Had an interesting discussion at a cafe today with a girlfriend of mine. As with most girlfriends, one topic we discussed was weight & food.
I told her I was interested in trying out "French women don't get fat" in part due to culinary & diet boredom (and you want to avoid that in order to keep losing lbs!)
In a nutshell, the book (for those of you who have not read it) basically advocates portion size and a food scale (especially in the beginning when you're still learning how to tell what a portion/serving is via sight).
I'm still a calorie counter, but I was intrigued by her idea of just portion/serving size instead of counting calories in order to lose weight (vis-a-vis The French Paradox).
Then my friend happened to mention that "well, that's how her grandparents and great-grandparents did it to maintain their weight-- or lose." They didn't have nutritional information on the back of food products at the turn of the 20th century or before then. *Many foods were just made at home.*
They just ate sensible portion sizes of various foods.
I also then remembered that plates were also a LOT smaller back then in the US of A
Even in the 1950s (and I remember some of my grandmother's family plates from that era), they were not gigantic as some dinner plate sets are today.So here's my question for the weekend:
what works best? counting calories to lose weight or portion/serving size?
~ tea

I like posing philosophical questions from time to time since I learn from others on this forum in order to keep improving my own eating/exercise habits!


