80% healthy food / 20% treat food theory??

mkmccarthy
mkmccarthy Posts: 4
edited October 5 in Food and Nutrition
I'm having a discussion / argument with my husband over the 80%/ 20% food theory. Now when it comes to the 20% " treat food" would that equate to 4 indulgent meals a week? ( that's his idea )

To me that seems a bit too much for someone trying to loose weight, but he thinks its the perfect balance.....

So what do you guys think????

Replies

  • Anayalata
    Anayalata Posts: 391 Member
    Is this just something he pulled out of his brain or is there some science behind it?

    I suppose it's alright as long as it's not "1 whole apple pie is my treat."
  • mkmccarthy
    mkmccarthy Posts: 4
    Well his thought process, was 3 main meals a day, which works out to 21 meals a week.

    4 treat meals a week being 20%
  • Hayesgang
    Hayesgang Posts: 624
    I look at it this way - that's 21 meals a week (if you on eat B,L,D) so 4 meals isn't that many. However, if each one of those meals is 900cals - that's a lot.

    You should eat whatever you want - it's all about moderation.
  • aaleigha1
    aaleigha1 Posts: 408 Member
    that to me sounds like something I might try at maintainace but why not log a weeks worth of menus and see how many calories that is over the week
  • Anayalata
    Anayalata Posts: 391 Member
    I believe the main idea is to stay on a calorie deficit every day that you're trying to lose weight.

    Once you reach your maintenance point, you can indulge yourself once a week (usually going over your maintenance by about 500-1000) so that your body doesn't get used to your diet.

    As long as the "treat food" isn't something like a 2000 calorie dish from a chain restaurant, then it shouldn't really be a problem.

    But hey, I'm not a fitness specialist or anything.
  • newarkco05
    newarkco05 Posts: 240
    I agree with the 80/20 in some ways. I think 20% is a good amount of treats... however... I do not agree with 4 complete cheat meals. The 20% should count all the extra through out the week- extra cream in your coffee, butter on your toast, all those little things are also extras and are not healthy. I usually eat whatever I want in moderation and have lots of fruits and veggies through out the day.
  • kmjenkins
    kmjenkins Posts: 396 Member
    I think it depends upon what a "treat" meal is, for some people this could be eating a small portion of macaroni and cheese, for others it could be two value meals from McDonald's. I think either way you go, the whole purpose of tracking calories/exercise is to make sure you are in your caloric ranges, and have a deficit if you are looking to lose weight. If that treat meal puts you over your calories range for the day, it isn't in my opinion a good idea to do that four times/week (or often at all). If you're in your caloric range then I think it just depends upon what you feel is the proper fuel for your body. If four "treat" meals a week keeps you in your caloric range and gives you the stamina/energy, etc. that you need to fuel your body in what you consider to be a healthy way--go for it. Try different things and do whatever works for you and your body. Good luck!
  • sandislim
    sandislim Posts: 264
    For me in means staying within your calorie allowance and sticking to healthy foods as much of the time as you can while allowing occasional treats that don't go beyond 20%.
  • mkmccarthy
    mkmccarthy Posts: 4
    Thanks guys! These are really good responses.
  • Sidesteal
    Sidesteal Posts: 5,510 Member
    In the nicest way possible:

    I think you're greatly complicating something that already needs to be simplified (dieting).

    If you just hit your kcal/macro goals every day, and select "mostly" nutritious foods, then it really isn't going to matter whether or not you mix in treats. As long as you're meeting nutrient sufficiency by again selecting "mostly" good foods, then you're really free to have treats.

    Beyond that, I wouldn't worry about this as it's a silly thing to try and calculate.
  • stuart959
    stuart959 Posts: 33 Member
    I don't necessarily agree with the theory, but some people need to feel like they're cheating to stay motivated. For me I eat out with the guys one night a week and often on that day unless I exercize a bunch or eat very light all day I end up going over maint but its only once a week AND planned. Being avgeraged over the course of a week I was still within 80% of my deficet amt. I'd offer to let him "spend" 20% of his deficeit amt per week planned in advance like a big meal out IF it helps him to win long term. (provided if he goes over 20% the difference is made up)
  • HeidiMightyRawr
    HeidiMightyRawr Posts: 3,343 Member
    I say if it fits your macros, why not have it?

    This basically means I eat what I feel like, but it obviously couldn't be "everything" I feel like as I wouldn't be hitting the macros. (I'd be getting too many carbs, too much sodium, and not enough protein etc) This approach has allowed me not to feel like I'm denying anything, but I'm still hitting my goals.
  • sarasmile144
    sarasmile144 Posts: 108 Member
    I've personally heard the theory 85% healthy and 15%.. well, maybe you can slide a bit. Because in many cases, 100% healthy every single day is unrealistic sounding. And I like this 85%/15%. Good luck figuring out what works for you, though!
  • KavemanKarg
    KavemanKarg Posts: 266
    This is based off Pareto's Law that 80% of results come from 20% of your efforts.

    For example:

    In any business, 80% of the sales usually come from the 20% of the customers that spend like crazy.

    and in that same business, 80% of the complaints also likely come from another 20% of the customer base.

    This law does not mean you can eat 20% crap.

    It means that of all the changes you make towards weight loss, 20% of them are the ones that are really gonna matter, but you still have to do them consistently!

    Interpreting Pareto's Law in the manner suggested equates to sabotage. It is meant to apply to the sum of all total efforts.

    For example:

    if you

    -Ate clean
    -Stopped smoking
    -Started running
    -Got fresh air every day
    -Got more sleep

    One of those changes would give you 80% of your new results, but you have to do that consistently, not 80%
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    This is based off Pareto's Law that 80% of results come from 20% of your efforts.

    For example:

    In any business, 80% of the sales usually come from the 20% of the customers that spend like crazy.

    and in that same business, 80% of the complaints also likely come from another 20% of the customer base.

    This law does not mean you can eat 20% crap.

    It means that of all the changes you make towards weight loss, 20% of them are the ones that are really gonna matter, but you still have to do them consistently!

    Interpreting Pareto's Law in the manner suggested equates to sabotage. It is meant to apply to the sum of all total efforts.

    For example:

    if you

    -Ate clean
    -Stopped smoking
    -Started running
    -Got fresh air every day
    -Got more sleep

    One of those changes would give you 80% of your new results, but you have to do that consistently, not 80%

    ? this has nothing to do with Pareto's law, it has to do with estimates of discretionary kcal allowance ie. most people should be able to hit all their macro minimums with about 80-90% of their kcal intake, therefore leaving 10-20% discretionary kcal left over
  • SarabellPlus3
    SarabellPlus3 Posts: 496 Member
    In the nicest way possible:

    I think you're greatly complicating something that already needs to be simplified (dieting).

    If you just hit your kcal/macro goals every day, and select "mostly" nutritious foods, then it really isn't going to matter whether or not you mix in treats. As long as you're meeting nutrient sufficiency by again selecting "mostly" good foods, then you're really free to have treats.

    Beyond that, I wouldn't worry about this as it's a silly thing to try and calculate.
    Yes.


    Really, there are a million variables, this is like how people say that eating right is 80%, working out is only 20%-- well, that's only true if you hardly work out, used to eat a LOT, and move to eating way less. Otherwise it is not true, and has no bearing on my (for instance) reality.

    How did you eat before? If you ate 100% food "treats", then moving to only 20% food "treats" will of course work well for you.
  • gumigal82
    gumigal82 Posts: 350
    I don't know if the 80/20 theory is the best one to follow. I go by what my doctor said- stay as close to my calorie count with exercise included 5 days a week. I go by "moderation is key"--eat meals that are healthy, filling and tasty--lean protein, healthy carbs, and veggies/fruit!
    But--Don't ever deprive yourself. Eat a small snack between meals--
    I "indulge" in two ways-- let myself have a small (calorie count wise) treat each day;) Also, every Saturday I have a free day-I allow myself to have a small calorie surplus...eat dinner out, get a dessert...without the guilt!
  • LorinaLynn
    LorinaLynn Posts: 13,247 Member
    In the nicest way possible:

    I think you're greatly complicating something that already needs to be simplified (dieting).

    If you just hit your kcal/macro goals every day, and select "mostly" nutritious foods, then it really isn't going to matter whether or not you mix in treats. As long as you're meeting nutrient sufficiency by again selecting "mostly" good foods, then you're really free to have treats.

    Beyond that, I wouldn't worry about this as it's a silly thing to try and calculate.

    That's how I work in treat foods. I'm having pepperoni pizza right now. :smile:

    I did a doubletake at the "as long as it's not 900 calories" thing, because most of my dinners, every day of the week, are around 700-1100 calories.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories