I keep a daily food log on calorie count to knw what I am eating; I have been logging for about two months. I count fruits in my daily log as well as vegatables. Does anyone else count fruits and vegtables? I was wondering If I am using up my calories if they really don't need to be counted. I have seen alot of fruitatrians who eat 2500 calories a day in just fruits and vegatables. They are very skinny I mean supper thin it is frightening. If anyone can help I would love to know. I love fruit and am learinig to love vegatables and if I don't have to count them thats a plus!! I will eat even more.


savynaturalista.wordpress.com

I count everything, if it has a calorie I count it.
If you eat more without counting you are still eating that many calories.

I understand but I was wondering if I can go over on fruits and veggies. I only take in 1600 calories a day so if I was to go over that can I still eat fruits and veggies without saying omg!! I am eating to much..

savynaturalista.wordpress.com

I count everything towards my "omg I'm eating too much" but if I want to eat more that day I eat fruits and veggies

Fruits and vegies have calories, some more than others a large banana could be 100 calories and so could a large orange a large apple can go as high as 135 calories. Vegies as a rule are lower calories than fruits. You can easily add several hundred calories a day with fruits and vegies. I account for everything.

It's hard to eat enough low-calorie, non-starchy vegetables to stall weight loss (because 10 servings only have about 250 calories of useable calories or less), but it's not at all difficult to stall weight loss on fruit (I've done it, even at my size).

And there are some starchy and/or sugar veggies (peas, carrots, beets, corn-which-isn't-really-a-vegetable-it's-a-grain) that can be easily overeaten to the point of calorie overload.

You can't truly compare a fruitarian diet to an omnivorous. Firstly, calorie-counting is a big hinkey with fruits and vegetables, because many calorie-counting resources include the calories in fiber (and fiber calories can't be digested). This means that many fruits and vegetables actually contain fewer useable calories than are being counted, sometimes half or fewer.

So 2500 calories of fruits and vegetables (if the calorie-counting resource doesn't subtract the fiber calories - and many of the most commonly used sources don't) can "really" provide as little as half of that. So the scary-thin fruitarian eating 2500 calories, may really only be getting 1200 or 1300 of those calories (and are pooping out the rest).

It would be great if fruits and vegetables didn't count, but they do.

That doesn't mean you have to count them, but counting them is the best way to know what you're really eating.

I count with an exchange plan, because it encourages me to eat enough of the food types I'm likely to avoid, and discourages me from eating too much of the foods I love.

For me, fruit is one of those. I adore watermelon, but when I don't count it, I don't lose, because I can and do eat enough to stall weight loss. I've stalled weight loss for weeks by not counting fruits, and even by counting but giving myself too large a fruit alottment (I use an exchange plan, to count and control calories, fat, carbs, and protein).

There are ways you can get by "not counting" fruits and vegetables. I person who loses weight on 1500 calories for example, would lose as well on a 1200 plan (if they're eating no more than 300 useable calories from fruits and vegetables).

But no matter whether you count them or not, they still count... and that's the important thing to remember..... and if they count anyway, why not be aware of what you're actually eating.

Me too.

When it comes to calorie counting, you don't get extra points (or even necessarily extra weight loss) by having done the most precise math.

So for some folks, the point of "not counting" fruits and vegetables, is to give added incentive for eating them.

If you absolutely detest fruits and vegetables and have difficulty eating them even if your life depended upon it (and it might), making them "free" can make them more attractive.

Your math doesn't have to be uber-precise to lose weight, it just has to be "good enough."

Also, fruits and veggies are at least somewhat self-limiting. If you go from eating zero to several hundred calories worth, diarrhea and intense abdominal cramping are a likely consequence.

If "not counting" encourages you to eat more fruits and vegetables when you otherwise wouldn't, then it can be a very useful strategy. And results are a lot more important than having the most precise math.

If you lose weight on 1500 calories, and count (or don't count) in a way that nets yo uan average of 1500 calories, the precision of your calorie counting method isn't important. Whichever counting method you find the most sustainable, enjoyable, and effective is the right method.

There are many ways to count, and they're all valid when they're effective, and that may mean

Counting by rounding to the nearest 5, 10, 50, or even 100.

Counting by way of a 1500 calorie exchange plan.

Counting by way of Weight Watcher's point system (which IS a method of calorie counting, since the calorie count is limited by the point value).

Counting by any method to the specific and precise count that averages 1500 calories.

Counting (by any method) to a range, a minimum/maximum rather than to a specific target.

and even allowing an uncounted budget (whether for all foods under 5 calories, or to a whole class of foods). Counting to 1200 calories and averaging 300 calories of uncounted fruits and veggies will be no more or less effective than counting to 1500.

There are many ways to count calories, and any and all of them can be equally as effective.

I find counting calories by way of an exchange plan the most effective for me. It not only results in just as much, if not more weight loss, counting this way encourages me to eat mostly whole foods (because they're the easiest and quickest to count).

The only reason I count non-starchy veggies is because my aim is to eat more, and only by counting can I see that I am eating more (which again is why exchange plans are such a great way of counting for me, I can see at a glance that I'm getting my minimum servings from each category, and am not exceeding my maximum).

When "precise math" is seen as more important than getting the job done healthfully, you can up with some pretty strange and counterproductive eating behavior.

If less precise counting, and/or a limited "freebie budget" helps keep you focused and motivated, that counts for more than getting the math right.

Some folks are going to be motivated by doing precise math (even though the reality is probably that their "true" count may be off my more than they'd be comfortable realizing), others are going to be motivated by estimation math.

It's no different than financial budgeting. Some folks will thrive on planning and calculating their budge and expenses to the very penny. Other folks do fine with less precise math (and would be driven batty by calculating to the nearest penny).

The precision of the math isn't as important as consistenly coming in "under budget." How you count, and what you count isn't as important as the consistently coming in under budget enough to result in weight loss. And your actual results are more important than the precision of your math.

That being said, if you're not seeing results you do have to question whether you've chosen a counting strategy appropriate for you. And it can be difficult to find the source of your errors if you're not counting at least fairly precisely. That doesn't mean though that you have to count calories to the nearest fraction of a calorie.

I've counted calories one way or another for decades. I do sometimes consider it helpful to make non-starchy veggies (but not fruit in my case) "free". Other times, I feel more OCD and I want to count each calorie (even though I know the numbers aren't as accurate as I am recording -- different carrots picked at different times will have different calorie counts, etc). It's more about my own head space and what is working for me at the time, whether I feel more need to have a tidy record of everything or whether I want the freedom of eating as much broccoli as I want without having to weigh it.

At the moment, I am trying a new approach which is sort of a modified ADF and on "fast" days I eat almost exclusively non-starchy veggies without counting (I allow a few other things, like NFPM in my coffee, also without counting). It's not that the other approaches haven't worked for me in the past, it's just that I like to shake things up once in a while and I'm OK with ongoing experimentation as I continue to find what works best for me at the moment.

I also find that counting non starchy veggies as free makes the most sense. That is however based on a vegetable centric food plan that is heavy on the vegetables, a good amount of lean protein and a modest amount of starches. I found it quite freeing years ago when the non starchy vegetables were "free" in the WW then current plan. Fruit is different - I have to know what a serving size/calorie value is and be conscious about it.

You made this so clear for me thanks!! I didnt know not counting could stall weight loss!! I guess I will continue to count my veggies and fruits.. Thanks everyone for the help!!

savynaturalista.wordpress.com