Literally cant understand what more i can do

__Di__

i know, it doesnt make any sense,

unless im some kind of secret eater.

ive been sticking between 1400 and 1800 calories,

Do you weigh all your food Brian?

Mattdemon

:GRABS TBRAIN1989 FROM THE BACK OF HIS NECK:

Listen to me, HOW BAD DO YOU WANT THIS? I don't use the metric system but even if I did, it doesn't matter. I don't even care what you are eating now or what you have to say about your calorie deficit. I did however take a look at what you ate yesterday. Up your ****ING protein. I hate that MFP highly underestimates this macro nutrient. You "should" try to match your protein intake by grams (or kglhb or whatever you blokes do) to your body weight. 200 lbs = 200 grams. It's ****ing hard but I only ask to try. The decision in favoring your protein over the others should bring you closer to your goals. It's critical into building muscle and with more muscle comes more calories burnt -> doing NOTHING.

Get your *kitten* in the gym, spent half your time on cardio into weight training and get back to me in a couple weeks. If you need a routine or something, message me. If you're really serious, I can get you to lose 10-15 pounds in a month. It's not ideal but if you're willing to go for it, you are fully capable of it.

You seem fairly athletic and I believe in you. Armed Forces? This will be EASY. You know what it's like. GET IT ****ING DONE!

__Di__

i knew someone would say not eating enough,

logic doesnt allow me to gain weight at a calorie deficit surely?

you cant even build muscle if your not eating more calories then you burn.

id have to eat about 4500 calories if i ate back my exercise,

I've gained at deficit before. if you're not putting enough cals in your body CAN cling to everything you DO eat...

that is a myth, regardless as to what the consensus is on MFP, the body does not hold onto anything because it uses it. If it held onto it, what would it use for energy?

Mattdemon

im certain im going to go for the upping calories attempt now, that seems to be the general consensus,

i wont have any problem eating that much, plus ill try and log at the weekends, it might be then that im eating all my weekly calories!

thanks everyone

I hope you are not serious. You gonna take the "General Consensus" advice. Use some logic man.

Your problem isn't because you are not eating enough.

Quoted For Truth, this dude has more in him. I know it.

__Di__

i knew someone would say not eating enough,

logic doesnt allow me to gain weight at a calorie deficit surely?

you cant even build muscle if your not eating more calories then you burn.

id have to eat about 4500 calories if i ate back my exercise,

I've gained at deficit before. if you're not putting enough cals in your body CAN cling to everything you DO eat...

You can't gain wait in a deficit.

If you gained you weren't in a deficit - either due to over estimation of calories burned or under estimation of calories eaten.

common misconception. I have hypothyroid disorder. untreated i could eat carrot sticks for a week and put on a couple of kg. my metabolism doesn't work when i'm not on meds.

That is different though, you had a medical condition there.

tbrain1989

trust me, i dont believe in eating more to lose weight, it literally doesnt make sense,

if your argument is that eating too little slows metabolism then it would be impossible to starve to death and we would be able to live on nothing,

if you your argument is that its a balance and not taking it to that extreme, then please feel free to tell me the balance,

as for BMI etc.. dont even get me started, im after a BF%

i am however willing to try something different when my current situation isnt working,

pcastagner

i knew someone would say not eating enough,

logic doesnt allow me to gain weight at a calorie deficit surely?

you cant even build muscle if your not eating more calories then you burn.

id have to eat about 4500 calories if i ate back my exercise,

I've gained at deficit before. if you're not putting enough cals in your body CAN cling to everything you DO eat...

You can't gain wait in a deficit.

If you gained you weren't in a deficit - either due to over estimation of calories burned or under estimation of calories eaten.

common misconception. I have hypothyroid disorder. untreated i could eat carrot sticks for a week and put on a couple of kg. my metabolism doesn't work when i'm not on meds.

That is different though, you had a medical condition there.

Thermodynamics still applies with hypothyroidism. All that changes is one of the variables, "calories out". You still can't gain weight on a deficit, unless it's water. Flesh is made of carbon compounds, and carbon compounds are lost when you exhale, because they are broken apart for energy to make your body function. Muscle and bone can possibly be cannibalized and turned to fat, but you can't have a net increase in carbon without adding in more carbon than you take away.


I don't know why people so consistently mistake variation in metabolism with exceptions to the laws of nature. Matter can neither be created, nor destroyed.

tbrain1989

thats why im so sceptical of the eat more theory,

i am a pure scientist and matter can only change form, not be created from nothing.

i know the purists on here would say that higher calories= more enegry available for harder training which in turn = higher results acheived because of the fuel available

but that at best is a bell curve...

Beckaroo94

Try having a net calorie intake that mfp suggests. You may gain some back at first, but if you follow it strictly over a month or so, you'll lose it back. You may have also gained muscle mass

pcastagner

trust me, i dont believe in eating more to lose weight, it literally doesnt make sense,

if your argument is that eating too little slows metabolism then it would be impossible to starve to death and we would be able to live on nothing,

if you your argument is that its a balance and not taking it to that extreme, then please feel free to tell me the balance,

as for BMI etc.. dont even get me started, im after a BF%

i am however willing to try something different when my current situation isnt working,

Well, in that case, leangains.


500 cal deficit max, reduce your workouts, eat all your cals in an 8 hour window, eat most most of them right after your workouts.


I tend to assume there is a mistake in your math somewhere rather than a problem with the basic laws of nature being suspended in your special snowflake body. Examples: I was eating lots of pork loin for a while, but didn't know the entry I chose was for loin trimmed of my favorite part, the fat. Before that, I was measuring cooked chicken breast as if it were raw. Before that, I was depending on an entry for beef that was just WRONG.

I could have, at that point, believed this ridiculous eat more theory, then switched to chicken breast measured properly, with a NOMINAL increase in calories (but not actual), then come back and told everyone to eat more because my emotions tell me I just figured something out. Instead, I continued to believe in the basic laws of nature, and continued to look for the flaw in my calculations. It worked. And I would gladly make a bet with anyone that I could have them losing weight consistently if I had control over their diet, prepared their food myself, and measured it myself, and adjusted based on results without their input.

There are a million ways to get this wrong. There is really no way to create or destroy matter. It is quite possible your metabolism is on the slow side, in which case, you simply lower your estimated BMR after being ABSOLUTELY SURE you have eliminated any other errors.

To be ABSOLUTELY SURE, I recommend eating the same foods for a month. Make a list of foods you are absolutely sure about, long enough that you can stand eating just those for a month. At the end of the month, compare results to predictions, and you can create an error correction using that data.

_Zardoz_

My initial thoughts looking at the days you have logged I'd lay off the processes food and get some fresh fruit and veg in your body along with some good protein ( not from the processes meat you seem to be eating)

Beckaroo94

thats why im so sceptical of the eat more theory,

i am a pure scientist and matter can only change form, not be created from nothing.

i know the purists on here would say that higher calories= more enegry available for harder training which in turn = higher results acheived because of the fuel available

but that at best is a bell curve...

I see what you mean. I'm quite scientific (studying chemical engineering) and skeptical about this, but this is how I think of it.

If you eat too little, your body will become more and more efficient and you would feel cold, lethargic etc, your bmr would become very low, and your body would try to convert as much food into fat as possible. If you ate too little and always exercised the calories you'd eaten, you would eventually starve to death after burning all the fat, protein etc.

Just try to trust mfp, and do what it says. Any diet works as long as you follow it the way it is intended. As long as you have a 500 calorie deficit per day, you'll lose weight. If you have a huge deficit, when you want to eat more again, you'll pile on weight again I assume

Capt_Apollo

as far as your pure scientist comment... well, the body is not a perfectly efficient machine that can be measured exactly. you fuel it for basic functions, and for training, and it also expels waste... so sometimes you need to eat more!! let your body take care of itself.

as far as your training goes, 5 side football and rugby is awesome. i know it can be very demanding on the body. but for your gym training, what are you doing?? you only list legs and upper body. that doesn't tell me any thing. thats not even a list of body parts, thats just listing a region. are you following a program like 5/3/1 or strong lifts? are you progressing a little bit each week? do you keep a log so you can go back to the rack/machine and get stronger, or are you doing the same weight every week?

tbrain1989

i do have the discipline to eat the same thing in repetition, so i might try that, may be that theres something im missing,

but were talking about a 2000 calories error.

not sure that can be right,

JessHealthKick

I have NETTED 1600 for the past 2 months, which meant that some days I was eating over 2100cals. I used to net closer to 1200 but wasn't seeing any progress. I am 21, female, 5ft 7.

my recent stats:

April 10:
weight of 64.1kg
32.5% bf%
17.9kg muscle

May 21:
weight of 63.8kg
30.1% bf%
18.6kg muscle

yes, I gained muscle. I thrash myself at the gym, run UPHILL (i.e. not boring cardio bunny) and squat.

pcastagner

i do have the discipline to eat the same thing in repetition, so i might try that, may be that theres something im missing,

but were talking about a 2000 calories error.

not sure that can be right,

Start with data, not reasoning. Notice that none of the people telling you to eat more have any data to back up their reasoning. Because you haven't provided it. It's all theoretical. Data, data, data!

Measure cooked meat as cooked meat. Eat simple foods that are easy to calculate. Keep good records.

I highly recommend learning to cook meat at low temps, it will make this easier. Heston Blumenthal has some good videos on YouTube. Basically though, 90C should be the upper limit for any protein, including eggs.


If your metabolism is really that slow, you can deal with that. I do actually notice some slowdowns, so I do re-feeds. You could start with a re-feed, then do a deficit if you want.


But basically:

Eat a deficit
Stop overtraining

JessHealthKick

i do have the discipline to eat the same thing in repetition, so i might try that, may be that theres something im missing,

but were talking about a 2000 calories error.

not sure that can be right,

we can't measure everything perfectly. Heart rate monitors are off too. Try to make sure you are netting ABOVE your BMR for a month and see what happens. I guarantee you will se an improvement! You need to have that 1400cals (or whatever your BMR is) to support normal bodily functions for the day. The extra cals go towards moving, so if you move more you should eat some more, rather than starving (I don't mean starving mode) your body of vital nutrients it needs to keep you breathing and healthy!

myofibril

trust me, i dont believe in eating more to lose weight, it literally doesnt make sense,

It does if you consider that the cals out side of the energy balance equation is affected by the cals in side.

To maintain your weight your food intake should equal your calories out (TDEE.) So, if I utilise 3000 calories worth of energy per day then I should eat 3000 calories. Therefore, if I eat 1,500 calories per day for 7 days I should lose weight at a quick rate (or on a strictly mathematical basis 1.5lbs per week.)

This would work if i wasn't for the fact that TDEE is rarely static and interdependent on calories in. Your body craves homeostasis and will therefore reduce the elements which make up cals out (BMR/TEF/TEA/NEAT) in a myriad of ways meaning the deficit you believe you are creating is actually much less than you realise. The sharper and more sudden the drop in cals in greater the knock on effect on cals out. From my understanding it isn't the slowing of RMR that is the real issue rather than a fall in daily activity and greater efficiency of movement which is the problem.

It's not so much about eating "more" as it is about finding a sweet spot: cals low enough that noticeable fat loss occurs bit not so low it creates an inefficient fat loss environment.

Unfortunately the eat more to lose more mantra is very poorly explained or misapplied, usually by the very people who purport to understand it leading to some eyebrowing raising conclusions (such as you can see a net gain in fat on a deficit - you can't - but weight can increase mainly due to water retention which is especially problematic in low calorie dieting.)

tbrain1989

as far as your pure scientist comment... well, the body is not a perfectly efficient machine that can be measured exactly. you fuel it for basic functions, and for training, and it also expels waste... so sometimes you need to eat more!! let your body take care of itself.

as far as your training goes, 5 side football and rugby is awesome. i know it can be very demanding on the body. but for your gym training, what are you doing?? you only list legs and upper body. that doesn't tell me any thing. thats not even a list of body parts, thats just listing a region. are you following a program like 5/3/1 or strong lifts? are you progressing a little bit each week? do you keep a log so you can go back to the rack/machine and get stronger, or are you doing the same weight every week?

i cycle my workouts with 2 weeks on a program consisting of

day 1
3 chest exercises moderate weight/ high reps
3 shoulder "
3 arm "
3 back "

day 2
squats "
RDL's "
leg press "
leg curls "
calf raises

i always finish my workout with 3*12 super sets of pull ups/ tri dips


i do the above on alternate days 5 days a week for 2 weeks

then week 3 i do heavy lifts,

day 1 squat-max
day2 rest
day 3 bench-max
day 4 rest
day 5 dead lifts -max

missybct

I would definitely just have full blood works done by the doctor. Just in CASE. Sometimes our bodies have a hard time adjusting to new things, or it could be a physical thing. Normally I discount that, especially considering the amount of exercise you do - but as Spock says "If you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth" :happy:

that is an awesome quote ... thanks very much, guess i need to find me a GP

Star Trek is full of them

Send me a message if you need any help!