121–130 of 501 posts
> You're Not Losing Fat Because You're Eating Too Damn Much (Even When You Don't Think You Are) I read through the whole article, it is true, but the headline is wrong, you are not losing weight because you feel miserable. If it was just an issue of calorie restriction with no other effects, yes, this would be the reason.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've hit this before as well, and have come to the conclusion that, at least for me, detailed meal planning is not sustainable in the long run. This is one reason why I think that dieting advice that is simple and straightforward has the most success. Some examples: 1. Cut out all sugar-sweetened beverages. This is a pretty easy rule to follow, and even if you find yourself missing a soda or something, my recommendat…
carbs is actually where im struggling the most. I defaulted to just making sides of white rice with everything for so long. I at least switched to brown rice, quinoa and couscous to make it a little easier but learning new sides to go with proteins is tedious. I struggle with feeling full too.
Personally I'd have less than that, 100-150ml maybe. Not calorie counting and never have. /Shrug/
And I agree with other commenter on the quote-unquote annoying writing style. I'll tell you why in a second. Ok here's why: it's annoying. I'll let that sink in.
Someone finally wrote this article. So refreshing. It's obvious when you live with a fat person why they have trouble losing weight, even when they're on a diet: they're usually not actually following it. Whether they don't understand portion sizes for calorie math, or look at calories at all, or eat things that they say "do not count", there is almost always a failure to understand what and how much they are eating.
Or alternatively, they know they are eating too much, but simply don't have the will power to quit. I'm no food expert, but to me it looks like any other addiction. They rely on food emotionally, so when they are ashamed or depressed that they aren't losing weight, they turn to food, which continues the addiction cycle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's more like they DO NOT want to believe how small portion sizes are required to consistently lose weight. Even if there was a device that could scan all food before eating it, they would still exempt some meals with the "do not count" argument. Rule of thumb, that if a meal is easy and fast to prepare, then it is probably not suited for a diet. To lose weight you have to do a lot more exercise than you think consi…
> To lose weight you have to do a lot more exercise than you think consistently. And you have to eat a lot less than you think. Exercise doesn't help very much, it's really all about diet. Plus if you are exercising a lot, you'll feel hungier and it'll be harder mentally to not eat more to compensate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're not wrong because it's about calorie deficit of which exercise can help you achieve. Also since the way fat gets "burned" for weight loss is by exhaling carbon atoms, aerobic exercise can assist with this process. As always do not add more mass than you expel.
I don't eat particularly healthy, and I don't exercise much, yet I'm perpetually borderline underweight. Why does the math not matter for me, while the next person watches every calorie, goes on long walks, and yet struggles to lose any weight?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're not wrong because it's about calorie deficit of which exercise can help you achieve. Also since the way fat gets "burned" for weight loss is by exhaling carbon atoms, aerobic exercise can assist with this process. As always do not add more mass than you expel.
I don't eat particularly healthy, and I don't exercise much, yet I'm perpetually borderline underweight. Why does the math not matter for me, while the next person watches every calorie, goes on long walks, and yet struggles to lose any weight?
I've counted calories closely before and it's not black magic at work, I just don't eat enough. It feels like I eat a lot (probably because it's mostly food I cook myself and not calorie dense fast food) and I feel full, but the calories don't lie.
I'm guessing it's the reverse for people struggling to lose weight. I feel full and comfortable 200 calories below the daily recommended amount, and they likely feel that same way 200 calories above. I easily fall underweight if I stop paying attention to my diet, and they likely become overweight when they do the same and listen to their body.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's why I always drink my coffee black. The amount of calories in sugar and especially "Coffee Mate" is amazing (in a bad way). A serving size of Coffee Mate is actually 1/5 of what I see most people actually put in their coffee. It only looks "low-ish" calories because the serving size is so small.
For folks who don't want to drink their coffee black, erythritol and monkfruit powder make fine zero calorie substitutes. For a lot of things, actually. Modern zero calorie sweeteners are really impressive. We've come a long way from the days of saccharine.
I know that's a wide range, but you can't really do "half-packets" easily and the cup sizes I use vary.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, over one tablespoon is more sugar than an adult should have per day. (Not to mention all the added sugar these days.) Maybe an ice cream on the weekend. I usually combine with a Almond/Coconut milk and it is fine without sweetener. May take a bit to get used to if you have habits to break.
By whose measurement? AHA says two tablespoons for women, three for men, is a maximum.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of my roommates tried everything, including good hard exercise and all sorts of diets. Nothing seemed to be working. It was kind of perplexing me, actually. Then we started working the same schedule, breakfast together. The whole thing unravelled with a casual comment he made. "Wow, you're really stingy with the sugar in your coffee." Except I wasn't. I was actually indulging myself, like two tablespoons. Show me…
If anyone remembers the internet personality Ulillillia, he claimed he lost weight by removing the grease from pizza he ate. Not exactly the diet plan anyone should really choose, but it shows that even changes that feel like they shouldn't matter actually do, even when eating what most would describe as an unhealthy diet. There are a lot of calories in fats and oils, and apparently removing some of them can have sig…
Fats are 9 calories a gram. If you remove the available grease you're getting, what, two grams off per slice, maybe? Doesn't seem like that's really moving the needle.
Though now I want to rigorously test this, so the next time I have pizza I'll weigh the napkin before and after soaking up available grease.