Added calories and lost weight???

Okay, so I'm not actually at a "plateau" so to speak.. it's been about two weeks I suppose and I keep fluctuating back and forth with this one pound.. but the scale hasn't gone down.

I really don't think I can cut calories and be happy... but I am TERRIFIED to increase. 

According to EVERY calculator/every poster/everybody.. I"m probably not eating enough calories (5'8, 235 pounds, 34 years old) and I eat, on average, 1600 calories a day... and burn on average...600 calories a day (with workouts)

I think, based on every calculator I've looked at and smart person I read on this site :-) , I should aim for closer to 2000...  but I'm just so hesitant to try!   What if I get used to it and I gain weight?  *lol*

Which leads me to THIS question... Who has "upped" their calories and maintained steady weight loss for a significant amount of time?

Thanks!

this is what i am considering but am also too afraid to do

Great question---looking forward to hearing the answers ( ; 

olivia... I just looked at your profile... HOW AWESOME ARE YOU!   Down 25 pounds!   YAY!!!  HOw great do we feel, huh???

i'm considering too but i'm also scared

I think the question has been phrased wrong.  If you eat way less than you need to lose weight, then up the calories to a level where you still can lose weight,  of course you can have a sustained loss at that higher level. It doesn't mean increasing calories is the way to break a plateau, or that you lose faster at a higher calorie level.  All the science I have read says the reverse is true.  You can slow your metabolism by cutting calories only by about 5 to 10%... 15% if you cut to 800 or below.  So even if your metabolism slows, you still have a larger calorie deficit than if you dieted at higher calorie numbers.. 

Most humans need more than 10 calories a pound... 11 to 16 is the typical range, higher if extremely athletic and active.  So, multiply your body weight by 10... so 2350 calories a day.  Anything under that, and the math says you shouldn't gain weight, should lose... the amount depends on your metabolism. So  you are currently eating 6.8 calories a pound. This is low, especially with your current level of exercise.  So you could increase to an 8 or 9 ratio and still lose weight. It is my understanding that the Biggest Loser diet has folks diet at a 7 ratio (body weight  x 7).  On last season's show, 50 of 50 contestents lost dramatic amounts of weight doing this diet combined with intense exercise. No one's metabolism stalled to where they were no longer losing weight.

If you are uncomfortable eating so few calories, you should be able to increase, just lose at a slightly slower pace.  If your current level of calories and exercise leaves you tired,  then upping calories or exercising less could benefit, in that times when you are not exercising, you might have more energy so naturally be more active more hours of the day, therefore burn more calories. A lot of people get so tired from workouts, they just sit the rest of the day.

I've read somewhere that at about 50-pound intervals, plateaus typically occur, like your body wants to readjust for a while.

So I say, have faith in the math.  Probably best to wait it out.

So maybe a better way to ask the question is:  Did anyone lose weight faster at a higher calorie level than at a lower calorie level, over a sustained period of time?

Nah... it wasn't about "faster" really... it was about continuous... I do WANT to eat more, in theory!   I mean... come on... I didn't get to be where I am NOW on 1600 calories a day...

...but... as you've stated before... as with most overweight people.. I have no true concept of what I WAS eating before...

so... I want to eat 2000 calories.. .break the plateau... KEEP eating 2000 calories and keep losing... and not have to cut back on calories again at a lower....

...hmmm.. insteresting thought just crept into my head... If I'm "in tune" with my body for real.. will I WANT less calories as my weight gets lower?  Right now... I've had about 1100 calories so far today and worked off 600 with exercise... I am LEGITIMATELY hungry!  Not just water... not just munchies... HUNGRY... as I get thinner will I get hungry less often? Hmmmm.. interesting!

My nutritionist put me on a 2000 cal diet this spring.  I did gain back a few pounds, but my weight leveled off, then she cut 100 a day each week until I started losing again.  I'm now losing at 1500 a day, very slowly.  The last time it happened I was at 1200 a day, plateaued for months, then increased to 1500 and lost 9 pounds that month.  Then I made the mistake of going back to 1200 because 1500 felt like a lot.  I learned my lesson this time!

ME. I was losing about a pound a month eating 600-800 calories a day. finally in the beginning of the summer, I DOUBLED that amount, and so far have lost about fifteen pounds.. I'm trying to eat even MORE now, matter of fact.

Okay then, yes I've done it.  Just after I turned 50 I decided to join a gym and lose weight that had crept on. I was 148 and wanted to go to 133.  It took me four months. To reach my goal weight I had to diet no higher than 1200 ... and I not eat back calories for exercise. I exercised about six days a week for an hour at a time. I never plateaued. Never got sick...have not had cold, flu or other illness since Jan. 2000.  Now some would say I was starving myself, etc, surely this would backfire, I would rebound and gain all sorts of weight when I increased calories.

After I hit my goal, I increased calories to to 1300. I lost a little more. So increased to 1400. Tracked it for a month or so, and still lost weight. Hmmm... by then was 130. The weight looked fine, so I increased to 1500 and stayed there for several months. Well,  then helped a friend with a renovation project, and lost two more pounds... down to 128. Hey, this feels good, so didn't try to regain it.   I was trucking just fine since then, doing 1500 and 128 pounds. Then this spring I then tried green tea capsules.  I started to drop more weight, so now seem to be doing closer to 1600... seems to vary by brand of capsules.  I am small boned, at the low end of the normal range, do not want to lose more. So on days I am below 128 I just add few hundred extra calories.  I have to do this for a while, before I am sure how much more I can eat.... then will omit the capsules for a while, to see if is really the capsules after all. I know recently I have been losing very slowly on 1500, so need to eat a bit more.

Now, for me, I know if I multiply my current body weight by 10, I would lose weight. I know because I currently need 1500 to 1600 to maintain, so I absolutely would lose on 1280 calories a day.

Tamara, I know from other posts, that women in your family might have naturally slow metabolisms.  So try increasing by 100 a day and see what happens.  Then try another 100.

It might very well be that body weight times 10 would produce too slow of a loss for you.  If you like the ratio idea try body weight by 8...  which would be 1880, and see how you do.  The idea with the ratio is that each week you redo the math and drop your calories slightly as you lose weight, so that you continue to lose about the same each week. In contrast, if you stayed on a 1500-calorie diet, the closer you go to your goal, the slower the loss would be, to the point it feels like plateauing.  Using the ratio, the idea is that you slowly get yourself used to lower calorie numbers.... just don't go under 1200.

What I do think is that given the level of exercise you are doing, your current calories is a bit low. Okay if you feel okay... not tired etc.  But this may be hard for you to sustain.  It is not a defeat to go to a higher number.  What matters more  is that you diet at a number that is both comfortable for you, and that results in a rate of loss you can be happy with. If the rate of loss is too slow, you might not stay motivated, so it is a balance.

As you lose weight, think of it as your own personal great science experiment. Like a scientist would do, be accurate and keep good records. If you are sloppy recording calories, you don't have a good sense of what it takes to get the results you want. I like charts, because it helps me  see visually what is happening.  Sometimes in my personal life, someone asks me a weight-loss question.  My response is, "I'm  only an expert in my own body." So you become an expert in your own body, know how many calories you need to eat to lose weight at the pace you want... over the long haul. Ups and downs yes, but think long range trend.

claireanne: 

 that is the most interesting thing I've ever heard.  About multiplying your weight by a certain number of calories. 

I'm losing at 1,200, (some days a little over).  I do what I do and when I didn't lose I simply dropped the calories.  And it comes out close to the number if I multiplied by "7" .    

okay, then.. .ship... aiming for (YIKES) 1700... starting, tomorrow. .. no eating back calories for exercise... just trying it out.  I will, of course, hold you and your expertise entirely responsible if it causes me to gain *lol*

(I'm happily at 1397 today)

It is not a defeat to go to a higher number REALLY struck a chord with me.. I think that's what I kept thinking... that I feel pretty good... but I AM pretty hungry..

I had this calorie range 1200-2000... but really.. I AIMED for 1200 every day.. and felt a little like a failure every day that I DIDN'T stay at 1200... which was virtually every day... and some strange sense of pride if I was under for the day...  so I"m changing the range... 1500-2000...  (You already know I weigh every day... so I should know soon enough if anything happens!)

its hard for me to believe that eating more you loose weight, can someone explain this to me???

Uhoh depressive... are you sure you're ready for this... *lol*... let the floodgates open for the theorists and "starvation mode" thread.

I myself had ALWAYS thought eat less... exercise more... never too little food.. never too much exercise...

but it's not working for me this time as it has in the past... although I still feel terrific... thought I'd try varying my approach... especially since i"m in this for the L O N G haul!

thanks, probably you are right. But I love healthy food and I have always eat healthy so the only way for me to loose weight is to cut calories. I have really tried to eat more often but I gain weight.

so its hard for me to understand it.

shiptonia and tamarascholtz:

I'll be waiting to hear about the green tea capsule.  Also, I didn't consider as we lose weight we need to change our calorie intake.

If I went over on my 1,200 I carried it over to the next day.  I KNOW I can't keep writing down every little calorie I eat for the rest of my life.  I'm hoping someday it will be automatic, and that I can quit jumping on the scale so many times a day.

I'm going to try 1,300 for this entire week.  If I can still lose one pound I will be happy.   Then, I will consider trying more, two week after that.

I know how you feel about calorie logging.. I kind of like it...

I have done it SEVERAL times over the last three years... and I always do it religiously... for about three months... and then it falls apart...

but then weight gain always happens... so for me.. this is forever...

I"ve been taking "slimquick" since I decided to change my life...it does have green tea extracts.. but recently, I started DRINKING green tea... and cut out soft drinks this week... (as in diet ones)... so far... nada... but who knows... I could wake up tomorrow five pounds less.. ya never know! 

There are, by the way, other people who have been successful without REDUCING calorie intake as they lose weight... it's an interesting theory.

A few people say eat the amount of calories you will have to eat to maintain your "goal" weight... so if your goal weight is... say 155 pounds... you're 5'8 and moderately active... according to this site...  you should be able to eat 2000 calories and maintain...

so the theory is... I should EAT 2000 calories now... weight loss will slow down A LOT when I get close to goal weight... but if I keep eating at that weight... I"ll eventually maintain 155..

WAY too scary to me to even think about...

But if you go to "tools" on this website... and try looking at your "allowance" and "expenditure".. they are, if nothing else.. interesting numbers...

It tells me, for example, I should eat 2050 calories a day and my weight should be gone by next September.  It also tells me that I currently use 2800 calories a day...  who knows if any of those things are true!

Tamara, that you have plateaued doesn't mean you need to eat more to lose weight... I know you know this.  It is not at all unusual to plateau... your body is just readjusting for a while.  It is very normal.  It also could be a combination of different factors happening all at once. Now if you increase calories and lose weight, this does not mean that eating more broke the plateau. Because A happened and B happened, does not mean A caused B.  It just means it was time for your plateau to end, and you would have lost weight again anyway. If you eat 100 more calories tomorrow, and the scale goes up by 2 pounds, that doesn't mean eating 100 more calories made you gain 2 pounds.

See we're impatient, and we get distressed when things don't go as expected. So we're short-sighted and think this means we need to reverse strategies. It is like how everyone panics when the Dow Jones takes a tumble...  people panic and want to sell off, change investment strategies. But talk to anyone who has been in stocks for a few decades. They don't flinch when the Dow drops. They have seen this before, many times. The stock market always corrects. So the people that bail out in a panic are the ones who lose money. The stock market always goes up again. 

So because, for a couple weeks, your weight doesn't respond as predicted, that is not a reason to reverse strategies.  I suggested you eat more only because it will be easier for you to sustain.  Because, if you look at the math, compare that to what various websites tell you, all indicators are that you can lose at a higher calorie level.  I have a friend about 220, doing 1800 calories and losing at about a pound and a half a week... and she doesn't work out.

Now for some people when they plateau, it can mean time to lower calories again.  Like if you're 150 pounds and dieting on 1800 calories. Your weight has dropped enough that you are close to your maintenance level, so the rate of loss gets so slow it seems like a plateau.  You just have to look at the numbers in your situation and see if it seems reasonable this could be happening.  In your case, it is clear you are already low enough.

So, as I said, have faith in the math.  I'm curious. Do you have good records about your rate of loss so far?  Do you have records of daily calories and daily weigh-ins?

Yes... I keep mine on www.fitday.com and I did lose nine pounds last month... I don't think I'm really ON a plateau...  I don't think two weeks constitutes that yet...

I just have been jumping back and fort between 235 and 236 with minor changes every day...

but I stalled at the same place on the way UP too... and I don't think that's coincidence (for about two months no matter what I did.. .I wasn't GAINING anymore... even when I put my 75 pounds back on I weighed EVERY day... can't imagine where I'd be if I didn't!)

And by the way ship.. I was just kidding about blaming you... I hope you know... I actually have been kinda hungry for months now...  and I ENJOYED the hunger because I thought i meant that I was losing weight... but if I can add an extra piece of chicken a day... and still lose weight... why not...

and of course I WILL jump to conclusions and think EVERYONE should lose weight MY way... *lol*

WOW!

I learned a lot from this thread. ( : thanks, tamara! I'm doing my best! Dang bridesmaid gig fast approaching September 8th = motivated. =D

Keep us posted, will you, tamara? I'll be really interested to hear what you learn from tracking the changes.....