eating more = weight loss???

Yes, I'm finding that out too!

can people be more specific because i want this message to be heard loud and clear.

How many calories do you eat when you DON'T lose (the lesser amount)?

How many do you eat when you're eating what is recommended (the higher amount)?

Yes. I have been eating 1200+ exercise calories and losing a pound or two here and there. This week I increased my calories to 1650, ignoring exercise (I did exercise, just didn't eat those calories back) but that still put me well over what I have been eating. I lost FOUR pounds this week.

I always eat my full calories. That way I don't feel deprived and I have the energy I need to keep moving!

let me clarify! okay when i say eat less then my recommended calorie intake I am in NO WAY starving myself!

Say if I don't eat back the calories I burnt from exercise or maybe I am about 300-400 calories under my required caloric intake for the day.

So the lesser amount say about 900 when I see no results and then I will only lose weight if I eat the higher amount of about 1200.

can you further clarify, sorry, do you mean 900 net calories or 900 total calories ingested on low days?

You do realize your weight is variable depending on time/water/etc.. ? Ask yourself how it makes sense eating more to a certain amount loses more weight than eating less.

I have been finding that if I meet my caloric intake for the day, rather then eating less I will only lose weight.. My body will refuse to lose weight unless I eat my up too my 1200 calories a day! Does anyone else find that they too need to eat more to see results?

If your consuming more calories on exercise days. Then it's because your refueling your body with sufficient amounts of nutrients to replenish what was lost during that exercise. If your eating at maintenance without any exercise at all. Then you will neither gain or lose. Weight/fat loss equals calorie deficit.

A great way to think about this, is to see your metabolism as a fire. It burns hotter when you keep giving it a steady supply of fuel. If you quit giving the fuel and stoking the fire, it fades to coals.

This is how I tend to think about it too.

You do realize your weight is variable depending on time/water/etc.. ? Ask yourself how it makes sense eating more to a certain amount loses more weight than eating less.

it makes sense because when we restrict our calories TOO much the body "catches on" and will slow down the metabolic rate (primarily NEAT goes down) and then we don't lose as much weight as we would predict based on our calorie "deficit." When we eat more the body is no longer fearful that a famine is around the corner so excess weight is shed more willingly.

I think of it like my computer. If I don't have enough RAM, and I try to run too many processes at once, it slows to a crawl.

If I don't give my body enough food, it's like a computer lacking in RAM: it doesn't function optimally, either. My hair growth will slow. My skin will look dull. My brain won't work right. (Ex: My brain will think "700 calories is enough!" :laugh: ) So I might still lose weight if I don't eat enough, but at what cost? I'd rather eat more and feel good while losing.

(FYI: 39 years old, 127 pounds, 5'5, eating around 1800-2000 daily (1500 + exercise calories) to lose about a half pound a week, but I've been slacking a bit lately and not logging because, quite frankly, that last pound isn't that important.)