Calorie Counter

You are currently viewing the message boards in:

Maintenance too low

pinkgurl456pinkgurl456 Posts: 52Member Member Posts: 52Member Member
I basically switched the app to maintenance and have been eating lower calories 1,600 instead of the 2,000 it gives for my height of 5,6 and haven’t been losing I’m afraid once I up it to 2,000 I will start gaining any advice? Do you think 1,600 which seems quite low is indeed my maintenance amount?

Replies

  • pinkgurl456pinkgurl456 Posts: 52Member Member Posts: 52Member Member
    I measure / weigh my foods so I’m pretty sure I’m not overestimating
  • AddicteadAddictead Posts: 60Member Member Posts: 60Member Member
    I find that I can eat more in maintaince vs losing weight. I suppose it's NEAT or something like that, I eat 1300-1400 for losing 0.5lbs but I maintain on 1800-2100
  • MadisonMolly2017MadisonMolly2017 Posts: 3,912Member Member Posts: 3,912Member Member
    It does seem low, but that would depend on how accurate your logging is, if you're not logging accurately (guessing portion sizes or using cups/spoons) you could quite easily be eating more than you think.

    pqjxtbawdaip.jpg

    LOVE this!
  • apullumapullum Posts: 3,861Member Member Posts: 3,861Member Member
    I measure / weigh my foods so I’m pretty sure I’m not overestimating

    Weigh ALL your food. Forget that you own measuring cups or spoons.
  • pinkgurl456pinkgurl456 Posts: 52Member Member Posts: 52Member Member
    Thanks everyone for being so kind with the helpful replies I’m definitely going to try to up to 1,700 calories like @sijomial suggested , does anyone think a Fitbit or something like that would be good to see how much I’m burning heart rate wise?
  • sijomialsijomial Posts: 15,038Member Member Posts: 15,038Member Member
    Thanks everyone for being so kind with the helpful replies I’m definitely going to try to up to 1,700 calories like @sijomial suggested , does anyone think a Fitbit or something like that would be good to see how much I’m burning heart rate wise?

    Heart rate monitors count heartbeats not calories. For a lot of types of exercise heart rate is a very poor basis on which to base calorie estimates. For some people doing some exercise they can be adequate.

    If you want an all day activity and exercise tracker then go for it, it's certainly not a requirement though. If it motivates you to move more/exercise more then that's a real benefit.

    The problem with changing methods now is that all your past data is thrown away and you are starting from scratch again. A few months of stability and playing with your numbers works just as well, I wouldn't actually bother trying to make your food logging more accurate as consistent works too. You might not actually be eating 1600 or 1700 cals but the goal is weight maintenance rather than getting bonus points for logging accuracy.
  • lorrpblorrpb Posts: 10,434Member Member Posts: 10,434Member Member
    1600 sounds like your weight loss calories, so of course you should increase them. How long have you been eating 1600 and were you losing or maintaining during this time? How many calories were eating before that (in weight loss)?
  • PAV8888PAV8888 Posts: 5,754Member Member Posts: 5,754Member Member
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    You're AT maintenance, right? And you're told that you should eat 2000 to maintain. But you're eating 1600. And you're not losing. But you're also NOT gaining, right?

    And by gaining I mean gaining consistently using a weight trend app (and by losing I mean losing consistently using a weight trend app). So first of all we need to sort out that you're aware of your typical weight range and how your weight changes during the month according to hormones, whenever you go out to restaurants, or with exercise, or what have you.

    Then... it really doesn't matter how you define your "1600", as long as you define it the same way all the time (the consistent part that @sijomial mentioned above).

    Bump it up to "1700" or "1800" or "1900" until you see that you're consistently gaining weight. Then dial it down by "100"

    Your body does have the ability to "absorb" a small degree of upward and downward caloric pressure by slightly slowing down or speeding up a few processes. Maybe when you start eating an extra "100" you will find yourself dancing in the street more often than you do now! :smiley:

    <That said, yes, measurements are evil: you have a scale; it knows things!>

    To be clear, I was referring to a food scale vs measuring food using cups and spoons.
  • pinkgurl456pinkgurl456 Posts: 52Member Member Posts: 52Member Member
    Ive been eating 1,600 for almost a year before that I lost weight eating 1,400 a day
  • LKArghLKArgh Posts: 5,039Member Member Posts: 5,039Member Member
    Ive been eating 1,600 for almost a year before that I lost weight eating 1,400 a day

    So you are at maintenance which is for you 1600 calories. Could be you are slightly underestimating what you eat, or overestimating how active you are. Does it matter? If you up your calories, you will gain.
  • lorrpblorrpb Posts: 10,434Member Member Posts: 10,434Member Member
    Congrats on maintaining for a year! I do not recommend increasing your calories. You could open your diary and have the smart folks here look at your logging. I agree that you might actually be eating more than 1600. Keep eating how you are now, regardless of the number, because it’s working for you.
Sign In or Register to comment.