Calorie Goal

chismmegan

MFP is telling me to eat around 1300 calories. I don't want to eat any of my exercise calories back and I haven't been since I started about a month ago. I did tell MFP my exercise, which is about 30-45 min cardio and 20 min strength machines about 4-5 days a week.

I was looking at other calorie calulators and they ranged from 1200 to 1800..which is a big jump. Eating at 1300 was fine for me but I know that some people would up their calorie intake and get better results. I've been at this for a month and have lost about 10lbs.

I just seem to not be going forward with my weight loss and I'm not really sure what do to.

tiffanylacourse

Wait, wait, wait.

Didn't you JUST say you'd lost 10 pounds in the last month? OBVIOUSLY your weight loss is progressing, and rather quickly I might add.

I have no more to add to that. I just think you should know that 10 pounds in a month is FANTASTIC progress. Just saying.

Alidecker

tiffanylacourse wrote: »

Wait, wait, wait.

Didn't you JUST say you'd lost 10 pounds in the last month? OBVIOUSLY your weight loss is progressing, and rather quickly I might add.

I have no more to add to that. I just think you should know that 10 pounds in a month is FANTASTIC progress. Just saying.

I was going to say the same thing.

chismmegan

It was quick at first, but I haven't seen progress for about 2 weeks. Obviously my progress will be different since this holiday weekend where I didn't track, but I've been around 148-151 for 2 weeks or more.

dragon_girl26

tiffanylacourse wrote: »

Wait, wait, wait.

Didn't you JUST say you'd lost 10 pounds in the last month? OBVIOUSLY your weight loss is progressing, and rather quickly I might add.

I have no more to add to that. I just think you should know that 10 pounds in a month is FANTASTIC progress. Just saying.

+2

OP, just curious...if you're considering 10 lbs as 'no progress', what exactly is your weight loss expectation?

lemurcat12

chismmegan wrote: »

I did tell MFP my exercise, which is about 30-45 min cardio and 20 min strength machines about 4-5 days a week.

Doing this does not affect your calorie goal or anything else.

I was looking at other calorie calulators and they ranged from 1200 to 1800..which is a big jump.

The higher ones include exercise. The lower ones are probably really BMR calculators.

Eating at 1300 was fine for me but I know that some people would up their calorie intake and get better results. I've been at this for a month and have lost about 10lbs.

I just seem to not be going forward with my weight loss and I'm not really sure what do to.

As everyone else said, these last two sentences don't go together. How is losing 10 lb in a month not going forward with your weight loss?

chismmegan

I never said that 10lbs wasn't good or "no progress"
I'm saying that I've been at that point for what seems like a good while now and I'm not sure if I'm at the right intake amount.

DisneyDude85

mashiara81 wrote: »

tiffanylacourse wrote: »

Wait, wait, wait.

Didn't you JUST say you'd lost 10 pounds in the last month? OBVIOUSLY your weight loss is progressing, and rather quickly I might add.

I have no more to add to that. I just think you should know that 10 pounds in a month is FANTASTIC progress. Just saying.

+2

OP, just curious...if you're considering 10 lbs as 'no progress', what exactly is your weight loss expectation?

This. Considering you started about a month ago, you're at a 2.5 lb loss a week. Even that could be too fast. Best to lose it slowly while changing habits

TeaBea

When you first start a diet, the weight comes off quickly. For the first week or two it's water weight (not fat). As you get closer to goal weight loss slows....this is NORMAL.

Within 10 - 15 pounds to lose expect 1/2 pound a week. So maybe you can lose 1 pound a week for the next few weeks.....but then expect less.

The reason MFP gave you extra calories for exercise: the larger the calorie deficit, the harder it is for your body to support existing lean muscle. For a higher percentage of fat loss....slow things down (ie: eat some of your exercise calories back).

juggernaut1974

chismmegan wrote: »

I never said that 10lbs wasn't good or "no progress"
I'm saying that I've been at that point for what seems like a good while now and I'm not sure if I'm at the right intake amount.

2 weeks isn't "a good while now". That's a typical, normal fluctuation in weight.

If you're stuck for a month or more, then maybe it's time to re-evaluate...not after only 2 weeks.

kk_inprogress

chismmegan wrote: »

It was quick at first, but I haven't seen progress for about 2 weeks. Obviously my progress will be different since this holiday weekend where I didn't track, but I've been around 148-151 for 2 weeks or more.

Two weeks is a very short time and weight loss is not linear. Your expectations are unrealistic!

chismmegan

ceoverturf wrote: »

chismmegan wrote: »

I never said that 10lbs wasn't good or "no progress"
I'm saying that I've been at that point for what seems like a good while now and I'm not sure if I'm at the right intake amount.

2 weeks isn't "a good while now". That's a typical, normal fluctuation in weight.

If you're stuck for a month or more, then maybe it's time to re-evaluate...not after only 2 weeks.

That is an answer I was looking for, thank you.

tiffanylacourse

chismmegan wrote: »

It was quick at first, but I haven't seen progress for about 2 weeks. Obviously my progress will be different since this holiday weekend where I didn't track, but I've been around 148-151 for 2 weeks or more.

2 weeks is NOT a plateau. I would say if you saw absolutely no results for 6-8 weeks, THEN you should start looking for answers. You weigh 148-151 - which is a normal weight. How tall are you?

chismmegan wrote: »

I never said that 10lbs wasn't good or "no progress"
I'm saying that I've been at that point for what seems like a good while now and I'm not sure if I'm at the right intake amount.

Again, 2 weeks is not a good while or an amount of time to think about changing your routine if it was working. Plus you said you haven't been tracking over a holiday weekend. I'm 100% sure you overate and or overdrank during that time period.

Give your routine time to work. Otherwise, nothing will work. Just saying.

chismmegan

I haven't weighed myself since before the holiday weekend. I won't weigh in until probably this coming weekend. I'm 5'4

tiffanylacourse

chismmegan wrote: »

I haven't weighed myself since before the holiday weekend. I won't weigh in until probably this coming weekend. I'm 5'4

Okay, so for your age and height, you're at a relatively normal/healthy weight. You should also understand that the less weight you have to lose, the longer it will/should take to lose it.

Best of luck!

chismmegan

Oh, and I definitely overate this weekend..which is why I'm not stepping on a scale until this weekend. I'm not too worried about the weight loss as much, because I do know that 10lbs is a good amount to lose. I guess I should have phrased my question differently. I don't want to make my body go into starvation mode with such little calories with the workouts that I'm doing. From what I've read (which isn't too much) you need more food if you're working out harder. I just wanted to make sure that I was at the right calorie intake and not making my body work too hard or something.

tiffanylacourse

chismmegan wrote: »

Oh, and I definitely overate this weekend..which is why I'm not stepping on a scale until this weekend. I'm not too worried about the weight loss as much, because I do know that 10lbs is a good amount to lose. I guess I should have phrased my question differently. I don't want to make my body go into starvation mode with such little calories with the workouts that I'm doing. From what I've read (which isn't too much) you need more food if you're working out harder. I just wanted to make sure that I was at the right calorie intake and not making my body work too hard or something.

Okay, that makes sense - I see what you mean now. You should definitely eat back at least half of your exercise calories. MFP is known to overestimate calories burned and underestimate calories eaten. Therefore, if you log all of your exercise and eat back about half, you should be fine.

PAV8888

You should probably read the stickies.

Until you fully understand the risks and ramifications of your decisions, your weakly weight loss target should not exceed 0.5lbs per 25lbs you are above the bottom of your healthy BMI range.

Mfp's caloric recommendations assume that you will eat back the full amount of true net exercise calories you spend over and above your selected activity level.

Determining that amount is not always easy which is why people suggest that you start by eating back half your exercise calories and re-evaluate based on your results.

Your weight loss speed expectation is beyond unrealistic, verging into detrimental, given you're at a normal weight.

You would be much better served by using a weight tracking application that creates a trendline to track your weight.

Weightgrapher.com has an optional feature where you can display your previous cycle on the graph. This helps women with a smaller deficit see their real weight picture even through periodic water retention fluctuations.

I haven't run your numbers, but if you're already in the bottom half of your normal bmi range you may be better served by body recomposition and exercise as opposed to caloric restriction.

Mapalicious

PAV8888 wrote: »

You should probably read the stickies.

Until you fully understand the risks and ramifications of your decisions, your weakly weight loss target should not exceed 0.5lbs per 25lbs you are above the bottom of your healthy BMI range.

Mfp's caloric recommendations assume that you will eat back the full amount of true net exercise calories you spend over and above your selected activity level.

Sorry to hijack the thread here, but...

Hey PAV8888 - I haven't heard this idea before, but I find it interesting! I would be interested to see a citation or a source (though I understand not everything has or needs a "study" behind it to work for folks).

I am 165, and at 5'10" that puts me 37 lbs above my "underweight" BMI level, and 9 lbs below my "overweight" level. (My goal is 153-ish, which would put me right in the middle at a BMI of 22).

Does that mean I shouldn't aim for losing more than about 0.75 lbs per week? This is actually EXACTLY the rate at which I've been losing (though I've been aiming for 1lb/week). Go figure.

PAV8888

Mapalicious wrote: »

Hey PAV8888 - I haven't heard this idea before, but I find it interesting!

The 0.5lbs per 25lbs "you have to lose" is a common MFP recommendation to preserve lean mass and ensure sane cutting goals for most people.

Technically speaking it is incorrect, because a real recommendation should probably be a % cut off of the person's TDEE based on the fat available to be lost.

But body fat % and TDEE are not usually known... so we go to proxies and estimates. Proxy for body fat % being how much you are planning to lose, and the estimated TDEE being MFP (NEAT+exercise), or scooby's or your Fitbit.

The only "tweek" is that I've added 0.5lbs per 25lbs "from the bottom of your normal weight range".

This is because you could have a 220lb obese person who has a goal of 195lbs at the top end of their overweight range.

The speed of weight loss they can tolerate is vastly different than what a 120lbs person trying to come down to 110lbs at the bottom of their normal weight range can tolerate without excessive lean mass loss.

The people who should be the MOST concerned about excessive lean mass loss are found in the second case. The ones who are trying to lose too fast when they are already at a normal weight.

But in trying to protect them, we shouldn't unduly scare people who have a lot of excess fat available to lose!

And when we don't tie the 25lbs "you want to lose", to some normative level ("from the bottom of your normal weight range") we could be discouraging someone who CAN tolerate a faster rate of loss.

AND on top of all that the real issue for most people (once you figure out a maximum cut) is to ensure that the cut is not so drastic that they give up, or binge, or restrict themselves so much they can't keep at it long enough to succeed.

BTW: there is no absolute agreement amongst the various studies that I am aware off. (And all this is just from random googling of pubmed studies; it's not like I have a monopoly on them )

There are studies that point out that a safe % loss rate to ensure maximum lean mass preservation is 0.7%.
Others point out that 1% and even 1.5% is safe, assuming the subjects have enough fat available.

Many point out that positive nitrogen balance (eating extra protein) is muscle sparing. Again the exact amount ranges. Double RDA, 1g per lb of lean muscle mass (proxied to 0.8g per lb of bodyweight), some more, some less. Of course, if you have bad kidneys, not a good idea to eat too much protein!

And lifting progressive weights. As long as you don't injure yourself great idea.

And frankly there are other studies that say that none of this will work and that you will lose lean mass anyway. And let's not even go into long terms weight loss success rates!

So all these are starting goals/rules of thumb till people can read and learn enough to forge their own path.

But, I do think that they are better than letting people who are already at a normal weight set themselves into 1000 or 1500 Cal deficits and expect good results....

PAV8888

Mapalicious wrote: »

PAV8888 wrote: »

weakly weight loss target should not exceed 0.5lbs per 25lbs you are above the bottom of your healthy BMI range.
Mfp's caloric recommendations assume that you will eat back the full amount of true net exercise calories you spend over and above your selected activity level.

I haven't heard this idea before, but I find it interesting!

The true net exercise calories part in regards to MFP is just the way MFP is setup. TDEE=NEAT+true net exercise calories.

The only "tweak" there is the "over and above your selected activity level".

Well, adding in exercise is fine as long as the person is actually meeting their stated activity level. And usually since sedentary only includes about 35 minutes of activity/3500 steps, people do and the exercise calories can be added on top.

But, there do exist some situations where the exercise calories should go into backfilling the activity calories that didn't get spent!

For example a person who is set to Active and who ended up not having an active day. Or a sedentary person that didn't quite perform 35 minutes of activity in addition to the exercise activity they logged.

This can easily wipe a smaller deficit.

GypsyRoaddog

Wow! Very complex!
I'm 6' tall, male, 62 years old, retired, and currently living what I'd call a sedentary lifestyle. I weigh 245 & my goal is 199 ... i.e. "Less than 200." 185 would seem ideal but I figure I'll see how I look & feel @ 195-199.
My car died on Friday & I intend to get a bicycle & walk/bike what will be, ob, 2 miles or so 3-5x/week.
I just weighed in & have gone from 248.5 to 245. I've been walking some but have not logged it, just cuz I haven't I guess I'm interested to read any comments y'all might have re my overall situation and also the fact that when I weighed in, MFP raised my daily calorie intake from 1350 tp 1500!
Long & complex post, I know. Any feedback will be greatly appreciated.
TIA,
Gyps