Check out this "expert" advise! "Counting calories is bad!"
Options
Replies
-
4legsRbetterthan2 wrote: »WalkingAlong wrote: »I read Cynthia Sass' book and liked it. I do think calorie counting is not ideal for long term weight maintenance, for many. You don't have to look far to see people all over this site with disordered relationships with food and the numbers.
correlation is not causation - CICO is a very usefull method for alot of people. I also think it is very attractive to people who have compulsive restriction type disorders, but that does not mean it caused them. They most likely came here with that mentality already.
CICO is valid for everyone. Tracking those calories however, is not necessarily the correct or ideal method for everyone.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »WalkingAlong wrote: »I read Cynthia Sass' book and liked it. I do think calorie counting is not ideal for long term weight maintenance, for many. You don't have to look far to see people all over this site with disordered relationships with food and the numbers.
What would you call a disordered relationship with food and the numbers and why is calorie counting long term not ideal?
Speaking from personal experience I got to a point where I started selecting foods strictly based on numbers and not based on other factors related to typical food selection processes (nutrient needs, palatability, etc). I started viewing foods as strings of numbers and not as food themselves. Furthermore, I disliked the amount of attention I needed to pay to energy values and I developed the feeling of severe restriction.
It's really not all that different from someone deciding to eliminate entire categories of foods and how, in SOME of those cases those people end up developing a less than ideal relationship with food (orthorexic type behaviors) because of their methods.
I've also had clients who have had issues with the relationships in their life because of their tracking behaviors.
I don't direct this at you (person I am quoting) but it baffles my mind how many people believe that since an issue or problem doesn't exist in their world, then it must not exist.
Ultimately, with any behavior you select you need to determine how that behavior effects the quality of your life. For SOME people, tracking intake is a net negative.
For many people it's perfectly fine, and for those who don't have issues with it, it's a powerful tool.
Oh, I don't question that it's problematic for some at all. I question that the site is rife with people with disordered relationships with food and numbers as the other poster asserted.
I also question the other poster's premise that for some people, long-term tracking is less than "ideal", whatever that is. "Ideal" maintenance is pretty much going to be an individual thing, who gets to do decide what works best for anyone? Why have a concept of what is and isn't ideal?
0 -
Yes counting calories is bad.........for the "diet" industry. It doesn't require you to buy someones cherry-picked pseudoscience book, it doesn't promise magic in pill or bottle etc.
Yep, this!!
OP: I lost 121 pounds counting calories and now maintaining almost 6 months still counting calories. To me it's just every day thing, just like brushing my teeth. No stress what's so ever.0 -
4legsRbetterthan2 wrote: »WalkingAlong wrote: »I read Cynthia Sass' book and liked it. I do think calorie counting is not ideal for long term weight maintenance, for many. You don't have to look far to see people all over this site with disordered relationships with food and the numbers.
correlation is not causation - CICO is a very usefull method for alot of people. I also think it is very attractive to people who have compulsive restriction type disorders, but that does not mean it caused them. They most likely came here with that mentality already.
CICO is valid for everyone. Tracking those calories however, is not necessarily the correct or ideal method for everyone.
I agree, my point is that calorie tracking probably didn't cause the issue, it was just another way for it to manifest itself.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »WalkingAlong wrote: »I read Cynthia Sass' book and liked it. I do think calorie counting is not ideal for long term weight maintenance, for many. You don't have to look far to see people all over this site with disordered relationships with food and the numbers.
What would you call a disordered relationship with food and the numbers and why is calorie counting long term not ideal?
Speaking from personal experience I got to a point where I started selecting foods strictly based on numbers and not based on other factors related to typical food selection processes (nutrient needs, palatability, etc). I started viewing foods as strings of numbers and not as food themselves. Furthermore, I disliked the amount of attention I needed to pay to energy values and I developed the feeling of severe restriction.
It's really not all that different from someone deciding to eliminate entire categories of foods and how, in SOME of those cases those people end up developing a less than ideal relationship with food (orthorexic type behaviors) because of their methods.
I've also had clients who have had issues with the relationships in their life because of their tracking behaviors.
I don't direct this at you (person I am quoting) but it baffles my mind how many people believe that since an issue or problem doesn't exist in their world, then it must not exist.
Ultimately, with any behavior you select you need to determine how that behavior effects the quality of your life. For SOME people, tracking intake is a net negative.
For many people it's perfectly fine, and for those who don't have issues with it, it's a powerful tool.
Oh, I don't question that it's problematic for some at all. I question that the site is rife with people with disordered relationships with food and numbers as the other poster asserted.
I also question the other poster's premise that for some people, long-term tracking is less than "ideal", whatever that is. "Ideal" maintenance is pretty much going to be an individual thing, who gets to do decide what works best for anyone? Why have a concept of what is and isn't ideal?
I see.
I agree that regardless of the prevalence of disordered eating on this site (I make no claims about it) you can't say that it was caused by tracking.
I do think that long term tracking probably isn't a great idea for many people. Most people are going to be better off using calorie tracking in the short term while they develop food habits that allow them to sustain a reasonable calorie intake so that the tracking piece can eventually (at some point) go away.
It baffles me how people believe that they will be 90 years old in a nursing home and logging the jello they eat through a straw.
Now, if someone enjoys calorie tracking then doing it long term is fine. I suspect most people aren't in this position.
0 -
So your argument is that calorie counting IS ideal for everyone for long term maintenance? All I said was that it's not ideal for everyone.mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »WalkingAlong wrote: »I read Cynthia Sass' book and liked it. I do think calorie counting is not ideal for long term weight maintenance, for many. You don't have to look far to see people all over this site with disordered relationships with food and the numbers.
What would you call a disordered relationship with food and the numbers and why is calorie counting long term not ideal?
Speaking from personal experience I got to a point where I started selecting foods strictly based on numbers and not based on other factors related to typical food selection processes (nutrient needs, palatability, etc). I started viewing foods as strings of numbers and not as food themselves. Furthermore, I disliked the amount of attention I needed to pay to energy values and I developed the feeling of severe restriction.
It's really not all that different from someone deciding to eliminate entire categories of foods and how, in SOME of those cases those people end up developing a less than ideal relationship with food (orthorexic type behaviors) because of their methods.
I've also had clients who have had issues with the relationships in their life because of their tracking behaviors.
I don't direct this at you (person I am quoting) but it baffles my mind how many people believe that since an issue or problem doesn't exist in their world, then it must not exist.
Ultimately, with any behavior you select you need to determine how that behavior effects the quality of your life. For SOME people, tracking intake is a net negative.
For many people it's perfectly fine, and for those who don't have issues with it, it's a powerful tool.
Oh, I don't question that it's problematic for some at all. I question that the site is rife with people with disordered relationships with food and numbers as the other poster asserted.
I also question the other poster's premise that for some people, long-term tracking is less than "ideal", whatever that is. "Ideal" maintenance is pretty much going to be an individual thing, who gets to do decide what works best for anyone? Why have a concept of what is and isn't ideal?
0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »
So your argument is that calorie counting IS ideal for everyone for long term maintenance? All I said was that it's not ideal for everyone.mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »WalkingAlong wrote: »I read Cynthia Sass' book and liked it. I do think calorie counting is not ideal for long term weight maintenance, for many. You don't have to look far to see people all over this site with disordered relationships with food and the numbers.
What would you call a disordered relationship with food and the numbers and why is calorie counting long term not ideal?
Speaking from personal experience I got to a point where I started selecting foods strictly based on numbers and not based on other factors related to typical food selection processes (nutrient needs, palatability, etc). I started viewing foods as strings of numbers and not as food themselves. Furthermore, I disliked the amount of attention I needed to pay to energy values and I developed the feeling of severe restriction.
It's really not all that different from someone deciding to eliminate entire categories of foods and how, in SOME of those cases those people end up developing a less than ideal relationship with food (orthorexic type behaviors) because of their methods.
I've also had clients who have had issues with the relationships in their life because of their tracking behaviors.
I don't direct this at you (person I am quoting) but it baffles my mind how many people believe that since an issue or problem doesn't exist in their world, then it must not exist.
Ultimately, with any behavior you select you need to determine how that behavior effects the quality of your life. For SOME people, tracking intake is a net negative.
For many people it's perfectly fine, and for those who don't have issues with it, it's a powerful tool.
Oh, I don't question that it's problematic for some at all. I question that the site is rife with people with disordered relationships with food and numbers as the other poster asserted.
I also question the other poster's premise that for some people, long-term tracking is less than "ideal", whatever that is. "Ideal" maintenance is pretty much going to be an individual thing, who gets to do decide what works best for anyone? Why have a concept of what is and isn't ideal?
No, my argument is over your use of the word "ideal". Calorie counting is just a tool. It's neutral. It's neither "ideal" or not if someone chooses to use it. There's no value judgment to be made regarding its use or lack thereof.
0 -
Hmmm...well what I've been doing has kept the weight I lost off for years so I think I'll just keep counting
0 -
Is this OP reason for not counting calories.
Also in the second article why would you stop doing what your doing just because of counting calories. That just not being smart. Why would you not listen to your body when counting calories just like when you weren't.
First article is fox news so no need to read or comment on fox news for anything.0 -
4legsRbetterthan2 wrote: »WalkingAlong wrote: »I read Cynthia Sass' book and liked it. I do think calorie counting is not ideal for long term weight maintenance, for many. You don't have to look far to see people all over this site with disordered relationships with food and the numbers.
correlation is not causation - CICO is a very usefull method for alot of people. I also think it is very attractive to people who have compulsive restriction type disorders, but that does not mean it caused them. They most likely came here with that mentality already.
CICO is valid for everyone. Tracking those calories however, is not necessarily the correct or ideal method for everyone.
I couldn't agree more. With this post, and the one above it.0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »I read Cynthia Sass' book and liked it. I do think calorie counting is not ideal for long term weight maintenance, for many. You don't have to look far to see people all over this site with disordered relationships with food and the numbers.
wait, so calorie counting = disordered relationship with foods?
0 -
Not what she said, but ok.WalkingAlong wrote: »I read Cynthia Sass' book and liked it. I do think calorie counting is not ideal for long term weight maintenance, for many. You don't have to look far to see people all over this site with disordered relationships with food and the numbers.
wait, so calorie counting = disordered relationship with foods?
0 -
sigh ..whyis there always one person that believes that the regular rules of math and physics do not apply to them…?
so you are saying you can eat in a 500 per day calorie surplus and you will lose weight? Because it not as simple as CICO..right, right, right????
Coming from a biologist, it is as simple as CICO, BUT the calories that go into your mouth do NOT always equal the calories that are available to your body for energy: even cooking something will change the amount of energy available to your cells (DOI: 10.1002, doi: 10.1073). Not to mention the individual differences in intestinal microbiota: micro-organisms that live in your gut help you to digest foods and therefore get more energy than others. To put it simply, some are better at it than others and this may be implicated in weight loss and gain (http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-4887.2006.tb00173.x). One of the interesting clinical implications of this is faecal transplant as a treatment for obesity. Would you swallow a 'poo pill' to lose weight?
0 -
holzeeg123 wrote: »
sigh ..whyis there always one person that believes that the regular rules of math and physics do not apply to them…?
so you are saying you can eat in a 500 per day calorie surplus and you will lose weight? Because it not as simple as CICO..right, right, right????
Coming from a biologist, it is as simple as CICO, BUT the calories that go into your mouth do NOT always equal the calories that are available to your body for energy: even cooking something will change the amount of energy available to your cells (DOI: 10.1002, doi: 10.1073). Not to mention the individual differences in intestinal microbiota: micro-organisms that live in your gut help you to digest foods and therefore get more energy than others. To put it simply, some are better at it than others and this may be implicated in weight loss and gain (http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-4887.2006.tb00173.x). One of the interesting clinical implications of this is faecal transplant as a treatment for obesity. Would you swallow a 'poo pill' to lose weight?
I agree with you that there are some internal things that will affect CICO like TEF, and what not; however, that does not invalidate that at end of the day it boils down to calories in vs calories out. Now, will that equation always be perfect, no; but, if one follows it will work.
No, I would not swallow a "poo pill"....LOL unless I can take that with a tablespoon of added sugar...but then would that be "bad"???
0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
Not what she said, but ok.WalkingAlong wrote: »I read Cynthia Sass' book and liked it. I do think calorie counting is not ideal for long term weight maintenance, for many. You don't have to look far to see people all over this site with disordered relationships with food and the numbers.
wait, so calorie counting = disordered relationship with foods?
ok, then go ahead and clarify it for me..0 -
I agree with you that there are some internal things that will affect CICO like TEF, and what not; however, that does not invalidate that at end of the day it boils down to calories in vs calories out. Now, will that equation always be perfect, no; but, if one follows it will work.
No, I would not swallow a "poo pill"....LOL unless I can take that with a tablespoon of added sugar...but then would that be "bad"???
Hmm yeah I think we are on the same page. I guess my response to that would be that's all well and good as long as people know that there may be other factors, and they will never be able to calculate "I had a 3600 deficit this week. WHY AREN'T I A POUND LIGHTER AGGGGHHH" which is exactly how someone who gets obsessive with calories may think.
Would you swallow a "poo pill" for a C. diff infection or are you averse to it all?
(rest of the post not a direct reply)
I also think there is a difference between someone using MFP to understand what they eat and learn about nutrition, and using it every day for the rest of their life. I'm sure people on this site will fit into both categories, and there's nothing wrong with that. IMO people need to work out what's right for them. No generalisations, no "right way" just try something for a few months and see. If you really want a lifestyle change, using the first few months to figure out if something is making you miserable or plain not working is nothing in the long term.0 -
The article says 7 eating habits you should drop now. It's not an article posed as showing a variety of ways people can lose weight effectively. If you look at the other "habits," they're negatively oriented. They're literally posing calorie counting as a negative method and then throw in a "oh it's not meaningless" to clean it up a bit.
Does calorie counting cause stress for some people? Sure. Anything can do that. That doesn't mean it's a negative method. Clean eating can stress people out. Moderation can stress people out. Simply existing can stress people out.
Counting calories can be highly effective. The article is indeed BS for suggesting a legitimate strategy is just going to make you gain weight due to stress.
Many people, like myself, find it to be a stress free method. Without counting calories, I feel like I just guessing and THAT is stressful for me. I under eat because I want to be "safe." The idea of eating clean for life would be stressful for me. Counting calories and realizing I can have a bowl of ice cream and still be on track for losing...that's the exact opposite of stressful.
Also, any "diet" is stressful to begin with. You're making a major adjustment in the way you typically go about your life. Once you adapt to the basic habits, it gets easier. After using MFP for a little while, unless you have a very random diet or don't group foods, logging becomes literal minutes of your day. The hardest part about logging is when I decide to eat under a serving and have to do the math
0 -
This has been one of the more interesting conversations on MFP! I think there is so much that goes into what will work for one individual vs. another and I especially appreciate holzeeg's insights about CICO. It is more complicated than some make it out to be. It's not a "simple math" equation but rather a more complicated equation--there are mediating and moderating factors (including hunger influencing hormones, gut bacteria, etc.). But you can still use the simple counting method to get a decent approximation of if you're on track or off. It's just important to not get too hung up on the simple math and base your expectations on it.
For some, paying attention to hunger and satiety will work without counting. For others, paying attention to types of food will work without counting. For me, I need both of those things AND counting to lose weight and some calorie counting to even maintain. I think that's because my body wants me to be heavier than I want to be, so I could gain weight on eating "clean" foods to satiety. This goes back to the "other factors" (including genetic tendencies) that will influence what works for one person vs. another.
So, in sum, live and let live. What works for one person may not work for another! The trick is to understand what works for you most of the time.0 -
If there is no value judgment that can be attached to methods, there is no point in discussing methods or discussing articles that do so.mamapeach910 wrote: »WalkingAlong wrote: »
So your argument is that calorie counting IS ideal for everyone for long term maintenance? All I said was that it's not ideal for everyone.mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »WalkingAlong wrote: »I read Cynthia Sass' book and liked it. I do think calorie counting is not ideal for long term weight maintenance, for many. You don't have to look far to see people all over this site with disordered relationships with food and the numbers.
What would you call a disordered relationship with food and the numbers and why is calorie counting long term not ideal?
Speaking from personal experience I got to a point where I started selecting foods strictly based on numbers and not based on other factors related to typical food selection processes (nutrient needs, palatability, etc). I started viewing foods as strings of numbers and not as food themselves. Furthermore, I disliked the amount of attention I needed to pay to energy values and I developed the feeling of severe restriction.
It's really not all that different from someone deciding to eliminate entire categories of foods and how, in SOME of those cases those people end up developing a less than ideal relationship with food (orthorexic type behaviors) because of their methods.
I've also had clients who have had issues with the relationships in their life because of their tracking behaviors.
I don't direct this at you (person I am quoting) but it baffles my mind how many people believe that since an issue or problem doesn't exist in their world, then it must not exist.
Ultimately, with any behavior you select you need to determine how that behavior effects the quality of your life. For SOME people, tracking intake is a net negative.
For many people it's perfectly fine, and for those who don't have issues with it, it's a powerful tool.
Oh, I don't question that it's problematic for some at all. I question that the site is rife with people with disordered relationships with food and numbers as the other poster asserted.
I also question the other poster's premise that for some people, long-term tracking is less than "ideal", whatever that is. "Ideal" maintenance is pretty much going to be an individual thing, who gets to do decide what works best for anyone? Why have a concept of what is and isn't ideal?
No, my argument is over your use of the word "ideal". Calorie counting is just a tool. It's neutral. It's neither "ideal" or not if someone chooses to use it. There's no value judgment to be made regarding its use or lack thereof.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K 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
- 393 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
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 939 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions