Well, I posted earlier about my inability to lose weight. I weighed myself today and I am now at 149.4. Out of the 150s, but the weight loss has been excruciatingly slow. I basically have lost a pound a week since I started - which is something, but I would love to know how to speed it up.
Now, since 3FC was down for the past few days, I lurked about the boards on livestrong. Had to get my fix somehow! Anyhow, there was a lady on there who weighed 230 lbs, said that she worked out hard every day, burned like 800 calories a workout, followed such and such diet and hadn't lost anything.
The people on that site commenced getting on her rear about not eating enough. They were saying that she had to intake 2,500 calories, or her body goes in starvation mode, she was in too much of a deficit, yada yada yada. They sounded quite knowledgeable and scientific, and some of the more scoldy ones sounded like they were exercise physiologists.
However, I am a devotee to Jillian Michaels' podcasts - addict, really. And one thing I have heard from her, over and over, is that, if you have a lot of weight to lose, you can drop your calories low, even if you are working out hard, because your excess fat is stored energy and the body wants it off. Well, considering how much weight she gets off contestants on The Biggest Loser, I would say her proof is in the pudding. And she also consistently says that, if you have only vanity pounds to lose, you have to eat more, or else you will go into starvation mode.
Enter me. While I will not qualify for The Biggest Loser, I also have more than vanity pounds to lose. And I am absolutely confused. Can I go to 1,200per day, when I typically burn a daily total of 2,200 + calories on days that I workout (that is my burn for the entire day, according to my Bodybugg)? Or, do I need to eat my BMR (1,400), so that my body doesn't go into starvation mode?
I have to say that I have been doing the 1,400 thing since I started on October 19, while being religious with workouts, and it has worked somewhat, but not as well as I had hoped.
I feel that I am in a grey area - between having enough fat stores to take my calories super low without the body shutting down, and having merely vanity pounds.
So, what do you ladies think? Should I take my calories down to 1,200, while maintaining or even increasing my workouts? Or keep on keeping on what I am doing and hoping that it kicks in?
Okay, first of all I have never ever heard of someone needing to eat 2500 calories to keep their body from going into starvation mode. That said, I am 5'2", weigh 182 pounds and I lose on 1350 calories a day. Do I think 1200 calories is too low for you? I say no. I say to try it, and see if you stay satisfied and lose weight. Again, these are just my opinions.
Last edited by Onederchic; 11-14-2009 at 11:07 PM.
You can't eat a 1200 calorie diet and exercise 800 cals a day for very long or you will mess with your metabolism. You have to fuel your body or you'll become sluggish and the weight won't fall off.
Onederland, I actually have been at this for three weeks - October 19 is the day that I started stringent calorie counting and became religious with the workouts. I started posting here about two weeks ago, which is why my stated starting weight is slightly lower than the weight which I began.
So, Cassieroll, you don't think that I have enough fat reserves that I can go low calorie without going into starvation mode? That is what I was wondering. I mean, 1,400 doesn't seem to be working for me. So, I either have to increase the calories somewhat or decrease them. Increasing them makes me nervous, but so does decreasing them.
And Onederchic, the 1,350 a day works for you? How has your weight loss been on that? Have you played around with your calories to see what works?
Yes, I have tweaked my calories along the way. It is about trial and error, in my opinion. I started out on way too little, around 900, and I did lose a lot quickly (about 75 pounds in 3 months) but then my weight loss stalled because I did hit starvation mode. I then found 3FC and learned I had to eat enough to fuel my body. I have tweaked my plan since and I do so each time I lose a significant amount and hit another stall or plateau. The past month I have only maintained due to an injury and other life issues but I am back on plan now. With the 1350 calories, I normally average a monthly loss of 5-8 pounds which I am pretty happy with.
I say up your calories if you feel the need to, work it for a few weeks then tweak it as necessary but be sure you are diligent with your plan. Work your plan and it will work for you. Keep us updated.
5-8 pounds sure sounds good to me! I would love to lose that each month...Maybe I should split the difference between the 1,400 and 1,200 and do 1,300.
jillianfan - I weigh more then you and in general eat more (1500 is my goal but eh, I exercise a lot so sometimes I'm over) but why I think my situation relates to yours is I some weeks have a larger then recommended deficits, (goal is to lose up to 3lbs/week) and I don't have much more weight to lose then you... only about 40lbs to go.
I use a bodybugg too and as long as I track my calories closely I haven't had much of a slow-down for under-eating as shown by my bugg numbers. I still lose what it expects me to.
Even if the starvation mode happens. It doesn't account for THAT much of a slow down. I don't remember the % though.
If I were you I'd try it and see what happens. Worst that can happen is you need to back off and add more calories in.
Idealmuse, thanks for your reply. I was actually considering intensifying the workouts in conjunction with cutting my calories down, so that I hit a burn of around 2,300 a day. It helps to know that you don't have a slow down with the lower calories.
Do you actually lose 3 lbs a week? That would be great if I could start doing that!
Last edited by jillianfan; 11-15-2009 at 01:47 AM.
The weeks where I buckle down and work at it I do... but most weeks I end up at 2lbs/week. 3000 burned is a bit of a beast to maintain consistently as you can imagine. Also, working out more can make you more hungry which is why I can sometimes exceed my 1500 Target. I try and not make it more then 1800 though.
I wish you luck 1200 isn't easy! Not sure I could do it for very long. If your worried about the starvation thing another thing you could try is rotate weeks. One week 1200 next week 1400.. next week 1200... etc.
Wow - 3,000 calorie burn a day! I think that I managed that exactly twice in the period that I have had the bodybugg. I am impressed!
I like the idea of rotating the weeks, actually. That isn't a bad idea...so maybe next week will be a 1,200 calorie week, since this week was 1,400. Thanks for the input! At this point, anything is worth a shot.
BTW - what kind of activities do you do to hit 3,000 calorie burn?
1-2 lb a week is considered healthy weight loss. At my weight now (201lb) it's become a lot more difficult to stick to my 2lb loss a week while in the early days when I was much heavier I could lose 2-3lb a week. As you become lighter unfortunatly the weight comes off more slowly as it's difficult to lower calories so much. If at around you weight I can lsoe at lb per week still I will be very happy
There's 3500 calories in each lb so it is going to be hard for you to lose 2lb+ a week. You can try decreasing to 1200 calories and see what difference it makes. You can try increase exercise and seeing what difference that makes. If it doesn't work you can go back to what your'e doing now but lowering to 1200 calories per week may help you lose about half a lb more per week depending how your body responds.
I agree rotating calorie amounts is good too I'm always altering the calories I have from week to week.
We're all different and for me I can eat below my BMR for a few months without my body goign into starvation mode. So fat after that when my weight loss slows down it's just been a matter of changing something - more or less exercise, more or less food, etc.
As well as trying out different calorie or activity levels you could try drinking more water if you aren't, making sure you're using your calories wisely on the most healthy food possible, cutting down sodium if you're not, seeign if cutting down refined carbs makes a difference for you. All those things help me. So experiment to see if the scales will move more for you but 1lb a week is still a good amount I know it's frustrating when people are losing more weight than you are but losing weight is a slow process. Even if I manage to continue to lose 2lb a week it's going to take me about another 26 weeks to get to goal.
I will add though that no person, website or calculator can give you an exact number of calories your body needs to lose weight but the calculator can maybe give you a stepping stone to start at anyway.
Rainbow - you are right, I should be happy that the scale is going down, slowly but surely. And I know that I will eventually reach my goal, by summertime of next year. It doesn't seem fair that, when I gain, I seem to gain at one helluva faster clip than one pound a week, but maybe it just feels like that.
And, I know that tv is unrealistic, but I am hooked on these shows called "Bulging Brides" and "The Last 10 Pounds." They are Canadian shows with a hunky black trainer and tiny woman nutritionist who work with women who want to fit into their wedding dress and "The Last 10 Pounds" deals with ordinary women who have gotten out of shape and want to fit into a certain outfit for a special event. They get on a 1,500 calorie a day diet, an exercise plan that usually includes around 4 hours of cardio a week and about 2.5 hours of weight training, and these women always hit the goal of a 10 lb weight loss in four weeks, six weeks for the brides. Sometimes they drop like 17 pounds in that span. And I am sitting here watching, thinking how much of a failure the trainer on that show, Tommy Europe, would think I was, when I work just as hard and eat just as little as those women. Ah, but I am older than those women, too, so there's the rub!
Onederchic, actually I somewhat zig-zagged this past week. Basically I had 1,200 calories two days, 1,300 calories two days, a high calorie day of 1,800, a day at 1,500 and a day at 1,400. It averaged to be 1,400. Maybe I should give it some time, but I know that I only lost .6 of a pound this week, so not sure it is working for me.
I think I might try the alternating weeks idea next.
I think it depends on you and your body. What works for you might not work for me. If you aren't losing with what you are doing now, you have to tweek it and if that means lowering your cals and upping your exercise for a while, then you do that. I've had better luck raising my calories than lowering them and baby, I've got some fat reserves!!!!
I'm also in the camp that you can't live the rest of your life eating 1200 cals and exercising like a fiend. It's just not possible unless you have the will of a jedi There's a balance and it's hard to find and it's different for every body. I think it's unreasonable to think a person can survive running 4 miles a day and only eating 1200 calories. There's a crash and burn (or binge) in the future and we all know how hard it is to come out of a binge.
Last edited by cassieroll; 11-15-2009 at 01:00 PM.
Questions about calorie deficits
Ah, but I am older than those women, too, so there's the rub! 
There's a balance and it's hard to find and it's different for every body. I think it's unreasonable to think a person can survive running 4 miles a day and only eating 1200 calories. There's a crash and burn (or binge) in the future and we all know how hard it is to come out of a binge.
