Anonymous wrote:This is real for me, so please help me decide.
Which one is better for me right now? I’m attempting a 3-week food journal or tracking so I can show my doctors that nothing is moving the needle.
1. Calorie tracking. I was aiming for a 500 cal deficit. I figured out my steady state is 2000-2200. So I figure I will attempt a range of 1500-1900.
2. Just a food journal. This has the plus of allowing me to be, ironically, more accurate? Not more accurate… I mean. It’s hard to track calories accurately. A simple food journal with no quantities helped me lose 15 pounds a couple of years ago.
The less work of a food journal that helps me see overall patterns but not measuring food, helps me track things I eat out, or the random meal served by my friend at a dinner party. Instead of being unable to track that meal.
This second thing is better in some ways…. But it’s not working anymore. I gained all my weight back. Plus recently another 5 lbs pretty rapidly.
**this is a real, and sort of upsetting, debate in my head. Please help me go forward.
If you want to show your doctors that "nothing is moving the needle" then you need to trach with 100% accuracy and consistency. I can list everything I ate today and it would look great but if I don't include quantities then it really doesn't mean much.
Another thing to track is your consistency. if you have a calorie deficit goal but only really hit that target 60 or 70% of the time then that is important to know because eating in a deficit M-f then overeating all weekend will definitely make losing a LOT harder.