3 ms·
The author argues that calorie /counting/ does not work. This is true. If you want to lose weight, it's theoretically simple: Eat less, possibly combined with b
by unregistereddev 3y ago
The author argues that calorie /counting/ does not work. This is true. If you want to lose weight, it's theoretically simple: Eat less, possibly combined with becoming more active. But counting calories is not the best way to achieve this.
Successful caloric restriction means consistently letting yourself get more hungry than you are comfortable with. Typically this requires a shift in mentality: You need to eat because you are hungry and stop eating when you are no longer hungry, as opposed to eating because you are stressed/bored/etc.
- paulpauper 3y agoIt worked for me for what it's worth. I found that staying under 2000/day means i do not gain weight. this is easier than having to prepare special meals or other things. ymmv
- thefz 3y ago> The author argues that calorie /counting/ does not work. This is true. No, it is not. The misconception behind is that you have to be calorie-perfect. That is not what calorie counting is for: it's for ballparking and educating yourself. One should always count calories, measure weicght, and if the direction is going up/down adjust accordingly. You are not measuring fuel for a plane to fly, you are eyeballing caloric input for one sack of salty water that may or may not burn it all, and that is not supposed to be a perfect calculation. Besides, below they state: > The only way to lose weight permanently is to permanently change your food environment. Or, you know, drugs. Drugs are not the answer and fools' gold for those that hope to make zero change in their lifestyle, take the magic pill and voila.
- episteme 3y agoYou don't have to be hungry to lose weight, nor is it about being uncomfortable. Counting calories teaches you which things are lower in calories and therefore can eat without feeling hungry while losing weight.