Paleo Diet and Paleolithic Diet Questions & Answers

Question

2

Okay I am curious to what fellow Paleo's out there think about the idea of negative calorie foods? When counting calories, can I count everything EXCEPT live raw foods such as baby carrots, grape tomatoes, cucumbers, bell peppers, jicama, etc? I'm trying to eat low calorie during the week days, and have one day of freedom on Sunday (still with Paleo foods of course) but was wondering if I should count those raw foods towards my calories during the week days or if they actually are negative calorie and shouldn't be worried about? For those of you who don't believe in counting calories and are shaking their head at me, I'm doing this because I find when I don't, my weight can go up a few or MORE pounds which is a YIKES in my book. It's too hard to restrict calories every SINGLE day at a maintainence level, but I'm finding going lower than maintainence level during the week Monday-Saturday and then not counting calories at all (above maintainence level probably) on Sundays, to work for me. So hey, it seems to be working so that's all that matters right? But anyways, are the live raw foods mentioned actually negative calorie or do they still need to be accounted for? Thank you!

**EDIT Thank you for all your comments, because of them I've decided to stop calorie counting. Rather continue short IFs and focus on “what food will give me the greatest satiety, in the smallest portion?” Instead of “how much food can I eat with the smallest amount of calories?” That second question is what I need to STOP doing because it probably streches my stomach out and I'm full but not satisfied, like some of you said. I did this the past two days and it worked well. Thank you everyone!!

edited Aug 26 at 15:38

asked Aug 23 at 3:17

Amber
1,293●7●20

4

Every cal you eat counts. Whether you've heated it or not is not very important. – ben61820 Aug 23 at 3:54

Thank you for all the helpful comments and im sorry if i wasnt clear but im not eating ONLY those raw foods during the week, i IF from 6pm-12pm each day bulletproof style (tea, 2 T butter, 2 T CO) and then a homemade salad with meat later, so im not starving myself of nutrient dense foods, but as far as "just listening to body" ill eat more than i should. so im counting calories during the week, but i'm by no means surviving on carrots and celery alone, just in ADDITION to the other foods so accompy satiety. – Amber Aug 23 at 23:03

arugula · Accepted Answer · 2012-08-23 18:23:51Z UTC

0

This doesn't answer your question but calorie counting is just so maddening for me. I had hit a weight plateau last year and my usual paleo practices (keto, pushing more weights) weren't budging the inches off my waist and other parts. Then I tried (due to some serious health motivation) and got a great body response to IF and portion control without counting calories. I basically just ate smaller physical amounts of meat, fats, and starches when I had them. Veggies I still allowed freely. Fruit I also allowed but maybe once every other day and, again, small portions. Like I said, it doesn't answer your question I just hate the idea of anyone using a calorie counter since it drives me nuts! :)

answered Aug 23 at 18:23

arugula
1,063●1●3●8

awesome to know arugula!! this is exactly what i do as far as IF! but i struggle with portion control, so during the week i feel i have to count calories. i was just wondering about raw veggies and if their calories were significant, but its good to know that you eat them freely as an addition to quality meats, fats, and starches. Thats what i do basically since SMALL portions of everything besides veggies usually results in lower calories :) good to know it is sucessful for you – Amber Aug 23 at 23:22

What is your struggle with portion control? Is it not being able to look at a steak and determine how many ounces it is? Or is it a self-control issue? It sounds to me like you have some self control since you're using the calorie measure to reign in your intake. So if it is volume/size/visual confusion, I can tell you that I simply tell myself, "I'll eat half of that and that's all." or "I'll eat two-thirds of that" Like with sweet potatoes, I still ate them but I'd eat about a third of one instead of a half with a meal. If I made a stir-fry with ground beef, I increased the veggies going... – arugula Aug 24 at 15:03

1

...into it by a lot - another 50% of veggies let's say. If I had a giant chicken breast in front of me, I'd just take half of it. I suspect that if I did run the amounts through a calculator, it would still look like quite a good diet in terms of protein, fat and veg intake. good luck! – arugula Aug 24 at 15:05

good idea. you've made me want to try not calorie counting. only eat half. thank you so much !! – Amber Aug 26 at 15:34

CD · Answer 2 · 2012-08-23 12:27:45Z UTC

This is exactly the problem with calorie counting. Depending on what you eat, and what you eat it with, and your gut health, and 100 other things the calories out changes.

And I am not talking about exercise, simply the effort it takes your body to digest, process, extract, and excrete foods changes. Celery is low calorie, and difficult to break down. Some people say that celery is negative calories (I cannot believe that).

Don't count the calories, eat healthy and the body will follow.

Diane · Answer 3 · 2012-08-23 18:13:06Z UTC

6

I have found that trying to fool my appetite with low calorie foods only backfires. Eating nutritionally dense foods with significant calories in small portions works a lot better. Being full doesn't equal being satisfied, is what I'm getting at.

answered Aug 23 at 18:13

Diane
4,259●2●9

1

Amen to this. Eating nutritionally-dense foods should be the focus whether or not the goal is weight loss. Otherwise, cycles of stress and hunger signals make everything worse. – Canis Minor Aug 23 at 18:20

thank you so much :) im still eating nutrient dense foods, i was just wondering about the ADDITION of live foods and if their calories were significant – Amber Aug 23 at 23:07

James · Answer 4 · 2012-08-23 03:24:55Z UTC

3

They still contain calories. Just probably not as much as stated because not all raw foods get fully digested.

answered Aug 23 at 3:24

James
599●2●7

1

Also to add. It depends what the TEF of the vegetables is. If they are raw they could not only not get fully digested, but they may also spend more energy processing digestion. That could possible leave you with an extremely low amount of energy provided by the vegetables. I think I might try that some time, living on nothing but vegetables for a week and see how much weight I lose. – James Aug 23 at 8:44

Primal NOLA · Answer 5 · 2012-08-23 05:19:06Z UTC

1

My guess is that high fiber green vegetables are indeed providing negative calories. I cannot provide any citations to support this. Now obviously if you subsisted on nothing but green non-starchy vegetables for any great length of time and didn't die, then they must be providing a net positive energy balance, and I'm sure this has been done before.

The question is whether adding green non-starchy vegetables to an otherwise energy dense diet of meat, some fruit, and some starchy vegetables/tubers actually increases the overall caloric load of one's diet in the body.

I could be wrong, but I think Leangains and other IIFYM type nutrition programs don't even count vegetables' calories at all.

answered Aug 23 at 5:19

Primal NOLA
582●6

2

NOthing provides negative calories. Thins can of course provide very small amounts of calories but in the end taking in more energy than your body requires for maintenance weight will manifest in either fat or muscle gain, period. One calorie more over maintenance or 500 over. – ben61820 Aug 23 at 13:52

2

Ben, what about water? It has zero calories, and surely the body must expend some energy to hydrate itself and then excrete? And coffee\tea? Very low calories, but the systematic response to caffeine (increased heart rate) plus absorption and digestion surely creates a net negative caloric intake. – CD Aug 23 at 16:38

this is exactly why i count calories most days even of nutritionally dense foods, because i too easily eat over my maintainence even when i'm full after a nice grass fed steak salad. ;) so thank you for understanding – Amber Aug 23 at 23:10

caffeine def boosts metabolism and so can cause greater fat burning, yes. But that is unrelated. there is no such thing as a unit of energy you consume causing the body to burn any more than that unit of energy. – ben61820 Aug 26 at 17:44

martinbacon · Answer 6 · 2012-08-23 06:30:28Z UTC

The following list of foods (in the portion sizes suggested) contain 20 calories or less and are therefore considered to be insignificant contributions to overall caloric intake.

Fruits and Vegetables (Note: These are particularly good choices because they add bulk and fiber to your diet.)

1 small, 2.6 oz bell pepper (or 1 cup sliced) (15 calories)
1 cup shredded cabbage (17 calories) (note: mix with balsamic vinegar to make a slaw)
1 small carrot (20 calories)
6 cauliflower florets (3 oz) (20 calories)
2 large stalks celery (17 calories)
1/2 large cucumber (17 calories)
1/2 cup eggplant (17 calories)
1 large scrambled egg white prepared with nonstick cooking spray (17 calories)
1 cup (cooked) greens (20 calories)
1 lemon or lime (2" diameter) (20 calories)
1 cup whole mushrooms (20 calories)
1 cup radishes, sliced (19 calories)
2 cups shredded Romaine lettuce (16 calories)
9 small strawberries (20 calories)
4 cherry tomatoes (2.4 oz) (20 calories)

probiotics

Michael · Answer 7 · 2012-08-23 08:05:06Z UTC

0

Shirotaki noodles are pretty low-calorie..

answered Aug 23 at 8:05

Michael
2,534●1●3●9

	That was my thought - the ones with soy have 20 cal a serving, the ones without 0. – karmapolicia Aug 23 at 20:44
	hmm never heard of them! are they similar to kelp noodles? – Amber Aug 23 at 23:23
	According this article: altmedicine.about.com/od/rawfooddiet/a/… Kelp Noodles vs. Shirataki Noodles 'Shirataki noodles are made from the root of the konnyaku potato (a plant grown throughout Asia). They are another popular noodle substitute. Shirataki noodles are high in glucomannan, a type of fiber found to reduce LDL cholesterol in several studies. Unlike kelp noodles, shirataki noodles can have a slightly fishy smell when uncooked or unrinsed.' ... – Michael Aug 24 at 7:11
	Some info here on them too if you like:slate.com/articles/life/food/2011/12/…. I should note that I've never actually had them or looked for them, but I imagine Asian supermarkets would stock them in reasonably populated western areas... – Michael Aug 24 at 7:11

fromthericefields · Answer 8 · 2012-08-24 03:00:34Z UTC

0

Anything other than water that provides no calories is not food and should not be Paleo like those zero calorie noodles. It does you nothing thus Grok would not have eaten it.

answered Aug 24 at 3:00

fromthericefields
770●1●9

Calorie Free Foods?

8 Answers