Eating more = losing weight?
Options
Replies
-
tannibal_lecter wrote: »I don't think you understand what was originally said.
When eating 1200 calories I stopped losing, and then started losing when I ate closer to maintenance. No one was saying we ate over maintenance, we just ate considerably more than before.
I think everyone understands what you're saying, but it isn't mathematically/scientifically possible. Much more likely answer is that you thought you were eating 1200 calories, but it turns out you were eating more all along. Or maybe you really did eat at 1200, but it was unsustainable, so you had "cheat" days that cancelled out the large deficit. Once you upped your calories closer to maintenance, it was sustainable for you.
0 -
tannibal_lecter wrote: »I don't think you understand what was originally said.
When eating 1200 calories I stopped losing, and then started losing when I ate closer to maintenance. No one was saying we ate over maintenance, we just ate considerably more than before.
who is "we"? I don't think you are the OP...are you?
so based on your not losing at 1200 calories theory, how do people die from starvation?0 -
I understand what was written.tannibal_lecter wrote: »I don't think you understand what was originally said.
When eating 1200 calories I stopped losing, and then started losing when I ate closer to maintenance. No one was saying we ate over maintenance, we just ate considerably more than before.
If you stopped losing at 1200 and then started losing at 1200+, you were moving more and that more than offset the additional intake, you were measuring incorrectly, or it was due to the normal fluctuations that happen during weight loss. Adding more energy to a system doesn't cause it to behave as if you are removing energy from it.
0 -
It's not an argument, lol.I don't believe that eating more is the key to weight loss. If a diet of donuts and fried foods were the way, that would be lovely, but no.
I do think there is something to be said for the break, though. There is something about beginning losing that helps me lose more and do it quicker and it's not a water issue. I lost quickly when I began. After a LONG time, I plateaued. Took a LONG break, went back to it and the weight started coming off at a good chop again. It came off like it's supposed to! Then it slowed down again.
At first, I thought, "Well, I was so obese. That's why it came off quickly and then slowed down. I was smaller." But, no. I was barely in the overweight category the second time I started losing and it came off quickly again.
There's something up with that, at least for me.
what do donuts and fried food have to do with the OP?
and for the millionth time no one is advocating a diet of 100% donuts and fried food, that is a ridiculous straw man argument.
I didn't suggest...or even think...that anyone advocated that diet.
You're arguing against things that weren't said.
nope, not arguing. I am making a statement fact. Donuts and fried food have nothing to do with OP.0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
I understand what was written.tannibal_lecter wrote: »I don't think you understand what was originally said.
When eating 1200 calories I stopped losing, and then started losing when I ate closer to maintenance. No one was saying we ate over maintenance, we just ate considerably more than before.
If you stopped losing at 1200 and then started losing at 1200+, you were moving more and that more than offset the additional intake, you were measuring incorrectly, or it was due to the normal fluctuations that happen during weight loss. Adding more energy to a system doesn't cause it to behave as if you are removing energy from it.
Well we know what factors do happen from a long deficit to increasing calories.0 -
Yes it's true, The lower you go more abrupt the faster your metabolism haunts then you can't wind down anymore because you've already dropped so low. That's why they tell ya to slowly decrease calories instead of in one big shot, ya u will lose weight but then you are a t a plateau when your at a 1000 calorie deficit, lucky for you this is heathy to be taking in 2000 keep at it and slowly decrease calories again, your body is happy it's back into the swing of things
wut???
how could you plateau on a 1000 calorie deficit..????
apologies, but this makes no sense.0 -
Yes it's true, The lower you go more abrupt the faster your metabolism haunts then you can't wind down anymore because you've already dropped so low. That's why they tell ya to slowly decrease calories instead of in one big shot, ya u will lose weight but then you are a t a plateau when your at a 1000 calorie deficit, lucky for you this is heathy to be taking in 2000 keep at it and slowly decrease calories again, your body is happy it's back into the swing of things
I'm really sorry I've read this twice and I still don't understand what you're saying, could you rephrase it0 -
It's not an argument, lol.I don't believe that eating more is the key to weight loss. If a diet of donuts and fried foods were the way, that would be lovely, but no.
I do think there is something to be said for the break, though. There is something about beginning losing that helps me lose more and do it quicker and it's not a water issue. I lost quickly when I began. After a LONG time, I plateaued. Took a LONG break, went back to it and the weight started coming off at a good chop again. It came off like it's supposed to! Then it slowed down again.
At first, I thought, "Well, I was so obese. That's why it came off quickly and then slowed down. I was smaller." But, no. I was barely in the overweight category the second time I started losing and it came off quickly again.
There's something up with that, at least for me.
what do donuts and fried food have to do with the OP?
and for the millionth time no one is advocating a diet of 100% donuts and fried food, that is a ridiculous straw man argument.
I didn't suggest...or even think...that anyone advocated that diet.
You're arguing against things that weren't said.
nope, not arguing. I am making a statement fact. Donuts and fried food have nothing to do with OP.
I assume Kalikel was saying that if you aren't losing weight at an appropriate deficit, then adding in MORE calories (from donuts) isn't going to make you lose more weight. To be fair, it doesn't matter if OP is adding calories by means of donuts or spinach, but I agree with the overall message here.0 -
Yes it's true, The lower you go more abrupt the faster your metabolism haunts then you can't wind down anymore because you've already dropped so low. That's why they tell ya to slowly decrease calories instead of in one big shot, ya u will lose weight but then you are a t a plateau when your at a 1000 calorie deficit, lucky for you this is heathy to be taking in 2000 keep at it and slowly decrease calories again, your body is happy it's back into the swing of things
I'm really sorry I've read this twice and I still don't understand what you're saying, could you rephrase it
Please don't.0 -
For Pete's sake.
Strawman and Anecdotal have been used so far. I think I'm gonna create Fallacy Bingo for MFP if it doesn't exist yet. (Though arguably I could be applying Fallacy Fallacy by calling something anecdotal, right?)
Not everyone is trying to have, much less trying to win an argument. Some people go to discussion boards to discuss.
Even if you are having a discussion, avoiding logical fallacies is a good idea.0 -
I am in the same boat as OP. I am a well seasoned MFP user and have been tracking for years now. At about 1.5years into it, I plateaued hard for 8 months at 210lbs. It was brutal as for 8 months I did not lose anything (no lbs, no inches, nothing!)
I tried everything to get that scale to move. I increased protein, lowered carbs, lowered calories, increased exercise, decreased exercise, changed my exercise from cardio to weights, changed cardio to difference cardio, tried IF...ugh. I knew that at 5'7 and 210 lbs I was not done...I had a lot left to lose, and thought that it should not be this hard...considering I was doing so well for 1.5 years.
I ended up purchasing a fitbit to more accurately track my TDEE. I was eating anywhere from 1300-1500 calories a day. After wearing the fitbit for a few days, I was shocked at how many calories I was burning a day, and realized I was under eating. I increased my calories to about 1900 a day and BAM! In 1 week after 8 long months...I lost 2lbs. I then purchased the bodymedia and have used a tracking device until about 6 months ago now.
That was 1.5 years ago, and I have gone down to 147lbs. I have recently been going through another plateau for the last 2 months. 1 week ago I increased my calories again and I ended up losing another lb.
Honestly, I think a lot of sheeple on MFP just go with the "you are not tracking properly" answer - which yes...that is the absolute 1st thing you need to tighten up if you are not losing. In my case, I had been tracking for well over a year (now 3years) and it had worked prior to the plateau so I knew my accuracy and technique with tracking was as accurate as it possibly could get.
If you do not have a tracking device, I would highly recommend one.0 -
Yes it's true, The lower you go more abrupt the faster your metabolism haunts then you can't wind down anymore because you've already dropped so low. That's why they tell ya to slowly decrease calories instead of in one big shot, ya u will lose weight but then you are a t a plateau when your at a 1000 calorie deficit, lucky for you this is heathy to be taking in 2000 keep at it and slowly decrease calories again, your body is happy it's back into the swing of things
I'm really sorry I've read this twice and I still don't understand what you're saying, could you rephrase it
It is outdated information of what this poster believes a 1000 calorie deficit will slow your metabolism so much. She is new so I can understand the misguided mainstream information being said.
0 -
tiffanymariearpaio wrote: »I used to over eat and gained a lot of weight so I started exercising and eating less calories and only healthy foods and I lost weight. After a few months of losing 20 lbs I reached a plateau. I was eating 1200 calories a day and exercising but not losing any weight. Then I downloaded this app and it told me to eat 2,000 calories a day! I never thought that would help me lose weight, I thought it was too many calories. But I listened to the app and had about 1,800 a day. After that it was late at night and I wasn't hungry anymore. After a week of using this app, I was under my calorie goal everyday except one day, I went over. I chose too many high calorie foods on accident that day. Anyway so after a week of essentially eating more, I had lost 2.5 lbs in a week! After a month of not losing anything! I never thought that eating more would help. This app allowed me to cheat more and be flexible and not worry so much about what I ate and I didn't have to be strict. I am really grateful for this app! Losing weight won't be as boring as I thought eating wise, or as strict.
Good for you and welcome aboard!
I wouldn't consider it cheating, but "fueling with greater accountability".
Bodies are strange and there are far too many variables. You may have been holding on to water/glycogen for a time, or missing something in you logging. Either way you're doing something right and getting good results so congrats!0 -
dakotababy wrote: »I am in the same boat as OP. I am a well seasoned MFP user and have been tracking for years now. At about 1.5years into it, I plateaued hard for 8 months at 210lbs. It was brutal as for 8 months I did not lose anything (no lbs, no inches, nothing!)
I tried everything to get that scale to move. I increased protein, lowered carbs, lowered calories, increased exercise, decreased exercise, changed my exercise from cardio to weights, changed cardio to difference cardio, tried IF...ugh. I knew that at 5'7 and 210 lbs I was not done...I had a lot left to lose, and thought that it should not be this hard...considering I was doing so well for 1.5 years.
I ended up purchasing a fitbit to more accurately track my TDEE. I was eating anywhere from 1300-1500 calories a day. After wearing the fitbit for a few days, I was shocked at how many calories I was burning a day, and realized I was under eating. I increased my calories to about 1900 a day and BAM! In 1 week after 8 long months...I lost 2lbs. I then purchased the bodymedia and have used a tracking device until about 6 months ago now.
That was 1.5 years ago, and I have gone down to 147lbs. I have recently been going through another plateau for the last 2 months. 1 week ago I increased my calories again and I ended up losing another lb.
Honestly, I think a lot of sheeple on MFP just go with the "you are not tracking properly" answer - which yes...that is the absolute 1st thing you need to tighten up if you are not losing. In my case, I had been tracking for well over a year (now 3years) and it had worked prior to the plateau so I knew my accuracy and technique with tracking was as accurate as it possibly could get.
If you do not have a tracking device, I would highly recommend one.
sorry, it does not work that way.
If underrating led to stalled weight loss, why are all the starving people in Africa thin and dying from starvation??
0 -
What sometimes happens is that people deprive themselves and think they are eating less, but fail to count some "cheat" calories. Once they start eating more, they don't feel deprived, so they stop cheating and end up eating less than they were before.0
-
comment removed by staff
It really doesn't matter in THIS particular post. I think you agree that eating more calories, in any form, is not the key to weight loss. Don't be so worried about defending donuts. They are doing just fine!0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »What sometimes happens is that people deprive themselves and think they are eating less, but fail to count some "cheat" calories. Once they start eating more, they don't feel deprived, so they stop cheating and end up eating less than they were before.
This, a million likes bestowed upon this....0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »What sometimes happens is that people deprive themselves and think they are eating less, but fail to count some "cheat" calories. Once they start eating more, they don't feel deprived, so they stop cheating and end up eating less than they were before.
That answer is for the non counters here. I think 90% of this site is or tries to count calories correctly.0 -
yopeeps025 wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »What sometimes happens is that people deprive themselves and think they are eating less, but fail to count some "cheat" calories. Once they start eating more, they don't feel deprived, so they stop cheating and end up eating less than they were before.
That answer is for the non counters here. I think 90% of this site is or tries to count calories correctly.
OP's post is only her 6th post here....so my hunch is that no, she wasn't counting correctly.0 -
yopeeps025 wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »What sometimes happens is that people deprive themselves and think they are eating less, but fail to count some "cheat" calories. Once they start eating more, they don't feel deprived, so they stop cheating and end up eating less than they were before.
That answer is for the non counters here. I think 90% of this site is or tries to count calories correctly.
OP's post is only her 6th post here....so my hunch is that no, she wasn't counting correctly.
Well we know she wasn't.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 397 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 975 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions