| Forum | Topic | Date | Replies |
 |
|
|
|
| Health & Support | how do you convince yourself that it's okay to eat more? help! | Oct 19 2007 05:07 (UTC) |
|
| Well, if you're losing weight faster than a 1-1.5 lb/month, then adding 100 calories per day will still make you lose weight. Try 850. You'll still lose weight. Then try 950. And so on until you're up to a safe level. I find that I can eat more when I DO count everything because I don't have to grossly overestimate to avoid the fear of accidental underestimation. So different approaches work for different people. |
|||
| Maintaining | This is irritating! (maintenance calorie count) | Oct 19 2007 05:01 (UTC) |
|
| I'd think your numbers would be a little higher, but not a LOT. 1400 is working for me now and I'm only a teensy bit bigger. Are you active at all? If not that might explain things. | |||
| Maintaining | Is it ok to maintain on 1,300-1,350 cals? | Oct 19 2007 04:57 (UTC) |
1 |
| I've been maintaining near-precisely on 1400. The 1500 is just an estimate (mine estimated 1700 but I'd gain on that). Probably better off with a higher calorie count and more exercise to compensate, but if you're over 1200, eating healthy food most of the time, and you're not actually losing weight, I don't see the problem. | |||
| Weight Loss | Weight loss from illness...will it stay off? | Oct 06 2007 04:03 (UTC) |
1 |
| You'll probably gain some of it back, but not all of it, if you count calories. This is because you can't really lose 5 pounds in 2 days; your system is emptied right now and the scale doesn't know whether it's weighing body tissue or undigested bits of food. But if you continue to count calories and eat modestly, you'll keep off the portion of the weight that was actual fat loss, and continue to lose. |
|||
| Foods | Least damaging of the standard desserts? | Sep 24 2007 15:59 (UTC) |
|
| Pudding is probably the best out of those. And as sun123 said, angel food cake is pretty low in calories and fat compared to most desserts, too. | |||
| Health & Support | body fat percentage question | Sep 24 2007 15:57 (UTC) |
1 |
| Good nutrition is a factor in menstruation, not just body weight. I have lost my period at certain weights in the past on starvation diets, but am still menstruating at a lower weight now, because I'm getting enough of each nutrient. The periods stop not just from low weight but also from inadequate intake/nutrition. 18% is not actually "normal" although it's within a healthy range (14-19% is lean/athletic, 20-25% is still medically good, over 25% is unnecessary). You'd still be quite a bit leaner than average. Some people who are naturally very thin don't actually have low body fat percentages. I know a woman who's taller and thinner than me, and seems very healthy, but she has almost no muscle definition. |
|||
| Health & Support | Increasing bone size? | Sep 24 2007 15:43 (UTC) |
|
| Weight gain improves bone density, often, but not bone size, if you're already full-grown. This is why osteoporosis is one of the few weight-related diseases for which thinness is a risk factor and being overweight ISN'T. The risks of being too heavy still are higher than the slightly higher tendency towards low bone density in the lighter people, though. My mother's normal weight is under 120 pounds and she's small-framed, so she's at increased risk for osteoporosis, but she's better off being physically active and doing weight-bearing exercises than gaining weight, because that would increase the risk of too many other diseases, especially in middle age. But bone size is, AFAIK, stable. |
|||
| Maintaining | This is irritating! (maintenance calorie count) | Sep 24 2007 15:38 (UTC) |
3 |
| Thanks - and it looks like 1250 was actually a little low, just not by much, so it didn't show right away. Since I lost a pound in three and a half weeks, 1400 would probably be correct. So I'll try that instead... although, I have to ask this: my job functions are changing, and I have slightly less physical activity to do there and more paperwork-type tasks. It's a good thing, job-wise, but it might drop my activity level a bit. Should I only increase to 1300, or should I just pick 1400 and add a little extra exercise at home? I'm not a runner or anything but I could definitely add a couple miles of walking. |
|||
| Foods | If you are concerned about ur sugar intake, do you drink fat free milk? | Sep 24 2007 15:31 (UTC) |
3 |
| Dairy is good for you because of the calcium in it (and many dairy products are sources of protein - whey protein, the kind in milk, is one of the most easily digested and bioavailable protein sources.) But you can get protein and calcium in other ways. I'd think the sugar in milk isn't a problem because it's not only sugar, the way most fruit juices or candies would be. It comes with protein so it will digest a bit slower than a glass of OJ would. (Fruit has fiber and other things so that's better than the juice/candy too.) 12g of sugar isn't bad when it comes with 6g or so of protein; it's not so good when there's no fat, fiber, or protein with it. |
|||
| Foods | Does soy milk make you fat? | Sep 24 2007 15:26 (UTC) |
6 |
| Unless you're overly sensitive to soy products and would have an immune reaction that slows metabolism, or drink a lot of it and get too many calories, no. | |||
| Weight Loss | im scared of calories. | Sep 24 2007 15:23 (UTC) |
|
| Maybe try adding a Slim-Fast? I know that sounds silly and counterproductive, but it's nutritionally complete as a "meal replacement" up to twice a day, and adding one on top of one's normal intake could push a calorie count near 800 up to 1000 without adding more food. You could have two to get it near 1200. | |||
| Foods | Is Drinking Wine Bad? | Sep 24 2007 15:17 (UTC) |
12 |
| Wine is usually low in calories compared to other alcoholic beverages, so it's a good choice for those who drink on occasion. Healthwise, red is best, and the calories in each can be easily found online with Google or on CC. Most wines are under 100 calories for a 5-oz glass but fortified and sweetened wines are more. Like anything, overdoing the alcohol adds a lot of calories, but a glass or two of wine every once in awhile can easily be budgeted in to most adult diet plans. |
|||
| Weight Loss | Body fat and Time of the month? | Sep 24 2007 15:08 (UTC) |
5 |
| The scales are often off - in the course of a normal day I've found that it can fluctuate as much as 6%. Body fat won't change at TTOM unless one overeats by a lot over several days, and even then the difference would be too small to be accurately determined by the scale (like 20% to 21%). Also, I've noticed that my reading is always highest in the morning because of overnight dehydration - that's 8 hours without drinking anything (I don't drink anything for 2 hours before going to bed, so I don't wake up and have to go to the bathroom) and likely sweating a little. For tracking of body fat changes over time it's best to use readings from the same time of day each day. Even if the numbers themselves are artificially high from dehydration, the changes over weeks will be fairly accurate. |
|||
| Weight Loss | Is this true?only starvation mode when you reach 100 pounds?? | Sep 22 2007 20:57 (UTC) |
3 |
| Weight has little to do with it. Especially since 100 pounds is possibly too much if you're extremely short, just right if you're short, underweight if you're close to average height, and dangerously low if you're tall. That's not even taking body types and other factors into account that could skew the figures further. Starvation mode is caused by extreme undereating over a fairly long period of time (i.e. more than just a few days). It is almost completely unrelated to current weight. |
|||
| Maintaining | This is irritating! (maintenance calorie count) | Sep 21 2007 18:53 (UTC) |
5 |
| Yeah... that's what I was afraid of. Will it correct in time now that I'm up to a safe amount? | |||
| Maintaining | just had a doctor tell me i'm a stone underweight | Sep 21 2007 18:52 (UTC) |
|
| Unless there's a medical reason to exercise less or you have too little body fat, don't cut your activity levels. Just eat more. That way you gain more lean mass and less fat mass. | |||
| Health & Support | Am I stunting my growth? | Sep 21 2007 18:36 (UTC) |
4 |
| I wouldn't think that gaining body fat is necessary for proper male growth and development, assuming you're not all the way down to really low bodybuilder-like percentages. And the negative height effect of undereating is blown way out of proportion. Yes, severe starvation / malnutrition / etc. can make you shorter, or can interfere with development which continues a few years after maximum height is reached, but moderate dieting in one's late teens isn't likely to cause problems. That said, gaining some muscle weight probably would be a good idea. Are you very small-framed? If not, you might be better off in the 140s, and since you're a guy, it's safe to gain just muscle. You'd actually drop a little bit in body fat percentage! You probably didn't do anything bad to your height, since you were done growing and mostly, if not completely, done developing when you started the diet. But some muscle weight gain might be in your best interest. It's up to you - if you're happy and healthy now, you don't NEED to, but you can, and if you really are too thin for your frame, you don't have to gain fat to get back up. |
|||
| Foods | Almond Breeze | Sep 21 2007 14:22 (UTC) |
|
| Unsweetened probably doesn't sell as well to the "general public" because for drinking straight-up it doesn't taste quite as good. But those who would go to a health food store in the first place are more likely to buy unsweetened than those who wouldn't. Might need it to replace milk because of a milk allergy, or be vegan, or simply want a milk substitute that's low in carbs / like the taste / whatever. | |||
| Foods | Isn't food meant to be enjoyed, instead of feared? | Sep 20 2007 14:56 (UTC) |
3 |
| I try to see food as neither something to be enjoyed nor feared. It's like taking a shower and going to the bathroom - just a necessary part of daily living. "Eat to live, don't live to eat." I pick foods based on nutrition and not taste, although if it's something I really hate I'll substitute something that I don't actively dislike that's nutritionally similar. |
|||
| Vegetarian | IBS, Wheat Allergies, and Dairy Allergies | Sep 20 2007 14:42 (UTC) |
|
| Between 1 out of 3 and 1 out of 4 Americans are gluten-intolerant to some degree without having celiac disease itself, and would feel better overall without the gluten foods, although eating them is unlikely to cause the severe damage that it would do to a person who has celiac. Most go undiagnosed for decades if not forever and simply assume that the mild complaints are "normal." |
|||
| Maintaining | Maintaining Mindset | Sep 20 2007 14:38 (UTC) |
4 |
| I haven't changed a thing from my dieting, except that my calorie count is a bit higher. I moved up slowly, then stopped at the point that my weight stopped going down. I still watch everything I eat and count every calorie, and eat (and avoid) the same things - I just eat more, quantity-wise. |
|||
| Foods | crystal lite | Sep 20 2007 14:35 (UTC) |
1 |
| I don't see how the Crystal Light would be any different from drinking plain water and then eating a little bit of the powder. Except that the powder alone would probably be nasty. | |||
| Foods | Coffee has CALORIES????? | Sep 20 2007 14:33 (UTC) |
5 |
| I always assumed that the small metabolic increase from the caffeine cancels it out, since the calorie content is so low. | |||
| Foods | Almond Breeze | Sep 19 2007 18:46 (UTC) |
10 |
| I've used it in soups to make themcreamier without being too heavy and it works just fine, and the flavor is mild. | |||
| Weight Loss | Do people generally look down on fat/ overweight people? | Sep 19 2007 18:30 (UTC) |
83 |
| I honestly envy those who are fat or at least slightly overweight, though not morbidly obese. When I was overweight, and even at the high half of normal weight, I felt too ashamed of myself to do anything other than go to work and shop for things I absolutely needed. When I see larger people in public, I'm jealous of how little self-consciousness they have relative to me. Even if they ARE aware of their size and dislike it - I imagine some are happy with themselves, and some aren't - they at least are still able to live life. I couldn't. When I see the morbidly obese I do make judgments, I guess, in the sense that I assume there's a medical problem and that it's none of my business. |
|||
| Health & Support | I need answers please people!!! | Sep 18 2007 22:46 (UTC) |
|
| If it works for you, it works. The human body is adaptable and doesn't need exact percentages of fat/protein/carbs or exact calories every single day. As long as it averages out appropriately, I wouldn't worry about it. There's a mild risk of gallstones if you heavily restrict fat for awhile and then have a lot at once, but if it's only the weekends that are a bit off-kilter and the rest of the time you're moderate in your intake, the risk isn't much. If you have a strong family history of gallstones or problems with them in the past it might be something to consider. |
|||
| Maintaining | This is irritating! (maintenance calorie count) | Sep 18 2007 22:39 (UTC) |
7 |
| I'm 104. And I don't want to lose or gain; I want to stay where I am. I'll consider intentionally building a little muscle in the future, but definitely do not want to put any fat on, and would like to just maintain first and think about how best to bulk up my arm/chest/stomach muscles after I get used to this. I got my body fat percentage where I want it, and gaining fat would put it higher, although gaining muscle, after I've maintained for at least a couple of months, might be something I'd do. 1200 might be the lower limit, but I was on 800 and inching it up. Weight loss stopped shortly after passing 1200, which is a good thing since I don't need to lose more, but I'm trying to figure out how reasonable it would be for 1250 to be maintenance cals for me. |
|||
| Maintaining | This is irritating! (maintenance calorie count) | Sep 17 2007 14:31 (UTC) |
10 |
| Okay. That makes sense - I'll just stick with what I've got and keep an eye on the scale to make sure it doesn't start going down (or up) in the next month or two. I guess my maintenance number could be 1300 or something and it would take a really long time to find out. I just thought that 1250 was really low... but since it's working, I don't want to change it. | |||
| Weight Loss | that stinks (Body Fat Calculator) | Sep 16 2007 21:33 (UTC) |
5 |
| Many are close, some are seriously wrong. I punched into my numbers to a few calculators just this morning, and one put me at just barely under "overfat." My real body fat is around 14%. If you have to use measurements instead of a caliper test or bioelectrical impedance, use several and then ignore the outliers. Most will put me pretty close to impedance testing numbers, but I had one say I was at 25% (I was that or just barely over it when 30 pounds heavier!) and one said negative 3% (buh?). So those get ignored. | |||
| Health & Support | does your doctor actually have to DIAGNOSE you with anorexia to be... | Sep 15 2007 15:34 (UTC) |
6 |
| If you have a cold, then you do have a cold, regardless of whether a doctor says so or not. Of course, anorexia is primarily a mental disorder, not the result of a relatively benign but annoying virus, but I think the point holds; getting an official diagnosis has nothing to do with whether or not you actually have something. |
|||
Join Calorie Count - it's easy and free!
Advertisement
Advertisement
NEW: Calorie Count Groups
With Groups - you're not alone.Get the experience and support
of others who succeeded.
