Back on the wagon! Question about calories
 

Hello everyone!

I'm back after a 6 month break from everything calorie and exercise. I needed this mentally, more than physically.

I've been back into it for a month or so now and have already lost 12 pounds from where I re-started. Lowest weight for the month has been 198lbs (of course, I fluctuate like crazy, so that never stays).

My question I'd like to ask is -should I be eating more calories? Right now I yo-yo between 1200-1800 in a week, usually sticking with 1500. This is what I did when I lost the 40lbs, but I somehow feel the fat isn't melting off as fast as it should?
I see a lot of ladies on here who weigh less than I do, and they eat at least 1900 a day!

I did calculate my BRM and it said I need to eat 2100 to lose a pound a week. Doesn't this seem like a bit much? Then I have my caloriecount website which says I have to eat 2100 to maintain -which means I have to eat only 1500 to burn.

Sadly, I've become confused. Any advice/help would be appreciated.:^:

1500 seems like a good amount.

The weight already (initially) melted off you once, it probably won't happen again. At least that has been my experience. But, it doesn't need to - just be consistent and you will lose.

At your height and weight, I wouldn't keep dropping calories - if I wanted to speed anything up, I'd do more exercise.

1900 seems like a lot to me, also. 1500-1600 sounds more appropriate, you may need to experimaent a little. I'm sure many of us complain that the darn fat doesn't melt off quickly enough. It will come off, though, keep at it.

Could you tell us more about why you needed the break? I'm wondering whether you have a tendency to try to lose weight too fast, and then end up needing a break as a reaction to that.

How much do you exercise?

When I was at your weight, I lost about 5 pounds per month on 1700 calories/day or so, maybe a bit more on the weekends. I exercised (cardio and strength training) about 4 times per week.

That's just one data point as everyone's body is different. The only way to really know is to do the science experiment - pick something and try it for a month or so, see how manageable it is for you and what results you get.

I see a few things, so forgive me if I seem all over the place.

Calorie needs can be very individual. Height, age, weight-loss history, activity levels, etc. all factor into how many calories a day we need to maintain or lose weight. The ladies who weigh less but eat more may have a lot of different things going on their routines. So while it can be a decent way to gauge calories for starting to see how much others in similar positions are eating, we're always going to have to adjust to fit our individual needs. That can mean a couple of weeks of experimenting.

Online calorie estimators tend to vary widely and sometimes overestimate. Again, they can be a good place to start if we have no idea, but adjusting is going to be needed to fit us individually.

The only real problem I see is this mentality:

Firstly, the weight is going to come off at its own pace. We get to determine how much effort we'd like to put into our weight loss, so that can certainly affect the rate at which we lose, but we still don't get to decide what the scale says.

Secondly, who says how fast weight "should" be lost? There's no expert saying you "should" lose weight at a certain rate. As long as the scale is showing a downward trend then you're doing things right.

Lastly, you went off your plan for about 6 months. Your body re-adjusted to that, and it's possible that it's just going to be a little harder to take off weight this time around.

Trying to determine how fast you "should be" losing weight, and then not meeting those baseless expectations could lead to huge frustrations which may lead to more "breaks". Don't let it. Nip it in the bud. There's no "should".

Down to your actual calories. Are you content with about 1500 calories a day? Are you hungry or weak? Or are you too full? Do you exercise regularly? These things all matter when it comes to your caloric needs.

If you're satisfied on your 1500 average amount of calories, there's not really a need to change anything. You could certainly always try to up them by a hundred calories for two weeks and keep track of the results. But, again this all comes down to experimenting. You're the only expert here on your own body.

I exercise 3-4 times a week. 45 minutes of HIIT, 30 minutes of weights, and then stretching after.

I took the break mostly from exercising, not so much from counting my calories. It's because no matter what I try, I just don't like to exercise. I think a lot of people feel that way, and I had trouble going every week by that point so I thought a break is needed.

It seems with me the only way to lose is to include exercise, because during that break I gained back some weight even though I was eating the norm. It always made me wonder if I might have a slow metabolism.

Find an exercise you like to do. I had to quit going to the gym because I broke my shoulder ( not at the gym) that halted my gym going. I found that although I was limited as to what I can do. I can walk, walking is great exercise and is cheap, all you need is a good pair of shoes. Do you like to swim ? That is also good exercise. I am just saying there are other ways to exercise than going to the gym.

I'll tell you right now, exercise alone won't help you lose weight. The overwhelming majority of weight loss comes from your diet. I should know; I joined a gym at 16 and maybe lost 20 pounds, but stayed at 200 pounds for five years because I was eating too much.

You can lose weight without exercising, but it really isn't a good idea—you might lose muscle weight.

Bargoo is right though, you should find an exercise you like. It doesn't have to be intense or anything like that, but you should be doing something. Even walking is better than nothing :)

I don't do it much, but I do find zumba and other types of dance a lot of fun. You don't realize that you're exercising, but you really do feel it the next day!