Eating more to weigh less or eating less to weigh less? .

So, many people say they (or others) are not losing weight because they eat too little... But what about those people who eat too little and end up weighing "98" pounds ... Why do some people eat little and stall/gain even, while some eat too little and lose too much weight?

(basically, "why does eating less work for thos chicks with anorexia but not for others?"- and, no, I do not want to be 98# or 108#.. I did the 108 thing when I was in my 20s, it was a BAD IDEA! I am just curious.)

Replies

beckytpa

I maintained 108 lbs for most of my life until I hit 43 and I didn't change anything. When I hit 123 lbs this year I went to a weight loss place and got medicine and shots and ate 600 calories a day for 2 weeks and didn't lose anything. So there might just be something to the not eating enough. I am trying the 1200 calories a day with little exercise and see if I lose weight. I have nothing but weight to lose.

aamberrr

Results of someone who ate 500 calories a day for two weeks. He still lost weight but it was because he was exercising... Exercise keeps your metabolism up no matter how low you go on the calorie intake.
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=121060001&highlight=psmf+day+results.

all the arguements of 'when you eat less, you body holds the fat and won't let go of it'-- if that were true, there would be no skeleton skinny anorexic people. but there are...

The "skeleton skinny anorexic people" don't consume enough for the body to gain a substantial amount of fat/weight from it. Even if their body WANTS to hold on to what they put into it, they barely put anything in. And then they lose tons and tons of muscle mass, which, yes, will = "weight" loss. Just not the kind of weight loss anybody should aim for.

I'm not sure what my opinion is on the "starvation mode" thing, whether it's a myth or not; I really haven't read much about it because I have no desire to cut my calories to below 1,200 when I can lose eating 1,600-1,800. But I'm assuming that the people who talk about starvation mode, who say that your body will hold onto your fat, are talking about people who dip below 1,200 on a regular basis, but still eat SOME calories. Their body would hold onto what it could and not want to let go of fat, but with anorexic people, it's like they eat so little that the body has no choice but to burn off all the muscle and fat for food. Make sense?

davidjohnb17

I regularly eat below 1200 calories a day (maybe 4 or 5 days of the week) and I have and continue to lose weight. That being said I always get a daily work out and have a moderately demanding job in terms of physical activity. I know it's been said a 1000 times so i'll be 1001st person to say it but it's what works for you that counts not what everyone else tells you to do. From personal experience and from seeing family members who have lost weight i'd say the starvation mode thing is either a myth or is a very rare occurance. I actually think sometimes people use this whole starvation mode thing as a reason to just be greedy whilst giving the illusion both to themselves and to others of actually doing something healthy!

Less calories + More exercise = weight loss. Should be one of the easiest formulas to understand so it amazes me that some will swear the opposite.

deksgrl

I regularly eat below 1200 calories a day (maybe 4 or 5 days of the week) and I have and continue to lose weight. That being said I always get a daily work out and have a moderately demanding job in terms of physical activity. I know it's been said a 1000 times so i'll be 1001st person to say it but it's what works for you that counts not what everyone else tells you to do. From personal experience and from seeing family members who have lost weight i'd say the starvation mode thing is either a myth or is a very rare occurance. I actually think sometimes people use this whole starvation mode thing as a reason to just be greedy whilst giving the illusion both to themselves and to others of actually doing something healthy!

Less calories + More exercise = weight loss. Should be one of the easiest formulas to understand so it amazes me that some will swear the opposite.

It is working for you because you still have quite a bit to lose. You may find when you get closer to your goal, the weight loss will stall. Then what do you do, cut another 200 or 300 cals a day to lost the rest? Try to work out harder to burn more every day with not enough fuel and then result in losing muscle mass? No thanks.

love4fitnesslove4food_wechange

I regularly eat below 1200 calories a day (maybe 4 or 5 days of the week) and I have and continue to lose weight. That being said I always get a daily work out and have a moderately demanding job in terms of physical activity. I know it's been said a 1000 times so i'll be 1001st person to say it but it's what works for you that counts not what everyone else tells you to do. From personal experience and from seeing family members who have lost weight i'd say the starvation mode thing is either a myth or is a very rare occurance. I actually think sometimes people use this whole starvation mode thing as a reason to just be greedy whilst giving the illusion both to themselves and to others of actually doing something healthy!

Less calories + More exercise = weight loss. Should be one of the easiest formulas to understand so it amazes me that some will swear the opposite.

You're a 20 year old MALE--you're likely killing your testosterone production and causing more harm than you can understand at the moment. I don't see why you're racing to the finish line--everything should be working in your favor at your age.

RetiredAndLovingIt

bump

tidmutt

Honestly, eating around 1800 calories a day results in very slow progress for me and my TDEE using one of those calculators is 2800 with moderate activity levels and 3000 at my current activity levels. I really wonder if I actually directly measured my energy expenditure if it would be much lower. It's easy to say, just be patient, but when you're someone who has 100 lbs to lose (like I did) losing 0.5 lbs a week just won't cut it. You can say well just "move more" but 45 minutes on the elliptical machine might only burn 300 calories if the person is 260 lbs and out of shape. Even 5 days a week that's barely a drop in the ocean.

I'm not saying starve yourself, that's counter productive in most cases because it's very difficult to control the desire to eat. Biological imperative and all that. However, eating less will result in losing more in the long term, ignoring short term fluctuations which are likely caused by fluid retention.

I'm a fan of a few different approaches. Intermittent Fasting can be a good way to cut calories without feeling too deprived, alternatively keeping calories low most days and then having a cheat day/meal can also be a good approach for some. A few will argue that this has some benefits relating to leptin signalling as well, but that's neither here nor there. I think individuals can find an approach that works for them, so you can still be in a large deficit but successful.

love4fitnesslove4food_wechange

Honestly, eating around 1800 calories a day results in very slow progress for me and my TDEE using one of those calculators is 2800 with moderate activity levels and 3000 at my current activity levels. I really wonder if I actually directly measured my energy expenditure if it would be much lower. It's easy to say, just be patient, but when you're someone who has 100 lbs to lose (like I did) losing 0.5 lbs a week just won't cut it. You can say well just "move more" but 45 minutes on the elliptical machine might only burn 300 calories if the person is 260 lbs and out of shape. Even 5 days a week that's barely a drop in the ocean.

I'm not saying starve yourself, that's counter productive in most cases because it's very difficult to control the desire to eat. Biological imperative and all that. However, eating less will result in losing more in the long term, ignoring short term fluctuations which are likely caused by fluid retention.

I'm a fan of a few different approaches. Intermittent Fasting can be a good way to cut calories without feeling too deprived, alternatively keeping calories low most days and then having a cheat day/meal can also be a good approach for some. A few will argue that this has some benefits relating to leptin signalling as well, but that's neither here nor there. I think individuals can find an approach that works for them, so you can still be in a large deficit but successful.

a 260 pound person would burn far more than 300 calories in 45 minutes on the elliptical--far more.

LCgymnast

I think it depends I think on metabolism in certain people.

Aviva92

Netting fewer than 1200 calories a day is harmful to your body. Search "Starvation Mode" and you will find countless articles and references, the basic idea is simple to understand: If you starve your body by netting less than 1200 calories a day then your body responds by slowing down, this includes metabolism, and by producing more fat cells to store anything and everything it possibly can. So, initially when you are starving your body you could, and probably will, gain weight, then eventually that weight will go away if you continue to starve yourself, you will become thinner and add a host of medical problems to your file as a result.

Of course, I am not a Nutritionalist or a Doctor, I just have read a lot on the topic.

I think this can't possibly be right. You're saying that 1200 is the magic number for everyone? from a 5'4" 124 pound woman like me to a 200 pound 6'2" man? I often eat under 1200 calories and feel just fine. I think that changing my diet to eat healthier resulted in my just being less hungry because I'm probably getting what I need from food. When I eat crap, I find that I'm hungrier. Crap doesn't fill me up.

Girl_Bomb

I had a hard time figuring out "eat less to weigh less" as i follow the eat more to weigh less but i am thinking Its eat less to weigh less meaning eat less then you burn meaning if my TDEE is for example 2500 and I'm eating 2000 calories then voila eating less, still a 500 cal deficit which would be 1lb per week. I don't think it means eat 1000cal everyday. In the end is it not the same thing?

It doesn't work like that in the real world.

What doesn't work like that in the real world?

The numbers are not so clear cut like many want them to believe. They are so hung up on the numbers they don't do anything about their situation. There is no need to worry about TDEE, etc, etc. Just get of your *kitten* and lift, eat, take notes, and make adjustments.

People make an already difficult situation harder.

I just through out those numbers considering a lot of people on here don't seem to understand that you need to eat. I don't complicate my own ****, I eat and lift weights, bam, done, I lost weight.

YoYo1951

bump

stephyy4632

bump so I can read latter

jaymek92

I very much want to see replies to this to!

Because although seen as unhealthy by most, I feel like theres no doubt that if you eat less, you'll weigh less. You might feel ****ty & lose a bit of muscle along with it, but you'll still weigh less.

right. so the real question is do you want to look like a skeleton at your goal weight? or a sexy, sexy beast?
because eating fewer calories will cause you to lose muscle along with fat, especially if you're not lifting weights.
eating more calories will make you lose less muscle with your fat. so you'll be happier with your body, barring any serious mental issues.

tidmutt

Honestly, eating around 1800 calories a day results in very slow progress for me and my TDEE using one of those calculators is 2800 with moderate activity levels and 3000 at my current activity levels. I really wonder if I actually directly measured my energy expenditure if it would be much lower. It's easy to say, just be patient, but when you're someone who has 100 lbs to lose (like I did) losing 0.5 lbs a week just won't cut it. You can say well just "move more" but 45 minutes on the elliptical machine might only burn 300 calories if the person is 260 lbs and out of shape. Even 5 days a week that's barely a drop in the ocean.

I'm not saying starve yourself, that's counter productive in most cases because it's very difficult to control the desire to eat. Biological imperative and all that. However, eating less will result in losing more in the long term, ignoring short term fluctuations which are likely caused by fluid retention.

I'm a fan of a few different approaches. Intermittent Fasting can be a good way to cut calories without feeling too deprived, alternatively keeping calories low most days and then having a cheat day/meal can also be a good approach for some. A few will argue that this has some benefits relating to leptin signalling as well, but that's neither here nor there. I think individuals can find an approach that works for them, so you can still be in a large deficit but successful.

a 260 pound person would burn far more than 300 calories in 45 minutes on the elliptical--far more.

Not necessarily. I used to be a 260 lb person, in fact, I used to be a 280 lb person and I can burn more calories in the same period of time than I could when I was heavier and less fit. And when I was 280 lb I was probably fitter than most 280 lb dudes. The reality is, and again, Lyle's blog for some info on this, most overweight and out of shape people will burn less than a fit individual simply because they don't have the conditioning. Lyle discusses this and mentions how an athlete can burn 1000 calories in an hour, but an obese subject would really struggle.

dragoness_leclerq

It's funny, one of the main reasons I stopped coming here was the fact that so many posters who claimed to be 'experts' on a subject spouted off wild conjecture and opinion as if it were medical, scientific fact. Starvation mode simply does not work in the way that so many people here claim it does until you reach about 10% body fat. A 250lbs man will not go into 'starvation mode' after a week on a VLCD or even total and complete water fasting. His body will not "hold onto the fat" because it "thinks it's starving". If that were true, no one would die of starvation. In the long run, VLCDs and fasting take an extraordinary amount of discipline from start to finish and close monitoring of caloric intake thereafter but they can and DO work.

It is only until someone gets into a very low BMI/BF% will they begin to see a slowed metabolism and you also don't start losing muscle until at or around there either.

A lot of you have said you experienced plateaus (or even GAINS!) in your weight loss but my guess is you were over calculating your expenditure, exercise and/or underestimating you net caloric intake, or worse, overeating because you (incorrectly) assumed you had burned more calories that day than you actually did.

I haven't bothered to read all the posts in this thread so I'm not sure, but some of you need to take a look at the data collected from the Minnesota Starvation Experiment.

dragoness_leclerq

Honestly, eating around 1800 calories a day results in very slow progress for me and my TDEE using one of those calculators is 2800 with moderate activity levels and 3000 at my current activity levels. I really wonder if I actually directly measured my energy expenditure if it would be much lower. It's easy to say, just be patient, but when you're someone who has 100 lbs to lose (like I did) losing 0.5 lbs a week just won't cut it. You can say well just "move more" but 45 minutes on the elliptical machine might only burn 300 calories if the person is 260 lbs and out of shape. Even 5 days a week that's barely a drop in the ocean.

I'm not saying starve yourself, that's counter productive in most cases because it's very difficult to control the desire to eat. Biological imperative and all that. However, eating less will result in losing more in the long term, ignoring short term fluctuations which are likely caused by fluid retention.

I'm a fan of a few different approaches. Intermittent Fasting can be a good way to cut calories without feeling too deprived, alternatively keeping calories low most days and then having a cheat day/meal can also be a good approach for some. A few will argue that this has some benefits relating to leptin signalling as well, but that's neither here nor there. I think individuals can find an approach that works for them, so you can still be in a large deficit but successful.

^^This guy gets it!!

ruperthumphrey

bump

WendyTerry420

Because although seen as unhealthy by most, I feel like theres no doubt that if you eat less, you'll weigh less. You might feel ****ty & lose a bit of muscle along with it, but you'll still weigh less.

this is what I'm saying... LOL..

saying "eating less will make you gain (or not lose)" makes no sense to me.

Because your body wont let go of fat because you are not eating enough for it to let go. What's so hard to understand about that? It will hold on forever to that fat and never let it go. this is why every single day people are writing in about their 6 month plateaus and can't figure it out.

What's so hard to understand? Nothing. I absolutely get what you (and everyone else in the bajillion threads about this) are saying. My issue is the people who DIE of STARVATION or waste away because of eating disorders. They are skinny. Too skinny. Their bodies didn't hold on to fat.

And this is coming from someone who eats roughly 1600cals/day. I'm not starving myself. I just think the starvation mode thing is silly.

People who die of starvation have actually died because of organ failure. When you don't get enough nutrition for your activity level, your internal organs are the first to suffer. It begins with an increase in cortisol from the stress you are putting on your body. Cortisol prevents fat oxidation, so the weight lost comes from your bones, your organs, and your muscle.

megalin9

People will argue this all day long, but in the end...why would you want to eat less if you can eat more and lose weight and be HEALTHY? I'd much rather be able to eat until I am full and have energy to fuel my workouts than feel like I'm always hungry and feeling like I'm missing out on so much.

This is really what it comes down to for me.

myownrules

you cannot lose weight be eating more than 1500 calories per day its been proven.

wahmx3

Huh??? Proven where, plenty of people lose weight and eat more than 1500 calories per day.

you cannot lose weight be eating more than 1500 calories per day its been proven.

love4fitnesslove4food_wechange

you cannot lose weight be eating more than 1500 calories per day its been proven.

You're joking right?

BarackMeLikeAHurricane

Eat more food, but less calories. Eat things that aren't very calorie dense.

kazzsjourney

you cannot lose weight be eating more than 1500 calories per day its been proven.

lol.....I lost most of my weight (over 180 pounds) eating 1800 cals a day so you can definitely lose weight eating over 1500 cals

Dagreth

I ate a very low calorie diet (500 calories) and I have lost quite a bit, I should mention I was very heavy. One thing I noticed when I got off the diet and tried to maintain, weight would come back fast if I had a bad day. It also became less effective after going on it third time and harder to stay on, felt hungry all the time.

I now eat around 2000 calories, what mfp recommends, and weight loss is slower, but like others have said, I can live with it and not be starving. Everyone is going to have their own way of doing things, and if it works and you are happy, then I say do it.

10manda86

I completely agree with you... although it is a slow process and losing less than a kg a week can be frustrating I see my change as a lifestyle change rather then a diet. I dont believe I could sustain 1200 cals a day for the rest of my life... so I basically eat what I like, try to keep it healthy, monitor my cals and if I see I am going over or I know I am going out for dinner I will squeeze in a walk with my kid and dog in the afternoon or do an extra workout to counter-balance what I have eaten or predict I will eat. I am trying now to live how I want to live for the rest of my life, I dont want this to be a short-term solution to my lifelong problem... I dont ever want to be this way again and in order to do so I must never go back to my old eating plan....
its only been 3 weeks since I got serious (i've been 'trying' for years and years) but I had my 26th birthday and decided by my 27th I didn't want to be the fat me, I wanted to be slim and healthy and wedding dress shopping! I have lost 2.9 kgs since I started which is a healthy pace... when/if I plateau I will spend a few weeks upping my cals with healthy choices for food, maybe I will gain a little but then I will cut back to what I am eating now which MFP says is 1200 a day, but I choose to eat back most of my exercise calorie coz like I said above 1200 isn't sustainable for me! I have read on several occasions that upping cals and cutting back every few weeks is a great way to kick start your metabolism and perhaps by doing so you can skip plateaus all together????
everyone is different, listen to your body... if you are hungry make healthy choices in snacks, even better go for a walk and have a snack when you come back if you are still hungry, i tend to find that when I return from a walk its time to start cooking dinner so I've skipped that craving moment!!! My final trick is a vitamin supplement that is designed for appetite suppression... I take it in the afternoons to curb those horrible cravings, they work, I was taking them twice a day as directed but I learned to control my morning cravings, I am trying to learn to control my evening ones and that way I wont need herbal help any more.
My most important weapon in my battle is my partner... He notices every millimetre that a lose and every gram. He constantly complements me on my eating choices and how I look. It is sometimes difficult to take, especially on days like yesterday when he thinks I look great and I feel like I look like a beached whale! but when he tells me how awesome I look and how proud of me he is it is so much easier to walk past the chocolate bars in the supermarket! I want to make him happy as much as I want to do this for myself and his support is a priceless tool and I believe way more important than how many cals I am or am not eating.

(p.s. I have lost 2.9kgs... my little bar thing says 1kg... Apparently it resets itself if you fiddle with the settings lol)

norcal_yogi

bumping....

KarenJanine

Because although seen as unhealthy by most, I feel like theres no doubt that if you eat less, you'll weigh less. You might feel ****ty & lose a bit of muscle along with it, but you'll still weigh less.

this is what I'm saying... LOL..

saying "eating less will make you gain (or not lose)" makes no sense to me.

Because your body wont let go of fat because you are not eating enough for it to let go. What's so hard to understand about that? It will hold on forever to that fat and never let it go. this is why every single day people are writing in about their 6 month plateaus and can't figure it out.

What's so hard to understand? Nothing. I absolutely get what you (and everyone else in the bajillion threads about this) are saying. My issue is the people who DIE of STARVATION or waste away because of eating disorders. They are skinny. Too skinny. Their bodies didn't hold on to fat.

And this is coming from someone who eats roughly 1600cals/day. I'm not starving myself. I just think the starvation mode thing is silly.

People who die from starvation / anorexia usually die of a heart attack owing to eletrolyte imbalance from not eating rather than by being too skinny.

KarenJanine

Obviously if someone eats 500 cals per day they will lose weight. But chances are they will end up with anorexia, or if they don't they will have lost a lot of muscle mass and will regain the weight with a higher body fat percentage than before they started when they start to eat 'normally' again.

I've done it that way (several times) before learning that I don't have to starve myself to lose weight. I've spent the last year actually gaining weight to repair my metabolism and rebuild some of the LBM I've lost over the past decade from doing unhealthy diets. I'm only now ready to start losing some of the fat which I aim to do at a slow and steady rate while eating around 2000 cals per day.

I now know that lifting and eating are going to give me the body I always used to think I could achieve by starving myself. I also will not have to worry about regaining the weight once I reach my goal because I now know what my maintenance numbers are.