[malfist]

I don't find calorie tracking to be very successful. In my mental ecosystem, it penalizes spending calories on healthy foods (why eat that banana if it's just calories), and I don't do so well with a budget, constant go over just slightly.

I had better luck with Weight Watcher with "free" healthy foods and the segmentation between weekly and daily budgets. Then weight watchers tweaked their point values so much that I couldn't stick with it very well, and when I dual tracked points and calories the new WW plan had me at under 1400 cal/day, which isn't sustainable.

> if you’re able to diet consistently I don’t see why a drug is needed

It'd really really really really really really hard to stick to a diet, especially long term. GLP-1s puts eating healthy and good portion sizes all on autopilot. I don't have to plan out how I'm going to manage my hunger and my food noise, it's just auto pilot. I naturally gravitate to eating enough, but not too much, and mostly plants.

[nemomarx]

I don't think 1400 is unsustainable? it'll lead to losing weight continuously, maybe a half pound a week ish, but that's sustainable for as long as you have weight to lose, isn't it?

[mmierz]

This depends on your size and activity level. The last time I dieted, I was losing a pound a week on 2700 calories. 1400 would have been a severe crash diet.

[malfist]

Depends on the person. I'm an active, 6' male with a TDEE of 2600. 1400 calories is absolutely unsustainable. That's nearly 3lb of weightloss per week.

If I was shorter, female and sedentary, sure. But that's not me.

[sjsisjxjdjd]

Yes, very likely.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_Barbieri%27s_fast

[apitman]

There's physically sustainable, and then there's mentally sustainable. Based on what I've read about long term fasts, I suspect 0 would be easier than 1400.

[whatshisface]

Bananas aren't really that healthy. Like you said their nutritional value is mainly just calories.