Dudes eating below 2000 calories
BFDeal
Posts: 3,160 Member
So I've had trouble breaking below 225lbs. It just flat out doesn't seem to work. Last year, eating 2300 calories I went from mid 240 to 225. Then nothing. I didn't change one thing and the losses stopped. Same thing a few years ago when I went from 300ish to 225. Randomly stopped losing. For. No. Reason. So I'm trying again. 2100 calories I've decided, which basically feels like starving BTW.
So, now the real reason for the thread. I've noticed in a few guys diaries I'm seeing guys eating below 2000 calories. Some way below. Some 1800. Some 1600 even. I know what you're thinking. "Maybe they're short dudes." One guy was 6'4" eating 1800. So, dudes doing this, why? Did you find eating more stopped working? Did you start with your low number or try a higher one then scale back? It just seems like I see those numbers thrown around for girls who are WAY smaller. Trying to figure out if this type of thing is something I should do.
So, now the real reason for the thread. I've noticed in a few guys diaries I'm seeing guys eating below 2000 calories. Some way below. Some 1800. Some 1600 even. I know what you're thinking. "Maybe they're short dudes." One guy was 6'4" eating 1800. So, dudes doing this, why? Did you find eating more stopped working? Did you start with your low number or try a higher one then scale back? It just seems like I see those numbers thrown around for girls who are WAY smaller. Trying to figure out if this type of thing is something I should do.
0
Replies
-
It's a lot of trial and error, man. I would say try it for a week and see how you feel and if you break your plateau. Definitely gotta get plenty of protein and bulky/fiber-y foods so you don't feel like you're starving to death. I am not sure exactly how many cals my husband is eating because I can't get him to log. X( Baby steps with him I guess, teaching him what are the low cal high satisfaction foods and how to make them taste their best with preparation. I forget; how tall are you?0
-
After 5 pounds lost you should recalculate your calorie goals. Right now, my goal is 2550 or so because I'm an enormous blob of gross, but I lowered it a bit further. I seem to actually be eating around 1300 - 1600 calories a day right now, because for the time being it's definitely working. I'll up my calories after another month or so or if I don't like the results I'm getting.
I guess to answer your question, I'm eating under 2000 because I'm happy and full and getting my protein with under 2000.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I'm currently eating 1800 to lose .5 lb a week. But I'm only 5'8 and 153 lbs.0
-
Okay. Let's see, what else: Experiment with 1800 calories, and is there a feasible way to switch up your workout? Sometimes that works also. Challenge your body with something different that it's not used to?0
-
I'm eating 1600 because I want to lose weight at around 2lbs per week. I eat more when I exercise, but on days I don't, 1600 or less. Since I am 6'5" 238, there is no fear of 2 lbs being too much.0
-
I have just started using MFP and got a goal of 1450cals/day. I'm 5'9'' and about 67kgs, just looking to lose a bit more before I start a sloooow bulk. I typically eat around 1600-1900 though as 1450 seems a tad low. Still lost a bit in the 4 weeks I've been going so seems to be OK.0
-
I'm 6'3 currently around 260 and I am at 1750 calories a day (sometimes less).
I have found that if i eat "real food" I dont get hungry until meal times. If it is in a can or a box, most of the time i dont eat it
I am doing a lot of lean protein (chicken, lean red meat, blah blah) and veggies. I will also eat a couple pieces of fruit throughout the day if i need a snack. (helps keep the blood sugar level for me)
...and lots and lots of water. I get a good amount of exercise just walking to the bathroom.0 -
I'm 6', eating 1900 daily to lose 1 pound per week. I eat throughout the day to stave off hunger, plus lots of water. I rarely feel hungry, much less often than I did when I was putting away over 1000 calories per meal. Feel free to add me if you'd like to browse my diary.0
-
You stopped losing because you were eating at maintenance, and/or metabolic adaptation lowered your maintenance enough that you were now eating at maintenance. Or you changed your activity without realizing, thus having a lower maintenance. Or despite your assumptions, you are eating more than you realize (especially if you are rounding your servings up, you really cannot be entirely sure how much you are eating or how much you SHOULD be eating because you are not tracking your true intake).
Some guys eat too low because they think that's how they need to lose weight. Others are probably light for their age/height/gender. Others still may have started out eating too low to begin with , which is why they had to eat even lower to continue losing. Others might just want to lose at a low number for a short time before going back to more reasonable intake for their needs.
If you aren't losing, either take a break and eat at maintenance for a month then do a 1lb/week deficit, or lower your calorie goal.0 -
Just don't give up - Personally as a female, 5'11" eating around 2000 calories works for me if I am not exercising. If I exercise I have to eat more or I will literally gnaw off my own arm in the mornings I am so famished. I still lose weight when I up my calories on workout days (because I am simply eating back those that I have earned - MFP already sets you at a deficit so eating back exercise calories shouldn't hinder your progress unless you are really overestimating your burn)
I say don't "starve" yourself if 2100 leaves you feeling really deprived and less likely to stay on plan then eat a little more, progress might be slower but you will be happier in the long run.0 -
1) progress is a great motivator.
2) faster cuts = less time spent at low-ish intakes
3) I generally think they whole "don't lose weight too fast, you'll lose all your muscle" mantra is greatly overstated, especially when on a legit lifting program.
FWIW... I'm 5'8", 175ishlbs, 38yrs old... 1850cals is a great intake for me when cutting, at least based on all my estimates.0 -
It's a lot of trial and error, man.
This.
I've been doing this for 7+ years. I'm 5' 10" - so not big, but not short either.
I started at 240 & got down to 199 in about 3-4 months following the Nutrisystem plan. That was the easy part. NS got old quick & started doing research on my own.
So, when I'm in weight-loss mode, I average around 1500-1800 cals a day; what I did was figured my BMR - without the "activity factor", because FOR ME anyway, if i ate 2,000+, I gained - no matter what. You can find free BMR calculators everywhere online, I checked 3-4 to make sure I came up with an accurate number.
So, the formula that I found that works for ME is: (cals in) - (cals burned) </= 1,500.
If I stay under 1,500 net, I seem to lose about a lb a week, which translates to about a 500 cal deficit per day, 3,500 deficit per week, 1 lb weight loss.
Following these guidlelines, I've stayed at 170 +/- 4 lbs for the last 3+ years.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
MFP put me at 1730 cals.. I entered that I wanted to lose about 11 pounds and a pound a week im 5 ft 7. I thought it was normal but idk now.0
-
Men's Health February issue has a great article on the lean muscle diet. I'm trying to incorporate part of that diet with my weight loss program. I'm 6'61/2" started on January 1st 278 currently 259 and now if I eat less than 2000 calories I have less energy. Feel free to add me.0
-
1) progress is a great motivator.
2) faster cuts = less time spent at low-ish intakes
3) I generally think they whole "don't lose weight too fast, you'll lose all your muscle" mantra is greatly overstated, especially when on a legit lifting program.
FWIW... I'm 5'8", 175ishlbs, 38yrs old... 1850cals is a great intake for me when cutting, at least based on all my estimates.
I've seen this repeatedly. Lots of people (especially men it seems) cut fast and hard. Not that I would recommend the program per se, but the intro to the ultimate diet that Lyle McDonald wrote explains the logic behind it and how it doesn't lead to muscle loss. The key being that it is short term. (His diet is very extreme and is often used by competitors to hit competing weight.)0 -
I've been averaging around 1600-1700 daily since last May. I have gone from 245lbs down to 195lbs averaging about 1.3 lb per week loss. I watch my numbers pretty close so I don't get too low in anything (fats, carbs, protein, etc...) and do light strength and cardio exercises. I have a desk job with lots of meetings so very little daily activity aside from my nightly exercises. I feel really good and I'm never hungry. Sub 2000 is working for me but... everyone is different.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
I'm eating way below 2000 and I'm 5'11". Personally I think most of us underestimate the actual amount of calories. I also have proven many times that calorie counts from many food manufacturers are not accurate. I use MFP as a basic guide but I never trust that the amount logged is the actual amount.0
-
Im currently 6'1 200lbs, just on the end of a bulking season. I am now on a very very fast cut only consuming 1250 calories or so a day because I have a climbing competition in around a month and a half and need to get down to 175-180 by then otherwise its bloody horrible trying to pull an extra unnecessary 20lbs.
I wouldn't recommend going as low as I have unless you have a real reason to drop weight fast like I do, and then not for very long. Once in back down to 180 or so ill probably be back upto 2000 or so calories a day.0 -
1) progress is a great motivator.
2) faster cuts = less time spent at low-ish intakes
3) I generally think they whole "don't lose weight too fast, you'll lose all your muscle" mantra is greatly overstated, especially when on a legit lifting program.
FWIW... I'm 5'8", 175ishlbs, 38yrs old... 1850cals is a great intake for me when cutting, at least based on all my estimates.
5'7, 160lbs, 24yo, female, backtracked on my lifting and energy when I was grossing 2000 cals. This is with me being a student and thus walking around maybe ~1.5hrs a day on average (also work retail o Saturday, bumping up my average), lifting 4x a week, and doing no more than 90 mins of cardio every week. If I grossed 1850 I'd be knocking shite over and having tantrums.0 -
I'm 5' 10", 55 years old, and started at 221 a year ago. I followed a slow carb diet and lost 20 without even thinking about how many calories I was eating. I plateaued at 200, so started the 4 Hour Body. At this point, I'm 180 and eating about 1700 cals a day with exercise (elliptical for 30 minutes a day in my target heart zone) plus the protocol in the book. I do have a cheat day. I'm losing about 2 lbs a week with this approach. In fact, MFP just recalculated my goal calories down after about 300/day after I lost 10 lbs.
My goal is 165-170 depending on my % body fat. The 4HB claims you don't have to count calories, but I found that after I got to about 185, I had to pay attention to get things moving again. I agree it's a lot of trial and error. Your numbers could be very different than someone else, so don't let the 2000 calorie number block you. Eat at the level you'll lose weight, but not so low that you feel totally deprived. The cheat day helps me incredibly for this. Some people don't have success with it, but it's worked for me.0 -
I'm 6'3" 205lbs, and on rest days I'm consuming 1825 calories and on workout days I'm consuming 2300 calories (i'm doing an IF diet as well). I found this using an online calculator to find my TDEE (total daily energy expenditure). Your TDEE should be your maintenance calories and from that you decide how much of a deficit you'd like to go into. My TDEE is 2500 calories. I'm on a -30%/-10% (workout/rest) deficit.
So tl;dr I calculated my TDEE and found my maintenance calories and used that as a starting point to find my caloric deficit.
Start here: http://iifym.com/tdee-calculator/0 -
This would have the effect of me actually eating LESS than I state I eat and it's also something people commonly recommend because calories values aren't exact anyhow. Plus, this idea that a few grams is causing a screeching halt is silly. And I frankly don't know how I could be eating more than I realize if I'm sitting the food on the scale? It's on the scale. It's sitting there. The scale gives a number.especially if you are rounding your servings up
EDIT: And I just remember, you're the gal who said I should be weighing my Oreos. I'm going to weigh 10 Oreos tonight (not going to eat all of them BTW) and see what the variance is from the weigh/calories given on the package.
Which means you have no idea how much you are eating, so you cannot actually know what goal you should be setting.
Whether you are eating 1000 calories or 3000 calories, you need to log the actual amount of food you are eating. Stop logging extra servings you aren't eating, log your true intake for a month to your gross goals, and if you do not lose ANY weight then lower your goal by 100 calories and monitor again.
People do not recommend estimating servings up because it doesn't allow you to accurately track your believed intake, meaning you are basing your decisions off of inaccurate data. If you log 2000 calories and want to assume that, because you measure instead of weigh, that you are actually eating 2200, that's fine. But log to 2000 so that you can increase and decrease your goals based off of results relating to your true logged and assumed intake.
And yes, I do recommend people weigh their packaged food, because in most cases the weight is not that of the packaging. In a few cases I've found the weight to be mostly spot on -- canned tuna, jello, Breton GF crackers, rice cakes, some types of bacon -- but pretty much everything else hasn't been. My muffins that are supposed to be 85g? usually 81g for the blueberry flavour and up to 95g for the chocolate flavour. My glazed donuts that should be 53g? If I've consumed 10 boxes of those over the last 7 months then probably only 4 of those 60 donuts were actually 53g (some go up to 69g). My bread slices can be a few g more or 10g more. Chocolates are also usually a few g more, which definitely matters for calorie dense items. Etc etc. If you are the only person eating those oreos and the total content weight (minus packaging of course) matches that of the box weight, then go ahead and just eat them as the default. If others will eat them and they do not match, then weigh each one. If I make 4-serving baked proatmeal, I don't weight it because only I eat it (but I log all ingredients in my recipe builder). I just made brownies and I did weigh the entire batch so as to create a serving size based on the weight (622g I believe) because I have no idea if my parents will grab some, but I also wound up cutting them in not at all even pieces.
If you fail in your weight loss, one can only assume that it is either due to eating more than one believes due to poor logging practices, or eating above one's needs. Either way it relates to cals in being more than they should be compared to your cals out.0 -
1) progress is a great motivator.
2) faster cuts = less time spent at low-ish intakes
3) I generally think they whole "don't lose weight too fast, you'll lose all your muscle" mantra is greatly overstated, especially when on a legit lifting program.
FWIW... I'm 5'8", 175ishlbs, 38yrs old... 1850cals is a great intake for me when cutting, at least based on all my estimates.
I've seen this repeatedly. Lots of people (especially men it seems) cut fast and hard. Not that I would recommend the program per se, but the intro to the ultimate diet that Lyle McDonald wrote explains the logic behind it and how it doesn't lead to muscle loss. The key being that it is short term. (His diet is very extreme and is often used by competitors to hit competing weight.)
How short is "short term?" I could probably do 1500 for a few weeks but I'm not sure I could maintain that as a lifestyle.
The UD is run for 6-8 weeks at a time with diet breaks between cycles. This is not a recommendation for you to follow that diet, but there are a lot of chapters about dieting, fat loss, muscle gain, how leptin affects everything, and overall, it's a great read:
http://www.ironmagazine.com/ebooks/The_Ultimate_Diet.pdf0 -
That's your net goal based off the activity level you used -I'm guessing you used sedentary? Most people are not sedentary outside of wheelchair- and bed-ridden individuals (although wheelchair users, if not using motored, could easily be at least lightly to moderately active). So if you truly are sedentary or lightly active in your day to day activity, then that's how much you'd eat to lose ~1lb. If you exercise then log it and eat back at least half the calories. At 5'7 I'd guess you aren't ridiculously heavy or anything, so a net maintenance of 2230 calories doesn't seem that illogical to me. That's probably what I could net and still easily maintain my weight on at the same height. But you must take proper activity level into consideration for your intake goals.steelerfan1967 wrote: »MFP put me at 1730 cals.. I entered that I wanted to lose about 11 pounds and a pound a week im 5 ft 7. I thought it was normal but idk now.0 -
I eat 1800 and im 6'0. I have a small apetite nowadays, but its impossible to eat until ur full with 1800, u just gotta eat until ur not hungry, which doesn't take much.0
-
5'11" 201lbs and eating at 1850ish. I exercise 4-5 times a week (3 of those are C25k 30min runs and 2 days of 45min strength training). Some days I am still a little hungry by bed time but I try to curb those cravings as much as I can. Feel free to take a look at my diary if you would like.0
-
1) progress is a great motivator.
2) faster cuts = less time spent at low-ish intakes
3) I generally think they whole "don't lose weight too fast, you'll lose all your muscle" mantra is greatly overstated, especially when on a legit lifting program.
FWIW... I'm 5'8", 175ishlbs, 38yrs old... 1850cals is a great intake for me when cutting, at least based on all my estimates.
I've seen this repeatedly. Lots of people (especially men it seems) cut fast and hard. Not that I would recommend the program per se, but the intro to the ultimate diet that Lyle McDonald wrote explains the logic behind it and how it doesn't lead to muscle loss. The key being that it is short term. (His diet is very extreme and is often used by competitors to hit competing weight.)
How short is "short term?" I could probably do 1500 for a few weeks but I'm not sure I could maintain that as a lifestyle.
I don't think there's a hard and fast rule for what's "too short"... too many variables. If you're running a 2000 calorie deficit, "too short" is going to be dramatically different than if you're running a 500 calorie deficit. In most cases, I wouldn't recommend an uncomfortable deficit (assuming the dieter can be honest with themselves about what that really means) for more than a couple of months.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions