Quote:
Originally Posted by mzzmac
if you uder your calories you'll lose weight. "starvation mode" is not really an issue unless your 95 lbs or something
Yes, and no. The term starvation mode is probably the worst term to use. I'm going to copy something in that I just posted in another thread. It was about some people needing to eat more to lose weight.
---
It's hard for a lot of people to grasp, but for me it works better. It kind of goes this way:
Higher calories
- more energy
- move around more, not exercise, just do more
- more energetic workouts
- better sleep
- consistent weight loss
Lower calories
- less energy
- spend more time on the couch
- go through the motions during workouts
- insomnia
- lose fast (sometimes), then lose next to nothing
I adding the sleeping stuff before I finished up the post. I really didn't think about it, but I do seriously sleep better. When I was on lower calories I would lie awake at night just wanting to go get something to eat. Now, I plan a snack before bed (usually protein shake and fruit), and sleep extremely well. An interesting point is that I'm well over 100 pounds lighter than when I last started to lose weight, and actually eating more (started at 1600-1800, eating 2000 now). That really just kind of floors me.
I do eat more on days I do weight training (in the form of a post-workout shake), and I generally take a break every 12-weeks. Having said all that (in the interest of full-disclosure) I'm currently about 9 pounds heavier than I was in March. Primarily because I let everything (food and exercise) go to **** during the final weeks of school and exams). I proved, that for me, planning really is everything.
---
I'll add a little more here. My current maintenance level appears to be about 3000 calories a day. My activity level at my current weight requires that amount of fuel to maintain. When I eat 2000 calories a day my 'system' works well, and I lose weight. I recognize that in the past when I tried to eat under 1200 calories a day I was truly starving my system. Yes, I would drop weight very quickly, and then suddenly I would stop. I couldn't understand that, and would try to eat less. What I recognize now (and people who know me in real life comment on) is that I have a ton of energy at this calorie level. At under 1200 calories I would workout, however, I did nothing else physical during the day. I wouldn't walk any further than I had to, I wouldn't take stuff upstairs - just leave it on the step until I was going, in fact, I would do as little extra movement as I could get away from.
At that calorie level my body was telling me I wasn't giving it enough fuel - to slow down. Oh, and every cold/flu/bug going around - I caught it. The magic 1200 number isn't a real one. It's just a number that most nutritionists feel you should eat to get the proper level of nutrients. Each person has that magic level that they should stick to. The problem is that it's not always easy to find. What works for one person may not work for someone else.
However, let me point out that my 80-something mother, who is ~120 pounds maintains that weight eating just slightly less than I do (we eat different breakfast, lunches, etc. but the same dinner). I would say she eats ~1800 cals a day. Oh yes, and then there's the chocolate bars (family size) and the candy she buys every week when she goes out. I call her the poster child for NEAT (I'll give you a link in a minute). She's almost always on the move. Not that she doesn't have a nap/lie down now in the afternoons, but she's always moving around. I try to emulate her, but it's tough some days.
More information on NEAT (Non Exercise Activity Thermogenesis)
http://mayoresearch.mayo.edu/mayo/re..._lab/about.cfm