"Eat Food. Not too much. Mostly plants." -Michael Pollan

Monday, September 10

Lunch in the Park

Breakfast lasted me until 11 today and then hunger hit me like a brick. I polished off my Luna bar fast for snack : )

Had lunch in my favorite park spot. Today there were two sketchy guys though who were making me nervous. They were making inappropriate comments that I obviously was supposed to "overhear." There were other people around (not too many, but enough) so I wasn't scared for my safety, but I would have preferred to be left alone! Thankfully they left after about 15 minutes.

Today's menu included:

Homemade rye bread sandwich with 1 oz roasted pork, 1 slice low-fat cheddar, lettuce and mustard:

Banana creme yogurt with grape nuts:

1 oz of sourdough pretzels:

1 cup of fruit (grapes and cantaloupe):

Celery sticks with 2 tbsp plain hummus:

All-together (including diet orange drink - BAD!)

I saved my fruit for later.

Somehow I've managed to eat 1200 calories already today. I'm supposed to be on minor cut-back from Saturday's dinner out, yesterday's day off of exercise and homecoming events this weekend, but I don't know if that's going to happen. I guess my goal will be to stick to 1800 today, which seems reasonable.

I'm having a major mental struggle trying to decide if:

A) I should continue to count calories. It WORKS. It's simple. It's proven. But it's restricting. And I'm tired of it.

B) I should count food groups. It allows for more flexibility in restaurants. It's easier to do because it requires no math. But it's easy to eat too much. And it still has the "here's my allowance for the day" mentality.

C) Just try to EAT for HEALTH. There's no counting, worrying, totaling. It could potentially be life-long. But is it the most practical? Would I gain? Is it even possible to do this as a self-proclaimed boredom eater who tends to eat for reasons other than hunger?

Ahhhh...the struggles of food. I'd tell anyone trying to lose weight to do Option A. It's the most effective. Option B is appealing, but it's just as constricting as calorie counting, which I think is actually easier and allows the "participant" to relax because you know how well you did each day by the numbers.

I really want to try Option C, but I'm terrified that I'd over eat. Take today for example. I'm already at 1200 and I feel like I've done pretty well "eating for health." If I have a snack or two, don't keep my dinner low, and have dessert (even if it's a healthy dessert like fruit or yogurt), I could easily be over my limits. How would I ever know if I'm not counting??

Your comments are welcome : )


Brenda said...

Hello, just wanted to let you know that your blog is great! I'm a fellow CK'er (bkellyak) who is an avid reader, diary/calorie tracker and nutrition freak :) I love reading what other healthy people eat. BTW, my diary is public.

Kath said...

Thanks Brenda!! Glad to know I'm not the only one who loves reading about other people's meals : )

Brenda said...

I struggle with the same issues but I think I will always be a calorie counter! I've been doing it for so long that it is pretty quick and simple especially using the CK diary.

Brady said...

You blog is truly wonderful (particularly the pictures). But I wish you would include pictures of the people you dine with (especially at Kudzu's). You have motivated me to eat healthier (and I'm not easily motivated). I don't know where you find the time!!!!

Becca said...

I think you should eat for health. It's life long and your young, so you can correct yourself if you notice your gaining weight. you could at least try it for a month and see how you do.

p.s. I noticed all your readers have "B" names. Funny.

Jessamy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.