What are your go to "free foods"
Options
Replies
-
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Susieq_1994 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »If I have cravings but few calories left, I drink herbal tea. So-called "free" foods still have calories and can add up really fast if you're a small person with a small deficit, as I am. Keep in mind that FDA guidelines allow manufacturers to call products "zero calorie" if they have fewer than 5 calories per serving. Since I have such a small deficit, I even log Splenda if I put some in my tea. (The Splenda website states that it's called "zero calorie" due to that FDA loophole. So I log a packet as 5 calories.)
I switched to liquid sucralose ages ago and haven't looked back. I've been getting it from Amazon for a couple of years now. Before I switched, I too logged my splenda. Just so you know, the exact count per gram of Splenda is 3 calories.
I said upthread that I drink herbal tea with liquid sucralose, and that is truly a free food. Some flavors get a small 10 calorie splash of milk. I can fit those into my day too. I have a ridiculous stash of tea!
Whoa. This actually shocked me. Splenda has only 1 calorie less than sugar per gram?! I'd rather have sugar!
There's a difference in sweetening power per gram, though. A gram of splenda sweetens like 4 grams of sugar.
This can make a difference if you're using the powdered stuff and need it for bulk in cooking.
If you're just using it to sweeten beverages or yogurt or cottage cheese, it's worth it to get the liquid and have zero calories. The brand I get even includes handy little travel size bottles with your order.
May I ask what brand of liquid sucralose you would reccommend? I just started using Splenda and I was unaware of the 3 calories per gram too. I would love to try it but I see so many different ones on Amazon including one made by Splenda and I'm not sure what to look out for. Thank you!
I've tried another brand before, but have come to prefer the delivery system for SucraDrops. Plus the little travel size is adorable.
That is the exact one I was looking at, thank you!0 -
Iced skinny latte or iced coffee ^-^ if I'm having a rough day I'll read a book and drink one0
-
midwesterner85 wrote: »For all of those who are saying "But everything has calories except water" - I don't think the idea was for things that literally have no calories, but for ideas of foods that have nearly zero calories. For some of us volume eaters, those foods make a huge difference. There is an enormous calorie difference between eating 36 oz. of peanut butter vs. eating 2 gallons of pickles. Yes, pickles have calories, but it is so close to zero that eating in large quantities when hungry is rarely going to put someone over their calories goals unless they are already at or above their daily limit.
I'm pretty sure these types of foods with very low calorie content for high volumes of food is what OP is looking for.
Uh, 2 gallons of pickles is around 450-500 cals. That's hardly zero and a large quantity could easily put someone over their daily calorie limit if they make the mistake of thinking 'they are so close to zero'. And I'm pretty sure no one needs the ~60,000 mg of sodium that goes along with that.3 -
I like saurkraut as a low calorie munch food. It's good cold or warmed up and has such a strong flavour that my tastebuds don't want anything afterwards.0
-
nursemommytanya wrote: »What are your favorite free foods to get you through a rough patch? I love broth but use it sparingly because of the sodium.
Pickles are my 'free food', no calories but you still get to crunch down and chew something.0 -
nursemommytanya wrote: »What are your favorite free foods to get you through a rough patch? I love broth but use it sparingly because of the sodium.
Pickles are my 'free food', no calories but you still get to crunch down and chew something.
Remember that pickles do have (minimal) calories - the label can say 0 because they are under 5 cals a serve, but multiple serves = calories.2 -
Not calorie free but for low cal snacks I like melba toast with salsa and sliced cheese, sliced apples with peanut butter, light popcorn, low fat crackers with laughing cow cheese or sliced cucumbers with tzaziki dip0
-
Nony_Mouse wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For all of those who are saying "But everything has calories except water" - I don't think the idea was for things that literally have no calories, but for ideas of foods that have nearly zero calories. For some of us volume eaters, those foods make a huge difference. There is an enormous calorie difference between eating 36 oz. of peanut butter vs. eating 2 gallons of pickles. Yes, pickles have calories, but it is so close to zero that eating in large quantities when hungry is rarely going to put someone over their calories goals unless they are already at or above their daily limit.
I'm pretty sure these types of foods with very low calorie content for high volumes of food is what OP is looking for.
Uh, 2 gallons of pickles is around 450-500 cals. That's hardly zero and a large quantity could easily put someone over their daily calorie limit if they make the mistake of thinking 'they are so close to zero'. And I'm pretty sure no one needs the ~60,000 mg of sodium that goes along with that.
It is much better than 6K calories of peanut butter... which would you choose if you were trying to lose weight and were hangry?
The pickles I have right now are about 32K mg of sodium for 2 gallons.1 -
While all foods have calories, some have "negative" calories because it takes more calories to eat and burn them the food itself has. I found these in a list of negative calorie foods. Of these, I think I'll pass on the tomatoes, cauliflower and hot chili peppers. Other than that, I find them all yummy and snack worthy
Celery
Oranges
Strawberries
Tangerines
Grapefruit
Carrots
Apricots
Lettuce
Tomatoes
Cucumbers
Watermelon
Cauliflower
Apples
Hot Chili Peppers
Zucchini
0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For all of those who are saying "But everything has calories except water" - I don't think the idea was for things that literally have no calories, but for ideas of foods that have nearly zero calories. For some of us volume eaters, those foods make a huge difference. There is an enormous calorie difference between eating 36 oz. of peanut butter vs. eating 2 gallons of pickles. Yes, pickles have calories, but it is so close to zero that eating in large quantities when hungry is rarely going to put someone over their calories goals unless they are already at or above their daily limit.
I'm pretty sure these types of foods with very low calorie content for high volumes of food is what OP is looking for.
Uh, 2 gallons of pickles is around 450-500 cals. That's hardly zero and a large quantity could easily put someone over their daily calorie limit if they make the mistake of thinking 'they are so close to zero'. And I'm pretty sure no one needs the ~60,000 mg of sodium that goes along with that.
It is much better than 6K calories of peanut butter... which would you choose if you were trying to lose weight and were hangry?
The pickles I have right now are about 32K mg of sodium for 2 gallons.
Who eats 36 oz of peanut butter or two gallons of pickles? I can't figure out why you measure everything in such huge quantities.1 -
While all foods have calories, some have "negative" calories because it takes more calories to eat and burn them the food itself has. I found these in a list of negative calorie foods. Of these, I think I'll pass on the tomatoes, cauliflower and hot chili peppers. Other than that, I find them all yummy and snack worthy
Celery
Oranges
Strawberries
Tangerines
Grapefruit
Carrots
Apricots
Lettuce
Tomatoes
Cucumbers
Watermelon
Cauliflower
Apples
Hot Chili Peppers
Zucchini
That's a complete myth, I'm afraid. It's been debunked a number of times over. There is no such thing as a negative calorie food.7 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »While all foods have calories, some have "negative" calories because it takes more calories to eat and burn them the food itself has. I found these in a list of negative calorie foods. Of these, I think I'll pass on the tomatoes, cauliflower and hot chili peppers. Other than that, I find them all yummy and snack worthy
Celery
Oranges
Strawberries
Tangerines
Grapefruit
Carrots
Apricots
Lettuce
Tomatoes
Cucumbers
Watermelon
Cauliflower
Apples
Hot Chili Peppers
Zucchini
That's a complete myth, I'm afraid. It's been debunked a number of times over. There is no such thing as a negative calorie food.
I just had a conversation with my mom this weekend that I'm pretty sure I could gain weight on JUST watermelon. I love fruits and veggies and I WISH this were true.2 -
I have a personal issue with any food being called 'free', regardless of calorie content - the fact is, no food is calorie free and by labelling something as a 'free food' you're taking away the need to be conscious of what you're consuming.
As for the comment above regarding 'volume eaters';
The whole idea of a positive lifestyle change is to enrich your life and be sustainable long term - there's absolutely no reason why you can't incorporate these low calorie foods as a snack when you're hungry, so long as you understand that just like everything else in life - moderation is key!
Changing habits of a lifetime is difficult but without embracing a learning curve and making the changes necessary, you're simply spinning your wheels!3 -
kk_inprogress wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »While all foods have calories, some have "negative" calories because it takes more calories to eat and burn them the food itself has. I found these in a list of negative calorie foods. Of these, I think I'll pass on the tomatoes, cauliflower and hot chili peppers. Other than that, I find them all yummy and snack worthy
Celery
Oranges
Strawberries
Tangerines
Grapefruit
Carrots
Apricots
Lettuce
Tomatoes
Cucumbers
Watermelon
Cauliflower
Apples
Hot Chili Peppers
Zucchini
That's a complete myth, I'm afraid. It's been debunked a number of times over. There is no such thing as a negative calorie food.
I just had a conversation with my mom this weekend that I'm pretty sure I could gain weight on JUST watermelon. I love fruits and veggies and I WISH this were true.
Our local news website ran an article just a couple months ago saying "OMG! Mayo clinic doctor confirms negative calore foods!" and purported to quote Donald Hensrud, M.D. who IS a Mayo Clinic doctor and has this to say:
http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/weight-loss/expert-answers/negative-calorie-foods/faq-200582601 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »kk_inprogress wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »While all foods have calories, some have "negative" calories because it takes more calories to eat and burn them the food itself has. I found these in a list of negative calorie foods. Of these, I think I'll pass on the tomatoes, cauliflower and hot chili peppers. Other than that, I find them all yummy and snack worthy
Celery
Oranges
Strawberries
Tangerines
Grapefruit
Carrots
Apricots
Lettuce
Tomatoes
Cucumbers
Watermelon
Cauliflower
Apples
Hot Chili Peppers
Zucchini
That's a complete myth, I'm afraid. It's been debunked a number of times over. There is no such thing as a negative calorie food.
I just had a conversation with my mom this weekend that I'm pretty sure I could gain weight on JUST watermelon. I love fruits and veggies and I WISH this were true.
Our local news website ran an article just a couple months ago saying "OMG! Mayo clinic doctor confirms negative calore foods!" and purported to quote Donald Hensrud, M.D. who IS a Mayo Clinic doctor and has this to say:
http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/weight-loss/expert-answers/negative-calorie-foods/faq-20058260
So you're saying my all-watermelon diet is a bad idea?? Because nutrients? Crap.3 -
PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »Did someone say free food?
Soulmate - at long last I have found you!4 -
While all foods have calories, some have "negative" calories because it takes more calories to eat and burn them the food itself has. I found these in a list of negative calorie foods. Of these, I think I'll pass on the tomatoes, cauliflower and hot chili peppers. Other than that, I find them all yummy and snack worthy
Celery
Oranges
Strawberries
Tangerines
Grapefruit
Carrots
Apricots
Lettuce
Tomatoes
Cucumbers
Watermelon
Cauliflower
Apples
Hot Chili Peppers
Zucchini
You may as well pass on all of them, because there is no such thing as a "negative calorie food". Google TEF (Thermic Effect of Food) and you'll learn exactly why this is a myth.3 -
kk_inprogress wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For all of those who are saying "But everything has calories except water" - I don't think the idea was for things that literally have no calories, but for ideas of foods that have nearly zero calories. For some of us volume eaters, those foods make a huge difference. There is an enormous calorie difference between eating 36 oz. of peanut butter vs. eating 2 gallons of pickles. Yes, pickles have calories, but it is so close to zero that eating in large quantities when hungry is rarely going to put someone over their calories goals unless they are already at or above their daily limit.
I'm pretty sure these types of foods with very low calorie content for high volumes of food is what OP is looking for.
Uh, 2 gallons of pickles is around 450-500 cals. That's hardly zero and a large quantity could easily put someone over their daily calorie limit if they make the mistake of thinking 'they are so close to zero'. And I'm pretty sure no one needs the ~60,000 mg of sodium that goes along with that.
It is much better than 6K calories of peanut butter... which would you choose if you were trying to lose weight and were hangry?
The pickles I have right now are about 32K mg of sodium for 2 gallons.
Who eats 36 oz of peanut butter or two gallons of pickles? I can't figure out why you measure everything in such huge quantities.
My initial point (emphasis added):midwesterner85 wrote: »For all of those who are saying "But everything has calories except water" - I don't think the idea was for things that literally have no calories, but for ideas of foods that have nearly zero calories. For some of us volume eaters, those foods make a huge difference. There is an enormous calorie difference between eating 36 oz. of peanut butter vs. eating 2 gallons of pickles. Yes, pickles have calories, but it is so close to zero that eating in large quantities when hungry is rarely going to put someone over their calories goals unless they are already at or above their daily limit.
I'm pretty sure these types of foods with very low calorie content for high volumes of food is what OP is looking for.
FTR, I have also eaten 36 oz. of peanut butter in a single sitting. Some of us have an appetite that takes a lot to fill. I'm pretty sure OP is asking for ideas to fill that appetite with a low calorie:satiety ratio. It's OK if you don't understand what it is like to be hungry all the time without eating a lot of food.1 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For all of those who are saying "But everything has calories except water" - I don't think the idea was for things that literally have no calories, but for ideas of foods that have nearly zero calories. For some of us volume eaters, those foods make a huge difference. There is an enormous calorie difference between eating 36 oz. of peanut butter vs. eating 2 gallons of pickles. Yes, pickles have calories, but it is so close to zero that eating in large quantities when hungry is rarely going to put someone over their calories goals unless they are already at or above their daily limit.
I'm pretty sure these types of foods with very low calorie content for high volumes of food is what OP is looking for.
Uh, 2 gallons of pickles is around 450-500 cals. That's hardly zero and a large quantity could easily put someone over their daily calorie limit if they make the mistake of thinking 'they are so close to zero'. And I'm pretty sure no one needs the ~60,000 mg of sodium that goes along with that.
It is much better than 6K calories of peanut butter... which would you choose if you were trying to lose weight and were hangry?
The pickles I have right now are about 32K mg of sodium for 2 gallons.
Sure it's better than eating 6k cals of peanut butter, but the point is you are being misleading by saying you can eat a large volume for virtually no calories or that said large volume is unlikely to put anyone over their calorie goals.0 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »For all of those who are saying "But everything has calories except water" - I don't think the idea was for things that literally have no calories, but for ideas of foods that have nearly zero calories. For some of us volume eaters, those foods make a huge difference. There is an enormous calorie difference between eating 36 oz. of peanut butter vs. eating 2 gallons of pickles. Yes, pickles have calories, but it is so close to zero that eating in large quantities when hungry is rarely going to put someone over their calories goals unless they are already at or above their daily limit.
I'm pretty sure these types of foods with very low calorie content for high volumes of food is what OP is looking for.
Uh, 2 gallons of pickles is around 450-500 cals. That's hardly zero and a large quantity could easily put someone over their daily calorie limit if they make the mistake of thinking 'they are so close to zero'. And I'm pretty sure no one needs the ~60,000 mg of sodium that goes along with that.
It is much better than 6K calories of peanut butter... which would you choose if you were trying to lose weight and were hangry?
The pickles I have right now are about 32K mg of sodium for 2 gallons.
Sure it's better than eating 6k cals of peanut butter, but the point is you are being misleading by saying you can eat a large volume for virtually no calories or that said large volume is unlikely to put anyone over their calorie goals.
Fair enough - it depends on how close one is to their calorie goal at that point. The alternative noted is going to put nearly everyone over their calorie goal.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 399 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 978 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions