For the 500,000 time EATING MORE WORKS

31prvrbs

Bumping to follow.....

But also want to say to those that feel that "eating more" is ramming a one size fit all approach down people's throats: How can eating according to your own personal nutrients REQUIRED by YOUR body, be one size fit all? But yet eating 1200 cals isn't? I don't get the logic. To me, telling people to eat 1200 cals is one-size-fit-all. It's a generic # that just gets tossed around aimlessly, because in medical/nutrition/fitness fields, we are told to never allow a client to drop BELOW 1200. Somewhere along the line it became a magic weight loss #....???? Where as each person, when BMR or TDEE calculations according to their personal stats receive an actual PERSONALIZED number, such as 1567, or 1798, or 3245, etc. Yet, no two are the same.

Which one sounds more "one size" approach?

And to those that feel completely satisfied on 1200 cals. Of course you do. Our bodies are an amazingly adaptive machine. It adapts to whatever you put it through. So even if you *should* be eating 2200 cals/day, but you choose to *actually* eat 1300, eventually your body will adapt to the 1300. So essentially, what you have done is made your body adapt to less than it needed.

Or rather, 1200 is the new 2000.

watersgirl

are you guys eating over your BMR on days that you don't work out?

If I'm reading right, you never ever want to go below your BMR - that is the number that your body NEEDS to function correctly.

freckledrats

WebMD has the most useful things to say about metabolism: http://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/guide/make-most-your-metabolism

While I can't speak to eating more calories to lose weight (I have *always* gained eating 1500+, so maybe it just doesn't apply to me), I can speak to eating more often helping the process. I like to spread my 1200 out over 3x 300 calorie meals and inserting small snacks between those meals to keep my metabolism going.

Also, you feel less hungry during the day.

ladyraven68

are you guys eating over your BMR on days that you don't work out?

I never net below my BMR.

chachita7

Congrats on your loss...

Fourmenandalady28

Well done!! That is AWESOME!

Keefypoos

are you guys eating over your BMR on days that you don't work out?

I never net below my BMR.

I on the other hand never net above my BMR
what works for one may not work for another

wickedcricket

ok but doesn't work for me. I eat more, I gain. period. even if extra cals are mostly FRUIT. still gain

tiggergrrl23

I agree with you! Eating back my exercise calories and eating more has really helped me. Thanks for posting!

ladyraven68

ok but doesn't work for me. I eat more, I gain. period. even if extra cals are mostly FRUIT. still gain

Eat more than what?

If you eat more than TDEE then yes you will gain weight, but nobody has ever suggested that.

nashai01

how do I calculate the amount of calories I need having TDEE and BMR?

www.fat2fitradio.com/tools - use the Military Bodyfat and then the BMR/Cal Calculators

Congratulations OP

I just went to this site and it told me t hat I need to eat more than 1000 extra calories. Its soooo hard for me to get in 1500 every day. :frown:

nashai01

Also what is TDEE?

ladyraven68

Also what is TDEE?

Total Daily Energy Expenditure, or maintenance calories.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/512956-tdee-what-is-it-and-why-you-should-not-eat-below-your-bmr?

huntindawg1962

Bumping to follow.....

But also want to say to those that feel that "eating more" is ramming a one size fit all approach down people's throats: How can eating according to your own personal nutrients REQUIRED by YOUR body, be one size fit all? But yet eating 1200 cals isn't? I don't get the logic. To me, telling people to eat 1200 cals is one-size-fit-all. It's a generic # that just gets tossed around aimlessly, because in medical/nutrition/fitness fields, we are told to never allow a client to drop BELOW 1200. Somewhere along the line it became a magic weight loss #....???? Where as each person, when BMR or TDEE calculations according to their personal stats receive an actual PERSONALIZED number, such as 1567, or 1798, or 3245, etc. Yet, no two are the same.

Which one sounds more "one size" approach?

And to those that feel completely satisfied on 1200 cals. Of course you do. Our bodies are an amazingly adaptive machine. It adapts to whatever you put it through. So even if you *should* be eating 2200 cals/day, but you choose to *actually* eat 1300, eventually your body will adapt to the 1300. So essentially, what you have done is made your body adapt to less than it needed.

Or rather, 1200 is the new 2000.

Agree with your first paragraph. The problem with all this is that there are too many generalizations that don't necessarily apply to all. Even the using of three or four simple measurements and then getting a body fat % is, in and of itself, flawed approach as is trusting someone using a $10 pair of calipers that had 30 seconds of training at a gym. Too, none of this really tells any individual their true BRM numbers nor does a "study" looking at 24 subjects tell us anything concrete, which, in any scientific world, is not even considered a statistically significant sample size.

What works for one may not work for another. The general weight charts also don't apply across the boards. You are likely to lose lean body on a weight loss plan - any plan - regardless how fast or slow you go, work out with weights or not, if you are significantly high to start as your body has built a structure to handle that weight that it just does not need to deal with at a lower weight number. What we really want is to re-distribute that muscle in vanity patterns rather than the "required to deal with it" patterns (hey, me too). Example - using the charts (on the top most end for maximum relief) my ideal weight as stated should be 174 but today I am well above that even on a lean body mass number without any fat%.

ladyraven68

are you guys eating over your BMR on days that you don't work out?

I never net below my BMR.

I on the other hand never net above my BMR
what works for one may not work for another

you may be confusing BMR for TDEE.

Eating over BMR as long as you are still under TDEE will work for everyone - if it doesn't they are miscalculating somewhere.

huntindawg1962

you may be confusing BMR for TDEE.

I don't think he was. And like that poster, I also don't net above my BMR by practice nor following what MFP has allotted daily for me either. I did follow the "eat your BMR" approach for a while, still lost lean mass. The only thing I saw was a month of slower weight loss (even less than the .7% per week as cited in the sampling study).

Nikkilou1202

Hi I am really new to this. I haven't really changed my diet all that much and I work out everyday burning around 600 calories a day. At the end of the day I still have about 400 calories to consume but not sure how to do this as I am already over on my protein and don't want to go over on the fat and carb counter. I eat regularly throughout the day and believe me when i say I eat decent size meals. I am 79kg and want to get down to 68kg. What do you suggest?

ladyraven68

you may be confusing BMR for TDEE.

I don't think he was. And like that poster, I also don't net above my BMR by practice nor following what MFP has allotted daily for me either. I did follow the "eat your BMR" approach for a while, still lost lean mass. The only thing I saw was a month of slower weight loss (even less than the .7% per week as cited in the sampling study).

That is really interesting - I have not read the 0.7% statistic anywhere.

I do track my loss as a % of my body weight each week, and my average loss for the past 6 weeks, is actually 0.71%,, and I haven't lost any lean mass.

I must be a model participant

FrostyFour

I just want to say that every pound of weight I've lost since I started has been because I adopted the "eat more" diet. 14 pounds in 2 weeks, can't argue with that!

Oh and I'm not even exercising!

dedication6

BUMP

Babrao

Yep!!! I lost 50 pounds pretty easy cutting back to 1200-1300 calories and crazy cardio 3-4 times a week, but after that I was very slow to lose even a pound or two and then nothing for 2 whole months, I switched to mostly strength training instead of cardio and upped my calories to like 1600 and now the scale is FINALLY moving again.

I used to be so worn out by Thursdays at kickboxing that I could barely punch, I definitely wasn't eating enough with what I was burning and after losing the initial excess fat I was carrying my body just held on to everything, I still have about 40 pounds or so to lose, but 40 pounds of FAT not muscle too

JeceCanDoIt

BUMP

I just posted a topic asking if I should eatmy calories back burned during exercise. Now I know I am def supposed to be doing that Excitinggggggggggg

Amanwall3

bump

SOOZIE429

Bumpity

andreanicole686

I know there are a million and one topics out there about this
But I feel there needs to be one more confirmation for those ppl struggling at 1200 calories and not losing
Here is my story of how increasing calories worked

I've been on this site 100 days and lost maybe 4 pounds in the first 40 days while struggling to only eat 1200 calories
after that nothing.....for 60 days I just stayed the same
1 week ago I took advice from another thread and found out my BMR and TDEE measurements and increased my calories to 1500
and this week lost 1.5 pounds....

So for those of you who "Can't stay under 1200 cals" it's really not necessary
Just thought I would share my success

I did the exact same thing! Went from 1200 to 1520 and have lost 9 pounds-6 after I switched and it was a lot faster!

andreanicole686

BUMP

I just posted a topic asking if I should eatmy calories back burned during exercise. Now I know I am def supposed to be doing that Excitinggggggggggg

Yeap, after exercise you should have a net of 1200 calories at the lowest.

yoovie

this is so effing frustrating

its like everyone on this stupid planet thinks that overeating is the only problem people have.

Some of us are killing ourselves trying to reach 1200 and seeing everyone constantly vomiting EAT MORE in our faces just almost is enough to make us quit.

It would be nice if, instead of constantly seeing this EAT MORE CALORIES OR YOU'LL NEVER LOSE ANY FREAKING WEIGHT DUMBASS! craziness, it was delivered with some better instructions on how to increase your appetite, how to forcefeed yourself without crying because you are trying not to vomit, or how to make your stomach bigger.

not everyone has problems with eating too much or exercising too little. Not eating enough because of a crappetite, for 15 years will make you just as fat as overeating.

aqua_zumba_fan

According to my BMR and TDEE I do need 1200 calories (I'm short and not much more to lose) but I work out my calories weekly so it varies and I eat back all exercise calories including walking so I'm never under 1200 and it's always net.

ironanimal

this is so effing frustrating

its like everyone on this stupid planet thinks that overeating is the only problem people have.

Some of us are killing ourselves trying to reach 1200 and seeing everyone constantly vomiting EAT MORE in our faces just almost is enough to make us quit.

It would be nice if, instead of constantly seeing this EAT MORE CALORIES OR YOU'LL NEVER LOSE ANY FREAKING WEIGHT DUMBASS! craziness, it was delivered with some better instructions on how to increase your appetite, how to forcefeed yourself without crying because you are trying not to vomit, or how to make your stomach bigger.

not everyone has problems with eating too much or exercising too little. Not eating enough because of a crappetite, for 15 years will make you just as fat as overeating.

Eat more calorie dense foods, ditch the low-fat/fat free/'diet' crap? It's not that difficult really.

huntindawg1962

I just want to say that every pound of weight I've lost since I started has been because I adopted the "eat more" diet. 14 pounds in 2 weeks, can't argue with that!

Oh and I'm not even exercising!

That is the beauty of weight loss, you never have to do any exercise. But, don't believe for one minute that all the weight you are losing, whether through eating more or eating less, is just fat melting off at that pace. It IS also water AND lean body mass. And if you are not resistance training, it is more likely a good % of muscle and water.