DESPERATE AND ABOUT TO QUIT
Replies
-
I don't think it's the OP's 15-20 but the difficulty in feeling in control or successful. Frustration can do nasty things to your head.
Come on back, OP. We've all been through the frustration! All of us want to be of help.
yeah OK, frustration at lack of success fair enough
but people who are really desperate would have 150lbs to lose, seriously damaged eating habits, medical conditions that could kill them if they don't change, severe mental health problems... I should know, that describes the state I was in 20 weeks ago
I'd love to be 20lbs from goal, I'd be bloody ecstatic6 -
punkinjdm6 wrote: »and my peanut butter is 0.5tbsp equals 12 calories thats what i mean.
I wanna know what brand/label of peanut butter you're eating! Mine (Adams No-Stir Creamy) is 51 calories for 8 grams - that's a scraped/leveled-off-on-the-jar's-lip-"teaspoon" (an actual tsp would be 5 ml or ~4-5 grams). And that is based on me creating a food entry for the peanut butter, inputting all the nutrition label information so I know it is accurate, and calculating everything in grams. Note: I do use a different platform to create and log my food than MFP but unless something has changed, you can create custom entries here, too, still.
Now compare that to your "12 calories for 1-1/2 teaspoons (aka, 0.5 tbsp)" peanut butter. Unless you found a super, super low calorie peanut butter your calorie intake accuracy is in the proverbial toilet.
Weighing is where it is at. It still is not 100% accurate because nutrition labels are legally allowed a certain % error in their calculations, but it is the most accurate way we have readily available, and user friendly once you get the hang of it, to figure how many (ballpark) calories you are consuming.1 -
middlehaitch wrote: »@HellYeahItsKriss, that was an great informative post on the use of the USDA data base.
Do you think you could post it as a separate thread (the panic season approaches
) so more people can see it, and it can be nominated for a sticky?
Cheers, h.
Sure, no problem. 1 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
On what authority do you say she does not need to go low carb? She may not "need" to eat any certain way but there are more than one way to skin a cat as they say and only eating 150 grams of carbs daily might work for her. I think she is very close to getting things going her way because she wants this thing.
Well Gale, thats because she has already stated she does not want a restrictive diet.14 -
Keto has saved me. It isn't the boogeyman people make it out as. Regardless of what diet, calories do matter. You just don't suffer as much when you're not hungry, and Keto keeps you full. Research it, there are lots of support groups. Remember than insulins job is to force excess sugar into cells, fat cells. If you have insulin resistance, your body doesn't want to burn your fat for energy, it just keeps storing it. It's key to keep your insulin low. I'm 60, I do not exercise even though I should, and I've lost 34 lbs in 5 mo. Good luck!8
-
grinning_chick wrote: »
I wanna know what brand/label of peanut butter you're eating! Mine (Adams No-Stir Creamy) is 51 calories for 8 grams - that's a scraped/leveled-off-on-the-jar's-lip-"teaspoon" (an actual tsp would be 5 ml or ~4-5 grams). And that is based on me creating a food entry for the peanut butter, inputting all the nutrition label information so I know it is accurate, and calculating everything in grams. Note: I do use a different platform to create and log my food than MFP but unless something has changed, you can create custom entries here, too, still.
Now compare that to your "12 calories for 1-1/2 teaspoons (aka, 0.5 tbsp)" peanut butter. Unless you found a super, super low calorie peanut butter your calorie intake accuracy is in the proverbial toilet.
Weighing is where it is at. It still is not 100% accurate because nutrition labels are legally allowed a certain % error in their calculations, but it is the most accurate way we have readily available, and user friendly once you get the hang of it, to figure how many (ballpark) calories you are consuming.
PB2. A powdered peanut butter.3 -
HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »
Well Gale, thats because she has already stated she does not want a restrictive diet.
I have been doing it for three years and do not find it restrictive in the least but I am doing it for health reasons to avoid some Rx meds with side effects that sound restrictive to say the less.
Well let me take that back. Yes it was restrictive until I realized I had a carb addiction but after I dealt with that by getting off of all added sugar and all forms of all grains the carb addiction left in a few weeks so I just stayed off sugar and grains with great health gains over the past three years.
Did you read the first post of this thread? That was how I felt before I finally got off of sugar and grains.18 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
I have been doing it for three years and do not find it restrictive in the least but I am doing it for health reasons to avoid some Rx meds with side effects that sound restrictive to say the less.
Well let me take that back. Yes it was restrictive until I realized I had a carb addiction but after I dealt with that by getting off of all added sugar and all forms of all grains the carb addiction left in a few weeks so I just stayed off sugar and grains with great health gains over the past three years.
Did you read the first post of this thread? That was how I felt before I finally got off of sugar and grains.
Yeah.. im not going through this again. You can continue to be a record on repeat but i am not going to send people down a rabbit hole they don't need to.9 -
So I'll note that the OP just said that she didn't want to follow a idea with "ridiculous restrictions" --- by which I think what she meant is diets like Keto or Atkins.
Personally I don't stress about logging accurately (although I do try my best to avoid really out-of-whack calorie logging). How does that work for me? Well, I use a walking treadmill desk (e.g., a Walkstation) and I use the "daily goal calories" as a an extreme maximum. So while MFP / Fitbit has me on a 750 calorie deficit goal, I usually end up exceeding it by 500 to 1500 calories, depending on how long I spend on the Walkstation. (On meeting-heavy days, I can't spend as much time on the treadmill desk. )
So for me, the main thing which MFP and Fitbit is useful as a prod. I used to eat quite a lot of celery sticks with peanut butter when I was on Atkins. But once I started figuring out how many calories were in Peanut Butter, it's now a very rare snack, and I've learned to love celery sticks w/o any accompaniment. By logging, even though I'm not stressing about being super accurate, it keeps me accountable to myself, and so I now mostly have a salad for lunch. And by looking up the calories before having my morning or afternoon stack, it makes me stop and think whether I really needed that snack, or whether I was eating for other reasons (being bored, or tired because I didn't get enough sleep the previous night, etc.)
Similarly, by using a Fitbit, by measuring how many steps I take, and how my stairs I take (as opposed to taking the elevator), it gives me the psychological prod to actually take those stairs, or to actually spend that extra hour on the Walkstation. (I try to do at least an hour on the Walkstation; yesterday I spent 2.5+ hours on the Walkstation. As a result I had a net deficit of 2300 calories, without feeling terribly deprived or hungry. And if the 2200 or so calories which I logged was off by even 20%, it's not a big deal.)
BTW, I find that while I'm walking, it tends to suppress my appetite for a snack.2 -
-
3 meals and 3 snacks is only excessive if your calorie intake is excessive. I eat 3 meals and 3 snacks and average about 1350 calories a day. Keeps me from being hungry and keeps my blood sugar from going up and down.
Same.
3 meals at 350 calories +
3 snacks that are 100 calories each = 1350 calories
2 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
On what authority do you say she does not need to go low carb? She may not "need" to eat any certain way but there are more than one way to skin a cat as they say and only eating 150 grams of carbs daily might work for her. I think she is very close to getting things going her way because she wants this thing.
There is no evidence that OP *needs* to go low carbohydrate for weight loss. I'm not sure what about that is unclear to you.
Saying it "might work" is totally different than saying she "needs" it.3 -
This thread is really hitting home because I just finally bought my food scale last week and discovered I had been severely underestimating how much peanut butter went into my PBJ, which was probably a contributor in maintaining through most of November...7
-
Egads! Dieting doesn't have to consume your whole life. Give IF a try if you haven't. Don't weight anything and don't count your calories. Fast tell lunch, eat a salad with some protein, eat an afternoon snack (200-300cal - count this), eat a small dinner, eat a small before bedtime snack. If that doesn't work, fast tell longer even to one meal a day. There is more than one way to get a deficit. County and measuring is a tool but that is all it is and it can take a lot of time and can also not be accurate and you may still go over. You can go over also with fasting of course, but let the scale be your guide. If the scale is going down that is all that matters. If it is not going down, do a longer fast tell it does go down. I would go bonkers weighing everything and counting everything. I suppose if you eat as often as you are eating, you might have to count because it would be very easy to eat too much. If you fast long enough, you can eat tell your full and not count. If you still are not losing, just shorten the eating window and eat tell full (your stomach will shrink and it will become harder to overeat). That will work for most. If not, then you can just count calories for the evening meal and restrict yourself based on that which will be much easier than doing that for 6-meals. Good luck!
PS I did a 20:4 IF diet and lost almost 60 lbs eating ad libitum in my eating window (very important to me to make the diet sustainable). I ate what I wanted and as much as I wanted and had a desert most nights.17 -
Egads! Dieting doesn't have to consume your whole life. Give IF a try if you haven't. Don't weight anything and don't count your calories. Fast tell lunch, eat a salad with some protein, eat an afternoon snack (200-300cal - count this), eat a small dinner, eat a small before bedtime snack. If that doesn't work, fast tell longer even to one meal a day. There is more than one way to get a deficit. County and measuring is a tool but that is all it is and it can take a lot of time and can also not be accurate and you may still go over. You can go over also with fasting of course, but let the scale be your guide. If the scale is going down that is all that matters. If it is not going down, do a longer fast tell it does go down. I would go bonkers weighing everything and counting everything. I suppose if you eat as often as you are eating, you might have to count because it would be very easy to eat too much. If you fast long enough, you can eat tell your full and not count. If you still are not losing, just shorten the eating window and eat tell full (your stomach will shrink and it will become harder to overeat). That will work for most. If not, then you can just count calories for the evening meal and restrict yourself based on that which will be much easier than doing that for 6-meals. Good luck!
So i guess it's not important to hit 1200 calories, as long as the scale goes down, that's all that matters?3 -
HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »
So i guess it's not important to hit 1200 calories, as long as the scale goes down, that's all that matters?
Yes, as long as your not being anorexic or purging and things like that. You don't want to grossly under eat. That is obvious for health/nutrition concerns. I normally ate about 1800-2400kcals in my 4-hr eating window when I lost all my weight. I rarely went below 1800. Occasionally I went up to 3000 (I did count the first couple of months but I never measured so wasn't all that accurate and I never had a limit that I stopped at. If I was hungry, I ate and I weighed myself everyday to see what the results were). I usually had a splurge day 1-day/week where I ate ad libitum all day and sometimes ate ad-libitum starting at noon. I'm 6'1" and currently 195. I started at 252. I run about 20-miles/week but lost most of my weight doing less than that.
When I did eat, I tried to eat good foods (fruits and vegetable, whole grains, dairy, and adequate protein). I took vitamin/mineral supplements also. I usually ate a desert awhile after dinner to include anything and everything. I found that my stomach shrank a lot and I didn't want the three bowls of icecream that I ate before doing this WOE and I would usually eat maybe one bowl or 3-4 cookies instead of 5-6 (home made stuff I wife and daughters are always making) etc.. No types of foods or quantities were off limits for me. I was simply too full to overeat eating all my calories in a short eating window. Not a bad feeling to have on a daily basis!
One thing that is really nice with this WOE is that I can eat like everyone else for dinner when I'm eating with them.9 -
Okay, so my next question is..
Since the OP's only issue was that she was using inaccurate logs in her diary.. and not anything else.. why would she have to drastically alter the way she eats? regardless of if she eats within 4 hours or 24 hours, if the logs shes using are wrong, they are going to be wrong at 4pm, 9pm, 7am, 1am... you were eating a vast portion of your calories within your small time frame, if shes going to copy your suggestion, then shes not going to have any different results, still using the same logs with the same calorie errors.
Once she fixes the logs however, she will then be eating the correct amount of calories for loss.. why does she need to fast if the problem is then resolved?
9 -
HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »Okay, so my next question is..
Since the OP's only issue was that she was using inaccurate logs in her diary.. and not anything else.. why would she have to drastically alter the way she eats? regardless of if she eats within 4 hours or 24 hours, if the logs shes using are wrong, they are going to be wrong at 4pm, 9pm, 7am, 1am... you were eating a vast portion of your calories within your small time frame, if shes going to copy your suggestion, then shes not going to have any different results, still using the same logs with the same calorie errors.
Once she fixes the logs however, she will then be eating the correct amount of calories for loss.. why does she need to fast if the problem is then resolved?
Because she is desperate and ready to quite like the title of her thread says. She can still do what she is doing if she prefers that or she can try what I suggested. Either will work if you get the deficit. I think what I do is much easier and it is very nice to be able to eat tell full. If she thinks eating multiple small meals with all the meal planning and weighing everything is easier than the fasting, then she should stick with that. I just think what I suggested would be much easier for many people. Not all though if they have issues with fasting. What I find very difficult is eating a small meal and then having to stop eating. That is really hard for me. My stomach gets awakened and I want to eat tell full. It is much easier for me to not eat at all and endure that and then be able to eat tell full later than eat a bunch of small meals and never get very full and have to stop before I want to (easier to overeat eating many small meals also). To each their own for what is easiest for them.9 -
Shes desperate and ready to quit yes, but that is because weight loss wasn't happening at all, and as you read through the thread, me and @janejellyroll and @aeloine and a few others worked with her and went through her open diary and determined that her food logs were not being picked correctly.
It wasn't that she was frustrated with weighing her food and finding it hard.
It wasn't that she was finding 3 meals and 3 snacks hard and wanting change.
It wasn't that she was hungry and over eating.
It was simply that her logs for her foods were very generic and not accurate. IE: logging steak as 210 when it should of been 270-300 calories instead.
The key word in your post was.. deficit. She didn't have one. She was eating more then she was logging.
This problem still would of been a problem regardless of if she fasted or not.
I am really just curious as to why people seem to post solutions to problems that don't exist.
7 -
HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »Okay, so my next question is..
Since the OP's only issue was that she was using inaccurate logs in her diary.. and not anything else.. why would she have to drastically alter the way she eats? regardless of if she eats within 4 hours or 24 hours, if the logs shes using are wrong, they are going to be wrong at 4pm, 9pm, 7am, 1am... you were eating a vast portion of your calories within your small time frame, if shes going to copy your suggestion, then shes not going to have any different results, still using the same logs with the same calorie errors.
Once she fixes the logs however, she will then be eating the correct amount of calories for loss.. why does she need to fast if the problem is then resolved?
Her stomach will shrink eating in a small window and it will be harder to overeat. She doesn't have to log at all. Just weigh the body and see if your losing weight. If not shorten the eating window for dinner or practice and easier method of portion control like only eating one-large plate of food. No need to measure every thing you eat. That actually would be almost impossible at my house to do that because almost everything we eat we make from scratch. To know how much I eat, I would have to ask my wife to measure every ingredient put into everything, weigh the whole thing, then weigh my portion, then calculate the percentage of the whole I ate. No way is my wife going to be willing to do that (she does most of the cooking) and I have no interest in spending the time doing it either. It was a major pain just guessing and logging the cals I ate when I did that.14 -
HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »Shes desperate and ready to quit yes, but that is because weight loss wasn't happening at all, and as you read through the thread, me and @janejellyroll and @aeloine and a few others worked with her and went through her open diary and determined that her food logs were not being picked correctly.
It wasn't that she was frustrated with weighing her food and finding it hard.
It wasn't that she was finding 3 meals and 3 snacks hard and wanting change.
It wasn't that she was hungry and over eating.
It was simply that her logs for her foods were very generic and not accurate. IE: logging steak as 210 when it should of been 270-300 calories instead.
The key word in your post was.. deficit. She didn't have one. She was eating more then she was logging.
This problem still would of been a problem regardless of if she fasted or not.
I am really just curious as to why people seem to post solutions to problems that don't exist.
She is frustrated because she is not losing weight. The cause was not eating at a deficit partly because she did not log correctly. I'm sure if she was losing, she wouldn't care so much how accurate her logging was. Why would you care how she loses weight as long as she eats healthfully? I said she can do whatever works for her. I just think she might consider a way that may potentially be easier for her.7 -
Her stomach will shrink eating in a small window and it will be harder to overeat. She doesn't have to log at all. Just weigh the body and see if your losing weight. If not shorten the eating window for dinner or practice and easier method of portion control like only eating one-large plate of food. No need to measure every thing you eat. That actually would be almost impossible at my house to do that because almost everything we eat we make from scratch. To know how much I eat, I would have to ask my wife to measure every ingredient put into everything, weigh the whole thing, then weigh my portion, then calculate the percentage of the whole I ate. No way is my wife going to be willing to do that (she does most of the cooking) and I have no interest in spending the time doing it either. It was a major pain just guessing and logging the cals I ate when I did that.
Her problem wasn't that she was over eating or that she was hungry.
Again.. i am curious to know why you seem to think this was the problem? Surely you continued to read the thread passed the first post or title?
The OP is not a married man with a wife not interested in weighing things before she cooks.
The OP is someone who is more then willing to weigh her food and is comfortable in the process.
The OP just happened to be picking incorrect MFP database entries which was stalling her losses.8 -
HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »
Her problem wasn't that she was over eating or that she was hungry.
Again.. i am curious to know why you seem to think this was the problem? Surely you continued to read the thread passed the first post or title?
The OP is not a married man with a wife not interested in weighing things before she cooks.
The OP is someone who is more then willing to weigh her food and is comfortable in the process.
The OP just happened to be picking incorrect MFP database entries which was stalling her losses.
I never said that was her problem, I said that was my problem. What I did say which was off topic some was that I thought people spend an awful lot of time weighing, planning, preparing when it isn't absolutely necessary to do so. I do think that is a little crazy doing all that to the level people are describing (worth it if you have to do it but what a time drain!) Again, I said whatever is easier for her. Again why do you care how she looses weight if she eats healthfully? I don't care how she does it. I'm just offering an alternative that many have found to work for them when they have had difficulties with all the measuring, counting, and eating small meals. Doing all that though may be easier for some who have issues with fasting.9 -
perhaps start a thread and offer this suggestion to others who may be struggling with weighing and counting?
I am not against IF.
What i do get my panties in a knot about though is when people offer drastic changes of eating to desperate people wanting results and are confused about whats wrong.
Fasting does not ensure not over eating in your calories.
This is about as baffling as weight watchers putting 200 foods on their 0 point list under the premise that people don't over eat on these foods.
When peoples problems aren't a lifestyle choice struggle, I don't offer them a different lifestyle choice. I would rather show her how to fix her logging and have her instantly find her way to having success then deciding to fast under the idea that she will not have to count or weigh her food only to potentially continue to struggle while already feeling desperate and ready to quit.9 -
HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »perhaps start a thread and offer this suggestion to others who may be struggling with weighing and counting?
I am not against IF.
What i do get my panties in a knot about though is when people offer drastic changes of eating to desperate people wanting results and are confused about whats wrong.
Fasting does not ensure not over eating in your calories.
This is about as baffling as weight watchers putting 200 foods on their 0 point list under the premise that people don't over eat on these foods.
When peoples problems aren't a lifestyle choice struggle, I don't offer them a different lifestyle choice. I would rather show her how to fix her logging and have her instantly find her way to having success then deciding to fast under the idea that she will not have to count or weigh her food only to potentially continue to struggle while already feeling desperate and ready to quit.
What I don't understand is the resistance to try something, or resisting even the suggestion of trying something, especially for folks who are struggling making what they are doing work, especially when the suggester acknowledges that it may be better for some staying the course their on. If it works for her great, don't change (or make the changes you suggested). If it's not working, then you might consider a change. For this person, it probably does make sense to make the tweaks you suggested and then see if it works. If she still has issues or just plain gets tired of all the planning, weighing and counting, there is no harm done in trying the IF IMO. Many have had great success with it.9 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »
On what authority do you say she does not need to go low carb? She may not "need" to eat any certain way but there are more than one way to skin a cat as they say and only eating 150 grams of carbs daily might work for her. I think she is very close to getting things going her way because she wants this thing.What I don't understand is the resistance to try something, or resisting even the suggestion of trying something, especially for folks who are struggling making what they are doing work, especially when the suggester acknowledges that it may be better for some staying the course their on. If it works for her great, don't change (or make the changes you suggested). If it's not working, then you might consider a change. There is more than one way to skin a cat!
It's interesting you and Gale seem to both of said the same thing..
3 -
Her stomach will shrink eating in a small window and it will be harder to overeat. She doesn't have to log at all. Just weigh the body and see if your losing weight. If not shorten the eating window for dinner or practice and easier method of portion control like only eating one-large plate of food. No need to measure every thing you eat. That actually would be almost impossible at my house to do that because almost everything we eat we make from scratch. To know how much I eat, I would have to ask my wife to measure every ingredient put into everything, weigh the whole thing, then weigh my portion, then calculate the percentage of the whole I ate. No way is my wife going to be willing to do that (she does most of the cooking) and I have no interest in spending the time doing it either. It was a major pain just guessing and logging the cals I ate when I did that.
I never said that was her problem, I said that was my problem. What I did say which was off topic some was that I thought people spend an awful lot of time weighing, planning, preparing when it isn't absolutely necessary to do so. I do think that is a little crazy doing all that to the level people are describing (worth it if you have to do it but what a time drain!) Again, I said whatever is easier for her. Again why do you care how she looses weight if she eats healthfully? I don't care how she does it. I'm just offering an alternative that many have found to work for them when they have had difficulties with all the measuring, counting, and eating small meals.
I think that it is valid that you present an alternative to measuring accurately that you think might be of interest to some people who are looking into ways that will allow them to create a deficit.
I will respectfully disagree with a some of the points you raise in the quoted text and elsewhere in the thread and which you present as benefits for your chosen method.
a) that "your stomach will shrink and so you will eat less" and
b) that "counting calories is so inaccurate you might as well not count them as long as you achieve a deficit" (or words to that effect) and
c) that it is incredibly time consuming to weight and measure and count calories.
(a) I fail to see how engaging in large meals till you're full enhances the stomach shrinking endeavor. To the contrary, I would think that usually eating multiple small meals to take the edge off but NOT feel full would be more likely to eventually result in adjustments such that a comparatively larger meal will feel like a feast, while being objectively smaller than in the past.
(b) the counting calories "thing" may not be totally accurate; but, I fail to see how totally NOT counting calories becomes more accurate. And I hasten to assure you that enough of us have successfully managed to count calories accurately enough to achieve our goals, that I would confidently state that most people can be trained to achieve sufficient counting accuracy!
(c) I beg to differ. Indeed, it is actually time consuming to select and log correct and appropriate entries if you have to find new items on a regular basis. But, it is actually incredibly easy and not time consuming to jot down weights, especially if you're cooking yourself. Easier than using measuring cups and trying to measure to a particular fill point too!
Accurate calorie counting allows one to maximise calories eaten while meeting goals. It also allows for things such as very small deficits and for experimentation with new food items. All these are things you would have a very hard time achieving when relying on daily scale results to give you feedback as to whether your restricted eating window the previous day was effective or not.
ETA that I can also confidently state that even if you devolve me to OMAD and a restricted eating window I am perfectly capable of putting away upwards of 3K calories in 30 minutes, especially if I am going into it with the intention of polishing off some plates.11 -
HellYeahItsKriss wrote: »
It's interesting you and Gale seem to both of said the same thing..
That's because it's true! There is more than one way to skin a cat. I'm open to more than one way.6 -
That's because it's true! There is more than one way to skin a cat. I'm open to more than one way.
If it's true, then why did you edit it out of your post?4 -
I think that it is valid that you present an alternative to measuring accurately that you think might be of interest to some people who are looking into ways that they can create a deficit.
I will respectfully disagree with a some of the points you raise in the quoted text and elsewhere in the thread and which you present as benefits for your chosen method.
a) that "your stomach will shrink and so you will eat less" and
b) that "counting calories is so inaccurate you might as well not count them as long as you achieve a deficit" (or words to that effect) and
c) that it is incredibly time consuming to weight and measure and count calories.
(a) I fail to see how engaging in large meals till you're full enhances the stomach shrinking endeavor. To the contrary, I would think that usually eating multiple small meals to take the edge off but NOT feel full would be more likely to eventually result in adjustments such that a comparatively larger meal will feel like a feast, while being objectively smaller than in the past.
(b) the counting calories "thing" may not be totally accurate; but, I fail to see how totally NOT counting calories becomes more accurate. And I hasten to assure you that enough of us have successfully managed to count calories accurately enough to achieve our goals, that I would confidently state that most people can be trained to achieve sufficient counting accuracy!
(c) I beg to differ. Indeed, it is actually time consuming to select and log correct and appropriate entries if you have to find new items on a regular basis. But, it is actually incredibly easy and not time consuming to jot down weights, especially if you're cooking yourself. Easier than using measuring cups and trying to measure to a particular fill point too!
Accurate calorie counting allows one to maximise calories eaten while meeting goals. It also allows for things such as very small deficits and for experimentation with new food items. All these are things you would have a very hard time achieving when relying on daily scale results to give you feedback as to whether what you did was effective or not.
a) your stomach absolutely does shrink if you fast for 20-hrs. Have you tried it. I can't eat much more than a plate full after that fast. If I eat a lunch, I can eat more for dinner than if I didn't eat the lunch. I don't know if eating a bunch of small meals will shrink the stomach because I don't want to go there and haven't done it because it is very hard for me to do.
b) not counting at all isn't more accurate. You don't have to be accurate though. You just have to have a Woe that is at a deficit. I imaging someone eating small meals could do this also but it would be very difficult and you would have to restrict a lot of food types or it would be very easy to overeat. Saving all the calories to the end of the day allows a person to eat tell full and still have a deficit (partly due to the stomach shrinking). You can still eat at a surplus but on the average it just didn't happen with me on a 20:4 diet eating ad libitum. Some I'm sure would have to practice portion control even eating in a 1-hr window but that can be accomplished by just eating a large plate of food and no more. If you count and do it accurately, you will lose so I have no doubt that people can do that and have success. I know many, many have. But it isn't the only way to get a deficit.
c) No logging is easier than any logging. I don't do the cooking so would be very difficult for me. When I did log, it was a pain for me. I'm sure some people have this down better and it might not take them a lot of time. I just think it is a major pain to log every gram of everything a person eats though and I do not want to do it. If it works though and you are good at it and you don't mind, by all means continue!
When I get to eat tell full and still lose weight, that is maximizing eating. Also I ate all foods types I wanted so I got to try everything, not experimentation necessary!7
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 395.1K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.2K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 445 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.2K Motivation and Support
- 8.2K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.9K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions