regular folk shouldn't try to be the best we can be?0 -
I just don't understand why people would rather have 1,500 of junk that in the end will do more harm than good to your health than eating 1,500 of tasty, healthy food that will make you a healthier human being. Why would I like to eat 1,000 at one sitting on McDonalds instead of 1,000 calories of meat, veggies, nuts, and even dessert during the day?
And forgive my english...
Because a McDonalds Big Mac and fries tastes way better than chicken and broccoli
And since I can fit it in with my goals, I'm going with the Big Mac :drinker: And I'm already a healthy human being, while eating Big Macs and fries and all the other foods I like. My life is pretty darn good :bigsmile: 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