It is NOT that simple.

_Timmeh_

nknight757

It is calories in /calories ourt however it is not the same for everyone. It is based on your height, weight, activity etc..When you log under 1200 calories on this website it clearly highlights in red that consuming less than 1200 calories can cause your body to go into starvation mode ie sabotage your weight loss. If you were obese then your body definitely could have gone into shock. I am much smaller than you and can still lose weight eating more than 1200 a day...

IrishHarpy1

I just think it takes a lot of nerve to start on a new program and immediately tell everyone else that they're doing it wrong.

It's your first month here.

If you don't want to use the free calorie counting app and take the advice in the free forums you certainly don't have to.

But for us it's working. LOTS of us. Maybe instead of insisting you're right about everything you could try listening.

But if not you're absolutely free to go. If you're against the idea of counting calories you probably shouldn't use a calorie counting website.

I think I love you....

krisiepoo

How long did you consume 1100 cals per day for and do you still have those tracking records?

Roughly a year, possibly more. But it was mostly processed foods--just smaller quantities.

Weightloss is magic

what makes you think you were overweight at 1100 calories a day?

Ummm... Being 235 lb. Am I understanding this question correctly? I was clinically obese and was only consuming 1100 cals a day. I increased my intake, but changed the quality of food, and lost 60 lb.

I think it is more likely you did not track properly

We need an eyeroll smiley.

Yes, because it is so impossible for me to have only consumed 1100 cals and be nearly 100lb oveweight. It MUST be that I just didn't track properly. And the part about losing 60 lbs when adding cals... that was a fluke, right??

Your post actually PROVES it IS about cals in/cals out... you just happened to be eating WAAAAY less than your body needed Thanks for proving what we've all been saying

rm7161

Actually I heard a doctor on NPR last week and he basically said that calories in and calories out is a fallacy. He advocated for eating whole foods, which is the basis of the whole clean eating movement. Below is the blurb from when he was on Talk of the Nation Science Friday:

In his new book Fat Chance: Beating the Odds Against Sugar, Processed Food, Obesity, and Disease, endocrinologist and obesity doc Robert Lustig deconstructs the mythology of fat. He says exercise, for all its benefits, won't help you shed pounds -- and that fasting only worsens weight gain.

He was also on the Diane Rehm show when a nutritionist called in saying that weight loss is all about calories in and calories out, he basically tore her a new one.

there you go, he's selling a book.

I think he's overstating the case for whole foods. Nothing against whole foods, I eat a lot of whole grains myself (edit: as long as they aren't wheat, rye or barley or variations of). They're healthy. But if you eat too much of them you are going to be fat.

I'm sticking to what gets results. What gets results for me is to watch what I eat, weigh every food that has high caloric density and portion appropriately, and exercise... the exercise helps my cardiovascular system which was part of the reason I started this in the first place. There is no magic food out there that will magically not make you gain weight. Not according to my waistline anyways.

sunsnstatheart

I don't think she was using skinny fat to insult body type, but to describe a skinny person's health being just as bad as an obese person's because they eat piles of **** wrapped in bacon...

well yeah in that case it's true. eating a crappy diet is bad. most people don't use the term skinny fat to mean that. they use it to mean skinny, but not muscular. that's why i hate the term.

I disagree there. Skinny fat means that yes they are at a healthy BMR and a healthy weight, but still at an unhealthy body fat percentage

I think this happening is pretty rare.

It happens often with anorexia

firstsip

I don't think she was using skinny fat to insult body type, but to describe a skinny person's health being just as bad as an obese person's because they eat piles of **** wrapped in bacon...

well yeah in that case it's true. eating a crappy diet is bad. most people don't use the term skinny fat to mean that. they use it to mean skinny, but not muscular. that's why i hate the term.

I disagree there. Skinny fat means that yes they are at a healthy BMR and a healthy weight, but still at an unhealthy body fat percentage

I think this happening is pretty rare.

Really? You haven't seen the hundreds of people saying, "I'm at my goal weight but I'm unhappy with my body. I ate 1200 calories for two years... what happened?" I'd go so far as to say that the crazy statistic of people who end up regaining lost weight stems from a loss of muscle on prolonged VLCD.

SideSteel

Your energy intake was not lower than your energy expenditure.

PikaKnight

You can't argue with the law of thermodynamics: burn more calories than you consume, and you lose weight. It's entirely possible to gain weight on only 1100 (supposing that they were accurately tracked) calories a day if your BMR was ridiculously low due to lack of exercise.

I eat at least 1-2 processed meals a day, and dropping over 100 pounds (20 before starting MFP) was cake. And yes, I also weight train and have built strong, lean muscles while doing it.

So for some of us -- yeah, it's easy.

Best of luck in whatever works for *you.* :flowerforyou:

:flowerforyou: :flowerforyou:

BrettPGH

Is there any chance we could all ignore the same girl trying yet again to derail another thread with her own issues? It's getting really old at this point. This thread has nothing to do with "skinny fat". Don't fall into her trap, you'll only end up with strikes.

Ah if only she'd post gifs.. then they'd do something...

Mighty_Rabite

Calories out must supersede calories in.

But let's add in the caveat of "at proper homeostasis."

Someone who is obese and inactive who eats little is likely to not have a very high metabolism, but ~1100 calories a day is still not usually down in the range of "you're going to lose weight no matter what." Usually such a state is clinically referred to as anorexia. Furthermore.. fat stores hardly burn any energy and don't contribute much to the metabolism other than being stored fuel.

My approximation.. your metabolism was dragging enough at 1100 calories per day that it slowed to the point of that being your maintenance level and therefore you maintained. When you bumped up your calories and ate more cleanly, it also bumped your metabolism by way of more food to process, more bodily functions could be done more efficiently..

And at least in my opinion, diet is the hardest part. I'm certain to lose 60lbs you bumped up the activity some! When I lost 50-55lbs back in 2006, it too was mostly diet, but I was reducing calories and adding some exercise.

neverstray

Had you increased calories eating junk, you would have lost.

Aviva92

Really? You haven't seen the hundreds of people saying, "I'm at my goal weight but I'm unhappy with my body. I ate 1200 calories for two years... what happened?" I'd go so far as to say that the crazy statistic of people who end up regaining lost weight stems from a loss of muscle on prolonged VLCD.

i don't think it means they are skinny fat. it's because the ideal now has changed to be muscular and they want to be the ideal.

etoiles_argentees

maintained 97 pounds for 6 months here at 1970 calories net. Gained 7 pounds eating over 2500 net in 6 months. 105 now, and I'm fine.

PikaKnight

I don't think she was using skinny fat to insult body type, but to describe a skinny person's health being just as bad as an obese person's because they eat piles of **** wrapped in bacon...

well yeah in that case it's true. eating a crappy diet is bad. most people don't use the term skinny fat to mean that. they use it to mean skinny, but not muscular. that's why i hate the term.

I disagree there. Skinny fat means that yes they are at a healthy BMR and a healthy weight, but still at an unhealthy body fat percentage

I think this happening is pretty rare.

Really? You haven't seen the hundreds of people saying, "I'm at my goal weight but I'm unhappy with my body. I ate 1200 calories for two years... what happened?" I'd go so far as to say that the crazy statistic of people who end up regaining lost weight stems from a loss of muscle on prolonged VLCD.

Save your sanity. :flowerforyou: :drinker: Just ignore.

FearlessRobb

You skimmed over the part where a trainer told you to eat more. This trainer, what did they train you to do? Did you also begin an effective exercise program at the same time as eating different foods. Can you tell us more about this exercise? Is there any possibility that the change in your exercise habits contributed to your newfound weightloss? Or does that hurt your narrative?

Yes, but I wasn't a workout fiend, and I had been working out before. The activity wasn't a very great increase. It only increased by about one day a week (went from 2-3 days on average to 4 days on average). And again, still doesn't "explain" how I was unable to lose weight on a calorie deficit. If that were that simple, I would've already been losing, wouldn't I?


Whoever asked how I was counting... I was using nutritional labels (since everything was packaged...) and keeping a paper journal. At the time, I was not aware of websites like MFP, so I was doing it "old school". So... eat a protein bar, write it down directly from the label. Eat a TV dinner? Write it from the label. That's how it was back then. And most of my cals came from carbs. I wasn't really making my own food at that time, so it was fairly simple to record what was on the label.


And I applaud all of you who are able to lose with the simple calorie deficit. But assuming it works for everyone and attacking anyone who says anything differently (this thread is a perfect picture of that) is just plain arrogant and ignorant. Perhaps there are "outside factors" for someone not losing weight--hypothyroid, medical condition, whatever--but that doesn't justify talking down to people and being condescending simply because they offer an alternative point of view. Clearly it can work for MOST, but true health is much more than BF% or BMI. The food you eat literally becomes your cells. So yeah, even if someone is not obese, they can still develop cancer, or diabetes, or heart disease, because even if they ear fewer cals than they burn, they eat crap.

I'm not saying that everyone needs to increase cals or that CI/CO can't work, but that it's one piece of health, and may not work for everyone. For those who are struggling with losing weight and are constantly told, "It's so simple!!!" It's degrading and frustrating for those of us who do carry a calorie deficit and may still struggle. I see so many posts of people (usually women) saying they've been under their count for so long now and seeing no results--or even gaining--and then a bunch of people (usually men) jump on them and tell them "it's so simple", when it's really not. It's way more complex than that.

well if u google it under 1200 calories a day is unhealthy for a person and ur body could have thought it was starving and storing fat as a way to survive. alot of people will eat 900-1000 for a month maybe 2 to drop 10 lbs a little more but its recomended to step up the food intake above 1200.
also since u were eating 1100 and then exercising ide say average 400 take off that ur at 700 calories for the day.
I honestly think its because your body thought it was starving and what they call starvation mode. just my opinion tho.

ps: calories are the main thing. but you should watch fat intake and drink a ton ton of water casue that helps alot

firstsip

I don't think she was using skinny fat to insult body type, but to describe a skinny person's health being just as bad as an obese person's because they eat piles of **** wrapped in bacon...

well yeah in that case it's true. eating a crappy diet is bad. most people don't use the term skinny fat to mean that. they use it to mean skinny, but not muscular. that's why i hate the term.

I disagree there. Skinny fat means that yes they are at a healthy BMR and a healthy weight, but still at an unhealthy body fat percentage

I think this happening is pretty rare.

Really? You haven't seen the hundreds of people saying, "I'm at my goal weight but I'm unhappy with my body. I ate 1200 calories for two years... what happened?" I'd go so far as to say that the crazy statistic of people who end up regaining lost weight stems from a loss of muscle on prolonged VLCD.

Save your sanity. :flowerforyou: :drinker: Just ignore.

I know... I'm trying to learn my lesson.

PikaKnight

Save your sanity. :flowerforyou: :drinker: Just ignore.

I know... I'm trying to learn my lesson.

It's one I have to remind myself often...lol.

lasmit4477

Really? You haven't seen the hundreds of people saying, "I'm at my goal weight but I'm unhappy with my body. I ate 1200 calories for two years... what happened?" I'd go so far as to say that the crazy statistic of people who end up regaining lost weight stems from a loss of muscle on prolonged VLCD.

i don't think it means they are skinny fat. it's because the ideal now has changed to be muscular and they want to be the ideal.

She didn't say that in her post!

Muscle mass makes up body composition and when you are in that low of a deficit without proper macronutrients and micronutrients, you will lose LBM. When people start a weight-loss journey, they set a goal weight, but in all honesty, they have a certain image of what they "think" they will look like at that weight. Being uneducated and misinformed is the issue. This is also the issue with the OP's post!

Akumu

I don't understand the gif, but I am feeling nice and tranquil now....

Lol, me too