Message Boards » General Diet and Weight Loss Help
TOPIC: **READ THIS** Figuring out your calorie goals |
|
|---|---|
|
Joined Feb 2011 Posts: 6 |
April 23, 2012 3:34 pm
This makes sense! I was eating 1200 calories at first but I was not losing and I was pretty cranky. Upped my calories to 1400-1500/day and have been consistently losing ever since! And I am not cranky anymore. It seemed weird at first since I am only 5' tall and started at 135 lbs, but now that I keep constantly losing, I am a believer!!
|
|
Joined Apr 2012 Posts: 29 |
April 23, 2012 3:47 pm
QUOTE: This makes sense! I was eating 1200 calories at first but I was not losing and I was pretty cranky. Upped my calories to 1400-1500/day and have been consistently losing ever since! And I am not cranky anymore. It seemed weird at first since I am only 5' tall and started at 135 lbs, but now that I keep constantly losing, I am a believer!! @marissa - so good to hear! I am also short at 5'1" and have processed all this info but haven't been willing to go all the way up to the 1900 level it recommends. I have been trying to stay up around 1500 a day this week and have seen the scale move myself. Do you mind me asking what your specific numbers are? I'd like to compare to mine since we are similar in height and weight. 
|
|
Joined Dec 2011 Posts: 485 |
April 23, 2012 3:49 pm
bump
|
|
Joined Apr 2012 Posts: 415 |
April 23, 2012 3:50 pm
so if my BMR is 1205, i am to be eating 200 more?
|
|
Joined Apr 2012 Posts: 29 |
April 23, 2012 3:53 pm
QUOTE: so if my BMR is 1205, i am to be eating 200 more? Yes, 200 more would be the minimum you should eat but that is if you are sedentary. If you work out, you would need to eat your calories from working out back as well to make sure your NET (calories in-calories out) does not fall below this minimum number.
|
|
Joined Dec 2011 Posts: 24 |
April 23, 2012 3:54 pm
bump
|
|
Joined Jan 2011 Posts: 261 |
April 23, 2012 3:55 pm
bump.
|
|
Joined Oct 2011 Posts: 104 |
April 23, 2012 3:55 pm
Thanks for the info!
|
|
Joined Jan 2012 Posts: 23 |
April 23, 2012 3:59 pm
Nicely put! Can you come and teach my students this. They won't listen to me! LOL
|
|
Joined May 2008 Posts: 1,959 |
April 23, 2012 4:00 pm
Bumping to read later. Thank you!
|
|
Joined Dec 2011 Posts: 31 |
April 23, 2012 4:36 pm
bump
|
|
Joined Nov 2011 Posts: 40 |
April 23, 2012 4:43 pm
Bump
|
|
Joined Apr 2012 Posts: 415 |
April 23, 2012 6:31 pm
QUOTE: QUOTE: so if my BMR is 1205, i am to be eating 200 more? Yes, 200 more would be the minimum you should eat but that is if you are sedentary. If you work out, you would need to eat your calories from working out back as well to make sure your NET (calories in-calories out) does not fall below this minimum number. ok so today i consumed 1611 calories; i burned 232. that gives me a net of 1379 and 61 remaining which i am not hungry enough to eat. Sorry for the redundancy but i want to be sure i am doing this right.
|
|
Joined Mar 2012 Posts: 137 |
April 23, 2012 6:35 pm
bump for later. thanks
|
|
Joined Mar 2012 Posts: 20 |
April 23, 2012 6:39 pm
Thank you!!!
|
|
Joined Sep 2011 Posts: 129 |
April 23, 2012 8:55 pm
I was eating 1200 for over a year and lost a lot. I kind of plateaued, so I upped it to 1370 by switching my goal to lose 1 lb/week on mfp (I had forgotten it was still set on 2). But this website says my BMR is 1469 and I should eat ~2184/day? I would love that, but it kind of freaks me out since I've gained a bit in the past week. I gained weight in the first place by generally eating 1400 cals/day and eating things with crazy amounts of sugar and calories when I went out to eat once or twice a week without realizing it. I can't figure out where my body wants me to be? But increasing it even more worries me. I know I'll get responses saying I'm being silly and need to eat more, but I don't know if it'll work?
|
|
Joined Apr 2012 Posts: 21 |
April 23, 2012 11:05 pm
Bump
|
|
Joined Mar 2011 Posts: 1,043 |
April 24, 2012 3:04 am
QUOTE: Bump Not sure I understand.... I am a 33 year old female 61 inches tall BF 26.1% Lean BM of 90.9lbs BMR 1263 it said my caloric intake should be 1460 give or take 200-300 calories..that seems like a lot.  confused
Where did you get 1460? that seems very low if your BMR is 1263, doesnt give you much wiggle room for a deficit! Unless you do absoloutely no exercise, you should be at least lightly active which will give you more cals. The number in the table is what you should eat, according to your activity level, you dont need to create a further deifict from this. 
|
|
Joined Mar 2011 Posts: 1,043 |
April 24, 2012 3:06 am
QUOTE: I was eating 1200 for over a year and lost a lot. I kind of plateaued, so I upped it to 1370 by switching my goal to lose 1 lb/week on mfp (I had forgotten it was still set on 2). But this website says my BMR is 1469 and I should eat ~2184/day? I would love that, but it kind of freaks me out since I've gained a bit in the past week. I gained weight in the first place by generally eating 1400 cals/day and eating things with crazy amounts of sugar and calories when I went out to eat once or twice a week without realizing it. I can't figure out where my body wants me to be? But increasing it even more worries me. I know I'll get responses saying I'm being silly and need to eat more, but I don't know if it'll work? what most people tend to forget is when they gained weight in the first place they were eating large amounts of junk food, its highly unlikely that you were only taking in 1400 cals before. Just make sure that you take in the extra cals from healthy foods not junk :-)
|
|
Joined Mar 2011 Posts: 1,043 |
April 24, 2012 3:08 am
QUOTE: QUOTE: oh lord, wakeup call. anyways, I need help, im so confused. if anyone is still reading this. currently MFP has me on 1370 and eating back exercise calories of course. body fat %- 38.7 BMR- 1352 (katch mcardle) suggested calories- sedentary- 1753; light active- 2009, moderate active- 2265 tdee- ? dangit can't see the 1st post now to calculate. uh so how many calories should I eat? im exercising 5-6 days a week, so does that count me as moderately active? confused! I would count that as moderately active and use the 2265 calories. TDEE is the number in the table (which is TDEE for your goal weight) x 1.2, so on mod active you would be 2718. You can calculate your deficit from this @ 500 cals / lb, as long as you net above BMR.
|
|
Joined Feb 2012 Posts: 96 |
April 24, 2012 3:15 am
Bump
|
|
Joined Mar 2011 Posts: 1,043 |
April 24, 2012 3:19 am
QUOTE: Do I have this right? My BMR by Katch-McCardle is 1421 My average calorie burn is 675 so My TDEE is 1421*1.2+675 = 2380.2 Since I want to aggressively lose weight, I set my calorie goal to TDEE - 750 = 1630 and plan NOT to eat back any of my exercise calories but will watch my exercise tab to ensure that I am on track with averaging a 675 burn. Did I get it right? Nope, 'aggressively lose weight' is usually counter productive as you dont give your body enough fuel. You will lose weight at first, but eventually your body will stop releasing fat, or will burn muscle and you will end up 'skinnyfat'. Eating 1630 and burning 675 will net you 955 which is waaay below BMR and not leaving your body enough fuel for essential processes. At a very minimum you should eat 1421 plus exercise cals so 2096. With the amount you have to lose, you should be aiming for a maximum of 1lb per week. Put your numbers into the calculator, the number in the table is the TDEE for yout goal weight and the number of cals you should eat - based on your exercise burns i would assume your are moderately active. To get your current TDEE, multiply the number in the chart by 1.2. You can create your deficit from this @ 500cals / lbs but make sure you dont NET below your BMR.
|
|
Joined Mar 2011 Posts: 1,043 |
April 24, 2012 3:20 am
QUOTE: ok so today i consumed 1611 calories; i burned 232. that gives me a net of 1379 and 61 remaining which i am not hungry enough to eat. Sorry for the redundancy but i want to be sure i am doing this right. that sounds good :-)
|
|
Joined Nov 2011 Posts: 119 |
April 24, 2012 3:23 am
bump
|
|
Joined Mar 2011 Posts: 1,043 |
April 24, 2012 3:27 am
QUOTE: I think this all very interesting, and I hope it works. I'm sure my calories dipped and/or stayed below BMR a lot over the past years of trying to get weight off! I upped calories almost two weeks ago and am getting nervous. After the first week, I lost a total of 5.5" (assuming I measured the same way both times...) and I gained about 3 pounds, which is gone now. As of this morning, I haven't lost pounds or inches. I guess my question is, should I keep going as is, cut back on calories, or up them some? I work out 3-4 days a week, but my workouts don't burn a lot of calories. I walk and am adding in strength workouts (not heavy lifting though). I have a desk job so I'm not up a lot during the day. My stats" 56 years (female) 5 ft 6 in 203 pounds TDEE: 2172 BF (military formula) 49.9% (yikes!) BMR (Katch McArdle) 1371 lightly active: 1922 cal/day I upped my calories to 1780 which I thought a compromise between using a 20%cut from my TDEE and using the f2f calculation of 1922 day. Any insight or suggestions would be appreciated. Well done on the inch loss, thats amazing in only 2 weeks! It takes a while for your body to adjust to a new cal level, so you need to stick with it 3-4 weeks before adjusting - its quite normal to get a bigger loss one week, then nothing rather than the same every week. Really you have had a result this week, although you were just relosing the 3lbs you gained, its still a loss! My stats are pretty simliar - 5'5, 204lbs, bf 40%, BMR 1574. I eat 1950 (this is higher than yours due to the difference in BF / BMR), and I lose 1.5 most weeks now ive been on a steady cal level for a few months. As your BF reduces, your lean body mass % increases so your BMR will be higher, so its ideal to rerun your numbers say every 10lbs.
|
Message Boards » General Diet and Weight Loss Help
Posts by members, moderators and admins should not be considered medical advice and no guarantee is made against accuracy.