Confused about caloric intake

Solomino
Solomino Posts: 36 Member
in Food and Nutrition
Hi

I have always thought that eating less is better....I have been conditioned
Since I have joined this great site and I have been logging and sharing my caloric intake, I am getting mixed messages,
Sometimes I get messages when I don't eat all the calories that are allotted to me like " good job being under" or way to go'. but then I am reading it is important to eat all the calories.

Which is it. I know that your system can go into starve mode but when I am full and I still have calories left over, I don't want to eat them just because they are there.

I would appreciate some insight here.
Thanks.

Replies

  • applepie161987
    applepie161987 Posts: 29
    It depends how much under...yes is important to still get your calories in, and not skip a meal. I try to eat 1300, but sometimes might eat 1200. It's still plenty of calories for me, but its obviously under. I also never skip a meal, so I know my metabolism is going all day.
  • bsuew
    bsuew Posts: 628 Member
    I know there are a lot of opinions here. What I do is eat between 1150-1250 every day. I don't eat my exercise calories back. If I do happen to want something that isn't within what I have left for the day, I'll either cut the next day a bit short or take a longer walk. It's working so far. I might add I've lost very slowly but I'm ok with that. 19 months so far = 79 lbs. I'm in the mind set that our bodies are all very different and what works for one doesn't work for everyone. :smile:
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    I've lost 60 lbs in 8.5 months eating 1600ish calories a day. As long as you weigh all your food, know how many calories you are burning, and eat your exercise calories back, you don't have to be starving.
  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    Your body needs a certain number of calories (energy) to do all the things you ask it to do (breathe, pump blood, digest food, clean the house, run errands, workout, etc etc). The goal is to be within a reasonable range of that number - slightly under to lose weight, slightly over to gain weight. Too far under for too long can cause problems. Too far over for too long can cause problems.

    The hard part is figuring out what that number is. MFP approximates it when you setup your profile/account. As do a zillion other calculators online. They are all just estimates to be used as starting points. Some trial and error is necessary.

    So with all that said, no one can really tell you how much you should be eating. We can give you a starting point, but then over time you'll likely have to tweak that number a bit until you find your sweet spot.
  • Solomino
    Solomino Posts: 36 Member
    Thanks everyone for your great advice.
  • medic2038
    medic2038 Posts: 434 Member
    Which is it. I know that your system can go into starve mode but when I am full and I still have calories left over, I don't want to eat them just because they are there.

    That's not at all true.
    All weight loss is based on a calorie deficit. "Starvation mode" is more of an excuse then anything.

    If you're under, it's no big deal (if anything it'll speed up your progress).
  • aetzkorn14
    aetzkorn14 Posts: 169 Member
    Which is it. I know that your system can go into starve mode but when I am full and I still have calories left over, I don't want to eat them just because they are there.

    That's not at all true.
    All weight loss is based on a calorie deficit. "Starvation mode" is more of an excuse then anything.

    If you're under, it's no big deal (if anything it'll speed up your progress).

    If you are slightly under don't stress at all but as far as starvation mode being an excuse please explain. I had issues not eating enough and it most certainly didn't speed things up. Weight loss is based on a caloric deficit...key word "weight" not "fat". Your body needs a certain amount of fuel before it feeds on its self which is counter productive in my opinion.
  • TitaniaEcks
    TitaniaEcks Posts: 351 Member
    The starvation response doesn't happen overnight. If you go under your calorie quota one day, you're not suddenly gonna shrivel up third-world-mode and die. As long as your overall, mid-to-long-term calorie and nutrient intake is adequate, you'll be just fine.

    If one day of going under 1200 was harmful, the diet method known as "intermittent fasting" would not exist.

    **Edited to remove specific national reference, as it may be offensive to people from Ethiopia for all I know.
  • spookiefox
    spookiefox Posts: 215 Member
    I know there are a lot of opinions here. What I do is eat between 1150-1250 every day. I don't eat my exercise calories back. If I do happen to want something that isn't within what I have left for the day, I'll either cut the next day a bit short or take a longer walk. It's working so far. I might add I've lost very slowly but I'm ok with that. 19 months so far = 79 lbs. I'm in the mind set that our bodies are all very different and what works for one doesn't work for everyone. :smile:

    If I believed I would have to limit myself to 1200 calories/day forever I would not want to live any longer. Seriously. And since you're not eating your exercise calories that is what you're saying.

    I'd like to be healthier, but not at the expense of happy.
  • spookiefox
    spookiefox Posts: 215 Member
    Which is it. I know that your system can go into starve mode but when I am full and I still have calories left over, I don't want to eat them just because they are there.

    That's not at all true.
    All weight loss is based on a calorie deficit. "Starvation mode" is more of an excuse then anything.

    If you're under, it's no big deal (if anything it'll speed up your progress).

    Metabolism does matter in weight loss, and eating too little for any length of time will affect metabolism. I hate the whole "starvation mode" concept because it oversimplifies this, but you can eat too little and it won't speed up your progress. More importantly, the goal should be healthy not skinny, and you can eat too little to be healthy too.
  • TitaniaEcks
    TitaniaEcks Posts: 351 Member
    If I believed I would have to limit myself to 1200 calories/day forever I would not want to live any longer. Seriously. And since you're not eating your exercise calories that is what you're saying.

    I'd like to be healthier, but not at the expense of happy.
    Well, food makes different people different levels of happy. My significant other, for example, is an oddity in that he LOATHES food - ALL food - and wishes he never had to eat again. He currently lives off Boost shakes, vitamin supplements and the occasional steak, and is waiting on the edge of his seat for that new Soylent meal-replacement stuff to arrive in the mail so he never has to eat again.

    I like food myself, a lot, but I never presume to impose my values on him. But I'm not so obsessed with food that I'd have a problem sticking to a 1200-a-day diet forever. It would not alter my happiness in any way.

    Everyone's different.
  • medic2038
    medic2038 Posts: 434 Member
    Which is it. I know that your system can go into starve mode but when I am full and I still have calories left over, I don't want to eat them just because they are there.

    That's not at all true.
    All weight loss is based on a calorie deficit. "Starvation mode" is more of an excuse then anything.

    If you're under, it's no big deal (if anything it'll speed up your progress).

    If you are slightly under don't stress at all but as far as starvation mode being an excuse please explain. I had issues not eating enough and it most certainly didn't speed things up. Weight loss is based on a caloric deficit...key word "weight" not "fat". Your body needs a certain amount of fuel before it feeds on its self which is counter productive in my opinion.

    Your body "feeding" on itself is the ENTIRE idea of losing fat!
    There's no such thing as exclusive fat loss (unless you get some kind of surgery). So whenever you lose X lbs, some of it is fat, some is LBM, some is water. Yes "metabolism" slows down, but LBM loss is the primary culprit there, not some magic metabolism crushers.

    Spooks, eating too little will never hinder your progress, in the sense that "weight" loss will stop. Now body composition can be adversely affected if people do it wrong (no arguments there).

    I'm on round 2 of PSMF which for me, is approximately 800 calories per day almost entirely from protein. I haven't magically stopped dropping and turned into a mass of fat. I've had very noticeable differences in body composition (FROM fat loss), which is the primary purpose of the diet.

Categories