This is why people can't eat all of their calories...

I'm pretty sure it's because people go to extremes and cut calorie-dense foods out of their diets completely.
That, or they enjoy humble-bragging :P

Just some food for thought tho, like I was saying. It can be difficult to make a small portion of a calorie dense food without wasting the rest of what you bought. Sometimes its easier and more cost effective to cut it out completely, not because you want to, but because its more practical, like my "exactly 9 french fries" example.

I guess I am the only one on the thread that is in the same boat. I understand not cutting out all bad food but I do find it difficult to eat healthfully and fill up all the calories without spending a ton! And by eating healthfully, I mean fitting in my macros, not banning ice cream or fat.

I'm not looking for anyone to analyze my diary or macros...just saying I understand you, OP. It's easy to budget in 1000 calories worth of food, it's easy to hit 3000 by going out to eat all the time...but hitting that magic number in the middle without too little protein or too many carbs...it is tough. Not impossible, just tough.

Saute your veggies or roast them in the oven with a bit of olive oil, 1 Tbsp has around 120 calories. Have a mere ounce of almonds for a snack...it's a tiny little handful and clocks in around 160 calories. I actually make my own home fries that consist of 150 grams of potato that I cut up and I add a tsp or two of olive oil and roast those in the oven...no waste. Also, numerous foods can be put in this thing called a refrigerator and reheated for later consumption...you don't have to waste anything really.

There are about a million other things you can do as well. I eat very healthy...I am very budget conscious and hate waste of any kind and do not remotely find it difficult to hit my 2700 - 2800 calories I need to maintain my weight...I certainly didn't find it hard to find 2000 - 2200 to lose weight, I can tell you that for sure.

OP, you're telling people that log and eat 2000 calories every day that what they're doing is impossible. You don't see any flaw in your argument? Have you looked at the open diaries on here? Hello, is this thing on?

OP, you're telling people that log and eat 2000 calories every day that what they're doing is impossible. You don't see any flaw in your argument? Have you looked at the open diaries on here? Hello, is this thing on?

There is no flaw in my argument because I'm not making an argument. I'm saying that something is difficult and that's why some people have trouble with it.

Hmm, I'd be willing to place a bet and say most people would agree it's much harder to eat 1,000 cals daily than it is 2,000

This is why everyone is always wondering why they can't eat the amount of calories they are supposed to. It's easy to eat 1000 calories in a day, its easy to eat 3000 calories in a day. It is not east to eat 2000 calories in a day.

There is no single answer for everyone. I've been at this since November 2011. On maintenance since May 2012. It's working, but it's nevery easy.

I'm glad you found out what worked for you but that doesn't mean it is the same for everyone.

Who says you only have to make half a cup of mac and cheese? Or only one portion of anything? Make the full thing and freeze it for later. Eat some tomorrow for lunch. Eat it the day after next for dinner.

I have read your post three times and with all due respect, I have no idea what you are talking about, except that I understand that you cut out soft drinks, sweet tea and eat beans from a can and put yogurt on your potato. Those are all things to congratulate you for. Does the rest of what you said apply to all of us ? I don't think so.....

I don't think you understand the art of an example.

Possibly, but what example would that be ?

You are not alone. I can't figure out the meaning or purpose of the OP either. That being said, my average daily calorie intake for the last 7 days was 1935cals/day. Not difficult at all. Oh, yeah, and I lost a lb in the process.

What can't you understand? It's in English, there are few(if any) grammatical errors. You might disagree, and you might be trying to tell everyone you disagree by being an *kitten* hat about it, but if you just don't understand what I'm trying to communicate then I think there's a deeper problem, and it's not on my end.

That being said, Yes, anyone can eat and add it all up and then say "oh no im 400 calories short" and go buy a milkshake. That's not okay. Planning for exactly 2000 is difficult for all of the reasons I have already said.

That's why I plan the milkshake from the get go.

My day is planned like this: First meal->dessert->dinner-> fill in snacks as needed to hit protein/fat/anything else I might feel like hitting. Easy Peasy

I don't eat in a vacuum.......I don't look up from the computer after logging and realize " OMG I only ate 689 calories, how did that come about " ?. It also does not happen that I realize " oh, I ate 3415 calories without realizing how that happened ". Why,? because I plan my food, I know now that a person of my height and age cannot consistently eat more than 1200 calories if they want to lose some weight. And I plan accordingly. Not down to last last calories, but within a 100 or so and that includes for example half a pound of strawberries with cream & sugar. I follow some people who are really successful and who I admire for all they have done to shed weight and become healthy and fit.....and they all plan before hand. No one eats " just because there are calories left " and I agree with you....it's not a good idea.
I am no one special, possess no special powers and am of average intelligence......and I manage. So what is so difficult for others? That's what I don't understand and the fact that " This is why people can't eat all of their calories " is a blanket statement that does not apply to many if not most people... And I realized right away that the post was in English and understand that part just fine, even though English is my fourth language.......jejeje.

Fast Food makes it easy to go over normal calories you should have! The extra sodas, beers, and sugars are no good.

Beer is no good???

OMG what a thing to say, there is no need to insult beer.

I'm wondering which fast food joint is serving beer; the Wendy's around here has yet to install a kegerator.

Fast Food makes it easy to go over normal calories you should have! The extra sodas, beers, and sugars are no good.

Beer is no good???

OMG what a thing to say, there is no need to insult beer.

I'm wondering which fast food joint is serving beer; the Wendy's around here has yet to install a kegerator.

Starbucks is starting to sell wine and beer in the evenings >>

Fast Food makes it easy to go over normal calories you should have! The extra sodas, beers, and sugars are no good.

Beer is no good???

OMG what a thing to say, there is no need to insult beer.

I'm wondering which fast food joint is serving beer; the Wendy's around here has yet to install a kegerator.

This whole thread is full of confusion...and now insults to beer...where will it end...

I don't eat in a vacuum.......I don't look up from the computer after logging and realize " OMG I only ate 689 calories, how did that come about " ?. It also does not happen that I realize " oh, I ate 3415 calories without realizing how that happened ". Why,? because I plan my food, I know now that a person of my height and age cannot consistently eat more than 1200 calories if they want to lose some weight. And I plan accordingly. Not down to last last calories, but within a 100 or so and that includes for example half a pound of strawberries with cream & sugar. I follow some people who are really successful and who I admire for all they have done to shed weight and become healthy and fit.....and they all plan before hand. No one eats " just because there are calories left " and I agree with you....it's not a good idea.
I am no one special, possess no special powers and am of average intelligence......and I manage. So what is so difficult for others? That's what I don't understand and the fact that " This is why people can't eat all of their calories " is a blanket statement that does not apply to many if not most people... And I realized right away that the post was in English and understand that part just fine, even though English is my fourth language.......jejeje.

While I agree with some of what you said, the bolded part I disagree with. People who have specific fitness goals find that their performance suffers if they are not eating ALL of their calories. These people do eat more when they have calories left.

agreed....hence my statement hunger is not always the best indicator of what your body needs.

Fast Food makes it easy to go over normal calories you should have! The extra sodas, beers, and sugars are no good.

Beer is no good???

OMG what a thing to say, there is no need to insult beer.

I'm wondering which fast food joint is serving beer; the Wendy's around here has yet to install a kegerator.

Starbucks is starting to sell wine and beer in the evenings >>

What about milkshakes at 8-9pm?

NO BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE BAD! MILKSHAKES ARE BAD! 8-9 PM IS BAD!

Fast Food makes it easy to go over normal calories you should have! The extra sodas, beers, and sugars are no good.

Beer is no good???

OMG what a thing to say, there is no need to insult beer.

I'm wondering which fast food joint is serving beer; the Wendy's around here has yet to install a kegerator.

Starbucks is starting to sell wine and beer in the evenings >>

What about milkshakes at 8-9pm?

NO BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE BAD! MILKSHAKES ARE BAD! 8-9 PM IS BAD!

What about a frappuchino? Or a frosty? Please tell me frosty's are okay after 9pm!

it is NOT okay to go out at 8 or 9 oclock at night and buy yourself a milkshake full of sugars, or even worse, synthetic sugars and then go to bed a couple of hours later. If you think that's okay, Im not sure what to tell you.

What was that you were saying about not demonizing foods?

This word you keep saying. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Once again, not about the food, about the timing and the consistency.

"Synthetic" sugars are "even worse" than sugars. Those are your words. It said nothing about consistency. That would be demonizing food. Unless you care to explain how/why "synthetic sugars" are "even worse" for you. Which part of your body gets damaged/destroyed by ingesting these?

BTW I agree that it is definitely about context.

And if you have already met your nutritional goals for the day, then the context is, "you need more calories and not more micronutrients, so sugar "synthetic" or otherwise, is not IN THIS SCENARIO bad (or "even worse") for you."