Can't get on board with eating MORE calories...

Biggipooh

Me neither. I eat 1300 cal, and burn about 300 in exercising. So I live on 1000 cal a day and that works great for me. I loose about 1/2 to 1 pound every week, which is totally healthy. When I am down to my ideal weight, I plan to eat each month 200 cal more, until I am back to the 1800 cal, my body needs to maintain. Everyone should figure out, what works best for (slow) weightloss.

jbpretty

I know how you feel. I was at a standstill so I upped my calories. MFP gave me just over 1500 but rarely do I eat quite that much. I like to zigzag my calories if I decide I'm going to have a high calorie day or two in the week, that seems to take any guilt I have away. Raising the calories does work. I'm very close to my goal and I'm consistently losing. I usually eat around 1400 calories a day I agree with others, try it. Keep us posted. Jamie

MaximalLife

Hi,

I've been overweight the past 15 or so years. I'm really dedicated to losing now but I'm having a hard time with the whole calories thing. I know losing is a simple equation of calories in/calories out. That's why I can't figure out this whole, "eat more to lose more" thing. Is it true? Has anyone seen it work? I have been keeping to 1200 cal/day and haven't lost much. MFP says I should be eating more like 1500. I'm nervous to try more calories for fear of gaining. I have been diagnosed with PCOS which means at this point gaining is extra easy and losing is extra hard.

I guess I'm just looking for some support on the higher calorie thing.

Thanks for listening to me ramble...

-Beth

Of course; it works for me.
If you restrict calories too much, you can forget losing weight and keeping it off.
Your metabolism will stifle.
To prevent this MFP recommends a slight deficit to reflect a 1 lb weekly weight loss.
And that includes eating back your exercise calories to retain that slight deficit.

Simply stated MFP has already figured out your total calories you need to eat per day to lose 1lb etc. a week. That's WITHOUT exercise. You'll notice that when you actually add exercise in, the calorie limit goes up. Why? Because it's telling you to eat your exercise calories. Large deficits aren't really good to do because while you will lose weight, what kind of weight will it be? In many cases you'll lose lean muscle tissue which LOWERS your metabolic rate even more. Then you have to eat even less to compensate for less of a calorie burn to continue to lose the same amount of weight each week.
Be efficient. Exercise hard and eat back the calories. The hard exercise will RAISE your metabolic rate and burn more fat at rest.

sullivann

shouldieatmyexercisecalories.com

You'll see more success keeping it off if you just FUEL your body.

Helloitsdan

The human body is only capable of losing so much fat in a day. Youll lose the same amount daily taking 20% from TDEE than you will at 1200 calories. The problem with 1200 calories though...its a metabolism killer. It slows it down! So its going to take a lot longer to lose the weight than if you took your TDEE and subtracted 20%.

To summarize:
My TDEE is 2500 calories daily.
My cutting number is 2000.
I lose 1lb a week at 2000 calories daily.
I lost .25lb weekly at 1200 before my metabolism came to a crawl.
So now I cut to 2000 and work out and lose a lot of weight.

Simple right?

tigersword

I know losing is a simple equation of calories in/calories out.

This is the kind of statement that doesn't carry a lot of weight around here. If that were the case we would all be skinny beatches right?

There is much more to sutstained weight loss than that.

Not really. It's just calories in vs calories out. Eat more than you burn, gain weight. Burn more than you eat, lose weight. It's not complicated. Now, fat loss is a bit more complicated than just weight loss, but even then, it's just burn more calories than you eat, just don't burn too much more than you eat, in order to maximize fat loss and minimize muscle loss.

NicoWoodruff

I think there's a balance to find personally.. it's important to not put yourself in starvation mode and all..

But there's also studies that show that some calorie restriction in lab mice adds to their health and longevity.

MFP is a great way to find where your personal tipping point is, the point where you maintain, the point where less cals than that you lose, the point where more cals than that you gain.

Restricting myself slightly from maintenance calories is the only way I've been able to lose. I'm quite active and eat very clean, and if I go over my personal amount of maintenance calories then I gain, for me it's simple as that.

When I get to my goal weight I do plan to push my max maintenance calories and see how much more muscle I can build that way.

KandieLantz

Worked for me too. See ticker below Msg or add me if you want extra support doing this the healthy way!

Nana_Booboo

Everyone is different but this makes sense to me and works for me.

A basic diet of 2000 cal plus exercise 2-5 times a week is the "normal" maintainable diet for most humans, correct? That's why most labels say "for a 2000 cal diet"

However, I still want to lose weight.

So for example, I take in 1800, exercise 600 bring my total calories in back down to 1200 thus having a deficit from a maintainable diet of 2000 cal of 800 cal a day that with in a weeks time is 5600 cal. That should give you a 1.5 lb loss.

I know not everyone can or will eat a 2000 cal diet but this is an example.

I log my food on MFP and my excercise and usually still have a net left.

Feel free to view my diary

It's working for me.

sandimack

Bump

Helloitsdan

The moral of the story is to have a good base of calories to work from then subtract with training.
Its better to have a fully functional metabolism to lose weight than to restrict cals to an extent that kills the metabolism.

linskeyr

bump

MSepp

Hi,

I've been overweight the past 15 or so years. I'm really dedicated to losing now but I'm having a hard time with the whole calories thing. I know losing is a simple equation of calories in/calories out. That's why I can't figure out this whole, "eat more to lose more" thing. Is it true? Has anyone seen it work? I have been keeping to 1200 cal/day and haven't lost much. MFP says I should be eating more like 1500. I'm nervous to try more calories for fear of gaining. I have been diagnosed with PCOS which means at this point gaining is extra easy and losing is extra hard.

I guess I'm just looking for some support on the higher calorie thing.

Thanks for listening to me ramble...

-Beth

I know it seems very counter-intuitive...however, if you don't consume adequate calories (are you doing physical exercise too?), your body will believe it is starving-and do everything it can to hold onto subcutaneous and visceral fat (fat under the skin and fat around your internal organs)-kind of like a bear hibernating in winter.

My sisters are athletes (marathoners and triathelets)...you should see their calorie requirements for the day-it's crazy.

Your body needs adequate fuel to burn fat. No worries-if it says 1500, shoot for 1500-it can't be worse than where you are now since you said you're not losing.

rayleansout

You have to eat to be lean - its what you eat that matters. split your meals into five or six times a day at a minimum. proteins veggies low glycemic good carbs, eat your calorie count and watch that scale move down Period. Yes it does work, Google thermodynamics of food, and read. I lost 120 pounds doing this so im pretty sure it works!!

MSepp

Word of caution-it is a bit easier for men to lose weight than women...unfortunate but very true. Curse your fast metabolisms

servilia

Others have covered the calories bit.. just thought I'd mention that since you're PCOS you might benefit from keeping tight control over non-fruit/veg carb intake - ie sugar, bread, pasta, etc. Look into it. Good luck.

Foxywake

I too could not get my head around this concept; I was stuck for ages without losing so upped my calorie intake to offset the calories burned through exercise and have definitely kick started my loss again. Keep positive and give it a try......

Blenders75

Calories in vs calories out is secondary. First, you need to get your hormones in the right order (lower insulin). People with PCOS are notorious for having some sort of insulin resistances (high insulin). Low carb diet will help greatly with that. See if you can lose on low carb first, then adjust your calories (up or down) accordingly to lose faster (if needed).

Nana_Booboo

Thank you!!!

psuLemon

I know losing is a simple equation of calories in/calories out.

This is the kind of statement that doesn't carry a lot of weight around here. If that were the case we would all be skinny beatches right?

There is much more to sutstained weight loss than that.

Not really. It's just calories in vs calories out. Eat more than you burn, gain weight. Burn more than you eat, lose weight. It's not complicated. Now, fat loss is a bit more complicated than just weight loss, but even then, it's just burn more calories than you eat, just don't burn too much more than you eat, in order to maximize fat loss and minimize muscle loss.

It truly is a bit more complicated than that. If what you were say was the case, then anyone eating a 1200 calorie diet would lost weight. It's really based on your bodies requirement for fuel and energy. For example, I was eating 1800 calories and did P90X for 90 days. I didn't lose a lb, inch or any body fat. I upped my calories to 2600 and did 90 days of CLX and lost 5 lbs, 3% body fat and 6". So sometimes it isn't as simple as burn more than you take in. Also, take into consideration this person has PCOS which comes with an intolerance to carbs. So even if you are under your TDEE in terms of calories, the carbs will turn into fat quickly and prevents weight loss.

tigersword

None of that changes the fact that it's based on calories in vs calories out. Also, PCOS does not cause carbs to instantly become fat, that's not how insulin resistance works. Insulin resistance also changes the entire metabolic equation by wreaking havoc on a person's metabolism. It's still calories in vs calories out. If hormones slow your metabolism due to a conservation response from long term calorie restriction, it doesn't mean that calories in vs calories out doesn't apply, it just means calories out are lower than expected. Then when you spike your intake, and the hormones reset your metabolism to a higher level, you then eat more while burning more.

Bottom line, it's always calories in vs calories out, even factoring in different circumstances.

psuLemon

None of that changes the fact that it's based on calories in vs calories out. Also, PCOS does not cause carbs to instantly become fat, that's not how insulin resistance works. Insulin resistance also changes the entire metabolic equation by wreaking havoc on a person's metabolism. It's still calories in vs calories out. If hormones slow your metabolism due to a conservation response from long term calorie restriction, it doesn't mean that calories in vs calories out doesn't apply, it just means calories out are lower than expected. Then when you spike your intake, and the hormones reset your metabolism to a higher level, you then eat more while burning more.

Bottom line, it's always calories in vs calories out, even factoring in different circumstances.

I guess what I should have stressed is too many calories out can cause conservation of those calories which prevents weight loss.

Helloitsdan

I like Tigersword. Great info! Always learning when you are around.

indrani1947

bump

drmerc

None of that changes the fact that it's based on calories in vs calories out. Also, PCOS does not cause carbs to instantly become fat, that's not how insulin resistance works. Insulin resistance also changes the entire metabolic equation by wreaking havoc on a person's metabolism. It's still calories in vs calories out. If hormones slow your metabolism due to a conservation response from long term calorie restriction, it doesn't mean that calories in vs calories out doesn't apply, it just means calories out are lower than expected. Then when you spike your intake, and the hormones reset your metabolism to a higher level, you then eat more while burning more.

Bottom line, it's always calories in vs calories out, even factoring in different circumstances.

THIS IS CORRECT

Conservation of Energy is not just a good idea... ITS THE LAW!

meee398

Bump

lisakyle_11

bump

yustick

I am currently trying to maintain a 2,000 calorie deficit per day. I reduced my calorie intake to 1,200 to 1,250 and increased exercise over a 4 week period to get to this point. I use a Fitbit to measure my calorie burn.

I have kept track of my calorie deficit and my weight loss so far has been consistent with the basic calories in/calories out formula. It has only been 6 weeks, so if this stops working, I will, taking the advice of many MFP members, increase my calorie intake.

I primarily eat quality foods to make sure I get the nutrients I need. I will eat more if I am really hungry, usually my stomach growls.

I can't understand how I would benefit from eating more calories when they would probably be snacks...Items with little or no nutritional value and ingredients that may hinder weight loss.

Jnt1979

I was also nervous! But since bumping up to 1600-1800 calories a day...I have lost 7 lbs in almost 3 weeks! It's def better for you!

good luck!

Birder150

From last Saturday to this past Sunday, my average daily intake was 2400 calories.
I lost 2.2 lbs without exercise.
Obviously, I'm still at a deficit or else I wouldn't have lost anything.

It's such a great feeling knowing that I can lose weight without severely restricting my calories.
I feel more energetic, sleep more soundly and longer and I look healthier too.
There's no going back for me.

You don't have to ramp it up all at once.
You can take baby steps and see how your body reacts.