5'5 women, around 140 pounds, how much are you eating?

13»

Replies

  • jendpositive
    jendpositive Posts: 26 Member
    Thanks arditarose, encouragement is very important on this journey.
  • arussell134
    arussell134 Posts: 463 Member
    I'm 5'6" and reached my goal of 135 lbs in early Dec. To achieve my weight loss, I ate about 1500 calories - up to about 1800 on days I worked out (or even a tad more, if it was a really big workout). At maintenance, I find about 1800 is good with 2000 - 2200 on days I work out.
  • karmatrix
    karmatrix Posts: 10 Member
    I'm 5'6'', a size 10 at 154 pounds, aged 37. Trying to get to 140 pounds at 1000-1200 calories a day. Have upped my exercise tremendously but weight loss has been slow.
  • Clawsal
    Clawsal Posts: 255 Member
    So… thank you all for your answers! I did not expect so many answers, but I absolutely read them all. It’s nice to see there are many of us in the same situation. :)

    I noticed, almost nobody is eating less than 1200 a day (as an average) and many of us started by eating 1200 kcal a day but started eating more after a while. It is so easy to burn out - feeling hungry and frustrated - when only eating 1200 kcal.

    Lots of us are trying to lose 0.5 -1 lbs a week. That's encouraging. I thought trying to lose 1lbs a week was too slow, but apparently its the norm :).

    I calculated the average of your numbers (that's 48 different people) and the daily calorie consumption average is 1498. I used the middle ground when you gave me a range of numbers. Of course there are many differences between individuals.

    Finally, I feel the factor that makes the most difference in how much you can eat is not age as I thought, but exercise, specially weight lifting! So time to start weight lifting :).
  • dinosaurparty
    dinosaurparty Posts: 185 Member
    edited February 2015
    Those are basically my stats right now. I'm aiming to eat 1200cal a day, and then part of my workout calories from that day if I need to. I sort of just assume that MFP's exercise calculator overestimates, so that usually amounts to like, a big apple or something.

    Honestly I'm sticking to my goals fairly closely, but it's not really much fun. It's getting easier as I get used to feeling hungry, though. I'm finding that I'm a lot more conscientious of food and meals - they're becoming something to look forward too, rather than just designated times to stuff my face. Being able to eat until I'm really full is a treat now, rather than a necessity, so I appreciate it - and the food - a lot more.

    I'm also finding a rhythm of eating that works for me and keeps me from going over my calorie goals, and that's helping a lot. I find that doing a morning fast (usually coffee or a skim latte for breakfast, then water) until lunch is best, because a) I'm not hungry in the morning unless I kickstart my stomach by eating, and b) I have waaaay less motivation to stick to my goals at night, so I need to save up a safety net of sorts.

    I can get wicked hangry, so recognizing that and dealing with it like a grownup who's in control of her emotions is important, haha.

    I'm losing about 1 to 2lbs a week I think. I'm just starting out, though, so that might change. My highest was 190 or so, but it has been a long, looooong journey, with lots of backtracking and stalls.
  • 4leighbee
    4leighbee Posts: 1,275 Member
    Clawsal wrote: »
    So… thank you all for your answers! ....... Finally, I feel the factor that makes the most difference in how much you can eat is not age as I thought, but exercise, specially weight lifting! So time to start weight lifting :).

    Not to complicate things, but I wonder - for those who answered where weight lifting affected their numbers, was it because they were bulking rather than eating at a deficit? You might want to disregard those figures for the purpose of determining a good place to start for you, if so, because they are purposefully eating more to grow new muscle (that's my understanding - I'm absolutely no authority on this).
  • arditarose
    arditarose Posts: 15,573 Member
    edited February 2015
    4leighbee wrote: »
    Clawsal wrote: »
    So… thank you all for your answers! ....... Finally, I feel the factor that makes the most difference in how much you can eat is not age as I thought, but exercise, specially weight lifting! So time to start weight lifting :).

    Not to complicate things, but I wonder - for those who answered where weight lifting affected their numbers, was it because they were bulking rather than eating at a deficit? You might want to disregard those figures for the purpose of determining a good place to start for you, if so, because they are purposefully eating more to grow new muscle (that's my understanding - I'm absolutely no authority on this).

    Not necessarily. I didn't go back to see if anyone was bulking. But for me, I'm still lifting in a slight deficit. I just find that I don't have the fuel to lift heavy if I'm having a deficit greater than 250 calories. This also brings me close to maintenance and ready to try a recomp if I have the patience. Also, at 140, it is close to goal and I think .5 pounds a week is appropriate.
  • alireymurrell
    alireymurrell Posts: 21 Member
    Timorous_Beastie wrote: »
    I'm 5'5, 42 years old, currently 147-ish aiming for about 135, and losing easily on 1500 plus most of my exercise calories. I run 2-3 times a week (weather permitting), lift heavy and do some cardio circuit training.

    You and I are almost in the same boat! I am trying to stay within 1200 calories and i am beyond discouraged bc I think I have lost 2 lbs. I am about 145ish and would love to be 130-but happy with 135. I exercise 2-3 times a week, track my food and am really getting annoyed-is it bc I am 43?? ugh-help. May friend you-maybe we can meal plan share? I don't know.
  • 4leighbee
    4leighbee Posts: 1,275 Member
    arditarose wrote: »
    4leighbee wrote: »
    Clawsal wrote: »
    So… thank you all for your answers! ....... Finally, I feel the factor that makes the most difference in how much you can eat is not age as I thought, but exercise, specially weight lifting! So time to start weight lifting :).

    Not to complicate things, but I wonder - for those who answered where weight lifting affected their numbers, was it because they were bulking rather than eating at a deficit? You might want to disregard those figures for the purpose of determining a good place to start for you, if so, because they are purposefully eating more to grow new muscle (that's my understanding - I'm absolutely no authority on this).

    Not necessarily. I didn't go back to see if anyone was bulking. But for me, I'm still lifting in a slight deficit. I just find that I don't have the fuel to lift heavy if I'm having a deficit greater than 250 calories. This also brings me close to maintenance and ready to try a recomp if I have the patience. Also, at 140, it is close to goal and I think .5 pounds a week is appropriate.

    Gotcha okay. I just figured it was a possibility and, if so, it would skew her calculations. (Unrelated: why does skew look like it's spelled wrong to me ...? It probably is.)
  • alireymurrell
    alireymurrell Posts: 21 Member
    HappyCampr1 wrote: »
    lgutches wrote: »
    This has been interesting for me to read. I'm 5'4" and 158 (going for 140). I had been at 1,200 plus exercise calories, but it just didn't seem like enough food. I checked TDEE and it suggested I bump it up so I did ... but I haven't been losing. I've readjusted back down to 1,200 plus exercise (which is usually 300-400/day), so we'll see how it goes. I'm nervous. I need it to be sustainable and hunger makes me want to binge. :/

    How long were you eating at 1400 calories? I only ask because whenever you increase your daily intake (especially if you've been eating so few calories), your body is going to store water to help process the additional food. The water weight can hide your losses for up to a month until you catch back up and start losing again. For me, it usually only take about 2 weeks if it's a couple hundred calories, but I've read a lot of people who say it's a month before the scale starts moving again. It's not that you're gaining weight or stalled, it's just water weight. Personally, I'd try the 1400 again.

    I am with you-been at 1200 calories and my scale isn't moving. I am over it!
  • arditarose
    arditarose Posts: 15,573 Member
    4leighbee wrote: »
    arditarose wrote: »
    4leighbee wrote: »
    Clawsal wrote: »
    So… thank you all for your answers! ....... Finally, I feel the factor that makes the most difference in how much you can eat is not age as I thought, but exercise, specially weight lifting! So time to start weight lifting :).

    Not to complicate things, but I wonder - for those who answered where weight lifting affected their numbers, was it because they were bulking rather than eating at a deficit? You might want to disregard those figures for the purpose of determining a good place to start for you, if so, because they are purposefully eating more to grow new muscle (that's my understanding - I'm absolutely no authority on this).

    Not necessarily. I didn't go back to see if anyone was bulking. But for me, I'm still lifting in a slight deficit. I just find that I don't have the fuel to lift heavy if I'm having a deficit greater than 250 calories. This also brings me close to maintenance and ready to try a recomp if I have the patience. Also, at 140, it is close to goal and I think .5 pounds a week is appropriate.

    Gotcha okay. I just figured it was a possibility and, if so, it would skew her calculations. (Unrelated: why does skew look like it's spelled wrong to me ...? It probably is.)

    No it's right. You probably haven't typed it in awhile ha
  • 4leighbee
    4leighbee Posts: 1,275 Member
    alireymurrell wrote: »
    HappyCampr1 wrote: »
    lgutches wrote: »
    This has been interesting for me to read. I'm 5'4" and 158 (going for 140). I had been at 1,200 plus exercise calories, but it just didn't seem like enough food. I checked TDEE and it suggested I bump it up so I did ... but I haven't been losing. I've readjusted back down to 1,200 plus exercise (which is usually 300-400/day), so we'll see how it goes. I'm nervous. I need it to be sustainable and hunger makes me want to binge. :/

    How long were you eating at 1400 calories? I only ask because whenever you increase your daily intake (especially if you've been eating so few calories), your body is going to store water to help process the additional food. The water weight can hide your losses for up to a month until you catch back up and start losing again. For me, it usually only take about 2 weeks if it's a couple hundred calories, but I've read a lot of people who say it's a month before the scale starts moving again. It's not that you're gaining weight or stalled, it's just water weight. Personally, I'd try the 1400 again.

    I am with you-been at 1200 calories and my scale isn't moving. I am over it!

    I think she was originally speaking to me in this one. It was a couple weeks ago, if I recall. I stayed patient - and stopped stressing about every single calorie. And I've lost three pounds since then. Stay patient. Keep doing the right stuff ... good things will happen!
  • Kfrase83
    Kfrase83 Posts: 42 Member
    Does anyone have any updates? For me, after spending 6 weeks or so stuck at 144/145/146, I decreased by goal changing it to 0.5lb/week, and last week I was at 143!! I'm kind of excited about that! The extra calorie wiggle room I get with decreasing the weight goal has made me happy, too. Some days I can stick around the previous 1,210, or I can eat to 1,430, my current daily calorie goal. Whatever works, and puts a smile on your face, right? :)
  • 4leighbee
    4leighbee Posts: 1,275 Member
    I am interested to learn over the next six months or so whether my weight loss follows the same pattern - very little movement on the scale until the week of/after my period and the week after that. During those weeks is when I had a steady, significant loss. Then nothing again for a couple weeks. Activity/nutrition is appreciably the same - and consistently in a deficit.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    I'm 5'5" and 133 pounds, and I've never eaten under 1650 (that's including exercise and everything). I'm 36.

    Now eating 1800 to lose my last 3 pounds, hopefully. I exercise 30-45 minutes a day in average.
  • emmoksha
    emmoksha Posts: 2 Member
    :)
  • hillarysiegel24
    hillarysiegel24 Posts: 14 Member
    5'4", started at 140, now at 136. Eating around 1200 calories a day (also doing Weight Watchers; I am at 26 points/day). I find it hard to go above 1200, but that is only because I have a super weak stomach and can't eat tons without being sick. I am losing steadily; I was a little over 140 when I started and have gotten down these ~4 pounds in a month, which seems fair to me. When I exercise I definitely try to eat more. Once I am down to 130 I plan to up my calorie intake a little bit.

    Goal is 122, and I plan to go from a ~26" waist to a ~24.5" waist. Hoping to do this by June!
  • Kfrase83
    Kfrase83 Posts: 42 Member
    Francl27 wrote: »
    I'm 5'5" and 133 pounds, and I've never eaten under 1650 (that's including exercise and everything). I'm 36.

    Now eating 1800 to lose my last 3 pounds, hopefully. I exercise 30-45 minutes a day in average.

    That's awesome Francl - MFP was very hard on me when I started. I have a desk job, but workout 6 days a week, and wanting to lose 1lb/week it told me to eat 1230. Then as the weight came off and I went in to update the goal or play around with the weekly goal, the daily calories would decrease. It sucked! I was able to do it for 5 solid months that restricted, but want to give myself some credit. LOL.

    Good luck on the last 3 pounds! I hope to lose 7 more to be at 135.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories