I know, but I just didnt think that someone could lose so much weigh so quickly with nothing left already. Obviously you can't lose your bones, skin, etc.

I just wish people would realize how serious starving yourself really is. I SERIOUSLY thought it was okay until I walked into that hospital room.

In my own experience, I stopped losing weight until I started eating more. I'm a firm believer in the starvation theory - probably I'm a believer because it matches my own experiences. I think about it like this - if i were on a plane that crash landed in the Andes and there was very minimal food and I had to hike my way to safety, what would I WANT my body to do. I would want it to slow down my metabolism, hold onto fat reserves and cannablize muscle. Basically, I would want my body to do whatever it takes to keep me alive.

How can my body tell the difference between a crash landing in the Andes and a weight loss attempt? It can't, so there is no reason for me to be surprised/upset when my body starts acting in my best interest.

This time, I worked with my body. Gave it plenty of food, lots of small meals throughout the day. I don't want to be restrictive - I love to eat! Eating is pleasurable, eating is social, I want to be able to eat as much as I possibly can and still lose weight/maintain. I want a hot metabolism, I want a body that feels secure enough to let go of fat reserves.

My experience, lost 55 lbs eating 1400-1600 calories a day. Then, I hit 140 lbs and weight loss stalled from Feb - May. I decided I was maintaining and increased calories to 1800-2000. Over a period of 9 months, I lost an additional 13 lbs - I lost weight eating MORE.

So, eating more definitely worked for me. It also made me happier, I love to eat and I was really happy to have an extra 300-400 calories a day to eat.

Mike was pretty darn close: http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/5...1600/chart.jpg

Of course you do have to compensate for the decrease in BMR as you lose weight. Carrying around all that extra weight takes energy as well.

I kno in my case I naturally tend to cheat enough on a highly restrictive diet to slip into maintainance unless I am really vigilant. Few people have the kind of willpower Mike has demonstrated in going from 50% bodyfat to 12%.

I'm sorry but I have to be critical of your advice as from what I have read from your blog you have lost 20# in 9 months and your bodyfat levels have remained the same?

Since March 1/06 I have lost 12.6# and dropped 5.9% bodyfat.

Your story gives me hope that I will not have to be on a restrictive amount of calories for EVER! Did you increase your exercise when you increased the amount of calories?

Thanks, everyone, for your informative posts on this subject. I'm always interested in reading how my metabolism works and how I can fine-tune my calories in vs. calories out (it's a tricky thing!)

No, I did not. I have been a lackadaisical exerciser during my entire weight loss process (which is shameful, I know). I haven't worked out regularly since I broke my rib back in August.

That is why I am using Mike as an example. My weight loss has been sporadic as I have spent long stretches in "maintainance" due to a lack of discipline. If I stuck with a constant deficit my diet would be long over. Part of my problem is I want to both gain muscle and lose fat at the same time which is pretty tricky. When my lifting is going well my diet is not and vice versa.

My lean bodymass appears to be in the 200-220# range so my BF% is probably 25-32%. The goal is to "see my abs" which would place me around 10%.

If I didn't care about lean bodymass I would ramp up the cardio and cut the calories as much as i could tolerate (1,000-1,500/day?).

Yeah, from what I've read it is very very difficult to build muscle and lose fat at the same time, but it makes sense to me. To build muscle, you need a caloric surplus, almost everybody gains a little fat at the same time they gain some muscle. To lose weight, you need a caloric deficit. How can you have a caloric surplus and a caloric deficit at the same time?

I'm sorry I'm new here, who is Mike?

Yes gaining lean mass and losing fat is very tricky to do at the same time, but it can be done. Since 03/01/06 I have gone from 179.2# @ 55.9%BF down to 166.6# @ 50%BF that makes for a total of almost 17# of fat lost and just over 4# of lean mass gained.

I have to agree almost entirely with RobertW on this one. Very interesting thread on starvation mode on the maintainer's forum:
http://www.3fatchicks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=64562

I think there are a lot of reasons people begin to lose after upping their calories. First of all, when your body gets used to something, it's going to slow your loss. If you are doing the SAME cardio routine, it will become less effective over time, same as hanging at the same calories for a long time over time. Also I've noticed when I eat more calories, I often do a better job of getting in my veggies and my protein, both of which I have SEEN help me lose weight faster when I pay attention to them.

I don't think starvation mode would really kick in for most people until about 800 calories. Just look at other cultures where people just don't eat as much, so long as the nation doesn't suffer other problems they tend to have exemplary lifespans which wouldn't be the case if they were consistently starving themselves over time. I think if you're on a plateau, there are a LOT of things you can do. Change your cardio, add cardio, add more weight lifting, increase your protein, increase your vegetables, stop eating packaged foods, start eating all natural or completely "clean" and unpackaged foods. Changing up your routine will make the scale move again, and for a lot of people they achieved that by increasing their calories. Also, if they increased them to a more comfortable level but to where they still had a consistent deficit they may be able to "stay on plan" better at that level and workout more, all of which would further help your weight loss. Just my opinion, upping calories might be the answer for many I just don't think any of us have to worry about starvation mode.

Sorry, but I there are 2 things here that stuck out at me. First, that you are planning to "end your diet". That is part of the problem with highly restrictive dietary regimes: they are almost exclusively done with the idea that they will end. They have to in order for someone to refrain from causing even more damage when at the low end of their weight limits. However, since you are not learning how to eat sensibly, when that diet ends, it is all too easy to fall back into the patterns that caused all of the excess weight to begin with! I'm am currently running on an 1800-2000 calorie plan. I'm tallish for a woman at 5'11", and rather active, so I feel this is a good calorie range not only for while I am losing weight, but also for once I have lost it. In other words, I learning now exaclty how I am going to eat for the rest of my life. And since this is going to take a while, I fully expect to have some great eating and exercise habits engrained after a while.

Also, I have been both losing weight AND gaining muscle at quite a good rate by eating right and exercising. Yes, I know that I am in the "she could hardly help but get better" end of the weight/strength continum, but it seems to me that if you aren't in a hurry to do either (or both) that you can get both stronger and fitter without sacrificing over-all health. Too many times people expect to do in one year what really can only be done safely in many, and then wonder why they have to make physical sacrifices to meet their goals.

Okay, I'm getting off my soap-box. But please, let's respect our bodies and do what they need to be healthy. A thin (or strong) yet sick body is not what any of us want.


edit: I eat 1800-2200 cals/day.

i thought the idea was to build muscle and burn fat at the same time?? muscle does not weigh more than fat, it is just sleeker. and if you are building muscle....muscle will burn fat faster than just dieting alone. basically, if you are building muscle and eating less and doing cardio, shouldn't you be burning "fat" off twice as fast??

well, i know i don't count my calories anymore, i just eat less and my weight loss during my whole process has been about one pound a week. i would say most days i probably stick around 1500 calories. some days less and some days more. even not having gone to the gym in the past 2 weeks, i have managed to lose at least one pound in the past 2 weeks. but you do have to give your body enough fuel to work with, but not too much. you do want to have to dig into those fat reserves, but not be solely dependant on them.

and that's why you shouldn't "diet" you should make a lifestyle change. If you concentrate on only eating less until you get where you want to be and then go back to having Big Macs everyday for lunch and pancakes and syrup for breakfast and steak and potatoes for dinner every day, you will just put that weight back on.

To clarify my position: Do what ever works best for you. I am just questioning the reasoning behind the "eat more to lose" theory. Didn't Bob's group on the biggest loser (following the "eat more diet") get creamed by Jillian's team following the "Eat less" approach?


Maybe if you lift weights 2xweek and run a small surplus on the following days, and then run deficits on the other 5 days? A pound of muscle only contains ~500 Cal (being 75% water) vs. the 3,500 Cal in a # of fat, so you don't need to have much of a surplus on those "anabolic days". Since your body prefers fat as a fuel to muscle you should be able to hold on to your newly gained muscle while shedding fat.

I am just hoping to gain a little strength and hold onto my muscle over the next few months while I drop the last 50#.

Lucksmyle,
Mike posts under the name Ultraclyde. He has had spectacular success losing weight through a combination of long distance running and strict calorie counting.

Well, I must say, this has been one interesting thread. I'd also like to chime in to say that I've noticed I'll start dropping weight again on the weeks I eat the most food. However, I'm a chicken when it comes to deliberately eating more. I can't do it. I've tried. I chicken out. The times I've lost weight by eating more were sort of accidents. Or, well, let's just say it didn't fall into my regular eating plan. Christmas, Thanksgiving, it never fails. I can be stuck for weeks, then go through the holidays terrified I'd going to put on a few pounds and I'm actually DOWN on the scale the next time I weigh myself. My last little drop in weight came right after Easter - we had gone out to an Easter brunch buffet, plus I ate a bunch of candy over that same weekend. Bam, hit the scale, was 137, after being stuck at 139 for weeks on end.

Now that I've gone back to my regular eating habits, I've bumped back up to 139 and even hit 141 the other day. I wasn't happy. But I try not to let it bother me too much. I just keep thinking about the progress I've already made, how much better I feel mentally AND physically, and count my blessings I don't weigh 200 pounds anymore.

LLV.....well said.....at least you are not back up to 200 pounds. how awesome that you have come so far. it sucks that you are struggling with that last nine pounds, but my my....look how far you have come. you are doing an awesome job and apparantly whatever you are doing is definately working for you.

something that i have heard over and over again on this board is that we are all different and we need to take time to figure out what works for our bodies. some may lose weight by eating less than 1200 calories and some may do better eating over 1600 calories. some people do well doing cardio while others do better with strength training. each body is different and we should definately learn to listen to what our bodies are telling us. :)