A Comparison of Counting Calories and Restriction Dieting
XXXX XXXXXX
University Composition and Communication COM156
October 20, 2013
XXXXXXXXXXXX

Introduction According to Rebecca J. Donatelle, over 66 percent of U.S. adults, or 72 million, can be considered overweight or obese (2011). This shocking fact demonstrates the importance for each individual to attempt to control their weight. There is a marker increase in interest in diets, including multiple fad diets and supplements that claim to be “the answer”. The main points of most of these diets is either a reduction in calories or a restriction of certain types of foods. Most of these “restricted diets” focus on a restriction of carbohydrates of certain types, or even altogether. Calorie restriction is indeed an effective way to lose weight but research suggests that a diet restricting certain foods may be an effective way of losing weight as well. Though both have their benefits, thanks to a greater ease of tracking, better satisfaction in meals, hormone manipulation, and a direct targeting of fats, restricted diets, especially low carbohydrate diets, are superior to restricted calorie only diets in terms of fat loss. In an interview by Ben Jones, Dr. Marion Nestle said “We don't advise counting calories because it can't be done accurately enough, it's not worth the trouble, and it's no fun.” This brings up a disadvantage to counting calories, the trouble and inconvenience. Restricted diets can often be much easier, or at least more convenient, to track than trying to count calories. While some diets with a lower calorie count have pre-counted portions, these are often expensive and allow no deviation or variety. For this reason, tracking caloric intake often requires a person to keep a log or to use a website, such a Livestrong.com’s MyPlate. Many websites have the calories for food already entered making it slightly easier to track, but it still needs to be looked up and in some cases, the food must be weighed to get an accurate count. Any sauces or other condiments need be measured and the calories added. This all adds up to a great deal of effort with a large margin of effort. While counting calories can be very inconvenient, a restricted diet can be very easy to follow and track. Usually this involves simply not eating a certain nutrient, there is no need for logs or journals as long as this food is avoided. This does not mean a person would not need to look at the nutrition information on items though, since over indulging on anything is often a bad idea. It also can be easier to follow a restricted diet when going out to dinner, though many restaurants are now offering lower calorie options. It is very easy to simply order an item that does not contain the food you are restricting yourself from. With these benefits, it is simply more simple and convenient to follow a restricted nutrient diet than it is to count calories. The convenience and ease of a diet plays a very large role in which is superior. As has been said, and will be said more, the best diet is one that can be followed steadily. With a world that focuses on convenience and time economy, anything that makes a diet more convenient and less like a chore is going to help make the diet better than the alternative. This is the reason that a restricted diet may be far better than the counting calories diet. Though some people may enjoy the organization and need to track and keep a record of everything as is necessary with counting calories, the average American, who is accustomed to ordering food or finding any information with a single click of a smartphone, is more likely to choose the more convenient and easier diet. Much of the time, with a few exceptions, meals with reduced calories are unsatisfying and may leave the dieter feeling hungry right after eating, while a meal on a restricted diet has no restriction on the amounts. Reduced calorie meals have much smaller portions to ensure the amount of calories consumed are restricted. Some dieters can choose to greatly reduce the amount of fat they eat so that they can increase the portions since fat has nine calories per gram while the other nutrients have four per gram. While this can help with the issue of meals leaving one still feeling hungry, it is often not always enough and many dieters reach a point where they can no longer stand feeling hungry all the time and may break from their diet. One benefit of this type of diet is that there is no restriction on what a person eats as long as it does not push them over the top of their calorie restriction. A person on this type of diet could even go to McDonald’s and get a Big Mac. This alone has 550 calories, but as long as this is accounted for, this diet’s philosophy is that it is simply 550 calories and not something that is unhealthy and should be avoided. A calorie is a calorie, regardless of origin. Restricted diets, conversely, allow a person to eat until they are full. If, for example, a person were to restrict carbohydrates such as within the Ketogenic Diet, they would be able to eat a large meal as long as they did not have any carbohydrates in the meal. While a person on a restricted calorie diet may be forced to have a salad with a small amount of light dressing and 3 ounces of baked chicken breast and a half cup of brown rice, a person on a no-carbohydrate diet would be able to have a 12 ounce steak with a topping of parmesan cheese and a large side of buttered vegetables. Most would prefer to have the meal with the large steak rather than the salad because not only is it more filling, but it is also considered to be tastier. Many restricted diet plans also have recipes that allow one to make a sort of “faux-nutrient” for meals so that the restricted food is not missed as much. An example is on the no-carbohydrate diet, a recipe for “Faux mashed potatoes” can be found in which someone uses whipped cauliflower and cream to create a dish similar to mashed potatoes. One problem with a restricted diet, such as no-carbohydrate, is that vegetarians would find it very difficult to follow due to the large amount of other nutrients one would need. Another problem is cravings. This is a problem with any other diet but, based on the personal experience of this writer, the cravings for a no-carbohydrate diet are quite strong. As with any diet, the best way to circumvent these desires for other foods is to find a proper substitute and maintain self-discipline. Supplementing a diet with proper vitamins and possibly fiber may be necessary due to the necessity of avoiding foods that may contain these. The final advantage to restricted diets, specifically no-carbohydrate diets, over a reduced calorie diet is that diets that restrict certain macronutrients often target fat loss over whole body weight loss. A diet in which one reduces calories targets total body weight and may include lean body mass loss. There is no specific way to target fat directly as calories fuel the entire body so a reduction affects the entire body as well. A benefit to this is that the caloric deficit in these types of diets can be achieved by exercising rather than simply through the manipulation of diet. A diet restricting certain foods often is designed around targeting fat directly through manipulating body chemistry, insulin, or hormones. According to Lyle MacDonald (1998), the Ketogenic Diet targets body fat directly by forcing the body into ketosis, or the production of ketones, which begins to use body fat to produce glycogen rather than using glucose stores. Other diets may involve manipulating other body chemicals such as nitrogen or insulin. The last disadvantage of this type of diet is that it can be dangerous depending on a person’s health. Medical advice is often recommended before attempting any exercise plans or diets but for these types of diets, it is nearly necessary to seek medical advice prior to starting because of the risk involved with altering the chemical composition of the body. The main issue regarding weight loss is not so much the type of diet chosen as the recognition that something needs to be done and consistency in doing so. That said, some diets are easier to remain consistent with and that is the main issue with most dieters. It is for this reason that a restricted diet, such as low carbohydrate diets, are more effective than low calorie or calorie counting diets because of an ease of tracking, better satisfaction in meals, and a more targeted approach toward fats through manipulation of hormones.

References
Donatelle, R. J. (2011). Health: The Basics, Green Edition. : Benjamin Cummings.
McDonald, L. (1998). The Ketogenic Diet. Austin, TX: Body Recomposition.
Jones, B. (2012). Counting the cost of calories. World Health Organization.Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 90(8), 566-567. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1034899045?accountid=458
Katan, M. B. (2009). Weight-loss diets for the prevention and treatment of obesity. The New England Journal of Medicine, 360(9), 923-5. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMe0810291
Smith, S. R. (2009). A look at the low-carbohydrate diet. The New England Journal of Medicine, 361(23), 2286-8. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcibr0908756
Livestrong.com MyPlate. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.livestrong.com/myplate/