Another one of these threads...

1000+ for dinner is high. It is the end of the day and you probably do not do enough after dinner to burn those calories. That also means that you are probably not eating enough for breakfast and lunch, which is when you need it to keep you going. Too few calories for the first two meals puts your metabolism in more of a conservation mode to keep it going. Switch up your eating routine. Eat like a King at breakfast, a Prince at lunch, and a peasant at dinner. 1000 for breakfast isn't bad, and it jumpstarts the metabolism. Try to avoid OJ for breakfast though, as it gives your blood sugar a spike and makes your body work to digest the sugar first, and not the food.

1000+ for dinner is high. It is the end of the day and you probably do not do enough after dinner to burn those calories. That also means that you are probably not eating enough for breakfast and lunch, which is when you need it to keep you going. Too few calories for the first two meals puts your metabolism in more of a conservation mode to keep it going. Switch up your eating routine. Eat like a King at breakfast, a Prince at lunch, and a peasant at dinner. 1000 for breakfast isn't bad, and it jumpstarts the metabolism. Try to avoid OJ for breakfast though, as it gives your blood sugar a spike and makes your body work to digest the sugar first, and not the food.

This is almost completely wrong. Time of day of consumption of Calories is irrelevant. It's overall intake vs. overall outgoing.


Toadie (may I call him/her that?) has it right - you need to track everything - including the day you go out to dinner. You might be surprised at how many calories are in that meal - especially if you're having dessert. I was shocked to find out that the carrot cake at Outback is considered 2 servings, and there's a lot of Calories in only one serving (491 per serving, IIRC). Thus, almost all of those 1000 Calories (were you to eat all this carrot cake, for instance) would be gone - even without the "real" dinner.

1000+ for dinner is high. It is the end of the day and you probably do not do enough after dinner to burn those calories. That also means that you are probably not eating enough for breakfast and lunch, which is when you need it to keep you going. Too few calories for the first two meals puts your metabolism in more of a conservation mode to keep it going. Switch up your eating routine. Eat like a King at breakfast, a Prince at lunch, and a peasant at dinner. 1000 for breakfast isn't bad, and it jumpstarts the metabolism. Try to avoid OJ for breakfast though, as it gives your blood sugar a spike and makes your body work to digest the sugar first, and not the food.

I agree with this. I eat most of my calories for breakfast, lunch and after workout snack and eat a very light dinner. I also eat dinner no later than 6 PM. That helped me reached my goal weight. I leave "1 lb to go" on my counter because there is always "1 lb to go." You hit your goal, then splurge 1 meal a week and it is back and by the end of the next week it is off again. Hope that helps!

Good that it works for you but it's not based on any universal weight loss principles. When you eat and how you divide it up is irrelevant except for your preferences and what makes it easier for you. Your metabolism does not shut off nor does it need to be jumpstarted in the morning.

You mentioned these muscles you have now built up, you do know of course that muscular tissue weighs more than fatty tissue?

1000+ for dinner is high. It is the end of the day and you probably do not do enough after dinner to burn those calories. That also means that you are probably not eating enough for breakfast and lunch, which is when you need it to keep you going. Too few calories for the first two meals puts your metabolism in more of a conservation mode to keep it going. Switch up your eating routine. Eat like a King at breakfast, a Prince at lunch, and a peasant at dinner. 1000 for breakfast isn't bad, and it jumpstarts the metabolism. Try to avoid OJ for breakfast though, as it gives your blood sugar a spike and makes your body work to digest the sugar first, and not the food.

This is not true for everyone. I often eat 1000 calorie dinners and lost just fine, and I maintain just fine. I do not need a king's breakfast to sit at my desk all day. I like to have a big full meal in the evening, so that's what I do. After I work out, shortly before bed. I lost just fine, I sleep just fine, I am rarely hungry and my metabolism is cranking along just fine.

There is nothing wrong with eating the way you describe if it keeps you happy and on track. But, there is no "best way" to portion your calories throughout the day, except the way that keeps you within your goals.

have you tried one method and then stuck with it for 5-6 weeks before making any other changes. I would suggest normal workouts and eat at maintenance for 3-4 weeks, then decrease cals again into a deficit, with a goal of 0.5lbs/week.

What are your stats? It is quite possible you are over extending yourself in terms of weight. And the vanity weight may not be obtainable or would require you to lose muscle.

But I would agree a diet and exercise break to allow your body to regulate hormones and repair muscles would be optimal. I always take one during xmas for 2 weeks.

This is almost completely wrong. Time of day of consumption of Calories is irrelevant. It's overall intake vs. overall outgoing.


Toadie (may I call him/her that?) has it right - you need to track everything - including the day you go out to dinner. You might be surprised at how many calories are in that meal - especially if you're having dessert. I was shocked to find out that the carrot cake at Outback is considered 2 servings, and there's a lot of Calories in only one serving (491 per serving, IIRC). Thus, almost all of those 1000 Calories (were you to eat all this carrot cake, for instance) would be gone - even without the "real" dinner.

Depends on the person I guess. But my 23 lbs of loss in 12 weeks and body fat drop from 19% to 13% in the same time would say its working for me, so it can't be wrong. Eating the big meal at night should make your body work harder to digest that during its valuable reparation time and MAY effect quality of sleep. Just another option for someone who has tried a lot of stuff already it would seem. No need to worry about trying to negate other comments folks.

This is almost completely wrong. Time of day of consumption of Calories is irrelevant. It's overall intake vs. overall outgoing.


Toadie (may I call him/her that?) has it right - you need to track everything - including the day you go out to dinner. You might be surprised at how many calories are in that meal - especially if you're having dessert. I was shocked to find out that the carrot cake at Outback is considered 2 servings, and there's a lot of Calories in only one serving (491 per serving, IIRC). Thus, almost all of those 1000 Calories (were you to eat all this carrot cake, for instance) would be gone - even without the "real" dinner.

Depends on the person I guess. But my 23 lbs of loss in 12 weeks and body fat drop from 19% to 13% in the same time would say its working for me, so it can't be wrong. Eating the big meal at night should make your body work harder to digest that during its valuable reparation time and MAY effect quality of sleep. Just another option for someone who has tried a lot of stuff already it would seem. No need to worry about trying to negate other comments folks.

You are obviously confusing correlation and causation. Weight loss, as pointed out by others, is simply calories in vs. calories out. Congratulations on finding something that you could stick to. But the reason you lost the weight and fat is because you consumed fewer calories than you expended. While the timing helped you consume the fewer calories, it wasn't the timing that made you lose the weight.

With only 5 pounds less to lose, she may not need to eat less. She may need to eat more because she is very close to maintenance. If she hasn't adjusted her goal to half a pound a week, MFP may have her at too much of a calorie deficit. Not enough info here to tell though.

This is almost completely wrong. Time of day of consumption of Calories is irrelevant. It's overall intake vs. overall outgoing.


Toadie (may I call him/her that?) has it right - you need to track everything - including the day you go out to dinner. You might be surprised at how many calories are in that meal - especially if you're having dessert. I was shocked to find out that the carrot cake at Outback is considered 2 servings, and there's a lot of Calories in only one serving (491 per serving, IIRC). Thus, almost all of those 1000 Calories (were you to eat all this carrot cake, for instance) would be gone - even without the "real" dinner.

Depends on the person I guess. But my 23 lbs of loss in 12 weeks and body fat drop from 19% to 13% in the same time would say its working for me, so it can't be wrong. Eating the big meal at night should make your body work harder to digest that during its valuable reparation time and MAY effect quality of sleep. Just another option for someone who has tried a lot of stuff already it would seem. No need to worry about trying to negate other comments folks.

But scientifically speaking, meal timing and meal frequency has zero to do with weight loss. If calories where consistent, you would have seen the same results if you switched your meals, ate less or more meals or did a program like interim fasting. And your bodies metabolism is constantly working; whether it's maintain your organs, digestion or repairing muscles. Overall, you will burn the same amount of calories digesting food regardless of when or how often you eat. That's the point.

Scientifically speaking...When you eat, your body will digest the food and use it for energy first, before it goes to fat stores. Your metabolism is constantly working but it does change the way it is working based on different factors. If you eat less at night, when your metabolism is slowest because you aren't burning extra calories other than basal metabolic rate, it does not have much to digest while it is in the reparation mode. The way I've always learned is that your body does the most reparation at night while it is at rest. It has to have energy from somewhere to do so. If there is less food to digest, it has to burn fat to make the energy. Exact opposite in the daytime. You are awake and doing something, so you are burning above basal. You will burn off the calories easier that way and get to the fat.

I never said anyone was wrong. Calories in, calories out, blah. Its the same concept I use, but timing does make a difference in forcing your body to burn the fat. Just watching calories will absolutely help, especially if you know what your basal rate is, but most people don't. I believe from my education, experience, and reading that timing does make a difference. The original pounds drop easier, but the last few are harder, and burning fat is what the OP seemed to be looking for. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe not. Show me scientific evidence that proves your point and I'll show you the same. Science is inexact and none of the research is scientific law, so just do what works.

bump

Thanks for all the information!

Some people asked for more stats, so here it goes.

I'm 5"3. I easily maintained 110 pounds just two years ago, before I got sick and put on all this weight. Easily, as in, I ate all the time, never counted calories, and wouldn't put on weight. So my goal weight is 115. That's 5 pounds higher than I was, so I feel like that's realistic!

Right now I'm 121ish pounds. I go from 120 - 122 depending on the day, so I just say 121.

I have some calipers, and I get a body fat reading of about 22% with them.

I do track everything I eat. I just track on another website because it's where I started and I find it easier to log on there. And I mean everything, I'll track a single m&m!

And the 1000ish calorie dinners are only once a week. Otherwise my three meals are evenly proportioned calories wise.

I really don't even know what my maintenance level is? I was eating 1200 calories, but increased it to 1400-1500. My one day off, I probably hit around 2000 calories. I mean, I was maintaing at 1200, and I'm maintaining here.

I do include HIIT training and plyometrics in my cardio and weights.


Thanks for all the help so far!!

Your true maintenance is definitely not 1200 calories, it's probably your bodies way of fighting you since you are already at a normal level. Based on your activity level and stats, you should be cutting around 1800 calories. The problem you might face is if you been suppressing calories for a long time, it will take some time to get your calories back up to a normal level. With that said, I would suggest bumping your calories up by 100 every week until you hit around 1800. I generally suggest macro's to be around 35/40/25 (c/p/f). And if you can, concentrate on lifting heavy. This will help with fat loss.