Counting calories so insane !

Counting keeps you accountable for what you eat and drink. Intuitive eating works if you don’t consume many calories from liquids and highly processed foods as those don’t satiate well so you tend to over consume those and they can be highly caloric.

Once you get going it gets easier..

First let's make sure you set a reasonable weekly weight loss goal. Is your rate of loss in line with this chart?



Going for 2 pounds per week without having the excess weight to support that rate of loss would definitely be stressful.

If you don't like calorie counting, don't do it. If you want to lose weight, but don't want to calorie count, use another method. You can use a structured meal plan that tells you how what to eat in what quantities, skip one meal daily but don't increase other meals, drop out or reduce frequency of foods you know are calorie dense (fried foods, snack-y foods, sugary foods, etc.), and more.

I'm old enough to remember when calorie counting wasn't a practical method, but people managed to lose weight anyway. Those methods still work.

For a person who tends to be overweight, just trying to be free-form "intuitive" from the start doesn't seem likely to work, to me. That's not saying that person can't get there. The closest I've seen to a method for intuitive eating from day 1 is to eat very slowly (put down the fork/spoon between bites, chew and savor slowly, sip water, etc.), then stop eating when reaching just the "not hungry any more" stage (not full!).

Best wishes!

AnnPT77 wrote: »

I'm old enough to remember when calorie counting wasn't a practical method, but people managed to lose weight anyway. Those methods still work.

True, but different times. Obesity wasn't as prevalent, ultra processed foods weren't so ready available and promoted, I suspect more jobs became more sedentary compared to previous generations, etc.

I agree calorie counting isn't essential, just saying it's probably harder to lose weight and keep it off now than decades ago, without availing yourself of tools like MFP.

Maybe try a green salad 15 minutes before one of your scheduled meals, as an appetizer if you may. This roughage slows our main digestion and reduces the insulin response which is more likely to keep the hunger signaling in the brain to a minimum. Basically it's a hack to reduce that initial insulin response, that for the most part in the demographic are insulin resistant and overweight will make a big difference in the response in the gut in regards to leptin our "we're full" hormone, especially considering this demographic is also generally leptin resistant as well.

kshama2001 wrote: »

neanderthin wrote: »

Intuitive eating is basically eating to satiety and where your not gaining weight. Whole foods helps this situation a lot as does the type of carbs your consuming. You want whole grains and legumes to displace any refined grains for the most part, cut back as much as you can on any sugary foods and sugary liquids and that includes fruit juices. Satiety is basically gut and brain hormonal signaling, and very easily disrupted when your carb allotment is comprised of mostly of the refined and sugary foods, and why I suggest you change that, it may work, it works for many. Low carb and ketogenic diets are the go to for intuitive eating and many that are successful don't count calories, myself included.

Yes, I've been able to "eat intuitively" when living in unusual situations where the food selection was very limited - at yoga centers where meals focusing on whole grains and legumes plus lots of non-starchy veggies were provided and at a yoga retreat center in Costa Rica where I cooked one of the meals but the food selection was very limited. Here there was lots of rice & beans and tropical fruit, but again no sugary foods or liquids, and also no cheese. (There was no refrigeration, which further reduced the selection.)

However, when I am doing all the shopping at American groceries stores and doing most of the cooking, intuitive eating does not work for me.

I put "eat intuitively" in quotes because I don't know that it really counts when the vast majority of my choices are nutrient dense as opposed to hyper-palatable/calorie dense.

I don't think there's any easy answers kshama2001. When your offered or introduced to hyperpalatable food choices
it becomes difficult to resist because they stimulate the brain’s reward system, which creates feelings of pleasure and satisfaction which may affect the ability to control food intake and cravings and this is mostly due to food availability, cost, convenience, advertising and peer pressure. Basically they've been engineered to be this way and rely heavily on human physiology for this effect. They modify the release of hormones that regulate hunger, stress, and metabolism and there's really no good way to get around this sans the removal of these types of foods.

The poster boy for processed and ultra processed foods and their possible connection and effect on our health is to look at the pacific island of Nauru which is the #1 Country for obesity. 94% are overweight with around 65% obese. The WHO have Nauru's population at 31% diabetic and with people between the age of 55-64 around 45%. The highest population other than them is China at 11% and the USA at10 %.

Nauru was a very poor country until mining took over for phosphorus and consequently left the land totally unusable with over 90% of the Island a wasteland with a grocery list of contaminants . Consequently agriculture or any farming is impossible which led to every food stuff to be imported with the majority foods that store easily and have long shelf life. Basically they lived on processed and ultra processed foods almost exclusively. This is one of the saddest stories of human exploitation I've come across, where it effected a whole population. The Australian government is still trying to fix this total disaster they created. A very innocent and free living people that were taken advantage of with basically no knowledge of nutrition was like a time bomb.