Poll: Calories and Fat: How much?

[ElinorC]

I was looking at the menu ideas posted by Cl at http://www.cookinglight.com/food/menu_ideas.asp

and thought that their calories and fat content were pretty high. How many calories and how many grams of fat do you think we should eat per day? Most of the menus for their meals were around 700 to 1000 calories and around 20 grams of fat. Does anyone else think that is too high?

[kentgirl]

Keep in mind that when you're counting calories and fat, you must take the whole day into account, not just one meal.

Here's a link to a great tool called the "Healthy Body Calculator" that will help you determine how many calories/fat grams you should eat in a day. You have to answer some questions (most are optional), then you'll get a report showing:
*your data
*Healthy Body Weight Range
*BMI (Body Mass Index)
*Your calorie and fat requirements (based on your answers)
And all sorts of good explanations and information regarding this information.

Here's the link: http://www.dietitian.com/ibw/ibw.html

[lindrusso]

Originally posted by ElinorC:
How many calories and how many grams of fat do you think we should eat per day? Most of the menus for their meals were around 700 to 1000 calories and around 20 grams of fat. Does anyone else think that is too high?

Elinor,

The answer for fat and calories per day will be different for everyone. It will depend on your activity level, whether you are trying to gain, maintain or lose weight, etc. Personally, to lose weight, I've calculated that I need to be intaking about 1500-1800 calories a day, keeping fat grams to about 20-30% of that total or about 40 to 60 grams of fat. If I'm really trying to be good, I stay at 30 grams of fat for the day.

So, for me, a meal that consists of as many calories and fat grams as you describe would leave me with very little wiggle room for the rest of the day. However, my breakfasts are usually very light - only about 300 calories, so sometimes I can afford a meal that you describe.

I guess all my long-winded reply really says is that it is a complicated issue!

kentgirl - that site is very interesting, but they have my weight range - I'm 5' 1" - at 95-116!!! Now, I know I need to lose weight (I'm at about 131), but this is very low - the lowest range I've ever seen on any chart. And this does not even take into account my small frame (I didn't have the measurements to enter this info) - if I had told the calculator I was small-framed, I'm afraid it would have me at 90-100! Ack!

[This message has been edited by lindrusso (edited 01-15-2001).]

[lindrusso]

Whoops - Let me try this again!

[This message has been edited by lindrusso (edited 01-15-2001).]

[hhcowgirl]

I, for one, completely agree that those menu suggestions usually amount to way too many calories and fat. My friend and I always joke about how if we followed all of the recipes from Cooking Light, we would be anything but light in weight! As for me, I am 5'9" and usually get around 1200-1500 calories a day, which I realize many people may consider low, especially considering the amount of running I do, but it is the number that I am comfortable with. To answer your question, then, sometimes just one of the CL meals would amount to my whole daily allotment--yikes!

[Joyce]

Don't forget that these recipes are not just for women. Men usually need more calories. I always adjust the portion size to suit my intake and my spouse's for his. We usually consume 700-800 calories at dinner, and about 400 each for breakfast and lunch. This is only a total of 1600 calories a day, and is not a lot unless you are dieting.

[MrsReber]

Whew! I am apparently in the right place for a pregnant woman of my size, but they want me to eat 2,530 calories a day! Yikes! 84 grams of fat! I'd be really stuffed. Then it says I should go down to 120 after the baby is born. I have NEVER gotten down to that weight. I think that would be very underweight for me at 5ft 4in. Each person really is different. I felt my best at 127 with 22 percent body fat. It's simply genetics. I was impressed that they accounted for pregnancy. I felt better knowing that I was within the correct range for weight gain, at the very least. Before I was pregnant, I'd stay around 1700 calories a day and that was with a good weight/cardio workout at least twice a week.

[SHERRY]

When my father had a heart attack, my mom and I went to a course on healthy eating, provided by the hospital. I think they gave the best advice of all.

Keep anything you eat at 30% or less fat. That is all I ever have to remember.
So if a dish is 90 calories and 30 calories from fat, then the dish is 30 percent fat.

What is important to remember is that every fat gram is 9 calories of fat. So, if a brownie has 3 grams fat then it has 27 of it's calories from fat. If the brownie is only 50 calories, then the fat content is 50% of the total calories...tooooo high. If the brownie is 100 calories, then the fat content is less then 30%.

Anyway, I just try to eat 3 healthy meals a day, and a snack in afternoon and as long as I know that the fat content is 30% or less, I don't worry about how much I am eating.

SOOO....as far as a meal of 1000 calories with 20 grams of fat...that equals 180 calorie from fat, which isn't even 20%. So in my mind, that is a good meal! http://www.cookinglight.com/bbs/smile.gif


[This message has been edited by SHERRY (edited 01-15-2001).]

[emilycat]

The caloric amounts of those meals would actually work well for me, provided I didn't snack...I get around 2,000 a day, but I also do a bit of running (45-55 miles each week).

I think that for many people, one meal of this size would suffice, assuming that say, breakfast and lunch were smaller.

And lindrusso, I also wanted to comment on the low ranges of the dietician.com site!
It had me at 93-113, my small frame accounted for, and I must say that I've never seen a range that low. I'm at 103 (5'2"), and I've weighed 94 before -- and I was way too skinny -- pictures I've seen of myself then are just not pretty.
Anyway, I guess my point is, for anyone who visits the site...don't freak out!

[SueK]

Emily--I just have to say this---when I read these posts, I form mental images of people, and I always have pictured you as being very petite, with short dark hair. Well, I don't know about the hair part, but I guess the petite part was right!

Well, every once in awhile I'm right about the pictures I form of people!

Also, I visited this site, and was surprised that for my height, I was actually within the weight range. I know I need to lose weight, but it made me feel good to see that it didn't tell me to lose an excessive amount of weight!

[emilycat]

Sue,

Oooh, how creepy...I do have short (chin-length) dark hair! http://www.cookinglight.com/bbs/eek.gif Well, it's not really that dark, but it is brown.
Hmmm... http://www.cookinglight.com/bbs/smile.gif I wonder what kinds of things give you those impressions of people?

[SueK]

Originally posted by emilycat:
Sue,

Oooh, how creepy...I do have short (chin-length) dark hair! http://www.cookinglight.com/bbs/eek.gif Well, it's not really that dark, but it is brown.
Hmmm... http://www.cookinglight.com/bbs/smile.gif I wonder what kinds of things give you those impressions of people?

Too funny! I guess your style of writing and attitude has reminded me of a spunky, Winona Ryder type person. (Okay, my apologies if you do not like her!) I have so many mental images of people on this board---well, if we ever make it down for the big trip to CL Headquarters, we can all find out if our impressions were correct!
Sue

[Natasha]

Hi Elinor,

Good question. As some others have pointed out, the right amount of calories and fat depends on so many factors, but would constitute a quite large meal for most women. This is especially so since we keep reading (no doubt CL has also published this advice) about how it s healthier to eat more smaller meals than 3 large ones.

The 700-1000 calories would fit fine into my daily intake (which I guesstimate at around 2000, though I don t monitor it closely at all...), but it doesn t fit with my eating habits. I don t like to eat that much at once very often; it makes me too full. Rather, I eat little meals and snacks pretty much constantly http://www.cookinglight.com/bbs/tongue.gif . Just as a point of reference, I m 5 feet 2, very active (though I don t put in the mileage that Emily does), and have been between 100-107 pounds for a number of years. I weighed myself last week, which is something I do once or twice a year, and was 105.

Forgot to mention that the 20g of fat in one meal does seem a bit high to me, too; at least, I would prefer not to have that much fat all at once.

Of course, as someone pointed out, men do tend to eat (and need) quite a bit more, so these menus might make sense...but I have never used them as a guide to preparing meals. It s all subjective...

Wow, speaking of eating, I have 30 minutes to get dinner ready (my night to cook), so bye!


[This message has been edited by Natasha (edited 01-15-2001).]

[LGBurns]

Originally posted by Natasha:
This is especially so since we keep reading (no doubt CL has also published this advice) about how it s healthier to eat more smaller meals than 3 large ones.

My sister is a dietician at UC Davis in Sacramento and she recently told me that, actually, it is healthier to eat 3 meals a day. Apparently, snacking throughout the day is harder on your heart. I think what Natasha is referring to is that small meals throughout the day makes it easier to lose weight (which my sister said is true). However, it is better for your body to have "rest time" between meals.

Also wanted to add that, in looking at the menus, all of them have dessert. I bet if you cut the dessert out you would bring the calorie and fat content down considerably.


[This message has been edited by LGBurns (edited 01-15-2001).]

[Natasha]

Yes, you re right, LG Burns; I should have been more succinct about more meals being recommended to lose weight.

Interesting comment about the rest time! My heart would not be happy to hear that! http://www.cookinglight.com/bbs/eek.gif Thanks for the tip.

[LGBurns]

You're welcome. I was surprised when she told me because I thought the same thing you did -- that it was actually healthier.

[Grace]

I'll just add my two cents here, that from everything I've read (and I've read a LOT), the general rule of thumb for calories is 2000 a day for women, and about 2500 a day for men, with no more than 30% of those calories coming from fat. I think Cooking Light's aim is not to be weight loss method (although for people who eat high calorie/high fat, just using CL recipes and eating their size portions, regardless of the calories or fat, they'd probably lose weight), but more a maintenance, every-day-healthy-lifestyle idea. Certainly one can tailor their calories and fat content if they're trying to lose or need fewer calories to maintain by adjusting the recipes, adjusting the portions, or choosing only the lightest of recipes, but I think they do a wonderful job of offering a really, really broad range of foods and cuisines that can fit into an everyday lifestyle, unlike, say "Fine Cooking" magazine. Every recipe in there (while they look good), is like a heart attack on a plate, or another slab of fat on my butt/thighs. I'm lucky if I can find even one reasonable recipe each month from there (someone gave me the subscription as a gift, or I'd never have ordered it for myself!). So if it's serious weight loss you're looking for, I agree, you'd need to adjust your menus, but overall, with a decent amount of excercise, I think CL really allows (me, at least), to enjoy ALL the things life has to offer, and that includes one of the greatest pleasures, eating!! I lost 30 pounds 4 years ago, and while I have put back about 10 of them (due to eating too large of portions, not fatty/unhealthy food), I know without CL I'd for sure be back at my old weight, or I'd be relegated to carrots, celery and cottage cheese for the rest of my life!

Thanks CL!!

[MrsReber]

Okay, now I tried that site twice and I tried a small frame and a medium frame build. They both told me that for a 5ft 4in woman, I should weight 120. My cardiologist told me that 125 would be perfect for me. So everyone is different. It all depends on your body fat ratio, too. But feeling good is the most important part.

[Kerri]

I think something else you have to remember with those menus is that often they include an appetizer, dessert, and other stuff including the dinner. You don't eat all those things everyday, at least I don't, but those menu ideas would be good for dinner parties when you are just looking for foods that go together.

[JanetB]

I think that site is putting the ranges a bit low. I'm 5'3 - with a medium build and it says that I should be between 109 and 123. The lowest I ever got was 119 - and everyone told me I wasn't looking healthy anymore - I was almost gaunt! Even the Doc. told me to be at least 125. I don't know. I guess it is a goal - but I think my bones might weigh 100lbs!

[LGBurns]

Are we using the same site? I was given a range for a 5' 4" woman with medium build of between 109-132. Also, it says that if you are an athlete, weight goal should be based on percent body fat. Anyway, it also said I was overweight but not by much (which I knew).