Really struggling with extreme hunger
Privatesandbank
Posts: 41 Member
Hi! Just for starters a tiny bit of background. Even though I have been on here maybe 3-4 weeks I haven’t updated my trackers- weight hasn’t been updated in a month so I have to get on that. I’m trying to only weigh myself once a month anyways.
That out of the way, I am slowly and consistently losing (clothes are getting looser and I look smaller). I haven’t cut my calories drastically. I was eating roughly 3000-3500 calories a day to maintain my high weight for the last 6-8 months. I tracked while I wasn’t cutting calories so I know that is a fact. I have done several months of tracking and several TDEE calculators and they all say 2500-3000 calorie maintenance for me. I’m 5’10” female 20 years old.
I decided to go with 1800-2000 calories a day which had me losing 2-3lb a week when I was weighing myself the first and second week.
I took a couple days off cutting because my hunger got to an insane level where I couldn’t sleep at night and I couldn’t focus on literally anything else. I ate 3000-3500 calories on these days and didn’t gain any weight.
Is my deficit too aggressive? Is it something diet related? I am eating relatively low carbs and high protein/ fat. I drink only water. I don’t snack. I eat 2-4 big meals a day. I have toyed with the idea of 2 meals a day but I won’t do OMAD. Too restrictive for me (my personal choice).
I would appreciate any insights! Thanks!
That out of the way, I am slowly and consistently losing (clothes are getting looser and I look smaller). I haven’t cut my calories drastically. I was eating roughly 3000-3500 calories a day to maintain my high weight for the last 6-8 months. I tracked while I wasn’t cutting calories so I know that is a fact. I have done several months of tracking and several TDEE calculators and they all say 2500-3000 calorie maintenance for me. I’m 5’10” female 20 years old.
I decided to go with 1800-2000 calories a day which had me losing 2-3lb a week when I was weighing myself the first and second week.
I took a couple days off cutting because my hunger got to an insane level where I couldn’t sleep at night and I couldn’t focus on literally anything else. I ate 3000-3500 calories on these days and didn’t gain any weight.
Is my deficit too aggressive? Is it something diet related? I am eating relatively low carbs and high protein/ fat. I drink only water. I don’t snack. I eat 2-4 big meals a day. I have toyed with the idea of 2 meals a day but I won’t do OMAD. Too restrictive for me (my personal choice).
I would appreciate any insights! Thanks!
2
Replies
-
mentallyinmaldives wrote: »Hi! Just for starters a tiny bit of background. Even though I have been on here maybe 3-4 weeks I haven’t updated my trackers- weight hasn’t been updated in a month so I have to get on that. I’m trying to only weigh myself once a month anyways.
That out of the way, I am slowly and consistently losing (clothes are getting looser and I look smaller). I haven’t cut my calories drastically. I was eating roughly 3000-3500 calories a day to maintain my high weight for the last 6-8 months. I tracked while I wasn’t cutting calories so I know that is a fact. I have done several months of tracking and several TDEE calculators and they all say 2500-3000 calorie maintenance for me. I’m 5’10” female 20 years old.
I decided to go with 1800-2000 calories a day which had me losing 2-3lb a week when I was weighing myself the first and second week.
I took a couple days off cutting because my hunger got to an insane level where I couldn’t sleep at night and I couldn’t focus on literally anything else. I ate 3000-3500 calories on these days and didn’t gain any weight.
Is my deficit too aggressive? Is it something diet related? I am eating relatively low carbs and high protein/ fat. I drink only water. I don’t snack. I eat 2-4 big meals a day. I have toyed with the idea of 2 meals a day but I won’t do OMAD. Too restrictive for me (my personal choice).
I would appreciate any insights! Thanks!
Most likely. 2-3 Lbs per week is very aggressive. 1% of bodyweight at the most, and even that can be too aggressive for some.5 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »mentallyinmaldives wrote: »Hi! Just for starters a tiny bit of background. Even though I have been on here maybe 3-4 weeks I haven’t updated my trackers- weight hasn’t been updated in a month so I have to get on that. I’m trying to only weigh myself once a month anyways.
That out of the way, I am slowly and consistently losing (clothes are getting looser and I look smaller). I haven’t cut my calories drastically. I was eating roughly 3000-3500 calories a day to maintain my high weight for the last 6-8 months. I tracked while I wasn’t cutting calories so I know that is a fact. I have done several months of tracking and several TDEE calculators and they all say 2500-3000 calorie maintenance for me. I’m 5’10” female 20 years old.
I decided to go with 1800-2000 calories a day which had me losing 2-3lb a week when I was weighing myself the first and second week.
I took a couple days off cutting because my hunger got to an insane level where I couldn’t sleep at night and I couldn’t focus on literally anything else. I ate 3000-3500 calories on these days and didn’t gain any weight.
Is my deficit too aggressive? Is it something diet related? I am eating relatively low carbs and high protein/ fat. I drink only water. I don’t snack. I eat 2-4 big meals a day. I have toyed with the idea of 2 meals a day but I won’t do OMAD. Too restrictive for me (my personal choice).
I would appreciate any insights! Thanks!
Most likely. 2-3 Lbs per week is very aggressive. 1% of bodyweight at the most, and even that can be too aggressive for some.
I agree. I just am confused because 2000 calories is definitely not starving and this is all because my maintainance is so high. After a few weeks of eating lower calorie my metabolism should adapt to be slightly slower right? I can’t imagine a cut on 2500 calories because I’m not a man and I’m barely overweight. I’ve always lost weight fast naturally and it took 4000-5000 calories a day for months to even gain 10-15 pounds over a year which is half what I am trying to lose. I know having a fast metabolism is great but it’s a double edged sword because it makes me feel starving all the time.
Edit: is a 2200-2500 cut even plausible for a young woman?1 -
I haven’t cut my calories drastically.
Yes you have made a drastic cut.
If you were maintaining on 3000 - 3500 then 1800 - 2000 is drastic.
What's the rush?
Is my deficit too aggressive?
Most likely although you haven't stated your current weight.
Certainly too aggressive if you are struggling with adherence so soon.
"Is it something diet related? "
The size of your deficit is the biggest factor but going low carb may also be a factor.
13 -
If you exercise, what % of the calories you earn from exercise do you eat back? If none, start eating 50-100% back.
If that is not applicable, then yes, your deficit is too large. Eat more and enjoy
5 -
I haven’t cut my calories drastically.
Yes you have made a drastic cut.
If you were maintaining on 3000 - 3500 then 1800 - 2000 is drastic.
What's the rush?
Is my deficit too aggressive?
Most likely although you haven't stated your current weight.
Certainly too aggressive if you are struggling with adherence so soon.
"Is it something diet related? "
The size of your deficit is the biggest factor but going low carb may also be a factor.
thank you! Helpful! I am not sure I’m “low carb”. I tend to eat mostly meat and vegetables but I eat English muffins and bread everyday usually one small amount at every meal or 2/3 meals. I’m probably getting 100g carb a day but I don’t know for sure bc I don’t track macros.
2 -
kshama2001 wrote: »If you exercise, what % of the calories you earn from exercise do you eat back? If none, start eating 50-100% back.
If that is not applicable, then yes, your deficit is too large. Eat more and enjoy
My exercise is next to none. I was at first but then I had to stop bc the running, swimming and weight lifting was making me even more hungry
2 -
1. Is there a particular reason you are eating low carb, high protein and fat? Is that what you ate before? People vary in what macros and eating schedule provides the most satiety. What works for others may be totally wrong for you. Try different combos - especially based on what kept you full in the past.
2. Hopefully there is no true rush for your weight loss, so you can definitely eat more and lose slower. That's actually a healthy strategy.
3. Choosing to weigh once a month may be best for you in which case you should stick to it. Sometimes infrequent weighing can miss actual weight loss. I originally weighed monthly, then weekly. I now weigh daily and use a weight trend app. This, for me, has been best because I stress about it less. Even if, like today, my weight happens to be the same as one week ago, I can see the trend is actually downward.6 -
1. Is there a particular reason you are eating low carb, high protein and fat? Is that what you ate before? People vary in what macros and eating schedule provides the most satiety. What works for others may be totally wrong for you. Try different combos - especially based on what kept you full in the past.
2. Hopefully there is no true rush for your weight loss, so you can definitely eat more and lose slower. That's actually a healthy strategy.
3. Choosing to weigh once a month may be best for you in which case you should stick to it. Sometimes infrequent weighing can miss actual weight loss. I originally weighed monthly, then weekly. I now weigh daily and use a weight trend app. This, for me, has been best because I stress about it less. Even if, like the past week, my weight happens to be the same as one week ago, I can see the trend is actually downward.
Thank you! No there is no rush! I selected 2k calories because it seemed a reasonable non starving amount but it may be too low for me I guess.1 -
mentallyinmaldives wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »mentallyinmaldives wrote: »Hi! Just for starters a tiny bit of background. Even though I have been on here maybe 3-4 weeks I haven’t updated my trackers- weight hasn’t been updated in a month so I have to get on that. I’m trying to only weigh myself once a month anyways.
That out of the way, I am slowly and consistently losing (clothes are getting looser and I look smaller). I haven’t cut my calories drastically. I was eating roughly 3000-3500 calories a day to maintain my high weight for the last 6-8 months. I tracked while I wasn’t cutting calories so I know that is a fact. I have done several months of tracking and several TDEE calculators and they all say 2500-3000 calorie maintenance for me. I’m 5’10” female 20 years old.
I decided to go with 1800-2000 calories a day which had me losing 2-3lb a week when I was weighing myself the first and second week.
I took a couple days off cutting because my hunger got to an insane level where I couldn’t sleep at night and I couldn’t focus on literally anything else. I ate 3000-3500 calories on these days and didn’t gain any weight.
Is my deficit too aggressive? Is it something diet related? I am eating relatively low carbs and high protein/ fat. I drink only water. I don’t snack. I eat 2-4 big meals a day. I have toyed with the idea of 2 meals a day but I won’t do OMAD. Too restrictive for me (my personal choice).
I would appreciate any insights! Thanks!
Most likely. 2-3 Lbs per week is very aggressive. 1% of bodyweight at the most, and even that can be too aggressive for some.
I agree. I just am confused because 2000 calories is definitely not starving and this is all because my maintainance is so high. After a few weeks of eating lower calorie my metabolism should adapt to be slightly slower right? I can’t imagine a cut on 2500 calories because I’m not a man and I’m barely overweight. I’ve always lost weight fast naturally and it took 4000-5000 calories a day for months to even gain 10-15 pounds over a year which is half what I am trying to lose. I know having a fast metabolism is great but it’s a double edged sword because it makes me feel starving all the time.
Edit: is a 2200-2500 cut even plausible for a young woman?
If your maintenance is 3000-3500 calories per day then obviously a cut on 2500 is plausible. It doesn't really matter what your gender is...it matters what your maintenance calories are. If you're only trying to lose 5-10 Lbs and you're not obese/morbidly obese then 2-3 Lbs per week is aggressive in the extreme.10 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »mentallyinmaldives wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »mentallyinmaldives wrote: »Hi! Just for starters a tiny bit of background. Even though I have been on here maybe 3-4 weeks I haven’t updated my trackers- weight hasn’t been updated in a month so I have to get on that. I’m trying to only weigh myself once a month anyways.
That out of the way, I am slowly and consistently losing (clothes are getting looser and I look smaller). I haven’t cut my calories drastically. I was eating roughly 3000-3500 calories a day to maintain my high weight for the last 6-8 months. I tracked while I wasn’t cutting calories so I know that is a fact. I have done several months of tracking and several TDEE calculators and they all say 2500-3000 calorie maintenance for me. I’m 5’10” female 20 years old.
I decided to go with 1800-2000 calories a day which had me losing 2-3lb a week when I was weighing myself the first and second week.
I took a couple days off cutting because my hunger got to an insane level where I couldn’t sleep at night and I couldn’t focus on literally anything else. I ate 3000-3500 calories on these days and didn’t gain any weight.
Is my deficit too aggressive? Is it something diet related? I am eating relatively low carbs and high protein/ fat. I drink only water. I don’t snack. I eat 2-4 big meals a day. I have toyed with the idea of 2 meals a day but I won’t do OMAD. Too restrictive for me (my personal choice).
I would appreciate any insights! Thanks!
Most likely. 2-3 Lbs per week is very aggressive. 1% of bodyweight at the most, and even that can be too aggressive for some.
I agree. I just am confused because 2000 calories is definitely not starving and this is all because my maintainance is so high. After a few weeks of eating lower calorie my metabolism should adapt to be slightly slower right? I can’t imagine a cut on 2500 calories because I’m not a man and I’m barely overweight. I’ve always lost weight fast naturally and it took 4000-5000 calories a day for months to even gain 10-15 pounds over a year which is half what I am trying to lose. I know having a fast metabolism is great but it’s a double edged sword because it makes me feel starving all the time.
Edit: is a 2200-2500 cut even plausible for a young woman?
If your maintenance is 3000-3500 calories per day then obviously a cut on 2500 is plausible. It doesn't really matter what your gender is...it matters what your maintenance calories are. If you're only trying to lose 5-10 Lbs and you're not obese/morbidly obese then 2-3 Lbs per week is aggressive in the extreme.
Thanks! I will try a couple weeks at 2300-2500 and work my way down to 2000 as I lose. My BMI is only 25 I think? I’m 5’10” and 169lb and I have insane genetics. Even after gaining from 129lb which was my natural weight my whole life without effort to 169 (during an incredibly stressful period where I also wasn’t allowed to exercise for medical reasons) I only went up 3 pant sizes from size 2 to size 8 and I’m still wearing the same shirts, coats etc. Weight can be confusing I guess bc so much is muscle and water. I’m aiming to lose 20-30lb of this weight gain. I realize I probably won’t be 129 again at my height and I have no desire to be but right now my weight is in the “overweight category” according to my doctor. I also get out of breath easily. Thanks so much for the comments.
1 -
Then do slow your rate of loss down to a pound per week and enjoy those extra calories!
7 -
mentallyinmaldives wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »If you exercise, what % of the calories you earn from exercise do you eat back? If none, start eating 50-100% back.
If that is not applicable, then yes, your deficit is too large. Eat more and enjoy
My exercise is next to none. I was at first but then I had to stop bc the running, swimming and weight lifting was making me even more hungry
If you are following MFP's calorie goals, then you are intended to eat back all exercise calories assuming they are calculated accurately.3 -
If you like exercising and feel the benefit, wouldn't it be better to keep it up and eat a bit more?
Given all the associated health benefits it seems a shame to quit if you enjoy it.
2 -
Above all else, "Listen to your body". If you're hungry all the time, then something isn't right. Common sense says one of two things could be off: The number of daily calories, and/or the macro mix. There's sometimes a 3rd element, psychological, that is, getting used to diet-sized portions of food wherein your brain learns to process hunger signals differently and you kinda learn to ignore or tolerate them and then they diminish, but let's focus on calories and macros here.
You shouldn't be starving on 2,000. I eat less than 2k calories and am gigantically huger than you. I'm hungry sometimes, of course--it's a diet, after all--but not ravenously famished.
If it were me, I would try to establish a comfortable baseline I can then work from and fine tune, entailing a bit more food than the 2000 that we know isn't working, and with a different macro mix. Something like 2200 cals and more carbs. For a few weeks. To see if it works. Your body isn't going anywhere. You can revisit it any time and make further changes.
Low carb, high protein fat does not work for everyone. It works for a lot of people but not everyone. I once mentioned on MFP that I'm doing 35-35-30 carb-fat-protein and there were a lot of people saying they were doing the same -- that's the traditional "balanced" or almost the Zone approach that isn't in high style right now but gets the job done for a lot of people, just basically balanced eating with no particular bias as far as carbs vs fat/protein is concerned. Not saying it's right for you, but maybe you need something more along those lines to feel satisfied. Why don't you try 2200 or perhaps 2300 calories per day with more emphasis on carbs for a few weeks and take it from there. It's really useful to iron out the calorie level and types of foods needed to feel content while dieting, it'll be a useful process for you, I think.
Good luck.
3 -
mentallyinmaldives wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »mentallyinmaldives wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »mentallyinmaldives wrote: »Hi! Just for starters a tiny bit of background. Even though I have been on here maybe 3-4 weeks I haven’t updated my trackers- weight hasn’t been updated in a month so I have to get on that. I’m trying to only weigh myself once a month anyways.
That out of the way, I am slowly and consistently losing (clothes are getting looser and I look smaller). I haven’t cut my calories drastically. I was eating roughly 3000-3500 calories a day to maintain my high weight for the last 6-8 months. I tracked while I wasn’t cutting calories so I know that is a fact. I have done several months of tracking and several TDEE calculators and they all say 2500-3000 calorie maintenance for me. I’m 5’10” female 20 years old.
I decided to go with 1800-2000 calories a day which had me losing 2-3lb a week when I was weighing myself the first and second week.
I took a couple days off cutting because my hunger got to an insane level where I couldn’t sleep at night and I couldn’t focus on literally anything else. I ate 3000-3500 calories on these days and didn’t gain any weight.
Is my deficit too aggressive? Is it something diet related? I am eating relatively low carbs and high protein/ fat. I drink only water. I don’t snack. I eat 2-4 big meals a day. I have toyed with the idea of 2 meals a day but I won’t do OMAD. Too restrictive for me (my personal choice).
I would appreciate any insights! Thanks!
Most likely. 2-3 Lbs per week is very aggressive. 1% of bodyweight at the most, and even that can be too aggressive for some.
I agree. I just am confused because 2000 calories is definitely not starving and this is all because my maintainance is so high. After a few weeks of eating lower calorie my metabolism should adapt to be slightly slower right? I can’t imagine a cut on 2500 calories because I’m not a man and I’m barely overweight. I’ve always lost weight fast naturally and it took 4000-5000 calories a day for months to even gain 10-15 pounds over a year which is half what I am trying to lose. I know having a fast metabolism is great but it’s a double edged sword because it makes me feel starving all the time.
Edit: is a 2200-2500 cut even plausible for a young woman?
If your maintenance is 3000-3500 calories per day then obviously a cut on 2500 is plausible. It doesn't really matter what your gender is...it matters what your maintenance calories are. If you're only trying to lose 5-10 Lbs and you're not obese/morbidly obese then 2-3 Lbs per week is aggressive in the extreme.
Thanks! I will try a couple weeks at 2300-2500 and work my way down to 2000 as I lose. My BMI is only 25 I think? I’m 5’10” and 169lb and I have insane genetics. Even after gaining from 129lb which was my natural weight my whole life without effort to 169 (during an incredibly stressful period where I also wasn’t allowed to exercise for medical reasons) I only went up 3 pant sizes from size 2 to size 8 and I’m still wearing the same shirts, coats etc. Weight can be confusing I guess bc so much is muscle and water. I’m aiming to lose 20-30lb of this weight gain. I realize I probably won’t be 129 again at my height and I have no desire to be but right now my weight is in the “overweight category” according to my doctor. I also get out of breath easily. Thanks so much for the comments.
5'10" at 169 Lbs, you have a BMI of 24ish which is not overweight. At 129Lbs you would be right on the bubble of underweight. In regards to getting out of breath easily, that's more of a cardiovascular fitness issue.12 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »mentallyinmaldives wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »mentallyinmaldives wrote: »Hi! Just for starters a tiny bit of background. Even though I have been on here maybe 3-4 weeks I haven’t updated my trackers- weight hasn’t been updated in a month so I have to get on that. I’m trying to only weigh myself once a month anyways.
That out of the way, I am slowly and consistently losing (clothes are getting looser and I look smaller). I haven’t cut my calories drastically. I was eating roughly 3000-3500 calories a day to maintain my high weight for the last 6-8 months. I tracked while I wasn’t cutting calories so I know that is a fact. I have done several months of tracking and several TDEE calculators and they all say 2500-3000 calorie maintenance for me. I’m 5’10” female 20 years old.
I decided to go with 1800-2000 calories a day which had me losing 2-3lb a week when I was weighing myself the first and second week.
I took a couple days off cutting because my hunger got to an insane level where I couldn’t sleep at night and I couldn’t focus on literally anything else. I ate 3000-3500 calories on these days and didn’t gain any weight.
Is my deficit too aggressive? Is it something diet related? I am eating relatively low carbs and high protein/ fat. I drink only water. I don’t snack. I eat 2-4 big meals a day. I have toyed with the idea of 2 meals a day but I won’t do OMAD. Too restrictive for me (my personal choice).
I would appreciate any insights! Thanks!
Most likely. 2-3 Lbs per week is very aggressive. 1% of bodyweight at the most, and even that can be too aggressive for some.
I agree. I just am confused because 2000 calories is definitely not starving and this is all because my maintainance is so high. After a few weeks of eating lower calorie my metabolism should adapt to be slightly slower right? I can’t imagine a cut on 2500 calories because I’m not a man and I’m barely overweight. I’ve always lost weight fast naturally and it took 4000-5000 calories a day for months to even gain 10-15 pounds over a year which is half what I am trying to lose. I know having a fast metabolism is great but it’s a double edged sword because it makes me feel starving all the time.
Edit: is a 2200-2500 cut even plausible for a young woman?
If your maintenance is 3000-3500 calories per day then obviously a cut on 2500 is plausible. It doesn't really matter what your gender is...it matters what your maintenance calories are. If you're only trying to lose 5-10 Lbs and you're not obese/morbidly obese then 2-3 Lbs per week is aggressive in the extreme.
This. Like you, I lose and maintain on higher (substantially higher) calories than MFP (and some other calculators, and my fitness tracker) estimate. It's rare, but it happens. (I'm a 5'5" woman who now weighs in the mid-130s pounds, is sedentary outside of intentional exercise (all of which calories I eat back), 64th birthday later this week, maintenance calories in the mid-2000s based on 4 years of maintenance so far.)
Your deficit is based on your calorie requirements, not some abstract number pulled out of a calculator or other people's experience.
Since you're not extremely overweight, your best bet would be to lose quite slowly, certainly no more than a pound a week (500 calories below maintenance) . . . that only for a while, because it would be a good plan to go to a 250 deficit (off whatever your personal maintenance is) as you get closer to goal weight.
And it would also be good to do some exercise, as long as you like it, and eat those calories back, because exercise is good for you.
Eat more; that should result in less hunger. (MFP thought I should eat at 1200 to lose. I wasn't hungry, but it was a bad plan. I corrected as soon as I realized, but not before getting weak and fatigued. You don't want that . . . or worse.)
Best wishes!
5 -
Above all else, "Listen to your body". If you're hungry all the time, then something isn't right. Common sense says one of two things could be off: The number of daily calories, and/or the macro mix. There's sometimes a 3rd element, psychological, that is, getting used to diet-sized portions of food wherein your brain learns to process hunger signals differently and you kinda learn to ignore or tolerate them and then they diminish, but let's focus on calories and macros here.
You shouldn't be starving on 2,000. I eat less than 2k calories and am gigantically huger than you. I'm hungry sometimes, of course--it's a diet, after all--but not ravenously famished.
If it were me, I would try to establish a comfortable baseline I can then work from and fine tune, entailing a bit more food than the 2000 that we know isn't working, and with a different macro mix. Something like 2200 cals and more carbs. For a few weeks. To see if it works. Your body isn't going anywhere. You can revisit it any time and make further changes.
Low carb, high protein fat does not work for everyone. It works for a lot of people but not everyone. I once mentioned on MFP that I'm doing 35-35-30 carb-fat-protein and there were a lot of people saying they were doing the same -- that's the traditional "balanced" or almost the Zone approach that isn't in high style right now but gets the job done for a lot of people, just basically balanced eating with no particular bias as far as carbs vs fat/protein is concerned. Not saying it's right for you, but maybe you need something more along those lines to feel satisfied. Why don't you try 2200 or perhaps 2300 calories per day with more emphasis on carbs for a few weeks and take it from there. It's really useful to iron out the calorie level and types of foods needed to feel content while dieting, it'll be a useful process for you, I think.
Good luck.
I probably have a higher metabolism than you. In fact I’m sure I do. No need to be angry and disagree ❤️6 -
mentallyinmaldives wrote: »Above all else, "Listen to your body". If you're hungry all the time, then something isn't right. Common sense says one of two things could be off: The number of daily calories, and/or the macro mix. There's sometimes a 3rd element, psychological, that is, getting used to diet-sized portions of food wherein your brain learns to process hunger signals differently and you kinda learn to ignore or tolerate them and then they diminish, but let's focus on calories and macros here.
You shouldn't be starving on 2,000. I eat less than 2k calories and am gigantically huger than you. I'm hungry sometimes, of course--it's a diet, after all--but not ravenously famished.
If it were me, I would try to establish a comfortable baseline I can then work from and fine tune, entailing a bit more food than the 2000 that we know isn't working, and with a different macro mix. Something like 2200 cals and more carbs. For a few weeks. To see if it works. Your body isn't going anywhere. You can revisit it any time and make further changes.
Low carb, high protein fat does not work for everyone. It works for a lot of people but not everyone. I once mentioned on MFP that I'm doing 35-35-30 carb-fat-protein and there were a lot of people saying they were doing the same -- that's the traditional "balanced" or almost the Zone approach that isn't in high style right now but gets the job done for a lot of people, just basically balanced eating with no particular bias as far as carbs vs fat/protein is concerned. Not saying it's right for you, but maybe you need something more along those lines to feel satisfied. Why don't you try 2200 or perhaps 2300 calories per day with more emphasis on carbs for a few weeks and take it from there. It's really useful to iron out the calorie level and types of foods needed to feel content while dieting, it'll be a useful process for you, I think.
Good luck.
I probably have a higher metabolism than you. In fact I’m sure I do. No need to be angry and disagree ❤️
I've never hit the disagree button on mfp. Probably never will.1 -
mentallyinmaldives wrote: »Above all else, "Listen to your body". If you're hungry all the time, then something isn't right. Common sense says one of two things could be off: The number of daily calories, and/or the macro mix. There's sometimes a 3rd element, psychological, that is, getting used to diet-sized portions of food wherein your brain learns to process hunger signals differently and you kinda learn to ignore or tolerate them and then they diminish, but let's focus on calories and macros here.
You shouldn't be starving on 2,000. I eat less than 2k calories and am gigantically huger than you. I'm hungry sometimes, of course--it's a diet, after all--but not ravenously famished.
If it were me, I would try to establish a comfortable baseline I can then work from and fine tune, entailing a bit more food than the 2000 that we know isn't working, and with a different macro mix. Something like 2200 cals and more carbs. For a few weeks. To see if it works. Your body isn't going anywhere. You can revisit it any time and make further changes.
Low carb, high protein fat does not work for everyone. It works for a lot of people but not everyone. I once mentioned on MFP that I'm doing 35-35-30 carb-fat-protein and there were a lot of people saying they were doing the same -- that's the traditional "balanced" or almost the Zone approach that isn't in high style right now but gets the job done for a lot of people, just basically balanced eating with no particular bias as far as carbs vs fat/protein is concerned. Not saying it's right for you, but maybe you need something more along those lines to feel satisfied. Why don't you try 2200 or perhaps 2300 calories per day with more emphasis on carbs for a few weeks and take it from there. It's really useful to iron out the calorie level and types of foods needed to feel content while dieting, it'll be a useful process for you, I think.
Good luck.
I probably have a higher metabolism than you. In fact I’m sure I do. No need to be angry and disagree ❤️
I don't see anything in igfrie's post (or anyone else's for that matter) that in anyway questions your metabolism or how many calories you're burning. If anything, you're the one on this thread who doesn't seem to believe in what your logging is telling you about your metabolism, since you're questioning whether you could really be on a cut at 500 to 1300 calories below what your logging days your maintenance is.
If you're experiencing extreme hunger, eliminating exercise to try to avoid hunger, and your logging says you're in a deep deficit, all the evidence points to increasing your calories, as igfrie and pretty much everyone else on the thread suggested.
10 -
when you say eating roughly 3000-3500cal a day - were you actually logging to establish a baseline?5
-
deannalfisher wrote: »when you say eating roughly 3000-3500cal a day - were you actually logging to establish a baseline?
That's what it says in the OP.4 -
Sorry I apologize I stopped reading when you said you stopped exercising because you were too hungry!
The basic equation is your have to reduce your required intake by a little bit (LITTLE BIT) to lose weight that mostly consists of fat in a slow and fairly sustainable fashion.
If you were maintaining at 6 million calories, you would need to eat 5,999,750 Calories to lose on average and over the long term approximately half a pound a week (or 25 lb in a year). And you would need to eat 5,999,500 Calories a day to lose on average and over the long term approximately a pound a week (or 50lbs in a year).
While continuing to do everything that you normally do.
And feeling good about yourself.
And suffering less rebound hunger and side effects.
You did the right thing and measured your intake before starting to lose.
Why disregard good input that is relevant to you for some off-the-wall general equation that applies to vast numbers of people and only by approximation to yourself?
Please go back to a period of maintenance, and then start up again, and re-evaluate your goals especially if from what I've gathered you're not even overweight!
One of the *kittens why can't they just see it" mistakes I see younger people making is unnecessary hard and restrictive eating early on in life which sometimes lead to problems for many years afterwards.
And what's even worse and more disappointing is that perfectly normal weight people end up in multi year spirals of weight loss and regain spurred by fleeting events such as a friend's wedding or a sun destination holiday. All by dieting way harder than necessary...16 -
Sorry I apologize I stopped reading when you said you stopped exercising because you were too hungry!
The basic equation is your have to reduce your required intake by a little bit (LITTLE BIT) to lose weight that mostly consists of fat in a slow and fairly sustainable fashion.
If you were maintaining at 6 million calories, you would need to eat 5,999,750 Calories to lose on average and over the long term approximately half a pound a week (or 25 lb in a year). And you would need to eat 5,999,500 Calories a day to lose on average and over the long term approximately a pound a week (or 50lbs in a year).
While continuing to do everything that you normally do.
And feeling good about yourself.
And suffering less rebound hunger and side effects.
You did the right thing and measured your intake before starting to lose.
Why disregard good input that is relevant to you for some off-the-wall general equation that applies to vast numbers of people and only by approximation to yourself?
Please go back to a period of maintenance, and then start up again, and re-evaluate your goals especially if from what I've gathered you're not even overweight!
One of the *kittens why can't they just see it" mistakes I see younger people making is unnecessary hard and restrictive eating early on in life which sometimes lead to problems for many years afterwards.
well, wiz..... I would agree. I cut very aggressively, serious rebound hunger that's only starting to abate some after an almost 20lbs weight regain, (intentional btw) Also do and don't agree with listen to your body. Something is wrong and your body is telling you something, but a binge will do nothing. So... yeah, listen, but don't3 -
Sorry I apologize I stopped reading when you said you stopped exercising because you were too hungry!
The basic equation is your have to reduce your required intake by a little bit (LITTLE BIT) to lose weight that mostly consists of fat in a slow and fairly sustainable fashion.
If you were maintaining at 6 million calories, you would need to eat 5,999,750 Calories to lose on average and over the long term approximately half a pound a week (or 25 lb in a year). And you would need to eat 5,999,500 Calories a day to lose on average and over the long term approximately a pound a week (or 50lbs in a year).
While continuing to do everything that you normally do.
And feeling good about yourself.
And suffering less rebound hunger and side effects.
You did the right thing and measured your intake before starting to lose.
Why disregard good input that is relevant to you for some off-the-wall general equation that applies to vast numbers of people and only by approximation to yourself?
Please go back to a period of maintenance, and then start up again, and re-evaluate your goals especially if from what I've gathered you're not even overweight!
One of the *kittens why can't they just see it" mistakes I see younger people making is unnecessary hard and restrictive eating early on in life which sometimes lead to problems for many years afterwards.
And what's even worse and more disappointing is that perfectly normal weight people end up in multi year spirals of weight loss and regain spurred by fleeting events such as a friend's wedding or a sun destination holiday. All by dieting way harder than necessary...
The bolded, fershure, and if one does it lots of times - especially if combined with lowball protein and exclusively near-pure cardio during loss phases - one side effect is likely to be incrementally worse body comp, and gradually lower TDEE, round by round and year by year. Very slight effects, but cumulative, and complemeted by gradually dropping NEAT as activity gets more daunting with poorer body comp.
I see it in my demographic (60s, female, lived through Twiggy era).
Granny sez: Don't do it, kids!11 -
Sorry I apologize I stopped reading when you said you stopped exercising because you were too hungry!
The basic equation is your have to reduce your required intake by a little bit (LITTLE BIT) to lose weight that mostly consists of fat in a slow and fairly sustainable fashion.
If you were maintaining at 6 million calories, you would need to eat 5,999,750 Calories to lose on average and over the long term approximately half a pound a week (or 25 lb in a year). And you would need to eat 5,999,500 Calories a day to lose on average and over the long term approximately a pound a week (or 50lbs in a year).
While continuing to do everything that you normally do.
And feeling good about yourself.
And suffering less rebound hunger and side effects.
You did the right thing and measured your intake before starting to lose.
Why disregard good input that is relevant to you for some off-the-wall general equation that applies to vast numbers of people and only by approximation to yourself?
Please go back to a period of maintenance, and then start up again, and re-evaluate your goals especially if from what I've gathered you're not even overweight!
One of the *kittens why can't they just see it" mistakes I see younger people making is unnecessary hard and restrictive eating early on in life which sometimes lead to problems for many years afterwards.
And what's even worse and more disappointing is that perfectly normal weight people end up in multi year spirals of weight loss and regain spurred by fleeting events such as a friend's wedding or a sun destination holiday. All by dieting way harder than necessary...
If you go strictly by the “rules”, you are not overweight. (In the healthy BMI range).
If you go strictly by the “rules”, you should cut 250 calories a day to lose weight (or less).
In other words, yes, you cut calories so much that your BODY is asking for nourishment.
6 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »mentallyinmaldives wrote: »Above all else, "Listen to your body". If you're hungry all the time, then something isn't right. Common sense says one of two things could be off: The number of daily calories, and/or the macro mix. There's sometimes a 3rd element, psychological, that is, getting used to diet-sized portions of food wherein your brain learns to process hunger signals differently and you kinda learn to ignore or tolerate them and then they diminish, but let's focus on calories and macros here.
You shouldn't be starving on 2,000. I eat less than 2k calories and am gigantically huger than you. I'm hungry sometimes, of course--it's a diet, after all--but not ravenously famished.
If it were me, I would try to establish a comfortable baseline I can then work from and fine tune, entailing a bit more food than the 2000 that we know isn't working, and with a different macro mix. Something like 2200 cals and more carbs. For a few weeks. To see if it works. Your body isn't going anywhere. You can revisit it any time and make further changes.
Low carb, high protein fat does not work for everyone. It works for a lot of people but not everyone. I once mentioned on MFP that I'm doing 35-35-30 carb-fat-protein and there were a lot of people saying they were doing the same -- that's the traditional "balanced" or almost the Zone approach that isn't in high style right now but gets the job done for a lot of people, just basically balanced eating with no particular bias as far as carbs vs fat/protein is concerned. Not saying it's right for you, but maybe you need something more along those lines to feel satisfied. Why don't you try 2200 or perhaps 2300 calories per day with more emphasis on carbs for a few weeks and take it from there. It's really useful to iron out the calorie level and types of foods needed to feel content while dieting, it'll be a useful process for you, I think.
Good luck.
I probably have a higher metabolism than you. In fact I’m sure I do. No need to be angry and disagree ❤️
I don't see anything in igfrie's post (or anyone else's for that matter) that in anyway questions your metabolism or how many calories you're burning. If anything, you're the one on this thread who doesn't seem to believe in what your logging is telling you about your metabolism, since you're questioning whether you could really be on a cut at 500 to 1300 calories below what your logging days your maintenance is.
If you're experiencing extreme hunger, eliminating exercise to try to avoid hunger, and your logging says you're in a deep deficit, all the evidence points to increasing your calories, as igfrie and pretty much everyone else on the thread suggested.
Gotta say, I took his "You shouldn't be starving on 2,000. I eat less than 2k calories and am gigantically huger than you. I'm hungry sometimes, of course--it's a diet, after all--but not ravenously famished." as questioning her calorie needs.
Other than that, I agree with you.
And I don't understand why OP seems to be questioning her "metabolism" (by setting a lower calorie goal than results would suggest) but questioning his doing the same.
Whatevs, I guess. 5 -
-
lynn_glenmont wrote: »mentallyinmaldives wrote: »Above all else, "Listen to your body". If you're hungry all the time, then something isn't right. Common sense says one of two things could be off: The number of daily calories, and/or the macro mix. There's sometimes a 3rd element, psychological, that is, getting used to diet-sized portions of food wherein your brain learns to process hunger signals differently and you kinda learn to ignore or tolerate them and then they diminish, but let's focus on calories and macros here.
You shouldn't be starving on 2,000. I eat less than 2k calories and am gigantically huger than you. I'm hungry sometimes, of course--it's a diet, after all--but not ravenously famished.
If it were me, I would try to establish a comfortable baseline I can then work from and fine tune, entailing a bit more food than the 2000 that we know isn't working, and with a different macro mix. Something like 2200 cals and more carbs. For a few weeks. To see if it works. Your body isn't going anywhere. You can revisit it any time and make further changes.
Low carb, high protein fat does not work for everyone. It works for a lot of people but not everyone. I once mentioned on MFP that I'm doing 35-35-30 carb-fat-protein and there were a lot of people saying they were doing the same -- that's the traditional "balanced" or almost the Zone approach that isn't in high style right now but gets the job done for a lot of people, just basically balanced eating with no particular bias as far as carbs vs fat/protein is concerned. Not saying it's right for you, but maybe you need something more along those lines to feel satisfied. Why don't you try 2200 or perhaps 2300 calories per day with more emphasis on carbs for a few weeks and take it from there. It's really useful to iron out the calorie level and types of foods needed to feel content while dieting, it'll be a useful process for you, I think.
Good luck.
I probably have a higher metabolism than you. In fact I’m sure I do. No need to be angry and disagree ❤️
I don't see anything in igfrie's post (or anyone else's for that matter) that in anyway questions your metabolism or how many calories you're burning. If anything, you're the one on this thread who doesn't seem to believe in what your logging is telling you about your metabolism, since you're questioning whether you could really be on a cut at 500 to 1300 calories below what your logging days your maintenance is.
If you're experiencing extreme hunger, eliminating exercise to try to avoid hunger, and your logging says you're in a deep deficit, all the evidence points to increasing your calories, as igfrie and pretty much everyone else on the thread suggested.
Gotta say, I took his "You shouldn't be starving on 2,000. I eat less than 2k calories and am gigantically huger than you. I'm hungry sometimes, of course--it's a diet, after all--but not ravenously famished." as questioning her calorie needs.
Other than that, I agree with you.
And I don't understand why OP seems to be questioning her "metabolism" (by setting a lower calorie goal than results would suggest) but questioning his doing the same.
Whatevs, I guess.
concur - mostly becuase i weight less than and maintain comfortable only 2900 a day - so yeah, i get epically cranky on 1800-2000cal a day - its why i only do a fat loss cut once a year3 -
Gotta say, I took his "You shouldn't be starving on 2,000. I eat less than 2k calories and am gigantically huger than you. I'm hungry sometimes, of course--it's a diet, after all--but not ravenously famished." as questioning her calorie needs.
Whatevs, I guess.
The OP, not me, is questioning her own calorie needs; indeed, that was the point of her post. What I was questioning was what she should do about the fact that she is so hungry on 2,000 calories. My suggestions were: eat more food, and think about changing up the macros, since low carb doesn't suit everyone.
If I was at calorie level X, whatever the X is, and I was "starving", I would: (a) increase my calories to something like X+300 and see how it goes, and (b) take a look at my food and macros and think about changing it up. Which is exactly what I suggested doing.
4 -
deannalfisher wrote: »when you say eating roughly 3000-3500cal a day - were you actually logging to establish a baseline?
I logged for 6-8 months. So yes
2
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions