I was reading an email that I got today that got me to thinking. It was talking about food from the perspective of whether or not to eat a cookie, a dozen donuts, a whole cheesecake, a bowl of ice cream, etc.

Do you ever look at food from the perspective of "how many extra minutes of exercise would I need to burn off (insert whatever you're looking at here)?"

Do you just figure out how to add a minute or two here and there until you've added the extra minutes?

Or, doesn't this end up being something that works for you?

I tend to think of it backwards.

Rather than thinking:
"If I eat an m&m, I'll have to walk a football field"

I then to think:
"Those 1,600 calories I burned in intentional exercise really make my life a whole lot more enjoyable!"

Wow, Cathy!

One M&M takes an entire football field! That certainly causes me to stop and reflect.

I don't think about the increase in exercise. I should. I just try to think "Is that really what you want?"

Linda

My philosophy on this falls in line with Jill's and Dawn's. I don't think how many minutes I'll have to exercise to burn something off. If there's something unhealthy I want to eat, I eat it...and then I get back to eating healthy.

Until my gym went out of business 6 months ago, I had been working out there both regularly and not so regularly for 8 years. I know how little calories most of those machines burn so it would be a mental deterrent for me personally to make it all about a math problem.

Both my eating and my exercise are as much or more about my health as they are about weight loss.

that's just too much math.

I don't look at food that way. I look at it as something I want to eat and usually just go ahead and eat it. I've really gotten better at not beating myself up and also at portion controlling high calorie/high fat things. Not to say I never overdo it but attaching an amount of exercise to a food would make it not enjoyable to eat.

Jill

No, I don't look at it that way. I try to look at food from a moderation stand point, and exercise from a "I need to exercise to be healthy." perspective and not just to lose weight.

I think that looking at how much exercise I would have to do to burn calories would end up back firing on me in the sense that I would feel like I was working WAY too hard and not really burning that many calories, and I'd start to think "Why am I wasting my time with this?" Looking at exercise from a health perspective, "I'm doing this to be healthy." regardless of how many calories I'm burning.

Dawn

A while ago, my WW lecturer brought in a bag of M&M's. She shared one with each of us, telling us not to eat it just yet. Then she shared a story about how it takes walking from the endline of a football field to the opposite endline to wear off the calories of eating just that one small M&M. Not being a football fan, I have no idea how many steps, yards, feet that is, but I knew it was far, having been in marching band for many years. I knew I didn't want to walk that far, for one M&M. She proceeded to give us the number of steps, miles, etc for some of the foods we ate, healthy, good for us, but very attractive...some of them were astonishing.

So I do look at the number of minutes, miles, etc that I have to do to make up for some of the things I eat...and most times, that ice cream cone isn't worth it.

I find that I can eat way more than I can burn off. I have to be aware to limit my food calories because I can't/don't burn off lots of extra calories. I focus more on keeping calories/servings in line, my weight seems to fall in line too.

It can take 20-30 minutes to burn 100 calories. I can eat 100 calories in 1-2 minutes! The trade off is not a good one!

I usually do what D does and look at it in terms of volume and what will take longer to eat/be more satisfying.

I also do consider the calories but on their own. I try not to worry about how much I'm burning because that doesn't make as big of an impact for me with my size. Yes, exercise is great, makes me feel good and has redefined my shape but it's the food component that makes or breaks my weight.

In the beginning of this journey, for really high calorie items, I did think about how much work it would take to burn off. i.e. Double whopper w/cheese and large fries (my old standby drive thru order) was in no way shape or form worth the energy it would take to burn off (now it would just make me sick) so I guess I did use it as a deterent of sorts ; )

>>Do you ever look at food from the perspective of "how many extra minutes of exercise would I need to burn off (insert whatever you're looking at here)?"

Never. Ever. That just makes me defensive. The argument I use these days is, "Will eating this make me feel sick/unhealthy or not?" That works a lot better. It's amazing what a little indigestion will do to/for you

I guess for me it is about knowing--ok i pigged out, let's try to make tomorrow a clean day and workout.

I have never been able to trust those machines anyways.

I don't look at it as much in terms of exercise...I see it in terms of volume. One Snickers bar or two pitas, sliced and baked, dipped in salsa, that'll take me 15-20 minutes to eat? I'm eating the pita chips, thankyouverymuch.

A ham sandwich with mayo and cheese or a salad, tuna, and Wasa crackers? I'm all over the three-course meal.

It made sad to see how few calories I burned the couple of times I turned on that feature on a gym treadmill.

I do this quite a bit. Mostly because I am bound & determined to break out of the 200s once and for all. Especially as I see more and more 199's etc. and then bounce back up to the 200-202 range and back down.

I also know that once in a while, I really don't care what is in whatever it is that I'm contemplating. Sometimes I just need a mushroom, bacon & swiss cheese burger. And I think that's not such a bad thing, as long as it's once in a while.