I feel like weight loss could be faster and so I re-ran my BMR #s and the Harris-Benedict equation.
My BMR is between 1991 (math only) and 2100 (biofeedback scale). The H-B equation for me means to maintain my current weight is a minimum of 3434 calories. To lose weight, subtracting no more than 500 calories from that number, I need to eat 2934 calories. I've been averaging 2100.
What would you do? Training staff are always telling me I don't eat enough and raising the calories is necessary for me. FYI, I work out 9-12 hours a week.
I think I can add calories by adding at minimum an avocado shake daily as it has about 645 calories and is protein/healthy fats. This fits 100% w/in my low carb diet.
I've been eating either 2200 or 2600 for the last 6 weeks and my weight loss (just over 2lbs a week) hasn't changed. As the lifting I'm doing is getting harder and I find myself just trying to get through Friday to get to my rest days. I've decided to increase my intake slightly (about 200 cals a day). I bought a heart rate monitor a week ago and the feedback I get from it is that I'm burning just over 5000 calories in 5 days of exercise. So for a couple of weeks I'm going to raise the food intake slightly and see if there's any effect. The other option was to lower the exercise slightly, but I decided to go the slightly more food option. I'm just looking for a little more energy by the time I get to the weekend.
How much are you losing on average at the moment? I'm asking because 9-12 hours sounds like a lot of time that you're exercising. Although now that I look at mine it works out to roughly 9 hours a week as well.
How much are you losing on average at the moment? I'm asking because 9-12 hours sounds like a lot of time that you're exercising. Although now that I look at mine it works out to roughly 9 hours a week as well.
On average 8lbs a month but it's not 2/week, it's like 4, stall, stall, 4. I'm expecting a "whoosh" soon though. I hope.
As for the working out, SUPPOSEDLY, I'm burning 6000+ calories a week from exercise. Which would lead me to think I'm only burning those calories and not food? I dunno.
I posted to your blog, but was also prompted to do my own again tonite using your formula. I'm going to shoot for like 1700-1800/day just because to eat more seems like too much food if I'm eating the right kinds of food. There just seems something odd about forcing yourself to eat more, which I know you've blogged about before. Of course, you are working out a ton. I wonder if you could eat what "feels" right and then reduce some cardio instead. I know that's probably not the direction you wanted to go, but the math would work, right?
On average 8lbs a month but it's not 2/week, it's like 4, stall, stall, 4. I'm expecting a "whoosh" soon though. I hope.
As for the working out, SUPPOSEDLY, I'm burning 6000+ calories a week from exercise. Which would lead me to think I'm only burning those calories and not food? I dunno.
I tend to bounce around a lot. Up/down, then hold. The only thing I take comfort in is that the highs continue to go down, as well as the lows. As your trainer thinks you should be eating more, why not try it his/her way for a couple of weeks. The worst that will happen is that you might stall for a couple of weeks. At best it may kickstart you into another downward trend.
I started in Dec. with about an 1800 cal average, and Jan / Feb was closer to 2000 cals. Feb's weight loss slowed down a bit, but then I changed my exercising and eating in March and it picked up a little. Eating more, but also exercising more. Over all this I've kept the just over 2lbs a week loss reasonably constant. I'm happy with that, and eating more than I've ever done when trying to lose weight. However, I do still have slow loss periods, but in the end they seem to balance out (so far). I suppose because I have so far to go I'm willing to give it some time.
8 lbs a month is a pretty decent loss, although I understand the frustration when you appear to stall. I had a mini freak out myself at one point where my weight didn't change much over 3 weeks. In the end I didn't do anything and it dropped quite fast for the next couple of weeks (ie. making up for it). Even if you decide to add more food (as your trainer is telling you) I'd suggest that you do it slowly over a period of time. Talk with them about it. Even with the changes I've made (my lowest days are now 600 cals over where I started) I made them no more than 200 cals at a time. I waited a little bit to see if it affected me negatively. So far I've been lucky and they haven't. Although I suspect if I'd added 600 calories each and every day it might have. Who knows though.
I posted to your blog, but was also prompted to do my own again tonite using your formula. I'm going to shoot for like 1700-1800/day just because to eat more seems like too much food if I'm eating the right kinds of food. There just seems something odd about forcing yourself to eat more, which I know you've blogged about before. Of course, you are working out a ton. I wonder if you could eat what "feels" right and then reduce some cardio instead. I know that's probably not the direction you wanted to go, but the math would work, right?
Hey SportMom, I'm "full" on about 1000 calories. I've gotten my way up to 1900-2000 calories, sometimes 2300 (good ole steak days). If I went with what feels right, I'd eat 900 calories ; /. Technically, I am eating at about my BMR without the exercise. I can't take the exercise away because it's the amount of training and cardio I'm advised.
Yes, Anne, it is. You have two camps--the diet programs/nutritionists/dieticians who say cut calories. Then you have the fitness pros who say add them.
It makes sense to me to let burned calories come from exercise to protect your metabolism (mine's still off from years of dieting). And it makes sense that if you fuel less than your BMR, your body is gonna stall like a car out of gas.
But yeah, 2900 calories! I did it yesterday and man was I stuffed. Gonna do it for a week and see how I manage. I was down .4 lbs today so perhaps...?
Ultimately, I hear you--you're saying I'm taking a slow period as a stall and it's mostly mental ; /.
I'm always being told to eat more & I must admit when I do it (with the right foods of course) I do lose more steadily. But I find I really have to work at it - it's just not a natural inclination for me.
Hey SportMom, I'm "full" on about 1000 calories. I've gotten my way up to 1900-2000 calories, sometimes 2300 (good ole steak days). If I went with what feels right, I'd eat 900 calories ; /. Technically, I am eating at about my BMR without the exercise. I can't take the exercise away because it's the amount of training and cardio I'm advised.
See, it's not that I don't believe you (I do). I just don't get this. I'm rarely hungry (well, post lifting M/W/F I could eat everything in sight), but I couldn't ever be full on 1000 calories. This morning I had the following (400 cal) breakfast:
So by the time I've hit lunch I'm already at 1088. The rest of my calories (to roughly 2400 today) will come from an afternoon snack (a treat today including some cheese spread and rice crackers), an evening meal (steak night), and an evening snack (usually protein shake, fruit salad, and two small biscotti).
I suppose what I like about this is that (a) I'm still losing weight eating at this level, (b) I feel I have somewhere to cut calories later when I have to, and (c) I could pretty much eat this way forever (with adjustments to maintenance calories).
If I was left to my own devices I'd have likely had the toast and jam with the grapefruit for breakfast (no protein shake). I'd have skipped the morning snack. Lunch would have likely been 4 whole wheat tortillas with 3-oz of cheese and ketchup, plus the apple. By mid-afternoon I would be hungry and looking for something to eat. Even if I'd had the same afternoon snack, I'd have just taken the container of spread with me and eaten what I wanted. I now always measure it into a small container.
To the lunch point the calorie counts are almost exactly the same. The composition are quite different:
The most obvious changes are the protein and the carbs. I can see why I would have more hunger on the old diet (less protein) and how that would cause the mid-afternoon overeating.
I'm always being told to eat more & I must admit when I do it (with the right foods of course) I do lose more steadily. But I find I really have to work at it - it's just not a natural inclination for me.
So, I ran my H-B numbers yesterday. My blog details that and how. I'm shooting for 2600-2900 calories. So, last 2 days I ate a ton (2800 and 3000+) and guess what, back down to 273. I know it's water weight, that fast. But it shows ya something, I think. Would love to see the week bring me to 269.
What do you think of Eating More
