Eating goal weight maintenance calories to lose weight.

bookwormwendy
bookwormwendy Posts: 112 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I read the long, detailed post about this, what I want to know is if anyone else has used this method successfully. I can see how it makes sense, eat the calories for the weight you want to be and you will eventually get there and you will be trained to eat the "right" amount of food already.
I have lost 43 lbs since April, fairly consistently but as my calories drop my weight loss is slowing and I am staying hungry. (I know the weight loss is going to slow- the staying hungry? Not fun) This isn't a happy place to be. I don't mind denying myself some to lose, I do mind being constantly hungry and miserable. I also have noted that at my reduced calorie point I seem to benefit from 'cheat" days on the weekend when I don't stick to my calories as strictly which leads me to wonder if my calories aren't too low to begin with.
I am 35
I am currently 169.8 with a goal weight of 140- for now. I will decide when I get there if there is where I want to stop.
I am allowed 1340 calories before adding any exercise for the day.
So, has anyone else used this method? Care to share your experience? Thanks.

Replies

  • bassmanlarry
    bassmanlarry Posts: 117 Member
    Bump
  • Melo1966
    Melo1966 Posts: 881 Member
    If your goal weight is 140 then by your standards 1,400 should be the base starting point. If you are hungry you need to eat or you will not make it in the long run. Exercise to eat more.:happy:
  • RetiredAndLovingIt
    RetiredAndLovingIt Posts: 1,395 Member
    bump
  • pkw58
    pkw58 Posts: 2,038 Member
    Well, I kinda sorta do this so yes and no and . I eat at a sedentary lifestyle MFP setting to lose 1/2 a pound a week to my lowest weight I would every want to weigh. So I am two pounds above that right now. So I would say it is working well.

    But I have to confess most of the time I am on the Dukan Diet, Phase 4, with some slight modifications (no bread, add an extra apple, banana or avocado daily) and I use MFP to log my calories and activity.

    I would say , based on my experience, eventually you will get there. but no chart or forumula you read in a book is you. You change daily, so even logging religiously you can eat the exact same way two weeks in a row and have two different results on the scale. But heck, it's all about what works for you! Give it a try!

    BTW, I am 5'8" and MFP sets my calories to a goal of 1320 per day. I tend to eat a bit over that most days these days. But will below my "net" goal that MFP calculates.
  • bookwormwendy
    bookwormwendy Posts: 112 Member
    I do exercise, usually about an hour a day.
  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    I don't like this method because it fails to consider your current size and needs. The further you are from your goal weight, the more ridiculous this method becomes.
  • GodTemple1992
    GodTemple1992 Posts: 7
    I have found that eating maintenance for my goal weight has worked great for me. I only have about five pounds left, however, so maybe this makes a difference.
  • TommiEgan
    TommiEgan Posts: 256 Member
    I have found that with the amount of exercise I do, I cannot keep up with my calorie intake. It is just way too much food. I generally eat the daily intake and if there is a deficit I leave it at that.
  • bradphil87
    bradphil87 Posts: 617 Member
    I switched to it when it was well above my bmr and like 300 cals below my tdee, made the transition to maintain a breeze :)
  • Martucha123
    Martucha123 Posts: 1,089 Member
    I think it's a method you can use if you are not very obese (if you are 300lbs+, you should probably eat more then maintenance for goal weight) and if you are ready to go really slow (the last 10 lbs will take forever)

    I like the idea that you will this way learn to eat the right amount, I think it's great for the yo yo dieters...
  • itsDapps
    itsDapps Posts: 11 Member
    I don't like this method because it fails to consider your current size and needs. The further you are from your goal weight, the more ridiculous this method becomes.

    my thoughts exactly
  • neverstray
    neverstray Posts: 3,845 Member
    If you're close, like within ten lbs, I think it could work, but it would be slow.
  • missdelarocha
    missdelarocha Posts: 32 Member
    I know this is old, but I really thought this needed a bump! I think it's something hardly anybody discusses, but it actually would be great for people who find it very difficult to eat even less than if they were maintaining their goal weight.
    For example, to lose 1kg a week (2 pounds) according to MFP I can eat 1200 calories, but to maintain my actual goal of 55kg (121 pounds) I can eat 1680 calories!

    This demystifies why so many people find it hard for me, they don't know what their goal maintenance is and they think they can only eat whatever their weight-losing rate of choice calorie intake is for the rest of their life, when really those calories are only that low to accommodate how quickly they want to lose the weight.
    Since people who lose weight very quickly tend to put it on quickly, it makes sense to eat at your goal maintenance, as far as I know it will get you to your goal weight eventually but surely. And as mentioned above, you would be quite well versed on eating at maintenance calorie amount!

    I'm working on the math to figure out how LONG it would take, because obviously the closer you are to maintenance the longer it takes for that weight to go. We'll just say 1lb of fat = 3,500 (a week), because that's the most consistent number I see, it would be very difficult to accurately calculate. If anybody good with math can jump in and help out that would be great.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    You can, but almost always, unless you have over a hundred pounds to lose, results in slower than reasonable weight loss.

    While slower is better, that's in comparison to extreme fast loss.

    Slower because you forced your metabolism slower by grossly undereating, or slower because you miscalculated some things, just means longer time with more weight, which can get discouraging.

    And this is coming from the guy that made a spreadsheet to totally do this and had a group couple years back. Several are still using the method, their routine rarely changes which makes it easier, but they slowly but surely lose the weight.
    But you do indeed learn to eat correctly for goal weight, that's for sure.

    To request for math, it would be very difficult as the amount of real deficit would constantly be getting smaller and smaller.

    Spreadsheet on my profile page still has this as alternate method, but it looks at goal weight with a 5% deficit, so it doesn't take as long near the end.
  • cafeaulait7
    cafeaulait7 Posts: 2,459 Member
    I read the long, detailed post about this, what I want to know is if anyone else has used this method successfully. I can see how it makes sense, eat the calories for the weight you want to be and you will eventually get there and you will be trained to eat the "right" amount of food already.
    I have lost 43 lbs since April, fairly consistently but as my calories drop my weight loss is slowing and I am staying hungry. (I know the weight loss is going to slow- the staying hungry? Not fun) This isn't a happy place to be. I don't mind denying myself some to lose, I do mind being constantly hungry and miserable. I also have noted that at my reduced calorie point I seem to benefit from 'cheat" days on the weekend when I don't stick to my calories as strictly which leads me to wonder if my calories aren't too low to begin with.
    I am 35
    I am currently 169.8 with a goal weight of 140- for now. I will decide when I get there if there is where I want to stop.
    I am allowed 1340 calories before adding any exercise for the day.
    So, has anyone else used this method? Care to share your experience? Thanks.

    Your stats and question are so funny, because I did what you did at basically your same stats down to the age, lol. It worked wonderfully. Too well, in fact, because I kept on losing :) The only reason I'm not doing it this time is because I'm too impatient. (I'm eating about 200 calories lower than goal maintenance now to speed it up).

    It did take a long time, but I wasn't concerned with a time-frame then. It was more about a lifestyle change, and it was wonderful. I just let the new habits slide for various reasons and slowly regained back up.

    I don't remember how long it took, y'all. Over a year, I'm sure. I did it with lifting weights as a central focus, too, so that changes the math itself. Anyway, it was really easy once I got into a good gym habit! I could eat a lot; I just couldn't overindulge on desserts and things like that. I didn't/don't need to be doing that ever anyway :)
  • missdelarocha
    missdelarocha Posts: 32 Member
    Thanks for your reply heybales, I really appreciate it as you've obviously tried and tested this method, I completely understand your point, it is quite slow unless there's a considerable gap between your goal maintenance and current maintenance, even then it would eventually slow down considerably, but for somebody who was either going to stay around the same weight and yo-yo diet (lose the weight quickly but regain) or aim for goal maintenance, I think the latter would be possibly less frustrating if you're not having to cope with more caloric deficit and lifestyle change than necessary, but as you said the speed may be discouraging.

    Yes, I didn't really think about how complex or lengthy the math might be, so I graciously withdraw the request for any, thank you for the spreadsheet though! It's really great. I'm a bit confused at the percentage change in relation to exercise and 5% though, so it is a 5% food deficit and the rest is created through exercise? Or is it 16.9%? (When I put all exercise values to 0 it gives me this percentage). Generally the TDEG I get is the same as my BMR.
  • GuybrushThreepw00d
    GuybrushThreepw00d Posts: 784 Member
    I think the main problem is
    pjeup.jpg

    Much better goals are size and fat composition.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Yes, I didn't really think about how complex or lengthy the math might be, so I graciously withdraw the request for any, thank you for the spreadsheet though! It's really great. I'm a bit confused at the percentage change in relation to exercise and 5% though, so it is a 5% food deficit and the rest is created through exercise? Or is it 16.9%? (When I put all exercise values to 0 it gives me this percentage). Generally the TDEG I get is the same as my BMR.

    So this info is totally related to that optional Future You method.
    It's a 5% deficit to the TDEE based on future weight. So basically to the food too, yes.

    Since your TDEE can be expressed as an activity factor from BMR, it's literally taking current TDEE / current BMR to get that factor, like 1.6 say. (it says under Your Results section)
    Then future BMR (based on Mifflin) x same factor say 1.6 = future TDEE with same exercise routine as current.
    Then take 5% off that to eat daily, or future TDEG in essence, with a slight deficit. That's just to prevent the impossible slowness at the end if you truly ate at goal weight.

    That other deficit amount shown is eating that much compared to your current TDEE, so you can see what to expect in weight loss to confirm.

    So if the TDEG shown there is your current BMR, that's where I draw the line so you don't get ridiculous as SS said above, keeps the deficit reasonable, and keeps you with enough protein recommended to be useful.
    If that is the case on the Future You section, it's likely the case in the main section too then, right, TDEG=BMR?
    That's just the line in the sand since that thing has no knowledge of you get lab tests under observation by a Dr or scientist making sure things don't go haywire eating too little.
  • towens00
    towens00 Posts: 1,033 Member
    I think the main problem is
    pjeup.jpg

    Much better goals are size and fat composition.
    ^^This
  • krissenior
    krissenior Posts: 68 Member
    I started doing this 4 days ago, however i eat at my goal maintenance on training days (not eating back workout cals) and i eat at TDEE - 25% on non workout days, seems pretty good up to now :)
  • endoftheside
    endoftheside Posts: 568 Member
    I started with this method back in January and it worked really well for a long while (I've lost about 50 pounds so far in 11 months). With my starting weight, it was never a crazy deficit. Now that I am down to <20 to lose, it is getting sooooo slow (if I do not create more of a deficit it may take years to lose the last few pounds).
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    It is a very valid method if you have very little to lose...like just a few cosmetic Lbs or something...not so much if you have a lot of weight to lose.
  • dsjohndrow
    dsjohndrow Posts: 1,820 Member
    Works for me. I started eating my goal weight maintenance calories over a year ago.
  • ashlwar84
    ashlwar84 Posts: 4 Member
    Personally, I tried eating 1200 calories for the past 7 months. I've lost 142 pounds. But...I was hungry. I'm no longer willing to be hungry. So, I upped my calories to 1350. Now, I've upped again to 1,500 based on what my trainer told me to eat. So, I'm happy at 1500, but I usually eat somewhere between 1300-1500.
  • JohnDowding
    JohnDowding Posts: 46 Member
    Maybe change something up in your exercise? Switching to a different exercise, or time of day. A while back, I found that just adding 15 minutes of strecthing before I start made a big difference.
  • Kelene616
    Kelene616 Posts: 166 Member
    Bump as I want to refer back to this
  • mungowungo
    mungowungo Posts: 327 Member
    Hmm interesting. I just did the math (well used a google search to find my goal weight maintenance).

    For my height, gender and age my goal weight maintenance calories (I would like to be 70kg or about 154lb) would be say 1668 calories (or 6979kj).

    MFP currently has me on 1390 (5816kj) - I didn't specifically set up anything to lose a particular amount each week - I'm fairly new to this site and didn't know how to do that anyway. And I do have about 100llb to lose - I'm not 20 something and I don't have a special event for which I have to lose x amount by a certain date or time - I'd just like to see steady progress in a downward direction - slow is good as I am absolutely paranoid about loose skin which I think is more likely the faster you lose.

    Using another google search I found out that my current BMR is about 1804 and I got a TDEE of 2165.

    So either way I would be consuming less than my current BMR. And I have been feeling a bit tired and lethargic in the last couple of weeks so maybe the lack of calories explains this.

    Methinks I'm going back to play with my goals/settings etc and put in my maintenance calories - as I'll still be eating at a deficit I should still continue to lose at a slow steady pace.

    Many thanks to the OP.

    Just did this and the projected weight loss at 1.5 llb a week rather than 2llb.
  • 100poundproject
    100poundproject Posts: 13 Member
    To the lady who started the thread:

    You are not eating enough. I went to health calculator.net and it says you need to eat at least 1872 calories to maintain a weight of 140 if you are eating at the maintenance weight of your goal, then this is what it is.

    No wonder you are hungry. You could also eat back some of your exercise calories. This number above is for a sedentary person. If you exercise an hour a day, you could eat at the maintenance level of: 2088.
  • 100poundproject
    100poundproject Posts: 13 Member
    I think MFP calculator maybe shooting too low.

Categories