1200 calories a day + exercise
Options
Replies
-
Besides, I've already said the numbers mfp gives me and the link above is basically the same. I'm logging as best I can and I'm losing so you can think all you want that I'm not going to be successful but I already am.0
-
MiloBloom83 wrote: »I just goggled to see how many calories a mile walked would burn. A 160lb person burns about 100 calories per mile. 4.1K is 2.5 miles. So 5 miles burns 500 calories. Your watch is grossly overestimating your calories burned. Good for you for getting out and doing it, but i think you need more accurate equipment. It's doing you a disservice. Garmin makes excellent devices. You can enter your personal stats. It tracks mileage very accurately, and also monitors heart rate, which is key to getting an accurate burn for weight loss.
I am not 160lb, I am 2340 -
juggernaut1974 wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »And I don't care how absurd you think it is, I'm logging the numbers mfp gave me. Without a tracking device that's the best I can do.
With all due respect -
If you don't think that logging wildly inaccurate numbers is absurd I will say that you're not likely to have a lot of success using MFP to reach your goals.
I'm assuming mfp numbers.
I understand...but common sense still needs to rule supreme.
People are telling you that the numbers MFP is giving you are inflated and wrong. They're wrong for me, they're wrong for you, they're wrong for everyone.
Ultimately, it's your choice what to do with that information of course.
Ok so if they are wrong, where do I find something that can tell me how much I am burning? If you have a link I will check it out0 -
Runner's world suggests 0.57 x weight in lbs as a formula for how many calories you burn per mile so approximately 333 .45 calories for your 4.1 k walk0
-
MiloBloom83 wrote: »I just goggled to see how many calories a mile walked would burn. A 160lb person burns about 100 calories per mile. 4.1K is 2.5 miles. So 5 miles burns 500 calories. Your watch is grossly overestimating your calories burned. Good for you for getting out and doing it, but i think you need more accurate equipment. It's doing you a disservice. Garmin makes excellent devices. You can enter your personal stats. It tracks mileage very accurately, and also monitors heart rate, which is key to getting an accurate burn for weight loss.
This person offered you some good suggestions.
Add 10-20% because you weigh more than 160. I'd say anywhere from 100-120 calories per mile would be a reasonable estimate.0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »And I don't care how absurd you think it is, I'm logging the numbers mfp gave me. Without a tracking device that's the best I can do.
OP -
are you losing weight? At what rate?
If it is working, keep doing it. If it is not, adjust.
Even if you calorie burns are too high, you may be off setting it by eating 1200 on the other days. You could try eating a little lesss on your active days and a little more on your rest days (so you average the same amount over the week). Or keep doing what you are doing. If it stops working, you could try eating a little less of your exercise calories.
This is the crucial question. OP's overall numbers (2000 gross on active days, 1200 on sedentary days, which less common) seem fine, but the question is whether if she is losing.
OP, if you are happy and it's working, keep it up. If you'd rather not eat 1200 on more sedentary days, just increase base calories and count back less of the walking calories.0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »
Also, scooby's calculator is a TDEE calculator - it INCLUDES exercise so it should be 1900 period, not net. 1900 flat for each day.
OP is eating 2000 most days and 1200 some so she would actually be pretty close to that number when averaged over the week.
You are incorrect. Scooby's calc shows TDEE and BMR calculations. I based my answer on BMR numbers. Dieticians and health nutritionists recommend eating back all the calories you burn during exercise for a healthy weight loss. At her weight, 1900 net is a good start.
0 -
Honestly, you're doing what I'm doing and it's working for me. I eat around 1200 a day and I walk a lot, about 45 min and make sure to make it to 10k steps. Last night my walk was 4 miles and nearly 450 calories or so according to MapMyWalk. I am trying to work up to eating about half. I started at 171 about 10 days ago and I'm 164 now. I also do squats. I feel better and feel the muscles developing just from simple exercise like this. If it's working, good job. I applaud you for doing your best. Haters be hating. Lol. But, seriously. If you're eating back calories you're fine. :-) Good luck.0
-
singingflutelady wrote: »Runner's world suggests 0.57 x weight in lbs as a formula for how many calories you burn per mile so approximately 333 .45 calories for your 4.1 k walk
Ok so that's reasonable. But then I walked back so it was 8.2K so 666 calories burned0 -
I think you should try a 1500 cal diet with lots of fruit and veggies, high protein and low fat and sugar. But, most important, once a week treat yourself with something really delicious.
When a person made a low calorie diet they lose weight fast but as soon as they're out of the diet they gain all the weight back. You cannot control the future or the emotions you're going to feel so saying "I'll be paleo, Atkins, keto...for life" is also unpredictable. A low calorie diet is going to be really hard to maintain in the long run.
The workouts are amazing and if you eat well and exercise well you'll see the results.
And BTW I think your goal is perfectly possible
0 -
It's difficult to get an accurate count for exercise calories. It's a matter of trial and error for most of us.
OP, log your exercise calories as best you can and monitor your weight loss.
If you're losing at the rate that you are expecting, things are probably okay for now. You will need to adjust things as you lose weight.
If you ae losing at a faster rate than expected, eat more until you find that sweet spot where you are losing what you are expecting to.
Find an online walking calculator as a comparison to MFP's walking calories. These calculators use your weight as part of the equation. If you want to use this calorie burn, over write the MFP calories when you go to enter your exercise. Just delete what MFP says you burned and overtype it with what the walking calculator says.
Use your weight loss to determine which method is best for you.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »And I don't care how absurd you think it is, I'm logging the numbers mfp gave me. Without a tracking device that's the best I can do.
OP -
are you losing weight? At what rate?
If it is working, keep doing it. If it is not, adjust.
Even if you calorie burns are too high, you may be off setting it by eating 1200 on the other days. You could try eating a little lesss on your active days and a little more on your rest days (so you average the same amount over the week). Or keep doing what you are doing. If it stops working, you could try eating a little less of your exercise calories.
This is the crucial question. OP's overall numbers (2000 gross on active days, 1200 on sedentary days, which less common) seem fine, but the question is whether if she is losing.
OP, if you are happy and it's working, keep it up. If you'd rather not eat 1200 on more sedentary days, just increase base calories and count back less of the walking calories.
Yes I am losing. More than 2lbs a week at the moment. Not saying it won't slow down at some point, I am sure it will but for now it's working.0 -
4 miles in 45 minutes of walking. Man you're fast. Much faster than the average walker or beginner runner
I could never walk that fast 0 -
singingflutelady wrote: »4 miles in 45 minutes of walking. Man you're fast. Much faster than the average walker or beginner runner I could never walk that fast
Where does it say I walked 4 miles in 45 minutes?0 -
I said I walked 4.1KM in 75 minutes and then another 4.1 KM in 75 minutes so thats 2 1/2 hours.0
-
I went from 213 to 140 from January 2013 to December 2013 and I ate around 1650-1700 the whole time (total). I'm 5'5" as well. So I suppose you could get there by December if you're more active than I was.
I do think that 1200 and exercise calories is too little, but you overestimate your exercise calories, so it's still probably fine.0 -
singingflutelady wrote: »4 miles in 45 minutes of walking. Man you're fast. Much faster than the average walker or beginner runner I could never walk that fast
Where does it say I walked 4 miles in 45 minutes?
No not you lol was responding to another poster0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »And I don't care how absurd you think it is, I'm logging the numbers mfp gave me. Without a tracking device that's the best I can do.
OP -
are you losing weight? At what rate?
If it is working, keep doing it. If it is not, adjust.
Even if you calorie burns are too high, you may be off setting it by eating 1200 on the other days. You could try eating a little lesss on your active days and a little more on your rest days (so you average the same amount over the week). Or keep doing what you are doing. If it stops working, you could try eating a little less of your exercise calories.
This is the crucial question. OP's overall numbers (2000 gross on active days, 1200 on sedentary days, which less common) seem fine, but the question is whether if she is losing.
OP, if you are happy and it's working, keep it up. If you'd rather not eat 1200 on more sedentary days, just increase base calories and count back less of the walking calories.
Yes I am losing. More than 2lbs a week at the moment. Not saying it won't slow down at some point, I am sure it will but for now it's working.
Then keep doing what you are doing. Consistency is key.
When your weight drops your calorie burns will drop too so that should keep you going as well. So you will eventually eat less.
And if it gets to the point where your weight loss stops, I would consider eating fewer of your exercise calories, where more people would cut their base calories.0 -
I went from 213 to 140 from January 2013 to December 2013 and I ate around 1650-1700 the whole time (total). I'm 5'5" as well. So I suppose you could get there by December if you're more active than I was.
I do think that 1200 and exercise calories is too little, but you overestimate your exercise calories, so it's still probably fine.
I'm not overestimating by much according to all these links and info other members are giving while insisting I am overestimating. It's giving me almost the same info.0 -
leomakarov wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »
Also, scooby's calculator is a TDEE calculator - it INCLUDES exercise so it should be 1900 period, not net. 1900 flat for each day.
OP is eating 2000 most days and 1200 some so she would actually be pretty close to that number when averaged over the week.
You are incorrect. Scooby's calc shows TDEE and BMR calculations. I based my answer on BMR numbers. Dieticians and health nutritionists recommend eating back all the calories you burn during exercise for a healthy weight loss. At her weight, 1900 net is a good start.
Why would you base your answer on BMR? Yes, Scooby's calculator figures BMR but to lose weight typically one would use the TDEE calculation hence my answer.
Most dieticians and nutritionists use TDEE to calculate calorie intake which includes exercise. No one here is saying don't eat your exercise calories, people are warning her about the high numbers.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 398 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
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 976 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions