Everyday Systems

When I look at most diets, "portion control" is an essential part. I'm wondering if it is, and I'm trying to figure out alternatives to portion control, since portion control means misery for me. The No S Diet has portion control as one plateful at meals. I elminated that aspect of The No S Diet.
Kathleen

Do little bears make poops in the woods? I think portion control is hard to get around. If you aren't willing to keep to that, No S probably isn't going to help much.

However, you can start just by not having sweets and committing to three structured meals a day on your N days. You can have seconds at those meals, so you wouldn't start with that feeling of deprivation. But you would need to have a set beginning and end of the meal and have at least a 4-5 hour gap between meals. You might find that after a few weeks of that, you may want less at your meals. And don't forget you have weekends to relax even more.

Or, exercise enough to burn off 1,000 cal. a day.


Hope you find something that works for you.

At least it's one of the least obnoxious forms of portion control. You don't have to do stuff that normal people don't do, like weighing or measuring out your food. You don't have to throw out your plates and buy smaller ones. You don't have to try to develop any kind of awareness of when you're hungry and when you're full. You don't have to count calories or fat or carb grams (unless you're diabetic). You don't have to completely eliminate any food or type of foods from your diet (not even sweets, you can still have them on S days). You don't have to refrain from eating all the food on your plate. If you wanted to do any of those things for some reason, you could, but you don't have to.

You can keep eating in front of the TV or computer and not paying much attention to what and how much you're eating if you want to. You can eat because it's a convenient time to eat. You can eat at restaurants. Again, if you wanted to stop doing those things, you could, but you don't have to.

I think portion control is essential and one plate at mealtimes (or just one serving of whatever is being served) is a good way to start. Many of us may have to pay more attention to portion size, though, or at least how much is on the plate.

The only time in my adult life that I was able to forgo portion control while losing weight was on a food elimination type plan (low carb -- I did the Carbohydrate's Addict Diet) combined with a 3 meal a day structure and daily exercise. I was able to lose a lot of excess weight by doing this but it was not a sustainable for me. I like carbs, missed them and need them to function properly.

I suspect that one might also be to lose weight without portion control/with a 3 meal a day structure by limiting the foods you eat at those meals to unrestricted portions of very healthy foods like fresh fruits, veggies, beans and the like. However, I would, personally, be pretty miserable eating like that on a long term basis. Again, not sustainable.

I think the "No Seconds" component is an essential part of the No S plan, at least for me. Unless I was willing to eliminate certain categories of food or limit myself to specific healthy choices, I doubt that No S would have worked for me without it.

I am not a dietitian or nutritionist or any other kind of diet expert, but I don't think you can eat as much as you want of whatever you want and expect to lose weight. If you're not going to control portion sizes, you'd have to avoid large amounts of calorie-dense foods. There are other diets that do that.

Anecdote time: Before I started No S, I hardly ever ate sweets (I didn't have them in the house unless my parents were coming to visit). I occasionally ate snacks, but not too often (I avoided buying snack foods unless someone who would want them was coming to visit). I tried to eat healthy food. I'm losing weight now that I've cut out seconds. No sweets, very few snacks, and generally healthy food wasn't enough for me to lose weight.

Just want to reiterate that though you can see most agree that you will have to limit portions of some foods, I'll remind you that you can ease into that. You may not get weight loss very quickly by allowing large meals, but you can establish a habit. I'm sure when some people started, they ate meals that they now would consider the equivalent of having taken seconds. Your appetite will change over time, but if you do what you've always done, you'll get what you've always gotten. Most of the time.

Let us know how things are going.

If you're asking "Can I lose weight eating unlimited amounts of anything I want?" my answer is "No." I think you have to limit something - either what you're eating or how much you're eating. It's much easier for me to limit how much I'm eating and still enjoy a wide variety of delicous, nourishing food. But you're not me. I know Weight Watchers has a list of foods that are allowed in unlimited amounts. Could you use that as a starting point for an eating plan that would allow you unlimited quantities of a limited variety of food?

I wish you all the best with this and truly hope you are able to work this out.

Starla,

I think your idea is a great place for Kathleen to start. Maybe have 1 plate of food you really "want" (the higher calorie stuff) and for seconds just have a plateful of veggies/fruit. I really believe you would be full enough to last to the next meal and not feel deprived.

Just my two cents...

Eileen7316 wrote:Starla,

I think your idea is a great place for Kathleen to start. Maybe have 1 plate of food you really "want" (the higher calorie stuff) and for seconds just have a plateful of veggies/fruit. I really believe you would be full enough to last to the next meal and not feel deprived.

Just my two cents...

I think that is a recipe for disaster if done daily. Unfortunately, I think we have to learn to appreciate and be satisfied with less of those things we really want and like. While there are certainly exceptions, those foods tend to be the more calorie dense foods. One plateful could be far more calories than needed -- even to last until the next meal.

It's like that article that 3aday posted/linked to a month or so ago said: we have to learn to eat less.

I agree with you Wosnes; I was trying to offer Kathleen an alternative since she does not like portion control. Maybe she could start there.

I have found, for myself, that if I limit my portions (3 plates a day) it doesn't take long for my appetite to follow suit. In other words, regularly timed, smaller portions of food seem to tame the appetite. Again, this is what I have discovered about myself.

Something else I've discovered about myself that is contradictory to "food fashion" is that I need carbs to stay full until the next meal.

I felt really deprived at first by not being able to have seconds. Eventually, I got used to it, and it doesn't seem like so much deprivation now, most of the time. You do get used to things (or at least I do), and something that seems terrible at first may come to be acceptable.

I don't like portion control as in weighing and measuring, but I do practice portion control. I try to make my plates of food 1/2 salad and/or other vegetables, 1/4 starch and 1/4 meat. Sometimes it's a little tricky, but it works as well as anything else.

I got the idea from this article and have seen it in other places, including this one by Ellie Krieger.

At first I used to measure portions such as pasta because I really didn't know what a proper portion looked like. But that didn't last long because now I just know and it's just ingrained in me. When I was young, I'd give myself heaps of speghetti, but not anymore.

"Is portion control necessary to lose weight?" Yes, unfortunately.

But perhaps a rephrasing of the question that might give you some comfort would be: "Is *conscious* portion control necessary to lose weight?" And I think the answer there is "Probably not." That is, I think it's possible to gradually reduce the amount you eat, such that you don't feel like you're deliberately having to say "I must stop eating now" at every meal. This has certainly happened to me, with NoS: I now just eat less in general, but it does not feel like deprivation, it's just the way I eat. (EDIT: Whoops, originally said the exact opposite, here! I certainly meant that it does *not* feel like deprivation.)

To put it another way, the misery you associate with portion control isn't from controlling your portions, it's from feeling deprived about having to eat less than you want, I assume? In the statement "I'd like to eat as much as I want", there are two things you can tackle: if you're not willing to jump right in to addressing "as much" (by consciously limiting your portions), maybe you can still address "I want" (by slowly changing how much you need to eat before you feel satisfied and don't want any more).

So my advice would be: take whatever gradual steps you can, with an eye on the long-term goal of being able to feel satisfied with less total food. There are some good suggestions above, like multiple plates to start with, that might be helpful. If you start with just two of the three S's, it may take longer to lose weight, but I bet you'll see some benefit, and hey, it's not a race ... In the long term, my guess is that any restriction you place on how much you eat at one sitting, even if it's a very mild one, will start to seem easy and non-miserable, and you'll be able to build on that.

Best of luck!

I think part of the problem with the idea of portion control is that over the last 40 years or so we've completely lost sight of what normal portions are. We've become accustomed to mounds of food -- and we eat them whenever the spirit moves us.

Hi Kathleen, what a haunting question you've posed here! I've been turning it over and over since I read it, thinking I had something really useful to say, then the impulse would fade - now DaveMc has covered some of what I was thinking anyway. But I have a slightly different take on things, so here goes:

I believe the issue isn't the experience of the smaller portion itself, or your sense of those fewer calories, so much as how much you mind about it. Not the actual physical need so much as how much you are distressed about it.

Going out further on a limb here (assuming you are a bit like me, and I really get minding about this, your post really sets off strong feelings in me) I am guessing portion control is probably triggering deeper feelings, deeper meanings. My personal perception is that there is, in my overeating, neediness and huge anger about the unmet need. I have to keep trying to tune in to that and deal with it or believe I'll never be at peace with food in a body I can fully enjoy.

I recall you mention on your Check In thread how, by the time you'd had your 4th child, portion control triggered bingeing. I'm thinking a lot changes in a life when you have 4 children, and wondering if there's a change in how you felt that has some bearing on how "depriving yourself" felt.

My personal strategy for trying to deal with the feelings around food is to use EFT (Emotional Freedom Techniques - a simple free self-help technique available on the Internet). Takes time and persistence, but it is effective and fits my budget perfectly.

I've done a lot of guessing here, I hope I haven't been rude or overly intrusive, but dealing with the feelings around food/neediness/love/deprivation etc. may be as fruitful an area for you to explore as it seems to be for me.

Best wishes,

Graham

wosnes wrote:I think part of the problem with the idea of portion control is that over the last 40 years or so we've completely lost sight of what normal portions are. We've become accustomed to mounds of food -- and we eat them whenever the spirit moves us.

Exactly. And like Yoda says, we must "unlearn what we have learned." lol.

"One plate" is pretty flexible and humane as far as portion control goes.

Maybe just bring that back, if you're having trouble without it?

Reinhard

It's a key question: do you need portion control?

I think I'm leaning towards trying to figure out how to allow myself as much as I want, but I don't want as much. (per DaveMc)

My sister linked me to an interesting article that says that both strengthening exercises and limited sweets can help to reduce appetite. I never tried Shovelglove, but maybe it's a key part of Reinhard's success.

What is it that happened to me that even the thought of portion control (even something as flexible as one plate) immediately triggers a binge?

I don't know.

My life is very, very different from that day in January, 2002 when suddenly I was eating everything in sight. Part of the reason why I don't think emotional eating is at the core of my problem is that the problem has remained consistent since 2002 but I've been through a lot of changes.

Thanks for your suggestions and ideas. I've got a new experiment going now -- three fasts per week (skipping breakfast), three times of doing very simple and easy strengthening exercieses, and an average of 12,000 steps per day six days per week. If nothing else, I'll be healthier because of the increased exercise.

Kathleen

Kathleen wrote:I think I'm leaning towards trying to figure out how to allow myself as much as I want, but I don't want as much. (per DaveMc)

That sounds very wise, but I may be biased. Good luck!

Just thinking about this some more ...

For me, at least, NoS has been almost entirely about learning (or training myself) to want less. On the face of it, this plan apparently shouldn't work: if you're allowed to eat anything you want, two days a week (or more), surely you'll just eat so much on the weekends that it will erase all your good work during the week, right? (This is what many newcomers are scared of, and in fact for a while it's true, they do eat too much on the weekends.) But it *does* work, and the secret (for me) is that "anything you want" gradually changes into something less extreme. You really can't indulge in unbridled, nonstop eating for two days a week and expect to lose (or even maintain) weight, but when even your excesses are more moderate than they used to be, you can feel like you're really cutting loose on S days while in reality they're less extreme than *every* day used to be.

My point, I guess, is that this issue of wanting less isn't unique to you, Kathleen. Most people focus on the S days in terms of learning to moderate their desires, but the issue of moderating N day meals is really pretty similar. So we've all been there!

Do let us know how it's going, we're rooting for you!

DaveMc wrote: But it *does* work, and the secret (for me) is that "anything you want" gradually changes into something less extreme. You really can't indulge in unbridled, nonstop eating for two days a week and expect to lose (or even maintain) weight

This is so very true. And another factor in the "truly wanting less" (not merely "wanting to have less to lose weight) is that it generally feels very yucky to overeat... My S-days have evolved from a dessert at every meal to one, with perhaps a second small treat (cookie or two) per weekend. That is what seems GOOD to me now. Otherwise, I feel overstuffed and yucky. I don't WANT my food to make me feel yucky. In the beginning, Sunday night was often very uncomfortable for me because I was overly full--I'm not a binger, but sweets and seconds all weekend long left me too full... It took me the whole first year to go to bed Sunday night feeling satisfied, not stuffed....

And, I'm still refining "what I want" two years into NoS. I've just hit a point where my standard for breakfast is going to have to change because I'm feeling too full by the end....

I've found NoS to give me the right amount of structure to safely LEARN what I need/want, giving myself full credit as a human being to figure this out for myself. Eating is so basic. We CAN eat and eat well--for taste, for health, for pleasure.

May you find peace with eating,

vmsurbat,
I think what you write is the reason why it is important to allow S Days to be S Days. Eventually, your stomach turns when you consider eating 4,000 calories of caramel macademian clusters, which is what I did on one weekend. I'm very confident I won't eat that much ever again, not because of any willpower but because of the memory of just how bad I felt for about two days after that!
Kathleen

vmsurbat wrote:I've found NoS to give me the right amount of structure to safely LEARN what I need/want, giving myself full credit as a human being to figure this out for myself. Eating is so basic. We CAN eat and eat well--for taste, for health, for pleasure.

May you find peace with eating,

I love, love, LOVE this! I never thought of "learning" as a basic piece of the puzzle on other diets, unless it involved learning calorie counts. But you are exactly right. Over the past year I have LEARNED how to eat with pleasure, for health, and without compulsion. Because of No S, I was able to do it on my own timeline, and almost to feel that I was "discovering" it. You've described the process perfectly!

I'm a runner and I still have to watch portions. In my early 20's maybe not so much but now in my mid 30's yes.

jellybeans01 wrote:I'm a runner and I still have to watch portions. In my early 20's maybe not so much but now in my mid 30's yes.

Heh -- wait until you're 60 (plus)! I really never had to watch portions until I was 50 plus. Maybe my portions were okay.

[Oops- In my original post here I misunderstood your current strategy. Sorry!]

I happened to watch Dr. Oz on Monday. The show was about losing 10 pounds this year -- without changing what you eat. Losing just 10 pounds will make a difference in your health: decreased risks for diabetes and heart disease, for instance. There were 5 things to do and one of them was watching portions. The expert said pretty much what I said above -- we've lost sight of what normal portions are.

I don't think that portion control means weighing and measuring, though, although it might be helpful initially. I think they can be "eyeballed."

"Portion control" does include "no snacks"! I figured that out and gave it up! Now I don't think I belong on this Web site, but I have benefited. Two years ago, my glucose level was 108 (pre-diabetic) and now it is 95. Two years ago, my choleresterol was 213 and now it's 181. I'm exercising, and I'm much calmer. This diet has shown me the way... by focusing on habits.
Kathleen

Kathleen wrote:I figured that out and gave it up! Now I don't think I belong on this Web site, but I have benefited.

And we've benefited from having you... so please don't think you're not welcome!!!

I hope you come to peace with your eating patterns, whatever path you take.