maintaning at 1400???

jeandinco

Before you all say that I am doing it wrong, please read my post.

I came from the 1200 calorie diet and increased it slowly to reach maintenance. (MFP said that my maintenance calories is 1600. I tried to reach it slowly, but I gained weight when I reached 1600--so I had to cut back)

I have been on the 1400-1450 diet for 3 weeks and the scale is no longer moving. Isn't 1400 still too low though? Well, I can now eat 500 grams of vegetables everyday, two pieces of Bakpia (Asian Pastry), milk, nuts and all the things I could eat before I even started my diet (except meat; I am a pescatarian now).

Thanks.

Stats:

Activity: Lightly Active: Sedentary Job and 1-2 exercise/week (15 mins cardio, 15 mins weight-lifting)
Eating Habits/Food Choice: Pescatarian, fasting 12-hr period
Height: 5'6
Weight: 55 kg
Body Fat: 18.8%

CorneliusPhoton

I think it sounds reasonable given your activity level. If you don't move much, you don't need to eat much.

ETA: If you tried 1600 and it didn't work, and 1400 does, I'd say stick with it for a few more weeks!

RoxieDawn

I ran your stats using an online calculator and did sedentary and lightly active and came up with:

TDEE - sedentary 1657 (desk job little exercise)
TDEE - light active 1825 (1-3 hrs exercise a week)

What are you using to measure body fat and coming up with 18.8% body fat percentage? The katch-mcardle calculator uses body fat percentage, and I ran your TDEE using this and it came to 1600 calories.

Something seems off in your numbers to me. Do you weigh and log the the food you eat? The exercise you do is not very much to warrant and activity level of lightly active, so do you have a active job?

Secondly what is your question to the forum, if it is asking if 1400 is too low is the only question, then yes to me this sounds low at your stats.

jeandinco

@RoxieDawn yes, I weigh everything, even sauces and ketchups. I used the underwater thingy for fat percentage. My job is sedentary.

RosieRose7673

I mean, I guess it could be possible considering you have minimal activity. However, I would think it could be possible to have some water retention due to increase in calories but 3 weeks seems like a bit.

Considering you have a desk job and only work out 2x a week with 15 minutes cardio and 15 minutes weight lifting, I don't think that truly counts as lightly active. Someone else, correct me if I'm wrong.

Keep eating 1400 calories for a few weeks more and see how your weight responds. How quick were you losing when eating 1200?

RoxieDawn

jeandinco wrote: »

@RoxieDawn yes, I weigh everything, even sauces and ketchups. I used the underwater thingy for fat percentage. My job is sedentary.

Well based on your stats you should be eating around 1600 to 1650 to maintain your weight. Why you are 200 calories less than that I am uncertain, other than you really are not moving a lot in the day time to burn much more than you BMR calories of 1330.

The 15 minutes of cardio and 15 minutes of lifting is not enough to even bump the calories up to equate to a lot of calorie burning. My best guess is on these days you burn maybe or not even 80 -100 more?

I can only say that if you do maintain at 1400 - 1450 and this is your "real number", then it is what it is. I am no expert or doctor to say if there is anything medical that is causing this such as hormonal imbalance or metabolic issue.

Keep running at 1400 and see how you feel in a few more weeks. I do know that on my completely sedentary days (and I mean basically a couch potato and only running to the bathroom a couple of time) I do not burn very much more than my BMR calories (maybe 100 or more)..

sijomial

Alternatively try eating at 1600 and see if you get an ultra slow trend upwards gaining just 2lbs in 35 days.

StaciMarie1974

It depends. If you're truly sedentary, then 1400 may be maintenance. If I did not make an effort to move, be more active: I'd average 2000-3500 steps a day and maintain on ~1450. I choose to be more active because being that sedentary is not healthy IMO.

Edited to add I'm 41, 5'5.5" and ~130. Just a few pounds heavier than you but not a significant difference.

TavistockToad

How long did you eat 1600 for, and how much did you gain?

StaciMarie1974

Also keep in mind the bmr/activity level calorie calculators are estimates on some fictional 'average' person. Reality can be a little higher or lower.

catstratch

Up your intake to at least 1600 for at least 2 weeks. Any initial weight gain is only food and water weight, which you will lose when your body stabilizes at the new intake. You WON'T GAIN any REAL weight. 1400 is not enough for you at all.
I'm also 55kg and 5'5 (so shorter than you) and I'm maintaining at 2000-2200 a day.

Noreenmarie1234

I ate 1200-1500 to lose, I overshot my goal because I knew when increasing back to maintenance you gain a few lbs of water weight and glycogen stores. I gained a few lbs (like 3-5) when transitioning to maintenance at 1800. Then, not too long ago I increased to 2200-2500 because I was always hungry and had urges to binge and didn't gain anything and now have more energy. I count VERY accurately too and it boggled my mind I could maintain on more than I was eating. It is probably because when eating more I have more energy and my body uses the calories to perform bodily functions better.

lithezebra

I don't find 1400 surprising at all for a relatively petite woman. That's about what I'm eating, and I'm more active, and shorter, than you. I fast for 12-14 hours too, and find it makes it easier to eat less.

AnnPT77

StaciMarie1974 wrote: »

Also keep in mind the bmr/activity level calorie calculators are estimates on some fictional 'average' person. Reality can be a little higher or lower.

Absolutely this. The calorie level at which you can eat and stabilize your weight is, by definition, your maintenance calories. It doesn't matter what the calculators say; it doesn't matter what others your size do: Your maintenance calories are individual.

rosebette

I'm a lot older and shorter, but about the same weight (between 120-122 lbs), and I would say I maintain at about 1400 on a day with only light activity (a 30 minute walk) and standing job (teaching). On days when I'm sedentary, I use only around 1200, which is what most people must eat to lose weight! I use a fitbit to track my burn.

Christine_72

I guess the moral of this story is to exercise more so you can eat more.

lithezebra

I exercise quite a lot, cardio and lifting, and being on my feet for much of the day, and 1450 still isn't too little. If I could be 8 inches taller, I would. Intermittent fasting allows me to feel full once a day.

Rocknut53

Christine_72 wrote: »

I guess the moral of this story is to exercise more so you can eat more.

^^This^^ I am working on maintenance right now and know that if I really want to eat more than I have been, I have to put more effort into exercise and just daily activity in general. I am still being meticulous about my logging as I never want to go back to where I was 6 months ago. If I can maintain for the next year, then I can say I have succeeded.

Noreenmarie1234

lithezebra wrote: »

I exercise quite a lot, cardio and lifting, and being on my feet for much of the day, and 1450 still isn't too little. If I could be 8 inches taller, I would. Intermittent fasting allows me to feel full once a day.

Have you tried eating more and seen a gain? That seem like so little. I am only 5'4

lithezebra

Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »

lithezebra wrote: »

I exercise quite a lot, cardio and lifting, and being on my feet for much of the day, and 1450 still isn't too little. If I could be 8 inches taller, I would. Intermittent fasting allows me to feel full once a day.

Have you tried eating more and seen a gain? That seem like so little. I am only 5'4

Yes. I don't gain uncontrollably at 1600 a day. I settle in at about 124 pounds on 1600 a day. If I want to maintain what I consider to be my ideal weight, I have to be pretty strict.

RoxieDawn

OP has not been back to her thread in 6 days. I wonder what she decided to do?

TavistockToad

Christine_72 wrote: »

I guess the moral of this story is to exercise more so you can eat more.

I think it's that OP is probably underestimating her maintenance calories

Christine_72

TavistockToad wrote: »

Christine_72 wrote: »

I guess the moral of this story is to exercise more so you can eat more.

I think it's that OP is probably underestimating her maintenance calories

Yeah i hope so..

ericatoday

That makes little sense to me. Im 5'7" and i have my stats set to sedentary even though im an active person and my maintenance is 1750

Noreenmarie1234

ericatoday wrote: »

That makes little sense to me. Im 5'7" and i have my stats set to sedentary even though im an active person and my maintenance is 1750

What is weird is I am all about science and math and believe the calories in vs calories out because it is FACT. But using calculators my maintenance should be ~1450 sedentary plus my exercise (300-500 calories) a few times a week. However, I do maintain on that amount, but I have no energy and feel sluggish. When I increased to see if I could maintain on more, I found out I gained like 2lbs initially, but then maintained at 2200-2600 a day (depending on hunger).

Calculators are probably accurate for 95% of the population as I have seen though.

dykask

Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »

ericatoday wrote: »

That makes little sense to me. Im 5'7" and i have my stats set to sedentary even though im an active person and my maintenance is 1750

What is weird is I am all about science and math and believe the calories in vs calories out because it is FACT. But using calculators my maintenance should be ~1450 sedentary plus my exercise (300-500 calories) a few times a week. However, I do maintain on that amount, but I have no energy and feel sluggish. When I increased to see if I could maintain on more, I found out I gained like 2lbs initially, but then maintained at 2200-2600 a day (depending on hunger).

Calculators are probably accurate for 95% of the population as I have seen though.

You are probably at a weight your body is happy with. When you eat more your metabolism just increases some to keep you from gaining too much. 2600 kc is a lot, more than I typically eat and I'm a man that often works out pretty hard!

There have been studies that support what you are saying:
http://archive.unu.edu/unupress/food2/UID08E/UID08E05.HTM

sugaraddict4321

A few thoughts. First, a lot of people set a goal of X kilos or pounds and once they hit it they expect the scale to not move an ounce.

Maintenance is actually a range of a few pounds/kilos, depending on how much one is consuming, how much sodium is in that food, the time of the month (for the ladies), how active one is, and how much one is eliminating. I have a range of about 10 pounds - 5 pounds on either side of my maintenance number. As long as I'm within that range, I don't change anything except increasing water intake. If I seem to stay on the high side of the range for more than a week, I drop my calories for a few weeks and it usually comes back into line.

Second, the online calculators are just rough estimates based on statistics. We all have different body compositions, even two people at the same height and weight. Both the MFP and IIFYM calculators give me at least 100 more calories than I really need. It took me months of trial and error to figure out the right number, but the calculators got me in the ballpark.

OP if you've been doing 1400-1450 for 3 weeks and the scale stays the same, that could be your maintenance level and that's okay. If you feel like you want more, try 1450-1500 for another few weeks and see how it goes.

Gamliela

It seems low. Sometimes its because you have slowed down your everyday activity, in other words, you don't go about your activities with the same vigour and so you actually require less energy now. Or you have some glitch in calorie logging and there are some hidden calories creeping into your day?

Best wishes as you continue the adventure of maintenance!

Maxematics

Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »

ericatoday wrote: »

That makes little sense to me. Im 5'7" and i have my stats set to sedentary even though im an active person and my maintenance is 1750

What is weird is I am all about science and math and believe the calories in vs calories out because it is FACT. But using calculators my maintenance should be ~1450 sedentary plus my exercise (300-500 calories) a few times a week. However, I do maintain on that amount, but I have no energy and feel sluggish. When I increased to see if I could maintain on more, I found out I gained like 2lbs initially, but then maintained at 2200-2600 a day (depending on hunger).

Calculators are probably accurate for 95% of the population as I have seen though.

I agree with this. I'm 5'3" and 108 pounds. Most people think that requires a tiny amount of calories to maintain. I've been eating 1800 to 2300 calories for the past few weeks in order to maintain my weight with at least three or four days where I've eaten 1000+ calories over my TDEE due to insatiable hunger. I started at 108.5 and the scale slowly crept up every day to a final high point of 112.5 during my TOM. I trusted in my Fitbit and hunger levels since they haven't failed me in the past and didn't freak out or come here talking about how I've gained weight. As of this morning I'm 108.2 pounds even though I'm still on my TOM, so I ended up losing a bit more weight even with all that going on.

AnnPT77

ericatoday wrote: »

That makes little sense to me. Im 5'7" and i have my stats set to sedentary even though im an active person and my maintenance is 1750

It's impossible to generalize from personal experience. The calculators give one a mean value from a statistically-justifiable sample from a population. Even though the resulting bell curve is fairly narrow (i.e., small-ish standard deviation), there is variation around that mean for individuals, in the research results, and in the population at large.

You're 5'7", and have to set MFP to sedentary even though you're active. I'm 5'5", plus old (60), and have to set MFP to active to get close to the right net calorie goal, even though I'm sedentary (outside of intentional exercise, which I eat back separately). I'm maintaining somewhere around 2100 net, perhaps a bit more, at 120 pounds.

No way to know where OP falls on that bell curve. To figure maintenance calories, one can start from the calculator values, and adjust over time based on experience; or add deficit calories (of actual loss rate) back to one's deficit-based calories eaten; or 'reverse diet', adding daily calories until weight stabilizes.

Other people's experiences are just points somewhere on the bell curve. They can be very interesting, but aren't really predictive.

LivingtheLeanDream

This same thread appears elsewhere and OP has still not turned up in over a week... guess they don't need our advice...