Hopefully if you’ve read these blogs for any length of time, you’ll be aware that a calorie deficit needs to be in place for weight loss to occur.
You’ll also hopefully be aware that I understand that there is more to “healthy eating” (and eating in general) than a calorie deficit.
But that doesn’t negate the fact that that needs to occur for weight loss to happen.
It’s a fairly regular conversation I have where people question the ‘accuracy’ of “counting calories”.
And I fully agree that’s it’s only so accurate.
The process, that is.
Not the fundamental concept.
There’s only so much accuracy in the numbers we work with – both in what’s in our food and in what our maintenance, deficit and surplus numbers look like.
But that doesn’t mean that energy balance isn’t occurring.
That doesn’t mean that, in super controlled laboratory environments, where calorie balance is kept within a verified range of +/- 20 calories a day……..
Everyone ever assessed has lost weight when in a deficit at pretty similar rates.
The issue is the limitations of accuracy in the methods of measurement available to us.
So, is the answer to go for an event less accurate method?
Portion control, counting points, different coloured days and so on are all perfectly valid approaches.
But they’re all even less accurate than tracking calories.
If they work for someone, that’s awesome.
No right or wrong.
If it’s working.
Just questioning the reasoning of shifting from the most accurate method available to us……..
To an even less accurate one……..
Because the most accurate one isn’t as accurate as we’d ideally like.
Much love,
Jon ‘Laser’ Hall
P.S. If what you’re doing isn’t working (long term), then jumping in here will make it way more likely you achieve those elusive, lasting results (I literally guarantee it) —> www.myrise.co.uk/apply
——————————————————————-
RISE in Macclesfield was established in 2012 and specialise in Group Personal Training weight loss programmes for those that don’t like the gym and find diets boring and restrictive!
