Calorie Intake?

nicklaunch91 wrote:

After eating so few calories for such a long time, you might need to reset your metabolism, as your body is so used to functioning at such a level. Try looking into it, see how it works out for you.

I agree with all this. I'll use my history as an example.

All my weight gain is due to the steroids I have to take for lupus. And I can say with 100% conviction that it is NOT always calories in/calories out. There are sometimes extenuating circumstances which makes that simple formula simply not work.

The first time I gained weight due to steroids, I was 12. My parents fed me a very healthy diet of lean meats, vegetables and by the slimness and health of the rest of my family, people always assumed that I was sneaking food. (With steroids, you can eat nothing and gain ridiculous amounts of weight.) And to prove to all these people that I wasn't overeating, I decided to eat as little as possible. The only thing I ate was the dinner my parents fed me, which was very sensible. The rest of the day, I ate nothing. I couldn't stand the thought of people thinking I had gotten myself that way by eating too much, because it wasn't true. I lost about 5lbs, and was thrilled to be in the 170's instead of 180's.

But then I just stopped losing weight. Because I was so young and didn't know any better, I just kept restricting my calories until I was in starvation mode. It was only like a year and a half later, when I fainted on the street, did I start eating normally. The weight didn't melt off, BUT--and this is a huge but--it did gradually come off over the next four years at which point I finally reached my pre-steroid weight. (And if I never went back on steroids, I do believe I'd still be there now.)

Of course, that's an extreme example, but the point is the same in principal: When you kill your metabolism, it will sometimes take it a very long time to start up. In fact, you might gain some weight back when you first start eating a healthy amount of calories. BUT, then that weight you gained back will start to just melt off. And you'll be like "Why is this happening all the sudden? I'm not doing anything differently!" But the answer is: your metabolism says "I'M ALIVEEEE!!" When it kicks back to life, normal weight loss techniques will start working more like they're supposed to, which is why it's very important to get back to those normal calories.

And the above experience wasn't a one-off thing: Right now, I'm recovering from another round of an extremely high dose of steroids. When I was on said steroids, I wasn't eating. I was starving. My stomach hurt too bad to eat, my lupus pain was so severe I felt like throwing up all the time. I was in sheer hell. I was lucky to get 600 calories a day--max. So that time, the starvation was totally against my will. And while starving, I literally gained 150lbs. (Again, like I said, it's not always calories in/calories out.) Steroids make you gain weight--so does starvation mode. The starvation mode amplified the steroid gain.

When I finally started getting my calories up to a normal range (I try to get a minimum of 1500, but that's only because of my illness forcing me to be sometimes sedentary), at first I gained like 20lbs I lost back. It was scary. But now I'm back down smaller than I was when I rebounded.

All of this is just to say that two times I under-ate for different reasons and both times, I had a rebound and then the weight literally started melting off once my body adjusted to healthy calorie intake. Now that I've experienced this twice, I will know that if I ever have to be on steroids again, getting my calories back up to where they should be is EXACTLY what I have to do to lose weight, even if I rebound at first.

Doesn't matter if you eat clean, calories in calories out.

I could lose weight eating McDonalds if I was a in a deficit... maybe you should see a nutritionist if nothing is working?

I respectfully disagree with this^

But I don't think you stated totally incorrect facts:

Can you gain weight if you "eat clean" but load up on fruits and nuts simultaneously? Absolutely. The carbs, however clean they may be, must be low if the fat is high to keep insulin low if significant weight loss is desired. Or, keep fat low with high levels of low glycemic carbs - this is less preferred b/c of higher inflammatory effects of insulin. Basically, a hunter gatherer diet was usually the former.

Can you eat "dirty" and lose weight? Absolutely. You see these people all the time. I also see them all the time in the health care world when things spiral out of control. Depends on several metabolic factors, including genetics.

The real questions are: Does weight loss mirror health? Does fitness even mirror health? Not exactly.

There are many methods of weight loss and even fitness, but only a few of these actually take health into account. There is a reason that even you calories-in calories-out crowd use the terms "clean" and "dirty". You all know the implications whether consciously or subconsciously.

Weight gain or loss is calories vs out, period. All your talk about low glycemic carbs has been deemed bunk. Insulin, while a storage hormone, isn't only responsible for fat storage. And many protein sources have been proven to illicit an insulin response comparable to carbohydrates. Furthermore, studies have proven that when calories and macros are constant, there is no significant difference in weight loss between a low GI vs high GI diet.

I do agree that a balanced diet with an eye on moderation is the most optimal for health purposes, but no one in the CICO circle looks at food as clean or dirty. Micronutrient dense whole foods should be a focus, but incorporating moderate amounts of foods absent of nutrients isn't automatically a health risk. Labeling foods as clean or dirty can lead to an unhealthy relationship with food.

Doesn't matter if you eat clean, calories in calories out.

I could lose weight eating McDonalds if I was a in a deficit... maybe you should see a nutritionist if nothing is working?

I respectfully disagree with this^

But I don't think you stated totally incorrect facts:

Can you gain weight if you "eat clean" but load up on fruits and nuts simultaneously? Absolutely. The carbs, however clean they may be, must be low if the fat is high to keep insulin low if significant weight loss is desired. Or, keep fat low with high levels of low glycemic carbs - this is less preferred b/c of higher inflammatory effects of insulin. Basically, a hunter gatherer diet was usually the former.

Can you eat "dirty" and lose weight? Absolutely. You see these people all the time. I also see them all the time in the health care world when things spiral out of control. Depends on several metabolic factors, including genetics.

The real questions are: Does weight loss mirror health? Does fitness even mirror health? Not exactly.

There are many methods of weight loss and even fitness, but only a few of these actually take health into account. There is a reason that even you calories-in calories-out crowd use the terms "clean" and "dirty". You all know the implications whether consciously or subconsciously.

Weight gain or loss is calories vs out, period. All your talk about low glycemic carbs has been deemed bunk. Insulin, while a storage hormone, isn't only responsible for fat storage. And many protein sources have been proven to illicit an insulin response comparable to carbohydrates. Furthermore, studies have proven that when calories and macros are constant, there is no significant difference in weight loss between a low GI vs high GI diet.

I do agree that a balanced diet with an eye on moderation is the most optimal for health purposes, but no one in the CICO circle looks at food as clean or dirty. Micronutrient dense whole foods should be a focus, but incorporating moderate amounts of foods absent of nutrients isn't automatically a health risk. Labeling foods as clean or dirty can lead to an unhealthy relationship with food.

Agree 100%^

http://iifym.com/tdee-calculator/

-500 from your TDEE, eat at that number. You'll lose 1lb a week.

Eat your exercise calories back.

I've been trying hard to figure out this TDEE #. -500 makes this wayyy more realistic. Only why does eating my exercise cals back make me sooo nervous? lol Thanks for the info tho!! :flowerforyou:

April;



If "- 500 from your TDEE...." and the ever present "a cal is a cal..." dogma really was that simple wouldn't EVERYBODY find weight loss a simple process and we'd ALL be slim, trim, and beautiful?

[/quote]

They all would be slim,trim,and beautiful if they ate -500 from TDEE but people don't do this or have any clue TDEE exists
[/quote]

As Isaac stated, most people don't look into lifestyle changes such as tracking or determining estimated caloric burn. Most people would rather spend money on "magic pills" or believe that only eating certain foods have a magical fat burn effect. Cico is a scientific fact. You can't avoid the law of thermodynamics just because you don't believe it.

http://iifym.com/tdee-calculator/

-500 from your TDEE, eat at that number. You'll lose 1lb a week.

Eat your exercise calories back.

I've been trying hard to figure out this TDEE #. -500 makes this wayyy more realistic. Only why does eating my exercise cals back make me sooo nervous? lol Thanks for the info tho!! :flowerforyou:

TDEE you would not eat back exercise. Your exercise should be calculated in it already. You'd eat that amount every day, regardless of exercise though.

I prefer this method because it makes it easier to adjust calories as needed. You'd basically stay at one stagnant amount for a few weeks...see how the weight is trending. Then, adjust up or down 100 calories or so depending on your goals and what the results were. Weight loss will never be linear, so you have to have patience and give it a few weeks to see where the weight is headed. You gain as much as 5 lbs in a single day and can go up and down 3 lbs from day to day. You're looking for trends over several weeks time.

http://iifym.com/tdee-calculator/

-500 from your TDEE, eat at that number. You'll lose 1lb a week.

Eat your exercise calories back.

TDEE takes exercise into account, so you wouldn't eat estimated calories burned back. As was stated previously, this is a good site to calculate a baseline, then adjust accordingly depending on personal experience and goals.

This is correct - there is actual TDEE and estimated TDEE. The site calculates an estimated TDEE that is average for the population, we are all different so after a few weeks it is best to tweak what you do so that you get the weight loss you are planning. Note that weight is not just fat - it is muscle , water , food in your tummy, energy stores etc. I tend to weight every day and work on an average value (which is hopefully decreasing) rather than what the scales say. Once you have done this for a couple of months you will be able to predict the weight loss from fat reduction from deficit and your prediction will be better that what the scales say on any particular day :-)

I would focus on what foods you are eating. Not how much. Don't focus on calories in calories out.

This is terrible advice.

Eat nutrient dense food yes... but please keep an eye on how much. Anything can be over-eaten...

April;



If "- 500 from your TDEE...." and the ever present "a cal is a cal..." dogma really was that simple wouldn't EVERYBODY find weight loss a simple process and we'd ALL be slim, trim, and beautiful?

[/quote] what is TDEE please?

They all would be slim,trim,and beautiful if they ate -500 from TDEE but people don't do this or have any clue TDEE exists
[/quote]

Not every system is perfect..
Although everybody says its in vs out, is only part of it..

If you are eating at your BMR and the weight is still not coming off, then I would suggest the following.
Work out longer,
Work out harder.
Change your work out pattern