Does anyone HAVE to eat clean to lose the weight?

Options
viglet
viglet Posts: 299 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I was always of the impression that it was all math, calories in calories out. That's how I went from 240 to 160... just eating within my calories.

I'm almost 3 weeks into counting again and I haven't dropped a single lb. I'm starting to think that I need to eat clean to see progress, which really sucks because honestly I enjoy dark chocolate and junk within my calories.

Has anyone else been in this position?
«13

Replies

  • viglet
    viglet Posts: 299 Member
    Options
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    Three weeks is really too early to determine that your plan isn't working.

    That said, if you weigh less now your margin for error is less and accuracy in measuring portions becomes more important. Using measurements like "1 leg," ".5 avocado," and "2.6 slices of bread" may not longer be accurate enough for you to meet your calorie goals.

    Many people have found that using a food scale helps them meet their goals.

    I try and use my food scale when I'm at home but don't all the time. I usually also log more than I eat. So for example if I had two slices of bread but a bite of my daughter's bread, I would 2.6 slices of bread just to be safe.
    But I assumed that my activity level would kind of counter balance any inaccurate logging. Hasn't so far.
  • viglet
    viglet Posts: 299 Member
    Options
    pinuplove wrote: »
    viglet wrote: »
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    Three weeks is really too early to determine that your plan isn't working.

    That said, if you weigh less now your margin for error is less and accuracy in measuring portions becomes more important. Using measurements like "1 leg," ".5 avocado," and "2.6 slices of bread" may not longer be accurate enough for you to meet your calorie goals.

    Many people have found that using a food scale helps them meet their goals.

    I try and use my food scale when I'm at home but don't all the time. I usually also log more than I eat. So for example if I had two slices of bread but a bite of my daughter's bread, I would 2.6 slices of bread just to be safe.
    But I assumed that my activity level would kind of counter balance any inaccurate logging. Hasn't so far.

    Time to tighten up the logging! Give that a few weeks, and if you don't see a difference then explore other possible causes. How much of your calculated exercise calories are you eating back?

    Typically none.

    I have had a couple days in the last few weeks where I have overeaten on a weekend, but then I eat WAY below the next day to compensate. So my average over the week is still around 1200 a day.
  • StaciMarie1974
    StaciMarie1974 Posts: 4,138 Member
    Options
    You may need to give it more than 3 weeks. Though it won't hurt to make sure your logging is accurate. Food scale for all solid food, enter your own recipes, avoid quick adds/home made entries in the database.
    viglet wrote: »
    I was always of the impression that it was all math, calories in calories out. That's how I went from 240 to 160... just eating within my calories.

    I'm almost 3 weeks into counting again and I haven't dropped a single lb. I'm starting to think that I need to eat clean to see progress, which really sucks because honestly I enjoy dark chocolate and junk within my calories.

    Has anyone else been in this position?

  • Packerjohn
    Packerjohn Posts: 4,855 Member
    Options
    estherdragonbat wrote: »
    A calorie deficit is all that matters for weight-loss. Hitting your macros and micros matters for health, but your body doesn't know or care whether you're getting the nutrients from 'clean' or 'dirty' sources.

    The bolded is true, but the higher percentage of calories from less nutrient dense foods the less likely one will get appropriate macro/micros for health and stay within their calorie goal.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,868 Member
    Options
    Dark chocolate is "clean"...it's pretty rich in nutrition. But no, you don't have to eat "clean" to lose weight....you should know because you lost weight before so everything that applied then applies today.
  • Spliner1969
    Spliner1969 Posts: 3,233 Member
    Options
    You don't have to eat clean to lose weight. However, the last half of your weight loss is usually going to be tougher than the first half, at least it was for me. I had to pay a little closer attention to my macros, and stay under my calorie goal, as well as adjust my calorie goal every 5 lbs lost, but I still ate what I wanted within reason. Now that I've been in maintenance for a little over a year I've been trying to slowly gain muscle, and that still means paying close attention to my protein macro, and my fat macros, carbs are always just whatever calories are left over. I still, within reason always, eat what I want. I do choose to eat more vegetables, both raw, steamed, and cooked with other things. I also choose to eat healthier (what does that term even mean?) versions of food, not because they are "healthier" but because something with less fat content has less calories and I can eat more of it and get more protein, fiber, etc. To me, eating "clean" is a myth. Choose what you want to eat based on the health and weight goals you seek. Otherwise eat what you want or need to eat to be happy.
  • cross2bear
    cross2bear Posts: 1,106 Member
    Options
    Eating clean is such a vague concept, one that differs from person to person and has so many interpretations that it is virtually a meaningless expression. Calories in, calories out - thats it (along with nutritional considerations of course. I would normally think that goes without saying but you never know....).

  • KrazyKrissyy
    KrazyKrissyy Posts: 322 Member
    edited May 2017
    Options
    Yes and no. Not specifically "clean" but I do have to keep a specific diet though. Recent diagnosis of gastroparesis. In other words low fiber, low fat, and sometimes low protein. Nutritionally dense, high fiber slow digesting foods are actually my enemy unfortunately (with the exception of overripe bananas). As for you, just log your food (any food) and keep a deficit. Good luck!
  • Running_and_Coffee
    Running_and_Coffee Posts: 811 Member
    Options
    It's easier for me to eat less when the food is "clean" (is clean the right word?? I mean not highly processed, no added sugars, not "fat free" or "sugar free" via chemicals.) I get that a calorie is a calorie, but I am more likely to eat less when the foods I eat are high protein, lower carb, not processed, without added sugar.

    A bowl of pasta and a sweet potato might have the same amount of calories, but a sweet potato fills me up more effectively and doesn't kick off any cravings the way pasta does.

    So anyway, when you have less to lose (sounds like you do), you might want to try to go "cleanish" (not perfection, but try) and see if that helps. There are no side effects to giving it a shot.
  • Lucas2013
    Lucas2013 Posts: 15 Member
    Options
    Eating clean means absolutely nothing without some context. A diet rich in kale is considered to be quite clean, but what about for someone suffering from clotting disorders? Kale is high in Vitamin K, which can cause the body to produce large amounts of thrombopoietin, clotting proteins. In this context, Kale is obviously a bad food, as it could kill someone. My advice? Drop the food labels and focus on getting enough fiber, micronutrients, and water. The rest is really just details. Ideally, however, if 80% of your diet comes from nutritious food, consuming 20% of your diet from foods you love should make no difference in health markers or fat loss. You should aim to make your diet as enjoyable as possible because why would you stick with something that you hate? Answer: you wouldn't.
  • KM0692
    KM0692 Posts: 178 Member
    Options
    I did Weight Watchers for a while, and according to them, your body metabolizes calories from a carrot differently than calories from a Pop Tart. I don't buy it. I know that I can lose weight on 1,650 calories a week...and it doesn't matter where the calories come from. I am not a clean eater (and I am not a horrible eater). I eat what I want, only in smaller portions.
  • sissy0107
    sissy0107 Posts: 40 Member
    Options
    =)
    That's an eternal question I'd say.
    I started at 240 pounds and lost 97 of them in 5 years. First four years I ate whatever, calories in calories out, and It worked. But then I plateaud for quite a while, until I started eating cleaner.
    So I'd say, at first it might not be important as just counting calories is enough to reduce your food count for the day. But when arriving at a certain fat loss level, you need to take into account your macros as well.
    Still, you have to get some pleasure in :).

Categories