Thread: What does 300 cal. meals look like... Wow!

I'm on the mailing list of Sparkpeople. I only brose it once and a while, I take some tips and leave some, but this article slaped me on the back of my head.

Next time I don't have the time to eat breakfast and think "Oh! I'll just grab a muffin on the way"... I'll think twice

What Does 300 Calories Really Look Like?

Qamar

The truth can be ugly!

Thanks for the info....I think..c::

Seriously, that was an interesting link, and a real eye opener regarding "healthy" restaurant food.

wow! that is very eye opening. How do they manage to pack the calories into those restaurant foods?..c::..c::

I've joined Sparkpeople on January 3th 2010 ... really great website ! ( and losing the weight too !!)

another link for SP that's interesting : Outsmart Your Cravings with These Smarter Temptations !! :-)

I don't understand the site. I though you were to eat 2000 cal. a day? this site looks like it promoting eating half that amount.

Originally Posted by toria_dances

I don't understand the site. I though you were to eat 2000 cal. a day? this site looks like it promoting eating half that amount.

Yeah, I noticed that the breakfasts, lunches, and dinners only add up to 1050 cals., which is too low even for weight loss. Perhaps they are assuming there will be mid morning and mid afternoon snacks that add another few hundred calories in. I'm not familiar with the sparks people plans.

2000 is a ballpark estimate for what women need to maintain healthy weight -- but it is often too high for middle aged women. I've had my metabolism test and if I don't exercise, I only burn 1800 in a day.

Weight loss generally needs about a 500 cal/day deficit, so for most people that is 1200 to 1500 cals. So those meals are still too small unless there are snacks.

Toria, most women -- based on a VERY general standard -- unless they're heavily involved in physical activity, don't need 2000 calories a day to maintain a healthy body weight. It's hard to get a very accurate number without going through some expensive testing procedures, but there are decent tables based on your age, height, resting heart fat, and body-fat percentage (measured through calipers or bioelectrical impedence.) Usually these base rates end up around 1300-1500 calories a day. But that's VERY general -- and that's ONLY the amount of energy needed to keep your body processes functioning.

Now they add to that base rate a certain amount of energy required to do basic activities, like chew food, brush your hair, and sit upright. Add more energy if you have a job involving walking or medium amounts of energy expenditure, or if you engage in medium-energy-expenditure recreational activities like jogging, skating, tennis, etc. You add more if you're running 5 miles a day.

So if need 1300 calories a day just to walk upright, and you add a couple hundred as a not-quite-couch-potato, but not-an-athlete -- you end up around 1500-1800 calories to maintain your existing body weight.

To lose weight, you either cut back on energy taken in, or increase energy expended. So either cut calories back to 1300-1500 or get on the treadmill for a few nights a week.

Spark is very good about encouraging its clients to eat no less than 1260 calories a day, which pretty much all research says is the bare minimum for your body to function without freaking out. And on days when you do a lot of aerobics or heavy activity, you're supposed to eat more, to balance it out. I think they target a daily calorie deficit of 300 calories.

Originally Posted by ssipes

Yeah, I noticed that the breakfasts, lunches, and dinners only add up to 1050 cals., which is too low even for weight loss. .

Sedonia, I don't think they intended for you to do that -- add up those particular meals. I think they were just showing you how you can "save" calories by eating differently.

Spark is based around calorie-counting, and keeps a running total for you when you enter in the foods you eat. On days when I want a big breakfast, I can choose a lighter lunch or dinner, like the ones from this article, to balance out the high-cal bacon and egss. Or if I want pizza for dinner, I can choose a lighter breakfast.

If you join the site, you can get custom meal-plans, and they will all be around 1400-1500 calories daily.

I'm a small person, and 1200-1500 is my weight maintenance range. If I want to lose, I have to stay low, around 1200, and exercise very hard. If I went above 1500 on a regular basis I would gain weight.

JME

Wow, thanks for posting that!

I just joined sparkpeople, I hope to lose weight.

Eat FOOD, ladies, not calories!!!!

From the photos there is the fact that eating smart isn't always about eating less and that eating out is best as something you do occasionally and not as a lifestyle/regular things...all good...It's possible to have a healthier idea of what 1 serving is without being an obsessive calorie counter but I know that knowing the calories gives you some guidance (I live where I can't get calorie info).......but I am no friend of that "less" or "at-home healthy" involving lesser foods like "light/lite/lean/low-fat/fat-free" items.

Originally Posted by Azhia

Eat FOOD, ladies, not calories!!!!

Over the last 3 years, I've lost 35 pounds counting calories on Spark.

Spark taught me there's no such thing as a "bad food" if you only eat 100 calories of it. My eating habits changed drastically when I started looking at it that way. :)

...

Originally Posted by aziyade

Over the last 3 years, I've lost 35 pounds counting calories on Spark.

Spark taught me there's no such thing as a "bad food" if you only eat 100 calories of it. My eating habits changed drastically when I started looking at it that way. :)

I think that's wonderful for you, Aziyade!

I don't think there is any such thing as bad food either, but I don't like attaching numbers and figures and "nutrients" to food.

A friend of mine who counted calories ended up in the hospital for several months with severe anorexia nervosa. I'm not suggesting that anyone who counts calories will end up this way and if counting calories is the only method to help one lose weight, that's fine, but I guess my philosophy of food is to enjoy it and eat it, not count it.

What I really like about this site, is that it's free! You can get support from other people. Soooooo much information! I'm on WW and can use these recipes and figure out points. The nutritional value is posted. I don't have to pay for the site and buy exspensive ww recipe books or mags.

I'll be 44 this year and have struggled for the last several with weight issues. I just hope everyone can use this site and info safely. Be realistic about what your weight goals are! ,r:;

Originally Posted by Azhia

Eat FOOD, ladies, not calories!!!!

Azhia I love you for that!
I was thinking about you today, btw, as I was puzzling over some make up at Sephora.

Tammy

[QUOTE=Azhia;618372 I'm not suggesting that anyone who counts calories will end up this way and if counting calories is the only method to help one lose weight, that's fine, but I guess my philosophy of food is to enjoy it and eat it, not count it.[/QUOTE]

Azhia, that's great if it works for you, but for people who eat healthy foods but are still overweight, counting calories, tracking nutrients or measuring food servings can be a solution.

Eating what feels "sensible" and choosing healthy foods can work very well if you are already a healthy weight and have a healthy body image and have a certain amount of education about food, but it is unlikely to lead to weight loss in someone who needs to lose weight. Creating a calorie deficit is unpleasant. Moreover, there are parameters that the calorie deficit must lie within. If the deficit is not large enough, it will get swamped out by occasional "cheats" in the eating plan. If it is too large, it will lead to loss of energy, poor health, and possibly a rebound binge eating. Many people honestly do not know what portions of foods they need to eat, much less how to calculate a reduction of this amount that would allow them to lose weight in a healthy way, so to me it makes perfect sense to do some measuring and calorie counting.

There are other reasons to quantify food intake as well besides weight. I struggled with reactive hypoglycemia for many years. Then I gained weight, and found that trying to lose weight while keeping my blood sugar stable was even more of a challenge. I tried choosing only healthy foods but that alone didn't solve my problems. I tried eating different foods, but I never figured out how to optimize my carb intake until I started looking very carefully at what I ate -- by that I mean looking at how many calories I was eating per day, how those calories were distributed through the day, what percentage of my calories were coming from carbs, fat, and protein, etc.

After a significant period of time of studying the data and relating it to how I felt, I now know how I have to eat to avoid reactive hypoglycemia symptoms and stay a healthy weight. NOW I know how to visually assess what the proper serving of brown rice is per meal, or a proper serving of chicken, but I would not have this ability had I not done some time measuring food and counting calories.

To me, counting calories, carbs, protein, fiber, etc., assessing whether I'm eating enough vitamin C or calcium are an objective, more scientific way of managing my health.

Like anything, these tools can be abused by someone who is predisposed to destructive behaviors, but you can't really blame the tools.

Its sort of like if someone said: don't worry about knowing how much your paycheck is, how much your bills are, or about balancing your checkbook. Just work hard, try to live frugally, and everything will work out. Well...maybe, or maybe not. Okay, technically I haven't balanced my checkbook since the 80's but I do track my income and expenditures.

As for myself I don't count, I just try to eat smaller portions and more good food: more vegetables, fruits, nuts, less red meat and cold cuts, less sugar and deep fried stuff. But I don't want to get deprive from everything I like.

Last weekend, I had French fries (it has been a month since I had those). I only ate half the usual portion, and instead of dipping them in dijonnaise mayo, I mixed some plain yorgurt with spices and it was yummy!

And I still have a small piece or two of dark chocolate, every day when the sugar bug bites. One or two pieces, not the whole bar!.p::

I eat a lot slower now, I chew several times, taking time to smell the spice and herbs in the meal. I also took the resolution to cook more from scratch, and I found out that sometime it does not take that much longer.

Making a bechamel sauce from butter, milk and flour and your own touch of herbs and spices is no longer than openning and envloppe and mix it with water. We don't need all the preservatives, additives, msg, over amount of salt, and all the craps that are in those mix. ..c::

Oops, almost lunch time... got to go! Hugs

Qamar

Originally Posted by Azhia

Eat FOOD, ladies, not calories!!!!

And don't forget to exercise! I can eat 2,000 calories a day if I work out five days a week. But as I get older, to maintain my weight I need to eat about 1,500 calories a day and work out three times a week.

Luckily I like to exercise a lot so it's not a big problem. But once I start eating out at restaurants a lot, it's amazing how fast the pounds start sticking to me.

no wonder i gained the Freshmen 15. i ate a starbucks muffin almost everyday XD

One of my problems was that I actually wasn't getting ENOUGH calories on a regular basis. I had dropped a lot of my extra weight, but couldn't lose any more. Well, at about 800 calories a day, your body goes bonkers and stores that fat as hard as it can.

With counting calories I was able to see that 800 calories was my average. I kicked it up to 1300 (thinking that was WAY too much food) and lost an additional 20 pounds in about a year. I still keep thinking I want to lose 20 more, but the husband thinks that's ridiculous. I just hate the muffin-top thing :)

Oh and alcohol -- NOT a dieter's friend. LOL.

Originally Posted by eden_eyes

no wonder i gained the Freshmen 15. i ate a starbucks muffin almost everyday XD

I read that if you eat a donut everyday you will gain 15 pounds in one year. Even if your breakfast is the same amount of calories in another form of food, because of the fat content in donuts, you will gain the weight. So eating fat free does help as long as you don't go crazy with it.

Originally Posted by Fotia

I read that if you eat a donut everyday you will gain 15 pounds in one year. Even if your breakfast is the same amount of calories in another form of food, because of the fat content in donuts, you will gain the weight. So eating fat free does help as long as you don't go crazy with it.

Dietary fat doesn't make you fat!

I'm not advocating donuts, don't get me wrong. Donuts are not good foods. They are a lethal combination of bad carbs and bad fats, both of which have very real disease-causing effects. But they don't make you fat just because they have fat.

But eating low fat and fat free is not a sure path to weight loss or weight maintenance. More often than not, when people cut fat, those calories get replaced with carbs, and eating too many carbs at one sitting can have a cascade of negative physiological reactions.

Originally Posted by Fotia

I read that if you eat a donut everyday you will gain 15 pounds in one year. Even if your breakfast is the same amount of calories in another form of food, because of the fat content in donuts, you will gain the weight. So eating fat free does help as long as you don't go crazy with it.

I'd like to see some links for that factoid. Ssipes reply says everything else I'd want to say.

A calorie is a calorie, the content of said calorie doesn't make you fat the calorie makes you fat.

If you eat high fat foods you are usually getting more calories because 1 gram of fat has 9 calories vs the 4 calories in 1 gram of carbohydrate or 1 gram protien.

I can see both sides of the calorie counting.

I do count calories and nutrients for a week or so every couple months just to take the pulse of my current diet. I am a vegetarian so I have to work at getting protein and iron into my diet. That means I want to be careful not to spend my daily calories on too many carbs--tough for me, as I love bread. Also, right now I'm recovering from surgery and need to stay on a very low sodium diet, so keeping track of my nutrients helps with that as well.

On the other hand, I do think a lot of people would lose weight simply by opting for healthier things and downsizing portions. Only eating until you are comfortably no longer hungry, rather than feeling very full.

The down side there is that people often do not realize how many calories they are actually consuming in the average day--it adds up faster than most people think. So, back to my original point, I think tracking your food intake either at the beginning of a new healthy lifestyle or to periodically assess one's diet can be a big help.

Originally Posted by Jujube

Only eating until you are comfortably no longer hungry, rather than feeling very full.

I agree with your post, I'll just add that for me the above serves to maintain my weight. Losing weight is uncomfortable and I think it is unavoidable. I can generally do ok with a calorie deficit until post dinner. Sort of like a bill collector demanding payment, that is when my body settles up for the day, realizes I'm shorting it several hundred calories, and starts demanding that I settle the bill with a 10pm pb&j. Going to bed hungry just sucks.,f::