under 5fts having success with eating more to weigh less

littlelol
littlelol Posts: 539
in Health and Weight Loss
Just wondered who is 5ft and under and having good results since upping their calories and how many calories are you having?

Replies

  • findingmyhappyplace
    findingmyhappyplace Posts: 75 Member
    Well I am just under 5'1 but I can lose weight on 2200 calories per day. I drop like a stone on 1800.

    Edited to add: This includes exercise calories. I work by TDEE. I workout 6 days a week, either lifting or running. Additionally I cycle daily and I have a fairly active job which has me on my feet for a few extra hours each day.
  • littlelol
    littlelol Posts: 539
    p.s, and how often does everyone exercise and are they eating back their exercise calories on top of your daily calories?
  • small_ninja
    small_ninja Posts: 365 Member
    I don't really know if I'm technically "eating more"; I typically NET at about 1,100-1,400 (and occasionally 1,600+ on lazy days). I exercise a fair bit so that has me eating anywhere between 1,400-1,900 calories a day. In the short amount of time I've been on here, I'd say I lose better when I'm netting around 1,200. I'm 5'0" and 124 lb; I've lost 8 lbs so far :smile:
  • Esme35
    Esme35 Posts: 11
    HI there, I'm 5ft and find I can lose weight if I stick to 1200-1500 cals a day. I have started exercising more recently to try and tone up as well. It's difficult to find time to exercise as I work full time and have a 2 year old girl, but I am trying to do the 30 day shred as it is only 25 mins start to finish, I can usually fit that in once LO gone to bed and before dinner. I have also got the 10 min solution work outs so I can fit these in when I can. I don't always eat back my calories but then MFP tells me off for not consuming enough cals!!
  • ladyraven68
    ladyraven68 Posts: 2,003 Member
    I'm 4ft 11. I started on 1200 plus exercise, but couldn't do it. Switched to TDEE - 20% = 1600 and it worked fine.

    But I started a new job in may, became more sedentary so switched to 1470. I'll go back to 1600 once I can get my routine sorted and can join a gym.
  • vegannlg
    vegannlg Posts: 170 Member
    *bump* 4'10" and curious, too.
  • mhuch110
    mhuch110 Posts: 130 Member
    I'm 4ft 11 (and 3/4 but who's counting!)...I am currently set at 1200 but I find it very difficult to eat this many in one day, especially one the days when I burn a lot through exercise. I exercise 6 days a week but only for about 30 mins so I burn between 200 - 300 each day. I am less active now because I am a teacher and have the summer off so I get LAZY! I have only been at this for about a month and have lost 5 pounds. I am trying really hard to net 1200 but I never make it.

    Good luck to you and feel free to add me if you'd like another motivational friend!
  • findingmyhappyplace
    findingmyhappyplace Posts: 75 Member
    No offence ladies, but given that anything under 1200 NET is considered a starvation diet, I don't think you really qualify as 'eating more to weigh less' unless you are consuming nearer 2000 calories.
  • small_ninja
    small_ninja Posts: 365 Member
    No offence ladies, but given that anything under 1200 NET is considered a starvation diet, I don't think you really qualify as 'eating more to weigh less' unless you are consuming nearer 2000 calories.

    I don't think it's easy for those of us under 5ft to qualify for the "eat more to weigh less" group... my TDEE -20% is 1,600-1,700 calories which still gives me a net of 1,100-1,200 calories anyways. My maintenance calorific allowance on days with no exercise is still only 1,600.
  • WonderKP
    WonderKP Posts: 146 Member
    I was wondering about this, since I tried the ~1200 cals last summer, did lots of biking, and stayed at 109-112 the whole time with no changes in appearance and measurements. Then I started lifting this year, bumped up cals to closer to 1400-1600, and my weight is staying around 115. again maybe slightly improved appearance, but measurements are the same. :/ Not seeing a difference. Not sure which way in the calories I should go. lower, or higher? Don't know if I messed up my metabolism, but I am perfectly satisfied (feeling full) with 1200-1500 cals.
  • kmmicco
    kmmicco Posts: 45 Member
    I'm 5'0 even. I started out eating 1200 cals a day, I lost 7 pound super quick, but then it started coming back on, even though I was staying at or under the 1200. I ended up gaining 5 pounds back! Then I came across a post on here about taking muscle and body fat into consideration. It turns out, even though I weight over 190, my body is almost 65% muscle...far higher than it's expected to be for a person of my height and weight. Based on this method, I found out my body was burning almost 2000 cals a day if I were to just lay in bed all day! So basically, I was unkknowingly putting my body into starvation mode. I now eat around 1860 cals a day, and I usually do NOT eat back my exerciese cals. So far since the switch, I have lost the 5 pounds I gained back and have seen consistant weight loss everyday, even if it's just 0.2 lbs (I know I shouldn't weigh everyday, but I wanted to see if it was working). I also have wayyy more energy to workout and just in my daily life in general. I wish I remember the exact name of who posted the thread I got all this info from. His name was Dan something. If anyone knows who I'm talking about, please let her know!
  • findingmyhappyplace
    findingmyhappyplace Posts: 75 Member
    No offence ladies, but given that anything under 1200 NET is considered a starvation diet, I don't think you really qualify as 'eating more to weigh less' unless you are consuming nearer 2000 calories.

    I don't think it's easy for those of us under 5ft to qualify for the "eat more to weigh less" group... my TDEE -20% is 1,600-1,700 calories which still gives me a net of 1,100-1,200 calories anyways. My maintenance calorific allowance on days with no exercise is still only 1,600.

    So move more. I'm 105 lbs and I ate over 3000 calories yesterday. It's entirely possible if you get off your *kitten* and rack up your NEAT calories.
  • small_ninja
    small_ninja Posts: 365 Member
    Uh, I do exercise a lot... almost everyday of the week in fact: karate, running, heavy lifting, and gym classes etc. So don't tell me that I need to "get off my *kitten*". In any case, that wouldn't change the net calories anyway; the recommended net would still be around 1,200 despite eating more gross calories...? The whole point of the 'eat more to weigh less' group is to up your net calories according to your body requirements, since a net of 1,200 isn't really right for everyone. What I'm saying is, is that a net of 1,200 is around about right for me (and maybe quite a lot of women of a similar build).
  • Hendrix7
    Hendrix7 Posts: 1,903 Member
    Whether you are under or over 5 foot tall has no relevance whatsoever as to if EM2WL will work for you.

    It's about good food and a sensible calorie intake, no matter what your height.
  • small_ninja
    small_ninja Posts: 365 Member
    Whether you are under or over 5 foot tall has no relevance whatsoever as to if EM2WL will work for you.

    It's about good food and a sensible calorie intake, no matter what your height.

    Yeap, I'm not disputing that it's about a sensible calorie intake; I don't think that my caloric intake is insensible. Like I said before, I try to meet my TDEE -20%, but I don't want to have to reiterate my point. Check my food diary if you like, it's open to the public :smile:

Categories