Quote Originally Posted by despero View Post
I have a really nice program on my phone that tracks all my meals. The only problem I have is trying to figure out certain foods. Like a peice of fried chicken...or if I make myself a salad. So some of that stuff is just a guess....like how much salad dressing I used. An ounce, less, more...I don't know. I guess at around an ounce. Same for the salad. I don't know how much is there...a cup, 2, etc. Its easy if I eat a yogurt, or a pack of instant oatmeal, something that's cut and dry, and tells you up front how many calories are there. But when you start getting into home made meals, I'm really bad at trying to figure out how much this or that...you know what I mean?
Yea, homemade meals can be tough unless the recipe lists calories, etc.

Of course a digital food scale helps. All ingredients/foods can be weighed in ounces or grams and looked up for calories and nutrients.

Most aren't that anal retentive though.

Though I will admit I have my clients weigh their foods initially just to get a good feel for what various portion sizes of various foods equate to in terms of calorie and nutrient content. The goal, however, is to ween them off of relying on a scale so they don't have to be obsessive.

The scale doesn't come back out unless things aren't "working."

You mentioned a food scale....are those expensive? And do they work good?
Expensive?

Nope. I mean just as with everything else... there are high end models that can get pricey. That said, I think I picked up my first digital food scale at target for 20-30 bucks.

I have a better one now that was roughly 100, but the cheaper one worked just as well.

I usually pack a lunch for work, have instant oatmeal for breakfast, then my husband makes dinner. So convenience is a big factor. But if I need to buckle down on something, let me know. I really want to make sure I do everything right this time.
Well there are two choices; 1) you wing it - make wise choices and calories/nutrients have a decent chance of falling into place or 2) you track intake to assure calories/nutrients fall into place.

One is not right and the other wrong. Or better/worse. It's a matter of preference and suitability.

If you're going with #1... it's a good idea to make sure protein is the foundation of your. Why? Well, it does a lot of great things while dieting such as satiates more than any other nutrient, expends more calories in digestion than any other nutrient, preserves lean tissue while dieting, etc.

Each meal should have a healthy dose of protein in it. For instance, breakfast of just oatmeal isn't going to cut it from my perspective.

It might help to tell you the very general/basic way I conceptualize diet design.

Since a calorie deficit MUST be in place for fat loss to occur, regardless of what foods you're eating, I assure this first.

1. Set calories at a deficit from maintenance
2. Set protein
3. Set fat
4. Assure an abundance of calorically-sparse, nutrient dense veggies and fruits
5. Fill in the remaining caloric allotment with carbs and/or more fat.

When setting calories, I'll typically start with something like 15 calories per pound as an estimated maintenance. From there, I'll set the target intake at something like 20-40% below maintenance.

Suppose that comes to 1500 calories for someone who's 140 lbs who's trying to get down to 120 lbs.

We know:

1 gram of protein gives us appoximately 4 calories.

1 gram of carb gives us approximately 4 calories.

1 gram of fat gives us approximiately 9 calories.

1 gram of alcohol gives us approximately 7 calories.

Since protein is the foundation for reasons already mentioned, I'll start with that. Something like 1-1.5 grams per pound of goal bodyweight is a good target. In this example, she would shoot for 120 grams of protein (1 x 120). This would account for 480 calories (4 x 120). This leaves us with 1,020 calories to "fill."

Next is fat. Something like 30% of total calories is a decent target. This equates to 450 calories worth of fat (.30 x 1500). 450 calories from fat is equivalent to 50 grams of fat.

This leaves us with 570 calories to fill (1500 - 480 - 450). This is where things get very individual. Some people tolerate carbs much better than others. Some people need higher levels of carbs to support training schedules. The list goes on.

Theoretically you could fill the remaining calories with all carbs which would come to 140 or so grams of carbs. Of you could do some carbs and some more fats/proteins. Or whatever. This is where experimentation comes into play.

But this is my general thought process. You can either calculate things to a "T" or you can say, okay... I need a good base of protein, some healthy fats, a bunch of fiber and vitamins from veggies and fruits and I can round all this off with some starchy carbs. See how that goes.

Some people can get by without being anal about things. They adhere to the whole, natural foods using a balanced approach and this, by its nature, tends to self-regulate calorie intake. Others, without tracking, tend to overeat calories.

People have asked me "are you dieting" and I always answer with "No, I've changed my eating habits, is all" I don't believe in "dieting", at least for me. Becuase that means something that will eventually end, or go off of. Well, I'm not planning on going off of anything. I need to change a lot of habits in order to get to a healthy lifestyle, and eating is one of them. So if I have to sacrifice convenience, then so be it. I'm willing to do what it takes. I'm determined!!!
That's a very good attitude.