How many calls per day?

Options
eva_letsdance
eva_letsdance Posts: 2,731 Member
Hi, i am doing well on keto, but i am not hungry and i hope i am eating enough to con't weigh loss. I have been loosing 1-2lbs per week. I try to eat at least 1200 calls to loose 2 lbs per week according to mfp. I read in a few posts that others are eating more like 1500 cals and loosing faster. Any advice or comments appreciated!
«1

Replies

  • Scochrane86
    Scochrane86 Posts: 374 Member
    Options
    don't look to much at the calories, if we are staying within our macros we should be good.
    I try and hit my macros and haven't noticed a difference whether I am eating 700 calories or 1700 calories.
    A lot of people on Keto don't pay attention to calories. Calories in VS calories out is a myth and as long as we are training our bodies to use our fat storages, we will loose weight
  • macchiatto
    macchiatto Posts: 2,890 Member
    Options
    I agree with @Sunny_Bunny_ . My weight loss calories were 1350/day (plus I'd eat back 1/2-2/3 of exercise calories). I'm 5'7" , female, was 39y/o and 151 lbs when I started keto. I lost 8 lbs in the first month and it took me a little over 3 months to lose the 23 lbs I wanted to lose.
  • eva_letsdance
    eva_letsdance Posts: 2,731 Member
    Options
    Thank you for all the feedback!
  • Scochrane86
    Scochrane86 Posts: 374 Member
    Options
    If you're losing weight and you're not going hungry and weight loss is your goal, then don't change anything because it sounds like you're accomplishing that just fine.
    Just eat when hungry. Not too often. Only low carb foods. Don't eat if not hungry.
    Easy peasy

    CICO isn't exactly a myth... it just isn't as black or white as the mainstream would have us believe.
    You're not going to lose more by eating more but you may still lose even if you increase calories. But I wouldn't eat when not hungry just for that reason personally.

    I agree with Dr. Fung that CICO while trying to achieve weightloss is a myth, but to each their own research right :)
  • nvmomketo
    nvmomketo Posts: 12,019 Member
    edited March 2017
    Options
    If you're losing weight and you're not going hungry and weight loss is your goal, then don't change anything because it sounds like you're accomplishing that just fine.
    Just eat when hungry. Not too often. Only low carb foods. Don't eat if not hungry.
    Easy peasy

    CICO isn't exactly a myth... it just isn't as black or white as the mainstream would have us believe.
    You're not going to lose more by eating more but you may still lose even if you increase calories. But I wouldn't eat when not hungry just for that reason personally.

    Bingo! :) I agree. If you are not hungry and still losing, you are in a great spot.

    I lost a bit faster than expected when I was losing but I think it was one of those times when all of the stars align and the heavens sing... My thyroid meds were great, a low stress time in my life, I was active, and AI issues and arthritis were pretty quiet. It was a perfect. I lost over 2 lbs per week which meant I was in a 1000kcal / day deficit even though I ate about 1500kcal per day.

    Then a few months later it all stopped, and even though I was only eating about 500-700 calories more per day I started GAINING weight. Ugh! Stress was up, less sleep, and my thyroid was acting up down. I gained 10 lbs in 6-8 months.

    Now I am trying to lose again. I need to go under where I was losing at before though. And I am hungrier.
  • DietPrada
    DietPrada Posts: 1,171 Member
    Options
    don't look to much at the calories, if we are staying within our macros we should be good.
    I try and hit my macros and haven't noticed a difference whether I am eating 700 calories or 1700 calories.
    A lot of people on Keto don't pay attention to calories. Calories in VS calories out is a myth and as long as we are training our bodies to use our fat storages, we will loose weight

    This is not good, or even close to correct, advice. Keto is not magic, if you're eating too many calories you won't lose weight. It's true you should stay within your macros, but macros in grams, not percent. If you hit your macros in grams you are by definition eating your calorie goal.

    OP it's true that some people might lose faster than you on more calories, but this doesn't mean you'll lose faster on the same calories. Your calorie goal to lose weight depends on your height, weight, age, gender, activity level etc. This will be totally different to someone else. Increasing your calories will not make you lose weight faster, but it might make it easier to stick to your plan if you are hungry on less calories. 2lbs a week is very aggressive, and you might find it hard to sustain. 1lb a week would allow you to eat a little more, and sustain it long term. But do what you're comfortable with. Just don't be surprised if you start eating more, you start losing less ... that's kinda how it works.
  • kpk54
    kpk54 Posts: 4,474 Member
    Options
    CICO is a myth? Oh my.
  • Gallowmere1984
    Gallowmere1984 Posts: 6,626 Member
    Options
    If you're losing weight and you're not going hungry and weight loss is your goal, then don't change anything because it sounds like you're accomplishing that just fine.
    Just eat when hungry. Not too often. Only low carb foods. Don't eat if not hungry.
    Easy peasy

    CICO isn't exactly a myth... it just isn't as black or white as the mainstream would have us believe.
    You're not going to lose more by eating more but you may still lose even if you increase calories. But I wouldn't eat when not hungry just for that reason personally.

    I agree with Dr. Fung that CICO while trying to achieve weightloss is a myth, but to each their own research right :)

    And everyone wonders why I trust Fung about as much as I'd trust a rabid dog to guard chickens.
  • canadjineh
    canadjineh Posts: 5,396 Member
    Options
    Point is, if you aren't hungry, you don't need to eat. Right now your body has the extra fuel available in storage, you aren't going to starve. Don't worry, you will have hungry days. Eat more then.
  • AlexandraCarlyle
    AlexandraCarlyle Posts: 1,603 Member
    edited March 2017
    Options
    And everyone wonders why I trust Fung about as much as I'd trust a rabid dog to guard chickens.

    Well, I guess that if you are as experienced a Medic as he seems to be, and have the same experience and qualifications as he has, and have done as much in-depth research on the matter as he has, and have verifiable data and documented information at your fingertips, done by you, over a similar period, then you're absolutely right to not trust him.
    That is of course, your privilege.

    So, whatcha got? ;)

    (PS: A rabid dog is actually the least likely animal to kill or eat a chicken).

  • Gallowmere1984
    Gallowmere1984 Posts: 6,626 Member
    edited March 2017
    Options
    And everyone wonders why I trust Fung about as much as I'd trust a rabid dog to guard chickens.

    Well, I guess that if you are as experienced a Medic as he seems to be, and have the same experience and qualifications as he has, and have done as much in-depth research on the matter as he has, and have verifiable data and documented information at your fingertips, done by you, over a similar period, then you're absolutely right to not trust him.
    That is of course, your privilege.

    So, whatcha got? ;)

    (PS: A rabid dog is actually the least likely animal to kill or eat a chicken).

    I have the following: Lyle McDonald, Layne Norton, Alan Aragon, Stephan Gueyenet, Andrew Chappell, Rob Lipsett, Mike Israetel, Melissa Davis, and a whole host of others. All of whom have far more qualifications, have actually proven themselves in the fields of medicine, research, and many in actual physical training (beyond extrapolation of data beyond it's actual meaning). And guess who all of them would call borderline fraudulent.

    Believe what you wish, but the man has about as much credibility outside of "true believers" as the Ancient Aliens guy. He reminds me of one of those teenagers who, upon being ignored, just start spouting the most ridiculous things they can think of. He is literally arguing against the only thing in nutrition that is essentially settled science. Many things are up for debate: the effect of calories as a unit of measurement, on the human body, is not one of them.
  • eva_letsdance
    eva_letsdance Posts: 2,731 Member
    Options
    Thank you again for all your responses.
  • 2t9nty
    2t9nty Posts: 1,584 Member
    Options
    In one of the many YouTube videos with links posted here, there is one I saw that had overlapping circles in a Venn diagram with "The Fat Hypothesis" (or something) for one and CICO for the other. Both have proponents. Things are complex and I decided to look in the intersection of those two schools for my diet. I mostly keep carbs under 20 and calories under 2000. This works for me, and the HF keeps me from being ravenously hungry 24/7.
  • trigden1991
    trigden1991 Posts: 4,658 Member
    Options
    If you're losing weight and you're not going hungry and weight loss is your goal, then don't change anything because it sounds like you're accomplishing that just fine.
    Just eat when hungry. Not too often. Only low carb foods. Don't eat if not hungry.
    Easy peasy

    CICO isn't exactly a myth... it just isn't as black or white as the mainstream would have us believe.
    You're not going to lose more by eating more but you may still lose even if you increase calories. But I wouldn't eat when not hungry just for that reason personally.

    I agree with Dr. Fung that CICO while trying to achieve weightloss is a myth, but to each their own research right :)

    This is my first time in this group and I already love it.

    1) Dr Fung is as uncredible as they come.
    2) CICO aligns with the first law of thermodynamics


  • JohnnyLowCarb
    JohnnyLowCarb Posts: 418 Member
    Options
    Ah man - there is a lurker here that knows it all. I will have to find another forum.
  • kpk54
    kpk54 Posts: 4,474 Member
    Options
    If you're losing weight and you're not going hungry and weight loss is your goal, then don't change anything because it sounds like you're accomplishing that just fine.
    Just eat when hungry. Not too often. Only low carb foods. Don't eat if not hungry.
    Easy peasy

    CICO isn't exactly a myth... it just isn't as black or white as the mainstream would have us believe.
    You're not going to lose more by eating more but you may still lose even if you increase calories. But I wouldn't eat when not hungry just for that reason personally.

    I agree with Dr. Fung that CICO while trying to achieve weightloss is a myth, but to each their own research right :)

    I'm curious how you gained your extra weight if it was not via eating more than you expended. I'm also curious how you have successfully lost 82 of those pounds if not by eating less than you expend. I'd love to eat more than I do but 3 years of maintaining indicates if I eat too much on an ongoing basis and don't offset it with increased activity, I will gain weight. I have to address my intake. What other options are there?
This discussion has been closed.