Thank you very much.

I hope I don't get slayed here, but frankly, I think some of the advice is not so helpful. Yes, you'll save 100 calories, but 100 calories off of WHAT? 500? If you eat many of the things listed on a regular basis, well you surely won't lose much, if any weight.


Instead of having Pizza Hut pizza, how about a nice salad and turkey breast and skip the pizza?

Instead of brownie ala mode, just the brownie? How about no brownie? What are they like 400 - 500 calories a piece? How about a sliced apple sprinkled with cinnamon instead?

Skip the cone if you're having ice cream? Well, why not have yogurt or a fruit smoothies instead of the ice cream? Now your talking calories saved.


Non- fat cream cheese on your bagel? Some bagels are upwards of 400 calories with ZERO nutrition and filling power. Why not ditch the bagel all together?

:dunno: I don't know. It just seems to me that the article is giving permission to eat things that are really not all that healthy because they've decided by cutting back a few calories, that that makes it all right. :dunno:

Robin, I definitely agree with most of what you're saying. In the long run, the things they are recommending are not exactly healthy alternative. They're slightly healthier, or at least slightly less caloric alternatives.
I think for most of us on this site, we're already past this stage, but I can see the suggestions in this article as being very helpful for people who just can't wrap their mind around eating healthy. I know it's been forever since you were at that point ;) But I'm sure you know how overwhelming it can be. Suggesting that you can cut 100 calories from every meal/snack without really changing your lifestyle is, in my opinion, a good way to ease someone into calorie counting. Once they start, they will become more aware, realize (hopefully) that it's not impossible, and then make even better decisions on their own. I would hope that most people would realize that they should not be having a brownie (instead of just having a plain brownie), and I don't know if the author of this article is exactly trying to give people permission to eat junk, but maybe just nudge people in the right direction. Of course, who am I to know what the intentions were? It's just how I choose to look at it.

peccavi, I DO see what you are trying to say. I am afraid though, that by telling people to simply shave off 100 calories per meal that you can lose weight, you kind of are giving out wrong information and false hope. That you are keeping them in denial and not telling them all the facts. I don't mean to sound so "stick in the mud-y", but I believe knowledge is power. And I'm not seeing great weight loss knowledge in that article. Because losing, consistient, longterm, sustainable weight takes a LOT more then shaving off 100 cals per meal.

I think I would have liked different alternatives to that brownie ala' mode. A sugar free hot chocolate or a chocolate fudge pop.

I think that their suggestions are going to give people the idea that by just cutting back on the ice cream alone, that they can lose weight. I think it's giving the wrong impression.

I guess I'm always trying to "protect" the newbies. The ones who will really take that to heart and think that "hey according to this here article, I CAN lose weight and still eat my brownies - and bagels - and pizza - and - and - and."

All right, I'll shut-up now. I'll get off my soap box. :soap::soap::soap:

I can see both sides of this discussion - on the one hand, any little change to get things started. On the other hand, making a little change to already bad habits doesn't teach you the long term habits that you can sustain. If you change absolutely nothing else in your life but leaving off the ice cream, sure it will make a difference. But, like Robin says, if you are eating those things regularly and in abundance how likely is it that you are going to not add anything else in to replace that ice cream? I believe that those suggestions can be used in tandem with an otherwise low calorie dietary change, absolutely. I couldn't give up my coffee with cream and sugar for example, so I substituted fat free creamer and started using flavored coffee beans and cut the sugar down. On top of counting calories the rest of the time. These tips seem to be a way to still allow yourself some indulgences from time to time, not a way to continue to eat like that every day.

SHANNON ~ I think that point is very important and I believe that is what ROBIN'S concern is, especially for newbies. My doctor explained this to me once: even a small fry with gravy can have up to 700 calories in it (fat in gravy + potatoes fried in fat), so in his opinion a small baked potato with low-fat sour cream is much healthier; he says nix the fries altogether.

Now, about once a year or so, DH and I may have one fry with gravy as a meal (not a side order), but that was a planned choice (and wasn't really a balanced meal either). People must realize (and I am still battling with this myself), that we need to make consistent and better food choices ALL THE TIME, especially if we don't want to gain the weight back!

This is my concern, and may be what ROBIN is referring to ~ 'Fast Foods and Junk Foods are not a good alternative for "REAL WHOLE and NUTRITIOUS FOODS".' There are many better alternatives out there. I do appreciate that for someone who wants to lose only 5-30 lbs all these tips put together in one day or week, could help someone get a good start, but these would need to be permanent changes as well ...

I was just reading an article by a doctor somewhere that he believes the reason we crave foods of any type is because 'we are not consistently eating foods with high nutritional values anymore'. These fast and quick foods just don't make our bodies happy, so we keep craving more and more food.

I'm now looking to find out what foods are more nutritious to help curb my cravings, which has been my downfall. I was diagnosed with a severe vitamin and mineral deficiency, and my doctor has recommended that I double my supplement just becuz I'm also about the size of two persons; and so, we'll see in a while if that helps me or not.

I do like some of the tips here simply because they remind us to be ever diligent about what we eat, and that we can always be making better choices ... sorry, I don't mean to rant either! ;)

I'm sorry, the more I see this article, the more I want to scream.

Wendy's? McDonald's?

Sure the foods they offered are BETTER choices from those particular establishments, but it's like picking the worse of two evils. They're both fairly rotten choices. Would you rather have a headache or a toothache? Well, ummm, I guess I'd RATHER have a headache, but quite frankly, I don't want EITHER of them, thank you very much. ;)

You know, they say the best way to make a change is to start small. So, if someone starts small by swapping a regular taco at Taco Bell rather than a chicken ranchero taco, more power to them. I think what derails a LOT of people is going full force and then falling off the bandwagon because they had one too many slices of pizza or a few beers. Before they know it, they're back to where they started from because they had it in their mentality that they needed to be perfect, eat the perfect foods, exercise perfectly and so on.

I didn't read the article in the sense that it's giving permission to eat junk food. I read it like - if you're out in these situations, here's your best choice. Sort of like the whole "Eat This, Not That" series. I think that's real life advice, and I think if someone is getting overwhelmed by the "all or nothing" or "perfectionist" mentality, then this article is a great place to start.

Regardless of all the issues stated, I just had to mention that 1 thing I did appreciate is using ready whip or sugar-free syrup on waffles vs. regular syrup.

I like to have waffles once every few months... this'll help for when I do. :)

So I still learned something new. :)

oh my goodness.. my intent of posting this was just to give people some ideas.. like I said most if it is pretty basic knowledge.. But I thought it would be good for maintainers or some of the newer ones just to learn a little bit about shaving calories off things..... of course A lot of the suggestions in it are not the way we would eat on a regular basis regardless of the fact that it would save a few cals.... I know every now and then If I am REALLY craving something like mcdonalds.. or I'm feeling pms'y I might allow myself to have a treat and NOT feel guilty about it especially if I plan it in.. these suggestions I felt were great little tips for those rare moment you allow yourself to splurge.. it really did remind me of the "eat this not that book"

please don't bite my head off! I did it to help... not stumble people... And I didn't for once gather from that article that it was saying " hey you can eat like this every day and still lose weight"

:) I don't think anybody was trying to bite your head off! Sorry if you were unhappy with the responses. It was just an interesting article... a little bit controversial, so it made for a good discussion. Thank you for sharing it.

Maria, bite your head off? Certainly not. But please don't bite mine off either, okay? I simply find some of the information to be more harmful then helpful. That is of course *my* opinion, which I believe I'm entitled to and tried my best to "put it out there" without offending anyone. I'm sorry if I failed.

I did think some of the tips were good ones. Like having an orange instead of orange juice and this one -

Scramble together four egg whites instead of two whole eggs.

But here's yet another perfect example of why I dislike the article as a whole:

I think that this would lead people to believe that granola is a healthy, low calorie choice. But the truth is that most granola is loaded, simply loaded with fat, sugar and calories.

Again as far as the article goes, it's just my opinion - and I'm sticking to it. ;)

You know, I understand both sides of this.

On the one hand, a lot of the "better" choices are better, but not great, or sometimes even good. And encouraging people that these are "healthy" choices is misleading. I'm not sure the article calls them "healthy" - it describes them accurately...choices that save you 100 calories. But if someone read this and thought these were "healthy" choices rather than "lower calorie than the first item" choices, I can see it being the wrong message received.

THAT BEING SAID, I have a few points on why I think the article is helpful.

#1, I don't think that to lose weight or even to be healthy, you have to forever abstain from all manner and variety of unhealthy foods. I enjoy some baked goods...decadent, full fat baked goods. Sometimes. Not regularly. But when I'm doing so, part of what keeps me in control is using strategies like these. Have some cake, but no ice cream on top. Have some pizza if I really want it, but get a veggie topping instead of the meat kind. If you're going to do it, and I think that most people sometimes DO eat things that aren't paragons of virtue, what keeps it controlled is EXACTLY strategies like these. Sometimes you're in a social situation where turkey breast and veggies isn't an option you're willing to take because of severe inconvenience or hunger. Sometimes you are at coworker bonding event and everyone is eating ice cream, and your boss doesn't say "do you want some ice cream" but "cone or cup?" These situations arise too. These solutions AREN'T perfect choices, but they ARE choices that will blow your calorie budget away just a little bit less.

#2, and I think all of us can relate to this, is that sometimes people are READY to make smaller changes before they are ready to make bigger ones. Maybe a person who isn't ready to give up their burgers altogether CAN make the switch from a quarter pounder to a cheeseburger. Maybe a person who isn't ready to give up the bagel can make a relatively painless switch to nonfat cream cheese. And if they made just 1 of these choices a day, and didn't eat that extra 100 calories a day, they'd be losing (if they were previously maintaining) or not gaining (if they already have a calorie surplus) just over 10 lbs a year, on average. 10 lbs a year, doing nothing different than switching one "bad" choice for one "less bad" choice. If they made that choice at each of 3 meals a day, suddenly they're losing 30 lbs a year...thats more than half a pound a week that is either lost or not gained by replacing "bad" with "not quite so bad".

And who knows? Maybe that small shift, and that downturn on the scale, will be enough to push them to make healthier choices the next day, and the next, all the way down to Robin's size. :)

I couldn't agree with you more mandalinn!:)

the article was true to it's title it is simply about 78 ways to cut 100 calories.. the title was not "eat this way because it's healthy and will make you loose lots of weight"

I think the article was true to it's intent and a gave lots of great tips for those who allow them selves to splurge every now and then yet maybe find a way to save a couple cals in the process! I think it's being read into a little more then necessary... but c'est la vie ...again I was just trying to be helpful...

also a side note I think granola CAN be a much healthier alternative and I eat it on a regular basis in portion controlled moderation of course! it's a GREAT source of fiber and protein...

Maria, I'm not sure why you're taking such offense in what I'm saying and why you feel the need to defend the article so much. Anything that I'm disagreeing with, I assure you is not aimed at you directly. It's simply an article that I personally didn't like so much. I found it to be misleading, inconsistient and quite frankly a little irresponsible - overall. Because like I said earlier, a few of the tips I really did think were good, like the orange/orange juice and the whole eggs/egg whites. I thought they made perfect sense and were informative and useful. I personally would have liked it better had it stayed along those lines. That's all. And I wasn't judging anyone for liking the article.

Maybe it was just too stating the obvious for me and I thought it could have delved a bit deeper. I mean telling folks to forgo the ice cream with the brownie? Come now? Does that REALLY have to be included in article aimed at shaving calories? I would have liked it to include more useful about things that we eat EVERYday. Not just the once in a while splurges.