The Calories You Burn

Part Two
   Here is a way to get a (very) rough estimate of the amount of calories you are burning in a day.  This is for people who have been weight stable for at least a year.  If you are currently at a steady weight,  write down everything (remember the Micky Mantra - every bite, lick and taste) you ate yesterday and the day before.  Write down everything for today and do the same thing tomorrow.  That should give you four days to average.  Do NOT change your normal behavior - this includes eating out. If you usually eat out, then you need to capture those meals in your average.
   There are many tools available on line (and perhaps in print) that can help you determine the calorie amounts for all of the foods on your list, if you have the serving sizes.  [You might have to go four days forward instead of two days backwards for accuracy.  The reason I suggested that you start with past days (even though you may forget something) is so you won't change your pattern because you are thinking about it.]
   If you purchase foods away from home, you can usually get calorie information from the restaurant's website, but it may be slightly or largely inaccurate.  If you prepare your own meals, you can get info on the ingredients from the USDA website.  When you feel pretty confident that you have the four days individual totals, add them together, divide by four and that is your average.  Remember this is only going to work if you are tracking what you normally eat.
  If you are stable, the number you came up with should be the same number that you burn.  TEI total energy intake = TEE total energy expenditure in weight stable people.  
   I will tell you that this type of estimate is closer than any you can get by trying to track your energy burn, outside of a clinical, laboratory setting.  The machines at your gym are NOT accurate.  Your GPS systems and sports watches are not either (but they are a good measure of consistency and changes - in other words they are reliable even if they are not valid)
  I want to be very clear that what I just told you is offered as a way for you to assess in general terms, the amount of energy you use in a day.  It is not meant to suggest how many calories you need to maintain or lose weight.  The only qualified nutrition guidance that applies to individuals is provided by licensed/registered dieticians.  Remember that even if you forget everything else you read.  Your personal trainer at the gym is NOT qualified to give you diet advice, unless of course, he or she is an RD.  
  Nutritional science continues to grow and to challenge our  assumptions about food and weight.  We are learning that a calorie is not a calorie. What you eat can have an impact on your metabolic processes.  Again, that is a discussion to have with a nutrition expert.
   Ah, but let me get back to the conversation started with the Lowe article.  We will use me as an example.  I am very confident that my calorie intake varies from 1600 to 1680 calories a day (higher if I am running more).  This keeps me, a very active person who is short and thin, at a stable weight.  If I shift that range by even 70 calories, to between 1750 and 1830 a day, I will gain several pounds in a year.  Seems like nothing, but of course, we have shifted our normal calorie intake by as many as 300 calories a day and gained many pounds.  This can be reversed, in general and at the population level, by a 500 calorie reduction (some say).   Sounds like a lot, but if you are one of the people eating 3000 calories a day  and switch to low energy dense foods, its a piece of ......... its not that hard.
 

Unlimited Food Supply and Biscuits

   Last night I made myself a note to write about Red Lobster's cheddar cheese biscuits because the restaurant is currently running its Four Course Seafood Feast special. I believe I broke that down last year (calorie wise), so you can search the blog for the details.  However, I heard the commercial yesterday and this time I was struck by this... "served with unlimited cheddar cheese biscuits".
   Today I read an article about the need for people to regulate their eating because of the abundance of food in our environment.  Food is available in unlimited supply.  Our brains are wired to eat when we see food, even if we are not hungry.  This was a survival mechanism 100 and more years ago (but is now contributing to disease and disability).  In our evolutionary history, it was unlikely that we'd ever become sedentary.  Another part of our brain is "turned on" by energy dense foods that are high in sugar and fat. Again - that was not a problem for our ancestors but it is a big problem for us.  
   Biological drives are not the only thing we have to contend with today.  We also have the social influences and a change in consumption norms.  (It now seems normal to eat hamburgers that are three times the size they were in 1950 and our office mates are constantly encouraging us to "try some" of the latest baked good).
   Nutrition/Public Health advocates generally fall into two groups. I am of the group that wants to manipulate the environment ( a little) so that we are not constantly bombarded with these foods and the pressure to eat them (i.e. $ 14.99 for a gluttonous feast).  If we change the environment, there will be less need for individuals to override their urges and other pressures. (less need for the elusive will power)
   Our inability to lose weight and keep that weight off (achieved by a rare few), is well documented.  We know that we should not eat something just because its there - and yet we do.
   I was going to talk about the article I read in tomorrow's post and I expect that I still will.  But for now, here are some comments on the food environment and efforts to control/regulate intake on a personal level. It starts with a statement on low energy dense foods as one solution (article citation is at the end of the blog) :

 ....if people try to avoid weight gain by limiting themselves to smaller portions of foods that are relatively high in energy density, they will have to restrict their food intake and cope with resulting feelings of hunger and deprivation. The virtue of a low energy dense diet is that it allows people to eat a satisfying amount of food while limiting energy intake (AKA Volumetrics, see my You Tube Channel for how to do this)

The mere presence of a food is often sufficient to elicit a drive to eat it.

...the fact that some people demonstrate such tight and prolonged control over their food intake, physical activity and body weight does not mean that weight control professionals are able to instill this ability among those that do not naturally possess it. (and I will add, those who do not posses this should NOT beat themselves up about it)

(with regard to the risk of dieting leading to eating disorders).... it may be even more important to determine why so many people are not more restrained eaters than it is to determine why a small percentage become so restrained that they develop disordered eating.

 I have to say that when I went to the Red Lobster website today - I saw a picture of some of the options in their feast and it looked like grilled fish and steamed vegetables were available (skip the 150 calorie, 2.5 g saturated fat biscuits).

Lowe, M. (2003). Self-Regulation of Energy Intake in the Prevention and Treatment of Obesity: Is It Feasible? Obesity, 11(10S), 44S-59S.