Dont be afraid to EAT MORE ladies!

Thank you for your thoughtful post, OP. However, I don't want to engage in cannibalism! :bigsmile:

Just kidding. You have a good point, but you really don't eat more to lose weight, you eat more to properly fuel your body for whatever your activity level is. if you exercise you will naturally need to eat more.

Here's an excellent article on why eating low calories and exercising your butt AND stressing out about how much a week you lose, etc., off are not good things: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1254955-metabolic-damage-alan-aragon-interviews-lyle-mcdonald

You still have to stay under your TDEE to lose weight.

There's some evidence that eating more actually does raise NEAT, which results in increased TDEE. I'm experiencing this a bit right now. My tested TDEE has been 1950 for the past year and a half. But right now I'm eating above that, have been for a month, and I haven't gained anything. My suspicion is that the extra calories (specifically carbs) are giving me more energy and making me more active throughout the day.

Which is a good thing because 1950 is a pretty low maintenance for a person who exercises 5 days per week.

Also to those who do have a lower TDEE I'd say this: my TDEE is lower than a lot of the ladies in this thread. But I would never discourage someone from trying out eating more for a couple of months at least. If a person CAN eat more, then they should imo.

Well after switching from weight watchers for many years decided to give mfp a try at first I started with what mfp set me up with which was 1440 calories + exercise but found this method was too messy and sometimes I felt bad for eating back my exercise calories. So after many many posts of annoying people and stressing myself out that I would be eating too much I took there advise followed TDEE -20% which gave me 1700 calories, this worked out me eating a lot more then when doing weight watchers ever with all free fruit,veg salad and weekly points so I was a little nervous! Any way today been my big first week weigh in I have lost 2lb!! I only ever use to lose 0.5-1lb a week max on weight watchers so maybe I wasn't eating enough back then who knows? I'm thrilled with this loss as I haven't denied myself any foods even ate 2 Easter eggs which I won at work sending me over my calories this week, before I would have usually thought I had failed and binged, but I tracked EVERYTHING even though I hated seeing numbers in red and stopped at that. So what I'm trying to say is don't me afraid to eat more like I was 1200calories or less doesn't mean better weight loss, be happy eat more and lose weight xxx

I have the same problem. While on WW, I was given 36 daily points to eat. I was afraid at first to consume so much, but found that If I ate below my points (5 points or more), I gained weight. If I ate at or very close to the 36, I would lose weight. Staying on this program, I lost 46 lbs in 8 months (with exercise 2-3 times a week). Now, on MFP, I have daily calories of 1510 and have lost only 10 lbs in. Although I am happy for that loss, the problem is that I've been doing this for 5 months. I understand that weight-loss is not linear, but the way my weight is just going up and down, I feel as if I'm just losing and gaining the same few pounds over and over again.

I exercise 2-3 times a week, doing cardio and strength and wear a FitBit Zip. I do eat back some of my calories, but I cannot seem to get out of this rut. I was thinking of just using the WW conversion which comes to 1880 calories (not sure if this is correct due to conflicting conversion information out there. Some say it's 40 calories per point, others say 50). So I decided to calculate my TDEE, which is 2069. I want to lose 80 more lbs, so at 20%, my TDEE is 1655.

I'm not sure if this is correct and have become very frustrated at the whole thing. I think that perhaps I should stay in the range of 1600-1800 calories per day, consuming a % of what I burn.

I am open to constructive advise.

This makes me confused.

Some posters, who are in the 40s have responded, stating eating more works for them.

I'm curious to know from those people who are 40s and eating, over 1500 calories; what types of workouts and how often and at what intensity are these workouts done?

I'm 5'4, 165, 45 y/o female, desk job. Workout at least 3 times a week, sometimes 5 (rollerblading, stairmaster, 5x5, elliptical, walking at least 4 miles).

Why when I tried eating at 1600 plus exercise I gained (tired it for about 6 months)? Yes, the gain was slow, but i gained. It seems I can only lose at 1400, with at least 5 hours of exercise a week.:grumble: I've had my thyroid and hormones checked... all good.

I have a sweet tooth, but isn't it calories in/calories out?

I've just given up and went back to 1200.

I'm 42 y/o female, I've gone through early menopause, eating around 1700 calories a day and I have a serious sweet tooth.

I lift 3 times a week, short runs twice a week, and ride my bike for all my errands as well as 1 long bike ride every week.

When you were eating at 1600 calories were you weighing your food or estimating it?

Hi,

A little of both. :blushing: Only because I've been counting for years and have a lot of the foods already in my diary. I have measuring cups and digital scale. I usually overestimate when I do estimate.

However, last week I decided to really, really measure and weigh ever single thing i can. I will see if this is my problem.

Thanks for responding. :flowerforyou:

Thanks to all for your stats.

I know i can't be a "special snowflake". This gives me hope, that when I do find the right numbers for me, I will be in at a weight i'm happy with.

:flowerforyou:

I hope you find a balance that works for you. I was eating 1400-1500 when I started and am able to eat 1700+ now and lose but I lift heavy weights. I was scared to increase what I ate, but ended up being pleasantly surprised.

Yes!!! NET CALORIES PEOPLE!! net calories! Don't just eat your BMI! My calorie goal from MFP is 1200. And I hit that target or better by eating 1500-1900 calories a day and burning at least 2300 or more each day. And the weight is dropping! I too was under the impression that a 1200 calorie day was just that. I could only eat 1200 calories. THAT'S NOTHING! And I didn't lose much and I was STARVING! Blegh.

Wow, that was really an unkind. Yes, perhaps this topic has been discussed in the past; however if you look many of the posts on these forums, you'll notice that the same topics appear again and again. Who cares? If the person posting is proud of what she / he is doing, than more power to this her / him! I think the old adage certainly applies here, "If you have nothing nice to say, than please don't say anything at all."

To the original poster: I LIKED your post! If eating MORE calories is what is working for you, than by all means let us know!!

Just because I am an editor for a living, I have to point out that this is not, in fact, a grammatical error. Rather, it is a punctuation error.

The thead title is grammatically correct, but it is missing both an apostrophe and a comma.

Thank you for explaining that. I always considered that kind of thing to be a punctuation error, but so many Americans refer to punctuation errors as grammatical errors that I'd taken it to be a dialectual difference, i.e. that in American English punctuation is considered as a subset of grammar.

Not dialect -- laziness or misunderstanding. It's kind of how so many people refer to their tax refund as their tax return. The tax return is what we submit to get our refund (for those who get one ...).

Just because I am an editor for a living, I have to point out that this is not, in fact, a grammatical error. Rather, it is a punctuation error.

The thead title is grammatically correct, but it is missing both an apostrophe and a comma.

Thank you for explaining that. I always considered that kind of thing to be a punctuation error, but so many Americans refer to punctuation errors as grammatical errors that I'd taken it to be a dialectual difference, i.e. that in American English punctuation is considered as a subset of grammar.

Not dialect -- laziness or misunderstanding. It's kind of how so many people refer to their tax refund as their tax return. The tax return is what we submit to get our refund (for those who get one ...).

A sentence fragment from an editor? I'm trying not to rage at you. :sad:

Just because I am an editor for a living, I have to point out that this is not, in fact, a grammatical error. Rather, it is a punctuation error.

The thead title is grammatically correct, but it is missing both an apostrophe and a comma.

Thank you for explaining that. I always considered that kind of thing to be a punctuation error, but so many Americans refer to punctuation errors as grammatical errors that I'd taken it to be a dialectual difference, i.e. that in American English punctuation is considered as a subset of grammar.

Not dialect -- laziness or misunderstanding. It's kind of how so many people refer to their tax refund as their tax return. The tax return is what we submit to get our refund (for those who get one ...).

A sentence fragment from an editor? I'm trying not to rage at you. :sad:

That's why I never correct spelling/grammar. As soon as you do it, you're bound to make a mistake of your own. And then if you have a decent friend list they will mock you relentlessly.

"Do you mean you burn a total of 2300 a day and not 2300 from exercise?"

I meant in a day. Some days its a bit more if I'm super busy at work and I add in a high intensity work out and some days (like yesterday when I was too flippin' tired and had a massive headache) its less. On AVERAGE, I'd say 2300 a day that my Fitbit counts plus any activities that I log that the Fitbit can't read (like yoga or weight training). I'm not playing slave driver on myself. But again, it's different every day. Hell, a couple weeks ago, I got sucked into an awesome and totally necessary Netflix binge with the boyfriend and we snacked all day. Surfing the couch all day didn't even register as 1900 tracked by the Fitbit. And for the first time in a long time, I didn't feel guilty! Because I've been doing well and paying attention and hitting my small goals. So it was easy to forgive and enjoy a cheat day. As long as I end up within 50 calories positive or negative of 1200 net calories a day, I've been steadily losing 1 or 1.5 lbs a week. It was hard at first to figure it out and understand and I did have to ask a nutritionist friend (everyone should have one! lol) to explain the math to me. It just sounded to counter-intuitive---but I'm much happier now eating more than I was trying to figure out how to only consume 1200 calories a day. I wanna go back in time and shake myself!

I lose eating 2000-2600 a day. Really depends on my workouts.
I am almost 39. 5'10. 133 Ibs.

Thread not what I expected...

See, this is where grammar is important.

Don't be afraid to eat more, ladies. Otherwise this is cannibalistic/sexual advice.

I was thinking the same thing...

Not everyone can eat more. The older you get the less you need to eat, so for me my TDEE is 1900.... in a few years I'm guessing even less.... soo it will be less than 1200 I'm guessing & if I eat more then I'll gain.

I don't think people need to eat if they are not hungry, and have real hunger not just think they are hungry. I for one am not going to put food in my mouth unless I know I am hungry.

But this topic has been done to death. How about letting people do what they want & you concentrate on your own life & eating? I don't care what others do.

Wrong. You clearly don't know anything about TDEE. The subjects of weightloss, heavy lifting, thighgap, etc have been brought up so much they are like beating a dead horse but that doesn't stop people from talking about them. I was on this site for over a year before I found a post explaining TDEE and why it works. Regardless, instead of being rude you could have congratulated her on her success. This is supposed to be a site for morivation. Take your bad attitude somewhere else.

Op congrats!!! To me, weight watchers is a simplified (too simplified) wa of counting calories that really doesn't teach You about nutrition. That is why I love mfp.