Anyone finding that it takes A LOT of calories to maintain?

I wish!

Hi. I'm 5'2" and petite (now for the first time!). I've been working on maintaining a 40+ pound weight loss but finding it takes a huge number of calories to maintain. Anyone have the same experience? I seem to keep losing. My goals are set to maintenance and active (despite a "desk" job, because I do a lot of walking just to get around NYC) and maintenance calories are 1540. I exercise everyday but don't track on MFP, but eat all the calories everyday (about 500), so about 2000 to 2200 total calories. I eat very clean and healthy so eat a ton of food - 950 calories of which are at breakfast. Any one have the same experience? Looking of maintenance friends...

Is the only reason you set it to "active" because you walk around NYC every day? How much walking do you actually do a day?

1540, heh. Try 2850 (without exercise) a day, that's my maintenance. But I do it, have been for over 2 years now. It can be challenging to get in all your calories in a healthy manor. But you learn, and your body will thank you for it.

I wonder why some people have this high threshold of calories to maintain? I seem to be the opposite--I can't even change my goals on MFP to maintain or I will gain weight. I'm still set on a loss, even though I have been the same weight for 7 months, and feel trapped in this super restricted calories cycle.

Altushe, You mention your big breakfast, do you spread your calories out throughout the day? I find eating in small cycles throughout the day works well for me. My day sort of goes like this : around 200 calories when I first get up between 6-7 am, another 200-300 a few hours later mid-morning. Then lunch- maybe 350-400. Afternoon snack - 150-200 , Dinner--that's my big one as I typically have a real protein meal (I usually just have dairy or grain/seed proteins during the day) and a glass of red wine with dinner. Maybe breaking it up will help you fill up the calorie allotment more easily?? I so wish I could get to that 2000-2200 maintenance level as I think I might naturally eat that way if I didn't track to a lower threshold, but still eat all-natural, healthy, etc.

Genetics plays a role too. For those who can't eat at maintenance, and say that maintenance is to many calories (I'm talking a large difference here, not 50 or 100 calories), I think in 95% of the cases, either they estimated something wrong, or they are in starvation mode and haven't given their body time to adjust to maintenance.

Interesting--I think I track pretty accurately --it's probably a combo of a lot of these factors. but I'm thinking about your comment on activity level and that most of us assume we do more than we do naturally, since our bodies adjust to our everyday routine and burn less. I thought I was active, but had moved mine down to lightly active and still had my goal at a loss--because I was worried the calorie goal was too high on maintenance/active. I just played around with the numbers again putting it on maintenance, but sedentary (and believe me, I do not think of myself this way...but really don't know what I'm burning on average). The difference was only about 120 calories. I probably could safely go to that number and have a goal of about 1950 (including exercise calories)

I wonder how you would know if you were still in starvation mode?

Thanks for your insight SHBoss....

Altushe--glad to know you aren't having a problem getting to the calories, I misunderstood. But you are still losing weight and you don't want to. Maybe a dietitian could help? I have never done this but have been contemplating the idea for myself.

]

Interesting--I think I track pretty accurately --it's probably a combo of a lot of these factors. but I'm thinking about your comment on activity level and that most of us assume we do more than we do naturally, since our bodies adjust to our everyday routine and burn less. I thought I was active, but had moved mine down to lightly active and still had my goal at a loss--because I was worried the calorie goal was too high on maintenance/active. I just played around with the numbers again putting it on maintenance, but sedentary (and believe me, I do not think of myself this way...but really don't know what I'm burning on average). The difference was only about 120 calories. I probably could safely go to that number and have a goal of about 1950 (including exercise calories)

I wonder how you would know if you were still in starvation mode?

Thanks for your insight SHBoss....

Altushe--glad to know you aren't having a problem getting to the calories, I misunderstood. But you are still losing weight and you don't want to. Maybe a dietitian could help? I have never done this but have been contemplating the idea for myself.

you would know you are in starvation mode by being at maintenance and gaining weight. Or by being below maintenance and over the course of a few months not dropping any(or very little) body fat. Unfortunately there's no really easy way to know with 100% surety at home. Because the symptoms come on so gradually (loss of energy, dulling of skin, hair, and nails, loss of appetite, reduction in immune system function...etc.) it's hard to see the forest for the trees. What you can do is go to a medical facility that has metabolic lab capabilities (I.E. don't just go to your GP and expect them to be proficient in weight loss strategies, 9 times out of 10 these doctors are as clueless as you and me on this particular subject).
At the least, if you're concerned, ask around. Most regions of the US (I have no idea about other countries) that have a steady population size or a large university reasonably close by will have metabolic lab capabilities somewhere in the area. You can have all sorts of tests done that can help. The least of which is an accurate body fat measurement. Better yet, have your blood worked up to tell you your fasting glucose, triglycerides, and immune system functions checked. More in depth analysis can be done as well, such as an indirect energy expenditure test (they will measure the Oxygen efficiency and be able to tell you within a couple of dozen calories what your ACTUAL resting metabolic rate is, which is kinda nice). If this doesn't match up (relatively closely) with what you should be burning; either you're in starvation mode, or you have some kind of medical condition (assuming the burn level is low, if it's high, well AWESOME, you get to eat extra!)

I know this sounds expensive, and it can be, but it's usually 1 time cost, and think about it in terms of long term physical and mental health, you're reducing stress, confirming what you SHOULD be eating, and giving yourself a chance to reach the goals you've always wanted. I think that's worth a few hundred bucks IMHO.