Beginning to think it's Calories consumed vs. NET instead

I WISH I had the time to read through all these comments...I read some and there is some great info and thoughts. I will add my experience with the thinking that there is definitely a "what works for your body" element you have to include in your thinking.

Last Summer, I started a great work out routine after many years of just having babies back to back and being a busy bee at home. Other than great walks, which enabled me to lose the pregnancy weight everytime, I didn't work out. I was a healthy eater, but still had the splurges of "normal" life

I expected the weight to FALL OFF last Summer since I was working out at least 3x a week, sometimes an hour on the treadmill, other times a kick boxing or barbell class. After that, I would go to the pool with my kids for the rest of the day, and if I ate, it was a healthy breakfast, no lunch ( or a salad/fruit) and a healthy dinner...occasionally ice cream with the kids.

Now, I know I lost a LITTLE and toned up a bit, but my clothes were NOT falling off of me...they fit. Some a LITTLE looser, but nothing like I expected having upped my exercise to such a new level. I could NOT figure out what was the point of dragging my 4 kids to the gym 3-4x a week for results that were so minimal, when I was working out SO HARD!

What I have now concluded is that I was NOT eating enough to maintain that level of exercise. I just didn't have the fuel. I don't think I needed to add much, but definitely more than I was thinking I needed...I had the mindset "the less I eat the better."

THUS, the reason I am going to try the EM2WL thinking. For me, it's worth a try because I want to see a real difference and keep motivation for the Fall...I am starting weights and seeing if I can get a greater result with fueling my workouts and eating more than I was last Summer. NOT eating the calories back didn't work for me at all. My plan is to eat my calories back (which, when calculated, turns out to be the same as my TDEE-15%)

SO, that's my story...I know there is crazy good scientific information, and I have learned a lot from some of it, but personal experience has to be part of it. Look at your history, look at what has worked and what hasn't and don't be afraid to try something new

What I have now concluded is that I was NOT eating enough to maintain that level of exercise. I just didn't have the fuel. I don't think I needed to add much, but definitely more than I was thinking I needed...I had the mindset "the less I eat the better."

THUS, the reason I am going to try the EM2WL thinking. For me, it's worth a try because I want to see a real difference and keep motivation for the Fall...I am starting weights and seeing if I can get a greater result with fueling my workouts and eating more than I was last Summer. NOT eating the calories back didn't work for me at all. My plan is to eat my calories back (which, when calculated, turns out to be the same as my TDEE-15%)

SO, that's my story...I know there is crazy good scientific information, and I have learned a lot from some of it, but personal experience has to be part of it. Look at your history, look at what has worked and what hasn't and don't be afraid to try something new

Excellent realization and experience.

One caveat when looking back at history and what has worked.

If what worked in the past didn't allow you to keep the weight off except for bad injury or other good reason, it was probably not actually a great overall method. Just to counter the claims of ones saying they've done this 4 or 5 times and always lost eating 1200 and burning off 400 successfully, and they are going to do it again. Forgetting the fact they are doing this 4 or 5 times precisely because it did not actually work.

If they are eating near maintenance they are eating above BMR, and they do eat exercise caloires back as maintenance = BMR + daily activity + activity (exercise).

Where did this theory come from that says if I do not eat at my BMR everyday my organs will shutdown and I will not survive???

....just curious.

It's probably one of the silliest things I have ever heard.

Where did this theory come from that says if I do not eat at my BMR everyday my organs will shutdown and I will not survive???

....just curious.

It's probably one of the silliest things I have ever heard.

I think someone is mincing words. BMR is the amount of calories for all of your essential life-sustaining bodily functions, but if you don't consume it, you won't die for a long time, because your body will preferentially choose functions to slow down. For example, muscle repair will take longer because it's non-essential. Your metabolism will slow down to preserve the energy supply.

Bump

I was tired of having my calories inconsistent based on what exercises I did that day. So now I am trying to eat the calories I need to maintain my weight and not adding in my exercise. I have actually finally started losing weight. I just started this and I have lost 2 pounds already. I exercise every day, but at different levels, one day 1 hour circuit training and the next day yoga. I don't count the calories burned and I eat a consistent amount everyday.

Glad you said something about Sugar!How come most people don't track their sugar?Once i started tracking it and staying under 25g daily the weight started falling off.I see some people on here eating 85-100 g of Sugar a day and can't figure out why their not losing.For some reason they don't want to put sugar on their diary????

I think it's different for everyone. I've been eating back my exercise calories for awhile now and I'm not losing any weight so this week I started to eat near maintenance and not eat my exercise calories back. I'm sure I'll be below my BMR some days but over the week I bet I'll be pretty close to it or even a bit over.

I don't believe it's just physics. Some people's bodies respond to stress differently then others. Mine goes into shut down mode if I do too intense cardio and my belly starts to expand despite the calorie deficit. Others can eat a diet full of sugar and lose weight, others can't.

I think everyone should try different approaches and find what allows them to lose weight and keep it off!

I totally agree! Take the gentleman who has lost so much weight in two months. It's most assuredly muscle as well as fat which isn't a great idea for someone of his and my age.

I generally don't add the exercise back because my metabolism isn't what it once was when I was under 50 and my exercise is moderate three times a week just to get things going again. My goal is a pound a week and a healthier diet and lifestyle. No magic formula.

Isn't BMR what we need to maintain weight? How can we lose if we eat that?

I am a nerd number tracker and I have recently found a site that works like mfp (still free) but it takes this topic off the discussion boards all together and it shows it to you based on your daily calorie intake vs expenditure with consideration of your current weight and bmr levels. It simple they spell the equation out for you...

calories eaten - calories burned - bmr = net calories so for me .. today it looked like this: 1340 calories consumed - 221 expended - 1724=net calories so my net calories is around 690.... and then the site will tell you what you will lose per week based on that info. Mine came out to 1.2 lbs (based on today) but I can't post the exacts on the net calorie total because I am posting this at midnight and I am new to the site.

I am still experiementing with the site but I think its better than this in how robust it is... not to mention when you join a group it even reports how much weight people have lost in that group... I think that is a big motivator as well... I hate to say it, I love MFP but I think this other site is more robust... I will make a post on my friends/update page to inform others if I decide to jump ship. I am still in testing mode.

Same numbers, different way of showing them. MFP's true draw is the food database; so far, I haven't seen any other site with content to match it. Otherwise, I'd have just switched to using FitBit's site (which has all the same calorie-counting features, but not the database) instead of synchronizing and using both.

I see this question all the time and I have never seen a fat starving person in the 3rd world. Tell someone in the 3rd world if they don't eat enough they are going to lose anymore weight or get fatter and put on weight.

Ok, I might seem really dim asking this and I know it's been asked many times before but can someone please explain this system to me?

My mum and I were doing fine until a few weeks ago and we put on a little bit of weight, why would this be? We were eating healthily doing loads of exercise and keeping our net total below what was set by MFP. I am currently on 1320 so should I be using that as my calories and not counting the exercise? I obviously mark iall my calories and exercise down but I am confused as to where I am going wrong?

Can anyone help, can it be on this thread as I have been redirected before and I didn't really understand the explanation

Thanks

So how do you put on weight when you are eating at a deficit to what your body is burning from all your daily activity?

Easy.

Energy stores.

You are working out and asking your body to make improvements, right? Why else workout afterall.

So it sees you burn carbs for energy, so it starts storing more of them for when you need them.

500 cal's of carbs with water attached weighs 1 lb. Usually store about 1500 in muscles. If you have been running depleted carb stores until a break finally, you'll gain weight. Much needed weight. Because without those carbs stored, your body has to break down muscle during exercise to convert to glucose to keep blood sugar up, and if really bad, to give to muscles to burn with fat.

I see this question all the time and I have never seen a fat starving person in the 3rd world. Tell someone in the 3rd world if they don't eat enough they are going to lose anymore weight or get fatter and put on weight.

Completely different situation, but thanks for trying. Sooner or later (when you're truly starving), your body will wind up consuming all its fat stores and a lot of muscle as well. On this site, I doubt anyone is in that situation; they're still eating food, but low enough calories to make their body think that starvation might be right around the corner. It screws up your metabolism, and isn't necessary.

I eat my maintenance on work out days, not worrying about what the net is at the end of the day and eat a small deficit on my off days. I may not be losing 5 lbs a week but I feel great, steadily losing about a pound a week and probably best of all the mirror is showcasing the hard work. I'll have my six pack before the pools open for summer