"You can eat whaver you want, as long as you eat at a deficit" is true, but it's garbage advice.
Replies
-
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.
Nah, it's ok. I was starting to second guess my reading comprehension skills since so many people seem to be attributing thoughts to users that aren't actually there...0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »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.
Nah, it's ok. I was starting to second guess my reading comprehension skills since so many people seem to be attributing thoughts to users that aren't actually there...
I was following along OK until the quotes within quotes started getting into the double digits!1 -
I don't unstand the us and them mentality re moderation and abstaining.
I think we all want folks to be sUccessfull.
Pointing out one way that works as an individual potentially sheds some light where none existed for some.
A blanket statement like "cutting out foods is garbage advice don't listen to them" would also be incorrect.
I expect some like me would say "yeah cutting out foods didn't work for me" and I'd expect others to come in and say "best thing I ever did". We all fall somewhere and it's good to know there are options.
6 -
I actually used to eat more foods that aren't so good but stayed within my caloric goal. The problem was that I wasn't paying attention to my daily intake of sugars, fats, etc and I wasn't losing weight. Now I make better choices while still eating the things I enjoy. 1 or 2 slices of pizza with salad. A smaller portion of meatloaf, steak, etc with more veggies. If I have a burger AND fries, I'll forego the bun and use A-1 sauce instead and maybe slap some lettuce and tomato on the burger. If I couldn't eat the foods I love the most, I would just quit. But also, the more I eat healthier portions, the less I crave things like fast food and cake.
And let's be real - your body processes 200 calories of chocolate much differently than it processes 200 calories of meats and vegetables. It's all about smart choices if you still want to enjoy what you put in your body.
1 -
leanjogreen18 wrote: »I don't unstand the us and them mentality re moderation and abstaining.
I think we all want folks to be sUccessfull.
Pointing out one way that works as an individual potentially sheds some light where none existed for some.
A blanket statement like "cutting out foods is garbage advice don't listen to them" would also be incorrect.
I expect some like me would say "yeah cutting out foods didn't work for me" and I'd expect others to come in and say "best thing I ever did". We all fall somewhere and it's good to know there are options.
Decided against it.......0 -
prattiger65 wrote: »leanjogreen18 wrote: »I don't unstand the us and them mentality re moderation and abstaining.
I think we all want folks to be sUccessfull.
Pointing out one way that works as an individual potentially sheds some light where none existed for some.
A blanket statement like "cutting out foods is garbage advice don't listen to them" would also be incorrect.
I expect some like me would say "yeah cutting out foods didn't work for me" and I'd expect others to come in and say "best thing I ever did". We all fall somewhere and it's good to know there are options.
Decided against it.......
Haha I saw that:)0 -
I actually used to eat more foods that aren't so good but stayed within my caloric goal. The problem was that I wasn't paying attention to my daily intake of sugars, fats, etc and I wasn't losing weight. Now I make better choices while still eating the things I enjoy. 1 or 2 slices of pizza with salad. A smaller portion of meatloaf, steak, etc with more veggies. If I have a burger AND fries, I'll forego the bun and use A-1 sauce instead and maybe slap some lettuce and tomato on the burger. If I couldn't eat the foods I love the most, I would just quit. But also, the more I eat healthier portions, the less I crave things like fast food and cake.
And let's be real - your body processes 200 calories of chocolate much differently than it processes 200 calories of meats and vegetables. It's all about smart choices if you still want to enjoy what you put in your body.
Maybe I am the only one, but this does not seem to make much sense. Eating steak and meatloaf are not "bad" foods; granted there are fats, but they can also be substantial sources of protein. Also, certain burgers can also be great parts of diets and many people eat higher fat diets. You also say not eating the bun when carbs are a big part of others diets. You can meet your caloric goal and not lose weight if you are eating right to a maintenance goal. If your "goal" was a deficit, it would not really matter what you ate to get there (as has been repeated numerous times).6 -
leanjogreen18 wrote: »prattiger65 wrote: »leanjogreen18 wrote: »I don't unstand the us and them mentality re moderation and abstaining.
I think we all want folks to be sUccessfull.
Pointing out one way that works as an individual potentially sheds some light where none existed for some.
A blanket statement like "cutting out foods is garbage advice don't listen to them" would also be incorrect.
I expect some like me would say "yeah cutting out foods didn't work for me" and I'd expect others to come in and say "best thing I ever did". We all fall somewhere and it's good to know there are options.
Decided against it.......
Haha I saw that:)
1 -
Thumbs up on the Snorlax picture, I love Pokemon.
I do think that a lot of the cheerful talk about how "you can eat ANYTHING and lose weight!" needs a footnote: "You can eat anything, but if it's high in calories you can only have a tiny bit."
Now personally, if I order a pizza I don't want to eat just one slice, hold the breadsticks. Sure, cold pizza is a great snack the next morning, but there's something especially delightful about a piping hot pizza with the cheese still gooey (and breadsticks on the side.)
What I do is I have days where I eat over my "normal" calories without worrying about it, and then I eat under the normal calories the next day. (This works best if the pig-out meal was dinner, since you usually still feel pretty full the next morning.) I don't consider that to be "a cheat day". It's not cheating, it's just moving the calories around so I can get what satisfies me--tons of pizza. 2 -
You guys just take every single word someone writes literally, to the t. I don't mean that you have to spend the rest of your life not eating things you enjoy. I also don't mean that you can NEVER have things you enjoy, or that are calorie dense. What I do mean, and was obvious in the original post, that is if you aren't just looking for something to complain about, is that dieting under the idea that "you can have whatever, so long as it fits in your calorie count" is not an effective long term solution because MOST people, especially larger people, run out of calories waaaaay before they become satiated. If you are a 135lb woman that's 5'9 which I think was an example somewhere in this thread, and you're only eating at a 500 calorie deficit, no *kitten* you are gonna be full before you run out of calories. You're small, even if you aren't at your "goal" you are going to feel satiated. If you are the kind of person who is accustomed to eating 3500-4000 calories a day and your prescribed amount is 2500, there is absolutely NO WAY that you can eat the calorie dense foods you enjoy, but at a lower quantity, and not be absolutely starving to death. Which will lead to a derailment in most people. Contrary to popular belief, will power is not a dominant trait. So there you go, here's another post for you guys to pick apart to for *kitten* that is obviously not what I meant.
Well you're describing me here in your premises (and my prescribed amount is even lower), and you're completely, completely, completely wrong. Inescapably, indefensibly wrong. Any point that you may have is absolutely levelled by how preposterously and utterly false and flat out insane your bolded claim is.
you know it's possible to eat both calorie dense foods that you enjoy, AND satiating, filling low cal stuff like spinach and cod, right?
Perish the thought of eating a Big Mac and fries meal, and 1lb of spinach & some lean meat on the same day!!! Is such a thing even possible???14 -
BlueSkyShoal wrote: »Thumbs up on the Snorlax picture, I love Pokemon.
I do think that a lot of the cheerful talk about how "you can eat ANYTHING and lose weight!" needs a footnote: "You can eat anything, but if it's high in calories you can only have a tiny bit."
Now personally, if I order a pizza I don't want to eat just one slice, hold the breadsticks. Sure, cold pizza is a great snack the next morning, but there's something especially delightful about a piping hot pizza with the cheese still gooey (and breadsticks on the side.)
What I do is I have days where I eat over my "normal" calories without worrying about it, and then I eat under the normal calories the next day. (This works best if the pig-out meal was dinner, since you usually still feel pretty full the next morning.) I don't consider that to be "a cheat day". It's not cheating, it's just moving the calories around so I can get what satisfies me--tons of pizza.
To the bolded... don't you think that sort of caution is unnecessary (and maybe presumes ignorance) on a site where people are logging and tracking calories? A person who is entering the foods they eat in their diary would know that 2 pieces of Dominos chicken, spinach and roasted red pepper pizza (my latest go to on pizza night) is 560 calories and 4 pieces of Parmesan bites are 150 which leaves me 190 calories to keep this meal under 800 which is what I aim for for splurge dinners. So another piece of pizza, or a salad, or some dessert or a glass of wine.
Caveating every post with information that posters should already know or be able to figure out themselves, seems redundant and insulting to me. I feel the same way about you the disclaimer, , even though I and many others do explicitly state, "but nutrition is also important"when someone asks if calories are all that matter for weight loss. My 5 year old knows that nutrition is important. Do I really have to add that to every post for grown adults so that my comments are not misinterpreted by people like the OP?6 -
^^^Not only that adding every caveat or note would make posts incredibly long.2
-
WinoGelato wrote: »BlueSkyShoal wrote: »Thumbs up on the Snorlax picture, I love Pokemon.
I do think that a lot of the cheerful talk about how "you can eat ANYTHING and lose weight!" needs a footnote: "You can eat anything, but if it's high in calories you can only have a tiny bit."
Now personally, if I order a pizza I don't want to eat just one slice, hold the breadsticks. Sure, cold pizza is a great snack the next morning, but there's something especially delightful about a piping hot pizza with the cheese still gooey (and breadsticks on the side.)
What I do is I have days where I eat over my "normal" calories without worrying about it, and then I eat under the normal calories the next day. (This works best if the pig-out meal was dinner, since you usually still feel pretty full the next morning.) I don't consider that to be "a cheat day". It's not cheating, it's just moving the calories around so I can get what satisfies me--tons of pizza.
To the bolded... don't you think that sort of caution is unnecessary (and maybe presumes ignorance) on a site where people are logging and tracking calories?
Not really, since we live in a world where people follow diets like "drinking apple cider vinegar."
More to the point, I think people who cut certain foods out of their diet do get some of the "I eat everything!" people looking down their noses at them. If you can eat anything and stay within your calories, then that's great. I can too--now. But when I started, I couldn't. I completely cut out a bunch of fatty foods, and it was a good decision. It didn't lead to the downfall of my diet, binging, etc etc etc. A lot of the foods I cut out I still don't eat. Ever. Because to eat them in a quantity that would make them "worth it" to me would be too many calories, and I'm not going to derive any satisfaction from eating a teensy portion (even though I could without 'cheating'.)
Different people need different strategies to be successful.4 -
I think it's silly to assume that by saying, "You can eat whatever and still lose weight if you're at a deficit" that people are going to take that and say, "Only junk for me...I will never eat a full meal again, just small bites of all the yummy junk food I love!" I mean come on, you really think that everyone out there is either eating "clean" or just shoving junk in their face and staying under calories?
Honestly cutting out everything I love is so unbelievably unsustainable for me...yesterday I had a free ice cream cone...I came in way under calories. Most days I eat veggies and lean meat, whole grain, and get in plenty of water...and most days I can also fit in a little chocolate or a treat of some kind. I would be completely lying if I said I hadn't spent almost all of my daily calories at Taco Bell on a few occasions. Making this a sustainable lifestyle change needs to allow flexibility. Most of the time I eat healthy foods and make good choices...but dang some times I would do anything for a Cheesy Gordita Crunch...see? Balance. It seems sad to deny yourself everything that isn't deemed healthy.8 -
No, actually I think the keto voices are heard quite loudly and clearly here at MFP. If "hiding in the bushes" means that only every second or third thread is about keto, I'll agree with that definition, though.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.
14 -
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.
So what exactly are your training and certification credentials? What specific education/training do you have which lends any credibility toward your attack on him?13 -
No, actually I think the keto voices are heard quite loudly and clearly here at MFP. If "hiding in the bushes" means that only every second or third thread is about keto, I'll agree with that definition, though.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.
Agree! And really, the only time I see people piling on about eliminating foods is when an OP posts that they've cut out [name the evil foods] and are really unhappy or can't stick to the food plan.
5 -
RUN_LIFT_EAT_ wrote: »I'm confused here... if I "eat whatever I want" but stay under my daily allowance, I won't lose weight? So the science is bad? Or is the science just bad for people who don't actually stick to the plan?
Somebody told me the best way to lose weight is to stop eating carbs. His reasoning was that he's willing to break the "don't go over your calories" rule but not the "don't eat sugar" rule.1 -
I don't mean that you have to spend the rest of your life not eating things you enjoy. I also don't mean that you can NEVER have things you enjoy, or that are calorie dense. What I do mean, and was obvious in the original post, that is if you aren't just looking for something to complain about, is that dieting under the idea that "you can have whatever, so long as it fits in your calorie count" is not an effective long term solution because MOST people, especially larger people, run out of calories waaaaay before they become satiated.
If you are a 135lb woman that's 5'9 which I think was an example somewhere in this thread, and you're only eating at a 500 calorie deficit, no *kitten* you are gonna be full before you run out of calories. You're small, even if you aren't at your "goal" you are going to feel satiated. If you are the kind of person who is accustomed to eating 3500-4000 calories a day and your prescribed amount is 2500, there is absolutely NO WAY that you can eat the calorie dense foods you enjoy, but at a lower quantity, and not be absolutely starving to death. Which will lead to a derailment in most people. Contrary to popular belief, will power is not a dominant trait. So there you go, here's another post for you guys to pick apart to for *kitten* that is obviously not what I meant.
The bolded statement is where I think your logic is off. The assumption that every fat person got there eating calorie dense foods. Sure, maybe some did. For me, I was really surprised at how full I was when I dropped down off some of the stuff I was eating (and overeating) and paid attention to nutrition and macros. Getting more fiber and protein made a difference. I really needed to lay off the juice. Sure, it has nutrients, but for what I was drinking, it has a ton of calories and typically isn't very satiating. I've heard the same from full-sugar soda drinkers and from fancy coffee people.
Will power didn't need to be a dominant trait. And I did lose 100+ pounds (kept it off for 2.5 years) by eating what I want and staying (generally) under my calorie goal when I was losing.
9 -
PIZZA FRIDAYS BABY!
down just shy of 60 pounds and still losing. I enjoy a couple slices every Friday without fail and it hasn't stopped me. and for the record I'm not one of those who forgot what its like to be fat cause I still am, but I am one of those that realized that this if for life and not temporary and life has room for pizza, burgers, ice cream etc.
LIFE HAS ROOM FOR PIZZA
5 -
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.
This is completely personal preference. While you should make healthier choices to fuel your body, it's ok to eat things you like. If anything, he sounds like a great trainer who his people have lasting success with, because he's teaching healthy habits and relationship with food. Clean eating is an insane concept in regards to me.. I respect anyone that wants to, and does, and/or restricts their diets. Again, to each their own. It would never work for me, and I think a lot of people fail because they attempt to "clean" eat.
And it doesn't sound like he's saying - Yo, eat fries. You don't need no green stuff. Cheers.11 -
I think I'd agree with the OP in this form: eating *kitten* junk food isn't worth it. Does life include pizza? Hell-mothertruckin'-yeah it does! Does life include Dominos pizza? That would depend on how unbelievably intoxicated I am, because man, that stuff just is NOT worth it.
I don't think I could go my whole life without junk food or high-calorie food or whatever their definition is; however, on a general level, I totally agree that I am more satisfied (and feel a lot better in every sense of the word) when I eat real foods. I quit doing the Keto thing, but I still think I feel better when I eat fewer carbohydrates (except for plants... because excluding plants from your diet is pretty counter to... well... life).4 -
You guys just take every single word someone writes literally, to the t. I don't mean that you have to spend the rest of your life not eating things you enjoy. I also don't mean that you can NEVER have things you enjoy, or that are calorie dense. What I do mean, and was obvious in the original post, that is if you aren't just looking for something to complain about, is that dieting under the idea that "you can have whatever, so long as it fits in your calorie count" is not an effective long term solution because MOST people, especially larger people, run out of calories waaaaay before they become satiated. If you are a 135lb woman that's 5'9 which I think was an example somewhere in this thread, and you're only eating at a 500 calorie deficit, no *kitten* you are gonna be full before you run out of calories. You're small, even if you aren't at your "goal" you are going to feel satiated. If you are the kind of person who is accustomed to eating 3500-4000 calories a day and your prescribed amount is 2500, there is absolutely NO WAY that you can eat the calorie dense foods you enjoy, but at a lower quantity, and not be absolutely starving to death. Which will lead to a derailment in most people. Contrary to popular belief, will power is not a dominant trait. So there you go, here's another post for you guys to pick apart to for *kitten* that is obviously not what I meant.
I just wanted to point out the bolded IS how some people moderate some foods.
It is also how SOME people fit in "what they want".
"What I want" shouldn't be confused with
"how much"
"how often"
or
"to hell with overall nutrition"
Just as you don't want your words taken too literally and you have to explain further what you mean should help you to see that "eating whatever I want" may have a slightly different meaning than you are interpreting it as.
3 -
Well done OP - well done. Hook line and sinker.8
-
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.
CICO is not a diet. It's not a way of eating. It doesn't work for some and not others. It says that you gain, lose, or maintain depending on where calories in are vs. calories out. HOW you eat to reach the goals you want to reach is personal.
What OP said was garbage advice was that you should eat what YOU like within your calories. WHY? Because he seemed to assume that meant eating only small amounts of so called junk foods. Of course, the foods he assumed we like are not only all junk foods, but pretty stereotypically fat person foods, and he assumed that as fat people (or former fat people) we wouldn't enjoy eating them in smaller amounts and couldn't figure out for ourselves how to eat to not be hungry. Advice to us must explain that, or we (as fat people) are apparently too dumb to figure out how to eat.
Saying: calories are what matter for weight loss, but of course you should eat for health and satiety too. However, you don't have to eat in any specific way (other than controlling calories) to lose weight, that's a matter of personal preference is therefore "garbage advice," because it means we -- stupid fat people! -- will eat only 6 french fries or whatever and be starving. (I'm also not sure why our calorie goals are so silly low, but better to create a strawman with, I guess.)13 -
leanjogreen18 wrote: »I don't unstand the us and them mentality re moderation and abstaining.
I think we all want folks to be sUccessfull.
Pointing out one way that works as an individual potentially sheds some light where none existed for some.
A blanket statement like "cutting out foods is garbage advice don't listen to them" would also be incorrect.
I expect some like me would say "yeah cutting out foods didn't work for me" and I'd expect others to come in and say "best thing I ever did". We all fall somewhere and it's good to know there are options.
Yeah, I think this is a good point, and as someone who considers herself a moderation person but does a lot of what some seem to consider abstaining, I don't see it as two separate groups.
What I dislike is people claiming that to lose weight you MUST do certain things: you MUST cut out junk food (or eat clean 70% of the time, whatever that means), you MUST cut carbs, you MUST cut out bread, you MUST cut sugar.
OR, the rather obnoxious related thing that doing it that way is better: well, eat as much added sugar as you feel you have to, but of course the better and stronger thing is to be like me and not eat any! Or "well, most people should cut carbs, carbs are UNNECESSARY and therefore bad" or "fat is filling, carbs aren't" (in reality it depends on the person and IMO the carb and the fat).
(On occasion I think the moderate position can get like that, but usually that's not the point at all, and I certainly think it's unfair to suggest that most people who take the "eat whatever you like" position are saying it's wrong to follow a diet like keto or paleo or vegan or cut out trigger foods, etc. I certainly am not.)
So when someone jumps into a thread to insist that everyone should "eat clean" (whatever that even means) or "not eat sugar" or "cut out fruit, nature's candy!" or whatever the hot thing of the moment is, I do think that's garbage advice. If they say "oh, I struggled with similar things and this is what worked for me," I don't think that's garbage advice.
But on point, I think it's not true to say that "eat what you want within your calories" is garbage advice. It's not, and it still leaves open a lot of flexibility to decide individually what you want and why. What's garbage advice is to assume that you know, fat people, what they want will be a lot of junk and they can't exercise judgment or common sense, no way.8 -
This is my interpretation of the original post:
That it's true that you can eat small amounts of high calorie foods and stay under your calories for the day, BUT that it's bad advice to give to someone just starting out, because if they get ravenously hungry they are more likely to fail. And the more small-in-volume, high-calorie foods you eat, the less high-in-volume, low calorie foods you can eat in a given day (while staying true to your calorie goal.)
My personal opinion is that it depends on the person. Some will do better if they eat 90 calories worth of carrots for a snack (three large carrots), while others will do better if they eat a Reese's peanut butter egg with the same amount of calories.
I do remember that when I first started calorie counting, I would get RAVENOUSLY, unbearably hungry, and would "crack" a lot of the time. The first week was the worst.2 -
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
I scratch my head when you say eat what you want.....and then show what experience you have for 30 years in nutrition.
I'm not a know it all, don't claim anything. Just kinda seemed strange, with all the bad food's out there. All the preservatives and crap they put in food now days. Maybe it's a 2 step process, lose weight by eating your favorite foods at less calories then maybe changing over to clean later on after you lose the weight.0 -
I don't mean that you have to spend the rest of your life not eating things you enjoy. I also don't mean that you can NEVER have things you enjoy, or that are calorie dense. What I do mean, and was obvious in the original post, that is if you aren't just looking for something to complain about, is that dieting under the idea that "you can have whatever, so long as it fits in your calorie count" is not an effective long term solution because MOST people, especially larger people, run out of calories waaaaay before they become satiated.
If you are a 135lb woman that's 5'9 which I think was an example somewhere in this thread, and you're only eating at a 500 calorie deficit, no *kitten* you are gonna be full before you run out of calories. You're small, even if you aren't at your "goal" you are going to feel satiated. If you are the kind of person who is accustomed to eating 3500-4000 calories a day and your prescribed amount is 2500, there is absolutely NO WAY that you can eat the calorie dense foods you enjoy, but at a lower quantity, and not be absolutely starving to death. Which will lead to a derailment in most people. Contrary to popular belief, will power is not a dominant trait. So there you go, here's another post for you guys to pick apart to for *kitten* that is obviously not what I meant.
The bolded statement is where I think your logic is off. The assumption that every fat person got there eating calorie dense foods. Sure, maybe some did. For me, I was really surprised at how full I was when I dropped down off some of the stuff I was eating (and overeating) and paid attention to nutrition and macros. Getting more fiber and protein made a difference. I really needed to lay off the juice. Sure, it has nutrients, but for what I was drinking, it has a ton of calories and typically isn't very satiating. I've heard the same from full-sugar soda drinkers and from fancy coffee people.
Will power didn't need to be a dominant trait. And I did lose 100+ pounds (kept it off for 2.5 years) by eating what I want and staying (generally) under my calorie goal when I was losing.
What I hightlighted in bold is a common scenario with eager new members. They go from a diet where they eat a lot of calorie dense foods and/or beverages, to an extreme where they eat nothing but nutrient dense, voluminous foods, and how many times have we seen the "I can't hit my 1200 calorie goal" posts on here? The answer is almost always one of two things:
1. They are actually eating more than they think, because they aren't logging accurately
2. They have gone to such an extreme that they really are struggling to eat that much, thinking that they can only eat "healthy" food. Not understanding that while micronutrients are important, so is hitting a minimum number of calories, and there are number of calorie dense foods (nuts, oils, avocado, full fat dairy, ice cream, cookies) that could round out an otherwise balanced day so that they also achieve their calorie target as well.
6
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions