PDA

View Full Version : Is there such thing as not enough food on a cut?



tpd1864
04-07-2013, 07:22 AM
I am new to the cutting and I am wondering if a person coould actually take in too little on a cut. I have been lifting steady with a 5 day a week split for approximately 3 years. Currently I am attempting to shed the fat before I try a true bulk phase. I am 5'10" and weight 200 lbs. My numbers on average is 1732 Calories on a workout day. Protein is 192 which is 45% carbs are 151 which is 35% and fats are 38 which is 20%.

Anyone with experience any input would be appreciated. I have also been doing approximately 40-45 min cardo after the workouts as well.. Like I said I am new to a good cut and don't know if I am taking in to little to get the results I would like to see.

Tommy W.
04-07-2013, 07:40 AM
Yeah that's fine. Some will say you need more but you don't. If you have to drop so much that you're not getting proper protien and fats and SOME carbs you'll need to raise your defecit with more activity. Cutting down at 10 calories per lb of bodyweight that you WANT to weigh is a good equation that I've used. I go slightly below that to really make things happen. It's tough but I'd rather get back to building muscle as soon as possible and prolonging the fat loss stage drives me nuts.

WonderPug
04-07-2013, 07:44 AM
My numbers on average is 1732 Calories on a workout day. Protein is 192 which is 45% carbs are 151 which is 35% and fats are 38 which is 20%.That's a terrible idea as dietary fat is way too low and total energy intake is so low as to cause increased lose of lean body mass while also increasing risk of stalled as well as lasting metabolic down regulation.

salamisalem
04-07-2013, 07:59 AM
sounds fine, even if you are eating too little its ok the defecit is fine considering how obese you are (being blunt, not insulting)

Tommy W.
04-07-2013, 08:06 AM
That's a terrible idea as dietary fat is way too low and total energy intake is so low as to cause increased lose of lean body mass while also increasing risk of stalled as well as lasting metabolic down regulation.

THIS^^^
You can drop some carbs and raise fats for a much better combo.

1JFS3
04-07-2013, 08:11 AM
My numbers on average is 1732 Calories on a workout day. Protein is 192 which is 45% carbs are 151 which is 35% and fats are 38 which is 20%.


How are you surviving? I'm 151g carb and 38g fat after my first two meals of the day and I'm maintaining. You need to increase a bit before you suffer metabolic damage my friend. Read the stickies.

tpd1864
04-07-2013, 09:12 AM
sounds fine, even if you are eating too little its ok the defecit is fine considering how obese you are (being blunt, not insulting)

Last I checked I was at 13% bf.

tpd1864
04-07-2013, 09:16 AM
How are you surviving? I'm 151g carb and 38g fat after my first two meals of the day and I'm maintaining. You need to increase a bit before you suffer metabolic damage my friend. Read the stickies.

I don't know if I am surviving I was taking in more as far as calories are concerned but the weight loss was not happening.. I was actually going up in weight. At that point I was quite a bit higher though. The reason for the post is to get some information about that.. I have read the stickies and I came up with a BMR of 1927 with no activity. I guess I was asking as far as any input from experience if I up the calories or even go with a carb cycle program would that be better for the cut rather than the same every day?

I'm down 6 lbs since I quit the bulk and would like to go down and shed some more bf. I have recently stalled at that weight and I suspect it is because of the low amount of calories I have taken in.

Tommy W.
04-07-2013, 09:45 AM
I don't know if I am surviving I was taking in more as far as calories are concerned but the weight loss was not happening.. I was actually going up in weight. At that point I was quite a bit higher though. The reason for the post is to get some information about that.. I have read the stickies and I came up with a BMR of 1927 with no activity. I guess I was asking as far as any input from experience if I up the calories or even go with a carb cycle program would that be better for the cut rather than the same every day?

I'm down 6 lbs since I quit the bulk and would like to go down and shed some more bf. I have recently stalled at that weight and I suspect it is because of the low amount of calories I have taken in.

Carb cycling is really just calorie cycling. Base your cal intake on a weekly basis rather than daily. You'd be surprised at what your daily number ends up being with this method. Rather than using the calculators which are not accurate for most people, just track your current cals and adjust from THERE. If you aren't losing fat then you need a bigger defecit. Increase the defecit with activity if you don't want to drop cals but until that defecit is increased you will not lose fat.

racedoc
04-07-2013, 10:30 AM
It can be tempting to really lowball your daily caloric intake but tends to make life rather miserable in addition to the physiologic changes the others mentioned. I'm a shorty in the mid 160's and have done that myself in past with scheduled diet breaks but always end up looking (and feeling) sick. Following the stickies is a great idea, but one of the best changes I made was to follow wonderpug's advice and throttle WAY back on protein, to around .8 g/pound per day. He's posted the links to the studies supporting that in the past. Makes the diet much more palatable and pleasant, as can raise the other macros up a bit. Good luck!

Tommy W.
04-07-2013, 10:33 AM
It can be tempting to really lowball your daily caloric intake but tends to make life rather miserable in addition to the physiologic changes the others mentioned. I'm a shorty in the mid 160's and have done that myself in past with scheduled diet breaks but always end up looking (and feeling) sick. Following the stickies is a great idea, but one of the best changes I made was to follow wonderpug's advice and throttle WAY back on protein, to around .8 g/pound per day. He's posted the links to the studies supporting that in the past. Makes the diet much more palatable and pleasant, as can raise the other macros up a bit. Good luck!

Totally agree. Too much protien is a waste and you can get the same benefit with a little less protien and a few more carbs

Ghosting
04-07-2013, 12:06 PM
I don't know if I am surviving I was taking in more as far as calories are concerned but the weight loss was not happening.. I was actually going up in weight. At that point I was quite a bit higher though. The reason for the post is to get some information about that.. I have read the stickies and I came up with a BMR of 1927 with no activity. I guess I was asking as far as any input from experience if I up the calories or even go with a carb cycle program would that be better for the cut rather than the same every day?

I'm down 6 lbs since I quit the bulk and would like to go down and shed some more bf. I have recently stalled at that weight and I suspect it is because of the low amount of calories I have taken in.

With a BMR of 1927, if your activity level is small, 1732 doesn't sound off. 90% of people will take a look at your weight and tell you to eat more or less based on your weight. Disturbing as heck, especially coming from a nutrition major. Proving that sometimes schooling, credentials or build doesn't mean the person knows what they are talking about. Also adding in that you are going to get metabolic damage. Implying you are eating to little.

This kind of talk sent me to my doc, to an endo and to get blood work. I wasted a ton of time and money.

Tommy W.
04-07-2013, 01:19 PM
With a BMR of 1927, if your activity level is small, 1732 doesn't sound off. 90% of people will take a look at your weight and tell you to eat more or less based on your weight. Disturbing as heck, especially coming from a nutrition major. Proving that sometimes schooling, credentials or build doesn't mean the person knows what they are talking about. Also adding in that you are going to get metabolic damage. Implying you are eating to little.

This kind of talk sent me to my doc, to an endo and to get blood work. I wasted a ton of time and money.

THIS x 1,000! People just don't want to be hungry so they make up all these excuses why they shouldnt eat under x amount of calories and point to studies to substantiate their claims that all these terrible things will happen. 99 percent of people that can't lose any more weight just need a bigger defecit, either with cals or activity or a combo of both

tpd1864
04-07-2013, 01:23 PM
With a BMR of 1927, if your activity level is small, 1732 doesn't sound off. 90% of people will take a look at your weight and tell you to eat more or less based on your weight. Disturbing as heck, especially coming from a nutrition major. Proving that sometimes schooling, credentials or build doesn't mean the person knows what they are talking about. Also adding in that you are going to get metabolic damage. Implying you are eating to little.

This kind of talk sent me to my doc, to an endo and to get blood work. I wasted a ton of time and money.

I use the app called myfitnesspal and it is as close to dead on I can get. I weigh all my food and eat pretty much the same things every day. So when I say I am taking in 1732 that is the amount of calories I take in. My numbers as far as c/p/f are listed in my first post.

Ghosting
04-07-2013, 01:24 PM
THIS x 1,000! People just don't want to be hungry so they make up all these excuses why they shouldnt eat under x amount of calories and point to studies to substantiate their claims that all these terrible things will happen. 99 percent of people that can't lose any more weight just need a bigger defecit, either with cals or activity or a combo of both

Thanks. I get a little "heated" about this subject.

tpd1864
04-07-2013, 01:25 PM
THIS x 1,000! People just don't want to be hungry so they make up all these excuses why they shouldnt eat under x amount of calories and point to studies to substantiate their claims that all these terrible things will happen. 99 percent of people that can't lose any more weight just need a bigger defecit, either with cals or activity or a combo of both

Tommy I agree but at some point I was wondering if I would do more damage than good considering I would then begin to see the lean muscle go away with the loss of calories.

Tommy W.
04-07-2013, 01:36 PM
Tommy I agree but at some point I was wondering if I would do more damage than good considering I would then begin to see the lean muscle go away with the loss of calories.

You'll lose some muscle no matter what. I've found it's better to shorten the time you're in a defecit and get back to adding mass ASAP. The muscle goes back on pretty fast once you've already had it. If you take a 4 month span and lose fat slowly or 3 months to lose it faster then the other month to put the muscle back on you'll be ahead muscle wise at the end of the 4 months with the latter protocol.

Ghosting
04-07-2013, 01:36 PM
I use the app called myfitnesspal and it is as close to dead on I can get. I weigh all my food and eat pretty much the same things every day. So when I say I am taking in 1732 that is the amount of calories I take in. My numbers as far as c/p/f are listed in my first post.


It is fine IMO (assuming an activity level of 1.2). It is a little over 500 cal or 20% deficit, but it doesn't stand out as being bad. Especially since labels (afaik) can be off +/-20%.

tpd1864
04-07-2013, 01:45 PM
It is fine IMO (assuming an activity level of 1.2). It is a little over 500 cal or 20% deficit, but it doesn't stand out as being bad. Especially since labels (afaik) can be off +/-20%.

Ghosting based on your opinion I'm guessing you are thinking the calories I'm taking in are about right for the cut? I see some guys posting on here that have more lbm than I but they have a hight maintenance level.

Ghosting
04-07-2013, 02:14 PM
Ghosting based on your opinion I'm guessing you are thinking the calories I'm taking in are about right for the cut? I see some guys posting on here that have more lbm than I but they have a hight maintenance level.


I don't get it. I have more LBM and a higher activity level than some guys yet they claim maintenance for them is 1500-double over mine. I'm fine. So either they aren't fine or they don't track calories (over estimate). It was always like look at me, and look at you, I'm right. Even though nobody actually ever said that, it was implied. I was certain I should be eating more and did. Fat loss for me was incredibly slow. Further just implying that I wrong and eating to little.

When I stopped listening to people (after my blood work) my fat loss was good. I was at about 265 last summer and I now sit around 215.


Edit : I'm a little above 6'. Just to put it in perspective :)

tpd1864
04-07-2013, 04:06 PM
I don't get it. I have more LBM and a higher activity level than some guys yet they claim maintenance for them is 1500-double over mine. I'm fine. So either they aren't fine or they don't track calories (over estimate). It was always like look at me, and look at you, I'm right. Even though nobody actually ever said that, it was implied. I was certain I should be eating more and did. Fat loss for me was incredibly slow. Further just implying that I wrong and eating to little.

When I stopped listening to people (after my blood work) my fat loss was good. I was at about 265 last summer and I now sit around 215.

Edit : I'm a little above 6'. Just to put it in perspective :)

Grats on the weight loss. I hope you have met your goals... I am set on gaining some mass. In highschool.. i know many years ago I wrestled 135.. I now weigh 200 and want to gain mass. I guess I want the best of both worlds.. I can not do both. I am setting my goals short term to keep track of them. I just need to determine if I need to eat more to help with the weight loss.

Ghosting
04-07-2013, 04:25 PM
Grats on the weight loss. I hope you have met your goals...

Thanks but I'm still not there. Would like to keep going to 180ish.

tpd1864
04-08-2013, 06:53 AM
I calculated what my Tee is and it is 1830.. I am guessing I need to drop some calories to cut properly.

so far away
04-08-2013, 06:59 AM
Does your activity level really consist of just waking up, making food, and then lying back down?

zerohourxx
04-08-2013, 07:25 AM
I calculated what my Tee is and it is 1830.. I am guessing I need to drop some calories to cut properly.

Would like to see how you did this calculation, because it seems way, way off. Looking at your profile, you listed yourself at 60% body fat, which is pretty much impossible unless you're morbidly obese to the point of immobility - you're 195lbs, so that's pretty much impossible. This is probably what's throwing off the calculation. Your purported TDEE is less than the average BMR for someone who weighs 195lbs, much less the average total TDEE.

Also, while I respect everyone's right to their opinion, I feel that most of the people in this thread other than WonderPug have been giving some pretty contradictory information. The original question was whether you can be taking in too few calories on a cut, and the answer to that is obviously YES. Eating too far below your maintenance will result in faster immediate weight loss, but will also inevitably cause you to lose a ton of muscle. Then, eventually, your weight loss will stall out entirely when your body slows down your metabolism to compensate because you're starving yourself. What then? Start eating 1000 calories per day and make things worse? Recipe for disaster, my friend.

To give you a slightly more realistic calculation - someone who weighs 195, with 25% body fat (representative of someone with fairly high body fat, but not grossly overweight) who is lightly active and works out a few times a week would come out with an average maintenance around 2500-2600 calories. Everyone is different, obviously, but that's most likely far closer to being accurate than what you've posted. Please post your calculations so that we can see where you're getting the idea that your TDEE is so ridiculously low.

wnsuth86
04-08-2013, 08:19 AM
I can only speak from personal opinion & experiences, but I lost a bunch of weight & eventually hit a plateau so I lowered my cals to under 1800 to try & cut a little more body fat & still wasn't losing any weight, plus I felt horrible. I upped my cals to a little over 2000 a day & after a couple of weeks I have lost a little more weight. If your at a plateau at 1700-1800 cals I'd try to up it a little & see what comes of it. If you start to put weight on you can always just lower your cals back down. Everyone is different so it really requires some trial & error in my opinion...

Tommy W.
04-08-2013, 08:32 AM
As much as some people would like to think that there's some magic equation that fits everyone, it just doesn't exist. You can START with the calculators and then you'll need to adjust up or down once you see how your body reacts to the prescribed calorie intake. Daily activity, lean mass and age are the big 3 in determining what your maintenance cals will be and understanding that maintenance is different every day. When I was 19 and surfing 4 times a week, training 3 days and working construction 5 days a week I recently calculated my maintenance to be around 3,500. Now at 60, 2 surf days, 4 training days and driving around all day overseeing projects my maintenance is right at 2,100. So when I need to drop a little fat it's 1,600 average per day. So yes under some circumstances you will need to go low cal to lean out. This is not my opinion this is fact. When people say that you will absolutely die or worse, have all your muscles fall off due to low cals I have to laugh at their ignorance.

zerohourxx
04-08-2013, 08:52 AM
As much as some people would like to think that there's some magic equation that fits everyone, it just doesn't exist. You can START with the calculators and then you'll need to adjust up or down once you see how your body reacts to the prescribed calorie intake. Daily activity, lean mass and age are the big 3 in determining what your maintenance cals will be and understanding that maintenance is different every day. When I was 19 and surfing 4 times a week, training 3 days and working construction 5 days a week I recently calculated my maintenance to be around 3,500. Now at 60, 2 surf days, 4 training days and driving around all day overseeing projects my maintenance is right at 2,100. So when I need to drop a little fat it's 1,600 average per day. So yes under some circumstances you will need to go low cal to lean out. This is not my opinion this is fact. When people say that you will absolutely die or worse, have all your muscles fall off due to low cals I have to laugh at their ignorance.

I'm not sure what your point is with this post, honestly. Yes, lowering calories is necessary for anyone to lose weight, and yes, some people need calories around what OP mentioned in order to lose 1lb/week consistently. If you read the first post, however, OP didn't say anything about the rate at which he's currently losing weight.

Also, nowhere did OP say that his maintenance calories were anywhere near 2100 per day, and reading back through the thread, nobody even bothered to ask him or clarify it, just immediately said, "yeah, 1700 calories is fine" without qualifying the statement at all. He said at one point that he estimated his BMR at 1927 "with no activity," but he posted he works out 5 days per week and does 50 minutes of cardio every day. BMR =/= TDEE. With that activity level, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if his maintenance were 2700 kcal/day or higher. Maybe it's lower, that's not the point. Neither you nor anyone else even asked before offering a generalized statement on calorie intake that may or may not even apply to him.

Assuming his current maintenance is 2700 kcal/day (not saying it's the case, but bear with me), would you still say he should eat less than 1700kcal/day? He's not obese, or even very overweight (195lbs at 5'10, after 3 years of working out regularly he could look pretty good for all we know). Opinions aside, I hope we can agree that losing 2lbs/week or more at his weight is not healthy, nor is it particularly sustainable. Eating at a 1000+kcal deficit over an extended period of time has the potential to harm his metabolism and could lead to significant muscle loss, depending on his current body fat % (which we don't know).

Again, I respect everyone's right to their own opinions, but what applies to you doesn't necessarily apply to the OP. To give him advice, people should be asking more about HIS current needs, not offering personal anecdotes about their own weight loss.

Tommy W.
04-08-2013, 09:29 AM
Assuming his current maintenance is 2700 kcal/day (not saying it's the case, but bear with me), would you still say he should eat less than 1700kcal/day? He's not obese, or even very overweight (195lbs at 5'10, after 3 years of working out regularly he could look pretty good for all we know). Opinions aside, I hope we can agree that losing 2lbs/week or more at his weight is not healthy, nor is it particularly sustainable. Eating at a 1000+kcal deficit over an extended period of time has the potential to harm his metabolism and could lead to significant muscle loss, depending on his current body fat % (which we don't know).

Again, I respect everyone's right to their own opinions, but what applies to you doesn't necessarily apply to the OP. To give him advice, people should be asking more about HIS current needs, not offering personal anecdotes about their own weight loss.

I'm not saying anything number wise. The point is that everyone needs to understand their own needs and requirements. If someone is not losing at X cals then create a bigger defecit with diet or activity. Pretty simple stuff. Personal experiences serve the purpose of illustrating what works in the the real world for some, not what theory will work for the masses

AdamWW
04-08-2013, 09:31 AM
answer: yes, there is such a thing.

tpd1864
04-08-2013, 10:08 AM
Would like to see how you did this calculation, because it seems way, way off. Looking at your profile, you listed yourself at 60% body fat, which is pretty much impossible unless you're morbidly obese to the point of immobility - you're 195lbs, so that's pretty much impossible. This is probably what's throwing off the calculation. Your purported TDEE is less than the average BMR for someone who weighs 195lbs, much less the average total TDEE.

Also, while I respect everyone's right to their opinion, I feel that most of the people in this thread other than WonderPug have been giving some pretty contradictory information. The original question was whether you can be taking in too few calories on a cut, and the answer to that is obviously YES. Eating too far below your maintenance will result in faster immediate weight loss, but will also inevitably cause you to lose a ton of muscle. Then, eventually, your weight loss will stall out entirely when your body slows down your metabolism to compensate because you're starving yourself. What then? Start eating 1000 calories per day and make things worse? Recipe for disaster, my friend.

To give you a slightly more realistic calculation - someone who weighs 195, with 25% body fat (representative of someone with fairly high body fat, but not grossly overweight) who is lightly active and works out a few times a week would come out with an average maintenance around 2500-2600 calories. Everyone is different, obviously, but that's most likely far closer to being accurate than what you've posted. Please post your calculations so that we can see where you're getting the idea that your TDEE is so ridiculously low.

Zero:
I have read the stickies posted by Emma and the numbers I came up with are the numbers I listed. My activity level is 5 days a week split working out. Below is the method I used to calculate my TDEE. I converted my kg to lbs. I may have done it wrong but I know when I was taking in 2500 calories I was adding weight and not shedding the weight.

1/ Harris-Benedict formula: Very inaccurate. It was derived from studies on LEAN, YOUNG, ACTIVE males MANY YEARS AGO (1919). Notorious for OVERESTIMATING requirements, especially in the overweight. IF YOU CAN AVOID IT, DON'T USE IT!
MEN: BMR = 66 + [13.7 x weight (kg)] + [5 x height (cm)] - [6.76 x age (years)]
WOMEN: BMR = 655 + [9.6 x weight (kg)] + [1.8 x height (cm)] - [4.7 x age (years)]

1.5-1.6 = Moderately Active (Moderately daily Activity & Moderate exercise 3-5 days a week)

Last time I checked I was 13% bf not 60% as my profile stated.. that was humor on my part.

I just redid the calculations and with out converting kg to lbs(error on my part more than likely) It tells me calorie intake is at 2016.93 Now if I add the 1.5-1.6 that adds quite a bit. puts me at 3000 for a TDEE. That just seems so high for me.. Although like I said in first post I am new at the cutting seriously.

WonderPug
04-08-2013, 10:13 AM
FYI: Your estimated BMR is ~2,033 calories and your estimated TDEE is between 3,050 and 3,250 calories.

tpd1864
04-08-2013, 10:21 AM
Does your activity level really consist of just waking up, making food, and then lying back down?

No it does not I figured my activity level at moderate.. 1.5-1.6.

tpd1864
04-08-2013, 10:24 AM
FYI: Your estimated BMR is ~2,033 calories and your estimated TDEE is between 3,050 and 3,250 calories.

TY I was wondering if I was way off on my calculations.. as the method I used did say it is normally high. I'm guessing if i'm taking in around 1750-1850 calories I should be in the ball park for a cut.

Also wondering should a person use the TDEE for the calories I should shoot for the actual amount taken in?

WonderPug
04-08-2013, 10:26 AM
Also wondering should a person use the TDEE for the calories I should shoot for the actual amount taken in?I don't understand what you are trying to ask.

tpd1864
04-08-2013, 10:29 AM
I don't understand what you are trying to ask.

My total intake for a day is 1750-1850 calories. As you posted my BMR is 2033 calories and my TDEE is 3050-3250 calories.. In order for me to lose the weight at my current calorie intake of 1750-1850 is that way to low for the cut or should I be looking at the 3050-3250 and adjust from the higher calories (TDEE) for the numbers.

Or do you think at the 1750-1850 calories that is way to low for a cut and may ultimately hinder the weight loss.

zerohourxx
04-08-2013, 10:37 AM
TY I was wondering if I was way off on my calculations.. as the method I used did say it is normally high. I'm guessing if i'm taking in around 1750-1850 calories I should be in the ball park for a cut.

Also wondering should a person use the TDEE for the calories I should shoot for the actual amount taken in?

I'm not sure you understand the difference between BMR and TDEE. You base your caloric intake off of your TDEE (the total # of calories you burn in a day), not your BMR. Your cutting calories should be around 2500 per day.

If you were gaining at 2500, I'd have to ask a few questions... namely, 1) how closely are you tracking your calories and are you sure it's accurate, and 2) how long were you cutting at 2500 calories, what kind of gains were you seeing, and are you sure your weight measurements were accurate and consistent?

WonderPug
04-08-2013, 10:39 AM
Consume ~3,100 calories per day for two weeks. Monitor weight. Assuming you're weight stable over two weeks, reduce intake by 10% and monitor weight biweekly, adjusting as needed to maintain weight loss.

tpd1864
04-08-2013, 10:41 AM
I'm not sure you understand the difference between BMR and TDEE. You base your caloric intake off of your TDEE (the total # of calories you burn in a day), not your BMR. Your cutting calories should be around 2500 per day.

If you were gaining at 2500, I'd have to ask a few questions... namely, 1) how closely are you tracking your calories and are you sure it's accurate, and 2) how long were you cutting at 2500 calories, what kind of gains were you seeing, and are you sure your weight measurements were accurate and consistent?

You are right I was confused about the difference and that is why I was asking my questions. I use the app called myfitnesspal to count my calories and I weigh the food I am taking in. Then again I don't know if in and out of a car all day and hitting the gym 4-5 days a week with cardio with it would be considered moderate for the TDEE. I was on that amount for quite some time.. Then again with more carbs don't know if some of that could be water retention.

I'm guessing me attempting to cut at my current level of 1750-1850 is way to low.

n0useforaname
04-08-2013, 10:41 AM
Not that it works for everyone, but typically if your TDEE is 3050-3250, you should cut at 2400-2600. Now that's assuming that's how your body works, as everyone is different. Me personally... I cut at 2500-2700 cals... whether I'm active or not, I can successfully cut at those numbers and drop 1-1.5 pounds per week. I look at it this way... your body can only oxidize so much fat in a day, so why in gods name would I want to eat less, when I know it's not doing me any good? I strive to have as much food in my body as possible so I"m not starving on a cut. IMO... if you are having a hard time losing weight at 1750 cals at your height at weight, I personally would try reverse dieting to see what happens. If you are happy with what you are doing, fine.. but I would NOT be happy eating that little to lose weight.

tpd1864
04-08-2013, 10:42 AM
Consume ~3,100 calories per day for two weeks. Monitor weight. Assuming you're weight stable over two weeks, reduce intake by 10% and monitor weight biweekly, adjusting as needed to maintain weight loss.

Can do and I was thinking my macros were off somewhat. I am low in the fat and high in the protein area.

tpd1864
04-08-2013, 10:44 AM
Not that it works for everyone, but typically if your TDEE is 3050-3250, you should cut at 2400-2600. Now that's assuming that's how your body works, as everyone is different. Me personally... I cut at 2500-2700 cals... whether I'm active or not, I can successfully cut at those numbers and drop 1-1.5 pounds per week. I look at it this way... your body can only oxidize so much fat in a day, so why in gods name would I want to eat less, when I know it's not doing me any good? I strive to have as much food in my body as possible so I"m not starving on a cut. IMO... if you are having a hard time losing weight at 1750 cals at your height at weight, I personally would try reverse dieting to see what happens. If you are happy with what you are doing, fine.. but I would NOT be happy eating that little to lose weight.

Think I'll up the calories and see what happens and addjust the food intake 10% at a time like wonder stated. I'm guessing my LBM will also have something to do with it. Back to the drawing board and get the diet reworked.

WonderPug
04-08-2013, 11:11 AM
Can do and I was thinking my macros were off somewhat. I am low in the fat and high in the protein area.Ensure protein intake of 160 grams and dietary fat intake of 90 grams, with your remaining caloric intake composed from whatever mix of macronutrients you prefer.

Ghosting
04-08-2013, 12:28 PM
Again, I respect everyone's right to their own opinions, but what applies to you doesn't necessarily apply to the OP. To give him advice, people should be asking more about HIS current needs, not offering personal anecdotes about their own weight loss.

I just assumed his calculations where correct. I was wrong and I can accept that. However, to say I was giving him personal ancedotes about weight loss pisses me off, because my advice was based around his telling us what his BMR was.

Edit : not to mention all the bad advice I was getting that caused a lot of wasted time and money. Hardly contradictory.

Ghosting
04-08-2013, 12:36 PM
Consume ~3,100 calories per day for two weeks. Monitor weight. Assuming you're weight stable over two weeks, reduce intake by 10% and monitor weight biweekly, adjusting as needed to maintain weight loss.

The best advice.

Ghosting
04-08-2013, 12:43 PM
My total intake for a day is 1750-1850 calories. As you posted my BMR is 2033 calories and my TDEE is 3050-3250 calories.. In order for me to lose the weight at my current calorie intake of 1750-1850 is that way to low for the cut or should I be looking at the 3050-3250 and adjust from the higher calories (TDEE) for the numbers.

Or do you think at the 1750-1850 calories that is way to low for a cut and may ultimately hinder the weight loss.

Like was said, with a TDEE of 3050-3250, yes 1750-1850 is way off. Go with what pug said and see what happens.

tpd1864
04-08-2013, 04:01 PM
Like was said, with a TDEE of 3050-3250, yes 1750-1850 is way off. Go with what pug said and see what happens.

I've decided to give more calories a shot. I think that would be the best idea and pug hit the nail on the head. That has been my primary problem thinking less is better when in fact I now beilive I have been hindering my weight loss by not eating enough.

I'll post again when I figure out what has worked and what has not. thanks for all the great advice.

tpd1864
04-08-2013, 04:03 PM
Ensure protein intake of 160 grams and dietary fat intake of 90 grams, with your remaining caloric intake composed from whatever mix of macronutrients you prefer.

I'll adjust accordingly.

Ghosting
04-13-2013, 09:30 PM
How are you surviving? I'm 151g carb and 38g fat after my first two meals of the day and I'm maintaining. You need to increase a bit before you suffer metabolic damage my friend. Read the stickies.

Sorry guy. I overreacted. This is a sensitive subject to me.

CandyRandy
04-13-2013, 11:07 PM
I am new to the cutting and I am wondering if a person coould actually take in too little on a cut. I have been lifting steady with a 5 day a week split for approximately 3 years. Currently I am attempting to shed the fat before I try a true bulk phase. I am 5'10" and weight 200 lbs. My numbers on average is 1732 Calories on a workout day. Protein is 192 which is 45% carbs are 151 which is 35% and fats are 38 which is 20%.

Anyone with experience any input would be appreciated. I have also been doing approximately 40-45 min cardo after the workouts as well.. Like I said I am new to a good cut and don't know if I am taking in to little to get the results I would like to see.

Your fat is too low.
Don't be concerned with percentages.
Calories are ok but it couldn't hurt to add 100-200 more. I would recommend adding those all in fats. But that's just me.

LiftCore
04-13-2013, 11:26 PM
Didn't really read through all the posts, but:

Yes. You can eat too little on a cut. This will lead to a multitude of problems most likely mentioned.
I wouldn't use online calculators or formulas and rely on them religiously because there is a lot of room for error/variance. As mentioned, the best way is to eat at a certain point for an extended period of time, and depending on the results (gain/loss and how much/how little, if any) you can change your calories/macros accordingly.

MAGnitude
04-14-2013, 04:45 AM
I am new to the cutting and I am wondering if a person coould actually take in too little on a cut. I have been lifting steady with a 5 day a week split for approximately 3 years. Currently I am attempting to shed the fat before I try a true bulk phase. I am 5'10" and weight 200 lbs. My numbers on average is 1732 Calories on a workout day. Protein is 192 which is 45% carbs are 151 which is 35% and fats are 38 which is 20%.

Anyone with experience any input would be appreciated. I have also been doing approximately 40-45 min cardo after the workouts as well.. Like I said I am new to a good cut and don't know if I am taking in to little to get the results I would like to see.

please learn how to calculate properly. BMR, TDEE, etc...

IgboMeso
04-14-2013, 04:58 AM
Yes, I don't think eating way below BMR is a good idea. I try to eat around my BMR, lift a couple of times a week and do cardio when I have time. Not a big fan of using activity multipliers or any of that chit, you should have a good idea of the amount of calories you can cut on from past experience.