Dam needa find a different plug then. COVID too long ran out of me tren
I think there are two people that conceivably need to care about counting calories. Sedentary individuals, that also hit the gym, trying to lose weight and clean eaters that are physically active. You could presumably run Scott Abel’s Cycle Diet without any effort given your lifestyle.
I’m debatably neither, and I definitely have a need to count calories.
What do you manage to overeat on if you don’t count?
Or maybe you mean that you undereat?
I can’t fathom counting calories anymore, I just did once with a typical day of clean eating to see where I was and it was in the ballpark of 2400 - 2500
You don’t need to count to overreat ahahah 
I can overeat on anything. I have an enormous appetite and put on flub very easily.
I see multiple possibilities.
We have different definitions of sedentary, clean eating, or both. Or I’m wrong in my hypothesis.
Or the discussion is missing some added nuance with regards to when a person puts their fork down. Did they eat until satiated and chewed their food mindfully or just inhaled it as quickly as possible to go back for seconds before others have even made a dent in their plate.
1 Like
This is where you and me are likely not seeing eye to eye. I’m not sedentary in anyone’s eyes.
1 Like
And here we go: the added nuance.
Even when chewing mindfully, and on a bulk, you shouldn’t always eat to satiety. Unless you’re eating a giant salad or a bowl of broccoli or something. Well I shouldn’t at least ahahah
This is very very tricky word for me. Because I objectively know what it means, however I can’t wrap my head around the idea that I could just eat until full because it wouldn’t happen.
I think a price to pay for being as lean as you are is being hungry a lot.
Edit: yes, even when bulking!
2 Likes
Full happens after satiety has been reached IMHO. It’s quite conceivable most people are bad at telling when they reach the first sensation (satiety) as it’s far “softer”.
I don’t have any good analogies at hand, but I’ll attempt one here. Imagine being thirsty, and drinking water until you are no longer thirsty. That’s satiety. Drinking another extra glas because you did a lot of moving about may be okay. And, drinking until you feel as if you’ve had too much water that’s what full is.
Ahah not that much actually, I often find myself full or “ugh I ate too much”. Arguably the only times when I’m really hungry are when I wake up, around noon - 1PM and after my workouts
And honestly if I were to buy and eat more vegetables (and do more stuff like Greg Doucette) I probably would never be hungry
I get the analogy, and how it works in theory, but I can’t imagine doing it in practise.
Then I don’t understand what the meaning of this was
Please clarify, as I misunderstood.
“An essay on the dichotomy of hunger”
I just feel that if I were always to eat to satiety (like for instance my post workout meals where I’m always ravenous even after 1200 cals) I would just get fat ahahah the human body probably doesn’t know when to stop for homeostasis
When were you last in this state weightwise?
I don’t think it’s as simple as the above question makes it seem though. I mean, to me it makes sense that if you kill it in the gym you’ll be… ravenous. Biologically, it’d be like “mission accomplished, thing is dead, now eat as much as you can of it”. Training hard is basically giving the body an impetus to grow to get bigger. That necessitates calories.
1 Like
For me, counting calories is 100% a way to stop myself justifying “extra here” or “extra there”. But also a way to stop myself undereating when life gets stressful. If I were to limit myself to only “clean food” (for whatever value of clean we decide), when life gets stressful, I just wouldn’t eat.
2 Likes
It is a constant battle of “can” vs “should”. I can eat more, but should I?
Most often, the answer to the second question is no.
2 Likes