Page 16 of 69 FirstFirst ... 614151617182666 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 686

Thread: The True Definition of Calories i.e. "Why what you believe is extremist BS" page 16

  1. #151
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Shop Now
    Quote Originally Posted by cori93437 View Post
    I think my issue with this, yes calories matter... but how sustainable is it to keep cutting them?
    I have much more than the 'last stubborn 35lbs' to lose.
    So when I stop losing weight completely at 1000-1200, then what? 800-900... stop losing again and go down further... 750?
    I'm 5'9" not 5'... that really doesn't sound healthy at all.

    How low can I go an not jack my already messed up metabolism up so badly that after losing the weight if I try and eat a normal maintenance amount of say 1200 cal a day... that I have real problems GAINing at that number?

    Being hungry isn't an issue for me... which is a whole other issue. I know people who have said that they envy that I'm never hungry. But living with constant nausea so that chewing and eating is often repulsive is no fun at all. Most days I only manage to maintain 1200 cal by having caloric liquids...
    I wouldn't dream of giving advice to you given your medical condition, cori. You are a VERY special snowflake.

    A question. You say that you "manage to maintain 1200". Is that because you have been told that below that there be dragons or because you don't feel right below that?

  2. #152
    cori93437's Avatar
    cori93437 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    central FL
    Posts
    6,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleobird View Post
    I wouldn't dream of giving advice to you given your medical condition, cori. You are a VERY special snowflake.

    A question. You say that you "manage to maintain 1200". Is that because you have been told that below that there be dragons or because you don't feel right below that?
    I wasn't counting for a while... I was very tired/sleepy... and not losing any pounds at all.
    I started counting my normal daily food and realized that I was already eating considerably below 1000 per day due to food avoidance because of the nausea.
    The docs told me to try and keep it higher than that so I started adding some liquid calories on purpose to get the number up.
    I had a little more energy and shed a few lbs... generally still 1lb a week or less.

    The past couple of weeks I snacked on some fruit (mangoes are a weakness)... calories 1200-1300 per day... less fat/more sugar from the fruit... and gained a couple of pounds... so I'm pretty sure I have to be below 1200 to lose, closer to 1000. And I have a considerable amount to get rid of still.
    I know that the more I lose and the closer I get to goal the more calories I'll have to cut... it happens to pretty much everyone as far as I can tell.
    That is going to end up being a VERY low number judging from where I am now.
    It's discouraging.
    “You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.”
    ~Friedrich Nietzsche
    And that's why I'm here eating HFLC Primal/Paleo.


  3. #153
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    One pound a week is not bad at all especially when your illness prevents you from doing much exercise.

    Not to you specifically, cori, but in general I think a lot of us want to see a pound a day coming off or we start getting discouraged and flit off to the next fad in nutrition, the next quick fix cure all. Calorie counting does work but you have to stick with it.

  4. #154
    cori93437's Avatar
    cori93437 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    central FL
    Posts
    6,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleobird View Post
    One pound a week is not bad at all especially when your illness prevents you from doing much exercise.

    Not to you specifically, cori, but in general I think a lot of us want to see a pound a day coming off or we start getting discouraged and flit off to the next fad in nutrition, the next quick fix cure all. Calorie counting does work but you have to stick with it.
    30 weeks, 17 lbs total. (There were some stalls in there... non-loss weeks)
    I'm not saying it doesn't work... and not even complaining about slow, because I don't ever feel hungry and I eat tasty food.

    I just have concerns about the long term ramifications, and how low I will have to go in order to sustain weight loss due to the effect of my metabolism adjusting to lower and lower inputs over time... IOW, how messed up am I going to be at the end of it?
    “You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.”
    ~Friedrich Nietzsche
    And that's why I'm here eating HFLC Primal/Paleo.


  5. #155
    sakura_girl's Avatar
    sakura_girl is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    US
    Posts
    3,636
    I'm still not a fan of calorie counting. This stems mainly from my past where I've stressed myself out counting every morsel that went into my mouth. It was effective, but WAY terrible for my cortisol levels, which led to my huge weight gain of 40lbs bingeing on 3000 calories/day despite doing an hour of exercise/day.

    For the past few months, I've seen a good 5-10 lbs of fat loss of consistently eating 2500-4000 calories a day of nutritious Primal food (plus nuts). According to even the most generous calculators, I should be gaining 5-10, not losing. So I'm just going to rely on my own hormones to tell me when to eat and how much food I need, and take a day a week to fast to help with the discipline and hormones. Seems to work? Just my n=1.

    Although, as I think it was magnolia who asked, how does is the Grokette supposed to stay relatively lean? Isn't it better she has a lot more fat to sustain the babies with? Doesn't it make more sense that girls, when going Paleo, would not get lower than 20% body fat? How is it that some do?

  6. #156
    bokbadok's Avatar
    bokbadok is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    356

    Red face

    Quote Originally Posted by RichMahogany View Post
    Choco - I DID read the article you linked to. And I respond by posting my own (to clear up the confusion about what is actually being argued rather than set forth an argument of my own) with my own pertinent quote:

    From Do calories matter? - The Eating Academy | Peter Attia, M.D.

    "People like me (and others) get a bad rap from folks who lack the patience (or training, perhaps) to actually hear the entire argument through before throwing their hands in the air, waving them frantically, and screaming that we’re violating the First Law of Thermodynamics for asserting the Alternative Hypothesis (more on this below).

    Let me be as crystal clear as possible, lest anyone feel the need to accuse me of suggesting the Earth is flat. The First Law of Thermodynamics is not being violated by anything I am about to explain, including the Alternative Hypothesis.


    Key concept #3 – current dogma
    Conventional wisdom, perhaps better referred to as Current Dogma, says that you gain weight because you eat more than you expend. This is almost true! To be 100% true, it would read: when you gain weight, it is the case that you have necessarily eaten more than you expended. Do you see the difference? It’s subtle but very important — arguably more important than any other sentence I will write. The first statement says over-eating caused you to get fat. The second one says if you got fat, you overate, but the possibility remains that another factor led to you to overeat.

    If you believe Current Dogma, of course you’ll believe that “calories count” and that counting them (and minimizing them) is the only way to lose weight."
    Thank you for posting this RichMahogany. What a GOLDMINE that blog is!

  7. #157
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by sakura_girl View Post
    I'm still not a fan of calorie counting. This stems mainly from my past where I've stressed myself out counting every morsel that went into my mouth. It was effective, but WAY terrible for my cortisol levels, which led to my huge weight gain of 40lbs bingeing on 3000 calories/day despite doing an hour of exercise/day.

    For the past few months, I've seen a good 5-10 lbs of fat loss of consistently eating 2500-4000 calories a day of nutritious Primal food (plus nuts). According to even the most generous calculators, I should be gaining 5-10, not losing. So I'm just going to rely on my own hormones to tell me when to eat and how much food I need, and take a day a week to fast to help with the discipline and hormones. Seems to work? Just my n=1.

    Although, as I think it was magnolia who asked, how does is the Grokette supposed to stay relatively lean? Isn't it better she has a lot more fat to sustain the babies with? Doesn't it make more sense that girls, when going Paleo, would not get lower than 20% body fat? How is it that some do?
    But you're very active and do some heavy weightlifting IIRC. Evidently that amount of calories is what you need. You are another example at the other end of the spectrum of how useless the official calorie charts can be.

    Having been a bodybuilder for a while back in my 20's at 15%bf it is my opinion that 20% for women is the edge of what you can do with a sustainable normal diet, as opposed to a "cutting" regimen getting ready for a show.

    I do not miss the days of pounding down endless fat free cottage cheese and egg white omelets.

  8. #158
    BestBetter's Avatar
    BestBetter is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    NY / Italy
    Posts
    1,210
    Quote Originally Posted by Leida View Post

    Calorie counting in my case has one effect that I do not like: a tendency to eat in an ‘itemized way’.

    The calorie count is far easier when you eat a boiled egg or a package something (a can of tuna; a scoop of whey).

    Complex dishes with multiple ingredients (unless it’s a frozen dinner) are hard to estimate.

    Counts are also very easily thrown off by the Fat Variable, which is how much fat is on this steak vs that steak and how much coconut oil got consumed when you fried your egg whites. How full that tbsp of almond butter was.
    This is one of the resons I stopped counting calories; because I find that if I'm focusing on eating really healthy foods, as in meats from the farmer's market, bone broth that I made myself, etc...there really is no way to measure accurately. So I end up having the debate, "Do I want to cook up that pastured oxtail (calorie and micronutrient count unknown) or should I eat a can of sardines (which has the nutrtional info clearly labeled)?"

    If I want to be a calorienazi, which petite women need to be, then I'd have to go with the packaged food, because it's measurable. But the grass-finished farmers market stuff is so much healthier, maybe I should just suck it up and put on some fat in the name of health?

    Counting was leading me to eat in an itemized way, too, and I don't think that ultimately that is a healthy way to approach eating. So I made a choice to stop counting and just focus on eating what I considered to be small but adequate portions of healthy food. While this may be good for my health, it's only led to increased fat gain. Pretty disheartening.

  9. #159
    sakura_girl's Avatar
    sakura_girl is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    US
    Posts
    3,636
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleobird View Post
    But you're very active and do some heavy weightlifting IIRC. Evidently that amount of calories is what you need. You are another example at the other end of the spectrum of how useless the official calorie charts can be.

    Having been a bodybuilder for a while back in my 20's at 15%bf it is my opinion that 20% for women is the edge of what you can do with a sustainable normal diet, as opposed to a "cutting" regimen getting ready for a show.

    I do not miss the days of pounding down endless fat free cottage cheese and egg white omelets.
    That's the thing. I'm not "very active." I have reduced my intense activity to 2x/week lifting for 1 hr, and maybe a sprint/week. My mileage walked is probably around 15/week, which is pretty much my only other means of consistent exercise. Sometimes I ride my bike short distances when I feel like it; <1 hr. Shouldn't I be eating around 2,500 for maintenance?

  10. #160
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by sakura_girl View Post
    That's the thing. I'm not "very active." I have reduced my intense activity to 2x/week lifting for 1 hr, and maybe a sprint/week. My mileage walked is probably around 15/week, which is pretty much my only other means of consistent exercise. Sometimes I ride my bike short distances when I feel like it; <1 hr. Shouldn't I be eating around 2,500 for maintenance?
    Like I said, the charts telling you what you "should" be doing are worthless. You seem to have found a good level that works for you. I would love to be able to eat that much but I can't.

Page 16 of 69 FirstFirst ... 614151617182666 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •