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

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.

Why? What will happen to us?

Damn, you got to it first!

Anyway, OP, another option (which may be thrown out the window) is to make that yummy mac and cheese in bulk and save it for later. Or, alternate days and eat your full mac and cheese cup and accept that it will put you over that day, but eat a lighter meal later and you'll still come out with an appropriate deficit over the long term. I try and stick with the same amount of calories every day because it works better FOR ME, but I don't think there is a rule that you have to do it that way - in fact, programs like Weight Watchers often have a daily goal of points plus a weekly amount to divvy up however you wish - a little every day, all at once, whatever.

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.

Actually, that is 100% OK. Why wouldn't it be? As long as you have hit all your macros, you don't get any points for eating 400 more calories of chicken and canned veggies.

Actually if your goal is losing weight and you find yourself 400 calories below at the end of the day and not hungry you DO get extra points for not being a complete dumb**** and drinking a full glass of liquid sugar that's just going to make you crave more sugar.

No, I most certainly don't get bonus points. All I would get is a bigger deficit than what I need/want and a crap run/lifting session the next day.

No thanks on that. I'll just eat the ice cream (Southern Butter Pecan, ftw)

Whatever works for you. I'm certainly not going to try to convince anyone my way is any better than theirs. For the record though, I'll be finishing up today anywhere between 500 and 700 under, and I'm on a 2lb. per week target. You bet your *kitten* I'll be running and lifting tomorrow just fine without downing a bunch of calories I don't need.

So, you are at a 1500-1700 calorie deficit? You must have a lot of weight to lose to be able to run that kind of deficit. People who are closer to their goal cannot do that.

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.

Actually, that is 100% OK. Why wouldn't it be? As long as you have hit all your macros, you don't get any points for eating 400 more calories of chicken and canned veggies.

Actually if your goal is losing weight and you find yourself 400 calories below at the end of the day and not hungry you DO get extra points for not being a complete dumb**** and drinking a full glass of liquid sugar that's just going to make you crave more sugar.

No, I most certainly don't get bonus points. All I would get is a bigger deficit than what I need/want and a crap run/lifting session the next day.

No thanks on that. I'll just eat the ice cream (Southern Butter Pecan, ftw)

Whatever works for you. I'm certainly not going to try to convince anyone my way is any better than theirs. For the record though, I'll be finishing up today anywhere between 500 and 700 under, and I'm on a 2lb. per week target. You bet your *kitten* I'll be running and lifting tomorrow just fine without downing a bunch of calories I don't need.

My body doesn't have the energy stores yours does to draw upon, clearly. Being 400 calories under would make me 650 calories off from my TDEE and yes, at my size, that would negatively impact me. I can feel my performance diminish when my body isn't properly fueled. Given the choice between eating 1000 calories a day in hopes of 'bonus points' and eating 1800 and not getting bonus points...I'm going for the food. 1000 calories just doesn't work for me.

But hey, I don't need to convince you, because you've got it all figured out. What the hell do I know, right? (Well, I know this ice cream is delish and that the peanut and dark chocolate bar I had to eat up some of that 200+ calorie gap between my goal and my TDEE was also delish.)

I thought it was going to be difficult at first and I only started a couple months ago. I actually haven't changed much in my diet. I am just more conscious of portion sizes. I'll still enjoy foods I want (like a Baconator) but I either adjust the rest of my day or exercise off at least 75% of whatever the splurge is. I could never stick to a diet because I always had to eliminate things. By just watching my calories and portion sizes, I don't feel like I'm depriving myself of anything. That has made a HUGE difference in how I look at losing weight.

Hey, OP, I remember you!

Guys, I just have to point out that the OP is the author of the "Hypothetical" Thread about starving yourself on I think it was 700 calories and then once goal weight is achieved adding 100 calories a week. He wanted to know if that would cause weight gain or if "this hypothetical person" would still maintain.

So, when you're trying to argue with him about it being okay to eat calorically dense food, keep that in mind.

Bingo.

Hmm. After reading 6 pages, my takeaway from this thread is such:

If someone has a problem, and offers a lengthy explanation of said problem, including detailed examples ... the best thing to do is smugly explain to him why he's wrong and how much better we are at eating than he is, and then routinely make comments about him not making any sense.

Dear OP,

You're not alone. Some people are *great* at this. Others have trouble eating all their calories, and others have difficulties balancing their caloric intake against their macros. Same days are more difficult than others no matter how much you plan. For some people, no days are difficult and because those people exist, people like you and I (and the very few other folks that seemed to understand where you're coming from) are 100% fundamentally wrong--according to them.

At the risk of coming off like a total **** ... the level of superiority in this thread is overwhelming.

The guy had a legit concern and tried to explain it. Can we not act like he's some kind of moron and we're all saints of great health?

The OP's difficulty is rooted in his unnecessary fear of a lot of various foods and his false belief that his eating has to meet a very narrow definition of "healthy" in order to be successful. People have been trying to explain that to him in various ways, and every time being met with smug evidence-free nonsensical assertions of this or that thing being "unhealthy" when not only is their suggestion not unhealthy, it is in fact a hell of a lot BETTER for one's health than the alternative (undereating) that he was suggesting.

And yes, when someone is wrong about something, the best thing to do IS to explain to them (and the rest of the audience who quietly read and learn from these threads) how and why they are wrong.

Well, I get what you are saying. I'm getting better at it, but I had several days for a couple of weeks where I was just stuffed at 1300 calories or less and just couldn't bring myself to eat anymore. And sweets weren't appealing to me. Then I started exercising like crazy and am hungry all the time. Although, I've recently had to force myself to start eating back some exercise calories cuz I was netting like between 800 and 1000 calories. Oh, and I'm suddenly back into sweets now. Can't wait for that chocolate peanut butter pretzel topped donut that I am having for breakfast. Mmm.

Whew, thanks for that reality check! Done hitting my head on THIS particular brick wall and taking my good sense where it will be recognized as such.

When you find such a place, please send the link.

Hmm. After reading 6 pages, my takeaway from this thread is such:

If someone has a problem, and offers a lengthy explanation of said problem, including detailed examples ... the best thing to do is smugly explain to him why he's wrong and how much better we are at eating than he is, and then routinely make comments about him not making any sense.

Dear OP,

You're not alone. Some people are *great* at this. Others have trouble eating all their calories, and others have difficulties balancing their caloric intake against their macros. Same days are more difficult than others no matter how much you plan. For some people, no days are difficult and because those people exist, people like you and I (and the very few other folks that seemed to understand where you're coming from) are 100% fundamentally wrong--according to them.

At the risk of coming off like a total **** ... the level of superiority in this thread is overwhelming.

The guy had a legit concern and tried to explain it. Can we not act like he's some kind of moron and we're all saints of great health?

The OP's difficulty is rooted in his unnecessary fear of a lot of various foods and his false belief that his eating has to meet a very narrow definition of "healthy" in order to be successful. People have been trying to explain that to him in various ways, and every time being met with smug evidence-free nonsensical assertions of this or that thing being "unhealthy" when not only is their suggestion not unhealthy, it is in fact a hell of a lot BETTER for one's health than the alternative (undereating) that he was suggesting.

And yes, when someone is wrong about something, the best thing to do IS to explain to them (and the rest of the audience who quietly read and learn from these threads) how and why they are wrong.

Very eruditely put! These threads do tend to become side tracked, but that is also part of the entertainment. However there are always people who are willing to drag the subject back to it's original topic. (Thank you all for that.) What amazes me is that the same conversations happen over and over. I put this down to new people joining and the incredible amount of misinformation about diet, exercise and health that floats around (even without the internet). I am 52 and have struggled with my weight since I was a child. I was 4'11" in grade 9 and weight 149lbs. For my first wedding at 21, I was 5'9" and 170lbs, for my second wedding at 34, I was 200lbs. In between I have yo-yo up and down. I have tried high carb low fat in the eighties, Low glycemic in this century and many others in between - they work (in the beginning), but they work because you become hyper concious of what goes in your mouth. Unfortunately - they only work for a short time as it is difficult to maintain that focus for an extended period. Even calorie counting and MFP - I started last January - got down to 184 but I was being incredibly strict with my eating. and soon stopped and ballooned back to 197 by Christmas.

I think there is a section of people on MFP that have it right - eat what you enjoy - try and meet your macros and be concious (but not hyper concious) of your portion sizes. Some days I am over, some days I am under - do I eat "clean"? For the most part, but sometimes circumstances and desire dictate otherwise.

One last thought - the weight doesn't appear overnight - you can't lose it overnight. Get it right and take your time. Much more manageable.

cheers.

Do these people who can't eat enough not like avocados and nut butters? Not together obviously, but come on people! It's healthy, it's good for you and it packs a nutrient dense high calorie punch!

Do these people who can't eat enough not like avocados and nut butters? Not together obviously, but come on people! It's healthy, it's good for you and it packs a nutrient dense high calorie punch!

I'll admit that I was afraid of avocado for a very long time. Those little fruits are intimidating and I had no idea how to choose one at the grocery store. I finally had to google "how to choose an avocado" to get over my fears!

Skeered!

Id be interested in seeing your diary. Some days I have trouble eating enough without eating something bad for me.
[/quote]

Nothing is bad for you if you can make it fit in your calorie and macronutrient allowance. You can have a hot fudge sundae or pizza or whatever, as long as you are in your calorie range, and getting all your other nutriets, i.e. protein, carbs, fiber, fat, etc.

Pretty good logic.

Id be interested in seeing your diary. Some days I have trouble eating enough without eating something bad for me.

That will change when you get closer to your goal. I started at @230 and normally I always had something bad every day, sometimes more! Unfortunately when you only have 1700 calories or less you can't eat bad stuff much anymore I envy people with normal metabolisms who can still eat 'desert' every day and lose weight.

Really?

I am on maintenance on 1700 calories and I don't exercise that much.
Can still fit in small portions of 'bad things' like chips, crisps, biscuits, ice cream, chocolate..
Not all of them every day of course and not in large amounts - but they do fit, believe me.

We have very different goals which is clear by your diary. I need minimum 110 g of protein / day and less than 200 carbs. I didn't see that once in 2 weeks from what you logged. There's nothing wrong with your plan though I couldn't function on it. So yes, I suppose if I wanted to throw my macros out the window then I "could" afford to eat a bunch of crap... I suppose I should have clarified that.

Id be interested in seeing your diary. Some days I have trouble eating enough without eating something bad for me.

That will change when you get closer to your goal. I started at @230 and normally I always had something bad every day, sometimes more! Unfortunately when you only have 1700 calories or less you can't eat bad stuff much anymore I envy people with normal metabolisms who can still eat 'desert' every day and lose weight.

Really?

I am on maintenance on 1700 calories and I don't exercise that much.
Can still fit in small portions of 'bad things' like chips, crisps, biscuits, ice cream, chocolate..
Not all of them every day of course and not in large amounts - but they do fit, believe me.

We have very different goals which is clear by your diary. I need minimum 110 g of protein / day and less than 200 carbs. I didn't see that once in 2 weeks from what you logged. There's nothing wrong with your plan though I couldn't function on it. So yes, I suppose if I wanted to throw my macros out the window then I "could" afford to eat a bunch of crap... I suppose I should have clarified that.

Hmmm, I wouldn't really say I eat a 'bunch of crap' - but yes, small amounts of above treat foods.

I don't know what your goal is - mine was to lose 10kg, which I have done.


anyway, my point wasn't to show my diary as a pedestal of healthy eating (or really, to show my diary at all) - just to point out 1700 calories does leave room for small amounts of treats.