I'm almost 228 lbs, 30% BF. I'm doing interval cardio and light weight lifting.

Following everyone's advice, should I really eat at least 2280 calories a day, with 228g of protein? It sounds like I could lose weight faster if I ate, say, 1800 calories, with still 228 g of protein, of course.

I know this is probably the 'going against everything you know' kind of line, but I would like to hear it for my confidence in eating and choice of food. Will my metabolism receive a boost from eating like this? Of course I know everyone's body is different, and when john lost the bulk of his weight, it was a lower-calorie diet. (1300-1700)

Any advice and encouragement would be appreciated. After years of building the willpower to eat less, now I have to eat more???

I'm almost 228 lbs, 30% BF. I'm doing interval cardio and light weight lifting.

Following everyone's advice, should I really eat at least 2280 calories a day, with 228g of protein? It sounds like I could lose weight faster if I ate, say, 1800 calories, with still 228 g of protein, of course.

I know this is probably the 'going against everything you know' kind of line, but I would like to hear it for my confidence in eating and choice of food. Will my metabolism receive a boost from eating like this? Of course I know everyone's body is different, and when john lost the bulk of his weight, it was a lower-calorie diet. (1300-1700)

Any advice and encouragement would be appreciated. After years of building the willpower to eat less, now I have to eat more???

its the best starts. eat 2300 calories each day with my exercise/weight training for two weeks and check the scale.

yeah you will lose weight faster if you ate less.. you will lose WEIGHT, not fat. you will lose muscle mostly. so go for it!

its best to determine how much you eat now on average per day.. and remove 200-300 cal max from that and stick to that for 2 weeks and if you get no results.. drop it a tad more

im 169 lbs and consume 1900-2000 calories a day and lose 1-2 lbs of FAT each week.

Jono is correct, If you eat to less calories you will eventually Lose Lean Mass and Fat and additionally you will have a slower metabolism. So if you ever got off your diet your weight would sky rocket back up. You want to keep it at 200 -300 minus your Base Metabolic Rate so you will benefit in Losing Fat, keeping your lean mass and raising your metabolic rate so you can keep the weight off :tu:

I ate 2300 calories of healthy food yesterday and lifted and played basketball for a bit, and this morning I weighed less and my BF was lower, so I guess it works! Thanks for the support!

I always thought it was 10x your target body weight in calories. Is that incorrect? Someone clarify for me please.
-Allen

I always thought it was 10x your target body weight in calories. Is that incorrect? Someone clarify for me please.
-Allen

There are a lot of threads that answer this, but the short answer is this:

10-12X your bodyweight is a quideline only, and only when you're trying to get leaner. Everyone is different, but this number is a pretty good one to start at.

Or you can do what's been suggested; see how much you eat now and subtract 200-300 calories.

Thank you, actually yes I am taking that advice. I was more concerned I had the 'guideline' wrong. I had always thought the guideline was 10x desired bodyweight, but now I was hearing 10x current body weight. I was confused.

-Allen

I'm not sure where this "10 times bodyweight" number comes from. Like many things in this field, it may just be one of those "commonly accepted things". It may not - there may be some scientific data to back it up, but I have yet to see this data.

I can't imagine that advice given to a professional athelete or bodybuilder - "ten to twelve times your bodyweight" should also go for somebody who's, say, 100 pounds overweight. That just doesn't make much sense - fat and muscle are so different and react very differently to food and exercise. How can you treat the person made up of 35% fat the same as the person made up of 8% fat?

I would think a better measure would be to go off LEAN BODY MASS. 12 times lean body mass is essentially what many of these guys and gals who are at 8% of bodyfat are using anyway when they're doing their cutting phases. I would think that would be a better number for the very obese person to use instead of simply weight.

What does everybody else think? Are there actually studies out there for the obese on this? Or is the "ten to twelve times bodyweight" thing just another one of the commonly accepted practices that should somehow apply the same to the person made up of a third of fat versus the person who seems to be almost all muscle?

I'm not sure where this "10 times bodyweight" number comes from. Like many things in this field, it may just be one of those "commonly accepted things". It may not - there may be some scientific data to back it up, but I have yet to see this data.

I can't imagine that advice given to a professional athelete or bodybuilder - "ten to twelve times your bodyweight" should also go for somebody who's, say, 100 pounds overweight. That just doesn't make much sense - fat and muscle are so different and react very differently to food and exercise. How can you treat the person made up of 35% fat the same as the person made up of 8% fat?

I would think a better measure would be to go off LEAN BODY MASS. 12 times lean body mass is essentially what many of these guys and gals who are at 8% of bodyfat are using anyway when they're doing their cutting phases. I would think that would be a better number for the very obese person to use instead of simply weight.

What does everybody else think? Are there actually studies out there for the obese on this? Or is the "ten to twelve times bodyweight" thing just another one of the commonly accepted practices that should somehow apply the same to the person made up of a third of fat versus the person who seems to be almost all muscle?I think of the "10 x" guide as nothing more than that--a general guideline. In addition to a very wide range of body fat levels, people also have a large range of metabolic rates, from very fast to very slow. Considering this, the "10 x" guide simply can not be optimal for everyone. Like all thing related to fitness, one should educate him or herself, monitor their progress and adjust as needed.

I can tell you that for me, I lost weight equally as well at < 10% body fat as I did when I was in the 20% + range while eating 10 times my total weight in calories each day.

I think some people place way too much emphasis on following to the letter what should be nothing more than a starting point. It's much better to educate yourself and then listen to your body, adjusting as needed!

I would think a better measure would be to go off LEAN BODY MASS. 12 times lean body mass is essentially what many of these guys and gals who are at 8% of bodyfat are using anyway when they're doing their cutting phases. I would think that would be a better number for the very obese person to use instead of simply weight.

I totally agree. I think LBM is a much better multiplier than total bodyweight. I have lost 100 lbs in the past year, and have gone through various phases of trial and error along the way. In retrospect the times where I would experience "stalls" (0-1 lbs loss per week) were usually when I was eating 10-12x total bodyweight, and the times I would experience better loss rates (3-4 lbs per week) would be when I ate 10-12x LBM. At the time I chalked it up to other things: too many carbs, slowed metabolism, low leptin levels, not enough cardio, wrong supps, whatever.

In the end, it's calories burned vs. calories consumed. The type, quality, timing, etc of those calories is diet technique - with the notable caveat that starvation levels WILL eventually lead to failure.

FYI I'm at 225 lbs and 30% BF.

At week three, I've lost 3 kg (6.6 pounds) and about 4% BF on a 2300 calorie diet with exercise and lifting. I eat a ton every day, and I don't feel hungry/tired at all. I could theoretically lower my calories to 2000 or less, and as a result lose weight faster, but I'm comfortable with this level, and I don't have to struggle with cravings/hunger.

Just a note to anyone else out there:You can eat lots and still lose weight at a more than reasonable pace!
:mad: Burn those calories away! :mad: