What is more important for you? Daily calories or perhaps meals you ate?

Options
2»

Replies

  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,021 Member
    edited January 2023
    Options
    sbelletti wrote: »
    What's your goal?

    Thank you for your kind comment :) When recording my macros, I am really insecure and thus just wanted to know what is generally important for different people. Some claim that the meal is important whereas others say the overall calorie intake. Thus I wanted hear people's opinions on this :smiley:

    Right. Of course everyone is different and will do what works for them. Personally, after a few years of trial and error it became apparent that I needed to find a better way than just counting calories and concentrated on the foods I ate instead, which was originally the catalyst that sent me down the nutritional rabbit hole.

    I found protein to be the pivotal macro for satiety and general health and to be the constant macro that controls everything. Carbs and fats were leavers I could pull depending on whether I wanted to lose or gain weight. If I felt my cloths were a little tighter I could pull the fat leaver increasing consumption that effectively lowered my carb consumption which for me, increased satiety and I ate less and if I wanted to bulk and build muscle I would pull the carb lever, which effectively for me lowered satiety and I ate more. Basically it boiled down to a protein to energy ratio. I found this to simplify everything and of course there's a lot more to it, but in the end I don't have to think about it and now check my calories about 4 or 5 times a year out of curiosity. Cheers.
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 10,022 Member
    Options
    weekly calories + daily nutrition (protein + fiber + iron)
  • Annie42019
    Annie42019 Posts: 85 Member
    edited January 2023
    Options
    For me it’s calories. Period. Full stop. I lost 75 pounds starting 4.5 years ( took 11 months) ago and have kept it off. I did not one lick of exercise when losing. I never tracked macros. I never tracked or even drank a particular amount of water. I have started walking since my loss for better health generally ( I aim for 10-12k steps ). I also do not eat breakfast ( eating early in the day makes me hungry all day). Also I’m in my 60’s.
  • BartBVanBockstaele
    BartBVanBockstaele Posts: 623 Member
    edited January 2023
    Options
    Annie42019 wrote: »
    For me it’s calories. Period. Full stop. I lost 75 pounds starting 4.5 years ( took 11 months) ago and have kept it off. I did not one lick of exercise when losing. I never tracked macros. I never tracked or even drank a particular amount of water. I have started walking since my loss for better health generally ( I aim for 10-12k steps ). I also do not eat breakfast ( eating early in the day makes me hungry all day). Also I’m in my 60’s.
    Absolutely. IF we are talking about fat weight loss/gain/maintenance, calories are the ONLY thing that matters. All the rest are skirmishes in the margin that have minimal or not influence whatsoever.
  • cinalicikler
    cinalicikler Posts: 30 Member
    Options
    Annie42019 wrote: »
    For me it’s calories. Period. Full stop. I lost 75 pounds starting 4.5 years ( took 11 months) ago and have kept it off. I did not one lick of exercise when losing. I never tracked macros. I never tracked or even drank a particular amount of water. I have started walking since my loss for better health generally ( I aim for 10-12k steps ). I also do not eat breakfast ( eating early in the day makes me hungry all day). Also I’m in my 60’s.
    Absolutely. IF we are talking about fat weight loss/gain/maintenance, calories are the ONLY thing that matters. All the rest are skirmishes in the margin that have minimal or not influence whatsoever.

    Hello @BartBVanBockstaele , but isn't the amount of the fats and carbohydrates also matter? What if the most of the calories comes from the fats?
  • BartBVanBockstaele
    BartBVanBockstaele Posts: 623 Member
    Options
    Annie42019 wrote: »
    For me it’s calories. Period. Full stop. I lost 75 pounds starting 4.5 years ( took 11 months) ago and have kept it off. I did not one lick of exercise when losing. I never tracked macros. I never tracked or even drank a particular amount of water. I have started walking since my loss for better health generally ( I aim for 10-12k steps ). I also do not eat breakfast ( eating early in the day makes me hungry all day). Also I’m in my 60’s.
    Absolutely. IF we are talking about fat weight loss/gain/maintenance, calories are the ONLY thing that matters. All the rest are skirmishes in the margin that have minimal or not influence whatsoever.

    Hello @BartBVanBockstaele , but isn't the amount of the fats and carbohydrates also matter? What if the most of the calories comes from the fats?
    That is a reasonable question. The issue is this: a calorie is unit that measures energy. Calories have no substance, no weight no volume. They are energy. That energy is produced by processing food in our body. In other words, we do not consume calories. We consume fat, protein and carbohydrates and by processing them we extract energy from them. So yes, fat, carbohydrate and protein are important, BUT since we almost do not eat any substances that are not food, we usually just talk about calories.

    There is an important distinction between them, however: carbohydrates and fats are *almost* only used for energy extraction whereas protein are the most important chemicals for our structures: skin, hair, bones, organs, muscles... Also, protein contains nitrogen and that makes it a little harder to digest, so we extract a bit less energy from it. However, that conversion has been done and when we look at food labels we no longer have to worry about that. This is, for example, how protein and sugar have the same caloric value on food labels. In reality, the caloric value of protein is a bit higher, but since extra energy is needed to extract the energy from the protein, it is counted at the same level as carbohydrates.

    Fibre is another exception, but those values have not yet been decided. Work is being done on that.

    What if most calories come from fat? For the most part, that is fine. However, research is ongoing, and there are signs that consuming too much fat in comparison with carbohydrates can lead to certain cardiovascular problems. These are being investigated especially under pressure from the keto diet, one of the diets that has been in fashion for the last number of years.

    Too much protein can lead to problems too and so can too much carbohydrate.

    However, from a weight loss standpoint, this is almost completely unimportant. As some people say: calories trump macros. For good reason: if you are eating at an energy deficit, it no longer matters much where the energy comes from: it will be used up and then your internal energy storage (mostly fat) will be used and you will end up losing weight, because you lose fat.
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,996 Member
    Options
    Annie42019 wrote: »
    For me it’s calories. Period. Full stop. I lost 75 pounds starting 4.5 years ( took 11 months) ago and have kept it off. I did not one lick of exercise when losing. I never tracked macros. I never tracked or even drank a particular amount of water. I have started walking since my loss for better health generally ( I aim for 10-12k steps ). I also do not eat breakfast ( eating early in the day makes me hungry all day). Also I’m in my 60’s.
    Absolutely. IF we are talking about fat weight loss/gain/maintenance, calories are the ONLY thing that matters. All the rest are skirmishes in the margin that have minimal or not influence whatsoever.

    If anyone wants to participate in a debate about the impact that exercise has on weight loss, we are doing that here: https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10882265/in-a-calorie-deficit-scale-isnt-moving-split/p1
  • cinalicikler
    cinalicikler Posts: 30 Member
    Options
    Annie42019 wrote: »
    For me it’s calories. Period. Full stop. I lost 75 pounds starting 4.5 years ( took 11 months) ago and have kept it off. I did not one lick of exercise when losing. I never tracked macros. I never tracked or even drank a particular amount of water. I have started walking since my loss for better health generally ( I aim for 10-12k steps ). I also do not eat breakfast ( eating early in the day makes me hungry all day). Also I’m in my 60’s.
    Absolutely. IF we are talking about fat weight loss/gain/maintenance, calories are the ONLY thing that matters. All the rest are skirmishes in the margin that have minimal or not influence whatsoever.

    -

    However, from a weight loss standpoint, this is almost completely unimportant. As some people say: calories trump macros. For good reason: if you are eating at an energy deficit, it no longer matters much where the energy comes from: it will be used up and then your internal energy storage (mostly fat) will be used and you will end up losing weight, because you lose fat.

    Thank you for this kind comment, so taking care of the my calorie count is the most important point here I believe. Then just entering estimations is adequate right? I do not really need to care about each meal or food I eat?
  • BartBVanBockstaele
    BartBVanBockstaele Posts: 623 Member
    Options
    Annie42019 wrote: »
    For me it’s calories. Period. Full stop. I lost 75 pounds starting 4.5 years ( took 11 months) ago and have kept it off. I did not one lick of exercise when losing. I never tracked macros. I never tracked or even drank a particular amount of water. I have started walking since my loss for better health generally ( I aim for 10-12k steps ). I also do not eat breakfast ( eating early in the day makes me hungry all day). Also I’m in my 60’s.
    Absolutely. IF we are talking about fat weight loss/gain/maintenance, calories are the ONLY thing that matters. All the rest are skirmishes in the margin that have minimal or not influence whatsoever.

    -

    However, from a weight loss standpoint, this is almost completely unimportant. As some people say: calories trump macros. For good reason: if you are eating at an energy deficit, it no longer matters much where the energy comes from: it will be used up and then your internal energy storage (mostly fat) will be used and you will end up losing weight, because you lose fat.

    Thank you for this kind comment, so taking care of the my calorie count is the most important point here I believe. Then just entering estimations is adequate right? I do not really need to care about each meal or food I eat?
    It depends. One has two consider two things: that which causes weight loss (an energy deficit) and that which helps us achieve an energy deficit (a diet). Strictly speaking from a weight loss standpoint, the only thing that matters is an energy deficit, nothing else. However, once you have onderstood that, you have to make sure you can maintain that deficit for long enough in order to lose weight and that's where diet comes in. Some people find that certain foods help them maintain a diet, by allowing them to be less hungry. Other people find that other foods do that. Also, the lower your energy intake is, the more important it becomes to keep an eye on the quality of your food. For example, eating only zucchini would not be a good idea: you can eat a lot, but zucchini do not contain everything you need to remain healthy and a zucchini-only diet would therefore not be a great idea.
  • JaysFan82
    JaysFan82 Posts: 851 Member
    Options
    I'm down 150 pounds this year

    Haven't looked at my Macros once. Just calories.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,872 Member
    edited January 2023
    Options
    Annie42019 wrote: »
    For me it’s calories. Period. Full stop. I lost 75 pounds starting 4.5 years ( took 11 months) ago and have kept it off. I did not one lick of exercise when losing. I never tracked macros. I never tracked or even drank a particular amount of water. I have started walking since my loss for better health generally ( I aim for 10-12k steps ). I also do not eat breakfast ( eating early in the day makes me hungry all day). Also I’m in my 60’s.
    Absolutely. IF we are talking about fat weight loss/gain/maintenance, calories are the ONLY thing that matters. All the rest are skirmishes in the margin that have minimal or not influence whatsoever.

    -

    However, from a weight loss standpoint, this is almost completely unimportant. As some people say: calories trump macros. For good reason: if you are eating at an energy deficit, it no longer matters much where the energy comes from: it will be used up and then your internal energy storage (mostly fat) will be used and you will end up losing weight, because you lose fat.

    Thank you for this kind comment, so taking care of the my calorie count is the most important point here I believe. Then just entering estimations is adequate right? I do not really need to care about each meal or food I eat?

    It can work to estimate portions (which is estimating calories) or estimate calories themselves . . . until it doesn't work.

    I'm not the person you asked, but I did the thing you're asking about.

    I committed to weight loss on 4/17/2015 (yes, I know the specific day). I wrote down my eating on paper, and estimated calories for the bigger items based on past experience with counting. At first, for some weeks in total, I lost well, felt good about the method.

    After a while, as I got lighter, my weight loss slowed down, and became unpredictable. To me, that felt like my methods weren't working the way I wanted.

    On 7/25/2015, I joined MFP and started logging everything I ate - bites, licks, tastes, condiments, beverages, cooking oil, the whole deal. Oh, and logging exercise, too, with the most sensible estimates I could get - eating those calories, too.

    Loss picked up again. It took a month or two of careful logging to pin down my actual real-life calorie needs, but I was losing well (too fast, actually) during that time.

    After I had enough personal experience data to better estimate my actual calorie needs, my weight loss rate was not only steady and satisfying, but also very predictable from the calorie/exercise data that I'd logged (looking at averages over a couple of weeks or so, because water retention fluctuations distort things if looking at just one day vs. the previous). A woman who has menstrual cycles might need to look at whole cycles to achieve predictability, but I'm in menopause so my patterns are simpler.

    By early 2016 I was at goal weight, and have been in a healthy weight range ever since, after around 30 years previously of overweight/obesity.

    TL;DR: Estimating rather than being precise can work, but it may stop working well at some point. Also, loss via estimating tends to be less predictable than loss while logging carefully, IME.

    How to proceed is your call. If you decide to estimate, and it isn't working, you can always start being more meticulous and precise. OTOH, if you decide to start with careful logging, and find it too burdensome, you can try switching to estimating.

    The important thing is to start, then keep going, even if you adjust your tactics along the way.

    Best wishes!
  • paperpudding
    paperpudding Posts: 9,090 Member
    Options
    I would also add to Ann's post that is isnt a polarised Estimate everything vs Precise on everything scenario

    I did sort of a hybrid method - careful weighing and logging of high calorie items eg cheese.
    items like bananas or oranges - just logged each one as 1 medium (the ones I ate didnt vary in size by much) and let law of averages even it out

    I do agree with the adjust (loosen or tighten logging) as you go - same general method but be flexible in your approach
  • HoneyBadger302
    HoneyBadger302 Posts: 2,000 Member
    Options
    My choice is based on a fair bit of trial and error, and some past success, and what works for my body, my workouts, and my lifestyle.
    For me, macros are king, primarily keeping an eye on Net Carbs. I limit my net carbs to 150 (or fewer) a day. This works for me as I find it's enough to support my workouts and keep my energy levels high, but low enough to keep me satiated and staying under my calorie limit(s). In fact, after about 3-4 weeks, I find I am frequently not finishing my dinner and end up with leftovers for lunch the next day. Totally satiated and satisfied, not fighting the constant hunger pangs I deal with on a higher carb diet. Too low on the carbs and my workouts start to tank, so this is the "magic" range for me to be in. Most days I have been averaging about 120/day, and that seems about perfect.
    It may or may not work for you - I closely weigh and measure anything with carbs, but no-carb foods, I get a little loosey-goosey with my tracking, sometimes just eye balling it or guesstimating (I have tracked religiously in the past, and am still tracking enough very closely that it's reasonably accurate). I do weigh and portion into one-meal all my meats when I go grocery shopping (prior to freezing) so those are fairly accurate as well. Things like cheese, .8-1.2 oz, I don't sweat, over time it evens out close enough.
  • Kathy535
    Kathy535 Posts: 31 Member
    Options
    I’ve been on and off ‘diets’ for the last 20yrs - with mixed success in the short term. I’ve recently been told I have very high levels of bad fats in my blood (triglycerides) and it’s prompted a change in my thinking. My eating is now less focused around calories and more around reducing foods that are unhelpful (processed, saturated fats, sugar, alcohol, red meat) and increasing foods thought to be helpful (fibre, healthy fats, complex carbs, plants, oily fish). Plus exercise. I’ve been tracking using MFP and trying to keep under a certain number of calories a day but not being too obsessive about it.

    Anyway, i’m typing this is to say that it’s been an eye opener in several ways:
    • I can’t believe what a weight has been lifted from me in terms of being able to eat foods I’d previously seen as ‘bad’ - bread is an example - or too high in calories (olive oil)
    • I can see my relationship with food has been unhealthy - I’d restrict myself, be hungry and then binge
    • I panic when I see my lunch is over 300 calories (eg homemade spiced lentil and vegetable soup) and have to remind myself that I’m ‘allowed’ more calories these days and the point is to get in a decent amount of fibre and healthy fuel rather than simply focusing on calories
    • I feel guilt when I have a sandwich or some diets, and I shouldn’t.
    • I’m not hungry! I’m eating sensible amounts of decent food and I’m not restricting eg fruit because it’s too high in calories. So my overall calories intake is probably lower than it was when I was ‘trying’ to lose weight through diet.
    • Im losing weight at a rate of 1lb a week and also centimetres around my waist which is important for my health

    I guess my point is that counting calories matters but it’s very easy for some of us to get caught up in the counting and choosing foods because they are lower in calories rather than thinking about what your body needs. So, maybe, as others have said, a combination of metrics is better than just one?
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,867 Member
    Options
    Annie42019 wrote: »
    For me it’s calories. Period. Full stop. I lost 75 pounds starting 4.5 years ( took 11 months) ago and have kept it off. I did not one lick of exercise when losing. I never tracked macros. I never tracked or even drank a particular amount of water. I have started walking since my loss for better health generally ( I aim for 10-12k steps ). I also do not eat breakfast ( eating early in the day makes me hungry all day). Also I’m in my 60’s.
    Absolutely. IF we are talking about fat weight loss/gain/maintenance, calories are the ONLY thing that matters. All the rest are skirmishes in the margin that have minimal or not influence whatsoever.

    Hello @BartBVanBockstaele , but isn't the amount of the fats and carbohydrates also matter? What if the most of the calories comes from the fats?

    For weight management, those things don't really matter. Calories are just a unit of measure...a unit of energy...like a watt or a jewel or whatever. Your body requires xxxx amount of energy to maintain the status quo. This energy requirement is variable depending on individual stats and overall activity.

    When you consume calories (energy) in excess of what you require, that surplus energy is stored as bodyfat...it's like your backup generator. When you consume calories insufficient to meet your overall calorie needs, your backup generator kicks on and you burn bodyfat to make up the difference. When you do this consistently over time, you lose weight as you deplete that stored energy.

    Your macros are what make up your calories. 4 calories per gram of carbohydrate, 4 calories per gram of protein, and 9 calories per gram of dietary fat. They can matter in terms of your overall nutritional profile but by and large, one's macros are preference...there is no universally optimal macro ratio. For example, a vegan is likely to have a diet that is very heavy in carbohydrates because their diet is plant based and plants = carbohydrates. Macros can also matter for satiety and for physical performance. A bodybuilders preferred macro ratio is likely to be different from that of an endurance athlete like a marathon runner for example. You may have heard of the keto diet...it is a diet many use to lose weight and it is super high in fat...most of one's calories on keto come from fat...around 70% or higher as another example.

    If you're new to this, I'd KISS and focus mostly on calories. As you work through things make not of what your general macro ratios are and how you feel. Once you get the calories down you can start messing around with your macros based on how you feel...satiation...physical performance, etc. Generally when losing weight it is recommended to have a bit higher protein intake than the minimum as it helps to preserve muscle mass in a catabolic state, particularly when paired with resistance training. Frankly it's the only macro I even concern myself with and I just let the other two fall where they may.
  • cinalicikler
    cinalicikler Posts: 30 Member
    Options
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    The important thing is to start, then keep going, even if you adjust your tactics along the way.

    I think this is my biggest issue. I just cannot start it in a sustainable way. :sweat_smile: Any suggestions for healthy and deterministic begging for this this?
  • mtaratoot
    mtaratoot Posts: 13,615 Member
    Options
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    The important thing is to start, then keep going, even if you adjust your tactics along the way.

    I think this is my biggest issue. I just cannot start it in a sustainable way. :sweat_smile: Any suggestions for healthy and deterministic begging for this this?

    I have written this before, and it's pretty valid. The best few tips I can think of for starting out are:
    • Plan to go slow. If you are trying to lose weight, remember you didn't gain it in a month or a year; take the slow route to help assure success. Then it will be easier to maintain when you reach goal.
    • Don't plan any strategies you aren't willing to continue indefinitely. Only do things that are sustainable in the long run.
    • Plan on having a reasonable calorie deficit, on average, each week. Best if you can manage a small deficit each day, but if you miss a day, don't fret. Just keep going forward. Stick to it.
    • Yeah, that's it's own point: STICK TO IT!
    • Set reasonable but challenging goals. Set long-term and short term goals. What are some specific goals you have set for yourself?
    • Check in often. Don't stress if the scale is up for the day. Look over the long term trend; weight loss is not linear. You'll have up and down days. Over time, if you maintain a deficit, you'll trend down.
    • Exercise is very healthy for fitness. It can contribute to a calorie deficit and aid in weight management. You still must manage your food intake to assure a calorie deficit. Logging your food and your activity in MFP will help you get an idea how to slowly adjust your target for success.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,872 Member
    Options
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    The important thing is to start, then keep going, even if you adjust your tactics along the way.

    I think this is my biggest issue. I just cannot start it in a sustainable way. :sweat_smile: Any suggestions for healthy and deterministic begging for this this?

    You don't have to do anything big. You can do a series of really small, manageable things. Over time, they add up. That time is going to pass anyway.

    1. You can pass the time trying for revolutionary change that seems aimed at losing weight fast (usually a bad idea).

    2. You can pass the time by making some moderate-sized challenges that are just within the range of manageable. For some people, that could be logging what they eat now, if they're calorie counting, then reviewing their food log for the relatively easiest calorie reductions. From that moderate change (logging or something else), you notice what the next manageable change would be, then do that . . . then just keep going in the same way.

    3. You can pass the time making really tiny changes, finding ones that are workable for you, discarding the ones that are too stressful or difficult, and just keep going.

    IMO, most people would get the best balance of speed and goal-accomplishment from #2, but some of the things you've posted make me think you might be a candidate for #3, at least to start. When you want to climb a mountain, start with a gradual-slope foothill, not the peak.

    It sounds like right now you're worrying over what to do, but not really doing much of anything because of feeling like it will be too hard or unpleasant.

    Maybe I'm wrong. But if I'm right, #3 would give you some very slow progress in a better direction. You could keep worrying about the harder options alongside, if you feel that's useful in some way.

    Some examples of possible very small things you could do that might be manageable (but only you can say which one - or something different you think of - would be manageable):

    * Take a 20 minute walk 3 days a week, do your best not to eat more as a consequence (not logging).
    * Eat more veggies and fruits.
    * Cut down on drinking soda, pop, fruit juice, sweet tea, alcohol or sweet coffee drinks, if you drink those. Substitute something zero or very low calorie for some of them. Keep reducing over time.
    * If you eat fast food meals somewhat often, take a few minutes at home, look at the chain's website, look at how many calories your current normal order has, and find an alternative thing you can order that is lower in calories but still satisfying to you. Order that next time you go. You might have to test a few alternatives to find the one you like best, but that's fine.
    * Find a place in your routine eating habits where you could reduce amount or frequency of butter, oil, high-fat dressings, high fat condiments (like mayo or tartar sauce). This includes options like ordering grilled or broiled/baked dishes in restaurants vs. fried, or things without a giant heap of cheese instead of with.
    * Substitute fruit for candy or baked goods some of the time.
    * If you eat burgers or sandwiches often, only eat half the bun. (In some places, including fast food places, you can order sandwiches without the bun or as a lettuce wrap.)
    * If you snack at night, swap your snacks to a more nutritious or lower calorie thing that you like, or decide to knit or something to keep your hands/mind busy instead of snacking.
    * Eat more slowly, put your fork down after every few bites, and think about whether you feel satisfied (not necessarily FULL full). If you do, stop eating. This will only be likely to work if you eat very slowly.
    * Move more in daily life: That "park farther from the building, take the stairs" kind of thing**, routinely.

    Etc. Or other things that make sense to you, small things. I'm betting you know which foods are more nutritious and lower calorie without a lot of research. Use that knowledge.

    Don't do some restrictive named diet, don't do calorie logging (since that seems not to work for you psychologically), don't do some brutal exercise program, don't try for a long laundry list of changes all at once. One change. Do it for a few weeks.

    Give each new thing a fair try. Give yourself grace and forgiveness if there are slips, but keep going if you can. If you hate it after a couple of weeks, drop it, try something else. If the change is manageable (not necessarily super easy, just something you can keep doing), then keep doing it until it's a habit, totally routine.

    Then pick another thing. Don't expect fast progress from an approach like this. Just keep making small changes. Eventually, you'll see results, if you keep going, if you keep stacking up the small changes. It could take a long time.

    If you need it to be fast and super easy both . . . I think you can't have that, unfortunately.

    So, I'd say start with easy and slow. Maybe once you get some things going, you'll feel more confident and empowered to make bigger changes. That would be good, but small changes will work, just very slowly.

    ** Ideas from many MFPers about increasing daily life movement are in this thread:
    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10610953/neat-improvement-strategies-to-improve-weight-loss/p1
    Some of those won't work in your life, but it's likely some would.
  • cinalicikler
    cinalicikler Posts: 30 Member
    Options
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    The important thing is to start, then keep going, even if you adjust your tactics along the way.

    I think this is my biggest issue. I just cannot start it in a sustainable way. :sweat_smile: Any suggestions for healthy and deterministic begging for this this?

    You don't have to do anything big. You can do a series of really small, manageable things. Over time, they add up. That time is going to pass anyway.

    1. You can pass the time trying for revolutionary change that seems aimed at losing weight fast (usually a bad idea).
    ...

    Thank you so much for this wonderful post :blush: As you stated, maybe everything will not work in my life but I am willing to give your suggestions a try :heart: