I disagree. If you’re active*, you can eat a good amount of calories and maintain your weight. It’s a common misconception, even among active women. I believe sometimes women don’t eat enough to see the progress they want to see. It’s so common to be told to drop your calories by 500, but it’s not sustainable once you get near your goal weight.anesidora317 wrote:I'm glad you did the math. When I watched the video I estimated in my head <a href="tel:2000-2500">2000-2500</a> calories and though YIKES that's a lot of food for "weightloss". Even if you are working out you shouldn't eat back so many calories that you are in the <a href="tel:2000-2500">2000-2500</a> range. Unless you are over 6 foot.lucyandthebanshees wrote:Okay I was really curious so I added up her “for weight loss” day of food. I’m estimating the meat because I don’t eat it, so I’m not too familiar so correct me if I’m wrong.
Breakfast:
Apple 80
Almond butter, looks like 2 spoons, 190
Almond granola, 0.5 cup, 220
Breakfast #2:
Bagel, 230
Smart balance, 80
Lunch:
Lettuce, did not count to account for some minimal mistakes
Ground chicken, 3oz is 150 and it looked like she had 3 oz. in each lettuce cup? So 600
Fire roasted corn, 100
Avocado, 230
Salsa, 10
Trilogy synergy kombucha, 50
Lunch #2:
Sweet potato, 180
Olive oil, looked like 1.5 spoons, 150
Thousand island, 2 spoons, 100
Dinner:
Grilled chicken, 100?
Brown rice, 0.5 cup 140
Honey, 60
Total: 2520
Honey, that is not for weight loss.
At the end of the day food is fuel. I eat around 2200 and nowhere near 6 foot. I go lower than 1800, I can’t really think straight, let alone progress in my workouts.
*When I say active I mean you do more than a 4 mph speed walk on incline 3 days a week. Sorry, Kayla.