Not losing weight 6 miles of walking atleast 3 times a week
Replies
-
This content has been removed.
-
Trixiegirl66 wrote: »But did you tell MFP that you were sedentary? Because if you say "sedentary" but you're not, the calories MFP gives you will be way too low. I'm currently set on "active" and "lose 1 pound/week" and MFP tells me 1800 cals/day. My weightloss record tells me even that's too low, and FitBit confirms that I actually burn ~2800 cals/day on average. Yet I only "work out" twice a week for an hour each time. So, why the high calorie burn? A neat little thing called Non Exercise Activity Thermogenesis (NEAT). I walk. A lot. Usually 15K-20K steps per day. I hit 27K steps the other day. To do that, I need to eat.
I suspect you're the same way. If you undereat (e.g. stick to the 1200 cals/day), you don't have the energy and you don't get much NEAT. If you eat more, you have more energy and are more active. It doesn't mean that CICO doesn't work. It very much works. It just means that if you drop CI, you might actually drop CO more. So, you find the sweet spot. I'm still working on finding my sweet spot. I log meticulously, and have crept my calories up from 1750/day to somewhere in the 1900-2000/day range without slowing the weightloss. I realize that as I lose weight, my daily burn will slowly drop so I don't want to raise the calories too drastically - but I also want to lose at a safe and sustainable rate.
Susanmfindlay, I had never heard of NEAT before, and now I fully get why I barely gained while eating so much in pregnancy - I walked very hilly terrain for hours with each pregnancy, especially my twin pregnancy. I am going to start tracking with greater precision and figure out the sweet spot for two pounds of loss a week until I hit goal. Thanks for explaining the process - this helps a great deal. Walking really is fabulous - I remember being young and living on chocolate, toast and Guinness but remained at a size zero thanks to living in a city as a pedestrian.
She doesn't even know how many calories she's consuming because she's not actually tracking them.2 -
This content has been removed.
-
Trixiegirl66 wrote: »She doesn't even know how many calories she's consuming because she's not actually tracking them.
courtneyfabulous,
Never did I say I do not track my calories. My husband said today that I way underestimated the calories I took in during pregnancy - he does all the cooking, and said I put away at least 3600 calories on very hungry days. So I am going to go with the logic that my body functions best with optimal food intake and see where it takes me.
My MFP diary is open, and indicates that I track and log everything down to black coffee. I am merely pointing out that the weight loss never took off until I ate way more than MFP suggested. For the first time in ten years, I fully anticipate getting back to my pre-twin pregnancy size. I think I simply need to eat enough now to regain the killer metabolism I took for granted in my twenties and early thirties.
I meant the OP does not track her calories. She listed the typical foods she eats but not the amounts or ingredients or total calories - wasn't talking about you.4 -
Make sure you're getting your heart rate up when you're walking. I walked almost ten miles a day in Italy, but I still gained because it was ten miles of mosey-ing around monuments from restaurant to gelato shop to bar to restaurant...
Stick with the process of keeping your calories in check, getting your heart rate up several times a week, and be positive. That last bit is the hardest, but you can do it!3 -
Notice the first half of this graph is fluctuating but not really losing - this is what my results were from eating "healthy" and exercising a lot. Notice the second half of this graph there is steady weight loss - this is what my results were from actually tracking food and eating within my calorie goal (and continuing to exercise). Now do you think maybe you should start actually tracking food/calories?? I think yes.11 -
Also, exercise is a pretty crappy way to lose weight.
http://www.vox.com/2016/4/28/11518804/weight-loss-exercise-myth-burn-calories
There's over 60 studies cited in that article.
Of course that isn't to say you SHOULDN'T exercise - everyone should, as it's probably the biggest thing you can do for your own longevity - but for losing weight? No, that's going to be mostly dietary for most folks.4 -
courtneyfabulous wrote: »
Notice the first half of this graph is fluctuating but not really losing - this is what my results were from eating "healthy" and exercising a lot. Notice the second half of this graph there is steady weight loss - this is what my results were from actually tracking food and eating within my calorie goal (and continuing to exercise). Now do you think maybe you should start actually tracking food/calories?? I think yes.
This is exactly the pattern I see. I should paste this on my wall to look at every day. It's so true. I know what my calorie goals are, but I let myself overeat about half the time. It's right there in the numbers!2 -
courtneyfabulous wrote: »
Notice the first half of this graph is fluctuating but not really losing - this is what my results were from eating "healthy" and exercising a lot. Notice the second half of this graph there is steady weight loss - this is what my results were from actually tracking food and eating within my calorie goal (and continuing to exercise). Now do you think maybe you should start actually tracking food/calories?? I think yes.
This is exactly the pattern I see. I should paste this on my wall to look at every day. It's so true. I know what my calorie goals are, but I let myself overeat about half the time. It's right there in the numbers!
Glad it helped! Yep, gotta track and hit that calorie goal as consistently as possible!2 -
Trixiegirl66 wrote: »The thing with hormonal imbalance, it responds very well to a diet built on lean protein, healthy fats and as much produce as you can fit into your day. I personally experienced correcting hormonal imbalance by increasing the good fats like Kerrygold butter, avocados, olives, eggs and nuts, along with chicken and tons of berries and veggies. In my own experience, the cutting out gluten made the biggest difference - as a journalist, I found tons of research indicating that gluten can disrupt hormones.
I am not a believer in the CICO myth - I recently lost over 30 pounds and 12 inches by significantly upping my calories, fat and protein. After years of diligently weighing and logging my 1200 calorie allowance, only to lose and gain the same five pounds over and over again, I decided to eat more - tons more!
I remembered being pregnant with my twins in 1996, and recalled how I ate a good 3,300 calories a day and delivered a set of healthy full sized twins 4 weeks early. I started at 124 and delivered at 147 - so roughly 12 pounds gained for each healthy baby, and yet I ate enormous amounts of food. By the six week postpartum checkup, I weighed five pounds less than where I started the pregnancy - while still eating massive plates of food several times a day.
No measuring, no logging - the thing is I lived off of produce, eggs, avocado, olive oil, chicken, beef, peanut butter etc. - no processed foods, minimal sugar and very little gluten. As soon as I stepped away from this eating style, I gained 10 pounds a month until I maxed out at 175.
A day after my 50th birthday on June 14th of this year, I decided to work toward getting back to losing weight by eating more - usually upping my calories by a good 500 to 800 OVER what MFP suggested for weight loss. Since going back to what works four months ago, I am down over 30 pounds and counting.
My profile pic is me at just about 8 months pregnant with my fourth child - a time when I again massively upped my calories to just under 3000, and again gained well under the expected amount for pregnancy. If you look at my pics, I was at near my highest weight of 175 in a photo with my eldest twins. Sorry in advance for the length answer and unsolicited testimonial - but if I had been advised to eat more a decade ago, my forties would have been a lot healthier!
Great post! A lot of wisdom here, refreshing to see a different experience and perspective on the typical CICO advice. I figured that would open up a can of worms.
OP, I invite you to experiment with eating lean meats, vegetables ("eating the rainbow") and smart carb choices at each meal. If your interested in a simple method of portion controlling without having to weigh and measure things let me know and I'll post it here for you.
1 -
Longevity100 wrote: »Trixiegirl66 wrote: »The thing with hormonal imbalance, it responds very well to a diet built on lean protein, healthy fats and as much produce as you can fit into your day. I personally experienced correcting hormonal imbalance by increasing the good fats like Kerrygold butter, avocados, olives, eggs and nuts, along with chicken and tons of berries and veggies. In my own experience, the cutting out gluten made the biggest difference - as a journalist, I found tons of research indicating that gluten can disrupt hormones.
I am not a believer in the CICO myth - I recently lost over 30 pounds and 12 inches by significantly upping my calories, fat and protein. After years of diligently weighing and logging my 1200 calorie allowance, only to lose and gain the same five pounds over and over again, I decided to eat more - tons more!
I remembered being pregnant with my twins in 1996, and recalled how I ate a good 3,300 calories a day and delivered a set of healthy full sized twins 4 weeks early. I started at 124 and delivered at 147 - so roughly 12 pounds gained for each healthy baby, and yet I ate enormous amounts of food. By the six week postpartum checkup, I weighed five pounds less than where I started the pregnancy - while still eating massive plates of food several times a day.
No measuring, no logging - the thing is I lived off of produce, eggs, avocado, olive oil, chicken, beef, peanut butter etc. - no processed foods, minimal sugar and very little gluten. As soon as I stepped away from this eating style, I gained 10 pounds a month until I maxed out at 175.
A day after my 50th birthday on June 14th of this year, I decided to work toward getting back to losing weight by eating more - usually upping my calories by a good 500 to 800 OVER what MFP suggested for weight loss. Since going back to what works four months ago, I am down over 30 pounds and counting.
My profile pic is me at just about 8 months pregnant with my fourth child - a time when I again massively upped my calories to just under 3000, and again gained well under the expected amount for pregnancy. If you look at my pics, I was at near my highest weight of 175 in a photo with my eldest twins. Sorry in advance for the length answer and unsolicited testimonial - but if I had been advised to eat more a decade ago, my forties would have been a lot healthier!
Great post! A lot of wisdom here, refreshing to see a different experience and perspective on the typical CICO advice. I figured that would open up a can of worms.
OP, I invite you to experiment with eating lean meats, vegetables ("eating the rainbow") and smart carb choices at each meal. If your interested in a simple method of portion controlling without having to weigh and measure things let me know and I'll post it here for you.
I'm sorry, but CICO is not a myth. It's proven science and is true whether you believe in it or not. It works if you implement the tool properly by being precise as possible with CI and monitoring your CO. No wisdom there, just ranting.
How can energy balance be a myth? Please explain? Does it not make sense that to lose weight one must eat less calories than they need to maintain their current weight? Does it not make sense that to maintain one must eat at their maintenance (TDEE) level? And, does it not make sense that to gain weight, one must eat above their maintenance calories? How would any of this NOT work?
It's quite humorous to see "CICO is a myth" being thrown around and is very obvious that they have no idea what CICO actually is. It is simply a balance of energy. CICO is the heart of ALL diets...keto, atkins, weight watchers. If you consume less calories than you need to maintain your current weight, you will lose weight. Simples.
And eating clean has a different meaning depending on who you ask. Eating clean is NOT necessary for weight loss. Hell, I've lost close to 100lbs eating the foods that i enjoy while watching my protein, fats, fiber and micros. I eat chocolate. I drink beer and wine. I eat sausages and bacon. I also eat vegetables and fruit. My fiber is at optimal level. My dietitian recommends moderating EVERYTHING. Anyone with a dietitian degree will say moderation is the key as cutting out foods can actually lead to eating disorders.
The point of the OP's post is that they are not weighing their food and therefore have no actual idea what their CI is. This causes an imbalance in the CI CO, so her CI is actually higher than she intends it to be, so she isn't losing the weight that she desires (perhaps TDEE -750 or -500) would be good here). If OP is maintaing or even gaining, her energy balance (CICO) is off. Her CI is simply too high due to estimation and/or measuring food instead of weighing. It has NOTHING to do with food choice.
Sometimes during my pms/tom, I get ravenous for chocolate and cheese puffs. I don't skimp. I eat them and log them. DO I gain weight? NO. Why? Because I am mindful of my CI and CO.15 -
Try Crossfit/ weight training...0
-
This content has been removed.
-
Trixiegirl66 wrote: »I find it insane how many react with such defensiveness and outright anger, when I suggest that shelving the obsessive CICO mindset was the very reason behind my fat loss. And while chocolate and cheese puffs might fit into your caloric plan and not cause weight gain, make no mistake that your liver, kidneys and brain all take a hit by means of inflammation.
Sure, I could fit a litre of coke, cheetos and two Big Macs into a daily caloric plan, but God help my organs, mental capacity and overall looks from such an abusive and ignorant mindset. I have lived abroad and in the United States, and I can tell you, we in the U.S are literally dying from the inside out due to the nonsense of CICO.
And although I gained fifty pounds in my forties, I have no stretch marks, age spots or wrinkles at 50 - all of these positives I attribute directly to eating good fats, clean protein and tons of organic veggies and fruits - whether they fit into my caloric plan or not. And you are right, I am a ranter - but I am sick of seeing friends and family falling into ill health, because they buy into watching calories instead of reading labels.
This is the sort of extreme thinking that causes yo-yo dieting.
Healthy living is not a matter of coke and Big Macs -v- kale and organic quinoa.
You're looking at @cerise_noir 's rational and sustainable diet as some sort of SAD cliche.
You're fighting an imaginary opponent and not looking at what she actually said.
A calorie is a calorie, and your orthorexic food choices didn't make you lose weight. A calorie deficit did, no matter if you've created your own myth about it.
The woo thinking that gets people to believe in organic and clean eating will take more than a post on MFP to correct, but for people on the sidelines, false statements should not go unchallenged.28 -
Trixiegirl66 wrote: »I find it insane how many react with such defensiveness and outright anger, when I suggest that shelving the obsessive CICO mindset was the very reason behind my fat loss. And while chocolate and cheese puffs might fit into your caloric plan and not cause weight gain, make no mistake that your liver, kidneys and brain all take a hit by means of inflammation.
Sure, I could fit a litre of coke, cheetos and two Big Macs into a daily caloric plan, but God help my organs, mental capacity and overall looks from such an abusive and ignorant mindset. I have lived abroad and in the United States, and I can tell you, we in the U.S are literally dying from the inside out due to the nonsense of CICO.
And although I gained fifty pounds in my forties, I have no stretch marks, age spots or wrinkles at 50 - all of these positives I attribute directly to eating good fats, clean protein and tons of organic veggies and fruits - whether they fit into my caloric plan or not. And you are right, I am a ranter - but I am sick of seeing friends and family falling into ill health, because they buy into watching calories instead of reading labels.
Funny. My liver, kidneys and brain are perfectly are perfectly fine, thank you very much. As is my mental capacity (oh, the nerve! LOL) No inflammation according to my doctor. My brain is just fine. I have several degrees and am in the process of becoming a vet. I am also a musician.
I rely on science and peer reviewed studies for weight loss research as I was once stuck in the woo tornado of derp.
I am in perfect health and both according to my doctor and dietitian. And, I am not acting defensive or angry, I was simply stating that there is nothing wrong with a few treats.
I definitely track ALL my micros (I even use another program to track every single one. I am quite diligent in making sure all my vitamins, minerals, fats, fiber and proteins are in check). I never, ever mentioned to stuff your face in so called junk and forget about nutrition. Who does that? I've never seen that mentioned in the few years I've been here. Nutrition IS very important, but I also include foods that I enjoy which makes the whole weight loss process bearable to me as elimination diets landed me in hot water with heavy binge and restrict cycles. My DIETITIAN (someone who has actually studied the science of diets for years) agrees with moderation, and you'll find all dietitians have this mind set. It is to prevent eating disorders.
I am 34, but I look younger than my husband who is 4 years younger than I. I am active, lift weights, kick box, jog, walk.
I've lived in both Australia and Canada. I see fads all over the place. I disagree with fads...they lack nutrition, are very restrictive and encourage unhealthy fast weight loss. I've been there and I failed every single time. This time, CICO has been a godsend to me.
I eat fruits and veg. I love them.
Most of the US doesn't KNOW about CICO. This is evident by the amount of fad diets floating around. I personally had NO idea about CICO until I signed up here. There are many knowledgeable members here, and some of them even have nutrition/diet/PT or science degrees. Some of them are in the medical field. I knew I was in good hands and could trust the information on here. At first, I thought the whole concept was strange, but...guess what? I am almost at my goal weight and I couldn't be happier. I am 4 pounds shy of losing 100 pounds.
like I mentioned, my DIETITIAN (someone who has actually studied the science of diets for years) agrees with moderation, and you'll find all dietitians have this mind set. It is to prevent eating disorders. I trust in those with degrees, not some derp from Facebook, tumblr or some random blog that doesn't site any resources. I used to, though.
Abusive and ignorant? How insulting. I worked hard to lose my weight. All this because I mention I like to treat myself alongside my nutritious food choices..22 -
This content has been removed.
-
Trixiegirl66 wrote: »Sure, I could fit a litre of coke, cheetos and two Big Macs into a daily caloric plan, but God help my organs, mental capacity and overall looks from such an abusive and ignorant mindset. I have lived abroad and in the United States, and I can tell you, we in the U.S are literally dying from the inside out due to the nonsense of CICO.Trixiegirl66 wrote: »Healthy living is based in fact not fantasy - sorry, but Big Macs and coke have NO place in an eating plan period. I double majored in journalism and nutrition at university, so with all due respect, you are very incorrect in your thinking regarding SAD being a cliche, or that I am somehow battling an "imaginary opponent."
Sorry to hear that eating normal, everyday foods has impacted your mental capacity and looks.
My mental capacity, on the other hand, has not been affected. I have a bachelor's degree in chemistry, and am in my second year of a PhD program in analytical chemistry. And I'm looking better than ever, after losing over 70lbs eating whatever I want in moderation. I'm in great health, which is not really a surprise as I know that eating a Big Mac once a month isn't going to harm my body.17 -
Could you be gaining muscle from walking around the same rate as reducing fat? Do you physically notice changes in your body? Just a thought cause I don't see it mentioned above. Muscle is heavier than fat, so it doesn't take as much of it to equate to a fat loss and it sounds like the scale is the only way you are measuring your progress.
If you don't want higher intensity (sweat, risk of injury), perhaps more resistance workouts. Again though, you might not loose weight so much as tone your body and burn more calories at idle.
If you are still on medications, do they have side effects that would affect your weight?
You are doing your body and mind great service by walking. Best of luck and so glad you've come through your troubles.2 -
Guys... you do know you can eat healthy foods AND count calories, right?12
-
Trixiegirl66 wrote: »Healthy living is based in fact not fantasy - sorry, but Big Macs and coke have NO place in an eating plan period. I double majored in journalism and nutrition at university, so with all due respect, you are very incorrect in your thinking regarding SAD being a cliche, or that I am somehow battling an "imaginary opponent."
And do be careful throwing around terms like orthorexic, for while I do not suffer from either anxiety or OCD eating related issues, many on this board do and your throwing the term around is both disrespectful and rude.
When you can prove that a 100 calorie serving of Snickers and a 100 calorie serving of avocado provide the same nutrients and fuel for the human body I will gladly listen to your argument on CICO. No false statements here - just truth that doesn't go down well with most not wanting to acknowledge the role food plays in health.
So during your nutrition studies in college, the concepts of context and dosage as they relate to health and nutrition were never introduced/discussed? Or is it just your own personal conviction that a diet has to be 100% infallibly "clean" all the time, and if you occasionally eat 100 calories of Snickers instead of avocado, your entire diet is unhealthy junk?15 -
Trixiegirl66 wrote: »The thing with hormonal imbalance, it responds very well to a diet built on lean protein, healthy fats and as much produce as you can fit into your day. I personally experienced correcting hormonal imbalance by increasing the good fats like Kerrygold butter, avocados, olives, eggs and nuts, along with chicken and tons of berries and veggies. In my own experience, the cutting out gluten made the biggest difference - as a journalist, I found tons of research indicating that gluten can disrupt hormones.
I am not a believer in the CICO myth - I recently lost over 30 pounds and 12 inches by significantly upping my calories, fat and protein. After years of diligently weighing and logging my 1200 calorie allowance, only to lose and gain the same five pounds over and over again, I decided to eat more - tons more!
I remembered being pregnant with my twins in 1996, and recalled how I ate a good 3,300 calories a day and delivered a set of healthy full sized twins 4 weeks early. I started at 124 and delivered at 147 - so roughly 12 pounds gained for each healthy baby, and yet I ate enormous amounts of food. By the six week postpartum checkup, I weighed five pounds less than where I started the pregnancy - while still eating massive plates of food several times a day.
No measuring, no logging - the thing is I lived off of produce, eggs, avocado, olive oil, chicken, beef, peanut butter etc. - no processed foods, minimal sugar and very little gluten. As soon as I stepped away from this eating style, I gained 10 pounds a month until I maxed out at 175.
A day after my 50th birthday on June 14th of this year, I decided to work toward getting back to losing weight by eating more - usually upping my calories by a good 500 to 800 OVER what MFP suggested for weight loss. Since going back to what works four months ago, I am down over 30 pounds and counting.
My profile pic is me at just about 8 months pregnant with my fourth child - a time when I again massively upped my calories to just under 3000, and again gained well under the expected amount for pregnancy. If you look at my pics, I was at near my highest weight of 175 in a photo with my eldest twins. Sorry in advance for the length answer and unsolicited testimonial - but if I had been advised to eat more a decade ago, my forties would have been a lot healthier!
It's wonderful you found a way of eating for you, but I guarantee if you lost weight it was because you ate at a calorie deficit because it's science. If you were not logging before this magic way of eating, or during it, then you really have no idea how much you were eating either time 11 -
Trixiegirl66 wrote: »The thing with hormonal imbalance, it responds very well to a diet built on lean protein, healthy fats and as much produce as you can fit into your day. I personally experienced correcting hormonal imbalance by increasing the good fats like Kerrygold butter, avocados, olives, eggs and nuts, along with chicken and tons of berries and veggies. In my own experience, the cutting out gluten made the biggest difference - as a journalist, I found tons of research indicating that gluten can disrupt hormones.
I am not a believer in the CICO myth - I recently lost over 30 pounds and 12 inches by significantly upping my calories, fat and protein. After years of diligently weighing and logging my 1200 calorie allowance, only to lose and gain the same five pounds over and over again, I decided to eat more - tons more!
I remembered being pregnant with my twins in 1996, and recalled how I ate a good 3,300 calories a day and delivered a set of healthy full sized twins 4 weeks early. I started at 124 and delivered at 147 - so roughly 12 pounds gained for each healthy baby, and yet I ate enormous amounts of food. By the six week postpartum checkup, I weighed five pounds less than where I started the pregnancy - while still eating massive plates of food several times a day.
No measuring, no logging - the thing is I lived off of produce, eggs, avocado, olive oil, chicken, beef, peanut butter etc. - no processed foods, minimal sugar and very little gluten. As soon as I stepped away from this eating style, I gained 10 pounds a month until I maxed out at 175.
A day after my 50th birthday on June 14th of this year, I decided to work toward getting back to losing weight by eating more - usually upping my calories by a good 500 to 800 OVER what MFP suggested for weight loss. Since going back to what works four months ago, I am down over 30 pounds and counting.
My profile pic is me at just about 8 months pregnant with my fourth child - a time when I again massively upped my calories to just under 3000, and again gained well under the expected amount for pregnancy. If you look at my pics, I was at near my highest weight of 175 in a photo with my eldest twins. Sorry in advance for the length answer and unsolicited testimonial - but if I had been advised to eat more a decade ago, my forties would have been a lot healthier!
Sigh, oh sigh.
I am glad you found something that works for you.
You've left out a few thousand important details that contribute a considerable number of calories to the CO part of your CICO.
Creating babies: takes energy
Recovering from creating babies: takes energy
Breastfeeding babies: takes energy
Chasing after your babies: takes energy
Eating too little for an extensive period of time has the potential to down-regulate your body and make you spend less energy.
Depending on personal make-up the overall decrease may be large enough that it overwhelms any perceived additional deficit you believe you have created.
To the OP:
It is obvious that so far you have not actually counted calories. You've sort of "watched" your food, but you haven't really itemised things and counted calories.
Salad toppings and dressings often make salads more calorific than the meal they're designed to replace.
While healthy fats are healthy, it does not mean that they contribute to the caloric deficit you need to achieve to lose weight.
Your goal is to eat about 15 to 20% less calories than you spend. For the a good majority of people that translates to about 500 Calories less a day.
If you achieve that goal you will lose weight.
Your weight loss will not necessarily happen with metronomic accuracy. Hormones, high sodium foods, exercise will all contribute to water weight changes that are faster than the underlying body fat changes your caloric deficit brings about. Use a trending weight app or web page (weightgrapher, trendweight, happy scale iphone, libra android) to track your weight changes and figure out what MAY be real weight changes and what is "noise" i.e. water weight changes.
While purposeful exercise activity is great, and moving 2 hours a day is wonderful, note that it won't help you much if it is at the expense of other activity you would have done anyways. Balance things out so that your OVERALL activity level including exercise increases.
While your activity will bring some extra calories to the table, the vast majority of your gains will be created by controlling your intake.
Use your logging to figure things out and educate yourself. Figure out which foods are a good bang for the caloric buck and leave you full and satiated for a longer period of time. And which foods are too many calories for the satiety they bring.
For most people without known/hidden kidney damage, increasing protein consumption helps with satiation and helps mittigate any loss of lean mass during caloric deficits. A good base target is 2x the RDA which would come to about 0.8g per lb of bodyweight (at top of healthy BMI if currently very obese).
As a woman a target of about 26g of fiber a day will help you be regular and contribute (for most) to a feeling of satiety (men about 38g)
I would suggest that eating at least 20% of your calories from fats is a good idea. Try keeping saturated fats to less than 10% of your overall calories.
And keep on walking
11 -
Trixiegirl66 wrote: »Sure, I could fit a litre of coke, cheetos and two Big Macs into a daily caloric plan, but God help my organs, mental capacity and overall looks from such an abusive and ignorant mindset. I have lived abroad and in the United States, and I can tell you, we in the U.S are literally dying from the inside out due to the nonsense of CICO.Trixiegirl66 wrote: »Healthy living is based in fact not fantasy - sorry, but Big Macs and coke have NO place in an eating plan period. I double majored in journalism and nutrition at university, so with all due respect, you are very incorrect in your thinking regarding SAD being a cliche, or that I am somehow battling an "imaginary opponent."
Sorry to hear that eating normal, everyday foods has impacted your mental capacity and looks.
My mental capacity, on the other hand, has not been affected. I have a bachelor's degree in chemistry, and am in my second year of a PhD program in analytical chemistry. And I'm looking better than ever, after losing over 70lbs eating whatever I want in moderation. I'm in great health, which is not really a surprise as I know that eating a Big Mac once a month isn't going to harm my body.
Yep yep-I've been maintaining a 50lbs loss for several years now eating all the foods I enjoy, including -gasp- Big Macs, and I'm in great health (I have my latest health screening listed in my profile). My organs, mental capacity and looks are just fine
OP-if you're not losing weight than you're eating too many calories. Focus on getting your calorie intake lined up with your weight loss goals and you'll be fine. And so sorry for your recent loss ~hugs~7 -
courtneyfabulous wrote: »
Notice the first half of this graph is fluctuating but not really losing - this is what my results were from eating "healthy" and exercising a lot. Notice the second half of this graph there is steady weight loss - this is what my results were from actually tracking food and eating within my calorie goal (and continuing to exercise). Now do you think maybe you should start actually tracking food/calories?? I think yes.
I wish I was surprised that this was ignored by the "you need to eat clean" person.17 -
This thread is making my head spin. Here's my take. I'm not educated, life circumstances kept me from pursuing higher education, but meh... I'm no fool. I'm smart enough to know I don't know everything.
Saying that, I'm smart enough to know that CICO isn't a myth.
I eat a mostly "clean" diet, because I, for the most part, feel more satiated with low fat dairy, produce, grains, and some other sources of vegetarian protein. My diet is also pretty low fat because I don't find fat sating in the least.
Saying this, if I want a Snickers bar? I pick one up at the store and eat it. #noregrets
Life is too short to be a food snob, and I learned long ago to not take myself that seriously.
To the OP -- count your calories and log your food. You walking 5-6 miles in 2 hours twice a week is a very slow pace and likely not impacting your calories out very much at all.18 -
I started MFP about two weeks ago and the first thing I noticed is that it is very similar to playing golf. By that I mean you have the pencil and you can put any score that you want on the card. With MFP, I find the same thing applies. If you don't write down everything because you don't like the way it looks, then you are only cheating yourself.
The second thing I have noticed is that people seem to go overboard on their food consumption. To cut out everything you like and try to supplement it with lentils and quinoa and rabbit food just, in my mind, doesn't work. You are gearing yourself for failure because eventually you will want ice cream, chocolate, beer and pizza.
I really like MFP because it lets me figure out my day's activities. As an example, yesterday, I went to meet friends at the Air Force Wing for a couple of beers. The beer at the wing is served in 20 oz mugs. I had two. Therefore, I put that in my daily allowance as 4 10 oz Coors Light beers and adjusted meals and my exercise regime to accommodate the change. I do the same for ice cream, pizza, chocolate and any other decadent food that I like.
In my humble opinion, there are no sacrifices to be made, only adjustments. I am losing one pound a week and have found that by consuming 10 glasses of water per day, walking for one hour at 3.5 mph and 30 minutes of circuit training, combined with breakfast, snack, lunch, snack, dinner and snack, I am eating less but I am never hungry. I am also eating more fruit. I will be 69 in January, 6'1", 215 lbs when I started and my goal is to be 190 pounds. I am ex special forces, have had a hip replacement, multiple surgeries, and I receive 5 medical pensions. Sometimes, we just have to soldier on. By the way, losing 25 pounds is very daunting and I don't think I can do that, but I can lose 5 pounds 5 times. Its all about attitude and perspective.
Good luck with your weight loss.
P.S.
I don't know what age you are, but one thing I have learned. As we age, we can't do exercises designed for 20 year olds. Our bodies don't metabolize at the rate they did when we were young. Work to your own limits. Pulse rates for weight loss are maintained at a lower than fitness rate.28 -
Trixiegirl66 wrote: »Healthy living is based in fact not fantasy - sorry, but Big Macs and coke have NO place in an eating plan period. I double majored in journalism and nutrition at university, so with all due respect, you are very incorrect in your thinking regarding SAD being a cliche, or that I am somehow battling an "imaginary opponent."
And do be careful throwing around terms like orthorexic, for while I do not suffer from either anxiety or OCD eating related issues, many on this board do and your throwing the term around is both disrespectful and rude.
When you can prove that a 100 calorie serving of Snickers and a 100 calorie serving of avocado provide the same nutrients and fuel for the human body I will gladly listen to your argument on CICO. No false statements here - just truth that doesn't go down well with most not wanting to acknowledge the role food plays in health.
The statement I bolded demonstrates you don't actually understand what CICO is. No one is saying that 100 cals of snickers and 100 cals of avocado are same from a nutritional stand point. NO ONE.
What CICO means is that the same calories from both foods would have the same impact on your energy balance. CICO does not address macro/micronutrients, how the body processes foods, satiety, etc.
Time and again on these boards, people ask whether a calorie is just a calorie, and people who understand the energy balance of CICO say "yes calories are all that matter for weight loss, but it is important to look at balanced nutrition and satiety for long term health and success". And time and again people who don't understand CICO or who willfully ignore that second part of that statement, turn it into a argument that people are advocating nothing but a diet of Big Macs, snickers, and soda.
And these strawman arguments are what I find disrespectful and rude... the assumption that anyone who says that it is possible to fit foods like Big Macs and snickers into your diet that is promoting a diet of nothing but junk and that we don't care about health.
As someone who majored in journalism I would hope you would be able to critically evaluate what people are posting and discern the true intent, but it seems you just want to twist those statements into what fits your perceived agenda...
29 -
Not being a food nor diet fanatic I don't understand the acronyms. Would I be correct in assuming that CICO stands for Calories In Calories Out?
As for Trixiegirl66's comments, I am thinking that it might be time for her to have a Snickers bar and relax a little. Gottaburnem said that she takes a snickers bar when she wants. Nothing to do with healthy eating, it just works for her.
By the way, what is SAD an acronym for?16 -
Not being a food nor diet fanatic I don't understand the acronyms. Would I be correct in assuming that CICO stands for Calories In Calories Out?
As for Trixiegirl66's comments, I am thinking that it might be time for her to have a Snickers bar and relax a little. Gottaburnem said that she takes a snickers bar when she wants. Nothing to do with healthy eating, it just works for her.
By the way, what is SAD an acronym for?
Standard American diet2 -
singingflutelady wrote: »Not being a food nor diet fanatic I don't understand the acronyms. Would I be correct in assuming that CICO stands for Calories In Calories Out?
As for Trixiegirl66's comments, I am thinking that it might be time for her to have a Snickers bar and relax a little. Gottaburnem said that she takes a snickers bar when she wants. Nothing to do with healthy eating, it just works for her.
By the way, what is SAD an acronym for?
Standard American diet
I personally detest that phrase almost as much as "clean eating" as I feel it is about as difficult to define and inconsistently applied. I could line 10 Americans up and none of us eat the same way...9
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
- 96.4K 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