Hello, I am new to this community and am eager in embarking upon my weight-loss journey to success with you all. Though, I am currently a bit perplexed over caloric intake.
I am 6'2" with a large frame (ancient viking blood yarrr) and currently weigh 321 lbs. I've had my body fat % tested at 33%. If my body fat is 33% then my real lean muscle mass is 321 - (321 x .33), or, simply 215 lbs muscle. Now heres where I get caught up. Using the Katch-McArdle Formula (and yes I'm pretty good with math); the formula would be as follows:
BMR (basal metabolic rate for men and women) = 370 + (21.6 X lean mass in kg)
So, for me that means 370 + (21.6 x 97.7) which equals roughly 2500 calories a day.
Assuming I work out well 3 - 5 times a week, my exercise multiplier is 1.55 (moderate). So, my BMR x 1.55 = 3875, which is then my Total Daily Energy Expenditure (TDEE). If you create a caloric deficit by cutting the TDEE by 30% then I should, in theory, be eating 3100 calories a day.
3100 still seems like a hell of alot for me considering I come from eating 2 meals a day for the past few months at about 2000 or less total calories a day to anywhere over 3000. I know that I need to balance out my metabolism over time, but do I really need to eat so much?
My second question is: Would I most likely maximize weight loss if I cycled 3 days at 2600-2800 calories and every 4th day ate 3500 calories?
If anyone that has experience with this system could reply I would be most, most grateful! Thanks!
(formula cited from "Burn the fat, feed the muscle by Tom Venuto)
Edit note: I also am familiar with the x15 multiplier rule, but as you can see, even with that I would be consuming a ton of calories (lean body mass of 215 x 15 = 3225) I don't dare use my actual weight of 321 x 15 cuz thats insane with the result of 4815.
I am 6'2" with a large frame (ancient viking blood yarrr) and currently weigh 321 lbs. I've had my body fat % tested at 33%. If my body fat is 33% then my real lean muscle mass is 321 - (321 x .33), or, simply 215 lbs muscle. Now heres where I get caught up. Using the Katch-McArdle Formula (and yes I'm pretty good with math); the formula would be as follows:
BMR (basal metabolic rate for men and women) = 370 + (21.6 X lean mass in kg)
So, for me that means 370 + (21.6 x 97.7) which equals roughly 2500 calories a day.
Assuming I work out well 3 - 5 times a week, my exercise multiplier is 1.55 (moderate). So, my BMR x 1.55 = 3875, which is then my Total Daily Energy Expenditure (TDEE). If you create a caloric deficit by cutting the TDEE by 30% then I should, in theory, be eating 3100 calories a day.
3100 still seems like a hell of alot for me considering I come from eating 2 meals a day for the past few months at about 2000 or less total calories a day to anywhere over 3000. I know that I need to balance out my metabolism over time, but do I really need to eat so much?
My second question is: Would I most likely maximize weight loss if I cycled 3 days at 2600-2800 calories and every 4th day ate 3500 calories?
If anyone that has experience with this system could reply I would be most, most grateful! Thanks!
(formula cited from "Burn the fat, feed the muscle by Tom Venuto)
Edit note: I also am familiar with the x15 multiplier rule, but as you can see, even with that I would be consuming a ton of calories (lean body mass of 215 x 15 = 3225) I don't dare use my actual weight of 321 x 15 cuz thats insane with the result of 4815.
Last edited:
. Your best bet is to probably stick this in the harsh truth section.