Going crazy on 1300 cals/day
Radnt1
Posts: 3 Member
It's 1 am and I want to eat.
How do I stick to 1300 cals/day? On most days I'm too busy to care and I manage okay on filling and nutritious food limited to 1300 cals. Today, I just want to collapse. Or eat someone's face off. Or both -.-
26 yo woman, 190 lbs ( started at 196 3 weeks ago) 5'6.
I work out every day. Had a 1 hour Cardio strength circuit class today at the gym. Followed by another hour of alternating treadmill, bike, crossfit trainer and elliptical.
So ate 1500 cals today.
I need to eat. If I weren't staying at someone else's house today, I would have. Need to wait till the morning now. Facepalm.
How do I stick to 1300 cals/day? On most days I'm too busy to care and I manage okay on filling and nutritious food limited to 1300 cals. Today, I just want to collapse. Or eat someone's face off. Or both -.-
26 yo woman, 190 lbs ( started at 196 3 weeks ago) 5'6.
I work out every day. Had a 1 hour Cardio strength circuit class today at the gym. Followed by another hour of alternating treadmill, bike, crossfit trainer and elliptical.
So ate 1500 cals today.
I need to eat. If I weren't staying at someone else's house today, I would have. Need to wait till the morning now. Facepalm.
0
Replies
-
Weight loss only works if you stick to a calorie defict. Set your calorie goal to something you can stick to. 1500 calories sounds about right for your size. Maybe eat back some of your exercise calories too.8
-
You should be eating back your exercise calories in any case. If you're working out that much, you need to be eating quite a bit more than just 1300. This should be a net goal, after exercise and food are both taken into account.7
-
It's 1 am and I want to eat.
How do I stick to 1300 cals/day? On most days I'm too busy to care and I manage okay on filling and nutritious food limited to 1300 cals. Today, I just want to collapse. Or eat someone's face off. Or both -.-
26 yo woman, 190 lbs ( started at 196 3 weeks ago) 5'6.
I work out every day. Had a 1 hour Cardio strength circuit class today at the gym. Followed by another hour of alternating treadmill, bike, crossfit trainer and elliptical.
So ate 1500 cals today.
I need to eat. If I weren't staying at someone else's house today, I would have. Need to wait till the morning now. Facepalm.
set MFP to lose 1lb per week, eat back a portion of your exercise cals. this will be more than 1300 cals.
make sure you are getting adequate fat and protein.5 -
I'm 5'8". I started at 205 in June and I'm 187 now. In June I did 1200 calories but ate back a good portion of my exercise calories. Now I switched to 1 pound a week loss and I start with 1430. I also eat back a portion of my exercise calories.
MFP gave you 1300 because of how much you told it you want to lose. So you'll lose on 1300. But the 2 hours of exercising is burning off extra calories that MFP didn't account for (unless you said you're highly active) So you have to eat at least some of them back or you're eating way less than 1300 in reality1 -
I love this quote - the winner is the person who can eat the most and still lose weight - maybe adjust your goal to a less aggressive; make sure you are eating back at least a portion of your exercise calories; check your activity level7
-
I'm losing weight without exercising. To quote someone else: Weight loss begins in the kitchen.1
-
Healthy, sustainable weight loss takes patience and diligence. Stick with a caloric deficit that provides for 1 to 2 pounds lost per week (daily deficit of 500-750 calories).2
-
-
This doesn't need to be a painful quick fix. You want something that is going to be sustainable for the rest of your life. You only need a slight deficit to lose weight and exercise can add to the deficit but if you are too low you will feel bad. Ease up a bit and enjoy the ride, this ain't no sprint.2
-
Have you tried IIFYM (if it fits your macros) to see what it recommends? Likely because of the amount of working out that you're doing you're eating far too few of calories. I am 233, and 5'6" so a bit bigger than you..but I eat 2046 calories a day regardless of whether I work out that day. It stays the same each day, so when I work out I do not eat back the calories I burn because it's already factored in. I work out 6 days a week (some cardio classes, some lifting, some HIIT) for about 60 minutes each time and am otherwise not too active (desk job 10 hour days). I'm losing about 1lb a week at that level of calories. I am eating about 30% protein, 35% carbs and 35% fat and making sure that those 2046 calories fit into my goals and are giving me the fuel I need to be able to feel good, complete my work outs, not be hungry and still lose weight. If you put your numbers to low you won't be able to keep it up long term..or you may be able to but you won't want to. Eating more helps get your metabolism working and will help in the long term so that you don't end up gaining everything you lose back.2
-
Have you tried IIFYM (if it fits your macros) to see what it recommends? Likely because of the amount of working out that you're doing you're eating far too few of calories. I am 233, and 5'6" so a bit bigger than you..but I eat 2046 calories a day regardless of whether I work out that day. It stays the same each day, so when I work out I do not eat back the calories I burn because it's already factored in. I work out 6 days a week (some cardio classes, some lifting, some HIIT) for about 60 minutes each time and am otherwise not too active (desk job 10 hour days). I'm losing about 1lb a week at that level of calories. I am eating about 30% protein, 35% carbs and 35% fat and making sure that those 2046 calories fit into my goals and are giving me the fuel I need to be able to feel good, complete my work outs, not be hungry and still lose weight. If you put your numbers to low you won't be able to keep it up long term..or you may be able to but you won't want to. Eating more helps get your metabolism working and will help in the long term so that you don't end up gaining everything you lose back.
IF you use MFP recommendations and eat back purposeful exercise calories on top of the recommended; and compare to a TDEE calculator - they should come out roughly the same - only TDEE accounts for purposeful exercise in your calorie count (works great if you have a standard workout schedule); if you are more hit/miss with your workouts then MFP works better2 -
It's been mentioned - but not why.
MFP accounts for NO exercise in that eating goal you initially see. And Sedentary for easily half that select it initially isn't true, they are more active because they have kids or pets or daily household chores they do.
You follow the app you honestly log exercise done and you won't be given 1300.
And with your routine - that should rarely be your daily goal.
Life lesson there:
You do more you eat more.
You do less you eat less (that's the gotcha for most here trying to lose).
In a diet a tad less in both cases.
Besides the fact as mentioned 1 lb weekly may be more reasonable, perhaps 1.5 to start out with.0 -
It's been mentioned - but not why.
MFP accounts for NO exercise in that eating goal you initially see. And Sedentary for easily half that select it initially isn't true, they are more active because they have kids or pets or daily household chores they do.
You follow the app you honestly log exercise done and you won't be given 1300.
And with your routine - that should rarely be your daily goal.
Life lesson there:
You do more you eat more.
You do less you eat less (that's the gotcha for most here trying to lose).
In a diet a tad less in both cases.
Besides the fact as mentioned 1 lb weekly may be more reasonable, perhaps 1.5 to start out with.
I wish there were better definitions for sedentary/lightly active (like a corollary step count or something) - if there is on MFP I haven't seen it
I don't get why people always recommend setting activity level to sedentary if you aren't2 -
Lots of nonstarchy vegetables. If this is salad, be sure to measure the dressing so you don't add all the calories right back in. Strawberries are also particularly low cal.0
-
I absolutely agree! If you want to lose weight and keep it off for good this has to be a gradual change, not an aggressive, miserable one. Otherwise, you're just crash dieting. Change your goal to be a little less intense, and make sure you're eating back at least half of those calories you worked off during workouts! Slow and steady truly does win the race when it comes to weight loss. If you're still hungry try breaking up your eating patterns into less big meals and more snacks; that works wonderfully for me and leaves me never feeling like I'm truly hungry. Good luck and good job!!This doesn't need to be a painful quick fix. You want something that is going to be sustainable for the rest of your life. You only need a slight deficit to lose weight and exercise can add to the deficit but if you are too low you will feel bad. Ease up a bit and enjoy the ride, this ain't no sprint.
0 -
Gotta up those calories.
Surely mfp gave you more than 1300 with your height and. Weight.
A crash course is not the way3 -
deannalfisher wrote: »It's been mentioned - but not why.
MFP accounts for NO exercise in that eating goal you initially see. And Sedentary for easily half that select it initially isn't true, they are more active because they have kids or pets or daily household chores they do.
You follow the app you honestly log exercise done and you won't be given 1300.
And with your routine - that should rarely be your daily goal.
Life lesson there:
You do more you eat more.
You do less you eat less (that's the gotcha for most here trying to lose).
In a diet a tad less in both cases.
Besides the fact as mentioned 1 lb weekly may be more reasonable, perhaps 1.5 to start out with.
I wish there were better definitions for sedentary/lightly active (like a corollary step count or something) - if there is on MFP I haven't seen it
I don't get why people always recommend setting activity level to sedentary if you aren't
Because they think desk job - never mind the 4-5 hrs each night or all weekend long being averaged in.
Activity tracker folks usually recommend setting to Sedentary - because MFP attempts correction then.
But I've seen many times failure to recognize why they did that, and just blanket recommend others to without any comment of syncing activity tracker being involved.
But it's those same folks when they started seeing how they easily were more than Sedentary before being inspired to move more. It would be nice if MFP mentioned that - but then they are referring to steps and with tracker synced, sedentary is best usually.
And you are correct - MFP's list of job types could be improved - the study that gives the multiplier has more complete description they could easily include in their text somewhere.0 -
somewhere there is a list that is like
sedentary - 4k steps
lightly active - 4k-8k steps
active - 8-12k
very active 12+
or something like that...but then the whole purposeful exercise thing is also missed by a lot of people (I also pay for premium, so MFP doesn't count my exercise calories from my FITBIT or POLAR)2 -
deannalfisher wrote: »It's been mentioned - but not why.
MFP accounts for NO exercise in that eating goal you initially see. And Sedentary for easily half that select it initially isn't true, they are more active because they have kids or pets or daily household chores they do.
You follow the app you honestly log exercise done and you won't be given 1300.
And with your routine - that should rarely be your daily goal.
Life lesson there:
You do more you eat more.
You do less you eat less (that's the gotcha for most here trying to lose).
In a diet a tad less in both cases.
Besides the fact as mentioned 1 lb weekly may be more reasonable, perhaps 1.5 to start out with.
I wish there were better definitions for sedentary/lightly active (like a corollary step count or something) - if there is on MFP I haven't seen it
I don't get why people always recommend setting activity level to sedentary if you aren't
Sedentary works well for a lot of people, which makes it a good default for those who are seeking advice. I've seen a corollary step count and I think it's about 5000 for sedentary, then add about 2500-5000 for each additional level. If you sync with your activity tracker, it doesn't matter where it's set because everything will get adjusted through syncing.
http://www.fitnessforweightloss.com/rate-your-activity-level-based-on-steps-per-day/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14715035
0 -
deannalfisher wrote: »It's been mentioned - but not why.
MFP accounts for NO exercise in that eating goal you initially see. And Sedentary for easily half that select it initially isn't true, they are more active because they have kids or pets or daily household chores they do.
You follow the app you honestly log exercise done and you won't be given 1300.
And with your routine - that should rarely be your daily goal.
Life lesson there:
You do more you eat more.
You do less you eat less (that's the gotcha for most here trying to lose).
In a diet a tad less in both cases.
Besides the fact as mentioned 1 lb weekly may be more reasonable, perhaps 1.5 to start out with.
I wish there were better definitions for sedentary/lightly active (like a corollary step count or something) - if there is on MFP I haven't seen it
I don't get why people always recommend setting activity level to sedentary if you aren't
Sedentary works well for a lot of people, which makes it a good default for those who are seeking advice. I've seen a corollary step count and I think it's about 5000 for sedentary, then add about 2500-5000 for each additional level. If you sync with your activity tracker, it doesn't matter where it's set because everything will get adjusted through syncing.
http://www.fitnessforweightloss.com/rate-your-activity-level-based-on-steps-per-day/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14715035
why does a sedentary recommendation work well is the person isn't sedentary - that is my point! people seem to recommend it, even when someone says that they walk 8-10k a day (I kid you not)
a lot of the people who are claim to be starving, are likely using that which is reducing their calories even more than they need to be which can potentially lead to binging because of hunger...4 -
If you're that active then I would definitely eat more calories than you're!
Do you have a fitness tracker or use another tracker to measure your exercise?
You should be looking at this as a marathon & not a 100-yard dash. Sure it's exciting to lose a lot of weight fast, but it's better to lose it a tad slower that way the healthy habits stick.
1 -
deannalfisher wrote: »It's been mentioned - but not why.
MFP accounts for NO exercise in that eating goal you initially see. And Sedentary for easily half that select it initially isn't true, they are more active because they have kids or pets or daily household chores they do.
You follow the app you honestly log exercise done and you won't be given 1300.
And with your routine - that should rarely be your daily goal.
Life lesson there:
You do more you eat more.
You do less you eat less (that's the gotcha for most here trying to lose).
In a diet a tad less in both cases.
Besides the fact as mentioned 1 lb weekly may be more reasonable, perhaps 1.5 to start out with.
I wish there were better definitions for sedentary/lightly active (like a corollary step count or something) - if there is on MFP I haven't seen it
I don't get why people always recommend setting activity level to sedentary if you aren't
Sedentary works well for a lot of people, which makes it a good default for those who are seeking advice. I've seen a corollary step count and I think it's about 5000 for sedentary, then add about 2500-5000 for each additional level. If you sync with your activity tracker, it doesn't matter where it's set because everything will get adjusted through syncing.
http://www.fitnessforweightloss.com/rate-your-activity-level-based-on-steps-per-day/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14715035
Nice study reference.
Based on currently available evidence, we propose the following preliminary indices be used to classify pedometer-determined physical activity in healthy adults:
(i). <5000 steps/day may be used as a 'sedentary lifestyle index';
(ii). 5000-7499 steps/day is typical of daily activity excluding sports/exercise and might be considered 'low active';
(iii). 7500-9999 likely includes some volitional activities (and/or elevated occupational activity demands) and might be considered 'somewhat active'; and
(iv). >or=10000 steps/day indicates the point that should be used to classify individuals as 'active'.
Individuals who take >12500 steps/day are likely to be classified as 'highly active'.
But I'd suggest that giving a default suggestion when it's known someone walks more or even if unknown daily activity level is working on myth, just as potentially bad as any of the other myths if no reason is given for the advice or limits as to when it applies.0 -
deannalfisher wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »It's been mentioned - but not why.
MFP accounts for NO exercise in that eating goal you initially see. And Sedentary for easily half that select it initially isn't true, they are more active because they have kids or pets or daily household chores they do.
You follow the app you honestly log exercise done and you won't be given 1300.
And with your routine - that should rarely be your daily goal.
Life lesson there:
You do more you eat more.
You do less you eat less (that's the gotcha for most here trying to lose).
In a diet a tad less in both cases.
Besides the fact as mentioned 1 lb weekly may be more reasonable, perhaps 1.5 to start out with.
I wish there were better definitions for sedentary/lightly active (like a corollary step count or something) - if there is on MFP I haven't seen it
I don't get why people always recommend setting activity level to sedentary if you aren't
Sedentary works well for a lot of people, which makes it a good default for those who are seeking advice. I've seen a corollary step count and I think it's about 5000 for sedentary, then add about 2500-5000 for each additional level. If you sync with your activity tracker, it doesn't matter where it's set because everything will get adjusted through syncing.
http://www.fitnessforweightloss.com/rate-your-activity-level-based-on-steps-per-day/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14715035
why does a sedentary recommendation work well is the person isn't sedentary - that is my point! people seem to recommend it, even when someone says that they walk 8-10k a day (I kid you not)
a lot of the people who are claim to be starving, are likely using that which is reducing their calories even more than they need to be which can potentially lead to binging because of hunger...
@deannalfisher I'm more lightly active/active, but have mfp set to sedentary. Any steps i do above 2,000ish is purposeful exercise. I "aim" get a minimum of 13k steps a day, but if friends or family are visiting or i have a social engagement those steps plummet way, way down.
The reasons I'm set at sedentary:
-I have my fitbit synced, so it will adjust my activity level automatically.
-I hate seeing negative adjustments on lazy days.
-Setting my activity level higher puts too much pressure on me to hit that level each and every day. I'm already obsessed with getting my steps in, i don't need more pressure.
-I go to bed early, at sedentary i lose around 60 calories every night. At lightly active that number shot up to around 200. I'd hate to think how far in the negative I'd go if i was set at Active. Losing all of those calories kinda negates upping my activity level in the first place.
-I prelog my day every morning, 9 times out of 10 I'm in the red. It shows me clearly how much exercise i need to do to get back in the green.
-If i do decide to have a sloth day, I can rest at ease eating my sedentary calories and not worry that I'm eating too much. Although negative adjustments handle this, it still bugs me.0 -
I agree with others suggesting that it may be more sustainable for you to target slower weight loss in your settings, and/or eat back more exercise calories.
In addition, timing and composition of eating may affect satiation and energy level. These things are very individual, so it could take some experimentation to find your best stratergy.
Timing means which meals/snacks are biggest, what time of day you eat them, and how many there are. Some common variations are skipping breakfast vs. eating it, 5-6 daily meals vs. 3 or even 1, snacks or no, etc.
Composition means varying, within a healthy range of each, whether you eat relatively more protein, relatively more fats, lots of high volume/high fiber/low cal foods (like veggies), etc. Different people find different macros more satiating. Some people can't feel full without some carbs (often complex carbs), while others find that eating carbs causes more carb cravings.
If you're not satiated, maybe try a new routine for a couple of days and see if it improves things. If so, keep it. If not, try something else.
It may also help to review your diary to see if you can identify patterns. If you have one of those super-hungry days (or the reverse), was there something different about how you ate that day, or even the previous day? Ditto for exercise or daily life activity? How was your sleep? Was there a different stress level? If you find patterns you can use that knowledge to adjust and improve the situation.
Finally, if you find you're losing faster than expected (after the first couple of weeks, when many of us see a big, misleading water weight blip), don't be afraid to add calories to keep your actual loss rate at a moderate sensible level. MFP's goal estimates are very close for most people, but can be noticeably off for a very few.
Wishing you a positive outcome - good results on the weight loss front, and improved satisfaction/sustainability!2
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions