Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Reality check: Counting calories

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Have you read this thread by someone who added potato or sweet potatoes to his daily intake and is losing?
    http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum...tml#post360433
    There is trick to it - make the food bland and boring and you will not overeat.

    I have been counting calories and exercising regularly since this thread came out and Do not see the scale move. I will give it a week, then we will try the sweet potato routine. Boiled meats? Nah! Can't go that far, portion control will work there.

    Comment


    • 180 Degree Health: Carb Cycling

      I'm wary of being in ketosis all the time. Especially for women who may be predisposed to thyroid issues.

      Personally I don't want to live life purposely eating bland food just to lose weight. Also it would be counterintuitive because it would lead me to binge on sugary crap. I guess I work the other way... I need to make the food taste good to feel satisfied, and since it's meat and veggies I don't really feel a craving for more... ok with sweet potatoes I guess I do, but in combination with other things there is literally no room in my stomach and I'm getting better at listening to those signals.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by imasin View Post
        Personally I don't want to live life purposely eating bland food just to lose weight. Also it would be counterintuitive because it would lead me to binge on sugary crap. I guess I work the other way... I need to make the food taste good to feel satisfied
        This. Just this.

        Comment


        • I wanted to say thank you to the original poster for posting this thread as well as the people contributing to it. I too feel like one of the people who really is doing everything right, but am still chunky. I'm reading the links and posts with hopes that I too will 'find the answer'.

          Same situation - eat low carb and don't lose.. do the HIIT stuff, do the exercise (but not too much). I feel 'leaner' when I'm really strict with the calories - but we are talking 1,000 a day, and that just sucks. It seems like IF might be it for me.. though I have a problem right now where I get 'grazey' for a few days after I IF - like my body is always searching for food for the couple days after, which ends up being counterproductive. I have been low carbing it (with the exception of the holidays where I had a blip in the carb radar, thank you mom) since July, so you'd think I'd be adapted.

          Keep on posting, and thanks!

          Comment


          • Originally posted by melsie View Post
            I feel 'leaner' when I'm really strict with the calories - but we are talking 1,000 a day, and that just sucks. It seems like IF might be it for me.. though I have a problem right now where I get 'grazey' for a few days after I IF - like my body is always searching for food for the couple days after, which ends up being counterproductive.
            1000 calories a day - omg, thats a number I never want to see again. Thats starvation - honestly, its below what has been used in studies to simulate starvation!! No wonder you want to "graze" for a few days afterwards. I'd want to eat a whole supermarket - probably cake aisle first.

            This is definitely nothing to do with lack of willpower!!! You know you are going to get "eat more" comments, right? Brace yourself

            Comment


            • 1000 calories is no where near starvation. You can have for a late lunch, 3 eggs, 2 slices of bacon and a cup or two of veggies. For dinner, you can have 6 ounces of chicken, another cup or two of veggies, plus about 1/4 cup of a fatty sauce. These can be very filling meals. Yes, you will still probably feel hungry, and it's not something you want to do for the rest of your life. However, it could be implemented a few days per week in order to aid in fat loss. It works especially well with intermittent fasting. If you can hold out until dinner, 1000 calories will make it a big one.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by john_e_turner_ii View Post
                1000 calories is no where near starvation. You can have for a late lunch, 3 eggs, 2 slices of bacon and a cup or two of veggies. For dinner, you can have 6 ounces of chicken, another cup or two of veggies, plus about 1/4 cup of a fatty sauce. These can be very filling meals. Yes, you will still probably feel hungry, and it's not something you want to do for the rest of your life. However, it could be implemented a few days per week in order to aid in fat loss. It works especially well with intermittent fasting. If you can hold out until dinner, 1000 calories will make it a big one.
                fine - we'll agree to differ

                Comment


                • It's definitely a subjective call. For some, 1000 calories might be a banquet, but many will consider it a snack.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by john_e_turner_ii View Post
                    1000 calories is no where near starvation. You can have for a late lunch, 3 eggs, 2 slices of bacon and a cup or two of veggies. For dinner, you can have 6 ounces of chicken, another cup or two of veggies, plus about 1/4 cup of a fatty sauce. These can be very filling meals. Yes, you will still probably feel hungry, and it's not something you want to do for the rest of your life. However, it could be implemented a few days per week in order to aid in fat loss. It works especially well with intermittent fasting. If you can hold out until dinner, 1000 calories will make it a big one.
                    I can attest that hunger can be managed on around 1000-1200 calories a day provided you eat enough protein relative to carbs. That's what "protein sparing modified fasts" do. And those have been around and used relatively sucessfully on obese patients for decades. I've been in that range since mid-December (I had a lot of weight to lose) and the hunger really isn't an issue once the insulin is under control. Hunger really only became a factor again when my daily walks started to become 10 mile hikes on the weekend. I also wear a BodyMedia Go Fit device, to track my calories burned. It might not be accurate, but I figure it will tell me if my metabolism is dropping inordinately compared to where it was. I also try to track body composition and performance lifting to make sure I'm not losing muscle instead of fat.

                    Now, 1000 calories a day isn't a lifestyle. It's a diet. Designed because when you're obese, the best thing you can do for yourself is to get a large amount of weight off quickly. I certainly don't recommend this for someone looking to lose 15 pounds. But for people with a lot of weight to lose, I'm not sure that the standard advice of "eat more calories/eat more fat" is good for them.

                    Comment


                    • I just read the Eades link and it makes a lot of sense. And I do include cheese and nuts in my food protocol and have had the feeling I should be eating less as I mentioned before (although one is always struggling to wonder if that's just the CW whispering in my ear). However, having followed Art De Vany's site for a number of months now, read his book The New Evolution Diet and exchanged some comments with him through his forum I would add a few more points to consider ... and this is not intended to confuse further, merely to indicate this is a very complicated subject and there are no easy quick fixes for many people and no one solution.

                      Firstly, the body is a complex, chaotic energy system which cannot be accurately measured in terms of energy consumed (food in) over energy conserved (fat stored) over energy burned (used in living including exercise). It has evolved to be dynamic and works best out of equilibrium for the vast majority of the time. The body is rarely, if ever, in energy balance. So attempts at 'fine-tuning' are often futile and just generate frustration (cortisol) which just adds to the hormone pot that control EVERYTHING!

                      Secondly, hormones - we are our hormones, literally. Each one of us has a unique blueprint the hormones are working to, and each one of us arrives here a different level of damage to our hormonal systems. So each of our experiences of the PB are unique at a biochemical/endocrine level.

                      Obviously broad brush statements like more carbs = more insulin requirement are true, but at an individual level it's far more complex. For example you may be able to clear the small amount of glucose you consume with adequate insulin to have good fasted results. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that you have insulin-sensitive fat cells that will release their stores for you to burn! And there a lots of reasons for this, one will be gender, age of PBer, another medical history, another simply that you are eating enough fat to satisfy your body's needs and a big one (and still not well understood) will be medication.

                      So, thirdly, medication. My area of interest and further reading is bipolarity and I know that some of the drugs used in this disorder create insulin resistance. I also know that some of the same drugs are used in different dosages for other psychiatric issues including epilepsy and one assumes their insulin resistance effect is similar. Drugs used particularly post breast cancer are designed to inhibit the action of oestrogen (and this is highly associated with fat storage) - see Taubes' recounting of the rats with ovaries removed ... they became massively fat, when the oestrogen was restored they became lean.

                      Fourthly, the use of IFing. Art De Vany talks quite a bit about IFing as a way to trigger autophagy (ie cell clean up) and as a way of replicating to some extent the idea of intermittent food supply that we evolved with. However, he doesn't use it as a way of reducing food intake over the longer period and he notes that the body naturally wants to eat more following an IF in order to 'catch up' - and incidentally that is thought to be why all calorie-restricted dieters end up gaining back the weight lost over time, they just catch up the eating. He also uses it ad hoc, ie not to a schedule allowing it to occur naturally through the course of the week.

                      Fifthly (can you say that!), he would argue for a lower fat level. We are not talking low fat, or even moderate fat, but not excessive fat because he believes herein lies the path to overeating in terms of the energy we require in a world where we are not moving about as much as our ancestors did. This is very much what Eades is saying, you can keep your carbs very low but still consume a large amount of energy through high fat foods like cheese and nuts and adding lots of butter. He postulates that humans are by necessity lazy overeaters predisposed to take on board energy when it's available and to be lazy not to burn it excessively ready for times of scarcity. What we have to balance in modern life is the fact that real scarcity doesn't occur - we have to 'create' it to keep the body on its toes so to speak.

                      Sixthly (ditto!), insulin spiking. I think this may be relevant in the context of eating one large meal at the end of a fast. I suspect from all I've studied and n=1 that it makes more sense to spread your food over a window of time rather than load it at one meal, more a feeling about how I feel if I eat a big meal compared with two smaller ones - I'm more likely to be hungry after the big one than after two smaller ones.

                      Seventhly (I'm sure you can't say that but I'm on a roll!) you can quite easily under-eat, over-burn and still not lose weight - your body is just using your protein to fuel itself so your muscle mass is decreasing (which is heavier) whilst you get fatter, it isn't being created from thin air, it's being created from your muscle mass and bone density loss.

                      Eigthly, working with the system and tricking it! It seems that fasted training particularly for heavy lifting and sprinting triggers all kinds of good things in terms of insulin sensitivity, human growth hormone etc which will affect the way the body utilises the fuel you feed it and the fuel you already have stored. It also directly alters the hormone levels and metabolic rates.

                      So, summarizing in the light of Paleobird's case - a potential to have under-eaten through the IF regime combined with a possibility of overloading at one breaking fast meal (insulin spike?) if that is occurring with a good high fat meal that is going to be a fat storage issue. Combine that with too few calories when looked at over the longer term - ie week on week the body is perhaps assessing a scarcity scenario so less likely to burn fat supplies. On top of that you have the potential for medications playing a role in insulin resistance.

                      Like I said it's a totally complicated and complex situation and only trial and error is likely to find the 'key'. However, the more focus you apply, the more navel-gazing the higher the stress factors involved and that's just adding another layer to the mix.

                      All I do know is what you have been doing isn't giving you the result you desire so you do need to change something but deciding what isn't easy you have to make a call and run with it for a while and then review and try not to over-analyse in the interim.
                      Seeking the natural way in a modern world ...

                      Comment


                      • Ok Erin's here to stir up the thread again.

                        I do 16-8 fasts every day. And this week I've made it a goal to "aim for" 1100 calories a day (or an average of 7700 calories a week).

                        I do this because as we all know, there is no way to truly be sure as to how many calories you are actually consuming, even if you use digital scales and measuring cups and TB and FitDay. Companies are allowed to be a percentage off in their calculations (what you read on nutrition labels), and 6 oz of red meat may have more fat (and thus more calories) than you assume when you log it in on FitDay. I use measuring and "calorie counting" as a subjective means, because I know that I probably consume more than what I tally every day. Having a subjective number to aim for helps me figure out what I need to tweak each week. I "aimed for" 1300 a day last week and even with eating super clean and not cheating at all gained a little fat. Well, that's probably because I actually consumed a couple hundred more calories than I assumed. For some reason, my body just seems to do really great in the percieved 900-1200 calorie range. I'm aware that I may be wrong with all of this, and that many people will think I'm "starving myself" or "sick", but I am totally comfortable with this. Any more food would make me feel physically distressed (as in give me a stomachache). Right now I'm not at a place where I want to be eating 1900 calories a day.

                        There seem to be two huge factions of Primal, as we all know. The intuitive eaters and the counters. I honestly see no problem with either. When I get to maintenance, I hope to shift to more intuitive eating. I'm a freak - I like counting. It's like an experiment every week.

                        I could be completely wrong here, but the OP might have been looking for validation to start taking a little more control. She has tried the intuitive thing. Maybe it would add LESS, not more, stress in her life if she tried counting and reducing her calories. If so, I strongly suggest reading the article that john_e_turner_ii posted earlier on this thread. It's mind-blowing. And if it freaks you out and makes you think people are starving themselves, check out the Before and Afters on his page. I think they're looking preeeetttty good, to be honest

                        And hey, nobody says you have to regiment and count calories for the rest of your life.

                        I feel like I'm going to get a lot of backlash for this

                        "The Way We Do Anything Is the Way We Do Everything"
                        ~ Kancho Cameron Shayne

                        Blog - The Primal Pantry
                        My Leangains/Primal Lifestyle Challenge to begin 2/7/11!
                        Check out the Blog for Daily Progress

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by imasin View Post

                          Personally I don't want to live life purposely eating bland food just to lose weight.
                          If I could knock 10 lbs off in a month I would do it. Then I could go back to worry free flavor full living. I too, am a foodie and cooking is my creative outlet.
                          Last edited by Adrianag; 03-03-2011, 09:44 AM.

                          Comment


                          • On the 1000 calories. The only time I'll ever lose is when that is my target. Yes, I count accurately (knowing it is not an exact science.. like Primalvore mentioned above.. but you do with the info you have). I don't want to have to eat 1000 cals, but that seems the way it is. I've been trying to tweak and study (probably read roughly 25 books on nutrition/weight loss/etc, Taubes included) to see if there is anyway I can get around this as being the only way I can lose.. but so far I haven't found anything. I've played for years with the numbers but so far this is it.

                            Yep, I've tried for the 1600-2000 - gained.. anything over 1400 for a period of time is a gain or maintain. My family has a long history of obesity - we aren't talking big eaters either. My mom eats roughly 1800 cals and is still overweight by 75+ pounds (been with her for full days on vacation so I count her calories too ).. same goes for grandpa, great grandpa.. all the way back :P Stupid survival mechanisms!

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                              I'm IFing because I was told that it was the way to cure "stalled weight loss". It didn't cause the stall. The stall was already there before the IFs. Granted it is obviously not helping any and needs to be tossed of the scrap heap of stuff that sounded good on the net but didn't work IRL.
                              Why does everybody assume I eat like a bird? I scarfed down 1/4 of a goose tonight plus squash, green beans, stuffing made with sausage, onions, and walnuts. And primal gravy. (recipe on request)
                              That's not alot of food.

                              If you like to keep your physical activity I think you should dial back the IF to 1-2 days at most or do it a la LeanGains (12 hr fast-12 hr eating window for women). If you want to keep the IF as is then you might want to dial back the physical activity. And sorry for the assumption, but when I quickly went thru this thread I think you mentioned that you sometimes don't intend to IF, you just aren't hungry some days and skip eating altogether (correct me if I'm wrong). So I assumed when you DO eat, it isn't much (and I don't think what you described for dinner was alot lol).

                              And please, do share that primal gravy recipe!

                              PS. out of curiousity what's your lean body mass?
                              Last edited by MountainDew; 03-03-2011, 12:27 PM.
                              PB Stats:
                              Started 5/10/10
                              Starting Weight: 215
                              Current Weight (1/25/11): 180
                              Goal Weight: 160

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                                But I thought he said the whole calories in calories out model was bogus. Now he's saying people overeat when they exercise and therefor don't create a calorie deficit? I thought he thought the whole idea of calorie deficits was a joke. Now I'm really confused.
                                No, he doesn't think it's bogus. He understands it and agrees with it. I think his argument is that it's more complicated than that.
                                The Inanity of Overeating

                                And Tom Naughton wrote up something trying to explain what Taubes was trying to get at:
                                Fat Accounts And The Laws of FiscalDynamics

                                But maybe that's what happens when you take nutritional advice from a journalist.
                                Now now, that's not really fair. Plenty of people here have come across doctors and nutritionists who didn't know what the hell they were talking about. You don't need to have a fancy title or degree to be educated on an issue.
                                PB Stats:
                                Started 5/10/10
                                Starting Weight: 215
                                Current Weight (1/25/11): 180
                                Goal Weight: 160

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X