Eating below my TDEE all this time. No weight loss?

[Noobontheblock]

Hey guys,

Before this 2-3 months. I have been eating 1400-1600 cals which is way below my calorie requirments. Currently eating at 2000 and increasing cals until i see changes on my scale. Now i have yet to see changes.

My question is if all this time i have been eating 1400-1600 which is probably 500-800 cals below my tdee. Why havent my weight decreased?I do the same activity. I thought if the cals in was less than cald out, u will lose weight

[HealingHands8]

If you are x amount under your estimated TDEE and you aren't losing weight your TDEE is obviously higher than you thought.

[Noobontheblock]

If you are x amount under your estimated TDEE and you aren't losing weight your TDEE is obviously higher than you thought.

What? I dont understand what you meant..

[AlwaysTryin]

What's your stats btw

[HealingHands8]

What? I dont understand what you meant..

If you are eating less than you 'TDEE' and not losing weight your TDEE is higher than you thought.

[Noobontheblock]

What's your stats btw

Im 116lbs and 5'2.. Soccer 4x a week with gym session 4x a week.. Eating at 2100 cals.. 50c/30p/20f.. Yes gotta eat more.. Thats why im increasing my cals.. Have increased 500cals since i started..

No weight changes yet because not eating enough yet..

[Mrpb]

Why are you using a 50:30:20 ratio?

[Noobontheblock]

Why are you using a 50:30:20 ratio?

What am i suppose to use? Still neww

[Mainer215]

Read http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=156380183

[Mrpb]

What am i suppose to do?

Take some time to read the stickies, starting here: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=156380183

If you read it well you'll notice it answers a lot of your question.

[Jasonk282]

Im 116lbs and 5'2.. Soccer 4x a week with gym session 4x a week.. Eating at 2100 cals.. 50c/30p/20f.. Yes gotta eat more.. Thats why im increasing my cals.. Have increased 500cals since i started..

No weight changes yet because not eating enough yet..

how old are you?

using a very active activily level of 2 your TDEE if you're a 17 year old male is 3247. if female then 2915.

eating 2100 cals is still WAY under. 14-1600 is even way below your BMR, which is probably why you have no weight loss.

[kennycroxdale]

Hey guys,

Before this 2-3 months. I have been eating 1400-1600 cals which is way below my calorie requirments. Currently eating at 2000 and increasing cals until i see changes on my scale. Now i have yet to see changes.

My question is if all this time i have been eating 1400-1600 which is probably 500-800 cals below my tdee. Why havent my weight decreased?I do the same activity. I thought if the cals in was less than cald out, u will lose weight

Total Daily Energy Expenditure

Your body constantly changes the amount of calories you burn in a day.

It has to do with...

The General Adaptation Syndrome

This is a survival mechanism that occurs to insure you don't waste away and die.

Money Analogy

Think if it like making $2000 a month. If you suddenly get a pay cut and begin making $1600 a month, you expenses exceed what you earn.

In this case you lose weight.

However, if your earning $2000 a month and get a raise to $2500 a month, what you earn will exceed what you earn.

In this case, you gain weight.

However, losing or gaining weight takes time.

Also, how much you end up gaining or losing has to do with what you are spending.

If you activity level goes up, you end up spending more (burning more calories).

Thus, you if you are "earning" more and "spending" more, you won't put on weight.

That means...

Caloric Adjustment

If you're not gaining weight with in a reasonable amount of time, you need to increase your caloric intake about 10%.

With that said, if you are not gaining weight with the same amount of calories, that means you need to increase them.

If you are not losing weight, you'd need to decrease calories.

1400 - 1600 Caloiries

You can only drop your caloric intake so low. The 1400 - 1600 is too low because dropping any lower would have decreased you metabolism even more.

As you have done, increasing your caloric intake is one of the keys.

Keep increasing you calories to a reasonable number.

Doing so will allow you to then drop them for fat/weight loss.

Kenny Croxdale

[cumminslifter]

soccer 4x a week will burn alot of calories, are you tracking correctly? how long have you been dieting? whens the last time you had a refeed or diet break? its likely your metabolism has lowered to meet your intake

[MetilHed]

If you are x amount under your estimated TDEE and you aren't losing weight your TDEE is obviouslylower than you thought.

If you are eating less than you 'TDEE' and not losing weight your TDEE is lower than you thought.

Maybe the fixed/bolded part will clear it up.

Or, you aren't tracking accurately and are eating more calories than you think you are.

[turtuv]

how old are you?

using a very active activily level of 2 your TDEE if you're a 17 year old male is 3247. if female then 2915.

eating 2100 cals is still WAY under. 14-1600 is even way below your BMR, which is probably why you have no weight loss.

if the calories in are less than calories out so there must be a weight loss, why you say that if he stay under BMR so he doesn't have any weight loss?

[borcic0]

Metabolic slow down? Our body weight is regulated and since you've been dieting for awhile your body has adapted to it so your metabolism most likely slowed and your hormones acted in a similar fashion. Our bodies fight weight loss (Because throughout history famine and starvation was always possible) and it rarely fights weight gain. I honestly would take a break and consider reading some of lyle mcdonad's articles, and he mentions this a lot in his books

[borcic0]

macronutrient's play a factor as well. I've seen a lot of people maintain LBM by dropping carbs and keeping fat moderate and protein high

[borcic0]

Lastly dieting to arbitrary numbers like 1400-1500 calories is never good, you should always start slow so you can preserve some of your earned gains

cheers

[Jasonk282]

if the calories in are less than calories out so there must be a weight loss, why you say that if he stay under BMR so he doesn't have any weight loss?

There's more to it than just cals in v cals out. Your body will fight against losing weight. The human body does not want to lose weight. Which is why people have a hard time losing weight, but can pack on the pounds real fast.

Eating that low for that low will wreck your metabolism, thus stopping weight loss. If the OP is as active as he/she is saying with all the training, 1400-1600 cals is no where near the right amount. according to *****://www.healthstatus.com/perl/calculator.cgi you're looking for a male to be losing 793 cals playing a 90 minute game of soccer. Now that's just an estimate.

If you take 1500 cals, the middle ground from the OP and take out 793 you're left with 707 net cals remaining. There by wrecking your metabolism and telling the body not to lose weight.

[turtuv]

There's more to it than just cals in v cals out. Your body will fight against losing weight. The human body does not want to lose weight. Which is why people have a hard time losing weight, but can pack on the pounds real fast.

Eating that low for that low will wreck your metabolism, thus stopping weight loss. If the OP is as active as he/she is saying with all the training, 1400-1600 cals is no where near the right amount. according to *****://www.healthstatus.com/perl/calculator.cgi you're looking for a male to be losing 793 cals playing a 90 minute game of soccer. Now that's just an estimate.

If you take 1500 cals, the middle ground from the OP and take out 793 you're left with 707 net cals remaining. There by wrecking your metabolism and telling the body not to lose weight.

but this should happen only if your metabolism slow down, which means that your caloric need are lower than before. but this doesn't change the fact that if one person eat less than he burn, he have to losing weight.

[ZMan45]

There's more to it than just cals in v cals out. Your body will fight against losing weight. The human body does not want to lose weight. Which is why people have a hard time losing weight, but can pack on the pounds real fast.

Eating that low for that low will wreck your metabolism, thus stopping weight loss. If the OP is as active as he/she is saying with all the training, 1400-1600 cals is no where near the right amount. according to *****://www.healthstatus.com/perl/calculator.cgi you're looking for a male to be losing 793 cals playing a 90 minute game of soccer. Now that's just an estimate.

If you take 1500 cals, the middle ground from the OP and take out 793 you're left with 707 net cals remaining. There by wrecking your metabolism and telling the body not to lose weight.

I agree that, at face value, calories in/out is vastly oversimplifying the complexities of our body. But the energy balance equation is dynamic and the net result will still dictate gains/losses in body mass. BMR, NEAT, TEF, metabolic adaptation, etc all play a role here.

Also, some minor slowdown =/= wrecking the metabolism.

[turtuv]

I agree that, at face value, calories in/out is vastly oversimplifying the complexities of our body. But the energy balance equation is dynamic and the net result will still dictate gains/losses in body mass. BMR, NEAT, TEF, metabolic adaptation, etc all play a role here.

Also, some minor slowdown =/= wrecking the metabolism.

what do you mean exactly?

[ZMan45]

what do you mean exactly?

I mean that calories in vs calories out is still what will determine how much weight is lost/gained. It's just not simple math.

[marcus13227]

I mean that calories in vs calories out is still what will determine how much weight is lost/gained. It's just not simple math.

I agree. Many people just seem to be caught up in simplifying everything to calories in vs calories out. Assuming the OP sprints during his soccer sessions, he would have unwillingly done some form of HIIT.

After the activity his body may need the extra energy to repair itself and it is not easy to estimate how much. Yet he's under eating all this time and his body just adapts to it.

[Jasonk282]

I agree that, at face value, calories in/out is vastly oversimplifying the complexities of our body. But the energy balance equation is dynamic and the net result will still dictate gains/losses in body mass. BMR, NEAT, TEF, metabolic adaptation, etc all play a role here.

Also, some minor slowdown =/= wrecking the metabolism.

OP is stating that they're eating 1400-1600 which is 500-800 under their TDEE but not losing weight. Which, IMO, would say that their TDEE is way off if they're eating 500-800 under it but not losing weight.

I also would not call 2-3 months of not losing weight, despite being in a supposed deficit, a minor slow down. maybe a 1-2 weeks sure, but 8-12 weeks...that's, IMO, not a slow down.

From my training in Marines and RECON the human body can survive on very little food for a long period of time. Time's I've gotten 1-2 meals in 2 days. However to eat that low of calories for that long of the time is not good.

[Mdenatale]

OP is 5'2" and 116lbs. Lots of activity or not that size body just isn't going to burn very many calories. Calculated BMR is only around 1200. Then there is always the highly likely possibility that calories are not being counted accurately. That is far more common than a slow metabolism.

[Mrpb]

The thread title is a bit confusing but the OP is slowly moving into a bulk. Currently he's consuming 2100 calories, if he took the advice from 3 other people.

Hopefully he has gained some weight now.

If not, bump to 2200.

[brandonbourgoin]

Do you have a food scale? Are you measuring your food? Guaranteed your taking in a lot more calories than you think.

[satoshii]

I have actually done this kind of diet but it came to a point when my body just started getting used to it and didn't help me lose further weight after some time. A friend of mine has been taking Liproxenol Max with his diet and so far, I must say that he has lost a huge amount of weight and he looks really great. I will be taking Liproxenol Max starting next week as well and let's see if it will give me the same results.

[turtuv]

if you change your caloric intake day by day your body doesn't get used to it, so you will continue to lose weight. one free meal a week is good as i see.