Daily calories are too much!! HELP!
Replies
-
I don't understand why all these first time posters are coming in here to post all this Youtube/fitness magazine woo in this thread? Did someone put a link to it in another forum or something?
<snip>
I think that's just what happened. There is always that contingent from the eating disorders websites/forums who just can't stand MFP and the healthy(er) guidelines that include eating more on exercise days and just eating more in general.
7 -
I don't understand why all these first time posters are coming in here to post all this Youtube/fitness magazine woo in this thread? Did someone put a link to it in another forum or something?
OP said she would see what she could tighten up on her logging back on page 2. Since she hasn't been back to tell us her logging was perfect and it must be something else, I'd hazard a guess that was the issue.
Pro tip: When you hear hoof beats, think horses, not unicorns. Logging accurately is a skill that requires practice, and for most of us our food log when we started was a hot mess. Most folks would find their calorie needs are pretty typical if they really nailed down their logging, and were more patient. Not starvation mode, not a dead metabolism, not a medical condition, not their body needing to be confused, not sugar hiding in their salt.
Yes! Especially the bolded! I used these all of these excuses like nobody's business before I knew better, but at the time I made myself genuinely believe them so they really did not feel like excuses! Hindsight is a *kitten* sometimes!15 -
I don't understand why all these first time posters are coming in here to post all this Youtube/fitness magazine woo in this thread? Did someone put a link to it in another forum or something?
OP said she would see what she could tighten up on her logging back on page 2. Since she hasn't been back to tell us her logging was perfect and it must be something else, I'd hazard a guess that was the issue.
Pro tip: When you hear hoof beats, think horses, not unicorns. Logging accurately is a skill that requires practice, and for most of us our food log when we started was a hot mess. Most folks would find their calorie needs are pretty typical if they really nailed down their logging, and were more patient. Not starvation mode, not a dead metabolism, not a medical condition, not their body needing to be confused, not sugar hiding in their salt.
Yes! Especially the bolded! I used these all of these excuses like nobody's business before I knew better, but at the time I made myself genuinely believe them so they really did not feel like excuses! Hindsight is a *kitten* sometimes!
An overweight kitten.
10 -
It's the additional calories doing workouts that gets me. Depending on what your doing, it gives you additional calories that you can use? starting calories is 1500, by the end of the day my calorie count shows 2100 calories. What's going on? I don't need the extra calories.8
-
bwestdevore37 wrote: »It's the additional calories doing workouts that gets me. Depending on what your doing, it gives you additional calories that you can use? starting calories is 1500, by the end of the day my calorie count shows 2100 calories. What's going on? I don't need the extra calories.
If your calorie goal is coming from MFP, you actually do.
Your calorie goal is given to you without considering intentional exercise. If you increase the energy you're using, you need to account for that in some way.9 -
Actually you do. The calorie goal MFP gives you includes a deficit already. When you exercise, you increase that deficit, possibly running one that's too aggressive. Plus you need more calories to fuel those workouts.
Frankly, as a short woman, I'm on 1360 calories to lose 1/2lb per week and that isn't much. A 2-hour walk, some strength training, eat back half the calories and save the rest as a cushion against logging errors and I can eat around 1700. BIG difference.7 -
bwestdevore37 wrote: »It's the additional calories doing workouts that gets me. Depending on what your doing, it gives you additional calories that you can use? starting calories is 1500, by the end of the day my calorie count shows 2100 calories. What's going on? I don't need the extra calories.
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10503681/exercise-calories-do-i-eat-these-a-video-explanation/p15 -
I don't understand why all these first time posters are coming in here to post all this Youtube/fitness magazine woo in this thread? Did someone put a link to it in another forum or something?
OP said she would see what she could tighten up on her logging back on page 2. Since she hasn't been back to tell us her logging was perfect and it must be something else, I'd hazard a guess that was the issue.
Pro tip: When you hear hoof beats, think horses, not unicorns. Logging accurately is a skill that requires practice, and for most of us our food log when we started was a hot mess. Most folks would find their calorie needs are pretty typical if they really nailed down their logging, and were more patient. Not starvation mode, not a dead metabolism, not a medical condition, not their body needing to be confused, not sugar hiding in their salt.
yep... it's pretty much always simply that most people couldn't visually recognize a single portion if it bit them in the *kitten* (myself included for most things). I think there are probably hundreds of forum posts by now along the lines of "I can't possibly eat 1200 calories - it's too much food" or "I'm only eating 1200 calories - why am I not losing?").estherdragonbat wrote: »Actually you do. The calorie goal MFP gives you includes a deficit already. When you exercise, you increase that deficit, possibly running one that's too aggressive. Plus you need more calories to fuel those workouts.
Frankly, as a short woman, I'm on 1360 calories to lose 1/2lb per week and that isn't much. A 2-hour walk, some strength training, eat back half the calories and save the rest as a cushion against logging errors and I can eat around 1700. BIG difference.
I think a lot of the "don't eat exercise calories" people must be larger or just don't do much exercise (like a 30 minute walk, or "vigorous" [not!] aerobics with the majority actually being rest breaks) to be able to get away with that. Any athletic petite female who tried such stupidity would wind up in the hospital. (my maintenance estimate is 1400 net calories → as if 1400 total calories combined with 2 hours of cycling hills or a long run is anything but insanely stupid).10 -
A-ha! Lightbulb moment! I don't understand why all these first time posters are coming in here to post all this Youtube/fitness magazine woo in this thread? Did someone put a link to it in another forum or something?
OP said she would see what she could tighten up on her logging back on page 2. Since she hasn't been back to tell us her logging was perfect and it must be something else, I'd hazard a guess that was the issue.
Pro tip: When you hear hoof beats, think horses, not unicorns. Logging accurately is a skill that requires practice, and for most of us our food log when we started was a hot mess. Most folks would find their calorie needs are pretty typical if they really nailed down their logging, and were more patient. Not starvation mode, not a dead metabolism, not a medical condition, not their body needing to be confused, not sugar hiding in their salt.
yep... it's pretty much always simply that most people couldn't visually recognize a single portion if it bit them in the *kitten* (myself included for most things). I think there are probably hundreds of forum posts by now along the lines of "I can't possibly eat 1200 calories - it's too much food" or "I'm only eating 1200 calories - why am I not losing?").estherdragonbat wrote: »Actually you do. The calorie goal MFP gives you includes a deficit already. When you exercise, you increase that deficit, possibly running one that's too aggressive. Plus you need more calories to fuel those workouts.
Frankly, as a short woman, I'm on 1360 calories to lose 1/2lb per week and that isn't much. A 2-hour walk, some strength training, eat back half the calories and save the rest as a cushion against logging errors and I can eat around 1700. BIG difference.
I think a lot of the "don't eat exercise calories" people must be larger or just don't do much exercise (like a 30 minute walk, or "vigorous" [not!] aerobics with the majority actually being rest breaks) to be able to get away with that. Any athletic petite female who tried such stupidity would wind up in the hospital. (my maintenance estimate is 1400 net calories → as if 1400 total calories combined with 2 hours of cycling hills or a long run is anything but insanely stupid).
If I'm on the forums, I read through those posts through my fingers, cringing in horror at the idea of not eating your calories back. It's never really occurred to me that maybe our definitions of exercise aren't matching up.
3 -
I don't understand why all these first time posters are coming in here to post all this Youtube/fitness magazine woo in this thread? Did someone put a link to it in another forum or something?
OP said she would see what she could tighten up on her logging back on page 2. Since she hasn't been back to tell us her logging was perfect and it must be something else, I'd hazard a guess that was the issue.
Pro tip: When you hear hoof beats, think horses, not unicorns. Logging accurately is a skill that requires practice, and for most of us our food log when we started was a hot mess. Most folks would find their calorie needs are pretty typical if they really nailed down their logging, and were more patient. Not starvation mode, not a dead metabolism, not a medical condition, not their body needing to be confused, not sugar hiding in their salt.
yep... it's pretty much always simply that most people couldn't visually recognize a single portion if it bit them in the *kitten* (myself included for most things). I think there are probably hundreds of forum posts by now along the lines of "I can't possibly eat 1200 calories - it's too much food" or "I'm only eating 1200 calories - why am I not losing?").estherdragonbat wrote: »Actually you do. The calorie goal MFP gives you includes a deficit already. When you exercise, you increase that deficit, possibly running one that's too aggressive. Plus you need more calories to fuel those workouts.
Frankly, as a short woman, I'm on 1360 calories to lose 1/2lb per week and that isn't much. A 2-hour walk, some strength training, eat back half the calories and save the rest as a cushion against logging errors and I can eat around 1700. BIG difference.
I think a lot of the "don't eat exercise calories" people must be larger or just don't do much exercise (like a 30 minute walk, or "vigorous" [not!] aerobics with the majority actually being rest breaks) to be able to get away with that. Any athletic petite female who tried such stupidity would wind up in the hospital. (my maintenance estimate is 1400 net calories → as if 1400 total calories combined with 2 hours of cycling hills or a long run is anything but insanely stupid).
I think part of the “i don’t eat exercise calories” contingent also comes from people who don’t meticulously weigh their food (and likely are eating them anyway by nature of underestimating food intake). and/or are in the early weeks/months of the process so the cumulative effects haven’t caught up yet.
My eyeballing food logging is about 500 calories low, my measuring cups method is about 300-400 calories low. Both of which aren’t too far off from my average exercise calories (400-ish normally).9 -
I had 1 cup of non- fat Greek Yoghurt for breakfast.
A salad with 4 eggs, half a tomato and Cucumber, Lettuce and lemon juice for lunch.
And boiled mix veg and pan fried chicken breast for dinner.
I have been on the bigger side my whole life, but ive been eating healthy for the last couple of years and all I've lost is 20lbs. And with my activeness I still can't seem to shake it. I am 5ft 10, so quite tall too. [/quote]
All the food listed above look over 900 calories. One large egg is roughly 75-95 calories depending if boiled, fried, etc. X 4 = 300-400.
1 -
Don't know why @dubird got Woo'd. Solid advice that works I'd say.1
-
DanSanthomes wrote: »Don't know why @dubird got Woo'd. Solid advice that works I'd say.
Yes, dubird's advice was solid.
Rather than let this thread get off-topic, if you use the search engine, (Woo Button) you'll find many threads devoted to discussing why this occurs.
4 -
@magdilinab, I'm wondering if it's your setting regarding how active you are. The app's setup is unclear as to how to determine your baseline activity level. However, it seems to me, because it gives extra calories when one logs exercises, that the baseline activity level needs to start with how active you are without intentionally adding exercise. So, for example, a person who intentionally exercises every day but has no kids to run after, has a sedentary desk job, and watches a lot of TV would still put "sedentary" or "minimal activity" (or whatever that option was) as their activity level. Therefore, if you think it may help, you might try decreasing your input of how active you are by a level. That will adjust the calculated calorie goals.
Or it really could be that you're just not eating enough. If you input a weight loss goal, then the app already includes a calorie reduction for you. Are you trying to cut more yourself?
Also, regarding some other comments, calories input by eating and spent by exercise are not the only things that affect our weight. Hormones, blood sugar level (which affects our hormones), and medications each affect how our body deals with calories. Therefore, a person with thyroid issues (and the resulting out-of-whack hormone levels) can eat a moderate amount, exercise a lot, and still gain weight. It's a lot easier to control caloric intake and exercise, though, which is why apps like this are so great. Of course, this has nothing to do with the calorie goals in the app and @magdilinab's original calorie calculation problem.8 -
@magdilinab, I'm wondering if it's your setting regarding how active you are. The app's setup is unclear as to how to determine your baseline activity level. However, it seems to me, because it gives extra calories when one logs exercises, that the baseline activity level needs to start with how active you are without intentionally adding exercise. So, for example, a person who intentionally exercises every day but has no kids to run after, has a sedentary desk job, and watches a lot of TV would still put "sedentary" or "minimal activity" (or whatever that option was) as their activity level. Therefore, if you think it may help, you might try decreasing your input of how active you are by a level. That will adjust the calculated calorie goals.
Or it really could be that you're just not eating enough. If you input a weight loss goal, then the app already includes a calorie reduction for you. Are you trying to cut more yourself?
Also, regarding some other comments, calories input by eating and spent by exercise are not the only things that affect our weight. Hormones, blood sugar level (which affects our hormones), and medications each affect how our body deals with calories. Therefore, a person with thyroid issues (and the resulting out-of-whack hormone levels) can eat a moderate amount, exercise a lot, and still gain weight. It's a lot easier to control caloric intake and exercise, though, which is why apps like this are so great. Of course, this has nothing to do with the calorie goals in the app and @magdilinab's original calorie calculation problem.
@shandigp This chart is an excellent visual of how MFP works.
6 -
You need to eat more. 900 calories a day isn't healthy. Add more foods. Add things like nuts, seeds, cheese, brown rice, quinoa, avocado. If you aren't hungry enough to eat a lot, add things like salad dressing, oils, milk, etc. It's not healthy to eat too little and you will never be able to sustain eating like that for life.0
-
The OP is never coming back, is she?2
-
Fear_The_Turtle wrote: »The OP is never coming back, is she?
She pretty much thanked everyone on pg 2 and said she would figure out where her logging went wrong. Possibly it became clear to her at that point and she can see most of the posts since then have been missing the mark.5 -
90% of the replies on this post are a dumpster fire of bad advice I can't blame her for not coming back
- Check your activity level setting
- Use a food scale for everything
- Shoot for the minimum 1200/day and work up from there
Aaaaaaaaand that about covers it! Best of luck, OP!8 -
scribblemoma wrote: »90% of the replies on this post are a dumpster fire of bad advice I can't blame her for not coming back
- Check your activity level setting
- Use a food scale for everything
- Shoot for the minimum 1200/day and work up from there
Aaaaaaaaand that about covers it! Best of luck, OP!
what do you think was the bad advice in these posts? she got a lot of good advice ad shoot for 1200 and work up from there? 1200 is too low for many people even to begin with.2 -
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »scribblemoma wrote: »90% of the replies on this post are a dumpster fire of bad advice I can't blame her for not coming back
- Check your activity level setting
- Use a food scale for everything
- Shoot for the minimum 1200/day and work up from there
Aaaaaaaaand that about covers it! Best of luck, OP!
what do you think was the bad advice in these posts? she got a lot of good advice ad shoot for 1200 and work up from there? 1200 is too low for many people even to begin with.
If she's unwilling to go over 900 then telling her to start at 1600+ (where I think she should be) probably won't do well. But as far as bad advice the over and over mentions of starvation mode/metabolic confusion for starters.7 -
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »scribblemoma wrote: »90% of the replies on this post are a dumpster fire of bad advice I can't blame her for not coming back
- Check your activity level setting
- Use a food scale for everything
- Shoot for the minimum 1200/day and work up from there
Aaaaaaaaand that about covers it! Best of luck, OP!
what do you think was the bad advice in these posts? she got a lot of good advice ad shoot for 1200 and work up from there? 1200 is too low for many people even to begin with.
Did we read the same thread? There was good advice from people with a lot of posts... And then there was terrible, dumpster fire advice from a lot of (I assume) new members with lost post counts.
For example, here's some advice on a calorie counting forum about how you shouldn't count calories:Here's some real advice for you. Don't "diet". That's a word that's thrown around like crazy, but the problem is a "diet" is temporary. So... what to do? Stop caring about calories. Don't pay attention to the number on the scale. There is absolutely no way to accurately count your calorie intake and the number on the scale is irrelevant, one of the reasons being that muscle weighs more than fat.
Eat HEALTHY. Do not fill yourself with sugar, preserved frozen garbage food, and fast food. Eat fresh, homemade foods and if you have to eat out try your best to eat as healthy as possible. DON'T OVEREAT!!! While our bodies are amazing, they can still only do things so quickly. It takes time for the brain to register that you're full while eating which leads to overeating! Eat slowly, chew thoroughly, and give your body time to let you know it's had all the sustenance it needs to feel full. Portion control. Find out how much you SHOULD be eating and stick with it. If you're usually an overeater I promise you the hunger pangs will only last a few days.
What can you drink? Anything that doesn't have sugar in it. I'd avoid diet soda, though, it's really no better than regular. Drink more water. Did you know that sometimes when your body seems like it's saying, "I'm hungry!" it really means, "I'm thirsty!"? WATER! You can find a calculator online to give you an idea of how much water you should be drinking daily, or you can use an app like Hydro Coach which will automatically calculate what your water intake needs are each day.
What else? EAT HEALTHY FATTY FOODS!!! Yes!! I say that because healthy fat is good for you. These healthy fats will also help you feel better and have more energy throughout the day. Give your body something good to burn! It helps you feel full longer, and also helps curb sugar cravings. Did you know sugar has been proven to be as addictive to the brain as heroin and that almost every single food you purchase at your local supermarket has sugar in it? Even your table salt has sugar in it. It's repulsive, really. If you want to become physically and mentally healthier, you have to work very hard for it and that work will continue every day for the rest of your life as you need a complete lifestyle change to get healthy and maintain that health.
Anyways, I wish you the best of luck and please help yourself on your journey by taking the time to do some research about your body, what diets really are (failure), the truth about calories, why you should ignore that number on the scale, why fatty foods are beneficial to your body and health, and anything else you can think of that you have questions about. The internet is a wealth of information as long as you can weed through all the fake and false stuff.
And here someone recommends some kind of... muscle confusion?thomasrhysnicholas wrote: »Sounds like you've hit your plateau. essentially your body is no longer in the shock/recovery phase that is needed to promote muscle gain and stoke your metabolic rate. Your body is no longer challenged by your 5km walk and your metabolism is slowing back down and burning less fat.
The answer isn't to cut more calories. You need to try mixing up your training. Try a basic HIIT workout. Joe Wicks beginner one is great
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q20pLhdoEoY
If you don't feel comfortable, then just try to pick up the pace during your walk. Also take a look at your macros, most PTs recommend 1.7g of protein per KG of body weight to sustain muscle mass.
And all this... which isn't even about OP.darenefollett wrote: »I am very new here. I have been logging and weighing food to the app for three weeks and working out with a personal trainer two days a week for about three months. I have measured macros before a few years ago as well as measurements and weighing myself daily. I am on the large size at 270 and 5’8, and though it’s never said too little on mfp, I have been told by my trainer I eat way too little and that is actually a problem. I only can lose weight by getting calories under 820 6 days a week with no added fat carb dairy, etc. even tuna is too fatty. But one day a week eating fats from avacado and nuts. So again, I defy all logic, and struggle as it seems you are and no one believes.
She had me water tank to see what my actual ratios were and I’m nearly 150lbs of muscle so I should be burning over 1,900cal just waking up and breathing. I have an appointment with the doctors to see if they can take my bloods and see if there is any hormone issues, but every time I do they come back within normal range because if and when a doctor believes me they don’t when those come back normal.
This is just the most recent attempt to lose weight and feel healthy for me. I’ve trained for triathlons and never dropped an lb after being seditary and finishing school. It doesn’t really matter what I do or don’t do, I can’t seem to get results.
I get that everyone thinks logically what we are saying is impossible, but at 820cal I can even stop losing weight if I eat the same thing for more than a few days. (Again, previously tracked macros for months and months and lost about 20lbs)
I like to say my body is efficient. It wants to keep me “healthy” and fat because I can also eat (or drink rather) thousands of excess calories and I don’t gain weight unless it is consistent enough/months go by and my body thinks I want to go up a size as my new steady weight. If I eat the same thing it thinks that’s the new normal so it stops losing.
All that to say, my trainer has bumped me to over 2,000 calories and I’m having a hard time eating it all especially the carbs. I have carbs in veggies, but I’m not too much of a carb lover. She has me eating Guac toast with smoked salmon to help get it in there.
She had at first talked to me about intermittent fasting, but that isn’t a problem for me. I can work out at 5:45am with her and not eat my first meal until 1:30 and stop eating by 7pm no prob, because my body isn’t hungry until about 3. If I haven’t eaten by then I’m in a bit of trouble mentally so I have to force myself to eat around noon. So again, we have passed on that bandwagon and gone the line that I need to maintain all day long. I have a green smoothie that I am starting to sip on all day and then eat as well on top of that to see if I can’t get my body out of this holding pattern it’s been in my entire life.
When I tell people how little calories it takes for me to lose or how little I actually eat they don’t believe me. I think one of the only reasons my trainer does is she is also my friend and is in communication with my husband who is an outside third party verifying what I am doing and saying. No he’s not with me every step of the way, but we’ve been married over 19yrs and he is a part of this and in it with me. He does most of the cooking so he has to be on board, and he’s always maintained the same weight since high school. We eat differently in the fact he enjoys carbs and bread and eats them all regularly, but other than that we eat the same things and have a healthy fresh diet.
Side note, my body is taking a bit of an issue with all the insolvable fiber right now, so I haven apparently been eating enough leafy greens my whole life, but I’m hoping that will go away and so will this raging thirst and we will see results doing the opposite of what I have always done. At least it feels like something different is happening.
I wish you luck, and perhaps eat more to lose more. For me the jury is still out, but I’m hopeful! Yesterday I was eating 4oz of smoked cheese and almond flour crackers doubting the logic of eating more calories because I was enjoying it so much. But time will tell.
Plus what @scribblemoma said above, with the over and over mentions of starvation mode/metabolic confusion.
Plenty of bad advice mixed in with the good...
5 -
scribblemoma wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »scribblemoma wrote: »90% of the replies on this post are a dumpster fire of bad advice I can't blame her for not coming back
- Check your activity level setting
- Use a food scale for everything
- Shoot for the minimum 1200/day and work up from there
Aaaaaaaaand that about covers it! Best of luck, OP!
what do you think was the bad advice in these posts? she got a lot of good advice ad shoot for 1200 and work up from there? 1200 is too low for many people even to begin with.
If she's unwilling to go over 900 then telling her to start at 1600+ (where I think she should be) probably won't do well. But as far as bad advice the over and over mentions of starvation mode/metabolic confusion for starters.
she came here trying to lose weight, she didnt gain the weight eating less than 900 calories. she also said she isnt weighing everything she eats so she is probably eating more than 900 calories. she is over 200 lbs. she didnt get that way eating 900 or less. she stated she was eating more. many think they have to eat very little to lose weight. so maybe that is what she thought too. as for the starvation mode thing what about it? are you saying thats the bad advice? if so only a few stated that (less than 90%)4 -
Dude what do you want Of course she didn't get overweight eating 900 a day. Never said it and never would. I eat more than 1200. She SHOULD eat more than 1200. But if she wants to at least hit that and work her way up (and I hope she does hence my "work your way up from there" statement) that's better than staying at 900 or alternatively giving up.
I apologize if my math was off and it's not EXACTLY 90%...things like sarcasm go right through you I suppose? Why are you so confrontational to my reply specifically and not anything in the 7 pages prior
6 -
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »scribblemoma wrote: »90% of the replies on this post are a dumpster fire of bad advice I can't blame her for not coming back
- Check your activity level setting
- Use a food scale for everything
- Shoot for the minimum 1200/day and work up from there
Aaaaaaaaand that about covers it! Best of luck, OP!
what do you think was the bad advice in these posts? she got a lot of good advice ad shoot for 1200 and work up from there? 1200 is too low for many people even to begin with.
Is it possible you're misreading @scribblemoma ? I took that post to be highlighting the good advice in those three bullet points and suggesting most of the rest (starvation mode, etc) was bad. And I don't think they're wrong.9 -
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »scribblemoma wrote: »90% of the replies on this post are a dumpster fire of bad advice I can't blame her for not coming back
- Check your activity level setting
- Use a food scale for everything
- Shoot for the minimum 1200/day and work up from there
Aaaaaaaaand that about covers it! Best of luck, OP!
what do you think was the bad advice in these posts? she got a lot of good advice ad shoot for 1200 and work up from there? 1200 is too low for many people even to begin with.
There's been a lot of good advice, but a large portion of the 8 pages has been newbs spouting diet myths.5 -
OP doesn't appear to have been back and there is so much misleading advice this thread is really pointless now, maybe a mod could turn it off?3
-
Moderator step in. Surely0
-
Jackie9003 wrote: »OP doesn't appear to have been back and there is so much misleading advice this thread is really pointless now, maybe a mod could turn it off?
OP was back on page 2.
Not sure why she needs to keep coming back after her question was answered and she acknowledged that.
4 -
Also, regarding the Minnesota Starvation Experiment, I found this really interesting article and I just wanted to share:
http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2009/12/the-minnesota-starvation-experiment/
What she's not recognizing, when she says that a pound is not lost for each 3500 calories of deficit, is the activity down-regulation. These guys don't simply keep their original TDEE. Their TDEE declines with weight loss (for obvious reasons, i.e., less body to move around), and their TDEE declines as they "lose interest in everything", find they don't have the energy to continue going to school, etc.
Deficit is the negative gap between intake and output (deficit = intake - output). The deficit changes with changes in either intake or output. Their original output shrank over the course of the experiment. That made their deficit, at a consistent calorie intake level, smaller.
I'm not arguing that a 3500 calorie deficit does or doesn't equal a pound of weight loss (though I suspect it does, roughly, all other things equal). What I'm arguing is that her reasoning is faulty when she says the Minnesota Starvation Experiment demonstrates that 3500 calories deficit doesn't equal a pound of weight loss. She's ignoring the change in daily life activity (not BMR, not the enforced walking - daily life).
This potential down-regulation of daily activity - which can be quite subtle at less severe levels of intake restriction - is one of many reasons you will frequently see "old hands" on MFP encouraging new people not to cut calories to lose weight ridiculously fast. There is not "starvation mode" where your body simply hangs onto calories no matter what you do. There is fatigue, lethargy, less intensity brought to exercise sessions, simplification/avoidance of daily life tasks, more rest/sleep, etc., when calorie restriction is extreme. It makes fast weight loss not just unhealthy (muscle loss, hair loss, etc.), but ultimately counter-productive.6
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K 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
- 424 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