someone, explain how eating more = weightloss? please

DietandVlogsense

tl;dr

No one's body goes into "starvation mode" if they drop below 1200 calories. Starvation mode is something that very, very, very few people in 1st world countries will ever experience. It happens from an extremely long time of caloric and nutritional deprivation. Think. Use your brains. If your body went into starvation mode within a week or a month or even several months of consuming low amounts of calories there would be no such thing as an anorexic or someone starving to death.

Well sure, keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better, but anyone dieting on an extremely low calorific intake is just setting themselves up to fail.

It's widely known that crash dieting, in the majority of cases, is not going to fail.

Bottom line; diet without exercise or excercise without a proper diet is NOT going to produce decent results.

But, that being said, not going to argue with anyone over it, at the end of the day I am finding a good mix of healthy movement, combined with a reasonable calorific reduction and diet shift, is doing wonders for me and that's all I am really concerned with.

mcarter99

'Crash dieting' and 'very low calories' are usually considered to be under 800 for long periods. 1200 is never considered crash dieting, and going below it for short periods isn't, either.

ladyraven68

Wow - a nutritionist recommending to eat above BMR - who'd have thunk it?

http://www.womenandweight.com/reviews/diets/1200-calorie-diet-getting-started/

YoungerNextYear59937

Mrsbigmack sums it up perfectly!

The minimum amount you'll burn in a day is BMR. The actual amount you burn in a day is called TDEE around here (Total Daily Energy Expenditure), which includes exercise AND a whole bunch of other activities like showering, eating, driving, moving around an office, changing diapers, sex, and whatever else you do in a day.

If you eat more than BMR but less than TDEE you will lose weight.

So some of us want to eat closer to our actual TDEE to lose weight (I like a ~400 cal/day deficit, personally) to lose weight slowly and without much effort while preserving lean muscle mass. Others choose to eat closer to BMR... or less.

Many people decide they want to lose weight and are bombarded with messages about eating 1200 calories/day, eating 500 calories plus HCG injections, eating 300 calories plus B vitamin injections or whatever... the truth is, as long as what you eat is somewhat less than what you burn, you'll lose weight.

It doesn't have to be super restrictive. Just tracked accurately.
[/quote]

myogibbs

Because those children are malnourished & it is a chronic condition. The body will hold on to fat & muscle as long as it can, but if the conditions remain sparse, the body basically eats itself... besides most of us that aren't "sticks" have a much different diet, even in "starvation mode" than those children...

Hendrix7

Urrrrgh some terrible posts in this thread.

The 'starving kids in africa' thing is a totaly absurd comparison and had nothing to do with this conversation.

'Crash dieting' and 'very low calories' are usually considered to be under 800 for long periods. 1200 is never considered crash dieting, and going below it for short periods isn't, either.

I know but 1200 cover most women's needs.

Wrong.

The '1200' cal minimum has to be the most abused and mis-used approach on this entire site.

People here are not 'most women' in the same way I am not 'most men', everyone is individual and their calorie intakes should calculated on an individual basis. Simply applying the '1200' rule, regardless of peoples current weight, bf% and activity levels is most likely why so many people on here are struggling.

if someone is BMR is 1500and their TDEE is 2100, 1200 calories is not enough for sustained and regular weight loss. Unfortunately many of this site think less is always better, which it isn't.

I would urge everyone here to do a little more research, work out your BMR and your calorie and macro needs FOR YOURSELF, do not blindly trust the numbers MFP gives you. Understand the role of different macro nutrients and what they do for you.Put yourself in control.

mcarter99

Wow - a nutritionist recommending to eat above BMR - who'd have thunk it?

http://www.womenandweight.com/reviews/diets/1200-calorie-diet-getting-started/

I can't read it because my browser says it has malware content. But one nutritionist recommending you eat above it won't convince me that it's dangerous to eat below it when no authoritative body uses BMR as the rec for what level to eat above.

kelsully

You know I think when someone starts this journey they want to succeed so much and just want to do things right. At the beginning of this process you eat less and you lose. As you continue, you start to have emotional responses to hunger or food. ie you are hungry and at first you think...yeah baby I am losing weight...after a considerable amount of time that hunger gets to be frustrating and defeating.

For me, I reached my goal and was doing great. I am maintaining and living an incredibly active lifestyle. I train for marathons. I was still in the mindset of restricting etc and had to relearn how to eat more to keep my body moving in ways that made me happy. I can not run 12 miles one day and not change my diet to take that activity into consideration if I want to be able to run 12 miles again etc. I started getting tired of pushing through the tired feelings and head rushes that were a result of too few calories etc. I needed to investigate how to fuel my activity and not gain weight. I ate back exercise and very slowly increased calorie goals. I feel more satisfied, less restricted and more "normal" eating more and I look the best I have ever looked and now place in my age division in races.

Once you are on taking on this process for an extended period of time (I have been on MFP for 650 days) you will likely go through all different kinds of approaches to losing and then maintaining a lifestyle in a way that you can live with.

Helloitsdan

This statement is usually directed to people who don't supply enough calories to compensate for their body's daily needs.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

But isn't that pretty much the definition of weight loss?

Nope.
Just limiting calories wont necessarily have you losing weight.
Even after 1 week your leptin levels drop up to 50%.
At high obesity you can go VLCD for a few weeks but you must come up to TDEE to regulate the hormonal imbalance.

How long have you been dieting Mcarter?
Curiosity thats all.

Heres a good study for you to read about how slight deficits are better than heavy ones.
http://www.nature.com/oby/journal/v9/n11s/full/oby2001133a.html

ninerbuff

This statement is usually directed to people who don't supply enough calories to compensate for their body's daily needs.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

But isn't that pretty much the definition of weight loss?

Key wording is "enough". You need a calorie deficit to lose weight, but it the deficit is extreme, the body will respond hormonally and change the way it regulates itself. One of the first things it will do is lower metabolic rate.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Acg67

Wonder how this person lost any weight at all

382 day fast, lost 276lbs

Features of a successful therapeutic fast of 382 days' duration. Postgrad Med J. 1973 March; 49(569): 203–209.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2495396/pdf/postmedj00315-0056.pdf

JuneBPrice

The minimum amount you'll burn in a day is BMR. The actual amount you burn in a day is called TDEE around here (Total Daily Energy Expenditure), which includes exercise AND a whole bunch of other activities like showering, eating, driving, moving around an office, changing diapers, sex, and whatever else you do in a day.

If you eat more than BMR but less than TDEE you will lose weight.

So some of us want to eat closer to our actual TDEE to lose weight (I like a ~400 cal/day deficit, personally) to lose weight slowly and without much effort while preserving lean muscle mass. Others choose to eat closer to BMR... or less.

Many people decide they want to lose weight and are bombarded with messages about eating 1200 calories/day, eating 500 calories plus HCG injections, eating 300 calories plus B vitamin injections or whatever... the truth is, as long as what you eat is somewhat less than what you burn, you'll lose weight.

It doesn't have to be super restrictive. Just tracked accurately.

It all totally confuses me. Maybe that is why I am not doing as well as I want. LOL.

Can you give me your height, weight and age? If you have it, your BF%. I'll find some real numbers for better illustration.

Can you do that for me, too? I'm 5'1, 120 pounds, and 18 =/

DaughterOfTheMostHighKing

Low-calorie diets can be effective treatment for long-term weight reduction, but the optimum way of delivering such diets remains unclear. Several approaches seem to offer greater efficacy: fat restriction, fixed energy deficits, or meal replacements. However, the future of dietary management should be seen as complimentary but subsidiary to lifestyle and behavior change. The challenge will be to identify those individuals who may be most responsive to specific dietary and/or behavioral changes.

mcarter99

This statement is usually directed to people who don't supply enough calories to compensate for their body's daily needs.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

But isn't that pretty much the definition of weight loss?

Nope.
Just limiting calories wont necessarily have you losing weight.
Even after 1 week your leptin levels drop up to 50%.
At high obesity you can go VLCD for a few weeks but you must come up to TDEE to regulate the hormonal imbalance.

How long have you been dieting Mcarter?
Curiosity thats all.

Heres a good study for you to read about how slight deficits are better than heavy ones.
http://www.nature.com/oby/journal/v9/n11s/full/oby2001133a.html

I never said heavy deficits are better. I'm saying people can not lose more at a lower deficit than a higher, overall, while they're maintaining adequate nutrition. For a lot of us, 1200 calories IS adequate nutrition.

How long I've been dieting means nothing but I'll share. I've been reading diet and nutrition and fitness books and sites for about 12 years. I lost 50 lbs. with Weight Watchers (who by the way thinks around 1000-1200 calories/day is sufficient nutrition for someone my size). I lost about 30 lbs. with calorie counting and Fitbit. I maintained with exercise for years. I've been logging here to lose some for the past 5 weeks. I've lost 9 lbs. in that time. My deficit on paper is around 600/day. I eat about 100 under BMR. I don't 'add back'. I focus mostly on NEAT with some kettlebells thrown in. I'm eating around TDEE minus 30%. I'm not in 'starvation mode', headachey, tired, weak or hungry. I hit all my macros and am satisfied. I eat foods like steel cut oats, flax meal, eggs, spinach, quinoa, romaine, chicken breast, lentils, garbanzos, fruit and a lot of vegetables and whole grains and healthy fats. I listen to my hunger signals and eat less some days, more others, but the above is what I average. I won't get into my academic or work background because it's not health related but it's research and quantitative analysis related, and part has to do with information literacy so the misinformation bugs me more than most.

People seem to think I'm advocating eating 1200/day. I'm not advocating anything except that people learn the facts and make their own decisions. I haven't ever read anything published that says people will lose more weight eating closer to TDEE than further from it. At least nothing besides personal anecdotes and theories here. That's all I'm saying. I will readily admit it might be healthier, more comfortable, less stressful, be more long-lasting and invoke less of a metabolic response. But if you could lose MORE weight eating more calories than less, this wouldn't be the only place with that knowledge.

JMeka

The idea as far as I can tell is this: Your caloric intake should be on par with your activity level. The overall health benefits associated with maintaining a high enough activity level to justify (and necessitate) a higher calorie food intake are far greater than the health benefits of losing weight through simple low-calorie or low-carb dieting with a low activity level.

Basically the goal behind the people pushing you to eat more to weigh less is remind you that if you're exercising, you need to increase your calorie intake accordingly in order to keep you fueled for your activity level and preserve lean muscle mass, which leads to more fat loss in a shorter period of time and greater overall health benefits.

As far as I can tell, anyway. And it's 100% true, if that's what they're trying to push on you.

Example: Three people who both each a BMR of 1700 calories a day, leading to a 1200 calorie per day goal for weight loss (deficit of 500 calories below maintenance which is ideal). Person A sits on their butt all day and eats their 1200 calories. The other two, Persons B and C, follow a fairly rigorous workout regimen that burns ~1000 calories a day. Person B continues to eat the 1200 calories per day despite the higher activity level. Person C increases their calorie intake by 1000 to adjust for the 1000 everyday they are burning through exercise. They will all lose weight. HOWEVER...

Person A gains no lean muscle mass and gains no real health benefits aside from those that comes with lowering your BMI.

Person B loses a lot in the beginning, unfortunately a lot of it is lean muscle mass as well as fat. Also, Person B is unable to maintain their activity level for very long and eventually falls off the exercise wagon due to lack of fuel for the machine that is their body. They then become Person A, or something close to it with their activity level.

Person C keeps losing, keeps working out rigorously building lean mass, improving overall health, and losing fat (but not necessarily weight due to the lean mass gain) at a greater speed than Persons A and B.

Ding Ding Ding.....this, can't be explained any better in my opinion...:happy:

moopa

bump

Jkmumma

Side comment on breast feeding: Breast feeding burns about 500 calories a day. ON AVERAGE

Helloitsdan

Props to ACG for that study but 99% of the women on here aren't under 24/7 doctor supervision.
The Swedish are pretty crazy with those studies though. Sure it can happen but why do it if you won't have to?

Mcarter, awesome.
Thank you for summing up for us.
I'm just trying to make this less painful for most.
If you like restricting up to 30% TDEE and working out on top of that...
I wouldn't want to take that chance.
Protein sparing fat loss is better for me.
I don't want to have to repeat my diet.
Once is enough for me.

Care to try my numbers some day then let me know.
Watboy used to fly the same flag as you but is now losing twice the fat than he was at 800-1400 daily.
Anywho...

islandesskeemo

For argument sake... Hugh Jackman Height: 6'1" Weight: 215 lbs Age 45ish...

LOL okay we'll do Hugh (no pun intended)...

If he's completely sedentary here are his estimated numbers:

BMR: 1886 (the number of calories he'd burn if he were comatose)
TDEE: 2263 (the estimated number of calories he actually burns in 24 hours once daily activities are factored in)
15% cut: 1924 (the number of calories he should eat every day to safely lose weight - about 3 lbs/month)

Now, if he does 3-5 hours of moderate exercise weekly, the numbers change:

BMR: 1886 (this doesn't change)
TDEE: 2924 (his average daily calorie burn taking into account daily activity AND exercise)
15% cut: 2485 (the number of calories he should eat every day to safely lose weight - about 3.5 lbs/month)

AND, if he does 5-6 hours a week of strenuous exercise, the numbers change again:

BMR: 1886 (again, this doesn't change)
TDEE: 3254 (his average daily calorie burn taking into account daily activity AND exercise)
15% cut: 2766 (the number of calories he should eat every day to safely lose weight - about 4 lbs/month)

With these calculations, you DO NOT eat back exercise calories. You set your calorie target and eat that every day. Your exercise calories burned are estimated and spread out across all the days of the week to get a daily amount to eat.

If Hugh were to sign up to MFP and fill out the form and tell it he wants to lose 2 lbs/week, it would probably give him a daily calorie target of 1263 (1000 less than his est TDEE when sedentary - see the first set of numbers). But if he's not actually sedentary - he actually works out hard 5-6 days a week for over an hour, he actually burns 3254 calories per day. BUT, he's only eating 1263... that's actually a daily caloric deficit of 1991.

So the body is learning how to do 3254 calories worth of stuff on 1263 calories. And our bodies are very efficient... it will learn. And Hugh's body will dump muscle mass since it is so costly to run it. And then it will start to break down other processes since they are using too many calories... and eventually Hugh's BMR will drop to maybe 800 calories.

So Hugh loses all the weight he wants nice and quickly.... or he stalls out. Wherever he ends up, his body is doing everything it needs to on the 1263 he gives it. Now, when he goes and eats 2000 calories, his body doesn't need the other 737 so it stores it as fat... every day... until Hugh has gained the weight back.

Or he has to keep eating 1263 calories/day for life and keep up that workout schedule.

Thank you, Thank you, Thank you!!!! After reading all the post before yours I was beginning to think that I needed to go in and change my sedentary lifestyle to a more active one on MFP. I feel like it is not enough calories with they way I work out even when i go over what MFP says i try not to gover ove much but didnt know that I could actually eat my calories back from exercise. You explained this very well.

mcarter99

Dan- I wanted to see what your rec for me would be so I read your 'in place of a road map' post and I'm confused.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/538381-in-place-of-a-road-map

It sounds like you're saying I should use the fat2fit calculator TDEE amount and eat that? That puts me around 1850. I know from my Fitbit I burn around 1950. Are you saying I can only lose a pound every 35 days? And get to my goal of losing 20 lbs. in early 2015? And log food for 700 days? To lose 20 lbs.? Or do I re-calc that as I lose to slow things down?