Food Diary ... less is NOT more.
Replies
-
Geez, I'm so tired of all these rants about what other people are doing and not doing. Unless you have a degree in nutrition and exercise, I'm not trying to hear what you have to say. Let people eat and exercise how they want to. How does it hurt you, if someone else isn't eating enough/working out enough IF you are? Worry about yourself and your weight loss and Lead by your ACTIONS NOT YOUR RANTS.
Thank you!
^^^^^^^^ this, this this, this! all day!
PS: this.0 -
Bump. I
a controversial thread. Gets me through the workday.
I had no blazing idea that I was going to stir this much controversy ... however, the more I read, the more I amused !!
Haha, it's because you're new here. Now you know that the message boards don't take kindly to know-it-alls and broscientists.
Note to self:
Haters gonna hate.
So now I'm going to make total light of the situation with this little ditty, and frankly I've offended enough people here with my personal opinion that I don't give a rats *kitten* anymore ...
At first I was annoyed
I was horrified
Kept thinking how do people live
Full of preservatives inside.
I spent so many hours
Searching the net alone
And I came to realize
These people take my opinions all wrong!
And so I’m back
I found my place
I posted in the forum
Not to put a sad look upon your face
I shouldn’t have to apologize
Cause you stuff Cheetos in your mug
But you’d rather blame society
Cause the junk foods like a drug!
Go on now go
Lay off my post
Just turn around now
'Cause you're comments aren’t welcome anymore
I will survive !!!
And please people ... this is intended as s lighthearted joke !!!0 -
I am amazed at the public food diaries I see. I don't understand how my MFP peeps expect to lose weight cramming all their calories in one, maybe two meals.
I'm not so sure it really matters when you eat your calories. There are some days I eat half of mine in one meal, but hasn't hindered me in the slightest. The body doesn't care if you eat three meals, two or seven.
Actually it does. I mean you will see your self lose weight by just counting calories and staying under a certain number, but you would be even more successful by eating more low-calorie meals in a day. The more meals you eat in a day the more "exercise" your metabolism gets. If you eat all your calories in one meal, your metabolism is "turned off" or however you want to put it...So when you start eating, it takes time for your metabolism to catch up to you, not burning off as much as you could if you spread out your calories in your day with more frequent meals. It then doesn't have a chance to completely shut down, allowing for it to be active at the beginning of your meals instead of in the middle of it.
Actually, you're wrong. Scientific studies, many of which have been referenced with links in this discussion already, show that you're wrong.
Now, personally, I prefer eating 4-6 small meals daily because I have never liked the feeling of a full stomach and get filled easily. I also work from home so that's easy for me to do. But I don't for a single second pretend that this is a superior way of eating to rev up my metabolism. (Well, actually, I used to think that until I learned I was wrong.)
Anyway, point is, as long as people are meeting their calorie and macro-/micro-nutrient targets most of the time, they will lose weight and be healthy in the process.0 -
I agree....you have to find a balance and then continue that pattern for a lifetime....along with exercise. It sucks that moderation and exercise is what keeps us fit but those are the facts. I prefer to work everyday to make myself stronger...but I still like a cocktail, glass of wine, cookie, a piece of cake. MODERATION....... substitute something for another so you don't feel like you are being cheated out of something you want, enjoy and like.0
-
Does anyone know were I can find the nutrition facts for a resturant called Strouds, They serve everything family style so you have free rain over how much or how little you eat. However they are so good that you TOTAL loose all self control. I have been to there web already and they do not have anything listed. Just writing this makes my mouth water. so if anyone knows that would be great. STROUD'S Resturant North location in Kansas City Missouri0
-
In general terms meal frequency makes little to no difference.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9155494:
More importantly, studies using whole-body calorimetry and doubly-labelled water to assess total 24 h energy expenditure find no difference between nibbling and gorging. Finally, with the exception of a single study, there is no evidence that weight loss on hypoenergetic regimens is altered by meal frequency. We conclude that any effects of meal pattern on the regulation of body weight are likely to be mediated through effects on the food intake side of the energy balance equation.
There is one important caveat which people tend to forget and that it protein intake should be sufficient. If it isn't then meal frequency is important as it has a LBM sparing affect.0 -
I am amazed at the public food diaries I see. I don't understand how my MFP peeps expect to lose weight cramming all their calories in one, maybe two meals.
I'm not so sure it really matters when you eat your calories. There are some days I eat half of mine in one meal, but hasn't hindered me in the slightest. The body doesn't care if you eat three meals, two or seven.
Actually it does. I mean you will see your self lose weight by just counting calories and staying under a certain number, but you would be even more successful by eating more low-calorie meals in a day. The more meals you eat in a day the more "exercise" your metabolism gets. If you eat all your calories in one meal, your metabolism is "turned off" or however you want to put it...So when you start eating, it takes time for your metabolism to catch up to you, not burning off as much as you could if you spread out your calories in your day with more frequent meals. It then doesn't have a chance to completely shut down, allowing for it to be active at the beginning of your meals instead of in the middle of it.
Actually, you're wrong. Scientific studies, many of which have been referenced with links in this discussion already, show that you're wrong.
Now, personally, I prefer eating 4-6 small meals daily because I have never liked the feeling of a full stomach and get filled easily. I also work from home so that's easy for me to do. But I don't for a single second pretend that this is a superior way of eating to rev up my metabolism. (Well, actually, I used to think that until I learned I was wrong.)
Anyway, point is, as long as people are meeting their calorie and macro-/micro-nutrient targets most of the time, they will lose weight and be healthy in the process.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh, so if I eat Big Mac's and Whopper Combos everyday, but stay in my "macro-/micro-nutrient" I will be healthy? Think you so much for clearing this up for me. And all this time, I thought fat and greasy foods were bad.0 -
If I only fuel my vehicle part of the day, how is that vehicle supposed to run at optimum output the entire day? Just sayin'.
I fill my car up once a day, seems to run fine for the rest of the day.
i was thinking the same thing. LOL.0 -
Those that are too rigid with their diet usually fail in the long-term to maintain weight loss.0
-
Bump. I a controversial thread. Gets me through the workday.
I had no blazing idea that I was going to stir this much controversy ... however, the more I read, the more I amused !!
Haha, it's because you're new here. Now you know that the message boards don't take kindly to know-it-alls and broscientists.
Note to self:
Haters gonna hate.
So now I'm going to make total light of the situation with this little ditty, and frankly I've offended enough people here with my personal opinion that I don't give a rats *kitten* anymore ...
At first I was annoyed
I was horrified
Kept thinking how do people live
Full of preservatives inside.
I spent so many hours
Searching the net alone
And I came to realize
These people take my opinions all wrong!
And so I’m back
I found my place
I posted in the forum
Not to put a sad look upon your face
I shouldn’t have to apologize
Cause you stuff Cheetos in your mug
But you’d rather blame society
Cause the junk foods like a drug!
Go on now go
Lay off my post
Just turn around now
'Cause you're comments aren’t welcome anymore
I will survive !!!
And please people ... this is intended as s lighthearted joke !!!
:indifferent:0 -
Geez, I'm so tired of all these rants about what other people are doing and not doing. Unless you have a degree in nutrition and exercise, I'm not trying to hear what you have to say. Let people eat and exercise how they want to. How does it hurt you, if someone else isn't eating enough/working out enough IF you are? Worry about yourself and your weight loss and Lead by your ACTIONS NOT YOUR RANTS.
Thank you!
^^^ what she said!0 -
I am amazed at the public food diaries I see. I don't understand how my MFP peeps expect to lose weight cramming all their calories in one, maybe two meals.
I'm not so sure it really matters when you eat your calories. There are some days I eat half of mine in one meal, but hasn't hindered me in the slightest. The body doesn't care if you eat three meals, two or seven.
Actually it does. I mean you will see your self lose weight by just counting calories and staying under a certain number, but you would be even more successful by eating more low-calorie meals in a day. The more meals you eat in a day the more "exercise" your metabolism gets. If you eat all your calories in one meal, your metabolism is "turned off" or however you want to put it...So when you start eating, it takes time for your metabolism to catch up to you, not burning off as much as you could if you spread out your calories in your day with more frequent meals. It then doesn't have a chance to completely shut down, allowing for it to be active at the beginning of your meals instead of in the middle of it.
Your metabolism does not 'shut down' when you are not eating. Why do people STILL believe this?
0 -
If you can hit your macros and micros properly, then yes, it would be perfectly healthy. Hitting your macros and micros means hitting the appropriate levels of carbs, fat, protein, vitamins, minerals, fiber, etc. What you eat to reach those limits does NOT make a difference to your body. Your digestive system doesn't know the difference between a Big Mac, and a Paleo friendly homemade version. It just sees the molecular components of the food, the amino acid chains, fatty acids, etc. As long as you hit your total calories, and hit the proper amount of macros and micros, you will be perfectly healthy.I am amazed at the public food diaries I see. I don't understand how my MFP peeps expect to lose weight cramming all their calories in one, maybe two meals.
I'm not so sure it really matters when you eat your calories. There are some days I eat half of mine in one meal, but hasn't hindered me in the slightest. The body doesn't care if you eat three meals, two or seven.
Actually it does. I mean you will see your self lose weight by just counting calories and staying under a certain number, but you would be even more successful by eating more low-calorie meals in a day. The more meals you eat in a day the more "exercise" your metabolism gets. If you eat all your calories in one meal, your metabolism is "turned off" or however you want to put it...So when you start eating, it takes time for your metabolism to catch up to you, not burning off as much as you could if you spread out your calories in your day with more frequent meals. It then doesn't have a chance to completely shut down, allowing for it to be active at the beginning of your meals instead of in the middle of it.
Actually, you're wrong. Scientific studies, many of which have been referenced with links in this discussion already, show that you're wrong.
Now, personally, I prefer eating 4-6 small meals daily because I have never liked the feeling of a full stomach and get filled easily. I also work from home so that's easy for me to do. But I don't for a single second pretend that this is a superior way of eating to rev up my metabolism. (Well, actually, I used to think that until I learned I was wrong.)
Anyway, point is, as long as people are meeting their calorie and macro-/micro-nutrient targets most of the time, they will lose weight and be healthy in the process.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh, so if I eat Big Mac's and Whopper Combos everyday, but stay in my "macro-/micro-nutrient" I will be healthy? Think you so much for clearing this up for me. And all this time, I thought fat and greasy foods were bad.0 -
Geez, I'm so tired of all these rants about what other people are doing and not doing. Unless you have a degree in nutrition and exercise, I'm not trying to hear what you have to say. Let people eat and exercise how they want to. How does it hurt you, if someone else isn't eating enough/working out enough IF you are? Worry about yourself and your weight loss and Lead by your ACTIONS NOT YOUR RANTS.
Thank you!
I agree with this! Unless someone asks your advice. There are a variety of ways that work for weight loss. What works for 1 person might not work for someone else. Just do what works for you to the best of your ability and let others do what works for them.
If they ask your opinion that is different.0 -
tigersword I you :P 0
-
:flowerforyou:0 -
Judge not, lest ye be judged!
Matthew 7:1
THIS!!!!!!!! Is the reason I keep my diary private!!!0 -
Your [quote) :"It drives me crazy to hear people say they don't have time to exercise or prepare fresh foods. Seriously people? Do you know how many hours there are in a day? Trade one sedentary activity for an activity of some sort ... trade that sedentary activity in and take care of your body! Mentally AND physically you'll feel better."
.
...and I say.......
You must not have small children (4 of them ranging from young infant to 5 years), THIS really inhibits your ability to exercise and prepare healthy foods, It takes every ounce of everything in me to feed the little ones, keep them all alive, and try to cram some veggies and fruits in me, in between breast feeding every 2 hrs and changing diapers, potty training, breaking up fights, and trying to keep us all alive....going on 2 hrs of sleep a night between two babies and 2 sick kids and a hubby who works 80+ hrs and no family or any help....I am just saying, its easy to judge, but we all try our best. I still manage to exercise 20-30 min 3 times a week, but would LOVE to do more, it is really not humanly possible:)0 -
Geez, I'm so tired of all these rants about what other people are doing and not doing. Unless you have a degree in nutrition and exercise, I'm not trying to hear what you have to say. Let people eat and exercise how they want to. How does it hurt you, if someone else isn't eating enough/working out enough IF you are? Worry about yourself and your weight loss and Lead by your ACTIONS NOT YOUR RANTS.
Thank you!
I agree with this! Unless someone asks your advice. There are a variety of ways that work for weight loss. What works for 1 person might not work for someone else. Just do what works for you to the best of your ability and let others do what works for them.
If they ask your opinion that is different.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^0 -
Do you have anything to back your point up with? If I provide you with peer reviewed studies that support the idea that meal frequencies don't effect metabolism and/or fat gain, would you change your position on this?
I do not have to be right and I'll gladly stop my end of this if you would like, but as it stands now, I am presenting you with good resources that have strong evidence to suggest that you are incorrect.
If you have anything to support your side of this, I'm happy to view it and given enough information to suggest that I'm incorrect, I'll even change my position on this, but as of now, you are just saying that I am wrong.
/FullOfWin0 -
If you can hit your macros and micros properly, then yes, it would be perfectly healthy. Hitting your macros and micros means hitting the appropriate levels of carbs, fat, protein, vitamins, minerals, fiber, etc. What you eat to reach those limits does NOT make a difference to your body. Your digestive system doesn't know the difference between a Big Mac, and a Paleo friendly homemade version. It just sees the molecular components of the food, the amino acid chains, fatty acids, etc. As long as you hit your total calories, and hit the proper amount of macros and micros, you will be perfectly healthy.I am amazed at the public food diaries I see. I don't understand how my MFP peeps expect to lose weight cramming all their calories in one, maybe two meals.
I'm not so sure it really matters when you eat your calories. There are some days I eat half of mine in one meal, but hasn't hindered me in the slightest. The body doesn't care if you eat three meals, two or seven.
Actually it does. I mean you will see your self lose weight by just counting calories and staying under a certain number, but you would be even more successful by eating more low-calorie meals in a day. The more meals you eat in a day the more "exercise" your metabolism gets. If you eat all your calories in one meal, your metabolism is "turned off" or however you want to put it...So when you start eating, it takes time for your metabolism to catch up to you, not burning off as much as you could if you spread out your calories in your day with more frequent meals. It then doesn't have a chance to completely shut down, allowing for it to be active at the beginning of your meals instead of in the middle of it.
Actually, you're wrong. Scientific studies, many of which have been referenced with links in this discussion already, show that you're wrong.
Now, personally, I prefer eating 4-6 small meals daily because I have never liked the feeling of a full stomach and get filled easily. I also work from home so that's easy for me to do. But I don't for a single second pretend that this is a superior way of eating to rev up my metabolism. (Well, actually, I used to think that until I learned I was wrong.)
Anyway, point is, as long as people are meeting their calorie and macro-/micro-nutrient targets most of the time, they will lose weight and be healthy in the process.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh, so if I eat Big Mac's and Whopper Combos everyday, but stay in my "macro-/micro-nutrient" I will be healthy? Think you so much for clearing this up for me. And all this time, I thought fat and greasy foods were bad.
hmmmmmmm... interesting...
There are 576 calories in a Big Mac. 292 of those calories are from fat. But wait, it has 31 grams of protein, so it has to be healthy. Hold on, I need more carbs because my body burns carbs really fast because I only eat once a day. So, let me go ahead and super-size my fries. That's a whopping total of 172 grams in carbs. No, not complex carbs, but simple carbs. You know the kind of carbs that are linked to diabetes, cardiovascular disease, etc? Wow, that's a grand total of 1200 calories in one meal. But as long as I burned 50 calories at the gym I'm good because of a calorie deficit. I'm a healthy 31 year old that looks 50 years old.
By the way, I ordered a diet coke with that meal because YOU KNOW I don't want to go over on my macros because of a soft drink.0 -
Myth.I think it is better for your metabolism, to eat regularly.0 -
stop reading what people write kind of simple plus i will cheer for my friends here but my main focus is me and my personal trainer who also does my diet plans says it total fine for me to have 2 cheat meals a week do i sure do will i sure will am losing inches and pounds and do i have more energy sure do. everyone's body is just not the same they will either figure it out or they will not for each his own.0
-
stop reading what people write kind of simple plus i will cheer for my friends here but my main focus is me and my personal trainer who also does my diet plans says it total fine for me to have 2 cheat meals a week do i sure do will i sure will am losing inches and pounds and do i have more energy sure do. everyone's body is just not the same they will either figure it out or they will not for each his own.
Absolutely nothing wrong with having a cheat meal once or twice a week. Hell, I have mine every Sunday. BUT it's not an everyday ordeal. According to your "friends' it's absolutely fine to eat bad food everyday. Who knew eating McDonalds, Burger King, and/or Wendy's was healthy.0 -
Your [quote) :"It drives me crazy to hear people say they don't have time to exercise or prepare fresh foods. Seriously people? Do you know how many hours there are in a day? Trade one sedentary activity for an activity of some sort ... trade that sedentary activity in and take care of your body! Mentally AND physically you'll feel better."
.
...and I say.......
You must not have small children (4 of them ranging from young infant to 5 years), THIS really inhibits your ability to exercise and prepare healthy foods, It takes every ounce of everything in me to feed the little ones, keep them all alive, and try to cram some veggies and fruits in me, in between breast feeding every 2 hrs and changing diapers, potty training, breaking up fights, and trying to keep us all alive....going on 2 hrs of sleep a night between two babies and 2 sick kids and a hubby who works 80+ hrs and no family or any help....I am just saying, its easy to judge, but we all try our best. I still manage to exercise 20-30 min 3 times a week, but would LOVE to do more, it is really not humanly possible:)
I was thinking the same thing!!!0 -
http://body-improvements.com/resources/eat/#cleandirty
Absolutely nothing wrong with having a cheat meal once or twice a week. Hell, I have mine every Sunday. BUT it's not an everyday ordeal. According to your "friends' it's absolutely fine to eat bad food everyday. Who knew eating McDonalds, Burger King, and/or Wendy's was healthy.0 -
Wow you sure eat a lot of processed food....pot meet kettle. I guess if you spread out your junk food its okay in your book. I am a working mom of 3 who has lost 29 lbs in 3 months. I try to eat as clean as possible but I still eat processed food and fast food. I also have spike days and days when I am just too tired to exercise. I feel great and look better than ever. Do what works for you, but don't come on here and be a know it all. Obviously you have a lot to learn.0
-
Are you always this obtuse? 172 grams of carbs will last the exact same amount of time in your body whether you eat them all at once, or split them up.
If you can hit your macros and micros properly, then yes, it would be perfectly healthy. Hitting your macros and micros means hitting the appropriate levels of carbs, fat, protein, vitamins, minerals, fiber, etc. What you eat to reach those limits does NOT make a difference to your body. Your digestive system doesn't know the difference between a Big Mac, and a Paleo friendly homemade version. It just sees the molecular components of the food, the amino acid chains, fatty acids, etc. As long as you hit your total calories, and hit the proper amount of macros and micros, you will be perfectly healthy.I am amazed at the public food diaries I see. I don't understand how my MFP peeps expect to lose weight cramming all their calories in one, maybe two meals.
I'm not so sure it really matters when you eat your calories. There are some days I eat half of mine in one meal, but hasn't hindered me in the slightest. The body doesn't care if you eat three meals, two or seven.
Actually it does. I mean you will see your self lose weight by just counting calories and staying under a certain number, but you would be even more successful by eating more low-calorie meals in a day. The more meals you eat in a day the more "exercise" your metabolism gets. If you eat all your calories in one meal, your metabolism is "turned off" or however you want to put it...So when you start eating, it takes time for your metabolism to catch up to you, not burning off as much as you could if you spread out your calories in your day with more frequent meals. It then doesn't have a chance to completely shut down, allowing for it to be active at the beginning of your meals instead of in the middle of it.
Actually, you're wrong. Scientific studies, many of which have been referenced with links in this discussion already, show that you're wrong.
Now, personally, I prefer eating 4-6 small meals daily because I have never liked the feeling of a full stomach and get filled easily. I also work from home so that's easy for me to do. But I don't for a single second pretend that this is a superior way of eating to rev up my metabolism. (Well, actually, I used to think that until I learned I was wrong.)
Anyway, point is, as long as people are meeting their calorie and macro-/micro-nutrient targets most of the time, they will lose weight and be healthy in the process.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh, so if I eat Big Mac's and Whopper Combos everyday, but stay in my "macro-/micro-nutrient" I will be healthy? Think you so much for clearing this up for me. And all this time, I thought fat and greasy foods were bad.
hmmmmmmm... interesting...
There are 576 calories in a Big Mac. 292 of those calories are from fat. But wait, it has 31 grams of protein, so it has to be healthy. Hold on, I need more carbs because my body burns carbs really fast because I only eat once a day. So, let me go ahead and super-size my fries. That's a whopping total of 172 grams in carbs. No, not complex carbs, but simple carbs. You know the kind of carbs that are linked to diabetes, cardiovascular disease, etc? Wow, that's a grand total of roughly 1200 calories in one meal. But as long as I burned 50 calories at the gym I'm good because of a calorie deficit. I'm a healthy 31 year old that looks 50 years old.
By the way, I ordered a diet coke with that meal because YOU KNOW I don't want to go over on my macros because of a soft drink.
Quick lesson in how the body processes food. Let's say you burn 100 calories an hour, for a TDEE of 2400 calories a day.
Now, you eat 2000 calories in one meal, and fast for the rest of the day. Your body will process that meal, and burn what it immediately needs, and store the rest. For the next 24 hours, your body burns the food you ate, which takes up 20 hours to burn off, and uses fat reserves for the remaining 4 hours, putting you at a caloric deficit of 400 calories.
Now, let's say you eat those 2000 calories spread out over 5 meals, let's say 3 hours apart, and 400 calories a meal.
You eat your first meal, and your body burns 300 of the 400 calories you eat, before you eat again, and again the body burns 300 out of the 400 calories you eat when you eat your third meal. At this point you're at a 200 calorie surplus. So 3 hours pass, you burn 300 calories more, and eat your 4th meal. So far you've eaten 4 meals, for 1600 calories, and you've burned 1200 calories for the day. So now you eat your final meal. You've eaten 2000 calories, and you've burned 1500 calories. It's been 15 hours, which leaves 9 hours left in a 24 hour day. In those final 9 hours, you burn the 500 calories left over from your 5 meals, and 400 calories from stored fat. So, eating 5 meals a day leaves you at a deficit of 400 calories.
So whether you eat 1 meal, or 5 meals, you burn the same number of calories, and burn the same amount of fat. It's 100% personal preference how many meals you eat, and has no impact on how much fat you burn or store in a 24 hour period.
As for the type carbs, french fries and hamburger buns are starches, which are complex carbs. Carbs are carbs, the simple vs complex debate is filled with so many fallacies and myths I don't even want to get into it. If you control for the right amount of calories, carbs are meaningless, unless you have a metabolic disorder.0 -
So whether you eat 1 meal, or 5 meals, you burn the same number of calories, and burn the same amount of fat. It's 100% personal preference how many meals you eat, and has no impact on how much fat you burn or store in a 24 hour period.
^ This. I attempted to lay this out earlier in this thread but apparently it wasn't received.
I made a compilation post about it here as well, just in case people here are interested in actually reading what the big players in the bodybulding/nutrition game have to say about it (not me obviously, I'm referring to the authors I'm listing in the below thread):
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/529002-a-compliation-on-meal-frequency0 -
did anyone ever hear the old saying "The only thing worse then a reformed smoker is a reformed wh*re?" as s smug ex-smoker it seems to me that the only thing worse then a reformed wh*re is a reformed over eater!0
This discussion has been closed.
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