How many calories you eat per day?

[achillezzz]

Just out of curiosity how many calories you guys/girls eat per day?

[TylerDurden]

I don't measure calories,besides calories are a vegan invention, really.  I just view c. 1.0 or 1.2 kilos of raw meat a day to be enough, roughly,  plus some raw fruit. But I also have whole-day fasts as well, here and there.

[kurite]

I havent counted for a really long time but when I did, around 2500-3000, but I still wanna lose weight so I dont really wanna go above 3000.

[ys]

besides calories are a vegan invention, really

not really, food calorie was invented by Wilbur Olin Atwater in 1887.
he wanted to find out what was the minimum food intake required to sustain adult person when doing heavy work.  they did not have vegans at that time.  or if there were vegans they were probably considered insane.

but yes, calories are pointless.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2238749/

[kurite]

not really, food calorie was invented by Wilbur Olin Atwater in 1887.
he wanted to find out what was the minimum food intake required to sustain adult person when doing heavy work.  they did not have vegans at that time.  or if there were vegans they were probably considered insane.

but yes, calories are pointless.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2238749/

Yah not vegan however people in the 80/10/10 group count calories to make sure they are getting enough. I don't know how they think a diet is natural if you have to count calories and struggle to eat enough.

[Hannibal]

It really depends on the day.
2000-4000 kcal.

[TylerDurden]

not really, food calorie was invented by Wilbur Olin Atwater in 1887.
he wanted to find out what was the minimum food intake required to sustain adult person when doing heavy work.  they did not have vegans at that time.  or if there were vegans they were probably considered insane.

but yes, calories are pointless.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2238749/

I know. I meant more that vegans/vegetarians in particular use the notion of calories to support their diet, but many question the idea that calories are a useful measurement.

[miles]

but yes, calories are pointless.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2238749/

Can you explain how this link shows that calories are pointless? It's massive, I tried to skim and find the relevant section but was unable to.

[achillezzz]

I read somewhere that neanderthals consumed insane ammount of calories which most of it was from fat.
Fat is very satisfying and very high in calories so I imagined that people on this forum who do high fat diets their calories intake would be insane either.

[Hannah]

I read somewhere that neanderthals consumed insane ammount of calories which most of it was from fat.
Fat is very satisfying and very high in calories so I imagined that people on this forum who do high fat diets their calories intake would be insane either.

I havn't really found that to be true. With lots of fat and lower carbs I usually hit about 1300 to 1500 calories a day. I wa ssurprised that it was that low when I started calculating it.

[Hannibal]

Fat is very satisfying and very high in calories so I imagined that people on this forum who do high fat diets their calories intake would be insane either. 

My insane amounts of fats have been even 0,5 kg a day (over 1 lb). I combined them with quite a lot of raw honey and have been extremely lean in that time

[turkish]

Hannibal,

Tried beef back fat for the first time y'day.

Just did not like the taste of it, i love the taste of muscle, but back fat i just cant seem to like the taste.

Do you recommend anything to improve the taste, maybe some sauces or perhaps honey itself?

[Hannibal]

Do you recommend anything to improve the taste, maybe some sauces or perhaps honey itself?

Fat combined with raw honey or some salt, pepper, etc.
Over 2 years ago that was my solution for eating the raw suet. 

[KD]

as much as i've tried to punch holes in these theories over the years, I have yet to meet a single individual that transcends the calorie theory completely, only people who may bend and readjust some level of efficiency in processing what 'food' has to offer.

The idea that eating a mineral and vitamin rich raw diet, free of toxins means you can eat far less calories - only goes so far. Just because there are some militant fruit eaters who say that if you run marathons you HAVE to eat 5 k worth of calories from carbohydrates or whatever doesn't mean the answer is not somewhere in between.

The correlation between food calories-in and energy-out is obviously not so simple or can be pulled off a chart, but if you are more active or looking for weight gain, you are likely going to have to consume more 'calories' of food intentionally and scientifically. Calories are BY FAR a more useful measurement for assessing quantities of food than weight. So even tho you can't compare the calories of suet to an apple, you CAN compare the calories of suet to someone of a similar age/build who is consuming suet or marrow or something, so it is totally rational and appropriate.

The idea that one doesn't have to monitor ones intake because they are eating raw, is just totally incorrect in regards to many of the reasons people get into health in the first place. If someone is obsessing over such things, that ain't good, but virtually ALL athletes, actors, etc.. HAVE to maintain a certain high and low for calories, otherwise something will be out of balance - physique, energy level etc...

Just because you can not disintegrate or not get fat not-counting calories, or because raw carbs or fats arn't storing as body fat in that moment, means pretty much nothing in terms of specific health goals.

[KD]

case in point, for myself, If I don't monitor what I eat based on some assumption of what I should eat in calories per my activity, I basically will not eat very much. Your body/hunger does not care about such things. They are all mental to begin with and likely people deal with the opposite which is some kind of emotional attachment to eating that has nothing to do with needed nutrition. The body is usually only interested in doing the absolute minimum, but raising that bar requires mental action and eating per requirements and not addictions.

Food is basically not very exciting to me unless I am exercising (or certain types become more appealing when not active), so essentially my exercise keeps me eating a sufficient amount and proper food for a natural active human, and my attention to calorie intake keeps me able to go beyond that and make the kind of progress in my exercise and keep up with building new tissue that pure hunger does not. If I was to not do one or the other, I would either eventually run out of gas or wither away working out, or in not working out, I would have an incredibly skewed requirement for what my body needs, wouldn't be replacing as many cells, uptaking proper oxygen, and so forth.

[turkish]

Fat combined with raw honey or some salt, pepper, etc.
Over 2 years ago that was my solution for eating the raw suet. 

Hannibal,
 Thanks i will try(honey/salt/pepper) it and report. As an aside i find marrow fat OK, not as tasty as flesh but much better than back fat.

[Sully]

All depends, I have been eating around 2,000 calories as of late. I weight 160 now. I am 5feet 10 inches. Sometimes I eat less and I feel a little better. The more nutritious my food is the lest I need to eat. I found after masterbating I get hungry. All depends, how much meat I eat depends on how much fruit I eat. How much fruit I eat depends on how much meat I eat. The active you are, likley the hungrier you will get.

If your eating highly sweet fruits, you may consume more calories. I tend to over eat on things like honey and dates. So I try not to get them very often.

Edit:I don't count calories. but I looked up amount of calories in certain foods before.  a pound of 85/15 meat, is around 1,000 cals. So even thogh i don't count, I can look back on it and guess pretty close to how many cals i had

[Hannibal]

The active you are, likley the hungrier you will get.

But the more sedentary you are the more carb cravings you've got.
That's a good post of roony - http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/general-discussion/why-raw-paleo%27s-and-zero-carbers-dont-move-their-defined-asses/msg28374/#msg28374

[achillezzz]

I came to a conclusion.

Counting calories or not counting calories when an active person wants to gain weight especially muscle mass he needs to eat bigger meals and you cant just eat bigger meals without forcing yourself or spicing the food to make it very very tasty.

otherwise you just eat when you hungry and keep things simple and there will be no noticeable changes in your muscle mass.

Also another theory, more muscle mass means burning more fat ..

So people who want to lose weight need to increase their calories intake (healthy raw calories of course mostly high quality fats) and work for strength and after gaining some muscle they will burn fat more efficiently.

Its just a theory I'm not fat nor looking for a way to lose weight I need to gain weight.

I'm just angry at all of the experts which promote low calories high cardio plans to weight lose when its all  about making people get to a level of malnutrition..

[KD]

Edit:I don't count calories. but I looked up amount of calories in certain foods before.  a pound of 85/15 meat, is around 1,000 cals. So even thogh i don't count, I can look back on it and guess pretty close to how many cals i had

sure, yeah, I've never owned a scale or weighed anything or check those nutrient databases. Its just a general awareness. I don't know precisely how many calories are in bone marrow or what I burn exercising either, just know the general range that keeps me stable/or gaining.

Even though as I pointed out you can't compare oranges to organ meats on calorie per calorie, I do know if say I was minus that 1 lb of ground beef, I would have to eat over say 12 eggs or something or 1/4 lb fat based on knowledge of calories and not what I want or desire or what fills me up. The point is you can manipulate circumstances to your advantage by having an awareness of caloric values, so they arn't useless. Someone can get filled up on a few squashes (hundreds of cals) prior to maybe 1 lb of pure animal fat (4000+ cal), so obviously calories are more valuable then weight or volume as measurements between foods.

[Sully]

But the more sedentary you are the more carb cravings you've got.
That's a good post of roony - http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/general-discussion/why-raw-paleo%27s-and-zero-carbers-dont-move-their-defined-asses/msg28374/#msg28374

Depends, I know some sedentary people who are really skinny. Often times they are sugar addicts.

@KD Yeah 1000 cls of dates is not the same as 1000 cals 85/15 beef.
for exapmple, from calorieking.com

raw ground beef 85/15
17oz, 1,036 cals, 86.6 grams of protein, 0 carbs, fat 72 grams


medjool dates edible portion
13oz, 1021 cals, 6.7 grams of protein, 276 grams carbs, fat 0.7 grams

very different

[miles]

I havn't really found that to be true. With lots of fat and lower carbs I usually hit about 1300 to 1500 calories a day. I wa ssurprised that it was that low when I started calculating it.

100g apples = 50 calories; 100g bananas = 100 calories; 100g lean beef muscle = 100 calories; 100g lean ox liver = 150 calories; 100g bone marrow = 850 Calories; 100g adipose = 1000 Calories

All approximate.

[turkish]

100g apples = 50 calories; 100g bananas = 100 calories; 100g lean beef muscle = 100 calories; 100g lean ox liver = 150 calories; 100g bone marrow = 850 Calories; 100g adipose = 1000 Calories

All approximate.

That probably explains why i feel so full after eating marrow fat (my first time).