YSK to lose weight, fill up with foods low in caloric density and high in fiber, like fruits and vegetables. This can trigger satiety without the overload of calories and beats going hungry long term.

Better: just learn to live with not feeling satiated all the time.

Not that you shouldn't make vegies a significant part of your diet, just that a big part of the lifestyle change is learning to be hungry between meals as a normal and non-distressing thing.

That's a more complicated topic. Not everyone's endocrine system is wired the same way, and you can't always just willpower your way through it.
Insistence that willpower is sufficient for weight regulation is a big cause of people going on diet after diet that just doesn't work. They're fighting against the system that has a disproportionate influence on what you want in the first place, and if you push it too far you find yourself not giving a shit about your diet, and then being filled with a slew of complex feelings coming from your "lack of self control".
It's better to direct that energy towards getting your diet compositionally right than trying to be okay just being hungry.
You can't get your body to stop insisting it needs food, but you can get it to insist less often. You can teach it that it doesn't need "SUGAR", it needs water and maybe an apple or banana. You can give it a little solid protein between meals to keep it from asking for a continuous stream of carbs.
You can learn to identify the difference between eating because you're bored or want a little dopamine, and eating because you're hungry. The first one is your brain and you can willpower through it to eventually unlearn the habit.
You can choose to make good choices at the store instead of failing to make them in the kitchen.
Willpower is critical, but it's important to know what you can or cannot actually solve with it and work within that framework.
You're in control of your body, but that doesn't mean that you need to pick the harder path.
And, for some people, their endocrine system is a lot more forgiving. Those usually aren't the people who have a lot of trouble loosing or keeping off weight because they try to just "eat less" and it works.
- I am all about keeping it sustainable; nobody has willpower longterm. Any fool can come up with a diet of rabbit food and have amazing results for a month before their brain goes postal on them and they start inhaling cheeseburgers nonstop. Trust me, I totally get that. We always attribute vast reserves of motivation and discipline to ourselves that we just don't have, and the results aren't pretty.
  But on the other side of the coin, your brain can get stuck in a short-term reward loop, and it howls blue murder when you first try to break out of it.
  I'm an stress-eater and a boredom-eater, and if the loop gets out of control, not constantly snacking becomes stressful in and of itself, and yeah that's a complete trainwreck.
  But what I've found is that after a surprisingly short time of acclimating yourself to controlled amounts of hunger, you can break that loop. Your brain re-learns the difference between not-full and actually-need-calories, and only sees the latter as a problem.
  What started out feeling like a catastrophe that you had to white-knuckle through just turns into a boring fact that takes little to no willpower at all to put up with at all.
  It's a really good investment of effort, and makes the whole process a lot easier.
- I do most of my dieting at the store, I dislike spending money, so it's really easy to avoid the crap there.
- Thanks for saying this. I think the idea that it is just willpower causes so much unnecessary suffering. As someone suffering from an eating disorder and thyroid disease, I was getting a bit down reading all the "it's just calories in vs calories out" remarks. It is so much more complicated than that.
- Maybe I’ll just fill up on rice cakes
- Everybody is different so advice varies. For instance, some people do very well with carbs and grains. Other people's bodies scavenge every carb and store it as fat so a high fiber, high fat diet works better for them since fat is satiating and a source of energy, Contrary to popular opinion fat does not make you fat unless it is combined with carbs, like a hamburger bun, fries and large Coke. Then again this only applies to good fats like salmon, sardines, olive oil and grass-fed meat, not the rancid vegetable oil that are pushed on us today - they actually cause allergy problems that contribute to weight gain. The 350 pound lady is starving because her system stored all the carbs she ate - your body needs about a teaspoon of sugar in its system to run and she doesn't have enough in her system to run her body.
  Good fats moderate a lot of metabolism problems for a certain groups of people. Our whole food industry is based on selling carbs. Try to buy food that aren't carbed up - it isn't easy. No wonder we have a weight problem in this country. Hungry? Try cutting carbs way back, increasing fiber and good fats - don't forget potatoes, carrots and most fall crops in general tend to be high carb foods so eat salads, cabbage and leafy greens with olive oil and vinegar dressing, for instance. Carb addiction is real so give your diet change some time. Oh yeah, stay away from processed foods - they contribute to weight gain too. Again, this may not apply to you in the least, but forget the old carbs in, carbs burned shit. It simply doesn't apply to some people.
- This is a joke, right?
  Insistence that willpower is sufficient for weight regulation is a big cause of people going on diet after diet that just doesn't work.
  No, that's caused by a specific lack of willpower. Going on diet after diet is exactly why focusing on being ok with being hungry is so important.
  Get a clue.
Learning to cope with discomfort is a very important, and very often disregarded, life skill.
- Not really. Especially when talking about physical pain.
  You should not be in discomfort all the time. This is the kind of thinking that prevents people from going to the doctor. Pain isn't normal.
And it's also good to remember in our modern lives, it's often just a feeling more than a state of being.
It'll tell you you're hungry just because it's the time of day you normally eat. It'll tell you you're hungry when you really just need a drink of water.
Also, it can take up to a year for your brain to adjust to a lower calorie diet.
I'd argue we should be 'grazing' more. Not just accept feeling bad.
I think we eat too much in one sitting. It should be spread out more.
Every couple hours we should be adding energy to our reserves not waiting 6+ hours.
Plus the feeeling of being hungry between meals goes away after a few months if you are still getting what you body needs.
This. Really. If it actually hurts to get hungry perhaps you have Helicobacter pylori. Let that get sorted out.
- GERD can also cause nausea when the stomach is empty. If I wait too long to eat, I become too nauseous to want to eat.
Mentally swapping the urge to be hydrated for the urge to be full was a game changer for me, and I wish there was one cool trick I could share but it was trial and error for me.
I'm pretty skinny, but I hate being hungry. I wish I were better about tolerating hunger, and it's something I could work on, but it's not a requisite skill. Just in case that's useful info for somebody.
Ricecake's comment is great. Wanting to eat is also often not actually hunger, and being able to distinguish between sensations is a skill. For example, I always think I'm really hungry the days before menstruating, and I do eat more, but often it's stomach cramps and hormonal changes that food does not satisfy. You'd be surprised at how long it's taken to see that pattern.
- I find that when food just isn't working to abate hunger, what I actually need is salt.
  Couple of fingers of jalapeno brine, the relief is incredible.
You're saying people should just deal with hunger and fight against everything evolution wants, instead of just eating high fiber food and not being hungry...
How is that "better"?
- Evolution's impact on our hunger was driven by scarcity. Most humans don't experience the levels of scarcity that drove that evolution.
  So, yes, you should work against evolution. This is true for a lot of aspects of the human condition.
- Evolution isn't divine, it's random mutation that generally benefits it's current environment. Considering most of our evolutionary traits emerged thousands, if not millions, of years ago... I'd say we can safely conclude that a lot of our evolutionary instincts aren't especially relevant to our current circumstances.

Just drinking more water helps a lot to feel full.

Staying active also, is not just good for increasing your caloric needs, it's also a great way to be busy, and substitute eating out of boredom.

Have you ever... Considered the disadvantages of drinking too much water all the time?
- Peeing?
- Drinking too much water is pretty difficult. You must be talking about the consequence of drinking a healthy amount of water, which is peeing every hour or so. On the one hand, yes, it's really annoying to be in the middle of something and have to go take a piss. On the other hand,
  My boss makes a dollar, I make a dime
  That's why I piss on company time

Excuse me, fruit are NOT in GENERAL low caloric density with the exception of strawberries.

This is part of the danger of getting your nutrition advice from some internet randos.

What are you talking about? What's more filling, an apple or one of those "100-calorie-packs" of hyperprocessed sugar?
The apple is less calories too.
This thread is generally filled with completely pants-on-head dietary advice.
Don't get this type of information from randoms on Lemmy, contact a professional instead. I've noticed that Lemmy is exceptionally bad as a source for this.
- is that a term you absorbed from zero punctuation?
No internet rando. The information is out there, but people don't want it.

That little clicker in the brain that goes off when you've had enough doesn't really work for me. I have to feel physically full or I still feel hungry. Even worse, my dopamine levels are garbage and eating makes me feel good.

Not saying this doesn't work. Only that I'm far from the only one where it is this simple.

I'm like you, and no it's not simple. As others said, calories in, calories out. Nothing else matters, you need to find your own way to keep it. And no, exercise does not help much with weight, only if paired with a good diet. You would need to work out for hours continuously just to lose the calories from a random extra dessert.
But, you can do it. Two things I wish I had known:
For example, my body was able to keep my weight instead of losing it if I kept calories intake where it should be and had a "cheat day" once a week at most. No cheat days for me, my body is too smart for that.
Sometimes you feel you are on track, and then you get stuck at a certain weight. Even if you keep your diet, you might get stuck at a certain weight despite losing it well beforehand. Keep at it. You will break through at one point, closer than you think. But you have to keep at it.
- It is not as simple as just calories in vs calories out. Your body has a setting point for what weight it thinks it should be. Once you are overweight, your setting point will be higher and your body wants to get back to that higher weight. It will start working actively against you. This might mean your appetite will increase and your metabolism will slow down. I think that is what you are describing here.
  Trying to push yourself to lose more weight despite your body working against you can cause rebound weight gain if you are not able to keep the diet (which might become increasingly difficult due to increasing appetite). The most important thing is to keep a healthy diet that does not reduce your quality of life too much and is doable on the long term, I think. If you are struggling everyday, then it might be better to eat a little bit more and stay on a higher weight a bit longer to ensure that you will maintain the weight loss.
  Maybe this is already what you meant. But the phrase "calories in vs calories out" and stating that nothing else matters made me want to respond. I think it is a popular oversimplification that causes a lot of unnecessary suffering for people trying to lose weight.
Feeling full is about volume of food. With high calorie dense foods like fast food, that’s going to be a ton of calories. With low calorie dense foods you can eat the same amount of food, and eat substantially less calories.
The only thing that matters in weight loss is calories in, calories out.
I get that it’s harder for some people, but finding less calorie dense foods that you enjoy will go a long way towards helping lose weight. Also, don’t drink pop unless it’s diet.
- or maybe stop eating for feeling full, and start eating for satiety.
I fucked my "clicker" up with too large portions, which expanded my stomach over the years. i was NEVER satiated, because i had no way of filling my stomach up. I was always hungry. In the end and after many years of fighting my massive overweight i went for an stomach bypass. If someone tells you that this is the easy way out: they are full of shit. You have to relearn eating, and 1) that really sucks and 2) that was exactly what i needed, No more feeling hungry is a blessing.
Same here. I use popcorn to get there. We probably go through three air poppers a year.
It doesn't work for me when it comes to any sort of fried potato variation (fries, tots, crispy crows, etc). No matter how full I am, I can keep eating those.
If you would accept a suggestion: Just fast for a few days. Your stomach will shrink and you can go back to eating normal portions after. Plus it's good for the soul, there's a reason so many religions recommend it.
- A few days? Depending on the person's condition, it might turn out badly.
  First, start with one day. Second, and most importantly, consult with a medical professional to make sure you don't have any counter-indications.

Certain fruits can be very high in sugars, also not a great idea. Focus more on veggies

Not to say avoid fruits. It's okay, and even encouraged, to eat whole servings of fruit each day.
A family member was eating nothing but fruit and really messed himself up. I forget exactly what happened but he lost muscle control on one side of his body.
- Never go full Jobs
- I am always teetering on the edge of doing this, not because I think it's a good idea, but just because I really, truly love fruit...

Holy fuck we hit 74%? Goddamn

Percent of adolescents ages 12–19 years with obesity: 22.2% (2017-March 2020)

Percent of children ages 6–11 years with obesity: 20.7% (2017-March 2020)

Percent of children ages 2–5 years with obesity: 12.7% (2017-March 2020)

This shit is child abuse people. Not ok.

Go for 100%...I know you can do it.
- Would you be satisfied with 100% minus 1 person?

Despite all the interesting advice in this thread the thing that helped me the most was accepting and getting used to the fact that if you're going to lose weight you're going to be hungry.

You're not starving to death, you're not dying, but there are times where you're going to just have to be hungry and deal with it. Our bodies are very good at doing their best to keep us alive, and hunger is our bodies way of saying "we need to look for food". The problem is we didn't evolve that skill at a time when looking for food only takes a few minutes and can involve thousands of calories.

If you're overweight your body is going to sound alarm bells that it's eating into the reserves, but you need to acknowledge that and let the reserves get used so you can lose weight.

thats plain wrong. you dont have to go hungry to loose weight. thats ONE method, yes. but there are others. the human body is not a car you put petrol into.

Fruits are high in sugar, how are they considered low calorie foods?

It doesn't say low calories but low caloric density and high in fibre. It's a combo that matters. Though one can definitely overdo on fruit.
Like the other commenter said, it's about the calorie density, not the calories.
An apple makes you satisfied longer than an equivalent number of calories of Oreos, so if you get to snack as much as you want on either, you'll eat fewer calories of apple than of Oreo over a given timeframe.
You can over eat either of them, it's just easier with one than the other.
Similarly, something like a steak can fill you up a lot, for a very long time, but has enough calories in it that it's still better to not eat for every meal.
Fruits have plenty of fiber, which helps increase satiety, which is what's important here. Also check the difference between a candy bar and a piece of friut, and then think about which fills you up better with fewer calories. Density matters too, it's much easier to snarf down a bunch of candy than to eat the same caloric value in fruit.
One apple (223 g) is supposed to be 116 calories.
Most fruits are low calorie with a lot of them having less than 100 kcal per 100g. There are some exceptions such as Avocado (due to fat content actually) and dates as well dried fruit (prunes at 300/100g vs plums at 45/100g).
Strawberries, cherries, apples, figs, bananas all are below 100kcal/100g. Obviously some are better at filing you up than others.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satiety_value

It's not just fruits and vegetables, but getting the right components.
A high sugar low fiber fruit won't do as much as a higher fiber fruit, so apple > blackberry, for example.

You can also take advantage of your bodies insatiable love for protein and make that a key part of the meal as well, and it'll signal that it's full sooner and for longer.

Food that physically takes longer to eat also help because you can eat faster than you can "realize" you're full.

A trick of mine, that I don't know if there's any general basis for it but it helps me, is to not take a plate with as much food as I think I want, but to instead take a plate with about half that. That way I get to feel like I'm having two servings, and the gap between finishing the first and starting the second usually means that the second is less than the first.

I used to be uninterested in foods like broccoli, apples, oranges, and blueberries, but after a transition period I love them and have them every day. I'd like to hear anyone's story who's also been able to integrate more of these foods.

Personally I'm luckyish in having the opposite problem from most, I've been entirely unable to gain weight, and before I started working out to put on muscle weight I weighed about 120 lbs
One of the fun parts about rapidly building muscle is your body will start asking for healthier foods. I've had a couple of times where I'll make a big steaming plate of veggies and be all about it until the moment I put some in my mouth and went "oh yeah, I still don't like steamed broccoli stems"
I also yesterday tried to challenge myself on a new personal record distance in biking, and was biking in the morning rather than the evening like I usually do. I quickly learned that I need a very different fuel in my body first thing in the morning if I'm going to be engaging in physical activity shortly later.

My own advice:

The diet I'm on, which has lost me 36 pounds (196 to 160) and counting since early April, is simple calorie restriction - I try my best not to go over 1500 calories/day, and if I do go over, I try to make up for it by going under on following days until things average out.

Every time I've tried this diet or similar diets, I've had great success, as long as I've meticulously tracked and wrote down how many calories I ate each day. The times I've tried this diet without tracking have all ended up failing, even when I "tried" sticking to it for months. The moment I start writing numbers down, things just fall into place. So for me at least, that's the key.

Some notes:

Over the last 127 days my actual average calories/day has been 1472/day
I try to avoid meals where counting is very difficult or impractical. That means I try to avoid going to restaurants that don't post calories and I'm not big on "real" cooking. If I do have a meal where a good count isn't possible I try my best to overestimate - usually with 2500 or 3000 depending on how full I am since it's really hard to eat more than that at once. I find it very difficult to go to most restaurants without getting more than 1500 calories, also, so I don't eat at restaurants all that often anymore. Fast food places like McDonald's are actually some of the easier options to work with, though.
I've made little to no effort to eat healthier - just less. I can have a blizzard from Dairy Queen if I want, but that's 1100 calories and then I've only got 400 left for something else. I have mastered making delicious ice cream that's just 300 calories/pint though. In practice I usually eat processed foods from a can, box, or bag that you just need to heat up or follow the instructions on the box for.
A scale is essential for getting accurate calories out of things like butter, milk, ketchup, ice cream ingredients, etc.
In general meats are a pretty poor choice - compared to other foods they make me a lot less full compared to how many calories they take up. I can eat 8 hotdogs (without buns) and fill up my daily calories in that one meal, and still be hungry - or I can have two cans of spaghettios (580 calories total), and be so full I almost can't finish.
For me at least, after the first week or so I just stop feeling hungry in general most of the time. There are occasionally days where I only eat because I know I should, rather than because I got hungry.
When I'm on this diet, I basically never get heartburn, even after a day where I eat something that would usually have given it to me badly - probably the nicest part of all this.
Despite what the post says, I eat basically no fruits or vegetables in my day-to-day life.
In the past, I've incorporated extremely heavy daily exercise into my routine as well - I'm talking multiple hours a day, every day, for at least two months. While it did have some noticeable benefits like a very noticeably lower resting heart rate and increased strength, it had basically no visible effect on my rate of weight loss - looking at the graph, you couldn't even tell which portions of the diet were subject to heavy exercise vs. heavy leisure. The lesson learned is that diet is far, far more important than exercise - you can offset an entire workout with a single cookie.
When I'm not making any dieting attempts at all, I'm a huge glutton. I've never gotten over 200 pounds, because any time I get close I start doing this diet - but if I ate the way I wanted to all the time, I could easily weigh 350+ pounds. I can very easily eat single 1200-2000 calorie meals multiple times a day. I've yo-yo'd a lot in the past few years but I'm hoping to more or less keep things permanently under control this time - once I get to 140ish I plan to raise my daily calorie allowance to the point where I maintain, rather than gain or lose, over time.

An added bonus of writing things down is getting to graph things too!

Note that I'm not claiming this is healthy. Just effective. Anyone can lose weight eating nothing but chocolate cake, as long as they eat sufficiently little. It doesn't mean you won't die from it.

I’ve made little to no effort to eat healthier - just less. I can have a blizzard from Dairy Queen if I want, but that’s 1100 calories and then I’ve only got 400 left for something else.
In addition to choosing not to have something in the first place, choosing not to finish something is another great skill. Lowest calorie blizzard is still hundreds of calories, but choosing to eat only half of the smallest size can work.
Definitely a harder habit to change compared to not ordering in the first place when raised to always clean the plate.
- While that's true, and while it's something I'd definitely recommend for others, I can't honestly say that's something I've mastered doing myself. To me, not finishing just means I have more work to do when it comes to figuring out how many calories I actually ate. While I could just guesstimate that I had 60% of that blizzard, I find that in practice I'm really not okay with being that wishy-washy with the numbers. The days where I have to just guesstimate kill me inside.
  And this situation with the blizzard is something I've dealt with. I had a mostly finished blizzard but couldn't finish it. I had to mark the level of ice cream still remaining, empty the cup, then get weight measurements for the empty cup (c), cup full of water (f), and cup full of water up to the level of remaining ice cream (w) - at which point the total calories eaten were (w-c)/(f-c) * B, where B is the number of calories in the full blizzard. If I could have avoided all of that by finishing the last 28% of that blizzard, you bet I would have.

Yes! The biggest factor with body weight is calories in vs calories out. Foods with volume and mass but fewer calories displace calorie dense foods. Even as simple as substituting popcorn vs potato chips is huge on calorie savings. Protein and fats (ideally plant based) can also help you feel full longer than say simple carbs like potato chips/white pasta.

I highly recommend Harvard's Nutrition Source for science-based nutrition info and recipes, the language is very accessible too!

Edit: fixed link

Correcting link https://nutritionsource.hsph.harvard.edu/
- Thanks!

I've been eating fruits and vegetables but it's really difficult to get hard full with them.

With that said, oatmeal helps. I've lost around 30 pounds and I hit a wall, I'm finding it hard to lose more, I'm increasing my exercise but I'm not sure if I'm eating too little now for my metabolism to kick in and help me lose more weight or if I'm eating too much and I need to cut down more. It's all about calories in calories out, up to a certain point.

You are fighting millions of years of evolution. If you are in caloric deficit for too long, your body thinks you don't have food near you anymore and try to conserve whatever energy you have.
Take a diet break and up your calories slightly daily until you see yourself gaining a little bit of weight. Then cut back the last increase.
Keep that calorie intake for a few weeks and then start a new cut after that. Rinse and repeat until you are at your goal weight.
Ab easy rule of thumb is to do a weight cut for 6-12 weeks, and then do a maintenance weight for the same length of time you did your cut.
- Not recommending chest days? I've read that a chest day every 4 days helped with that specific issue, I don't know how accurate that is, as you can find everything and it's opposite online.
you cant loose weight while your insulin is high. ever. your oatmeal gets turned into fat instead of energy. so you cant loose weight. switch to meat salt and vegtables. try it one week, see what happens. the reason you lost weight is that you were eating even more sugar and carbs before.
- I think the reason why I lost so much weight is because I was eating like 3000-4000+ calories a day and didn't care about my diet at all, and now I'm eating 2000 or less calories per day.
  There are tons of sites/articles/etc that say oatmeal is great for weight loss, it lowers your blood sugar, it's very filling and full of vitamins, minerals, fiber, etc. though there's always going to be conflicting information, which makes part of this more difficult.

Unless your brain is fucking broken like mine, lol.

This is oddly controversial, but an even more satiating method is to consume more protein. If you hit your goal body weight (lbs) in grams of protein, you won't be reaching for that end of day snack.

Note drinking the protein instead of eating it doesn't work nearly as well for this.

Just to parrot you with an example, which would you prefer? A half pound of chicken breast or two apples and a banana? Guarantee you the chicken breast is gonna leave you better off on the whole than the fruits.
Too much protein can be hard on the kidneys, especially long term. Balance and moderation. Not saying your point is bad. But there are a lot of protein bros out there.
I don't think it is controversial, except when it is an all or nothing thing just like the zero carbs crap. A balanced diet will keep you full and includes proteins, fats, carbs, and everything else as long as they are in the right balance.
Crappy diets like the one based on the food pyramid, which had way to many carbs, are the main problem.

Modern fruits have too much fructose for good health these days. They've been bred to be way too sweet.

Still better than an industrial snack, don't let perfect be the enemy of good. If you already have illuminated all these snacks and other sweetened products from your diet, I think you're doing pretty great. Before that, it seems a bit silly to worry about fruits being too sweet.
- I have a lot of friends who have a fruit smoothie every morning and wonder why they aren't losing weight. Bananas, apples, and grapes in particular are to be avoided. Most berries are okay.

So sitting on my ass eating candy isn't the way to lose weight?

Technically it still depends on the amount of candy.
- Indeed, reminds me of the ones that give you a "power wash [for] your intestines":
  https://www.mashed.com/444725/read-this-before-eating-haribo-sugar-free-gummy-bears/

I don't want a pickle.

I just want to ride on my motorcycle
Funniest shit I ever saw..
Edit: autocorrect screwed me.

For me I found that I need summer levels of vitamin D, so when for September to April take 40000 IU per day. For me I took 2-3 months to get out of power saving mode. In the summer I try to be a long as I can sun without getting sunburn without sunscreen, midday.

Then I do intermittent fasting only eating dinner.

This has led me to losing 250g per day.

40 000 iu? I always heard 10k iu is the upper limit for most people. Is this a typo or is there new research on safe levels?
- The pills i see are mostly 1000 or 4000

It is somewhat simple, and I know some people live in "food deserts"; but really if you couldn't get it 500 years ago, it is probably not good for you.

Eat simple foods, with few steps from identifiable grown thing (veg, fruit, animal, fish) to what ends up on your plate.

This is not as easy as that, people don't know how to cook well or don't have access to good quality foods.

74%? That's actually lower than I thought

Fruits and veggies are great for gut biome and the fiber helps keep you moving, but there is such a thing as too much bowel movement.

TBH, the best weightloss options are actually a liquid supplement diet, the kind that come in bins of powder with a plastic scoop inside and PROTEIN written across the front. Most of them are meal replacers, and some of them are also low calorie.

If you stick to a vegan diet expecting to lose weight you'll usually fall into the trap of a high carb diet instead.

I'm vegan and struggling with my weight for a while, bought a Huel subscription and it is really helping. I'll get my measured out meal, then fill up on water and tea, but the shakes by themselves are surprisingly filling.
Portion control had been my biggest struggle. It's easier to say no to another meal shake than getting seconds of something else, and the shakes do taste good. Well, the chocolate does, the Vanilla is... not amazing.
I'm also keeping up on it more cause I don't want the hassle of modifying the order.
The other big thing that keeps me at it is weighing myself every day and logging it in a health app.
- This next statement is off topic a bit, but I bought a Muscle Milk Strawberry powder once and it was just bland vanilla with little tiny bits of occasional strawberry. 0/10

if that method would work, then it would have a higher success rate than 5 %.

(NOTE: I am not a doctor, nutritionist, etc - just someone who has learned a lot of lessons the hard way and likes to share). Without challenging the focus of these stats, I'd like to add two interrelated side-notes (from decades of being professionally physically active, and then decades of being professionally deskbound and too burnt out to move in my spare time, and then getting it mostly back under control later): (1) If you have reached the point where you have long-term struggled with losing weight then - unless you are a very rare exception - changing diet alone will likely not be enough because (2) the steepest but most important curve is "reprogramming your metabolism". One of the most common psychological obstacles I see people hit after years of sedentary living is naively changing only what they eat and getting disappointed when their body doesn't magically "change gears" by itself. The second most common obstacle I see (when people do also start moving their body too) is "counting kilos/pounds" and giving up in frustration when the numbers don't go down straight away, or even go up. When you do "any old exercise" you burn energy while you exercise (which is of course better than not doing any, and helps with aerobic/cardio/psychological fitness too) but beyond that one of the best secrets to serious body transformation is to build muscle (including the women, and not necessarily to a "bodybuilding" degree - a lot of muscle building happens before the "looking jacked" phase). When you do that the increased muscle burns more energy all day and night, not just during the exercise - it reprograms your metabolism. Even better, the longer you do it it doesn't just "change gears" in those moments/days, it teaches your body to become better at "changing gears" in the future. Eventually (unless you have a medical condition, etc) the excess fat burns itself off in service of your body's new functional requirements. Another thing that surprises many is how little resistance training is actually needed for a good baseline to start with (for many people three "adequate but not crazy" workouts per week is enough to see steady progress). BUT a big confusion happens for people weighing themselves all the time - muscle is more dense than fat so there is a good chance if doing it the right (emotionally & financially sustainable) way your overall weight might appear to plateau for ages (or even increase) at first while the increase in dense muscle offsets the loss of sparse fat. I suggest for "tracking weight/fat loss" in most typical cases do so indirectly, not by naively counting loss of overall kilos (of fat, muscle, bones, organs, tendons, ligaments, and so on combined). Regarding diet (especially when exercising) some good rules of thumb are to ensure a broad spread of micro nutrients by shopping for various fruits, veges, nuts, seeds, etc (including semi-regularly surprising yourself with things you usually wouldn't buy to cover the edge-case micros), ensure a good balance of macro nutrients (often the "40 30 30" guide is near enough - 40% carbs, 30% protein, 30% fats - but when strong muscle-building you will need higher amount of protein, covering broad amino acid spectrum), reduce processed foods which are "energy dense" (a euphemism for "nutrient sparse"), keep hydrated, get sun (or other source of vitamin D) every day, reduce sources of stress (stress-addiction to adrenaline and cortisol is real and devastating to your body, and highly addictive if you continue for too long). The most important part is - whatever positive changes you achieve - you need to win the mind-game by making them part of your unquestioning routine, not a novelty that you try to keep kicking down the road. The best equivalent I can think of for this is brushing your teeth - most people find it boring but "just do it" without pondering "will I manage to brush my teeth today". Internalise the other changes the way you brush your teeth.

Start every day by drinking 1-2 liters of room-temp water, then waiting an hour to eat.

Humans don't need grains.

Pretty simple.

Eating fruits and vegetables might definitely help and it is in any case very healthy! However, people should not always expect to lose more than 10% of their weight in the long term (over years). This 10% can already provide great benefits for your health, so definitely try to lose that weight if you are overweight.

Often it is said that it is just calories in vs calories out. This is only true up until a certain point. For many people, after losing about 10% of their weight, their body starts to work against more weight loss. Their metabolism starts to slow down and their appetite will increase, making it more difficult to lose weight. It might make it almost impossible to keep on a diet and it might even cause people to gain more weight back than they lost.

The theory behind this is that your body has a set point or settling point for what it thinks your weight should be. When you are overweight, the set point changes to a higher weight. When you lose weight, your body wants to get back to this higher set point. The set point can be changed to a lower weight, but that might take years and years. There also is some limited evidence that building more muscles might help somewhat.

I think it is important to add this to the discussion, as often there is the idea that weight loss is just based on self-control and limiting calorie-intake. While this might play a role, the idea that these are the only factors that determine your weight causes a lot of suffering for people. It might also cause more weight gain in the long term.

So, try to lose about 10% of your weight and if you feel like you are struggling after that, go to a specialised doctor who can help you with losing more weight (doctors without this specialisation are often clueless about weight loss in my experience). In addition, a psychologist might be able to help if your are overeating due to an eating disorder.

No. If you stop losing weight on a caloric deficit, you miscalculated the deficit. It's a thermodynamic certainty. When people hit a long term plateau on a CICO diet, it's because they either failed to adjust their total daily calorie expenditures for their new weight, or most likely they're cheating on their calorie counts.
- Like I said, that is an oversimplification. There are many other factors that play a role, like the body working against the weight loss and lowering metabolism and increasing appetite, as I already discussed. There are also psychological factors and environmental factors that can have a big impact on weight loss.
  Just ignoring those makes losing weight more difficult and means you have to do it entirely based on willpower. If you are one of those people for which these other factors play a big role it becomes very difficult to keep the weight off in the long term just based on willpower. This can be the case, for example, if you have an eating disorder, very high stress, untreated medical conditions (e.g. hypothyroidism), not enough money to buy healthy food, problems with the body signaling hunger or fullness, unsolved emotional issues, and so on.
  Of course there are some people who just eat too much and who can just lose the weight easily by eating less. However, especially for people who are very overweight, these factors will play a role. They hear they should just eat less all the time and if they fail they are made to feel like a failure themselves and as if they have a lack of willpower. This is not the case. For them losing the weight is more difficult and the underlying issues should be addressed. You cannot just generalise like that and apply what works for you to everyone else.
  Edit: please find sources for my claims in my comment below.