"You can eat whaver you want, as long as you eat at a deficit" is true, but it's garbage advice.
Options
Replies
-
LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
Really love this.
But it seems to be based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the OP. OP wasn't describing the method that worked for them personally, they were saying that people who had success with other methods were offering "garbage advice."
In reality, there are people who do really well while eliminating or heavily restricting certain foods. And there are other people who do really well without eliminating foods.
For me personally, the concept of "good" and "bad" foods sets me up for failure and it sets me up for binges. The "garbage advice" OP is complaining about is what finally enabled me to lose weight and keep it off relatively easily.
I have no problem with anyone who doesn't want to eat [x] ever again because they know it's the best way for them. But the reason threads like this tend to get out of control is because people assume that their path to success is the only path.
I read the OP as saying that people saying "CICO works for me, therefore it must work everyone" was the garbage advice.
OP wrote: "So when someone tells you you can have junk food, don't listen to them, not because they are lying to you - they aren't, it's true - but because the advice isn't helpful in practice."
That's the "garbage advice" OP is identifying -- that one can have "junk food." But that's not garbage at all. Everyone can lose weight on a calorie deficit. Does this mean that things like satiety, nutrition, and the desire to overeat tasty food don't exist? Of course not. Does it mean everyone will be able to stick to their plan if they're including "junk food"? No -- because psychological factors can make a huge impact on someone's ability to actually meet a goal.
This is why you'll see everyone giving the "garbage advice" also giving advice like "Make sure you're meeting your needs for protein and fat" or "Pay attention to what meal timing works best for you" and "Understand what foods can be riskier for you to have in the house" and so on.
But there's nothing inherent about including some "junk food" in your diet that means that you won't lose weight. If I have a nutritious lunch and then have some mini oatmeal cookies (like I did today), the lunch doesn't get cancelled out.
The whole idea that everyone either must eat "junk food" or never eat "junk food" is silly. There are lots of people who will do great including "junk food" in a calorie deficit and there are also many people who find including "junk food" to be too frustrating, too much of an effort in self-control, too whatever. So in that sense, the garbage advice is coming from whoever is telling you that there is only one way and that anybody who had success with a different method is peddling "garbage."
It's a lie that not everyone can stick to portion control when eating "junk food." I did and I do and I know I'm not alone. Some people might rather skip tortilla chips than have one ounce, but I'd rather have that ounce. I'd rather have it because I know from experience that when I try to *not* have them, I eventually wind up eating the whole bag anyway. So this works for me, just like eliminating them works well for other people.11 -
LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
Really love this.
But it seems to be based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the OP. OP wasn't describing the method that worked for them personally, they were saying that people who had success with other methods were offering "garbage advice."
In reality, there are people who do really well while eliminating or heavily restricting certain foods. And there are other people who do really well without eliminating foods.
For me personally, the concept of "good" and "bad" foods sets me up for failure and it sets me up for binges. The "garbage advice" OP is complaining about is what finally enabled me to lose weight and keep it off relatively easily.
I have no problem with anyone who doesn't want to eat [x] ever again because they know it's the best way for them. But the reason threads like this tend to get out of control is because people assume that their path to success is the only path.
I read the OP as saying that people saying "CICO works for me, therefore it must work everyone" was the garbage advice.
I seriously feel like I am beating my head against the wall.
CICO DOES work for everyone. It is not a way of eating. It doesn't have anything to do with foods. It is an energy balance. That is all.20 -
-
AntoinetteAngus wrote: »
Really? I have success rates with ALL my clients and I don't preach eating "clean" at all. In fact, I do tell them to eat whatever they like AS LONG AS they don't exceed the calorie intake set for them. Do you know why people fail at diets? Because they usually are restricted from eating things they actually like. If one LEARNS how to control how much of something like eat, then the chances are higher that they will adhere to that habitual behavior.People don't want to eat 1 slice of pizza, or a 1/4 of a plate of Loco Rice, or 7 chili cheese fries. They want to have a meal. If you eat the "right amount" of junk food to stay within your calorie limits, you're going to be starving to death and it's going to cause you to eat more. Eating food that doesn't taste as good as what you want is much better than satisfying a craving and then derailing later because you were so hungry you caved. There are a few people around here who have done their time, lost their weight, and they are in good shape. These people give advice from the "look at me, I lost a ton of weight so I know what I'm doing" stand point, but seem to have forgotten what it was like to ACTUALLY live as a fat person. So when someone tells you you can have junk food, don't listen to them, not because they are lying to you - they aren't, it's true - but because the advice isn't helpful in practice.
Sorry if you can't do it, but that's an issue you deal with that you have to fix. Unless you have some actual peer reviewed clinical study that one CAN'T be taught moderation, you're just opining what you believe.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
To me this is extremely concerning coming from a 'so-called' Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer. You should be socially responsible and teach your client to aim to eat clean at least 70% of the time. It seems like anyone can become a Certified Trainer these days and most of them are completely out of shape. Where exactly did this notion of eating whatever you want whenever you want as long as it fits in your calorie goals come from? You are being lied to and thank you to the original poster for starting this discussion.
OK, I will bite: what am I supposed to eat 70% of the time and what do I get to eat 30% of the time?
Is that counted by meals? (Salad meal vs big Mac meal)?
Is it counted within meals? (Pizza and salad)?
Is it counted by days? (I ate clean today but not yestersay?)
do we count by volume or by calories?
Serious question.
I'm liking you more & more, @PAV8888
3 -
LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
Really love this.
But it seems to be based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the OP. OP wasn't describing the method that worked for them personally, they were saying that people who had success with other methods were offering "garbage advice."
In reality, there are people who do really well while eliminating or heavily restricting certain foods. And there are other people who do really well without eliminating foods.
For me personally, the concept of "good" and "bad" foods sets me up for failure and it sets me up for binges. The "garbage advice" OP is complaining about is what finally enabled me to lose weight and keep it off relatively easily.
I have no problem with anyone who doesn't want to eat [x] ever again because they know it's the best way for them. But the reason threads like this tend to get out of control is because people assume that their path to success is the only path.
I read the OP as saying that people saying "CICO works for me, therefore it must work everyone" was the garbage advice.
Could you point out where OP thinks CICO is "garbage advice"? Because I did not read that.
People don't want to eat 1 slice of pizza, or a 1/4 of a plate of Loco Rice, or 7 chili cheese fries. They want to have a meal. If you eat the "right amount" of junk food to stay within your calorie limits, you're going to be starving to death and it's going to cause you to eat more. Eating food that doesn't taste as good as what you want is much better than satisfying a craving and then derailing later because you were so hungry you caved. There are a few people around here who have done their time, lost their weight, and they are in good shape. These people give advice from the "look at me, I lost a ton of weight so I know what I'm doing" stand point, but seem to have forgotten what it was like to ACTUALLY live as a fat person. So when someone tells you you can have junk food, don't listen to them, not because they are lying to you - they aren't, it's true - but because the advice isn't helpful in practice.
CICO is the ONLY way to lose weight. Semantics aside. Bottom line is to lose weight, eat less calories than your body is burning. How you arrive at your personal calorie deficit is up to each of us. It is helpful in practice, because I know from personal experience that because I have been successful this time (so far) because of a post I read on MFP saying enjoy all foods in moderation. -27 pounds since 1/1/17, so I say it can, and does work for me.
3 -
3rdof7sisters wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
Really love this.
But it seems to be based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the OP. OP wasn't describing the method that worked for them personally, they were saying that people who had success with other methods were offering "garbage advice."
In reality, there are people who do really well while eliminating or heavily restricting certain foods. And there are other people who do really well without eliminating foods.
For me personally, the concept of "good" and "bad" foods sets me up for failure and it sets me up for binges. The "garbage advice" OP is complaining about is what finally enabled me to lose weight and keep it off relatively easily.
I have no problem with anyone who doesn't want to eat [x] ever again because they know it's the best way for them. But the reason threads like this tend to get out of control is because people assume that their path to success is the only path.
I read the OP as saying that people saying "CICO works for me, therefore it must work everyone" was the garbage advice.
Could you point out where OP thinks CICO is "garbage advice"? Because I did not read that.
People don't want to eat 1 slice of pizza, or a 1/4 of a plate of Loco Rice, or 7 chili cheese fries. They want to have a meal. If you eat the "right amount" of junk food to stay within your calorie limits, you're going to be starving to death and it's going to cause you to eat more. Eating food that doesn't taste as good as what you want is much better than satisfying a craving and then derailing later because you were so hungry you caved. There are a few people around here who have done their time, lost their weight, and they are in good shape. These people give advice from the "look at me, I lost a ton of weight so I know what I'm doing" stand point, but seem to have forgotten what it was like to ACTUALLY live as a fat person. So when someone tells you you can have junk food, don't listen to them, not because they are lying to you - they aren't, it's true - but because the advice isn't helpful in practice.
CICO is the ONLY way to lose weight. Semantics aside. Bottom line is to lose weight, eat less calories than your body is burning. How you arrive at your personal calorie deficit is up to each of us. It is helpful in practice, because I know from personal experience that because I have been successful this time (so far) because of a post I read on MFP saying enjoy all foods in moderation. -27 pounds since 1/1/17, so I say it can, and does work for me.
well, the title of the thread is you-can-eat-whaver-you-want-as-long-as-you-eat-at-a-deficit-is-true-but-its-garbage-advice5 -
WinoGelato wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
Really love this.
But it seems to be based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the OP. OP wasn't describing the method that worked for them personally, they were saying that people who had success with other methods were offering "garbage advice."
In reality, there are people who do really well while eliminating or heavily restricting certain foods. And there are other people who do really well without eliminating foods.
For me personally, the concept of "good" and "bad" foods sets me up for failure and it sets me up for binges. The "garbage advice" OP is complaining about is what finally enabled me to lose weight and keep it off relatively easily.
I have no problem with anyone who doesn't want to eat [x] ever again because they know it's the best way for them. But the reason threads like this tend to get out of control is because people assume that their path to success is the only path.
I read the OP as saying that people saying "CICO works for me, therefore it must work everyone" was the garbage advice.
I seriously feel like I am beating my head against the wall.
CICO DOES work for everyone. It is not a way of eating. It doesn't have anything to do with foods. It is an energy balance. That is all.
Yeah this.
No matter how you get there... IIFYM, Keto, Low/No Carb etc.. it all comes down to CICO. CICO isn't a diet, it's an equation that no matter what way you eat...it all comes back to that. CICO does work for everyone.. that's a fact, how you make the CICO work for you in regards to how you eat is up to the individual person.11 -
WinoGelato wrote: »
Sorry. Carlos took them all already.6 -
janejellyroll wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
Really love this.
But it seems to be based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the OP. OP wasn't describing the method that worked for them personally, they were saying that people who had success with other methods were offering "garbage advice."
In reality, there are people who do really well while eliminating or heavily restricting certain foods. And there are other people who do really well without eliminating foods.
For me personally, the concept of "good" and "bad" foods sets me up for failure and it sets me up for binges. The "garbage advice" OP is complaining about is what finally enabled me to lose weight and keep it off relatively easily.
I have no problem with anyone who doesn't want to eat [x] ever again because they know it's the best way for them. But the reason threads like this tend to get out of control is because people assume that their path to success is the only path.
I read the OP as saying that people saying "CICO works for me, therefore it must work everyone" was the garbage advice.
OP wrote: "So when someone tells you you can have junk food, don't listen to them, not because they are lying to you - they aren't, it's true - but because the advice isn't helpful in practice."
That's the "garbage advice" OP is identifying -- that one can have "junk food." But that's not garbage at all. Everyone can lose weight on a calorie deficit. Does this mean that things like satiety, nutrition, and the desire to overeat tasty food don't exist? Of course not. Does it mean everyone will be able to stick to their plan if they're including "junk food"? No -- because psychological factors can make a huge impact on someone's ability to actually meet a goal.
This is why you'll see everyone giving the "garbage advice" also giving advice like "Make sure you're meeting your needs for protein and fat" or "Pay attention to what meal timing works best for you" and "Understand what foods can be riskier for you to have in the house" and so on.
But there's nothing inherent about including some "junk food" in your diet that means that you won't lose weight. If I have a nutritious lunch and then have some mini oatmeal cookies (like I did today), the lunch doesn't get cancelled out.
The whole idea that everyone either must eat "junk food" or never eat "junk food" is silly. There are lots of people who will do great including "junk food" in a calorie deficit and there are also many people who find including "junk food" to be too frustrating, too much of an effort in self-control, too whatever. So in that sense, the garbage advice is coming from whoever is telling you that there is only one way and that anybody who had success with a different method is peddling "garbage."
It's a lie that not everyone can stick to portion control when eating "junk food." I did and I do and I know I'm not alone. Some people might rather skip tortilla chips than have one ounce, but I'd rather have that ounce. I'd rather have it because I know from experience that when I try to *not* have them, I eventually wind up eating the whole bag anyway. So this works for me, just like eliminating them works well for other people.
You're right, I was mixing up posts a bit. Sorry about that. The post I originally responded to, yeah, I liked it. Not apologizing for that. There are times when the advise given here is really open minded and kindly given and times when it comes across like newmeadow mentioned. When I say "CICO works for everyone" I'm not talking about the basic science of it. I know that's the equation. There is a tone, and often outright phrases, from the "everything in moderation" crowd that sounds like the above. Not from everyone and I'm not saying the OP is correct in doing the same thing.0 -
Deleted, explanation below3
-
WinoGelato wrote: »
Sorry. Carlos took them all already.
*kitten* me. Any Girl Scout cookies to spare?1 -
LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
Really love this.
But it seems to be based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the OP. OP wasn't describing the method that worked for them personally, they were saying that people who had success with other methods were offering "garbage advice."
In reality, there are people who do really well while eliminating or heavily restricting certain foods. And there are other people who do really well without eliminating foods.
For me personally, the concept of "good" and "bad" foods sets me up for failure and it sets me up for binges. The "garbage advice" OP is complaining about is what finally enabled me to lose weight and keep it off relatively easily.
I have no problem with anyone who doesn't want to eat [x] ever again because they know it's the best way for them. But the reason threads like this tend to get out of control is because people assume that their path to success is the only path.
I read the OP as saying that people saying "CICO works for me, therefore it must work everyone" was the garbage advice.
OP wrote: "So when someone tells you you can have junk food, don't listen to them, not because they are lying to you - they aren't, it's true - but because the advice isn't helpful in practice."
That's the "garbage advice" OP is identifying -- that one can have "junk food." But that's not garbage at all. Everyone can lose weight on a calorie deficit. Does this mean that things like satiety, nutrition, and the desire to overeat tasty food don't exist? Of course not. Does it mean everyone will be able to stick to their plan if they're including "junk food"? No -- because psychological factors can make a huge impact on someone's ability to actually meet a goal.
This is why you'll see everyone giving the "garbage advice" also giving advice like "Make sure you're meeting your needs for protein and fat" or "Pay attention to what meal timing works best for you" and "Understand what foods can be riskier for you to have in the house" and so on.
But there's nothing inherent about including some "junk food" in your diet that means that you won't lose weight. If I have a nutritious lunch and then have some mini oatmeal cookies (like I did today), the lunch doesn't get cancelled out.
The whole idea that everyone either must eat "junk food" or never eat "junk food" is silly. There are lots of people who will do great including "junk food" in a calorie deficit and there are also many people who find including "junk food" to be too frustrating, too much of an effort in self-control, too whatever. So in that sense, the garbage advice is coming from whoever is telling you that there is only one way and that anybody who had success with a different method is peddling "garbage."
It's a lie that not everyone can stick to portion control when eating "junk food." I did and I do and I know I'm not alone. Some people might rather skip tortilla chips than have one ounce, but I'd rather have that ounce. I'd rather have it because I know from experience that when I try to *not* have them, I eventually wind up eating the whole bag anyway. So this works for me, just like eliminating them works well for other people.
You're right, I was mixing up posts a bit. Sorry about that. The post I originally responded to, yeah, I liked it. Not apologizing for that. There are times when the advise given here is really open minded and kindly given and times when it comes across like newmeadow mentioned. When I say "CICO works for everyone" I'm not talking about the basic science of it. I know that's the equation. There is a tone, and often outright phrases, from the "everything in moderation" crowd that sounds like the above. Not from everyone and I'm not saying the OP is correct in doing the same thing.
I don't expect you to apologize for liking anything, I was just pointing out that if OP was "piled on," as @newmeadow wrote, it has more to do with their blanket declaration that nobody can succeed if they don't eliminate "junk food" from their diet than people being upset that someone might not want to eat junk food.
I would say the majority of "moderation" people don't care if other people eat "junk" or not, they're (we're) just more concerned that there are still so many people who are convinced that you have to eliminate certain foods in order to have success. We're either watching people on the merry-go-round and failing or we've successfully escaped the merry-go-round and we're trying to help. We still see daily posts in here from people convinced they can't lose weight if they don't go low carbohydrate or low fat or eliminate fast food or never have added sugar or go dairy-free or whatever. It's not like we're attacking some embattled minority position here -- part of the reason why the US (and some other western countries) struggle so much with obesity is because of the false idea that there is a "perfect" diet that one must meet or otherwise not bother to even try.
The truth: there is probably is no perfect diet, CICO is the key to weight loss, there are multiple strategies for making CICO work for you, and one of those strategies is to include all kinds of different foods in the context of hitting a calorie/macro goal.7 -
3rdof7sisters wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
Really love this.
But it seems to be based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the OP. OP wasn't describing the method that worked for them personally, they were saying that people who had success with other methods were offering "garbage advice."
In reality, there are people who do really well while eliminating or heavily restricting certain foods. And there are other people who do really well without eliminating foods.
For me personally, the concept of "good" and "bad" foods sets me up for failure and it sets me up for binges. The "garbage advice" OP is complaining about is what finally enabled me to lose weight and keep it off relatively easily.
I have no problem with anyone who doesn't want to eat [x] ever again because they know it's the best way for them. But the reason threads like this tend to get out of control is because people assume that their path to success is the only path.
I read the OP as saying that people saying "CICO works for me, therefore it must work everyone" was the garbage advice.
Could you point out where OP thinks CICO is "garbage advice"? Because I did not read that.
People don't want to eat 1 slice of pizza, or a 1/4 of a plate of Loco Rice, or 7 chili cheese fries. They want to have a meal. If you eat the "right amount" of junk food to stay within your calorie limits, you're going to be starving to death and it's going to cause you to eat more. Eating food that doesn't taste as good as what you want is much better than satisfying a craving and then derailing later because you were so hungry you caved. There are a few people around here who have done their time, lost their weight, and they are in good shape. These people give advice from the "look at me, I lost a ton of weight so I know what I'm doing" stand point, but seem to have forgotten what it was like to ACTUALLY live as a fat person. So when someone tells you you can have junk food, don't listen to them, not because they are lying to you - they aren't, it's true - but because the advice isn't helpful in practice.
CICO is the ONLY way to lose weight. Semantics aside. Bottom line is to lose weight, eat less calories than your body is burning. How you arrive at your personal calorie deficit is up to each of us. It is helpful in practice, because I know from personal experience that because I have been successful this time (so far) because of a post I read on MFP saying enjoy all foods in moderation. -27 pounds since 1/1/17, so I say it can, and does work for me.
But this is just not true, and keeps being repeated as a blanket statement. I'm fine with fitting a piece of pizza or a few small cookies into my calorie budget (and I only have 1200), and would eat all the foods if I limited myself to eating things that aren't very appealing to me, and in fact have done this in the past. I've successfully lost over 30 lbs and am continuing to lose without having to fight cravings every step of the way. I want to also note that my appetite isn't magically suppressed because I'm smaller and need fewer calories, and eating things I like is an important part of dealing with restriction in other areas of my diet. It's just offensive to generalize personal approaches to managing food to everyone
It may not be true for you, but it is true for me. I am eating whatever I want, in moderation, and have lost 27 pounds in 79 days.
Because for whatever reason, people can not eat certain foods without eating too much, doesn't mean others can not eat whatever they want in moderation, and successfully lose weight.
It IS all about eating less calories than you burn for weight loss. The only difference is how you choose to spend your available calories. It is a personal decision what foods you eat. If you can not eat certain foods with out bingeing, by all means limit yourself. Some of us can, and do, fit the calories in each and every day, and stay within our calorie budget.
4 -
3rdof7sisters wrote: »3rdof7sisters wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
Really love this.
But it seems to be based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the OP. OP wasn't describing the method that worked for them personally, they were saying that people who had success with other methods were offering "garbage advice."
In reality, there are people who do really well while eliminating or heavily restricting certain foods. And there are other people who do really well without eliminating foods.
For me personally, the concept of "good" and "bad" foods sets me up for failure and it sets me up for binges. The "garbage advice" OP is complaining about is what finally enabled me to lose weight and keep it off relatively easily.
I have no problem with anyone who doesn't want to eat [x] ever again because they know it's the best way for them. But the reason threads like this tend to get out of control is because people assume that their path to success is the only path.
I read the OP as saying that people saying "CICO works for me, therefore it must work everyone" was the garbage advice.
Could you point out where OP thinks CICO is "garbage advice"? Because I did not read that.
People don't want to eat 1 slice of pizza, or a 1/4 of a plate of Loco Rice, or 7 chili cheese fries. They want to have a meal. If you eat the "right amount" of junk food to stay within your calorie limits, you're going to be starving to death and it's going to cause you to eat more. Eating food that doesn't taste as good as what you want is much better than satisfying a craving and then derailing later because you were so hungry you caved. There are a few people around here who have done their time, lost their weight, and they are in good shape. These people give advice from the "look at me, I lost a ton of weight so I know what I'm doing" stand point, but seem to have forgotten what it was like to ACTUALLY live as a fat person. So when someone tells you you can have junk food, don't listen to them, not because they are lying to you - they aren't, it's true - but because the advice isn't helpful in practice.
CICO is the ONLY way to lose weight. Semantics aside. Bottom line is to lose weight, eat less calories than your body is burning. How you arrive at your personal calorie deficit is up to each of us. It is helpful in practice, because I know from personal experience that because I have been successful this time (so far) because of a post I read on MFP saying enjoy all foods in moderation. -27 pounds since 1/1/17, so I say it can, and does work for me.
But this is just not true, and keeps being repeated as a blanket statement. I'm fine with fitting a piece of pizza or a few small cookies into my calorie budget (and I only have 1200), and would eat all the foods if I limited myself to eating things that aren't very appealing to me, and in fact have done this in the past. I've successfully lost over 30 lbs and am continuing to lose without having to fight cravings every step of the way. I want to also note that my appetite isn't magically suppressed because I'm smaller and need fewer calories, and eating things I like is an important part of dealing with restriction in other areas of my diet. It's just offensive to generalize personal approaches to managing food to everyone
It may not be true for you, but it is true for me. I am eating whatever I want, in moderation, and have lost 27 pounds in 79 days.
Because for whatever reason, people can not eat certain foods without eating too much, doesn't mean others can not eat whatever they want in moderation, and successfully lose weight.
It IS all about eating less calories than you burn for weight loss. The only difference is how you choose to spend your available calories. It is a personal decision what foods you eat. If you can not eat certain foods with out bingeing, by all means limit yourself. Some of us can, and do, fit the calories in each and every day, and stay within our calorie budget.
psssttt...
I think you and @mph323 are saying the same thing. It is OP that believes that most people aren't satisfied with smaller portions of foods they love, and therefore, none of us should be advocating that as an approach. Most of the rest of us, find that to be a viable solution, that has generated much success for us.4 -
Deleted, explanation below0
-
AntoinetteAngus wrote: »
Really? I have success rates with ALL my clients and I don't preach eating "clean" at all. In fact, I do tell them to eat whatever they like AS LONG AS they don't exceed the calorie intake set for them. Do you know why people fail at diets? Because they usually are restricted from eating things they actually like. If one LEARNS how to control how much of something like eat, then the chances are higher that they will adhere to that habitual behavior.People don't want to eat 1 slice of pizza, or a 1/4 of a plate of Loco Rice, or 7 chili cheese fries. They want to have a meal. If you eat the "right amount" of junk food to stay within your calorie limits, you're going to be starving to death and it's going to cause you to eat more. Eating food that doesn't taste as good as what you want is much better than satisfying a craving and then derailing later because you were so hungry you caved. There are a few people around here who have done their time, lost their weight, and they are in good shape. These people give advice from the "look at me, I lost a ton of weight so I know what I'm doing" stand point, but seem to have forgotten what it was like to ACTUALLY live as a fat person. So when someone tells you you can have junk food, don't listen to them, not because they are lying to you - they aren't, it's true - but because the advice isn't helpful in practice.
Sorry if you can't do it, but that's an issue you deal with that you have to fix. Unless you have some actual peer reviewed clinical study that one CAN'T be taught moderation, you're just opining what you believe.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
To me this is extremely concerning coming from a 'so-called' Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer. You should be socially responsible and teach your client to aim to eat clean at least 70% of the time. It seems like anyone can become a Certified Trainer these days and most of them are completely out of shape. Where exactly did this notion of eating whatever you want whenever you want as long as it fits in your calorie goals come from? You are being lied to and thank you to the original poster for starting this discussion.
Personally, I think people should eat clean 100% of the time. I'm pretty sure 30% E. coli contaminated food is still bad for your health.
Wash your veg, people! Clean the kitchen!18 -
I've lost over 60lbs eating what I want, which sometimes includes eating two cheeseburgers, a triple cheesebuger, chocolates, cake, ect. I have not exercised a single time during this period.
Truly I think I might have a food addiction. So by wanting to eat the most food as I can, volume matters.
What foods have the least calories per gram? Lean meats like chicken, turkey. Veggies have few calories as well.
My diet has completely shifted from LOTS OF JUNK->Less junk->A little junk, but mostly whole foods prepared myself (just so I can eat more volume). I still eat like crap but it's a hell of a lot better than where I was.5 -
WinoGelato wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »3rdof7sisters wrote: »@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
And all I am saying is that IT ISN'T THE SAME FOR EVERYONE.
And it isn't "garbage advice, which the OP is claiming.
It is garbage advice for the people it doesn't work for. I don't eat candy bars and ice cream and batter fried shrimp in moderation. Telling me to make them fit my macros is garbage advice for me. I throw that advice in the metaphorical garbage. Apparently OP does too and the many people who liked and awesomed his original post.
Funny how touchy people are about the wording, since many who take issue with it have seemingly solved their overweight problem already.
I don't know exactly what nerves are being touched here or if it's just a keyboard warrior thing. But I know what doesn't work for me, OP knows what doesn't work for him and we're definitely not alone in this.
Again, I think we are getting mixed up here. As I stated above, we were responding to a poster who said CICO is bunk, NOT the OP. You quoted that post and said there are a number of ways a person can be successful, and both @Duchy82 and I agree with you, but want to reinforce (not necessarily to you but to @elisa123gal ) that regardless of the method - CICO is not bunk, it is the fundamental energy balance that drives ALL weight loss.
Again. This is not about the OP and what works for him and what he believes to be "garbage advice".
I'm glad you're okay with what the OP said then. Maybe I think you're alright after all.
At this point I have to think that you aren't even reading what I am writing. I am trying to clarify that you are taking points made to a different poster, as directed at the OP, when they are not.
No, I am not ok with what the OP said, I do not think that "eat what you want within a calorie deficit" is garbage advice, for so many of the reasons listed on this thread.
But this particular discussion (if you can call it that) that you and I are engaging in, IS NOT ABOUT THE OP, or his view points.
But now I have to ask, do you believe that CICO is a fundamental energy balance and that regardless of whether you eat vegan, LCHF, paleo, keto, IIFYM, Twinkie Diet, etc - if you lose weight, then CICO is at work?
Or do you also think that CICO is bunk?
Of course I'm reading what you're writing. I'm trying to exit the thread by lightening the mood because I have to go to work now. Otherwise I'd love to stay in this thread and yell at people for the rest of the day.
Dude, you've been here for a long time and so have I. You're paying attention to what goes on here and you've read my posts. You know I don't refute CICO, so stop it.
See you later late tonight if this thread is still here. It's been real.
I do know that you don't refute CICO. That's why I'm perplexed, that when @Duchy82 and I were responding to a person who said CICO is bunk, you chimed in with comments about the OP. Who didn't actually use the phrase CICO. This is why I am confused, and why I was trying to clarify, that my latest comments in this thread, which you seemed to take issue with, were directed at @elisa123gal, who hasn't actually been back to explain why she thinks CICO is bunk and if she understands that it isn't a way of eating, but rather, an energy balance equation.
0 -
3rdof7sisters wrote: »3rdof7sisters wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
Really love this.
But it seems to be based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the OP. OP wasn't describing the method that worked for them personally, they were saying that people who had success with other methods were offering "garbage advice."
In reality, there are people who do really well while eliminating or heavily restricting certain foods. And there are other people who do really well without eliminating foods.
For me personally, the concept of "good" and "bad" foods sets me up for failure and it sets me up for binges. The "garbage advice" OP is complaining about is what finally enabled me to lose weight and keep it off relatively easily.
I have no problem with anyone who doesn't want to eat [x] ever again because they know it's the best way for them. But the reason threads like this tend to get out of control is because people assume that their path to success is the only path.
I read the OP as saying that people saying "CICO works for me, therefore it must work everyone" was the garbage advice.
Could you point out where OP thinks CICO is "garbage advice"? Because I did not read that.
People don't want to eat 1 slice of pizza, or a 1/4 of a plate of Loco Rice, or 7 chili cheese fries. They want to have a meal. If you eat the "right amount" of junk food to stay within your calorie limits, you're going to be starving to death and it's going to cause you to eat more. Eating food that doesn't taste as good as what you want is much better than satisfying a craving and then derailing later because you were so hungry you caved. There are a few people around here who have done their time, lost their weight, and they are in good shape. These people give advice from the "look at me, I lost a ton of weight so I know what I'm doing" stand point, but seem to have forgotten what it was like to ACTUALLY live as a fat person. So when someone tells you you can have junk food, don't listen to them, not because they are lying to you - they aren't, it's true - but because the advice isn't helpful in practice.
CICO is the ONLY way to lose weight. Semantics aside. Bottom line is to lose weight, eat less calories than your body is burning. How you arrive at your personal calorie deficit is up to each of us. It is helpful in practice, because I know from personal experience that because I have been successful this time (so far) because of a post I read on MFP saying enjoy all foods in moderation. -27 pounds since 1/1/17, so I say it can, and does work for me.
But this is just not true, and keeps being repeated as a blanket statement. I'm fine with fitting a piece of pizza or a few small cookies into my calorie budget (and I only have 1200), and would eat all the foods if I limited myself to eating things that aren't very appealing to me, and in fact have done this in the past. I've successfully lost over 30 lbs and am continuing to lose without having to fight cravings every step of the way. I want to also note that my appetite isn't magically suppressed because I'm smaller and need fewer calories, and eating things I like is an important part of dealing with restriction in other areas of my diet. It's just offensive to generalize personal approaches to managing food to everyone
It may not be true for you, but it is true for me. I am eating whatever I want, in moderation, and have lost 27 pounds in 79 days.
Because for whatever reason, people can not eat certain foods without eating too much, doesn't mean others can not eat whatever they want in moderation, and successfully lose weight.
It IS all about eating less calories than you burn for weight loss. The only difference is how you choose to spend your available calories. It is a personal decision what foods you eat. If you can not eat certain foods with out bingeing, by all means limit yourself. Some of us can, and do, fit the calories in each and every day, and stay within our calorie budget.
But see, saying that it's what works for you and saying "People don't want to eat 1 slice of pizza, or a 1/4 of a plate of Loco Rice, or 7 chili cheese fries. They want to have a meal. " is not the same at all. What works for me (eating smaller portions of things I like) wouldn't work for everyone, and I wouldn't say "People don't want to eat only the food that doesn't taste as good as what you want" because some people find success eating this way. I'm objecting to the blanket statement "People don't want..."
psssttt...
you guys agree. You are talking past each other. That seems to be happening a lot in this thread.
I feel like I'm the only one seeing that. Maybe I'm confused.4 -
WinoGelato wrote: »3rdof7sisters wrote: »3rdof7sisters wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »LowCarb4Me2016 wrote: »@3rdof7sisters and @WinoGelato.
Yeah, the eating less calories to lose weight thing. The original post in this thread and my comment you're both responding to actually doesn't refute that fact or diminish it.
OPs point was simple in his original post, if strongly and controversially worded. He doesn't want to eat one fried chicken wing, a single biscuit, and a Pepsi at Popeye's (I'm paraphrasing). It doesn't satisfy, it temps, it teases, it sets obsession thoughts in motion and ultimately, it derails. Yes. Some people are like that. I know it's shocking, wrong and silly.
Yes, yes, we know. There's hundreds if not thousands of success stories here at MFP with the same testimony. 'I ate a half cup of Ben and Jerry's ice cream every day while losing weight and look at me now! This is the way it's done. If you don't do this you'll binge on ice cream later." "Life isn't worth living without a Snickers every now and then. Eat one once in a while or you're doing it wrong and you'll put all the weight back on later." "Don't be a fool. Eat barbequed pork ribs, corn on the cob, and deep fried onion rings and don't skip dessert. Just make it fit or you're a dumbasss."
But that approach doesn't work for everyone. I know, I know. They're just not trying hard enough, they're wrong, they're destined for failure and someday, if they pay attention to the most prolific posters on MFP they'll finally get it.
I go to live meetings full of people who have successfully kept off 100+ pounds eliminating tempting foods and never picking up again. Yeah. They're out there. And they're here, at MFP whispering quietly in the bushes, running from the spotlight, and chatting in countercultural groups of likeminded weirdos.
Because if they ever described their method of success, by reducing caloric intake by ELIMINATING CERTAIN FOODS INDEFINATELY they'll get piled on like this OP did.
Really love this.
But it seems to be based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the OP. OP wasn't describing the method that worked for them personally, they were saying that people who had success with other methods were offering "garbage advice."
In reality, there are people who do really well while eliminating or heavily restricting certain foods. And there are other people who do really well without eliminating foods.
For me personally, the concept of "good" and "bad" foods sets me up for failure and it sets me up for binges. The "garbage advice" OP is complaining about is what finally enabled me to lose weight and keep it off relatively easily.
I have no problem with anyone who doesn't want to eat [x] ever again because they know it's the best way for them. But the reason threads like this tend to get out of control is because people assume that their path to success is the only path.
I read the OP as saying that people saying "CICO works for me, therefore it must work everyone" was the garbage advice.
Could you point out where OP thinks CICO is "garbage advice"? Because I did not read that.
People don't want to eat 1 slice of pizza, or a 1/4 of a plate of Loco Rice, or 7 chili cheese fries. They want to have a meal. If you eat the "right amount" of junk food to stay within your calorie limits, you're going to be starving to death and it's going to cause you to eat more. Eating food that doesn't taste as good as what you want is much better than satisfying a craving and then derailing later because you were so hungry you caved. There are a few people around here who have done their time, lost their weight, and they are in good shape. These people give advice from the "look at me, I lost a ton of weight so I know what I'm doing" stand point, but seem to have forgotten what it was like to ACTUALLY live as a fat person. So when someone tells you you can have junk food, don't listen to them, not because they are lying to you - they aren't, it's true - but because the advice isn't helpful in practice.
CICO is the ONLY way to lose weight. Semantics aside. Bottom line is to lose weight, eat less calories than your body is burning. How you arrive at your personal calorie deficit is up to each of us. It is helpful in practice, because I know from personal experience that because I have been successful this time (so far) because of a post I read on MFP saying enjoy all foods in moderation. -27 pounds since 1/1/17, so I say it can, and does work for me.
But this is just not true, and keeps being repeated as a blanket statement. I'm fine with fitting a piece of pizza or a few small cookies into my calorie budget (and I only have 1200), and would eat all the foods if I limited myself to eating things that aren't very appealing to me, and in fact have done this in the past. I've successfully lost over 30 lbs and am continuing to lose without having to fight cravings every step of the way. I want to also note that my appetite isn't magically suppressed because I'm smaller and need fewer calories, and eating things I like is an important part of dealing with restriction in other areas of my diet. It's just offensive to generalize personal approaches to managing food to everyone
It may not be true for you, but it is true for me. I am eating whatever I want, in moderation, and have lost 27 pounds in 79 days.
Because for whatever reason, people can not eat certain foods without eating too much, doesn't mean others can not eat whatever they want in moderation, and successfully lose weight.
It IS all about eating less calories than you burn for weight loss. The only difference is how you choose to spend your available calories. It is a personal decision what foods you eat. If you can not eat certain foods with out bingeing, by all means limit yourself. Some of us can, and do, fit the calories in each and every day, and stay within our calorie budget.
But see, saying that it's what works for you and saying "People don't want to eat 1 slice of pizza, or a 1/4 of a plate of Loco Rice, or 7 chili cheese fries. They want to have a meal. " is not the same at all. What works for me (eating smaller portions of things I like) wouldn't work for everyone, and I wouldn't say "People don't want to eat only the food that doesn't taste as good as what you want" because some people find success eating this way. I'm objecting to the blanket statement "People don't want..."
psssttt...
you guys agree. You are talking past each other. That seems to be happening a lot in this thread.
I feel like I'm the only one seeing that. Maybe I'm confused.
Oh geez, I just looked back and realized that what I picked up as a comment by newmeadow and others was actually a quote from OP. Sorry, my bad. I'll go delete my previous comments so as not to muddy the water.
eta: I guess my contribution to this thread is to violently agree with everyone who is saying eat however works for YOU, and you'll succeed as long as your calories in are less than your calories out. :-)7
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 913 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions