EAT GIRLS! EAT!!!!!!

RobynMWilson

Either there's an awful lot of starving young girls on here or they are all lying on their food diaries...

EAT GIRLS!!!!!!!!! I'm twice your age, eat twice as much as you, and am smaller than some of you!! Stop the madness! Skinny is NOT where it's at, HEALTHY is! You're messing up your metabolisms and when you get to my age, you will not be able to maintain your weight!!

I agree to a certain extent... Losing weight is all about experimenting. When I started my journey to a better and healthier lifestyle I was eating upwards of 2200 calories a day and losing about 1-2 lbs a week. I also worked out 3 hours a day.

I fell off the wagon for a few months, gained all my weight back and then some ( fast food, and sugar )

When I recently got back on the "wagon" I went back to what I had been doing, but at 2200, or 2000 I was not losing weight while working out 3 plus hours a day. ( besides the gym, I work at home, private preschool and 4k, so besides cleaning, My job is not very "mobile." )

I started eating about 1700 a day and now I have been losing weight consistantly.

It is all about what your body needs and wants, sometimes more, sometimes less. Our bodies are hard things to figure out. The main thing is to listen to our body and know its needs, never under eat or over eat is such a vague statement, it is different for each individual person.

I guess I shoulda specified that I maintain at 1800-2200 cals per day, depending on the workout. 1700 is not starving yourself. Sounds like you have a sensible eating plan you can live with and when you're maintaining you will be up to 2000 cals per day!

RobynMWilson

"For results: Look at your body like a science experiment. Add a stimulus. Measure response. Adjust as needed. One variable at a time." -C.Ballantyne

Eat more, eat less, work out differently, work out more! Work out less. Eat more protein, eat more fiber, eat fewer carbs, lift weights, run, don't run, blah blah blah

Try it on yourself and take notes, see what works. One person's tracking of their calories could be way over/under than actual calorie intake. Two people have the same food yet log it differently due to estimations, measurements, portion sizes, etc.

So all you can possibly get on these forums are generalized advice, and there's no magic one-hit-kill bullet. You're going to have to try it yourself. And take notes. And adjust as needed.

^^^ Absolutely! But eating 600-800 cals per day as a young girl is NEVER good!

RobynMWilson

EAT GIRLS! EAT!!!!!!

dies laughing. I think I'm scarred for life!

Lol me too!

iqnas

But I don't want to eat girls... I am not into cannibalism.

RobynMWilson

(I'm talking about NET calories in this post)

I find that if I have 1,200 a day, I do lose weight, but quite slowly. If I eat 1400ish, I lose weight consistently and more quickly. If I eat 1600, I maintain. If I eat 1700 I gain. Have tried this for extended periods of time. So don't try and tell me to eat more!

I am starting to think this is me too. I net 1400 now. OP my BMR is just a wee over 1200 so we are all different. If I ate 2000 I'm fairly certain I'd blow up unless of course I earned those extra cals through working out. But I get the sentiment here I am eating more than I thought I could and still losing so it's good to play with the numbers for a while.

Finally someone here mentions BMR! Thank you!

I'm 52 and small and still can't eat as much as the bigger taller girls, it's never going to happen. Just because we are small and can't eat as much as bigger people does not mean we have eating disorders. If there are skinny girls eating too little then yes I disagree with that, but to tell a fat person who is trying to eat on a calorie deficit to eat more?? How do you know what their BMR is or their body fat % and you tell them to eat more?

I am short, petite, small; my RMR is low compared to others. With my doctors approval I had to eat less than or right around 1000 calories to lose weight. We are all different. There is no one size fits all. Even people my height and gender are different and some need more calories than I do. My doctor checked my hormone levels throughout my 60 lb weight loss journey (from obese down to 10% body fat) and everything was fine. I got stronger and stronger at the gym, my running and weight lifting strength improved even while eating on a significant calorie deficit. My DXA scan proved I did not lose lean body mass or go into starvation mode.


While you don’t have to worry about starvation mode when you have significant fat on your body, as you get closer to your goal you do need to increase your calories slightly as you get leaner as here’s why:

The Theory of Fat Availability:
•There is a set amount of fat that can be released from a fat cell.
•The more fat you have, the more fat can be used as a fuel when dieting.
•The less fat you have, the less fat can be used as a fuel when dieting.
•Towards the end of a transformation, when body fat is extremely low you
may not have enough fat to handle a large caloric deficit anymore.

At the extreme low end, when your body fat cannot ‘keep up’ with the energy deficit
you've imposed on your body, the energy MUST come from SOMEWHERE. This is
when you are at risk of losing lean body mass during dieting (commonly referred to
as ‘starvation mode’). This happens at extremely low levels of body fat, under 6% in
men and 12% in women [Friedl K.E. J Appl Phsiol, 1994].

-Brad Pilon and John Barban (from The Reverse Taper Diet in The Adonis Index and Venus Index manuals)

As far as calories…What you need to eat for a deficit is relative to your RMR. If you are short you really don't have much room for up compared to the 1200. If you are taller you will have a higher RMR and can go up or down and still be in a deficit (way above 1200) so you can lose no matter what. All that matters is a calorie deficit.

To tell everyone eat more is wrong.

To tell everyone to eat less is wrong.

To find the exact amount of calories for you to be in a sustainable calorie deficit is correct. Some people can handle a deeper calorie deficit than others. Some people have emotional eating disorders and it comes into play. Even a small deficit puts your body in a state of flux with hormones and such and everyone is different.

You just need to find the correct calories for YOU to be healthy and sustainable and still lose weight. It might require some experimentation and tremendous patience. You can always notch up and down by 100 until you find what is sustainable and still allows you to lose weight.

If you have emotional eating issues than you are not going to be able to handle such a deep deficit and if you eat to low it will backfire. A better strategy is to eat at a shallower deficit, and sometimes give yourself a break from the deficit and eat at maintenance. This is not going backwards, but eating to low and then binging because you can't sustain it is going backwards. It's better to stay forwards even if it is slower. The tortoise wins this race in the end.


If you plug in all your info (typically age, gender, height and weight) into one of those calculators what you get is the average metabolic rate of a group of people who share your age, sex, height and weight. What you DON’T get is YOUR EXACT calorie needs. It's a place to start.

To find the exact calories needed for YOU to be in a healthy sustainable calorie deficit is the right answer. Wait, if you need to adjust by 100 do it, wait, adjust, wait, adjust, wait. The tortoise wins this race.

You want to eat as healthy as you can because it makes you feel better and perform better, and makes you healthier. There are a bunch of tricks and clean eating; reducing sugar (especially HFCS), fiber, white flour vs whole grain, low carb, low fat, on and on. All that matters is calories for weight loss. If you need to eat a certain way for health reasons or to feel better do it, but extensive good food and bad food lists will drive you insane at some point, it’s a constantly moving target. Just eat what you like, mostly healthy, mostly balanced, within a calorie budget. We all know what healthy is by now, just do it.

Also people play mental accounting games with calories just like with finances. Make steps to make sure you are making accurate measurements. Packaged foods can have MORE than they say but not less (they get in trouble if less so they would rather error with MORE).

So you mean to tell me that for me to tell 18-year old girls who only eat 600-800 calories per day is WRONG? Then I don't wanna be right!

I'm not trying to run anyone's weight loss program. What works for you works for you and you're saying you're doing it under your doctor's supervision so who am I to argue with that if you're not miserable and starving? But do you REALLY think it is wrong for me to tell an 18yr old girl that it's "okay" to eat 600 cals??

RobynMWilson

Ha! I was thinking the same thing when I saw this post.

Hahaha! My bad...thanks for the lesson in punctuation :P Sister Emmanuel would wack me over the head with my phonics book right now if she were around to see this lol

sophayz

I AM TRYING BUT ITS NOT EASYYYYYYYYY (mentaly)

RobynMWilson

I am short. (5'2) I maintain on 2,100-2,400/day. My TDEE is 2,100.

1900/day or less I immediately see a loss. Being short is not an excuse for under eating, and it never will be.

Netting 1400 calories is fine for lots of people, but eating 1400 total and exercising half of it off -- not OK. Never will be. Argue until you're blue in the face. Even the posts from people who did VLCDs and lost their hair and suffered horribly from it -- people argue. It's just.. whatever. Do whatever you want to your bodies, but don't FR me unless you want a foot up your butt.

^^^ are you from NJ perchance? You sound like a Jersey Girl!! Gotta love it!

jofjltncb6

But do you REALLY think it is wrong for me to tell an 18yr old girl that it's "okay" to eat 600 cals??

Yes I do.

trishaseren

I joined MFP not so much to loose weight but to gain a greater awareness of what I was eating, I haven't changed my eating habits, just made adjustments especially I as I have a terrible sweet tooth but I noticed that my calore intake is always around 1200-1500 even before I made adjustments. I'm never hungry so I figure it's right for me, the funny thing is that the girls at work think I eat constantly as I eat around six small meals a day at work, not including breakfast and dinner!

I'd never starve myself as a) I get so stressed and agitated when I'm hungry that I become utter useless and b) I'm too scared of damaging my metbolism.

RobynMWilson

(I'm talking about NET calories in this post)

I find that if I have 1,200 a day, I do lose weight, but quite slowly. If I eat 1400ish, I lose weight consistently and more quickly. If I eat 1600, I maintain. If I eat 1700 I gain. Have tried this for extended periods of time. So don't try and tell me to eat more!

I am starting to think this is me too. I net 1400 now. OP my BMR is just a wee over 1200 so we are all different. If I ate 2000 I'm fairly certain I'd blow up unless of course I earned those extra cals through working out. But I get the sentiment here I am eating more than I thought I could and still losing so it's good to play with the numbers for a while.

Finally someone here mentions BMR! Thank you!

I'm 52 and small and still can't eat as much as the bigger taller girls, it's never going to happen. Just because we are small and can't eat as much as bigger people does not mean we have eating disorders. If there are skinny girls eating too little then yes I disagree with that, but to tell a fat person who is trying to eat on a calorie deficit to eat more?? How do you know what their BMR is or their body fat % and you tell them to eat more?

I am short, petite, small; my RMR is low compared to others. With my doctors approval I had to eat less than or right around 1000 calories to lose weight. We are all different. There is no one size fits all. Even people my height and gender are different and some need more calories than I do. My doctor checked my hormone levels throughout my 60 lb weight loss journey (from obese down to 10% body fat) and everything was fine. I got stronger and stronger at the gym, my running and weight lifting strength improved even while eating on a significant calorie deficit. My DXA scan proved I did not lose lean body mass or go into starvation mode.


While you don’t have to worry about starvation mode when you have significant fat on your body, as you get closer to your goal you do need to increase your calories slightly as you get leaner as here’s why:

The Theory of Fat Availability:
•There is a set amount of fat that can be released from a fat cell.
•The more fat you have, the more fat can be used as a fuel when dieting.
•The less fat you have, the less fat can be used as a fuel when dieting.
•Towards the end of a transformation, when body fat is extremely low you
may not have enough fat to handle a large caloric deficit anymore.

At the extreme low end, when your body fat cannot ‘keep up’ with the energy deficit
you've imposed on your body, the energy MUST come from SOMEWHERE. This is
when you are at risk of losing lean body mass during dieting (commonly referred to
as ‘starvation mode’). This happens at extremely low levels of body fat, under 6% in
men and 12% in women [Friedl K.E. J Appl Phsiol, 1994].

-Brad Pilon and John Barban (from The Reverse Taper Diet in The Adonis Index and Venus Index manuals)

As far as calories…What you need to eat for a deficit is relative to your RMR. If you are short you really don't have much room for up compared to the 1200. If you are taller you will have a higher RMR and can go up or down and still be in a deficit (way above 1200) so you can lose no matter what. All that matters is a calorie deficit.

To tell everyone eat more is wrong.

To tell everyone to eat less is wrong.

To find the exact amount of calories for you to be in a sustainable calorie deficit is correct. Some people can handle a deeper calorie deficit than others. Some people have emotional eating disorders and it comes into play. Even a small deficit puts your body in a state of flux with hormones and such and everyone is different.

You just need to find the correct calories for YOU to be healthy and sustainable and still lose weight. It might require some experimentation and tremendous patience. You can always notch up and down by 100 until you find what is sustainable and still allows you to lose weight.

If you have emotional eating issues than you are not going to be able to handle such a deep deficit and if you eat to low it will backfire. A better strategy is to eat at a shallower deficit, and sometimes give yourself a break from the deficit and eat at maintenance. This is not going backwards, but eating to low and then binging because you can't sustain it is going backwards. It's better to stay forwards even if it is slower. The tortoise wins this race in the end.


If you plug in all your info (typically age, gender, height and weight) into one of those calculators what you get is the average metabolic rate of a group of people who share your age, sex, height and weight. What you DON’T get is YOUR EXACT calorie needs. It's a place to start.

To find the exact calories needed for YOU to be in a healthy sustainable calorie deficit is the right answer. Wait, if you need to adjust by 100 do it, wait, adjust, wait, adjust, wait. The tortoise wins this race.

You want to eat as healthy as you can because it makes you feel better and perform better, and makes you healthier. There are a bunch of tricks and clean eating; reducing sugar (especially HFCS), fiber, white flour vs whole grain, low carb, low fat, on and on. All that matters is calories for weight loss. If you need to eat a certain way for health reasons or to feel better do it, but extensive good food and bad food lists will drive you insane at some point, it’s a constantly moving target. Just eat what you like, mostly healthy, mostly balanced, within a calorie budget. We all know what healthy is by now, just do it.

Also people play mental accounting games with calories just like with finances. Make steps to make sure you are making accurate measurements. Packaged foods can have MORE than they say but not less (they get in trouble if less so they would rather error with MORE).

I feel like I've seen this wall of text before... many many many times before.... hmmm

Someone should copy it and save it somewhere to paste in future threads.

I think I have too...

RobynMWilson

(I'm talking about NET calories in this post)

I find that if I have 1,200 a day, I do lose weight, but quite slowly. If I eat 1400ish, I lose weight consistently and more quickly. If I eat 1600, I maintain. If I eat 1700 I gain. Have tried this for extended periods of time. So don't try and tell me to eat more!

i think she means eat more for those who are under 1200 daily, 500-1000 intakes

Yes I do mama!

iampanda

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

RobynMWilson

meh...I'm small...and if I ate 2000 calories, I would weigh over 200lbs...there are many types of bodies, metabolism and what not...and for what it is worth, once you hit 40ish you have to start eating less to maintain...that is just the shizzle your body throws at you. And yes, that is from a textbook..well not the shizzle part. Up the clean eating, up the weight training, and follow what your body tells you...works for me...but then again I eat less than 1200 cals to lose weight, lift weights and still need to lose another 15lbs. Course I do also have a category for chocolate...so don't take advice from me even with the nutrition and nursing courses under my belt.

Lol I'm 40 now and the one who started this and I was referring to girls half my age who eat less than half of what I do, at 40ish!

CynthiaElise

RobynMWilson

But do you REALLY think it is wrong for me to tell an 18yr old girl that it's "okay" to eat 600 cals??

Yes I do.

Troll ^^

RobynMWilson

I love eating... I can't eat too little. LOL. But... I always aim for 1500 calories a day... as that is what my doctor has put me on for Diabetes... and, my A1C has went from 6.4 to 5.1. I think I'm sticking with that. Somedays I'll eat more. Somedays less.

But... I agree with you. Skinny isn't pretty. Healthy is.

And 1500 cals isn't too shabby. I Just see this young girls, who may not have an eating disorder, yet, following their starving peers and the point of this forum is to show them that it doesn't have to be that way!

_stephanie0

meh...I'm small...and if I ate 2000 calories, I would weigh over 200lbs...there are many types of bodies, metabolism and what not...and for what it is worth, once you hit 40ish you have to start eating less to maintain...that is just the shizzle your body throws at you. And yes, that is from a textbook..well not the shizzle part. Up the clean eating, up the weight training, and follow what your body tells you...works for me...but then again I eat less than 1200 cals to lose weight, lift weights and still need to lose another 15lbs. Course I do also have a category for chocolate...so don't take advice from me even with the nutrition and nursing courses under my belt.

Don't worry, I won't. I lift weights and lose by eating 1500-1600 cals a day. I am under 5 foot

Love.

ash8184

Point taken, but the best policy, if you really want to know, is to get your BMR tested. I for one know that my BMR is under 1200 so eating net 1600, 1800, 2000+ will make me GAIN. Educate yourself about your body and you'll be successful

pet1127

Okay so this site tells me my goal calorie intake is 1420. I find it very hard to stay under that. I have been losing 1 pound per week for the last three weeks so something is working. I am having a big issue with eating "right". Any suggestions?

shop the outside of the grocery isles if you cant pronounce it dont eat it :happy: