Considering JUDDD for maintaining - have questions

[SoHappy]

Originally Posted by E.W.

It will be quite a while before I need to realy think about maintiance but a ran some
numbers through the calculator and the results were not what I expected.

I weighed between ~300 lbs when I started this, hardly exercise at all and am almost
62 years old. Using the 25% figure in the calculator my UD comes out to 3310 calories
and 828 for a down day. I doubt I want to get quite this low but supose I got down
to 150lbs. Plugging those figures back in the calculator using a 50% maintaince setting
my UD is 1722 calories ( hay I thought I would get more food when on maintience not less) and my DD comes out to 861 calories. This does bring up the fact that perhaps
if we do lose 20lbs or more we need to recalculate our UD and DD calorie targets.

This is a perfect example of how the fatter we are when we run those calorie calculators, the more skewed and *off* and overboard the numbers we are given can become. I just realized that I was only 5'-3" of little old lady, whether I was surrounded by 100 pounds of FAT or not. It occurred to me that it might not be worthwhile to eat all those extra calories my fat brought the number up to. No need to feed all that fat.

That's why we warn folks that the *larger* they are, the more *off* those numbers can be, and to take those high numbers with a huge grain of salt.

It's the same thing with exercise. Most of us think of our exercise level as more intense than it is, if we exercise 7 days a week and get sweaty, we want to choose that highest exercise level on the calculator, but very often, that gives is a calorie number far higher than where we have to eat at to lose weight.

Whether you can eat *more* in maintenance is dependent upon what calorie level you ate at in weight loss, and if you have elevated your weight loss calorie level quite a bit above what your maintenance level can ever be, then that *eating more* thing is not going to work for you.

While we're still quite overweight, we can eat at a pretty high number of calories and lose weight in spite of how high we're currently eating, but as we slim down, something has to come into balance, calorie-wise. When you stop to think about it, slim people are usually not seen among the really big eaters. But JUDDD can get you about as close to both worlds as possible.. slim and eating well.

[Beeb]

Originally Posted by SoHappy

This is a perfect example of how the fatter we are when we run those calorie calculators, the more skewed and *off* and overboard the numbers we are given can become. I just realized that I was only 5'-3" of little old lady, whether I was surrounded by 100 pounds of FAT or not. It occurred to me that it might not be worthwhile to eat all those extra calories my fat brought the number up to. No need to feed all that fat.

That's why we warn folks that the *larger* they are, the more *off* those numbers can be, and to take those high numbers with a huge grain of salt.

It's the same thing with exercise. Most of us think of our exercise level as more intense than it is, if we exercise 7 days a week and get sweaty, we want to choose that highest exercise level on the calculator, but very often, that gives is a calorie number far higher than where we have to eat at to lose weight.

Whether you can eat *more* in maintenance is dependent upon what calorie level you ate at in weight loss, and if you have elevated your weight loss calorie level quite a bit above what your maintenance level can ever be, then that *eating more* thing is not going to work for you.

While we're still quite overweight, we can eat at a pretty high number of calories and lose weight in spite of how high we're currently eating, but as we slim down, something has to come into balance, calorie-wise. When you stop to think about it, slim people are usually not seen among the really big eaters. But JUDDD can get you about as close to both worlds as possible.. slim and eating well.

And very true. But will add that I do eat more than I did during weight loss calories to maintain. It's a 50/50 spread now instead of much less calories on my DDs than my UDs. I never get to the ceiling of my calories for either day, but I do have more calories to play with. Weight loss was 700 DDs and 1654 UDs. Now it's 900 DDs and 1,800 UDs. Why? I have now idea but it keeps me right on target with my weight when I get close to these numbers and I continue to lose when I don't.

Maybe I'm just plain weird!

[metqa]

maintaining takes more food than reducing but only at the same weight.

maintaining at a higher weight takes more food than maintaining at a lower weight. So the amount you use to lose at a higher weight may ultimately become the maintenace number of your lower weight, forcing you to eat less to reduce than you did before.

That's why your lower weight maintenance calories maybe so much less than your higher weight reducing calories

[SoHappy]

Originally Posted by metqa

maintaining takes more food than reducing but only at the same weight.

maintaining at a higher weight takes more food than maintaining at a lower weight. So the amount you use to lose at a higher weight may ultimately become the maintenace number of your lower weight, forcing you to eat less to reduce than you did before.

That's why your lower weight maintenance calories maybe so much less than your higher weight reducing calories

Yeah. That. ^ ^ ^

[metqa]

Another thing to consider is discovering your lean body mass. Even if it's not completely accurate you would at least get a figure closer to what you should be feeding since fat cells don't need any more feeding.

[Beeb]

Originally Posted by metqa

maintaining takes more food than reducing but only at the same weight.

maintaining at a higher weight takes more food than maintaining at a lower weight. So the amount you use to lose at a higher weight may ultimately become the maintenace number of your lower weight, forcing you to eat less to reduce than you did before.

That's why your lower weight maintenance calories maybe so much less than your higher weight reducing calories

Metqa, I you but I have NO idea what you are saying here! Even reading it 4 times, I'm still ! But, then again, I'm not a very science minded person and tend to get lost in lots of things anymore that involved the "science" of things!

[synger]

I think she's saying that the number of calories you need to lose when you're 270 pounds may be what you need to maintain at 150. Maintaining a higher weight takes more calories than maintaining a lower weight.

Maybe that's why heavier folks like me just can't get down to day-to-day low even calories to lose weight. I was ALWAYS hungry, even at 1600 calories a day. On JUDDD I'm somewhat hungry one day, but not at all hungry the next. It's amazing.

[SoHappy]

Originally Posted by synger

I think she's saying that the number of calories you need to lose when you're 270 pounds may be what you need to maintain at 150. Maintaining a higher weight takes more calories than maintaining a lower weight.

Maybe that's why heavier folks like me just can't get down to day-to-day low even calories to lose weight. I was ALWAYS hungry, even at 1600 calories a day. On JUDDD I'm somewhat hungry one day, but not at all hungry the next. It's amazing.

And I think this ^ ^ ^ is going to help you lose weight wonderfully well! Keeping to the higher UD calories is going to help rev your metabolism UP, and keeping to the lower DD calories is going to have you melting away.