Semi-new, netting 1200 calories.
Options
Replies
-
PoisonIvy088 wrote: »If that's true then why am I only losing 1 pound a week? I definately DO NOT eat 2000 calories a day. And I've been maintaining my weight for years. I logged a few days at maintenance, everything I ate normally without logging. And it was between 1600-1700 calories. (1700 if I exercise)
It's possible your maintenance is around 1600-1700. It's also possible that it's truly higher, but due to logging inaccuracy you're actually eating more calories than you think you are. Before you jump in and say that's impossible, read this thread.
Thanks for the sticky reminder. I did read them all.
However, you should also consider this: MFP set my goal to 1370 when I stated I wanted to lose 1 pound a week. I am eating 1200 about, which is only 170 calories less than that goal, and losing, as MFP predicted, 1 pound a week. So I don't think my logging is too bad.
In any case, 1lb/week is actually really aggressive/fast for someone like you who is already at a healthy weight and only has <10lbs to lose. 0.5lbs/week is probably a more appropriate pace for your goals.PoisonIvy088 wrote: »If that's true then why am I only losing 1 pound a week? I definately DO NOT eat 2000 calories a day. And I've been maintaining my weight for years. I logged a few days at maintenance, everything I ate normally without logging. And it was between 1600-1700 calories. (1700 if I exercise)
It's possible your maintenance is around 1600-1700. It's also possible that it's truly higher, but due to logging inaccuracy you're actually eating more calories than you think you are. Before you jump in and say that's impossible, read this thread.
In any case, 1lb/week is actually really aggressive/fast for someone like you who is already at a healthy weight and only has <10lbs to lose. 0.5lbs/week is probably a more appropriate pace for your goals.
0 -
Thanks for the sticky reminder. I did read them all.
However, you should also consider this: MFP set my goal to 1370 when I stated I wanted to lose 1 pound a week. I am eating 1200 about, which is only 170 calories less than that goal, and losing, as MFP predicted, 1 pound a week. So I don't think my logging is too bad.0 -
Sigh. I hate typÍng on a phone. Sorry for all the weird double posts and stuff.0
-
S'k, the phone app isn't great.
And yeah, no calculator on earth is going to be more accurate than actual real-world results. Just, check your trend over time. If you've only been doing this a couple of weeks, you might not see the long term trend yet because of fluctuations, water retention from training, etc.0 -
S'k, the phone app isn't great.
And yeah, no calculator on earth is going to be more accurate than actual real-world results. Just, check your trend over time. If you've only been doing this a couple of weeks, you might not see the long term trend yet because of fluctuations, water retention from training, etc.
Thanks a bunch. 0 -
PoisonIvy088 wrote: »PoisonIvy088 wrote: »Hi everyone. I'm new here.
Well, sort of.
I've been a bit of lurker for a week or two.
I'm 22, female, 5'2 and currently 130lb. My goal is to get down to 121lb, and then I'm going to start my first ever bulk. I usually sit on my butt all day in front of my desk outside of the 1 hour I spend in the gym every morning.
I've gotten a lot of tips and stuff here, but I see that many are quite apprehensive of 1200 calories. I notice that I eat that much (not intentionally, but that's what I net, mostly because I eat 3 home cooked meals each day and I don't care for snacks.) If I actually ate snacks that would push me up to my goal of 1370.
But I'm not hungry enough. I also hit all my macros on 1200, including 120 grams of protein a day and lots of fibre. My macros are set to 40% carbs, 35% protein and 25% fat.
I have one day a week where I eat at maintenance just, well, because I want to. And so I can fit in a treat if I want it.
Do I have to eat more if I'm still hitting all my macros and satisfied by my meals? (They're huge plates of food, because they are homecooked and pretty much all lower calorie than packaged or restaurant food)
If by bulk, you are aiming to gain muscle, then yes, you need to be in a surplus. I just punched in your numbers; your BMR is ~1400 calories, and your daily calorie needs are roughly ~2000 calories (I have a similar desk job, considered to be the "lightly active" category, so that is what I used to calculate daily needs).
If you are only eating 1200 calories per day, basically what you are saying is you aren't even supplying your body with enough calories to meet base functions, let alone build muscle. If you are trying to drop weight, the most I would restrict your calories per week from your maintenance level is 500 (so eat at 1500 calories), otherwise you are going to run into the issues that come with body stress response from extreme calorie deficits (such as increased cortisol production. Cortisol is the enemy of fitness plans everwhere).
If you want to bulk, it is commonly accepted that you need to be in a calorie surplus to the tune of about 300 calories over maintenance. Your calorie goals are a moving target, so you will have to periodically adjust them every few months as you gain/lose weight.
As far as not eating enough, two words: PEANUT. BUTTER.
And I would definitely make sure you are weighing your food OP. I know you said your meals are homecooked, and "eyeballing" is tempting but misleading when it comes to counting calories for homecooked stuff. You may be eating way more or way less than you think.
If that's true then why am I only losing 1 pound a week? I definately DO NOT eat 2000 calories a day. And I've been maintaining my weight for years. I logged a few days at maintenance, everything I ate normally without logging. And it was between 1600-1700 calories. (1700 if I exercise)
Subjective. Logging inaccuracies, calorie need estimation inaccuracies, possible unintended body recomp over the years (from leaner to higher bodyfat, but overall maintaining same weight). Add up enough of those small inaccuracies and they can give you a couple hundred calorie spread of uncertainty. Good measurements are important.
Speaking of, weight by itself it such a bad metric, really. If you want to measure something useful, bodyfat as a function of weight is a better indicator for future recalculations of calorie needs. If you can get a decent fix on your BF%, Katch-Mcardle method estimation is the accepted best fit for people with normal or lean BF%.0 -
If you're going to bulk, yes you will need to eat more than 1200 calories a day.0
-
Liftng4Lis wrote: »If you're going to bulk, yes you will need to eat more than 1200 calories a day.
I know.0 -
PoisonIvy088 wrote: »Thanks for the sticky reminder. I did read them all.
However, you should also consider this: MFP set my goal to 1370 when I stated I wanted to lose 1 pound a week. I am eating 1200 about, which is only 170 calories less than that goal, and losing, as MFP predicted, 1 pound a week. So I don't think my logging is too bad.
Which means it is calculating that you need 1870 for maintenance NOT including any exercise. MFP is not a TDEE calculator. Your TDEE would be higher.
0 -
PoisonIvy088 wrote: »Thanks for the sticky reminder. I did read them all.
However, you should also consider this: MFP set my goal to 1370 when I stated I wanted to lose 1 pound a week. I am eating 1200 about, which is only 170 calories less than that goal, and losing, as MFP predicted, 1 pound a week. So I don't think my logging is too bad.
Which means it is calculating that you need 1870 for maintenance NOT including any exercise. MFP is not a TDEE calculator. Your TDEE would be higher.
Actually MFP calculated my TDEE as 1670. Because I am sedentary. I walk less than 5000 steps a day if I don't exercise.
I also eat back my exercise calories. I only walk for cardio an hour each day, and do weights 3 times a week for an 45min (not counting rest). So my burns are about 140-200 (margin of error included) according to MFP.
So it looks something like this : 1200-200 = 1000 200 = 1200. So technically I eat 1400 calories of food I would still end up at 1200.0 -
I hate typing on this phone.0
-
PoisonIvy088 wrote: »PoisonIvy088 wrote: »Thanks for the sticky reminder. I did read them all.
However, you should also consider this: MFP set my goal to 1370 when I stated I wanted to lose 1 pound a week. I am eating 1200 about, which is only 170 calories less than that goal, and losing, as MFP predicted, 1 pound a week. So I don't think my logging is too bad.
Which means it is calculating that you need 1870 for maintenance NOT including any exercise. MFP is not a TDEE calculator. Your TDEE would be higher.
Actually MFP calculated my TDEE as 1670. Because I am sedentary. I walk less than 5000 steps a day if I don't exercise.
I also eat back my exercise calories. I only walk for cardio an hour each day, and do weights 3 times a week for an 45min (not counting rest). So my burns are about 140-200 (margin of error included) according to MFP.
So it looks something like this : 1200-200 = 1000 200 = 1200. So technically I eat 1400 calories of food I would still end up at 1200.
No, MFP does not calculate TDEE. It calculates NEAT (non-exercise activity thermogenesis).
Then it deducts a set amount of calories from that depending on how many pounds you say you want to lose per week.
So, if it is telling you to eat 1370 then your NEAT is 1370 + 500 = 1870. This number does not include purposeful exercise.
If your exercise typically burns 200 calories then your TDEE would be 1870+ 200. So, about 2,000 calories.
Following this method, then to lose 1 pound a week, you would eat about 1500 calories. So it's in the same ballpark, allowing for fluctuations in exercise burn if by MFP method you are eating 1400-ish.
0 -
Also, I just noticed that you only have 12 pounds to lose according to your ticker, you might be better off shooting for half a pound a week loss. However with a deficit of only 250 calories, you have to be very accurate with logging.0
-
PoisonIvy088 wrote: »PoisonIvy088 wrote: »Thanks for the sticky reminder. I did read them all.
However, you should also consider this: MFP set my goal to 1370 when I stated I wanted to lose 1 pound a week. I am eating 1200 about, which is only 170 calories less than that goal, and losing, as MFP predicted, 1 pound a week. So I don't think my logging is too bad.
Which means it is calculating that you need 1870 for maintenance NOT including any exercise. MFP is not a TDEE calculator. Your TDEE would be higher.
Actually MFP calculated my TDEE as 1670. Because I am sedentary. I walk less than 5000 steps a day if I don't exercise.
I also eat back my exercise calories. I only walk for cardio an hour each day, and do weights 3 times a week for an 45min (not counting rest). So my burns are about 140-200 (margin of error included) according to MFP.
So it looks something like this : 1200-200 = 1000 200 = 1200. So technically I eat 1400 calories of food I would still end up at 1200.
No, MFP does not calculate TDEE. It calculates NEAT (non-exercise activity thermogenesis).
Then it deducts a set amount of calories from that depending on how many pounds you say you want to lose per week.
So, if it is telling you to eat 1370 then your NEAT is 1370 500 = 1870. This number does not include purposeful exercise.
If your exercise typically burns 200 calories then your TDEE would be 1870 200. So, about 2,000 calories.
Following this method, then to lose 1 pound a week, you would eat about 1500 calories. So it's in the same ballpark, allowing for fluctuations in exercise burn if by MFP method you are eating 1400-ish.
Yeah I know MFP calculates NEAT. I meant to type that but couldn't edit with this phone. I use a TDEE method of eating though.
And I still don't think its that high. Its not exactly a pound I lose each week. Slightly less. I just typed a pound so I don't have to try and remember the decimals. Again, if it really was 2000, I think I should lose more than that a week. Because 2000-1200 = 800 x 7 = 5600. Isn't a pound supposed to be 3500?
0 -
Also, I just noticed that you only have 12 pounds to lose according to your ticker, you might be better off shooting for half a pound a week loss. However with a deficit of only 250 calories, you have to be very accurate with logging.
I am very impatient with it. Not too impatient to do something stupid and eat 800.
Its just because I didn't expect him telling me I need to lose weight. I thought I could just bulk right of the bat.
So, I kind of want to get past it as quickly as I can while still being healthy so I can just get going with my goals already. I know its not how it works and it should be done slowly.
Besides I'm not deprived or anything anyhoo. I get enough protein (100 something grams) and most of my meals are bulked up with lots of veg.0 -
Your body is complex and since you are not that far away from a healthy weight, it is likely not going to drop the weight at a faster rate (unless you go to unhealthy measures). And yes, the calculators are not exact, they are estimates. And, inaccuracies in measuring calorie intake can make it seem like the calculation is incorrect.
You are eating 1400 calories a day with exercise? This would be consistent with a TDEE of about 1900. So, as I said, ballpark, it is about the same.0 -
Your body is complex and since you are not that far away from a healthy weight, it is likely not going to drop the weight at a faster rate (unless you go to unhealthy measures). And yes, the calculators are not exact, they are estimates. And, inaccuracies in measuring calorie intake can make it seem like the calculation is incorrect.
You are eating 1400 calories a day with exercise? This would be consistent with a TDEE of about 1900. So, as I said, ballpark, it is about the same.
All this math is making my head hurt...
0 -
PoisonIvy088 wrote: »Also, I just noticed that you only have 12 pounds to lose according to your ticker, you might be better off shooting for half a pound a week loss. However with a deficit of only 250 calories, you have to be very accurate with logging.
I am very impatient with it. Not too impatient to do something stupid and eat 800.
Its just because I didn't expect him telling me I need to lose weight. I thought I could just bulk right of the bat.
So, I kind of want to get past it as quickly as I can while still being healthy so I can just get going with my goals already. I know its not how it works and it should be done slowly.
Besides I'm not deprived or anything anyhoo. I get enough protein (100 something grams) and most of my meals are bulked up with lots of veg.
He is wanting to lower your body fat % first. Because when you bulk you will add fat and muscle. Then you will have to do another cut to reduce the fat again. If you don't lower the fat % first, you are probably not going to be happy with your look and you'll want to fire him as your trainer.
0 -
PoisonIvy088 wrote: »Also, I just noticed that you only have 12 pounds to lose according to your ticker, you might be better off shooting for half a pound a week loss. However with a deficit of only 250 calories, you have to be very accurate with logging.
I am very impatient with it. Not too impatient to do something stupid and eat 800.
Its just because I didn't expect him telling me I need to lose weight. I thought I could just bulk right of the bat.
So, I kind of want to get past it as quickly as I can while still being healthy so I can just get going with my goals already. I know its not how it works and it should be done slowly.
Besides I'm not deprived or anything anyhoo. I get enough protein (100 something grams) and most of my meals are bulked up with lots of veg.
He is wanting to lower your body fat % first. Because when you bulk you will add fat and muscle. Then you will have to do another cut to reduce the fat again. If you don't lower the fat % first, you are probably not going to be happy with your look and you'll want to fire him as your trainer.
He also told me I will start cursing him after the first week, which I have not.
0 -
The benefit of a smaller calorie deficit and slower weight loss is that you will preserve as much LBM as possible. No sense reducing LBM when your ultimate goal is to build muscle.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 395 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 960 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions