4 ms·

Annoying article to read. Why swear so much? Anyway. I used to believe this. Every few months I'd flip between dieting, and not dieting (putting on weight). Wh

Annoying article to read. Why swear so much? Anyway. I used to believe this. Every few months I'd flip between dieting, and not dieting (putting on weight). When dieting, I'd go on a 500 calories restriction. This meant religious calorie counting, going to bed every night hungry, and generally being grumpy constantly. Waking up in the night because I wanted some toast or something and trying to work out if I could fit it into my budget. I got my daily calorie requirement down so well I could lose a pound a week reliably. But it was miserable. Eventually, I'd meet a goal and start eating what I wanted again. And my weight would go up. And then I'd have to diet. A shit life. This year, I've started intermittent fasting (12/12), and every week or two I have a 36 hour fast. I never feel hungry in between meals anymore, and even when fasting for 36 hours I only feel hungry for brief periods of the day. If I knew this was possible in my early twenties I'd be so much better off today. Instead I listened to everyone online, don't care about what you eat just make it fit your macros. Reductionist bullshit in short. And in consequence my insulin was always up, always demanding more food. However, to the author, I'm sure they feel good acting like everyone else is stupid. It all comes down to counting calories and people not trying hard enough right. Not fundamentally flawed advice at large on how to eat right, just pure moral failing.

NegativeK 3y ago
500 calories a day sounds miserable. Did you have similar success (or similar suffering) on an intermediate caloric number without cycling on/off?
- badpun 3y ago
  I think they meant eating 500 calories below their normal need. Eating 500 calories per day will loose you 4 pounds a week, not one (as they mentioned).
  - simmerup 3y ago
    Yes this exactly. Apologies for not being clear.
- simmerup 3y ago
  As the other commenter said this was less than my necessary calories. So generally I needed 2800~ calories, and when cutting i’d eat 2200~ calories. Sometimes less when I wanted to step it up to 1.5~ or so lbs a week., but a lb a week was what I found maintainable without facing a binge eating session that I couldn’t stop myself from committing
WWLink 3y ago
I'm doing CICO and I have been since February, but the thing I found helped make it a lot more livable was to do a small deficit (200-300 calories) instead of a big one (500-600 calories). Ultimately, the most important thing? Just logging everything I eat and hoping to hit said goal. Some days I end up eating 100% of my 'sedentary' calories. Oh well. I still end up losing weight when I look at it in the scale of a month or so (3-4lbs a month!) I found it a lot less stressful to have a small deficit! I just have to remember to write down what I ate. That said, definitely YMMV! I think if your BMR is only like 1000 calories and your sedentary energy level is 1200 calories, it would probably be impossible to be satisfied with any kind of calorie deficit. X_X I don't know how smaller people do it! My deepest sympathies! And to be sure: I was regularly eating 3000 calories a day before I started in February. When I did - it took at least a couple of months to stop feeling hungry all the damn time lol.
- simmerup 3y ago
  Once going on my fasting and only eating 3 meals a day, I lost 8kg and for the last two months have been maintained a stable weight without having to think about calories at all. I won’t be going back. Edit: also, I was never massively overweight. Generally my waist at its height was around 33inches. It was just a hard way to live.
  - DiggyJohnson 3y ago
    Not sure if you're missing a word in your first sentence. "Only eating 3 meals a day" surely isn't fasting, no?
    - simmerup 3y ago
      I eat breakfast at around 8/9ish, lunch, and then dinner before 7, normally at 6. This gives me my rough 12/12 with some give and take. I specify 3 meals because I no longer snack in between them at all. Including no sugary drinks or sugary tea. Once a week or two I skip a day of meals to make a 36hour fast. This depends on my social calendar whether it’s possible
doc_gunthrop 3y ago
I wouldn't say 12/12 counts as intermittent fasting, but it sounds like it's been working for you so keep on.
- simmerup 3y ago
  Everyone has their own rules on this stuff. On 16/8 I couldn’t get enough calories
Buttons840 3y ago
It's funny how people will get concerned if you fast, but if you eat yourself into morbid obesity nobody says anything. Likewise, as I've switched to more whole foods I might eat, let's say, 4 whole peaches one day. My family speaks up, "4 peaches is a lot of sugar" they say, and they're right. But I used to eat 4 large candy bars in a day, plus a row of Oreos, and they said nothing.
- simmerup 3y ago
  Yes, it’s mad how accustomed we all are to sugar. I think I was getting around 20-30% of my calories from sugar, and regularly would have chocolate at work as a pick me up when I started flagging. I thought the energy was fueling my brain but in hindsight it was more akin to nicotine withdrawal than nutrition.
amenhotep 3y ago
You're still fundamentally finding success due to your calories in matching your calories out, though? It's just a match over a longer timescale. Did you feel people were telling you that have to match calories over every single 24 hour period, or something? I don't mean to disagree fundamentally, intermittent fasting seems great and it's awesome that you've found a way to keep your calorie intake controlled without suffering constant hunger, but I don't get why you seem to think it's somehow in opposition to CICO. Of course you can eat 48 hours worth of food one day and 0 the next. That's kind of the beauty of it, as long as the numbers work out on average you can eat however you like - the only tricky part is that it's up to you to find a way to make the numbers work out sustainably. Which you have!
- simmerup 3y ago
  I no longer have to worry about counting calories to maintain my weight. I simply don’t get hungry when I don’t need food. When calorie counting Id be eating every two hours, constantly snacking and weighing a budget of calories I could spend on food. Sure, technically I’m adhering to some calorie count that I don’t even know what it is anymore. But my body takes care of keeping track. I’m hungry, I have a bigger portion. I’m not hungry, I don’t eat. And the fundamental thing is when I was calorie counting and eating whatever I wanted whenever I wanted, my weight was constantly going up! It took constant vigilance and the willingness to go long periods feeling like shit to keep my weight in check. Now, my weight just maintains. I never thought it was possible. And the simplistic ‘a calorie is just a calorie’ noise is no longer a belief I subscribe to.
- simmerup 3y ago
  Also, sorry, I think I missed out a detail that this regime only works for me if I avoid all sugary and processed food. If I do something like eat a big chocolate bar, I’m also immediately hungry again and craving chocolate and treats and processed food. As part of my new diet I only have whole foods like rice, beans, meat and veg. This food fills me up and interacts with my body in a fundamentally different way than processed sugary food. I don’t even miss it, until I eat some. It’s wild.
  - 3y ago

NegativeK 3y ago

500 calories a day sounds miserable. Did you have similar success (or similar suffering) on an intermediate caloric number without cycling on/off?

badpun 3y ago
I think they meant eating 500 calories below their normal need. Eating 500 calories per day will loose you 4 pounds a week, not one (as they mentioned).
- simmerup 3y ago
  Yes this exactly. Apologies for not being clear.
simmerup 3y ago
As the other commenter said this was less than my necessary calories. So generally I needed 2800~ calories, and when cutting i’d eat 2200~ calories. Sometimes less when I wanted to step it up to 1.5~ or so lbs a week., but a lb a week was what I found maintainable without facing a binge eating session that I couldn’t stop myself from committing

WWLink 3y ago

I'm doing CICO and I have been since February, but the thing I found helped make it a lot more livable was to do a small deficit (200-300 calories) instead of a big one (500-600 calories). Ultimately, the most important thing? Just logging everything I eat and hoping to hit said goal. Some days I end up eating 100% of my 'sedentary' calories. Oh well. I still end up losing weight when I look at it in the scale of a month or so (3-4lbs a month!) I found it a lot less stressful to have a small deficit! I just have to remember to write down what I ate. That said, definitely YMMV! I think if your BMR is only like 1000 calories and your sedentary energy level is 1200 calories, it would probably be impossible to be satisfied with any kind of calorie deficit. X_X I don't know how smaller people do it! My deepest sympathies! And to be sure: I was regularly eating 3000 calories a day before I started in February. When I did - it took at least a couple of months to stop feeling hungry all the damn time lol.

simmerup 3y ago
Once going on my fasting and only eating 3 meals a day, I lost 8kg and for the last two months have been maintained a stable weight without having to think about calories at all. I won’t be going back. Edit: also, I was never massively overweight. Generally my waist at its height was around 33inches. It was just a hard way to live.
- DiggyJohnson 3y ago
  Not sure if you're missing a word in your first sentence. "Only eating 3 meals a day" surely isn't fasting, no?
  - simmerup 3y ago
    I eat breakfast at around 8/9ish, lunch, and then dinner before 7, normally at 6. This gives me my rough 12/12 with some give and take. I specify 3 meals because I no longer snack in between them at all. Including no sugary drinks or sugary tea. Once a week or two I skip a day of meals to make a 36hour fast. This depends on my social calendar whether it’s possible

doc_gunthrop 3y ago

I wouldn't say 12/12 counts as intermittent fasting, but it sounds like it's been working for you so keep on.

simmerup 3y ago
Everyone has their own rules on this stuff. On 16/8 I couldn’t get enough calories

Buttons840 3y ago

It's funny how people will get concerned if you fast, but if you eat yourself into morbid obesity nobody says anything. Likewise, as I've switched to more whole foods I might eat, let's say, 4 whole peaches one day. My family speaks up, "4 peaches is a lot of sugar" they say, and they're right. But I used to eat 4 large candy bars in a day, plus a row of Oreos, and they said nothing.

simmerup 3y ago
Yes, it’s mad how accustomed we all are to sugar. I think I was getting around 20-30% of my calories from sugar, and regularly would have chocolate at work as a pick me up when I started flagging. I thought the energy was fueling my brain but in hindsight it was more akin to nicotine withdrawal than nutrition.

amenhotep 3y ago

You're still fundamentally finding success due to your calories in matching your calories out, though? It's just a match over a longer timescale. Did you feel people were telling you that have to match calories over every single 24 hour period, or something? I don't mean to disagree fundamentally, intermittent fasting seems great and it's awesome that you've found a way to keep your calorie intake controlled without suffering constant hunger, but I don't get why you seem to think it's somehow in opposition to CICO. Of course you can eat 48 hours worth of food one day and 0 the next. That's kind of the beauty of it, as long as the numbers work out on average you can eat however you like - the only tricky part is that it's up to you to find a way to make the numbers work out sustainably. Which you have!

simmerup 3y ago
I no longer have to worry about counting calories to maintain my weight. I simply don’t get hungry when I don’t need food. When calorie counting Id be eating every two hours, constantly snacking and weighing a budget of calories I could spend on food. Sure, technically I’m adhering to some calorie count that I don’t even know what it is anymore. But my body takes care of keeping track. I’m hungry, I have a bigger portion. I’m not hungry, I don’t eat. And the fundamental thing is when I was calorie counting and eating whatever I wanted whenever I wanted, my weight was constantly going up! It took constant vigilance and the willingness to go long periods feeling like shit to keep my weight in check. Now, my weight just maintains. I never thought it was possible. And the simplistic ‘a calorie is just a calorie’ noise is no longer a belief I subscribe to.
simmerup 3y ago
Also, sorry, I think I missed out a detail that this regime only works for me if I avoid all sugary and processed food. If I do something like eat a big chocolate bar, I’m also immediately hungry again and craving chocolate and treats and processed food. As part of my new diet I only have whole foods like rice, beans, meat and veg. This food fills me up and interacts with my body in a fundamentally different way than processed sugary food. I don’t even miss it, until I eat some. It’s wild.
- 3y ago