If you're tracking calories...PLEASE buy/use a food scale

#81

Yes, and it will also reduce your metabolism after you are fat adapted. One of the big differentiators that I can see is that many people starting keto have a very recent history of calorie-restricted dieting and have already dropped their metabolism into the toilet. They can only eat 1200 calories of anything (keto or not) to maintain their weight, less to lose. A couple of weeks of feeling free to eat everything in sight may help heal this, but ultimately, you need to be at a deficit to lose weight. Your metabolism may drop, but you can help it out by starting from a higher point.

For you. But not for many many people. This is one way to eat at a deficit to lose weight. For other people, we need to get to our deficit another way. Understanding how much we’re eating by counting calories gives us information we need. Someone may learn that they’re eating 2800 calories/day–if that’s their approximate TDEE they will never lose weight eating that way. We’re not ‘doing it wrong’ and we’re not stupid (“improper macro assessment”); we’re different human beings.

Which is yet another reason, that telling newbies to eat to satiety isn’t the most useful information for many of them. They may not be able to read these signals for months, if ever, and they need something that works now.

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #82

In the context of eating less in order to lose weight, where does the body’s metabolic response to increased food intake come into the picture? We are all conversant with its ability to decrease energy expenditure, but it is also able to increase it, as well.

The other assumption that intrigues me is the assumption that excess fat must automatically be stored, even though we are all familiar with how the body can waste ketones in the breath and urine. We also all know how certain fats “go right through us” (often with disastrous consequences for our clothing, lol). So how does the body decide which fat to store, and which fat to excrete? What controls that decision on the part of the body?

There has to be something to calorie balance, of course, because we all know stories of actors putting on or taking off weight for specific roles. (Shelley Winters was particularly noted for her ability to put on and take off weight, until she couldn’t take it off any more—bet we could all explain that!) But it seems to me that we also have to admit it is not the whole story—even though many people, even on these forums, talk as though it is.

(Cristian Lopez) #83

Consider me the prodigy of a boy when I was 14, I was aware of the truths of life and I wanted to begin to work on my strength training and my LONGEVITY. I cant see myself eating pizza or cookies or Junk food, as its no longer food to me anymore and rather just plain crap. I would rather fast than have my slice of cake, and to be clear this isn’t a diet to me anymore, rather its my life style.

I know for adults it may be shocking but I never intended to lose any weight with this, I just enjoy bio-hacking and seeking health and longevity balanced with my athletic performance!

(John) #84

this is not true. Even taubes says calories come second to what you are eating. he DOES NOT say they dont matter

(Cristian Lopez) #85

Hey Rob

Actually if anyone read my prior comment, I forgot to mention this is the exact case in which tracking is necessary. You could not have said it any more clearly, as with any life style you will notice changes afterwards and especially when switching fuel sources. I dont know how to put it into words but the point I mean by tracking is that 10,000 calories within 20 net carbs well… You’ll gain weight regardless of how much beta-hydroxybutyrate your breaking down!! and some people still think its only hormonal and that keto is temporary diet thats a magic pill with an unlimited food cap or at-least its highly misunderstood that way! Not most people on here do, but some will argue and well it all comes down to the basic laws of thermodynamics applied to physical stress and exertion. Simply, If someone sits all day and goes above there calories burned than well they will begin to gain weight if they keep it up.

But again I highly believe that 5,000 calories in strict ketogenic macros are muchhhhh different than 5,000 RDA calories.

(Robert C) #87

Thanks but, most important, keep an open mind. 20 net carbs spring vs fall etc. I do not think of Keto as a straightjacket - more an enabler.

(Jay Patten) #88

inCollage_20190321_185244081
inCollage_20190321_185244081.jpg1920×1920 2 MB

Got it, thanks :grin:

I’m not trying to be a smartass here… but I’m also not eating 5K in calories a day, either, lol.

(Alec) #89

I think what is being referred to here by CICO is the model of weight loss that you can lose weight in the long term by simply burning more calories than you eat. The reason that it is debunked is that the stats show that 99% of people who go on a low calorie diet regain the weight because of homeostasis. The body wants to go back to where it was comfortable.

So, yes, with this meaning, CICO has been debunked. I know, I’ve done that and failed many times.

Saying calories matter or don’t matter doesn’t really help or make sense, they are just our counting mechanism (ref Taubes rich man analogy). The issue is what do you take in (mostly under your control), and more importantly what your body decides to spend (not in your control). You are not in conscious control of calories out. Your body is. And the mechanism to know whether your body needs more calories is hunger.

(John) #90

Good job. Looks as though you pay attention to how much you intake.maybe you dont track it on paper but you probably have a good idea of how much to eat. I dont think that is the same for everyone. Some of us do need to track what we eat to keep things moving along. I still beleive that when you are way over weihgt you probably do not need to worry about how much you eat but if you want to get real thin like yourself at some point most people will need to. You may be the exeption

(Todd Batitis) #91

This was one of my favorites regarding my wife. When I was doing LCHP and eating 6 times a day, I would portion my nuts into 1 ounce bags and could eyeball it pretty reliably.

My wife was getting out of the bath one night, this is a woman who is eating 1200 calories or less, and asked me to get her about 4 ounces of nuts.

My first thought was FOUR? Seriously? OK. I bring them to her in a bowl and she says, “THAT is 4 ounces!! Um, put about 3 of those ounces back.” LOL

(Karim Wassef) #92

He’s not alone. I went from 255 to 165 without counting any calories.

I can’t stress enough that eating fat, not carbs is a metabolically and hormonally different CICO. If you eat more, you burn more (CO goes up) because insulin is low and mitochondrial activity is upregulated. It is not a linear process.

If you eat less calories as carbs, your metabolism drops (CO goes down). That’s not the case with fat. It is really different.

There may be exceptions where counting carbs is warranted but for most on this forum, it does not appear to be the case.

This is anecdotal, but is there a way to run a vote on the forum to see how many people experience satiety without counting vs needing to count?

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #93

What Taubes actually says, is that we don’t lose weight because we ate less, we ate less because we were in weight-loss mode. The causality runs in the opposite direction to what is usually assumed. I think that was what Jay was alluding to.

My favorite example is kids during their growth spurt. Yes, they are taking in more energy than they are spending, but that’s not why they are growing. Everybody knows that teenagers eat their parents out of house and home because of the growth spurt, it’s not that the eating more causes the growth spurt. And I don’t see why that can’t apply equally to growing sideways as to growing up, lol! :grin:

(Jay Patten) #94

The beauty of it all is that once the hormones are fixed, and the metabolism comes back online, the desire to overeat honestly goes away and counting calories becomes a moot point. I would find it very difficult if not impossible to spend a day binge eating like I used to.

That’s why I emphasize fixing the problem (getting hormones back in check) over counting calories. Fixing the one (hormomes) naturally solves the other (over eating).

(Jay Patten) #95

Yes, this is what I was trying to say.

Fixing hormones --> naturally eating less

However

Eating less does not --> fixing hormones

(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing) #96

There is, but perhaps not at the trust level you are at. You can see if it’s possible at your trust level, by clicking on the gear icon at the top of the post-editing box. If the option “Build Poll” shows up, you’re good. Otherwise, send me a PM, and I’ll be happy to set it up for you.

(Karim Wassef) #97
  • I eat to satiation without counting calories
  • I need to calorie count

0 voters

(traci simpson) #98

That’s awesome and very mature thinking.

(Windmill Tilter) #99

I voted! Do I get a button?

I always eat to satiety. I always count calories. But I don’t need to count calories or even see the calories on the day that I’m eating them. I picked both even though “need” makes the second vote somewhat inaccurate. Anyhow, that’s why you’ve got more votes than voters. :yum:

(Karim Wassef) #100

:rofl:

(Khara) #101

Ya I was wondering. Boy you messed with that pretty quick didn’t you. :grin: