Such conflicting/ misleading information

tbrain1989

I think we as an anonymous group need to help each other out a little more, we provide such subjective , conflicting and scientificaly inaccurate information , no wonder its hard for newbies to feel confident and guided.

eat more to lose weight?

my first thorn in the rose bush, we say to people dont eat less then 1200 calories, but why 1200? who has proven that this is the Base Metabolic Rate ?

does anyone know the most affective weight loss treatment in the world?
gastric band; which restricts to 600-800 calories per day, depending on how tight the restriction is.

so how much more should i eat to lose weight?

then its the multiple calculators for specifc calorie counting, i know that with the wide range of options on the internet, my "recommended" calorie intake can fluctuate by 1000 calories.


then theres the exercise estimates of calorie burn, i wouldnt even bother logging or paying any attention to this, what possible relevant back ground calculation could MFP be running that gives them the numbers.

and finally meal time/number of meals/macronutrients/paleo/atkins/eat clean/ and many others! none of these have the best answer, any change you make must be manageable

Yooperm35

I don't know about anyone else, but when I lost weight (and then gained it back because I stopped counting calories) I tried to educate myself on eating more and losing weight. And it is working. I am no longer eating 1200 calories a day but I am still losing weight. Granted, it's not at a phenomenal rate like it was the first time around - but I am close to my goal weight, so I wouldn't expect it to be. I am NOT hungry and don't feel like I am 'dieting'.

If something works for someone, good for them- I know that I can't do 1200 calories. It sucks and I was hungry and I gained back 50% of what I lost before I put on the brakes and did something about it (AGAIN). Obviously I didn't have 40# to lose because I hate eating.

Koldnomore

I think we as an anonymous group need to help each other out a little more, we provide such subjective , conflicting and scientificaly inaccurate information , no wonder its hard for newbies to feel confident and guided.

eat more to lose weight?

my first thorn in the rose bush, we say to people dont eat less then 1200 calories, but why 1200? who has proven that this is the Base Metabolic Rate ?

does anyone know the most affective weight loss treatment in the world?
gastric band; which restricts to 600-800 calories per day, depending on how tight the restriction is.

so how much more should i eat to lose weight?

then its the multiple calculators for specifc calorie counting, i know that with the wide range of options on the internet, my "recommended" calorie intake can fluctuate by 1000 calories.


then theres the exercise estimates of calorie burn, i wouldnt even bother logging or paying any attention to this, what possible relevant back ground calculation could MFP be running that gives them the numbers.

and finally meal time/number of meals/macronutrients/paleo/atkins/eat clean/ and many others! none of these have the best answer, any change you make must be manageable

"Eat More to lose weight" does not mean eat more than you WERE when you were FAT. It means you do not need to cut our everything and eat like a bird. Before you can figure out how much more you can eat you first need to know how much you are currently eating and even if you are still in a deficit. Obviously if you are not losing weight then eating more is not the best answer. Eat more is for when you ARE still losing weight but feeling hungry, tired, losing hair and all that other stuff. If you are a normal person with no medical issues then it is impossible to not lose weight in a deficit - its just that people 'say' they are in a deficit when they aren't. Stop trusting people who say they only eat 1000 calories a day and don't lose weight because 99% of the time they are full of it.

I have no idea why people are so stuck on 1200 calories. It further proves to me that people don't bother to do their own research and just do what everyone tells them. Calorie intake is based on height, weight, age, activity level and a whole lot of other stuff. People say 1200 because MFP will not go lower then that but its not based on anything 'real' SOME PEOPLE will need to eat less than 1200 based on their stats and no one is going to die if they eat 1200 calories for a few months - especially if they have a lot of weight to lose. Actually it's a great way to get that good kick in the *kitten* if you have a ton to lose assuming you can keep up with it. Of course if you are eating less than you need to eat by HUGE amounts (like 800 calories or something dumb like that) then your body will eventually adapt and you will mess up your metabolism - Adaptive Thermogenisis (Google it) I HATE people who say 'blah blah blah 1200 calories" because it is pure hohkey. MOST people will be able to eat more then that and lose weight but for some people it IS just fine. I'd be happier for people who don't know any better to just stop repeating garbage.

Losing weight is easy, all this other junk just gets in the way. Eat a little less than what you were eating before, try to move a little bit more. Keep doing it. It's THAT easy. Unless you have very specific goals for your body (ie. abs, running a marathon etc..) or some medical condition (in which case see a doctor) that's all it takes. Period. full stop. end.

beachlover317

Mmmmk. You do you.

Rerun201

We are all "experiments of one". We respond to inquiries made here with what experiment has worked for us in the past.

Science is not necessarily the answer, at least not where the science of diet and exercise is today. Too many bogus claims of the efficacy of this method over that through "studies" that are so biased or fraught with error they cannot be considered science.

The one, true fact of science is that you must consume fewer calories than you burn over the course of time to lose weight. and consume more than you burn to gain weight. The only time that gets confusing is when people looking to make a buck twist, spin and alter the "facts" to suit their need. Anyone selling a diet or exercise book is doing it out of the need to make money, so we, as consumers, need to be aware of that.

This brings to mind the glorious days of the 60s and 70s when bodybuilders would spout their workouts in magazines and books, telling all of us we can accomplish the same things they did and they did not use steroids. It all turned out to be pretty much BS. They made their best gains while using steroids, but the decision was made to not disclose this fact as the publishers made money on protein powders and mostly worthless exercise equipment.

Through trial and error we find what works for us, hopefully shortening the learning process by using what has worked for others.

It's up to those posting inquiries to decide what they want to try. If it works, good. If not, they've learned something in the process and can move on to the next suggestion.

It is important to note the old saying, "There's more than 1 way to skin a cat". I'm pretty sure this was spoken by a future serial killer to one of his or her friends since animal abuse is seen frequently in the backgrounds of serial killers. But what we can take from it is that there is not just one way to get to where we want to be. The goal may be to lose weight which can only be done through caloric deficit, but there are many ways to create said deficit. Eat less, exercise more, with a myriad of programs that combine both these factors to some degree or another.

My way may not be ideal for you, but it gets me there. And it just might be ideal for someone else. What is working for me is the Warrior Diet combined with bodyweight exercise and walking. What's working for you?