Sugar - possibly the easiest thing to cut back on for weight loss!
Options
Replies
-
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »I got a spam flag right away. Is that good? I really don't know how the flag system works.
Spam flags are used by petty people to put the mark on someone's profile and try to hurt their feels. They are supposed to be used on people selling things so the mods can get it gone ASAP.
-1 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »stealth -- the first two sentences address you directly. The "you" in the rest of the sentences refer to "those of you who hold this position."
- Most of the time, try to select foods designed to help you meet any currently unmet macro/micro and calorie targets.
- If you want a treat, evaluate how much of it you can eat and still hit your targets.
I completely agree with your post. That is eating in moderation. But it's not "eat what you want in moderation."
People say all the time on these boards "eat what you want, just in moderation" or "eat what you are currently eating, just in moderation." And the corollaries -- "there are no good or bad foods," "all food is equal -- none is garbage or crap."
Just to clarify, I know the menu I posted was in fact NOT moderation, even though all nine foods were a single serving size, and the second menu I posted was also NOT moderation, even though I met all my numbers.
It was not moderation because it was all treat foods, not foods designed to help us.
If some foods are treats, then other foods are something other than treats. Some people call that food "healthy choices" or "clean eating" or "good food." I personally call it "regular food."
And since we all agree we should limit treats, and we all agree that we should eat food that is designed to help us, then we all agree that there are different kinds of food choices -- regular food and treats.
Most of our diet should consist of regular food, and some of our diet should consist of treats -- and here, within the context of treats, I am totally willing to concede that you can eat whatever you want. You want to eat a Big Mac, go for it. Deep-fried stick of butter? Have at it.
I am focusing on this issue this because I didn't get to 213 pounds by overeating regular food. I got there by eating a diet that looked a lot like a donut, a latte, and an egg and cheese croissant in the morning, a Subway sub, chips and two cookies for lunch, and a large pizza for dinner, washed down with milk and a sleeve of Oreos.
If I came on MFP and wrote "I need help losing weight" and the response was "just keep eating what you are eating, just in moderation," I'd be happy as a clam to do that! Keep eating what I eat but in moderation means "Keep eating what you are eating, just less of it." It does not mean "Change your diet drastically and save the treats for once in a while."
And after I try to eat what I'm eating but only less of it, and I fail spectacularly because the food I'm eating doesn't last long in my system so I am hungry all the time, my next MFP post would be "You told me what to do and I did it and it didn't work. I keep overeating even when I try not to! I must be addicted to sugar."
Telling people to keep eating what they are eating, just in moderation, is terrible advice.
Much better advice would be "You need to cut out the crap on a daily basis and save it for a treat once or twice a week" or perhaps the slightly softer "You are eating treats instead of nutritious food. You have to change your diet to low calorie, highly nutritious foods in order to feel full all day long. You can continue to eat treats, but on a very limited basis, when you can fit them into your numbers. If you don't follow our advice, chances are very high that you will spend your diet days hungry and miserable, and you will just fail again at losing weight."
Categorizing people as lazy or lacking willpower when they can't control their overeating because they are basically following the advice to "eat what they want, just in moderation" and end up with hunger pangs and cravings is the absolute height of hypocrisy.
And just to bring this back to the original point, since we all agree that limiting treats is necessary for weight loss, and there are at least five grocery aisles devoted to treat foods packed with sugar (the donut and muffin aisle, the cookies and crackers aisle, the soda aisle, the frozen desserts aisle, and the cakes and cookie mixes aisle), then by god we all agree that sugar is possibly the easiest thing to cut back on for weight loss.
why, it works for the majority of people?
i am curious who this "we" that you speak of is….
-1 -
[/quote]
That was really well written, and I agree with all of it. Especially the bolded.
[/quote]
^^THIS is the only post I read besides the first one because I love Supernatural and Dean is my hollywood man crush.
My personal opinion of all this as far as limiting foods and weightloss is this : when you stress too much over what you should/should not be eating it creates even more needless anxiety than is even worth it.
First off, sugar does have it's place in the human body. Maybe not candy canes and lollipop sugars, but the nervous system feeds off of pure glucose.. which you know can also be found from carbs. But most people who low carb diet talk about a brain fog or lack of energy that's why it's so hard to stick to.... so lol at the title "the easiest thing" because that's just not true. BUT I'm going to out on a limb and *hope* you meant the quickest way to know what to cut down on when you are on a weightloss goal is to cut down on excess sugars. Yes easy to find where you are eating excess sugars and stop doing that- that's true. Focusing on cutting out "liquid calories" and sugar added foods WILL jump start you to your weigtloss goals, but that will only last so long before you feel kind of crummy. Which is the moderation part-- maybe 2 days a week you allow yourself to indulge in those drinks/foods for a meal or 2 to help you stay on track. You should try to invest in a routine SLOWLY that will help you stay consistent. Thinking one day you're going to cut excess sugars and drinks cold turkey forever is just lieing to yourself.
I remember my sugar filled addiction days and it took me 4 years of try again, fail again, fail better method in order to finally get to a point where my brain doesn't CRAVE sugar filled items to for quick energy (although I do take an appetite suppressant/fat burner called Liporidex.. that probably helped a lot too) BUT HECK i still drink a regular soda now and again and sweet tea . .. it doesn't taste as good anymore, but I do grab for one every now and again.
The truth is- the quickest way to weightloss is to 1) Hire someone who can help you figure out your nutritional macros, so you can see what the portion sizes for you even look like 2) if you can't afford someone there are great example diets you can start with as a basline on bodybuilding.com that are FREE 3) Once one of the above happens BE CONSISTENT with your nutritional intake and get out there and get moving for 30-40 minutes 2-3 times a week.
Don't stress yourself out with what type of exercise or whatever-- just do something that gets you moving! Go out dancing, go skiing, walk on a treadmill, walk outside-- you don't have to be doing MAX effort cardio in order to see results. Weightloss takes time - a weight loss goal of 1-2lbs a week is a realistic weightloss goal.. if you lose less than that you need to lower your calories by 500 calories/day if you lose more than that you can probably increase your calories by 500/day and still see a weight loss.
As as I'm concerned if you are steadily losing 1-2llbs a week whatever you are doing IS WORKING!!!! Who cares what others think? If it's working stick to it, when you see yourself plateau look at what other changes you can make, do it and keep going.
If you read something in a forum that sounds completely absurd or not logical for you to be able to follow- you're not there yet and don't stress about it! There are 23223687890109328913 ways to weightloss and the best way for YOU is the one you can stick to!
This message brought to you by an IFBB Professional Athlete.
Keep Moving Forward. 0 -
why, it works for the majority of people?
i am curious who this "we" that you speak of is….
The "we" are the people who are reading the posts, thinking about the content, then contributing to one side of the conversation, or the other, in meaningful and thoughtful ways.
And just for my own benefit, since apparently you disagree with my argument, I'm curious to know what part you disagree with.
Do you disagree that people should limit treats?
Do you disagree that the majority of people's diet should come from low-calorie, high nutrient foods?
Do you disagree that deep-fried butter would be considered a treat, and thus eaten sparingly?
Do you disagree that when people eat a diet full of treats instead of regular food, they suffer from hunger pangs more often than people who eat a diet of regular food and limit the treats?
Or do you agree with all of the statements and just randomly disagree with the conclusion?
-1 -
The post is correct - if you cut back on processed sugars. I agree that eating fruit-based sugar is okay in moderation - like anything else, moderation is important. I lost 50 pounds over the past year completely changing my diet and not considering what I do as temporary. What I have done is permanent. I eat fruits and veggies, lean meats (emphasis on seafood), and I don't eat any kind of bread or pasta. I eat whole nuts - 1-3 oz per day. I workout regularly and I feel fantastic.
I don't miss processed sugar and foods one bit. I don't drink caffeine whatsoever. I have so much energy I feel like I am manufacturing it!0 -
tedboosalis7 wrote: »
I have so much energy I feel like I am manufacturing it!
LOL -- good for you.
I need to eat more seafood. I'm not really comfortable cooking fish because I don't have experience doing it, so I tend to forgo fish when I'm looking at my proteins. But I love fish. I need just jump in and cook some and see how it turns out.
0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »I got a spam flag right away. Is that good? I really don't know how the flag system works.
No it's a petty thing that idiots use who don't agree with your post!
If I was a moderator here I would be kicking off the people who abuse the flagging system for their own selfish kicks.
-2 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »
why, it works for the majority of people?
i am curious who this "we" that you speak of is….
The "we" are the people who are reading the posts, thinking about the content, then contributing to one side of the conversation, or the other, in meaningful and thoughtful ways.
And just for my own benefit, since apparently you disagree with my argument, I'm curious to know what part you disagree with.
Do you disagree that people should limit treats?
Do you disagree that the majority of people's diet should come from low-calorie, high nutrient foods?
Do you disagree that deep-fried butter would be considered a treat, and thus eaten sparingly?
Do you disagree that when people eat a diet full of treats instead of regular food, they suffer from hunger pangs more often than people who eat a diet of regular food and limit the treats?
Or do you agree with all of the statements and just randomly disagree with the conclusion?
I disagreed with the bolded part…here I cut and pasted it for you..
"Telling people to keep eating what they are eating, just in moderation, is terrible advice"
actually it is not, because learning to eat the foods that you like in moderation is a much better approach then saying restrict a whole food group because one deems it as "bad"…
It just amuses me when people like to use the word "we" as if they speak for everyone and everyone agrees with them, but the rest of us are just unthoughtful louts….it is an easy way to set up a straw man …
0 -
Dierdre isn't debating. She's not making an argument. She's not trying to fight.
I think she's trying very hard to get to the bottom of exactly what people are saying.
They make broad statements, which is fine. The "Nothing should be eliminated from the diet" is a broad statement. When these people are asked exactly how that is supposed to work, people assume it's some kind of debate or argument. It's not.
I was recently told that those who seem to be on MFP just to be nasty are really not nasty. They're trying to help when they make what appear to be very rude comments.
So, here they are, being offered the opportunity to help.
People are asking how to do the things they say people should do. If "moderation" doesn't mean "a moderate amount", how much is "moderate"? If things are not to be eliminated, how do we work them all in and still meet calorie goals as well as macros and micros?
It's not a debate or an argument. It's a question. Tell me how.
Explaining CICO totally might help someone who hasn't heard it. But once they've heard it and say, "I understand that. I still binge. How do I stop binging?"...now comes the opportunity to help.
The answer was "Practice it." Practice what? How is it done? Explain how to do it.
If people really are trying to help others when they tell them what to do, then explain to them how they are supposed to do these things. That's what we all need to know. How does it work? How do I do it?
How?
In regards to the bolded bit, that's been asked and answered in more specific terms up-thread.
But, in very general terms:
- Keep track of what you eat.
- Most of the time, try to select foods designed to help you meet any currently unmet macro/micro and calorie targets.
- If you want a treat, evaluate how much of it you can eat and still hit your targets. Decide if having that amount is worth it to you. If it is, eat as much as you want within your pre-determined limits. If it isn't, or you can't have some (in other words, you have no calories left and don't want to get some extra activity), decide if you want to go to the trouble of planning it into another day. Execute that decision. Alternatively, go over by a bit today and either accept the hit, or adjust intake/exercise on one or maybe a couple of other days to make up the difference.
Doing this, it is possible to work any food into your overall diet, given that the person is not trying to achieve a deficit too big for the amount of weight they need to lose. It is not necessarily possible to work in the amount of that food you want on any given day - or maybe ever. I mean, a 1,200 calorie piece of cheesecake is not going to fit into many people's plans. But 1/4 of it will if you plan ahead. A bite or two of it will fit in more frequently, if you decide it's worth it.
BTW - if you decide it's not worth the effort to fit in that 1/4 piece of cheesecake, that is not the same thing as saying you 'can't' work cheesecake in to your diet. No. You don't 'want' to work cheesecake into your diet. Which is completely and utterly fine. I only mention it because I do see some of that reasoning floating around.
The problem with trying to explain specifically how to go about this, is that the above can be accomplished in a million different ways. Everyone has different issues and goals. So, everyone is going to explain what worked for them, maybe what they heard worked for someone else. Maybe some of those specifics doesn't work so well for you, but that's no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
For someone who's never tried this before: start with a suggested plan of attack that appeals to you. Modify it as you choose. Try it. Identify weaknesses. Ask for help with specific issues if you don't know how to address them. Apply common sense and personal knowledge to eliminate those weaknesses in ways you think you're most likely to be able to maintain. Rinse and repeat until you're happy with your plan and observed results. Prosper.
That was really well written, and I agree with all of it. Especially the bolded.
Curious Ana. When you switched to GF did you find yourself better able to moderate? That's been my experience with it (similar symptoms plus sleepiness).
0 -
Telling people they should do something most people find difficult isn't good advice - you have to tell them how to actually accomplish it for it to be good advice.0
-
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »
why, it works for the majority of people?
i am curious who this "we" that you speak of is….
The "we" are the people who are reading the posts, thinking about the content, then contributing to one side of the conversation, or the other, in meaningful and thoughtful ways.
And just for my own benefit, since apparently you disagree with my argument, I'm curious to know what part you disagree with.
Do you disagree that people should limit treats?
Do you disagree that the majority of people's diet should come from low-calorie, high nutrient foods?
Do you disagree that deep-fried butter would be considered a treat, and thus eaten sparingly?
Do you disagree that when people eat a diet full of treats instead of regular food, they suffer from hunger pangs more often than people who eat a diet of regular food and limit the treats?
Or do you agree with all of the statements and just randomly disagree with the conclusion?
I disagreed with the bolded part…here I cut and pasted it for you..
"Telling people to keep eating what they are eating, just in moderation, is terrible advice"
actually it is not, because learning to eat the foods that you like in moderation is a much better approach then saying restrict a whole food group because one deems it as "bad"…
It just amuses me when people like to use the word "we" as if they speak for everyone and everyone agrees with them, but the rest of us are just unthoughtful louts….it is an easy way to set up a straw man …
My answer to someone saying "I cut out sugar because it's toxic and evil according to the latest woman's magazine" would be different than my answer to someone who says "when I eat sugar/fats/carbs I can't seem to stop"....the answer for that may include a period of elimination (for adherence and self-confidence) whereas the former would be along the lines of moderation.
0 -
girlviernes wrote: »I dunno... maybe that should be the next diet craze... raw fat.
You mean like....say....downing spoonfuls of coconut oil?
0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »stealth -- the first two sentences address you directly. The "you" in the rest of the sentences refer to "those of you who hold this position."
- Most of the time, try to select foods designed to help you meet any currently unmet macro/micro and calorie targets.
- If you want a treat, evaluate how much of it you can eat and still hit your targets.
I completely agree with your post. That is eating in moderation. But it's not "eat what you want in moderation."
People say all the time on these boards "eat what you want, just in moderation" or "eat what you are currently eating, just in moderation." And the corollaries -- "there are no good or bad foods," "all food is equal -- none is garbage or crap."
Just to clarify, I know the menu I posted was in fact NOT moderation, even though all nine foods were a single serving size, and the second menu I posted was also NOT moderation, even though I met all my numbers.
It was not moderation because it was all treat foods, not foods designed to help us.
If some foods are treats, then other foods are something other than treats. Some people call that food "healthy choices" or "clean eating" or "good food." I personally call it "regular food."
And since we all agree we should limit treats, and we all agree that we should eat food that is designed to help us, then we all agree that there are different kinds of food choices -- regular food and treats.
Most of our diet should consist of regular food, and some of our diet should consist of treats -- and here, within the context of treats, I am totally willing to concede that you can eat whatever you want. You want to eat a Big Mac, go for it. Deep-fried stick of butter? Have at it.
I am focusing on this issue this because I didn't get to 213 pounds by overeating regular food. I got there by eating a diet that looked a lot like a donut, a latte, and an egg and cheese croissant in the morning, a Subway sub, chips and two cookies for lunch, and a large pizza for dinner, washed down with milk and a sleeve of Oreos.
If I came on MFP and wrote "I need help losing weight" and the response was "just keep eating what you are eating, just in moderation," I'd be happy as a clam to do that! Keep eating what I eat but in moderation means "Keep eating what you are eating, just less of it." It does not mean "Change your diet drastically and save the treats for once in a while."
And after I try to eat what I'm eating but only less of it, and I fail spectacularly because the food I'm eating doesn't last long in my system so I am hungry all the time, my next MFP post would be "You told me what to do and I did it and it didn't work. I keep overeating even when I try not to! I must be addicted to sugar."
Telling people to keep eating what they are eating, just in moderation, is terrible advice.
Much better advice would be "You need to cut out the crap on a daily basis and save it for a treat once or twice a week" or perhaps the slightly softer "You are eating treats instead of nutritious food. You have to change your diet to low calorie, highly nutritious foods in order to feel full all day long. You can continue to eat treats, but on a very limited basis, when you can fit them into your numbers. If you don't follow our advice, chances are very high that you will spend your diet days hungry and miserable, and you will just fail again at losing weight."
Categorizing people as lazy or lacking willpower when they can't control their overeating because they are basically following the advice to "eat what they want, just in moderation" and end up with hunger pangs and cravings is the absolute height of hypocrisy.
And just to bring this back to the original point, since we all agree that limiting treats is necessary for weight loss, and there are at least five grocery aisles devoted to treat foods packed with sugar (the donut and muffin aisle, the cookies and crackers aisle, the soda aisle, the frozen desserts aisle, and the cakes and cookie mixes aisle), then by god we all agree that sugar is possibly the easiest thing to cut back on for weight loss.
I didn't even read this entire post because you took the person's post completely out of context. She said food that helps you meet your micro/macro needs and any food, "healthy" or not, can do that for you.
Do not twist someone's words to fit your own agenda.0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
So, elimination?Dierdre isn't debating. She's not making an argument. She's not trying to fight.
I think she's trying very hard to get to the bottom of exactly what people are saying.
They make broad statements, which is fine. The "Nothing should be eliminated from the diet" is a broad statement. When these people are asked exactly how that is supposed to work, people assume it's some kind of debate or argument. It's not.
I was recently told that those who seem to be on MFP just to be nasty are really not nasty. They're trying to help when they make what appear to be very rude comments.
So, here they are, being offered the opportunity to help.
People are asking how to do the things they say people should do. If "moderation" doesn't mean "a moderate amount", how much is "moderate"? If things are not to be eliminated, how do we work them all in and still meet calorie goals as well as macros and micros?
It's not a debate or an argument. It's a question. Tell me how.
Explaining CICO totally might help someone who hasn't heard it. But once they've heard it and say, "I understand that. I still binge. How do I stop binging?"...now comes the opportunity to help.
The answer was "Practice it." Practice what? How is it done? Explain how to do it.
If people really are trying to help others when they tell them what to do, then explain to them how they are supposed to do these things. That's what we all need to know. How does it work? How do I do it?
How?
In regards to the bolded bit, that's been asked and answered in more specific terms up-thread.
But, in very general terms:
- Keep track of what you eat.
- Most of the time, try to select foods designed to help you meet any currently unmet macro/micro and calorie targets.
- If you want a treat, evaluate how much of it you can eat and still hit your targets. Decide if having that amount is worth it to you. If it is, eat as much as you want within your pre-determined limits. If it isn't, or you can't have some (in other words, you have no calories left and don't want to get some extra activity), decide if you want to go to the trouble of planning it into another day. Execute that decision. Alternatively, go over by a bit today and either accept the hit, or adjust intake/exercise on one or maybe a couple of other days to make up the difference.
Doing this, it is possible to work any food into your overall diet, given that the person is not trying to achieve a deficit too big for the amount of weight they need to lose. It is not necessarily possible to work in the amount of that food you want on any given day - or maybe ever. I mean, a 1,200 calorie piece of cheesecake is not going to fit into many people's plans. But 1/4 of it will if you plan ahead. A bite or two of it will fit in more frequently, if you decide it's worth it.
BTW - if you decide it's not worth the effort to fit in that 1/4 piece of cheesecake, that is not the same thing as saying you 'can't' work cheesecake in to your diet. No. You don't 'want' to work cheesecake into your diet. Which is completely and utterly fine. I only mention it because I do see some of that reasoning floating around.
The problem with trying to explain specifically how to go about this, is that the above can be accomplished in a million different ways. Everyone has different issues and goals. So, everyone is going to explain what worked for them, maybe what they heard worked for someone else. Maybe some of those specifics doesn't work so well for you, but that's no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
For someone who's never tried this before: start with a suggested plan of attack that appeals to you. Modify it as you choose. Try it. Identify weaknesses. Ask for help with specific issues if you don't know how to address them. Apply common sense and personal knowledge to eliminate those weaknesses in ways you think you're most likely to be able to maintain. Rinse and repeat until you're happy with your plan and observed results. Prosper.
That was really well written, and I agree with all of it. Especially the bolded.
Yes, that is what the bolded part would mean. Does not mean that I promote eliminating food one enjoys. The phrase was in fact bolded because I support the poster's differentiation between choosing not to eat something on that day because it's easier to simply eat it another day instead, versus thinking that the food cannot be worked into one's diet.0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »
why, it works for the majority of people?
i am curious who this "we" that you speak of is….
The "we" are the people who are reading the posts, thinking about the content, then contributing to one side of the conversation, or the other, in meaningful and thoughtful ways.
And just for my own benefit, since apparently you disagree with my argument, I'm curious to know what part you disagree with.
Do you disagree that people should limit treats?
Do you disagree that the majority of people's diet should come from low-calorie, high nutrient foods?
Do you disagree that deep-fried butter would be considered a treat, and thus eaten sparingly?
Do you disagree that when people eat a diet full of treats instead of regular food, they suffer from hunger pangs more often than people who eat a diet of regular food and limit the treats?
Or do you agree with all of the statements and just randomly disagree with the conclusion?
I disagreed with the bolded part…here I cut and pasted it for you..
"Telling people to keep eating what they are eating, just in moderation, is terrible advice"
actually it is not, because learning to eat the foods that you like in moderation is a much better approach then saying restrict a whole food group because one deems it as "bad"…
It just amuses me when people like to use the word "we" as if they speak for everyone and everyone agrees with them, but the rest of us are just unthoughtful louts….it is an easy way to set up a straw man …
My answer to someone saying "I cut out sugar because it's toxic and evil according to the latest woman's magazine" would be different than my answer to someone who says "when I eat sugar/fats/carbs I can't seem to stop"....the answer for that may include a period of elimination (for adherence and self-confidence) whereas the former would be along the lines of moderation.
well in my opinion people will have long lasting and sustainable success if they learn to moderate their food choices instead of eliminating a whole food group..
when I first started on this path I believed all the BS that sugar is bad, or carbs will make you gain weight…so what happened, I would barely eat any carbs until I was a starving mess and then I would go find a box of crackers, or bag of chips, or whatever and shovel the whole thing down my stomach and then I would feel like crap; OR I would wait to eat ice cream and then crave it so bad that I would eat a whole pint or maybe even more.
eventually, I learned that these things are not "bad" and that I can eat them in moderation, still hit my goals, and enjoy the food that I like without viewing them as "evil"…
0 -
Dierdre isn't debating. She's not making an argument. She's not trying to fight.
I think she's trying very hard to get to the bottom of exactly what people are saying.
They make broad statements, which is fine. The "Nothing should be eliminated from the diet" is a broad statement. When these people are asked exactly how that is supposed to work, people assume it's some kind of debate or argument. It's not.
I was recently told that those who seem to be on MFP just to be nasty are really not nasty. They're trying to help when they make what appear to be very rude comments.
So, here they are, being offered the opportunity to help.
People are asking how to do the things they say people should do. If "moderation" doesn't mean "a moderate amount", how much is "moderate"? If things are not to be eliminated, how do we work them all in and still meet calorie goals as well as macros and micros?
It's not a debate or an argument. It's a question. Tell me how.
Explaining CICO totally might help someone who hasn't heard it. But once they've heard it and say, "I understand that. I still binge. How do I stop binging?"...now comes the opportunity to help.
The answer was "Practice it." Practice what? How is it done? Explain how to do it.
If people really are trying to help others when they tell them what to do, then explain to them how they are supposed to do these things. That's what we all need to know. How does it work? How do I do it?
How?
In regards to the bolded bit, that's been asked and answered in more specific terms up-thread.
But, in very general terms:
- Keep track of what you eat.
- Most of the time, try to select foods designed to help you meet any currently unmet macro/micro and calorie targets.
- If you want a treat, evaluate how much of it you can eat and still hit your targets. Decide if having that amount is worth it to you. If it is, eat as much as you want within your pre-determined limits. If it isn't, or you can't have some (in other words, you have no calories left and don't want to get some extra activity), decide if you want to go to the trouble of planning it into another day. Execute that decision. Alternatively, go over by a bit today and either accept the hit, or adjust intake/exercise on one or maybe a couple of other days to make up the difference.
Doing this, it is possible to work any food into your overall diet, given that the person is not trying to achieve a deficit too big for the amount of weight they need to lose. It is not necessarily possible to work in the amount of that food you want on any given day - or maybe ever. I mean, a 1,200 calorie piece of cheesecake is not going to fit into many people's plans. But 1/4 of it will if you plan ahead. A bite or two of it will fit in more frequently, if you decide it's worth it.
BTW - if you decide it's not worth the effort to fit in that 1/4 piece of cheesecake, that is not the same thing as saying you 'can't' work cheesecake in to your diet. No. You don't 'want' to work cheesecake into your diet. Which is completely and utterly fine. I only mention it because I do see some of that reasoning floating around.
The problem with trying to explain specifically how to go about this, is that the above can be accomplished in a million different ways. Everyone has different issues and goals. So, everyone is going to explain what worked for them, maybe what they heard worked for someone else. Maybe some of those specifics doesn't work so well for you, but that's no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
For someone who's never tried this before: start with a suggested plan of attack that appeals to you. Modify it as you choose. Try it. Identify weaknesses. Ask for help with specific issues if you don't know how to address them. Apply common sense and personal knowledge to eliminate those weaknesses in ways you think you're most likely to be able to maintain. Rinse and repeat until you're happy with your plan and observed results. Prosper.
That was really well written, and I agree with all of it. Especially the bolded.
Curious Ana. When you switched to GF did you find yourself better able to moderate? That's been my experience with it (similar symptoms plus sleepiness).
No. I stopped eating gluten almost 5 years ago, and it was not at all for dietary/weight management purposes. I continued to binge while eating both GF and "clean" - i.e. omitting foods that I deemed bad.0 -
I like how we've gotten to the part where the group objecting to the perceived implication of something that everyone must do to be successful is now making statements also implying that there's only one way to do things. But it seems to be ok this time.0
-
-
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »
What other choice do you have?
Eliminate the food altogether. End of binges.
Once I eliminated desserts from my diet, my willpower miraculously recovered from its oddly lopsided weakness.
Hopefully you can keep that up for the rest of your life...
Well, I've been dessert free for 10 years, so I'm pretty comfortable saying it's working for me.
But it doesn't work for everyone, and I certainly don't advocate that everyone has to eliminate their trigger foods. Some one else has pointed out that people have to figure out what works for them and I agree. To each his own.
But back to willpower. Why is my willpower lopsided? It works just fine with most foods but doesn't work at all with some foods.
And I'm serious about having a serious discussion. I'm not interested in shaming anyone or winning anything. I just want to follow the discussion of willpower to some interesting and useful place.
Willpower: Duhigg references it like a muscle in his book on Habits. Kahneman references the ego depletion in his book. Daniel Kahnenman Thinking, Fast and Slow he discusses briefly the Baumeister studies and cites 'that an effort of will or control is tiring; if you have to force yourself to do something you are less willing or less able to exert self control when the next challenge comes". It seems we have a finite amount of willpower. For Duhigg he said the more we use it the better we become using it(think adaptation with muscles and the opposite muscle atrophy when we stop). Duhigg also mentions it is used best early and with the things we like to do least. Do the thing you want to do least for the day first thing. Sound familiar? Both of these books are excellent source material to incorporate into your daily lives in terms of understanding and managing your day around food and willpower.
Last, for bingers, one of the suggestions to stop binging is to not diet. Seems a recurring theme for some who binge, they continue to try and diet. This is one of many steps to stop the binging. Just discontinue dieting and it will help ease the binging. There are several more steps; fight boredom, exercise, proper rest, and so on. I have worked with a binger(it is not their only issue) for 6 months now and with their permission I am writing this out. Stress is their leading cause of binging. The act itself, from texture of foods, to tasting, their brain does in fact 'shut off' and they are satisfied and relieved. We roughly calculated the calories of approximately 800 in 4-5 minutes. I am just a friend to them who listens and tries to help; it is something that a doc is better equipped to assist them then a lay person like myself. They are getting help and those steps are slowly improving. They are quite frankly starting to thrive in life. Humbly proud of this person and am fortunate to watch their growth is immeasurable to me. What difference we make sometimes we will not know, but helping each other learn is a pretty good step.
0 -
can i ask something? ummm don't every single human being eats with moderation?, i mean then how in the world they're so many people who have never count a calorie in their life, who have never being 1 single pound overweight, who knows anything about TDEE and macros and all that stuff, who have never hit a gym a day in their life (i have a lottt of friends like that) are in a normal weight? do they have a special gene, that we didn't got? . i've ask a couple of them today if they to stay in their normal weight ELIMINATED any food and the answer was basically hell noooooooo, many of them say that they don't make any effort to stay in their weight = translation (they eat with moderation and they are not even aware of , they eat in a good calorie range and they again don't know it)
for me moderation goes with balance and equilibrium , i can eat what i want oh yesss butt jeeezz not in the amount that i used to or the timing, i've read somewhere in the post that saying "i'll eat what i want but with moderation is basically eliminating food" (i think it was something like that), i don't see that way but if that's the definition of some people of elimination, then yes i do it
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 391 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 925 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions