Calorie counting

On reason cited for obesity these days is the size of portions, especially in restaurant/fast food settings.

Certainly seems to be the case. I'm continually shocked by portion sizes in the photos people post from diners etc. in the States. Aside from the 'full English breakfast', I'd say portion sizes are generally smaller in UK restaurants although that is probably a generalisation. Its difficult to make 'like for like' comparisons really. I wonder if McDonald's is the same portion size across different countries?
 
Last edited:
If you really want a very low calorie alternative to rice there is always this. Yes, I've tried it. Its made from konjac flour and oat fibre (no other additives). They make noodles too.

73344
 
You have to concoct some pretty extreme examples, like Oreos vs salmon and rice, to find a situation where calories don't work as a simple way of determining healthy. Even in that example, the same calories of the healthy meal will leave you more satiated than that many calories of dessert.

I know people like to point out that "its not that simple", but with a little common sense, the idea that "high calorie is unhealthy" is close enough to the truth while also being simple enough to follow.
Again, I will have to go with the "not that simple" - If I eat the same calories of salmon and eggplant for a meal, and compare it with the calories of a meal of tater tots and pasta - I will gain weight faster on the latter than on the former, even with calories balanced to the same level in each of those meals.

I'll take my four ounces of salmon! (Two is just a teaser...) Six is better yet!

I ate a modified Paleo diet for 7 or 8 years. I lost weight simply because I wasn't over-hungry on it. I ate to satiety - NO calorie counting. I am planning on going back on this. ,


For sure, there are quite a few calories in orange juice. But it also has health benefits compared to a drink like Coke. Fruit juice does have issues where teeth are concerned, I think.
Orange juice has about as much calories as a regular soda. Also, all the fiber has been stripped out. And, unless you squeeze your own, the processes that go into making orange juice render a lot of the other nutrients near-useless. I skip it, unless I make my own, which I don't do often.
 
- If I eat the same calories of salmon and eggplant for a meal, and compare it with the calories of a meal of tater tots and pasta - I will gain weight faster on the latter than on the former

Not sure what you mean. If each meal is the same amount of calories then is shouldn't make any difference. What is the scientific evidence that calories from carbohydrates lead to faster weight gain?

I'm aware that carbs can cause issues with glucose and insulin which can then make someone want to eat more. But that isn't the same thing.
 
Not sure what you mean. If each meal is the same amount of calories then is shouldn't make any difference. What is the scientific evidence that calories from carbohydrates lead to faster weight gain?

I'm aware that carbs can cause issues with glucose and insulin which can then make someone want to eat more. But that isn't the same thing.
There is no science showing carbs are some special macronutrient that makes people fat. Low carb, paleo, keto have 1 thing in common and that is the diet is satiating and you aren't hungry most of the time, that's it, there is no magic. People just eat way too much and when you have a country that is 75% overweight and obese that it's the calories in food that are to blame is like blaming paramedics at accident scenes because they are always there, instead of the bad driving that really caused the accident. the diet industry want people to believe calories are bad, that way they can push their agendas instead of saying to people eat less, move more, that's just to easy and there's no money to be made.
 
the diet industry want people to believe calories are bad, that way they can push their agendas instead of saying to people eat less, move more, that's just to easy and there's no money to be made.

Very true! Witness the rise of gluten free products everywhere when in fact, true gluten intolerance is quite rare.

Its strange though because I don't find eating low carb/paleo is satiating. I love carbs like potatoes and rice far too much! I never eat anything sugary though. I just don't have a sweet tooth and also dislike chocolate. In the past, I've successfully lost weight with quite a high carb calorie controlled diet, which included potatoes, bread and rice. I also tend to eat vegetarian most of the time.
 
I can be completely full and if something looks good...I can easily fit it in
Haha, that's so true. My wife says, delicious things go to your heart, not to your belly, that's why you can eat them even after you are full.. Although the fat definitely appears on my belly afterwards :D
 
Portion size does matter. On reason cited for obesity these days is the size of portions, especially in restaurant/fast food settings.
So you DEFINITELY want to avoid IHOP.Too much, man.
According to health authorities, the recommended intake per day for a "normal" person is between 2,000 and 2,500 cal. A plate of IHOP pancakes would feed a family of Venezuelans right now:hyper:
 
I was put on a "low fat diet" - just try to get a medical person to explain what that is,,,, in detail,,, like dude - some specifics here? .... they just talk, I have to do.

as a result I wrote software that uses a USDA(?) data base plus my personal adds to control total and saturated fat intake.
then....I got heavier and heavier. so in addition to fat, I now monitor calorie intake.

there are a ___lot___ of side effects/topics/issues to calories. the suggestion that less calories is more healthy is just absurd.
there is rather a lot more to "health" than calories.

carbs - athletes in long endurance sports do a 'carb load' - because calories from carbs are slowly converted to blood sugar=energy....
that works in my experience - a can do a very low calorie meal with a baked potato an be 'satisfied' for much longer than a low calorie salad.
speaking of salads . . . it ain't the salad that counts - it's all the dressing&stuff that go on the salad that turn it into a calorie bomb... similar situation to many "dishes"

so watching my calories, I've dumped 15 lbs/~7kg. no world record. but there's a technique behind that.
a comment above references the "size" of stuff on the plate . . . okay, some clarifications....
(1) in USA the evening meal tends to be the big one, while in Europe the mid-day meals tends to be the big one.
(2) in the '60's - in Europe one would see menus with the amount of meat specified in grams.... that simply does not work with "supersized" everything in USA. and is no longer the norm in Europe - altho I do agree Europe portions tend to be less than in USA. I was at a simply more than greasy-spoon diner level place - ordered a pork chop - ate it there, brought home the leftovers and made two meals out of those . . .

my 'technique' to controlling calorie and fat intake is simple - we do a meal plan, every week. it is not set in stone, it does get changed as the situation/mood/availability changes.
but....
each morning I use the software to enter the evening meal - tallies up the fat and calories. hence I know for breakfast/brunch/lunch . . . whether I need to go skimpy or can "indulge" for those meals.
having an unrestricted approach to breakfast/brunch/lunch and then finding out 'oh nuts, dinner is really heavy fat/carb/calories' is too little, too late. the 'too little' issue shows up as 'too much' on the scale....
 
it ain't the salad that counts - it's all the dressing&stuff that go on the salad that turn it into a calorie bomb... similar situation to many "dishes"

Very true. Mayonnaise has much to answer for. It never used to be a norm with salads in the UK but it now seems it is.

so watching my calories, I've dumped 15 lbs/~7kg. no world record. but there's a technique behind that.

That's brilliant, Really well done. :okay:
 
Mayonnaise has much to answer for
Low fat mayo for the win! Even Hellman's light is not so bad, and there are even lighter versions that taste acceptable. Compare that to pure oil (olive, or whatever you prefer), and see where the true calorie bomb lies.
 
I´m probably one of the luckiest people around because, regardless of what I eat or don´t eat, I´ve maintained the same body weight as when I was 18: 75 kgs. So I´ve never dieted, or watched calories, or fat intake, or salt intake, or anything in particular.
What I will say is that it´s all so confusing! We´re constantly bombarded with new medical/scientific claims that this or that food item is good or bad for you. There must be thousands of "definitive" diets out there, all claiming to make you lose weight in no time. Peanuts are bad for you, salt is bad for you, sugar is bad for you, too much fat is bad for you, 2,000 calories is enough, vegetarian diets make you anaemic, 5-a-day is the only way; wow! So confusing!
Personally I hate the flavours of "low fat", "Low sugar" and "low salt" items - I think they taste of nothing; but I can understand why people use them. I just wonder how on earth anyone makes a calculated decision on what is healthy!
 
So you DEFINITELY want to avoid IHOP.Too much, man.
According to health authorities, the recommended intake per day for a "normal" person is between 2,000 and 2,500 cal. A plate of IHOP pancakes would feed a family of Venezuelans right now:hyper:

This is an example of how calories, and counting them, REALLY matters. A salad at a restaurant can have 1,500 calories. People think they are eating better when they order a grilled chicken salad. They don't know they are eating 75-percent of their RDA in calories.

That's also why many of us eat better. We prepare and cook our own food. I can make a healthy, nutritious salad at home that tastes good and packs half the calories (and fat, and sodium) as a restaurant salad.

I am on a low sodium diet (not for blood pressure, so stop typing), so restaurant food is a rare treat for me, because rastaurant kitchens love to pile on the salt. Same goes for calories. I don't know how a restaurant can pack 1,500 calories into a salad, but they do.

CD
 
You missed the point.

Your argument dictates that 4 ounces of salmon is not as healthy as 2 ounces of salmon based on the amount of calories, is that your argument?
I get your point, you're aware that calories are not the be-all-end-all of nutrition. However you can't deny that they are very closely related. I've heard every argument there is that "calories are a scam!", and none of them hold water when you apply a little common sense to what you eat.

Portion size does matter. On reason cited for obesity these days is the size of portions, especially in restaurant/fast food settings.

But, more important is what comes with your calories. With a can of Coca Cola, not much (or Oreos). With a plate of salmon, with veggies on the side, you get calories PLUS a whole lot of things your body needs, like protein, vitamins and minerals.

CD
You'll also find that calories from junk never seem to satisfy you, no matter how good the food tastes. Calories that come from a balanced meal leave you satisfied longer.

So if you combine "control your calories" with "eat until you're satisfied", then you'll wind up eating healthy by default.

And I'll stress that "controlling" your calories is way better than "counting" your calories. Counting calories is a waste of time, for a lot of reasons. Going on some variety of a low-carb diet is a pretty good way of controlling calories. Not because carbs are fundamentally worse than fats or proteins - most of the benefit of low-carb lies in how easy it is to overeat starches. It's not the right diet for me, but when I feel I've overdone it recently and want something lighter to balance things out, low-carb is what I fall back to.
 
Back
Top Bottom