eating more to lose weight

Ive read this in a couple older posts that I didn't feel the need to bring back from the dead. The gist was, some guy said he was trying to get lean eating 3500 calories or some other number and sure as shit someone would come on and say that's not enough food for your stats. How they know this is also a mystery to me. They would suggest that to lose weight or break through the diet plateau that the member needed to increase (not decrease) his calories. Any idea why this would be suggested.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nephets

Ive read this in a couple older posts that I didn't feel the need to bring back from the dead. The gist was, some guy said he was trying to get lean eating 3500 calories or some other number and sure as shit someone would come on and say that's not enough food for your stats. How they know this is also a mystery to me. They would suggest that to lose weight or break through the diet plateau that the member needed to increase (not decrease) his calories. Any idea why this would be suggested.

---

If calories are too low below the maintainenace then you will throttle metabolism and not lose weight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Windex

If calories are too low below the maintainenace then you will throttle metabolism and not lose weight.

---

Yes and no. Resting metabolic rate doesn’t actually change that much.
What tends to happen is that non-exercise activity thermogenesis (spontaneous movement, foot twitching, pacing, etc.) falls off of a cliff.
Anyone who has ever been contest lean has experienced the extreme form of this, where even going to check the mail feels like a major chore. The NEAT drop can be offset by forcing yourself to move more, but it takes conscious effort after a certain point.