My calorie goal hard to reach, any suggestions?

I just completed the 30 day ice cream/ gelato cleanse.

lost 5.8lbs
1" off my waist
new PR on my half-marathon

and I'm finishing off a half-pint of Cadbury Creme Egg Ice Cream as I type this.

Wait... you mean to tell me that somewhere in this world there exists Cadbury Creme Egg Ice Cream, yet I have never heard about it? How did I not know this?! And where might I ask did you buy such a tasty sounding treat?

Wait..... wait...... this is a 25 year old GUY with a TDEE of only 2300? What is wrong with this picture?

I weight 215, 5'10", 25, listed my activity as lightly active, since I don't get to get to a gym regularly, and I take long walks (that's what it said under lightly active), clicked wanted to lose 2 lbs a week, and it said my goal was 1750 (I could be wrong, maybe I need 2800 to maintain weight, not sure exactly, but I just assumed MFP subtracted like 500-650 calories from what I need to eat to maintain, so that's where I got 2300 for my total to maintain, could be off by a hundred or 2, but dif websites have gave me different goals for maintaining weight, so not sure which to believe)

Wait..... wait...... this is a 25 year old GUY with a TDEE of only 2300? What is wrong with this picture?

I weight 215, 5'10", 25, listed my activity as lightly active, since I don't get to get to a gym regularly, and I take long walks (that's what it said under lightly active), clicked wanted to lose 2 lbs a week, and it said my goal was 1750 (I could be wrong, maybe I need 2800 to maintain weight, not sure exactly, but I just assumed MFP subtracted like 500-650 calories from what I need to eat to maintain, so that's where I got 2300 for my total to maintain, could be off by a hundred or 2, but dif websites have gave me different goals for maintaining weight, so not sure which to believe)

There are definite negatives to having a large calorie deficit. The greater the calorie deficit, the greater the muscle loss during weight loss. Also, the greater your metabolism wants to bridge the energy gap between calorie intake and calorie burn and will slow down if you sustain a large calorie deficit for a long period of time. Studies also show that with a large calorie deficit and faster weight loss, you're much much more likely to regain the weight and actually overshoot your original weight on the way up, mainly due to hormones that make you hungry when the body senses rapid weight loss and keep making you hungry even when you gain weight again...

I'm not here to debate. Your metabolism doesn't change significantly when you eat a large deficit. Everyone eating at a deficit will have a small decrease in metabolism, but it isn't exponential and it's temporary... so it's a non-factor. It absolutely does not matter. He's not starving himself so muscle loss won't be significantly if any different than if he was eating a few hundred more calories.

An individual is not a statistic. You can't point at someone and tell them that eating 1200 calories will definitely cause them to gain weight after they finish dieting. Something being statistically significant doesn't mean that it applies to everyone. Some people will have more success losing 2 lbs/week than 1/2 lb/week and vice versa. And don't use words like "much more likely" if you don't have the source. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1038/oby.2001.134/full here you will see that there is evidence against the idea of a VLCD hindering long term success of weight loss. While it is a popular idea and is often repeated, there isn't much research to back up the claim that VLCD is more likely to cause weight gain...while there is evidence against the claim.

Sidenote: OP isn't on a vlcd and I'm not advocating them...but I am disputing the notion that lower calorie diets are more harmful or won't work as well as eating a few hundred more calories.

VLCDs and LCDs with an average intake between 400 and 800 kcal/d do not result in differences in body weight loss, as shown in some RCTs. Therefore, the pessimistic 1958 view of Stunkard and McLaren-Hume (1), that most patients will not lose weight, is no longer true. However, their statement that most patients regain their lost weight is still true. Although their are difficulties in comparing studies because of large variations in the design and control of study variables, the overall picture is still very negative. VLCD in combination with active follow-up treatment seems to be one of the better treatment modalities for long-term weight maintenance success. Carefully controlled studies, however, are needed to determine more precisely the role of VLCD or other dietary treatments such as LCD in the treatment of obesity. Questions such as the rate and level of initial weight loss, as well as gender differences on weight-maintenance success, need further attention.

Wait..... wait...... this is a 25 year old GUY with a TDEE of only 2300? What is wrong with this picture?

I weight 215, 5'10", 25, listed my activity as lightly active, since I don't get to get to a gym regularly, and I take long walks (that's what it said under lightly active), clicked wanted to lose 2 lbs a week, and it said my goal was 1750 (I could be wrong, maybe I need 2800 to maintain weight, not sure exactly, but I just assumed MFP subtracted like 500-650 calories from what I need to eat to maintain, so that's where I got 2300 for my total to maintain, could be off by a hundred or 2, but dif websites have gave me different goals for maintaining weight, so not sure which to believe)

I'm going to guess it's a little off but you'll be able to better tell in time. For perspective, I'm 5'3.5 " 116 lbs and a girl and I lose weight around 2150ish, just weightlifting 3x a week, walking and taking care of my kids.

That's actually a very nice weight for you at your height. But since you lose weight around 2150ish, I'm wondering why MFP told me my goal is 1750 =/ and I am 215 pounds and 5'10"... Starting to wonder if the calorie thingy is truly correct, unless it's telling me that because I'm shooting for 2 lb's a week instead of 1/2 or 1

quoting the first part of your post, not the NASM part. My goal is to hit about 195 and maintain, since I'll still have fat to turn to muscle, because my main goal is this, where I'll be working at a prison, say for instance, if an inmate tries to screw with me, and I end up grabbing him by the arm, I want his first thoughts to be =0 OH S**T. I don't want to surplus much after that, because I don't want to fail, I just want to get lean and cut first, (something I've never been, nor ever tried to do), then I'll try to bulk up, but I think 195 to 185 seems like a good weight to start cutting up, even if I start hitting the weights before I reach my goal of 185-195, it may help with the process of building muscle, But I am going to do what one of the girls said and just make all my meals contain more calories, like adding cheese and wrap bacon around a piece of chicken, etc..

Don't you find it even a little bit thought-provoking that you're in such a strong minority with this belief that you can actually increase mass while in a calorie deficit (or decrease mass while in a calorie surplus)? Just a little bit? No?

I wish the NASM had a Board to which I could report your posts to have your CPT license revoked for malpractice.

Because the general public has been mislead to believe what they want to hear. They find excuses to eat junk without feeling guilty about it. I know i'm in a very small minority but which does not mean I am wrong. Granted if you burn more energy than you take you will lose weight , BUT that is not always FAT. What that weight is consist of (muscle, fat, water), varies, with the quality / quantity of your calories, how much you take in at sitting, timing, exercise and much more. If i'm allowed to eat 2500 on a calorie deficit diet and I eat it all right before bed. Are you saying I will not gain any fat? Or will I wake up even more ripped than the day before?
As far as my part time job as a cpt I have not had any problems with any of my programs I create for my clients, so I do understand there is no changing your thought about this because you are close minded and this is pointless i just hope others who read this can at least think outside what they have been taught.

*off topic but marijuana is another thing people are misinformed about, and look what is happening all around the states. Legalization.

quoting the first part of your post, not the NASM part. My goal is to hit about 195 and maintain, since I'll still have fat to turn to muscle, because my main goal is this, where I'll be working at a prison, say for instance, if an inmate tries to screw with me, and I end up grabbing him by the arm, I want his first thoughts to be =0 OH S**T. I don't want to surplus much after that, because I don't want to fail, I just want to get lean and cut first, (something I've never been, nor ever tried to do), then I'll try to bulk up, but I think 195 to 185 seems like a good weight to start cutting up, even if I start hitting the weights before I reach my goal of 185-195, it may help with the process of building muscle, But I am going to do what one of the girls said and just make all my meals contain more calories, like adding cheese and wrap bacon around a piece of chicken, etc..

You can't "turn fat into muscle" that's not how it works. Unless somebody is very obese in which case different circumstances apply, this is how it works: If you're running a calorie deficit you will always lose fat & muscle. If you're running a calorie surplus you will always gain fat & muscle. If you're running at maintenance you will maintain your weight, but it is possible to slowly increase muscle mass and slowly decrease body fat. Through proper macronutrient manipulation, strength training that incorporates progressive overload, and proper calorie deficit or surplus size, you can minimize muscle loss during a calorie deficit and you can minimize fat gain during a calorie surplus.

Don't you find it even a little bit thought-provoking that you're in such a strong minority with this belief that you can actually increase mass while in a calorie deficit (or decrease mass while in a calorie surplus)? Just a little bit? No?

I wish the NASM had a Board to which I could report your posts to have your CPT license revoked for malpractice.

Because the general public has been mislead to believe what they want to hear. They find excuses to eat junk without feeling guilty about it. I know i'm in a very small minority but which does not mean I am wrong. Granted if you burn more energy than you take you will lose weight , BUT that is not always FAT. What that weight is consist of (muscle, fat, water), varies, with the quality / quantity of your calories, how much you take in at sitting, timing, exercise and much more. If i'm allowed to eat 2500 on a calorie deficit diet and I eat it all right before bed. Are you saying I will not gain any fat? Or will I wake up even more ripped than the day before?
As far as my part time job as a cpt I have not had any problems with any of my programs I create for my clients, so I do understand there is no changing your thought about this because you are close minded and this is pointless i just hope others who read this can at least think outside what they have been taught.

*off topic but marijuana is another thing people are misinformed about, and look what is happening all around the states. Legalization.

In this case, you are in the minority and you are very very wrong. Every time you post you say something even more wrong. Meal size and meal timing importance was refuted like 10 years ago. It absolutely does not matter how many meals you eat a day or how big each meal is as long as your calorie intake and macronutrient intakes are the same every day. You sound like a body builder from the 80's. Get with the times man, do a little research...

okay now im done with you. meal timing means nothing .haha wow. dont get protein after your workout or what?

Don't you find it even a little bit thought-provoking that you're in such a strong minority with this belief that you can actually increase mass while in a calorie deficit (or decrease mass while in a calorie surplus)? Just a little bit? No?

I wish the NASM had a Board to which I could report your posts to have your CPT license revoked for malpractice.

Because the general public has been mislead to believe what they want to hear. They find excuses to eat junk without feeling guilty about it. I know i'm in a very small minority but which does not mean I am wrong. Granted if you burn more energy than you take you will lose weight , BUT that is not always FAT. What that weight is consist of (muscle, fat, water), varies, with the quality / quantity of your calories, how much you take in at sitting, timing, exercise and much more. If i'm allowed to eat 2500 on a calorie deficit diet and I eat it all right before bed. Are you saying I will not gain any fat? Or will I wake up even more ripped than the day before?
As far as my part time job as a cpt I have not had any problems with any of my programs I create for my clients, so I do understand there is no changing your thought about this because you are close minded and this is pointless i just hope others who read this can at least think outside what they have been taught.

*off topic but marijuana is another thing people are misinformed about, and look what is happening all around the states. Legalization.

Its cool just keep suggesting that people who are overweight can eat whatever they want and they'll get results as long they eat under maintenance calories.

Its cool just keep suggesting that people who are overweight can eat whatever they want and they'll get results as long they eat under maintenance calories.

Stop twisting people's words. You absolutely SHOULDN'T eat whatever you want to stay under your maintenance calories and lose weight. You SHOULD hit certain macronutrient, micronutrient, and fiber goals every day. Now in order to do that, most of the food you eat is going to end up being nutritious, minimally processed food, but you can ALSO eat processed food or other food that you enjoy in moderation and it actually HELPS you stay on your diet and prevents binges. It's a win-win situation. Also, bottom line, even if you threw macronutrients aside, it can be argued that it is healthier for those who are obese to eat WHATEVER they want as long as their losing their weight then for them to eat "healthy" but maintain their weight. Getting to a healthy weight is the most important thing.

Its cool just keep suggesting that people who are overweight can eat whatever they want and they'll get results as long they eat under maintenance calories.

You can eat whatever you want and get results, you just cant eat as much as you want, while paying attention to your macros