Has any women lost any weight eating 1600 calories a day?
Replies
-
-
are calorie counters wrong? it said 1500-1700 calories for me to lose weight based on my weight and height0
-
It is confusing, but it appears that "Starvation Mode" is a myth, but a myth containing at least a small kernel of truth.
From Weight Watchers:
http://www.weightwatchers.com/util/art/index_art.aspx?tabnum=1&art_id=35501
Restricting calories during weight loss lowers metabolism because the body becomes more efficient, requiring fewer calories to perform the necessary daily functions for survival. Consequently, this can slow (but not stop) the anticipated rate of weight loss.
For example, if an individual needs 2,000 calories per day to maintain weight, reducing intake to 1,500 calories, assuming exercise stays the same, should provide a 1 pound per week weight loss (Note: 1 pound of weight is equivalent to about 3,500 calories). Furthermore, reducing to 1,000 calories should result in a weight loss of 2 pounds per week and going down to 500 calories a day should result in a weight loss of 3 pounds per week. However, if an individual actually reduces their intake to 500 calories, the weight loss would not likely be a steady 3 pounds per week because of the reduced metabolic rate. It would likely be around 2¼ to 2½ pounds. This "lower than expected" rate of weight loss is a lot different than "no" weight loss as the "starvation mode" notion proposes.
It is unclear as to whether the relationship between reduced caloric intake and a lower metabolism follows a straight path or becomes more pronounced the greater the caloric reduction. Some studies have found no significant reduction in metabolism until the caloric restriction is quite large (e.g. 800 calories or less per day). Others suggest a linear relationship with small reductions in metabolism accompanying small reductions in caloric restriction, with the gap increasing as the caloric deficit is enlarged.
While there is no biologic evidence to support the "starvation mode" myth, there may be behavioral reasons why weight loss stops when calories are severely reduced. Over-restriction of calorie intake, known as high dietary restraint is linked to periods of overeating, hindering successful weight loss.3 (For more information on dietary restraint, read the Science Center article, The Skill of Flexible Restraint).
Metabolism after Weight Loss
The good news is that after the weight-loss goal is achieved and weight has stabilized, it does not appear that the dip in metabolism is permanent. Several rigorous studies done at the University of Alabama in Birmingham showed that metabolism goes back to expected levels with sustained weight loss,4 discounting the theory that a lowered metabolism helps to explain the common phenomenon of weight regain following weight loss.1 -
newstart1988 wrote: »
im being told things by everyone on here without scientific studiesnewstart1988 wrote: »this is so confusing everyone is saying the opposite of what I researched and been told by others. now I don't know how many calories to eat :-/
What? What have you been told? Can you back it up with scientific studies because 90% of dietary information, tabloid coverage, weight loss books and programmes and well meaning friend advice is simply nonsensical
Get your calorie counting estimates as accurate possible
Do you really want to lose weight? If so, stop defending your eating habits and start eating less.4 -
If you are maintaining weight at your current diet all you have to do is chop calories off it slowly until you are losing at a rate you want. Wait 2 weeks to judge how it is working for you though.0
-
newstart1988 wrote: »
so I don't measure peanut butter based off of the serving size on the container? How do I measure peanut butter?newstart1988 wrote: »
when I went to a calorie counter it said based on my weight and height that I needed to eat between 1500-1700 calories to lose weight healthily. I weight my food on a food scale and I use a measuring cupnewstart1988 wrote: »Has any women lost any weight eating 1600 calories a day? I was eating 1200 calories a day but my body was holding onto the weight because I was under eating. So now im trying to eat 1600 calories a day instead. I would love your advice and experiences. Thanks. :-)
Your body was not holding on to weight because you were eating too few calories because that doesn't happen, it is not how adaptive thermogenesis works aka no such thing as starvation mode
My guess is you were not logging properly
Until you get your logging sorted nothing will work ...see stickie at top calorie counting 101 http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1296011/calorie-counting-101/p1
Once you log properly yes it is more than possible ...I lost the majority of my weight eating around 1800 calories a day but I was extremely careful with weighing and accurate logging of food and not over-estimating exercise burns ...still am, still losing slowly at 2100 calories as I try to find my maintenance level
Really? I looked at one day and you had 6tbsp of peanut butter logged ....a highly calorie dense food in an innaccurate measure, the calorie count on that alone could be out by up to 100%
I am not trying to trick you or make you cross
Get your logging right and the weight will drop off
You should measure it using a scale. Ideally one that uses grams. There is a lot of wiggle room with ounces and measuring spoons. A couple grams more here and there of peanut butter adds up right quick. Weigh the bread or whatever you're putting the peanut butter on and then tare that off then add the peanut butter so you can see how many grams you've got.0 -
The OP is only going on what others have told her, and I can vouch that up until a year or two ago, these forums used to be full of threads with things like "you need to eat more, you're in starvation mode". I've noticed trends in weight loss advice. I remember being told those things myself, and I remember thinking that it didn't make sense to eat more and yet lose more weight. It's the largely unregulated pool of peer advice and pseudo-science that gets people confused.
OP, my recommendation to you is to ask your doctor or a nutritionist.2 -
newstart1988 wrote: »
im being told things by everyone on here without scientific studiesnewstart1988 wrote: »this is so confusing everyone is saying the opposite of what I researched and been told by others. now I don't know how many calories to eat :-/
What? What have you been told? Can you back it up with scientific studies because 90% of dietary information, tabloid coverage, weight loss books and programmes and well meaning friend advice is simply nonsensical
Get your calorie counting estimates as accurate possible
Starvation mode, as you are using the term, is a myth. Here is what it really means (with the studies):
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1077746/starvation-mode-adaptive-thermogenesis-and-weight-loss
The best thing you can do is try to tighten your logging for a 3-4 weeks on measurements at whatever calorie amounts you choose. Go from there. But be really as accurate as you can be.0 -
newstart1988 wrote: »
I have one and I use itNoblankFRplease wrote: »get a food scale
Not according to your diary
Everything solid should be weighed including peanut butter, you can even weigh oils0 -
Minnesota starvation experiment0
-
Unfortunately, my BMR is 1200. That's not happening for me.
0 -
youre not giving me the evidence that you said I need, I was stating the facts it has nothing to do with me not wanting to lose weight. I appreciate you help and thanksatypicalsmith wrote: »newstart1988 wrote: »
im being told things by everyone on here without scientific studiesnewstart1988 wrote: »this is so confusing everyone is saying the opposite of what I researched and been told by others. now I don't know how many calories to eat :-/
What? What have you been told? Can you back it up with scientific studies because 90% of dietary information, tabloid coverage, weight loss books and programmes and well meaning friend advice is simply nonsensical
Get your calorie counting estimates as accurate possible
Do you really want to lose weight? If so, stop defending your eating habits and start eating less.
4 -
newstart1988 wrote: »this is so confusing everyone is saying the opposite of what I researched and been told by others. now I don't know how many calories to eat :-/
Sigh. Just listen to rabbit, its clear you dont understand enough about weight loss. Its not hard, its just burn more than you consume= weight loss. Just follow what Rabbit is telling you.
Its usually the case that when people come up with all the ideas that they arent losing, they also have scope to improve their logging and make sure they are at deficit, becayse the reason for the stall is just eating more than they realised. Go an look at the sticky on calorie ccounting 101.2 -
xMadeInChinax wrote: »Unfortunately, my BMR is 1200. That's not happening for me.
BMR is only one part
MFP gives you BMR+activity level based on stated goal loss which would be 1600 basic calories if you are active even with a BMR of 1200
Plus on top you get to eat back purposeful exercise1 -
I completely agree with you and I will do just that. thanks so much for understanding where im coming from.Marchmallow wrote: »The OP is only going on what others have told her, and I can vouch that up until a year or two ago, these forums used to be full of threads with things like "you need to eat more, you're in starvation mode". I've noticed trends in weight loss advice. I remember being told those things myself, and I remember thinking that it didn't make sense to eat more and yet lose more weight. It's the largely unregulated pool of peer advice and pseudo-science that gets people confused.
OP, my recommendation to you is to ask your doctor or a nutritionist.
1 -
newstart1988 wrote: »
youre not giving me the evidence that you said I need, I was stating the facts it has nothing to do with me not wanting to lose weight. I appreciate you help and thanksatypicalsmith wrote: »newstart1988 wrote: »
im being told things by everyone on here without scientific studiesnewstart1988 wrote: »this is so confusing everyone is saying the opposite of what I researched and been told by others. now I don't know how many calories to eat :-/
What? What have you been told? Can you back it up with scientific studies because 90% of dietary information, tabloid coverage, weight loss books and programmes and well meaning friend advice is simply nonsensical
Get your calorie counting estimates as accurate possible
Do you really want to lose weight? If so, stop defending your eating habits and start eating less.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1077746/starvation-mode-adaptive-thermogenesis-and-weight-loss0 -
newstart1988 wrote: »
youre not giving me the evidence that you said I need, I was stating the facts it has nothing to do with me not wanting to lose weight. I appreciate you help and thanksatypicalsmith wrote: »newstart1988 wrote: »
im being told things by everyone on here without scientific studiesnewstart1988 wrote: »this is so confusing everyone is saying the opposite of what I researched and been told by others. now I don't know how many calories to eat :-/
What? What have you been told? Can you back it up with scientific studies because 90% of dietary information, tabloid coverage, weight loss books and programmes and well meaning friend advice is simply nonsensical
Get your calorie counting estimates as accurate possible
Do you really want to lose weight? If so, stop defending your eating habits and start eating less.
The scientific evidence is eat less, move more. Not eat more, move less.1 -
Oh FFS a doctor couldn't help you
"Hello doctor I'm not losing weight but I'm guessing how much I'm eating by using spoons and cups and even though I think I'm consuming 1200 calories a day and putting in all the effort, this one easily fixable mistake, that many make, means I am more likely eating 2000 calories each day "
Watch the video link I posted and Weigh your food5 -
ive been given that same kind of evidence from others. I think I will talk to my doctor and go by what a professional says. thanks again.atypicalsmith wrote: »newstart1988 wrote: »
youre not giving me the evidence that you said I need, I was stating the facts it has nothing to do with me not wanting to lose weight. I appreciate you help and thanksatypicalsmith wrote: »newstart1988 wrote: »
im being told things by everyone on here without scientific studiesnewstart1988 wrote: »this is so confusing everyone is saying the opposite of what I researched and been told by others. now I don't know how many calories to eat :-/
What? What have you been told? Can you back it up with scientific studies because 90% of dietary information, tabloid coverage, weight loss books and programmes and well meaning friend advice is simply nonsensical
Get your calorie counting estimates as accurate possible
Do you really want to lose weight? If so, stop defending your eating habits and start eating less.
The scientific evidence is eat less, move more. Not eat more, move less.
3 -
I will trust my doctor over an internet stranger. I don't need anymore of your advice thanksOh FFS a doctor couldn't help you
"Hello doctor I'm not losing weight but I'm guessing how much I'm eating by using spoons and cups and even though I think I'm consuming 1200 calories a day and putting in all the effort, this one easily fixable mistake, that many make, means I am more likely eating 2000 calories each day "
Watch the video link I posted and Weigh your food
2 -
newstart1988 wrote: »
I will trust my doctor over an internet stranger. I don't need anymore of your advice thanksOh FFS a doctor couldn't help you
"Hello doctor I'm not losing weight but I'm guessing how much I'm eating by using spoons and cups and even though I think I'm consuming 1200 calories a day and putting in all the effort, this one easily fixable mistake, that many make, means I am more likely eating 2000 calories each day "
Watch the video link I posted and Weigh your food
Fine by me. LOL ...here we go again with the special snowflake status
0 -
Try the 1600 cals, for say 4-6 weeks. Weigh everything, see if it works. Make sure you are very detailed about your logging. Something need our own experience to work out best.1
-
Methinks she doesn't want to work at this. Just a thought.2
-
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Try the 1600 cals, for say 4-6 weeks. Weigh everything, see if it works. Make sure you are very detailed about your logging. Something need our own experience to work out best.
Also worthwhile0 -
and here we go again with you needing to have the last word with your 2 cents after ive simply asked you to stop trying to give me advice. youre way of helping isn't helping me so I don't need anymore of your comments to make it more simplenewstart1988 wrote: »
I will trust my doctor over an internet stranger. I don't need anymore of your advice thanksOh FFS a doctor couldn't help you
"Hello doctor I'm not losing weight but I'm guessing how much I'm eating by using spoons and cups and even though I think I'm consuming 1200 calories a day and putting in all the effort, this one easily fixable mistake, that many make, means I am more likely eating 2000 calories each day "
Watch the video link I posted and Weigh your food
Fine by me. LOL ...here we go again with the special snowflake status
2 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Try the 1600 cals, for say 4-6 weeks. Weigh everything, see if it works. Make sure you are very detailed about your logging. Something need our own experience to work out best.
I have to say, I'm going to agree with this because OP seems to have her own ideas and isn't listening.
Enjoy your 1600 for a few weeks to get yourself out of 'starvation mode'. Get back to us in a few weeks with the results.
Sometimes the best evidence is the evidence you create yourself.1 -
MonsoonStorm wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Try the 1600 cals, for say 4-6 weeks. Weigh everything, see if it works. Make sure you are very detailed about your logging. Something need our own experience to work out best.
I have to say, I'm going to agree with this because OP seems to have her own ideas and isn't listening.
Enjoy your 1600 for a few weeks to get yourself out of 'starvation mode'. Get back to us in a few weeks with the results.
Sometimes the best evidence is the evidence you create yourself.
I do believe her 1600 is actually closer to 3000, but if she can lose weight with that, more power to her!0 -
newstart1988 wrote: »
I completely agree with you and I will do just that. thanks so much for understanding where im coming from.Marchmallow wrote: »The OP is only going on what others have told her, and I can vouch that up until a year or two ago, these forums used to be full of threads with things like "you need to eat more, you're in starvation mode". I've noticed trends in weight loss advice. I remember being told those things myself, and I remember thinking that it didn't make sense to eat more and yet lose more weight. It's the largely unregulated pool of peer advice and pseudo-science that gets people confused.
OP, my recommendation to you is to ask your doctor or a nutritionist.
Go and do that then , but I cnat understand the difficulty of fixing a healthy calorie deficit and losing weight slowly and steadily just like many people on this forum. Your Dr will tell you the same. You have a not insignificant amount of weight to lose and theres no need to do that at 1200 because thats too aggressive imo and you say you wnat to last all the way down to 130. You could be at this for 1-2years, so 1600 would be a much more liveable target.
Whilst there is some poor advice on here, generally its consistent and the experienced posters agree on the basics of how weight loss is achieved, starvation mode is a myth . Eating more to lose more on a straight calorie basis makes no sense unless they are being practical and telling you to eat an amount that maks you feel less miserable so your plan is more sustainable and you make it to the end.
Go and talk to your Dr then, but sufficent information is available on the stickies or just a casual browse of the internet. Your challenge isnt just about calorie counting its about making it through to the end.
You arent listening OP, try it your way.
1 -
-
atypicalsmith wrote: »MonsoonStorm wrote: »EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Try the 1600 cals, for say 4-6 weeks. Weigh everything, see if it works. Make sure you are very detailed about your logging. Something need our own experience to work out best.
I have to say, I'm going to agree with this because OP seems to have her own ideas and isn't listening.
Enjoy your 1600 for a few weeks to get yourself out of 'starvation mode'. Get back to us in a few weeks with the results.
Sometimes the best evidence is the evidence you create yourself.
I do believe her 1600 is actually closer to 3000, but if she can lose weight with that, more power to her!
Like I said, create her own evidence.0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVjWPclrWVY
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 423 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