How Can I Eat 5000 Calories A Day And Lose Weight?

Vinny

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
1,438
Age
51
Location
Sofia, Bulgaria
Do you know with absolute certainty what they're eating all day every day? Perhaps the times you see them, they're binge eating after having restricted. This is the pattern for many people I know. They will be "good" by skipping a meal or under-eating in anticipation of a special event or night on the town. Or they just tend to eat more food in the evening because they've been restricting the rest of the day.
I remember my father quite well.
He used to eat ginormous amounts of food. He never skipped a meal simply because he wasn`t capable to.
I was often amazed how much food he can chomp down in one sitting, and repeat a bit later again, and again, and again.... and during the night, he was invading the kitchen at least once. I watched this for decades.
For the time I remember him, he`s been always obese, and never got rid of his belly. And, he always had very low energy (I`m the same).
@Kelj
 

somuch4food

Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2018
Messages
1,281
I strongly agree.

Besides massive portions of highly caloric food, there’s also the fad of eating all day long. Everywhere you go there is food on offer.

I lived in Italy 2004-2006 and was struck by the meal hygiene. They had proper meals and did not snack between meals. Snacks were for small children, not adults. I haven’t check the stats in a few years, but Italians were recently the leanest people in Europe with the lowest cancer rates. And they all smoke and drink lol

There’s no way Italian women eat 3000+ calories a day. And they’re way better looking and healthier than American women.

Why do people on this forum act like Americans aren’t fatter now because they eat more calories than ever before? Isn’t it common knowledge that people eat 300-500 calories more per day than they did fifty years ago?

I agree that set time meals are important and part of the equation, but I tend to be wary of calorie counting since Italian probably have bigger meals than most americans as the European culture often dictate multiple courses to a meal which is lacking in America. Eating more diversity in one meal helps pack on more food to last longer.

The main problem which was mentioned by Dino is that most people eat out of addiction or marketing traps. They aren't aware of their body and its reactions. Many people around me find it normal to feel cold, low energy and extremely bloated after a meal. They don't know that proper nutrition can make you feel otherwise.

We might be consuming more calories, but I don't think it's what's causing the weight gain. Since life is so stressful today people compensate with more fuel, but what they really need is to rest properly at night.

The circadian rhythm of people is also out of whack from lack of proper meal and bed time and lack of adequate sunlight.

I often weigh myself at night and find the results don't really match what I've eaten or how much I exercised. The calorie theory is not accurate and does not directly equal weight gain.
 

sweetpeat

Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
917
I remember my father quite well.
He used to eat ginormous amounts of food. He never skipped a meal simply because he wasn`t capable to.
I was often amazed how much food he can chomp down in one sitting, and repeat a bit later again, and again, and again.... and during the night, he was invading the kitchen at least once. I watched this for decades.
For the time I remember him, he`s been always obese, and never got rid of his belly. And, he always had very low energy (I`m the same).
@Kelj
My mom is the opposite. She will eat a regular size bowl of cereal for breakfast (or sometimes skip breakfast), a bowl of soup for lunch, then a regular size dinner. So like 1200 calories. She is also obese and low energy.
 

Cirion

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
3,731
Location
St. Louis, Missouri
My mom is the opposite. She will eat a regular size bowl of cereal for breakfast (or sometimes skip breakfast), a bowl of soup for lunch, then a regular size dinner. So like 1200 calories. She is also obese and low energy.

My ex ate 1 meal a day on average, doubtfully more than 1000 calories probably less. Wasn't obese, but was maintaining and couldn't lose any weight.

Her dad was a chronic dieter and didn't eat much more than her. We'd order a pizza and he'd eat like 1 slice. He retained a beer belly and also complained about inability to lose weight.

The ex was also always cold, set thermostat to like 84 deg, wore coats in summer. The dad always complained about low energy/being tired. He was also quite irritable, which I now believe is due to the low energy state (I also get irritable in very hypothyroid conditions).
 
Joined
Dec 18, 2018
Messages
2,206
its combined vitamin-element deficiency that is not to be corrected by normal diet but only by supplementation.
there is no true medical service available,survival is your responsibility.
 
Joined
Dec 18, 2018
Messages
2,206
medical culture is one big incel-conspiracy.cockblocking the way to health ^^
 

Kelj

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2019
Messages
299
FAQ — The Eating Disorder Institute

"AbdulDulloo and his colleagues carefully assessed the comprehensive data from the Minnesota Starvation Experiment [AG Dulloo et al., 1990, 1996, 1997 and 1998], and found that in re-feeding the body preferentially restores fat relative to lean tissue, contributed by reduced thermogenesis, to support further adipose organ restoration; that there appear to be distinct signalling mechanisms in re-feeding from both fat mass and fat-free mass to trigger hyperphagia (extreme eating); and that we can surmise from these findings that the return to an optimal fat mass to fat-free mass ratio will be curtailed should a patient fail to refeed fully and allow for a possible temporary overshoot in weight to occur.

Because a recovered state from self-imposed starvation in clinical trials often refers merely to a return to BMI 18.5 (rather than a cessation of all weight gain and weight stabilization as a result of unrestricted eating), we see a large body of literature that indicates many 'recovered' patients that fit the clinical criterion of BMI 18.5 have disproportionately high levels of visceral fat compared to lean (fat-free) mass [L Scalfi et al., 2002; M Helba et al., 2009; J Hebebrand et al., 2007; MT García de Álvaro et al., 2007].

All that science is important.

If you just restore to a specific weight either by half-restricting throughout the recovery process or as soon as you reach a "target weight", then you set yourself up for disproportionate layers of visceral fat. That is known to correlate with negative health implications for you over your lifetime. [MI Goran et al., 1999; T Cascella et al., 2002; JL Kuk et al., 2006]

Conversely, in the very few trials where recovery was identified with both extended inpatient and outpatient review and a criterion of "achieved maximum weight gain", then patients achieved average fat mass to fat-free mass ratios and returned to average gynoid (female) shape [CI Orphanidou et al., 1997].

It's not the food intake or extreme hunger that causes a temporary overshoot in weight, it is the need for the body to restore its optimal fat mass to fat-free mass ratio that causes food intake and extreme hunger when recovering from persistent energy deficits in the body. "

Binges Are Not Binges — The Eating Disorder Institute

"Restriction/Reactive Eating Cycles: Often diagnosed as ED-NOS by psychiatrists and psychologists alike, the patient is encouraged to focus on lessening binge episodes. Sadly, almost all patients enter into this cycle from a period of self-administered starvation and the binge is the body reacting to too-severe calorie restriction relative to its energy requirements. Recovery from all facets of an eating disorder requires focus on lessening restrictive behaviors."

Homeodynamic Recovery Method, Doubly-Labeled Water Method Trials and Temperament-Based Treatment — The Eating Disorder Institute

"We lie about what we eat. Yes, in health survey after health survey, adult women report eating on average just under 2000 kcal/day and men around 2500 kcal/day. 1, 2, 3

And yet, when we actually measure the intake in laboratory settings rather than relying on self-generated food journals or survey responses, then we eat about one quarter to one third more than the surveys would suggest we are eating. And just in case the following quote is obscure— we are eating more than we say we do because our energy expenditures are actually higher. In other words, we are not overshooting our energy needs when we are eating a third more than we say we are eating.

“The measurement of dietary intake by self-report has played a central role in nutritional science for decades... Recently, the doubly-labeled water method has been validated for the measurement of total energy expenditure in free-living subjects, and this method can serve as a reference for validating the accuracy of self-reported energy intake. Such comparisons have been made in nine recent studies, and considerable inaccuracy in self-reports of energy intake has been documented. Reported intakes tend to be lower than expenditure and thus are often underestimates of true habitual energy intake. Because the degree of underreporting increases with intake, it is speculated that individuals tend to report intakes that are closer to perceived norms than to actual intake.” 4 [emphasis mine]

in the one and only doubly labeled water trial where two groups of women were identified as either non-restricters or restricters of food intake and all were weight-stable, the non-restricting group ate on average 2400 kcal/day and the restricting group ate just shy of 2000 kcal/day. 7 Admittedly this is a small study, but I use it because it identifies a clear non-dieting control group.

If we average the studies reviewed by Dr. Hebert and his colleagues, then people eat on average 25% more than they think they do (or report that they do). As most adult women say they eat just shy of 2000 kcal/day, then on average they actually eat 2500 kcal/day to maintain their health and weight.

But the fact that we eat much more than we say we do does not have any causative effect on obesity onset or persistence. It only reflects the fact that our actual intakes match our energy expenditures. Doubly labeled water method trials are measuring actual energy expenditure and intake. A non-dieting subject, regardless of BMI, will naturally match her energy intake to her energy expenditure.

Urban Chinese adult women (age ranges 35-49) had energy intake levels confirmed at 2300 kcal/day. That their intake was somewhat lower than averages found in North America is not due to racial differences but rather a discrepancy in average height (lower in China compared to North America for that age range). 10

Pregnant adult women require on average 2854 kcal/day in the first trimester, 3070 kcal/day in the second trimester and 3092 kcal/day in the final trimester. 11

The compilation of 22 studies indicates that adult women have an average confirmed intake of 2500 kcal/day, using the doubly labeled water method. The average confirmed intake for the adult men was 3400 kcal/day. However, the age range in this compilation for the females was 25 and older, whereas for the males it was 22 and older. Because males younger than around 25 will consume more (for developmental reasons), the average intake listed for males is a bit higher than for fully matured male adults (approximately 3000 kcal/day). 12

And all these data are for those over the age of 25. What does that mean for those between the ages of 12-24? The doubly labeled water trial method is the only way to be sure of what individuals actually consume to maintain health and weight and even then we struggle to tease out true non-restricting results from within those trials.

One lone doubly labeled water trial confirms that 12 to 18 year-old males and females who maintained weight during the trial had total energy expenditure requirements that averaged 3072 kcal/day. 13

In the absence of actual data, we have to use studies of under reporting on this age group to extract likely energy requirements from there. It is worth noting that in an additional analysis of a representative cross-section of those who completed the French Étude Individuelle National des Consommations Alimentaires survey, 40% of the children ages 11 to 17 had attempted to lose weight in the past year and 41% wanted to weigh less, out of a total of 881 males and females assessed.

Rather conveniently, 16 to 17 year old dieting and non-dieting males were also assessed for their self-reported intakes and male dieters stated they consumed 2190 kcal/day whereas non-dieters stated they consumed 3066 kcal/day. 16 As there are no distinctions between rates of underreporting for males and females in this age range, 16 to 17 year old non-dieting males actually eat an average 3833 kcal/day to support development to age 25.

In the same study, children ages 3 to 10 underreported food intake by 4.8%, and those between ages 11 to 17 underreported by 26%. No significant differences were found between males and females in underreporting values, and no incidences of over reporting occurred for those aged 11 to 17. 14

However, none of the above data on actual required energy for various age- and sex-matched subgroups will apply to you if you have an eating disorder. These data apply only to energy-balanced individuals and those with eating disorders are energy deficient.

Only 4% of the adult female population will have naturally inherited a weight set point between BMI 18.5-20.9.

In Dr. Evelyn Attia’s review of the current status of treatment for anorexia nervosa, she highlights that adequate re-feeding generally sits between 3000-4000 kcal/day. 17 Dr. Philip Mehler indicates that, depending on the treatment program, daily intake will peak between 3500-5000 kcal/day. 18

When young adult males were semi-starved (consuming 1570 kcal/day) for a mere three months, their re-feeding process involved ad libitum eating up to 10,000 kcal/day. In fact the initial post-starvation period return to their pre-study eating habits resulted in absolutely no weight restoration, and for many it caused further health (both mental and physical) deterioration. 20

The cumulative energy deficits that are average for those with active eating disorders are very rarely as low as 165 000 kilocalories and that was the estimated average cumulative deficit for the subjects in the Minnesota Starvation Experiment. A net energy deficit (combined energy expenditures and insufficient energy intake) of 1000 kcal/day for a mere six months generates a cumulative energy deficit of 180 000 kilocalories."

Note the references in these articles to scientific papers. There is a lot to understand about calories/energy.
 

Cirion

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
3,731
Location
St. Louis, Missouri
In fact the initial post-starvation period return to their pre-study eating habits resulted in absolutely no weight restoration, and for many it caused further health (both mental and physical) deterioration.

Re-quoting for great justice, especially the bold part.

Just eating "reasonable" caloric intakes simply does not work with someone who has a history of dieting.

I've found this to be true for me. In fact, I completely relate to the bolded part: "further deterioration of health" despite eating "normal" level of calories.
 

lampofred

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
3,244
Not a proponent of fasting or caloric restriction, but high iron and low magnesium unnecessarily increase caloric requirements. High iron by wasting the glucose and vitamins you eat, low magnesium by wasting ATP.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom