How do I Eat More To Weigh Less??

its not 'eating more' as in being able to eat $hitloads and still lose, more that you don't need to cut cals QUITE as much as some people do - eg maybe you could still lose @ 1500, and not need to go down to 1200.

Helloitsdans post 'in place of a roadmap' explains it really well, basically all it comes down to is calculate the total energy you burn from normal daily activy and exercise (this is your TDEE and what you would need to eat to maintain), calculate your BMR (which is what your body needs to survive if you were in a coma), eat between the two and you WILL lose.

Example - my BMR is 1550. TDEE is 2800ish. I eat 2100cals which is 700 deficit - apx 1.5lbs a week (40 carbs / 30 protein / 30 fat), and try to get 5 fruit & veg a day. I do eat 'bad' things, but try to be healthy most of the time.
It WORKS, ive lost 60lbs in 10 months, have only had 2 0.5lb gains in that time - once following an injury and once following a car accident. Slow loss combined with exercise (heavy weights / moderate cardio) is far better than aiming for too much and ending up regaining the weight.

I'd like to hear the answer to this too. I'm in the energy in/energy out camp - eat more than you need and you WILL put on weight - eat less than you need and you WILL lose weight.

Some will talk about lean mass and starvation mode and metabolism ebla bla.

"Eat more to lose weight" is pure bollocks

Dude, REALLY?

EM2WL is a nice catch phrase, but it's really about eating the RIGHT amount for you, which is typically somewhere between your BMR (the amount of calories your body burns completely at rest, just staying alive) and your TDEE (the total amount of calories you burn in a day including your BMR, normal daily activity and exercise).

For instance, my BMR at 5'5, 40 years old and 134 pounds, is estimated to be 1,279. I personally think that's low because it's based on statistical averages and I've been working damn hard to have a little more muscle and a little less body fat than the statistically average 40 year old.

My TDEE is estimated around 2327. Which means, as long as I eat less than 2327, I'll lose weight. How much I lose depends on how I eat. Losing two pounds a week would put me at 1327, which is more than my BMR, but I don't have enough excess body fat to support that kind of a deficit and I'd be tired and miserable and not be able to perform as well. I lost best eating around 1800-2100 calories total, which was around 1350-1500 plus exercise calories.

Like mentioned earlier everyone is different, I have always cut calories too lose weight to the extreme, I have an eating disorder and it was normal for me to go 3 or 4 days on a banana and water. After having my second baby I just want to be in shape and healthy, I was eating 600 to 800 calories and doing Jillian Michael workouts an hour a day and didnt lose any weight for almost 1 month. In the last 2 weeks I have bumped my calories to 1200 and started insanity, I feel better and have lost 3 lbs! I am 5' 4" and before my pregnancy was 117, now 9 weeks postpartum I am 130. Still would like to lose 5 to 10 lbs but I also want to build muscle this time. I can say with a eating disorder it blew my mind to eat more but its working. I honestly think my metabolism had slowed down so much that my body was holding on to the food I ate for energy, I was really starving my body.

The way I look at eat more to weigh less is eating a ton of food, but it's all low cal. I can eat 3 cups of broccoli half of a chicken breast and some fruit for under 400 calories. That is a lot of freaking food! I can also eat an entire head of cauliflower for about 200 calories. I guess I kind of think of eat more to weigh less as an off shoot of clean eating coupled with volumetrics

Nope. That's not the idea at all.

Because there is a big difference between you feeling full, and your body being fed fully for the level of activity you put it through.

You can get all your nutrients in 800 calories if you try real hard. But your body could be starving for energy, calories.
You could get all your energy needs in 2000 calories by eating crap. But your body could still be starving for nutrients.

Either extreme is going to lead to stress on the body, non-optimal performance in whatever you do, and for weight loss, setting yourself up for failure sooner or later.
All to be repeated again down the road.

I am definitely an Eat More Weigh Less success story. I started out at 158 and never ate below 1350 + eating back my exercise calories (usually between 300-500 a day). I had my weight loss set at 1 pound a week at first and then as I had about 5-10 pounds left to go I changed it to 1/2 pound a week which had me at about 1500 calories. I am now at maintenance and eat between 1800-2100 calories a day. I will be the first to admit that I do not eat as much "healthy" food as I should, but I also work my butt off at the gym and have started lifting. I currently weigh 126 (I actually lost 4 pounds according to my scale in the past two weeks even at my maintenance calorie level, so apparently I need to eat even more to maintain!).

IMO, the whole "starvation mode" issue is really something else...

When a person eats below their body's MINIMUM requirements (BMR) the body naturally lowers it's caloric (energy) needs to maintain life and continue to function. Its not really starvation, its adaptation. It doesn't happen over night, but it does happen.

SO, when you are trying to loose weight and your body has adapted to the low caloric deficit, you struggle to loose because in order to reach the required weight loss deficit, you must continue to lower your intake until it's impossible to do anymore. This is why people who eat at 1200 a day GAIN when they eat more. Its takes time.

Eating MORE doesn't mean eating EVERYTHING in mass quantities. It means eating at a slight deficit (1/2 pound a week) and fueling with body with the energy it needs to preform at it's peak.

I used to eat 1200 a day for a long time when I didn't know better. I now eat upwards of 2000 a day.

there are resources available on this subject. Ive spent a lot of time researching it for myself because I was tired of feeling starved all the time. It was worth every second! I can lift more, run farther, faster, longer, I can compete and endure. Not to mention that my body composition is always changing for the good.

The way I look at eat more to weigh less is eating a ton of food, but it's all low cal. I can eat 3 cups of broccoli half of a chicken breast and some fruit for under 400 calories. That is a lot of freaking food! I can also eat an entire head of cauliflower for about 200 calories. I guess I kind of think of eat more to weigh less as an off shoot of clean eating coupled with volumetrics

Nope. That's not the idea at all.

Because there is a big difference between you feeling full, and your body being fed fully for the level of activity you put it through.

You can get all your nutrients in 800 calories if you try real hard. But your body could be starving for energy, calories.
You could get all your energy needs in 2000 calories by eating crap. But your body could still be starving for nutrients.

Either extreme is going to lead to stress on the body, non-optimal performance in whatever you do, and for weight loss, setting yourself up for failure sooner or later.
All to be repeated again down the road.

Thank you for your thoughts on it! The reason I like to eat in this manner is I like to eat. A lot. So I do. I eat a ton of food feel full and satisfied and stay at my caloric goal. If I exercise during the day I will factor in some denser food to make sure I don't feel dizzy. The other reason I like eating that way is becuase it helps with my water intake goals

The concept is to more healthy foods, mainly fruits and veggies. For example, you can have several servings of veggies and fruit for the same amount of calories in the average protein bar or diet microwave meal. It's not about eating more calories it's about eating more food.

I don't consume many calories and I eat up to 3x a much as most people on here. I eat all day! I'm just choosing foods high in nutrients instead of the typical diet stuff or a few crackers with an oz of cheese.

If you eat a whole plate of food for the same amount of calories in a small plate you will better off. You will get the vitamins and minerals your body needs.

You are what you eat so choose wisely.

That is incorrect. It IS about eating more calories, albeit as nutritious as you can. Just not more than maintenance level.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/680246-tdee-bmr-what-they-are-and-what-to-do-with-them

I think the term was coined more to encourage and also convince people that eating less than what a body needs to function properly is counter-productive. Most experts tell us not to eat under 1200 calories and many people do thinking "the less I eat the more fat I'll lose". That is only partly true because the human body is built to protect and even heal itself. You can find many articles on this. You can google metabolism, optimal fat loss but beware of gimmicks, pills and fad diets that will surely popup to try and sway you. People are rich and still getting there off of people that don't read all the facts about how the human body works.

Eat what your body needs, good nutrition. And eat what your weight, age, height etc. will determine on a calculator.

Denise