Thanks Kiki, I am so new to calorie counting and nutrition, I am still really afraid of food. I confess to doing the low calorie diet and then binge eating because I am just so darn hungry!

Hi,
I am thinking about upping my calories and I am also thinking about losing weight zigzgging my calories (either weekly or 3 days at TDEE-15% and one day at TDEE or maybe another method?). Does anyone have experience with that combination or at least with eating more and zigzagging calories? I am a binge eater so my calories will likely vary, even if I do not intend to do it (therefore I guess the weekly method might be better for me). I am at 1400-1600 calories without counting in exercise at the moment, but have heavy binge periods for 1-6 days of 3500-4900 cals a day in between. How can I start the process? At which level should I start upping and at which rate? Would you recommend going by inches or jumping in?
Note thar my binges are triggeref mainly by anxiety which is mainly triggered by weight gain on the scale (but I still weigh in daily in order to learn to see the natural shifts independently on the scale..). So I need a "Foolproof" method. Or at least some of your stories to motivate me and lower my anxiety.....
I was thinking about maybe starting at 1400 for three days and one day at 1800 and then slowly up it? by 100 calories a week to 1500 and 1900; 1600 and 2000 etc. (that must be close or at my TDEE). Or should I start at 1400*7=9800 a week and then up it by 700 every week? Like 10500 next week etc.? Or directly jump to my TDEE or TDEE -15 % (because of all the bingeing)? I am realtively short and lightwieght/close to maintenance, but active. So I would guess at scooby's I would be either 3-5 times of moderate exercise a week (TDEE=1955 cal; 15%=1661) or 5-6 times of streneous exercise a week (I guess I am 6-7 times a week but at low intensity level (TDEE=2176; 15%=1849). My BMR according to scoobys is 1261.
By the way I heard that scoobys calorie values are too high because it uses an old formula and that IIFYM etc. are better (with lower values). What do you think about that?

Sorry...extra calories...equals slower loss...giving one a chance to get bored or make no progress whatsoever...it's simple..it's not complicated...energy in...energy out...you just have to suck it up and make the commitment...and people can do this anyway they wish...anyway that suits them..they can eat junk food..healthy food...whatever..,the fact remains eat more calories than you burn up you gain....heard a quote once, it stuck in my mind...EVER SEE A FAT SHEEP IN A CONCRETE PADDOCK!!!

@diane2306, I agree with what Heybales noted above^^^^. Eating too little will slow the metabolism and set the dieter up for failure. Many of us in this group know this firsthand. EM2WL doesn't claim to be a "fast" way to lose weight - it is a sustainable way to lose weight and keep it off, which is the most important thing. What good is a crash diet when you gain the same 10lbs back the next week when you can't stand it anymore? Yes, calories in...calories out. But EM2WL is about eating at a smaller deficit and it still requires a commitment. Yes, it's slower weight loss than someone with huge calorie deficit, but that is not a bad thing...it's a good thing when you understand the metabolism and keeping weight off for life. Many people who eat too little calories will stall out and their progress will halt. Eating more actually helps many to break through plateaus as it helps to speed up their metabolism. I encourage you to read through more of the group page and really see what it's about. If it's not for you, no problem. But I don't want others who are open to the concept to be discouraged by your post. Many have found freedom from low calorie dieting with EM2WL!

diane2306 wrote: »

sorry if I sounded a little harsh in my post, I guess I was really only looking at it from my point of view and I would not wish to discourage anyone who is following EM2WL. If it works for people then great. We are all trying to accomplish a weight loss, no matter how we do it.

Correct.

Many people are just back here after successfully losing weight 3, 4, 5, 6 and greater times in their life - always gaining it back, sometimes more. Having a harder time getting it back off each time.
And wondering why.

And the principle of just eat less and less and less eventually fails long term for majority (stats for success of maintenance) and fails short term for many (stats for giving up before reaching goal).

kirksaavedra wrote: »

I am 5'2" 189 41 yr old .scooby calculator says my tdee is 2714 and cut is 2307.yikes?really?i have 60 pounds to lose and I have upped my calories from 8 to 1000.i am eating what mfp has me at 1860.the people that I told it this rhink im frickin'nuts and will gain.my mother says you need to cut back and eat smaller meals.blah,blah,blah.i tried to explain ,she doesn't get it.it is making me question it,but not eating enough is not working.instopped eating. And it was not on purpose ,but there were two major stressful events that took place in the last two years and inlost 20.i started doin bootcamps and with unknown low calorie eating i put weight on 30 pounds in six months.devastating.should I eat the cut at 2307?I really don't feel I can afford to gain anymore weight.

So do ANY of them and yourself have any clue in the world how much you used to eat that caused you to gain weight perhaps with no exercise, in order to think you'll gain eating 2300 with exercise being done?

Vast majority of people have no idea, their only concept of calories is the low calorie fad diets, almost all of which start at 1200. Which is bare minimum for a sedentary woman to get required nutrition in on average eating.

So they are thinking of eating levels for a diet, not burning levels when you were barely gaining weight but heavier. Because at that point, what you ate is about what you burned.

Your boot camp on low calorie probably stressed your body out so bad, gained a bunch of water and lowered your daily burn so much, you probably actually ate over your diet frequently enough that it meant eating over your maintenance too, which meant fat gain.

You should slowly add 100 calories to your eating level daily, a week or two at a time.

And you were truly only eating 800 - 1000 calories gross - or you at back exercise calories so actually ate more?

Couple of your comments I can't make out because they are run together with no punctuation.
Upped calories from 8 to 1000, but then eating what MFP has at 1860?

Add some carriage returns for readability please, this ain't twitter with 140 character max.

Sorry,was a bit confusing.Was trying to get it all out without having to type as much.
Had been bulimic for 7 yrs ,from 13 til21.
Had kids iny 20's and then when I turned 30,I decided to try and lose 20.came off easy with diet and exercise.Kept it off for almost 6 yrs ,when I took anxiety med and gained 20 in two months.then took steroids for skin problems and gained more weight.Have been on a mission to lose it .I have never stopped working out in over twelve years.i have unknowingly eaten so little calories along with exerxise for the most part 5 days a week for a long time.i took a couple of months off after my husband had a heart attack dec 2013.I started exercising after a two and a half minth break.started in end of February and stayed with it till May of 2014.infid not lose weight ,I started gaining.quickly.Maybe the stress had something to do with it.I do not binge eat at all and stay away from sweets because they cause me heartburn.
I have explained to my mother that barely eating is not healthy or an option for me,since it didn't work.
My mother still tells me I need to eat less and smaller meals.I roll my eyes cause it's beating a dead horse .Its hard to explain everything via typing.
When I started to track my calories and realized how little I ate in a day,I knew I had to up them and see if that worked.
I'm just gonna try and not discuss it with my family members.
I hope his made sense this time.
I upped my calories to 1800 and mfp calculates the exercise cals.i am trying to get as close as possible to those cals.
Did I ruuuuuuuuun on this time.
I don't do,"Twitter".
Hope it was clear enough to decipher what I am saying:)

I had only been eating 800 -1000 after exercise for years.Unknowingly.I remember doing insanity workout and I obviously was confused about how much to eat while doing that kind of workout.i didn't lose any weight doing that either.I have very disordered eating habits do to thinking I must eat lower cause that's what I was taught in order to lose weight.I thought,well ,that didn't work so try something else.this has to work .i have disordered writing thought too.Can you feel my humor ?I hope so:)

I'm kind of un sure of the type of exercise to do since lifting heavy doesn't feel like an option .I have siatica issues.Everytime I have tried to do heavier weights,it aggravates my back.I then go back to some type of cardio just to keep busy without hurting my back.

Circuit training, it's still heavy, but heavy for doing 15-20 reps and only up to 1 min rests - so with those limitations it's not really as heavy as straight lifting would be with lower reps and longer rests.

Still beneficial results doing 3-4 circuits of about 7-9 lifts or machines.
Sounds like gym available, might see how many machines they have, leave out duplicate ones that work the same muscles.

Start a new topic, the focus of this sticky topic has been bypassed and best to move on to one you start.
List the machines you got available. If not, if dumbbells or free weights or what.

Also, have you had muscle imbalances looked at for your sciatica, mention that too in the post?