Intermittent fasting
Replies
-
0
-
Well, ok. Let's put it this way. What you are doing now has not been working for the past 4 months. Therefore, why not try reducing your calories and see? What's the worst thing that's going to happen... the same old nothing that's happening now?0
-
Sarasmaintaining wrote: »Scaling food is not an option for me I dont think our ancestors were measuring their food. We have to eat right and when we eat right we will be always in a balanace CICO.
You're really making this a lot harder on yourself than it needs to be. Suck it up, spend $15 on a food scale and get a better idea of where you're at in terms of calories consumed. You need to get an accurate starting point, in order to pin down where you've gone off track. You posted because you're not moving forward and everyone is telling you the same thing, including people who've successfully lost the weight and are now maintaining. Don't you think we might actually know what we're talking about here?
Eta: the whole intuitive eating thing is what got most of us here in the first place. It's also obviously not working out so great for you either, or you wouldn't be stuck where you're at.
Second this. I thought I had a good handle on how much I was eating until I actually started using a scale. Boy, was I wrong!!
And yes, our ancestors didn't measure their food. They spent the day growing/hunting it, thus using a lot more calories than the average person now. So why discount a very good way of helping you lose weight simply because people in the past didn't have it? Are you going to give up every bit of modern society simply because it wasn't done that way hundreds of years ago? I see nothing wrong with using every tool you can to help you lose weight and become healthier.
And for the record, most of my weight loss was done with JUST calorie counting. I can't do IF because it'll cause my blood sugar to crash (borderline hypoglycemic), I didn't substitute very much in way of foods, and I certainly didn't cut back on carbs! I love hot bread too much to cut it out of my diet! My eating habits are still not very good or very healthy (though a bit more than they used to be since we now cook dinner most nights instead of eating out), and I still indulge on junk food when it fits my daily goal. But using a scale and paying attention to portion sizes and how much of what I'm eating is the main thing that's helped me. What worked for me isn't going to work for everyone by any means, but I'm describing it to let you know that cutting carbs isn't a be-all-end-all solution for weight loss. Nor is cutting fat, or cutting sugar, or eating at specific times or whatever. If something like that helps you, more power to you. But at the heart of any proper diet change for weight loss is CICO.
When I mention our ancestors it wasnt to take it litterally but some guys here cant get the point without explanation. What I meant is that our ancestors they could manage a healthy weight without measuring weight because they where eating according to their gene evolution and yes they whereactive but this is secondary. Nowadays our genome didnt evoluate in the same speed as our nutritional intake we are bombarding our body with carbs (mainly fructose and corn syrup) where we dont have an enzyme that can digest it and that is why it turns into fat. That is why we always return to our main point ``Are all calories the same``
What, in the actual...?
wait or genomes ovulate now????0 -
Sarasmaintaining wrote: »Scaling food is not an option for me I dont think our ancestors were measuring their food. We have to eat right and when we eat right we will be always in a balanace CICO.
You're really making this a lot harder on yourself than it needs to be. Suck it up, spend $15 on a food scale and get a better idea of where you're at in terms of calories consumed. You need to get an accurate starting point, in order to pin down where you've gone off track. You posted because you're not moving forward and everyone is telling you the same thing, including people who've successfully lost the weight and are now maintaining. Don't you think we might actually know what we're talking about here?
Eta: the whole intuitive eating thing is what got most of us here in the first place. It's also obviously not working out so great for you either, or you wouldn't be stuck where you're at.
Second this. I thought I had a good handle on how much I was eating until I actually started using a scale. Boy, was I wrong!!
And yes, our ancestors didn't measure their food. They spent the day growing/hunting it, thus using a lot more calories than the average person now. So why discount a very good way of helping you lose weight simply because people in the past didn't have it? Are you going to give up every bit of modern society simply because it wasn't done that way hundreds of years ago? I see nothing wrong with using every tool you can to help you lose weight and become healthier.
And for the record, most of my weight loss was done with JUST calorie counting. I can't do IF because it'll cause my blood sugar to crash (borderline hypoglycemic), I didn't substitute very much in way of foods, and I certainly didn't cut back on carbs! I love hot bread too much to cut it out of my diet! My eating habits are still not very good or very healthy (though a bit more than they used to be since we now cook dinner most nights instead of eating out), and I still indulge on junk food when it fits my daily goal. But using a scale and paying attention to portion sizes and how much of what I'm eating is the main thing that's helped me. What worked for me isn't going to work for everyone by any means, but I'm describing it to let you know that cutting carbs isn't a be-all-end-all solution for weight loss. Nor is cutting fat, or cutting sugar, or eating at specific times or whatever. If something like that helps you, more power to you. But at the heart of any proper diet change for weight loss is CICO.
When I mention our ancestors it wasnt to take it litterally but some guys here cant get the point without explanation. What I meant is that our ancestors they could manage a healthy weight without measuring weight because they where eating according to their gene evolution and yes they whereactive but this is secondary. Nowadays our genome didnt evoluate in the same speed as our nutritional intake we are bombarding our body with carbs (mainly fructose and corn syrup) where we dont have an enzyme that can digest it and that is why it turns into fat. That is why we always return to our main point ``Are all calories the same``
What in the actual *kitten*?
0 -
Could the OP be losing muscle?
If the above is accurate, could the OP be losing muscle?I am sorry but I dont believe in calori deficit pe se. Our body always adapt to new conditions and tends to increase or decrese its basal metabolism accordingly. One year ago I can create a caloric deficit by consuming 2500 cal. For the last 4 month I have to go less than 1400- 1500cal which is so hard to maintain.
0 -
Sarasmaintaining wrote: »Scaling food is not an option for me I dont think our ancestors were measuring their food. We have to eat right and when we eat right we will be always in a balanace CICO.
You're really making this a lot harder on yourself than it needs to be. Suck it up, spend $15 on a food scale and get a better idea of where you're at in terms of calories consumed. You need to get an accurate starting point, in order to pin down where you've gone off track. You posted because you're not moving forward and everyone is telling you the same thing, including people who've successfully lost the weight and are now maintaining. Don't you think we might actually know what we're talking about here?
Eta: the whole intuitive eating thing is what got most of us here in the first place. It's also obviously not working out so great for you either, or you wouldn't be stuck where you're at.
Second this. I thought I had a good handle on how much I was eating until I actually started using a scale. Boy, was I wrong!!
And yes, our ancestors didn't measure their food. They spent the day growing/hunting it, thus using a lot more calories than the average person now. So why discount a very good way of helping you lose weight simply because people in the past didn't have it? Are you going to give up every bit of modern society simply because it wasn't done that way hundreds of years ago? I see nothing wrong with using every tool you can to help you lose weight and become healthier.
And for the record, most of my weight loss was done with JUST calorie counting. I can't do IF because it'll cause my blood sugar to crash (borderline hypoglycemic), I didn't substitute very much in way of foods, and I certainly didn't cut back on carbs! I love hot bread too much to cut it out of my diet! My eating habits are still not very good or very healthy (though a bit more than they used to be since we now cook dinner most nights instead of eating out), and I still indulge on junk food when it fits my daily goal. But using a scale and paying attention to portion sizes and how much of what I'm eating is the main thing that's helped me. What worked for me isn't going to work for everyone by any means, but I'm describing it to let you know that cutting carbs isn't a be-all-end-all solution for weight loss. Nor is cutting fat, or cutting sugar, or eating at specific times or whatever. If something like that helps you, more power to you. But at the heart of any proper diet change for weight loss is CICO.
When I mention our ancestors it wasnt to take it litterally but some guys here cant get the point without explanation. What I meant is that our ancestors they could manage a healthy weight without measuring weight because they where eating according to their gene evolution and yes they whereactive but this is secondary. Nowadays our genome didnt evoluate in the same speed as our nutritional intake we are bombarding our body with carbs (mainly fructose and corn syrup) where we dont have an enzyme that can digest it and that is why it turns into fat. That is why we always return to our main point ``Are all calories the same``
What, in the actual...?
wait or genomes ovulate now????
Be careful when taking antibiotics while your genomes ovulate, because it will break down the enzymes that fight off fat and you'll end up with an unwanted food baby. Or so I read somewhere.0 -
Sarasmaintaining wrote: »Scaling food is not an option for me I dont think our ancestors were measuring their food. We have to eat right and when we eat right we will be always in a balanace CICO.
You're really making this a lot harder on yourself than it needs to be. Suck it up, spend $15 on a food scale and get a better idea of where you're at in terms of calories consumed. You need to get an accurate starting point, in order to pin down where you've gone off track. You posted because you're not moving forward and everyone is telling you the same thing, including people who've successfully lost the weight and are now maintaining. Don't you think we might actually know what we're talking about here?
Eta: the whole intuitive eating thing is what got most of us here in the first place. It's also obviously not working out so great for you either, or you wouldn't be stuck where you're at.
Second this. I thought I had a good handle on how much I was eating until I actually started using a scale. Boy, was I wrong!!
And yes, our ancestors didn't measure their food. They spent the day growing/hunting it, thus using a lot more calories than the average person now. So why discount a very good way of helping you lose weight simply because people in the past didn't have it? Are you going to give up every bit of modern society simply because it wasn't done that way hundreds of years ago? I see nothing wrong with using every tool you can to help you lose weight and become healthier.
And for the record, most of my weight loss was done with JUST calorie counting. I can't do IF because it'll cause my blood sugar to crash (borderline hypoglycemic), I didn't substitute very much in way of foods, and I certainly didn't cut back on carbs! I love hot bread too much to cut it out of my diet! My eating habits are still not very good or very healthy (though a bit more than they used to be since we now cook dinner most nights instead of eating out), and I still indulge on junk food when it fits my daily goal. But using a scale and paying attention to portion sizes and how much of what I'm eating is the main thing that's helped me. What worked for me isn't going to work for everyone by any means, but I'm describing it to let you know that cutting carbs isn't a be-all-end-all solution for weight loss. Nor is cutting fat, or cutting sugar, or eating at specific times or whatever. If something like that helps you, more power to you. But at the heart of any proper diet change for weight loss is CICO.
When I mention our ancestors it wasnt to take it litterally but some guys here cant get the point without explanation. What I meant is that our ancestors they could manage a healthy weight without measuring weight because they where eating according to their gene evolution and yes they whereactive but this is secondary. Nowadays our genome didnt evoluate in the same speed as our nutritional intake we are bombarding our body with carbs (mainly fructose and corn syrup) where we dont have an enzyme that can digest it and that is why it turns into fat. That is why we always return to our main point ``Are all calories the same``
0 -
Sarasmaintaining wrote: »Scaling food is not an option for me I dont think our ancestors were measuring their food. We have to eat right and when we eat right we will be always in a balanace CICO.
You're really making this a lot harder on yourself than it needs to be. Suck it up, spend $15 on a food scale and get a better idea of where you're at in terms of calories consumed. You need to get an accurate starting point, in order to pin down where you've gone off track. You posted because you're not moving forward and everyone is telling you the same thing, including people who've successfully lost the weight and are now maintaining. Don't you think we might actually know what we're talking about here?
Eta: the whole intuitive eating thing is what got most of us here in the first place. It's also obviously not working out so great for you either, or you wouldn't be stuck where you're at.
Second this. I thought I had a good handle on how much I was eating until I actually started using a scale. Boy, was I wrong!!
And yes, our ancestors didn't measure their food. They spent the day growing/hunting it, thus using a lot more calories than the average person now. So why discount a very good way of helping you lose weight simply because people in the past didn't have it? Are you going to give up every bit of modern society simply because it wasn't done that way hundreds of years ago? I see nothing wrong with using every tool you can to help you lose weight and become healthier.
And for the record, most of my weight loss was done with JUST calorie counting. I can't do IF because it'll cause my blood sugar to crash (borderline hypoglycemic), I didn't substitute very much in way of foods, and I certainly didn't cut back on carbs! I love hot bread too much to cut it out of my diet! My eating habits are still not very good or very healthy (though a bit more than they used to be since we now cook dinner most nights instead of eating out), and I still indulge on junk food when it fits my daily goal. But using a scale and paying attention to portion sizes and how much of what I'm eating is the main thing that's helped me. What worked for me isn't going to work for everyone by any means, but I'm describing it to let you know that cutting carbs isn't a be-all-end-all solution for weight loss. Nor is cutting fat, or cutting sugar, or eating at specific times or whatever. If something like that helps you, more power to you. But at the heart of any proper diet change for weight loss is CICO.
When I mention our ancestors it wasnt to take it litterally but some guys here cant get the point without explanation. What I meant is that our ancestors they could manage a healthy weight without measuring weight because they where eating according to their gene evolution and yes they whereactive but this is secondary. Nowadays our genome didnt evoluate in the same speed as our nutritional intake we are bombarding our body with carbs (mainly fructose and corn syrup) where we dont have an enzyme that can digest it and that is why it turns into fat. That is why we always return to our main point ``Are all calories the same``
That doesn't really make any sense. Are you saying evolution is responsible for making people fat?0 -
Sarasmaintaining wrote: »Scaling food is not an option for me I dont think our ancestors were measuring their food. We have to eat right and when we eat right we will be always in a balanace CICO.
You're really making this a lot harder on yourself than it needs to be. Suck it up, spend $15 on a food scale and get a better idea of where you're at in terms of calories consumed. You need to get an accurate starting point, in order to pin down where you've gone off track. You posted because you're not moving forward and everyone is telling you the same thing, including people who've successfully lost the weight and are now maintaining. Don't you think we might actually know what we're talking about here?
Eta: the whole intuitive eating thing is what got most of us here in the first place. It's also obviously not working out so great for you either, or you wouldn't be stuck where you're at.
Second this. I thought I had a good handle on how much I was eating until I actually started using a scale. Boy, was I wrong!!
And yes, our ancestors didn't measure their food. They spent the day growing/hunting it, thus using a lot more calories than the average person now. So why discount a very good way of helping you lose weight simply because people in the past didn't have it? Are you going to give up every bit of modern society simply because it wasn't done that way hundreds of years ago? I see nothing wrong with using every tool you can to help you lose weight and become healthier.
And for the record, most of my weight loss was done with JUST calorie counting. I can't do IF because it'll cause my blood sugar to crash (borderline hypoglycemic), I didn't substitute very much in way of foods, and I certainly didn't cut back on carbs! I love hot bread too much to cut it out of my diet! My eating habits are still not very good or very healthy (though a bit more than they used to be since we now cook dinner most nights instead of eating out), and I still indulge on junk food when it fits my daily goal. But using a scale and paying attention to portion sizes and how much of what I'm eating is the main thing that's helped me. What worked for me isn't going to work for everyone by any means, but I'm describing it to let you know that cutting carbs isn't a be-all-end-all solution for weight loss. Nor is cutting fat, or cutting sugar, or eating at specific times or whatever. If something like that helps you, more power to you. But at the heart of any proper diet change for weight loss is CICO.
When I mention our ancestors it wasnt to take it litterally but some guys here cant get the point without explanation. What I meant is that our ancestors they could manage a healthy weight without measuring weight because they where eating according to their gene evolution and yes they whereactive but this is secondary. Nowadays our genome didnt evoluate in the same speed as our nutritional intake we are bombarding our body with carbs (mainly fructose and corn syrup) where we dont have an enzyme that can digest it and that is why it turns into fat. That is why we always return to our main point ``Are all calories the same``
0 -
kmsoucy457 wrote: »Could the OP be losing muscle?
If the above is accurate, could the OP be losing muscle?I am sorry but I dont believe in calori deficit pe se. Our body always adapt to new conditions and tends to increase or decrese its basal metabolism accordingly. One year ago I can create a caloric deficit by consuming 2500 cal. For the last 4 month I have to go less than 1400- 1500cal which is so hard to maintain.
The OP claims to have lost 37lbs in 40 days by eating 500 calories per day. So yes, probably.
0 -
kmsoucy457 wrote: »Could the OP be losing muscle?
If the above is accurate, could the OP be losing muscle?I am sorry but I dont believe in calori deficit pe se. Our body always adapt to new conditions and tends to increase or decrese its basal metabolism accordingly. One year ago I can create a caloric deficit by consuming 2500 cal. For the last 4 month I have to go less than 1400- 1500cal which is so hard to maintain.
The OP claims to have lost 37lbs in 40 days by eating 500 calories per day. So yes, probably.
I might think OP might have lost more muscle than fat. But this is all one big troll thread anyways.
0 -
yopeeps025 wrote: »kmsoucy457 wrote: »Could the OP be losing muscle?
If the above is accurate, could the OP be losing muscle?I am sorry but I dont believe in calori deficit pe se. Our body always adapt to new conditions and tends to increase or decrese its basal metabolism accordingly. One year ago I can create a caloric deficit by consuming 2500 cal. For the last 4 month I have to go less than 1400- 1500cal which is so hard to maintain.
The OP claims to have lost 37lbs in 40 days by eating 500 calories per day. So yes, probably.
I might think OP might have lost more muscle than fat. But this is all one big troll thread anyways.
do VLCD's affect brain matter too?0 -
-
yopeeps025 wrote: »kmsoucy457 wrote: »Could the OP be losing muscle?
If the above is accurate, could the OP be losing muscle?I am sorry but I dont believe in calori deficit pe se. Our body always adapt to new conditions and tends to increase or decrese its basal metabolism accordingly. One year ago I can create a caloric deficit by consuming 2500 cal. For the last 4 month I have to go less than 1400- 1500cal which is so hard to maintain.
The OP claims to have lost 37lbs in 40 days by eating 500 calories per day. So yes, probably.
I might think OP might have lost more muscle than fat. But this is all one big troll thread anyways.
do VLCD's affect brain matter too?
From personal experience I don't know.
0 -
Sarasmaintaining wrote: »Scaling food is not an option for me I dont think our ancestors were measuring their food. We have to eat right and when we eat right we will be always in a balanace CICO.
You're really making this a lot harder on yourself than it needs to be. Suck it up, spend $15 on a food scale and get a better idea of where you're at in terms of calories consumed. You need to get an accurate starting point, in order to pin down where you've gone off track. You posted because you're not moving forward and everyone is telling you the same thing, including people who've successfully lost the weight and are now maintaining. Don't you think we might actually know what we're talking about here?
Eta: the whole intuitive eating thing is what got most of us here in the first place. It's also obviously not working out so great for you either, or you wouldn't be stuck where you're at.
Second this. I thought I had a good handle on how much I was eating until I actually started using a scale. Boy, was I wrong!!
And yes, our ancestors didn't measure their food. They spent the day growing/hunting it, thus using a lot more calories than the average person now. So why discount a very good way of helping you lose weight simply because people in the past didn't have it? Are you going to give up every bit of modern society simply because it wasn't done that way hundreds of years ago? I see nothing wrong with using every tool you can to help you lose weight and become healthier.
And for the record, most of my weight loss was done with JUST calorie counting. I can't do IF because it'll cause my blood sugar to crash (borderline hypoglycemic), I didn't substitute very much in way of foods, and I certainly didn't cut back on carbs! I love hot bread too much to cut it out of my diet! My eating habits are still not very good or very healthy (though a bit more than they used to be since we now cook dinner most nights instead of eating out), and I still indulge on junk food when it fits my daily goal. But using a scale and paying attention to portion sizes and how much of what I'm eating is the main thing that's helped me. What worked for me isn't going to work for everyone by any means, but I'm describing it to let you know that cutting carbs isn't a be-all-end-all solution for weight loss. Nor is cutting fat, or cutting sugar, or eating at specific times or whatever. If something like that helps you, more power to you. But at the heart of any proper diet change for weight loss is CICO.
When I mention our ancestors it wasnt to take it litterally but some guys here cant get the point without explanation. What I meant is that our ancestors they could manage a healthy weight without measuring weight because they where eating according to their gene evolution and yes they whereactive but this is secondary. Nowadays our genome didnt evoluate in the same speed as our nutritional intake we are bombarding our body with carbs (mainly fructose and corn syrup) where we dont have an enzyme that can digest it and that is why it turns into fat. That is why we always return to our main point ``Are all calories the same``
0 -
Just to give everyone some perspective… this is from OP’s profile:
"I lost 37lb in 40 days(following 500cal per day). Now I live in low carb high fat diet “
But yeah, it’s all about maintaining that deficit. If you’re not doing that now, IF is unlikely to make a difference in and of itself.
P.S. OP, highly recommend you do some weight training. I shudder to think how much muscle mass you parted with.
What the actual..
Hopeless. This thread is hopeless.
0 -
may the broscience be with you OP.....0
-
Scaling food is not an option for me I dont think our ancestors were measuring their food. We have to eat right and when we eat right we will be always in a balanace CICO.
LOL wut??????
Why are you using a computer to track your calories then? I am pretty sure that they didn't do that either..
Ok, I am calling troll.
Yes0 -
This certainly seems troll-y to me, but to answer your question: Technically I only eat in a 9 hour window every day (breakfast at 8am and dinner at 5pm). I rarely eat after dinner. This isn't a conscientious decision, it's just what works with my schedule. I've had this schedule for years, and never lost a single pound until I started tracking CICO. I mean, I GUESS if I had eaten dinner at 4pm I would officially be doing 16:8 and perhaps I could have been losing weight all those years. But somehow I doubt that hour would have done anything without actually creating a deficit.
With that said, if you tend to overeat late night snacks, by all means create a schedule and stick to it (no eating after a certain time). It does help me stick to my calorie budget, but ultimately I still need to eat less.0 -
Sarasmaintaining wrote: »Scaling food is not an option for me I dont think our ancestors were measuring their food. We have to eat right and when we eat right we will be always in a balanace CICO.
You're really making this a lot harder on yourself than it needs to be. Suck it up, spend $15 on a food scale and get a better idea of where you're at in terms of calories consumed. You need to get an accurate starting point, in order to pin down where you've gone off track. You posted because you're not moving forward and everyone is telling you the same thing, including people who've successfully lost the weight and are now maintaining. Don't you think we might actually know what we're talking about here?
Eta: the whole intuitive eating thing is what got most of us here in the first place. It's also obviously not working out so great for you either, or you wouldn't be stuck where you're at.
Second this. I thought I had a good handle on how much I was eating until I actually started using a scale. Boy, was I wrong!!
And yes, our ancestors didn't measure their food. They spent the day growing/hunting it, thus using a lot more calories than the average person now. So why discount a very good way of helping you lose weight simply because people in the past didn't have it? Are you going to give up every bit of modern society simply because it wasn't done that way hundreds of years ago? I see nothing wrong with using every tool you can to help you lose weight and become healthier.
And for the record, most of my weight loss was done with JUST calorie counting. I can't do IF because it'll cause my blood sugar to crash (borderline hypoglycemic), I didn't substitute very much in way of foods, and I certainly didn't cut back on carbs! I love hot bread too much to cut it out of my diet! My eating habits are still not very good or very healthy (though a bit more than they used to be since we now cook dinner most nights instead of eating out), and I still indulge on junk food when it fits my daily goal. But using a scale and paying attention to portion sizes and how much of what I'm eating is the main thing that's helped me. What worked for me isn't going to work for everyone by any means, but I'm describing it to let you know that cutting carbs isn't a be-all-end-all solution for weight loss. Nor is cutting fat, or cutting sugar, or eating at specific times or whatever. If something like that helps you, more power to you. But at the heart of any proper diet change for weight loss is CICO.
When I mention our ancestors it wasnt to take it litterally but some guys here cant get the point without explanation. What I meant is that our ancestors they could manage a healthy weight without measuring weight because they where eating according to their gene evolution and yes they whereactive but this is secondary. Nowadays our genome didnt evoluate in the same speed as our nutritional intake we are bombarding our body with carbs (mainly fructose and corn syrup) where we dont have an enzyme that can digest it and that is why it turns into fat. That is why we always return to our main point ``Are all calories the same``
That doesn't really make any sense. Are you saying evolution is responsible for making people fat?
I mean our nutritional modification is much much faster than our genome evolution and IMO this is why We have all these metabolic syndrome( Obesity,Diabetes, Blood pressure,Gout......)
0 -
Sarasmaintaining wrote: »Scaling food is not an option for me I dont think our ancestors were measuring their food. We have to eat right and when we eat right we will be always in a balanace CICO.
You're really making this a lot harder on yourself than it needs to be. Suck it up, spend $15 on a food scale and get a better idea of where you're at in terms of calories consumed. You need to get an accurate starting point, in order to pin down where you've gone off track. You posted because you're not moving forward and everyone is telling you the same thing, including people who've successfully lost the weight and are now maintaining. Don't you think we might actually know what we're talking about here?
Eta: the whole intuitive eating thing is what got most of us here in the first place. It's also obviously not working out so great for you either, or you wouldn't be stuck where you're at.
Second this. I thought I had a good handle on how much I was eating until I actually started using a scale. Boy, was I wrong!!
And yes, our ancestors didn't measure their food. They spent the day growing/hunting it, thus using a lot more calories than the average person now. So why discount a very good way of helping you lose weight simply because people in the past didn't have it? Are you going to give up every bit of modern society simply because it wasn't done that way hundreds of years ago? I see nothing wrong with using every tool you can to help you lose weight and become healthier.
And for the record, most of my weight loss was done with JUST calorie counting. I can't do IF because it'll cause my blood sugar to crash (borderline hypoglycemic), I didn't substitute very much in way of foods, and I certainly didn't cut back on carbs! I love hot bread too much to cut it out of my diet! My eating habits are still not very good or very healthy (though a bit more than they used to be since we now cook dinner most nights instead of eating out), and I still indulge on junk food when it fits my daily goal. But using a scale and paying attention to portion sizes and how much of what I'm eating is the main thing that's helped me. What worked for me isn't going to work for everyone by any means, but I'm describing it to let you know that cutting carbs isn't a be-all-end-all solution for weight loss. Nor is cutting fat, or cutting sugar, or eating at specific times or whatever. If something like that helps you, more power to you. But at the heart of any proper diet change for weight loss is CICO.
When I mention our ancestors it wasnt to take it litterally but some guys here cant get the point without explanation. What I meant is that our ancestors they could manage a healthy weight without measuring weight because they where eating according to their gene evolution and yes they whereactive but this is secondary. Nowadays our genome didnt evoluate in the same speed as our nutritional intake we are bombarding our body with carbs (mainly fructose and corn syrup) where we dont have an enzyme that can digest it and that is why it turns into fat. That is why we always return to our main point ``Are all calories the same``
That doesn't really make any sense. Are you saying evolution is responsible for making people fat?
I mean our nutritional modification is much much faster than our genome evolution and IMO this is why We have all these metabolic syndrome( Obesity,Diabetes, Blood pressure,Gout......)
If cavemen had Taco Bell they'd be just as fat as the rest of us.0 -
Yeah, we like to fall into the fallacy that we were, in some way, at the apex of health before we settled into a life of agriculture and trade. What's more likely is that diabetes was something that would have quickly killed anyone with the misfortune of having it at a very early age. Obesity and gout was something that a rare few, if anyone, would have the luxury of developing. Abundant harvests would be stored for harder times, not wasted in excess.
It's easy to forget the incredibly high infant mortality rate or that people were lucky to survive into their thirties. I can't help but think that we see the rise of conditions that were little heard of before simply due to our advanced medical knowledge. Before they would have quickly died. Now we can diagnose most things early and treat them while insuring a long lifespan.0 -
techgal128 wrote: »Sarasmaintaining wrote: »Scaling food is not an option for me I dont think our ancestors were measuring their food. We have to eat right and when we eat right we will be always in a balanace CICO.
You're really making this a lot harder on yourself than it needs to be. Suck it up, spend $15 on a food scale and get a better idea of where you're at in terms of calories consumed. You need to get an accurate starting point, in order to pin down where you've gone off track. You posted because you're not moving forward and everyone is telling you the same thing, including people who've successfully lost the weight and are now maintaining. Don't you think we might actually know what we're talking about here?
Eta: the whole intuitive eating thing is what got most of us here in the first place. It's also obviously not working out so great for you either, or you wouldn't be stuck where you're at.
Second this. I thought I had a good handle on how much I was eating until I actually started using a scale. Boy, was I wrong!!
And yes, our ancestors didn't measure their food. They spent the day growing/hunting it, thus using a lot more calories than the average person now. So why discount a very good way of helping you lose weight simply because people in the past didn't have it? Are you going to give up every bit of modern society simply because it wasn't done that way hundreds of years ago? I see nothing wrong with using every tool you can to help you lose weight and become healthier.
And for the record, most of my weight loss was done with JUST calorie counting. I can't do IF because it'll cause my blood sugar to crash (borderline hypoglycemic), I didn't substitute very much in way of foods, and I certainly didn't cut back on carbs! I love hot bread too much to cut it out of my diet! My eating habits are still not very good or very healthy (though a bit more than they used to be since we now cook dinner most nights instead of eating out), and I still indulge on junk food when it fits my daily goal. But using a scale and paying attention to portion sizes and how much of what I'm eating is the main thing that's helped me. What worked for me isn't going to work for everyone by any means, but I'm describing it to let you know that cutting carbs isn't a be-all-end-all solution for weight loss. Nor is cutting fat, or cutting sugar, or eating at specific times or whatever. If something like that helps you, more power to you. But at the heart of any proper diet change for weight loss is CICO.
When I mention our ancestors it wasnt to take it litterally but some guys here cant get the point without explanation. What I meant is that our ancestors they could manage a healthy weight without measuring weight because they where eating according to their gene evolution and yes they whereactive but this is secondary. Nowadays our genome didnt evoluate in the same speed as our nutritional intake we are bombarding our body with carbs (mainly fructose and corn syrup) where we dont have an enzyme that can digest it and that is why it turns into fat. That is why we always return to our main point ``Are all calories the same``
That doesn't really make any sense. Are you saying evolution is responsible for making people fat?
I mean our nutritional modification is much much faster than our genome evolution and IMO this is why We have all these metabolic syndrome( Obesity,Diabetes, Blood pressure,Gout......)
If cavemen had Taco Bell they'd be just as fat as the rest of us.
I almost want to get that tattooed on me.0 -
Sarasmaintaining wrote: »Scaling food is not an option for me I dont think our ancestors were measuring their food. We have to eat right and when we eat right we will be always in a balanace CICO.
You're really making this a lot harder on yourself than it needs to be. Suck it up, spend $15 on a food scale and get a better idea of where you're at in terms of calories consumed. You need to get an accurate starting point, in order to pin down where you've gone off track. You posted because you're not moving forward and everyone is telling you the same thing, including people who've successfully lost the weight and are now maintaining. Don't you think we might actually know what we're talking about here?
Eta: the whole intuitive eating thing is what got most of us here in the first place. It's also obviously not working out so great for you either, or you wouldn't be stuck where you're at.
Second this. I thought I had a good handle on how much I was eating until I actually started using a scale. Boy, was I wrong!!
And yes, our ancestors didn't measure their food. They spent the day growing/hunting it, thus using a lot more calories than the average person now. So why discount a very good way of helping you lose weight simply because people in the past didn't have it? Are you going to give up every bit of modern society simply because it wasn't done that way hundreds of years ago? I see nothing wrong with using every tool you can to help you lose weight and become healthier.
And for the record, most of my weight loss was done with JUST calorie counting. I can't do IF because it'll cause my blood sugar to crash (borderline hypoglycemic), I didn't substitute very much in way of foods, and I certainly didn't cut back on carbs! I love hot bread too much to cut it out of my diet! My eating habits are still not very good or very healthy (though a bit more than they used to be since we now cook dinner most nights instead of eating out), and I still indulge on junk food when it fits my daily goal. But using a scale and paying attention to portion sizes and how much of what I'm eating is the main thing that's helped me. What worked for me isn't going to work for everyone by any means, but I'm describing it to let you know that cutting carbs isn't a be-all-end-all solution for weight loss. Nor is cutting fat, or cutting sugar, or eating at specific times or whatever. If something like that helps you, more power to you. But at the heart of any proper diet change for weight loss is CICO.
When I mention our ancestors it wasnt to take it litterally but some guys here cant get the point without explanation. What I meant is that our ancestors they could manage a healthy weight without measuring weight because they where eating according to their gene evolution and yes they whereactive but this is secondary. Nowadays our genome didnt evoluate in the same speed as our nutritional intake we are bombarding our body with carbs (mainly fructose and corn syrup) where we dont have an enzyme that can digest it and that is why it turns into fat. That is why we always return to our main point ``Are all calories the same``
That doesn't really make any sense. Are you saying evolution is responsible for making people fat?
I mean our nutritional modification is much much faster than our genome evolution and IMO this is why We have all these metabolic syndrome( Obesity,Diabetes, Blood pressure,Gout......)
That still doesn't make sense to me. Obesity, diabetes and other problems did exist in the past. The reason we have so many people with those problems now isn't that they're new or somehow gotten worse, it's that people are living longer and there are treatments to compensate for those problems. Not to mention there's a LOT more people in the world now.
The biggest problem I see with how people eat now is they eat too much. Plus, it's cheaper to just eat canned and packaged foods, not to mention easier for families where both parents work (or just have one parent). We as a society have gotten used to restaurant portions as normal, which are way to much really, and since gathering of food means a simple trip to the grocery store once a week for most people instead of working in the field all day every day, our activity level has gone down. I know a lot of people talk about corn syrup and chemicals and everything messing up food, but it's really not. All it's done is made more varieties of food available for lower prices, which leads to us eating more. Quite simply, today's problems with obesity (with the rare exception of medical reasons) come down to the fact that we are eating a lot more and doing a lot less in terms of physical activity. In other words, more calories in than out.
And yeah, when I use 'society' I am talking about Americans, simply because that's what I know. I don't know much about the state of food service in other countries.
0 -
atypicalsmith wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »Exercise more. Everyone poo-poos exercise here, but it is calories in AND OUT. Walk. Ride a bike. Dance in front of the television. Do jumping jacks. Play ball with your kids or your neighbors' kids. Play golf. Go swimming. Run and run and run some more. Go hiking up a mountain. Take your kids to a playground and actually play with them. But most of all, stop eating too much!
If OP is not logging accurately more exercise is not going to matter. You can't out train a bad diet.
who is "poo-pooing" exercise...????
That was a while ago, when a lot of people were saying that exercise didn't count, but calories did.
I believe what everyone is saying, or was saying, is that exercise is not necessary for weight loss. You can create ad deficit without exercise, and lose weight.
However, for general health reasons everyone should do some of form of exercise that they enjoy.
Absolutely!0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »You've had the same intake for 18 months? How much weight have you lost?
As your weight decreases, you need to adjust your intake to account for your lighter body's lower TDEE.
If you have been eating the same amount of calories you ate when you were heavier, you're likely eating at maintenance.
You're not weighing your food, okay, whatever, looks like you won't budge on that... what metric to you use to gauge your calorie intake?
Love your new profile pic mamapeach!0 -
atypicalsmith wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »You've had the same intake for 18 months? How much weight have you lost?
As your weight decreases, you need to adjust your intake to account for your lighter body's lower TDEE.
If you have been eating the same amount of calories you ate when you were heavier, you're likely eating at maintenance.
You're not weighing your food, okay, whatever, looks like you won't budge on that... what metric to you use to gauge your calorie intake?
Love your new profile pic mamapeach!
Thanks!
0 -
If you are interested in intermittent fasting, John Romaniello is one of the biggest experts in this area and offers alot of blogs and solid science for how to achieve the results you want. Check out his programs, books or blogs at romanfitnesssystems.com
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions