Counting calories: Are all calories created equal?
This seems like such a silly question but, I'm almost embarrassed to ask it. How do you count calories? I've lost about 105 pounds following weight watchers but I've hit a plateau. I've been logging everything that goes into my mouth on fitday while I continue to count points but I've found that with weight watchers eating 20 points means eating anywhere from 1100 - 1500 calories depending on how much fiber and fat I eat.
I would really like to loose about 10 more pounds or so. I think that in order for me to do this I need to decrease my calories a little more as well. I'm just not really sure how since I've never tried traditional calorie counting. I guess what I want to know is whether it truly is a simple equation of figuring out just how many calories you need to eat to loose or do fat grams and fiber count? So is a calorie just a calorie just a calorie?
I feel like I need to go back to remedial weight loss 101...lol.
An excellent question! And, for me at least, as I was losing and maintaining that loss there are different ways to look at that question. I found that for fat loss, a calorie is pretty much a calorie. For weight loss, there is a big difference between carbs, protein and fat, since carbs bring water along for the ride, and will at least temporarily bump my weight up (so will salty food for that matter). And for feeling satisfied, calories that come along with lots of water (soups, yogurt), lots of fiber (beans, whole wheat cereal), lots of protein, or lots of volume (air popped popcorn) are much more filling than things like pretzels, chips, crackers, etc. So it was easier for me to stick to a calorie level if I eat the 'right' kind of calories, but in terms of fat loss, as long as I stuck to it, easy or hard, it all came out about the same.
I am also a weight watcher and have had the same issue as you are having. My solution has been to switch to calories, instead of points. I use the points as a rough estimate for my day, and then log my calories. I am trying to averge 1200 calories a day. You are right there can be a big difference in the points value. I think as you get closer to goal you need a more exact count of calories than points. A points calories can vary greatly. Since changing over to calories I am seeing the scale move downward, slowly but down. That has helped as I was very fustrated.
Congratulations on your success.
I am doing weight watchers, and joined at very close to my goal and have yet to see the scale move. I will try out the calorie counting tip and see what happens.
No one has mentionned exercise... For me exercise is key, but not just walk at a good pace but actually walk really fast or even better running seems, for me, to burn a LOT more calories than just regular cardio. Along with good intense cardio doing weights and gaining muscle burns more calories than just doing cardio only..
I find that calorie counting is very important... Rather than eating calories or points in processed foods, like crackers or low fat cookies, it's better if I eat oatmeal, brown rice, or something similar that is unprocessed and therefore much more filling. I did do WW eons ago with points and I was finding that I was trying to fill my point values with low fat processed foods rather than unprocessed things that are much more filling and better for you anyways and full of vitamins and nutrients... I also find that eating more protein is important and more filling ...
If counting calories seems too daunting (it would be a learning curve for me since I've gotten so hooked on WW Points that I carry the formula around in my head so I can calculate points at the store if I don't know the points value already), think about cutting down on your 0 point items, especially if you have a habit of snacking on 0 point items. Limit yourself to three 0 point items a day for example. But to second Ilene's suggestion, stay with unprocessed foods. Loose the sugar-free jello and keep the spinach, for instance. What you'll be doing is lowering your calorie count without having to re-learn how to "count" your food.
Ann - Before I forget...CONGRATS!!! You will be an excellent mommy and a wonderful role model to your child on living healthy! I have definitely noticed that higher carbs and fiber cause a temporary surge in my weight due to water. It can be very disconcerting to say the least.
Reg - I think your right that once you get closer to your goal you have to be more precise with your calories. I don't know how tall you are but I think that when you are a shortie like me (not quite 5'2") which in turn means a lower goal weight, you have even less wiggle comes to the number of calories that you can consume.
Ilene - LOL I thought intense exercise was a given when it came to weight loss. I'm an avid runner. Right now I'm averaging about 25 miles per week. There is no way I could have lost 100+ pounds without exercising...though I know there are some people out there that have...which is sad IMHO.
Cath - I know what you mean about changing your mind set, however I’ve been logging every bite I eat on fit day for a while now so it isn't much of a change. Actually it is changing my mindset that I need to do in order to break this plateau I think. I feel that I have confused myself into believing that some calories have more impact then others and have started avoiding foods that don't have fiber and am trying find foods that I can eat large quantaties of and not feel guilty. I eat a diet that includes a very minimal amount of processed foods. You made an excellent point about decreasing the number of 0 point foods that I eat. Eating mass quantities of "0" point soup is still binging.
As of the Feb. 2nd I have stopped paying attention to then number of points that I eat and instead am counting the calories I eat I am keeping my calories between 1200-1300. This is my experiment of the month. I still am not sure that my initial question has been answered though. I guess what I am wondering is: Does 100 calories worth of chicken have the same impact on ones weight as 100 calories of oatmeal, or 100 calories of peanut butter, or 100 calories worth of green beans? While I realize the nutritional composition is completely different and some of these foods will leave people more satiated then others, I just want to know if fat and fiber play a real role in the weight loss process. Are some food actually metabolized better then others and therefore have less of impact on our end calories?
I think that for weight loss, a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. The metabolization is already built into the formula that is used to determine how many calories are in a given food item. For weight loss I am going strictly by calories. I have tried to make more of those calories come from healthy foods, but I believe that a 250 calories worth of chocolate will effect my weight exactly like 250 calories of lean chicken. Sometimes the chocolate wins out and I just cut elsewhere.
I'm using FitDay and am paying more to average weekly caloric intake than micro-managing each day. So far, it seems to be working.
THis is not an expert opinion, just what I have learned and observed.
I think that for weight loss, a calorie is a calorie is a calorie.
I couldn't agree more.
I have been on low carb for 2 years and lost my weight effortless and have maintained since May of 2003. Lately I've been struggling and gained a few back. I've been trying to get it back off and am very frustrated. I've decided the only way now is to count calories. Low carbing and counting calories is ridiculous so now will just count calories. I just joined this bb and I think I'm going to love it. I hope this is the bb I should be posting on.
While I agree that for just plain losing weight, a calorie is a calorie, that sure isn't true health-wise. Yes, you can lose weight eating 1200 calories worth of tootsie rolls daily. I'm not sure how many that would be, but you'd feel like %^#$ and look like that, too. You can't maintain muscle mass, energy, healthy skin or hair on an unhealthy diet, no matter how many or how few calories you are consuming if they don't contain enough healthy fats, protein, vitamins and minerals.
I guess it's almost mind boggling to me to believe that here after almost two years of eating healthy and exercising and loosing almost half of my former self I am now discovering that what it all comes down to is the calories...not the fat...not the fiber...but calories. I mean I knew that it was the calories that mattered but I thought that the whole weight loss process was so much more complicated and mysterious then that. I feel like a kid finding out that there is no Easter bunny .
Does anyone know why Weight Watchers puts higher value on low fat/high fiber foods? I suppose it must be to encourage healthy eating...Arrrg I guess I still don't understand why some people don't like fruits and veggies.
While a 1200 calorie chocolate diet does have it's appeal ...I think I'll stick to my fruit, veggie, chicken, and oatmeal diet.
While I agree that for just plain losing weight, a calorie is a calorie, that sure isn't true health-wise. Yes, you can lose weight eating 1200 calories worth of tootsie rolls daily. I'm not sure how many that would be, but you'd feel like %^#$ and look like that, too. You can't maintain muscle mass, energy, healthy skin or hair on an unhealthy diet, no matter how many or how few calories you are consuming it they don't contain enough healthy fats, protein, vitamins and minerals.
Mom was right...eat your vegetables.
Mel
I guess I didn't state my reply very good. Yes a calorie is a calorie but Mel is right. Eating fruits, vegi's and whole grains and lean meats are the way to go. Nutrition is so important, more so when we are restricting our calories.
Mel, is this the bb I should be posting on? Stuggling to stay at goal!! Also I have my instant email notification checked and I didn't get one that there was a reply to this thread. Am I doing something wrong?
Counting calories: Are all calories created equal?
... But having said that, a calorie may be a calorie, but all calories are not created equal...KWIM?
.
