I thought the "eat more food" people were crazy

affacat

I take multivitamins but also ensure I am eating solid, well designed meals. I wouldn't recommend getting your cals through trash foods and then supplementing with a vitamin. Some argue against vitamins due to absorption rates and other things, but I can definitely 'feel' days I skip my vitamins.

scrapscot

I was having the same place. I was stuck for 10 months. I upped my calories to 1400, not using up my exercise and I've lost 1.2 lbs the 1st week. Hopefully tomorrow there will be another drop.

Good going! Hope it continues for you too!

WBB55

I want to be clear before the snark monsters show up.

I am NOT saying that eating more led to the weight loss.

I'm saying that when I started eating more, I started losing more. It could be coincidence. I'm simply saying that I'm adding it back to my list of possibilities.

Well, it seems to me proper body fueling leads to body efficiency, which probably means more pep in your workouts and everyday movement.

My UP24 and weightlifting log disagree with you.

Everyone has different experiences. And everyone here is glad that your plan works for you. Grats on your success!

AnswerzPwease

If you're eating at a deficit, you should lose. It's awesome that you're losing. Keep up the good work!

I think the issue a lot of people face is that they don't know what their TDEE. So they think the only thing to do is eat as little as possible. That works for some people. Other people do it differently.

I was eating a 1500 calorie defecit a day and losing 1 pound a week.

And I weigh everything. Use the USDA database. I'm a little OCD.

For whatever reason, the scale was stuck.

What's your deficit now, if you don't mind me asking, and what's your rate of loss now?

In the end, to me, it doesn't matter as long as you're happy with your rate of loss and overall mood.

I'm eating about 2200 cals a day now. And I've lost 4 pounds in the last 4 days.

That rate will likely slow down. And maybe even stop for a bit. But 2200 is probably a good deficit for you. You estimate that's about 800 calories below your TDEE? Is that your estimate? If so, just continue on at 2200 for a while. If your numbers are all accurate, you'll probably steady off at 1-1.5 lbs per week. I think 800 calories/day is a very sensible deficit for you based on your profile picture.

One of the formulas has me at 3700 and another has me at 3300 (TDEE).

Meh, they're all estimates. Stick to the 2200 if you like it, keep close track of your rate of loss for a couple months. Then you can do math to figure your actual TDEE, if all of your logging is accurate. Doing this helped open my eyes to what a reasonable calorie deficit was, even if you have a lot of weight to lose. But that's me personally. Now I let my FitBit track my TDEE, and I don't really do the math as much and tweak, since I find my FitBit to be accurate to within +/-70 calories per day over the long term (based on the charts I've made for myself).

Really, 2200 sounds great. Just stick to that for a couple months. Then come back and tell us how much you've lost. Maybe we'll give you new advice then. Good luck, ok?

Thanks for all your advice. Honestly appreciate it.

So you find your fitbit to be accurate at calculating calorie expendeture? I was thinking about the Bodymedia one.

CMarieVirginia

Don't underestimate the power of metabolism. When you eat too little your body down shifts into starvation gear, burns less calories to keep you alive longer. Keep your body thinking you're fine by distributing your calories throughout the day--5-6 small meals are better than 3 big ones. Also, people think if they drink a lot of water they will bloat up. Wrong. The opposite is true and you can sabotage your weight loss by not drinking your water (8 or more cups per day). Water, lots of it, washes your fat away. Fat weighs something--it's heavy. Keep at it. You'll soon see the pounds disappear and then you'll be hooked on MFP. Good luck.

DeguelloTex

/weep

WBB55

If you're eating at a deficit, you should lose. It's awesome that you're losing. Keep up the good work!

I think the issue a lot of people face is that they don't know what their TDEE. So they think the only thing to do is eat as little as possible. That works for some people. Other people do it differently.

I was eating a 1500 calorie defecit a day and losing 1 pound a week.

And I weigh everything. Use the USDA database. I'm a little OCD.

For whatever reason, the scale was stuck.

What's your deficit now, if you don't mind me asking, and what's your rate of loss now?

In the end, to me, it doesn't matter as long as you're happy with your rate of loss and overall mood.

I'm eating about 2200 cals a day now. And I've lost 4 pounds in the last 4 days.

That rate will likely slow down. And maybe even stop for a bit. But 2200 is probably a good deficit for you. You estimate that's about 800 calories below your TDEE? Is that your estimate? If so, just continue on at 2200 for a while. If your numbers are all accurate, you'll probably steady off at 1-1.5 lbs per week. I think 800 calories/day is a very sensible deficit for you based on your profile picture.

One of the formulas has me at 3700 and another has me at 3300 (TDEE).

Meh, they're all estimates. Stick to the 2200 if you like it, keep close track of your rate of loss for a couple months. Then you can do math to figure your actual TDEE, if all of your logging is accurate. Doing this helped open my eyes to what a reasonable calorie deficit was, even if you have a lot of weight to lose. But that's me personally. Now I let my FitBit track my TDEE, and I don't really do the math as much and tweak, since I find my FitBit to be accurate to within +/-70 calories per day over the long term (based on the charts I've made for myself).

Really, 2200 sounds great. Just stick to that for a couple months. Then come back and tell us how much you've lost. Maybe we'll give you new advice then. Good luck, ok?

Thanks for all your advice. Honestly appreciate it.

So you find your fitbit to be accurate at calculating calorie expendeture? I was thinking about the Bodymedia one.

I had to tweak it (change my stride length, and I rounded down my height, so it made my BMR a little lower) based on my long term charts of meticulous logging. So when I bought it, I kinda already knew what my BMR and TDEE was from other tests I've had done. So after I tweaked the settings, I trust the FitBit now to be close enough to give me an idea of what any day's given TDEE was.

I assume I weigh less than you, and I personally can't eat at a huge deficit without sacrificing performance, mood, and sleeping issues. So I absolutely, personally, have to accurately keep my intake to no less than 500 below TDEE on average. But that's me. I have other medical issues I deal with which take priority above weightloss. And the FitBit helps me personally with many of my health issues (not just weightloss).

Since you have more fat stores than me (I assume) you don't have to be as accurate with your TDEE. What's more important for you right now is finding a sustainable plan that you can stick with that doesn't leave you with any hunger, hormone, craving issues. If 2200 is that number, then I think that's awesome. Maybe it'll be 2500. Maybe it'll be 2000. Who knows.

neandermagnon

Just some observations from having been around here for a couple of years. It seems to me that when people have very large deficits, they tend to not really get adequate nutrition and are lacking in certain nutrients and end up with hormonal imbalances which cause weight loss issues. When they up there calories to a more reasonable deficit, their nutrition improves and their hormones balance out and their body's start working correctly and they start losing weight. I would also add that many people also see an improvement in the level of effort for their workouts and tend to just move more in general.

Of course, eat more doesn't mean that you eat above your TDEE....I think that's where people get confused when you say eat more to lose...you still have to be at a deficit. It just tends to be more reasonable which lends itself to greater dietary adherence in many cases as well as a better overall nutritional profile which helps the body just work better.

^^^ what he said

well fed people move more. they do better workouts. they fidget more. they move around more when not exercising. they feel warmer, their bodies generate more heat, more energy goes to non-essential functions... some of this is increased activity due to feeling more energetic, some of it is adaptive thermogenesis. but the upshot is, if you eat more (i.e. a moderate deficit compared to an extreme deficit), your TDEE tends to go up as well........ lots of people find that when they raise their calories for bulking, that they dont' gain weight right away, they sometimes have to raise their calories again, and again, before they start gaining weight, because of their TDEE going up due to these issues. Your TDEE isn't a static number, your body's in a constant state of flux, adjusting to what's going in. Of course, there are limits in both directions, because your body can only adjust so much, and so people can become obese or starve to death. But the body is more adaptable than people give it credit for.

Additionally, I just want to repeat the point that "eat more" does not mean "eat over your TDEE" it means "it's better to have a moderate deficit than an extreme deficit"

CMarieVirginia

I'm new too. I've lost 7 pounds in 24 days. I weigh in every day and here's what that's like: down-up-down-up-lose a pound-up-down-up-down-lose a pound. That's just what I've learned to expect. A pound doesn't weigh all that much. Don't despair, I'm losing and I'm doing very little exercise. I'm 66. If it's working for me, it will work for you. Keep the faith. You're on the path to success, and you've got friends.

WalkingAlong

So you find your fitbit to be accurate at calculating calorie expendeture? I was thinking about the Bodymedia one.

They all just estimate. I've had both types and they do about the same, so I'd pass on the arm-worn Body Media, with its monthly fee. And be warned they don't estimate resistance or cycling. I love Fitbits, though, just for the motivation and for seeing an inactive day's data vs. an active one.

Changing your stride length in Fitbit settings doesn't affect your calorie burn data, just your distance estimate.

CindyB97

I'll chime in as another one who was on a serious plateau, about 2-3 months, with MFP set to 1 pound per week. I finally took the plunge and nervously set MFP to 1/2 pound per week and IMMEDIATELY started losing. I didn't change my activity level, exercise, or anything. And I've been steadily losing ever since.

I don't know if I would label it the "starvation" mode like some would, but there is definitely something to it; eating too few calories does tend to stall one's weight loss at a certain point. There are too many posts, here and elsewhere that I've seen, along with my own experiences, to believe otherwise. Maybe not for every single person, but it's definitely not just an obscure fluke.

Cranquistador

/weep

why you cry?

Supertact

vgesgiyrfjk4rguoig

Bakkasan

Everyone has different experiences. And everyone here is glad that your plan works for you. Grats on your success!

If everyone on MFP were more like you, this would be a much better place. Way to many people here think their way is the right way and the rest are just idiots.

albayin

Everyone has different experiences. And everyone here is glad that your plan works for you. Grats on your success!

If everyone on MFP were more like you, this would be a much better place. Way to many people here think their way is the right way and the rest are just idiots.

you know what is even funnier? many haven't event tried their "own way" before telling others what the best way should be...

AmyRhubarb

Just some observations from having been around here for a couple of years. It seems to me that when people have very large deficits, they tend to not really get adequate nutrition and are lacking in certain nutrients and end up with hormonal imbalances which cause weight loss issues. When they up there calories to a more reasonable deficit, their nutrition improves and their hormones balance out and their body's start working correctly and they start losing weight. I would also add that many people also see an improvement in the level of effort for their workouts and tend to just move more in general.

Of course, eat more doesn't mean that you eat above your TDEE....I think that's where people get confused when you say eat more to lose...you still have to be at a deficit. It just tends to be more reasonable which lends itself to greater dietary adherence in many cases as well as a better overall nutritional profile which helps the body just work better.

This.

Too often people see the words "eat more" and it makes no sense to them, because they are misunderstanding the concept. Eat more than 1200 calories, or whatever far-too-low number they have been struggling to stay under. My goal is to eat as much as possible while still losing weight (or more importantly - FAT), and I've done this by maintaining a small calorie deficit rather than a huge one.

For me, this has meant eating 1800-2000 calories a day (and I'm a 46 year old chick - you young guys out there trying to get by on 1500 need to eat more!), and I haven't had a single set back, "plateau", or struggled to stick to my plan. The fat and inches have steadily come off, I am well-fueled for workouts and daily life, and the best part is this is sustainable! I have plenty of room for dinners out, a drink a couple of times a week, desserts, holidays, vacations, etc.

Life happens, and I intend to enjoy it AND stick with my healthy lifestyle. And I've been able to do just that since calculating my TDEE, taking a 10-20% cut from that and eating to goal on a daily basis. I exercise too - 5-6 days a week, about 60 minutes on average - three days I run, and the other three I do workouts with dumbbells in my living room. I'm slimmer, stronger and healthier in my 40's than I ever was in my 30's! :drinker:

Iwishyouwell

I'm not saying this is the case for the OP, but sometimes when people "up their calories" it really equates to finally just logging their calories properly.

It's not uncommon for a person to think they're eating at a much bigger deficit than they really are. Then they're told "eat more" to lose, they start accurately weighing, measuring, and logging in order to get in more food, and viola, they think they're losing by "eating more" when they're actually eating less, but logging more accurately.

Otherwise I agree with this:

^^^ what he said

well fed people move more. they do better workouts. they fidget more. they move around more when not exercising. they feel warmer, their bodies generate more heat, more energy goes to non-essential functions... some of this is increased activity due to feeling more energetic, some of it is adaptive thermogenesis. but the upshot is, if you eat more (i.e. a moderate deficit compared to an extreme deficit), your TDEE tends to go up as well........ lots of people find that when they raise their calories for bulking, that they dont' gain weight right away, they sometimes have to raise their calories again, and again, before they start gaining weight, because of their TDEE going up due to these issues. Your TDEE isn't a static number, your body's in a constant state of flux, adjusting to what's going in. Of course, there are limits in both directions, because your body can only adjust so much, and so people can become obese or starve to death. But the body is more adaptable than people give it credit for.

Additionally, I just want to repeat the point that "eat more" does not mean "eat over your TDEE" it means "it's better to have a moderate deficit than an extreme deficit"

AnswerzPwease

I'm not saying this is the case for the OP, but sometimes when people "up their calories" it really equates to finally just logging their calories properly.

It's not uncommon for a person to think they're eating at a much bigger deficit than they really are. Then they're told "eat more" to lose, they start accurately weighing, measuring, and logging in order to get in more food, and viola, they think they're losing by "eating more" when they're actually eating less, but logging more accurately.

Otherwise I agree with this:

^^^ what he said

well fed people move more. they do better workouts. they fidget more. they move around more when not exercising. they feel warmer, their bodies generate more heat, more energy goes to non-essential functions... some of this is increased activity due to feeling more energetic, some of it is adaptive thermogenesis. but the upshot is, if you eat more (i.e. a moderate deficit compared to an extreme deficit), your TDEE tends to go up as well........ lots of people find that when they raise their calories for bulking, that they dont' gain weight right away, they sometimes have to raise their calories again, and again, before they start gaining weight, because of their TDEE going up due to these issues. Your TDEE isn't a static number, your body's in a constant state of flux, adjusting to what's going in. Of course, there are limits in both directions, because your body can only adjust so much, and so people can become obese or starve to death. But the body is more adaptable than people give it credit for.

Additionally, I just want to repeat the point that "eat more" does not mean "eat over your TDEE" it means "it's better to have a moderate deficit than an extreme deficit"

I agree that probably happens a lot.

But I'm a bit OCD, I weigh and log everything.

MelodyandBarbells

I'm not saying this is the case for the OP, but sometimes when people "up their calories" it really equates to finally just logging their calories properly.

It's not uncommon for a person to think they're eating at a much bigger deficit than they really are. Then they're told "eat more" to lose, they start accurately weighing, measuring, and logging in order to get in more food, and viola, they think they're losing by "eating more" when they're actually eating less, but logging more accurately.

Otherwise I agree with this:

^^^ what he said

well fed people move more. they do better workouts. they fidget more. they move around more when not exercising. they feel warmer, their bodies generate more heat, more energy goes to non-essential functions... some of this is increased activity due to feeling more energetic, some of it is adaptive thermogenesis. but the upshot is, if you eat more (i.e. a moderate deficit compared to an extreme deficit), your TDEE tends to go up as well........ lots of people find that when they raise their calories for bulking, that they dont' gain weight right away, they sometimes have to raise their calories again, and again, before they start gaining weight, because of their TDEE going up due to these issues. Your TDEE isn't a static number, your body's in a constant state of flux, adjusting to what's going in. Of course, there are limits in both directions, because your body can only adjust so much, and so people can become obese or starve to death. But the body is more adaptable than people give it credit for.

Additionally, I just want to repeat the point that "eat more" does not mean "eat over your TDEE" it means "it's better to have a moderate deficit than an extreme deficit"

Why the assumption that as they ate more, they likely simultaneously started being more meticulous with measuring the food? Why not just use the existing process and add a couple hundred calories? I know you just expressed a hypothesis, just wondering what's the basis for it.

Assuming that they're being honest in follow up posts, why not report that they found that they were actually eating 2000 calories per day before rather than 1200, and actually dropped to 1800?

lindsey1979

I think there is a sweet spot for weight loss -- not the greater the deficit the greater the results, which would seem to be the issue if CICO were strictly applied. I can't tell you the reason for it, though I suspect it has something to do with the body's various hormonal processes -- cortisol, leptin, insulin, etc. I hope one day they'll figure out how it all works, or how it best works for individuals, but that research seems to be in its infancy.

I know that when I started IFing -- creating the bulk of my weekly calorie deficits through 2 days of fasting, my weightloss seemed the most consistent. It broke through a 6 week plateau I had and has continued since. My weekly deficits have been almost always the same, but with IFing, it's continued to come off and I haven't hit a long plateau. According to CICO, it really shouldn't matter, but I've seen so differently in my life and have heard of many people with similar experiences, so I figure there must be more to it than just CICO. Studies have shown that IFing increases insulin sensitivity and IGF-2 levels. It wouldn't surprise me if they found out that IFing or hitting a certain sweet spot for any given individual lines up the hormonal responses that result in optimal weight loss.