Question about eat more to lose more?

runzalot81

This is great topic! Thanks so much, albayin for asking the question and to everyone else for their input.

I workout aplenty and have been struggling with a few pounds creeping on. Since I just joined yesterday, I can see that MFP wants me to eat more. Okay. Can't get any worse, right?

1holegrouper

There is a sweet spot (total daily calories) for all of us and it is highly individual and is a moving target as well. Our natural tendency when we are determined to lose fat is to overreact which translates to not eating enough calories. I also agree with an earlier statement that we need to pack in the most nutrient rich food on our plates that we can. When we are running a calorie deficit we are in some ways more vulnerable and our need for good nutrition becomes evermore important.

MsSheri82

I remember awhile ago when I was doing weight watchers I was always under my daily points allowance and I couldnt figure out why i wasnt losing weight. So I did some research and read that maybe I wasnt eating enough. I was a bit shocked because I thought the less you eat the more weight you lose. But anyway, I started using ALLmy daily points and the weight started dropping. I dont know what the correlation is but there is some validity to it. It may be because I have ALOT of weight to lose.

mcarter99

Because it's on my clipboard.

"The only scientifically proven method for losing weight involves burning more calories than are taken in.2 This fact, often called the "law of thermodynamics," has been shown time and time again in decades of rigorous scientific studies. One example of the hundreds of studies that exist was done in Switzerland. Fifty-four obese people had their calories restricted to 1,100 per day. Different combinations of foods and meal timing were tested. There was no difference in weight losses; it came down to the number of calories, not how they were provided, that accounted for the weight loss that the participants experienced.3

At the end of the day, the only true way to lose weight is to eat fewer calories in food and/or burn more calories. Yet only 1/3 of Americans trying to lose weight try to do so by using the recommended method of eating less and exercising more; the fundamental foundation of weight loss.4"

http://www.weightwatchers.com/util/art/index_art.aspx?art_id=20781&tabnum=1&sc=801&subnav=Science+Library:+The+Physics+of+Weight+Loss

Neecy_Pooh

I think it's more about chosing more nutrient dense foods which tend to be less calorie dense, so that you end up eating a greater volume of food throughout the day.

Reguardless, I'm still losing faster than 1 lb per week right now at a net goal of 2900 cals (MFP wants to put me around 2300).

The reason it is like that because they calculate a 500 cal. deficit beforehand. So technically, they are putting you at 2800, you just don't see it because they assume the 500 calorie deficit. : )

CoderGal

I've read a lot about it, but I was wondering, has anyone who has not too much to lose (10-15lbs) found success with this method? Ive seen plenty of success stories about people with 50-100lbs to lose upping their calories and watching the lbs drop off, but I'm wondering if because I'm so close to my goal weight, that might not work so well with me. Thoughts?

I started doing it when I had about that much to lose I think. I started at 1200 and jumped to NETTING 1700 (often over 2000).

I'm 5'7, 119 lbs.

I've ate close to TDEE when I was sedentary and when I was active (higher#). I got to goal and I'm still using it. My thoughts are try it, I haven't seen it not work on anyone sensible who has given it a few months chance. I lost a pound a week straight to goal.

This is how I turned out :P


You might also want to check out this persons profile who's pretty slim, she has lots of result pics, this is her thread about 'what happened when I didn't eat enough':
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/494091-i-just-don-t-care-anymore

I also enjoy this persons story:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/572503-why-you-should-eat-more-a-lion-s-tale

CoderGal

I think it's actually exercise more to eat more to lose more, make sure you extract the full story :-)

As an example, someone who increases their calories and increases their protein is probably getting the benefit of the increased protein content, not the extra calories. A re-mix at the previous calorie level to more protein could have been at least as effective.

This is what I believe the more I read about this theory/cult/trend/whatever, the more I believe often we don't get the whole picture...

False.

I started the TDEE thing when I was doing full time studies and working part time spending most of my time in bed or in a chair. My exercise was strolling to my car. In fact when I started it I was quite sick, probably from my immune system being so low lol so I was extra sedentary. I basically got straight to goal being sedentary (the last few weeks I was active when uni ended, but for months and months I was not).

So, stop spreading rumours around please Though yes, most of the people who want to do this the healthy way advise you exercise. I'm not going to argue with that. Makes perfectly logical sense to me.

sabolfitwife

So in all reality, you should just be eating back your exercise calories?? I burn anywhere from 220 (on a normal day) to 500 kcals/workout. MY BMR is 1,645 and I eat that plus a little daily. So if I eat back my exercise calories it'd be any where from 1,800-2,100 kcals/day? I've heard about this and am just nervous to try it. If it doesn't work, then it was all for not, and it's juts like a shot in the dark. I think I might try it though... 9 out of 10 people seem to get great results from this.

pandurbear77

Because it's on my clipboard.

"The only scientifically proven method for losing weight involves burning more calories than are taken in.2 This fact, often called the "law of thermodynamics," has been shown time and time again in decades of rigorous scientific studies. One example of the hundreds of studies that exist was done in Switzerland. Fifty-four obese people had their calories restricted to 1,100 per day. Different combinations of foods and meal timing were tested. There was no difference in weight losses; it came down to the number of calories, not how they were provided, that accounted for the weight loss that the participants experienced.3

At the end of the day, the only true way to lose weight is to eat fewer calories in food and/or burn more calories. Yet only 1/3 of Americans trying to lose weight try to do so by using the recommended method of eating less and exercising more; the fundamental foundation of weight loss.4"

http://www.weightwatchers.com/util/art/index_art.aspx?art_id=20781&tabnum=1&sc=801&subnav=Science+Library:+The+Physics+of+Weight+Loss

I absolutely love that you said this! With all these crazy diets of eating less carbs or increasing your calorie intake to weight less are beginning to make my head spin, when a dog is overweight you feed them less and excersie them more and they loose weight. This is a natural process so why wouldn't it make sense for humans to do the exact same thing? Why do we have to complicate it with all these crazy diets...

taylor5877

I think it's more about chosing more nutrient dense foods which tend to be less calorie dense, so that you end up eating a greater volume of food throughout the day.

Reguardless, I'm still losing faster than 1 lb per week right now at a net goal of 2900 cals (MFP wants to put me around 2300).

The reason it is like that because they calculate a 500 cal. deficit beforehand. So technically, they are putting you at 2800, you just don't see it because they assume the 500 calorie deficit. : )

First sentence was explaining what I take as "eat more to lose more"

Secondly, the number I said for MFP was of course after the 500 cal deficit for "1 lb per week", which leaves me hungry and tired.

nxd10

It seems to work better for me, but it hasn't been a controlled study, so to speak. At the same time I started eating more, I also started concentrating on getting a higher proportion of protein in my diet (nearly double from prior) and drinking a ton more water. I don't know if the increased rate of weight loss was due to the increased calories, protein or water, or the combination of the three. I'm happy with the results, though!

I would have said 'yes'! But I have been looking honestly at my diary recently.

I was barely above the healthy BMI to start and have easily dropped a pound a week following the MFP guidelines. I only walk for exercise and started with a pretty clean diet.

I moved to a slightly higher protein and minimized dense carbs like white rice and bread and went to no fat dairy and less cheese. I kept beans, lentils, etc. I'm rarely hungry and eat immediately if I am, over and above my normal big meals. Easy changes to make.

What all this has done is make it really hard to hit my calorie goals - I average way under every week. The more I lose the easier it is to do this.

Given the research on metabolism and weight loss, this makes sense (more exercise and less weight slow metabolism - see recent NYTimes wellness blog and associated papers). I think what is happening is that I'm eating well, paying attention to my body, and eating what I need.

All of which is to say that I would start with the MFP recommendations, eat very healthy, and go from there.