There is a big difference between eating more to lose weight

Rhea30

There is a big difference between eating more to lose weight and eating how you used to eat.

I read a lot of posts from people from both sides of the fence: the ones who tell you to eat more to lose weight, and the others who say they simply "can't" eat all their exercise calories back, or reach their calorie goal for the day because they're so "stuffed", or lose weight if they aren't eating at MFP's 1200 calorie guideline.

What I don't understand is, most people came to MFP because they were eating well above their recommended caloric intake, so how all of a sudden are they now not able to eat exercise calories back and not eat up to 1200, 1300, 1400 calories?

I bet you that for most people, if you were to take an *honest* look at what you were *really* eating before you came to MFP, and just logged your calories as you normally ate when you gained weight, you were probably eating well above 2500, 3000, or even 4000 calories a day. For most average size people, that could account to a 10, 20, or even 30 pound weight gain. (This is the average person, this is not counting someone who may have other health issues going on...)

So this is why traditional "dieting" fails - people go from eating a ridiculous amount of calories to all of a sudden restricting themselves to 1200 calories a day. It's such an extreme measure that it's hard for most people to keep it up as a lifestyle.

Now look at the sensible approach. If you've got a good amount of weight to lose, losing a half to one pound a week is a very reasonable and healthy goal to strive for. To do so, all you need to do is somehow cut 500 calories a day from what you normally take in.

That's not hard to do - cutting down on a portion size, walking for 30 minutes, skipping a soda or two - just small things - can add up. If you were eating 4000 calories a day eating 1000 calories worth of donuts and/or pizza, you could cut that by eating 1 instead of 2 slices or 2 pieces of donuts. Let's say you're a 5'6" sedentary woman, and your daily calorie needs at goal weight are about 1800 calories a day to maintain. If you're about 20 pounds overweight, you could simply take off 250 calories from food, and 250 from walking, cleaning, doing something for 30 minutes to an hour. It's not extreme and it won't make you feel like you're "dieting".

The whole point when people say "eat more to lose weight" is that you don't have to go to such extreme measures (going from 3000+ calories a day to 1200! That's just crazy!)

Just get used to eating a little less than your maintenance calories. "Eat more to lose weight" does not mean stuffing your face with seconds, thirds, box loads, and packages of all the stuff you used to eat. You're still reducing calories if you're eating like you were at your goal weight.

It boggles my mind, especially when I read about folks who have 30+ pounds to lose and all of a sudden say they are "fine" and "not starving" eating only 1200 calories a day now.

That isn't far fetch for someone all of sudden not able to eat or feeling stuff on 1200 calories, even if they were overeating before. Your appetite changes with your eating, before when overeating their appetite was adjusted to it so it was harder to get stuff or full on the high calories, as a person diets their appetite will change to the calorie intake so a person then will get full easier.

mgero212

AMEN!

tangiesharp

Thanks for this post.

Chipmaniac

Grind...

I thought we need some variety after all the bumping.

auntiebabs

It boggles my mind, especially when I read about folks who have 30+ pounds to lose and all of a sudden say they are "fine" and "not starving" eating only 1200 calories a day now.

The difference between food that is HIGH in CALORIES and LOW NUTRITION vs. NUTRIENT DENSE FOOD.

The purpose of hunger is to encourage you to fuel you body, pouring in empty calories is not giving your body a high quality fuel and it won't relieve your hunger...

Choose mostly nutrient dense foods and you feel much more satisfied on fewer calories.

:drinker:

But really do agree with you on small changes being the best way to stick with new eating habits.
After all if you revamp your whole diet, in times of stress (and who doesn't have stress?) you'll revert back to what is familiar and feel like a failure, but a series of small changes simple become new habits, replacing the old.

auntiebabs

wow this strand got really long between when I started my reply and when I hit post now I have to go back and read it.

sathor

it makes sense, people that eat less for a short time will have their stomach itself shrink, and they just can't fit as much in, and if they don't push it, it will stay that way. I used to easily down an entire pizza, but after I stopped eating as much during the off season, I found that I was only eating half as much as I did before many times. Some competative eaters drink lots of water at one time to stretch their stomachs out before a competition. it probably works like that.

kbuelo

Thank you so much for this clear explanation!

sofitheteacup

I am one of those who says that they cannot eat back all the exercise calories and sometimes finds it hard to eat 1200 cals a day. For me this is because it is what I am eating now. I accept that in the past I was probably eating a lot more in terms of calories but the food was crap e.g. large bag of tyrrells or kettle chips as a snack, Mc Donalds meals which meant I was full at the time but 2 hours later I wanted more. Now I think hard about my calories and what I put in my mouth. I make the most of what I eat and find that I am fuller for longer, which means I am not hungry between meals as I have been in the past and this is why I can't always get my calories in. Don't know if this is the same for everyone, but this is my experience.

This is how it is for me.

I don't like the implication that I'm either lying, in denial, or an idiot if I don't find it easy to eat as many calories as I used to.

My consumption wasn't drastically high like 4,000/day originally, but it was probably around the 2,500 mark. But that was with a lot of fast food, cheese, snacks, etc. and binging brought on by emotional or work related stress. Now I cook all of my own meals and I'm a lot more conscious of what I eat, so the healthy things that fill me up now are the same if not more volume but significantly less calories. I now go to the gym every day so keep my stress level manageable. Eating 1800 calories a day to net the proper amount is difficult unless I'm spending a significant portion of my time eating when I'm not physically hungry-- which is what got me into this situation to begin with.
Does that make more sense?

Argent78

To me, eating more to lose weight is summed up by this article:
http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/nutrition_articles.asp?id=1260

Eat more food in volume and weight, but eat less in calories. Keeps you full. without the "bad macro"-calorie heavy.

If to eat the "homemade" way (from the article) and are looking for more more than just weight loss, to transition into a healthy lifestyle, and maintain your exercise, you can still have a hard time hitting those calorie goals MFP calculates for you.

OMG this article is so perfect!!

paulaann67

Thanks ESSJAY76 for sharing this post it is so true!!

DoingthisforChris

To me, eating more to lose weight is summed up by this article:
http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/nutrition_articles.asp?id=1260

Eat more food in volume and weight, but eat less in calories. Keeps you full. without the "bad macro"-calorie heavy.

If to eat the "homemade" way (from the article) and are looking for more more than just weight loss, to transition into a healthy lifestyle, and maintain your exercise, you can still have a hard time hitting those calorie goals MFP calculates for you.

Great Link thanks for the share

IHeartNewMe

Bumping to read later!

tamheath

i thin kyou've explained this better than anyone on this site so far :flowerforyou:

I had the same thought. :flowerforyou:

cmccorma

The way I ate before, I did not eat just because I was hungry. I ate because it tasted good, especially the food that was bad for me. So yes I can say I am not starving and when I do feel hunger I eat. In the past, I did not wait to feel hunger. I just kept myself stuffed all the time.

Peachy_T

Bump to read later

Healthy_4_Life2

Bump

MJ7910

yes i agree with this. i think there is a huge difference between eating 1200, 1600, 2000 or 3000... i'm sure what i ate before was like 2500 a day some days so it doesn't surprise me that i gained weight. some days i woudl eat a few donuts for breakfast (so 700 cals)... a few candy bars... 200 cals... lunch was pizza (3 slices so about 800 cals)... then maybe another granola bar or snack for lunch (300 cals).... and something for dinner (maybe 400)... that types of day would be about 2400 ish and were pretty typical for me. plus i wasn't exercising...

and now i watch everything i eat and write it down... huge difference.
i agree that we don't really know what we are eating or how much unless we track it

Figment14300

bump

gatorginger

Well for me I am only eatin 1000 calories a day and though I'm not stuff every day I am much more satisfied because before I started this I skipped supper completely during the week days but pigged out on the weekend and that normally did it for me but as I've gotten older that isn't working so well. So since I was already used to not eating as much during the week I only eat 1000 a day but I am hoping to up it to 1200 eventually. I've lost 11 pounds so far and have only be doing this about 4 weeks and so far I love it as it lets me eat what I want and yes I am eating healthier than I was before, plus I am drinking lots more water and that does make you full

myfitnessnmhoy

. Maybe a cheat day would bring my average calories up/

I'm not discouraging "cheat" or "diet vacation" days, as long as you log them. However, if you're having trouble meeting your calories on a daily basis, routine cheating as a way to make up for it is counterproductive. You'll still lose weight, but you'll be sending your body confusing signals.

Isn't there anything you like to eat that's energy-dense and pretty rich in whatever of the Holy Triangle (carbs, fats, proteins) you are short on?

jen88ve

What I don't understand is, most people came to MFP because they were eating well above their recommended caloric intake, so how all of a sudden are they now not able to eat exercise calories back and not eat up to 1200, 1300, 1400 calories?

The problem is that we are now eating good food that fills you up. If I eat good protein and lots of fruit and veggies and try to keep fat < 20%, calorie intake will be low and I will be stuffed. 400 calories of good protein and fruit and veggies will stuff you.

Sure when I was eating bad...I could eat 1/2 a pizza ( 4 pieces) and calories would be 1500-2000 calories or go to the chineese buffett and blow them out of the water with a couple egg rolls.

Today, I have to work on trying to add good calories. Maybe add some protein powder or nuts to my food or eating greek yogurt.

I really agree with this statement. I use to go to McDonalds and eat a value meal just for dinner and that's over 1,000 and I was barely full, but now I eat fruits, veggies and protein and I have to eat a lot more of it to get up to my 1,200 calorie. So I am eating more food than before because I'm eating food with a lot less calories. I do agree that people think they need to drastically change their diets, but I understand why people are getting more full from what they are eating now.

Jenjaz1910

Only last week have I started to UP my calories so that I am eating to at least my BMR. It is hard and not seen a loss at all (BUT I have lost 7.5 inches) but this post is FAB!! It isn't a race, or rather it is and slow and steady wins it! x

ebaymommy

BEST POST EVER!!!!!!!

Thank you so much for writing it all out so well. Beautiful job!

pinkstp

Maybe I'm alone in this but I have NO problem eating back calories from exercising. #thisiswhyi'mfat? LOL
Aside from that, I know that when MFP suggested I cut to 1400 I was cool with it. Then I upped it to 2 lbs to see what that would take and it said 1200. I tried that for 2 weeks and practically murdered everyone around me. Thank god I'm up to 1340!

k0nfyo0zed

There is a big difference between eating more to lose weight and eating how you used to eat.

(snip)

I bet you that for most people, if you were to take an *honest* look at what you were *really* eating before you came to MFP, and just logged your calories as you normally ate when you gained weight, you were probably eating well above 2500, 3000, or even 4000 calories a day. For most average size people, that could account to a 10, 20, or even 30 pound weight gain. (This is the average person, this is not counting someone who may have other health issues going on...)
(snip)

The whole point when people say "eat more to lose weight" is that you don't have to go to such extreme measures (going from 3000+ calories a day to 1200! That's just crazy!)

Just get used to eating a little less than your maintenance calories. "Eat more to lose weight" does not mean stuffing your face with seconds, thirds, box loads, and packages of all the stuff you used to eat. You're still reducing calories if you're eating like you were at your goal weight.

It boggles my mind, especially when I read about folks who have 30+ pounds to lose and all of a sudden say they are "fine" and "not starving" eating only 1200 calories a day now.

i snipped parts of your original post to highlight some things i've said myself to my friends who tell me "i have a hard time eating 1400 calories...." and i think "funny, just last month i saw you snarf down 4 slices of pizza"....

i didn't get fat eating a healthy 2000 calorie diet and exercising at a modarate level, i got fat cause i ate junk and sat on my butt all the time. so now i eat a lot more healthy foods, fuel my body properly, and exercise my tail off. it's an excellent compromise. my body stopped losing weight when i started starving it.

beachdiva2010

Bump

amicklin

Essjay, what is this sense you speak? None of that here!

kappy_hollowell

Great post!

kristinL16

Before I started losing weight back in January, I calorie checked what I was eating...I was ranging between 1400-1600 calories NOT ON A DIET. 1361 is my BMR. I was steadily gaining weight. So not always true that people were eating 2400 calories.

I don't know what your height and weight are, and how much you're looking to lose, but that's why I had to had to specify "most" "average" people... not if you had some sort of health issue that continuously caused you to gain weight on that amount of calories. You may have an extraordinary case.

Not necessarily an exception. Mt BMR is either 1214 or 1416, depending on the method used to calculate. My TDEE with sedentary as my multiplier could easily be under 1600. That doesn't give much wiggle room in regards to diet and lifestyle without exercise.