Eat more weigh less folks - please help!
Options
Replies
-
I really don't "get" the science behind raising calories to lose weight if you're already not losing weight at the calorie intake you're presently at. Most science tells us that we must burn more than we take in to lose weight. Revving up your metabolism by eating more? I just don't see it.
There is no science that says raising calories will make you lose weight. In fact, many people here often preach that you will often GAIN a few pounds in the first few weeks when you raise your calories. However, the reason that it works is under the assumption that you will become more active and so increase your total daily maintenance due to the extra food that you are eating to fuel a more productive exercise routine.0 -
Heres how I do mine which helps me diet into the shape in my avi
I the following link to get my bmr (use to do the calculations but this is the closest calculator every time) = BMR
http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/bmr_calculator.htm
Then select which category you come into with the following and multiply your BMR
Activity Factor Category Definition
1.2 Sedentary Little or no exercise and desk job
1.375 Lightly Active Light exercise or sports 1-3 days a week
1.55 Moderately Active Moderate exercise or sports 3-5 days a week
1.725 Very Active Hard exercise or sports 6-7 days a week4
1.9 Extremely Active Hard daily exercise or sports and physical job
Now that will give you your daily calorie requirement
You then take away 300-500 calories from that number which should put you into a calorie deficit.
Do not cut more then 500 calories a day from your requirements
It works for me
Did you mean TDEE as BMR is the minimum you should be eating and not any lower?0 -
I dont really follow the "eat more, weight less" rule....it defo wouldn't work for me but it seems popular on MFP!
I think it's hard to give advise without looking at your food diary and exersice regime....you work out 4 times a week, but for how long and doing what?
In my experience (having lost 20lb in the past but then getting lazy) I do believe that 1200 is sufficient for the human body and exercise is the way forward....4 intense work outs a week on 1200 is never going to force your body into starvation mode IMO.
Sorry I havent got any advice on the thread title.....
*Holding breath for the abuse I might get from the "Eat More" crew.....*
1200 really doesn't have any meaning other than this... it's the minimum calorie level that seems to be sufficient for getting the proper mix of nutrients. what this means is that a bunch of folks worried solely about the nutritional aspect of diets have decided that as a general rule, nobody should eat below this amount without medical supervision.
when it comes to the amount of energy your body needs, 1200 is too low for most people. certainly the vast majority of men, and even the majority of women.
what happens is this... if you eat too few calories for a prolonged period of time, your body attempts to adjust to the lower caloric intake. it does that by simultaneously trying to get more efficient with its use of those calories, while also redirecting where it uses those calories. this is why people on large calorie deficits will often start losing their hair. the body just doesn't consider hair growth or health to be a high priority metabolic function when it no longer has a surplus of calories to spend each day. the increased efficiency manifests itself as slowed weight loss (slowed fat loss!). this is what confuses people and makes them think that they are gaining fat. they are not. they are simply not losing it as quickly anymore.
none of this is starvation mode. starvation mode is something that happens when you are literally starving yourself of calories and your BF% is so low that your body starts to consume itself to stay alive. think of the WWII death camps and how many of those people looked when they were freed. some of them were so far gone that even feeding them copious amounts of food after liberation was not enough to save them. that's starvation mode. if you were ever get to this point, you'd need medical assistance immediately.
what happens for the people on here is often called adaptive thermogenesis. that's basically a fancy way of saying that your BMR starts to drop due to a low calorie diet. the amount of this drop seems to be debated. some say it's not much more than 10%. others seem to think it can be larger. either way, this is what people often believe causes plateaus. the "eat more" crowd is not saying that eating more calories will cause you to lose weight per se... what they are saying is that you need to eat more if you find yourself in this situation in order to get your metabolism back on track, so that your weight loss can resume. it's really more of a "fix" for over-stressing your body by under-eating and a strategy for resuming your weight loss with a more suitable calorie deficit.0 -
Try switching up your work out routine.0
-
yeah u are stuck because you are DIE eting:) and not having any fun with food:) def increase cals and think longer term:) its a magic formula that only you can write!0
-
I dont really follow the "eat more, weight less" rule....it defo wouldn't work for me but it seems popular on MFP!
I think it's hard to give advise without looking at your food diary and exersice regime....you work out 4 times a week, but for how long and doing what?
In my experience (having lost 20lb in the past but then getting lazy) I do believe that 1200 is sufficient for the human body and exercise is the way forward....4 intense work outs a week on 1200 is never going to force your body into starvation mode IMO.
Sorry I havent got any advice on the thread title.....
*Holding breath for the abuse I might get from the "Eat More" crew.....*
1200 really doesn't have any meaning other than this... it's the minimum calorie level that seems to be sufficient for getting the proper mix of nutrients. what this means is that a bunch of folks worried solely about the nutritional aspect of diets have decided that as a general rule, nobody should eat below this amount without medical. supervision.
when it comes to the amount of energy your body needs, 1200 is too low for most people. certainly the vast majority of men, and even the majority of women.
what happens is this... if you eat too few calories for a prolonged period of time, your body attempts to adjust to the lower caloric intake. it does that by simultaneously trying to get more efficient with its use of those calories, while also redirecting where it uses those calories. this is why people on large calorie deficits will often start losing their hair. the body just doesn't consider hair growth or health to be a high priority metabolic function when it no longer has a surplus of calories to spend each day. the increased efficiency manifests itself as slowed weight loss (slowed fat loss!). this is what confuses people and makes them think that they are gaining fat. they are not. they are simply not losing it as quickly anymore.
none of this is starvation mode. starvation mode is something that happens when you are literally starving yourself of calories and your BF% is so low that your body starts to consume itself to stay alive. think of the WWII death camps and how many of those people looked when they were freed. some of them were so far gone that even feeding them copious amounts of food after liberation was not enough to save them. that's starvation mode.
what happens for the people on here is often called adaptive thermogenesis. that's basically a fancy way of saying that your BMR starts to drop due to a low calorie diet. the amount of this drop seems to be debated. some say it's not much more than 10%. others seem to think it can be larger. either way, this is what people often believe causes plateaus. the "eat more" crowd is not saying that eating more calories will cause you to lose weight per se... what they are saying is that you need to eat more if you find yourself in this situation in order to get your metabolism back on track, so that your weight loss can resume. it's really more of a "fix" for over-stressing your body by under-eating and a strategy for resuming your weight loss with a more suitable calorie deficit.
Agreed, but don't waste your breath on her, she eats under 1200 cals, complains about being tired and not having energy for the tough workouts she does (tbf they were pretty hard) and isn't open to things that are working for others who have studied nutrition.0 -
Did you mean TDEE as BMR is the minimum you should be eating and not any lower?
BMR is your base rate, TDEE is worked out by multiplying but the numbers I have given depending on your level of activity.
You then deduct a set amount to put you into a deficit. You have to eat less then your body need so it uses your stores for energy0 -
I dont really follow the "eat more, weight less" rule....it defo wouldn't work for me but it seems popular on MFP!
I think it's hard to give advise without looking at your food diary and exersice regime....you work out 4 times a week, but for how long and doing what?
In my experience (having lost 20lb in the past but then getting lazy) I do believe that 1200 is sufficient for the human body and exercise is the way forward....4 intense work outs a week on 1200 is never going to force your body into starvation mode IMO.
Sorry I havent got any advice on the thread title.....
*Holding breath for the abuse I might get from the "Eat More" crew.....*
1200 really doesn't have any meaning other than this... it's the minimum calorie level that seems to be sufficient for getting the proper mix of nutrients. what this means is that a bunch of folks worried solely about the nutritional aspect of diets have decided that as a general rule, nobody should eat below this amount without medical. supervision.
when it comes to the amount of energy your body needs, 1200 is too low for most people. certainly the vast majority of men, and even the majority of women.
what happens is this... if you eat too few calories for a prolonged period of time, your body attempts to adjust to the lower caloric intake. it does that by simultaneously trying to get more efficient with its use of those calories, while also redirecting where it uses those calories. this is why people on large calorie deficits will often start losing their hair. the body just doesn't consider hair growth or health to be a high priority metabolic function when it no longer has a surplus of calories to spend each day. the increased efficiency manifests itself as slowed weight loss (slowed fat loss!). this is what confuses people and makes them think that they are gaining fat. they are not. they are simply not losing it as quickly anymore.
none of this is starvation mode. starvation mode is something that happens when you are literally starving yourself of calories and your BF% is so low that your body starts to consume itself to stay alive. think of the WWII death camps and how many of those people looked when they were freed. some of them were so far gone that even feeding them copious amounts of food after liberation was not enough to save them. that's starvation mode.
what happens for the people on here is often called adaptive thermogenesis. that's basically a fancy way of saying that your BMR starts to drop due to a low calorie diet. the amount of this drop seems to be debated. some say it's not much more than 10%. others seem to think it can be larger. either way, this is what people often believe causes plateaus. the "eat more" crowd is not saying that eating more calories will cause you to lose weight per se... what they are saying is that you need to eat more if you find yourself in this situation in order to get your metabolism back on track, so that your weight loss can resume. it's really more of a "fix" for over-stressing your body by under-eating and a strategy for resuming your weight loss with a more suitable calorie deficit.
Agreed, but don't waste your breath on her, she eats under 1200 cals, complains about being tired and not having energy for the tough workouts she does (tbf they were pretty hard) and isn't open to things that are working for others who have studied nutrition.
it's ok. my answer is not just for her, but also for any lurkers reading this thread who had similar questions.0 -
I started on the 1200 cals and initially was loosing, then I stalled and started reading up on why that may be - for me 1200 simply wasnt enough and I have now started to up them by 100 each week until I get to the 'Scooby' calculation.
As it worried me so much (I couldnt believe I could eat 2000+ cals & maintain) I invested in a FitBit - which showed how much I was burn each day and has also give me peace of mind. Just to add having now upped mine by 200 (I still have a way to go) I have shifted an extra 3lbs and dont feel so exhausted
Hope this helps x:flowerforyou:0 -
bump0
-
I was scared at first to eat more to lose...but when I did, the weight started to come off again. You need food to fuel your body. Determine your BMR and TDEE at anywhere from 10 - 20%. I use the scooby calculator. If you include activity in your calculations you don't eat your exercise cals back...if you set it to sedetary then you would obviously eat the cals back. I usually will eat about 1/2 my cals back. Hope this helps. Also, try to swtich up your routine. Your body can get used to one thing, so changing it up confuses your muscles and makes them work more. You just have to play around with the calories and activity till you find what works best for you.
0 -
have you tried the calculation of the website I have given you?0
-
1200 really doesn't have any meaning other than this... it's the minimum calorie level that seems to be sufficient for getting the proper mix of nutrients. what this means is that a bunch of folks worried solely about the nutritional aspect of diets have decided that as a general rule, nobody should eat below this amount without medical supervision.
when it comes to the amount of energy your body needs, 1200 is too low for most people. certainly the vast majority of men, and even the majority of women.
what happens is this... if you eat too few calories for a prolonged period of time, your body attempts to adjust to the lower caloric intake. it does that by simultaneously trying to get more efficient with its use of those calories, while also redirecting where it uses those calories. this is why people on large calorie deficits will often start losing their hair. the body just doesn't consider hair growth or health to be a high priority metabolic function when it no longer has a surplus of calories to spend each day. the increased efficiency manifests itself as slowed weight loss (slowed fat loss!). this is what confuses people and makes them think that they are gaining fat. they are not. they are simply not losing it as quickly anymore.
none of this is starvation mode. starvation mode is something that happens when you are literally starving yourself of calories and your BF% is so low that your body starts to consume itself to stay alive. think of the WWII death camps and how many of those people looked when they were freed. some of them were so far gone that even feeding them copious amounts of food after liberation was not enough to save them. that's starvation mode. if you were ever get to this point, you'd need medical assistance immediately.
what happens for the people on here is often called adaptive thermogenesis. that's basically a fancy way of saying that your BMR starts to drop due to a low calorie diet. the amount of this drop seems to be debated. some say it's not much more than 10%. others seem to think it can be larger. either way, this is what people often believe causes plateaus. the "eat more" crowd is not saying that eating more calories will cause you to lose weight per se... what they are saying is that you need to eat more if you find yourself in this situation in order to get your metabolism back on track, so that your weight loss can resume. it's really more of a "fix" for over-stressing your body by under-eating and a strategy for resuming your weight loss with a more suitable calorie deficit.
Probably the best "Eat More" explanation I've read! Love it.
To the OP, if you have 15lbs to lose (or even a little more) and want to stick with the MFP method, I would set your weekly weight loss goal to .5 - 1 lb a week. That will most likely give you a higher daily calorie goal (and don't forget to eat most or all of your exercise calories back!).
If you're worried about upping all at once, as others have suggested, add calories 100 or so at a time until you reach your goal.
Good luck!0 -
@davekang Yes it says that my BMR is 1800. Reducing that by 300-500 calories a day would put me in line with the 1500 recommended by MFP if I changed from 2 pounds loss a week to 1 pound loss. I think I will up my calories a bit this week and be sure to eat what is recommended...0
-
Like a lot of people, I had no clue about BMR, TDEE and the 20% deficit. I jumped back on the weight loss wagon in mid-January after visiting the doctor and having the scale reflect how heavy I had actually become. I started on 1200 calories and was doing C25K and 30DS and not eating many of the exercise calories back and was exhausted.
Then I read a thread about BMR & TDEE and it started to kind of click with me, although it did seem kind of scary at first, you know, to INCREASE caloric intake while trying to LOSE weight. So I started bumping up the calories. 1300 and some change, then 1500 and some change, started lifting weights 3x a week (barbells, not the pink barbie ones, LOL), dropped the Shred program, as well as most of my running, and bumped them again to over 1800. Boom. By mid-April I had lost 26 or so pounds, so it's obviously working for me.0 -
@davekang Yes it says that my BMR is 1560. Reducing that by 300-500 calories a day would put me in line with the 1200 recommended by MFP.
No, BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate - basically calories you burn if you were to just lie there and do nothing) is not what you reduce. you would take 300-500 calories off of your TDEE amount.0 -
I dont really follow the "eat more, weight less" rule....it defo wouldn't work for me but it seems popular on MFP!
I think it's hard to give advise without looking at your food diary and exersice regime....you work out 4 times a week, but for how long and doing what?
In my experience (having lost 20lb in the past but then getting lazy) I do believe that 1200 is sufficient for the human body and exercise is the way forward....4 intense work outs a week on 1200 is never going to force your body into starvation mode IMO.
Sorry I havent got any advice on the thread title.....
*Holding breath for the abuse I might get from the "Eat More" crew.....*
1200 really doesn't have any meaning other than this... it's the minimum calorie level that seems to be sufficient for getting the proper mix of nutrients. what this means is that a bunch of folks worried solely about the nutritional aspect of diets have decided that as a general rule, nobody should eat below this amount without medical. supervision.
when it comes to the amount of energy your body needs, 1200 is too low for most people. certainly the vast majority of men, and even the majority of women.
what happens is this... if you eat too few calories for a prolonged period of time, your body attempts to adjust to the lower caloric intake. it does that by simultaneously trying to get more efficient with its use of those calories, while also redirecting where it uses those calories. this is why people on large calorie deficits will often start losing their hair. the body just doesn't consider hair growth or health to be a high priority metabolic function when it no longer has a surplus of calories to spend each day. the increased efficiency manifests itself as slowed weight loss (slowed fat loss!). this is what confuses people and makes them think that they are gaining fat. they are not. they are simply not losing it as quickly anymore.
none of this is starvation mode. starvation mode is something that happens when you are literally starving yourself of calories and your BF% is so low that your body starts to consume itself to stay alive. think of the WWII death camps and how many of those people looked when they were freed. some of them were so far gone that even feeding them copious amounts of food after liberation was not enough to save them. that's starvation mode.
what happens for the people on here is often called adaptive thermogenesis. that's basically a fancy way of saying that your BMR starts to drop due to a low calorie diet. the amount of this drop seems to be debated. some say it's not much more than 10%. others seem to think it can be larger. either way, this is what people often believe causes plateaus. the "eat more" crowd is not saying that eating more calories will cause you to lose weight per se... what they are saying is that you need to eat more if you find yourself in this situation in order to get your metabolism back on track, so that your weight loss can resume. it's really more of a "fix" for over-stressing your body by under-eating and a strategy for resuming your weight loss with a more suitable calorie deficit.
Agreed, but don't waste your breath on her, she eats under 1200 cals, complains about being tired and not having energy for the tough workouts she does (tbf they were pretty hard) and isn't open to things that are working for others who have studied nutrition.
Uhh Ohhh! Somesones touchy since I removed them from my friends list! Hilarious!!
Dont talk *kitten* mate, feeling safe in the knowledge other people cant see my diary or profile?! Pretty lame discrediting a total stranger on here like this...."Her" is not pleased......
I rarely eat under 1200, NEVER moan about being tired and I havent Poo-Poo'd "Eat More" - I just know it doesnt work for me and that if I eat the RIGHT THINGS 1200 is sufficient for me on a day to day basis. However, I do indulge at weekends...
FYI my TDEE is only 1780.......0 -
I want to pipe in here, there are NAY Sayers on both sides of the coin , but did you know
in 2011 the CDC - yeah that CDC centers for disease control . our fair government
sent out literally MILLIONS of pamphlets on how to do just this thing!
go check it out, its ALL about calorie density, you can eat a LOT of food for 1400-1600 calories a day and still lose weight ,
and not cut out ANY food.
thats important too.
approaching weight loss from a factual and numerical basis , and removing the emotions from food and eating makes a much beeter health perspective.
and yes TDEE less 20% is vital for most people0 -
@davekang Yes it says that my BMR is 1560. Reducing that by 300-500 calories a day would put me in line with the 1200 recommended by MFP.
No, BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate - basically calories you burn if you were to just lie there and do nothing) is not what you reduce. you would take 300-500 calories off of your TDEE amount.
This. Not a good idea to eat less than your BMR. You should eat somewhere between that and your TDEE. A moderate approach usually has better long-term results than a drastic approach.0 -
Ditto! Plus, you wouldn't want to take 500 calories away from that anyway! That would be nearly 33%! I would say that based on a BMR of 1560, multiple it by 1.55 since you workout 4 days a week then you would get 2418. Then depending on what kind of cut you want, your TDEE minus would be ... 10% = 2176 or 20% = 1934. This would include exercise though so you don't eat those back (which is why many just log it as 1 calorie burns). Now, that's a lot more than 1200 so maybe increase by 100-200 a week to make it easier.@davekang Yes it says that my BMR is 1560. Reducing that by 300-500 calories a day would put me in line with the 1200 recommended by MFP.
No, BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate - basically calories you burn if you were to just lie there and do nothing) is not what you reduce. you would take 300-500 calories off of your TDEE amount.
I absolutely agree with needing to eat more. Your body needs the calories to be able to burn. This description is perfect!!1200 really doesn't have any meaning other than this... it's the minimum calorie level that seems to be sufficient for getting the proper mix of nutrients. what this means is that a bunch of folks worried solely about the nutritional aspect of diets have decided that as a general rule, nobody should eat below this amount without medical. supervision.
when it comes to the amount of energy your body needs, 1200 is too low for most people. certainly the vast majority of men, and even the majority of women.
what happens is this... if you eat too few calories for a prolonged period of time, your body attempts to adjust to the lower caloric intake. it does that by simultaneously trying to get more efficient with its use of those calories, while also redirecting where it uses those calories. this is why people on large calorie deficits will often start losing their hair. the body just doesn't consider hair growth or health to be a high priority metabolic function when it no longer has a surplus of calories to spend each day. the increased efficiency manifests itself as slowed weight loss (slowed fat loss!). this is what confuses people and makes them think that they are gaining fat. they are not. they are simply not losing it as quickly anymore.
none of this is starvation mode. starvation mode is something that happens when you are literally starving yourself of calories and your BF% is so low that your body starts to consume itself to stay alive. think of the WWII death camps and how many of those people looked when they were freed. some of them were so far gone that even feeding them copious amounts of food after liberation was not enough to save them. that's starvation mode.
what happens for the people on here is often called adaptive thermogenesis. that's basically a fancy way of saying that your BMR starts to drop due to a low calorie diet. the amount of this drop seems to be debated. some say it's not much more than 10%. others seem to think it can be larger. either way, this is what people often believe causes plateaus. the "eat more" crowd is not saying that eating more calories will cause you to lose weight per se... what they are saying is that you need to eat more if you find yourself in this situation in order to get your metabolism back on track, so that your weight loss can resume. it's really more of a "fix" for over-stressing your body by under-eating and a strategy for resuming your weight loss with a more suitable calorie deficit.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions