Dudes eating below 2000 calories
Replies
-
Just for some comparison
I'm a 5'2 35yr old woman who loses on 1600 cals a day as long as I get 10,000 steps in. I get to eat more when I lift or run.
Should you guys who are 6ft really be eating the same as me or less.0 -
BFDeal how old are you, and how long have you been dieting? Your metabolism starts to drop like a rock when you get over 30. If you have been dieting consistently for a long time, your metabolism will also drop due to adaptation. I agree with ana, if you have plateaued for a long time, you have found your new maintenance level. The guys you see dieting at 2500-3000 cal/day are usually in their 20's and have a lot of lean body mass.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
Either way it relates to cals in being more than they should be compared to your cals out.
Yeah I get the science explanation for it but I just don't understand why my calorie figure to do this is seemingly so much lower than even a tiny female. And why would 2300 work for, what, 20 weeks in a row, then stop on a dime the next week. Why wouldn't it gradually slow down? It was pretty much right under 1lb all those weeks then it stopped. That doesn't make sense.
Could be a few things at play here...- Your 2300 cals may be very different than someone else's 2300 cals based on how accurately you/they log. This is a HUUUGE variable. Also, net vs gross cals, which people don't always distinguish.
- as your weight changes, the calorie intake at which you maintain also changes. It's probably not significant when talking about a 10lb weight loss, but 50lbs could very well be significant. I haven't run the numbers in a long time, so I'm talking purely theoretical here.
- Many people get lazy as they get closer to goal weight (or get less unhappy with their current weight/fitness). Workout intensity isn't what it should be, they don't log as completely/accurately, or both.
- Lastly, and I hesitate to even mention this... but do some reading on the set point theory regarding body weight. I'm not sure where I fall on this, but if nothing else, it's worth a couple of quick google searches.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
1800 should be minimum for most men, 1500 I guess if you are on the somewhat shorter side or older.
Is there a way for you to increase your daily burn by 250 kcals and decrease calories by 250?0 -
Either way it relates to cals in being more than they should be compared to your cals out.
Yeah I get the science explanation for it but I just don't understand why my calorie figure to do this is seemingly so much lower than even a tiny female. And why would 2300 work for, what, 20 weeks in a row, then stop on a dime the next week. Why wouldn't it gradually slow down? It was pretty much right under 1lb all those weeks then it stopped. That doesn't make sense.
If you start with a large daily calorie deficit, and you eat and exercise exactly the same every day, your weight loss will be fairly linear at first. As you lose weight and approach your new maintenance level, your weight loss will taper towards a logarithmic curve. You probably just didn't notice the logarithmic part at the end due to precision of your scale and daily water fluctuations. I have been known to fluctuate 12 lbs a day, so the only way I can measure my weight loss is by taking a rolling average over 2 weeks.
I am 38 and I have about 170 lbs of lean body mass, and I have to cut at 1900 or 2000 net calories a day, so your results are not that unusual. Have you tried HIIT or other metabolic boosting methods?0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Either way it relates to cals in being more than they should be compared to your cals out.
Yeah I get the science explanation for it but I just don't understand why my calorie figure to do this is seemingly so much lower than even a tiny female. And why would 2300 work for, what, 20 weeks in a row, then stop on a dime the next week. Why wouldn't it gradually slow down? It was pretty much right under 1lb all those weeks then it stopped. That doesn't make sense.
Have you tried HIIT or other metabolic boosting methods?
No. I pretty much just lift. I figured that was enough because that's pretty much what everyone says they do and that you don't need cardio. I guess maybe I need to look in to it.
I think it's really difficult to factor lifting into your TDEE because there are so many variables that go into determining the intensity that often aren't factored into the equation. I personally lose much better while doing cardio purely because I can have more calories, and I can stick to my goal. I'd look into adding cardio (and find whatever works whether it's HIIT, steady state, whatever).0 -
For me it's all about what's sustainable. I have hunger issues, which vary a lot from person to person due to a number of factors. I have a lot of trouble sustaining a deficit if I eat below 2200(ish) calories. I can do it, but it ends up being quite stressful for me.
Instead, I'm eating 2400 calories and trying to keep my activity up. It's a lower deficit, but it works better than feeling hungry all the time.0 -
No. I pretty much just lift. I figured that was enough because that's pretty much what everyone says they do and that you don't need cardio. I guess maybe I need to look in to it.
I would say that either your metabolism has adapted or your accuracy in measuring is the issue. I took a peak at your food diary and are you logging every single item that you eat?0 -
girlviernes wrote: »1800 should be minimum for most men, 1500 I guess if you are on the somewhat shorter side or older.
What study are you basing this on?
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Either way it relates to cals in being more than they should be compared to your cals out.
Yeah I get the science explanation for it but I just don't understand why my calorie figure to do this is seemingly so much lower than even a tiny female. And why would 2300 work for, what, 20 weeks in a row, then stop on a dime the next week. Why wouldn't it gradually slow down? It was pretty much right under 1lb all those weeks then it stopped. That doesn't make sense.
Have you tried HIIT or other metabolic boosting methods?
No. I pretty much just lift. I figured that was enough because that's pretty much what everyone says they do and that you don't need cardio. I guess maybe I need to look in to it.
You don't need to do cardio if your calorie deficit is sufficient, but you have plateaued for awhile, so your deficit is no longer sufficient. If you want to continue to eat the way you do now and also have that extra tray of sushi every week while continuing your weight loss, then you need to figure out what to do about the "calories out" side of the equation. You can increase your calories out by steady state cardio or raising your metabolism, or both.0 -
Have you ran your BMR and TDEE calculations since you have lost weight?0
-
for what I want, MFP has me at 1600 cal now, the calories have been dropping as I've lost weight. Now I average between 1500-1600 most days. I possibly could eat more, but I save some calories for weekend bc I know that I'll be more likely to go over 1600 on those days. I don't plan on dropping below 1600. 1600 is sustainable for me, but lower? Not so much. It makes me miserable.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
Hey man, I am 6'2" 242 starting/230 currently... I have MFP set at 1200 because I know I will eat over whatever goal I have set and think "oh that's not too much over" so I generally end up around 1600 for the day. I find that on the days I get hungry, it's because I haven't had enough protein. I generally start out the day with a banana before the gym, then eat 2 eggs and a protein shake for breakfast, a salad with chicken or chicken and green veggies for lunch, then a mixture of lean meat and veggies for supper. I've lost 12lbs in about 4.5 weeks and feel great! I actually feel more awake during the day and definitely don't crave snacks as often. If I do snack however, I try to make it something with a lot of protein; it's nice to make a lot of chicken breasts at one time so they're always there for you when you're feeling hungry. Hope this helps! Feel free to PM me if you have any questions!0
-
REFEED
have a very high carb day eating at maintenance once a week. If this doesnt work then you need to lower your calories.
Look into refeed days, they are important when eating at a deficit for a long time eventually causing fat loss to stall if you dont do them. Everyone seems to skip these but they are important. They are basically designed to replenish leptin levels in the body.
Google 'Refeed Days' for more info0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Don't make it more complicated than it needs to be.
Cut cals by 10%, log as consistently and as accurately as you can for at least a month. Evaulate, being honest about your efforts/accuracy. Tweak as needed.0 -
REFEED
have a very high carb day eating at maintenance once a week. If this doesnt work then you need to lower your calories.
Look into refeed days, they are important when eating at a deficit for a long time eventually causing fat loss to stall if you dont do them. Everyone seems to skip these but they are important.
I've had this suggested. I'm still considering it but I've read in a few places that if you're overweight you have plenty of leptin already. I may still try the refeeds if I can't get things going otherwise.
I had a similar problem in that I was stuck at 63kg for over 3 months. I did a refeed day just once and instantly the next week my weight dropped. These arent broscience and just because you are overweight doesnt mean you dont need them. If you have been at a deficit for an extended period of time then you will likely need it. It is just that if you have a low body fat you will need them more regularly.
0 -
^^ causation or correlation?0
-
^^ causation or correlation?
Here is a decent quick read for reading about re-feeds.
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=127293643
For some people, if they are not losing weight they simply need to drop the calories. However, some people genuinely do need to re-feed when they stop losing weight.
For me, the cause of my weight loss was because i incorporated a re-feed into my routine. Now that I have seen the benefit, I would never go back to not having re-feeds.
0 -
I know what refeeds are... I just think it's really hard, considering all the variables involved in weight loss, to definitively tie an outcome directly to 1 singular change/event.0
-
6-2, 205, over 40, moderately active, mainly walking ~12,000 steps a day plus moderate home workouts / lifting - I'm set for 2200 cals per day and usually go a bit over, ocassionally way over a few times per month - initially when I stayed strictly on target I was losing 1+ lbs every week - I'm not as strict lately and am happy with a slower loss for now (at least till summer and I get more active) and I still lose about 0.5 lb a week on average
One thing I'm convinced makes a big difference for me is that I've almost entirely cut out fast food and snack food and also try keep the sodium number down. That way @ 2200 calories I get 3 really solid meals and never feel I'm depriving myself. Even when I get otherwise sloppy or indulgent, so long as I'm not eating totally crappy food, I almost always surprise myself and still lose a bit of weight - I've seriously weighed in 10+ times sometimes because I'm having a hard time believing I still lost for the week.0 -
I didn't log this past weekend (actually I had some stuff in there but just removed it because most of it was guess) because I had a birthday thing Saturday and a Superbowl party Sunday. I basically just chalked it up to a couple spike days and moved on. Beyond that yes. I eat very simply mostly. Chicken and potatoes for lunch, cottage cheese and salsa for snacks, apples for snacks at home, the occasional Oreo or cereal or other "treat." If you see a wacky named entry it's probably a recipe I inputed. For recipe servings I make the weight of the final product the number of servings so I can just weigh out portions.ruggedshutter wrote: »No. I pretty much just lift. I figured that was enough because that's pretty much what everyone says they do and that you don't need cardio. I guess maybe I need to look in to it.
I would say that either your metabolism has adapted or your accuracy in measuring is the issue. I took a peak at your food diary and are you logging every single item that you eat?
EDIT: I make all my lunch meat servings in advance on Sunday. I weigh the entire amount of chicken and just divide that by five. I don't weigh each portion individually. Yes I rounded up the 5oz from 4.74575454 or something like that LOL. Monday was a weird day for other reasons. I didn't eat until dinner. Yes I had about 2200 calories in the span of about 1.5 hours. Bulkers and "I can't seem to eat that much" people take note.
Just for the record - I'm totally jealous of this ability.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
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.
Did something change in your diet then? You seem to eat a lot of the same foods. Since food labels only have to be accurate to +/- 20%, there's a pretty big possible swing.
0 -
I didn't log this past weekend (actually I had some stuff in there but just removed it because most of it was guess) because I had a birthday thing Saturday and a Superbowl party Sunday. I basically just chalked it up to a couple spike days and moved on. Beyond that yes. I eat very simply mostly. Chicken and potatoes for lunch, cottage cheese and salsa for snacks, apples for snacks at home, the occasional Oreo or cereal or other "treat." If you see a wacky named entry it's probably a recipe I inputed. For recipe servings I make the weight of the final product the number of servings so I can just weigh out portions.ruggedshutter wrote: »No. I pretty much just lift. I figured that was enough because that's pretty much what everyone says they do and that you don't need cardio. I guess maybe I need to look in to it.
I would say that either your metabolism has adapted or your accuracy in measuring is the issue. I took a peak at your food diary and are you logging every single item that you eat?
EDIT: I make all my lunch meat servings in advance on Sunday. I weigh the entire amount of chicken and just divide that by five. I don't weigh each portion individually. Yes I rounded up the 5oz from 4.74575454 or something like that LOL. Monday was a weird day for other reasons. I didn't eat until dinner. Yes I had about 2200 calories in the span of about 1.5 hours. Bulkers and "I can't seem to eat that much" people take note.
Just for the record - I'm totally jealous of this ability.
Definitely a double edged sword. I'm one of those guys that seems to always be hungry. I eat frequently to make it manageable though. For me, bulking seems like it would fun not some task like it gets made out to be.
I get that. You'd currently prefer my double-edged sword (I struggle to eat enough to maintain weight) and I'd prefer yours. But it seemed like a little sociable envy might be appreciated.
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