You NEED to stop calorie counting and restricting!
Replies
-
Honestly, it is very difficult. We have some touting lots of protein. Others say LCHF. And I've also seen "carb up".1
-
WHY DO I KEEP READING THIS EVERYWHERE ONLINE?
Calorie counting on MFP has been a game changer for me and it's so irritating when people keep saying calories don't matter and you can eat as much as you want of "healthy" foods and still lose weight
Thoughts??
I used to be an adamant believer of CICO, and I still believe the math/science behind it is sound. However, now I'm pregnant and I have gestational diabetes, and I have been forced to count my carbs and calories. I have to be extremely careful with my carb intake so that I don't spike my blood sugar, because I want my gestational diabetes to be diet controlled.
There's something that I've notice from eating the way that I have. I've adopted a diet that cuts out the majority of refined sugars, grains, and white starches from my diet--not because I don't like them, but they always consistently make my blood sugar spike. Now I'm eating a diet that consists primarily of full-fat dairy, fresh fruits, fresh veggies, and meat. My dietician put my on a 2,300-calorie diet because I need to gain weight during the last three months of my pregnancy, and I haven't gained any weight yet, so I still have a long way to go in the weight-gain department. And I've noticed that, pretty much every day, no matter how hard I try, I can't meet my calorie requirement on this diet. I was almost able to do it yesterday because I ordered a bunless Baconator at Wendy's, but I couldn't finish it!
Moral of the story? I still believe counting calories works when you want to lose weight, but I've had such a hard time eating the right amount of calories on a low-carb diet that I'm beginning to think that it may be a legitimate way for me to lose weight after this baby is born. I'll certainly be trying to back that up with logging, but if I'm losing without feeling the need to go hungry, why bother?4 -
Yes, yes and YES.lissadecker wrote: »So, I'm a little late to this party, but, based on my own limited experience, I think that taking the focus off of calorie counting and restriction early on in a weight loss journey can be beneficial for some. Jumping right in to exercise routines and food scales and calorie counting can be overwhelming for people, especially people who are already busy with jobs and parenting and life in general. We all have our habits and routines and carving out time for something new can be a challenge. For me, my main concern is getting healthy. That just happens to include losing weight. I started by simply switching to a healthier diet with no regard for calorie counting and no specific exercise regime. I simply stopped eating high fat, high carb, sugar-laden processed foods. Instead, I went on what I called a "mostly vegan" diet that consisted primarily of vegetables plus some fruit and little to no animal products. I lost weight - about 25 pounds over the course of 8 to 12 weeks. During that time, I also kicked the soda habit and drink water almost exclusively now. My sporadic exercise developed into an actual daily routine. I started writing down what I ate. I ended up on MFP only because I wanted a simpler way to log my food. However, after joining and logging with MFP for a short time, it was very easy to switch to starting to count calories which I do now.
My point is that if I had tried to start with calorie counting and restriction and an exercise regime then I think it would have been too many changes too quickly and I would have been less likely to stick to it. I would have likely failed by now as I have many times in the past. For me, it was a way to get pointed in the right direction and begin building the healthy habits that are going to help me to succeed in the end. I don't think it is a strategy that would necessarily continue to work long term. I am sure that it would not for me, even given my initial success. Science is science, after all. Some people may find it difficult to eat an abundance of calories from "healthy" sources, but I can eat quite a bit so, at some point, I was destined to be a calorie counter again if I was going to make this work. However, beginning with a simple diet shift does a few things that help put a person on the path to success. It builds good eating habits, nourishes the body, and motivates with a taste of success. So I think it can be a good beginning strategy, especially for people who are very obese and poorly nourished, as I was. It sure as hell isn't going to hurt.1 -
lissadecker wrote: »So, I'm a little late to this party, but, based on my own limited experience, I think that taking the focus off of calorie counting and restriction early on in a weight loss journey can be beneficial for some. Jumping right in to exercise routines and food scales and calorie counting can be overwhelming for people, especially people who are already busy with jobs and parenting and life in general. We all have our habits and routines and carving out time for something new can be a challenge. For me, my main concern is getting healthy. That just happens to include losing weight. I started by simply switching to a healthier diet with no regard for calorie counting and no specific exercise regime. I simply stopped eating high fat, high carb, sugar-laden processed foods. Instead, I went on what I called a "mostly vegan" diet that consisted primarily of vegetables plus some fruit and little to no animal products. I lost weight - about 25 pounds over the course of 8 to 12 weeks. During that time, I also kicked the soda habit and drink water almost exclusively now. My sporadic exercise developed into an actual daily routine. I started writing down what I ate. I ended up on MFP only because I wanted a simpler way to log my food. However, after joining and logging with MFP for a short time, it was very easy to switch to starting to count calories which I do now.
My point is that if I had tried to start with calorie counting and restriction and an exercise regime then I think it would have been too many changes too quickly and I would have been less likely to stick to it. I would have likely failed by now as I have many times in the past. For me, it was a way to get pointed in the right direction and begin building the healthy habits that are going to help me to succeed in the end. I don't think it is a strategy that would necessarily continue to work long term. I am sure that it would not for me, even given my initial success. Science is science, after all. Some people may find it difficult to eat an abundance of calories from "healthy" sources, but I can eat quite a bit so, at some point, I was destined to be a calorie counter again if I was going to make this work. However, beginning with a simple diet shift does a few things that help put a person on the path to success. It builds good eating habits, nourishes the body, and motivates with a taste of success. So I think it can be a good beginning strategy, especially for people who are very obese and poorly nourished, as I was. It sure as hell isn't going to hurt.
I lost my first 50 lbs while counting calories, barely weighing any food, living mostly on lean cuisine, hot pockets, and fast food. My bloodwork and physical fitness improved significantly. The beginning is where you can screw off the most and still have good results (if you're significantly overweight) so there's no reason for it to be overwhelming. You can learn as you go in baby steps and still be making progress the whole time.10 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »MissusMoon wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »Here's a guy who ate a huge caloric surplus (high fat, little carb) for a month, and didn't gain weight. How can that be?
Summary: "Here is a difference between overeating and overeating.
When eating bad carbohydrates it’s easy to gain weight quickly. You’ll get plenty of the fat-storing hormone insulin in your blood.
It’s generally hard to gain weight on an LCHF diet. It’s even difficult to eat too much food, as you then usually have to eat more than you want. Even if you force down large amounts of LCHF-food, against your will, the result is usually as it was for Feltham. It’s a constant struggle and weight gain will likely be modest.
Overweight people eating as much as they want on an LCHF diet will typically lose weight."
http://thehealthhelp.co/what-happens-if-you-eat-5800-calories-daily-on-an-lchf-diet/
The claims in this link are just that: claims. Unless this person is working out enough to maintain they are not consuming that much without gaining weight. No one can defy science.
I was eating LCHF and it got me to Obese II. Meats, cheeses, nuts, avocados. Very little refined sugar, and flour and rice products were an extreme rarity.
The "science" this dude spouts is woo. Nutritionally speaking a calorie is not a calorie. But with weight, your body processes a calorie from any source the same way. It is an EXCESS of anything that causes fat storage. There are a lot of articles and such. There is no solid science unless you are talking about a few very specific health issues.
TL;DR version: Subject of the article is not being honest.
Well if you want to believe that eating 1,500 calories of donuts for six months (yes, I know nobody is recommending that) or 1,500 calories of mostly healthy food for six months will result in the same weight loss, be my guest.
Here is one of thousands of articles that says you are absolutely wrong. And he's not selling anything.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/09/fed-up-asks-are-all-calories-equal/
Um...actually if you ate 1500 calories of just donuts a day and it's lower than your weight threshold then, yes, you will lose weight.
But you'll also suffer from extreme malnutrition from not eating the right foods
Calorie in calorie out.
A calorie is a calorie9 -
-
Annahbananas wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »MissusMoon wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »Here's a guy who ate a huge caloric surplus (high fat, little carb) for a month, and didn't gain weight. How can that be?
Summary: "Here is a difference between overeating and overeating.
When eating bad carbohydrates it’s easy to gain weight quickly. You’ll get plenty of the fat-storing hormone insulin in your blood.
It’s generally hard to gain weight on an LCHF diet. It’s even difficult to eat too much food, as you then usually have to eat more than you want. Even if you force down large amounts of LCHF-food, against your will, the result is usually as it was for Feltham. It’s a constant struggle and weight gain will likely be modest.
Overweight people eating as much as they want on an LCHF diet will typically lose weight."
http://thehealthhelp.co/what-happens-if-you-eat-5800-calories-daily-on-an-lchf-diet/
The claims in this link are just that: claims. Unless this person is working out enough to maintain they are not consuming that much without gaining weight. No one can defy science.
I was eating LCHF and it got me to Obese II. Meats, cheeses, nuts, avocados. Very little refined sugar, and flour and rice products were an extreme rarity.
The "science" this dude spouts is woo. Nutritionally speaking a calorie is not a calorie. But with weight, your body processes a calorie from any source the same way. It is an EXCESS of anything that causes fat storage. There are a lot of articles and such. There is no solid science unless you are talking about a few very specific health issues.
TL;DR version: Subject of the article is not being honest.
Well if you want to believe that eating 1,500 calories of donuts for six months (yes, I know nobody is recommending that) or 1,500 calories of mostly healthy food for six months will result in the same weight loss, be my guest.
Here is one of thousands of articles that says you are absolutely wrong. And he's not selling anything.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/09/fed-up-asks-are-all-calories-equal/
Um...actually if you ate 1500 calories of just donuts a day and it's lower than your weight threshold then, yes, you will lose weight.
But you'll also suffer from extreme malnutrition from not eating the right foods
Calorie in calorie out.
A calorie is a calorie
Amen! Freelee keeps saying all cals are not created equal and I'm just like0 -
-
WHY DO I KEEP READING THIS EVERYWHERE ONLINE?
Calorie counting on MFP has been a game changer for me and it's so irritating when people keep saying calories don't matter and you can eat as much as you want of "healthy" foods and still lose weight
Thoughts??
I want their definition of "healthy".2 -
MissusMoon wrote: »
Yes yes this!2 -
WHY DO I KEEP READING THIS EVERYWHERE ONLINE?
Calorie counting on MFP has been a game changer for me and it's so irritating when people keep saying calories don't matter and you can eat as much as you want of "healthy" foods and still lose weight
Thoughts??
I want their definition of "healthy".
If your body craves it...?1 -
WHY DO I KEEP READING THIS EVERYWHERE ONLINE?
Calorie counting on MFP has been a game changer for me and it's so irritating when people keep saying calories don't matter and you can eat as much as you want of "healthy" foods and still lose weight
Thoughts??
I want their definition of "healthy".
If your body craves it...?
I crave the blood of my enemy, butttt apparently that's frowned upon in this establishment!!!!14 -
sashayoung72 wrote: »WHY DO I KEEP READING THIS EVERYWHERE ONLINE?
Calorie counting on MFP has been a game changer for me and it's so irritating when people keep saying calories don't matter and you can eat as much as you want of "healthy" foods and still lose weight
Thoughts??
I want their definition of "healthy".
If your body craves it...?
I crave the blood of my enemy, butttt apparently that's frowned upon in this establishment!!!!
I thought that's what MFP is known for!
6 -
also I can't find the calorie entry for it, dang it. actually i didn't look, it's probably in there somewhere.5
-
sashayoung72 wrote: »also I can't find the calorie entry for it, dang it. actually i didn't look, it's probably in there somewhere.
0 -
If you're already thin, you could still gain weight by eating healthy foods if you go over your required intake. It's really just basic mathematics. You burn 3500 calories below those your body naturally burns, you lose a pound. You consume 3500 over what your body burns, you gain a pound.
Of course it doesn't mean our calculations will give us the exact expected results. There's muscle weight, water retention, hormonal problems, etc. But generally, precisely, it's all about calories.
In fact there was a recent study where the researcher himself was the subject. For 6 months, he ate ALL SORTS of junk food but lowered his daily calorie intake. he lost weight.
Yes, of course, eating healthy is important for a lot of reasons- having sufficient nutrients, reducing risk of diseases, having better functioning, living longer, having a general healthier life, etc. But weight loss is just one element of fitness and it's affected by a single element- calories.1 -
Maria_Fatima wrote: »If you're already thin, you could still gain weight by eating healthy foods if you go over your required intake. It's really just basic mathematics. You burn 3500 calories below those your body naturally burns, you lose a pound. You consume 3500 over what your body burns, you gain a pound.
Of course it doesn't mean our calculations will give us the exact expected results. There's muscle weight, water retention, hormonal problems, etc. But generally, precisely, it's all about calories.
In fact there was a recent study where the researcher himself was the subject. For 6 months, he ate ALL SORTS of junk food but lowered his daily calorie intake. he lost weight.
Yes, of course, eating healthy is important for a lot of reasons- having sufficient nutrients, reducing risk of diseases, having better functioning, living longer, having a general healthier life, etc. But weight loss is just one element of fitness and it's affected by a single element- calories.
Amen!!2 -
Annahbananas wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »MissusMoon wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »Here's a guy who ate a huge caloric surplus (high fat, little carb) for a month, and didn't gain weight. How can that be?
Summary: "Here is a difference between overeating and overeating.
When eating bad carbohydrates it’s easy to gain weight quickly. You’ll get plenty of the fat-storing hormone insulin in your blood.
It’s generally hard to gain weight on an LCHF diet. It’s even difficult to eat too much food, as you then usually have to eat more than you want. Even if you force down large amounts of LCHF-food, against your will, the result is usually as it was for Feltham. It’s a constant struggle and weight gain will likely be modest.
Overweight people eating as much as they want on an LCHF diet will typically lose weight."
http://thehealthhelp.co/what-happens-if-you-eat-5800-calories-daily-on-an-lchf-diet/
The claims in this link are just that: claims. Unless this person is working out enough to maintain they are not consuming that much without gaining weight. No one can defy science.
I was eating LCHF and it got me to Obese II. Meats, cheeses, nuts, avocados. Very little refined sugar, and flour and rice products were an extreme rarity.
The "science" this dude spouts is woo. Nutritionally speaking a calorie is not a calorie. But with weight, your body processes a calorie from any source the same way. It is an EXCESS of anything that causes fat storage. There are a lot of articles and such. There is no solid science unless you are talking about a few very specific health issues.
TL;DR version: Subject of the article is not being honest.
Well if you want to believe that eating 1,500 calories of donuts for six months (yes, I know nobody is recommending that) or 1,500 calories of mostly healthy food for six months will result in the same weight loss, be my guest.
Here is one of thousands of articles that says you are absolutely wrong. And he's not selling anything.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/09/fed-up-asks-are-all-calories-equal/
Um...actually if you ate 1500 calories of just donuts a day and it's lower than your weight threshold then, yes, you will lose weight.
But you'll also suffer from extreme malnutrition from not eating the right foods
Calorie in calorie out.
A calorie is a calorie
Sorry, but a calorie is a calorie is a dated notion. Our bodies are not simple bunsen burners.
https://authoritynutrition.com/debunking-the-calorie-myth/0 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »Annahbananas wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »MissusMoon wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »Here's a guy who ate a huge caloric surplus (high fat, little carb) for a month, and didn't gain weight. How can that be?
Summary: "Here is a difference between overeating and overeating.
When eating bad carbohydrates it’s easy to gain weight quickly. You’ll get plenty of the fat-storing hormone insulin in your blood.
It’s generally hard to gain weight on an LCHF diet. It’s even difficult to eat too much food, as you then usually have to eat more than you want. Even if you force down large amounts of LCHF-food, against your will, the result is usually as it was for Feltham. It’s a constant struggle and weight gain will likely be modest.
Overweight people eating as much as they want on an LCHF diet will typically lose weight."
http://thehealthhelp.co/what-happens-if-you-eat-5800-calories-daily-on-an-lchf-diet/
The claims in this link are just that: claims. Unless this person is working out enough to maintain they are not consuming that much without gaining weight. No one can defy science.
I was eating LCHF and it got me to Obese II. Meats, cheeses, nuts, avocados. Very little refined sugar, and flour and rice products were an extreme rarity.
The "science" this dude spouts is woo. Nutritionally speaking a calorie is not a calorie. But with weight, your body processes a calorie from any source the same way. It is an EXCESS of anything that causes fat storage. There are a lot of articles and such. There is no solid science unless you are talking about a few very specific health issues.
TL;DR version: Subject of the article is not being honest.
Well if you want to believe that eating 1,500 calories of donuts for six months (yes, I know nobody is recommending that) or 1,500 calories of mostly healthy food for six months will result in the same weight loss, be my guest.
Here is one of thousands of articles that says you are absolutely wrong. And he's not selling anything.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/09/fed-up-asks-are-all-calories-equal/
Um...actually if you ate 1500 calories of just donuts a day and it's lower than your weight threshold then, yes, you will lose weight.
But you'll also suffer from extreme malnutrition from not eating the right foods
Calorie in calorie out.
A calorie is a calorie
Sorry, but a calorie is a calorie is a dated notion. Our bodies are not simple bunsen burners.
https://authoritynutrition.com/debunking-the-calorie-myth/
Wow! AuthorityNation is woo11 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »Annahbananas wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »MissusMoon wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »Here's a guy who ate a huge caloric surplus (high fat, little carb) for a month, and didn't gain weight. How can that be?
Summary: "Here is a difference between overeating and overeating.
When eating bad carbohydrates it’s easy to gain weight quickly. You’ll get plenty of the fat-storing hormone insulin in your blood.
It’s generally hard to gain weight on an LCHF diet. It’s even difficult to eat too much food, as you then usually have to eat more than you want. Even if you force down large amounts of LCHF-food, against your will, the result is usually as it was for Feltham. It’s a constant struggle and weight gain will likely be modest.
Overweight people eating as much as they want on an LCHF diet will typically lose weight."
http://thehealthhelp.co/what-happens-if-you-eat-5800-calories-daily-on-an-lchf-diet/
The claims in this link are just that: claims. Unless this person is working out enough to maintain they are not consuming that much without gaining weight. No one can defy science.
I was eating LCHF and it got me to Obese II. Meats, cheeses, nuts, avocados. Very little refined sugar, and flour and rice products were an extreme rarity.
The "science" this dude spouts is woo. Nutritionally speaking a calorie is not a calorie. But with weight, your body processes a calorie from any source the same way. It is an EXCESS of anything that causes fat storage. There are a lot of articles and such. There is no solid science unless you are talking about a few very specific health issues.
TL;DR version: Subject of the article is not being honest.
Well if you want to believe that eating 1,500 calories of donuts for six months (yes, I know nobody is recommending that) or 1,500 calories of mostly healthy food for six months will result in the same weight loss, be my guest.
Here is one of thousands of articles that says you are absolutely wrong. And he's not selling anything.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/09/fed-up-asks-are-all-calories-equal/
Um...actually if you ate 1500 calories of just donuts a day and it's lower than your weight threshold then, yes, you will lose weight.
But you'll also suffer from extreme malnutrition from not eating the right foods
Calorie in calorie out.
A calorie is a calorie
Sorry, but a calorie is a calorie is a dated notion. Our bodies are not simple bunsen burners.
https://authoritynutrition.com/debunking-the-calorie-myth/
do you run a blog too by the way? you sound exactly like someone I talked to earlier on another site and that person basically said the same thing, then proceeded to tell me that you can eat what you want as long as you are eating healthy because your body doesnt react the same way to all foods. then they went on to tell me to buy a book from a journalist gary taubes. then said that modern science was wrong and its not all about CICO and fructose makes you fat unless its from fruit yet,they lost weight cutting out all carbs and sugar. if that were true I would have not lost any weight to date.10 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »Annahbananas wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »MissusMoon wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »Here's a guy who ate a huge caloric surplus (high fat, little carb) for a month, and didn't gain weight. How can that be?
Summary: "Here is a difference between overeating and overeating.
When eating bad carbohydrates it’s easy to gain weight quickly. You’ll get plenty of the fat-storing hormone insulin in your blood.
It’s generally hard to gain weight on an LCHF diet. It’s even difficult to eat too much food, as you then usually have to eat more than you want. Even if you force down large amounts of LCHF-food, against your will, the result is usually as it was for Feltham. It’s a constant struggle and weight gain will likely be modest.
Overweight people eating as much as they want on an LCHF diet will typically lose weight."
http://thehealthhelp.co/what-happens-if-you-eat-5800-calories-daily-on-an-lchf-diet/
The claims in this link are just that: claims. Unless this person is working out enough to maintain they are not consuming that much without gaining weight. No one can defy science.
I was eating LCHF and it got me to Obese II. Meats, cheeses, nuts, avocados. Very little refined sugar, and flour and rice products were an extreme rarity.
The "science" this dude spouts is woo. Nutritionally speaking a calorie is not a calorie. But with weight, your body processes a calorie from any source the same way. It is an EXCESS of anything that causes fat storage. There are a lot of articles and such. There is no solid science unless you are talking about a few very specific health issues.
TL;DR version: Subject of the article is not being honest.
Well if you want to believe that eating 1,500 calories of donuts for six months (yes, I know nobody is recommending that) or 1,500 calories of mostly healthy food for six months will result in the same weight loss, be my guest.
Here is one of thousands of articles that says you are absolutely wrong. And he's not selling anything.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/09/fed-up-asks-are-all-calories-equal/
Um...actually if you ate 1500 calories of just donuts a day and it's lower than your weight threshold then, yes, you will lose weight.
But you'll also suffer from extreme malnutrition from not eating the right foods
Calorie in calorie out.
A calorie is a calorie
Sorry, but a calorie is a calorie is a dated notion. Our bodies are not simple bunsen burners.
https://authoritynutrition.com/debunking-the-calorie-myth/
Did you see my rebuttal to this in the other thread on page 3 of this very same thread?5 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »Annahbananas wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »MissusMoon wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »Here's a guy who ate a huge caloric surplus (high fat, little carb) for a month, and didn't gain weight. How can that be?
Summary: "Here is a difference between overeating and overeating.
When eating bad carbohydrates it’s easy to gain weight quickly. You’ll get plenty of the fat-storing hormone insulin in your blood.
It’s generally hard to gain weight on an LCHF diet. It’s even difficult to eat too much food, as you then usually have to eat more than you want. Even if you force down large amounts of LCHF-food, against your will, the result is usually as it was for Feltham. It’s a constant struggle and weight gain will likely be modest.
Overweight people eating as much as they want on an LCHF diet will typically lose weight."
http://thehealthhelp.co/what-happens-if-you-eat-5800-calories-daily-on-an-lchf-diet/
The claims in this link are just that: claims. Unless this person is working out enough to maintain they are not consuming that much without gaining weight. No one can defy science.
I was eating LCHF and it got me to Obese II. Meats, cheeses, nuts, avocados. Very little refined sugar, and flour and rice products were an extreme rarity.
The "science" this dude spouts is woo. Nutritionally speaking a calorie is not a calorie. But with weight, your body processes a calorie from any source the same way. It is an EXCESS of anything that causes fat storage. There are a lot of articles and such. There is no solid science unless you are talking about a few very specific health issues.
TL;DR version: Subject of the article is not being honest.
Well if you want to believe that eating 1,500 calories of donuts for six months (yes, I know nobody is recommending that) or 1,500 calories of mostly healthy food for six months will result in the same weight loss, be my guest.
Here is one of thousands of articles that says you are absolutely wrong. And he's not selling anything.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/09/fed-up-asks-are-all-calories-equal/
Um...actually if you ate 1500 calories of just donuts a day and it's lower than your weight threshold then, yes, you will lose weight.
But you'll also suffer from extreme malnutrition from not eating the right foods
Calorie in calorie out.
A calorie is a calorie
Sorry, but a calorie is a calorie is a dated notion. Our bodies are not simple bunsen burners.
https://authoritynutrition.com/debunking-the-calorie-myth/
I think everyone here can testify CICO is real...8 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »Annahbananas wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »MissusMoon wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »Here's a guy who ate a huge caloric surplus (high fat, little carb) for a month, and didn't gain weight. How can that be?
Summary: "Here is a difference between overeating and overeating.
When eating bad carbohydrates it’s easy to gain weight quickly. You’ll get plenty of the fat-storing hormone insulin in your blood.
It’s generally hard to gain weight on an LCHF diet. It’s even difficult to eat too much food, as you then usually have to eat more than you want. Even if you force down large amounts of LCHF-food, against your will, the result is usually as it was for Feltham. It’s a constant struggle and weight gain will likely be modest.
Overweight people eating as much as they want on an LCHF diet will typically lose weight."
http://thehealthhelp.co/what-happens-if-you-eat-5800-calories-daily-on-an-lchf-diet/
The claims in this link are just that: claims. Unless this person is working out enough to maintain they are not consuming that much without gaining weight. No one can defy science.
I was eating LCHF and it got me to Obese II. Meats, cheeses, nuts, avocados. Very little refined sugar, and flour and rice products were an extreme rarity.
The "science" this dude spouts is woo. Nutritionally speaking a calorie is not a calorie. But with weight, your body processes a calorie from any source the same way. It is an EXCESS of anything that causes fat storage. There are a lot of articles and such. There is no solid science unless you are talking about a few very specific health issues.
TL;DR version: Subject of the article is not being honest.
Well if you want to believe that eating 1,500 calories of donuts for six months (yes, I know nobody is recommending that) or 1,500 calories of mostly healthy food for six months will result in the same weight loss, be my guest.
Here is one of thousands of articles that says you are absolutely wrong. And he's not selling anything.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/09/fed-up-asks-are-all-calories-equal/
Um...actually if you ate 1500 calories of just donuts a day and it's lower than your weight threshold then, yes, you will lose weight.
But you'll also suffer from extreme malnutrition from not eating the right foods
Calorie in calorie out.
A calorie is a calorie
Sorry, but a calorie is a calorie is a dated notion. Our bodies are not simple bunsen burners.
https://authoritynutrition.com/debunking-the-calorie-myth/
Of course a calorie is a calorie. That's why we call it that. The body needs stuff besides calories, but calories are, you know, calories.11 -
If all you ate was healthy foods but you eat more calories than you burn, you'd still gain weight. Total calories at the end of the day will equal more weight.9
-
I haven't had any success with diets other than counting calories. It works for me, so I am sticking with it. To each their own.7
-
shortvixen09 wrote: »People can lose weight differently. Some lucky folks have the metabolism to do so. Some people say it don't matter what you eat, as looking as you work it off. However, you just can't go wrong with calories counting. Maybe tough at times but now that I think about, it's probably the most simple thing to do. I'd die if I had to work everything I WANT to eat off. Lol.
My sister is one of the "lucky" ones she can eat whatever she wants but she stays a stick, it's not sustainable though her metabolism will slow as she gets older and she's going to start gaining if she doesn't start eating at maintenance instead of a surplus
She doesn't eat at surplus, she eats at maintanece now. She is not lucky unless she is tall. Her maintenance will go down as she gets older.
I find that INCREDIBLY hard to believe as she eats actual crap and never exercises...she's around 5"5? Or 5"6? She just has an extremely thin body type
You can eat crap and still eat at maintenance. She might not excerise but she may be active in her day to day life.
I assure you she isn't lol. She's a high school student who sits 8 hours a day and does 0 exercise at home. I understand that you can eat crap and still be at maintenance.
Suuuuuuure your sweet high school sibling is sedentary all the time
4 -
You do what works for you. But yes its not necessary to count calories, if you are eating the right foods and working out on a daily basis, especially if you're weight training.
Not accurate.
You can eat all the right foods and work out on a daily basis and still gain weight if you eat too much.
Eat at a calorie deficit without literally counting calories and you will lose weight eating whatever you want and not working out at all if you don't want to.
4 -
RosieRose7673 wrote: »RosieRose7673 wrote: »shortvixen09 wrote: »People can lose weight differently. Some lucky folks have the metabolism to do so. Some people say it don't matter what you eat, as looking as you work it off. However, you just can't go wrong with calories counting. Maybe tough at times but now that I think about, it's probably the most simple thing to do. I'd die if I had to work everything I WANT to eat off. Lol.
My sister is one of the "lucky" ones she can eat whatever she wants but she stays a stick, it's not sustainable though her metabolism will slow as she gets older and she's going to start gaining if she doesn't start eating at maintenance instead of a surplus
She doesn't eat at surplus, she eats at maintanece now. She is not lucky unless she is tall. Her maintenance will go down as she gets older.
I find that INCREDIBLY hard to believe as she eats actual crap and never exercises...she's around 5"5? Or 5"6? She just has an extremely thin body type
You can eat crap and still eat at maintenance. She might not excerise but she may be active in her day to day life.
I assure you she isn't lol. She's a high school student who sits 8 hours a day and does 0 exercise at home. I understand that you can eat crap and still be at maintenance.
She's in high school. People don't stop maturing until into their twenties. She likely needs extra energy for growth.
Do you live with her? Are you by her side 24/7? If not, it's likely she doesn't eat that way all the time.
That's literally what I said in my first post! Lol. I mentioned her metabolism would slow as she got older and it would catch up with her.
Yes I live with her
You also said that she is eating a surplus when she is maintaining her weight. Another poster and I were just telling you that if she is maintaining her weight, she is not eating a surplus.
I posted that to give you a few reasons as to why it may seem like she eats at a surplus.
I was just assuming based on the way she eats and her lack of an active lifestyle that she was. I have no idea for certain because unlike me she doesn't count calories lol
I'm late to the conversations, but just about the only time someone would lose weight eating at a surplus is if they have some medical issue that needs immediate attention. Hyperthyroidism comes to mind, as does cancer.
Other than those medical issues, whatever your weight is doing is supported by whether you eat too much, too little, or just about right.
You may not literally be counting calories but, setting aside those medical conditions, a deficit is 100% required to lose weight.
People with hypertyrodism have extremely have metabolisms. They still need to est in a surplus to gain but its really hard. One guy on this forum had it and has to eat 6k calories to gain.
This happened with a friend too. She was eating loads of calories and losing weight due to hyperthyroidism.0 -
RosieRose7673 wrote: »RosieRose7673 wrote: »shortvixen09 wrote: »People can lose weight differently. Some lucky folks have the metabolism to do so. Some people say it don't matter what you eat, as looking as you work it off. However, you just can't go wrong with calories counting. Maybe tough at times but now that I think about, it's probably the most simple thing to do. I'd die if I had to work everything I WANT to eat off. Lol.
My sister is one of the "lucky" ones she can eat whatever she wants but she stays a stick, it's not sustainable though her metabolism will slow as she gets older and she's going to start gaining if she doesn't start eating at maintenance instead of a surplus
She doesn't eat at surplus, she eats at maintanece now. She is not lucky unless she is tall. Her maintenance will go down as she gets older.
I find that INCREDIBLY hard to believe as she eats actual crap and never exercises...she's around 5"5? Or 5"6? She just has an extremely thin body type
You can eat crap and still eat at maintenance. She might not excerise but she may be active in her day to day life.
I assure you she isn't lol. She's a high school student who sits 8 hours a day and does 0 exercise at home. I understand that you can eat crap and still be at maintenance.
She's in high school. People don't stop maturing until into their twenties. She likely needs extra energy for growth.
Do you live with her? Are you by her side 24/7? If not, it's likely she doesn't eat that way all the time.
That's literally what I said in my first post! Lol. I mentioned her metabolism would slow as she got older and it would catch up with her.
Yes I live with her
You also said that she is eating a surplus when she is maintaining her weight. Another poster and I were just telling you that if she is maintaining her weight, she is not eating a surplus.
I posted that to give you a few reasons as to why it may seem like she eats at a surplus.
I was just assuming based on the way she eats and her lack of an active lifestyle that she was. I have no idea for certain because unlike me she doesn't count calories lol
I'm late to the conversations, but just about the only time someone would lose weight eating at a surplus is if they have some medical issue that needs immediate attention. Hyperthyroidism comes to mind, as does cancer.
Other than those medical issues, whatever your weight is doing is supported by whether you eat too much, too little, or just about right.
You may not literally be counting calories but, setting aside those medical conditions, a deficit is 100% required to lose weight.
People with hypertyrodism have extremely have metabolisms. They still need to est in a surplus to gain but its really hard. One guy on this forum had it and has to eat 6k calories to gain.
This happened with a friend too. She was eating loads of calories and losing weight due to hyperthyroidism.
This goes to prove that hormones do impact CICO efficiency. Insulin is another hormone that can cause weight gain if the body becomes resistant to it. Growth hormones impact weight loss as well. Perhaps some teenagers can burn more calories without gaining is due to growth hormones?
In many people's minds on these threads is the idea that CICO is simple math. HOWEVER, when you add variables it changes the outcome (like an algebra problem).
Pregnancy sometimes impact weight gain and loss (hormones). Lack of sleep, high ongoing stress, testosterone, estrogen, progesterone, etc... the list could go on. Menopause, aging, depression, amongst others impact the metabolism due to hormones.
It is not always CICO by simple addition and subtraction. Of course if one could figure out the formula including the variables one could come up with an equation.
1 -
gonetothedogs19 wrote: »Annahbananas wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »MissusMoon wrote: »gonetothedogs19 wrote: »Here's a guy who ate a huge caloric surplus (high fat, little carb) for a month, and didn't gain weight. How can that be?
Summary: "Here is a difference between overeating and overeating.
When eating bad carbohydrates it’s easy to gain weight quickly. You’ll get plenty of the fat-storing hormone insulin in your blood.
It’s generally hard to gain weight on an LCHF diet. It’s even difficult to eat too much food, as you then usually have to eat more than you want. Even if you force down large amounts of LCHF-food, against your will, the result is usually as it was for Feltham. It’s a constant struggle and weight gain will likely be modest.
Overweight people eating as much as they want on an LCHF diet will typically lose weight."
http://thehealthhelp.co/what-happens-if-you-eat-5800-calories-daily-on-an-lchf-diet/
The claims in this link are just that: claims. Unless this person is working out enough to maintain they are not consuming that much without gaining weight. No one can defy science.
I was eating LCHF and it got me to Obese II. Meats, cheeses, nuts, avocados. Very little refined sugar, and flour and rice products were an extreme rarity.
The "science" this dude spouts is woo. Nutritionally speaking a calorie is not a calorie. But with weight, your body processes a calorie from any source the same way. It is an EXCESS of anything that causes fat storage. There are a lot of articles and such. There is no solid science unless you are talking about a few very specific health issues.
TL;DR version: Subject of the article is not being honest.
Well if you want to believe that eating 1,500 calories of donuts for six months (yes, I know nobody is recommending that) or 1,500 calories of mostly healthy food for six months will result in the same weight loss, be my guest.
Here is one of thousands of articles that says you are absolutely wrong. And he's not selling anything.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/09/fed-up-asks-are-all-calories-equal/
Um...actually if you ate 1500 calories of just donuts a day and it's lower than your weight threshold then, yes, you will lose weight.
But you'll also suffer from extreme malnutrition from not eating the right foods
Calorie in calorie out.
A calorie is a calorie
Sorry, but a calorie is a calorie is a dated notion. Our bodies are not simple bunsen burners.
https://authoritynutrition.com/debunking-the-calorie-myth/
Did you see my rebuttal to this in the other thread on page 3 of this very same thread?
I hate repeating myself too.
Maybe if I write in bold they will actually read it?
There was convincing evidence that energy balance is critical to maintaining healthy body weight and
ensuring optimal nutrient intakes, regardless of macronutrient distribution of energy as % total fat and
% total carbohydrates.
http://foris.fao.org/preview/25553-0ece4cb94ac52f9a25af77ca5cfba7a8c.pdf4
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
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K 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