To the mean people of MFP... You can say "I told you so"
Replies
-
I think to each his own what works for one might not work for the next.0
-
If you aren't giving your body what it needs to function then it will hold onto what it has halting weight loss. If you give it what it needs and continue working out you'll still actually be at a deficit and be able to lose weight. Oh my. I know it doesn't seem logical when all you hear is to lose weight you have to eat less and move move, but really, you still need to eat more and give your body the proper fuel to function.
If someone was eating 1200 calories a day and burning say 300, that would leave them at 700 net. 1200 - 500 = 700. 700 is not enough fuel for the body to continue to function properly.
But if someone is eating 1900 calories a day and burning 500 they are eating what they need for their body to function and are at a deficit. 1900 - 500 = 1400. Less than what they ate = deficit.
She is obviously at a deficit or how would she be losing weight...so yeah it does add up.
1500 = no deficit. One week later 2300 = deficit. That math doesn't work.
Our bodies can't hold onto fat while we eat a calorie deficit. If one eats a very low calorie diet for a prolonged period of time, it is possible that their BMR would lower to the point that what was once was a deficit is no longer a deficit. Eating more can correct this. BUT it will not correct in 1 week. There will be an initial weight gain.
It's more likely that either the OP is actually creating a bigger deficit through exercise, or she was under-estimating her calories before she upped them.0 -
This actually doesn't add up... perhaps you weren't logging accurately before or you're exercising more now?
The 'eat more' message is more for those people who are attempting around 1200 calories a day and keep falling off the wagon and binging, because it's too great a deficit for them.
But I'm happy for you! If it works - keep it up.
It does add up. The eat more isn't just for anyone only eating 1200 calories (though the OP did state she was eating about 1200-1500 calories...)...The eat more is for ANYONE not eating what their body needs in order to fuel their workouts.
How does it add up exactly? A deficit is needed for weight loss. If the OP did not have a deficit at 1200 - 1500 then how does she have a deficit at 2300 calories?
It doesn't make logical sense to me either, but here's what happed to me.
Around 10 years ago, I had 15 pounds to lose. I'm 5'11" and was trying to get from the 170s into the 150s. I was "eating right", eating 1100-1300 calories per day and exercising 5 days a week. I did weigh and measure my food and write down what I ate. I didn't need MFP to teach me that. Three months in, the scale had not moved and my clothes were not getting looser.
At that point, I knew nothing about calorie deficits, TDEE, BMR and what have you, but I concluded that I wasn't eating nearly enough calories for a person my size, as I had heard that eating too few calories could be counterproductive. I started eating full fat (or reduced fat if I found it too rich) versions of the foods I was already eating, ate a little more as far as portions, and upped my calories to 1800 a day. And honestly, the 1800 was an arbitrary number that I picked. I did not change up my exercise at all. After three weeks, 10 pounds came off in a whoosh.
I could not believe it. One week my jeans were fitting and the next week, they were extremely loose. I weighed myself, saw the 10 pound loss and got on and off the scale a few more times because I could not believe the number was real. Obviously, I was in a deficit at 1100-1200 calories, but my body didn't let go of weight until I decreased that deficit.
I know that my experience is anecdotal, but it happened. I just don't know the whys or wherefores.0 -
If you aren't giving your body what it needs to function then it will hold onto what it has halting weight loss. If you give it what it needs and continue working out you'll still actually be at a deficit and be able to lose weight. Oh my. I know it doesn't seem logical when all you hear is to lose weight you have to eat less and move move, but really, you still need to eat more and give your body the proper fuel to function.
If someone was eating 1200 calories a day and burning say 300, that would leave them at 700 net. 1200 - 500 = 700. 700 is not enough fuel for the body to continue to function properly.
But if someone is eating 1900 calories a day and burning 500 they are eating what they need for their body to function and are at a deficit. 1900 - 500 = 1400. Less than what they ate = deficit.
She is obviously at a deficit or how would she be losing weight...so yeah it does add up.
1500 = no deficit. One week later 2300 = deficit. That math doesn't work.
Our bodies can't hold onto fat while we eat a calorie deficit. If one eats a very low calorie diet for a prolonged period of time, it is possible that their BMR would lower to the point that what was once was a deficit is no longer a deficit. Eating more can correct this. BUT it will not correct in 1 week. There will be an initial weight gain.
It's more likely that either the OP is actually creating a bigger deficit through exercise, or she was under-estimating her calories before she upped them.
She was eating LESS than what her body needs to function. She was eating 1200-1500 a day AND STILL WORKING OUT CREATING A DEFICIT but her body needed more fuel than what she was giving it so it held on to everything it had instead of losing weight.
It's simple math. 1500-500 = 1000 or 1200-500 = 700. Your body needs at least 1200 calories just to function.0 -
I have been at my weight loss journey for 3 months tomorrow and I have lost 18 lbs. I started out eating between 1200-1500 calories a day and exercising regularly... but just recently I quit losing weight and to top it off I was hungry all the time! I asked myself how am I going to eat less than 1200 calories if I am as hungry as I am now! The answer: Don't! ....EAT MORE!
I got on here looking for answers and I didn't like that people were telling me that I wasn't eating enough... I was actually extremely defensive about it. How dare they tell me I am not eating enough when I have lost all the weight I have so far! Then someone directed me to this thread:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/974888-in-place-of-a-road-map-2k13
I am now eating 2300 calories a day and exercising regularly and back to losing 1lb a week! The best part is... I am full! Yay! No more hunger! Thanks for the read! I hope this helps at least one person out there!
I know, meanies we,all are! :bigsmile:
Congratulations on your success.0 -
If you aren't giving your body what it needs to function then it will hold onto what it has halting weight loss. If you give it what it needs and continue working out you'll still actually be at a deficit and be able to lose weight. Oh my. I know it doesn't seem logical when all you hear is to lose weight you have to eat less and move move, but really, you still need to eat more and give your body the proper fuel to function.
If someone was eating 1200 calories a day and burning say 300, that would leave them at 700 net. 1200 - 500 = 700. 700 is not enough fuel for the body to continue to function properly.
But if someone is eating 1900 calories a day and burning 500 they are eating what they need for their body to function and are at a deficit. 1900 - 500 = 1400. Less than what they ate = deficit.
She is obviously at a deficit or how would she be losing weight...so yeah it does add up.
1500 = no deficit. One week later 2300 = deficit. That math doesn't work.
Our bodies can't hold onto fat while we eat a calorie deficit. If one eats a very low calorie diet for a prolonged period of time, it is possible that their BMR would lower to the point that what was once was a deficit is no longer a deficit. Eating more can correct this. BUT it will not correct in 1 week. There will be an initial weight gain.
It's more likely that either the OP is actually creating a bigger deficit through exercise, or she was under-estimating her calories before she upped them.
She was eating LESS than what her body needs to function. She was eating 1200-1500 a day AND STILL WORKING OUT CREATING A DEFICIT but her body needed more fuel than what she was giving it so it held on to everything it had instead of losing weight.
It's simple math. 1500-500 = 1000 or 1200-500 = 700. Your body needs at least 1200 calories just to function.
So, you are suggesting that we don't lose weight on deficit, if the deficit is too large?0 -
I am now eating 2300 calories a day and exercising regularly and back to losing 1lb a week! The best part is... I am full! Yay! No more hunger! Thanks for the read! I hope this helps at least one person out there!
OP, how many calories were you burning through exercise before and how many do you burn now?
Congrats on your success, btw. I am just trying to figure out what worked.0 -
If you aren't giving your body what it needs to function then it will hold onto what it has halting weight loss. If you give it what it needs and continue working out you'll still actually be at a deficit and be able to lose weight. Oh my. I know it doesn't seem logical when all you hear is to lose weight you have to eat less and move move, but really, you still need to eat more and give your body the proper fuel to function.
If someone was eating 1200 calories a day and burning say 300, that would leave them at 700 net. 1200 - 500 = 700. 700 is not enough fuel for the body to continue to function properly.
But if someone is eating 1900 calories a day and burning 500 they are eating what they need for their body to function and are at a deficit. 1900 - 500 = 1400. Less than what they ate = deficit.
She is obviously at a deficit or how would she be losing weight...so yeah it does add up.
1500 = no deficit. One week later 2300 = deficit. That math doesn't work.
Our bodies can't hold onto fat while we eat a calorie deficit. If one eats a very low calorie diet for a prolonged period of time, it is possible that their BMR would lower to the point that what was once was a deficit is no longer a deficit. Eating more can correct this. BUT it will not correct in 1 week. There will be an initial weight gain.
It's more likely that either the OP is actually creating a bigger deficit through exercise, or she was under-estimating her calories before she upped them.
She was eating LESS than what her body needs to function. She was eating 1200-1500 a day AND STILL WORKING OUT CREATING A DEFICIT but her body needed more fuel than what she was giving it so it held on to everything it had instead of losing weight.
It's simple math. 1500-500 = 1000 or 1200-500 = 700. Your body needs at least 1200 calories just to function.
So, you are suggesting that we don't lose weight on deficit, if the deficit is too large?
NO. What I am saying is that if you eat below what your body needs to function then you won't lose weight. You may at first but it will stop.0 -
I can't respond for the OP - only for myself. In my case I WAS at a deficit at 1200 and below (of course). I wanted to lift weights and I really wanted to run. After 3 months eating this low, I could not do it anymore. I was hungry all the time and had no energy to exercise at all.
Upping my calories slowly, allowed me to see over time, how high I could go before I maintained. It took me about 6 weeks to see that even at 1800 I was still losing. I had a lot of weight to lose and I knew there was no way I could cut from 1200 calories. It's a slow process and I'm sure I would have lost like crazy at 1200 calories, but on top of everything else - my hair was starting to fall out too.
The thing is I didn't have to. I am able to lose at 1800, lift heavy weights 3x a week & run a couple of days. This is my experience. I can not speak for anyone else - except to say that you should try it. Our bodies were not made to run on 1200 calories.
Were you eating exercise calories back, when you were at 1,200 calories?0 -
If you aren't giving your body what it needs to function then it will hold onto what it has halting weight loss. If you give it what it needs and continue working out you'll still actually be at a deficit and be able to lose weight. Oh my. I know it doesn't seem logical when all you hear is to lose weight you have to eat less and move move, but really, you still need to eat more and give your body the proper fuel to function.
If someone was eating 1200 calories a day and burning say 300, that would leave them at 700 net. 1200 - 500 = 700. 700 is not enough fuel for the body to continue to function properly.
But if someone is eating 1900 calories a day and burning 500 they are eating what they need for their body to function and are at a deficit. 1900 - 500 = 1400. Less than what they ate = deficit.
She is obviously at a deficit or how would she be losing weight...so yeah it does add up.
1500 = no deficit. One week later 2300 = deficit. That math doesn't work.
Our bodies can't hold onto fat while we eat a calorie deficit. If one eats a very low calorie diet for a prolonged period of time, it is possible that their BMR would lower to the point that what was once was a deficit is no longer a deficit. Eating more can correct this. BUT it will not correct in 1 week. There will be an initial weight gain.
It's more likely that either the OP is actually creating a bigger deficit through exercise, or she was under-estimating her calories before she upped them.
She was eating LESS than what her body needs to function. She was eating 1200-1500 a day AND STILL WORKING OUT CREATING A DEFICIT but her body needed more fuel than what she was giving it so it held on to everything it had instead of losing weight.
It's simple math. 1500-500 = 1000 or 1200-500 = 700. Your body needs at least 1200 calories just to function.
So, you are suggesting that we don't lose weight on deficit, if the deficit is too large?
NO. What I am saying is that if you eat below what your body needs to function then you won't lose weight. You may at first but it will stop.
Why would it stop if I am in a deficit?0 -
Plateaus are an inevitable part of the weight loss process. Although it sounds counter-intuitive, you have to eat more calories to kick start your metabolism again once you hit the plateau. The other comments re: caloric math are spot on, especially when exercising.0
-
0 -
If you aren't giving your body what it needs to function then it will hold onto what it has halting weight loss. If you give it what it needs and continue working out you'll still actually be at a deficit and be able to lose weight. Oh my. I know it doesn't seem logical when all you hear is to lose weight you have to eat less and move move, but really, you still need to eat more and give your body the proper fuel to function.
If someone was eating 1200 calories a day and burning say 300, that would leave them at 700 net. 1200 - 500 = 700. 700 is not enough fuel for the body to continue to function properly.
But if someone is eating 1900 calories a day and burning 500 they are eating what they need for their body to function and are at a deficit. 1900 - 500 = 1400. Less than what they ate = deficit.
She is obviously at a deficit or how would she be losing weight...so yeah it does add up.
1500 = no deficit. One week later 2300 = deficit. That math doesn't work.
Our bodies can't hold onto fat while we eat a calorie deficit. If one eats a very low calorie diet for a prolonged period of time, it is possible that their BMR would lower to the point that what was once was a deficit is no longer a deficit. Eating more can correct this. BUT it will not correct in 1 week. There will be an initial weight gain.
It's more likely that either the OP is actually creating a bigger deficit through exercise, or she was under-estimating her calories before she upped them.
She was eating LESS than what her body needs to function. She was eating 1200-1500 a day AND STILL WORKING OUT CREATING A DEFICIT but her body needed more fuel than what she was giving it so it held on to everything it had instead of losing weight.
It's simple math. 1500-500 = 1000 or 1200-500 = 700. Your body needs at least 1200 calories just to function.
So, you are suggesting that we don't lose weight on deficit, if the deficit is too large?
NO. What I am saying is that if you eat below what your body needs to function then you won't lose weight. You may at first but it will stop.
Why would it stop if I am in a deficit?
I repeat...It's simple math. 1500-500 = 1000 or 1200-500 = 700. Your body needs at least 1200 calories just to function.
Your body needs 1200 calories just to function...0 -
Im going to have to read this when I get home Thanks0
-
airhumps post
this makes me happy0 -
Thanks for sharing this.0
-
Yes, tending to go to extremes and starving yourself but not losing weight...it seems to be counter-intuitive. I want to lose 45 lbs. but I want to do it in a week! I have to realize it's going to be slow. 1 lb./week is what it takes. In reality, it takes all that time to truly understand how to manage it for the long haul. It's practice!0
-
Thank you for the post - I really appreciate this - I am going to study it.0
-
:drinker:
Congrats on the loss!
Yeah, that whole cortisol/grehlin/leptin-thing really can become a thorn in your side after awhile.0 -
Yeah. 2,300 calories is a lot! Plus, the amount of food that I would have to eat...I wouldn't be able to.Wish I had the balls to do this. I'm just never sure of my numbers.. Lol!
The number itself is not the point. You have to understand what your body needs calorie wise to perform all of it's functions...everyone's requirements are going to be different. You can't just start eating 2300 calories and expect the same results when you don't understand what your body needs.
You burn XXXX calories in a given day...this includes everything from those calories required just to keep your lungs and heart pumping to your day to day hum drum and your exercise. I'll use my numbers as an example....
I need roughly 2700 calories to maintain...roughly 1850 of that requirement simply goes to basic bodily functions...just being alive. Roughly 500 calories go towards my NEAT...my day to day hum drum of cooking, cleaning, going to work, fixing this and that at the house, chasing the kids around, etc. Finally, about 350 - 400 calories are burned from exercise. So...1850 + 500 + 350 = 2,700 calories...this is my maintenance number.
To lose I need to consume below this number...i.e. have a deficit of calories from maintenance. To lose about 1 Lb per week I would need to eat around 2,200 calories. For someone who exercises far more than I do and burns, say, 600 calories per workout...they could lose 1 Lb per week eating nearly 2,500 calories because they have a significantly higher EAT (Exercise Activity Thermogenesis)
It's not magic...it's just math.0 -
Thanks0
-
Yes, tending to go to extremes and starving yourself but not losing weight...it seems to be counter-intuitive. I want to lose 45 lbs. but I want to do it in a week! I have to realize it's going to be slow. 1 lb./week is what it takes. In reality, it takes all that time to truly understand how to manage it for the long haul. It's practice!
dont set yourself up for failure expecting to lose a pound a week for 45 weeks though. doesnt work like that.0 -
OP Keep up the good work! Your body is thanking you buy giving you results!0
-
mean people???
0 -
If you aren't giving your body what it needs to function then it will hold onto what it has halting weight loss. If you give it what it needs and continue working out you'll still actually be at a deficit and be able to lose weight. Oh my. I know it doesn't seem logical when all you hear is to lose weight you have to eat less and move move, but really, you still need to eat more and give your body the proper fuel to function.
If someone was eating 1200 calories a day and burning say 300, that would leave them at 700 net. 1200 - 500 = 700. 700 is not enough fuel for the body to continue to function properly.
But if someone is eating 1900 calories a day and burning 500 they are eating what they need for their body to function and are at a deficit. 1900 - 500 = 1400. Less than what they ate = deficit.
She is obviously at a deficit or how would she be losing weight...so yeah it does add up.
1500 = no deficit. One week later 2300 = deficit. That math doesn't work.
Our bodies can't hold onto fat while we eat a calorie deficit. If one eats a very low calorie diet for a prolonged period of time, it is possible that their BMR would lower to the point that what was once was a deficit is no longer a deficit. Eating more can correct this. BUT it will not correct in 1 week. There will be an initial weight gain.
It's more likely that either the OP is actually creating a bigger deficit through exercise, or she was under-estimating her calories before she upped them.
She was eating LESS than what her body needs to function. She was eating 1200-1500 a day AND STILL WORKING OUT CREATING A DEFICIT but her body needed more fuel than what she was giving it so it held on to everything it had instead of losing weight.
It's simple math. 1500-500 = 1000 or 1200-500 = 700. Your body needs at least 1200 calories just to function.
So, you are suggesting that we don't lose weight on deficit, if the deficit is too large?
NO. What I am saying is that if you eat below what your body needs to function then you won't lose weight. You may at first but it will stop.
Why would it stop if I am in a deficit?
I repeat...It's simple math. 1500-500 = 1000 or 1200-500 = 700. Your body needs at least 1200 calories just to function.
Your body needs 1200 calories just to function...
Well, first of all that's simply not true. BMR varies from person to person and is generally higher than 1200. But, luckily, we have fat stores and all those calories don't have to come from food. Otherwise, the OP's body would have ceased to function a while ago. As would everyone else eating < 1200, including weight loss surgery patients.
But none of that has anything to do with why one wouldn't lose weight while on a deficit. I realize you are just repeating things you've read on MFP, but you don't seem to have fully grasped the concepts.0 -
The number itself is not the point. You have to understand what your body needs calorie wise to perform all of it's functions...everyone's requirements are going to be different. You can't just start eating 2300 calories and expect the same results when you don't understand what your body needs.
You burn XXXX calories in a given day...this includes everything from those calories required just to keep your lungs and heart pumping to your day to day hum drum and your exercise. I'll use my numbers as an example....
I need roughly 2700 calories to maintain...roughly 1850 of that requirement simply goes to basic bodily functions...just being alive. Roughly 500 calories go towards my NEAT...my day to day hum drum of cooking, cleaning, going to work, fixing this and that at the house, chasing the kids around, etc. Finally, about 350 - 400 calories are burned from exercise. So...1850 + 500 + 350 = 2,700 calories...this is my maintenance number.
To lose I need to consume below this number...i.e. have a deficit of calories from maintenance. To lose about 1 Lb per week I would need to eat around 2,200 calories. For someone who exercises far more than I do and burns, say, 600 calories per workout...they could lose 1 Lb per week eating nearly 2,500 calories because they have a significantly higher EAT (Exercise Activity Thermogenesis)
It's not magic...it's just math.
0 -
Well I am trying to "up" my calories to be around 1450 (have some trouble the past few weeks being consistent) .
I guess I'm reluctant to fully commit because I usually only see people who claim success with this method after 3 or 4 weeks but I never see posts from people who have had long term success with this ( 30 or more lbs or more than a yr).
75lbs and was at 91lbs but gained a bit of muscle back before cutting again!0 -
wow - great job, congratulations!
I think I am hitting a "plateau" around the same place you did - I am trying to up my calories away from 1200 (where I started convinced I knew it all lol)
I do believe creating a deficit is what counts, with some excercise to get healthier not just thinner - so I am aiming to give my long suffering body what it needs to do what I ask it to and keep up my excercise and the slow but steady progress of shifting my fat. It will take time but we'll get there!
Thanks for the read- great knowing I'm not alone :happy:0 -
bumping to read later...thanks!0
-
Well, first of all that's simply not true. BMR varies from person to person and is generally higher than 1200. But, luckily, we have fat stores and all those calories don't have to come from food. Otherwise, the OP's body would have ceased to function a while ago. As would everyone else eating < 1200, including weight loss surgery patients.
But none of that has anything to do with why one wouldn't lose weight while on a deficit. I realize you are just repeating things you've read on MFP, but you don't seem to have fully grasped the concepts.
I'm not just repeating things I've read. I've LIVED it. Been there done that kind of mistakes. Most people with eating disorders are proof that under 1200 is pretty much too low...if they keep at it their bodies will shut down. Sure can people eat under 1200 for a period of time, is it healthy or sustainable? No.
I am no longer going to debate this with you because I am not looking to derail the OP's thread.
OP - You are doing fabulously. Keep it up!0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions