Calorie intake MFP setting

ttfnweight

is it really that bad for one to assign a sedentary setting with a lightly to moderately active life style? I changed my setting to sedentary to lower my cals because I have gained since upping them a mo ago. I was on a consistent down trend. It was slow but there, now I'm back up where I began to lose. So IS IT bad? I don't have energy to work out it seems so I thought this would compensate.

KrisiAnnH

You should set your settings to whatever activity you actually are, or you may not be fuelling your body properly. It's natural for weight loss to slow down as you lose, no one consistently loses at the same rate they did at the beginning, so dont worry too much about your weight loss slowing down. Gaining weight since upping your activity level could be due to a number of things- water weight, looser logging, etc, or it could just be that your activity levels arent actually enough to class you as 'lightly active'.

If I were you I'd set your calories somewhere in the middle of 'sedentary' and 'lightly active' and work from there (say sedentary is 1200 and lightly active is 1400, maybe set it at 1300?). You can always adjust as you go

ttfnweight

WBB55

are you "eating back" exercise calories?

dhimaan

If you don't workout then don't eat more calories. Eat at the lower level. Either you are sedentary or you are not. Pick one.

ttfnweight

WBB55 wrote: »

are you "eating back" exercise calories?

Sometimes yes. Lately I've been eating them back.

Liftng4Lis

Do what is sustainable for you.

hamptontom

ttfnweight wrote: »

Lately I've been eating them back.

Two things...your "maintenance level" will go down as your weight does.

My "maintenance" number when I started (@ 279 lbs) was almost 2400.

Now, at 231, it's down to roughly 2200.

Might not seem like a big difference, but it can be the difference between eating at a deficit or...well, not.

That's one Wendy's Grilled Chicken Go-Wrap's worth of difference.

Secondly...if you read enough of what's said here, you'll see a common opinion rise up about eating back exercise calories. Many people say you shouldn't eat back ANY of them, and the rest say you should only eat back half or so.

Depending on how much physical activity you're getting in, that could be an issue, too.

Experiment with eating back less of your calories...and check one of the online BMR calculators and see what your maintenance number is...it may have changed since you started.

ttfnweight

Liftng4Lis wrote: »

Do what is sustainable thank you. I appreciate the feedback.

ttfnweight

hamptontom wrote: »

ttfnweight wrote: »

Lately I've been eating them back.

Two things...your "maintenance level" will go down as your weight does.

My "maintenance" number when I started (@ 279 lbs) was almost 2400.

Now, at 231, it's down to roughly 2200.

Might not seem like a big difference, but it can be the difference between eating at a deficit or...well, not.

That's one Wendy's Grilled Chicken Go-Wrap's worth of difference.

Secondly...if you read enough of what's said here, you'll see a common opinion rise up about eating back exercise calories. Many people say you shouldn't eat back ANY of them, and the rest say you should only eat back half or so.

Depending on how much physical activity you're getting in, that could be an issue, too.

Experiment with eating back less of your calories...and check one of the online BMR calculators and see what your maintenance number is...it may have changed since you started.

Thank you. I appreciate the feed back. Great thoughts. It's confusing. More cals less cals. Feed your body but not too much. Ugh! I feel like I don't know anything about food anymore!! Lol

hamptontom

ttfnweight wrote: »

Thank you. I appreciate the feed back. Great thoughts. It's confusing. More cals less cals. Feed your body but not too much. Ugh! I feel like I don't know anything about food anymore!! Lol

I don't know when that feeling goes away. I'm less than six months in and sometimes the more I learn, the stupider I feel.