iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

The 'Everything In Moderation' Myth

Everything In Moderation

First Posted: 09/12/11 09:14 AM ET Updated: 11/12/11 05:12 AM ET

By Jennifer Appenrodt for YouBeauty.com

You can scarf down that plate of fries as long as you put in an extra 30 minutes at the gym, right? Sorry to burst your caloric-counting bubble, but it’s possible that it's not so simple.

“Calories in versus calories out” has become a sort of one-size-fits-all mantra for those wanting to fit into that one-size-too-small dress. This widespread theory has bred a generation of calorie-counting devotees who can rationalize eating anything as long as they keep below their daily calorie limit -- or put in extra time at the gym.

More on YouBeauty.com:
QUIZ: What’s your eating style?
Are Low-Fat Foods Making You Fat?
QUIZ: What’s your stress level?

Out of the calorie-obsessed culture sprouted the uplifting idea of "everything in moderation," which may have started as a way to help people feel less obsessed with food, but has spiraled into a free pass to "treat yourself" to a supersized ice cream sundae every week.

What’s The Deal?
“Caloric theory is woefully inadequate and dramatically incomplete,” says Marc David, an expert in nutritional psychology and founder of the Institute for the Psychology of Eating in Boulder, Colo. “In the way nutritional science understands calorie burning as it relates to weight, it’s very primitive.”

Though David admits there are useful aspects to the theory, he believes that it oversimplifies the understanding of weight. “The mass media wants to make it ‘Here’s what everybody should do and here is the simple answer,” says David. “But weight is much more complex and involves many other factors.”

According to this theory, one problem with counting calories is that you are (wrongly) assuming that all calories are created equal. Eating fewer calories won't do your health any favors if all those calories come from reduced-fat potato chips and Tasti D-Lite.

A study conducted at Harvard School of Public Health focused on which diet and lifestyle factors prevent weight gain in the first place. “We found that the conventional wisdom to focus only on total calories, or even on total fat or sugars, will be less effective than focusing on the quality of the overall diet,” says lead author of the study Darius Mozaffarian, M.D., a cardiologist and epidemiologist at Harvard Medical School in Boston.

The results showed that, when it comes to losing weight, it’s actually more about quality than quantity when it comes to what you put in your mouth. “Eating more of several specific foods was actually associated with relative weight loss,” says Dr. Mozaffarian. “This indicates that the path to eating fewer calories is not to simply count calories, but to focus on consuming a more healthy diet in general.”

Dr. Mozaffarian points out that one of his major problems with caloric theory is that people choose the wrong targets for "good" versus "bad" foods. They select foods as "good" based on low calories, fat or sugar per serving rather than overall dietary quality and health effects. A good example is nuts, which have 165 calories per serving but have actually been proven to aid in weight loss. Soda, on the other hand, has fewer (120) calories per serving, but has been linked to weight gain.

“Or a much more common example is people choosing reduced-fat potato chips or crackers to lower calories when all they are doing is reducing the healthy vegetable oils and leaving starch and salt,” says Dr. Mozaffarian. “’Fat-free’ bagels, other white breads and ‘sugar-free’ refined breakfast cereals are also considered healthy when they are simply refined grains that have similar effects as eating table sugar -- or perhaps even worse given their added salt.”

And then there's the popular weight-loss mantra “everything in moderation.” As in: Go on, girl, eat that cake … just don’t eat the whole cake. "Everything in moderation can mean anything to anyone, providing a free pass to eat whatever you want,” says Dr. Mozaffarian. Not to mention that the general public's perception of portion sizes is so skewed that "only one" piece of cake could really be the equivalent of say, three.

Even if you eat small portions, there are such things as “bad” foods, and even a small amount of a bad thing does not equal a good thing. “The food you eat affects your proteins and genes long after it has passed out of your body,” says YouBeauty co-founder Dr. Michael Roizen. “For example, if you consume too much sugar it changes your protein structure for the entire life of that protein, which is 180 days -- so that means that the protein stops doing its job for 180 days.”

A huge reason the caloric theory is so widespread is that many national and government organizations still recommend cutting calories by reducing fats, such as recommending low-fat or non-fat salad dressings, as well as eating and cooking vegetables, fish and other foods without added fat.

But research has shown that cutting out fat has little relation to weight gain and in some cases, “good fat” can actually aid in weight loss. “Our findings show that fat content, per se, has little relation to which foods or beverages were associated with weight gain,” says Dr. Mozaffarian. “For example, non-fat foods such as refined breads and cereals were associated with weight gain, some higher fat foods such as whole-fat milk and cheese were neutral and other higher fat foods such as nuts were associated with relative weight loss.”

How To Help Yourself

Now that your fat-and-calorie-counting mind has been blown, try these simple dietary changes that can have a big impact.

Go for quality over quantity. Eat more minimally processed foods like fruits, vegetables, nuts and whole grains, recommends Dr. Mozaffarian. Aim to consume fewer starches and refined foods like potatoes, white bread, low-fiber breakfast cereals, processed meats, sweets and soda. And it bears repeating that it’s important to break a sweat regularly and get enough sleep to prevent the number on the scale from creeping up.

Watch stress levels -- one of the biggest impacts on metabolism. “Stress chemistry day in and day out slows down the calorie-burning metabolism,” says David. “It’s a profoundly hidden reason, but it’s huge when it comes to losing weight.”

Stop counting calories. Kick the calorie-counting habit once and for all. “The goal is for people to relax, enjoy the pleasures and tastes of their food and reduce obsessions over nutrition labels and calorie or fat counts,” says Dr. Mozaffarian.


FOLLOW HUFFPOST HEALTHY LIVING

By Jennifer Appenrodt for YouBeauty.com You can scarf down that plate of fries as long as you put in an extra 30 minutes at the gym, right? Sorry to burst your caloric-counting bubble, but it’s...
By Jennifer Appenrodt for YouBeauty.com You can scarf down that plate of fries as long as you put in an extra 30 minutes at the gym, right? Sorry to burst your caloric-counting bubble, but it’s...
Filed by Julie R. Thomson  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 27
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
03:06 AM on 09/28/2011
Regarding overweight people, imatruepatriot says 'calories have nothing to do with it". Sorry, but this is a false statement. If the statement were preceded by "for some people" or "sometimes" or " in some cases" then it would be true. Since it is not, the statement is false. This is basic freshman level logic. Everything else being equal, an increase in calories WILL cause weight gain. Yes insulin resistance plays a part, yes exercise plays a part, yes genetics plays a part, and yes calories play a very BIG part.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Nelson Montana
Artist, Author, Composer
11:05 AM on 09/19/2011
Oh, and that statement about eating sugar affecting the processing of protein for 180 days....WHAT THA....?
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Nelson Montana
Artist, Author, Composer
11:02 AM on 09/19/2011
The major contradiction here is the point of the article is the exact opposite of the title. Eating as much as you want and then exercising it off is not an "everything in moderation" approach. It's a "one excess negates another excess" approach.
06:07 PM on 09/14/2011
I agree with pierre99. Why do so many think they need to tell others how to eat? "Don't ever skip breakfast", Eat many small meals throughout the day", "Don't ever go shopping while hungry", " Don't ever let yourself get hungry" " Eat low fat", Eat low carb", "Avoid the demon sugar". I eat what I want when I want, lots of veges, some protein, fat, carbs...you know: FOOD, and I never deny myself dessert, usually twice a day. I walk 5 miles of hills in the morning and do a 25 mile bike ride or an hour long treadmill workout in the afternoon or evening. If I'm busy I sometimes will start my treadmill workout as late as 11pm. Oh yes, of course, that must be wrong also.
07:58 AM on 09/14/2011
I agree and disagree with certain points Jennifer makes. Sure, some foods don't provide great nutrition, but 1 cookie certainly isn't harmful, it's the entire bag that our nation eats that's bad for our health. Check out this article on the same subject, but with a different perspective.

http://www.angrytrainerfitness.com/2011/03/ask-alfonso-are-all-calories-created-equal/
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tomteboda
05:57 PM on 09/13/2011
Dr. Roizen, for all his accomplishments, is an anesthesiologist. His specialty area is not carbohydrate metabolism, and his unreferenced claim about permanent alteration (and deactivation) of protein structure with sugar exposure stretches all credulity. As a chemist whose graduate work was in protein structure and carbohydrate metabolism, I have never read any credible scientific work to verify such a claim.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sunnybunny
02:42 PM on 09/13/2011
Moderation works good for me for maintaining weight. I only seem to gain when I go for long periods where I overindulge frequently. However, losing weight does not happen either without going for long periods of time consciously, consistently depriving myself of those indulgences (I am referring to 3-6 months at least - whether gaining or losing , but losing is so much harder). Either way I stay the same size if I don't go to either extreme.So, moderation is apparently the key to staying the same size and if that's your goal then there ya go.
06:59 AM on 09/13/2011
If you changed "everything in moderation" to "anything in moderation," it would be a much more useful phrase. It's like trying to explain to my son that while we can afford that toy, we can't afford every toy, so you have to make sure that when you buy a toy it's the one that will be the most fun to play with.

Dr. Mozaffarian was the author of the study that looked at what people ate and weight gain over several years. In the write up of the study, they specifically attribute the weight difference to differences in calorie consumption. But I see all of these quotes from him (this is the second article on this site alone referencing his work) saying the exact opposite. It is troubling.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tomteboda
06:00 PM on 09/13/2011
I like your comparison to toys. I believe you are exactly right... a handful of potato chips shouldn't destroy a healthy diet, its the handful of chips followed by a piece of cake followed by a bowl of ice cream followed by a candy bar followed by lard-fried chicken.... all in one day!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
onionboy
Blessed are the Cheese Makers
11:09 PM on 09/12/2011
Pablum. Every bit of advice in this article serves to do one thing...reduce calorie intake...which is supposed to be what it's NOT about. Eat a lot of unprocessed foods, fruits and vegetables? Of course. What does that mean? Fiber...which means greater satiety and reduced caloric density.

I mean, it's starts off equating a plate full of fries with 30 minutes at the gym. Who's doing that math? Yes, if you eat like that, you'll gain weight. But that IS about calories in vs. calories out. On the other hand, if you look at a more mathematically reasonable example....well, then there'd be no article.
photo
iRock
and that's all that needs to be said...
08:45 PM on 09/12/2011
I eat about a half cup of lentils and maybe some brown rice or diced tomatoes when i'm hungry.

is this too many carbs, or are these the good kinds of carbs to eat? or are the starchy too?

sometimes i don't know what to eat
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
onionboy
Blessed are the Cheese Makers
11:03 PM on 09/12/2011
It's fine. You're half-cup of lentils is maybe 100-calories. More importantly, though, the lentils and the brown rice have a lot of fiber. I find that fiber is a huge help when it comes to satiety.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Oceras
Tax High Incomes!
11:56 AM on 10/03/2011
A cup of lentils has 40 grams of carbohydrate, but it has 16 grams of dietary fiber. That yields a net carbohydrate content of 24 grams. And it has 16 grams of protein. Lentils are a great food.

The following is a great source for nutrition information on a great many foods.

http://nutritiondata.self.com/tools/nutrient-search
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
southerncaliforniaguy
04:15 PM on 09/12/2011
Moderation translates to the other side of the sea-saw. Activity level of your body. That simple.
I once spent three years eating a muffin or brownie every morning with my coffee, my job also had me walking miles around huge stages for ten hours or more a day and I ate healthy so it was moderate but the job was the exception. Now I am at a desk more, so if I did that I'd gain, so I do it twice a week and walk, bike to work. So moderation translates to what you have riding on the other side of the sea-saw. I hope that helps keep it simple. Just draw one out and figure it out yourself. You will see very quickly what is moderation on paper.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Buck Winthrop
Pulp-fiction novelist, publicist, pop culturist.
04:13 PM on 09/12/2011
I think it is very healthy to have a piece of rich cake or piece of pizza once in a while. People who deprive themselves of everything and watch every single crumb they put into their mouth are simply not living. Indulging within reason keeps you on track for the over-all healthy life style.
02:09 PM on 09/12/2011
I agree with most of this theory but to be fair most people who work out regularly at the gym are unlikely to sit and eat a plate full of fries thinking they're 'allowed' the calories. If you work out frequently and have a reasonable understanding of calories I think the 'everything in moderation' idea works fairly well...
photo
bump00000
The Seventh Chakra, amazon
02:07 PM on 09/12/2011
Wait a minute. Everything in moderation, doesn't mean super size. It means exactly what it says. Some food, some exercise etc,... Moderation doesn't mean over indulge and then over excerpt to make up for it.
photo
HerrMonk
Fighter, Trainer, Nat.Sec.Consultant, Libertine
01:14 PM on 09/12/2011
Yes, up there with the Lipid Hypothesis (myth), the "Everything in Moderation" theory might be the most damaging bit if misinformation/misdirection in the nutrition world at the moment.

This idea that you can continue to eat pretty much whatever you want (you certainly needn't totally eliminate anything from your diet) as long as you 'balance' it out with something 'healthy' or work it off has contributed enormously to our obesity epidemic.

There are so many unhealthy epiphenomena this attitude gives birth to you could write a couple books on it, yet, some people continue to chant it as if it's the solution to every problem: Everything in moderation...