This could be a really stupid question but....

KrazyKaryn

Hi there, I am new to this site and just LOVE it.
My question is.. once you add your food etc.. on your home page you see something like this,,,,

1450GOAL 737CALORIES REMAINING 897FOOD 184EXERCISE = 713NET

My question is.. do we need to use exactly the amount remaining here in order to actually lose weight, or does it make a difference, will I lose weight even if I am under the ranges??
I have heard if you don't have som much of this or that then you will not lose weight because your body needs a certain amoount.
Also looking for friends on here that are determined and willing to give and take encouragement! ALL recipies welcome
Thank you all!

frazz007

What I saw suggested was to eat to the calorie goal plus 1/2 the exercise calories.
So calories are added for exercise but people here feel that the exercise calories are an overestimate.
Adjust your calories based on your weight loss. ie, eat a little less or exercise more if you do not lose weight.

stixwithit

If you don't eat enough calories, your body will go into "starvation" protection mode and not burn the fat needed for weight loss. So make sure you eat your initial calories and some of your exercise ones.

Mpol2

http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/833026/important-posts-to-read/p1

Read this.... Lots of helpful info.

MKEgal

KrazyKaryn wrote:

once you add your food etc. on your home page you see something like this
1450 GOAL
737 CALORIES REMAINING
897 FOOD
184 EXERCISE
713 NET
My question is: do we need to use exactly the amount remaining here in order to actually lose weight, or does it make a difference, will I lose weight even if I am under the ranges??

As long as you're eating less than your body needs to run you will lose weight.
You have to. It's physics.
.
For weight loss purposes, it doesn't matter if you're eating all twinkies or all carrots or a healthy diet of varied foods... as long as calories out are more than calories in you'll lose weight.
For _health_, it makes a HUGE difference what you eat. Try for 80% varied healthy whole unprocessed foods & 20% maybe not quite so healthy (or even some oreos once in a while).
.
You do not need to reach your calorie goal (1450) in order to lose wieght. In fact, depending on what you've told the computer, you can probably eat over that & still lose, only more slowly.
Going under slightly is fine. But unless you're very short (like maybe 5'2" or less), don't go under 1200 cal/day (or unless your doctor says it's OK). That makes it hard to get the nutrients you need.
.
From what you posted up there, you've eaten almost 900 calories and your goal is 1450, so you have 550 remaining for the day.
Ignore exercise/net calories. Most people underestimate what they eat, most machines (including MFP) overestimate calories burned. Most of the time those errors cancel out.
.
Here's a newbie help post which includes links to helpful info, including sexypants, realistic goal setting (weight, calories, macros), weighing & logging food accurately, motivation/encouragement...
Go read sexypants. Like, now. Shoo.
.

MKEgal

stixwithit wrote:

If you don't eat enough calories, your body will go into "starvation" protection mode and not burn the fat needed for weight loss.

This. Is. Completely. FALSE.
PLEASE stop spreading this myth!!!!

Yes, there is a "starvation mode". No, it's not easy to get into. It takes a long time on a VLCD.
Here's a very good article explaining what starvation is and is not:
http://www.aworkoutroutine.com/starvation-mode/
That includes pictures of people who were starving.

If you are eating less than your body needs, your body will burn what it has available in order to keep running.
It prefers to burn carbohydrates (glucose, then glycogen).
Then it prefers to burn fat. If there is fat available, it will burn fat. It will not conserve fat.
As a distant third it will burn protein (muscle), but this is an inefficient conversion and is a gamble - hoping that the animal will find/eat food before the heart, diaphragm, &/or skeletal muscles give out, causing death. THAT is starvation mode.

To use myself as an example, for most of the last year I've been eating a few hundred calories below my BMR (the amount needed to sustain life while in a coma, which doesn't account for activity). Sometimes I'll have more, but usually not even as much as I exercise.
I'm about 5'10" and my calorie goal has decreased from 1750 to 1400 over the year. (Currently, MFP says my BMR is 1617. It started at 1974.)
In the past year I've lost 81 lb of fat & at least maintained my muscle mass (might have gained a little, or it could be a measurement error).

.

So make sure you eat your initial calories and some of your exercise ones

For most people, this too is a myth. For people doing extreme amounts of exercise, training for a marathon or ironman for example, having some extra calories is a good idea.

marciebrian

stixwithit wrote: »

If you don't eat enough calories, your body will go into "starvation" protection mode and not burn the fat needed for weight loss. So make sure you eat your initial calories and some of your exercise ones.

so annoying to keep seeing people say such nonsense! No you will NOT go into starvation mode. If it did I guess we wouldn't have to worry about malnourished children being so emaciated. You should eat to your goal but don't stress a few calories below or over. As for exercise calories 1/2 back is what is most recommended. I don't eat mine back at all and have yet to starve.

Oncebittentwiceshy38

I have found for myself that if I'm constantly trying to eat to few calories that I will burn out. Once I realized that 1200 was too low for me and went with a realistic amount I found I could do this long term. I'm back on track and I eat 1750 calories a day, plus I let my fit bit figure out how many exercise calories I should eat back. Some days I'm under, but I know that even if I eat all of them I will still lose weight.

KrazyKaryn

You have all been awesome, thank you so much for the info! NOW another question, the only time I crave sweets is when I am pmsing.. WHAT can I have to help this and stay within my limit???

Sued0nim

stixwithit wrote: »

If you don't eat enough calories, your body will go into "starvation" protection mode and not burn the fat needed for weight loss. So make sure you eat your initial calories and some of your exercise ones.

So much no to this - starvation mode simply doesn't exist as you seem to think it does,


OP, log exercise at 50% of the calories that MFP database or gym machines give you (just double click on it when you enter it) ..then eat them all.. Use the weekly reports so that some days you might eat less, others more based on what you're doing / how you're feeling

mcclelland0484

stixwithit wrote: »

If you don't eat enough calories, your body will go into "starvation" protection mode and not burn the fat needed for weight loss. So make sure you eat your initial calories and some of your exercise ones.

I honestly don't believe that to be possible. That's like saying "don't drive your car around with no gas, it will damage your engine". If you create a deficit you will lose weight. Starvation mode is a myth. If you use more calories than you consume your body will have to get the energy from some where. Anytime you are trying to lose weight you are essentially starving yourself anyway. If you maintain good protein and vitamin levels and stay physically active you should be able to maintain muscle mass during the "starvation" process. The general idea that you can cut to many calories and therefore not lose weight is crazy. If the car had no gas it would die. Your spare tank is sitting around you midsection. Now if you have no fat reserves and create a deficit you will lose muscle mass and then eventually die. That's called an eating disorder and can actually lead to starvation.

shreddedtrooper

MKEgal wrote: »

stixwithit wrote:

If you don't eat enough calories, your body will go into "starvation" protection mode and not burn the fat needed for weight loss.

This. Is. Completely. FALSE.
PLEASE stop spreading this myth!!!!

Yes, there is a "starvation mode". No, it's not easy to get into. It takes a long time on a VLCD.
Here's a very good article explaining what starvation is and is not:
http://www.aworkoutroutine.com/starvation-mode/
That includes pictures of people who were starving.

If you are eating less than your body needs, your body will burn what it has available in order to keep running.
It prefers to burn carbohydrates (glucose, then glycogen).
Then it prefers to burn fat. If there is fat available, it will burn fat. It will not conserve fat.
As a distant third it will burn protein (muscle), but this is an inefficient conversion and is a gamble - hoping that the animal will find/eat food before the heart, diaphragm, &/or skeletal muscles give out, causing death. THAT is starvation mode.

To use myself as an example, for most of the last year I've been eating a few hundred calories below my BMR (the amount needed to sustain life while in a coma, which doesn't account for activity). Sometimes I'll have more, but usually not even as much as I exercise.
I'm about 5'10" and my calorie goal has decreased from 1750 to 1400 over the year. (Currently, MFP says my BMR is 1617. It started at 1974.)
In the past year I've lost 81 lb of fat & at least maintained my muscle mass (might have gained a little, or it could be a measurement error).

.

So make sure you eat your initial calories and some of your exercise ones

For most people, this too is a myth. For people doing extreme amounts of exercise, training for a marathon or ironman for example, having some extra calories is a good idea.

^^^^

Just an idea but there are other calculators and its good to consult all of them and take them all into consideration. Sure there will be variation however MFP sometimes can be off at times.
Some out there consider BMR and activity level which then makes it quite simpler (as its just 1 value, no math) and as long as the activity remains constant the macro count will be the same. Once the activity decreases/increases significantly it would behoove the user to re-calculate Macros/intake and adjust accordingly.

5'10" at 1400, interesting. Age/activity level/gender. Currently I have the GF at 1450-1600,2k on refeed/cycle days and she's 5' even at 107#. Just goes to show that everyone is different and metabolic rates/activity levels are so varied.
Be patient, adjust accordingly and try to eat the most calories possible whilst obtaining your goals.

To quote Nick Cheadle: "Guessing as to how much protein, carbohydrate & dietary fat you’re consuming means you’ll ultimately be guessing as to how your results will turn out. That’s just not going to cut it if you’re chasing improvement. " end quote

It goes beyond simple caloric counting if your progress has stalled and the intake is not causing results, this sentence alone usually makes most think and I hope it will here. Best of luck out there #LOA

JordisTSM

KrazyKaryn wrote: »

You have all been awesome, thank you so much for the info! NOW another question, the only time I crave sweets is when I am pmsing.. WHAT can I have to help this and stay within my limit???

You can have what ever you like, just log it, and work it in to your daily calories. I have a major sweet tooth, so I always leave room in my calories for some chocolate and usually some ice cream at the end of the day. I'm six weeks in and 20lbs down, so it's not hindering my progress