Cals help,

Options
2»

Replies

  • byock
    byock Posts: 23
    Options
    I always have a hard time with BMR calculators. I must have a non existent metabolism.

    According to Fat2fit I have a BMR of 1833. With light exercise I should be at 2569.

    I work out at the gym hard 5 days a week. 3 days heavy lifting, 2 days HITT cardio. I also have a 2nd job delivering 3 days a week on foot walking average of 8 miles a day with 60+ lbs on my back at 4mph.

    at 2000 calories a day I gain weight. I am down to 1600 a day total not eating back exercise calories and I am losing about .5 to 1lb a week. Best advice I can give is experiment and see what works for you.
  • tdmcmains
    tdmcmains Posts: 227 Member
    Options

    This biggest problem is people don't understand the ramifications of under eating. Like yourself, they think that hungry is a signal of whether or not a person should eat. Well here is the problem with hunger signals, it can be suppressed. All you have to do is go a week without eating higher calories and your body will adjust. Now multiply that out by months and you can see where it gets you. Also, your body doesn't know the difference between a lb of chicken vs a pound of carrots. Quantity is still the same but calories are different.


    Now, as a man, you have more nutritional requirements to maintain muscle mass. So what happens when you don't feed your body to run properly... simple, it coverts the amino acids from muscle into energy and stores fat. And what happens when you lose muscle... your metabolism slows down and your body becomes less effective at burning calories. That means, you burn less calories at rest and while being active which makes it even harder to lose weight and even easier to gain body fat. Now, I understand it may be working for you now, but long term, when you are in a healthy range, it's going to be very very difficult to lose the last few pounds. If you want to track your body fat in correlation with your weight loss, you can see how much lean body mass you have lost.


    OP,

    Below is a good article I suggest you read. It describes the issues I discussed above. Also, you should aim to eat 20-30% below your TDEE (30% is fine until you are within 50 lbs of your weight goal). Simply put, calories are fuel and if you don't feed yourself enough, your body will fight to preserve the calories. You have to remember our bodies are designed to withstand famine, which means it will store body fat when it feels there isn't enough coming in. Now, if you really want to tighten your body and become smaller/slimmer, then you should incorporate weight training. WT will cut more body fat than cardio will and it will help maintain your muscle.

    And I would have you eat around 1800 calories (35% carbs, 40% protein and 25% fats).


    http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/core_march_8.htm

    ^^^ This.
  • mcarter99
    mcarter99 Posts: 1,666 Member
    Options
    If you do the 2300, you do not eat back your exercise calories, because activity is factored in. The more weight you need to lose, the lower calories you'll be able to get away with at first, but eventually you'll stall. This is a lot to read, but it's good information. http://body-improvements.com/resources/eat/

    I like that article. But upping her intake from 1400 to 2300 goes against his advice.

    4. Based on the trend you’re seeing with your tracking, adjust your intake accordingly.
  • debzza
    debzza Posts: 25 Member
    Options
    I sometimes get too focused on immediate results. Since you can cope with 1400 calories, just focus on staying in your meal/calorie plan. Go out and exercise, dance, run, play in the park.. but don't focus on the scale. Time will go by much quicker and the pounds will keep coming off. If you don't be careful, you'll be weighing yourself every day! :laugh: Re-focus on fun things.

    Tbh, i already do weigh myself everyday, but only take notice of my friday weigh in at a doctors clinic ( more accurate than mine) x thats why i wanted to get the cals right so i can realx about everything abit
  • welshae
    welshae Posts: 4 Member
    Options
    PLease do not lower your calories. Be really proud of what you've lost. If you plan on making this a lifetime change, then be happy with the slow progress. If your calorie intake becomes too low, your body will "hold" those lbs and it will make you crazy. You have to think of yourself on a marathon or 100 miler race and not a 5K race. Be positive, change up the routine by challenging your body and you will reach your goal. It's all mental. If you feel great - be great! :) This may sound really stupid - but I smile when I work out - it puts me in a positive mood and want to try harder/work harder. Stay strong.
  • ekone
    ekone Posts: 10 Member
    Options
    I think eating more calories to "get your metabolism working" is a mistake. What makes you think there is something wrong with your metabolism? If you eat less calories, you will lose more weight. It's simple math. But, you do have to eat enough calories to stay healthy (my guess is 1100, as one poster said, is too little- and I thought MFP does not let you go beneath 1200). Honestly, eat the calories MFP says to eat and be happy that you are losing weight every week, even in 1/2 pound increments.
    I'm on 1200 calories myself (at 5'1"), but I generally get to eat 150-200 more for exercise every day. The first few months were very hard- I felt extremely hungry. But, I am seeing a steady weight loss of about 1 pound a week and I'm thrilled. Seeing and feeling this transformation has been really exciting for me- I'm not bored yet.
  • mcarter99
    mcarter99 Posts: 1,666 Member
    Options


    This biggest problem is people don't understand the ramifications of under eating. Like yourself, they think that hungry is a signal of whether or not a person should eat. Well here is the problem with hunger signals, it can be suppressed. All you have to do is go a week without eating higher calories and your body will adjust. Now multiply that out by months and you can see where it gets you. Also, your body doesn't know the difference between a lb of chicken vs a pound of carrots. Quantity is still the same but calories are different.


    Now, as a man, you have more nutritional requirements to maintain muscle mass. So what happens when you don't feed your body to run properly... simple, it coverts the amino acids from muscle into energy and stores fat. And what happens when you lose muscle... your metabolism slows down and your body becomes less effective at burning calories. That means, you burn less calories at rest and while being active which makes it even harder to lose weight and even easier to gain body fat. Now, I understand it may be working for you now, but long term, when you are in a healthy range, it's going to be very very difficult to lose the last few pounds. If you want to track your body fat in correlation with your weight loss, you can see how much lean body mass you have lost.


    OP,

    Below is a good article I suggest you read. It describes the issues I discussed above. Also, you should aim to eat 20-30% below your TDEE (30% is fine until you are within 50 lbs of your weight goal). Simply put, calories are fuel and if you don't feed yourself enough, your body will fight to preserve the calories. You have to remember our bodies are designed to withstand famine, which means it will store body fat when it feels there isn't enough coming in. Now, if you really want to tighten your body and become smaller/slimmer, then you should incorporate weight training. WT will cut more body fat than cardio will and it will help maintain your muscle.

    And I would have you eat around 1800 calories (35% carbs, 40% protein and 25% fats).


    http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/core_march_8.htm

    I'm in agreement with your recs but I don't think that article makes a good case for extremely slowed metabolism. There are many scientific studies that show dieters under-report their intake by huge amounts. He offers the case of one dieter on a self-reported diet. Plus it's all restaurant food. The caloric values in that are based on the 'spec' quantities from corporate. The food preparers usually go way over those. So nothing is measured, even if it is all recorded. It's just not a good example.
  • rose313
    rose313 Posts: 1,146 Member
    Options
    Sounds like you are doing fine, weight loss should not happen super fast anyway, it is healthy to lose a pound a week.
  • CallMeCupcakeDammit
    CallMeCupcakeDammit Posts: 9,377 Member
    Options
    If you do the 2300, you do not eat back your exercise calories, because activity is factored in. The more weight you need to lose, the lower calories you'll be able to get away with at first, but eventually you'll stall. This is a lot to read, but it's good information. http://body-improvements.com/resources/eat/

    I like that article. But upping her intake from 1400 to 2300 goes against his advice.

    4. Based on the trend you’re seeing with your tracking, adjust your intake accordingly.

    I read that as meaning if you're already using his formula of BW x 12-14 or BW x 16-18. On fat2fitradio, they also suggest adjusting your intake.

    "As you get closer to your goal weight, your weight loss will start to slow down. It is OK to eat a few hundred calories less per day (200-300) to speed up your weight loss at this point."

    Someone mentioned that they are not certified in anything, but they've done their research, and there is a whole group of people on this site that will swear that it works. Just something to consider other than eating lower than her body needs her to.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,411 MFP Moderator
    Options
    I think eating more calories to "get your metabolism working" is a mistake. What makes you think there is something wrong with your metabolism? If you eat less calories, you will lose more weight. It's simple math. But, you do have to eat enough calories to stay healthy (my guess is 1100, as one poster said, is too little- and I thought MFP does not let you go beneath 1200). Honestly, eat the calories MFP says to eat and be happy that you are losing weight every week, even in 1/2 pound increments.
    I'm on 1200 calories myself (at 5'1"), but I generally get to eat 150-200 more for exercise every day. The first few months were very hard- I felt extremely hungry. But, I am seeing a steady weight loss of about 1 pound a week and I'm thrilled. Seeing and feeling this transformation has been really exciting for me- I'm not bored yet.

    Unfortunately, bodies NEVER follow simple math, otherwise weight loss would be easy. And it's not as simple as eat less, exercise more. That theory has been proven to be wrong by hundreds and hundreds of threads on this board alone. But if she follows MFP (at 1400 calories a day) and eats back exercise calories (which is the MFP suggested way), then she will be almost exactly what I stated (1700-1800).
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,411 MFP Moderator
    Options


    This biggest problem is people don't understand the ramifications of under eating. Like yourself, they think that hungry is a signal of whether or not a person should eat. Well here is the problem with hunger signals, it can be suppressed. All you have to do is go a week without eating higher calories and your body will adjust. Now multiply that out by months and you can see where it gets you. Also, your body doesn't know the difference between a lb of chicken vs a pound of carrots. Quantity is still the same but calories are different.


    Now, as a man, you have more nutritional requirements to maintain muscle mass. So what happens when you don't feed your body to run properly... simple, it coverts the amino acids from muscle into energy and stores fat. And what happens when you lose muscle... your metabolism slows down and your body becomes less effective at burning calories. That means, you burn less calories at rest and while being active which makes it even harder to lose weight and even easier to gain body fat. Now, I understand it may be working for you now, but long term, when you are in a healthy range, it's going to be very very difficult to lose the last few pounds. If you want to track your body fat in correlation with your weight loss, you can see how much lean body mass you have lost.


    OP,

    Below is a good article I suggest you read. It describes the issues I discussed above. Also, you should aim to eat 20-30% below your TDEE (30% is fine until you are within 50 lbs of your weight goal). Simply put, calories are fuel and if you don't feed yourself enough, your body will fight to preserve the calories. You have to remember our bodies are designed to withstand famine, which means it will store body fat when it feels there isn't enough coming in. Now, if you really want to tighten your body and become smaller/slimmer, then you should incorporate weight training. WT will cut more body fat than cardio will and it will help maintain your muscle.

    And I would have you eat around 1800 calories (35% carbs, 40% protein and 25% fats).


    http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/core_march_8.htm

    I'm in agreement with your recs but I don't think that article makes a good case for extremely slowed metabolism. There are many scientific studies that show dieters under-report their intake by huge amounts. He offers the case of one dieter on a self-reported diet. Plus it's all restaurant food. The caloric values in that are based on the 'spec' quantities from corporate. The food preparers usually go way over those. So nothing is measured, even if it is all recorded. It's just not a good example.

    Well you always have to consider human error as to a cause for why people aren't gaining or losing. And I agree, there are a lot of variables such as restaurant food but for a sake of an argument, we will have to make some things constant (aka people are measuring right). I will note, from my person experience with designing diet programs for people on this board, increasing calories has helped 99% of the people I have worked with.
  • mcarter99
    mcarter99 Posts: 1,666 Member
    Options
    I wonder why increasing calories strategically helps so many people but simply overeating never seems to? Are there ever threads about, "I totally blew it last week and averaged 1900 calories when I should be getting 1400, but I LOST MORE WEIGHT?"

    And why aren't there actual weight loss professionals getting rich off this amazing discovery- EAT MORE TO WEIGH LESS? It's exactly the magic pill America has been dying to find. It seems to be just a small group of people on this site who have success with it (reportedly). If eating more makes you lose more, how did any of us get overweight to begin with?
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,411 MFP Moderator
    Options
    I wonder why increasing calories strategically helps so many people but simply overeating never seems to? Are there ever threads about, "I totally blew it last week and averaged 1900 calories when I should be getting 1400, but I LOST MORE WEIGHT?"

    And why aren't there actual weight loss professionals getting rich off this amazing discovery- EAT MORE TO WEIGH LESS? It's exactly the magic pill America has been dying to find. It seems to be just a small group of people on this site who have success with it (reportedly). If eating more makes you lose more, how did any of us get overweight to begin with?

    There are plenty of groups that exploit the eating more to lose more; BeachBody, Fat2Fit & The new rules of lifting for women. What you have to understand is it doesn't mean eating more calories than your body expends (or your TDEE) but it defies the general assumption of eating 1200 calories is the way to go. And in fact, most dieticians and nutritionist design meal plans similarly.

Categories