Beating a Dead Horse
karmasBFF
Posts: 699 Member
So I have a notion and I know its probably like beating a dead horse but I need SOMEONE that isnt determined to convince me of their opinion and more interested in actually thinking about the concept I present below.
How do you feel about eating your excercise calories?
I havent actually bought the book but I did some online research about the Biggest Loser Diet and NOWHERE does it mention eating excercise calories. And if you think about this, these people are losing like 8 lbs in a week! Some even lost 12! In one week! And I'm not talking 400lb Michael. Im talking 230 lb Cheryl! If you need to create a deficit of 3500 calories to lose one lb and they are losing 10-that means between food and excercise they are burning 35,000 calories a week! How is this possible if they are eating them back? How the hell is it possible to EAT 35,000 calories a week?? That's 5,000 calories a day, on TOP of their recommended consumption of 6 calories per lb of weight!!!!
I know there are TONS of links on here about what a newbie should read, and the 700 calorie a day woman-I've read those. Please dont repost them. Just take a minute and think about this. I have also flipped through the book on Amazon and it also states to create a larger deficit by excercising more. It is metabollically impossible to create a larger deficit if you are eating them back.
And I've thought about the argument that MFP already creates a deficit for you. But the concept in Biggest Loser is 7 calories per lb of weight (the show actually does 6 for faster results). That, too, is an already established deficit. So that kind of diminishes any weight that argument carries.
Your opinion?
How do you feel about eating your excercise calories?
I havent actually bought the book but I did some online research about the Biggest Loser Diet and NOWHERE does it mention eating excercise calories. And if you think about this, these people are losing like 8 lbs in a week! Some even lost 12! In one week! And I'm not talking 400lb Michael. Im talking 230 lb Cheryl! If you need to create a deficit of 3500 calories to lose one lb and they are losing 10-that means between food and excercise they are burning 35,000 calories a week! How is this possible if they are eating them back? How the hell is it possible to EAT 35,000 calories a week?? That's 5,000 calories a day, on TOP of their recommended consumption of 6 calories per lb of weight!!!!
I know there are TONS of links on here about what a newbie should read, and the 700 calorie a day woman-I've read those. Please dont repost them. Just take a minute and think about this. I have also flipped through the book on Amazon and it also states to create a larger deficit by excercising more. It is metabollically impossible to create a larger deficit if you are eating them back.
And I've thought about the argument that MFP already creates a deficit for you. But the concept in Biggest Loser is 7 calories per lb of weight (the show actually does 6 for faster results). That, too, is an already established deficit. So that kind of diminishes any weight that argument carries.
Your opinion?
0
Replies
-
I love our threads, you bring up such good points and, though you aren't looking for it, you know that there are going to be WORDS had on this one. Currious to see how and where it goes.0
-
No opinion really - just curious to finally see the other side of the argument. All I ever see is eat them. Good post!0
-
I have the same issues. Im torn between eating them and not.
I read on another site, someone said...."I cut back calories to lose weight, I exercise for good health". I know a lot of people who dont eat back calories and have success at losing - I really do believe a lot of it has to do with how much weight you have to lose.
Ive been doing A LOT of research on the idea of Starvation Mode and Im not quite convinced of it yet and at my weight, neither is my doctor. He doesnt recommend going below 1500 calories and pointed me to a study on Starvation Mode that was very interesting - I'll have to post the link when I can find it at home. The study was done on "normal weight" people and obese people.
Watching Biggest Loser last night, I thought the same thing....how are they pulling in such huge numbers each week if they eat back what they've sweated out. I work out 2x a day and burn 1100 calories for those workouts. At my current weight, would I be more successful if I didnt eat back those 1100 calories each day and just ate the 1760 recommended. Dilemma....
I think I'll guinea pig myself and test this out. For the next week, I'll exercise as usual and not log the calories and just eat the 1760 recommended....should be interesting to see if that changes anything.0 -
You make a good point babe, as always. I would believe that you need to eat back part of the exercise calories to return you to your RMR (the point below which your body technically enters starvation mode). That's just my opinion because the science all seems to point to the fact that you need to be fueling your body with what it needs to work properly in order for any type of benefits to be seen.
That said the trainer I worked out with last night told my that unlike the info often bandied around MFP the less you eat and the more you work out the more you will lose. Simple as. No she agreed you can't sustain a volume of weightloss by just dropping your calories to 1200 a day and working out like a fiend and doing that day in day out, but if you change it up, exactly the same principles as interval training, then your body will become much more responsive and work harder.0 -
I don't know either, so I'm glad you posted this. I would like to find out. I have been able to lose about 60 lbs, but I did it before I joined MFP and I did it eating under 1600. I zig-zagged between 1400 and 1600 and I exercised about an hour and a half everyday, so I burned alot. Now, I'm not losing and I'm thinking I might just go back to my original plan. I might have to lower my calories again, but the whole eating your exercise calories is very confusing to me, I don't want to gain, but I don't want to put myself in a bad spot by not eating enough.0
-
Simple - Calories in vs. Calories out!0
-
Simple - Calories in vs. Calories out!
There is a section in the book that has quoted statements from previous contestants and one of them says that exactly. "Simple- Calories in vs Calories Out". I wont post all of it as I dont want to infringe on copyright but basically he says he eats what his weight x 6 is and burns as many calories as he can. Being a previous contestant and having worked directly with Jillian, Bob and the Drs, I would think its safe to assume he learned this from them.
Which means all the arguments about eating them back are invalid. Right?0 -
Since I started counting using MFP I've had trouble eating even the 1200 minimum even before "exercise calories". This is due to the fact I'm eating a lot of veggies and fruits with very little bread and meat. I stopped ordering take-out and no more fast food. In 2.5 months I've lost 13 pounds. I feel that if I had eaten all my "exercise calories" I would not have had such a quick drop.0
-
If I'm not hungry, I don't. If I want a snack or something, I do. I had a few hundred extra the other day. I couldve eaten them just to eat but I wasn't hungry. I was proud that Ive gotten out of my habit of eating when I'm bored or when I'm not hungry so I wasn't going to take a step backward.0
-
I think this is a very worthy question that deserves a cogent and direct answer. I hope somebody steps up.0
-
I suspect those big numbers the BL contestants are getting come from a significant amount of lean body mass as well as fat, and if you're a really big person, that's not a problem. (I really wish they would measure fat lost and not total pounds.) So I think having a smaller caloric deficit and eating your exercise calories is more important the smaller you are so as not to lose the healthy parts of yourself.0
-
My friends and I have debated the Biggest Loser weight loss program we see on tv many times. Interesting isn't it?
Here is what I know (for me personally)
-I tracked and worked my *kitten* off at the gym for 7 weeks, not eating back my work out cals and didn't see an ounce of weight come off at the scale. Sure my body shape changed and I gained muscle, but no weight loss or inches off.
-Once i started eating my work out cals back I started losing weight. In 3 weeks I think I've lost 4-5 lbs. I am pretty sure that I was starving my body even though I hate that stupid term.
I can only guess that since they are in controlled environment - doctors, personal trainers, etc. and that is all they do day in and day out is work out and learn better eating habits, then obviously it can work. But I have to wonder if it is more about the setting and environment they are in more than anything. If all I did all day was work out, I am sure that I too could burn more than I ate and lose weight, gain muscle, etc.
I feel like there are 4 kinds of living when it comes to weight loss/gain/maintain....
1. maintain - eat what you want, work out or don't
2. gain - overeat bad foods, don't work out
3. general "normal" weight loss using whatever method you find that works
4. BL style weight loss. Weight loss on proverbial steriods. Controlled environment heavily monitored by doctors and PT's, sole focus is weight loss, etc.
And unfortunately very few of us are lucky enough to be able to just solely focus on weight loss. Or we'd all not be here!
Those are my theories on the subject anyways.0 -
I never really believed in this whole "starvation mode" thing. Now if you are actually starving yourself and exercising then that is obviously unhealthy. But I totally agree with the points the OP made. It's all about calories in vs. calories out. You have to create a deficit and if you eat those calories back then there is no deficit. I think if you're already significantly overweight like those on the biggest loser you have to actually starve yourself to go into "starvation mode." Thanks for the post. This is something I've always thought about but never knew how to say.0
-
I mean, I don't know what else to say to you, you say you've read all the stuff posted, and much of that is mine, and is based on solid scientific fact and known trails conducted by very respectable universities and metabolic labs so I won't go further into it.
Here's the thing about the biggest loser. The people on that show are doing extremely long workout intervals, they are well over 35% body fat, and they have doctors watching their every step. So of course they can perform at a higher deficit.
What you have to remember is, the more fat you have relative to your weight and height, the bigger the deficit you can have.
the other thing to remember is IT'S A SHOW. They are looking for super dramatic weight loss so they will push their contestants to lose more weight than is usually acceptable to do. Why do you think the show is so popular. They wouldn't draw anywhere near the same numbers if they had everyone on for a year, and had them work a full time job with stress, and obligations, and kids, and in-laws...etc. and they had them trying to lose at about 2 lbs a week. That just isn't "show worthy"
Generally, for the smaller contestants, you'll see weight loss on average between 3 and 6 lbs. Sure once in a while they'll get a 10 or 12, and that's fine for them, but it doesn't mean that's a safe, sustainable loss. So as you can see, the less you have to lose, the smaller amount you will lose per week.
The real question is this: Are you looking to lose weight, or are you trying to become healthy. losing a large amount of weight is great if it's done healthy, but that's not what the site is about.0 -
My friends and I have debated the Biggest Loser weight loss program we see on tv many times. Interesting isn't it?
Here is what I know (for me personally)
-I tracked and worked my *kitten* off at the gym for 7 weeks, not eating back my work out cals and didn't see an ounce of weight come off at the scale. Sure my body shape changed and I gained muscle, but no weight loss or inches off.
-Once i started eating my work out cals back I started losing weight. In 3 weeks I think I've lost 4-5 lbs. I am pretty sure that I was starving my body even though I hate that stupid term.
I can only guess that since they are in controlled environment - doctors, personal trainers, etc. and that is all they do day in and day out is work out and learn better eating habits, then obviously it can work. But I have to wonder if it is more about the setting and environment they are in more than anything. If all I did all day was work out, I am sure that I too could burn more than I ate and lose weight, gain muscle, etc.
I feel like there are 4 kinds of living when it comes to weight loss/gain/maintain....
1. maintain - eat what you want, work out or don't
2. gain - overeat bad foods, don't work out
3. general "normal" weight loss using whatever method you find that works
4. BL style weight loss. Weight loss on proverbial steriods. Controlled environment heavily monitored by doctors and PT's, sole focus is weight loss, etc.
And unfortunately very few of us are lucky enough to be able to just solely focus on weight loss. Or we'd all not be here!
Those are my theories on the subject anyways.
Great post! However, you can have all the doctors and trainers and professionals you want as many times a day as you need, but weight loss is based on what you take in vs what you put out. Regardless of the personelle you staff.
When you weren't losing, what were you eating? How many calories were you consuming? Also, what kind of workouts were you doing? Apparently, the BL diet has a systematic way of exercising also and I'm curious to see how yours compares. Will you please be my guinea pig??? LOL0 -
Here is my opinion:
There are good reasons to eat them and there are good reasons not to eat them.
Good reasons not to:
1) Most people underestimate what they eat and overestimate how much they burn in exercise (this has been established through clinical studies even; it's not just someone's opinion). If you set up your goals here on MFP to have a 500 calorie a day deficit, it would be really easy for these calculations to completely wipe out any deficit that you have set up.
2) Unless you wear a HRM or Bodybugg/GowearFit every time you exercise, the amount of calories MFP or the machines at the gym or any other source says you burn is only an estimate. This estimate may be right on for you, but more likely it's high or low. If it's high, then, again, you are eating more than you should to maintain your deficit
3) If your deficit is higher, you'll lose weight faster and that can be motivating for people
4) Our bodies don't turn on a dime. Just because you burned an extra 300 calories today, doesn't mean your body will be hungry for an extra 300 calories today. In fact, it's quite likely that you won't be extra hungry today but will be extra hungry tomorrow. Forcing yourself to eat extra calories on the day you burn them when you aren't hungry for them and not eat them the next day when you are hungry for them is not the way to long term success IMO. Most dietitians recommend you think of yourself as a calorie bank and make sure you stay in balance over a period of several days. An example of this would be to eat 100 of the exercise calories today, 100 tomorrow (on your day off from exercise) and not eat 100 at all as a cushion.
Good reasons to eat them:
1) If you work out a lot, you may not have enough energy if you don't eat at least some of your exercise calories. Being tired and grumpy and not recovering well from exercise kind of defeats the point of trying to get healthy, right?
2) Eating your exercise calories is closer to what you'll do in maintenance so it's good practice
3) It will cause you to lose weight slower and that can prevent certain health problems such as developing gallstones.
It's really up to you and works for you. When I was losing my weight, I was on a doctor-supervised program so I did what my doctor told me. That did not include eating my exercise calories. However, as my workouts increased over the minimum they recommended, he did have me increase my protein, which had me eating more calories. But it wasn't a direct 1-to-1 correspondence.0 -
I agree with GingerSnark. I don't have a hard and fast rule of "must eat exercise calories" or "must not eat exercise calories". If I'm hungry because I exercised, I allow myself to have some more calories that day. If I'm not, I don't. If I have a special occasion and now I'm going to be high on calories, I try to make sure to get my exercise in. I do try to limit myself to eating 50% or fewer of my exercise calories (although somedays I'm not successful
) because I'd rather give myself a shot at losing faster and to account for the possibility that I didn't burn as many calories as I thought. 0 -
Last year, I started doing the Biggest Loser @ my church and dropped about 35 pounds in 3 months. I was NEVER eating my exercise calories, always sticking in the 1200-1400 calorie range.
Of course, when the contest was over, I returned to my way of eating prior to the Biggest Loser and gained all my weight back and then some.
I started back on the calorie counting/workout about 2 weeks ago, and started going to the gym again. This time, to make sure that I don't have the rebound that I did last year, I started eating some (but not ALL) of my exercise calories. The results have not been quite as dramatic, but I can definitely guarantee that I am not hungry most of the day like I was last year.
So, my take on it is, yes eat some of your exercise calores, as a kind of a reward for your hard work. Don't have any empirical evidence to back it up, but that is the way that I feel!0 -
Simple - Calories in vs. Calories out!
Agreed- as it says in my profile, "it's all about crunching numbers..."
While I think there is absolutely such thing as not fueling your body enough and not being nutritious, I think the idea that if you have 1 day where you don't eat "enough" your body will automatically enter "starvation mode" is silly. Over time, yes, you'll do harm by not eating enough. In 1 day (say you're sick, not hungry at all, burn a crazy high amount of calories, etc.) you're not going to mess up everything inside. That's just my opinion.0 -
So I'm confused what your looking for? You don't want people posting who agree with the eating your exercise calories correct? because you make it clear you don't want to hear about that. The posts about it are not just someone oppinions but serious mechanical step by steps on why it works...so you don't want that right? Instead of saying how do you feel about eating your exercise calories... I think your question should be that you are looking for solid evidence other than biggest loser results on why you shouldnt eat them? Correct? Just checking...I'm curious to hear this myself......0
-
I think that it's important not to starve yourself...it IS true that if you become chronically undernourished you will have all kinds of negative results...eating disorders, disease, stalled metabolism etc.
That said, I don't think I need to eat an extra 1,000 calories a day as long as I am eating healthy, nutritionally dense foods. For one thing, in order to do that I have to add fatty foods and/or stuff myself. It was (is) hard for me to manage my cravings and portion control anyway, so why would I want to undo all the work I've put in in those areas? What if i get hurt and suddenly have to drop 1000 calories a day from my meals?? Ouch!
I think everyone is probably a little different...and I also think that bodies respond well to being surprised and challenged. If you're eating your calories and losing weight and feeling good...keep doing it!! If you're not seeing results that way, create a bigger deficit. If it was working for you one way and now it's not working anymore, change it up.
Just make sure you're not starving..I do think the 1200 cal/day minimum is a good guideline to make sure that you remain healthy, but you can't freak out over it. Use common sense and pay attention to what your body is telling you.0 -
I mean, I don't know what else to say to you, you say you've read all the stuff posted, and much of that is mine, and is based on solid scientific fact and known trails conducted by very respectable universities and metabolic labs so I won't go further into it.
Here's the thing about the biggest loser. The people on that show are doing extremely long workout intervals, they are well over 35% body fat, and they have doctors watching their every step. So of course they can perform at a higher deficit.
What you have to remember is, the more fat you have relative to your weight and height, the bigger the deficit you can have.
the other thing to remember is IT'S A SHOW. They are looking for super dramatic weight loss so they will push their contestants to lose more weight than is usually acceptable to do. Why do you think the show is so popular. They wouldn't draw anywhere near the same numbers if they had everyone on for a year, and had them work a full time job with stress, and obligations, and kids, and in-laws...etc. and they had them trying to lose at about 2 lbs a week. That just isn't "show worthy"
Generally, for the smaller contestants, you'll see weight loss on average between 3 and 6 lbs. Sure once in a while they'll get a 10 or 12, and that's fine for them, but it doesn't mean that's a safe, sustainable loss. So as you can see, the less you have to lose, the smaller amount you will lose per week.
The real question is this: Are you looking to lose weight, or are you trying to become healthy. losing a large amount of weight is great if it's done healthy, but that's not what the site is about.
I'm not sure you are at liberty to say what the site is about as you are one user amongst thousands. The site is about what the USERS think its about, regardless even of what Mike's intentions were. Again, I am not looking to be convinced-I am looking for a valid answer to the original question.
How do you create a deficit that big and still eat your calories?
Mayoclinic has analyzed the BL diet, and considering they are one of the most reputable health clinics in America, I hold their opinion with high regard. Its a great diet, according to their analysis. Its a healthy way to lose weight. Its a diet that SHOULD be followed. So your argument about it being a show is irrelevant. Because the diet and the concept is real, apart from the show.
A LOT OF PEOPLE ON THIS SITE ARE 35% over body fat. So, perhaps, in ALL OF THE POSTS THAT ARE YOURS, you should specify where the body fat % should be in order to be required to eat your calories back. I dont mean to be rude, but your post starts off argumentative and that was totally unecessary. For someone that didnt know what else to say, you sure said a lot.
My OP was not meant to offend anyone, especially you. And with no disrepect, there are trainers that argue both sides of the issue. I just want an answer to the question: HOW DO YOU CREATE A LARGER DEFICIT IF YOU ARE EATING BACK YOUR CALORIES???0 -
So my opinon on all this is why eat less if you don't need to? I mean what is the point?
I feel better when I adequately fuel my body, especially when I am training hard. And I enjoy eating :laugh:
And I know that although my weightloss will be slow, it will be healthy and sustainable.
To me it isn't about a number on a scale, it is about how I feel (both physically and emotionally) and being a good role model for those around me.
This isn't a race and it isn't temporary, there is no going back or stopping after I cross the finish line.
This is a permanent change to how I live and how I view food and life in general.
Why are we so obsessed with comparing ourselves to what we see in the media?
It is also important to note that the contestants on biggest loser are able to devot their entire days to losing weight. This mean they have way more time to exercise, eat and recover than most of us. Not to mention all the medical supervision. And who's to day they aren't eating back at least some of their exercise calories?0 -
HOW DO YOU CREATE A LARGER DEFICIT IF YOU ARE EATING BACK YOUR CALORIES???
Why do you want to?
And seriously this site is about support, motivation and education.
Banks has always been a great source of all 3.0 -
So I'm confused what your looking for? You don't want people posting who agree with the eating your exercise calories correct? because you make it clear you don't want to hear about that. The posts about it are not just someone oppinions but serious mechanical step by steps on why it works...so you don't want that right? Instead of saying how do you feel about eating your exercise calories... I think your question should be that you are looking for solid evidence other than biggest loser results on why you shouldnt eat them? Correct? Just checking...I'm curious to hear this myself......
I dont want the posts that direct me to the posts I've already read. They are not based on fact or research. They are posted by users just like me and you. Many of them are biased, or from studies that may be biased themselves.
I want a simple answer to a simple question: HOW DO YOU CREATE A LARGERE DEFICIT IF YOU ARE EATING YOUR CALORIES BACK?0 -
Here's the thing about the biggest loser. The people on that show are doing extremely long workout intervals, they are well over 35% body fat, and they have doctors watching their every step. So of course they can perform at a higher deficit.
What you have to remember is, the more fat you have relative to your weight and height, the bigger the deficit you can have.
I think you hit the nail on the head with this....especially for me. Im 332lbs, 5'6" tall...I have well more than 35% BF - Im well into the 50% range.
I dont kid myself to think that I would be able to maintain a high deficit forever. But I think while I work to get down to something healthier, I can do it. I know as I lose the weight and then want to maintain, I'll have to find a balance again between calories in and calories out.0 -
I don't usually respond to these posts because they're just cat fights in the making, but....
I agree with you and I've definitely felt the frustration and confusion you're expressing.
I don't believe in eating your exercise calories. So shoot me. Whatever.
I think people should just go based on what they're comfortable with, and that should be the end of it. Keep your calorie intake at a healthy level, do an adequate amount of exercise for your lifestyle, and call it good. The end.
That being said, though, I don't think we "normal" people should ever compare our weight loss to Biggest Loser contestants. It's not even a question of technicalities like whether or not they eat their exercise calories. It's simply because the rest of us have to work, raise families and lead daily lives, so we don't have the option of working out six hours a day, nor do we have the priviledge of expensive health foods being both bought and prepared for us.0 -
I think that it's important not to starve yourself...it IS true that if you become chronically undernourished you will have all kinds of negative results...eating disorders, disease, stalled metabolism etc.
That said, I don't think I need to eat an extra 1,000 calories a day as long as I am eating healthy, nutritionally dense foods. For one thing, in order to do that I have to add fatty foods and/or stuff myself. It was (is) hard for me to manage my cravings and portion control anyway, so why would I want to undo all the work I've put in in those areas? What if i get hurt and suddenly have to drop 1000 calories a day from my meals?? Ouch!
I think everyone is probably a little different...and I also think that bodies respond well to being surprised and challenged. If you're eating your calories and losing weight and feeling good...keep doing it!! If you're not seeing results that way, create a bigger deficit. If it was working for you one way and now it's not working anymore, change it up.
Just make sure you're not starving..I do think the 1200 cal/day minimum is a good guideline to make sure that you remain healthy, but you can't freak out over it. Use common sense and pay attention to what your body is telling you.
I completely agree and would add that if you are at plateau also try increasing your calories a bit too. Changing it up is really important.0 -
I mean, I don't know what else to say to you, you say you've read all the stuff posted, and much of that is mine, and is based on solid scientific fact and known trails conducted by very respectable universities and metabolic labs so I won't go further into it.
Here's the thing about the biggest loser. The people on that show are doing extremely long workout intervals, they are well over 35% body fat, and they have doctors watching their every step. So of course they can perform at a higher deficit.
What you have to remember is, the more fat you have relative to your weight and height, the bigger the deficit you can have.
the other thing to remember is IT'S A SHOW. They are looking for super dramatic weight loss so they will push their contestants to lose more weight than is usually acceptable to do. Why do you think the show is so popular. They wouldn't draw anywhere near the same numbers if they had everyone on for a year, and had them work a full time job with stress, and obligations, and kids, and in-laws...etc. and they had them trying to lose at about 2 lbs a week. That just isn't "show worthy"
Generally, for the smaller contestants, you'll see weight loss on average between 3 and 6 lbs. Sure once in a while they'll get a 10 or 12, and that's fine for them, but it doesn't mean that's a safe, sustainable loss. So as you can see, the less you have to lose, the smaller amount you will lose per week.
The real question is this: Are you looking to lose weight, or are you trying to become healthy. losing a large amount of weight is great if it's done healthy, but that's not what the site is about.
I'm not sure you are at liberty to say what the site is about as you are one user amongst thousands. The site is about what the USERS think its about, regardless even of what Mike's intentions were. Again, I am not looking to be convinced-I am looking for a valid answer to the original question.
How do you create a deficit that big and still eat your calories?
Mayoclinic has analyzed the BL diet, and considering they are one of the most reputable health clinics in America, I hold their opinion with high regard. Its a great diet, according to their analysis. Its a healthy way to lose weight. Its a diet that SHOULD be followed. So your argument about it being a show is irrelevant. Because the diet and the concept is real, apart from the show.
A LOT OF PEOPLE ON THIS SITE ARE 35% over body fat. So, perhaps, in ALL OF THE POSTS THAT ARE YOURS, you should specify where the body fat % should be in order to be required to eat your calories back. I dont mean to be rude, but your post starts off argumentative and that was totally unecessary. For someone that didnt know what else to say, you sure said a lot.
My OP was not meant to offend anyone, especially you. And with no disrepect, there are trainers that argue both sides of the issue. I just want an answer to the question: HOW DO YOU CREATE A LARGER DEFICIT IF YOU ARE EATING BACK YOUR CALORIES???
See this is why I asked what you were looking for...because the way you worded your original post it sounded like you WANTED peoples oppinions on eating vs not eating...he was giving his side and if you think that his response was argumentative....sorry but you need to get out into the real world more..... He was being totally respectful and honest...THIS is why I said you should be careful of how you worded it because at least if you were just asking for back up on your oppinion of not eating it...then he would have know to not post a response at all!!!!!0 -
HOW DO YOU CREATE A LARGER DEFICIT IF YOU ARE EATING BACK YOUR CALORIES???
Why do you want to?
And seriously this site is about support, motivation and education.
Banks has always been a great source of all 3.
Because sure I want to be healthy and maintain the loss, but what's wrong with getting there faster? And there will be people who will judge that for being shallow but I dont think there is one person on this site that hasnt hoped that the weight would just go away! Overnight!
Banks is a great source but when someone starts a post with "Well, I dont know what else to say to you", I do not think that is supportive, motivating or educational. I dont want to hear biased opinions or be questioned on why I would want to create a larger deficit. The answer to that is obvious. I want an answer to the original question. Not an argument. Not a debate. SUPPORTIVE, EDUCATIONAL and MOTIVATIONAL ANSWERS.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions