Now I'M confused about my Calorie Intake..

LowFatMilk

LowFatMilk

New member
I haven't been losing weight since just above the 250 mark, and perhaps I know why now..

Lately I've been going with the fitday Guide which was saying I had around 3000 calories to maintain my current weight, but upon further review using this formula:

Women: BMR = 655 + ( 4.35 x weight in pounds ) + ( 4.7 x height in inches ) - ( 4.7 x age in years )

If you are lightly active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.375
Click to expand...

And it's giving me approximately 2650 as a maitenance number...

I've been eating roughly between 2100- 2500 calories a day thinking that the fitday number was accurate.

So, am I to assume the formula is more accurate and that's why I've been stuck? I've been more active in the past two months than I've been in years..yet..nothing :). ( I shouldn't say nothing, I've maintained it for a little while, which is better than gaining it back)
 
when you lose weight - you do need to adjust your calories downward (which is why starting at too low a number is bad.. )

I'd ensure that your calories you're taking in are accurate...
 
maleficent said:
when you lose weight - you do need to adjust your calories downward (which is why starting at too low a number is bad.. )

I'd ensure that your calories you're taking in are accurate...
Click to expand...

Yes, I realize that, but at my weight according to fitday I should have been fine, especially doing an hour of quick paced walking out in the cold 5 times a week.

runrun.jpg


That was from 253lbs, on a day I happened to eat 2000 calories (I typically as I said eat between 2100-2500 calories a day). This to me implies that there has been some sort deficit for that day.

I do measure my foods accurately, I use my food scale, I use measuring stuff, I use the nutrition guides, I use the resources I have at hand.


But my question was is it possible that fitday threw off my numbers and should I follow the other formula that gives the number of 2650
 
Every since Fitday got sold last year it's been headed downhill. I've been using DailyPlate.com and it seems to be much better (and has all the foods you can think of)
 
HealthyEating said:
I am in the same boat, stuck at 158 lbs for a week, even though I exercise and eat very healthy. It's really annoying.:banghead:
Click to expand...

Plateaus are caused by something you don't believe in... mainly your calories were too low to begin with, now that you are at a fairly lower weight, you have no where to drop your calories again, because below would be unhealthy. But, you think that's "BS" right?

Modest calorie reductions are the best way to prevent plateaus from ever really occuring. Cutting out 800 calories from your daily diet is just plain stupid, especially when you throw 400-500 calories on top of that reduction with gym activity. Most set-point theory research believes 1000 is the most your body could handle without beginning "starvation mode", however, you don't even want to be near that 1000 calorie reduction. The SMART calculation that has worked for years, is BODY WEIGHT x 11 (some need 10, some can do 12) calories. Eat that, do the gym, and your plateau stops.
 
Ok so if the BMR calculator calculated:
Women: BMR = 655 + ( 4.35 x weight 208 Lbs ) + ( 4.7 x height 5' 2.5" ) - ( 4.7 x age 22 ) = 1,747.80 Calories
Am I trying to cut my calories to much too fast with 1500?
 
MotherOf2 said:
Ok so if the BMR calculator calculated:
Women: BMR = 655 + ( 4.35 x weight 208 Lbs ) + ( 4.7 x height 5' 2.5" ) - ( 4.7 x age 22 ) = 1,747.80 Calories
Am I trying to cut my calories to much too fast with 1500?
Click to expand...

WAY too fast.

x your weight by 11-12, hell even 10 (some people have needed that low), your around the 2100-2400 calorie range to lose weight. That is if your are using the gym at least 3-4 times a week. Yano, working up a sweat and hitting some weight training, for about an hour or so.

Think about it logically... your body when it does lose weight will need less calories (less weight, less energy needed to move it around). What do you do when your body gets used to the 1500 calories? But you have to drop the cals because you dropped the weight... now you have to eat 1400? 1300? That's only a 200 calorie drop, and after 15 days only 1 lb of weight. Seems kind of... futile if you ask me. This way, you start eating at 2200 calories, you keep at that til you don't lose anymore, than drop to 2000. It shocks the system into losing more again. I hope this makes sense.

Those 1800 calories would be if you lied in bed all day doing absolutely nothing, not how much you actually burn, you have kids, a job, you move, you do stuff... hell, even digesting food that you eat BURNS calories. To maintain your weight, being active at a gym, I'd say you would need to eat 2600 calories a day, to lose it, you could go to 2200. CERTAINLY, however, 1500 is WAY too low to start.
 
I didn't really think of that i guess lol. i've yet to be a dieter and i've never really been a calorie counter so for some reason 1500 sounded like a good idea. and i really wasnt thinking that far ahead. just that i want to lose weight now. but now that i think about it, what your saying perfect sence. if i start at 1500 where am i going to go from there. its hard to eat only 1500 as it is i dont really think i could handle much less then that. If i were to allow myself to eat even 2000 calories I wouldn't even have to think about it, 2000 is easy :hurray:
 
MotherOf2 said:
I didn't really think of that i guess lol. i've yet to be a dieter and i've never really been a calorie counter so for some reason 1500 sounded like a good idea. and i really wasnt thinking that far ahead. just that i want to lose weight now. but now that i think about it, what your saying perfect sence. if i start at 1500 where am i going to go from there. its hard to eat only 1500 as it is i dont really think i could handle much less then that. If i were to allow myself to eat even 2000 calories I wouldn't even have to think about it, 2000 is easy :hurray:
Click to expand...

Smart move. If you've been eating 1500 for a while, I'd bump it up to about 1700 calories for the first two weeks, than after that, back up to 1900, two more weeks, get yourself to 2100. This way... you don't add 600 calories per day at once, that'll be instant weight gain, the metabolism needs time to catch up.
 
My original question was has my fitday number been wrong, and all I wanted was verification of whether it was or not. I've gotten from two sources now, from my formula and the weight x10 or 11 that my fitday number was too high an estimate and now I can go ahead and correct it.
 
meh it's only been like a day maybe 2 other then that I've never really counted calories more then glancing at some numbers and getting a general idea in my head what the total might be. So i decided that i would see what 2000 calories looks like today and I actually found that it's A LOT of food, and it was actually a pretty bad day mostly because i'm lacking my prefered fruit and vegies and not having a chance to get to the grocery store. this is what I have down for today

Bowl Of plain cherios Cereal W/ 2% Milk -200 Cals
1/4 left over McCain traditional crust Pizza -360 Cals
Veggie Pita (veggies, 1 tbsp light ranch dressing, cheese -300 Cals
1/6 pizza -240 Cals
Pork Chop -200 Cals
Side Kicks -300 Cals
Veggies - 50 Cals
Flavoured Popcorn (my snack later may not eat all of it...)-440 Cals
_______
2090 Cals

now if i replace my unusual pizza snacks i had today with my normal fresh veggies and low fat sour scream dip i will be far below that and i dont really have a desire to even eat more then that on a daily basis. the only time it would come close if i eat takeout or maybe spaghetti for supper (i loove spaghetti And portion sizes my flaw in that section) so what if you just dont want to eat that much? does it matter if some days i only eat 1500 and some i eat 2000?
 
Last edited:
MotherOf2 said:
meh it's only been like a day maybe 2 other then that I've never really counted calories more then glancing at some numbers and getting a general idea in my head what the total might be. So i decided that i would see what 2000 calories looks like today and I actually found that it's A LOT of food, and it was actually a pretty bad day mostly because i'm lacking my prefered fruit and vegies and not having a chance to get to the grocery store. this is what I have down for today

Bowl Of plain cherios Cereal W/ 2% Milk -200 Cals
1/4 left over McCain traditional crust Pizza -360 Cals
Veggie Pita (veggies, 1 tbsp light ranch dressing, cheese -300 Cals
1/6 pizza -240 Cals
Pork Chop -200 Cals
Side Kicks -300 Cals
Veggies - 50 Cals
Flavoured Popcorn (my snack later may not eat all of it...)-440 Cals
_______
2090 Cals

now if i replace my unusual pizza snacks i had today with my normal fresh veggies and low fat sour scream dip i will be far below that and i dont really have a desire to even eat more then that on a daily basis. the only time it would come close if i eat takeout or maybe spaghetti for supper (i loove spaghetti And portion sizes my flaw in that section) so what if you just dont want to eat that much? does it matter if some days i only eat 1500 and some i eat 2000?
Click to expand...

Anyone know?
 
Bowl Of plain cherios Cereal W/ 2% Milk -200 Cals

Do you weigh this out? Measure it? Because I think a serving of Cherrios is something like 110 for 33 grams? Not sure, but it's not a lot, and milk is 120 calories for 8 ounces... so how are you measuring this stuff?

I gave you my advice prior. If you want to zigzag, that's fine, but zigzag 1500 / 2400 calories (2400 should be days you train harder). This way you still average ~2000 calories a day when you take the difference between the two.
 
as of right now im still measuring using measuring cups until i get a digital scale. right now all i have a spring type one that seems to be off it doesnt even sit at 0. the box of cheerios says 120 calories per serving of 1 1/4 cup (30 g) with half a cup of 2% milk 180. now i also sprinkle on a teeny tiny bit of sugar so i just round it up to 200 since i dont even have the bag that the sugar came in any more. I keep it in a sealed container.

as for "zig zagging" calories. I pretty much train the same every day except on weekends. and trying to down 2400 is even harder then trying to down 2000... so maybe i should just find a way to stick to 2000 lol :S
Sorry If i'm beginning to seem like a pain :ack2:
 
lol I used to... i used to look at a single serving of anything and be like yeah right wheres the rest of it... i used to be able to eat non stop if i wanted to eat 2 hamburgers and a huge pile of fries i could. suddenly it's just changed without me even trying. one day I ate a burger and fries and decided oh theres a spare small fry left ill just eat it. by the time i got half way through that small bag of mcdonalds fries I was like oh man i should not have eaten those fries :puke: I just find it takes a lot less to satisfy me (which is strange because you would think since i work harder I would be hungrier :confused:) EXCEPT when in comes to pasta, and I get a lot less cravings for things. the only thing that i crave is some sort of snack at night time but nothing junky in particular...
 
you must eat 8.57659er meals a day. This is the optimaximal numerage of caloritude to achieve the desired lipolytcticicicic affectation. This has been proven by scientists, who are believable and thrustworthy because they wear white labcoats and carry clipboards (one even owns a stethoscope, but only uses it to listen to himself fart through his abdomen so that doesn't really count).

Hope this helps.
 
Steve said:
you must eat 8.57659er meals a day. This is the optimaximal numerage of caloritude to achieve the desired lipolytcticicicic affectation. This has been proven by scientists, who are believable and thrustworthy because they wear white labcoats and carry clipboards (one even owns a stethoscope, but only uses it to listen to himself fart through his abdomen so that doesn't really count).

Hope this helps.
Click to expand...

Solved all my worries. Cute...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top