Was slim, now chubby because BF. Anyone else struggling? - long

101Mims · June 2013

I've never been anorexic, but I've always controlled my eating. For the last 20 years Ive been eating once a day - anything I like really - but with drinks and everything else I guess I've been on 600 to 800 calories.

I'm 5ft 2" and weighed before pregnancies between 95 and 100lbs. That was what I'm happy with and feel looks best on my frame.

I only recently found out that I have been suffering with an under active thyroid which was only diagnosed during pregnancy. Hypothyroidism made it very easy for me to gain weight so I guess that's why Ive fought all my adult life to keep the weight off. With pregnancy I also quit smoking and stopped taking my script for Lexapro which I had been on for 5 years.

Since 2010, when we decided to try for our first child, Ive put weight on. I knew I had to as I was too thin to maintain a pregnancy. Now after 2 children I'm 135lbs and out of shape.

I didnt manage to BF our son, but wasnt worried about the weight gain as I knew we would try for another as soon as we could.

Now I'm BF Delilah and am so happy to be able to do so and hope to continue for as long as I can. My aim is to make it to her first birthday.

But! I have to eat and eat and eat in order to keep my supply. I have no time to exercise - 2U2! and no one to help out. I mean I barely manage to shower before 2am most nights.

Now summer is here, - I live in Spain -this is the third summer Ive been heavy, and it's starting to get to me.

I'm in a stable relationship, am 37 yrs old so I've got no one to impress. I've no friends, so no outside pressure, to keep up with any one else either. It's not about how I look to others, but how I feel about myself.

I'm wondering are there any other ladies with body-weight control issues who are BF? and how are you finding it?

penguingrrl · June 2013

Weight has always been a struggle for me, but with BFing this time it's awful. I don't fit in things I fit in 3 weeks PP despite exercising and eating well. I'm constantly hungry and fill up with veggies and fruits, lean protein, etc.

It's really strange because with DD2 I was below my pre-pregnancy weight at this point, also from nursing presumably, but for some reason this time around my weight is just staying on no matter what I do. I also won't do anything that puts my supply at risk as I do feel BFing is a huge priority.

At this point I'm accepting that the weight will come off after he has weaned and I have the ability to take more drastic steps. That said, eating less than 1200 calories a day is pretty dangerous. When I diet I count carefully and eat 1200-1300 calories spaced evenly through the day. Less than that and I pass out. More than that and I don't lose weight or keep it off.

holly321 · June 2013

Due to pumping issues, I have recently cut back on bf. I feed DS in the morning and evening. And since I cut back,I have started to lose weight, rather quickly.

i was about 20 lbs overweight when I got pregnant with dd, we knew we wanted a second quickly. So I didn't bother to lose the weight. I then got pregnant and lost the baby in the second trimester. I quickly dropped 10 of the 15 lbs. I gained, due to be depressed and not wanting to eat.

Up until about 2 weeks ago, I was 40 lbs heavier than I want to be, now it is closer to 30.

I hate being this heavy. I am fortunate to be really tall and curvy, so it hides it, but I hate the way I look. Up until about a year before getting pregnant with dd, I was always really skinny.

Now, to answer your question, I have cut all processed food out of my diet, and cut back on all beverages but water, and maybe 1 cup of coffee a day. I have been trying to watch my portions, which doesn't seem like an option for you, since you need to help your supply.

And I totally understAnd not having time to exercise. I have been trying to Doolittle things here and there, like sit ups, walking the kids, even iff I just do2 minutes of jumping jacks, it is better than nothing.

pitterpatter129 · June 2013

My weight is a huge issue to begin with. I used to be tiny and cute (like started college at 104 lbs!) but now I'm a good 100 lbs overweight from a healthy weight (227 lbs.) Ugh. BUT, in regards to bfing, I can't even lose a few pounds without my supply taking a hit, so I've given up for now. I decided when I wean this one (and there won't be others!), that I'm going back to my Zumba classes and dieting and whatever. I'm just trying to make sure I don't gain any extra!! I might start actively trying to lose weight once little one starts solids... I did weight watchers with DS1 and I lost about 10 lbs before my supply died and I quit. I'm definitely ready to be a few sizes smaller. The mirror is not my friend right now.

ETA: I guess I didn't read well, but you are at my nice, healthy goal weight! Same height. You have a good size going, so just maintain it. I agree with t.c. that if you can't maintain a pregnancy at a weight, then it wasn't healthy in the first place.

Runaway22 · June 2013

Weight has never been a real issue for me, but it is now. The few pieces that i can squeeze into look terrible and I hate how I look naked. I've always had body issues, because growing up I thought that my physical appearance was a top priority. My mom put a lot of pressure on me and constantly compared herself to me. Basically, i was supposed to be "hot enough to snag a rich guy." Didn't happen lol. Only now that I've had a baby, my body looks more like hers and less like "mine," so I'm really struggling with accepting it. Most days I HATE my body and sometimes get really depressed about it. And since I'm single, I'm losing hope about ever looking desirable again. I get it's irrational, but it's honestly how I feel.

Not sure if this is at all helpful, but you're not alone.

Runaway22 · June 2013

Teacher Clark:
Food for thought

https://www.rolereboot.org/life/details/201306whenyourmothersaysshesfat

Copy and paste into your browser, unless someone can clickify this

I would, but I'm mobile and can't add the dashes :::sad face:::

kleigh926 · June 2013

First of all, having to eat a lot in order to maintain supply is not uncommon. Sometimes I feel like I'm eating all day just to keep producing milk, and I know others who have said the same thing. You need more calories to BF than when you're pregnant. Also, it's not uncommon to hold onto a little extra weight while BF'ing either.
Second, being 5' 2" and 135 pounds doesn't sound that bad to me. I do think it sounds like you have a bit of an unhealthy body image and unrealistic expectations of what your body "should" look like, especially after having kids.

singingsea · June 2013

kleigh926:
Second, being 5' 2" and 135 pounds doesn't sound that bad to me. I do think it sounds like you have a bit of an unhealthy body image and unrealistic expectations of what your body "should" look like, especially after having kids.

This.

Also I would kill to be 135. I'm that height and 160 Sad

101Mims · July 2013

Teacher Clark:
Wow, I'm sorry, I just can't wrap my head around the fact that you eat so little and are more comfortable maintaining what's seems to be an unhealthy weight(....)There doesn't seem to be a happy middle ground. If a woman isn't absurdly skinny then she must be overweight. There is a middle ground between skinny and overweight, it's called healthy. I am sorry if this is coming off as snarky. I am just truly alarmed by this as well as a growing trend that I have seen that praises anorexic like bodies and vilifies women of normal healthy weight.

I agree with every word. I know being that weight isn't ideal, but I still stand by the fact that I'm not, nor ever have been anorexic. Calorie control yes- but setting out to starve myself absolutely not. I Reach my goal weight and maintain it.

I have never looked to images of other women and thought that I wanted be thin just like them. The media has never had an impact. For me, it's an internal dialogue and it's all about control.I had an ...unorthodox ? upbringing and this is one of the bits of baggage I've been carrying around with me since then. Most of us have something I'm sure.

If I was to chose a female in the media who I thought had a great body I would probably go with Beyonce as she keeps herself in shape through lots of exercise and, I presume, a good diet.

Thank you for your reply to my post tho :-)

101Mims · July 2013

kleigh926:
....Second, being 5' 2" and 135 pounds doesn't sound that bad to me. I do think it sounds like you have a bit of an unhealthy body image and unrealistic expectations of what your body "should" look like, especially after having kids.

Well I'm not so deluded to think I'm going to go back to 95lbs! Maintaining that weight is totally selfish, and far to frail to work with kids. I'm fine with having a more robust frame, and the days of being so self absorbed are well and truly past.

I'll be happy at 110 I think?

I think in my original post I was just venting about the body changes that come with BFas I never went thru them with DS.

I mean I'm now a Gcup, having gone from barely an A! I used to have slim legs and now the tops of my thighs rub together and in this heat, it's so yukky. And yesterday I went thru all my pre pregnancy clothes and got a huge bag together to give to charity knowing that I would never fit them again.

Some of those clothes Ive had since I was 20, jeans, pencil skirts and the like. We really don't have the money for any new clothes for me, so it was sad letting go of some of my most treasured items.

Ahh well ...I'm a mummy now and things must change :-)

Puck1182 · July 2013

Honestly? You probably need to eat more to lose weight, as counterintuitive as it seems. By eating 600800 calories a day, you put your body into starvation mode, so it's now clinging to every last calorie for dear life. If you're still eating just 600800 calories a days while BFing, that leaves just 100300 calories for your body to survive on since 500 of that goes to LO.

Really, you need to be eating a bare minimum of 1700 calories a day if you're BFing, 1200 if you're not. If you have access to a nutritionist, I'd make an appointment, because I'm really not sure of the best way to work back up to the calories you need without your body freaking out even more. 110 sounds like a reasonable goal for your height, but it will probably be hard to get there without getting your body out of starvation mode first...

kleigh926 · July 2013

101Mims:
Teacher Clark:
Wow, I'm sorry, I just can't wrap my head around the fact that you eat so little and are more comfortable maintaining what's seems to be an unhealthy weight(....)There doesn't seem to be a happy middle ground. If a woman isn't absurdly skinny then she must be overweight. There is a middle ground between skinny and overweight, it's called healthy. I am sorry if this is coming off as snarky. I am just truly alarmed by this as well as a growing trend that I have seen that praises anorexic like bodies and vilifies women of normal healthy weight.
I agree with every word. I know being that weight isn't ideal, but I still stand by the fact that I'm not, nor ever have been anorexic. Calorie control yes- but setting out to starve myself absolutely not. I Reach my goal weight and maintain it.
I have never looked to images of other women and thought that I wanted be thin just like them. The media has never had an impact. For me, it's an internal dialogue and it's all about control.I had an ...unorthodox ? upbringing and this is one of the bits of baggage I've been carrying around with me since then. Most of us have something I'm sure.
If I was to chose a female in the media who I thought had a great body I would probably go with Beyonce as she keeps herself in shape through lots of exercise and, I presume, a good diet.
Thank you for your reply to my post tho :-)

But wanting control is a hallmark sign of anorexia. I'm not claiming that you are or were anorexic, but just think about it. 600-800 calories a day IS starving yourself, whether you consciously set out to do that or not. That's not just calorie counting, that's starvation.

tiffanyp · July 2013

Puck1182:
Honestly? You probably need to eat more to lose weight, as counterintuitive as it seems. By eating 600800 calories a day, you put your body into starvation mode, so it's now clinging to every last calorie for dear life. If you're still eating just 600800 calories a days while BFing, that leaves just 100300 calories for your body to survive on since 500 of that goes to LO. Really, you need to be eating a bare minimum of 1700 calories a day if you're BFing, 1200 if you're not. If you have access to a nutritionist, I'd make an appointment, because I'm really not sure of the best way to work back up to the calories you need without your body freaking out even more. 110 sounds like a reasonable goal for your height, but it will probably be hard to get there without getting your body out of starvation mode first...

She's not eating 600 calories now. That's what she ate when she weighed 95 lbs. Starvation mode does not prevent weight loss. People who are in starvation mode will lose less than what you would expect from the huge calorie deficit, as their bodies slow down up to 20% in an effort to try to survive. However, they will still be losing weight quickly, and consistently, until they die from complications due to malnutrition. Sorry for the thread hijack. I'm just tired of hearing people say that you need to eat more to lose weight, because that's not the way thermodynamics works.

tiffanyp · July 2013

Teacher Clark:
tiffanyp:
Puck1182:
Honestly? You probably need to eat more to lose weight, as counterintuitive as it seems. By eating 600800 calories a day, you put your body into starvation mode, so it's now clinging to every last calorie for dear life. If you're still eating just 600800 calories a days while BFing, that leaves just 100300 calories for your body to survive on since 500 of that goes to LO. Really, you need to be eating a bare minimum of 1700 calories a day if you're BFing, 1200 if you're not. If you have access to a nutritionist, I'd make an appointment, because I'm really not sure of the best way to work back up to the calories you need without your body freaking out even more. 110 sounds like a reasonable goal for your height, but it will probably be hard to get there without getting your body out of starvation mode first...
She's not eating 600 calories now. That's what she ate when she weighed 95 lbs. Starvation mode does not prevent weight loss. People who are in starvation mode will lose less than what you would expect from the huge calorie deficit, as their bodies slow down up to 20% in an effort to try to survive. However, they will still be losing weight quickly, and consistently, until they die from complications due to malnutrition. Sorry for the thread hijack. I'm just tired of hearing people say that you need to eat more to lose weight, because that's not the way thermodynamics works.
True, but either way 600 to 800 calories is not healthy.

I totally agree. She doesn't need to restrict calories nearly that much to get to a weight where she's happy again.

Puck1182 · July 2013

tiffanyp:
Puck1182:
Honestly? You probably need to eat more to lose weight, as counterintuitive as it seems. By eating 600800 calories a day, you put your body into starvation mode, so it's now clinging to every last calorie for dear life. If you're still eating just 600800 calories a days while BFing, that leaves just 100300 calories for your body to survive on since 500 of that goes to LO.

Really, you need to be eating a bare minimum of 1700 calories a day if you're BFing, 1200 if you're not. If you have access to a nutritionist, I'd make an appointment, because I'm really not sure of the best way to work back up to the calories you need without your body freaking out even more. 110 sounds like a reasonable goal for your height, but it will probably be hard to get there without getting your body out of starvation mode first...
She's not eating 600 calories now. That's what she ate when she weighed 95 lbs. Starvation mode does not prevent weight loss. People who are in starvation mode will lose less than what you would expect from the huge calorie deficit, as their bodies slow down up to 20% in an effort to try to survive. However, they will still be losing weight quickly, and consistently, until they die from complications due to malnutrition. Sorry for the thread hijack. I'm just tired of hearing people say that you need to eat more to lose weight,  because that's not the way thermodynamics works.

Yeah I definitely had a reading comprehension fail [totally missed the eat and eat and eat part, I thought she was back to restricting calories, though not necessarily to the degree she was before, I just used those numbers as an example], then combined two separate points into one that didn't make sense at all.

I wasnt actually trying to say that she would gain weight WHILE restricting calories that much, just that doing so put her body into starvation mode, and eating more would cause a disproportionate weight gain because her metabolism was so slow. But [and definitely correct me of I'm wrong here], wouldn't eating enough calories eventually take her body out of starvation mode after the initial weight gain, thus making it easier to lose weight in a healthy way? Of course "healthy" was a key word I left out. This is what I get for bumping hastily at work. :P

tiffanyp · July 2013

Puck1182:
tiffanyp:
Puck1182:
Honestly? You probably need to eat more to lose weight, as counterintuitive as it seems. By eating 600800 calories a day, you put your body into starvation mode, so it's now clinging to every last calorie for dear life. If you're still eating just 600800 calories a days while BFing, that leaves just 100300 calories for your body to survive on since 500 of that goes to LO. Really, you need to be eating a bare minimum of 1700 calories a day if you're BFing, 1200 if you're not. If you have access to a nutritionist, I'd make an appointment, because I'm really not sure of the best way to work back up to the calories you need without your body freaking out even more. 110 sounds like a reasonable goal for your height, but it will probably be hard to get there without getting your body out of starvation mode first...
She's not eating 600 calories now. That's what she ate when she weighed 95 lbs. Starvation mode does not prevent weight loss. People who are in starvation mode will lose less than what you would expect from the huge calorie deficit, as their bodies slow down up to 20% in an effort to try to survive. However, they will still be losing weight quickly, and consistently, until they die from complications due to malnutrition. Sorry for the thread hijack. I'm just tired of hearing people say that you need to eat more to lose weight, because that's not the way thermodynamics works.
Yeah I definitely had a reading comprehension fail [totally missed the eat and eat and eat part, I thought she was back to restricting calories, though not necessarily to the degree she was before, I just used those numbers as an example], then combined two separate points into one that didn't make sense at all. I wasnt actually trying to say that she would gain weight WHILE restricting calories that much, just that doing so put her body into starvation mode, and eating more would cause a disproportionate weight gain because her metabolism was so slow. But [and definitely correct me of I'm wrong here], wouldn't eating enough calories eventually take her body out of starvation mode after the initial weight gain, thus making it easier to lose weight in a healthy way? Of course "healthy" was a key word I left out. This is what I get for bumping hastily at work. :P

For the most part, your body goes back to its normal metabolism as soon as you start eating again. It's also not an on/off switch. The more you restrict calories, the more your body slows down. You will still lose more weight the more you restrict calories, but you get diminishing returns. I'm not 100% positive, but I believe that the idea of screwing up your metabolism forever is incorrect. I've never read any documented cases of this. In the Minnesota Starvation Study (where this whole starvation mode business was discovered), the men participating did not have any long term health consequences. On a similar note, you can't trick your body into speeding its metabolism by eating more often. Lots of people think if you eat 6 small meals a day instead of 3 bigger ones, you will lose more weight, but if the total calories are the same then this simply isn't true. You can eat 8 meals or 1 and the outcome doesn't change. I actually don't have a problem with people eating 1 meal/day while dieting as long as the calorie level is appropriate and they are getting sufficient protein. 800 calories is too low for anyone though. While breastfeeding I wouldn't go below 2000.

tiffanyp · July 2013

Teacher Clark:
Puck1182:
tiffanyp:
Puck1182:
Honestly? You probably need to eat more to lose weight, as counterintuitive as it seems. By eating 600800 calories a day, you put your body into starvation mode, so it's now clinging to every last calorie for dear life. If you're still eating just 600800 calories a days while BFing, that leaves just 100300 calories for your body to survive on since 500 of that goes to LO. Really, you need to be eating a bare minimum of 1700 calories a day if you're BFing, 1200 if you're not. If you have access to a nutritionist, I'd make an appointment, because I'm really not sure of the best way to work back up to the calories you need without your body freaking out even more. 110 sounds like a reasonable goal for your height, but it will probably be hard to get there without getting your body out of starvation mode first...
She's not eating 600 calories now. That's what she ate when she weighed 95 lbs. Starvation mode does not prevent weight loss. People who are in starvation mode will lose less than what you would expect from the huge calorie deficit, as their bodies slow down up to 20% in an effort to try to survive. However, they will still be losing weight quickly, and consistently, until they die from complications due to malnutrition. Sorry for the thread hijack. I'm just tired of hearing people say that you need to eat more to lose weight, because that's not the way thermodynamics works.
Yeah I definitely had a reading comprehension fail [totally missed the eat and eat and eat part, I thought she was back to restricting calories, though not necessarily to the degree she was before, I just used those numbers as an example], then combined two separate points into one that didn't make sense at all. I wasnt actually trying to say that she would gain weight WHILE restricting calories that much, just that doing so put her body into starvation mode, and eating more would cause a disproportionate weight gain because her metabolism was so slow. But [and definitely correct me of I'm wrong here], wouldn't eating enough calories eventually take her body out of starvation mode after the initial weight gain, thus making it easier to lose weight in a healthy way? Of course "healthy" was a key word I left out. This is what I get for bumping hastily at work. :P
It depends on how long she's been doing it. You can permanently alter your metabolism if you do it too long. Your body slows down because its starving.

Has this been documented anywhere? I'm not trying to be snarky. You seem to have a good amount of knowledge on the subject, and I'm always trying to learn more. If you got this info from a reputable source, please share!

tiffanyp · July 2013

Teacher Clark:
tiffanyp:

Has this been documented anywhere? I'm not trying to be snarky. You seem to have a good amount of knowledge on the subject, and I'm always trying to learn more. If you got this info from a reputable source, please share!
Yes, it is well known information. As a biology major who also took many psychology classes along with being an anatomy and physiology teacher I am fairly well versed in this.

Interesting. So, how much dieting (how intense, how long, etc) does it take to permanently screw up one's metabolism. Also, by what mechanism is it screwed up? Is it merely loss of muscle mass that decreases the overall calorie needs, or is it a hormone production thing? Can you point me to any good scientific articles or studies that address this?

Was slim, now chubby because BF. Anyone else struggling? - long

Re: Was slim, now chubby because BF. Anyone else struggling? - long

Choose Another Board

Search Boards