Tried to eat more it does not work

psuLemon

Increasing calories only works for some people, and only under certain circumstances. Conventional wisdom says if you want to lose weight, eat LESS.. and that's still true the vast majority of the time. When someone isn't losing weight, it's most often because they're either underestimating the calories they're eating or overestimating their calorie burn.

That said, there are rare occasions when someone is doing intense exercise, especially strength training, and truly isn't taking in enough fuel. When that's the case, increasing calorie intake can lead to more efficiency overall when it comes to muscle repair and recovery as well as fat loss.

The whole "eat more to lose weight!" party line is thrown around entirely too much on these boards. Most of the time, it simply isn't the case.

when they say "eat more" they just mean enough to support one's body and be able to sustain it long term. this is not 3000 calories but more like 1600-2200. this is the normal "daily intake" for most people that is on most nutrition labels. sure, if you have a seriously damaged metabolism or a really low metabolism by nature (thyroid problem or something else like that), it probably wouldn't work for you. but it does actually work when given a chance. some people give up pretty quickly because they might see a gain as their body adjusts. these gains go away and the body then thinks it is being fed again. there are people who eat very litte and are still not in good shape, mostly because they have damaged their metabolism over years and their body has tried to compensate by getting used to that level. or, if they have a condition that naturally makes their metabolism low. but for most people, this is not the case. most people can eat a little more and it helps them in the end to keep their metabolism higher.

Right, I understand that and I don't disagree with you at all. But when someone says, I've been eating X number of calories for X amount of time and haven't lost any weight, it's almost always underestimating intake or overestimating burn. If someone is truly eating 1200 calories for 3 months, they WILL lose weight.. if they do not, they are most likely eating more than they think they are, or burning less calories than they think they are.

I completely agree with you that most people should be eating in that slightly higher calorie range, like the 1600-2200 that you mention, for slow, steady fat loss as well as a diet that's easy to maintain long-term. I'm just saying that most of the time when people aren't losing weight, it's certainly not because they're not eating enough.

And I can't tell you how many cases I have dealt with regarding people eating 1200 calories and exercises and 98% of them just needed to eat more. That is dealing with well over 100+ people. I can understand if you are completely sedentary and do not exercise that 1200 calories may apply but for those who exercise, then 1600+ is better. This lady is working out 3 days a day. And the average person ( i have seen) with JM programs burn around 200-300 calories a session. So if that is the case she is burning at least 600-900 calories for all three. On top of that she is lightly active as she deals with 3 children. So here is my updated numbers from adding this all up.


1400 * 1.375 + 600 = 3029

So even if her BMR is only 1250, she is burning 2800-3200 calories in a day. This means, she should be around 2200-2600 calories a day to cut fat and lose weight without losing muscle. So eating 1400 calories still isn't enough.

I will say, i kind of agree with what you are saying.

cakeums

I think alot of people do not take in account their percent of body fat. If my body fat % is 20-30% and I do not eat at my BMR, My body will break down that fat to use it as energy to survive. This happens everyday in nature. Animals and people put on fat to survive during times when food is scarce.

Now I do agree when you do not have much body fat lets say < 10% you better be eating the calories you need.

Bull, mine is 35% right now and it has come down 2% in the past 3 weeks from fueling properly and working out. If I didn't fuel properly, I would end up decreasing my lean body mass, which is the last thing I want!

fitby38

OMG! Some of you were really mean in these post. I teach 13 year old and they had more manners. That is so not cool. That being said, are any of you on here posting (and demand you are right) a doctor??? Just curious... I do see a doctor to follow my weightloss and she told me NOT NOT NOT to eat the workout calories. So I am wondering why she would tell me that. I even printed out the last round of arguements on here and took them to her and asked her what I should do. She again told me not to eat over the calories and to eat every 2 hours. She said that it will burn the fat and my metabolism will be fine as long as I eat something (an apple, peanut butter toast etc) every two hours. So unless one of you are a doctor (not a nurse but a doctor) then maybe we should not pass out advice until we have spoken to our own doctor. Then maybe we could all be a little nicer. WE are here for support and understanding not to be harassed or hurt.

[/quote]

ahhh ... OMG this ... this is my fitness pal ... not my fitness doctor!!! she asked the question knowing full well she wasnt getting EXPERT advice ... no one is being mean!!! quit being so dang sensitive!

tabinmaine

Actually the "skipped meals" being bad is a myth. Many on here fast for 16hrs and then power feed for 8hrs. Timing of meals 1,3,or 8 of them a day does NOT matter...... that has been proven to be wrong..... and actually it's calories consumed in a week that matters.....not daily...

ahhh ... if you say so
[/quote
timing of meals doesn't matter. all of my loss has come from working graveyard hours. I eat at strange hours all the time. I am rarely consistent and I have been losing weight just fine.

thats fine ... my response never said anything about timing of meals, nor was that the point of my response ... so my "ahh if you say so" what to the bicep pic who replied

Oh shoot, sorry about that, my quote button is messing up too, I meant to quote someone who said timing of meals was important

kateroot

Increasing calories only works for some people, and only under certain circumstances. Conventional wisdom says if you want to lose weight, eat LESS.. and that's still true the vast majority of the time. When someone isn't losing weight, it's most often because they're either underestimating the calories they're eating or overestimating their calorie burn.

That said, there are rare occasions when someone is doing intense exercise, especially strength training, and truly isn't taking in enough fuel. When that's the case, increasing calorie intake can lead to more efficiency overall when it comes to muscle repair and recovery as well as fat loss.

The whole "eat more to lose weight!" party line is thrown around entirely too much on these boards. Most of the time, it simply isn't the case.

when they say "eat more" they just mean enough to support one's body and be able to sustain it long term. this is not 3000 calories but more like 1600-2200. this is the normal "daily intake" for most people that is on most nutrition labels. sure, if you have a seriously damaged metabolism or a really low metabolism by nature (thyroid problem or something else like that), it probably wouldn't work for you. but it does actually work when given a chance. some people give up pretty quickly because they might see a gain as their body adjusts. these gains go away and the body then thinks it is being fed again. there are people who eat very litte and are still not in good shape, mostly because they have damaged their metabolism over years and their body has tried to compensate by getting used to that level. or, if they have a condition that naturally makes their metabolism low. but for most people, this is not the case. most people can eat a little more and it helps them in the end to keep their metabolism higher.

Right, I understand that and I don't disagree with you at all. But when someone says, I've been eating X number of calories for X amount of time and haven't lost any weight, it's almost always underestimating intake or overestimating burn. If someone is truly eating 1200 calories for 3 months, they WILL lose weight.. if they do not, they are most likely eating more than they think they are, or burning less calories than they think they are.

I completely agree with you that most people should be eating in that slightly higher calorie range, like the 1600-2200 that you mention, for slow, steady fat loss as well as a diet that's easy to maintain long-term. I'm just saying that most of the time when people aren't losing weight, it's certainly not because they're not eating enough.

And I can't tell you how many cases I have dealt with regarding people eating 1200 calories and exercises and 98% of them just needed to eat more. That is dealing with well over 100+ people. I can understand if you are completely sedentary and do not exercise that 1200 calories may apply but for those who exercise, then 1600+ is better. This lady is working out 3 days a day. And the average person ( i have seen) with JM programs burn around 200-300 calories a session. So if that is the case she is burning at least 600-900 calories for all three. On top of that she is lightly active as she deals with 3 children. So here is my updated numbers from adding this all up.


1400 * 1.375 + 600 = 3029

So even if her BMR is only 1250, she is burning 2800-3200 calories in a day. This means, she should be around 2200-2600 calories a day to cut fat and lose weight without losing muscle. So eating 1400 calories still isn't enough.

I will say, i kind of agree with what you are saying.

Right. I'm certainly not advocating a 1200 calorie diet for anyone. For the vast majority of people, 1200 calories isn't nearly enough. I completely agree that calorie intake should be at a level that's healthy, sustainable, and supports fat loss without excessive loss of lean tissue or negative impact on metabolic functions.

I'm just saying that you will absolutely lose weight if you are truly eating 1200 calories a day (even though it's not very healthy and a lot of your weight loss will come from lean tissue on such a large deficit)... and if you are not losing weight on said calorie intake, you're measuring your food wrong, lying to yourself about what you're eating, or overestimating your calorie burn. Plain and simple. It's just physics.

fitby38

[/quote]

Oh shoot, sorry about that, my quote button is messing up too, I meant to quote someone who said timing of meals was important
[/quote]


gotcha

ColleenRoss50

The whole "eat more to lose weight!" party line is thrown around entirely too much on these boards. Most of the time, it simply isn't the case.

Totally agree!

lisa28115

I find your responses funny. My doctor is both a nutritionist and a MD. She has a bachelor in nutrition and worked as a fitness trainer and went back to med school after her first daughter was born to become a doctor and own her own weightloss clinic. SO before you go and posting about things you are not clued in on, ask first. Just a suggestion.

I am also educated in nurtition and science. I do think that it depends on where you get your information from whether or not it is correct. I hold a bachelor in animal science and hold a teaching certificate in science. I understand that I must research my topics and doctors. I HAVE researched them and she is very well credited in her area of specialty. My point was on how you state your position (most were rude and mean) and that if you are NOT in a specialty to not pass out your opinion because some people will bite and it may actually hurt their health.

ALSO if you are passing out these advices but not considering all the health of that person, like diabetes, high blood pressure, thyroid disease, cardio disease, immune disorder and liver function, then you should really not tell people what they should be doing. IT may effect their health. I just stated what my doctor told ME to do. The human body has other factors that play into how it works. Hormones are a big piece of that puzzle and everyones body makes these hormones on different levels and therefore will always have different results.

I am not argueing or debating with anyone. My heart just hurt for this woman who asked for simple help when people were just flat out rude or mean. So I hope she figures out what works and is successful in her journey. May the weight fall off and you find your true happiness.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19943985

How bout the NIH? Do that count as a reputal source for meal timing?



OP, lets try to put some stuff in perspective and try to be as unbias as possible. It's obvious things aren't working for you. I say this for a few simple reasons. First, if it was working, then why would you have increased your calories in the first place? And I believe Einstein said the definition of insanity is " doing the same experiement over and over and expecting different results". So going back to your old ways will cause an issue right?


Now, there are a few main factors you have to consider when looking for weight loss, or more importanly, fat loss. The two main variables are a BMR and your TDEE. Your BMR is aka as your metabolic rate. This is the amount of calories your body requires to run the systems (organs, brain, etc...) and your TDEE is the amount of calories your body burns throughout a day, including exercise. Now for all those who are "older" and say I have a slower metabolic rate, there is a reason for it. As people age, your body has a harder time holding onto lean muscle mass. Is that a problem? Not soo much. This just means your starting point to measure TDEE is lower than your 20 year old twin. I know we all want to say we are special and different but we aren't (see first link for more information).

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/you-are-not-different.html

Ok, so now we established that you have two major variables, we have to evaluate your caloric needs (aka - calories to burn fat, maintain lean muscle mass and run all the systems). To understand, I will do some estimates based on real life people I have worked with. One of the people I am working with used to eat 1400 calories and did a ton of cardio. She plateau'd around 145 lbs for months. She is 36 years old and came to me after seeing some post of mine (as you can tell with my followers). And here is her response

"I just wanted to thank you for your help. You helped me a few months back and I just wanted to give you an update on my progress. 12 weeks ago I started at 154 and 28% bf. I got my bf remeasured last Friday and it was 24%. But I only lost 1 pound. It is crazy to me but I have learned to ignore the scale. You were right that keeping consistent and not giving up my body would finally adjust.

Thanks again for your help!

Stephanie"


BTW, her routine is ONLY weight lifting. Zero cardio. And she was eating 2100 calories on workout days and 1800 calories on non workout days.


It's a simple known fact, that your body needs calories to burn. Calories = fuel. So what happens when you don't eat enough calories? You put a lot of stress on your body and your body fights back (see second link)

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/why-big-caloric-deficits-and-lots-of-activity-can-hurt-fat-loss.html

So for all those number geeks, lets look at an example. Lets say your BMR is 1400 calories and you do 30DS (where you burn 300 calories a day) and you live a sedentary lifestyle. That means your caloric needs are:


1400 * 1.2 + 300 = 1980

From there we can form a deficit

i use a 20% deficit as the bigger you are, the large the deficit you can sustain and this will help preserve muscle mass

=1980 * .8 = 1584

This means, your nutritional needs are 1600 calories a day. Now eating below this doesn't mean you will lose faster. The math says it will, but the body can contradict the math as proven by those on VLCD that are already in a healthier weight limit and those who hit weight loss plateaus.


Lets start here and discuss. I could rant for longer but I will reframe.

Lemon

But on 1600 calories a day with 300 30ds every day the net will only be 1300 cals. This is below the bmr suggested of 1400. This is not good advice.

she says she does 30ds 3x a day...7 days a week!!!!:huh:

ironanimal

The whole "eat more to lose weight!" party line is thrown around entirely too much on these boards. Most of the time, it simply isn't the case.

Totally agree!

Only because people don't take the time to properly research their own needs. Science applies to everyone, and sure, that means some people DO need as little as 1200 a day, but for most people that's simply not the case.

lisa28115

My BMR is 2300 a day with a 500 calorie deficit to lose a pound a week, I exercise 6 days a week with 1 day off... I am a Firm believer in fueling my body to fuel my workouts, that being said on workout days I eat 3200 calories a day (I burn no less than 1000 calories a workout per my Polar FT60) which is 900 calories over my daily BMR (I eat back 85-90% of my exercise calories) and in the process have lost 305 lbs. and went from 560 lbs. to 255 lbs. as of Wednesday... You have to fuel your body if your going to push it that hard... Good luck to you......

THANK YOU...:flowerforyou:

lisa28115

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/food-guide-aliment/basics-base/1_1_1-eng.php

Age Sedentary1
Level Low Active2
Level Active3
Level
2-3 y 1100 1250 1400
4-5 y 1200 1350 1500
6-7 y 1300 1500 1700
8-9 y 1400 1600 1850
10-11 y 1500 1800 2050
12-13 y 1700 2000 2250
14-16 y 1750 2100 2350
17-18 y 1750 2100 2400
19-30 y 1900 2100 2350
31-50 y 1800 2000 2250
51-70 y 1650 1850 2100
71 y + 1550 1750 2000

lisa28115

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/food-guide-aliment/basics-base/1_1_1-eng.php

Age Sedentary1
Level Low Active2
Level Active3
Level
2-3 y 1100 1250 1400
4-5 y 1200 1350 1500
6-7 y 1300 1500 1700
8-9 y 1400 1600 1850
10-11 y 1500 1800 2050
12-13 y 1700 2000 2250
14-16 y 1750 2100 2350
17-18 y 1750 2100 2400
19-30 y 1900 2100 2350
31-50 y 1800 2000 2250
51-70 y 1650 1850 2100
71 y + 1550 1750 2000

ACCORDING TO THIS IF YOU ARE IN THE 30TO 50 YEAR RANGE YOU ACTIVE TO VERY ACTIVE YOU SHOULD BE EATING 2000 TO 2250 CALORIES..ISN'T THIS YOU???

lisa28115

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/food-guide-aliment/basics-base/1_1_1-eng.php

Age Sedentary1
Level Low Active2
Level Active3
Level
2-3 y 1100 1250 1400
4-5 y 1200 1350 1500
6-7 y 1300 1500 1700
8-9 y 1400 1600 1850
10-11 y 1500 1800 2050
12-13 y 1700 2000 2250
14-16 y 1750 2100 2350
17-18 y 1750 2100 2400
19-30 y 1900 2100 2350
31-50 y 1800 2000 2250
51-70 y 1650 1850 2100
71 y + 1550 1750 2000

You just contradicted your own belief by posting that. If you're in your 40s, that says you should be eating 2250 calories a day if your active to maintain your weight...and by active they are saying 2-3 hrs a WEEK but you're doing that each day.

Take 500-600 off each day for a 1 lb/wk loss and that puts you in the 1650-1750 range for calorie intake...and you're not even close to that.

THANK YOU!!!:flowerforyou:

lisa28115

BTW, why would you even have this thread if Jenni Craig worked? And if you obviously know more than all of us, why even ask for advice.

THANK YOU...:flowerforyou:

lisa28115

I am not sure what you are on, but l am not killing myself.

I have been to Jenny Craig and they had me on 1200 calories a day with 1 hour of exercise..

Doing the same as if l was still with Jenny Craig

I am fit and very health by all blood test done and a full check up with my doctor..

Did Jennie Craig have you eating half your calories as junk food, or was it nutritious food?
did they have you exercising 2-3 hours a day?

Sorry, but you're not doing the same as if you were still with JC.

THANK YOU...I AGREE:flowerforyou:

THE DOING 30DS 3XTIMES A DAY IS WAHT TRIPS ME OUT
I DON'T BELIEVE SHE WORKS 2 JOBS 9UNLESS THEY ARE PART-TIME) AND CARE FOR 3 KIDS BY HERSELF AND WORKSOUT THIS MUCH

SOMETHING DOES NOT ADD UP HERE...I CALL BS:devil:

CyberEd312

My BMR is 2300 a day with a 500 calorie deficit to lose a pound a week, I exercise 6 days a week with 1 day off... I am a Firm believer in fueling my body to fuel my workouts, that being said on workout days I eat 3200 calories a day (I burn no less than 1000 calories a workout per my Polar FT60) which is 900 calories over my daily BMR (I eat back 85-90% of my exercise calories) and in the process have lost 305 lbs. and went from 560 lbs. to 255 lbs. as of Wednesday... You have to fuel your body if your going to push it that hard... Good luck to you......

THANK YOU...:flowerforyou:

Your Welcome!! LOL......

Seriously though it amazes me because if you base this off the science it is pretty cut and dry... At 560 lbs. 34 months ago my dietician had figured up I was consuming 7-8000 calories a day (I was packing on weight over a 8 year period at an alarming rate) but down 305 lbs. and consuming 3200 calories a day now, I literally eat 10 times the amount of food now at 3200 calories as compared to all the crap I ate at 8000 calories a day. And as far as someone posting that they would take the advice of a doctor over an MFP member is crazy. You know what my doctor wanted me to do when I crawled into his office at 560 lbs. do not stop at go and head straight to gastric bypass surgery. (Not knocking those that have had it, but this was NEVER an option for me because if I could not fix what was broke in my head then no surgery would ever cure me) but my family doctor is just that, he can treat me for cellulitis (skin rashes from loose skin) or Flu and Colds but he doesn't know the first thing about weight loss and openly admitted that to me and directed me to a dietician once I told him I was doing this the natural way or die trying... I don't have to be here I joined here after I had already lost well over 270 lbs. I came here to Pay it Forward, drop some knowledge on those that want the advice of someone who has spent the last 34 months living it, and by looking at some of the tickers of 80,100+ lbs. lost I would trust those people for advice over my family doctor any day... Does one set of rules fit everyone, heck no but there are enough people on here that have lost a ton of weight and the over all science seems to be the same amongst all of us in our approach so something must be working.... but if that isn't good enough and you still feel like doing it your own way than that is fine too... I am here to help those that what the help........ Good Luck to you.......

silverbullet07

I think alot of people do not take in account their percent of body fat. If my body fat % is 20-30% and I do not eat at my BMR, My body will break down that fat to use it as energy to survive. This happens everyday in nature. Animals and people put on fat to survive during times when food is scarce.

Now I do agree when you do not have much body fat lets say < 10% you better be eating the calories you need.

Bull, mine is 35% right now and it has come down 2% in the past 3 weeks from fueling properly and working out. If I didn't fuel properly, I would end up decreasing my lean body mass, which is the last thing I want!

You can still add muscle eating less calories then your BMR if you have enough fat. Eat proper protein after your workouts will repair muscle.. I'm doing it now. Have added muscle and loss 40 lbs in the last 3 months and I'm netting real low calories and eatting way below my BMR.. So not bull for me...

psuLemon

I think alot of people do not take in account their percent of body fat. If my body fat % is 20-30% and I do not eat at my BMR, My body will break down that fat to use it as energy to survive. This happens everyday in nature. Animals and people put on fat to survive during times when food is scarce.

Now I do agree when you do not have much body fat lets say < 10% you better be eating the calories you need.

Bull, mine is 35% right now and it has come down 2% in the past 3 weeks from fueling properly and working out. If I didn't fuel properly, I would end up decreasing my lean body mass, which is the last thing I want!

You can still add muscle eating less calories then your BMR if you have enough fat. Eat proper protein after your workouts will repair muscle.. I'm doing it now. Have added muscle and loss 40 lbs in the last 3 months and I'm netting real low calories and eatting way below my BMR.. So not bull for me...

Unless you are obese, it's almost impossible to legitimately add lean muscle mass while on a calorie deficit. How are you tracking your muscle growth? Just curious?

Saruman_w

Starvation never works. If you want to lose weight it must be done the right way. If you were losing weight starving, I can bet you it wasn't much fat that you were losing. It's also never wise to become attached to the number on the scale. Take measurements. And don't fall for stupid fads.

silverbullet07

Yes there is a lot of controversy about that topic but as long as you fat % is hig enough it can be done. I use a body composition analyzer and with my workouts I know I'm getting stronger.