Not getting the whole "Eat more to lose more" mentality

lmkaks

I just read the Road Map post everyone talks about. First of all, I am confused in general, but basically according to that I should be eating close to 1900 calories a day.

MFP has me at 1810 a day if I want to lose one lb a week. I never even get close to that (I probably average around 1500-1600 a day) unless I make a conscious effort to eat 1800 calories - and usually that involves me having two helpings of dinner to get there (so I think I am doing it wrong...)

So if I don't eat 1800 calories a day, and only eat 1500 people say "YOU ARE NOT EATING ENOUGH!" and tell me that is why I am not losing weight. However, if I change my goals in MFP to where I want to lose two lbs a week, MFP tells me I shoudl be eating 1320 calories a day.

So, it makes sense to me that, as long as I am eating between 1320-1800 calories a day, I should be losing, right? Which means, if I am averaging 1500 calories a day, I should be losing 1-2 lbs on a weekly basis, but I have lost only one pound in the last three weeks.

As for "starvation" mode, I would think that if I were eating below 1200 calories, that my body would freak out, but I really don't understand how 1500-1600 calories would send my body into starvation mode, especially if MFP says I could eat 1320 and lose weight.

I AM SO CONFUSED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And beyond frustrated.

(It all makes me want to go eat a donut then take a nap. Kidding - kind of).

this_time_nextyear

Are you exercising enough to fill in the deficit?
Your TDEE (which i assume you calculated) is to maintain weight, TDEE - 20% gives weight loss anymore not recommended, assuming by your stats you arent morbidly obese? Then to lose 1lb per week you need to be in deficit of 3500 calories. If your calorie deficit from TDEE - 20% is equivalent to that then you should lose, if not you need to make the rest up with exercise.
Its not as simple as just eating less to lose weight, its about the whole package to do it healthily. Your deficit will result in weight loss on its own, just maybe not enough for a 1lb a week. Does this make sense?

sunnyside1213

It doesn't work for me. I eat TDEE - 20% = 1017 c. That works.

BamaBreezeNSaltAire

There's so much more to this. More than I have time to explain at the moment but I'll search for the info I used and I'll message it to you. Your diary looks great, you just need more information to work with.

auddii

If you change your goals to 2lbs per week, MFP does a simple math equation to figure out your calories. It doesn't mean that it's healthy, it's just telling you the answer to what you input. Unless you have over 75 lbs to lose, you shouldn't be expecting a 2lb per week lose, it just isn't sustainable. Eating 1500-1600 calories probably isn't going to put you in starvation mode. What is your BMR? You should be eating at least that amount.

I find it pretty easy to eat 1800 calories a day because I haven't cut out things some people consider unhealthy like peanut butter (my friend on WW always freaks out when she sees PB in my pantry), avocados, olive oil, cheese, yogurt, milk, etc. Healthy fats can be very calorie dense and get you where you need to go. I tend to snack through the day because I get hungry every few hours. I used to save up all of my calories for the end of the day, and then I'd always fall short. It's easier now that I've increased a little all of my calories at meals and snacks.

Duck_Puddle

Are you very tall or very active or very overweight? Sounds like your TDEE is around 2300? That's kinda high unless you're very active, very tall and/or very overweight (I'm 5'4", 160-ish and run 25 miles a week and my TDEE isn't that high).

Since any caloric deficit is calculated off that TDEE (via mfp or roadmap or whatever), that number needs to be correct. The reason I'm questioning the 2300 (aside from it being kind of high) is that mfp assumes no exercise until you log it in and "earn" it. The roadmap includes that exercise already. Your numbers are off by 100-meaning that you burn 700 calories a week in exercise. That just doesn't add up to a TDEE that high (unless you are very tall, very active or very overweight).

alifer

You have to find the number that works for you, where you aren't hungry all the time, but still losing consistently. Mine is about 1500.

Sometimes when the scale isn't moving the measurements are dropping. Very important to watch those numbers too. If you haven't started watching and tracking measurements I highly recommend it.

lmkaks

Are you exercising enough to fill in the deficit?
Your TDEE (which i assume you calculated) is to maintain weight, TDEE - 20% gives weight loss anymore not recommended, assuming by your stats you arent morbidly obese? Then to lose 1lb per week you need to be in deficit of 3500 calories. If your calorie deficit from TDEE - 20% is equivalent to that then you should lose, if not you need to make the rest up with exercise.
Its not as simple as just eating less to lose weight, its about the whole package to do it healthily. Your deficit will result in weight loss on its own, just maybe not enough for a 1lb a week. Does this make sense?

I did everyting that the guy posted a while back about the "Road Map". According to that, my TDEE - 20% is 1906. So that means, I would need to eat no more than that, to lose.

BUT, I am not losing, so people have said I am not eating enough, but I really don't understand that concept. I think that is where I am confused.

lmkaks

There's so much more to this. More than I have time to explain at the moment but I'll search for the info I used and I'll message it to you. Your diary looks great, you just need more information to work with.

You mean except for the pint of Ben and Jerry's frozen yogurt I had last night...pretend you didn't see that.

lmkaks

If you change your goals to 2lbs per week, MFP does a simple math equation to figure out your calories. It doesn't mean that it's healthy, it's just telling you the answer to what you input. Unless you have over 75 lbs to lose, you shouldn't be expecting a 2lb per week lose, it just isn't sustainable. Eating 1500-1600 calories probably isn't going to put you in starvation mode. What is your BMR? You should be eating at least that amount.

I find it pretty easy to eat 1800 calories a day because I haven't cut out things some people consider unhealthy like peanut butter (my friend on WW always freaks out when she sees PB in my pantry), avocados, olive oil, cheese, yogurt, milk, etc. Healthy fats can be very calorie dense and get you where you need to go. I tend to snack through the day because I get hungry every few hours. I used to save up all of my calories for the end of the day, and then I'd always fall short. It's easier now that I've increased a little all of my calories at meals and snacks.

This is very helpful. Thank you.


My BMR is 1733. My TDEE is 1906. I have about 45 pounds to lose. I am 5'9" 211 lbs.

GauchoMark

are you weighing your food? Portion estimation is a huge source of error.

Also, measuring 1 lb in 3 weeks could easily be 3 lbs in 3 wks in reality depending on your measurement error, water retention, etc. Unless you are taking daily weight measurements and using a trend to see your progress, its really tough to see a 1 lb difference.

Mischievous_Rascal

I practice this and it's been steady, but slow, which is great because anytime it's been fast I haven't kept it off. It does take a lot of research, and a some tweaking, but it's worth it if you take the time to wrap your head around it.

And one pound in three weeks? That's awesome!!! Your body is being stubborn, but you can be more so. It will adapt and you'll end up losing. Just wait for it!!!

SARgirl

It looks like you just joined in December so it hasn't been that long. I would say pick one version (MFP or TDEE or whatever you decide) and stick with it for a minimum of 4-6 weeks before trying to switch to something else. You have to give whichever way you decide time to work before saying if it works for your body or not.

BusyRaeNOTBusty

I like eating. If I can still reach my goals (eventually) by eating a lot, I'm all for it. Also once I reach my goals I can pretty much continue eating the same way I am now. It's not like I'll be going off and on a "diet".

GauchoMark

also, based on your stats, your BMR is 1726, but a sedentary TDEE is 2072. Small difference, but you would take your percentage from 2072.

Ploogy

For what it's worth, I understand your confusion and frustration. Part of the initial allure of MFP was that it would "take the guesswork" out of everything, and the reality is that it doesn't fully. It provides discipline through monitoring, but you still have to learn the skills to choose food wisely and stay involved. At first (that is, a few days ago!), it was a frustrating realization, but I'm beginning to accept it.

I've been furiously studying everything here, and wading through the often conflicting information in these forums, but you are fortunate that this_time_nex has steered you in the direction that it appears most knowledgeable folks here agree on. That you need to look at this holistically. Think of it like steering a ship - even if you are going towards the general direction you are headed in, you can't take your hands off the wheel because there is no autopilot. There will be some stormy weather.

But I know what you are saying: can someone just give me some guidance on how to set basic parameters?! So, here is what I've gathered: MFP recommendations, if you choose to use them, are best used with the 1 Pound a Week recommendation. For a lot of people, if you choose to lose at a rate any higher, the caloric recommendation it suggests ends up actually being lower than your Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR), which is the minimum calories that your body needs to "function" without trying to seek energy through significant catabolism. This is why you are getting hit back and forth between being told that you aren't eating enough - if you try and eat at the "2 pound a week level" (which is below BMR), the prevailing wisdom is that - while you'll lose weight, you'll also take significant muscle with it, and risk stalling in weightloss as the body starts to downregulate because it perceives a "starvation".

So, the goal it seems is to eat at a deficit from your total daily energy expenditure (TDEE), but never less than your BMR. You have to steer the ship through these two goalposts, and that seems to be the key. The added confusion I - and you, and I think alot of people - have, is that MFP's allows you the option to undereat too much, without enough of a warning or explanation.

Does this make sense?

weird_me2

It could also be that your BMR/TDEE aren't as high as they are calculating. How tall are you and how much do you weigh? Do you know your body fat %?

PlanetVelma

It looks like you just joined in December so it hasn't been that long. I would say pick one version (MFP or TDEE or whatever you decide) and stick with it for a minimum of 4-6 weeks before trying to switch to something else. You have to give whichever way you decide time to work before saying if it works for your body or not.

This right here!

Each time you make adjustments to your calorie intake, etc... you should give your body at least 4-6 weeks to adjust. Do NOT weigh yourself during this period.

Focus on drinking more water, eating healthy, getting enough veggies, physical activity level, etc... and many times the scale is lying POS, so instead of weighing yourself, take your measurements and gauge how your clothes fit.

Good luck!

ingeh

I workout 3-4hrs a week and my tdee to lose 1lb a week is 1900cals (well more like 1950-80 but I round it down) I do a 30 min kettlebell routine and 30 mins cardio 4 days a week and then rest friday-monday. I use the scooby workshop calculater as you enter how many hours you exercise. I find that way alot easier for me. Iv been losing 1lbs a week when eating 1700cals and eating back exercise calories (netting probably 1900cals anyway) but my HRM broke so im just going with this.
Maybe just stick at it and see how you go? You have to keep at things for weeks before you find the right way for you. Im losing every week after following mfp guide and losing maybe 1lb every 2-3 weeks. So I love this way and then I dont need to eat back exercise calories as its already counted for.
Hope you keep working towards your goals!

aguethler

TDEE by activity level is SO hard to gauge on your own. I recently got a bodymedia armband and it has me burning between 2300 and 2700 calories a day with usually only 200-400 coming from formal exercise. Using the best calculators I could find on the internet they all had my TDEE at less than 1200 so no wonder I was having trouble. At 1200 where MFP had me start I really was starving. I lost great for about 4 days and then I got so sick. I am a little person 132 and 5'2" but I am very active in little ways all day long taking care of 4 little kids. I had been eating 1400 calories and not losing. After getting the armband I started eating 1650 and I started losing again. Now I am still eating that and have stopped losing with the same workout regiment, I am actually going to up it again to 1800 and see how that goes since that will be at least 500 per day deficit for me. The long and the short is that if you eat too little your metabolism slows down to make the food stretch to fill you bodies needs.

WBB55

Hi there! my highest weight was 240. I'm down 80 lbs. I'm not a nutritionist or anything, but I thought I'd comment because I think I've been in a similar place. So I'm trying to be a LITTLE critical, but know that it comes from a place where I feel like I know what you're going thru, ok?

I think you might be the kind of person where the old addage "a calorie is a calorie" doesn't apply. As in, if you are really going to try to eat at the "low" end of your calorie range, you have to make sure that every calorie is as healthy as possible. Frozen pre-packaged lunches, pudding cups, and chocolate covered pretzles might fit into your CALORIE goals for the day, but they might not fit into the goals you're trying to reach ultimately. I'm not saying never have snacks or processed food. But if ANYONE out there is only eating 1200-1500 calories every day, then every calorie has to be filled with as much nutrition as possible. Eating more whole, nutritious foods thruout the day will leave you feeling better and more full.

I don't know if all of the things you're logging as "snacks" are eaten at the end of the day, but if you find yourself making poor choices after dinner, you could try eating more calories earlier in the day. That way you're not as hungry late in the day and less likely to grab something unhealthy, like a tub of ice cream.

I'm not suggesting you eat more calories. I'm suggesting that you try making the calories you DO eat, more nutritious. It might help you start losing again when you're giving your body the fuel it needs to succeed.

Chief_Rocka

What you have to realize in that your metabolic rate decreases in response to a caloric deficit.

So, let's say you're eating 1500 calories and losing one pound a week at a 500 cal/day deficit. After a while, through several mechanisms, you don't have a 500 cal/day deficit anymore. So, to reestablish a deficit, you have to lower calories a bit more and/or increase your calorie expenditure. You can stave off this lowering of your metabolic rate for a longer time by taking frequent diet breaks.

The problem with jumping right into something like 1,100 calories a day is that yes, initially you will lose weight, but, just as before, your body will catch up, and you'll stall. So what do you do then? Lower calories? Not likely. Increase activity? You're luck if you have the energy. The only solution at that point is to increase your caloric intake for an extended period of time, where weight loss will eventually stall, and you may even gain some, and give your hormones a chance to return to baseline. Most people on MFP aren't going to do that. So, the most intelligent course of action is to use the smallest deficit possible that allows you to lose weight, so you have more wiggle room to adjust things later.

As for people that "eat more and start losing," I suspect that an increase in calories relieves some of those stress hormones which cause you to hold on to some water, causing people to see relatively rapid weight loss after raising calories. I also suspect that eating enough food gives people enough energy to train with intensity, which actually leads to a higher net deficit.

Ploogy

This was incredibly insightful. I hadn't thought about it this way. Thanks so much for this.

What you have to realize in that your metabolic rate decreases in response to a caloric deficit.

So, let's say you're eating 1500 calories and losing one pound a week at a 500 cal/day deficit. After a while, through several mechanisms, you don't have a 500 cal/day deficit anymore. So, to reestablish a deficit, you have to lower calories a bit more and/or increase your calorie expenditure. You can stave off this lowering of your metabolic rate for a longer time by taking frequent diet breaks.

The problem with jumping right into something like 1,100 calories a day is that yes, initially you will lose weight, but, just as before, your body will catch up, and you'll stall. So what do you do then? Lower calories? Not likely. Increase activity? You're luck if you have the energy. The only solution at that point is to increase your caloric intake for an extended period of time, where weight loss will eventually stall, and you may even gain some, and give your hormones a chance to return to baseline. Most people on MFP aren't going to do that. So, the most intelligent course of action is to use the smallest deficit possible that allows you to lose weight, so you have more wiggle room to adjust things later.

As for people that "eat more and start losing," I suspect that an increase in calories relieves some of those stress hormones which cause you to hold on to some water, causing people to see relatively rapid weight loss after raising calories. I also suspect that eating enough food gives people enough energy to train with intensity, which actually leads to a higher net deficit.

Flowers4Julia

Just took a fast peek at your diary/profile. Being a high school teacher and eating at 1320 cals just seems to low. I'd guess that is why you are stalled. It does seem odd to eat more to lose, but when you think about that the human body can learn to survive and maintain in a famine situation (biologically) for quite a while, why wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that by eating too few calories the same thing would result?

Just something to consider!

laccy40

I've recently calculated my bmr, tdee etc and have a target of 1650. I'm 5'7" and used lightly active. I've lost some weight and most importantly toned up. It's really important to make sure you do the amount of exercise you said you would when you calculated your tdee. If you've checked everything, you might just need more time. After I lost weight on a low calorie diet it really messed me up and put on all the weight and more even though I was eating less than I am now. I had to reset my metabolism before I could start over, but having done that I feel better than ever.

lmkaks

For what it's worth, I understand your confusion and frustration. Part of the initial allure of MFP was that it would "take the guesswork" out of everything, and the reality is that it doesn't fully. It provides discipline through monitoring, but you still have to learn the skills to choose food wisely and stay involved. At first (that is, a few days ago!), it was a frustrating realization, but I'm beginning to accept it.

I've been furiously studying everything here, and wading through the often conflicting information in these forums, but you are fortunate that this_time_nex has steered you in the direction that it appears most knowledgeable folks here agree on. That you need to look at this holistically. Think of it like steering a ship - even if you are going towards the general direction you are headed in, you can't take your hands off the wheel because there is no autopilot. There will be some stormy weather.

But I know what you are saying: can someone just give me some guidance on how to set basic parameters?! So, here is what I've gathered: MFP recommendations, if you choose to use them, are best used with the 1 Pound a Week recommendation. For a lot of people, if you choose to lose at a rate any higher, the caloric recommendation it suggests ends up actually being lower than your Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR), which is the minimum calories that your body needs to "function" without trying to seek energy through significant catabolism. This is why you are getting hit back and forth between being told that you aren't eating enough - if you try and eat at the "2 pound a week level" (which is below BMR), the prevailing wisdom is that - while you'll lose weight, you'll also take significant muscle with it, and risk stalling in weightloss as the body starts to downregulate because it perceives a "starvation".

So, the goal it seems is to eat at a deficit from your total daily energy expenditure (TDEE), but never less than your BMR. You have to steer the ship through these two goalposts, and that seems to be the key. The added confusion I - and you, and I think alot of people - have, is that MFP's allows you the option to undereat too much, without enough of a warning or explanation.

Does this make sense?

YES! This does. Thank you. I *think* I am starting to get it.

lmkaks

I practice this and it's been steady, but slow, which is great because anytime it's been fast I haven't kept it off. It does take a lot of research, and a some tweaking, but it's worth it if you take the time to wrap your head around it.

And one pound in three weeks? That's awesome!!! Your body is being stubborn, but you can be more so. It will adapt and you'll end up losing. Just wait for it!!!

Thank you!

laccy40

What you have to realize in that your metabolic rate decreases in response to a caloric deficit.

So, let's say you're eating 1500 calories and losing one pound a week at a 500 cal/day deficit. After a while, through several mechanisms, you don't have a 500 cal/day deficit anymore. So, to reestablish a deficit, you have to lower calories a bit more and/or increase your calorie expenditure. You can stave off this lowering of your metabolic rate for a longer time by taking frequent diet breaks.

The problem with jumping right into something like 1,100 calories a day is that yes, initially you will lose weight, but, just as before, your body will catch up, and you'll stall. So what do you do then? Lower calories? Not likely. Increase activity? You're luck if you have the energy. The only solution at that point is to increase your caloric intake for an extended period of time, where weight loss will eventually stall, and you may even gain some, and give your hormones a chance to return to baseline. Most people on MFP aren't going to do that. So, the most intelligent course of action is to use the smallest deficit possible that allows you to lose weight, so you have more wiggle room to adjust things later.

As for people that "eat more and start losing," I suspect that an increase in calories relieves some of those stress hormones which cause you to hold on to some water, causing people to see relatively rapid weight loss after raising calories. I also suspect that eating enough food gives people enough energy to train with intensity, which actually leads to a higher net deficit.

This is what I am talking about. I had to eat more for a while then calculate a small, sustainable deficit. Result, I'm eating more, have more energy and packing more into my workouts.

lmkaks

also, based on your stats, your BMR is 1726, but a sedentary TDEE is 2072. Small difference, but you would take your percentage from 2072.

Where did you find this? I used the fit2befit link that was posted in message boards a while ago, and it said my BMR was 1733 (and my TDEE 2383 - I don't know, that was the number associated with "light activity" that I was told to use). So the TDEE - 20% was 1906.

I don't know if I am using the right link/calculator...

lmkaks

It looks like you just joined in December so it hasn't been that long. I would say pick one version (MFP or TDEE or whatever you decide) and stick with it for a minimum of 4-6 weeks before trying to switch to something else. You have to give whichever way you decide time to work before saying if it works for your body or not.

This right here!

Each time you make adjustments to your calorie intake, etc... you should give your body at least 4-6 weeks to adjust. Do NOT weigh yourself during this period.

Focus on drinking more water, eating healthy, getting enough veggies, physical activity level, etc... and many times the scale is lying POS, so instead of weighing yourself, take your measurements and gauge how your clothes fit.

Good luck!

LOL! Thank you. I know I have to up my water and veggies for sure.

WendyTerry420

What you have to realize in that your metabolic rate decreases in response to a caloric deficit.

So, let's say you're eating 1500 calories and losing one pound a week at a 500 cal/day deficit. After a while, through several mechanisms, you don't have a 500 cal/day deficit anymore. So, to reestablish a deficit, you have to lower calories a bit more and/or increase your calorie expenditure. You can stave off this lowering of your metabolic rate for a longer time by taking frequent diet breaks.

The problem with jumping right into something like 1,100 calories a day is that yes, initially you will lose weight, but, just as before, your body will catch up, and you'll stall. So what do you do then? Lower calories? Not likely. Increase activity? You're luck if you have the energy. The only solution at that point is to increase your caloric intake for an extended period of time, where weight loss will eventually stall, and you may even gain some, and give your hormones a chance to return to baseline. Most people on MFP aren't going to do that. So, the most intelligent course of action is to use the smallest deficit possible that allows you to lose weight, so you have more wiggle room to adjust things later.

As for people that "eat more and start losing," I suspect that an increase in calories relieves some of those stress hormones which cause you to hold on to some water, causing people to see relatively rapid weight loss after raising calories. I also suspect that eating enough food gives people enough energy to train with intensity, which actually leads to a higher net deficit.

^^ This

I'm 5'4" and weigh 208, down from 263 just since July. I average about 1900 calories a day, but sometimes I go up to 2100 or even to my TDEE of 2500. In addition to what Fire_Rock has correctly stated, it is also psychologically beneficial to eat more food. For the most part, I don't even have to stop and think anymore about what I eat and still come in around 1900ish. The only thing I ever have to think about is whether or not to have a "real" dessert or if I only have room for a low-calorie dessert.