Dietitians say counting calories bad
Replies
-
I haven't read any of this thread but the opening, but....I wouldn't take any life advice from Tik Tok.6
-
Dogmom1978 wrote: »I agree with the therapist, but 100% disagree with professionals utilizing tiktok to get themselves out there. True professionals can use more reputable resources to do so
Yeah, like LinkedIn, for example.
Though it would make sense to go onto TikTok if one was trying to reach certain demographics, I guess.
3 -
Dogmom1978 wrote: »Ohh boy, we have just had a debate about counting calories on a different thread, that went kind of hot. I stated 'counting calories is a waste of time' and I received some backlash some even felt insulted. I still believe it is in itself not enough. It is a great tool to track calorie intake to achive calorie deficit, and if one's calorie deficit is sustainable on the long run it should be off great benefit. What is more important than calorie deficit/calorie counting is the type of calorie one takes in. It can mean the difference between a successful diet or frustration.
@bubus05 It got hot because of how very incorrect the “advise” you were giving was (which was proven by multiple people on that thread).
For health, you should obviously try to get enough protein and fat. For losing weight, calorie deficit is all that matters. Carbs aren’t evil. IF you have a health condition where you have to limit certain macros, then yes, you should track those more carefully (a couple of examples: diabetes or kidney disease).
As said above, for most of us, counting calories works. Most of us don’t have an actual eating disorder. If you do, you are probably underweight and shouldn’t count calories because it will likely trigger more unhealthy eating behaviors.
OP, based on some of your other threads, I’m going to ask if you have ever talked to a professional. If not, maybe talking to a therapist would be helpful.
No I have never talked to a professional however that doesn't mean I can't read or listen to professionals. By the way there is no need to be personal about this I consider everyone a friend here after all we are all interested in how diets work or dont work that's some common ground isn't it.
I pointed out a calorie deficit or calorie extra intake for that matter will influence one's metabolism, this is proven by multiple studies and experts, therefore equally as important-as calorie counting- if not more so is what one will consume. How am I wrong?
I admire your tenacity, @bubus05 ... but as of this minute, you have 23 total posts on MFP, and 210 disagrees. That's plain amazing to me. Now I'm not saying that proves or disproves anything about your beliefs, but you've definitely found yourself a hot topic. You must understand by now that people here are going to challenge you every time you bring it up.
In a weird way I kind of like to be challenged I dont take anything here personally, we agree to disagree there is nothing wrong with that. Yes most will disagree with me but I dont mind. Everything that I wrote here is based on
experience. The why and how is based on research, now I might be missing something or misunderstand something quite possible I am no expert myself. I think that most will agree that depending on what one eats will influence one's metabolism. The question is how or at what point during diet. IMHO a simply reduced calorie intake with no regards to the type of calorie one eats is not the best most effective method, if it is not sustainable. If it is sustainable no worries the pounds one lost will remain lost regardless of the diet being on high carb low carb whatever kind of diet. I am not advocating against 'counting the calories' but try to point out that a simply reduced calorie diet may not get you the results you want or that long term may not be sustainable. Here is the science parthttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3673773/
In the bolded, you are using a figure of speech (a synechdoche or metonomy), but confusing the rhetorical device with the reality.
There are not types of calories, any more than there are types of inches.
A calorie is simply a measurement of the energy content of food. Foods have other attributes in addition to calorie level, such as nutrient content. The energy content (calories) is strongly, directly related to weight management. Various aspects of the nutritient content are related to health. Some combination of the calorie level, nutrient content, physical volume, even flavors/textures and more, contribute to whether a particular overall way of eating is satiating, sustainable, etc. The ideal combination for satiety and sustainability tends to vary quite a bit from individual to individual.
Yes, simply reducing calories from current intake X to lower intake X-Y will not necessarily result in lower body weight. Reducing calories consistently, on average, to intake X < weight-maintenance calorie level will result in weight loss. Weight-maintenance calorie level differs from individual to individual, sometimes in ways that are difficult to explain. (It can be usefully approximated in an individual by calorie counting, and adjusting intake based on weight loss rate, or even gain rate: This would be what we sometimes refer to as the n=1 personal experiment.)
Yes, calorie restriction seems able to reduce maintenance calorie needs from what they once were (or could've been) at Z bodyweight, to a lower level, via adaptive thermogenesis. Stupidly fast weight loss seems especially likely to cause more extreme adaptive thermogenesis, doubly especially so when combined with no/low exercise (perhaps especially no strength exercise), and triply especially so when also combined with sub-par nutrition.
Yes, even absent long-term adaptive thermogenesis, severely undereating can reduce daily energy expenditure, because underfueled people move less than adequately fueled ones, and exercise at lower intensity besides. In other words, CI influences CO, because human bodies are dynamic, not static.
To me, it seems helpful to be as clear as we can manage to be about what the various dynamic elements are, and how they relate to one another (and to probability of weight management success), not get into the quicksand that comes from (mis-)using figures of speech in confusing ways.10 -
Everything Ann said.
Also, for me anyway, when I reduced cals, I naturally (like without even thinking much about it) cut back on what seemed like extra cals -- snacks (in fact I cut out snacking, since for me it was not satisfying, although I kept having occasional small desserts when they fit in my cals, after dinner), reducing portions that were larger than they should have been (basically mindless eating of whatever I happened to put on my plate, even if not really hungry), and reduced portions of high cal ingredients/sides (basically, oil, butter, cheese, and to some degree nuts, were now dealt with much more carefully and sparingly, and starchy carb sides, which I really don't need a lot of, were included in smaller portions). Other than that, I didn't change my diet much, and to me that was really just how it made intuitive sense to reduce cals without thinking much about it. I was satisfied and happy, and if I hadn't been I would have adjusted.
Not really sure why one would think reducing cals would somehow not lead to a sustainable diet unless one assumes people who calorie count are idiots who just ignore things like nutrition, satiety, and satisfaction in a way those not calorie counting supposedly do not. I don't get it. It really seems like a strawman.7 -
Everything Ann said.
Also, for me anyway, when I reduced cals, I naturally (like without even thinking much about it) cut back on what seemed like extra cals -- snacks (in fact I cut out snacking, since for me it was not satisfying, although I kept having occasional small desserts when they fit in my cals, after dinner), reducing portions that were larger than they should have been (basically mindless eating of whatever I happened to put on my plate, even if not really hungry), and reduced portions of high cal ingredients/sides (basically, oil, butter, cheese, and to some degree nuts, were now dealt with much more carefully and sparingly, and starchy carb sides, which I really don't need a lot of, were included in smaller portions). Other than that, I didn't change my diet much, and to me that was really just how it made intuitive sense to reduce cals without thinking much about it. I was satisfied and happy, and if I hadn't been I would have adjusted.
Not really sure why one would think reducing cals would somehow not lead to a sustainable diet unless one assumes people who calorie count are idiots who just ignore things like nutrition, satiety, and satisfaction in a way those not calorie counting supposedly do not. I don't get it. It really seems like a strawman.
It seems like a straw man argument because it is one. 😊
That said, some people have success not counting calories on certain diets such as keto. Not because they aren’t eating in a deficit though although there are some who seem to not realize they are eating in a deficit. If I suddenly stopped eating my dessert every night and ate a piece of chicken instead of a serving of ice cream or cookies, my deficit would be larger and hence I would lose more faster. For me, that isn’t sustainable. I enjoy and greatly look forward to my evening “reward”. I never wanted to give up the foods I loved to lose weight; it wasn’t something I could see myself doing for the next 30 or 40 years, so why even attempt it?
Sustainability is the name of the game and each persons sustainable process is different. Mine is carefully tracking my calories and exercising (for health, although sometimes it’s useful if I’m running a little low on those dessert calories).
My point, is, OP if counting calories doesn’t work for you for some reason, you need to find what does. Losing weight is all well and good, but I want to keep it off. I’ve done many “diets” in the past and I was a yo yo for years. That isn’t healthy; my dad did the same thing and his cardiologist told him that gaining and losing is harder on your heart than just carrying the extra weight would be (assuming one doesn’t gain indefinitely). As an FYI, my dad had 3 heart attacks and multiple heart surgeries before he lost and kept (most of) the weight off.3 -
Dogmom1978 wrote: »Everything Ann said.
Also, for me anyway, when I reduced cals, I naturally (like without even thinking much about it) cut back on what seemed like extra cals -- snacks (in fact I cut out snacking, since for me it was not satisfying, although I kept having occasional small desserts when they fit in my cals, after dinner), reducing portions that were larger than they should have been (basically mindless eating of whatever I happened to put on my plate, even if not really hungry), and reduced portions of high cal ingredients/sides (basically, oil, butter, cheese, and to some degree nuts, were now dealt with much more carefully and sparingly, and starchy carb sides, which I really don't need a lot of, were included in smaller portions). Other than that, I didn't change my diet much, and to me that was really just how it made intuitive sense to reduce cals without thinking much about it. I was satisfied and happy, and if I hadn't been I would have adjusted.
Not really sure why one would think reducing cals would somehow not lead to a sustainable diet unless one assumes people who calorie count are idiots who just ignore things like nutrition, satiety, and satisfaction in a way those not calorie counting supposedly do not. I don't get it. It really seems like a strawman.
It seems like a straw man argument because it is one. 😊
That said, some people have success not counting calories on certain diets such as keto.
Yes, I agree. As I said back on page 1: "But no, [calorie counting is] not for everyone, and there are other ways to control cals without counting. This is all individual."
I've lost without calorie counting and know it's perfectly possible. For me, calorie counting is preferable for losing (I stop and start during maintenance), since I find it pretty fun and motivating, and I know from past experience that I actually tend to go overboard when I'm not counting. The calorie goal helps me see I can fit lots more than my mind tends to assume and still be at a deficit. (When I started at MFP and first started logging I saw I was unintentionally eating about 1000 cals, which would not have been sustainable. I added back in some olive oil and cheese and so on.)
But absolutely if OP or anyone else dislikes cal counting or finds it leads to unhealthy behaviors, other options are available. I would suggest that if one is reacting to the calorie count by wanting to binge, that suggests more is going on than just counting cals and maybe some personal analysis of why (or talking to a professional, as others have suggested) is a great idea.3 -
I am not advocating against 'counting the calories' but try to point out that a simply reduced calorie diet may not get you the results you want or that long term may not be sustainable.
Neither will eating the "right" kind of calories. I know plenty of people who can't lose weight eating "clean"...10 -
New_Heavens_Earth wrote: »Thank you all so much. I probably do need to talk to a therapist as suggested. As far as TikTok there are actually a lot of professionals using it to get themselves out there and direct you to their website/business.
Not only just a therapist but a registered dietitian as well. Not a health/ weight loss coach or vague nutrition title, but a registered dietitian.
While I definitely agree 100%-- a dietitian and therapist would be ideal, many people cannot afford this help and I don't want to leave those people hanging.
I struggled with bulimia for about 7 years, beginning very "casually", then progressing into a daily compulsion. I felt like I really needed help, but my insurance didn't cover the cost and the free therapy in my area had very limited hours that would not work with my work schedule.
So I read a number of books and articles on it that helped me. I took certain vitamins, noted triggers, gave myself permission to gain weight (up to a point). On 12/30/2020, it will be one whole year (yay!) that I have not purged.
I definitely think that dietitians and therapist would be first choice. So if your insurance covers it or you can afford it start there. If you can't, try to find a free therapist in your area. If that fails or if you know that you are in a place where you just won't go to a therapist, then please research and find all of the resources you can.
If you have an ED or feel that you are on the brink of one, then know that you are not alone and that you are worthy of help. Many of adults who develop EDs are actually overweight people who began dieting and developed restrictive eating patterns that led to binging, followed by feelings of shame. The more you understand what is physically happening, the easier it is to identify the help you need.
9 -
janejellyroll wrote: »There may be individual people for whom counting calories isn't a good idea (like those with EDs), but to conclude that it's a bad idea for everyone on that basis? That's exactly the kind of unhelpful and uneducated advice I'd expect to get from TikTok.
This is me. I am very open on here about the fact that I currently can not (and am not supposed to be) count calories. This is a decision made by myself and my therapist due to anxiety. In the past I have had NO problem with calorie counting and in fact lost about 50lbs years ago (which I put back on due to depression and anxiety after my mom passed away). Now though... it hasn't been good for my mental health. But it's not the fault of the calorie counting... it is the fault of my anxiety.
As for Tiktok... there can be good advice on it, but it is also very very very hard to weed out bad information. The only nutrition advice I take from that sort of thing is (1) from people I already follow elsewhere and have proven that their advice is scientifically sound, (2) people that THOSE people also follow, or (3) every so often I will find someone and follow them to see if they are good or woo. I would say 95% of the nutrition advice I see on Tiktok is junk with no science behind it. It is the old "calories don't matter", "you won't lose if you eat carbs", and "only eat 800 calories a day" people from other platforms.5 -
I think a lot of advice that is given out to the masses it intended to appeal to most people... I don't think counting calories is "the norm". It obviously works for all of us but we're the ones taking the time to comment in the myfitnesspal forum. I don't think it works well for a lot of people and can lead to obsessive behaviors that are not healthy. A lot of people just automatically go to 1200 calories which is not enough for most people. Whenever I hear dietitians or any other "expert" claiming that counting calories is bad, I just shrug and say "it works for me." and that's all there is to it.3
-
Everything Ann said.
Also, for me anyway, when I reduced cals, I naturally (like without even thinking much about it) cut back on what seemed like extra cals -- snacks (in fact I cut out snacking, since for me it was not satisfying, although I kept having occasional small desserts when they fit in my cals, after dinner), reducing portions that were larger than they should have been (basically mindless eating of whatever I happened to put on my plate, even if not really hungry), and reduced portions of high cal ingredients/sides (basically, oil, butter, cheese, and to some degree nuts, were now dealt with much more carefully and sparingly, and starchy carb sides, which I really don't need a lot of, were included in smaller portions). Other than that, I didn't change my diet much, and to me that was really just how it made intuitive sense to reduce cals without thinking much about it. I was satisfied and happy, and if I hadn't been I would have adjusted.
Not really sure why one would think reducing cals would somehow not lead to a sustainable diet unless one assumes people who calorie count are idiots who just ignore things like nutrition, satiety, and satisfaction in a way those not calorie counting supposedly do not. I don't get it. It really seems like a strawman.
I mean, nobody LIKES to be hungry. Even without a conscious effort to do so, most people over time are going to realize, "Hey, [meal x] has the same number of calories as [meal y], but I feel much more satisfied after [meal x]" and incorporate that information into their meal planning when possible.2 -
I hear dietitcians saying calorie counting doesn't work, which is false. Counting calories will help you lose weight if you stay in a deficit. I think a love of dietitcians are worried about long term effects of counting calories, both for physical and emotional reasons. But I hate the way they say it "doesn't work". I have seen one on TikTok who was slamming people for not "just eating intuitively". I wanted to punch her.
Now, having said all that - counting calories DID give me a mild ED. Just being transparent. But it won't do that for everyone. Talking about the realities of the changes you may go through emotionally and not just physically when you are on a "weight loss journey" is important.4 -
The fact is, no matter how weight is lost, a calorie deficit is how it’s accomplished. ALWAYS, whether or not you’re actively keeping track or not.5
-
Ohh boy, we have just had a debate about counting calories on a different thread, that went kind of hot. I stated 'counting calories is a waste of time' and I received some backlash some even felt insulted. I still believe it is in itself not enough. It is a great tool to track calorie intake to achive calorie deficit, and if one's calorie deficit is sustainable on the long run it should be off great benefit. What is more important than calorie deficit/calorie counting is the type of calorie one takes in. It can mean the difference between a successful diet or frustration.
Eating “clean” “healthy” food made me gain weight. Why? Because calories. Eating things I love and finding food that makes me happy and satiated ie bread, fast food, desserts, made me lose weight. Why? Because calorie control and finding something I can sustain. I’m not a snowflake. This works for 99.99% of people. Why? Physiology.9 -
msalicia07
Well done if you have succeeded, I would argue with the 99.99 percent success rate though with your suggested method. But if it works for you amazing.2 -
msalicia07
Well done if you have succeeded, I would argue with the 99.99 percent success rate though with your suggested method. But if it works for you amazing.
The method is CICO. Unless you have one of the rarest conditions in the world, it will work because that's physiology. There wasn't a single obese case in any POW situation ever recorded in the history of the earth. Why? Because human physiology determines you will lose weight in a calorie deficit. This is not debatable, it is a fact. And it doesn't matter what the individual eats as long as they're in a deficit. To maintain weight loss, however, it's best to have a diet that you can sustain and enjoy. You cannot provide evidence that someone will gain fat in a deficit, no matter what they ate, because no such evidence exists. I'll wait.12 -
breefoshee wrote: »New_Heavens_Earth wrote: »Thank you all so much. I probably do need to talk to a therapist as suggested. As far as TikTok there are actually a lot of professionals using it to get themselves out there and direct you to their website/business.
Not only just a therapist but a registered dietitian as well. Not a health/ weight loss coach or vague nutrition title, but a registered dietitian.
While I definitely agree 100%-- a dietitian and therapist would be ideal, many people cannot afford this help and I don't want to leave those people hanging.
I struggled with bulimia for about 7 years, beginning very "casually", then progressing into a daily compulsion. I felt like I really needed help, but my insurance didn't cover the cost and the free therapy in my area had very limited hours that would not work with my work schedule.
So I read a number of books and articles on it that helped me. I took certain vitamins, noted triggers, gave myself permission to gain weight (up to a point). On 12/30/2020, it will be one whole year (yay!) that I have not purged.
I definitely think that dietitians and therapist would be first choice. So if your insurance covers it or you can afford it start there. If you can't, try to find a free therapist in your area. If that fails or if you know that you are in a place where you just won't go to a therapist, then please research and find all of the resources you can.
If you have an ED or feel that you are on the brink of one, then know that you are not alone and that you are worthy of help. Many of adults who develop EDs are actually overweight people who began dieting and developed restrictive eating patterns that led to binging, followed by feelings of shame. The more you understand what is physically happening, the easier it is to identify the help you need.
Agree with everything said here. I'm still in treatment for bulimia (exercise purging). Definitely started with restrictive dieting, compulsive over exercise to the point of almost losing my job, and using my weight to gain approval, recognition, and control.
I found low cost therapy through ED websites and foundations. Some offer treatment scholarships and free webinar series for info. I pay out of pocket for therapy and an RD ($80 for therapy per week and $300 US per year for the RD). I've overshot my weight goal and now working on losing to a maintainable weight, which is slightly higher than the BMI charts recommend.
Congratulations on your recovery, and good health to you.4 -
I'd like to say that I find calorie counting freeing. I'm NOT constantly thinking about food, b/c I plan ahead and just mostly stick to my plan without beating myself up if I eat more, b/c I'm hungry or craving a treat.
If calorie counting is a trigger for negative thoughts and behaviors, you shouldn't do it. You should also consult a therapist if this continues, and you need help unraveling emotional/food issues.7 -
msalicia07 wrote: »msalicia07
Well done if you have succeeded, I would argue with the 99.99 percent success rate though with your suggested method. But if it works for you amazing.
The method is CICO. Unless you have one of the rarest conditions in the world, it will work because that's physiology. There wasn't a single obese case in any POW situation ever recorded in the history of the earth. Why? Because human physiology determines you will lose weight in a calorie deficit. This is not debatable, it is a fact. And it doesn't matter what the individual eats as long as they're in a deficit. To maintain weight loss, however, it's best to have a diet that you can sustain and enjoy. You cannot provide evidence that someone will gain fat in a deficit, no matter what they ate, because no such evidence exists. I'll wait.
I can't argue with that. If there is calorie deficit one will lose weight. The problem arises though when I try to calculate accurately what my BMR rate is. I found that for me anyway the BMR is not an absolute figure but constantly changing for me almost on a weekly basis if I look at the scale. That's why I dont really like to only depend on what my alleged BMR is because I just dont trust the figure. As a consequence I find it difficult to calculate where my calorie deficit begins. For me it is essential what I actually put in to lose weight and hope for the best I am in calorie deficit. But that is me, if you can lose weight eating what you really like hats off congrats.1 -
msalicia07 wrote: »msalicia07
Well done if you have succeeded, I would argue with the 99.99 percent success rate though with your suggested method. But if it works for you amazing.
The method is CICO. Unless you have one of the rarest conditions in the world, it will work because that's physiology. There wasn't a single obese case in any POW situation ever recorded in the history of the earth. Why? Because human physiology determines you will lose weight in a calorie deficit. This is not debatable, it is a fact. And it doesn't matter what the individual eats as long as they're in a deficit. To maintain weight loss, however, it's best to have a diet that you can sustain and enjoy. You cannot provide evidence that someone will gain fat in a deficit, no matter what they ate, because no such evidence exists. I'll wait.
I can't argue with that. If there is calorie deficit one will lose weight. The problem arises though when I try to calculate accurately what my BMR rate is. I found that for me anyway the BMR is not an absolute figure but constantly changing for me almost on a weekly basis if I look at the scale. That's why I dont really like to only depend on what my alleged BMR is because I just dont trust the figure. As a consequence I find it difficult to calculate where my calorie deficit begins. For me it is essential what I actually put in to lose weight and hope for the best I am in calorie deficit. But that is me, if you can lose weight eating what you really like hats off congrats.
You aren't understanding what BMR is, it's not your maintenance calories unless you are at total rest all day and in a fasted state.
You seem to be confusing TDEE and BMR.
And also consider the size of the numbers concerned and you might see the accuracy argument doesn't make a lot of sense.7 -
msalicia07 wrote: »msalicia07
Well done if you have succeeded, I would argue with the 99.99 percent success rate though with your suggested method. But if it works for you amazing.
The method is CICO. Unless you have one of the rarest conditions in the world, it will work because that's physiology. There wasn't a single obese case in any POW situation ever recorded in the history of the earth. Why? Because human physiology determines you will lose weight in a calorie deficit. This is not debatable, it is a fact. And it doesn't matter what the individual eats as long as they're in a deficit. To maintain weight loss, however, it's best to have a diet that you can sustain and enjoy. You cannot provide evidence that someone will gain fat in a deficit, no matter what they ate, because no such evidence exists. I'll wait.
I can't argue with that. If there is calorie deficit one will lose weight. The problem arises though when I try to calculate accurately what my BMR rate is. I found that for me anyway the BMR is not an absolute figure but constantly changing for me almost on a weekly basis if I look at the scale. That's why I dont really like to only depend on what my alleged BMR is because I just dont trust the figure. As a consequence I find it difficult to calculate where my calorie deficit begins. For me it is essential what I actually put in to lose weight and hope for the best I am in calorie deficit. But that is me, if you can lose weight eating what you really like hats off congrats.
That’s on you for not logging correctly, applying your TDEE, adding any extra exercise calories outside of what is already accounted for, then tracking your trend on something like Libra or an excel doc.
If you need help we would be happy to steer you in the right direction. It sounds like you just don’t know how to properly track and measure. It’s an extremely common mistake and one we all fall victim to from time to time.6 -
msalicia07 wrote: »msalicia07
Well done if you have succeeded, I would argue with the 99.99 percent success rate though with your suggested method. But if it works for you amazing.
The method is CICO. Unless you have one of the rarest conditions in the world, it will work because that's physiology. There wasn't a single obese case in any POW situation ever recorded in the history of the earth. Why? Because human physiology determines you will lose weight in a calorie deficit. This is not debatable, it is a fact. And it doesn't matter what the individual eats as long as they're in a deficit. To maintain weight loss, however, it's best to have a diet that you can sustain and enjoy. You cannot provide evidence that someone will gain fat in a deficit, no matter what they ate, because no such evidence exists. I'll wait.
I can't argue with that. If there is calorie deficit one will lose weight. The problem arises though when I try to calculate accurately what my BMR rate is. I found that for me anyway the BMR is not an absolute figure but constantly changing for me almost on a weekly basis if I look at the scale. That's why I dont really like to only depend on what my alleged BMR is because I just dont trust the figure. As a consequence I find it difficult to calculate where my calorie deficit begins. For me it is essential what I actually put in to lose weight and hope for the best I am in calorie deficit. But that is me, if you can lose weight eating what you really like hats off congrats.
You aren't understanding what BMR is, it's not your maintenance calories unless you are at total rest all day and in a fasted state.
You seem to be confusing TDEE and BMR.
On top of that, your TDEE isn't something you can calculate on a weekly basis. It takes several weeks (at least a month) to eliminate the 'noise' from weight fluctuations (water weight, food waste,...) and determine your true weight trend.7 -
msalicia07 wrote: »msalicia07
Well done if you have succeeded, I would argue with the 99.99 percent success rate though with your suggested method. But if it works for you amazing.
The method is CICO. Unless you have one of the rarest conditions in the world, it will work because that's physiology. There wasn't a single obese case in any POW situation ever recorded in the history of the earth. Why? Because human physiology determines you will lose weight in a calorie deficit. This is not debatable, it is a fact. And it doesn't matter what the individual eats as long as they're in a deficit. To maintain weight loss, however, it's best to have a diet that you can sustain and enjoy. You cannot provide evidence that someone will gain fat in a deficit, no matter what they ate, because no such evidence exists. I'll wait.
I can't argue with that. If there is calorie deficit one will lose weight. The problem arises though when I try to calculate accurately what my BMR rate is. I found that for me anyway the BMR is not an absolute figure but constantly changing for me almost on a weekly basis if I look at the scale. That's why I dont really like to only depend on what my alleged BMR is because I just dont trust the figure. As a consequence I find it difficult to calculate where my calorie deficit begins. For me it is essential what I actually put in to lose weight and hope for the best I am in calorie deficit. But that is me, if you can lose weight eating what you really like hats off congrats.
You aren't understanding what BMR is, it's not your maintenance calories unless you are at total rest all day and in a fasted state.
You seem to be confusing TDEE and BMR.
On top of that, your TDEE isn't something you can calculate on a weekly basis. It takes several weeks (at least a month) to eliminate the 'noise' from weight fluctuations (water weight, food waste,...) and determine your true weight trend.
Ayup, that ^^^^.
Because this: vvvv.
https://physiqonomics.com/the-weird-and-highly-annoying-world-of-scale-weight-and-fluctuations
And if you buy into the common misapprehension that calorie "calculator" estimates will be spot on for every single person . . . multiple this/that by a factor of ten or so.
Start with a "calculator" estimate (MFP for pre-exercise calories, TDEE calc for calories including exercise). Follow that recommendation for at least a month (at least one full menstrual cycle for premenopausal women, though 2 is better, so you can compare body weights at the same relative point in *at least* two different menstrual cycles). Log with really good logging practices the whole time (minimize generic or other people's "homemade" entries, confirm data all foods you eat the first time you log them, use a food scale as often as practical, estimate on the high side when you have no alternative, log exercise carefully if using MFP NEAT method, etc.) Then adjust.
Freaking out and changing routine after a few days, even a couple of weeks: Fools' game.8 -
msalicia07 wrote: »msalicia07
Well done if you have succeeded, I would argue with the 99.99 percent success rate though with your suggested method. But if it works for you amazing.
The method is CICO. Unless you have one of the rarest conditions in the world, it will work because that's physiology. There wasn't a single obese case in any POW situation ever recorded in the history of the earth. Why? Because human physiology determines you will lose weight in a calorie deficit. This is not debatable, it is a fact. And it doesn't matter what the individual eats as long as they're in a deficit. To maintain weight loss, however, it's best to have a diet that you can sustain and enjoy. You cannot provide evidence that someone will gain fat in a deficit, no matter what they ate, because no such evidence exists. I'll wait.
I can't argue with that. If there is calorie deficit one will lose weight. The problem arises though when I try to calculate accurately what my BMR rate is. I found that for me anyway the BMR is not an absolute figure but constantly changing for me almost on a weekly basis if I look at the scale. That's why I dont really like to only depend on what my alleged BMR is because I just dont trust the figure. As a consequence I find it difficult to calculate where my calorie deficit begins. For me it is essential what I actually put in to lose weight and hope for the best I am in calorie deficit. But that is me, if you can lose weight eating what you really like hats off congrats.
You aren't understanding what BMR is, it's not your maintenance calories unless you are at total rest all day and in a fasted state.
You seem to be confusing TDEE and BMR.
On top of that, your TDEE isn't something you can calculate on a weekly basis. It takes several weeks (at least a month) to eliminate the 'noise' from weight fluctuations (water weight, food waste,...) and determine your true weight trend.
This plus if you exercise inconsistently your average weekly TDEE is going to be higher on a higher exercise week, which is why for such people logging exercise separately and adding to TDEE without intentional exercise can work better.4 -
msalicia07 wrote: »msalicia07
Well done if you have succeeded, I would argue with the 99.99 percent success rate though with your suggested method. But if it works for you amazing.
The method is CICO. Unless you have one of the rarest conditions in the world, it will work because that's physiology. There wasn't a single obese case in any POW situation ever recorded in the history of the earth. Why? Because human physiology determines you will lose weight in a calorie deficit. This is not debatable, it is a fact. And it doesn't matter what the individual eats as long as they're in a deficit. To maintain weight loss, however, it's best to have a diet that you can sustain and enjoy. You cannot provide evidence that someone will gain fat in a deficit, no matter what they ate, because no such evidence exists. I'll wait.
I can't argue with that. If there is calorie deficit one will lose weight. The problem arises though when I try to calculate accurately what my BMR rate is. I found that for me anyway the BMR is not an absolute figure but constantly changing for me almost on a weekly basis if I look at the scale. That's why I dont really like to only depend on what my alleged BMR is because I just dont trust the figure. As a consequence I find it difficult to calculate where my calorie deficit begins. For me it is essential what I actually put in to lose weight and hope for the best I am in calorie deficit. But that is me, if you can lose weight eating what you really like hats off congrats.
You aren't understanding what BMR is, it's not your maintenance calories unless you are at total rest all day and in a fasted state.
You seem to be confusing TDEE and BMR.
On top of that, your TDEE isn't something you can calculate on a weekly basis. It takes several weeks (at least a month) to eliminate the 'noise' from weight fluctuations (water weight, food waste,...) and determine your true weight trend.
This plus if you exercise inconsistently your average weekly TDEE is going to be higher on a higher exercise week, which is why for such people logging exercise separately and adding to TDEE without intentional exercise can work better.
^^^
THIS!!! Some weeks more workouts are more frequent and more intense. Some weeks I need more rest to make up for those intense workouts that I maybe wasn’t ready for them to be that intense. Some weeks I’ll burn several thousand calories from exercise (and I ALWAYS underestimate) and some weeks I might burn a couple hundred calories through exercise.
That is precisely why sedentary + exercise works for me. It took some trial and error to determine that though.7 -
Guys give me some slack here. Ok I looked up what TDEE was. The BMR plus calories burnt during exercise. All good but if the BMR is unreliable it is still hard to know where calorie deficit begins even if I know exactly how much I burnt during exercise. But I dont want to argue too much, you are essentially right even a close estimate is better than nothing. I have roughly six months of keto plus IF plus one day a week fasting behind me, a fairly extreme diet regime, I have had success-60 pounds roughly- but I have to admit I am struggling to lose weight these days and I am in calorie deficit that's for sure without tracking anything. I need twenty pounds off more to get where I want to be and despite calorie deficit I am having difficulties.2
-
Curious if they would say that balancing your checkbook is bad as well.
TikTok, is this a new source for actual information?4 -
I just find it easier to eat as healthily as i can and to actively keep my portions small. I also make sure i do exercise every day. The weight comes off but slower. From personal experience I'd rather lose it slowly and keep it off, rather than lose it quickly by focusing on calories and putting it all back on again anyway. But that's just me.2
-
Guys give me some slack here. Ok I looked up what TDEE was. The BMR plus calories burnt during exercise. All good but if the BMR is unreliable it is still hard to know where calorie deficit begins even if I know exactly how much I burnt during exercise. But I dont want to argue too much, you are essentially right even a close estimate is better than nothing. I have roughly six months of keto plus IF plus one day a week fasting behind me, a fairly extreme diet regime, I have had success-60 pounds roughly- but I have to admit I am struggling to lose weight these days and I am in calorie deficit that's for sure without tracking anything. I need twenty pounds off more to get where I want to be and despite calorie deficit I am having difficulties.
“I am in a calorie deficit that’s for sure without tracking anything’s and “I am struggling to lose weight these days”.
Obviously if you aren’t losing weight you are NOT eating in a deficit. Again, congrats on losing 60 lbs, but if you are trying to lose more and you aren’t losing, then clearly at your new weight, your calorie intake is no longer in a deficit. You aren’t defying science.
We keep trying to help and you just don’t seem to understand the basics of weight loss.7 -
getting_stronger1483 wrote: »I just find it easier to eat as healthily as i can and to actively keep my portions small. I also make sure i do exercise every day. The weight comes off but slower. From personal experience I'd rather lose it slowly and keep it off, rather than lose it quickly by focusing on calories and putting it all back on again anyway. But that's just me.
Focusing on calories doesn’t make anyone lose weight quickly. I lose 1 lb a week. Some people lose .5 a week. Some of us are eating at maintenance and still tracking calories. It isn’t a quick fix and it isn’t meant to be done short term. I fully expect to measure and track for the rest of my life. I’ve stopped before and the weight creeps back on. I no longer wish to be a yo yo.6
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions