YOUR opinion
 

I just want to hear your opinions!

I have come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter HOW you get your calories (protein, carbs, fat... chocolate, spinach, roast beef) it's the TOTAL calories that really matter.

I do agree that it's far better to get the bulk of calories from fruits, veggies, and lean meats - I think the human body thrives on the basics.

However... 1200 calories is 1200 calories... no matter how you slice it - when it comes to weight gain or weight loss.

Or do you believe differently?

What if you ate 12 100-calorie packs for your 1200 calories? Besides being nutrient deficient, you would be so hungry and likely wind up binge eating. And you'd never learn how to eat properly.

I completely agree! - I'm certainly not saying that "it's OK" to eat "whatever" ... I'm just saying in the general game of weight loss/weight gain, a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. :dizzy:

I believe differently.

You're right that 1200 calories in is 1200 calories in, no matter what you're eating. But the other half of the weight loss equation is calories OUT, and what you eat does have an impact THERE. For example, refined carbs take almost no energy to digest, but protein takes 15-30% of the calories it contains just to make the energy available. Not to mention, protein and other appropriate nutrients help you to build muscles, and muscles also help you to burn more calories at rest. There is also some evidence that blood sugar spikes can slow down metabolism...eating lots of refined sugar is going to send you on that blood sugar rollercoaster, which may reduce that calorie OUTPUT.

Beyond the idea that it's more difficult to stick to a plan with bad food choices (due to the blood sugar rollercoaster and lack of satiety from the low fiber choices), it really does make a difference in calories burned, so while a calorie IS a calorie, some food calories have less impact on your body than others because they support your body in burning the calories from the food off.

There's a theory that if the nutrient density in your food is low, your body can perceive that as potential starvation and store more fat, even if calories are adequate. A corollary would be that low nutrient density is perceived by your body and it responds with more hunger. Makes a lot of sense to me. Certainly, on a gross level, calories are a far bigger factor - you'll lose on 1000 calories of junk vs 2500 calories of healthy food. But comparing 1400 calories of junk to 1600 calories of super healthy food may be a different story.

I believe differently. :)

We don't have a good enough grasp of how nutrients work yet. Why does 100mg of Vitamin C from an orange absorb more effectively than 100mg from a tablet? My husband is bipolar, and we've been researching diet/exercise as a control. Bipolars who take a Vitamin B12 supplement alone are less depressed and more manic. But, if they EAT the B12, then it levels both.

Of course, nutrients are just scratching the surface. High levels of insulin support weight gain (hyperinsulenic hypoglycemics gain weight quickly); low levels support weight loss (untreated diabetics lose weight quickly). Protein and fat do not affect glucose levels, one of the defining factors in insulin, as much as carbohydrates do.

If I eat 1000 calories of pure carbs, I'm giving my body much more glucose than I would be if I ate 1000 calories of fat and protein. When the insulin gets involved, it starts stocking the glucose wherever it can. It's used for immediate needs, then pushed into muscles as glycogen, then, when all other space has run out, it starts storing it away in fat cells.

So...I don't believe the calorie is a calorie is a calorie mantra. I believe in keeping insulin levels as low as possible and forcing my body to derive glucose from protein and fat (very difficult) and use the stores it already has.

i see your point and kind of agree. if i ate 2 snickers bars and 2 liter of soda every day, i WOULD lose weight, but, id feel like crap and probably pass out every day. calories are calories, its more that if you're sticking to a plan, you want to try to get the MOST out of your calories so that you aren't hungry all the time. also, most of us are trying to be healthier along with our weight loss, so we eat accordingly. but yes, calories in needs to be less than calories out to lose weight, no matter what you eat.

Oooh. I definitely believe differently. In my book, not all calories are created equally. Eating a double helping of steamed veggies for 100 calories is going to be handled far differently than a 100 calorie snack pack. Plus, what effect is a 100 calorie snack packs and other processed nothings going to have on your overall health and appearance? For me, a wide variety of whole foods is most definitely the ticket for health and appearance.

Also, wanted to add--I always aim for the most NUTRIENT DENSE food for the lowest calories. I strive to get the most BANG for my buck so to speak.

I'll also throw in on top of the insulin-fat connection, there are several studies that link Omega-6 fatty acids to fat storage. They also trigger fat storage in plants, so they are found in high quantities in seeds, nuts and grains.

A calorie is only a calorie in the lab's bomb calorimeter. Genetics make everyone's mitochondria work a little differently in how the energies from different foods are used by our bodies. I think that's why some people thrive and lose weight on low carb, and others can eat pasta all day without gaining, and some need a different balance. When I was trying to find my own way, I tried both of them and found that I could lose on about 500 calories more per day on Atkins than I could on Zone. There's lots of ways that could be interpreted (root cause), but what it certainly meant for me is that a calorie is not just a calorie! I think I'm a "flyer" in the data, though, and for the +/- 2 sigma population (about 95%), calorie counting is very, very helpful.

Of course we could eat 1200 calories of jelly beans but we wouldn't get good nutrition . And I personally would take a long nap after so much sugar. Best to eat a well balanced diet of wholesome food.

I believe differently. I've been losing weight for awhile now (125 pounds gone - 8.5 to go!!) and I find that it does make a difference what calories I eat. Some weeks I'll have a "bad" week where I'll eat the right number of calories but my food choices will be less healthy and other weeks I'll have "good" weeks where I'll eat my calories but with healthy foods - fruit, veggies, whole grains, etc. Even though I eat the same amount of calories my weight loss is ALWAYS better after a "good" eating week than a bad. I still lose weight on the bad weeks but not enough.

That is by no means a scientific answer, but it's what I've found in my personal experience.

I'm also pretty committed to my workouts and when I eat bad calories I can't work as hard in my workout, that equals less calories burned at the end of the day as well.

So far, it seems the consensus is that most folks do not agree that "a calorie is a calorie". But keep the opinions coming! - I'm still interested in what you all have to say!

Aside of the weight loss (congrats BTW!!!!!!) ... what else has this particular diet done for you? Any negatives (i.e. constipation, skin changes (such as more or less acne, etc.) or any difference in how you feel about diets in general?

My answer is yes and no.

Yes, it's the calories. 1200 = 1200.

But no, it's not JUST the calories. We're talking quality of life, feeling healthy, feeling satisfied by what we eat, getting nutrition.

For example, you could eat nothing but bread. Let's say you don't want to lose weight particularly, so you're eating 2000 calories of bread a day. Well, after some length of time, you'll have vitamin and protein deficiencies. You may even have gained weight, but your hair will be falling out, you may be anemic, you may have developed rickets, etc.

Many obese/overweight people are actually malnourished for this reason, in spite of how much they eat.

Jay

I completely agree as far as losing weight goes - which is what OP is talking about.

As far as nutrition goes, obviously not - but I don't think anybody was making that argument.

Totally agree thanks now I dont have to report lol

Yes and no...

Whether a person is consuming "healthy" or "unhealthy" calories the body is still subject to the laws of physics. The energy balance equation, or what some people describe as "calories in, calories out" will determine whether mass is lost, gained, or remains the same. However, the kinds of foods we eat can shift (but not negate, that distinction is important) the "out" part of the equation, as Amanda described. Since protein has a much higher thermic effect than fat or carbohydrates, your body will expend more calories to process it. So eating a higher percentage of protein will increase your calorie maintenance level relative to eating the same number of calories with a higher percentage of fat or carbs.

I agree with Jay also... technically it is the same but I can tell you since I started eating healthier foods, I have never felt better. And the right healthy foods are more satisfying making your diet so much easier.

Okay, I have a question to throw into the mix. I've been so confused about this. For those who have been successful at losing weight (a lot or a little, it doesn't matter), what did you find your percentage of macros was? Is it optimal to do something like The Zone (40-30-30), or something that's USDA recommended for a healthy lifestyle (not sure about the percentages, but the carb intake seems pretty high)?

I'm so confused. I don't know what the best amount of carbs would be. Personally, I'd love to follow the USDA guidelines, but I feel like I wouldn't lose weight that way. Obviously it's different for everyone, but what have you all noticed was your intake when you were losing weight successfully?

Hi Beach Patrol - I partly agree. I think overall that calories are the main key to weight loss, unless there are problems with insulin resistance, or at least some insulin metabolism issues, which actually isn't too uncommon. In that case, reduced carbs or better carbs come in to play. Additionally, I also think that the body is going to be more resistant to weight loss if the diet isn't balanced enough. If my body desperately needs a certain nutrient, I'm going
to crave it or be 'hungry' until I give my body what it needs.

(Oh, edited to add that Amanda basically already said this - sorry!)

Personally, I make sure to eat a minimum of 100g of protein and 30-40g of fiber each day. Everything else is fat and carbs, but I don't target a particular macronutrient ratio.

:oThank you for your kind words.
I've been on Atkins 5½ years. What has the diet done for me? Well, basically, it has saved my life. I was 245 lbs before I started Atkins, my Dad is a type 2, insulin dependant diabetic and I did not want to end up in the same boat. I couldn't even walk up 3 steps without being totally out of breath.
A friend of mine had lost 60 lbs on Atkins and had suggested I get the book & read it. I did. Honestly, I was a bit skeptical it would work but, I decided it was worth a try. I lost 50 lbs in the first 4½ months:carrot: which of course, motivated me to continue. I felt better than I had in years! Eating salads & veggies and drinking lots of water was MUCH different from the garbage I had been putting into my body...½ gallon of ice cream & a box of pop tarts or a large bag of Fritos & large container of onion dip for dinner:o:o Not to mention my daily afternoon trip to the Taco Bell drive thru for grilled stuffed beef burrito's...usually 2 per day. Most people falsely believe Atkins to be unhealthy but, let me assure you, back then, I was the poster child of unhealthy eating!
As for negatives...I know some people believe Atkins is a deprivation diet but, its not...not at all. The initial phase (Induction) limits your carbs to 20 per day...no bread, no potatoes, no rice, no pasta, no cereal, no fruit, no sugar, no white flour, no caffeine....but, trust me, you CAN live without those things and if you do the plan correctly, as Dr. Atkins wrote it....those things are gradually added back into your diet. Atkins is not the all you can eat red meat, bacon & butter diet the average person thinks it is. With all the veggies & salads I eat and all the water I drink, I don't have constipation. My skin & my hair are probably better now at 48 years old than they have ever been in my life!
How I feel about diets in general? Atkins is the 1 that worked for me so...I'm going to sing its praises....now & for the rest of my life:)

I strongly disagree. If I tried to eat 1200 calories of sugar per day, or even 900, I would gain weight uncontrollably. For me, I cannot touch most carbs. There are almost no good carbs in my world...virtually all carbs are bad carbs. The only carbs in my diet come from leafy green vegetables and almonds, and the occasional egg. Period. Of course, everyone's different. This is just me.

I agree that where the calories come from can change the math. Not the truth of the math, but both sides of the equations (calorie intake vs calories burned or otherwise excreted{not to be intentionally graphic, but some foods are not digested completely, so some of their calories leave the body intact, such as those from fiber/cellulose which humans cannot digest}).

Most of my dieting life (38 years and counting) I thought 1200 calories of fat would result in the same amount of weight loss as 1200 calories of protein. I also believed that low-carb diets were unealthy. Only in the last, oh about five years somewhat and only the last two years seriously have I begun understanding how important the calorie source is to my weight loss, and how much concentrated carbohydrate foods (even to a degree "good" ones) negatively affect not only my hunger and food intake, but also my energy level, my autoimmune symptoms, and mood. I don't think it's at all a coincidence that this has been the only time ever in my life in which I have been able to sustain a weight loss, and ENJOY it.

I've had better luck maintaining than losing, because I STILL find myself falling into the trap of thinking that "only calories matter" or that it's not healthy to limit grainfoods and other high-carb, but "healthy" foods, or that it's unfair or unreasonable to give up favorite carb-dense foods. I tell myself that I can enjoy high-carb foods if I count the calories, or if I limit the servings, or if it's a whole-grain or lower GI food......

It all "sounds good," and many people have lost weight with these same "rules," but I've proven to myself over and over again in these last five years, that I do need to eat fairly low-carb to maintain my weight and I need to restrict carbs even further to lose weight. When I believe it, I lose weight. When I don't, and choose to believe that only calories count, I don't do so well.

It's practical, really. I've experimented (38 years of experimenting) and I've found what does work for me. I don't like the conclusion that I've reached. I want it to be different. I want to be able to eat more than two servings of fruit in a day. I want to be able to eat whole wheat bread. I want to be able to eat pasta. I "can" eat any of those things (and less healthy carb choices also), but if I do, I will not lose weight. Whether it's because those things make me hungrier and I end up eating more calories - or whether they slow down my metabolism so that I burn fewer calories IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER.

Most of my dieting life I've been searching for a WOE that I find not only effective, but doable. Not only when I devoted every moment of attention to it at the exclusion of other important things in my life, but indefinitely. A WOE that could become part of my life without overshadowing the rest. A WOE I could actually enjoy.

The sad part is that I have found it. A diet that is almost grain-free (I seem to do ok, with small amounts of rice and other non-gluten grains. I don't know if gluten is actually a problem, or if the grains that have worked so far just happen to be non-gluten grains like rice, tapioca, corn, quinoa...). A diet in which non-starchy vegetables are my main carbohydrate source. A diet that limits fruits to a couple servings. A diet that includes a serving or two of dairy.

I have achieved half the battle - finding a food plan that is effective and enjoyable. So what's holding me up? Denial? Laziness? Fear of change?

Maybe all of those, but I believe that much of it is just the feeling that I'm swimming upstream. It's difficult to live counter-culture. At least I find it so. I like to think that I'm unique and independant, an individual, a non-conformist; but the truth is that I'm a very conventional person in most things. I tend to think that not only majority rules, but that the majority is usually right, so I keep talking myself out of what I know to be true - just because it's still a minority opinion.

La Bonita, I do best when I follow the Zone percentages. I also aim for 100 grams protein a day when I'm working out a lot.

Jay

Beach Patrol~I gotta agree with you.
A calorie is a calorie~However I think It is good to eat the best types of foods are body needs to thrive.(like the fruits and veggies as you mentioned Are super)
I have counted calories For a little over 10 months now and I have lost weight consistently. A little over 80 lbs ~anyways I sometimes eat good for my body and sometimes so so. I Feel better & healthier When I eat things better for me and that my body needs~but I lose the same ~either way.
BUT I HAVE TO SAY~WHEN YOU EAT THE RIGHT TYPE OF FOODS YOUR BODY NEEDS YOU FEEL HEALTHIER ALONG WITH THE WEIGHT LOSS~WHEN YOUR EATING JUNK FOODS SOMEWHAT THROUGHOUT THE DAY~YOU FEEL LOUSY.
SO CHOOSE TO BE HEALTHY ALONG WITH THIN~It's hard to do But Best to do.:hug:

I have to agree "carbs", I can not eat carbs and lose. In fact even eating small portions of carbs stalls my weight loss.

I think perhaps the difference between those who can eat carbs and those who can just reduce food intake (calories) may be linked somehow to the way they became overweight.

Were they overweight all their lives?

Or did they gain weight by over eating?

I believe their is a metabolic link that some people just can not eat carbs.

An interesting thought. I wonder if there if been any studies.

Yes, that IS interesting. It makes me think really hard about what I consider my own years of dieting.

I consider that I was VERY THIN during most of my teens & early 20's... 103 lbs in hi-school, 115 in college (lotsssss of weight lifting & swimming really added that "carved muscle" look!) and around 123-128 in my 20's. Then I hit my 30's... and wham-o! The weight just piled on & on & on... I dieted/exercised back down to the upper 120's/lower 130's about 5 or 6 times since then. I am now 46. Starting the pause (this was the 1st month I have had NO period :( ) noticing the ohmygod changes in my body (more fat around the midsection as opposed to just my hips/thighs) and clumps of hair falling out each time I shower, hot flashes, night sweats, difficulty sleeping, blahblahblah.

So I figure - wow! - for over 2 decades now, I've been battling weight gain! - sometimes I succeed! - only to gain it back, & then MORE. Ugh. :mad:

But when I REALLY scrutinize my past, I realize that I have been battling my weight all my life. ALL MY LIFE. Since I was a pudgy toddler (extremely pudgy... rolls of fat on my arms & legs!) to my chubby puberty years, and then when the "baby fat" finally left, I became OBSESSED with dieting. I was even anorexic during my 18th year - NOT a pretty picture, with my collar bones & hip bones protruding... :rolleyes: but I remember the EUPHORIA when I hit a "Size 0" in jeans... OHMYGOD.. .you'd have thunk I won the lottery or something. :^:

Of course, a couple months later, I was down to 92 lbs & eating about 1 meal a week (you read that right... A WEEK) ... and passing out on a regular basis, and finally got diagnosed with hypoglycemia and anemia... I had to give up every single food I'd grown up eating! No more fried chicken, no coconut cake or chocolate pie, no fried squash or fried okra... No peanut butter and jelly (just peanut butter was fine, but without jelly? ICK!) .... I literally had to RELEARN how to eat. It was one of the hardest things I've ever done in my life.

Skip forward a year... It took ONE YEAR for me to GAIN 10 pounds! - I was 102 and still the skinniest little thing you ever saw.

But the years passed, and my health got better... and then it took a turn to the OTHER side of unhealthy... fat. Not just a few extra pounds... but 135 from 123... lost back to 128... then up to 142... lost back to 132... then up to 152! ... lost back to 128... then up to 165!!! OMG!!!!... lost back to 138... then hit 170.. then 178... then 184... and finally, my top weight of 192. I'm back at around 180 now. I was 170 earlier in the year. Lost from 192 to 170 with MediFast...(and that was during T'giving & Christmas!!!) then couldn't afford it any longer... and all year I was gaining & losing 10 pounds.

When I cut carbs I DO LOSE WEIGHT. But I can never keep it up for long. I LIKE BREAD, dagnabit! Sure, I eat whole grain bread... but I also like to have a biscuit with breakfast from time to time! - not every day... not even once a week... but just SOMETIMES. Macaroni & Cheese... not every day... not even once a week... but maybe a couple times a month. I don't eat a lot of cookies, but when I want one, dammit I WANT ONE. :shrug:

I've tried SO MANY DIETS thru the years. Some of them have worked wonderfully, others not so much. But regardless, I have always gained back the weight I lost & MORE on top of it. I can't seem to grasp that whole "maintaining" thing. And of course I get very disappointed in myself, and then angry with myself, and then the frustration piles on... and ACK! - what a vicious circle.

My fear - aside of heart disease, stroke, adult on-set diabetes, hip & knee surgery and other health issues.... my fear is that I'll eventually get out of "onederland" and then there will be no turning back. :yikes: :sorry:

Hey BeachPatrol! :wave:

I have to say, there is nothing wrong with the foods you have listed there. And, nothing is wrong with how often you say you have one of those foods.

You can correct me if I'm wrong-- maybe once you start eating ONE of those things, like a serving of mac & cheese, you are deciding that you've "ruined everything." This may even be unconscious! Then, since you have "failed," you eat more--of the mac & cheese, or you add in the biscuit, the cookies, etc. as though there is no tomorrow. Is this what's happening? Because plenty of people have those foods as often as you do, without suddenly gaining weight.

Jay

OK, I don't want to derail this very interesting conversation, but....seriously? I would have put you in late 20's or early 30's based on your picture. I just had to say that. You look so young!

hmmm I agree but...
your body does better with healthy foods, 1200 calories of veggies, meats and fruits as you said is healthier than 1200 calories you ate at Mcdonalds. Your body will feel better, you will be healthier and if you are working out I bet your performance would be better when your eating healthy

Also, there is sodium to take into account. If you eat 1200 calories and it is high sodium you may have lost fat but will gain on the scale if you retain water

All in all, I try to aim for 80%/20%. I aim for 80% of my food to be healthy and let myself have some kind of treat which is 20% as long as it fits into my calories. I avoid trans fat and I try to be conscious that my food is nutritional (not too much sodium or fat, plenty of protein & fiber ect)

I thought the same thing!

(Sorry nothing to add to the convo, just lurking and had to put in that)

:hug:
I agree with the majority above. It IS about the calories, but where those calories come from DOES matter.

Your story is similar to mine. I yo-yo dieted all the way up to 215 lbs. I FINALLY broke the cycle and changed my lifestyle instead.

What works for me:
Calorie counting (because it IS about the calories)
40/30/30
Mostly whole-foods diet (as much as possible)
MUFAs (healthy fats)
Adequate water
6 small meals
Moderate exercise (yes - this is a KEY when you reach a certain age/stage of life)
Meditation/prayer/yoga - I was a stress eater and had to find other ways to de-stress

In addition accountability and community are important. Logging calories, weight, and exercise works for me.
Coming here to 3FC also helps :D

You absolutely CAN overcome the changes that your hormones are causing. This was the most pleasant surprise of all on my journey. By adopting this new lifestyle, my hot flashes were greatly decreased, my apple shape disappeared, my sleep returned to normal, my mood stabilized, and my energy level soared :D

Hey JayEll!!!!! :D

I have to say, that "NO".. I don't have that "I've ruined everything" problem & go on a crazy binge & just keep eating more. I do, however, seem to have the problem of REALLY LIKING FOOD :^: ... seriously, I love the taste of food. Veggies as well as cake! - Salmon as well as steak! - hey, I rhymed, heh. But yeah, that's true for me. I can eat very healthy - and usually do! - and when I eat "junk", I don't go overboard... well, yeah, sometimes I do! - when it's "that time" of the month :o but I make allowances for that because I know it's coming.

I really do not understand my appetite. Unless it really IS just a clear-cut case of "loving food". :hun:

You are very kind! - thank you! The ONE really good thing about fat? It really plumps out the wrinkles! :cbg:

You have done a WONDERFUL job! Congrats on your success!!! :carrot: