"Eating Clean" vs Counting Calories
Skillzorz
Posts: 28 Member
I am torn between eating completely clean (meats, veggies, fruits, no packaged foods, no artificial, no complex carbs or sugars) and counting calories. I've heard that eating completely clean is healthier (Paleo, to be exact), but counting calories is easier to make into a "lifestyle". I generally fluctuate between both. When I'm bored of eating clean, I count calories. When I don't want to count calories anymore, I eat clean. I have to say, counting calories has always made the scale drop quicker for me. But when I'm eating completely clean, I feel better, but don't lose weight as fast.
I would like to know some opinions on this! It seems like there's controversy on both sides.
I would like to know some opinions on this! It seems like there's controversy on both sides.
0
Replies
-
Why not find a healthy balance and/or do a combination of both? Weight loss is all about calories in vs calories out, regardless of whether those calories come from "clean" eating or regular balanced eating or all junk food. While cleaner eating usually is more filling so you're less likely to overeat, it's still possible to eat enough calories to maintain or gain if you're not keeping track.0
-
Can't you do both? If you like clean eating and it makes you feel better why not count calories with your clean eating?0
-
All of the above. Losing weight comes from a caloric deficit regardless of what you're eating. If you want to eat paleo for health reasons, just work it in. By its very nature, eating paleo will likely help you stick to your calorie goals anyways.0
-
Don't make it any more complicated than it needs to be. Sure, eating "healthy" foods is good for you, but the overall composition of your diet is certainly far more important than any one food or food group.
Eating clean, by the way, is no guarantee of either being healthy or losing weight. You can still over eat and you can still be deficient in some nutrients. Eating clean/Paleo/whatever fad isn't magic.
Eat a balanced diet of food that makes you feel good, just make sure (to lose weight) you really are in a deficit. Find a balance between "healthy" foods and foods that maintain your sanity!0 -
There is nothing healthier about a Paleo diet compared to a balanced diet.0
-
Do both. Problem solved. Why would there be a vs.0
-
I think the only reason I put a VS is is because from doing a lot of reading, eating packaged food even when counting calories is just plain bad for you. It has hidden sugar, and preservatives that effect your over-all health. (So I've read)0
-
If your goal is to lose weight, you will be most successful by knowing how much you are eating, since that is what determines the weight loss. Of course, in general, you can eat more volume of "clean" food than not, but this isn't going to guarantee that you are in a calorie deficit. You still won't lose weight if you are eating at maintenance level or above, even if it is not processed food.0
-
There is nothing healthier about a Paleo diet compared to a balanced diet.
This. And like others have said, if you really prefer eating paleo, do it, but count calories.
I gained weight during my most obsessive "eating natural" phase, which was essentially a form of so-called "clean" eating (although I didn't use the term). I also have found that I feel better when I'm not eating a bad diet, but that doesn't mean I only feel good on a "clean" diet, defined in whatever way you do, since it varies. I've tried cutting things out, and I've tried incorporating them in moderation, and I feel equally good in both cases.
In fact, now that I'm exercising a lot I find I feel better eating more carbs than I naturally would if I tried to follow a paleo diet or some such, and in particular that food like dairy and legumes (which I don't eat enough of) make me feel better than cutting them out. In fact, this morning I ate some steel cut oats (grains, you know) after a long run, and I can't imagine my usual eggs would have hit the spot better (although I was careful to eat a good bit of protein and some fat with my breakfast, since that's what matters most for me).
0 -
You can still gain weight by over eating your "clean" foods. Weight loss is 100% about calories in vs. calories out.
Use both if it suits you better, but to lose weight you need to know exactly what you're ingesting compared to how much your body uses.
Just remember: watching macros is for health, calories for weight loss.
0 -
Like the IIFYM vs Clean Eating thread, you're talking about 2 different things.
People count calories so they know how much they are eating, which is key to weight and body comp goals.
People eat clean for overall health reasons.
The 2 concepts are completely unrelated. This is not a "versus" conversation.0 -
jocemmedina wrote: »I think the only reason I put a VS is is because from doing a lot of reading, eating packaged food even when counting calories is just plain bad for you. It has hidden sugar, and preservatives that effect your over-all health. (So I've read)
There are a lot of opinion based articles out there that may say that. There isn't much science that says anything of the sort.0 -
Like the IIFYM vs Clean Eating thread, you're talking about 2 different things.
People count calories so they know how much they are eating, which is key to weight and body comp goals.
People eat clean for overall health reasons.
The 2 concepts are completely unrelated. This is not a "versus" conversation.
People eat clean for overall health reasons and to lose weight. I know a lot of people who are doing it and dropping weight rapidly.0 -
jocemmedina wrote: »Like the IIFYM vs Clean Eating thread, you're talking about 2 different things.
People count calories so they know how much they are eating, which is key to weight and body comp goals.
People eat clean for overall health reasons.
The 2 concepts are completely unrelated. This is not a "versus" conversation.
People eat clean for overall health reasons and to lose weight. I know a lot of people who are doing it and dropping weight rapidly.
Yay anecdotes! Are they eating "clean" in a surplus? What would happen if they ate the exact same macros and cals but one was a "clean" diet and one was "unclean"?
0 -
They are not losing weight because they are eating clean. They are losing weight because they are in a calorie deficit. If you can do that (be in a deficit) without counting calories, then great. But you can "eat dirty" and lose weight, too.
0 -
ZOMG, processed sugars makes you gain more than sugar in fruits.jocemmedina wrote: »Like the IIFYM vs Clean Eating thread, you're talking about 2 different things.
People count calories so they know how much they are eating, which is key to weight and body comp goals.
People eat clean for overall health reasons.
The 2 concepts are completely unrelated. This is not a "versus" conversation.
People eat clean for overall health reasons and to lose weight. I know a lot of people who are doing it and dropping weight rapidly.
Yay anecdotes! Are they eating "clean" in a surplus? What would happen if they ate the exact same macros and cals but one was a "clean" diet and one was "unclean"?
lolz.
BAH!
0 -
I personally do both. I eat "clean" (per your definition), but I log everything.0
-
No, paleo isn't necessarily healthier, but it's also not at all UNhealthy.
And if (like me) eating carbs makes you hungry while eating fat and protein makes you full, paleo is an easy way to cut out the carbs and therefore keep calories low.
(I'm NOT paleo because I don't have a problem meeting my goals, but it is super easy. Not always the cheapest way to eat, though.)
To answer OP's question: Do both. Eat real food that you make yourself, and adjust calories to meet your goals.0 -
jocemmedina wrote: »I am torn between eating completely clean (meats, veggies, fruits, no packaged foods, no artificial, no complex carbs or sugars) and counting calories.
Why not do both.
I eat clean while counting calories.
For example my first goal is to come in under 1600 calories. Inside of that I have another goal of taking in less than 100g of carbs. I also try to limit my sodium intake.
0 -
jocemmedina wrote: »I think the only reason I put a VS is is because from doing a lot of reading, eating packaged food even when counting calories is just plain bad for you. It has hidden sugar, and preservatives that effect your over-all health. (So I've read)
What does packaged food have to do with counting calories?0 -
I'm going a totally different route here and addressing something essential to my* long-term success:
If you're bored with counting calories and you stop completely without any substitute, you're screwed.
If you're bored with eating clean and you stop completely without any substitute, you're screwed.
But if you can maintain your motivation, interest, and generally good habits by switching between two things you know you can do --- while still losing weight (she said she still loses, just not as fast), then ABSOLUTELY! This plan sounds awesome. Switching between two viable options is brilliant. She's replacing calorie counting with a super healthy diet. She's replacing a super healthy diet with calorie restriction. And, I assume, she doesn't go from eating totally clean to eating 1,200 calories of Doritos every day, so the calorie counting option is still a moderately respectable diet in terms of what is in what she's eating.
I'm going to try this. The primary problem I have in yo-yoing is that I'm ALL ABOUT calorie counting and weighing everything and being proactive for a few weeks, and then it gets cumbersome and irritating and my response is to drop everything. But if I plan to switch it up every 4-weeks, and intend NOT to count every other month, maybe that will help in long-term success.
I know that lacks the traditional wisdom expounded all other these threads of consistency, but frankly, consistency doesn't work for me. Consistency is boring and I have too much going on in my life and too many regular changes for consistency to be sustainable in any part of my day-to-day. I've aimed for consistency consistently for 15 years and have consistently failed in lasting consistency.0 -
jocemmedina wrote: »I think the only reason I put a VS is is because from doing a lot of reading, eating packaged food even when counting calories is just plain bad for you. It has hidden sugar, and preservatives that effect your over-all health. (So I've read)
What does packaged food have to do with counting calories?
Tons of sugar and sodium...depending on the product.
For example:
I just had this can of soup for lunch. It's 90 calories per serving and it's two servings per can. So you might think wow, that's really healthy.
However, eating that can pretty much put me at my limit of daily sodium as that can had 1,580 mg of sodium.
Now, had I chose to make my own soup I could have controlled the amount of sodium in the recipe.
0 -
jocemmedina wrote: »I think the only reason I put a VS is is because from doing a lot of reading, eating packaged food even when counting calories is just plain bad for you. It has hidden sugar, and preservatives that effect your over-all health. (So I've read)
What does packaged food have to do with counting calories?
Tons of sugar and sodium...depending on the product.
I didn't ask that right. OP said she said vs because of packaged food. You don't have to eat packaged food to count calories. I am not sure I understand what packaged food has to do with the conversation0 -
The core of any diet meant for weight management is the calorie count.0
-
Calorie deficit is how to lose weight. Learn more about macros to discover more of what balance of nutrition you should be consuming, and, yes, making "cleaner" choices is best for your health and possibly get you to your goal more quickly. But to lose weight and keep it off only chose a lifestyle of eating that you can do forever. If not, you may very well bounce right back when you are tired of your fad diet.
Good luck to you!0 -
jocemmedina wrote: »Like the IIFYM vs Clean Eating thread, you're talking about 2 different things.
People count calories so they know how much they are eating, which is key to weight and body comp goals.
People eat clean for overall health reasons.
The 2 concepts are completely unrelated. This is not a "versus" conversation.
People eat clean for overall health reasons and to lose weight. I know a lot of people who are doing it and dropping weight rapidly.
Yay anecdotes! Are they eating "clean" in a surplus? What would happen if they ate the exact same macros and cals but one was a "clean" diet and one was "unclean"?
Ha, right-on. What is eating "clean" anyway? There's no industry standard definition to my knowledge; eating clean can mean different things to different people.
Eating "clean" doesn't mean you can't gain weigth because I assure you that you can if you eat surplus calories. You have to count calories or measure your food in some way. Dr. John Berardi has a good method for measuring food based on eating 4 times a day and using your hands as a method of measurement. You can probabl find it on Precision Nutrition's site.
0 -
[/quote]
Eating "clean" doesn't mean you can't gain weigth because I assure you that you can if you eat surplus calories. You have to count calories or measure your food in some way. Dr. John Berardi has a good method for measuring food based on eating 4 times a day and using your hands as a method of measurement. You can probabl find it on Precision Nutrition's site.
[/quote]
I'm going to look this up! Thanks!
0 -
[
But that's just it -- depending on the product.
You identified one that has ingredients you don't want (canned soup is terrible if you care about sodium and I personally am in favor of always making soup at home -- it's easy and tastier too).
But there are plenty of other packaged foods that, depending on the person, might be worth it. (Just as some people might disagree with you and me on the soup without being crazy and without making their weight loss more difficult).
For example, this morning I had Bob's Red Mill steel cut oats. It's packaged, so I guess it's full of sugar and sodium, right? Oh, but in fact it has none of either. Now, it's grains, so arguably basically is sugar (carbs, you know), but I think it's perfectly healthy and not at all problematic for someone trying to lose weight.
Another favorite of mine is Fage 0% yogurt, plain (note that I particularly like the 0%, which is extra processed). Now, I suppose I could make my own yogurt from raw milk or some such (I don't buy raw milk, for the record), but would it actually have less sodium or sugar (the sugar here being lactose)? I seriously doubt it.
Condemning "processed" foods vs. non is too broad.
Similarly, while I pretty much only eat homemade pie, is my homemade pie inherently better for weight loss than a piece I might get at a restaurant or the store? Probably not. In fact, one reason I haven't made pie since starting this (although I will for Thanksgiving) is that it will be hard to eat just one piece. That might be a sensible reason to prefer the packaged version, if you can buy just one. (Sadly, I'm unaware of any I would like as much.)
Same for ice cream vs. homemade. I love the idea of homemade, but are the reasons you have to watch portions really different depending on whether you buy or make it? I think not.
0 -
You haven't said what it is you're trying to accomplish....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