Fat Burn
Meselele
Posts: 19 Member
Anyone who has tried the eat more to lose weight concept?? I lift weights an I heard 1200 aint enough for my activity level, can someone shed more light on this? am quite anxious about uping the calories
0
Replies
-
Eating more will not make you lose more. It will however make you lose a greater percentage of fat, which is what you want. The less you eat the more muscle mass you will lose. You'll get better results in the long run eating more calories and having a smaller deficit.
0 -
kyrannosaurus wrote: »Eating more will not make you lose more. It will however make you lose a greater percentage of fat, which is what you want. The less you eat the more muscle mass you will lose. You'll get better results in the long run eating more calories and having a smaller deficit.
^That makes no sense at all.
The "eating more to lose weight" was some sort of myth that did the rounds several years ago. It's been totally debunked.
Calories in need to be less than calories out.
1200 calories is probably much too few for most women, though. You can still be at a calorie deficit if you eat a few hundred more calories. (Is that what you were trying to say, kyrannosaurus?)
OP, what is your height and weight?
0 -
kyrannosaurus wrote: »Eating more will not make you lose more. It will however make you lose a greater percentage of fat, which is what you want. The less you eat the more muscle mass you will lose. You'll get better results in the long run eating more calories and having a smaller deficit.
^That makes no sense at all.
The "eating more to lose weight" was some sort of myth that did the rounds several years ago. It's been totally debunked.
Calories in need to be less than calories out.
1200 calories is probably much too few for most women, though. You can still be at a calorie deficit if you eat a few hundred more calories. (Is that what you were trying to say, kyrannosaurus?)
OP, what is your height and weight?
What doesn't make sense? Eating more will not make her lose more. That's what I said. The bigger the deficit the faster the weight loss will be. So eating more calories will result in a slower weight loss but more of the weight loss will be fat... hence the better results in the long run.0 -
There isn't a strong correlation between deficit and % of weight loss that is fat.0
-
5.21ft I meant0
-
kyrannosaurus wrote: »kyrannosaurus wrote: »Eating more will not make you lose more. It will however make you lose a greater percentage of fat, which is what you want. The less you eat the more muscle mass you will lose. You'll get better results in the long run eating more calories and having a smaller deficit.
^That makes no sense at all.
The "eating more to lose weight" was some sort of myth that did the rounds several years ago. It's been totally debunked.
Calories in need to be less than calories out.
1200 calories is probably much too few for most women, though. You can still be at a calorie deficit if you eat a few hundred more calories. (Is that what you were trying to say, kyrannosaurus?)
OP, what is your height and weight?
What doesn't make sense? Eating more will not make her lose more. That's what I said. The bigger the deficit the faster the weight loss will be. So eating more calories will result in a slower weight loss but more of the weight loss will be fat... hence the better results in the long run.
It doesn't make sense because it's not correct.
0 -
The last time I checked my fat percentage I was @ 21.5%0
-
You are already a normal weight.
What sort of exercise are you doing and for how long have you been exercising.
Ordinarily eating more will not help you lose faster as it is more calories and a calorie deficit is required to lose weight. By lifting you are doing the right thing to retain LBM and ensure the max % of body fat loss v muscle loss.
You do need to fuel your workouts though and consider eating exercise calories burned back. You should try and hit your macros, especially the one for protein, as you are lifting. 1200 is the min for a sedentary female, so use some common sense see how your weight loss goes, listen to your body and adjust accordingly. If you are doing additional cardio then eat 50% of those calories back and adjust. Most people dont eat extra for lifting as it burns relatively few calories. The golden rule is always listen to your body, so as long as you are netting 1200, hitting your macro and feel fine then dont worry about eating more. Plenty of people cna eat more and still lose though.
If you are just lifting, then progress is slow, you have little to lose and building muscle takes time. Look at the progress you make on what you can lift. Be consistent and patient.0 -
Closed diary so hard to tell. If you're eating 75g of protein and 30g of fat/oil you have the basics, a variety of foods to provide your micro needs.
As you aren't tall or heavy your energy use may not be much higher than what you're eating.0 -
There isn't a strong correlation between deficit and % of weight loss that is fat.
The trainers and doctor have always drilled this into me that I needed a smaller deficit to minimise muscle loss. If an aggressive deficit isn't going to cause a greater amount of muscle wastage why are 1200 diets so controversial?0 -
Pass, 1200 isn't even a thing in the UK so I don't know. Typically it is nutrional adequacy that is a concern, muscle loss is mainly a sports science thing. That and commercial interests in exercise.
The low calorie Protein Sparing Modified Fast is designed to preserve muscle at a high deficit and if you trawl through studies you probably won't find a clear correlation (I haven't) not least due to the vagaries of determining body fat.
Loss of FFM is often loss of water too.0 -
kyrannosaurus wrote: »There isn't a strong correlation between deficit and % of weight loss that is fat.
The trainers and doctor have always drilled this into me that I needed a smaller deficit to minimise muscle loss. If an aggressive deficit isn't going to cause a greater amount of muscle wastage why are 1200 diets so controversial?
You are mixing up the ratio of muscle loss with % of muscle loss. 1200 diets arent controversial, they just mark the min amount a woman needs for basic nutrition and below which you should not go. On a sustainability level its a challenge and many other dieters lose on more than this.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions