This is not a yes-no type of question so I’ll answer with a few examples.
During my first attempts to lose weight, I believed that less is better (everyone was saying that)…except I didn’t have the proper knowledge on how to apply it and ended up excluding everything that helped me lose weight.
One of my unsuccessful experiences: in my teenage years I heard of a miracle soup that makes you lose weight quickly and no exercise is needed. Oh wow! I felt so lucky to have learned about it – just the thing that would change my body forever 
Sign me up!
The idea was simple- eat only that soup mainly made out of cabbage, and very few other vegetables, no oil, no nothing else…it. did. not. taste. good.
I don’t remember how many days I was supposed to be on that diet, but I lasted for about 2-3 days.
That kind of diet is not smart, does not drive long-term results, and is not sustainable. I remember I felt weak, I had no energy (that explains the claim “ no exercise needed” because there is no energy left in the body 
), thus my adherence to the diet fell quickly (and thank God for that!)
Eliminating everything else – healthy fat, carbs and protein was unnecessary and not safe.
So that’s an example of how less is not better.
.
.
.
I’ll move to something more generic only to demonstrate the power of quantity: glycemic index and the glycemic load.
The glycemic index is the ranking attributed to a food’s effect on blood glucose (blood sugar) 2 hours after consuming that food.
The glycemic load relates to the quantity of carbohydrate food consumed, which influences blood sugar response.
I’ll take the extremes as an example: the food with the highest glycemic index is sugar (100/ 100) , followed by white, plain baguette and candy (95/100). On the other end, we have hummus (6/100) , agave (11/100) and peanuts (13/100).
These are hard facts, but it does not mean that these numbers are definite.
Now, what’s interesting here is to look at this from a quantity perspective: it’s only logical to think that sugar gives a much higher glycemic index than peanuts.
But if only ½ teaspoon of sugar is eaten vs. 9X of the same quantity of peanuts, then the tables would turn.
It’s not only that, many factors come into play:
– Food form (solid vs. liquid) – liquid tends to be absorbed much quicker, thus the glycemic index is higher
– The presence of other food (fat, protein, fiber) – the combination slows down the digestion, thus lowering the glycemic index
– How the food is cooked/ processed – separating the fiber from the nutrient increases the glycemic index, while reheating (pizza or rice) is lowering the glycemic index
– The different response each of us might have on eating the same food
Even more interesting is that both, the glycemic index and glycemic load are linked to weight loss (for anyone curios to look at it, I’ll leave in the comments links to the studies made on this subject)
And this was an example of how less might be better.
.
Having plenty of (failed) experiences with diets, I found what works for me, as well as for other women I’ve helped lose weight and keep it off.
And that’s the portion size – is something that resonated with me as I am not necessarily of fan of counting calories non-stop just to lose weight. Tried it, didn’t stick.
Following the portion size and focusing on mindfulness makes sense to me as I can eat intuitively and I don’t feel deprived either.
What’s better is that it worked when I had different goals – lose, maintain or gain weight.
This is something I work with inside of my program and it is a first I’m teaching my clients to implement.
If you’d like to get help in your weight loss journey by adhering to a simpler way of eating, let me know.
Leave a Reply