Your Favorite Weird-ish LC Meal
Options
Replies
-
octobubbles wrote: »....
I do believe most people get a "reduced hunger" when going to keto, but primarily because their previous hunger levels were way too high. I think it's better to say that hunger more closely aligns with physical need. I am more hungry than most because I need more calories than most people. I am still losing weight, and I don't exactly have tons of weight left to go. When your weight is off to one extreme or another, your hunger is proportionately off to the inverse extreme. Someone who is under-weight will be hungrier than their ideal intake and someone who is over-weight will be less hungry than their ideal intake. As your weight returns to the natural weight your body desires, your appetite adjusts to return to the amount needed to maintain that natural weight. When I was heavier, I experienced the "disinterested in food" days much more frequently than I do now.
...
I actually considered messaging you directly about this, but you prompted the question here, so here it shall go!
So, my increasing suspicion, which your statement seems to support, is that there's no need to adjust to a 'maintenance' WOE once we reach our goal weight. In a perfect world (where we let ourselves be driven by hunger/satiety in the stomach rather than the like in the mind), when we reach the optimal weight for our body, our body's hunger will maintain itself.
Would you agree/care to comment?
I would agree with that. So long as we've removed anything that disrupts or screws with our hunger signals*, and we've learned to trust them and not a calorie number we've made up for ourselves, there is no need to change anything to move into maintenance. You'll just slowly slide into it. *Note: Some conditions may make hunger signals harder/impossible to accurately judge for some people.
Of course, many people tend to freak out as this happens. They get maybe 10 pounds away from their goal and suddenly notice the weight loss is slowing down. Sometimes it even appears to have stopped or gone up (because scale weight is highly variable and people don't look for month-to-month averages and trends, they look week-to-week at best, and often day-to-day). They then notice that their calories have gone up. "Oh no! I need to start restricting my calories to keep my weight loss going at the rate I wanted," they automatically assume. And, we end up with people proffering wisdom such as, "not counting only works when you've got a lot to lose, when you get closer to your goal you will need to count or you'll stop losing."
The only change I made, when I went to maintenance, was a mental one. I consciously told myself that I wasn't going to care what the scale said unless my trend-line rose above a certain number (that is, I gained a fair amount and kept it on). I would eat as much or as little as I wanted and remind myself that I wasn't trying to lose. My calories eaten did see a small spike (from about 2000-2200 to 2400-2600), as I had been trying to only eat when my body demanded it. Now I was eating whenever I felt "a little hungry." I was still eating to hunger cues, I just was more willing to eat right away instead of waiting to see if I was "really" hungry.0 -
I would agree with that. So long as we've removed anything that disrupts or screws with our hunger signals*, and we've learned to trust them and not a calorie number we've made up for ourselves, there is no need to change anything to move into maintenance. You'll just slowly slide into it. *Note: Some conditions may make hunger signals harder/impossible to accurately judge for some people.
Cool, glad to hear that. I genuinely worried about a maintenance plan, thinking about it after a talk with my husband about my goals. Then I had that hypothesis, that maybe it would take care of itself. This is a Way of Eating, after all, not a diet.
Thanks!0 -
I Absolutely agree. I watched that video that DittoDan suggested. I think it's Dr. Attia, but it's posted the the blog by jason Fong... I don't know who it is, a 8 part series that's fascinating and he says exactly that. That's why CICO is so difficult. Science aside, the calculators say to maintain my svelt (not) 225lbs at 5'4" I need to eat around 2500 calories a day. I reduced it 1200. And now, on the keto diet.... Some days and I have to purposefully eat another meal even though I'm not terribly hungry just to make the calories. Thankfully I LOVE the fat. Cheese and butter. So, I enjoy the eating of that meal anyway. But could easily, even at 225lbs live on 1000 calories a day this way.0
-
But could easily, even at 225lbs live on 1000 calories a day this way.
Would it be beneficial for those of us in that weight range to eat 1000 or fewer calories a day, since we have so much stored fat already on hand for our bodies to burn? As long as we're eating balanced macros and not hungry?0 -
wheatlessgirl66 wrote: »But could easily, even at 225lbs live on 1000 calories a day this way.
Would it be beneficial for those of us in that weight range to eat 1000 or fewer calories a day, since we have so much stored fat already on hand for our bodies to burn? As long as we're eating balanced macros and not hungry?
You're asking me a dangerous question, because I don't feel comfortable recommending that anyone "aim" to eat that low. But, if you're getting ample protein (say around 100+g/day or so) and you are truly eating as much as you physically desire. If that's where you end up, that's where you end up. So long as you don't refuse to eat more and raise the calories as your desire goes up and/or the weight goes down.
Also, the above paragraph is based on the assumption that you are not actively using things (or doing things) that will blunt your natural appetite (weight loss drugs, more than 3-4 cups of coffee/tea a day, drinking 2 glasses of water before eating if you feel hungry, etc.). If you have some sort of physical or other condition, which you know of, like a diagnosed or suspected eating disorder, that is another situation where I would encourage you to aim for higher calorie goals than your body may seem to be asking for.
Edit: I guess the real determining question, for me, would be, "How will you react when your body is asking you to keep eating after you've already had 3,000 calories in a day?" If you'd be willing to go with that on the days it happens, then I would say you would be ok going with the 1,000 calories on the days when that is all your body wants. If you're not going to really accept the ups as well as the downs, in desire, then I would say you need to dampen the downs a bit... much like you would dampen the ups.0 -
Thanks, Goat. In my effort to lose weight for over 30 years, I ate a pretty steady average of 1200 cals but never really lost weight. I've never taken meds to lose weight or had an eating disorder. I just mostly stayed hungry. But since March 1 on LCHF, my appetite is easily satisfied and sometimes I eat when I'm not really hungry, just to get the calories up as well as my macros. Or sometimes, I'm too full to finish a meal or eat another one. I'm not trying to do that, it just happens. But I don't want to train my body to eat only 1000 calories so that I could never eat more than that or I'd gain weight. That's kind of what happened before, apparently, and I could never lose weight for all those years. I'm just wondering if I'm not very hungry because my body is already full of 30 years of stored fat and if it's changed to burning fat, it's kind of already 'living off the fat of the land.' Thanks for your help!0
-
One of my faves...sauteed chicken with onion, mushrooms, green bell pepper. Once cooked, add Franks hot sauce and shredded cheese, topped with a few banana peppers0
-
Octobubbles...I think that to be true, that is why I cannot do the "eat everything in moderation within calorie goal"...some foods make me feel sated and carb heavy meals just make me hungrier. I lost lots of weight and kept it off for two years, then slowly started gaining again (was sliding back to old habits)0
-
octobubbles wrote: »I would agree with that. So long as we've removed anything that disrupts or screws with our hunger signals*, and we've learned to trust them and not a calorie number we've made up for ourselves, there is no need to change anything to move into maintenance. You'll just slowly slide into it. *Note: Some conditions may make hunger signals harder/impossible to accurately judge for some people.
Cool, glad to hear that. I genuinely worried about a maintenance plan, thinking about it after a talk with my husband about my goals. Then I had that hypothesis, that maybe it would take care of itself. This is a Way of Eating, after all, not a diet.
Thanks!
I have about 13 years of good maintenance sticking with keto or slightly more relaxed LC, but still under 100. Most of it keto. I gained during the few years when I had other health stuff going on and didn't bother paying attention to how much I was using of stuff, but I was still in keto. You can stay LC if you prefer it, it's perfectly doable. The main thing to learn before you start maintenance is how much you personally need to eat to gain, lose, maintain, and if keto is a factor, where your line is to get kicked out for more than a few hours instead of popping back into it on your own by the time you eat again.
For me, that means still constant tracking, otoh for Fit_Goat, he just eats cows 0 -
wheatlessgirl66 wrote: »But could easily, even at 225lbs live on 1000 calories a day this way.
Would it be beneficial for those of us in that weight range to eat 1000 or fewer calories a day, since we have so much stored fat already on hand for our bodies to burn? As long as we're eating balanced macros and not hungry?
@wheatlessgirl66
Just as point of reference, I'm around 240 pounds (5'4" tall), give or take a few, and I regularly eat 1600-2500 calories, depending on my hunger and the day, and my general weight and inches are down. I do zero exercise at the moment aside from walking around the grocery stores, apparently almost daily...LOL. I have a goal of 8000 steps per day, but haven't beat it in a while.
I could not SURVIVE on 1000 calories per day, even if it were pure fat. Some days I'm around 1600 days, and I've had a few hit near 3000 calories. I stay under my carbs, loosely aim for my protein goal, and eat fats until I'm full. Some days it is less, some days it is more. I don't sweat the calorie thing at all.
If I'm getting healthier, the rest isn't a worry....
Just to give you another perspective in this game of life.
0 -
Thanks, @KnitOrMiss--Seems it's best keep my goal of around 1400 cals/day. My approach to carbs, protein and fats is the same as yours. Keeping carbs corralled is the hardest thing. It's so lovely to eat fats to feel full--it works! Thanks for sharing your perspective!
0 -
Cold sirloin burger topped with almond butter, Dijon mustard, dill pickles and wrapped in romaine.0
-
stillonamission wrote: »I don't know if it is weird... but I did have a new coworker ask about my lunch. Another coworker said responded by telling her I follow a weird 'food thing'.
2 eggs, 1/2 avocado, 1 tablespoon mayo & salt - the best!
Simple and amazing thank you for this! Literally was licking the bowl afterwards LOL!0
