# Calorie Counting Is Utter Bullshit



## EndsOfTheEarth (Mar 14, 2015)

I don't care who wants to argue with me on this one. I'd long suspected it was rubbish but wasn't able to categorically say so until I ran an experiment. This past month I dedicated myself towards becoming a calorie counter and I did the calculations using many different recommended methods where it came up with a daily recommended intake for sustaining my current weight 50kgs of 1800 Calories a day before I factor in exercise. 

For an entire month I did not exceed this daily calorie count and I did my daily exercise of 2hrs walking plus either 1 hour yoga or 30 min resistance circuit training. I was religious with my exercise. Well at the end of my experiment not only is my body weight up by 5kgs but it also appears to be 5kgs of fat, not muscle gain. The skin around my abdomen which was tight as a drum with good muscle definition before I started the experiment now has uncomfortable folds and shows no muscle definition now. Not only that but my waist and hip measurements have both expanded. My jeans are uncomfortable to wear as well. This is with a daily cal burn of between 200-400 cals in exercise and a calorie controlled diet. 

When I look back that means my true calorie maintenance count must be well under 1,000 cals a day, otherwise I would not have been able to gain 1.25kgs of fat each week! If we say 250gms of that gain per week was water weight and I only gained say 4kgs of fat then that means I have must have been running a daily calorie surplus of 1,161 calories each day! So my true calorie maintenance must actually be 639 calories a day. Something the experts say is dangerously low and impossible! I guess I have the world's most efficient metabolism if I can run my body on 639 calories a day. 

Or....

Calorie counting is bullshit and what actually matters is the type of food you eat, not the calories. I am now going back to my prior eating plan by eliminating the bananas in the smoothies, the smoothies themselves, any form of wheat flour product and taking quinoa out of my diet as well. We'll see what happens over the next month, and yes I am going to continue to count the calories of my meals, although I won't bother trying to make any targets. I want to see if I am simply eating 600 cals a day, or if I'm exceeding that and losing fat anyway.


----------



## dulcinea (Aug 22, 2011)

I agree. I need to get back to eating well. When I was eating well, I'd always look at the protein, kinds of fat involved, nutrients, glycemic index, and sugar content. I often had a goal of less than 20 grams of sugar a day, and, for a while, was even consuming less than 10 grams a day (in addition to fruit). I think every time I ate healthy, my calorie count would actually be more, because, when I'm not aware of my eating habits, I'll skip meals without thinking. It definitely makes a huge difference.


----------



## BenevolentBitterBleeding (Mar 16, 2015)

5kg of fat in a month sounds nuts. Did you count macros specific for your goal, or only calories?

IME keeping up with a proper routine of macros, exercise, sleep, etc... yielded the kind of results I wanted(albeit very slowly; ectomorph._.); opposed to when - only adding _Up!_ calories by - _winging_ it: the outcome become vewwy vewwy bad.


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

Calories don't matter at all, what matters is nutritional data. Wanna get fat, eat fat, wanna get muscle mass(with exercising of course), eat protein. For health there are other very important materials (carbohydrates, fibre, vitamins, minerals and so on). But seriously, does anyone want to count them, even if not everything is written? The answer is no.


----------



## BenevolentBitterBleeding (Mar 16, 2015)

The red spirit said:


> Calories don't matter at all, what matters is nutritional data. Wanna get fat, eat fat, wanna get muscle mass(with exercising of course), eat protein. For health there are other very important materials (carbohydrates, fibre, vitamins, minerals and so on).


Actually there are diets where the majority of it is fat _and_ help one to become fit; while _losing_ fat weight.



> But seriously, does anyone want to count them, even if not everything is written?


Yes.



> The answer is no.


No...


----------



## Aridela (Mar 14, 2015)

EndsOfTheEarth said:


> I don't care who wants to argue with me on this one. I'd long suspected it was rubbish but wasn't able to categorically say so until I ran an experiment. This past month I dedicated myself towards becoming a calorie counter and I did the calculations using many different recommended methods where it came up with a daily recommended intake for sustaining my current weight 50kgs of 1800 Calories a day before I factor in exercise.
> 
> For an entire month I did not exceed this daily calorie count and I did my daily exercise of 2hrs walking plus either 1 hour yoga or 30 min resistance circuit training. I was religious with my exercise. Well at the end of my experiment not only is my body weight up by 5kgs but it also appears to be 5kgs of fat, not muscle gain. The skin around my abdomen which was tight as a drum with good muscle definition before I started the experiment now has uncomfortable folds and shows no muscle definition now. Not only that but my waist and hip measurements have both expanded. My jeans are uncomfortable to wear as well. This is with a daily cal burn of between 200-400 cals in exercise and a calorie controlled diet.
> 
> ...


Depends largely on your body. 

Might be a good idea to have allergy tests done. Turns out I was allergic to dairy. Since I removed all dairy (I still have a bit of cheese on occasion, but small quantities), I have shed weight like crazy. If I slip and eat dairy for even a few days I just feel bloated and on occasion can't hold the food down. 

Best of luck!


----------



## EndsOfTheEarth (Mar 14, 2015)

Exactly. And this is what a lot of people miss especially when 'calories are all that matter' get touted like it's gospel. I know for a fact I cannot touch any kind of wheat flour product nor banana's and not put on weight as a result. Most grains also cause me grief. I purposefully included both of these products, although I only ate wheat flour products for 10 days out of the entire month and very small doses when I did eat them, but did consume half a banana daily. Despite running a supposed calorie deficit daily (once exercise was factored in) I gained fat eating small amounts of these things. 

It doesn't bother me because I know the weight will come off again within 2 months once I stop eating those things. I was testing this 'calories are everything' rule. Since someone I know insisted to me that I didn't need to restrict eating grain products for example as long as I watched my calories. Lol! Through trial and error over the years I have basically refined my diet down to this, because it's what my body does well on. 

- Vegetables, can eat any of them in practically any amount except spuds
- Meat, as long as it''s not cured I'm fine. Nitrites however in cured meats are a no go. 
- Fruit, I can't eat this unrestricted and some fruits like banana not at all unless I want to pack on the pounds. Best fruits for me are apples, guava's, oranges, berries. Basically the non-starchy fibrous ones. 
- Grain, best avoided entirely but can eat brown rice in moderation, quinoa in moderation. 
- Dairy, I don't seem to have a problem with it as long as it's in moderation. 
- Eggs, eat to my hearts content. 

Anything packaged, processed and sold in a box, as a ready-made meal etc. No.


----------



## Razorsharp (Jun 23, 2016)

I agree with you. Calorie counting is only viable if the food mix is the same. Which means increasing amout = extra weight and vice versa.

One calorie means the energy to heat one liter of water by one degree. This means that the chemical energy stored in a wooden branch is quite high. The amount of calories in a bucket of gasoline is insane. So it should make anyone fat, right? No we cannot process lignin (I think this is the English Word for the hard center of a wooden stick), gasoline is poisonous.

Why would anyone think that the different calories we consume have the same effiency? Why would one calory of sugar should be similar to a calorie of fat or a calorie of fiber. Obviously sugar is more potent than starch. No one brings a bran flakes on an Ironman competition. They bring fructose dense gels. 

So increasing calorie intake by switching to an all-Vodka diet will not make anyone fat. I cannot cocieve that. Take the same amount of calories from the Vodka-diet and go to an all sugar diet and the results will differ.

I have done calory counting successfully but I did it by changing my amount of food and the type of calories at the same time. Decrease food amounts and cutting 80-90% of sugar intake. So it would not classify as pure calorie counting.

Exercise does almost nothing for my weight. After 40 it is all about intake. I excercise 6-10 hours a week, mostly cycling. And I get stronger and fitter but not lighter. I have to cut/change food intake to drop weight. I do it now actually and it is a pain. I eat mostly vegetables, noodle soups (home-made) and carrots (two is my breakfast) now for two months until my season starts.


----------



## EndsOfTheEarth (Mar 14, 2015)

BenevolentBitterBleeding said:


> 5kg of fat in a month sounds nuts. Did you count macros specific for your goal, or only calories?
> 
> IME keeping up with a proper routine of macros, exercise, sleep, etc... yielded the kind of results I wanted(albeit very slowly; ectomorph._.); opposed to when - only adding _Up!_ calories by - _winging_ it: the outcome become vewwy vewwy bad.


Yes I watched macros. Basically protein and carbs were similar proportion and fat under 70gms per day. My total carb intake was on average just over 100gms per day, my protein intake averaged 140gms a day. I was eating a very clean diet actually. No added sugar, the only carbs I was getting were from fruit, and vegetables and the small amount of the wheat product I ate. I also weighed everything with a digital scale, no eyeballing and tracked everything that passed my lips on a diet diary.

The only real difference between this month and my previous months in which I had no problem with weight gain was the addition of banana's, small amount of wheat flour product, the addition of quinoa, addition of protein shakes (because I ordinarily do not eat that level of food and found it near impossible to hit the calorie count with my usual food (plate of veggies and meat) alone). The protein powder I was using is a brown rice and pea powder that has no flavouring nor sweetener in it. Yes I included this in the calorie count too. The average calories of these shakes once fruit, milk and other items to make it palatable were added was 320 Cal per serve. I simply hate the taste of whey protein powder which is why I went with the vegan option instead. 

It was an experiment to see if I really did have it wrong and if I should instead be counting calories, macros and all that other BS. The answer? If this is the result, no. I should just do what I've done for a very long time eat mostly vegetables, meat, a little bit of fruit, a little bit of dairy and forget the rest. It's a relief to go back to my old eating habits now since drinking protein shakes really doesn't help anything at all. It's also expensive to buy that stuff. 

It'll be interesting to see how quickly the fat goes once I do that and what I finally weigh once my body fat is back to it's previous levels. See if there was any muscle development or not, I'd be surprised if there was none at all since I've been training like a demon this past month. I've certainly gotten stronger from my training regime.


----------



## Epic Love (Dec 30, 2016)

I personally made the experience that it is not bullshit at all. One winter I gained like 3 kilos and frustrated as I was I started calorie counting during the warmer period of the year and only eat my 1500 calories once a day and somehow I lost the weight again and even a bit more. So for me it did work but you have to really count it right and I might have counted more calories for certain foods than they actually have so I probably eat less than 1500 calories a day. I did it quite for some time after this summer and never gained any weight back.


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

BenevolentBitterBleeding said:


> Actually there are diets where the majority of it is fat _and_ help one to become fit; while _losing_ fat weight.


Yeah I know that, I just didn't mentioned types of fat, so I'm sorry for that. I really should have done that.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

I'm a registered dietitian and it seems to me some major mistake was made in calculating your caloric needs.


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

I've always believed that the most important rules to improve your diet are 1) Eat more good food, 2) Get more exercise, 3) Eat less bad food.

*In that order.* More good food, more exercise, and more bad food is healthier than less good food, less exercise, and less bad food.

@EndsOfTheEarth What are your favorite good foods and exercises?


----------



## BlackDog (Jan 6, 2012)

It's not bullshit. If someone who only needs 1800 calories a day is consuming 3000, you really think they won't gain weight? Of course they will. Calorie counting is probably the single most effective thing you can do if you're trying to lose weight. That's not to say there aren't any other factors to take into account, but calories-in-calories-out is vital and there's no way you'd gain weight long term if you created a calorie deficit. 

More than likely, something was off with one (or more) of your calculations or you didn't stick with it long enough. 

Now obviously I don't advocate calorie counting and being a junk food eating couch potato, but in addition to proper diet and exercise it is very effective. Eating proper whole foods and avoiding anything processed or pre-prepared will be helpful in maintaining nutrition and satiating you for longer. Some kinds of foods also help keep you feeling full longer and some are metabolized slightly differently. If you have allergies or intolerances obviously you need to be mindful of those as well.


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

BlackDog said:


> It's not bullshit. If someone who only needs 1800 calories a day is consuming 3000, you really think they won't gain weight? Of course they will. Calorie counting is probably the single most effective thing you can do if you're trying to lose weight. That's not to say there aren't any other factors to take into account, but calories-in-calories-out is vital and there's no way you'd gain weight long term if you created a calorie deficit.


 Well, yes, the difference between 2000 and 3000 is worth paying attention to :wink: I just got the impression that the OP was talking about "calorie counting" as focusing on the difference between 2000 and 2005 or something like that.

(I'd also say that "losing weight" shouldn't be the primary concern: somebody who's 230 pounds after a year of eating well and exercising will be healthier than someone who's 210 after a year of not eating well or exercising)


----------



## EndsOfTheEarth (Mar 14, 2015)

Does no-one actually read the thread? 

- This was an experiment, I did not try and lose weight. I tried to maintain my existing weight. 
- I used standard calorie calculations for figuring my maintenance calorie intake. I calculated this more than once using different methods and came out at around 1800 cals a day to maintain my existing weight without exercise. 
- I did not eat junk food. I simply added banana's, a small amount of grain product and a protein shake to my existing diet. My existing diet consists of vegetables, non-cured meats, eggs and a moderate amount of dairy. I do NOT eat any form of processed, packaged food. I make all my meals from scratch using fresh vegetables, raw meat and dairy products such as natural unsweetened yoghurt and a low fat cottage cheese.
- I gained weight eating like this, somewhere around 5kgs in a month while exercising everyday to the tune of 200-400 cals a day. At least some of that is fat gain because I now have visible fat rolls where previously I had none. I am heavier on the scale, I am larger in inches, my clothes do not fit anymore. 
- I am NOT asking for dieting advice. It was an experiment to see IF calorie counting held any value for me. It doesn't as far as I'm concerned. 
- According to my results I must have been eating a calorie surplus (IF calorie counting is true), I calculated the calorie surplus must have been around 1100 cals a day to gain the amount of weight I did gain, meaning my maintenance cal intake must be something like 600cals a day. Something science says is dangerously low and impossible. Therefore I concluded calorie counting is bullshit. 
- As I said I do not care if you want to argue with me, I am not here to be convinced of your rightness and my wrongness. If you want to believe in calorie counting, good for you, I don't because my results do not correlate with that. 
- I measured my food correctly with a digital scale, I used a calorie calculator and I did NOT leave off food that I ate. I did this everyday for a month. 
- I am now going to resume eating as I did before, in which my weight was stable at 50kgs and I never had a problem with weight gain. Once the visible excess fat rolls on my body are gone I will weigh myself again to see how much of that 5kg gain is muscle. Some of it should be because I have been working out the whole time. But at least some of that weight gain is fat, that much is undeniable. At 1800 cals a day I should not be putting on fat while eating a good diet and exercising for 2.5hrs a day according to all standard calorie counting methods, but I did. This is what I am disputing.


----------



## Hypaspist (Feb 11, 2012)

Calorie counting isn't bullshit. Well, to a point. Some of us couldn't hit our daily calorie target even if we tried. It's the types of calories you take in. Empty calories of course will cause weight gain (i.e. fat) even when staying within limits. It's absolutely critical to empty those calories and instead focus on taking in calories that our body can use productively. So no, calorie counting isn't bullshit if you're counting empty calories. If you're counting the calories from nutritious sources or don't even meet your daily goal anyway, then yeah, it is kind of pointless.

tl;dr: Don't consume ocean liners worth of empty calories.


----------



## EndsOfTheEarth (Mar 14, 2015)

Hypaspist said:


> tl;dr: Don't consume ocean liners worth of empty calories.


Except I did NOT do this, love the assumptions just because my results don't correlate with your expectations. But thats why I ran the experiment, to see if something everyone tells you is true rather than just wholesale swallow whatever information it out there. I'm satisfied that I did this experiment correctly and I'm satisfied that calorie counting concept holds no value for me.


----------



## Hypaspist (Feb 11, 2012)

EndsOfTheEarth said:


> Except I did NOT do this, love the assumptions just because my results don't correlate with your expectations. But thats why I ran the experiment, to see if something everyone tells you is true rather than just wholesale swallow whatever information it out there. I'm satisfied that I did this experiment correctly.


Never said you did. I just drove that point home to dispel the myth that all calories are created equal. To see exactly where weight gains come from, you'd need a full nutrition log/journal to examine.

Tons of misinformation on official sounding websites out there.


----------



## CHLOELILI (May 25, 2016)

I noticed that the more I paid attention to my food , the more I gained weight , because I felt frustrated. 10 years ago, I was 10 kg heavier. I didn t do anything to lose weight. Now I go walking every day, eat less, but everything I want. I don t eat hamburger nor fat food, just because I don t need them.


----------



## SolonsWarning (Jan 2, 2017)

The red spirit said:


> Calories don't matter at all, what matters is nutritional data. Wanna get fat, eat fat, wanna get muscle mass(with exercising of course), eat protein. For health there are other very important materials (carbohydrates, fibre, vitamins, minerals and so on). But seriously, does anyone want to count them, even if not everything is written? The answer is no.


This is just completely untrue. Calories are by far the most important factor in weight (although weight and health are only partially related). Eating a lot of sugar will get you fat just as quickly as eating a lot of fat (and possibly even faster due to the havoc it wrecks on your body).


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

1800kcal was likely your total energy requirements _after_ adjusting for exercise, not before. At 50kg your basal metabolic rate, provided your metabolism is normal and your muscle mass average, is around 1200-1300, then you add 200-400kcal for activity, in approximation, since I don't know your height or age. 5kg in a month is a lot of weight, so something definitely went wrong there and as you said some of it is water retention, especially since you ate more carbs. 
Calorie counting absolutely works, it's used all over the world, not just from fitness gurus and celebrities and magazines, but professionals in hospitals, treating patients and people with multiple issues etc and of course it's based on very fundamental physical laws. It's ludicrous to say you did an "experiment" and then come out and say it's bullshit when it's a well established thing in science for years. This doesn't mean there aren't certain caveats with how our bodies react to certain foods, but chances are something else was amiss rather than "it's utter bullshit". Perhaps you overestimated certain things, you said 1800 was before exercise, does that mean you ate more than 1800? 
If you are curious about your basal metabolic rate you can have it tested btw.


----------



## BlackDog (Jan 6, 2012)

Simpson17866 said:


> Well, yes, the difference between 2000 and 3000 is worth paying attention to :wink: I just got the impression that the OP was talking about "calorie counting" as focusing on the difference between 2000 and 2005 or something like that.
> 
> (I'd also say that "losing weight" shouldn't be the primary concern: somebody who's 230 pounds after a year of eating well and exercising will be healthier than someone who's 210 after a year of not eating well or exercising)


Well I mean, it's a matter of degree. She claims that "calorie counting is utter bullshit/rubbish", which is just simply not true. Presumably in order for it to be "utter bullshit" that would mean that there is no correlation between caloric intake and weight loss/gain. Which is absurd. If that were the case then the concept of a recommended daily caloric intake would be pretty moot. 

Is the calories-in-calories-out model perfect? Absolutely not, it has its share of nuances. But as a general rule of thumb it's accurate, and for somebody looking to control their weight calorie counting is an excellent tool. At the very least it's not utter bullshit, and I still suspect something went wrong with the OP's experiment in order to yield results like that. Most likely either the maintenance level was wrong, or she was eating more calories than she thought (very, very common).


----------



## BenevolentBitterBleeding (Mar 16, 2015)

EndsOfTheEarth said:


> Yes I watched macros. Basically protein and carbs were similar proportion and fat under 70gms per day. My total carb intake was on average just over 100gms per day, my protein intake averaged 140gms a day. I was eating a very clean diet actually. No added sugar, the only carbs I was getting were from fruit, and vegetables and the small amount of the wheat product I ate. I also weighed everything with a digital scale, no eyeballing and tracked everything that passed my lips on a diet diary.
> 
> The only real difference between this month and my previous months in which I had no problem with weight gain was the addition of banana's, small amount of wheat flour product, the addition of quinoa, addition of protein shakes (because I ordinarily do not eat that level of food and found it near impossible to hit the calorie count with my usual food (plate of veggies and meat) alone). The protein powder I was using is a brown rice and pea powder that has no flavouring nor sweetener in it. Yes I included this in the calorie count too. The average calories of these shakes once fruit, milk and other items to make it palatable were added was 320 Cal per serve. I simply hate the taste of whey protein powder which is why I went with the vegan option instead.
> 
> ...


It sounds like your previous diet was more one of a paleo/keto type; which explains why you wouldn't originally have lots of noticeable fat. I suspect that once your body readjusts to the former way of eating you'll quickly burn the current excess.

I'm not an expert but a few things that stuck out and I wonder about are:

How much of an effect does the added carbs in the diet have on fat storage; especially if you're not properly using it _Up!_ as energy.
Because the amount of protein compared to fat/carb ratio in the trial diet doesn't seem right. Usually _'standard'_ diets have more carb because we normally use that for energy; and in the case of a keto diet we'd use fat instead. Someone correct me, but I think if there's too much protein in a keto diet, the body tries to use that before the fat so we might gain 'fat' as weight; because the body is eating into our protein(muscle)?
Though if that were the case I'd assume you'd lose muscle mass + gain fat; but if you're feeling stronger and/or are noticeably so, than I suppose you burned the _excess_ protein for energy and gained weight from the fat *and* the sugar/carbs; which somewhat explains why _the look_ isn't as lean. (instead of burning either fat or carb + using the protein to build muscle)
Maybe your body needed more time to readjust to the new way it was converting energy.
It's weird, I have an issue with bananas as well; and wheat. And yeast... (Though it could all be placebo.)


----------



## BenevolentBitterBleeding (Mar 16, 2015)

The red spirit said:


> Yeah I know that, I just didn't mentioned types of fat, so I'm sorry for that. I really should have done that.


No worries; my misunderstanding.



Simpson17866 said:


> ... "calorie counting" as focusing on the difference between 2000 and 20*05* or something like that.


:laughing: Hilarious.


----------



## Asura (Apr 2, 2016)

I went from 255 down to 175 in 2016 strictly by counting calories.
I was rigid though. Extremely overly dedicated. That's what you have to be when you count calories. There is no guessing or estimating allowed. "This looks like about 250 calories" is probably 400.
I'm 6'3 I have a active job and I set my daily intake to 1800-2100 which is far below what I was burning in the 3000s.

When I say you have to be strict I mean STRICT. I weighed my food to make sure I was having EXACTY 1 serving of whatever I was eating. Was it pleasant? Hell no. But it worked.
People would always ask me "What are you eating you've lost so much weight?" And my response every time was "Whatever I want as long as it's in my calorie range."

For example one day a week I would order a large pizza, eat half of it around noon and the other half for dinner and that was my entire calorie count for the day...but I got to eat pizza and still lose weight.

Remember that unless you have a health condition that's changing your intakes weight loss is a science and not an art. A calorie is a unit of energy not just a food measurement. Less energy in than out= loss of stored energy. More energy in than out=storage of energy.

Also different calories are burned at a different rate. For example you body spends more calories using protein calories than carb calories. If you eat 100 calories of protein alone your body spends about 20 digesting it so you really only ate 80. Carbs about 10 per 100 fat about 5. So yes every calorie is different but if you set and stick to a weight loss limit you will never go over that anyway.

Calorie counting works it's just not this relaxed thing people want it to be. It sucks and it's really hard work but it really does work.


----------



## Flamme et Citron (Aug 26, 2015)

There's no reason to believe your unscientific 1 person sample size experiment on yourself is more true than decades of clinical studies and research. Calories do seem to matter. But like everything in life, it's a web of multiple, complex factors all working together to achieve the result we see.


----------



## Kaboomz (Jun 14, 2016)

as much as i'd love to agree (it'd save me a lot of time and money) i just can't

any typical modern lifestyle requires certain calorie intake

if i don't eat upwards of 3200, i start losing weight. i'm tall and athletic and no matter what type of food i eat, i don't get fat, but if i start undereating, it becomes obvious very, very quickly. 

calories reflect metabolic rate, and metabolic rate is regulated by diet, so you can't just discredit one without addressing the other. if you have a sluggish metabolic rate, you will put on fat even if you under eat


----------



## Tsubaki (Apr 14, 2015)

My grandma is a nutritionist and since I had some problems myself with dietary choices, I asked her a lot about it.
What I found out is that there's a factor that most diets simply ignore, but is vital for a healthy lifestyle. Diets only talk about how you should lose fat and burn muscles, how certain amounts of calories will achieve that and whatever, but what is most important is actually the cellular content of your LBM. You need a certain amount of macronutrients and if you don't get them, your body will start to deconstruct the less important body cells to make up for it. As a consequence, there are less cells that are burning calories, so you gain weight more quickly, storing fat and building muscles more slowly.

Especially in the morning and around noon, you need a lot of carbs. (If you are eating healthily, you are physically unable to overeat in the morning, since a lot of calories are being burnt during the first half of the day). If you start to treat food like a currency, it's very likely that you undereat in the morning, since it makes you hesitant to just eat until you're full, if it means that you are eating a lot of calories. That sort of eating habit makes you burn your cells and not fat, making you more prone to storing fat and making muscle gain harder.
@EndsOfTheEarth:
From what you said about your normal diet, I am not sure if the calorie counting is the only reason for the weight gain. With so few grains and no actual source of slow-digesting carbohydrates, you remind me of a person that I am close to who is extremely active, but whenever he starts to eat "normally"(more grains and more in general), he starts to gain fat quickly.
For him, the problem is most likely that with no proper source of energy, his cellular content is extremely low, so if he starts to eat more and especially more grains, it just gets stored in fat, because the effect is along the lines of("OMG, finally more energy again! Let's store this! We will need it!")

That's what the effect you are experiencing looks like to me, however, I have no idea how you actually eat and how much of everything, so I might be spectacularly wrong. ^^"
Did you ever do a body fat measurement that also includes cellular content? It would just be interesting to know where you stand with your diet.


----------



## pwowq (Aug 7, 2016)

Kcal-counting matter when I have to pack glycogen. Hard core slacking and 4-5000kcal per day, I gain 5-10% bodyweight in a few days.


One key to lose excess fat is to always push your body harder and harder. Doing too much of the same makes your body more energy efficient ie need less energy to do the same job.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

I think calorie _awareness_ is beneficial. You _can_ eat too much of "healthy food". Being aware of the caloric value of food, even healthy choices, seems smart. It's not like calories have no impact at all. Portion control can help with that, but since foods have different caloric value, you can eat a lot of some and little of others and take in the same amount of calories. 

I can easily see how the nutritional content of the food eaten makes a difference too. I am sure that eating well helps your body function better, and that will help for weight management. Eating well may give you more energy, lower stress, boost your immune system - all good for losing weight or maintaining a healthy weight.

My approach is to make healthy choices and be _calorie aware_ while controlling portion size.
I had periods of counting calories to get an idea of what is what, and I think it is a way to start learning about what you're putting in your body, but not something to do obsessively.


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

EndsOfTheEarth said:


> I did my daily exercise of 2hrs walking plus either 1 hour yoga or 30 min resistance circuit training.
> ....
> This is with a daily cal burn of between 200-400 cals in exercise and a calorie controlled diet.


Where did you get the caloric value for your workouts? I lift weights and cycle for hours, and I doubt that I burn as much as 400 calories per day with exercise.


----------



## EndsOfTheEarth (Mar 14, 2015)

bentHnau said:


> Where did you get the caloric value for your workouts? I lift weights and cycle for hours, and I doubt that I burn as much as 400 calories per day with exercise.


From my calorie counting app. The walking was uphill climbs at a specific space. Not just lolling about the shopping centre. 

Update - It looks like a lot of this excess weight was from the protein shakes, I may be intolerant to the protein powder. Since it has no sweetners in it or other junk and the other foods (sans banana's) I added to it was stuff I normally eat and am still eating at the same level, I'm concluding it's the powder and banana's stacking the weight on. I've been off it now since I started this post and lost all the rolls on my abdomen as a result and a cm off my hips as well (which is the place I lose last) and a tonne of excess form my inner thighs, I have thigh gap again. Looks like it was inflammation and water retention mostly. 

I tend to stack on inches and pounds whenever I eat foods my body does not tolerate which now include...

- All wheat flour products
- Banana's
- Apparently vegan protein powder but I also know that whey protein does the same thing from experience. My body does not like concentrated and processed proteins. I can eat dairy normally with no ill effects.
- Concentrated sugars whether from fruit or processed sources.

Easy, peasy. So yeah not bothering with calorie counting anymore. Life just works for me when I eat what I want and avoid known aggravating foods.


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

EndsOfTheEarth said:


> I've been off it now since I started this post and lost all the *rolls on my abdomen* as a result and a cm off my hips as well (which is the place I lose last) and a tonne of excess form my inner thighs, I have thigh gap again. Looks like it was inflammation and water retention mostly.


Rolls made of what?!



> Easy, peasy. So yeah not bothering with calorie counting anymore.


Of course you aren't going to bother with it. Why would you bother to count calories given that you aren't trying to gain or lose weight?



> Life just works for me when I eat what I want and avoid known aggravating foods.


Basically you're saying that you're going to avoid certain foods and continue eating at maintenance to maintain your current weight, yes? That works for everyone.


----------



## Finny (Jul 17, 2015)

Of course calorie counting doesn't work because it's not only the calorie intake but what you eat - and what effects you the most in terms of weight loss or weight gain (depending on what you want) is person to person. The best way to loose weight is to stick to a diet and exercise you find that works for you.


----------



## ENTJudgement (Oct 6, 2013)

EndsOfTheEarth said:


> Calorie counting is bullshit and what actually matters is the type of food you eat, not the calories.


What is heavier, 1Kg of feathers or 1Kg of stone?

What contains more calories, 1000cals of banana smoothies or 1000cals of fat pork meat?

Calories are a fixed unit, if you intake lesser calories than you spend per day, you will not have enough energy to "store" as fat period.


----------



## Penny (Mar 24, 2016)

i disagree. i think calorie counting works. i lost like ten pounds just calorie counting. low carb doesn't really work for me. i mean it works temporarily, but as soon as you start eating carbs again it all comes back on.


----------



## Humilis Curator (Feb 26, 2010)

Calorie counting has been intensely successful for me. I dropped 80 lbs of fat and then gaining 20 lbs of muscle over the past two years since I committed to calorie counting and exercising. Not to be cliche but it changed my life.


----------



## Dare (Nov 8, 2016)

The simple 'calories in calories out' idea is wrong. Excerise is irrelevant for weight (but good for you in other ways and essential to put on muscle). Those of you who are reducing calories while continuing to eat significant carbohydrates are damaging your metabolism. Healthy fats are not fattening the way carbohydrates are.

If anyone would like to be brought up to date on the science, I recommend Dr Jason Fung

37 minute summary:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5F5o0a4p_3U

The full lecture series (six hours in total):
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YpllomiDMX0

Gary Taub 'Why we get fat' has also done good work in this field.

In a nutshell it's hormones that decide if the calories are stored. An untreated type 1 diabetic who lacks insulin cannot put weight on regardless of what or how much they eat. In normal people 1000 calories of high carbohydrates is going to create a high insulin response which means that energy is going to be more stored as fat. 1000 calories of low carbohydrate food such as butter will not produce such a high insulin response and will be burned more as energy rather than stored to the same degree. Food timing also plays a role (the longer your blood sugar stays low the better so frequent snacking is bad).

I was in a situation where although thin, I could not afford to put on any weight. To be sure, I researched nutrition extensively. What an eye opener it was that all the stuff you hear, the stuff people routinely tell each other, is all wrong. I dropped my paleo type diet and moved to a ketogenic one. My weight has been more stable since doing that with other benefits too (not getting hungry all day, higher energy, thinking more clearly).

People should do whatever they like but science should not be treated as a matter of opinion or hearsay. We must replace old incorrect ideas with new right ones if we are going to claim to be rational.


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

Dare said:


> Excerise is irrelevant for weight (but good for you in other ways and essential to put on muscle).


This is complete nonsense. Burning extra calories is irrelevant to weight? Where does the energy for that exercise come from? If someone starts running weekly marathons without eating more calories, will that person's weight remain the same?



> In a nutshell it's hormones that decide if the calories are stored. An untreated type 1 diabetic who lacks insulin cannot put weight on regardless of what or how much they eat.


The dietary effects of a medical problem do not prove or illustrate anything about nutrition for people in general.



> I was in a situation where although thin, I could not afford to put on any weight.


If you couldn't afford to put on any weight, you weren't thin.


----------



## Dare (Nov 8, 2016)

bentHnau said:


> This is complete nonsense. Burning extra calories is irrelevant to weight? Where does the energy for that exercise come from? If someone starts running weekly marathons without eating more calories, will that person's weight remain the same?


I gave you some links to experts, feel free to enlighten/educate yourself. A study was actually done on people who began running marathons and there was no difference in their weight. That study was contained in Gary Taubs 'Why we get fat' book.




> The dietary effects of a medical problem do not prove or illustrate anything about nutrition for people in general.


This doesn't deserve a response. Fortunately scientists and doctors are not so closed minded and will take clues for how the body works where they can find them. 




> If you couldn't afford to put on any weight, you weren't thin.


Another good one. Ever heard of models? Ballerinas? The same could be said for actors. Maybe a bride who has had her final dress fitting. No doubt I could think of more people this could apply to if I spent 30 seconds thinking about it. 

It's interesting that you find being presented with new information so threatening that you make a personal attack rather than explore it's merits and discuss the science. Educate yourself or don't. Believe in an idea from the 1970s that has been disproven. I don't care. I was only trying to help.


----------



## DarkSideOfLight (Feb 15, 2011)

It is. People don't get that eating is simple. Stay away from shit food and move your ass = healthy diet, life etc. Simple.


----------



## la_revolucion (May 16, 2013)

I don't think it's sustainable, no, but it does have it's place if you are training for a specific goal. Such as cutting/bulking for weight lifting or doctor's orders to lose weight for health reasons. It's ultimately an individual's responsibility though to establish a healthy eating regiment and to become educated in what nutrients are best for their body. Because after all, you can't count calories forever. It's more or less a means to an end. That end being an individual trained to eat certain portions, food groups and etc.


----------



## MisterPerfect (Nov 20, 2015)

EndsOfTheEarth said:


> I don't care who wants to argue with me on this one. I'd long suspected it was rubbish but wasn't able to categorically say so until I ran an experiment. This past month I dedicated myself towards becoming a calorie counter and I did the calculations using many different recommended methods where it came up with a daily recommended intake for sustaining my current weight 50kgs of 1800 Calories a day before I factor in exercise.
> 
> For an entire month I did not exceed this daily calorie count and I did my daily exercise of 2hrs walking plus either 1 hour yoga or 30 min resistance circuit training. I was religious with my exercise. Well at the end of my experiment not only is my body weight up by 5kgs but it also appears to be 5kgs of fat, not muscle gain. The skin around my abdomen which was tight as a drum with good muscle definition before I started the experiment now has uncomfortable folds and shows no muscle definition now. Not only that but my waist and hip measurements have both expanded. My jeans are uncomfortable to wear as well. This is with a daily cal burn of between 200-400 cals in exercise and a calorie controlled diet.
> 
> ...


Okay, you dont gain muscle by sitting around doing nothing. You gain it by excersising. Though you already have some muscle regardless of what you do. Also we all have a different recomended calorie intake and there are different foods that have different vitimins are cuase different things to happen digestive/physically wise. So its a lot more complicated that counting your calories. You also have to take into account fat. Which I learned that no fat or fiber at all will kill your digestive system but also is suppose to make you lose calories. Generally eating less fatty meats, and healthy fibers will keep you regulaur and help keep your wieght down. Also while there is a recomended calorie intake, the amount of calories you burn is different from person to person. Since we all have different metobolisms, fat percentage, amount of muscle, hieght, wieght, build. So the issue is not just CALORIES.


----------



## EndsOfTheEarth (Mar 14, 2015)

^ Yeah exactly. All of those are reasons why calorie counting is a bullshit method. For the record during this period I was... 

- performing 3 high intensity body weight workouts per week 
- performing 3 high intensity yoga workouts per week
- performing min 2hrs LISS cardio workouts every single day
- calculated my recommended daily intake using a cal counting app and also manually using two different established algorithms. I was recommended to consume approx 1800 calls a day based on these calculations. 
- maintained a diet consusying of three meals per day with were 80% non starchy vegetables and protein. 
- the other items was a daily protein shake containing zero added sugar but was thickened with a banana. 
- a small amount of wheat based product equivalent to approx 4 slices of whole grain bread a week. 

Turns out 1800 calls a day even with that level of exercise is about double what I should actually consume, according to whether or not I'm losing weight, maintaining or gaining. In fact my cal counting app indicated that 1800 cals day with my activity level should result in a cal deficit and therefore weight loss. It didn't. I have now cut back to less than 1000 calls a day and am no longer gaining weight. My exercise routine has not changed at all. So apparently I have the world slowest metabolism according cal 
counting methods. 

All the reasons you cited are reasons why cal counting didn't work for me. Any amount of wheat product oy diet causes me to balloon with water retention. It doesn't make me sick but it obviously doesn't agree with me either. Same with bananas and protein powder obviously. Now I stopped eating those things and also cut my Foid back to less than 1000 calls a day I am maintains my normal weight by every meAsure. 

My conclusion is that cal counting alone isn't very effective nor very accurate for all people. I'm sure some people have had success with it. Just as some people have success living on watermelon or any other stupid thing. That dorsnt make it valid for me however. Given that my body works quite happily on about half the rec daily cals and I am about twice as active as the average individual exercising for 3hrs every single day. I do think counting cals is bullshit.


----------



## EndsOfTheEarth (Mar 14, 2015)

And pretty much every cal counting enthusiast on here qualified it with well it depends on this, that and everything else you said. My conclusion is it isn't the calorie counting that making the difference it's the lifestyle and food choices. Which was pretty much my premise all along. If someone calorie counts they are likely to be simultaneously exercising and maling better food choices. They then erroneously attribute their success to counting cals when it's far more likely to be the other things they did along with it that made the difference.

The recommended daily intake was so far off it was stupid and totally useless to me. Apparently my current daily food intake constitutes famine according to cals alone. One look at me and you'd laugh. I'm 5ft tall and weigh over 120lbs, I have quite obvious leg and arm muscle definition and bulk. You cannot see my ribs or my spine anywhere. I'm hardly anorexic. I look healthy. Determining food quantity by calorific value is clearly very off.


----------



## Shroud Shifter (Sep 9, 2015)

I've never counted calories. But I did reduce what I ate a bit (on average) and increased my workout (dramatically) and I seem to have lost a lot of weight (or put it where it counts). But my calorie intake's pretty low, I only eat twice a day and about 1200 calls most days seems to be enough for me. Maybe I just have slow metabolism.


----------



## Dante Scioli (Sep 3, 2012)

EndsOfTheEarth said:


> ^ Yeah exactly. All of those are reasons why calorie counting is a bullshit method. For the record during this period I was...
> 
> - performing 3 high intensity body weight workouts per week
> - performing 3 high intensity yoga workouts per week
> ...


What? There is no way you gained that much weight eating so little.

Unless you are absurdly tiny, 1800 calories is low to begin with. Doing that much exercise, any weight you gained (which by rights should have been little if any) should have been half muscle.

The only explanations I can think of:
-The foods you were eating were not properly labeled in terms of calorie content or you improperly tallied them or your app lies to you to make you feel better about what you eat
-You were total skeletor before beginning this experiment and seriously needed the extra weight

There's no way you will be healthy if you sustain eating under 1000 calories a day and exercising that much. Once your body runs out of fat to burn, you'll be in starvation mode and your body will cannibalize your muscles and you'll start to die.


Edit: I thought of another explanation.
When your body gains muscle it pretty much always gains an equivalent amount of fat. Maybe you were bulking up and mistook your gains for flab. Muscle definition _will_ decrease when you gain strength. After you've built up your new muscles, you can cut back on calories again for awhile until the corresponding fat is gone and you're back to your desired/original muscle tone.


----------



## MisterPerfect (Nov 20, 2015)

EndsOfTheEarth said:


> ^ Yeah exactly. All of those are reasons why calorie counting is a bullshit method. For the record during this period I was...
> 
> - performing 3 high intensity body weight workouts per week
> - performing 3 high intensity yoga workouts per week
> ...


It could be you have a slow metobolism. I tend to have a very fast one and never leave my wieght bracket which fluctates a 20 pound difference and I never go under or over that.


----------



## atamagasuita (May 15, 2016)

Me too i never count my calories. I cannot even comprehend it. Lol xD just eat right, exercise right. Period xD

And i have the metabolism of a 19 yo


----------



## NAC (Nov 16, 2015)

Of course calorie counting isn't "bullshit" - that's a nonsense claim to make. It's one of the most well documented and tested areas in health- and nutrition- science.
Controlling your calorie intake(not necessarily counting each and everyone, but just being aware of approximate amounts) is undisputed the most effective way of controlling your weight. Increasing your quantity of physical activity, will - for many- be the #2 in that regard, if the goal is to lose weight.

That said, it's obvious that managing your calorie intake well isn't going to make you healthy and in good shape on its own.
If we change the scope from "weight control" to "health", you should prioritize the quality of the food you eat rather than the quantity of calories you get from your food.


----------



## The red spirit (Sep 29, 2015)

I personally could agree with OP and statement, but for different reason. I'm very slim myself. 62kg 185cm and 17 year old. I'm not fat by any means. All I do is basically nothing special. Neither I care about what I eat (well it should be tasty), neither I exercise regularly (except PE lessons). I could feel, what my body 'tells' me. I can feel, when I feel too empty or too full and it never lies. It's nothing special. Counting calories is overrated, better learn to 'listen' to your body, it's easier, faster, far more accurate (for beginers) and doesn't require any thinking. It's not bullshit. You can count calories and learn a lot of stuff, while you could just 'listen' to your body.


----------



## flamesabers (Nov 20, 2012)

I'm not a fan of counting calories though that's more of a personal preference than anything else. When I strive to lose weight I follow these three general rules:

1. I don't overeat. I give time for my body to digest the food before deciding on whether I'm still hungry and need to eat more food.

2. I avoid drinking beverages that have lots of calories.

3. I exercise more often.


----------



## SevSevens (Aug 5, 2015)

will power is limited.

caloric counting takes willpower - dedication and hard work.

losing weight takes willpower - dedication and hard wokr.

if your goal is to lose weight, and weight requires will power, then counting calories will deplete the resource you need to lose weight. Paradoxical, but in the end, counting calories will make you fat.


----------



## NAC (Nov 16, 2015)

SevSevens said:


> will power is limited.
> 
> caloric counting takes willpower - dedication and hard work.
> 
> ...


If doing simple counting makes you fat and deprives you of willpower, you didn't have much chance of achieving anything regardless.

Anyway, the debate here, is if calorie counting is "bullshit" or not(if it works to control your weight). Not if people like doing it or not, or if it makes you more healthy or not. OP claimed it was bullshit, several others have hinted the same, that it doesn't work. That is so easy to disprove by common sense(and the thousands of legit science articles you can find on the area). Their claim(that calorie counting doesn't work) is on level with people wanting to believe 9/11 was an inside job or that the moon landing was fake.

Personally I don't care to do accurate counts of calories, because I already got optimal control of my weight(have gone from being underweight 120 pounds to 200 pounds muscular), just by using approximate counting of calories, while working out. But I'm sure that doing it more accurately wouldn't cause a negative effect on the result. There's a reason pretty much any fitness/bodybuilding athlete counts calories when losing weight before a competition(hint: because it works).

It's very simple. If any person takes their current diet(assuming the diet currently are keeping them around the same weight, if maintained), and increases the amount of the specific food in that diet by 25%, they will gain weight, because of the calorie increase. If they do the same, but instead of increasing, decreases by 25%, they will lose weight, because of calorie decrease.
This will 100% work for anyone, assuming your amount of physical activity remains approximately the same(and even with some increase, it should still work, especially for losing weight).


----------



## Shiver (Nov 10, 2016)

I've actually been tracking my calories for years now and have found that altering my weekly average has a demonstrable impact on my weight. What I've done is to cycle my intake between "high" and "low" days while keeping my average aligned with my desired weight. Using this method I'm able to "adjust" my weight extremely accurately simply by raising or lowering that average across 2-4 days. Exercise of course acts as a modifier to the formula, but the idea remains and I expect that this would not work if the calorie counts themselves did not matter.

A partially related finding is that the calorie cycling itself may increase my metabolism - I actually maintain using more calories now than when I started (by about 3-4%), with the food types and exercise amount remaining constant.

Something to note is that calorie counts on most foods aren't perfect and that this might have influenced OP's experiment to some degree. Businesses are given a certain amount of variance to play with on those numbers and I personally find it better to assume that the real amount might be higher than is listed.



SevSevens said:


> will power is limited.
> 
> [...]


I've never considered my willpower a limited resource. I'd agree with NAC that if this is a concern, a person is done from the start. If someone can be of the mindset to make the counting and restriction an enjoyable challenge, they'll have a much better chance.


----------



## SevSevens (Aug 5, 2015)

NAC said:


> If doing simple counting makes you fat and deprives you of willpower, you didn't have much chance of achieving anything regardless.
> 
> Anyway, the debate here, is if calorie counting is "bullshit" or not(if it works to control your weight). Not if people like doing it or not, or if it makes you more healthy or not. OP claimed it was bullshit, several others have hinted the same, that it doesn't work. That is so easy to disprove by common sense(and the thousands of legit science articles you can find on the area). Their claim(that calorie counting doesn't work) is on level with people wanting to believe 9/11 was an inside job or that the moon landing was fake.
> 
> ...


What if you have carpal tunnel and a bulging disk. Writing things becomes incredibly painful and requires more will power than running a few miles without said defects.

Consider this - injuries are real. People have busy lives, sometimes seven kids. People with a high level of responsibility in other areas of life don't have 10 minutes to spare.

Then there is the eternal bachelor...or Leon...who kills for a living. He has lots of time, except, well...when he adopts that little girl, then he dies. Do you think Leon had time to count calories?

Hwa?


----------



## SevSevens (Aug 5, 2015)

Shiver said:


> I've actually been tracking my calories for years now and have found that altering my weekly average has a demonstrable impact on my weight. What I've done is to cycle my intake between "high" and "low" days while keeping my average aligned with my desired weight. Using this method I'm able to "adjust" my weight extremely accurately simply by raising or lowering that average across 2-4 days. Exercise of course acts as a modifier to the formula, but the idea remains and I expect that this would not work if the calorie counts themselves did not matter.
> 
> A partially related finding is that the calorie cycling itself may increase my metabolism - I actually maintain using more calories now than when I started (by about 3-4%), with the food types and exercise amount remaining constant.
> 
> ...


According to the scientific method willpower is limited.

Also, philosophically speaking, willpower is constrained by time, and time is limited, both in terms of directional flow, and quantity.

Say wha?


----------



## Shiver (Nov 10, 2016)

SevSevens said:


> According to the scientific method willpower is limited.
> 
> Also, philosophically speaking, willpower is constrained by time, and time is limited, both in terms of directional flow, and quantity.
> 
> Say wha?


And yet, as clearly stated above, my calorie counting is successful, despite your earlier claims.


----------



## SevSevens (Aug 5, 2015)

Shiver said:


> And yet, as clearly stated above, my calorie counting is successful, despite your earlier claims.


Well, calorie counting is fine, if you have willpower (mana) and time (vitality) to devote to it. But if you're a jolly bloke on the go, then you probably would be better off with a more holistic approach.


----------



## Shiver (Nov 10, 2016)

SevSevens said:


> Well, calorie counting is fine, if you have willpower (mana) and time (vitality) to devote to it. But if you're a jolly bloke on the go, then you probably would be better off with a more holistic approach.


It takes me about a minute to search a meal's foods and enter them into a phone app - less if the foods are already saved from having eaten them prior.


----------



## SevSevens (Aug 5, 2015)

Shiver said:


> It takes me about a minute to search a meal's foods and enter them into a phone app - less if the foods are already saved from having eaten them prior.



Takes you a minute, and it takes Michael Jordan a ten seconds to drive the lane and school Patrick Ewing, but does it takes fat joe twenty.

That's the gypo way anyways. To lay it to you true, with all the sounds in the band.


----------



## Shiver (Nov 10, 2016)

SevSevens said:


> Takes you a minute, and it takes Michael Jordan a ten seconds to drive the lane and school Patrick Ewing, but does it takes fat joe twenty.
> 
> That's the gypo way anyways. To lay it to you true, with all the sounds in the band.


I'm not sure how one can consider the use of a calorie counting app to be comparable to professional basketball. Unless Fat Joe's fingers are _really_ just too fat to use the phone.


----------



## Westy365 (Jun 21, 2012)

Calories aren't usually the problem. It's the quality of what you eat. Avoid processed food and trans fats. Sugar is basically toxic, not to mention addictive.
Carbs can also be problematic if you eat too many and don't burn them through exercise.

If you eat a reasonable amount of healthy food, and abstain from unhealthy foods, you should be fine. Calories are more like guidelines anyway.


----------



## Shiver (Nov 10, 2016)

Westy365 said:


> Calories aren't usually the problem. It's the quality of what you eat. Avoid processed food and trans fats. Sugar is basically toxic, not to mention addictive.
> Carbs can also be problematic if you eat too many and don't burn them through exercise.
> 
> If you eat a reasonable amount of healthy food, and abstain from unhealthy foods, you should be fine. Calories are more like guidelines anyway.


Macros are important for overall health, yes. The body needs different amounts of proteins, carbs, and fats to function optimally.

That said, 100 calories from Skittles is effectively the same as 100 calories from a salad. Your body will process and process them differently and they may exist in wildly different forms, but the actual unit measurement itself is comparable. As a unit of heat energy it is effectively measuring the amount of "fuel" provided to your body, which is "burned off" during exercise, or stored otherwise. A person can still get fat from "healthy" foods, given sufficient _quantity_.

I think the happy medium is to eat the right amount of food and try to make your choices as healthy as possible. On the other hand, I don't feel a particular regret in allocating space in my daily amount for an awesome slice of pie.


----------



## Pupazzo (Apr 12, 2015)

EndsOfTheEarth said:


> I don't care who wants to argue with me on this one. I'd long suspected it was rubbish but wasn't able to categorically say so until I ran an experiment. This past month I dedicated myself towards becoming a calorie counter and I did the calculations using many different recommended methods where it came up with a daily recommended intake for sustaining my current weight 50kgs of 1800 Calories a day before I factor in exercise.
> 
> For an entire month I did not exceed this daily calorie count and I did my daily exercise of 2hrs walking plus either 1 hour yoga or 30 min resistance circuit training. I was religious with my exercise. Well at the end of my experiment not only is my body weight up by 5kgs but it also appears to be 5kgs of fat, not muscle gain. The skin around my abdomen which was tight as a drum with good muscle definition before I started the experiment now has uncomfortable folds and shows no muscle definition now. Not only that but my waist and hip measurements have both expanded. My jeans are uncomfortable to wear as well. This is with a daily cal burn of between 200-400 cals in exercise and a calorie controlled diet.
> 
> ...


 you didn't even post your macros. if your diet was: a huge amount of carbs, low fats and low protein it's normal that you've gained a lot of water weight and some fat.


----------

