change in calories... happy

HHEHEA
HHEHEA Posts: 17 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
crazy how i wasnt loosing on 1200 calories.. but as soon as I raised the calories to 1400 I'm loosing everyday... loosing and eating more.. who can be sad about that!!! so so happy I changed from weight watchers to counting calories... I eat everything I want.. do not feel deprived at all

Replies

  • babypunkprincess
    babypunkprincess Posts: 109 Member
    I was the same. The reason why we don't lose weight is bc we are under eating. There isn't anything left and the body holds onto what's left making no weight loss or even weight gain.
  • babypunkprincess
    babypunkprincess Posts: 109 Member
    edited August 2016
    callsitlikeiseeit wrote: »
    babypunkprincess wrote: »
    I was the same. The reason why we don't lose weight is bc we are under eating. There isn't anything left and the body holds onto what's left making no weight loss or even weight gain.

    that is so many levels of wrong.

    anyways, generally the culprit when this happens is you are logging better and more accurately. maybe you dont feel as bad about the chips and log them, whereas before ' if its not there i didnt really eat it' mindset. Our bodies know, even if we lie to ourselves. maybe youre more mindful about not grabbing a handful of 'whatever' and eating it. Maybe you are more conscious in not adding oils and butter, or reducing the amount. Could be a hundred reasons, but eating MORE will not cause weight LOSS.

    cause ... science.

    Although, looking at your diary very quickly, I would say you have a lot of room for improvement there as it stands. Continue to work on it and WEIGH EVERYTHING ON A SCALE. not 9 pieces of salami or whatever it was.

    ;)


    That is just my experience and from what I researched. Either way a lot of people who are low calorie diets can't lose weight, but once the up their calories a bit they lose. I couldve misunderstood what i read but it's a fact that under eating can make u not lose weight or gain.
  • bemyyfriend0918
    bemyyfriend0918 Posts: 241 Member
    babypunkprincess wrote: »
    I was the same. The reason why we don't lose weight is bc we are under eating. There isn't anything left and the body holds onto what's left making no weight loss or even weight gain.

    I agree with this!! Obviously we arent talking about raising calories to 3000 a day or anything, but going from 1200 to 1400 or so is perfect for getting your body to start burning again :-)
  • terbusha
    terbusha Posts: 1,483 Member
    Love it! It's amazing how treating your body right produces much better results. This journey is about fueling our bodies, not about restricting and frustration. Way to go! Keep up the great work
  • awolf2011
    awolf2011 Posts: 265 Member
    I started on some medication a few months ago and it made me gain 10 lbs in 1 month. I was watching what I was eating and exercising regularly. A side effect of the meds. So, I decided that I needed to start logging my calories everyday and trying to get within my goal. Low and behold, I lost 4 lbs in 4 days!!! So, I'm on the path of taking control of my calories once again. I find that if I go a couple weeks with really watching myself, I then stay on a good path. Once I veer off, look out...... :)
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    It's probably just a coincidence. You were retaining water, and you just happened to drop it when you started eating a bit more... just a coincidence.
  • SueInAz
    SueInAz Posts: 6,592 Member
    bemyyfriend0918 wrote: »
    babypunkprincess wrote: »
    I was the same. The reason why we don't lose weight is bc we are under eating. There isn't anything left and the body holds onto what's left making no weight loss or even weight gain.

    I agree with this!! Obviously we arent talking about raising calories to 3000 a day or anything, but going from 1200 to 1400 or so is perfect for getting your body to start burning again :-)
    No, really.... it doesn't work like that. You can't eat more and lose more; it's simple thermodynamics. Others have already stated things that could really have been the difference (better logging, simple water retention) but simply upping calories didn't start your body to do anything except get more calories.
  • dragon_girl26
    dragon_girl26 Posts: 2,187 Member
    How long were you on your 1200 calorie diet, OP, before bumping up to 1400?
  • HHEHEA
    HHEHEA Posts: 17 Member
    about 3 weeks.. I lost here and there but not much....I pretty much weighed most of my foods. I documented everything that went in my mouth...
  • kermax39
    kermax39 Posts: 149 Member
    I agree, iv seen better results long term by sticking to my upper calorie limit. When I have in the past stuck to 1200 I inevitably lossed 2 one week gained 3 the next week...then another 2-weeks before that 3-went off. Its all about sustainability for me.......I cant manage a 1200 diet for more than a week without wanting to kill my partner lol .......I think the reason why people lose more on a higher daily calorie intake is because its easier to stick to. Or am I stating the obvious? When I went to slimming world at different groups over the years the one thing I was always told was to eat all my syns if I wanted a steady loss. Its kinda simple if u look at it this way.
  • md523083
    md523083 Posts: 37 Member
    I've also lost weight after eating a bit more... it's all water though. You cannot lose more weight by eating more calories. The less you eat, the more you will lose. Obviously, there is an unsafe level of restriction to never cross, but if you ate nothing one day you would be at a deficit matching your TDEE.
  • dragon_girl26
    dragon_girl26 Posts: 2,187 Member
    edited August 2016
    HHEHEA wrote: »
    about 3 weeks.. I lost here and there but not much....I pretty much weighed most of my foods. I documented everything that went in my mouth...

    Ah, ok. I had a suspicion that might have been the case. Not that I'm trying to advocate sticking with 1200, but if you would stayed with it another week or so you would have most likely seen the weight drop. It wasn't because of the calorie increase...it was because you didn't give it enough time. Sometimes it takes a couple of weeks after starting a new diet to see weight changes, especially if you started a new exercise program at the same time (water retention).

    Still, stay with the 1400 by all means if it's more satisfying to you, you're still losing weight, and you feel better.
    Your body would burn fat at both 1200 and 1400 calories. Starvation mode (the idea that if you eat too little, your body clings to fat) is a myth.
  • SusanMFindlay
    SusanMFindlay Posts: 1,804 Member
    Some people's bodies, given the option, will reduce NEAT in response to lower calories than they "want". It's not that eating too little "lowered their metabolism"; it made them move less, fidget less, be less motivated to go for a walk, etc. Yes, real live people in poor countries get skinny eating too little - because they have no choice but to move. This is a first world phenomenon.

    Regardless, if raising calories from 1200 to 1400 helps counteract that and gives good results, then that's what matters.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,223 Member
    Weeellllll, I think there's an interpretation that doesn't violate the laws of thermodynamics (but I'm not sure whether I actually believe it or not - almost certainly not true in any & every case).

    There's suggestive evidence that if someone seriously under-fuels over a period of time, the person's body will down-regulate activity to compensate, without their wishing it to do so, and perhaps without them even noticing. It's not precisely accurate, but one might oversimplify it as under-fueling-related fatigue. Maybe they fidget less, spend less time weeding the flowerbed on the way into the house after work, fix lower-effort meals, park closer to the store, go just a bit easier on the elliptical, and other less dramatic things.

    Is it a trivial amount of calories? Some studies have shown that fidgeters can burn as many as 300 extra calories daily, and that's just the fidgeting.

    Possibly there's a consumption band where some people can add to calories just a bit, and find a "knee in the curve" of fatigue & down-regulation, so that they (without trying) start doing just that little bit more again. (Yup, that's a heckuva lotta "maybes" I just strung together there. Pure wild speculation.)


    This is not the "starvation mode" idea as commonly seen here, that claims your body will hold onto calories & totally prevent you losing weight no matter how little you eat. Clearly, humans can starve to death.

    Anecdotally, it seems like a lot of people report no loss at (say) 1200, but loss at 1400. Maybe they binge/cheat/derail less, maybe they move more, maybe they were logging inaccurately - no way to know. I can't see what it would hurt a person to try eating a couple of hundred more calories daily for a while, if they've been at quite a low level - if they start gaining more, it wasn't a good idea. ;)

    A maintenance break is another option.
  • monicaw44
    monicaw44 Posts: 71 Member
    I lost at 1200, but I gained it back. now Im doing 1450, and I dont feel deprived, or hungry.
  • heyaliwood458
    heyaliwood458 Posts: 75 Member
    If you can lose weight while eating more calories than you should definitely be happy and eat as much as possible while losing, but you can definitely lose on 1200. Ive been between 1200 and a little less than 1300 and have lost 114 pounds. (I definitely wouldn't suggest going to 1200 unless for some reason you need to, because now I have to worry about slowly adding calories without gaining)

Categories