You NEED to stop calorie counting and restricting!

Sorry got dragged out Sunday supermarket shopping

What I was trying to say was that unless the body actually takes in/absorbs the calories then it is not really calorie in as it were

like myself due to the surgery, the calories I eat is not really my calories in

I think this is where the difference of opinion is

Calorie In and Calorie absorbed

for example, you could eat 10000 calories, but if you only absorb 1000, then your calorie in is in reality 1000, not 10000

but MFP will count it as 10000

if we were to take it literally, as long as the calories your body absorbs is less than the amount of calories your body burns, then you will lose weight, as the body needs to get the fuel from somewhere

tross0924 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/

So there's 7 pages here and I didn't read them all. I hope this has been pointed out already but if not -

Behold! The twinkie diet!!
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/

That's why fad diets are popular and successful (short term). They all limit calories. But people can't maintain fad diets forever. The twinkie guy wouldn't be able sustain his experiment indefinitely either.

The body is able to recycle a lot of macronutrients over and over which is why fasting works for a while also. But no one can fast indefinitely without refeeds.

sashayoung72 wrote: »

DebSozo wrote: »

tross0924 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/

So there's 7 pages here and I didn't read them all. I hope this has been pointed out already but if not -

Behold! The twinkie diet!!
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/

That's why fad diets are successful. They all limit calories. But people can't maintain fad diets forever. The twinkie guy wouldn't be able sustain his indefinitely either. But the body is able to recycle a lot of macronutrients over and over which is why fasting works for a while also. But no one can fast indefinitely either without refeeds.

could you IMAGINE eating just twinkies for like years.....ughhhh how gross after even a day, I'd be crying for some cauliflower or chicken in a hot minute.

I know! I haven't eaten twinkies in a long time. I could probably eat one but would get sick of them after a couple. Ugh

sashayoung72 wrote: »

DebSozo wrote: »

tross0924 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/

So there's 7 pages here and I didn't read them all. I hope this has been pointed out already but if not -

Behold! The twinkie diet!!
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/

That's why fad diets are successful. They all limit calories. But people can't maintain fad diets forever. The twinkie guy wouldn't be able sustain his indefinitely either. But the body is able to recycle a lot of macronutrients over and over which is why fasting works for a while also. But no one can fast indefinitely either without refeeds.

could you IMAGINE eating just twinkies for like years.....ughhhh how gross after even a day, I'd be crying for some cauliflower or chicken in a hot minute.

Donuts are my weekness. I'm pretty sure I could eat donuts all day everyday for years Twinkies? Not so much.

wytey wrote: »

Sorry got dragged out Sunday supermarket shopping

What I was trying to say was that unless the body actually takes in/absorbs the calories then it is not really calorie in as it were

like myself due to the surgery, the calories I eat is not really my calories in

I think this is where the difference of opinion is

Calorie In and Calorie absorbed

for example, you could eat 10000 calories, but if you only absorb 1000, then your calorie in is in reality 1000, not 10000

but MFP will count it as 10000

if we were to take it literally, as long as the calories your body absorbs is less than the amount of calories your body burns, then you will lose weight, as the body needs to get the fuel from somewhere

What you say is almost true, but all it means is that, if you've logged it as 10,000 then you have a 9,000 kcal difference that you don't know about and it would actually be part of your CO. No one says that CO only counts if it's exercise. Undigested food that passes out of your system would count too. If there is enough of it, you would feel effects and would probably want to see a doctor.

Body builders eat at a surplus while they are bulking and at a deficit while cutting. They will be among the first to tell you that CI CO is for everyone.

Water weight is not fat and will eventually be shed. This has nothing to do with CI CO because water has no calories.

Inaccurate estimates do not mean CI CO doesn't apply to everyone. That's like saying I shouldn't get an overdraft fee when my account is overdrawn because my estimates of the balance and of how much I was spending were inaccurate. We can never know 100% perfectly what our calorie intake/output is, but there is feedback in the form of a bathroom scale to help us adjust accordingly.

CI CO applies to absolutely everyone, even people with medical conditions. They might have to work harder to find the right balance, but it still exists for them.

NOTE: I just want to make we are not taking about counting calories but the actual principle of CI CO. Some people equate CICO with counting calories as a dietary tool when it's really a fact of life that happens whether you are paying attention or not.

what I was trying to say is that what you eat does not mean that all of it is digested

in my case, I don't know the exact amount, but I was taken into hospital and when they opened me up, a section of my intestines were rotten as they put it and had to be chopped out as it were, so my intestines is shorter than the normal person, thus the food goes from one end to the other quicker than a normal person, sorry if you are eating...

10000 was extreme, for example, right now telling MFP that if I want to lose 2lbs per week, it is saying I should eat just over 1500 cals per day, but even at 1500, not all of the food eaten is digested unless they are easily digested, granted, some foods are harder to digest than others and not everyone will digest them, but for me, more of them are harder to digest if that makes sense

so even if I eat 1500, unless the body digests and intakes it all, my calorie intake would be 1500 but the amount the body absorbed as it were would not be 1500 if that makes sense?

I think it should be CaCo, calorie absorbed and calorie out, as like in my case, what I eat does not mean that my body has absorbed it all, even though that is the case for everyone, but for people like myself, unless the food is easy to digest, then the difference is higher than the normal person

1 calorie eaten, not absorbed by the body and then out undigested is different from 1 calorie eaten, digested and aborbed and then out

or take 2 people, both eat the same amount of food and calories, 2000 kcal, but both only need 1500 kcal to substain their weight, one digests/aborbs 1750, the other only 1250, who is going to gain weight and who is going to lose weight?

as for when I was in ICU, yes, at one point, my food as it were was via IV, but that is irrelevant, I brought that up to say that my body has less time to digest the food than a normal person due to the surgery

Erased/self-edited