Eat More to Weigh Less? I THINK NOT!

show previous quotes

I agree that this is BS.
The only time you need to eat more is when you exercise. Even then, I try to eat to keep going - protein or whatever - and be healthy.
This is one piece of advice I REFUSE to listen to because my experience shows that when I eat more, I weigh more!!! AND I want to eat more.
I will continue to eat what I do and not worry about THAT advice.
Doin' JUST FINE here, thanks

"Eat More" doesn't necessarily mean eat more food or eat when you aren't hungry. It means eat more *calories*. So instead of having carrot sticks as a snack, you might have celery with a little bit of peanut butter instead. You aren't eating more food, just more calories.

WHATTTTTTTT :indifferent:

I think they meant more nutrient-dense foods by that. But...I could be wrong.

I meant volume.

A spoonful of peanut butter has, say, 200 calories.

Or you could eat half a pint of blueberries for 100 calories.

So, if you eat a spoonful of peanut butter instead of half a pint of blueberries, you're eating less food but more calories. That's what I mean when I say eating more to weigh less doesn't always mean eat more FOOD. It means eat more CALORIES.

No, sorry. The whole "eat more to weigh less" thing is about calories.

That's what I just said. :huh:

show previous quotes

I agree that this is BS.
The only time you need to eat more is when you exercise. Even then, I try to eat to keep going - protein or whatever - and be healthy.
This is one piece of advice I REFUSE to listen to because my experience shows that when I eat more, I weigh more!!! AND I want to eat more.
I will continue to eat what I do and not worry about THAT advice.
Doin' JUST FINE here, thanks

"Eat More" doesn't necessarily mean eat more food or eat when you aren't hungry. It means eat more *calories*. So instead of having carrot sticks as a snack, you might have celery with a little bit of peanut butter instead. You aren't eating more food, just more calories.

WHATTTTTTTT :indifferent:

Yes.. you read that right.. eat more effing food. Get a HRM, start logging consistently. Stop making excuses

Sorry!!! I really, really read that wrong!

Ha. I was so confused for a second. I had to re-read what I typed to make sure I didn't switch the words around. :bigsmile:

show previous quotes

You could just forget the technical crap and just eat when your body tells you to. I don't particularly believe the "eat more weigh less" stuff people on this site say.

you're too literal. In a way, eat more to weigh less agrees with eating when you are hungry.

I tried 1200. I was hungry. so i ATE MORE. and now I weigh less. How can you disagree with that??

How in the world does that agree with eating when you're hungry? Maybe some people just don't eat a lot and they are okay on 1200 calories a day? I'm sure everyone doesn't eat the exact same things every day, so that number can change. That's why I say just eat when you get hungry. You ate more, and you lost weight, that's great. But, shocker, not everyone is you.

This is far too oversimplified.
Hunger isn't always a reliable indicator.
Anorexics often don't experience hunger and they are literally starving. Some obese people feel constant hunger and they do need to eat.
Consistently under eating can affect hunger signals. Consistently under eating can have a negative impact on metabolism, which can make it harder to maintain when you reach goal.
The idea of eating more to weigh less is not to eat tons of food, it is to eat enough food that you avoid excess muscle loss and to minimize the effect dieting has on your metabolism while still losing weight.

But that isn't even the issue on this topic. OP did not even attempt to try the eat more to weigh less.

Are you serious? Just because I didn't log it you're suggesting I haven't eaten more? You couldn't be anymore wrong. I DID eat more. And it felt great. Did I lose weight? No. I pretty much stayed the same. I understand you are trying to help but I know what I ate and how much even if it's not in the log.

I wasn't referring to you about the hunger part.

The last line I did. I don't understand how you can know how much you were eating when you weren't logging. You said yourself you didn't know how much some of your meals were.
If you know what you ate fine. Like I said I'm done giving you advice. I just hate to see people avoid the EMTWL because you feel that is the reason you aren't losing when you aren't logging consistently. I said I was out, I shouldn't have come back. Curiousity kills the cat.

3dogs is giving you the best advice in this thread--you should really thank her and think about what she's saying. You have to consistently log your calories or you simply have no idea what the numbers are, period. You can't say you tried EM2WL and it didn't work when you didn't follow the program. Follow the program as stated (not your own bizarre version of it) for a month or two and see what happens. Perhaps it will work for you, too.

If you refuse to consistently and accurately log your food intake, I'm not sure how anyone can advise or help you. It's impossible for anyone to estimate what your empty food logs may or may not total. And who knows how many calories you possibly burned...it's all very mysterious.

My suggestion is that you really buckle down, track everything accurately, and see what happens.

This. Ohhhh this.

21 days is the key for me.. 21days to break a habit and make new ones.. I dont think u gave it long enough

Honestly, around here I think people worry way too much about "starvation mode". According to my research, it simply doesn't happen until calories drop to around 500. At levels around 1000-1200, your metabolic rate will drop from 14-22%, and that is nothing to worry about for most people. It won't make your body hold onto every ounce of fat, and you most definitely will not gain weight because of metabolic slow-down. Those are urban myths except for the very rare snowflake. You might, however, be cranky and tired, so if you can find a calorie level that leaves you satisfied and allows you to drop weight - even better for going the distance some of us have to go to get to a healthy weight.

How is having your metabic rate drop by 14-22% not a big deal? That's a huge drop, and I would have a big problem with it. We all know that eating even a few hundred calories above your TDEE will result in consistent gains, adding on pounds. I know that you aren't advocating eating low calories, but I do think that a metabolic drop at that level is a big deal.

If you're eating 1680 a day and not losing, then your TDEE probably isn't 2400. Or you just need to give it a while and your weight will start dropping again.

What is TDEE? I have no idea?

You probably should give it a little more time.

^This. You can't put your weight loss on a schedule, and if it was really that important then you should have planned for it sooner. Fast weight loss usually results in a rebound. Slow and steady keeps it off.

Are you sure that your TDEE and BMR numbers are correct? If it asks you to select a model, try the Katch-McArdle. http://scoobysworkshop.com/accurate-calorie-calculator/

Also, a lot of people I follow on here tend to switch up their calorie goals from day to day and set weekly macros instead, therefore they eat lighter some days and heavier other days according to what kind of workouts they are doing (more on lifting days, less on cardio and rest days). If you're not having luck at your current goal perhaps try something similar to this.

I recommend PMing Helloitsdan, he's a very helpful member on here and very knowledgeable about calories and how to balance eating and exercise to burn the weight off.

Muscle does not weigh more than fat, a pound is a pound whether its a pound of gold or a pound of sand (why does everyone say this?!?) 2 +2 = 4.... As far as volume a pound of fat takes up more space than a pound of muscle, so inches are lost versus weight.

If I never measured before using a scale, I don't see why I should start now.

Because your career depends on it?

show previous quotes

If I never measured before using a scale, I don't see why I should start now.

Because your career depends on it?

*gigglesnorts*

show previous quotes

If I never measured before using a scale, I don't see why I should start now.

Because your career depends on it?

*gigglesnorts*

*claps*

I literally just do the "Eat when I am physically hungry" thing. Alot of the foods I eat are low calorie BUT extremely fulling (I was shocked the other day when I had some raw cucumber and it only equaled to 8 calories! And that kept me full for a few hours) TBH I don't really pay too much attention to how little calories I am eating, I pay more attention to if I am eating too many, and to keep track of what I am eating. The more to 1700 I get (The recommended amount before exercise) the more weight I put on, so I have to try keep it less (Even when I have exercised although I let myself eat more if need be) and that also makes me eat healthier cause I know I don't have as many calories to eat.

It really is about listening to your body and doing whats right for YOU No persons answer is right really, do what you think is best....

BUT if you do want to up your calories next time, maybe do it SLOWLY, add 50-100 every 4-5 days

But most of all make a decision and STICK WITH IT for at least 2-3 months, and try to keep to the same amount of calories give or take 100 every day, if you keep jumping 500-600 calories difference all the time your body will get confused

Good luck x

I'm not certain what you're wanting in this thread, but medicine that gives you diarrhea will make you lose pounds really fast. Also dehydration, shaving body hair/getting a hair cut/plucking eyebrows, trimming your nails, and exfoliation. All these combined might give you measurable results. But you have to realize, you cannot leave any hair behind. If you're going to commit to this approach, you will need to remove every follicle for any hope of shedding a full pound.