**Hi. I started the SCD on January 1st and then after a quick stall I switched to Paleo which was followed by an even quicker stall. I started at 239 and got down as low as 220. For the last 2 1/2 months my weight has fluctuated between 220-225.
I can't exercise due to some limitation. I used to go to the gym about 2 1/2 yrs ago but an old injury sidelined me. I damaged a vertebrae in my neck when I was 13 and over time it flattened and now it's pinching a nerve which affects my neck, back and arms. Also, due to a broken hip at birth I now have osteoarthritis and will eventually need a new hip. I walk my dog about an hour a day when the pain is not too bad but that's the only exercise I get.
I've done everything I can think of dietwise to break this plateau: Cheat day, calorie restriction, calorie recycling. I now just started IF with Paleo. I keep reading conflicting information regarding calories. I read that with Paleo you just need to eat to satiety and then other articles say you need to restrict calories and then other articles say to multiply your current body weight by 10 and eat that number in calories. Help!
I am a 43 yr old male, 6 ft tall, large frame, currently weigh 227, and I am eating around 1800-2000 calories a day. I still feel hungry during my 8 hr feeding window. Should I eat more, stay with my current calories, or tough it out and eat less? Thank you!**
asked bybtskidz (0)
Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!
on May 13, 2013
at 02:20 PM
When people say "just eat to satiety" they are assuming that you are eating foods that are both satiating and hypocaloric. That is, it feels physically difficult to go over your daily caloric needs on white potato and chicken breast...but you CAN! The line "eat to satiety" is just that - a line. It's meant to draw people into a diet that otherwise suffer from severe hunger when they try to lose fat. It, however, is not a license to ignore calories. If "eating to satiety" means, to you, eating hypercalorically then you WILL NOT LOSE WEIGHT (baring correcting any severe hormonal imbalances or other similar issues). Even with super satiating foods, when you are looking to lose fat, there will be times that you are hungry. That's just how it is. That's how it SHOULD be. That's just how our body works.
However, Paleo + IF, I have found, is pretty close to having your cake and eating it too with regard to hunger and fat loss. Yes, paleo tends to be far more satiating than a "heart healthy whole grain" diet, especially with an IF protocol. You plan out your food for the day, place it all in the kitchen, stare at it angrily and...a massive whirwhind of cooking, sampling and eating. Pure fun and food in one corner of the day. The rest of the day is for doing things OTHER than food. I never give food a second thought after downing 1400 calories from eggs, meat, a MASSIVE pile of kale and spinach sauteed in bacon grease with onion and garlic, cottage cheese, potato and some kefir. I am full, satisfied, and ready to get on with the rest of the day. But I STILL count if I'm looking to shed some fat.
As I mentioned before there are plenty of other factors such as hormone imbalances, poor gut flora, inflammation issues, autoimmune issues, ad nauseum. Paleo helps you snuff these out. Helps you get rid of what's holding you back. But once you do, you still need to obey thermodynamics. Eat hypocalorically. With those other issues out of the way it WILL be much easier, but it still needs to be done.