To the mean people of MFP... You can say "I told you so"
Replies
-
Ugh...just hired a trainer and they are telling me to not eat back the calories...time will tell...
I can't allow myself to work my butt off and burn 1,000 calories in a day, and then eat them back. All of that hard work for nothing. The whole concept of dieting is to eat less and/or exercise more. Not exercise more annnd eat more. I'll stick with what has worked for ages and what is working for me right now.
As long as you realize that this is NOT the way MFP is set up to work.
That's fine with me. According to MFP, I should only be eating 1,200 calories. I'm 5ft 8 and weighed up to 225 when it said that. I don't really look at MFP as a diet plan, anyway. People on my MFP friends list are on just about every diet and they're losing, and like me, they use MFP to track calories (and other things that they're watching since they're diets and needs are all different), use the forums for advice, and get motivation from others. Congrats on it working for you, though.
0 -
Ugh...just hired a trainer and they are telling me to not eat back the calories...time will tell...
I can't allow myself to work my butt off and burn 1,000 calories in a day, and then eat them back. All of that hard work for nothing. The whole concept of dieting is to eat less and/or exercise more. Not exercise more annnd eat more. I'll stick with what has worked for ages and what is working for me right now.
As long as you realize that this is NOT the way MFP is set up to work.
That's fine with me. According to MFP, I should only be eating 1,200 calories. I'm 5ft 8 and weighed up to 225 when it said that. I don't really look at MFP as a diet plan, anyway. People on my MFP friends list are on just about every diet and they're losing, and like me, they use MFP to track calories (and other things that they're watching since they're diets and needs are all different), use the forums for advice, and get motivation from others. Congrats on it working for you, though.
Good luck to you...and I mean that
I'm just going to say it...she's lost 101 lbs she must know a little something about something.
When I started I was doing only 1200 and exercising. I did lose weight for awhile. I had 70 lbs to lose. I was hungry more than I thought I should be and was a bit sluggish. The weight finally halted, because I wasn't fueling myself properly. The minute I listened to the mean ones who had lost a lot of weight over the ones who didbg have much to lose who kept saying eat less...I started losing again. So there is definitely something to this eat more move more mentality. Because diets are not sustainable. It has to be a lifestyle change not just an until I reach my goal...because lots of people don't think about what happens after they reach their goal.0 -
Once again, I can not speak for the OP, but only for myself. When I was eating at 1200 cals I had perfect adherence. I was afraid to eat anything over my cal limit. When I upped calories I loosened up a bit. I eat treats again as long as they fit into my 1800 cals. I eat the foods I love again - if they fit in my day. I have never been one to indulge in cheat meals. Especially now that I am eating the foods I enjoy. I have tracked for over 17 months consistently - every day. It's the only way I know that this really works.
Right, this is why I gave two alternatives. The first one (which I notice you ignored to rebut the second one) is that some people are very badly affected by low energy input and their energy expenditure really does slow down quite a ways, to the point where what would normally be a losing diet turns into a maintenance diet. For them, an increase in energy input allows them to increase expenditure by a disproportionate amount (NEAT is especially important here) so that they can resume losing weight.0 -
Congrats OP! The TDEE method does work, as my ticker shows. It's also much more enjoyable to eat good food of a reasonable quantity, meet my macros/calories & have tons of energy! Stick with it!!!0
-
Well I am trying to "up" my calories to be around 1450 (have some trouble the past few weeks being consistent) .
I guess I'm reluctant to fully commit because I usually only see people who claim success with this method after 3 or 4 weeks but I never see posts from people who have had long term success with this ( 30 or more lbs or more than a yr).
more than a year. still losing.0 -
Thanks for sharing this link!! And its great that its working for you!!0
-
Ugh...just hired a trainer and they are telling me to not eat back the calories...time will tell...
There are such things as bad trainers that don't know what they are talking about.0 -
Ugh...just hired a trainer and they are telling me to not eat back the calories...time will tell...
I can't allow myself to work my butt off and burn 1,000 calories in a day, and then eat them back. All of that hard work for nothing. The whole concept of dieting is to eat less and/or exercise more. Not exercise more annnd eat more. I'll stick with what has worked for ages and what is working for me right now.
:huh: :huh: :huh: :noway: :noway: :noway:0 -
Congrats, OP.
:flowerforyou:0 -
I repeat...It's simple math. 1500-500 = 1000 or 1200-500 = 700. Your body needs at least 1200 calories just to function.
Your body needs 1200 calories just to function...
Where are you getting the fact that your body needs 1,200 calories just to function?0 -
I am using in place of a road map as well. except I am at 1531 as I am going for 2lbs a week as I am quite big
0 -
Why would it stop if I am in a deficit?
This is what I have been thinking the whole time. The deficit is simple math that will determine, roughly, how many pounds are destined to come off, at least pounds that contain energy.
I understand it's a good idea to eat (nearly) enough to fuel your body, as in use a TDEE-20% kind of approach for losing weight. The difference comes from energy stored in your body (hopefully fat).
I think maybe what is at work in situations like these where people report suddenly losing weight after a plateau is the "whoosh." I think Lyle McD talks about this effect in one of his articles. Sometimes a "refeed" is enough to break through a plateau. I don't know if there is a whole lot studied on refeeds, but there seems to be a lot of anecdotal evidence. For what it's worth...
Lyle article:
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/of-whooshes-and-squishy-fat.html0 -
How long ago did you up your calories?
2-3ish weeks ago. I couldn't believe that I lost 2lbs after stepping on the scale after the first week! I have been consistently losing 1lb a week since.
Your diary shows you upped your calories 10 days ago. It also shows very very spotty logging since you started tracking on here. Your average looks to have been at least 1,500 with many days quite a lot over the 1,500 you say you ate up to before you upped your calories. I am not saying this to try to be rude...but as has been pointed out, the math was not making sense. Nine times out of ten, people's diaries are not as accurate as they think they are.
Dieting is stressful on the body - the greater the deficit, the more stress. This leads to water retention. You eat more, you release water initially.
I am not trying to be mean here, but I am not sure how you can conclude that upping your calories have made you lose more weight (as in more fat) based on the above.0 -
Bravo!! Here's to your continued success! :drinker:I have been at my weight loss journey for 3 months tomorrow and I have lost 18 lbs. I started out eating between 1200-1500 calories a day and exercising regularly... but just recently I quit losing weight and to top it off I was hungry all the time! I asked myself how am I going to eat less than 1200 calories if I am as hungry as I am now! The answer: Don't! ....EAT MORE!
I got on here looking for answers and I didn't like that people were telling me that I wasn't eating enough... I was actually extremely defensive about it. How dare they tell me I am not eating enough when I have lost all the weight I have so far! Then someone directed me to this thread:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/974888-in-place-of-a-road-map-2k13
I am now eating 2300 calories a day and exercising regularly and back to losing 1lb a week! The best part is... I am full! Yay! No more hunger! Thanks for the read! I hope this helps at least one person out there!
Best move I ever made was reading (and re-reading and RE-READING! ) and applying the info in the Road Map thread. That was nearly two years ago, and I've head steady success with sustainable lifestyle change and fat loss ever since. 0 -
Threads like this are why people keep misunderstanding EMTWL. Basic rational thought still needs to apply, you know? You don't lose more at a 500 calorie cut than a 1000 calorie one, that's just crazy talk. The concept isn't about losing more faster, its about comfort, adherence, and crap like that.
People don't (or shouldn't) say 'eat moar' every time someone is stalled, but in cases where diet adherence suffers.
Or that's my view anyway, take that as you will. I just hang out here.0 -
To those that were wondering how fast can the metabolism respond, going up and going down and how long down, ect, here is some nicely laid out research, plus some other points throughout the topic thread.
And when I say metabolism, I'm not meaning just BMR which can only be suppressed so much, your body has functions that must be done, it'll get the energy from somewhere to accomplish them even if done a tad slower. And despite the idea that many have that it'll all come from excess fat you have, the studies show that is not the case.
If your body could do that, there would be no need for it suppress other activities and RMR and NEAT, ect, to conserve.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1077746-starvation-mode-adaptive-thermogenesis-and-weight-loss0 -
GJ OP! Try to ignore everyone trying to do math without knowing the real numbers. In fact most of the time we dont realize the numbers we all use are all approximations anyways. The fact is its working for her, finding out what she exactly did for intake and exercise is a good idea for her in the future, but now she's on the right track.Well I am trying to "up" my calories to be around 1450 (have some trouble the past few weeks being consistent) .
I guess I'm reluctant to fully commit because I usually only see people who claim success with this method after 3 or 4 weeks but I never see posts from people who have had long term success with this ( 30 or more lbs or more than a yr).
What do you mean you dont think you've seen anyone who's eaten back their exercise calories and claimed success for the long term? There are tons on here, and you just saw another one then (me). 23,000+ cals eaten last week, about 3,300 cal/day and I lost 2.6lbs last week and total over 30lbs lost. Last week was higher loss than average, probably because I increased lifting. I did increase my food intake by a lot, ate a whole extra large Round table pizza as well, so I thought it would have been less. Sorry if I broke the laws of physics, but I promise to fix them again, after I'm where I want to be
0 -
This actually doesn't add up... perhaps you weren't logging accurately before or you're exercising more now?
The 'eat more' message is more for those people who are attempting around 1200 calories a day and keep falling off the wagon and binging, because it's too great a deficit for them.
But I'm happy for you! If it works - keep it up.
No it isn't. The 'eat more' message is simply: 'eat what your body needs'. It's telling people that they can eat a lot of food and still lose weight, as long as they burn more than they eat. It's telling people that losing weight shouldn't be a crash diet, it should be a lifestyle change.
Well done OP
This^^^^0 -
If you aren't giving your body what it needs to function then it will hold onto what it has halting weight loss. If you give it what it needs and continue working out you'll still actually be at a deficit and be able to lose weight. Oh my. I know it doesn't seem logical when all you hear is to lose weight you have to eat less and move move, but really, you still need to eat more and give your body the proper fuel to function.
If someone was eating 1200 calories a day and burning say 300, that would leave them at 700 net. 1200 - 500 = 700. 700 is not enough fuel for the body to continue to function properly.
But if someone is eating 1900 calories a day and burning 500 they are eating what they need for their body to function and are at a deficit. 1900 - 500 = 1400. Less than what they ate = deficit.
She is obviously at a deficit or how would she be losing weight...so yeah it does add up.
^^This too!!
Some people are just to stuck in their ways to see anything in any other way, it's basic math and physiology plain and simple. But some will never believe it, but that's ok, I am so happy that you are doing whats right for your body and not starving it and ruining your metabolism lady, very proud of you!! 0 -
Today I learned that 12 - 3 = 7.If someone was eating 1200 calories a day and burning say 300, that would leave them at 700 net.0 -
Today I learned that 12 - 3 = 7.If someone was eating 1200 calories a day and burning say 300, that would leave them at 700 net.
0 -
If you aren't giving your body what it needs to function then it will hold onto what it has halting weight loss. If you give it what it needs and continue working out you'll still actually be at a deficit and be able to lose weight. Oh my. I know it doesn't seem logical when all you hear is to lose weight you have to eat less and move move, but really, you still need to eat more and give your body the proper fuel to function.
If someone was eating 1200 calories a day and burning say 300, that would leave them at 700 net. 1200 - 500 = 700. 700 is not enough fuel for the body to continue to function properly.
But if someone is eating 1900 calories a day and burning 500 they are eating what they need for their body to function and are at a deficit. 1900 - 500 = 1400. Less than what they ate = deficit.
She is obviously at a deficit or how would she be losing weight...so yeah it does add up.
I don't think you understand the whole idea of weight loss. Whether your net calories after exercise is 700 or 1400, your body will make up the difference to get to its calorie requirements by burning your stored fat (or muscle). If you are not providing the fuel, it makes the fuel by literally eating yourself. As long as you have fuel to burn (fat), you will not be experiencing the true starvation response and your body will get the exact amount of calories it needs every day. So 700 calories is not enough to fuel your body, but 700 plus your burned fat/muscle that your body uses to make up the difference is enough to meet your requirements.
The real dangers of eating so little are:
- The possible onset of an eating disorder
- Most likely lacking proper nutrition the body needs for hair, skin, teeth, organ function, etc.. that can lead to major problems
- Higher likelihood of binging and falling off the wagon in general
- Your body will consume more lean muscle than you'd probably like
There is no magic that happens when you increase your calories that suddenly makes you lose weight within a week. THAT'S simple math: greater deficit = greater weight loss. As others have said, either the logging was incorrect before, the exercise increased, water weight was released, or your body finally let go of the weight (fat loss is never perfectly linear). Also, 1200 calories is such an arbitrary number to use for supposed "starvation mode" and makes no sense.0 -
This thread makes math cry.0
-
Why do people have to ruin threads like this?0
-
Why do people have to ruin threads like this?
There are a thousand different motivations for internet forum use. But basically this thread is somewhat misleading. Of course, if you had posted about eating a "donut diet" and losing weight, while posting a hundred pictures of donuts you didn't actually eat, you'd have a lot of the same people cheering you on instead of applying the same level of critical thought.0 -
Why do people have to ruin threads like this?
Who ruined it?0 -
Well I am trying to "up" my calories to be around 1450 (have some trouble the past few weeks being consistent) .
I guess I'm reluctant to fully commit because I usually only see people who claim success with this method after 3 or 4 weeks but I never see posts from people who have had long term success with this ( 30 or more lbs or more than a yr).
I've lost nearly 62 lb's. I tried cutting calories to 1400 but within 2 weeks I gave up and went with eat more to weigh less. I've been doing it since February and it's still working hope that helps convince you.0 -
For those who have upped their calories and are back to losing regularly, Congratulations!!!!! What are you doing for exercise, and how often are you exercising? Kat0
-
[snip]
I am now eating 2300 calories a day and exercising regularly and back to losing 1lb a week!
[snip]
You're losing a pound a week eating 2300 calories a day?
You must exercise like a beast!0 -
For those who have upped their calories and are back to losing regularly, Congratulations!!!!! What are you doing for exercise, and how often are you exercising? Kat
I've just completed C25K. I also walk, go on stationary bike and do some kettle bell routines. I do my running 2-3 times a week. I don't do crazy amounts of exercise.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 423 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