Who knew? Too few calories can keep you from losing weight!

[Walt34]

Were they saying you should eat 2000/day plus any specific exercise or was the 2000/day taking into account exercise?

That's with the exercise routine I'm doing now. It runs for about an hour and twenty minutes including rest breaks every other day.

For example today I ate a salad for breakfast, with some additions of dressing and grated cheddar cheese it came to maybe 270 calories at best. We were out much of the middle of the day so late afternoon I heated up a can of chili, that's shown as 540 calories, later I ate some celery and carrots with dip, maybe 100 calories, and I'm full! There' a chicken roasting in the oven and when that's done I'll probably eat 100-200 calories worth of that if I can. I'm heating some tea that I'll put a teaspoon of honey in, that's ~30 calories. So that totals ~1,090 calories. And today is a "heavy" day because of the can of chili, not something I normally eat.

Tomorrow I'll make the appointment with the dietician, couldn't reach her today.

 

[igsoy]

The gym I go to is in the last two weeks of a 90 day nutrition challenge. We decided to use counting Macros as our method this time around. So this means using a kitchen scale to weigh grams of food so you can have accurate counts of your protein grams, carb grams, and fat grams. Several members had purchased a personalized template from Renaissance Periodization and the rest of us used that methodology from their book to come up with our own specific bodyweight prescription.

When you're in a caloric deficit, the most important macro is protein. The template expected you to get 20-40 grams of protein (depending on your bodyweight) at each meal plus a post workout shake and a bedtime casein whey drink. This ensures that your body never goes more than 3 hrs without a protein source ensuring that it will not default to the easiest (whilst in a caloric deficit) energy source: burning your muscles for energy. For most members this was the hardest task, to eat enough protein every day.

You stay on your baseline macros until you stop losing at least 1/2 pound a week. Then they cut out half your carbs, leaving you with most of your carbs timed pre and post workout (for their purposes, all vegetable carbs are free and you are to eat 2-3 cups of veggies at each meal and snack). When you stop losing on that, then they cut out your added fat (for their purposes, fat in lean meat and fish is free and doesn't count) and leave you with only fat before bed so you still sleep well.

Our gym owner lost 15 lbs. in 6 weeks of this plan. I lost 7, then took off 3 weeks for holidays, then have lost another 2, so 9 in 8 weeks so far. I don't cook much and have never weighed food before, but I'm pretty sure the biggest difference was getting so much protein and veggiesn in, that makes it easy to eat less of the other macros.

Then, when your body is ready for a rest from cutting, you add back slowly so your body doesn't overreact and then your figure your new baseline macros at your lower weight.

 

[Katsmeow]

This has been discussed over at MFP many times. Most believe there's no scientific basis for starvation mode. The standard line there is your not weighing your food and logging it properly( do you weigh and log every bit of food? It's tough).

After logging 6,000 meals for DW and I, I'll say it's not easy. Especially after reaching your goals. The less you weigh the harder it becomes.

Does MFP tell you how many meals you log? What about snacks? Does it count that as meals.

I haven't missed a day of logging on MFP in over 4 years. I am on Day 1631 right now. Once you do it awhile it is pretty easy to log. It takes me less than 5 minutes a day. Actually less than 2 on the average day. It just part of my routine. I don't think I will ever quit doing it even though I am at normal weight now.

As for starvation mode - no I don't believe it isn't. Metabolic adaptation exists. As you lose weight, you do burn fewer calories also as you now weigh less.

My favorite article on Starvation Mode (that is, the myth of Starvation Mode)

https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/starvation-mode/

 

[MRG]

Does MFP tell you how many meals you log? What about snacks? Does it count that as meals.

I haven't missed a day of logging on MFP in over 4 years. I am on Day 1631 right now. Once you do it awhile it is pretty easy to log. It takes me less than 5 minutes a day. Actually less than 2 on the average day. It just part of my routine. I don't think I will ever quit doing it even though I am at normal weight now.

You know how MFP works. Why ask me? My experience is the amount of time required to log depends on what and how you eat. As far as my 6000 meal entries.

I've logged 1000 days for two people at 3 meals daily equals 6000 meals. That doesn't include the 0-N daily snacks for both of us. DW logs some of her snacks but not all. Of course there's all the manual exercise entries. During this time of year we spend more time weight lifting and on cardio equipment indoors. I don't have a way to automatically log those activities like hiking or snowshoeing.

 

[plex]

Previously, I had a year where my weight suddenly jumped more than it had in the previous 15 years. So, I went the simple calorie restriction route for a year. Went from 210-160. Usually I ate around 1200-1300/calories a day and I'm 6'2, so it got somewhat near a starvation diet. There were times when my weight would not move for 1-2 weeks, but then I'd suddenly drop 2-3 lbs in a couple days, so I think it was just a matter of the body organizing what to remove next.

The fun part of it was watching fat disappear from one focused area of the body to the next, starting from the face, upper arms, sides of the stomach, and finally the thighs. The down-sides were obviously anemia, with my blood pressure on the lower end of normal, and the largest side effect was some slight hair loss, which recovered after a year of normal eating. My work efficiency probably dropped a little bit too.

On the topic of nuts, I definitely did make eating almonds a regular part of my eating habits during that period, along with raisins. They were both filling, but low calorie, and even when on a low calorie diet, the almonds would nuts did not digest quite completely.

 

[dixonge]

It's been almost two years since I had to copy this link to the forums! I guess that's good...

But serously, even though this article uses a lot of hyperbole and bombastic statements, it's just true. It deals with estimations, reporting, and starvation mode. Read it carefully, follow the links and read those too. All will be answered.

Why Am I Not Losing Weight: 11 Reasons You're Failing To Lose Fat

 

[athena53]

It's been almost two years since I had to copy this link to the forums! I guess that's good...

But serously, even though this article uses a lot of hyperbole and bombastic statements, it's just true. It deals with estimations, reporting, and starvation mode. Read it carefully, follow the links and read those too. All will be answered.

Why Am I Not Losing Weight: 11 Reasons You're Failing To Lose Fat

Good link. A few points that really stood out for me- first was portion control. I now weigh more foods and that makes a big difference. I also calculate the macros of boxed/canned foods by figuring out the content of the entire package and then figuring out what portion (50%, 100%) I'm going to eat. Most "serving sizes" are BS.

Second- no "free calories". When I added a 4-lb. container of grapes to my weekly Costco shopping list (they're delicious frozen), I started gaining weight. Surprise, surprise. I'm more relaxed about non-starchy vegetables.

Finally- exercise doesn't make up for overeating unless you're an Olympic athlete. I burn about 1,200 calories on the occasional 35-mile charity bike ride. Very easy to eat more than that in a Cheesecake Factory dinner. Even my daily workout, which burns about 700 calories, allows for only the occasional dietary "sin".

A friend lost a lot of weight after her doctor told her she was pre-diabetic and needed to restrict her carb consumption. I'm sure part of it was portion control and part was cutting out the really sugary foods- I'm working on that, too.

 

[Ronstar]

Thanks for posting^. The article (and questions/answers)are really entertaining and simple.

 

[grasshopper]

My friends call me Nevermiss Ameal Grasshopper, so my last blood and urine labs came back all in "normal" range except I had small ketones. I racked it up to my 5 mile walk the day before and fasting 16 hours for the blood work up. So I used some test strips I had from my diabetic dog, and sometimes I come up negative, and sometimes a trace. Meanwhile my glucose is 88 and steady. We have a follow up with the doc soon.

 

[jim584672]

I have been tracking every calorie for the last 8 months. By looking at weight change verses calorie count I see I burn 2300 calories a day. Like clockwork if the calories are reduced the weight is reduced accordingly. I conclude that it all comes down to calories and nothing else matters.

After loosing weight I strayed from the diet and started to eat ice cream and chips and gained 8 pounds. My lipid panel went to crap. So back on the diet and lipid panel is now good.

 

[MRG]

It's been almost two years since I had to copy this link to the forums! I guess that's good...

But serously, even though this article uses a lot of hyperbole and bombastic statements, it's just true. It deals with estimations, reporting, and starvation mode. Read it carefully, follow the links and read those too. All will be answered.

Why Am I Not Losing Weight: 11 Reasons You're Failing To Lose Fat

Thank you.

I found that to be true. Our best investment in weight management was a $15.00 food scale. Today it's the most used item in the kitchen. I find measuring cups are off by 20%.

I'm glad they did include number 11.

The muscle vs fat it very noticeable. When we were almost at our goal weight we started lifting weights. DW only dropped 8 more pounds, however she lost 4 sizes with those pounds.

 

[Chuckanut]

IRead it carefully, follow the links and read those too. All will be answered.

Why Am I Not Losing Weight: 11 Reasons You're Failing To Lose Fat

I think this article misses the big point. It tells us what is happening, but it does not tell us why it is happening. It's like a guy walking down the Main street of his town with a friend and he sees a HUGE number of people crowded into one restaurant, while the others are not very busy. He asks his friend "Why is that restaurant so crowded?" And the reply is "Well, more people are going into it than coming out of it." Very true. But it begs the question "Why are more people going in than out?".

Perhaps this restaurant has a world famous chef instead of the hash-slingers who cook at the other places. Perhaps they are celebrating their 20th anniversary and offering meals at the same prices as 20 years ago. Perhaps, it recently mailed out thousands of 2 for 1 coupons that expire tomorrow. We don't know why, just the what

Our question should be "Why are people eating more calories than they need to eat?"

There are many answers, and one that many people will jump on is that the person lacks the will power and/or desire to consume less food. No doubt that is true for some. But, I believe they are a small minority. There are other reasons.....

There are, of course, medical issues, both physiological and psychological that may be causing problems.

Then there is the food we eat. We don't eat calories in a vacuum. We eat them as part of the food we consume. And different foods effect our bodies differently. Our bodies are complex chemical factories, not simple steam engines.

Nobody would argue that eating highly processed and/or sugary foods like cake, cookies, sugar bomb cereals, white bread, pretzels, chips and such is the same as eating veggies, eggs, fish, meat, and whole grains.

My argument is that for many people (not all since we are all different) the sugary, processed junk triggers responses in the body that store to many calories as fat, thus causing us to eat more in order to get the available energy the body needs. Will power cannot hold up under the constant demands of the body for more food. Especially when there is plenty of food all over the place. (Usually, the kind of food that got us in this mess in the first place.) The meat, eggs, fish, veggies group fills us up, meets our energy needs and keeps us satisfied so we do not need to consume more food to get the energy we need. Most importantly it does not cause the body to store calories needed now as fat and keep them there.

Granted an over simplification of a complicated physiological process, but I'm just a layman.

We really need to look at the Why, not just the What.

My 2¢. Take what you wish and leave the rest.

 

[flintnational]

^^+1

That is also my personal experience and what I see in the published studies relating to diet.

Edit to add: I attached a paper with my detailed thoughts at this thread at post #5.

 

[Chuckanut]

^^+1

That is also my personal experience and what I see in the published studies relating to diet.

Edit to add: I attached a paper with my detailed thoughts at this thread at post #5.

Good point: It is a personal experience. Human bodies are complex and what works great for you and me may not be helpful to somebody else. And visa-versa.

One thing that really bothers me about the article is that is beats people over the head with the "It worked for me, and if it didn't work for you, then you must not have done it right, because you are ignorant, stupid or defective in some way" belief system . Alas this belief is all to common in the areas of health, nutrition, exercise, etc.

If CICO works somebody, great! If being a vegetarian works for others, great! If low-carb works for me and you, fantastic. If eating three ice cream sundaes each day works for the guy next door - I am in sanely jealous.

 

[Walt34]

If eating three ice cream sundaes each day works for the guy next door - I am in sanely jealous.

The hardest part about all this is that there was a time in my life when I was that guy. And now I'm not.

 

[Amethyst]

One wonders whether the Creator really meant for alimentation to get this complicated, requiring so much mental effort....

 

[MRG]

The hardest part about all this is that there was a time in my life when I was that guy. And now I'm not.

DW can still do it, however her blood chemistry gives it away.

 

[LOL!]

I will throw this out there to think about:

I think the microorganisms in one's gut release compounds that say "Feed me!" So if you have been on a high carb diet, all the microbes that like high carbs take over and pump out these compounds (call them hormones if you like) which mess with your brain and gut. These crowd out the microbes that like high fat or that like high protein.

Or maybe it is not the microbes themselves, but the genes they activate and turn on to digest whatever it is you are feeding them.

So if you can change your microbes by changing your diet ... or ... if you can push those microbes out by eating more fiber, so your food goes through you faster, then these microbes will have less influence over your nutrition, calorie use, and weight gain/loss.

I think this is partly why almost every diet works for awhile: Your microbes are stunned by the change, but they adapt and then start sending out their chemical messages. It is also why different people have different results from different foods: They got different microbes in their gut.

And in the extreme if you have microbes that give you constant diarrhea, then you are going to lose weight.

 

[dixonge]

Good point: It is a personal experience. Human bodies are complex and what works great for you and me may not be helpful to somebody else. And visa-versa.

One thing that really bothers me about the article is that is beats people over the head with the "It worked for me, and if it didn't work for you, then you must not have done it right, because you are ignorant, stupid or defective in some way" belief system . Alas this belief is all to common in the areas of health, nutrition, exercise, etc.

If CICO works somebody, great! If being a vegetarian works for others, great! If low-carb works for me and you, fantastic. If eating three ice cream sundaes each day works for the guy next door - I am in sanely jealous.

CICO works because it is science, proven. It is factual. Yes, there are minor variables at play (which the article addresses) but they are just that, minor. CICO doesn't work for 'somebody' at the expense of someone else. It just works. Calorie counting is the tricky part. Implementation is where the problems come in...again, as addressed fully in that article.

 

[haha]

One wonders whether the Creator really meant for alimentation to get this complicated, requiring so much mental effort....

Certainly. More evidence that she hates our guts.

 

[flintnational]

IMHO, CICO, does not help many folks. A few things to consider.

- How in the world did humans maintain a healthy weight prior to identification of the calorie?

- How does most of creation stay thin? Last time I checked, humans were the only animals that could even count calories.

- Today we are able to measure calories in and expenditure of calories more accurately than at any time in history. Calories are shown on food package labels. We build multi million dollar gyms on every street corner to burn calories. Yet, our weight has been on a steady increase for several decades.

I believe it is time for another explanation, one that answers the question, "Why do I consume to many calories".

From what I have seen, many experts are moving to a "whole foods" recommendation. Whole unprocessed foods appear to be the natural diet of humans. And, like everywhere else in nature, when humans eat the correct diet, their body spontaneously maintains a proper weight. Weight appears to be an automatic system unless we muck it up with sugar, refined carbs and other low quality processed foods.

 

[Chuckanut]

The hardest part about all this is that there was a time in my life when I was that guy. And now I'm not.

In my 20's I was over 6 feet and wanted to gain weight so I could fill out my size 30 inch waist pants and not have them look so darn baggy. Three sundaes a day was not enough!

I was looking at some photos of my uncles and father last year, these guys were all in their 30's and 40's at the time. Many of the photos were at the beach our outdoors with shorts, often with no shirt. They were all very lean, not skinny, just no fat showing at all.

A few years ago a teacher I knew hosted a French high schooler for 6 months as part of an exchange program. The young girl gained 20 pounds in that time and was seriously worried about what her mother would say when she returned home. IIRC, she thought she looked like a 'sack of potatoes'.

So, Yes, regardless of whether or not one counts calories, carbs, eats vegetarian, Mediterranean, paleo of whatever, there is something in our food and/or the way that it is processed that, for many of us, is throwing our bodies for a loop. And, yes, probably our personal eating habits need improvement also. We can't blame it all on somebody else.

Side note: it is good to see so many of our older retired folks taking an interest in their diet and overall health. We deserve a big pat on the back.

 

[dixonge]

I believe it is time for another explanation, one that answers the question, "Why do I consume to many calories".

From what I have seen, many experts are moving to a "whole foods" recommendation. Whole unprocessed foods appear to be the natural diet of humans. And, like everywhere else in nature, when humans eat the correct diet, their body spontaneously maintains a proper weight. Weight appears to be an automatic system unless we muck it up with sugar, refined carbs and other low quality processed foods.

CICO is just math. It doesn't explain why we eat too much, just why we gain weight when we do.

I think you're on the right path here. An invariable product of processing and commoditization of the food chain is a massive increase in the caloric density of food. The connection from our eyes to our stomachs is still working on a million-year-old evolutionary relationship between food and satiety. We can now ingest an entire day's worth of food before our system can realize it and stop the cravings. We can do that in under ten minutes, easy. In the past, it took a lot longer. Whole foods, especially non-meat items, is about the only way we have to reset things.

 

[GTFan]

A few weeks ago DW and I both began a weight-loss program at the gym (they actually call it The Wellness Center) in an effort to lose "that last few pounds" that bugs most people. Both of us would like to lose at least five, and I'd prefer to lose ten, but I'll settle for five. BTW, I'm male, 5'9" and 155 lbs.

I'm same height and only 10lbs. heavier than you and in no way shape or form feel overweight. And I would guess that since you go to the gym you have better muscles than I (which means more mass), so why exactly do you want to trim down to such a low body fat? It's not going to help you as you get older from what I've read, some fat is not a bad thing.

 

[Walt34]

Basically just to get that five or ten pounds off. It's not a huge deal for me but it's been sort of an irritant for several years. I'm fully aware that lots of people would love to be my height and weight. Even the doc said that I don't need to lose it but doing so wouldn't hurt anything either.