Hello, I was wondering because last time I asked everyone said "OMG your undereating"..if I sit around all day, except when i excersize and i eat around 1500-1700 calories (on the weekend its more), I am 19 female 5'2 and 110 pounds..am i really considered undereating, even though i just eat when I am hungry? Should I eat more just to get 2000 calories, or should I listen to my body?~erica ps. thankyou for any advice:)
Since you are not overweight (according to your prior posts) then why worry? Use the tools to determine your burn and eat that amount to maintain. There's no guess work on CC.
I figure if it's not broke, don't fix it. 5'2, 110 is about right as far as a healthy weight. If you are just eating whenever you feel hungry and staying around 110, and you feel good, I'd say you're doing fine.
claudiek...eating the way you are allows you to maintain or lose? have you recently lost weight? what do you do for working out?
i wouldnt say your undereating.
because if you just sit around all day, you wont need more food because your not wasting energy.
it would be a lot different if you were someone who was nonstop go, THEN that would be undereating.
but i think your fine (:
Original Post by claudiek:
I am 5'2 and 109 so the same thing as you and I eat arround 1300-1400 when I don't workout and up to 1500 when working out, sometimes more on the weekend... so I don't think you're undereating, if yes, then I am WHAY under. We are short so 1700 goes a long way for us...
ok thankyou for the advice, its easier to relate to someone who is my own weight and height, i do workout, but the rest of the day i just sit around, so i feel good at about 1500-1800 calories(depending on what i do), and if I am hungry and need more thats fine, I actually ate more today not cause i was hungry but because ppl are trying to tell me i need 2000 cal. which is alot for little me lol, i mean i imagine the people telling me i need that much are taller and weigh more then me am i right? and if they are eating that much it would be logical if a shorter person ate less then them not the same amount~erica ps and i eat more on the weekend to lol!
you aren't undereating, don't worry. I dunno who would say that. Silly people.
I eat the same amount as you [I'm 5'1] and weigh a couple of pounds less, and I would say that you're not undereating.
Although if you do lose any weight, it would be wise to increase your calorie intake.
Don't worry about it :)
People (like me) told you that you were probably undereating on the basis that you complained in a earlier post that you were losing strength. Also, you're only 19 and you're reasonably active... 3 x 20 minute cardio each week plus some weights work. 'Sedentary' means that you literally roll out of bed onto the sofa and back again each day and do nothing in between..... that's not you at all. So 2000 cals is a reasonable target for someone with your stats and level of activity.
I would actually suspect that your weekday estimates are under (you eat more than you think, in other words) and that when you eat more at the weekend with your family you are topping up the shortfall subconsciously.
Younger people tend to need more to eat than older people as a given. If you get your body used to low calories at this time of your life you can find that, as you get older and as your energy needs reduce, you find it difficult to keep your weight under control. 'Dieting yourself fat' they call it.....
Original Post by gi-jane:
People (like me) told you that you were probably undereating on the basis that you complained in a earlier post that you were losing strength. Also, you're only 19 and you're reasonably active... 3 x 20 minute cardio each week plus some weights work. 'Sedentary' means that you literally roll out of bed onto the sofa and back again each day and do nothing in between..... that's not you at all. So 2000 cals is a reasonable target for someone with your stats and level of activity.
I would actually suspect that your weekday estimates are under (you eat more than you think, in other words) and that when you eat more at the weekend with your family you are topping up the shortfall subconsciously.
Younger people tend to need more to eat than older people as a given. If you get your body used to low calories at this time of your life you can find that, as you get older and as your energy needs reduce, you find it difficult to keep your weight under control. 'Dieting yourself fat' they call it.....
i know you are trying to help, but i was not complaining of losing strength i already told you i "used" to do pullups on a regular basis, but now i just started doing them again, i GAINED 15 pounds since i used to do 11 pullups, 15! when i was 15 i weighed 95 pounds so doing 11 pullups was a peice of cake..now i am 19 110 pounds and just started doing regular strength training so i can only do 5 or 6 right now. so I am not losing strength i just started strength training, and i got my protein powder out, so I usually have something after i work out, and i don't go by set cal. every day. thankyou so much for your help, its nice that you are giving me advice, but nobody as tall that weighs as much as me is eating 2000 calories and my estimated calories on one website was anywhere from 1641 to 1969 please don't be mad at me i shouldn't have asked in the first place, it just made people get mad at me anyways, thankyou for your advice but i don't see anyone my size eating that much~erica
Eriza: 4'11 here, less than you weigh and I am currently eating 1800-1900 calories. you can look at all of my food posts on the different calorie ranges what did you eat today thread in the food forum. I've gone as high as 2000 calories for 3 weeks but i cut back on exercise so decreased my calories. i'm older than you as well, only 21 but still...there's no reason why you shouldn't be able to eat 2000 without gaining.
Original Post by chrissy1988:
Eriza: 4'11 here, less than you weigh and I am currently eating 1800-1900 calories. you can look at all of my food posts on the different calorie ranges what did you eat today thread in the food forum. I've gone as high as 2000 calories for 3 weeks but i cut back on exercise so decreased my calories. i'm older than you as well, only 21 but still...there's no reason why you shouldn't be able to eat 2000 without gaining.
i woke up late all i ate so far is breakfast, i had oatmeal with honey and almonds, and a protein shake with whey protien and soymilk~erica
You are eating enough to maintain your weight and nothing else. And it turns out many other women who are your height and weight seem to be doing the same thing (hence the other posts). It's easy when we're petite to assume we are somehow different -- but actually we can mess up our metabolism as easily as the next regular-height person.
If you would like to eat to avoid fracturing bones when stepping off a curb, dementia, anxiety disorders, cardiovascular disease (yes, because of how your slowed metabolism will lay down fat), insulin resistance/pre-metabolic syndrome and diabetes (yep -- diabetes is not just for the obese it's also for the metabolically-challenged who eat just to maintain a number on the scale).
Worse than that, if you eat 1700 now (at only 19) to maintain then you have no room when your metabolism slows over the decades. I've known many a woman who hit 50 and have slowly crimped their intake down 900 calories to "maintain" over the years and are devastated that they start packing on the pounds after menopause and can't seem to jump start their metabolism to be able to eat beyond starvation -- and they can't do high-impact exercise to get things moving because of their easily breakable bones at that point.
I know, being 50 is irrelevant when you're 19. But surely you could try to up the calories (especially as you are so active)? Oh, and read this link that another poster discovered. She's 32 and has just realized she has carefully maintained her weight (at the expense of maintaining her health) and now will have to work to fix the damage (and yeah, I know 32 is about as far away as 50, but it's worth a shot).
http://caloriecount.about.com/interesting-art icle-re-restrictive-eatingand-consequences-ft 155448
Original Post by hedgren:
You are eating enough to maintain your weight and nothing else. And it turns out many other women who are your height and weight seem to be doing the same thing (hence the other posts). It's easy when we're petite to assume we are somehow different -- but actually we can mess up our metabolism as easily as the next regular-height person.
If you would like to eat to avoid fracturing bones when stepping off a curb, dementia, anxiety disorders, cardiovascular disease (yes, because of how your slowed metabolism will lay down fat), insulin resistance/pre-metabolic syndrome and diabetes (yep -- diabetes is not just for the obese it's also for the metabolically-challenged who eat just to maintain a number on the scale).
Worse than that, if you eat 1700 now (at only 19) to maintain then you have no room when your metabolism slows over the decades. I've known many a woman who hit 50 and have slowly crimped their intake down 900 calories to "maintain" over the years and are devastated that they start packing on the pounds after menopause and can't seem to jump start their metabolism to be able to eat beyond starvation -- and they can't do high-impact exercise to get things moving because of their easily breakable bones at that point.
I know, being 50 is irrelevant when you're 19. But surely you could try to up the calories (especially as you are so active)? Oh, and read this link that another poster discovered. She's 32 and has just realized she has carefully maintained her weight (at the expense of maintaining her health) and now will have to work to fix the damage (and yeah, I know 32 is about as far away as 50, but it's worth a shot).
http://caloriecount.about.com/interesting-art icle-re-restrictive-eatingand-consequences-ft 155448
ok im going to try eating 1900 calories this week thanks for the advice guys~erica
Original Post by ericaaxe:
ok im going to try eating 1900 calories this week thanks for the advice guys~erica
I'm so very glad you're going to move the calories up!!!
And FYI, I'm 15 years older than you. I'm 5'4" and to maintain my 123 lbs I eat 2200 to 2400 a day (I workout 4-5 times a week for about an hour and a half) and would say I'm lightly active the rest of the time (i.e. not bed ridden).
And when I enter my stats in the burn meter it says I'm supposed to eat 2140 to maintain if I set my activity level to the very highest setting: "very active" (which I'm not). But in reality if I eat under 2200, I lose weight which doesn't work. So if I can have that kind of metabolism and be so old, I bet you can too!
You're only a couple of inches shorter than me and I bet you work out harder than me as well.
Best of luck.
Original Post by hedgren:
Original Post by ericaaxe:
ok im going to try eating 1900 calories this week thanks for the advice guys~erica
I'm so very glad you're going to move the calories up!!!
And FYI, I'm 15 years older than you. I'm 5'4" and to maintain my 123 lbs I eat 2200 to 2400 a day (I workout 4-5 times a week for about an hour and a half) and would say I'm lightly active the rest of the time (i.e. not bed ridden).
And when I enter my stats in the burn meter it says I'm supposed to eat 2140 to maintain if I set my activity level to the very highest setting: "very active" (which I'm not). But in reality if I eat under 2200, I lose weight which doesn't work. So if I can have that kind of metabolism and be so old, I bet you can too!
You're only a couple of inches shorter than me and I bet you work out harder than me as well.
Best of luck.
i was wondering how long do you think it will take before my weight regulates cause i suspect I will gain some weight eating 1900 for a little while, how long will I gain before my metabolism speeds up??~erica
Given that you're 19, I'm not even sure you will gain any weight upping to 1900 (which is still not optimal) -- your metabolism responds quickly at that age. You may see a pound or two show up for a week, but as I said I wouldn't even count on that. You probably see more fluctuations with your period and water retention!
If I were facing your situation (given that I can sense a lot of anxiety from you on the topic of any weight gain at all) I'd probably get myself to 2200 calories a day as quickly as I could and then make a pact with myself not to weigh myself at all for a full month on the new higher calorie intake. I'd go with usual my logging of calories, exercise and general activity routine and then after a full month see if the scale changed at all. Chances are by then it'll be the same as it was before you upped the calories.
I think a month will smooth out any blips in weight.
Original Post by hedgren:
Given that you're 19, I'm not even sure you will gain any weight upping to 1900 (which is still not optimal) -- your metabolism responds quickly at that age. You may see a pound or two show up for a week, but as I said I wouldn't even count on that. You probably see more fluctuations with your period and water retention!
If I were facing your situation (given that I can sense a lot of anxiety from you on the topic of any weight gain at all) I'd probably get myself to 2200 calories a day as quickly as I could and then make a pact with myself not to weigh myself at all for a full month on the new higher calorie intake. I'd go with usual my logging of calories, exercise and general activity routine and then after a full month see if the scale changed at all. Chances are by then it'll be the same as it was before you upped the calories.
I think a month will smooth out any blips in weight.
ok thanks alot, maybe i wont weigh myself for a month (i say that now...) lol but im def going to go for 1900 cal. thanks for the advice~erica ps. i think i ate like 2000 cal today lol
Fast food?Fast answers.
Text food hamburger to
HEALTH (432-584) for full calorie information. FREE!
Click here to start
