If you're still hungry, can you really be overeating?

If I ate healthily all day one day, and had pretty close to my calories, but am still very hungry, if I eat over the calories it tells me to, can I really be overeating for my body, because it's telling me to eat more?
«1

Replies

  • grawrrrr
    grawrrrr Posts: 336
    It would help to know what your calories are, what your activity level is, etc.
  • EvanKeel
    EvanKeel Posts: 1,903 Member
    Perceived hunger is a little tricky. So the short answer to your question is, yes you could potentially be eating more than you need. Even if I'm eating "healthy" foods that everyone swears up and down will keep me sated, I don't feel sated unless I'm 300-400 calories over my maintenance in a day. Who knows? Maybe that's changed since the last time I tried that.

    It would be a mistake to assume that your body will just tell you to stop eating once you've hit enough calories to maintain your activity level.
  • stonel94
    stonel94 Posts: 550 Member
    Okay, well i'm allowed... 1650 (1 lb a week loss and only trying to lose a couple pounds, I'm not techincally overweight, just not happy with my body) and i put lightly active because since i'm on break I'm just chilling and shopping and then exercising most days. I put down 5 45 min workouts, but I workout at least 6 days a week and sometimes for an hour. I eat healthy usually, I just have to have something sweet but I try to do it well like a 90 calorie cookie or 1/2 the fat ice cream or just 1 130 cal ice cream bar stuff like that.
    usually i'm not hungry, but sometimes i am...
  • Natihilator
    Natihilator Posts: 1,778 Member
    Do you drink enough water to stay properly hydrated? Sometimes hunger signals can really by thirst signals.
  • stonel94
    stonel94 Posts: 550 Member
    Yeah I drink tons of water, like way over 8 cups a day, usually at least 10 cups, more usually
  • Eat more protein and fiber. Both will fill you up quickly and keep you full longer.
  • bathsheba_c
    bathsheba_c Posts: 1,873 Member
    What do you mean when you say that you're not happy with your body? Some possibilities, depending on what the answer is:

    1. You only started losing weight, and your stomach is still getting used to less food, in which case you should eat more protein and fiber and wait for it to pass in a week or two.
    2. You are close enough to healthy weight that you should be aiming for 1/2 lb instead of 1 lb each week.
    3. You don't actually need to lose weight; you just need to incorporate strength training to get the kind of figure you want.
  • Dave198lbs
    Dave198lbs Posts: 8,810 Member
    If I ate healthily all day one day, and had pretty close to my calories, but am still very hungry, if I eat over the calories it tells me to, can I really be overeating for my body, because it's telling me to eat more?

    if the number of calories you are eating is indeed "healthily" as in enough, hunger does not mean you must eat and it is not always your body telling you to eat more. A feeling of Hunger is a response to more than your body needing additional nourishment.

    you can train your hunger and it can be managed but first, your base calorie number must be correct.
  • AllTehBeers
    AllTehBeers Posts: 5,030 Member
    Okay, well i'm allowed... 1650 (1 lb a week loss and only trying to lose a couple pounds, I'm not techincally overweight, just not happy with my body) and i put lightly active because since i'm on break I'm just chilling and shopping and then exercising most days. I put down 5 45 min workouts, but I workout at least 6 days a week and sometimes for an hour. I eat healthy usually, I just have to have something sweet but I try to do it well like a 90 calorie cookie or 1/2 the fat ice cream or just 1 130 cal ice cream bar stuff like that.
    usually i'm not hungry, but sometimes i am...

    This sounds more then "lightly active." Even if it's just an hour of jogging a day, that could be close to 300 extra calories you're burning. I would try putting your setting at "active" and see how that goes. If you are truly feeling hungry at the end of the day, it is possible you're not giving your body enough.

    You could also change to a 250 calorie deficit. That would give you enough for an extra meal.
  • omnisis
    omnisis Posts: 85 Member
    There's pyschological hunger and legitimate hunger. It can be very hard to tell the difference between the two sometimes. Generally I only ever get hungry at night and for this reason I try to have a light protein heavy snack about an hour before bed. Also if you aren't trying to lose you can just eat more and monitor your weight/measurements weekly and adjust accordingly. MFP is pretty good with their TDEE calculations but in the end it's based on equations that are just "models" and your individual metabolism may be slightly different.

    Here's a simple truism: If you aren't gaining or losing week over week then you are at your maintenance intake. If you are gaining your are over. If you are losing you are under. I trust feedback from my own body more than I trust generic calculations.
  • tuckerrj
    tuckerrj Posts: 1,453 Member
    I'm sorry my dear. I can't know for sure about your situation. You're so young and resilient. I only know that in my life, I can no longer "trust" my hunger pangs. I've spend DECADES overeating. My body seems to have no idea when I've had enough to eat. My only hope is that after months (or years) of eating a reasonable amount of healthier food, I may one day be able to trust my body's hunger messages. Until then, I'll use my calorie count on MFP as my surrogate "you've had enough" trigger.

    I know that eating unprocessed food that isn't so calorie dense (like fresh fruits and vegetables) tends to fill me faster and with less calories. So I try to focus on them. Hang in there and do you're very best, and oh yeah Merry Christmas!!!
  • divacat80
    divacat80 Posts: 299 Member
    Overeating one day and giving in to your hunger feeling shouldn't stall your weightloss. But, you might be burning more calories than you think and your body might need more calories than those you eat. Maybe getting a heart rate monitor (or fitbit) would help you a lot in knowing your true daily expenditure and that would help you design a better daily meal plan.
    However, sometimes not even the best hrm are good at stating the exact amount of calories you burn or what your resting heart rate is.

    Also, remember that MFP gives you the amount of calories you HAVE TO EAT, with the calorie deficit already substracted. It took me a long time to actually believe this, follow it and realise that I was still losing weight.
    And, let me point out that MFP is not always good at estimating the calories you burn per exercise/activity, since this depends on a lot of different factors, it's not the same for everyone in every situation. It doesn't have in mind your heart rate so it can't calculate the burnt calories with accuracy. That's why I suggest getting a heart rate monitor :)

    Best of luck!
  • barbaramitchell101
    barbaramitchell101 Posts: 360 Member
    I found that when I ate foods more DENSE IN NUTRIENTS and added a high protein shake, I don't get the sugar/carb cravings, and it has curbed my appetite...I can now ignore it when peeps bring donuts into the office, where before I culdn't resist having 2 or 3...I stay pretty close to the 1200 alloted to me...oh, and I have a desk job so I really don't get much exercise....
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Okay, well i'm allowed... 1650 (1 lb a week loss and only trying to lose a couple pounds, I'm not techincally overweight, just not happy with my body) and i put lightly active because since i'm on break I'm just chilling and shopping and then exercising most days. I put down 5 45 min workouts, but I workout at least 6 days a week and sometimes for an hour. I eat healthy usually, I just have to have something sweet but I try to do it well like a 90 calorie cookie or 1/2 the fat ice cream or just 1 130 cal ice cream bar stuff like that.
    usually i'm not hungry, but sometimes i am...

    Be aware that all that exercise related stuff was merely goals - it is NOT used in any calculations for your eating level.

    That is why when you log exercise, you are given credit to eat back - so that you maintain the deficit to have 1 lb weekly loss goal.

    And yes, if it's not boredom eating, or a problem with eating straight carbs giving you low blood sugar later and making you feel hungry, it many times is real hunger because of under-eating.

    Also be aware that there is a deficit between your eating goal and your supposed maintenance level (without exercise involved at all).
    You can eat over your goal, and not above your real maintenance (if it's real), and still be at a deficit.

    If you have very little to lose, then you have a small deficit you should take. Your body will have a much smaller window for a deficit before it decides it's going to fight weight or fat loss.

    I'd say use the 1/2 lb weekly goal if already at healthy weight.

    Or even better, Maintenance, and then good strength training 3 x weekly to improve muscles while burning fat.
    Contrary to the way MFP works by eating back exercise calories, don't eat back the lifting calories if you eat at maintenance, they are so small of a burn during the workout. The MFP estimate is usually very close, it sounds small, and it is.
    But cardio if you have time to do any, log and eat back to stay at maintenance.
  • arcticfox04
    arcticfox04 Posts: 1,011 Member
    If your eating to your goal calories and still hungry eat more protein. Always eat back your exercise calories.
  • Yes. it takes about twenty minutes for your stomach to signal to your brain that it's full. Plus, if you've just started eating smaller portions, your stomach is a bit enlarged, and so it has to shrink to suit your smaller portion sizes.
  • spiregrain
    spiregrain Posts: 254 Member
    I noticed I was having a lot of physical hunger (as opposed to solely psychological desire to eat, which I have also experienced) even at maintenance. I think for me, it is because I have terrible sleep patterns (lifelong broken internal clock, night bird forced to get up early, + a baby) so sometimes I sleep 6 hours (a lot for me) or 3 hours (not enough for me) and however much it is its never consecutive. I think that the poor sleep schedule is causing me to have problems regulating ghrelin and leptin (sp? on both) which regulate your body's signals relating to fullness and hunger. Maybe something to look into if you have any questions at all about your sleep patterns. I think also people who wake up feeling exhausted might want to check with their doctor and investigate sleep apnea as a possibility, since that can also cause an unrested sleep (and I think messes up the hunger hormones as well).

    In my case, there is almost nothing that I can do to get more sleep -- I already get a ton of help with the baby at night, and sleeping pills don't help me sleep -- but knowing that the message to eat is a message that is being sent due to a mistake in my body helps me to accept that my numbers are my numbers and I'm not secretly burning an extra 700 calories which urgently needs to be made up for in brioche and ice cream. :)

    There is a great article on WebMD about this subject:

    http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/lose-weight-while-sleeping

    (Excuse the terrible title, this article is actually based on real science and not some guy's wacky moon theory.)
  • I've been where you are - obsessed. don't switch anything except exercise - try a sport for pleasure. You could be getting bored and allowing your perfection desire to kick in. Don't. You'll loose the focus and gain lots of weight - from size 8 to size 12. Enjoy, stop worrying, live in the now of health.
  • Dave198lbs
    Dave198lbs Posts: 8,810 Member
    Yes. it takes about twenty minutes for your stomach to signal to your brain that it's full. Plus, if you've just started eating smaller portions, your stomach is a bit enlarged, and so it has to shrink to suit your smaller portion sizes.

    That 20min thing is a myth.

    I know if I stop eating while I am still hungry and wait 20 minutes, my hunger often stops or lessens and if I dont stop I could have easily chowed down 500 more calories so I dont know if its a myth or not but it works quite often for me
  • Sleep is difficult for me when i eat late and isn't that many fat folks problem? A friend told me to follow my breath and try to count to ten. So much psychological stuff. like eating to stay up. a hot bath works well. I know that decaf is starting to keep me up, if I don't meditate. Mediation three times a day is what I need now! Wish me luck.
  • kms1320
    kms1320 Posts: 599 Member
    Yes. it takes about twenty minutes for your stomach to signal to your brain that it's full. Plus, if you've just started eating smaller portions, your stomach is a bit enlarged, and so it has to shrink to suit your smaller portion sizes.

    That 20min thing is a myth.

    I know if I stop eating while I am still hungry and wait 20 minutes, my hunger often stops or lessens and if I dont stop I could have easily chowed down 500 more calories so I dont know if its a myth or not but it works quite often for me

    I wouldn't disagree with that. I am challenging "it takes 20mins for your brain to receive the signal." Imagine a 32oz milk shake with the fattiest ice cream and whole milk chugged down. You will be full within a few minutes.
    It's not a myth.

    "http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/how-your-brain-signals-your-bodys-need-for-food.html
    CCK: When you eat, food enters and fills your stomach and then travels to the intestinal tract. As the food is digested and the body’s cells are fed, a chemical called cholecystokinin (CCK) is released, turning on feelings of fullness and turning off the appetite."

    It takes 30 minutes or more for food to even get broken down in the stomach and sent to the small intestine. You are talking about filling your stomach to capacity, which is an entirely different signal than turning off the chemicals that signal hunger.

    Some christmas education :)
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Yes. it takes about twenty minutes for your stomach to signal to your brain that it's full. Plus, if you've just started eating smaller portions, your stomach is a bit enlarged, and so it has to shrink to suit your smaller portion sizes.

    That 20min thing is a myth.

    I know if I stop eating while I am still hungry and wait 20 minutes, my hunger often stops or lessens and if I dont stop I could have easily chowed down 500 more calories so I dont know if its a myth or not but it works quite often for me

    I wouldn't disagree with that. I am challenging "it takes 20mins for your brain to receive the signal." Imagine a 32oz milk shake with the fattiest ice cream and whole milk chugged down. You will be full within a few minutes.
    It's not a myth.

    "http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/how-your-brain-signals-your-bodys-need-for-food.html
    CCK: When you eat, food enters and fills your stomach and then travels to the intestinal tract. As the food is digested and the body’s cells are fed, a chemical called cholecystokinin (CCK) is released, turning on feelings of fullness and turning off the appetite."

    It takes 30 minutes or more for food to even get broken down in the stomach and sent to the small intestine. You are talking about filling your stomach to capacity, which is an entirely different signal than turning off the chemicals that signal hunger.

    Some christmas education :)
    So that explains CCK, but that ignores both leptin and insulin, which also suppress appetite, and also react much quicker. CCK's appetite suppressing effect is really minor at best, it's main function is basically to turn on the digestive system to start digesting food, leptin and insulin are the main hormones that really control satiety. CCK basically suppresses appetite when your nauseous or anxious, it's more part of the fight or flight reflex rather than normal hunger/satiety.
  • kms1320
    kms1320 Posts: 599 Member
    Yes. it takes about twenty minutes for your stomach to signal to your brain that it's full. Plus, if you've just started eating smaller portions, your stomach is a bit enlarged, and so it has to shrink to suit your smaller portion sizes.

    That 20min thing is a myth.

    I know if I stop eating while I am still hungry and wait 20 minutes, my hunger often stops or lessens and if I dont stop I could have easily chowed down 500 more calories so I dont know if its a myth or not but it works quite often for me

    I wouldn't disagree with that. I am challenging "it takes 20mins for your brain to receive the signal." Imagine a 32oz milk shake with the fattiest ice cream and whole milk chugged down. You will be full within a few minutes.
    It's not a myth.

    "http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/how-your-brain-signals-your-bodys-need-for-food.html
    CCK: When you eat, food enters and fills your stomach and then travels to the intestinal tract. As the food is digested and the body’s cells are fed, a chemical called cholecystokinin (CCK) is released, turning on feelings of fullness and turning off the appetite."

    It takes 30 minutes or more for food to even get broken down in the stomach and sent to the small intestine. You are talking about filling your stomach to capacity, which is an entirely different signal than turning off the chemicals that signal hunger.

    Some christmas education :)
    So that explains CCK, but that ignores both leptin and insulin, which also suppress appetite, and also react much quicker. CCK's appetite suppressing effect is really minor at best, it's main function is basically to turn on the digestive system to start digesting food, leptin and insulin are the main hormones that really control satiety. CCK basically suppresses appetite when your nauseous or anxious, it's more part of the fight or flight reflex rather than normal hunger/satiety.

    Since you asked I'll quote some more of the article, which you obviously didn't read, and put it here so you have more info to cherry pick from :)

    "The breakdown products of foods — amino acids from protein, fatty acids from fat, and glucose from carbohydrates — regulate hormones such as insulin, which affect the process at a cellular level. They send messages to the brain telling it that fuel is needed.

    When the body needs nourishment, neurotransmitters are released. One neurotransmitter called Neuropeptide Y (NPY) is important in sending messages to various parts of the brain.

    Scientists have recently identified two chemicals — ghrelin and leptin — circulating in the blood that communicate with NPY.

    Ghrelin and glucose: According to the theory, low levels of glycogen and low blood sugar levels stimulate a spike in ghrelin and NPY’s activity in the hypothalamus. As NPY is stimulated, your desire for sweet and starchy foods goes up. And when ghrelin rises, so does appetite.

    While you sleep, your glycogen and blood sugar stores are used up, causing the brain to release NPY. Skipping breakfast increases NPY levels so that by afternoon, you’re set up for a carbohydrate binge. This craving for carbs is not the result of a lack of willpower; it’s an innate biological urge at work.

    The leptin link: After eating, leptin levels increase and inhibit the firing of NPY, so you feel full. If it has been a while since you’ve eaten, your blood levels of glucose are low and therefore leptin is low, and ghrelin is high.

    The circulating levels of ghrelin peak at different times depending on when you have your heaviest meal. People who eat big lunches show ghrelin peaks at a different time than people whose main meal is at night.

    In addition, these processes are at work:

    The galanin-fat connection: Galanin is released when fat stores need filling up. In the evening, galanin levels tend to rise, which may be nature’s way of making sure that people have enough calories to last them through the night.

    CCK: When you eat, food enters and fills your stomach and then travels to the intestinal tract. As the food is digested and the body’s cells are fed, a chemical called cholecystokinin (CCK) is released, turning on feelings of fullness and turning off the appetite."
  • kms1320
    kms1320 Posts: 599 Member
    Yes. it takes about twenty minutes for your stomach to signal to your brain that it's full. Plus, if you've just started eating smaller portions, your stomach is a bit enlarged, and so it has to shrink to suit your smaller portion sizes.

    That 20min thing is a myth.

    I know if I stop eating while I am still hungry and wait 20 minutes, my hunger often stops or lessens and if I dont stop I could have easily chowed down 500 more calories so I dont know if its a myth or not but it works quite often for me

    I wouldn't disagree with that. I am challenging "it takes 20mins for your brain to receive the signal." Imagine a 32oz milk shake with the fattiest ice cream and whole milk chugged down. You will be full within a few minutes.
    It's not a myth.

    "http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/how-your-brain-signals-your-bodys-need-for-food.html
    CCK: When you eat, food enters and fills your stomach and then travels to the intestinal tract. As the food is digested and the body’s cells are fed, a chemical called cholecystokinin (CCK) is released, turning on feelings of fullness and turning off the appetite."

    It takes 30 minutes or more for food to even get broken down in the stomach and sent to the small intestine. You are talking about filling your stomach to capacity, which is an entirely different signal than turning off the chemicals that signal hunger.

    Some christmas education :)

    I learned about CCK when I was 12. CCK is described by tigersword. Dietary fat helps release CCK. There are multiple receptors in the stomach. 1 Detects the calorie density of our food, one detects the volume. For someone to be full there has to be volume of food and adequate calories.

    An example is drinking a lot of water, no calories but good amount of volume. It won't really get rid of hunger, it might stop it for a few minutes but that's it.

    The other receptors detect calorie density. Drinking a cup of olive oil has a ton of calories but probably won't satisfy you long and as I said CCK is mainly released from fat intake.

    There are 16TBS in a cup 1 tbs is about 120-140 calories. Lets just use 130. 130 * 16 = 2,080 calories of fat.
    Again, thank you for not reading the article I linked, and only the small part I quoted.
  • kms1320
    kms1320 Posts: 599 Member
    Nope, if you fill by volume you're going to feel full too, like I said a few posts ago :)

    That's why I chug water when I'm getting hungry but still have time to my next snack or meal. I end up drinking 1-2 gallons a day, which keeps me hydrated.
  • kms1320
    kms1320 Posts: 599 Member
    Nope, if you fill by volume you're going to feel full too, like I said a few posts ago :)

    Okay I'll stop eating food and just drink water.
    If your goal is simply to feel full, then keep pumping water down your throat.. I don't see that being beneficial for the long term though lol.
  • AllTehBeers
    AllTehBeers Posts: 5,030 Member
    Yes. it takes about twenty minutes for your stomach to signal to your brain that it's full. Plus, if you've just started eating smaller portions, your stomach is a bit enlarged, and so it has to shrink to suit your smaller portion sizes.

    That 20min thing is a myth.

    I know if I stop eating while I am still hungry and wait 20 minutes, my hunger often stops or lessens and if I dont stop I could have easily chowed down 500 more calories so I dont know if its a myth or not but it works quite often for me

    I wouldn't disagree with that. I am challenging "it takes 20mins for your brain to receive the signal." Imagine a 32oz milk shake with the fattiest ice cream and whole milk chugged down. You will be full within a few minutes.
    It's not a myth.

    I think what was being discussed was this point.

    This article says nothing about "20 minutes" at all. It even says this:
    Researchers think that certain conditions, such as anorexia and bulimia, may affect many appetite-control body chemicals, including CCK. In bulimics, researchers think that either the CCK mechanism doesn’t work properly or the body’s chemical systems become so desensitized that the person eats huge quantities of food quicker than the brain is able to signal satisfaction and fullness.

    The opposite effect may occur in anorexics — the CCK mechanism is so oversensitized that they feel full after only a few bites of food. When bulimics and anorexics start eating normally, their CCK systems usually normalize.

    While these are extreme examples, they show that signals to the brain can vary in time depending on a lot of different factors.
  • kms1320
    kms1320 Posts: 599 Member
    Yes. it takes about twenty minutes for your stomach to signal to your brain that it's full. Plus, if you've just started eating smaller portions, your stomach is a bit enlarged, and so it has to shrink to suit your smaller portion sizes.

    That 20min thing is a myth.

    I know if I stop eating while I am still hungry and wait 20 minutes, my hunger often stops or lessens and if I dont stop I could have easily chowed down 500 more calories so I dont know if its a myth or not but it works quite often for me

    I wouldn't disagree with that. I am challenging "it takes 20mins for your brain to receive the signal." Imagine a 32oz milk shake with the fattiest ice cream and whole milk chugged down. You will be full within a few minutes.
    It's not a myth.

    I think what was being discussed was this point.

    This article says nothing about "20 minutes" at all.
    It's not an instant adjustment to the food you eat. That should be common sense. Just one example.. people who eat slower are generally thinner than people who eat fast. Because it takes time for the chemicals to interact and transmit satiety and pleasure. I'm not debating a 20 minute-not-a-second-longer-not-a-second-less, but to think it's an instant process is quite frankly, insulting. If it was instant, people wouldn't over stuff themselves then feel like they are going to burst a short time later saying "I can't believe I ate that much."
  • AllTehBeers
    AllTehBeers Posts: 5,030 Member
    It's not an instant adjustment to the food you eat. That should be common sense. Just one example.. people who eat slower are generally thinner than people who eat fast. Because it takes time for the chemicals to interact and transmit satiety and pleasure. I'm not debating a 20 minute-not-a-second-longer-not-a-second-less, but to think it's an instant process is quite frankly, insulting. If it was instant, people wouldn't over stuff themselves then feel like they are going to burst a short time later saying "I can't believe I ate that much."

    No one said it was an instant adjustment either. They had just stated that they believed the "20 minutes" was a myth.
  • kms1320
    kms1320 Posts: 599 Member
    Yes. it takes about twenty minutes for your stomach to signal to your brain that it's full. Plus, if you've just started eating smaller portions, your stomach is a bit enlarged, and so it has to shrink to suit your smaller portion sizes.

    That 20min thing is a myth.

    I know if I stop eating while I am still hungry and wait 20 minutes, my hunger often stops or lessens and if I dont stop I could have easily chowed down 500 more calories so I dont know if its a myth or not but it works quite often for me

    I wouldn't disagree with that. I am challenging "it takes 20mins for your brain to receive the signal." Imagine a 32oz milk shake with the fattiest ice cream and whole milk chugged down. You will be full within a few minutes.
    It's not a myth.

    I think what was being discussed was this point.

    This article says nothing about "20 minutes" at all.
    It's not an instant adjustment to the food you eat. That should be common sense. Just one example.. people who eat slower are generally thinner than people who eat fast. Because it takes time for the chemicals to interact and transmit satiety and pleasure. I'm not debating a 20 minute-not-a-second-longer-not-a-second-less, but to think it's an instant process is quite frankly, insulting. If it was instant, people wouldn't over stuff themselves then feel like they are going to burst a short time later saying "I can't believe I ate that much."

    Or some people just don't care and keep on eating. I am going back to the milkshake example. If you can chug one down in 1 minute which is about 1000-2000 calories. You're telling me you can sit there and drink 20 of them since it takes time for your body to get the signal you're full.

    No, like I said before, and you admitted to, filling your stomach regardless of calorie content will send a signal to stop eating. It's not the same thing we're talking about here. Ever take the gallon of milk challenge? Ever try to chug a gallon of water straight? You're going to throw it up because your stomach can't hold that much. COMPLETELY different signals to stop eating! It's like you are throwing common sense out the window and arguing semantics with straw man arguments in an effort to "be right."

    Oh, and "some people don't care and keep eating" is the answer and not study after study that shows in general people who eat slower also eat less. My bad.. what are your credentials again?