engrevo

The Merit of Calorie Counting

March 9, 2011

Primal Toad has been generating lots of great content lately, and his series detailing a heart-healthy eating plan is no exception.

In the third installment, he decries the practice of counting calories (he’s gone on record before with a similar sentiment). I agree with him… sort of.

I certainly agree that for the large majority of people (even dieters), counting calories is unnecessary and even counter-productive. However, I think there are parties with something to gain from the practice (think: bodybuilders, fitness models, anyone navigating single-digit BF%, etc.).

Rest assured that you can live a very long and happy life complete with six-pack abs without tracking your intake. I know I have had great success in the past without weighing and measuring my food but I still think the practice of counting calories can be of value.

Jump for what Taubes meant and when counting helps.

Also included is a similar but distinct argument that calorie counting is useless because it is inaccurate. This is where I start to disagree. Toad has a quote from Gary Taubes in this post, and Taubes makes a very similar argument in his first-ever blog post. The argument is that counting calories is senseless because 20 extra calories per day results in 20 extra pounds of body fat.

Taubes presents this argument to illustrate that average caloric balance is not the driving factor of long-term fat loss, because it couldn’t possibly be controlled for by human intervention. His point is that the weight gain can’t be caused by 20 extra calories per day because no one can balance the books accurately enough to avoid overeating by a measly 20 calories.

His point is not that counting calories is useless because determining one’s energy balance is inherently mysterious (for most of us) and therefore inexact. In GCBC, Taubes states firmly that he believes in the “calories in, calories out” theory for weight management. That is to say, he believes fat loss requires a caloric deficit and that a caloric surplus will result in gaining weight.

He goes on to reveal that the solution is a diet that manages insulin and therefore hunger, allowing your body to mediate the magnitude of your intake the way it was meant to.

It seems to me that this boils down to:

Achieving exact “maintenance” by weighing and measuring is impossible, but with proper diet everything will work out to a reasonable equilibrium.

I think of it just like a close play at first base in baseball, or dropping a marble on a knife point. It’s not possible that the runner and the marble arrive at the same time (though many little league parents will tell you “tie goes to the runner”), just like the marble will always glance to one side of the knife point.

In the case of counting calories, this phenomenon is magnified by the error that (almost) everyone will have in their calculations for energy requirements and intakes. Without a lab full of space-age sciencey junk at your disposal, I’d venture to guess your numbers are off by 20% or more. Recalling the marble-and-knife, this error makes the marble bigger and the knife sharper. [I’m liking this marble and knife thing, so I’m going to run with it. Think of the marble as having (Diameter = Daily Intake + 2*Measurement Uncertainty), and the knife is your Daily Expenditure. I also like that the marble can deflect off to the side after striking the knife, representing a dieter changing their intake because of it’s relation to their calculated expenditure. Neato!]

To sum up to this point:

• Eating maintenance is impossible.
• Only a select few [read: scientist] can count calories accurately.
• I still think counting can be useful.

Calorie counting can be useful when you are trying to do one of two things:

1. Run a large deficit.
2. Compare very different intakes.

Those trying to lose body fat or gain muscle are familiar with point number one. In the case of the marble and knife, now we’re dropping the marble far away from the knife, so we’re more sure on which side it will land. I am currently counting calories for the purposes of point number two (for reasons which will become clear in a later post). I’m alternating between days of 20% under maintenance and 20% over maintenance. Granted, I’m never hitting my exact target (and my target is never exactly 20% from maintenance), but I’m quite confident that there is a significant difference in my intake on adjacent days, and relatively certain that these marbles are falling on opposite sides of the knife.

It is also very important to remember that “counting calories” does not necessarily entail action towards a specific magnitude of intake; one can weigh, measure, and log their food religiously without trying to hit a target number. In this case, the knife point is gone, and we’re just dropping marbles and recording where they land. This type of record can be useful data down the road.

An interesting sidebar on this discussion is whether caloric intake matters at all. I’ll attack this with vigor in an epic post down the line, but for this discussion, let’s just assume that it matters enough.

The Bottom Line:

Though it’s certainly not for everyone, “counting calories” can be an appropriate tool when used correctly in pursuit of a fitting goal.

 

*UPDATE* Toad now has put up a newer post on the subject.

 

Entry filed under: Calories. Tags: .