Counting Cals vs Body's Natural Instinct

It actually reminds me of advice I was reading when I got my kids... that babies naturally stop drinking milk when they are full, but when moms add rice to their bottle to make them sleep longer, it messes it up and they will just learn to overeat.

Got to wonder if there's truth to it now. Of course all the moms I know who did that say it was BS, but who knows.

Francl27 wrote: »

It actually reminds me of advice I was reading when I got my kids... that babies naturally stop drinking milk when they are full, but when moms add rice to their bottle to make them sleep longer, it messes it up and they will just learn to overeat.

Got to wonder if there's truth to it now. Of course all the moms I know who did that say it was BS, but who knows.

I absolutely refused to put anything in my kids' bottles except for formula or milk. I always said If babies were ready to eat solid food, they could eat it from a spoon. With a sample size of 2 (lol) both my kids are at a great weight and stop eating when they are full. Who knows, they may have been this way even if i had put cereal in their bottles....but i look at all my friends who did that and all their kids are overweight, from the youngest, a 1 year old, to the oldest, to a 7 year old.

I did get a lot of nagging and forceful pressure to add stuff to my kids' bottles, though.

i think the "fullness" feeling is your brain responding to how much is in your stomach and not the nutrient content of what you eat. Foods today are so dense in calories, you could eat something that is the size of your fist and not be full but it would contain almost half your days worth of calories in it.

fat2fitaddict wrote: »

So I have never really been a fan of counting calories..until recently..about 2 months ago. But something I read the other day hit me pretty good and so I wanted to get your take on it as well!

The article was long and detailed but it basically stated that we as humans have a natural "cut off" or "calorie counter" built into us and that we should eat until full and that our bodies will tell us when to cut off the feed! It went on to even say that counting cals in his opinion was a eater disorder within itself. The article concluded by stating that the problem with obesity isn't that our internal cut off alarm doesn't work, but rather that we fail to listen to it and adhere by it. He also stated that it's not always our faults as foods today (sugary, additive, etc) are basically hijacking and short circuiting our system. Causing us to continue eating after we have had enough.

What's your thoughts on this? Should we be "less conscience" on cals and MORE CONSCIENCE on our internal switch?

It all comes down to how serious you are about your program, how precise you want your results to be, and what exactly you define as ”counting calories” in the first place.

What exactly are calories anyway?

Calories are simply a measurement of the total amount of energy contained in the foods you eat.

If your goal is to burn fat, you need to create a calorie deficit by burning more calories than you consume. If your goal is to build muscle, you need to create a calorie surplus by consuming more calories than you burn (as some of you, may already know). It's all about the numbers.

This is the most foundational, fundamental dietary principle there is and it must be followed if you want to see progress. It’s not that cut and dry, though. There is also an optimal range that you’ll want to hit in order to achieve the best results. If you’re not counting calories in any real way, there’s a decent chance you’ll get the deficit/surplus aspect met (though even this fails in a lot of cases), but a pretty good chance that it won’t be in the optimal range.

What are the consequences of this?

Well, if your goal is fat loss, and your deficit is less than 15-20%, you simply won’t lose fat at your maximum potential. If it’s greater than 15-20%, you’ll still lose fat, but you’ll also lose an excessive amount of lean muscle tissue in the process.

If your goal is muscle gain, and your surplus is less than 15-20%, you won’t gain muscle at your maximum potential. If it’s greater than 15-20%, you’ll still gain muscle, but you’ll also gain an excessive amount of fat as well.

This is where counting calories comes into play. It’s a way to hit your diet with precision so that you:

a) Maximize fat loss while minimizing muscle loss.

Or

b) Maximize muscle gain while minimizing fat gain.

If you simply “wing” your diet, it’s going to be pretty hard, if not impossible to accomplish this.

One thing is for sure though, you definitely need some sort of system in place where you understand what your daily calorie/protein/carbohydrate/fat needs are and have a reasonably accurate idea of what you’re taking in through your diet. Otherwise, you’re just shooting darts with a blindfold.

Try to completely “wing” your diet and there’s a very good chance that you’ll be burning fat or building muscle well below your potential (or losing muscle/gaining fat to an excessive degree), or even worse, wasting your time in the gym altogether.

Proper fitness nutrition is not rocket-science, but don’t make the mistake of thinking that calories don’t matter. If you truly want to achieve an impressive, head-turning body, they absolutely do.

In the end, It’s really up to you. It depends how serious you are about your results and how much effort you're willing to put into your diet.

One of the reasons I have to count calories is that my "natural instinct" is to eat until I'm uncomfortably full, or until there's nothing left in sight to consume!

rankinsect wrote: »

I don't buy the premise that everyone has a functional hunger/satiety system. Yes, our bodies have evolved to regulate our weight by regulating our appetite, but our eyes also have evolved to correctly focus light, and yet how many people wear glasses or contacts?

Evolution is amazing but it's not perfect, particularly when circumstances have changed so much so quickly - we're far more sedentary and have access to far greater amounts of calories than ever before. A propensity to overeat would be an evolutionary advantage when famine and starvation were recurring threats, because those who stored excess fat in times of plenty would better weather the times of famine. Now we put the descendants of those people into a perpetual time of plenty.

^This^

ElkeKNJ wrote: »

i think it might be true for natural foods. I will never overeat on broccoli, but crisps..... I easily eat a family bag of those in one sitting.

I've actually binged on broccoli, lol. I seriously sat and ate an entire pound of broccoli florets in half an hour a few months ago. I ate until I was stuffed, so I know I overate. The 'damage', however, was only 160 calories. It's not about eating until your body's natural instinct tells you to stop. It's about making the right choices in what you eat.

"Naturally thin people". That made me laugh. I was recently accused of having a fast metabolism and great genes because of my weight (almost at GW). Pu-leeze! Hard work and exercise and MFP for 2 1/2 years except when I stopped counting and gained.

KingJmz wrote: »

i think the "fullness" feeling is your brain responding to how much is in your stomach and not the nutrient content of what you eat. Foods today are so dense in calories, you could eat something that is the size of your fist and not be full but it would contain almost half your days worth of calories in it.

This! Your body can't tell while you're eating whether or not you've eaten too many calories.

I agree to a point. I know lots of people that can eat what they want, stop when their full and are slim, I think that is how our bodies should work. I have tried listening to my body and eating like this while tracking calories as well out of curiosity and always seem to consume around 1500kcals, which is maintenance cals for my ideal weight. I would follow the Paul McKenna rules of eating very slowly, eating what I want not what I think I should and only eating when hungry, stopping when full. The problem is you have to be very attentive and can easily slip back into old habits.