Calories

Why do people count them?

Where did that concept come from?

Because calories determine the level of function in the body?

Wile guess...

that sounds like quite the over-generalization, if you ask me

I just wanted to wonder aloud, after reading some columnist in the local paper (a doctor) offer up multiple paragraphs of the same old tired conventional wisdom in response to a reader writing in about help to lose weight

actually, i found it online

click

i'm of the opinion that his information is dangerously incorrect, but i wonder more so where the concept came from , and why people have been taught to think in calories

so i googled it, and i guess the concept was born of the Atwater system?


It seems to me that people are somewhat confused as to what calories even are in the first place. Their education seems to have left them thinking that calories are actual objects, when in fact a calorie is just a unit of measurement. An assumption-loaded unit of measurement at that, when it comes to determining caloric content of foods

Its because people think of calories as energy, and if you don't use these measurements of energy they store as fat. So the thought of calorie in/calorie out naturally developed. And because nutrition facts are structured based on a 2K calorie diet a day, so people have no other reference.

Let me ask you; How come most people DO NOT count calories?

It's the smartest thing you can do.

Lets say some1 would break even if he had a daily intake of calorie intake of 2500, if he counted his calories or followed a diet-plan, then he would be able to intake 2000 calories and then lose weight. Huh, smart right?

EVERYONE should "count calories" or follow a diet plan if they want some kind of results with their body, whether its to gain muscle or to lose weight or fat, then its the best thing you can do.

i never count calories and think that is exactly the wrong way of going about a healthy eating.  in my opinion, it's not the worst thing you can do but it completely misses the point.  quantity of calories is practically immaterial; the quality of the calorie is where your focus should be. 

ClubDirt

That is COMPLETE bullshit. You only say that because you are too lazy / cant be assed to count calories. Counting calories is EXACTLY what you should do if you give a fuck about your body. The Quantity and the amount of calories is what matters the most, what kind of calorie it is doesnt matter at all. 2000 Calories is 2000 Calories, thats a fact. That means if u break even at 2500 calories, then u will lose weight at 2000 calories. This way, you can eat all the candy and shit you want till 2000 calories and you will still lose weight. I don't recommend it, and from a health perspective its stupid to eat junk food anyways, but that doesnt mean u cannot lose weight. If u want to loose weight or gain muscle you should DEFINTELY follow a diet-plan or count your calories, anything else would be very very stupid.

Counting calories is for fat poeple, no offense but yes indeed.

If you're pre competition it is also highly advised if you want to beat the man next to you.

PS, the counting is far from accurate when you factor in metabolic rate. 101 basic.

Searchwarrant, dude, wtf are u on. I'm not going to competition and im not fat, yet i count my calories because i want the best results possible - and u cant get that if u dont count ur calories, thats pretty obvious.

Counting IS 100% accurate, the metabolic rate is different from person to person, thats why u test how many calories u need.

For example, i tested how many calories i needed to keep my weight, my weight = 90,8 kg. For 1 week i then ate 2650 calories and after the week it was 90,8 kg. Therefore i can say; i need 2650 calories to break even.

If i eat more than 2650 i will gain weight
if i eat less than 2650 i will lose weight

common sense! Thats how the body works.

no offense, asomugha, but if you take everything you just said and figured out what the opposite would be, you'd be in better shape.  that is the old, conventional oversimplified thinking, sinilar to the old way of looking at cholesertol, i.e. if you can simplify down to a number, you can make people understand and sell whatever product or bullshit a doctor, food company, drug company is peddling. 

it's not about being lazy at all.  i imagine i could download any number of applications on my phone that could do this for me in seconds. 

your body needs what it needs for optimal performance.  it's not some artificial preset number of calories, it's the right fuel for what your body does.  and your body will tell you what you should be eating and how much of it.

Dude, 1978 called and wants its diet plan back.

Let's say i eat an 16 oz filet mignon

meanwhile, you down a six pack of coca cola

my intake is roughly 1000 calories

yours is significantly less, at around 840 calories

Do you honestly believe that you are going to lose (fat) weight in that scenario, because i know that i would relative to your caloric intake

a calorie is just a unit of measurement. I kinda think most people think that a calorie is an actual thing that is inside of food.

Conversely, counting carbohydrates seems more effective (for weight management) for more then one reason. Primarily, because carbohydrates are what cause people to get fat, and secondly because they are a tangible thing that are in food (grams of sugars)

My value add (if any view it as such) is that calories are a very important measurement for those who need help with weight control.  They are not the end all be all,but they are a very important starting point.  Easiest way to use the calorie count as a helpful measure of intake is a +/- 180 lbs man needs +/- 1,800 calories to maintain that weight without working out.  Therefor, if a 180 lbs man burns an additional +/- 500 calories by working out, then he can consume +/- 2,300 calories and generally maintain weight.  Generally better foods have better contents and thus fewer calories.  The example of the steak vs the 6 pack of cokes doesn't account for the fact that if consumed all at once, neither would be fully absorbed by the body.  However, the bad food (6 pack of coke) that would be absorbed by the body is much worse (unused sugars turn into stored fat) than the better food (steak) because the body generally doesn't as easily convert unused proteins into stored fat.  There are many other factors of course: good and bad carbs, proteins, good and bad fats; but the calorie as a unit of measure is not a BS way to manage weight gain or loss. 

i'm not saying calories are bullshit.  but they are nothing more than a unit of energy.  a calorie, in and of itself, doesn't really give you consciously or your body, very much information.   not all calories are created to be equal.  i suppose having some general idea of how many calories you are taking in versus how many you are using can be helpful in a sense.  but it's still the wrong way to look at it.

use be easy's example.  on any given say, your body, after years of evolving to this point, has an optimal amount of energy and a range of nutrional needs for that day (by range, i mean there are multiple ways to achieve good nutrition).  you could just count calories so you get enough but fewer than you burn regardless of how many of those calories come from bad carbs.  but you are better off not worrying about the unit of measurement and focus on eating what your body wants until its needs are met.  and your body doesn't want bad calories whether you consume 5000 of them or 1500 of them.  

i guess you could do both, focus on good calories and count them maybe that's asomugha's point, but my guess is over time you'd find that counting is a waste because if you are eating the right foods, you won't overeat and your body will naturally tell you when it's had enough.

as an example, you could get any number of bad carbs and eat without getting full- a carton of ice cream, 2 big bowls of cereal, a bag of chips.   but if you ate am omelete with ham and vegetables, you'd have to try to overeat it.  and your body is much happier burning the omelette than the bad carbs.

Wow, so many fail to understand what the body is about, i could explain this in much deeper depth, but my english skills lacks badly as im not from an english speaking country.


Ok, let me tell you one thing now:

There is NO difference between eating 1000 calories from ice cream or eating 1000 of calories from vegetables. When it comes to weight loss, there is NO difference at all. NO DIFFERENCE. I said, NO DIFFERENCE when it comes to weight loss. NO DIFFERENCE!!!!! You have to understand this!!!

BUT, there are many health benefits from eating vegetables over ice cream, so therefore vegetables are still a lot better (or meat over icecream for that sake) also, you have to add this to the fact; Ice Cream doesnt saturate at all, so you can easily eat 3000 Calories from Ice Cream and still be hungry - on the other hand you may not be hungry by just 500 Calories of vegetables therefore its very stupid to Ice Cream over this.


But as i said, there is NO DIFFERENCE AT ALL between calories from Ice Cream or Vegetables, NO DIFFERENCE.


Actually, when i bulk (training related) i will have to eat 3150 calories, i find it hard to do that, so sometimes i add some junk so i can reach that amount of calories because its easier.

ClubDirt - I get your point to a certain extaint, if you eat proper food then you will not feel hungry and therefore you wont gain massive amounts of weight. But, many people have no clue on how high their intake really is, and therefore they should pay highly attention to the amount of calories, if its outta control.

For normal people, they would do as fine by not counting calories or by following a diet plan.

But for people that wants to build muscle (and for some obese people so they get some idea and control of their calorie intake) they have to count calories.

I have to eat 2650 calories a day to maintain my weight, when i BULK i will have to eat 2950-3150 calories a day (Approx) to gain muscle, IF i eat more than 3150 calories i will store up some fat too, which is bad, therefore its important that i keep track of the amount of calories i have / day.

When i CUT i will have to eat 2150-2350 calories a day to cut down the fat i have gained when bulking, IF i eat less than 2150-2350 (its likely i do that if i dont keep track) then i will lose too much muscle as well. Therefore again; its important for me to keep track of it.

For normal human beings with control with themselves, they can do whatever they want, no need to count calories if they feel good about themselves and the way they eat. But for obese and people training; its highly adviced that u follow a diet-plan / keep track of your macro nutrients (Protein, Fat, Carbs) and the amount of calories you intake / day.

why are you lying?

I am not lying, THIS IS FACTS for god sake. Its basic nutrition... Everyone should know that...

look who it is!

Asomugha the liar said But as i said, there is NO DIFFERENCE AT ALL between calories from Ice Cream or Vegetables, NO DIFFERENCE.

good afternoon, liar

There isnt, not when it comes to weight loss.

asomugha, i think the issue is your taking an extreme position.  your body is much more complicated than that.

 we aren't saying that calories don't matter.  yes, if you eat something, it's going to get used or stored.  yes, you can gain weight eating the best calories if you consume more than you need, which is not easy to do with good calories.  but yes, 1000 bad calories does not equal 1000 good calories whether we are talking about health, hormonal response, metabolism, biology, or weight gain.  your body does not react the same to different nutrients just because we've assigned the same unit of measurement to them, i.e. the calorie.

this guy is saying what we are saying, although he does it better than i am:

Gary Taubes never said calories do not matter. The point is using calories in/out to "explain" weight gain is a tautology. Acknowledging this does not invalidate the First Law of Thermodynamics. It is an attempt to shift ones focus on the hormonal impacts of macronutrient consumption. The focus on gluttony/sloth - eat less/move more - has not yielded any consistent long term results since you are fighting your natural set point. By adjusting the macronutrient composition and more importantly, avoid Neolithic Agents of Diseases - you can shift the hormonal response in your favor

We did not evolve with bomb calorimeters and so counting calories is futile and doesn't work. It's not that calories don't matter, but what is actionable by using a tautology to improve oneself...nothing.

This was the point of Taubes as I have understood it.

i would add that artificial calorie counting and calorie deprivation screws up yopur metabolism which will ultimately result in a negative weight gain reaction. 

That is total BS. Eating anything specific will not change your metabolism, that is complete broscience. That only occurs when u gain weight or lose weight, then your metabolism change, it can also change because of age and other stuff, but its not like if u eat lots of ice cream your metabolism is totally fucked.

And why does it change? ALL BECAUSE OF CALORIES DICTATING IF YOU WILL EITHER GAIN OR LOSE WEIGHT.

The metabolism can actually be affected also if u eat way too much or way too little, but how do you found out if u eat too much or too little? YOU COUNT CALORIES! Simple as that!

Counting calories is what anyone should do if they hate or love their body, if they dont care; dont do anything.

Hello, liar

why do you continue to lie?

2000 calories a day of ice cream and soda pop

vs

2000 calories a day of bacon and eggs, avocados and filet mingon

DOES MATTER

When it comes to weight loss, the difference is night and day.

You don't have to continue to lie, you can just admit that you don't know what you're talking about and are ignorant to the facts, nobody will chide you for doing that

Lol no, you clearly do not know what you are talking about, i know skinny bitches on 120 Lbs that lives of this daily:

They eat:

Chocolate bars in the morning

for breakfast they have pizza and some candy, typically with a soda

for dinner pizza/burger some soda and some ice cream.

That is about 1600 calories, and they are skinny as fuck. On the other side i have people eating vegetables, meat, oats, etc. they eat about 3300 calories a day and are fat as fuck because they eat TOO MANY CALORIES.

Calories is all that matters, nothing else. There is NO difference at all between 2000 calories from soda or 2000 calories from vegetables as i said, you will still gain the same amount of weight.


Dont act like you know something, i have tested this on my clients and my self, i sometimes eat junk to add-up the extra calories i need to build muscle and its working just fine.

Tell me, what would a normal person gain in weight by eating 2000 calories from vegetables or 2000 calories from ice cream? I know for a fact that there is no difference (because i have studied this for years now) when it comes to WEIGHT LOSS.

But you probably cant tell because you are just a randon-i-dont-know-shit about diet like everyone else, maybe you heard something from your father, or a stupid cherry picking study, but you havent STUDIED diet like i do every day. I read about diet like 2 hours a day, every day. You probably havent spent more than 5 minutes reading a random article and then based your oppinion.

You will be surprised on how the body works some day, trust me. Eventually you wont because u dont give a fuck.