Eating 1500 calories a day, exercising and still not losing

Options
12467

Replies

  • piggler65
    piggler65 Posts: 54 Member
    Options
    I see that MFP has suggested my rather low sounding target calories - this is because I put in 2 pounds of fat loss per week. Even if I set it to 1 pound loss per week it suggests lower target calories than has been suggested here so far.

    How does anyone justify or explain eating higher than the 1290 calories suggested by MFP?
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    Options
    Eating more may be beneficial to energy levels though, to allow for longer workouts and increased NEAT through the day. 1500 does seem a rather small amount for a 6 foot guy

    What are "energy levels" ?

    Not sure longer workouts would help. If the guy is in caloric balance I cannot see a logical argument for eating more. In fact "longer workouts" is equivalent to "eating less".

    To my mind we need to think about why he is not using fat from adipose tissue and my working hypothesis is that the high carbohydrate intake leads to chronic high insulin and hence low fat loss.
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    Options
    I see that MFP has suggested my rather low sounding target calories - this is because I put in 2 pounds of fat loss per week. Even if I set it to 1 pound loss per week it suggests lower target calories than has been suggested here so far.

    How does anyone justify or explain eating higher than the 1290 calories suggested by MFP?

    there are 3 pages of people telling you to eat more, giving food suggestions, and the reasons for eating more... you can either do it or not... but lets not start again with if 1290 is enough for a 6ft male....

    i dont believe for a second that MFP only gives you 1200 for 1lb of weight loss at your size, maybe check your numbers.

    also, a lot of people have suggested TDEE calculations, which has exercise cals included, while MFP gives you a figure before exercise, so that number will be lower.
  • robin52077
    robin52077 Posts: 4,383 Member
    Options
    I usually use a cup - although I will admit I have been trying compress as much as I can into that poor old cup!

    that's a problem.

    a measuring cup for oats should be loosely scooped and not even full to be a proper serving. every time you think you're eating a serving you're more likely eating 1.5 servings. Do that with a couple of calorie dense foods in the same day and you end up with numbers SO far off it is unbelievable. Weigh everything to the gram for a while to get used to what it SHOULD look like. You can still eat the larger amount, you just may have to log 1.5 or 1.75 servings or whatever it is you are hungry for.
  • piggler65
    piggler65 Posts: 54 Member
    Options
    thats fair enough - I will do that.
  • piggler65
    piggler65 Posts: 54 Member
    Options
    it gives 1290 for 2 pounds fat loss per week and goes to 1700 for 1 pound! I am not arguing with anyone just asking why it sets that figure which I have been keeping to religiously!
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    Options
    there are 3 pages of people telling you to eat more
    I think he's asking why he should eat more - one poster says it's simply a matter of a calorie deficit. The vast majority (if not all) of the others are "eat more.... because I say so" or words to that effect - maybe "I did and it worked for me" is a more positive summary.

    When I see someone adding 6 spoons of sugar to a carbohydrate breakfast which already includes tinned fruit in syrup I am tempted to think the quantity is not the issue.

    Inadequate fats, barely adequate protein, excessive carbs.

    But like the OP I would like to hear the "calorie is not a calorie" argument for eating more set out logically, as I'm sure it could be ......
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    Options
    it gives 1290 for 2 pounds fat loss per week and goes to 1700 for 1 pound! I am not arguing with anyone just asking why it sets that figure which I have been keeping to religiously!
    I ran your numbers on http://www.myfitnesspal.com/account/my_goals with "sedentary" setting.

    0.5 lb/week 1880 calories a day excluding exercise
    1 lb/week 1780 cals
    1.5 lb/week 1530
    2 lbs/week 1280

    so if you used 1780 for 1lb and exercised 300 you would be expected to eat 2080.

    Alternatively you could tell it you are lightly active (on your feet a good part of the day) and the calories without exercise goes up to 1960.

    It is working simply on a 500 calories per day deficit from what it thinks you use (2380 without exercise), in order to generate each 1 pound/week of loss.

    As you aren't losing at an alleged calorie deficit you're either under-reporting or using less energy than the predictions estimate (they ar eonly within 10% for 2/3 of people).

    So that' what MFP is doing and why it suggests what it does.

    [Edit to fix typo 2080]
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    Options

    so if you used 1780 for 1lb and exercised 300 you would be expected to eat 1280.

    1780 + 300 is what you would be expected to eat using MFPs settings
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    Options
    1780 + 300 is what you would be expected to eat using MFPs settings
    yep, typo already corrected.
  • spookygoldfish
    spookygoldfish Posts: 10 Member
    Options
    Hi, we have similar stats I'm 6' tall & weight 199lbs.

    I have my calories set to net 2070 a day & I always lose 4- 6lbs per month. I also always eat my exercise calories back so consume around 2500 -3000 a day & still lose weight! My marcos are set at 45 carbs 30 protein 25% fat.

    This has worked for me & it helps that I'm never hungry!

    I think you should try netting around 1800 a day for a month, you may be surprised (in a good way) at the results!
  • a_mccalla
    a_mccalla Posts: 1 Member
    Options
    Maybe you need to increase your protein intake. Take a look at your daily food percentages. Are you eating more carbs? With all that exercising, your body might need 45% daily protein.:smile:
  • AntWrig
    AntWrig Posts: 2,273 Member
    Options
    Eating more may be beneficial to energy levels though, to allow for longer workouts and increased NEAT through the day. 1500 does seem a rather small amount for a 6 foot guy

    What are "energy levels" ?

    Not sure longer workouts would help. If the guy is in caloric balance I cannot see a logical argument for eating more. In fact "longer workouts" is equivalent to "eating less".

    To my mind we need to think about why he is not using fat from adipose tissue and my working hypothesis is that the high carbohydrate intake leads to chronic high insulin and hence low fat loss.
    Cart before the horse. Instead of focusing on such advanced topics such as "not using fat from adipose tissue and my working hypothesis is that the high carbohydrate intake leads to chronic high insulin and hence low fat loss". Which you can't even come to that conclusion due to not knowing his history.

    First and foremost establish a rough caloric baseline and go from there. GENERAL starting point is 1 to 1.25g per lb for protein, 20-35% of total calories for fats, fill the rest in with carbs.

    Starting calories:
    10 X current weight x 1.2-2.5 activity level OR just start at 12x current bodyweight. IF you're obese start with a realistic lean body mass. If you weigh 400lbs don't say your LBM is 125 etc.

    Start there.
  • deksgrl
    deksgrl Posts: 7,237 Member
    Options
    You need to eat more. You are a 6' tall man plus you exercise. Your body needs the calories for fuel. If you don't have a lot of weight to lose you cannot lose 2 pounds a week, it just ain't going to happen. Set your goal to 1 pound a week or maybe even half a pound a week, not sure how much more weight you need to lose, half a pound may be more realistic.

    If you have less than 15 lbs to lose 0.5 lbs/week is ideal.
    If you have 15 -25 lbs to lose 0.5 to 1.0 lbs/week is ideal
    If you have 25-40 lbs to lose 1 lbs/week is ideal,
    If you have 40-75 lbs to lose 1.5 lbs/week is ideal,
    If you have 75+ lbs to lose 2 lbs/week is ideal,

    When you are heavy you can handle a larger deficit than when you have less to lose.
  • kcoftx
    kcoftx Posts: 765 Member
    Options
    I don't have a lot to add to this debate but I can tell you that using a food scale for months actually TAUGHT me proper portions. Now I can eyeball it better (maintenance). Some calorie dense foods may sometimes benefit from going back to scale once in awhile to verify eyeballing is still on target.

    This thread is full of contradictions though. Eating too much (due to improper measurements) vs eating too little. Both sides are telling you the opposite but they both are giving you huge hints on how to get on track.

    The closer you are to goal, the less your deficit should be and the harder it is to shift the weight. Although not necessary for weight loss, lifting can support body composition.

    In the meantime, I want to say good luck on your job search. It took me four months but I finally accepted a job yesterday! (I had 2 offers the same day). That was with the support of an employment specialist and some party tricks. It can be a job looking for a job. I wish you support and speedy results.
  • ncmedic201
    ncmedic201 Posts: 540 Member
    Options
    I used a food scale for a short time just to get an idea of what a true portion looks like. Walmart has a cheap one for about $5. It's not the greatest but gives you a better idea of portions. I understand trying to keep the groceries bills low. Lentils and beans are a great and inexpensive way to get your protein in. By the dry beans and it will save you money. Frozen veggies are also inexpensive.You can make some great dishes wiwith the rice that will give you your nutrients. Nuts are also a good way. Try finding them in bulk instead of the cans and you'll probably save some money that way also. Avocados are also fairly inexpensive and a good source of fat, potassium and many other nutrients.

    As far as meal timing, if you like eating twice a day then stick with it. If you want to eat more often then that is fine also. It's really up to you on that. There's no evidence that 6 meals is better than 2 etc.
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    Options
    First and foremost establish a rough caloric baseline and go from there. GENERAL starting point is 1 to 1.25g per lb for protein, 20-35% of total calories for fats, fill the rest in with carbs.

    Yep, I have indeed suggested a lot more fats and proteins, and hence less carbohydrates, within the same caloric intake. I was just explaining "why".

    That looks to be well over the top in terms of protein, but he's too far the other way.
  • piggler65
    piggler65 Posts: 54 Member
    Options
    makes sense - I think I must try and get more accurate with my reporting. Thanks for this - I think your understand what I am saying and trying to do.
  • WendyTerry420
    WendyTerry420 Posts: 13,274 Member
    Options
    Ok I am a vegan. I weigh now 197 pounds - I thought I my diet was healthy and balanced but I will consider your suggestions thanks

    It sounds like you should be eating to maintain your weight or at a surplus to gain muscle. Eat protein. Even vegans need protein. You will need to add nuts, legumes, beans, etc to bump up your protein. Men especially need protein to support muscle mass, even if you are skinny you have muscles that need protein!
  • piggler65
    piggler65 Posts: 54 Member
    Options
    Ok - so with me wanting 2 lbs a week weight loss and therefore MFP setting my target at 1280 calories why are people suggesting I eat so much more was my question and what you alluded to in your last post.

    I never realised that I was to eat my colories I exercised away - although i have always seemed to eat most of them anyway.

Categories