Why are calorie counting approaches so dominant in weight loss discussions?

[Lemonthyme]

An honest question. Why is everyone SO obsessed with counting every calorie on here?

I ask because there is a lot of evidence that it isn't an accurate thing. I work in the food industry so some of this comes from knowledge you might not have got wind of.

• Calories can be up to 20% out (either way) and be legal. Even if calories are more than 20% out, the product will not be recalled by anyone. Even if there's a howler on packaging, it normally takes a BIG issue to be recalled and, say 25%-30% more calories than it says? Nah, I could talk any retailer into letting that stay on the market.
• And if you think processed foods are hard to count, natural ones are too with seasonal variability, ripeness, storage, if something has been frozen or deep chilled all makes a difference. And those apps which work it out from photos? They can be wildly wrong.
• Takeaway calories where given are known to be even worse. They won't even be testing their products but relying on calculation models. Which are often crazily wrong.
• There is some fairly recent research that calories are not all absorbed depending on how it's consumed. The way calories are calculated is pretty blunt. It treats the body as though it's a furnace, it's not. Google this yourself but if you eat whole nuts vs. ground nuts, the pack calories will say the same thing. But in reality, you will not absorb all of the calories from whole nuts. Your body isn't good enough at breaking it down. Same goes for starches. Amylose particularly when cooked and cooled will convert in part to resistant starch which your body will treat like fibre but cooked potatoes eaten hot and cold will have the same calories on them but the body won't treat them that way.
• Our body adapts "calories out" when calories in are reduced. Sad but true. One of the reasons exercise is so important.
• Different macronutrients take more energy to process. Protein is particularly high. Carbs low.
• The foods you eat have impacts on your gut microbiome which impact the foods you crave, your mood and your appetite.
• And that's before you get into how differently our hormones react to x number of calories from sugary foods vs something with a higher satiety index.

I get that people want a number but calories seems like such a blunt tool. For those who use it, have you ever tried focusing on nutrition and more mindful eating or does that just not work for you? I'm not saying it doesn't work, because I did follow a calorie controlled diet in my 20s which did work, but I've also followed more intuitive approaches as I am now. I've just never encountered so many people evangelical about how calories must be counted. Every thread about 2-3 people will be stating with HUGE certainty that you MUST calculate your TDEE and be in a deficit of x amount.

Every time I shrug and think "well I'm not and I'm not prepared to do anything now to lose weight that I won't be doing in a year's time to maintain because otherwise I'll gain it all back."

Calorie counting is an incredibly useful tool even if packets may have somewhat incorrect readings. It allows people to become familiar with the calories in different foods over time and helps them make better more mindful decisions . Is this Big Mac meal worth 1000 calories .
Of course it's not the only way to lose weight but it's popular for a reason . It works.

I think calorie counting has its place, it’s certainly useful to have an idea of which foods and meals are packed full of calories and which ones aren’t.

But I take the point about the way our bodies process the calories we eat not being as easy to quantify.

I’m fasting about 2 days a week at the moment, and I’m tracking my calories as well (although I’m not being obsessive about restricting food on non-fasting days), and my weight loss has been consistently better than I’d expect from the standard calories in / calories out advice.

So either my Fitbit has got my calorie expenditure wildly out, or there’s other factors affecting how many calories I’m burning.

Other diets work because you end up in calorie deficit even if you’re not actually counting them as such.

It's fascinating how much people are hanging on to it all. There is increasing evidence that calories are actually not a very good approximation of what our body is doing and yet so many replies saying "that's just another way to be in a calorie deficit..." etc. But surely the GLP1 drugs prove that your internal chemistry impacts how much you want to eat? That's one of the reasons I'm approaching it the way I am because I wanted to impact my developing insulin resistance and I suspected that was behind the issues I'd found since perimenopause. I was finding eating what I was when I was mid 30s was causing weight gain or maintenance when it was causing loss back then. That's more than CICO.

As for the comment that it works? Well it works to lose weight but only if you're prepared to calorie count for the rest of your life will you keep it off. And I see a lot of people who lose weight calorie counting but a lot who soon gain it. Or people who are so wedded to it they've lost weight several times doing so. But doesn't that say everything?

As for "ok if you're actually eating 1700 calories, then you'd have to reduce it further" comment. But that's the problem. You might think you're eating 1400 one day and it's actually 1700, so you reduce to 1200 but then you're really eating 700 another day and feeling very deprived. By focusing on calories not how they are making you feel you're more likely to eat more on a day that you're underestimating them because you have calories "left" and less on a day you're not but feel like eating a scabby horse.

I work in the food industry and I have defended it a lot when it comes to nutrition but on threads like this, I start to see how pervasive the marketing approaches are. The "low calorie treats" are things that would appear in a calorie counter's diet but not in mine because I see them as foods that won't fill me. Comments like "Calorie restriction also allows people to eat whatever they want, as long as they eat less of it" are the ones where I think "sheesh... my industry has got in your head."

When I count calories (to lose the half stone that goes on and off over a year or two cycle), it works for me.

I know if I'm eating too much. I've done it so many times. Basic rule of thumb. If I feel hungry and slightly hollow it's working. If I don't feel hollow when I wake up in the morning, I ate too much the day before.

FWIW I'm losing weight within a healthy BMI.

So even if something has the wrong calories I can tell. I also don't buy that 200g of strawberries is that different depending on the day.

Great thread OP and really interested in what you say. It echoes what I had learned from scientific podcasts about calories/ . I just focus on fibre, protein and 30 + plants a week.
O eat to be healthy but also want to feel satisfied. I no longer count calories.

Here's a paper for you. Showing on cultivation method and variety, sugar content of strawberries (the main source of calories) will vary by as much as 30%.

Sugar content analysis of three strawberry cultivars applying two different cultivation methods | European Journal of Horticultural Science

Now think about compound foods and how many errors build up over every ingredient unless it's highly refined.

Yes people should eat intuitively, eat whole foods which fill them and not over eat. Except people don’t, hence a lot of people are overweight and obese.
So they track calories as that’s an easier way gauge food intake rather than figure out what foods the body will process and how, nobody is doing this we don’t have food science degrees.

It's a blunt instrument, sure, but I think you're more offended by people treating calorie counting as gospel rather than the majority who use it as a useful, if hazy, guideline?

It's easy to see a couple of people insisting on it and generalising it to the majority, I don't think it is. For sure there'll be dedicated fans of any system - calorie counting, keto, intermittent fasting etc - all certain theirs is true - but you can ignore them. Most of us are just trying to do the best we can with what we have.

I don't calorie count because most of my food is made at home and it's a ballache to weight and calculate everything. Easier if you're just scanning barcodes. I also don't intuitively eat because then I'd get fat. It doesn't work for me. Each to their own.

Yes, but if the errors are equally likely to go in either direction then it will all balance itself out over time.

This isn't an argument for the really rigid calorie counting people get into. I think people just like doing this because it gives them a structure and a sense of control. But as others have said, having a general sense of how many calories are in particular foods and planning accordingly is very helpful.

Im not sure fasting a day a week = intuitive eating, did you discover that you naturally just didn’t eat on Mondays? Fascinating indeed.

I bought into intuitive eating, cooked only from scratch, high quality ingredients, really mindful about what and when I ate. Never put on so much weight so quickly in my life

I agree, OP.

As I understand it (disclaimer: not a scientist), while the amount of energy we take in has relevance, our bodies are way more complicated than CICO would imply. What you eat, when you eat it, how frequently you eat, the state of your gut microbiome and your body's levels of insulin, ghrelin, leptin and other hormones are all factors in body weight.

Personally, I find that eating twice a day (no snacks) and aiming for around 80% minimally-processed or unprocessed foods works for me to maintain a healthy weight. Doing this means the occasional piece of cake/chocolate for pudding doesn't seem to be a problem.

We're all different, though, and I know people who find tracking calories motivating so it works for them. One friend eats little and often through the day, which would be disastrous for me!

I get that people want a number but calories seems like such a blunt tool. For those who use it, have you ever tried focusing on nutrition and more mindful eating or does that just not work for you?

I don't see how the two are mutually exclusive.

I get that levels of intuitive eating are fallible as well. But I was just curious by HOW SURE so many people are on here that it's the ONLY WAY to lose weight. It's not.

I've never seen anybody say that, and I think you might be misinterpreting what people actually say.

It's not that counting calories is the only way to lose weight. That's easily refuted by the fact that some people use all kinds of other methods to lose weight and they sometimes work.

It's that every method of losing weight, if it actually works, by definition involves creating a calorie deficit. If you are losing weight, then you ARE eating fewer calories than you are burning. There is no other way for the body to lose weight.

It's true that what might be involved in that could be more complicated than simplistic models of calorie counting account for. On the other hand where other methods fail, it can also help, as pp have said, to take a more thorough and objective approach to the maths involved. Even if such an approach can never be perfect.

Every diet that works is a calorie controlled diet. But if you want to achieve that end indirectly - by counting carbs, intermittent fasting, "intuitive eating" or whatever - have at it. Whatever works for you.

But you’re eating low calorie so it doesn’t matter does it?

that’s what I don’t understand “I don’t count calories I just eat healthily. Er, ok, so that’s going to also be naturally low calorie then?

It’s just different ways of getting to the same place. Some people prefer to use data points (I can’t see that tracking calories is any more joyless and difficult than an oura ring, Fitbit etc, which people enjoy using) and some prefer to “initiatively” eat healthily. It’s getting the same outcome.

My mind is boggled at this

“Doing this means the occasional piece of cake/chocolate for pudding doesn't seem to be a problem.”

the occasional piece of cake or chocolate shouldn’t ever be a “problem”.
Why would it?! Anyone on the planet should realise that the occasional piece of chocolate/ cake can’t impact their weight.

agreeing that calorie counters are controlling and uneducated and the typing things like that is quite sinister.

I’ve counted calories for over a year because I find it so easy. It helps me control what I eat is that simple for me

I do intermittent fasting, wli and calorie counting and exercise to lose weight - literally have to throw everything at it to lose every pound 😁 nightmare. I did Zoe for a year (loads of plants, fibre etc) didn’t lose a pound. Lost weight through healthy eating and exercise and not calorie counting doing the body coach plan but it stopped working when I guess I hit perimenopause. So I agree with you op it’s far, far more complex than cico sadly but if I don’t do calorie counting I find it hard to keep track of what I’ve eaten.

It’s important people do what works for ghem op. And it’s great intuitive eating works for you. But I’m sure it can’t be that hard to fathom why It does not work for others. I understand being evangelical about something that works for you, but think maybe this is a little extreme.

on saying that, you raise excellent points on how many people get it wrong and why, I see so many thread where people declare they are in a defecit and not losing weight, and then utterly batshit responses of mayne you’re not eating enough. The level of knowledge is low and we need to do better in schools at educating people. The unpalatable truth is if you’re not losing, you’re not in a defecit and have under estimated your cals, or over estimated Your tdee, or both.

it does however give a good benchmark for people. So for example if you think you’re eating x cals and are maintaning your weight, them you know cut 500 off of that and you lose a pound a week. So as a guide it works.

@EvolvingDoor "I've never seen anybody say that, and I think you might be misinterpreting what people actually say."

Some recent examples from other threads:

"I’m 5 ft 9 and lost 4 stone by rigidly sticking to 1,500 (sometimes 1,390) calories or less by weighing and logging everything on my fitness pal."

"I'm 5' 4 perimenopausal and I need to stick to 1000 or to lose any amount of weight."

"I'm 5ft 3 sedentary and my maintenance ranged from 1800 to 1500 before and after a 4 stone weight loss so you really need to go on www.tdeecalculator.net and work out your maintenance and deficit calories."

"You just need to track what you’re eating and know what your TDEE is. Then you’ll know if you’re in a calorie deficit or not."

Etc etc. A lot of posters do seem quite set on it being the only way.

Why did you feel the need to be rude?

No, as I explained, despite a healthy diet and fitness regime, I have a level of insulin resistance, there is good evidence that fasting, especially for 24 hours minimum helps reverse this. But just cutting calories would not on its own. Outside of this one 24 hour period, I use an intuitive eating approach.

What I'm suggesting is using science led approaches to reverse my age related insulin resistance and a level of intuitive eating / control of macros, high fruit and veg diet at other times. But almost every thread I write a comment on, whether it's about this, or behaviour change approaches if you want to use them alongside whatever method you choose will have at least one comment saying something along the lines of "YOU MUST CALCULATE YOUR TDEE" and sometimes more actually attacking any suggestion I make, whether that is on upping protein and fibre and only eating unrefined carbs in an intuitive way or avoiding snacking (massive evidence this messes up you ghrelin btw which will hugely contribute to the food noise everyone is trying to get rid of with GLP1s).

Just suggesting that I know of no person who is thin who counts calories. The people who get thin and stay thin adopt behaviours that they can do for life (if they were formerly heavier).

Meh. You do you. No need to be rude to others though.

I think you’re being pretty rude by patronisation tbh.

So far all you’re saying is you’ve “hacked” your age related insulin resistance (self diagnosed?) and are suggesting- with no practical help- that others should consider this rather than tried, tested, accessible and easy to understand, well established calorie counting.

you’re also using words like “intuitive eating” then describing something like fasting which is in no way intuitive.You are presenting as someone with superior ideas and insight that you’re frustrated no-one else will adapt despite them being confused and hard to replicate.

@Lemonthyme none of those quotes you've listed say what you're claiming they say which was that "I was just curious by HOW SURE so many people are on here that it's [calorie counting and knowing TDEE] the ONLY WAY to lose weight."

The first three are people describing their own experience at not at all claiming that this is the only way to lose weight. The third and fourth are suggesting that the poster needs to find out their TDEE and track their calories, which is not the same as saying that calorie counting is the only way to lose weight. Those quotes are highly likely to be in the context of someone being confused about why they are not losing weight. It is entirely reasonable to then suggest that people should examine what they are eating and how that relates to their daily calorie needs to see if they are anywhere near the right ballpark for weight loss.

None of that is the same as being SURE that calorie counting and knowing your TDEE is the ONLY WAY to lose weight. It is simply useful tool to approximate the amount of energy you are consuming compared to what you need, and to see where you are in that equation.

Of course, to reduce your calories, you can then decide to eat "intuitively" by deliberately deciding to fast for certain periods of time, to increase protein and fibre, to avoid snacking, to eat only unrefined carbs and so on. This may help some people with sticking to a lower calorie diet longer term, if it suits them, but others may not find it helpful. There is not a one size fits all approach as to how to reduce your overall calorie intake to be in a sustained deficit in order to lose weight long term.

I would love to understand how your deliberate and planned choices as to how and what you eat are more intuitive (or intuitive at all) than planning a calorie controlled diet and sticking to that. I find the use of the word "intuitive" to describe what you are doing as a very strange choice of terminology given how planned and deliberate it is.

"avoiding snacking (massive evidence this messes up you ghrelin btw which will hugely contribute to the food noise everyone is trying to get rid of with GLP1s)."

What do you mean by this, OP - that snacking is bad for you? or that it's good for you? Do share some evidence ( I don't mean this in a remotely snarky way - this board would benefit from more people linking to proper studies into health and weight loss).

Saying "slim people don't count calories" is true but a bit irrelevant. Like saying "people with good mental health don't go to therapy".

I've lost and maintained a 16 stone loss (with the exception of 2 stone this last 12 months) with calorie counting.

I don't know how else to do it and not overly interested in alternatives since it worked for me.

That's just my personal experience. Appreciate others may have different experiences but just wanted to contribute to the discussion with real life results.

You can't out-train a bad diet, as they say. The amount of exercise you'd need to do to balance out eating too much would be insane, so that leaves diet as the main focus.

Given that - intermittent fasting or being in a ketogenic state etc aside - it basically does boil down to: if you eat more than you need, you put on weight, and if you eat less you lose it, then calorie counting does make sense. Yes there are other factors, but that's the biggest one, so that's probably why it's the most dominant approach. It also forces people to be more mindful about their food intake, and be aware of just how much they might be grazing/snacking without having realised.

On a personal level, I find that when I eat less I lose weight, and when I eat more I gain it; calories in, calories out. Also, intuitive eating doesn't work for me - I don't eat enough as hunger doesn't seem to register strongly with me, and I end up losing an unhealthy amount of weight.