Seems like a lot of calories
Options
jhonen32629
Posts: 16 Member
My Fitness Pal suggests that I eat 2,200 calories a day. That seems like a lot to lose weight.
Do you guys try to eat as many as your goal says and still lose weight?
Do you guys try to eat as many as your goal says and still lose weight?
0
Replies
-
Yep.
My goal is to NET 1340 (5'4.5", 24yr old female, 157.2lbs) for 1lb per week loss. My total intake is generally in the 1600-2000 calorie range and my average weight loss from Sept 11 is about 1.5lbs per week currently (average fluctuates between 1.3-2lbs).0 -
Oh wow, ok. Thank you for the prompt reply
0 -
They'd tell me to eat 2200 a day as well to lose 1/2 kilo a week when I had it set to lose 1kilo a week I had 1500 a day to eat . I have just started back this week before hand I ate 1500 but I find it hard some times even though I did lose 5 kilos in 5 weeks . I am going to try the 2200 this time and see how it goes
0 -
I'm confused. It tells me to eat 1500 a day, i logged in and i ate 800, and worked out and lost 400...I'm really confused about this. I think I'm suppose to net 1200 for weightloss??
And no I don't have an eating disorder, I just don't realize how little I'm eating I guess?0 -
I'm confused. It tells me to eat 1500 a day, i logged in and i ate 800, and worked out and lost 400...I'm really confused about this. I think I'm suppose to net 1200 for weightloss??
And no I don't have an eating disorder, I just don't realize how little I'm eating I guess?
MFP's goals are NET Goals, because they are based on an estimated calorie burn without exercise. If you exercise, then your daily burn is going to be higher than MFP's estimate. To maintain the same deficit your total calorie intake has to increase.
Example (my info):
MFP estimated TDEE without exercise - 1830
1lb per week loss setting - -490*
MFP Goal without exercise - 1340
Exercise Burn - 394
MFP estimated TDEE with exercise - 2224
1lb per week loss setting - -490*
MFP Total Calorie Goal - 1734 (NET 1340)
I also have a vivofit and my tracked total calorie burn for the day is 2334 so far. So, I should have an adjustment for another 100 calories or so, but currently the 2 sites aren't playing nice with each other.
*I lost 10 calories, because my weight has gone down since the last time I updated my goal. If I update, my daily goal will go down to 1330 and I will have a 500 calorie deficit according to MFP.0 -
Mine has been set at 1,200 since I joined (I have since lost 20kgs).0
-
RebelDiamond wrote: »Mine has been set at 1,200 since I joined (I have since lost 20kgs).
That usually happens to women who select to lose 2lbs per week (1kg). Other factors in that are what activity level you picked, age, height, gender, and weight.
I get 1200 if I select 2lbs per week loss and have for awhile. The reason is because I can't actually have a 1000 calorie deficit at my selected activity level without going under 1200 calories (830 to be exact). If, I change my activity level up to lightly active, I can just barely have a 1000 calorie deficit. I'm on sedentary for the simple fact that I have an activity tracker that (when it's working correctly) adds calories based on my activity level for the day.0 -
Reading a debate about calories and how many is right is interesting for me.
I re-educated myself around food two years ago with the help of an expert.
I lost 23 kilos in 6 months and went from 36% body fat to 13% body fat in a year.
I've learnt that, funnily enough, it really depends on WHAT you eat.
Calories are perhaps a bit of a distraction though they can help at a very very basic level. Often too basic, though. Obviously you need to burn more than you consume in order to create a calorie deficit and thus ask your body to find energy elsewhere. The problem is your body is cleverer than that, it evolved when we didn't have supermarkets or even shops on the high street. When 3 or more meals a day wasn't the norm. It evolved largely in a time when there wasn't a meal on the table every day. We had to hunt it, gather it and we might eat a big feed once a week, perhaps.
It also depends what you expend. If you're not exercising at all, the daily recommendations for calorie consumption might be about right, but obviously everyone is slightly different. Regardless, if you're exercising, you will need more as you are burning more! A typical hours gym workout or class (say, 30 mins work of some kind and 30 mins standing around) can consume somewhere between 400 and 800 calories, sometimes more for the very athletic.
Whether you exercise or not, you will often find you can genuinely actually eat much more than you might think, however it is very much down to the composition of what you eat and also it's quality.
The goal in any case is satiety - i.e you don't want or have to feel hungry but equally shouldn't feel like a stuffed pig after eating.
Unprocessed foods are always better than processed. If it grows from the ground or on an animal it will be better than something in a box from the supermarket.
Understand that sugar including too much natural sugar (e.g in 100% fruit juices) is bad and the right fats are in fact good).
If you starve yourself on low calories (under 1500 is not generally good, as I was warned by my nutrition adviser when I lost the weight!), of course eventually you will lose a little weight as your body will actually burn muscle tissue first and then fat reserves. More likely however, you will stress your body out, cause it to think it's being starved which short term makes it prone to fat retention (for when it needs it as it thinks you are going to starve) and then of course the inevitable binge-day when you can't bear being hungry or missing sweet things any longer.
I am no medical professional nor nutritionist so this is just my experience (and seemingly the advice of a large number of experts), but I am someone who was fat and unfit and is now healthy and lean. My advice, from experience;
Look at your three key macronutrients.
That is your fat intake, protein intake and carbohydrate.
You can set targets for these in % terms using myfitnesspal.
If you're aiming to induce fat loss you will need to restrict carbohydrate intake to something like 10% for 2-4 weeks depending on your body fat %, then increase slowly to say 15% then 20% then 25% over the following 8 weeks.
You may wish to aim for somewhere in the region of;
10% carb
40% protein
and 50% fat.
YES 50% fat. Eating fat does not make you fat. Just eat good fats - general rule; these come from foods that haven't been made by a human or a machine in a factory and like most things in life, are good in moderation. Stuff that grew from the ground (Avocado?) or on an animal (beef?) is fine.
Remember this.
Eating refined carbohydrates(anything containing sugars) and too much natural sugar (that glass of 100% pure orange juice you think is so healthy every day, or that smoothie you buy in the fancy green health bottle, or that low fat meal with the high sugar/carb count you didn't spot) makes you fat because your body doesn't need all that energy all in one go, it can't keep it in your bloodstream and so over time stores more and more of that spare energy AS FAT. Yes, your body converts carbohydrate to fat!
Also remember that all carbs are not bad. Restricting carbohydrates to say 10% of your intake for four weeks will certainly make a big difference to your body composition (the fat will drop off you) but as you become leaner you should absolutely re-introduce good carbohydrates; hell get up to 25%/30% a day, you only have to do one thing which is JERF (Just Eat Real Food) and not processed crap.
Personally I live by a 95/5 rule now. 95% of the time I am well behaved, I avoid alcohol, sugar and dairy. 5% of the time, I eat dirty, like eat cake and get drunk etc :-)
0 -
How much you have to eat to both lose and maintain will depend on a variety of factors. Activity level, weight, height, sex, even age. Someone with more weight to lose, might be able to lose on a higher intake. My mother steadily loses at around 2000 a day, whereas I maintain around 2000 a day. Someone more active can probably consume more calories and still maintain or lose. Someone less active might be able to eat less and maintain or may have to eat less to lose. Settings on MFP will change your given goal. Whether you have it set to sedentary, active, moderately active... or how many lbs/kilos you want to lose per week. Someone who wants to lose quickly might eat less than someone who's content losing 1/2 lb a week.
MFP tells me I need about 1700-1900 to maintain, depending on my settings at the time. This is net. I do try my hardest to eat around there, but am sometimes low (I struggle with an eating disorder, and therefore use MFP to make sure I eat enough). Generally, though, I hit at least 1900. Yes, it works. I have lost a few pounds in the past months (typo, month would have me worried lol), unintentionally (okay, more than a few - like 10). But in general, I have maintained the same weight since January 2014, with only a 5-10 lb fluctuation. Gains seem to happen after a high caloric day (water weight) or around my time of month (bloating). In general, eating what MFP suggests has worked for me.
Some people will need to tweak their settings. Play with it until you find what works for you.0 -
Congrats on the weight loss, but most of your advice is low carb dogma.kriscroucher wrote: »Reading a debate about calories and how many is right is interesting for me.
I re-educated myself around food two years ago with the help of an expert.
I lost 23 kilos in 6 months and went from 36% body fat to 13% body fat in a year.
I've learnt that, funnily enough, it really depends on WHAT you eat.
Calories are perhaps a bit of a distraction though they can help at a very very basic level. Often too basic, though. Obviously you need to burn more than you consume in order to create a calorie deficit and thus ask your body to find energy elsewhere. The problem is your body is cleverer than that, it evolved when we didn't have supermarkets or even shops on the high street. When 3 or more meals a day wasn't the norm. It evolved largely in a time when there wasn't a meal on the table every day. We had to hunt it, gather it and we might eat a big feed once a week, perhaps.
It also depends what you expend. If you're not exercising at all, the daily recommendations for calorie consumption might be about right, but obviously everyone is slightly different. Regardless, if you're exercising, you will need more as you are burning more! A typical hours gym workout or class (say, 30 mins work of some kind and 30 mins standing around) can consume somewhere between 400 and 800 calories, sometimes more for the very athletic.
Whether you exercise or not, you will often find you can genuinely actually eat much more than you might think, however it is very much down to the composition of what you eat and also it's quality.
The goal in any case is satiety - i.e you don't want or have to feel hungry but equally shouldn't feel like a stuffed pig after eating.
Unprocessed foods are always better than processed. If it grows from the ground or on an animal it will be better than something in a box from the supermarket.
Understand that sugar including too much natural sugar (e.g in 100% fruit juices) is bad and the right fats are in fact good).
If you starve yourself on low calories (under 1500 is not generally good, as I was warned by my nutrition adviser when I lost the weight!), of course eventually you will lose a little weight as your body will actually burn muscle tissue first and then fat reserves. More likely however, you will stress your body out, cause it to think it's being starved which short term makes it prone to fat retention (for when it needs it as it thinks you are going to starve) and then of course the inevitable binge-day when you can't bear being hungry or missing sweet things any longer.
I am no medical professional nor nutritionist so this is just my experience (and seemingly the advice of a large number of experts), but I am someone who was fat and unfit and is now healthy and lean. My advice, from experience;
Look at your three key macronutrients.
That is your fat intake, protein intake and carbohydrate.
You can set targets for these in % terms using myfitnesspal.
If you're aiming to induce fat loss you will need to restrict carbohydrate intake to something like 10% for 2-4 weeks depending on your body fat %, then increase slowly to say 15% then 20% then 25% over the following 8 weeks.
You may wish to aim for somewhere in the region of;
10% carb
40% protein
and 50% fat.
YES 50% fat. Eating fat does not make you fat. Just eat good fats - general rule; these come from foods that haven't been made by a human or a machine in a factory and like most things in life, are good in moderation. Stuff that grew from the ground (Avocado?) or on an animal (beef?) is fine.
Remember this.
Eating refined carbohydrates(anything containing sugars) and too much natural sugar (that glass of 100% pure orange juice you think is so healthy every day, or that smoothie you buy in the fancy green health bottle, or that low fat meal with the high sugar/carb count you didn't spot) makes you fat because your body doesn't need all that energy all in one go, it can't keep it in your bloodstream and so over time stores more and more of that spare energy AS FAT. Yes, your body converts carbohydrate to fat!
Also remember that all carbs are not bad. Restricting carbohydrates to say 10% of your intake for four weeks will certainly make a big difference to your body composition (the fat will drop off you) but as you become leaner you should absolutely re-introduce good carbohydrates; hell get up to 25%/30% a day, you only have to do one thing which is JERF (Just Eat Real Food) and not processed crap.
Personally I live by a 95/5 rule now. 95% of the time I am well behaved, I avoid alcohol, sugar and dairy. 5% of the time, I eat dirty, like eat cake and get drunk etc :-)
0 -
@neanderthin thanks, appreciated.
re low carb dogma; I have to disagree with you though I can see why you would read it that way as I did focus on what you might do in the first 2-4 weeks of an attempt to cut significant body fat, assuming you have that as a goal and a significant amount to lose.
I also referenced the fact fat doesn't make you fat and that is a well trotted low carb story and is sometimes mis-represented by those who seem terrified by any "carb" reaching their lips - however it is true to say that consuming fat from natural sources in balance doesn't make you fat; we've evolved eating fat for many many thousands of years and use it as a primary energy source.
To be clear - yes low carb seems to work for people that are high body fat (I was 36%) and need to cut significant carbs to induce a change - hence I mention a 2-4 week period where you might go for the kinds of % macronutrients suggested.
After that, as I said, jack up the carbs, slowly at first, but find your plateau.
Frankly, 2 years on, I'm perfectly aware it's not quality carbs that need restriction whatsoever, in fact it IMHO wouldn't be healthy to cut them to the levels the low carb freaks would have you believe.
It's two things for me at least and probably much of the population that is sick of being fat;
1. Junk - processed foods often high in sugars or transfats - crap carbs basically
2. Alcohol
Point 1 is harder for people to tackle because people don't always have the food knowledge or are misinformed and so don't necessarily think they're eating junk when in fact they are.
Point 2, well, I have periods when I drink and I don't care and periods of abstinence. Fact is, if you drink regularly/alot - you won't lose weight unless you're doing something very unhealthy to achieve it.
Hence the general opinion offered; just eat real food - if you're doing that and not just eating like a pig at a trough then you can probably worry much less about "low carb dogma" unless you've got a very short term fat loss goal in mind.0 -
OP, you're a 23 year old guy, right? How much do you weigh now? 2200 calories seems just fine for a man of your age, but it depends on your weight.
Most people really have no perspective on calorie counts, so they've heard random numbers but don't understand the context. Case in point: I was at a dinner party where two people, a man and a woman, were telling me about their new 1200 calorie diets. I was sitting there trying not to yell "I've watched you eat more than 1200 calories since I've been here!" They had no idea what 1200 calories looks like, but they heard that number somewhere and decided that's what you're supposed to eat when you lose weight.0 -
kriscroucher wrote: »@neanderthin thanks, appreciated.
re low carb dogma; I have to disagree with you though I can see why you would read it that way as I did focus on what you might do in the first 2-4 weeks of an attempt to cut significant body fat, assuming you have that as a goal and a significant amount to lose.
I also referenced the fact fat doesn't make you fat and that is a well trotted low carb story and is sometimes mis-represented by those who seem terrified by any "carb" reaching their lips - however it is true to say that consuming fat from natural sources in balance doesn't make you fat; we've evolved eating fat for many many thousands of years and use it as a primary energy source.
To be clear - yes low carb seems to work for people that are high body fat (I was 36%) and need to cut significant carbs to induce a change - hence I mention a 2-4 week period where you might go for the kinds of % macronutrients suggested.
After that, as I said, jack up the carbs, slowly at first, but find your plateau.
Frankly, 2 years on, I'm perfectly aware it's not quality carbs that need restriction whatsoever, in fact it IMHO wouldn't be healthy to cut them to the levels the low carb freaks would have you believe.
It's two things for me at least and probably much of the population that is sick of being fat;
1. Junk - processed foods often high in sugars or transfats - crap carbs basically
2. Alcohol
Point 1 is harder for people to tackle because people don't always have the food knowledge or are misinformed and so don't necessarily think they're eating junk when in fact they are.
Point 2, well, I have periods when I drink and I don't care and periods of abstinence. Fact is, if you drink regularly/alot - you won't lose weight unless you're doing something very unhealthy to achieve it.
Hence the general opinion offered; just eat real food - if you're doing that and not just eating like a pig at a trough then you can probably worry much less about "low carb dogma" unless you've got a very short term fat loss goal in mind.
0 -
Have you figured out your BMR? I would start there. Try using this: http://scoobysworkshop.com/calorie-calculator/
Put your stats in here. Does it compare to MFP? This will give you a baseline to start and this calculator for me seems to be the closest to my actual BMR and TDEE. I too use a fitness tracker so with all this said this said, I had to tweak MFP and calculate a reason able deficit for weight loss. MFP pal over estimated and I was eating too much and not loosing.
I eat less than 1200 but this is because I am a already pretty lean for my age, height and current weight. I spent two months on this before I was able to start loosing weight. I have seen some not eating enough and starving at the end of the day and some that have over estimated and can't loose.
Hope this helps some.0 -
If I'm not mistaken it won't give you below 1200.RebelDiamond wrote: »Mine has been set at 1,200 since I joined (I have since lost 20kgs).
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions