Is there anyone not counting calories?
Replies
-
janejellyroll wrote: »candylilacs wrote: »I count carbs. When I get 25-35 carbohydrate mark, I stop. Seeing that it must be so freeing not be a slave to the calories, I signed up.
If counting calories is being a "slave" to calories, then counting carbohydrates is being a "slave" to carbohydrates. I don't see a meaningful difference here.
I'm a slave to carbs. In fact, I'm carbs' *kitten*. If I were in a jail cell with carbs, I wouldn't even have to be threatened. I would gladly bend over for carbs.
Edited because I really WOULD gladly bend over for carbs.
6 -
janejellyroll wrote: »candylilacs wrote: »I count carbs. When I get 25-35 carbohydrate mark, I stop. Seeing that it must be so freeing not be a slave to the calories, I signed up.
If counting calories is being a "slave" to calories, then counting carbohydrates is being a "slave" to carbohydrates. I don't see a meaningful difference here.
I'm a slave to carbs. In fact, I'm carbs' *kitten*. If I were in a jail cell with carbs, I wouldn't even have to be threatened. I would gladly bend over for carbs.
Edited because I really WOULD gladly bend over for carbs.
<=== is currently shopping Amazon for a slice of bread costume! Lol j/I
I have never been a slave to carbs, but might have been chained to a radiator by some once....1 -
oh boy! So much to say about this, but its religion you know. you cannot challenge anyone's beliefs without offending them. However, we all know people who look at food and gain weight. We all know people who can pretty much eat what ever they want to, and never gain a pound. So its not calories. Fat isn't 9 calories per gram. Carbohydrates aren't 4 calories per gram. Different types of carbs/fats/protein have different amounts of calories, so how can you even began to count them anyway? Those are comprise numbers published by the government trying to simplify things for the population. Depending on what type of meat, or vegetables, or whatever, the calories contained in a gram of fat/protein/carbs vary widely, so you're not really counting anything accurately.2
-
I'm bad at estimating, so counting calories with my food scale takes out the guesswork.5
-
LagunaPaul wrote: »oh boy! So much to say about this, but its religion you know. you cannot challenge anyone's beliefs without offending them. However, we all know people who look at food and gain weight. We all know people who can pretty much eat what ever they want to, and never gain a pound. So its not calories. Fat isn't 9 calories per gram. Carbohydrates aren't 4 calories per gram. Different types of carbs/fats/protein have different amounts of calories, so how can you even began to count them anyway? Those are comprise numbers published by the government trying to simplify things for the population. Depending on what type of meat, or vegetables, or whatever, the calories contained in a gram of fat/protein/carbs vary widely, so you're not really counting anything accurately.
Ok.. I hit the disagree button, but unlike some people, I'm going to tell you WHY I disagreed. 1st. Ok you dont like the word "calories" , so I will refer to it ad energy from the sun. Or just energy. Yes, it does come down to "energy". The problem we run into is, it is hard to tell the average "energy" intake in individuals. In several over feeding studies, people have gained different amounts of weight on the same caloric surplus. Why? Well, some people may be able to ramp up there tdee to burn off excess "energy" better than others. In a free living "energy" intake environment, some people may over eat one day and then compensate by eating less a day or two later. If you are not weighing and measuring every morsel of "energy" you have no idea how much "energy" they ate. So, yes... it does all come down to "energy" intake.15 -
LagunaPaul wrote: »oh boy! So much to say about this, but its religion you know. you cannot challenge anyone's beliefs without offending them. However, we all know people who look at food and gain weight. We all know people who can pretty much eat what ever they want to, and never gain a pound. So its not calories. Fat isn't 9 calories per gram. Carbohydrates aren't 4 calories per gram. Different types of carbs/fats/protein have different amounts of calories, so how can you even began to count them anyway? Those are comprise numbers published by the government trying to simplify things for the population. Depending on what type of meat, or vegetables, or whatever, the calories contained in a gram of fat/protein/carbs vary widely, so you're not really counting anything accurately.
If you have even a scrap of evidence to back up any of these absolutely outlandish claims then I have some fantastic news for you!
This evidence will be so earth-shattering that it will turn the entire scientific community on it's head and no doubt you'll be a shoo-in for the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine, Chemistry, and Physics. So I would encourage you to publish urgently as they all come with a substantial monetary reward.19 -
I log it after I eat and it is what it is. I'm in my range all the time.1
-
I log it after I eat and it is what it is. I'm in my range all the time.
Interesting.
I tend to log before I eat it.
Often I pre-log the entire day when I get up in the morning so that I have a plan for the day and will make changes/additions/subtractions/substitutions as needed.
The other reason I find pre-logging handy is it helps me avoid problems before they happen. Like, I'll grab something to eat, log it, see what impact it's had on my calories for the day and all of a sudden that particular thing isn't quite as appealing as it was a few seconds earlier or I change what I'm going to eat so that I can better stick to my target. If I log after eating and don't like what I see then it's too late.4 -
LagunaPaul wrote: »oh boy! So much to say about this, but its religion you know. you cannot challenge anyone's beliefs without offending them. However, we all know people who look at food and gain weight. We all know people who can pretty much eat what ever they want to, and never gain a pound. So its not calories. Fat isn't 9 calories per gram. Carbohydrates aren't 4 calories per gram. Different types of carbs/fats/protein have different amounts of calories, so how can you even began to count them anyway? Those are comprise numbers published by the government trying to simplify things for the population. Depending on what type of meat, or vegetables, or whatever, the calories contained in a gram of fat/protein/carbs vary widely, so you're not really counting anything accurately.
If you have even a scrap of evidence to back up any of these absolutely outlandish claims then I have some fantastic news for you!
This evidence will be so earth-shattering that it will turn the entire scientific community on it's head and no doubt you'll be a shoo-in for the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine, Chemistry, and Physics. So I would encourage you to publish urgently as they all come with a substantial monetary reward.
Wow... we must have either butt hurt someone or someone does not have the Ovarian/Testicular fortitude to defend their supposition....🤔6 -
psychod787 wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »candylilacs wrote: »I count carbs. When I get 25-35 carbohydrate mark, I stop. Seeing that it must be so freeing not be a slave to the calories, I signed up.
If counting calories is being a "slave" to calories, then counting carbohydrates is being a "slave" to carbohydrates. I don't see a meaningful difference here.
Well in the calories case you're a slave to all macros, but counting carbs, you're the master over fats, protein, and alcohol. Maybe that lets a person feel they're a switch and not a pure slave in their food tracking relationships. 🤷
Wait.... So what you are saying is, to be "free", we just shouldn't eat?!?!?! Bro.... just shattered my world! LOL
To paraphrase Tyler Durden, "It's only after you've lost every macro that you're free to eat any macro."5 -
-
Wow, this thread has "evolved"!
--all calories are different and the government has come up with consensus numbers.
Yeah... so what? Approximate is more than good enough for horseshoes, hand grenades and calories. Worrying about a precision beyond 9/4/4, or choosing to consume nuts solely because Atwater may have incorrectly estimated how much of them you poop, or because certain proteins have a higher TEF is definitely majoring in the minors if you're dealing with a few tens of thousands of Calories in deficits to get to where you need to be.
--you can't calculate the exact amount of calories you eat and spend, therefore it is an unreliable measurement that takes too much time to implement and you might as well implement something else.
(see above for Yeah... so what? Approximate is good enough for horseshoes, hand grenades and calories. Because it is!)
To the "meat" of the argument: you can quite easily log consistently and after 4-6 weeks for most females and 3 weeks or so for most males have SUFFICIENTLY meaningful trend based results on how accurate your logging is vis a vis reality and more than sufficient information to be able to make minimally sized corrections as needed to achieve the results you desire.
So the whole argument here is whether something else works better for you and is easier on you. Because *I* 1000% (notice the 10x multiplier on 100%) agree with you that the option you should choose to implement should be what's EASIER FOR YOU!
FOR ME, eating the most I could within the context of achieving the results I wanted, eating the widest possible range of foods, having the freedom to eat Belgian chocolate covered cookies or trying to make brownies out of carrots and zucchini squash getting both veggie and chocolate "macros" taken care off at once and NOT wondering every day that my weight changed semi-unpredictably if I was still on the right path was EASIEST.
For me being able to make SMALL corrections was what was EASIEST because in order to see a daily drop on the scale (like many people want) actually requires a LARGE deficit, one larger than most people should be implementing for minimal impact.
So again, for me, calorie counting provided more precision and more EASE than anything else i had ever tried.
In fact it was calorie counting was the difference between being ready to give up on trying to "eat better" and "move more" because it was un-sustainable for me less than 10 months in, or discovering MFP in my attempt to preserve my odd 40+lb loss to that date and then going on to lose another ~85lbs over the next two years, and then staying within 5lbs of my lowest weight these past three+ years.
Nothing will be UTTERLY easy, effortless, and mindless, if you've ended up on MFP because you needed to. Because if it was then you wouldn't actually have needed MFP in the first place!
Within that context, though, I will continue to advocate for taking the easier path... because it is more sustainable long term, again in my opinion.... which has been partially formed by observing myself and people around me make multiple attempts at other more heroic and differentially constrained approaches.
So. To me the (easier) path is to have a nagging voice--which I more often than not partially, but not totally, ignore --saying: "yo, bro, you've had enough today!" But not having to sit there agonizing whether I should "be allowed" to eat a couple of slices of pizza from the delivery vs "being good" and only eating my microwavable container.10 -
I log it after I eat and it is what it is. I'm in my range all the time.
Interesting.
I tend to log before I eat it.
Often I pre-log the entire day when I get up in the morning so that I have a plan for the day and will make changes/additions/subtractions/substitutions as needed.
The other reason I find pre-logging handy is it helps me avoid problems before they happen. Like, I'll grab something to eat, log it, see what impact it's had on my calories for the day and all of a sudden that particular thing isn't quite as appealing as it was a few seconds earlier or I change what I'm going to eat so that I can better stick to my target. If I log after eating and don't like what I see then it's too late.
That is a good way to do a calorie counting diet. I should mention that I now eat very low carb, high fat, and only one meal a day. My method is to correct the hormone imbalance root cause of my health issues. My hormones are becoming more balanced, I'm getting full on a normal amount of food. My body is telling me "whoa boy that's enough!" It falls between 1400-2000 calories every time. It works for me, effortlessly, and that's the way I'd like to continue. Some people do better on low calorie. I gained my weight back because I couldn't sustain it. I lost 100 lbs, so I know calorie counting works, but it's not for me.2 -
I purposely take a break for a day or a few days once in a while to break my logging streak.
When I logged for almost a full year it started to feel like a chore and sort of like I was doing it to hit that one year mark. I stopped logging on day 360, but since I’ve started up again, I’ve enjoyed it and it feels good.1 -
psychod787 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »This site is built around calorie counting. So most of us here do just that.
@snickerscharlie , some of us just like the comrade like relationship we develop with others here.
Mr_Healthy_Habits wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Mr_Healthy_Habits wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Mr_Healthy_Habits wrote: »I don't really track much either...
Lost about 180lbs and never tracked anything. It really wasn't until I started trying to gain weight that I began tracking. When you are trying to build muscle and don't want to go to far over and minimize fat gains, a target of 250+ calories is extremely difficult to hit...
Everyone will tell you, just weigh everything, which you really can't do if you want to maintain a normal life and even if you did there's just no reliable way to tell what your deficit is because there's no reliable way to know how much you're actually burning in a day...
I'd use formulas and trackers and everything, and it always just felt like way too much food and it was...
I do believe cico can be an effective tool but the only thing you can probably take to the bank is the calories in part, calories out tbh we don't really know... You can't trust fitbit, formulas or whatever, which is why it's unsuccessful for many people...
Another thing you can't really trust is restaurant calorie estimates either... Plus you can still gain over a weekend in a deficit if you eat out or salt your food too much or drink alcohol...
I know many disagree with me, but I've been at this for a while now and you can't argue with results...
I have a tattoo on my arm that says "Eat wise and exercise" that's all you should need...
I weigh just about everything I eat at home and my life is pretty normal.
If you log relatively accurately, you *can* accurately estimate what you're burning in a day because you can compare your real life results to your estimates over time. It won't happen instantly, but this is how people figure out if their activity tracker (or other method of estimating calories out) is over- or under-estimating -- they're comparing it to their real life results.
Restaurant calorie estimates can be tricky, which is another factor to consider when we're deciding whether or not we want to take steps to be more accurate with our calorie intake estimates when we can. I weigh my food at home precisely so I can limit the impact of the times when I'm going with someone else's estimate.
Do I think someone *has* to weigh food and log in order to be successful? Obviously not. But I think it's one of the best ways for the average person to ensure they're regularly hitting their calorie goals. Telling someone to "eat wise" is very vague. How exactly do I implement that? That would be a lot harder for me than "Hey, generally net about 1,460 calories a day if you want to maintain your current weight."
(Obviously, if it is negatively impacting your mental health, I don't recommend you do it).
If it works for you as a tool to achieve good health, then I'm not going to disparage anyone from using it...
But I have to ask, what do you do when you go over someone's house for dinner? I mean it's not like you can ask them to weigh the food out ahead of time for you, and don't you ever make any type of casseroles or dishes with a mixed amount of food where you're sharing amongst people, even if you do weigh your portion it's still not accurate...
And as for the accuracy of the calories out part of the whole equation... They're still really is no reliable way to tell, I mean yeah you can look at your weight over time and gauge whether or not you've been in a deficit... But weight fluctuates day today on such arbitrary things like whether or not you had a good movement in the morning to water weight, to when you last ate, Etc... So considering the day-to-day fluctuations there's really no way to tell what kind of a deficit you're in... My whole point is it's not an exact science
When I go to someone's house for dinner, I make my best estimate. It's unlikely to cause any issues because the majority of my intake is pretty accurate.
You can use weighing to make a pretty accurate estimate for mixed/shared dishes too. I can simply measure the total weight of the dish against the weight of what I'm consuming.
The fact that we can never be 100% accurate isn't an argument that we shouldn't try at all. Nobody is saying it's an exact science, but the inexact science can still produce great results and, for many of us, it's much easier than slogans like "eat wise." That's a meaningful phrase for you, but it doesn't mean anything to me.
I lost 40+ pounds and have been maintaining since 2015 just focusing on consistently meeting my calorie goal by weighing food when I can and making my best estimate the rest of the time. That's why I don't think it's an especially unreasonable way to live.
"Eat wise" may work for certain people, but I'd have no idea how to make that work. And if I was "eating wisely" and exercising and not seeing results, how would I know what adjustments to make?
I'm not going to disagree with you on any of what you said... If it works for you then great, you be the example of how to make it work and I applaud you for it...
For myself however, it has its place and can be a useful tool but not without limitations... I just don't believe tracking and weighing your food everyday should be necessary, we shouldn't have to do this in order to stay a healthy weight...
But they you can argue that we should be able to eat what ever we'd like and not have to worry about "eating wise"... And you may be right
Either way, congrats on your success
While I agree with you in many ways, calorie counting is just a tool. I look at it like this, when I am working on my car, I might have a wrench that "works", but is just not quite right for the job. So, I reach into the tool box for a wrench that works better for this job. Controlling dietary intake is not much different imho. One wrench does not work as well, try another until you find one that does.
Or you could save some time, but risk your knuckles by grabbing a monkey wrench and smacking it with a big hammer. Hmm... this speaks for my love of destruction and chaos.2 -
psychod787 wrote: »LagunaPaul wrote: »oh boy! So much to say about this, but its religion you know. you cannot challenge anyone's beliefs without offending them. However, we all know people who look at food and gain weight. We all know people who can pretty much eat what ever they want to, and never gain a pound. So its not calories. Fat isn't 9 calories per gram. Carbohydrates aren't 4 calories per gram. Different types of carbs/fats/protein have different amounts of calories, so how can you even began to count them anyway? Those are comprise numbers published by the government trying to simplify things for the population. Depending on what type of meat, or vegetables, or whatever, the calories contained in a gram of fat/protein/carbs vary widely, so you're not really counting anything accurately.
If you have even a scrap of evidence to back up any of these absolutely outlandish claims then I have some fantastic news for you!
This evidence will be so earth-shattering that it will turn the entire scientific community on it's head and no doubt you'll be a shoo-in for the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine, Chemistry, and Physics. So I would encourage you to publish urgently as they all come with a substantial monetary reward.
Wow... we must have either butt hurt someone or someone does not have the Ovarian/Testicular fortitude to defend their supposition....🤔
Oh, I have no doubt that I have some petty stalker who insta-disagrees any post I make. I could post an objective, undisputed fact like "I went for a nice walk yesterday" and they'll disagree the post. Quite frankly I find it endlessly amusing, and to be honest it's a bit of an ego trip to think that something I've said has had such an impact on someone that they're dedicating their time, thoughts and effort on going around disagreeing with my posts.8 -
psychod787 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »candylilacs wrote: »I count carbs. When I get 25-35 carbohydrate mark, I stop. Seeing that it must be so freeing not be a slave to the calories, I signed up.
If counting calories is being a "slave" to calories, then counting carbohydrates is being a "slave" to carbohydrates. I don't see a meaningful difference here.
I'm a slave to carbs. In fact, I'm carbs' *kitten*. If I were in a jail cell with carbs, I wouldn't even have to be threatened. I would gladly bend over for carbs.
Edited because I really WOULD gladly bend over for carbs.
<=== is currently shopping Amazon for a slice of bread costume! Lol j/I
I have never been a slave to carbs, but might have been chained to a radiator by some once....
I'd say something witty but I'm in a carb coma.
And I'm not witty.
5 -
Anyone count macros? If so, what’s you percentages to lose weight please1
-
alex2017new wrote: »Anyone count macros? If so, what’s you percentages to lose weight please
Did you read most of this thread before asking about the percentage of macros that leads to weight loss?
Do you think that you will lose more weight if:
a) You eat 50% Carbs, 30% Fat and 20% Protein for 1750 Cal a day
b) You eat 20% Carbs, 50% Fat and 30% Protein for 1800 Cal a day or
c) You eat 55% Carbs, 20% fat and 25% Protein for 1750 Cal a day
d) You eat 10% Carbs, 50% Fat and 40% Protein for 1800 Cal a day
Why? What time frame are you considering? What % of the loss will be fat and what % of the loss will be lean mass? Will there be a loss?
Bonus points: If your carbs come from whole wheat pasta will you lose more weight or less weight given an isocaloric intake as compared to white rice? What if, in this scenario as given, we replace the whole wheat pasta with sweet potatoes and the white rice with a mix of white, yellow, and red baby potato nuggets instead?
7 -
I purposely take a break for a day or a few days once in a while to break my logging streak.
When I logged for almost a full year it started to feel like a chore and sort of like I was doing it to hit that one year mark. I stopped logging on day 360, but since I’ve started up again, I’ve enjoyed it and it feels good.
I do something similar- I tend to let myself have one or two meals per week that aren't accounted-for precisely.
That's how I manage with what was mentioned above about eating out or restaurants etc. I'll still put some estimate in for those meals, mainly because I hate the look of an empty row, and I don't want to throw MFP's numbers off too much with my having weirdly low-calorie days followed by a pause in loss!
But with that I tend to simply search the database for what I've had, and over-estimate how much I ate by a little. I figure, I know that left to my own devices I'll eat more than my allowance. I mean, if I didn't do that I wouldn't be here in the first place, would I?! But I chuck it in, make a mental note that it's just a placeholder estimate, and carry on about my day.
Another thing I think is really important when it comes to logging calories and losing weight? Going over the allowance does NOT mean you're suddenly gaining!
Let's say you're on a deficit of 500 cals per day, which is pretty standard for a lot of people who have a moderate amount to lose. Let's say one day you go over your allowance by 200 or even 400 calories.
What happens then? YOU STILL LOSE WEIGHT THAT DAY! Sure, you're only losing a tiny bit that day. But you're still making progress.
It's like.. it's like sometimes if you're cycling a bike up a hill, you need to slow down. And sometimes you need to get off the bike and walk for a while to catch your breath. It's cool! You're still getting closer to the top!
6 -
I dont calorie count but that works for me, i do keto keeping my carbs 20g or under a day, I log everyday. Personally carbs leave me feeling bloated and sluggish, so I cut them out.2
-
I don't count calories but mostly I've been pretty competant at maintaining my weight.
But I found counting calories very useful and educational when losing weight as well as allowing me to be more precise to dial in a sensible rate of loss.
I'm still calorie aware without needing to count my food although I do find it helpful to log my very varied and sometimes extremely high exercise calories as part of my mindful eating.
Daily weighing to casually monitor my weight trend is my verification that I'm on average about right with my calories and also a safety net to catch an upward drift.
I can lose weight to correct a drift without calorie counting but it tends to be a bit sporadic but that's ok.
Binging and feeling guilty are separate issues OP and you need to address that.5 -
-
magnusthenerd wrote: »psychod787 wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »candylilacs wrote: »I count carbs. When I get 25-35 carbohydrate mark, I stop. Seeing that it must be so freeing not be a slave to the calories, I signed up.
If counting calories is being a "slave" to calories, then counting carbohydrates is being a "slave" to carbohydrates. I don't see a meaningful difference here.
Well in the calories case you're a slave to all macros, but counting carbs, you're the master over fats, protein, and alcohol. Maybe that lets a person feel they're a switch and not a pure slave in their food tracking relationships. 🤷
Wait.... So what you are saying is, to be "free", we just shouldn't eat?!?!?! Bro.... just shattered my world! LOL
To paraphrase Tyler Durden, "It's only after you've lost every macro that you're free to eat any macro."
Freedom's just another word for nothing left to eat.
(That comes out really dark.)12 -
I mostly log after I prepare a meal or after eating, but I think about cals when prepping if it's not something where I roughly know the cals. My days tend to be pretty standard, although I might adjust dinner if lunch is higher than normal.
I only prelog if I'm planning to have leftovers.
I don't snack, however, so seeing where something unexpected fits in isn't normally an issue.
Lots of different ways to do this depending on personal preference, which is one reason I like it.
3 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »candylilacs wrote: »I count carbs. When I get 25-35 carbohydrate mark, I stop. Seeing that it must be so freeing not be a slave to the calories, I signed up.
If counting calories is being a "slave" to calories, then counting carbohydrates is being a "slave" to carbohydrates. I don't see a meaningful difference here.
Well in the calories case you're a slave to all macros, but counting carbs, you're the master over fats, protein, and alcohol. Maybe that lets a person feel they're a switch and not a pure slave in their food tracking relationships. 🤷
And if that works for someone, that's fine. But some people feel "enslaved" having to artificially limit their carbohydrates. I personally feel freer just working within a calorie limit and making sure I'm getting sufficient fat and protein.5 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »Mr_Healthy_Habits wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Mr_Healthy_Habits wrote: »I don't really track much either...
Lost about 180lbs and never tracked anything. It really wasn't until I started trying to gain weight that I began tracking. When you are trying to build muscle and don't want to go to far over and minimize fat gains, a target of 250+ calories is extremely difficult to hit...
Everyone will tell you, just weigh everything, which you really can't do if you want to maintain a normal life and even if you did there's just no reliable way to tell what your deficit is because there's no reliable way to know how much you're actually burning in a day...
I'd use formulas and trackers and everything, and it always just felt like way too much food and it was...
I do believe cico can be an effective tool but the only thing you can probably take to the bank is the calories in part, calories out tbh we don't really know... You can't trust fitbit, formulas or whatever, which is why it's unsuccessful for many people...
Another thing you can't really trust is restaurant calorie estimates either... Plus you can still gain over a weekend in a deficit if you eat out or salt your food too much or drink alcohol...
I know many disagree with me, but I've been at this for a while now and you can't argue with results...
I have a tattoo on my arm that says "Eat wise and exercise" that's all you should need...
I weigh just about everything I eat at home and my life is pretty normal.
If you log relatively accurately, you *can* accurately estimate what you're burning in a day because you can compare your real life results to your estimates over time. It won't happen instantly, but this is how people figure out if their activity tracker (or other method of estimating calories out) is over- or under-estimating -- they're comparing it to their real life results.
Restaurant calorie estimates can be tricky, which is another factor to consider when we're deciding whether or not we want to take steps to be more accurate with our calorie intake estimates when we can. I weigh my food at home precisely so I can limit the impact of the times when I'm going with someone else's estimate.
Do I think someone *has* to weigh food and log in order to be successful? Obviously not. But I think it's one of the best ways for the average person to ensure they're regularly hitting their calorie goals. Telling someone to "eat wise" is very vague. How exactly do I implement that? That would be a lot harder for me than "Hey, generally net about 1,460 calories a day if you want to maintain your current weight."
(Obviously, if it is negatively impacting your mental health, I don't recommend you do it).
If it works for you as a tool to achieve good health, then I'm not going to disparage anyone from using it...
But I have to ask, what do you do when you go over someone's house for dinner? I mean it's not like you can ask them to weigh the food out ahead of time for you, and don't you ever make any type of casseroles or dishes with a mixed amount of food where you're sharing amongst people, even if you do weigh your portion it's still not accurate...
And as for the accuracy of the calories out part of the whole equation... They're still really is no reliable way to tell, I mean yeah you can look at your weight over time and gauge whether or not you've been in a deficit... But weight fluctuates day today on such arbitrary things like whether or not you had a good movement in the morning to water weight, to when you last ate, Etc... So considering the day-to-day fluctuations there's really no way to tell what kind of a deficit you're in... My whole point is it's not an exact science
There once was a mathematician and an engineer. They were both offered the chance to be with a beautiful woman, but she told them her one rule: every time you approach me, you have to proceed at half intervals, so you may walk walf way to me, then 3/4, then 7/8, 15/16, and so on.
The mathematician looks at the engineer and says "let's leave, we'll never get to her!"
The engineer replied, "Oh, in theory sure, but practice it will be close enough!"
I think your idea of reliable is the mathematician, but losing weight is more an engineering problem, luckily. People can figure out their calories out reliably enough. There are people on here who do analysis on all their intake, all their activity, and come up with estimates even for their BMR component separate from activity and exercise expenditures.
I like this twist on the Zeno paradox.
I don't think people realize that precision does not exist in reality. As close as we can come to it is extremely expensive and unnecessary in most situations.
Saying you can't use calorie counting to lose weight due to not knowing precisely how many calories are burned is akin to saying you can build a house because due to not knowing precisely the dimensions and load capacity of building materials.6 -
janejellyroll wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »candylilacs wrote: »I count carbs. When I get 25-35 carbohydrate mark, I stop. Seeing that it must be so freeing not be a slave to the calories, I signed up.
If counting calories is being a "slave" to calories, then counting carbohydrates is being a "slave" to carbohydrates. I don't see a meaningful difference here.
Well in the calories case you're a slave to all macros, but counting carbs, you're the master over fats, protein, and alcohol. Maybe that lets a person feel they're a switch and not a pure slave in their food tracking relationships. 🤷
And if that works for someone, that's fine. But some people feel "enslaved" having to artificially limit their carbohydrates. I personally feel freer just working within a calorie limit and making sure I'm getting sufficient fat and protein.
Yeah, I'm not sure why counting cals would be slavery but limiting carbs super restrictively would not be. I am not saying low carb isn't a diet that would work for some, I know it does, and for them it doesn't feel restrictive, but for me trying to fit all the veg I eat in even 30-35 net carbs was tough, and meant I had to avoid foods I like to eat like fruit and beans. And that was at a pretty high calorie level (maintenance) when eating within my cal limit was easy.
Counting carbs to me seems pretty similar to counting cals, because you are logging to some extent.
I guess if you do a loose "no sweets, starchy carbs, or fruit" way of eating rather than actually counting carbs you don't have to log, but that brings us back to "there are many ways to not log if you really hate it, but for many people it's an interesting temporary learning experience and others of us don't mind it at all."
For OP, the question is WHY the logging is difficult -- is it because you think the POINT of logging is eating as low as possible or that going over cals is a terrible failure? If so, those triggers could exist with pretty much any way of reducing cals (going over my carbs = failure that triggers binge) so working on the underlying issue seems the most important thing.5 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »psychod787 wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »candylilacs wrote: »I count carbs. When I get 25-35 carbohydrate mark, I stop. Seeing that it must be so freeing not be a slave to the calories, I signed up.
If counting calories is being a "slave" to calories, then counting carbohydrates is being a "slave" to carbohydrates. I don't see a meaningful difference here.
Well in the calories case you're a slave to all macros, but counting carbs, you're the master over fats, protein, and alcohol. Maybe that lets a person feel they're a switch and not a pure slave in their food tracking relationships. 🤷
Wait.... So what you are saying is, to be "free", we just shouldn't eat?!?!?! Bro.... just shattered my world! LOL
To paraphrase Tyler Durden, "It's only after you've lost every macro that you're free to eat any macro."
Bro! You broke the first rule of carb club!4 -
I count my calories, that is why I'm using this site lol. I've been a mfp member since 2012 and I have not been logging consistently the entire time, not even half of it. I tend to log for a period of time, get away from logging, come back to it, get away from it, etc. One thing I will say though is, when I am away from MFP for a significant amount of time, I gain weight. Maybe not at first, but eventually I slip on my good habits.3
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