CALORIE QUALITY
sarahbe89
Posts: 18 Member
I don't understand why there isn't more emphasis on the QUALITY of the calories people are eating. If you are eating 1,200 calories of JUNK like pizza ice cream and all kinds of processed foods it isn't going to give you the results of eating 1,200 calories of lean protein fruits and veggies and healthy fats. Just kind of agrivates me when I see people complain about not getting the results they want even when they are staying with in their calorie budget but than their food diary is filled with crap food. Thoughts? Do you think quality is just as important if not more so than quantity?
0
Replies
-
This has been covered in literally thousands of threads.
For weight loss, doesn't matter. For overall health, it matters. For most people in the real world, 80-90% from whole-type foods, the rest from treat-types of food.0 -
nope, its calories in vs calories out. I can get fat on natural foods too ya know, if I eat more than i burn.0
-
Actually it will give you the same results. But the type of food you eat will determine how well satisfied your appetite is. I can eat 1 burger for 600cals but a few bowls of broccoli for the same amount. Plus the brocolli has more nutritional value. But you will lose weight on either option because you need to create an energy deficit to lose.
Personally though, I would rather work in some foods I actually like and enjoy the weight loss. Even if I have to drink more water to keep me fuller then.
0 -
Oh and I wanted to add, weight loss can be stalled by junk food because it has more sodium. Which holds back water weight. 0
-
For fat loss, the quality of calories does not matter. CICO matters.
For optimum nutrition and health, eating a diet with a sufficient amount of the necessary nutrients matters.0 -
For weight loss, it's calories in/calories out. If you eat high quantities (that is, in excess of what you burn) of high quality foods, you probably won't be pleased with your results.0
-
ForestFairy022 wrote: »Actually it will give you the same results. But the type of food you eat will determine how well satisfied your appetite is. I can eat 1 burger for 600cals but a few bowls of broccoli for the same amount. Plus the brocolli has more nutritional value. But you will lose weight on either option because you need to create an energy deficit to lose.
Personally though, I would rather work in some foods I actually like and enjoy the weight loss. Even if I have to drink more water to keep me fuller then.
This.0 -
ForestFairy022 wrote: »Oh and I wanted to add, weight loss can be stalled by junk food because it has more sodium. Which holds back water weight.
Only in the same way that a woman's menstrual cycle or starting a new exercise regime can stall weight loss. Both result in the body temporarily storing water and therefore the scale won't go down, but it doesn't actually stop fat loss.0 -
Whole foods tend to make you fuller and provide more nutrients. You can lose weight eating anything, even only Twinkies like that professor guy. you won't be healthy but you will be skinny
0 -
-
DemoraFairy wrote: »ForestFairy022 wrote: »Oh and I wanted to add, weight loss can be stalled by junk food because it has more sodium. Which holds back water weight.
Only in the same way that a woman's menstrual cycle or starting a new exercise regime can stall weight loss. Both result in the body temporarily storing water and therefore the scale won't go down, but it doesn't actually stop fat loss.
Yes exactly. So people might *think* they aren't losing, but it's just because of water weight that the scale doesn't go down. And it will eventually
0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »This has been covered in literally thousands of threads.
For weight loss, doesn't matter. For overall health, it matters. For most people in the real world, 80-90% from whole-type foods, the rest from treat-types of food.
This^
I use my macros as guides, but I can have a piece of chocolate and I can have ice cream. Lifestyle changes for me are not about eating the "perfect" diet forever. My future (as a thin person) will not be zero chocolate and zero ice cream. I need to log ice cream (now) so I have a realistic idea of what a portion looks like.0 -
ForestFairy022 wrote: »DemoraFairy wrote: »ForestFairy022 wrote: »Oh and I wanted to add, weight loss can be stalled by junk food because it has more sodium. Which holds back water weight.
Only in the same way that a woman's menstrual cycle or starting a new exercise regime can stall weight loss. Both result in the body temporarily storing water and therefore the scale won't go down, but it doesn't actually stop fat loss.
Yes exactly. So people might *think* they aren't losing, but it's just because of water weight that the scale doesn't go down. And it will eventually
Ah right, I thought you were saying that eating salty foods was bad for weight loss. Which I found a bit confusing since your post just before that one was saying that only calories matter lol.0 -
Isn't the ultimate goal to be HEALTHY though? Or am I the only one who thinks like that? I'm all for having the occasional treat but I'm not going to fill up my daily calories with junk. But that's just me.0
-
DemoraFairy wrote: »ForestFairy022 wrote: »DemoraFairy wrote: »ForestFairy022 wrote: »Oh and I wanted to add, weight loss can be stalled by junk food because it has more sodium. Which holds back water weight.
Only in the same way that a woman's menstrual cycle or starting a new exercise regime can stall weight loss. Both result in the body temporarily storing water and therefore the scale won't go down, but it doesn't actually stop fat loss.
Yes exactly. So people might *think* they aren't losing, but it's just because of water weight that the scale doesn't go down. And it will eventually
Ah right, I thought you were saying that eating salty foods was bad for weight loss. Which I found a bit confusing since your post just before that one was saying that only calories matter lol.
Sorry, haha I was walking and trying not to be run over by a truck while texting
0 -
-
It's the other way around. If you are eating only junk, 1200 calories will not be much. Anyone claiming to eat only 1200 calories of only junk and not losing weight, is lying (I mean... "not in accordance with what is correct").
Edit: You have to specify what you mean by "results". For weight loss, calories is everything. For health, it's more complex.0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
Nobody here has ever said to just eat junk. They said work it into your calories, eat it in moderation. Many people misinterpret that as them saying hey! Let's live of burgers and pizza!
(I totally live of burgers and pizza but they are my own homemade healthy ones, so please reserve judgement)
0 -
Let's take two guys of fairly equal size and fitness level. We put both guys on the same training program and allow each man to eat 3,000 calories per day.
Guy A can only get his calories from lean meats and fish; fresh fruits and vegetables; and sweet potatoes and brown rice.
Guy B can only get his calories from candy, ice cream and fast food.
After eight weeks, who do you think is going to look and perform better?0 -
"Healthy" can have many meanings. Check out the twinkie professor link. His LDLs went DOWN eating a diet of 67% foods from a convenience store. His body fat% went from 33 to 30%. His health markers basically all improved BECAUSE he lost weight (in this case 27 lbs) not because of what foods he ate. -- At least that's the take away I myself take away.0
-
"Misinterpret" or "purposefully distort"?ForestFairy022 wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
Nobody here has ever said to just eat junk. They said work it into your calories, eat it in moderation. Many people misinterpret that as them saying hey! Let's live of burgers and pizza!
(I totally live of burgers and pizza but they are my own homemade healthy ones, so please reserve judgement)
0 -
Isn't the ultimate goal to be HEALTHY though? Or am I the only one who thinks like that? I'm all for having the occasional treat but I'm not going to fill up my daily calories with junk. But that's just me.
I think it's really bizarre to assume everyone has the same ultimate goal. Humans are a pretty diverse lot.
0 -
kommodevaran wrote: »It's the other way around. If you are eating only junk, 1200 calories will not be much. Anyone claiming to eat only 1200 calories of only junk and not losing weight, is lying (I mean... "not in accordance with what is correct").
Depends on your definition of junk food, but some would say what I ate when I lost most of my weight was all junk. I was at uni and lived exclusively on microwave meals, pub food and take outs. I counted as accurately as I could (like, I weighed my take away foods, but had to go for a generic 'egg fried rice' option because obviously don't know the exact recipe the take away used) and my rate of loss at 1200 a day coincides with what most calculators recon my TDEE is.0 -
3stepsahead wrote: »Let's take two guys of fairly equal size and fitness level. We put both guys on the same training program and allow each man to eat 3,000 calories per day.
Guy A can only get his calories from lean meats and fish; fresh fruits and vegetables; and sweet potatoes and brown rice.
Guy B can only get his calories from candy, ice cream and fast food.
After eight weeks, who do you think is going to look and perform better?
Why does it always have to be just one or the other?....I believe in a happy medium and have had much success with it. I am about to compete in a bodybuilding show (masters figure division), so I feel that I may be able to back up what I am saying.0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
"Misinterpret" or "purposefully distort"?ForestFairy022 wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
Nobody here has ever said to just eat junk. They said work it into your calories, eat it in moderation. Many people misinterpret that as them saying hey! Let's live of burgers and pizza!
(I totally live of burgers and pizza but they are my own homemade healthy ones, so please reserve judgement)
I'd like to think of it as a lack of reading comprehension. Teeheehee0 -
What if Guy A binges because of the ridiculous restriction he's placed on himself? Apart from that, if Guy B gets enough protein from the fast food and ice cream... they'd look and perform indistinguishably if they both stuck to their respective diets.3stepsahead wrote: »Let's take two guys of fairly equal size and fitness level. We put both guys on the same training program and allow each man to eat 3,000 calories per day.
Guy A can only get his calories from lean meats and fish; fresh fruits and vegetables; and sweet potatoes and brown rice.
Guy B can only get his calories from candy, ice cream and fast food.
After eight weeks, who do you think is going to look and perform better?
Also, false dichotomy is false.
0 -
From all theDeguelloTex wrote: »
from all the responses to the original post.0 -
3stepsahead wrote: »Let's take two guys of fairly equal size and fitness level. We put both guys on the same training program and allow each man to eat 3,000 calories per day.
Guy A can only get his calories from lean meats and fish; fresh fruits and vegetables; and sweet potatoes and brown rice.
Guy B can only get his calories from candy, ice cream and fast food.
After eight weeks, who do you think is going to look and perform better?
Guy B because he will have lost weight.
Guy A gave up on his restrictive diet and binged, went waaay over on his calories and actually *gained* weight.
Moderation is key. Incorporating some of the foods you love into your daily 'budget' is the way most people manage to lose weight, stay healthy *and* keep their sanity. It's a balance. 0 -
From all theDeguelloTex wrote: »
from all the responses to the original post.
We all pursue our own version of what we decide "healthy" is and/or what's sustainable for our lifestyle.0 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »3stepsahead wrote: »Let's take two guys of fairly equal size and fitness level. We put both guys on the same training program and allow each man to eat 3,000 calories per day.
Guy A can only get his calories from lean meats and fish; fresh fruits and vegetables; and sweet potatoes and brown rice.
Guy B can only get his calories from candy, ice cream and fast food.
After eight weeks, who do you think is going to look and perform better?
Guy B because he will have lost weight.
Guy A gave up on his restrictive diet and binged, went waaay over on his calories and actually *gained* weight.
Moderation is key. Incorporating the foods you love into your daily 'budget' is the way most people manage to lose weight and keep their sanity. It's a balance.
There's that "moderation" word again - you see? I wasn't delusional when I said nobody here advocates eating JUST "junk food".0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions