So I started my weight loss journey 4 months ago. Since then I've been mostly sticking to 1550 calories a day.

In the beginning, I worked out 6 days a week for 30 minutes- 1 hour. I consistently lost weight at first, about 1lb/wk.

Then my situation changed and I had a lot more free time; about 1.5 months ago I started working out 6 days a week for 1-2 hours each time. (Often closer to 2 hours). I kept my calorie count at 1550. I did work in the extra calories from my workout into my daily allotment, as I've always done. So often I'd eat 1700-1800 calories, but it evened out as I'd have a 2 hour work out that day. (I know you can't accurately estimate calories-- but what I do is enter my weight 15lbs lower on the machines, and then subtract 50-100 calories depending on how long the work out was. I add the number I get to my daily calorie allotment).

During this time I had a few instances where I went off plan (Friends wedding, Thanksgiving, xmas parties). I assumed my weight would be up, but each time, it was down. After an indulgent wedding weekend I had a "whoosh" of a 3 pound loss.

It seems like it can't be true/doesn't make sense that I need to up my calories. Yes, I'm working out a lot, but I add the extra calories to my daily intake, something I've always done since day 1. Just looking for input. I was thinking of going from 1550 to 1700 for a couple weeks, but I'm hesitant because I don't want to get used to eating more and then have to cut back again if it doesnt work.

I've read other people here that swear by cycling their calories. It seems that if you've stayed at 1500 calories a day for that long, your body has gotten used to that amount and is sitting there not wanting to budge especially with the duration of your workouts!

In general, and this depends on activity level and a couple other factors, to maintain your weight of 156, you would need about 2340 calories a day. To lose 1 lb a week, that would mean a deficit of 500 calories a day or 1840 calories.

From what you've written, it sounds like some calorie cycling would work for you. Maybe do a 1900 calorie day, then a 1700 calorie day and your normal 1500 calorie day.

Let us know how it goes!!

I know how you feel. I'm 43 and only 5 ft 3. I also work out 1 - 2 hours, 6 days a week. I started June at 1400 calories, and like you, I wasn't working out as much as I am now. I didn't weigh myself throughout my weight loss, but I estimate that I was about 180 when I started in June. In October, I thought I looked pretty good and figured I would try maintenance. I used lots of online calorie calculators to figure out what my maintenance calories would be (all of this, though, still w/out weighing myself). I played it safe and started eating 1700-1800 even though many of the calculators recommended more than that. Finally, the Tuesday after Thanksgiving, I decided to weigh myself so that I could more accurately determine my maintenance calories. I was 140.6. I was floored! My goal weight was 145. I decided to consistently eat 12,600 calories per week (I cycle calories, & that averages to 1800 per day) and see if I gained on that. Three weeks later, I weighed in at 137.2. So, I had lost approx. 1 lb. each week eating on average 1800 per day. I would never have guessed that I would be able to eat more than 1800 per day. I increased my calories to 1900 per day the following week, and this week, I'll average about 2000 per day.

So, the lesson here is don't underestimate your metabolism. You're expending a lot of energy (and if you're like me--and most women--we also do lots of everyday activities, and that adds up). There's no major harm in increasing your calories. Find out how much you can eat. You may be pleasantly surprised as I was.

I'm not sure there's any way around this risk. There's no way to tell what your ideal calorie range is except by experimenting.




It doesn't make sense because you're thinking of calories burned as a constant - it's not.

Weight gain/loss/maintenance is a matter of calories in and calories out, but what you eat (and tons of other factors) can affect the "calories out" part of the equation.

One way that too few calories can work against you, is in having less energy. The less energy you have, the less you move - even in little ways you might not notice. Your body may also reserve energy in ways you would never notice.

I was absolutely shocked to discover that I lose more weight on 1800 calories of low-carb than on 1800 calories of high-carb (even when accounting for calories from fiber which can't be digested and for the little bit of extra water weight loss that always results in the first couple weeks of reducing carbs).

I only happened to discover (because I was keeping a health log that included a spot for taking a daily body temperature reading) that my body temperature is actually almost a full degree higher on low-carb. My normal body temperature has been in the 96's for a long time. I only get readings of more than 98.0 when I'm very sick or when I'm eating low-carb. Maintaining body temperature requires energy (calories) and so assuming that the air temperature is lower than body temperature, maintaining a higher body temperature burns more calories than maintaining a lower one.


I'm not at all saying that what's true for me is true for you, but there's no way to determine your best calorie or carb level (or a thousand other things you may want to learn, such as which diet you feel best on mentally and physically) without experimenting. And experimenting always entails the risk of learning that your "old way" was better.

Hi. If you lost weight after a weekend of eating more than you needed it's probably because you temporarily increased your leptin levels and need to occasionally do this. Google leptin, refeed, and you'll find out lots about this. I'm playing with calorie levels now because I've plateaud and this eating more on a regular basis may move me into weight loss again.