Using my future calorie maintenence to lose weight?
GalaxyGraves
Posts: 7 Member
Would this work?
I was thinking that if I work out what my maintenance calorie intake would be of my goal weight, then start eating that calorie intake now, that I would loose weight until my goal then stop there.
I was thinking that if I work out what my maintenance calorie intake would be of my goal weight, then start eating that calorie intake now, that I would loose weight until my goal then stop there.
3
Replies
-
sounds complicated? why not just plug in your stats to MFP and let it tell you how many calories you need to stay within to lose?3
-
RunRutheeRun wrote: »sounds complicated? why not just plug in your stats to MFP and let it tell you how many calories you need to stay within to lose?
^ Yup.1 -
GalaxyGraves wrote: »Would this work?
I was thinking that if I work out what my maintenance calorie intake would be of my goal weight, then start eating that calorie intake now, that I would loose weight until my goal then stop there.
This is exactly what I do. Just take it in stages not all at once, depending on how much you have to lose. Eat like the person you want to be, exercise like the person you want to be, and you will slowly become that person.
For example, if you currently weigh 200, start out eating like a version of yourself (height, activity level etc) that weighs 180. When you get down to about 185, start eating like a person who weighs 175, etc. Those last few pounds are always going to be slowest, so when you get to about 5 pounds from it, start with a lower weight again.
And yes, of course, you could use the MFP calc and just eat less, but this is nice because it trains you to understand and naturally go into "maintenance" without ever actually having to raise calories (i.e. cut hard, then come back up). So maintenance for you will be no difference at all by that point.
Its all mind games and math, so whatever helps you understand it and adhere to it, use it
13 -
It's a cool idea, I've considered it myself. It would take a really long time, though. Mathematically speaking, if you could know exactly what your maintenance TDEE is (you can't) and eat exactly that every day (you can't possibly be that precise) it would take (literally) forever. (I mean both "literally" and "forever" literally there.) You'd approach your goal weight asymptotically.
The closer you got to your goal, the closer your intake would get to maintenance, and the slower your loss would be.
Maybe it's better to figure out what your TDEE will be at goal and aim for a couple hundred calories less than that. It'll still be slow toward the end, and it'll still require really precise logging, but at least it would make it mathematically feasible to reach your goal.
But, as has been pointed out to me recently on these boards, take my input with a grain of salt. I'm not a veteran of many years of logging. I can only speak to the math and science of your question.2 -
Your intake while trying to lose weight will be less than what you will need to maintain. Hence the calorie deficit that is built in when you enter your data.
Example: For me to lose one pound a week with my current data (i.e. weight, activity level, work, etc.), I need to have an intake of 1500 calories, to lose Zero or maintain my current weight, I should eat around 2000. So if I was to go at my maintenance intake I would not lose weight and stay at my current weight.
3 -
Nope it's not complicated but your goal weight / target weight is probably an estimate as are your eventual maintenance calories. It's a legitimate technique that gives you an automatically reducing deficit the closer you get to goal weight.
Wish I had heard of the concept before I lost my weight!
It's the thinking behind the book "The Lean Muscle Diet" (horrible title but fascinating book) by Lou Schuler (New Rules of Lifting guy) and Alan Aragon.2 -
Your intake while trying to lose weight will be less than what you will need to maintain. Hence the calorie deficit that is built in when you enter your data.
Example: For me to lose one pound a week with my current data (i.e. weight, activity level, work, etc.), I need to have an intake of 1500 calories, to lose Zero or maintain my current weight, I should eat around 2000. So if I was to go at my maintenance intake I would not lose weight and stay at my current weight.
She understands that she needs a deficit. She's suggesting creating that deficit by eating at maintenance for her GOAL3 -
Yes, it would work but as others have said it requires a fair amount of patience.
That said if you can predict your goal weight TDEE with reasonable accuracy this method can help train you to eat at that level with relative ease (given you have been eating at that level through your weight loss phase) and therefore may make future regain less likely.0 -
It doesn't sound crazy to me, but only because my activity increased while I was losing. So I ate around 1700 calories the whole time (no eating back exercise calories).. which would have been a bit under my maintenance calories now if I had kept the same activity level (which is basically sedentary).
To put it this way, my maintenance calories are higher now as an active 135 pounds 38yo woman than when I was a sedentary 213 pounds 34yo woman. So if I had used that number, I wouldn't have lost anything.3 -
She is not suggesting anything, she is asking a question which is indicated by the first sentence in her post. Would this work? She goes on to state she wants to lose weight, not build muscle or tone up which could change the approach. But by all means please do show me where the system builds in a deficit at the maintenance level that would allow you to lose weight at any discernible measure. Otherwise give the young lady viable data to prove that it would work as she has asked.
I myself have faith in the system as the system has been designed and have no need to try and out think it. Furthermore, I have seen people first hand try and out think it and fail and it has nothing to do with their activity level it’s all about CICO.
However, whichever method you attempt I wish you all the best of luck in reaching your goals.
V/r,
DW
1 -
She is not suggesting anything, she is asking a question which is indicated by the first sentence in her post. Would this work? She goes on to state she wants to lose weight, not build muscle or tone up which could change the approach. But by all means please do show me where the system builds in a deficit at the maintenance level that would allow you to lose weight at any discernible measure. Otherwise give the young lady viable data to prove that it would work as she has asked.
I myself have faith in the system as the system has been designed and have no need to try and out think it. Furthermore, I have seen people first hand try and out think it and fail and it has nothing to do with their activity level it’s all about CICO.
However, whichever method you attempt I wish you all the best of luck in reaching your goals.
V/r,
DW
As you lose weight, your maintenance calories will decrease unless you offset it by increased activity...
Strong contradiction in last bolded sentence btw.0 -
Nope it's not complicated but your goal weight / target weight is probably an estimate as are your eventual maintenance calories. It's a legitimate technique that gives you an automatically reducing deficit the closer you get to goal weight.
Wish I had heard of the concept before I lost my weight!
It's the thinking behind the book "The Lean Muscle Diet" (horrible title but fascinating book) by Lou Schuler (New Rules of Lifting guy) and Alan Aragon.
Yup, exactly how this book is set up. It does work, assuming you get the math correct and stick with it. It can be a slow process however, depending on how small of a deficit.0 -
Nope it's not complicated but your goal weight / target weight is probably an estimate as are your eventual maintenance calories. It's a legitimate technique that gives you an automatically reducing deficit the closer you get to goal weight.
Wish I had heard of the concept before I lost my weight!
It's the thinking behind the book "The Lean Muscle Diet" (horrible title but fascinating book) by Lou Schuler (New Rules of Lifting guy) and Alan Aragon.
This^
It's a great method if you have the patience. Everyone losing weight should find an estimate of maintenance calories for their future weight. Knowing this number solidifies the notion that permanent lifestyle changes will be needed to keep the weight off. You will be living your future "lifestyle" while losing weight.
Great idea!1 -
GalaxyGraves wrote: »Would this work?
I was thinking that if I work out what my maintenance calorie intake would be of my goal weight, then start eating that calorie intake now, that I would loose weight until my goal then stop there.
If you have a lot of weight to lose, it might make your calories unnecessarily low for your current weight and be unhealthy or so low as to cause burnout.
If you have very little to lose, it might give you too small a deficit and take forever to lose the weight.
If you don't fall into the first case at least, and this seems the easiest way for you, then sure it would work. Best of luck 1 -
Interestingly, I just did my calculation for maintenance based on my goal weight, and it's within 50 calories of my current intake, set to lose a pound a week!1
-
LolBroScience wrote: »She is not suggesting anything, she is asking a question which is indicated by the first sentence in her post. Would this work? She goes on to state she wants to lose weight, not build muscle or tone up which could change the approach. But by all means please do show me where the system builds in a deficit at the maintenance level that would allow you to lose weight at any discernible measure. Otherwise give the young lady viable data to prove that it would work as she has asked.
I myself have faith in the system as the system has been designed and have no need to try and out think it. Furthermore, I have seen people first hand try and out think it and fail and it has nothing to do with their activity level it’s all about CICO.
However, whichever method you attempt I wish you all the best of luck in reaching your goals.
V/r,
DW
As you lose weight, your maintenance calories will decrease unless you offset it by increased activity...
Strong contradiction in last bolded sentence btw.
I would agree that your calories maintenance or otherwise will change as you lose weight. What I do not understand is if I consume at my current weight what my maintenance weight intake should be at, and given that I have properly programed all other data inputs how will weight loss occur in the first place.
And you are correct, I left a lot of context out of the CICO statement and as put it is a contradiction. Thank you for pointing that out. Basically, the fellas that I were referring to were extremely active but because of their perspectives on their intakes they were actually putting on weight and not muscle. But they were using all kinds of logic I’m not even going to start on.
I just know that until I used the MFP systems calculator I was working out even harder lifting, HIIT, running, several sports with minimal results. I went from around 245 to 230 in over a year’s time, once I started using the built in system I went from 229 to 180 in less than a year. I do get that everybody is different but the maintenance route to start with does not make sense to me.
I guess I will need to look up the referenced book and give it a once through to see if that helps me to understand.
0 -
Interestingly, I just did my calculation for maintenance based on my goal weight, and it's within 50 calories of my current intake, set to lose a pound a week!
A couple ideas.........
MFP's current intake is before exercise. Most TDEE calculators include exercise. Put in sedentary (if you didn't already)....that should be more of a direct comparison to MFP. Another thought, there are several calculators.....use a bunch. Get a good consensus.....even then it's an estimate.
The difference between my starting weight TDEE & my goal weight TDEE is around 200 calories. Exercise can help bridge that. My wake up call that maintenance is going to take work.1 -
I've tried this. For me, i wasn't hitting enough of a deficit to lose. I found I had to be really strict at ALL TIMES for my body to give up the fat.1
-
LolBroScience wrote: »She is not suggesting anything, she is asking a question which is indicated by the first sentence in her post. Would this work? She goes on to state she wants to lose weight, not build muscle or tone up which could change the approach. But by all means please do show me where the system builds in a deficit at the maintenance level that would allow you to lose weight at any discernible measure. Otherwise give the young lady viable data to prove that it would work as she has asked.
I myself have faith in the system as the system has been designed and have no need to try and out think it. Furthermore, I have seen people first hand try and out think it and fail and it has nothing to do with their activity level it’s all about CICO.
However, whichever method you attempt I wish you all the best of luck in reaching your goals.
V/r,
DW
As you lose weight, your maintenance calories will decrease unless you offset it by increased activity...
Strong contradiction in last bolded sentence btw.
I would agree that your calories maintenance or otherwise will change as you lose weight. What I do not understand is if I consume at my current weight what my maintenance weight intake should be at, and given that I have properly programed all other data inputs how will weight loss occur in the first place.
And you are correct, I left a lot of context out of the CICO statement and as put it is a contradiction. Thank you for pointing that out. Basically, the fellas that I were referring to were extremely active but because of their perspectives on their intakes they were actually putting on weight and not muscle. But they were using all kinds of logic I’m not even going to start on.
I just know that until I used the MFP systems calculator I was working out even harder lifting, HIIT, running, several sports with minimal results. I went from around 245 to 230 in over a year’s time, once I started using the built in system I went from 229 to 180 in less than a year. I do get that everybody is different but the maintenance route to start with does not make sense to me.
I guess I will need to look up the referenced book and give it a once through to see if that helps me to understand.
She's asking about eating the maintenance calories of her GOAL WEIGHT, not her current weight. So if she is currently 180 and maintenance calories are 1900, and if she were 145 her maintenance calories would be 1600, she can eat at 1600 and will keep losing until she gets to 145.6 -
It's a valid, and even good, idea. The only problem is that your loss would slow to a crawl and you will almost never reach your goal weight. You could go for goal weight minus 150. Your loss would slow down gradually as you lose weight, which is nice and healthy, but it won't slow down enough to keep you in perpetual diet.
.1 -
She is not suggesting anything, she is asking a question which is indicated by the first sentence in her post. Would this work? She goes on to state she wants to lose weight, not build muscle or tone up which could change the approach. But by all means please do show me where the system builds in a deficit at the maintenance level that would allow you to lose weight at any discernible measure. Otherwise give the young lady viable data to prove that it would work as she has asked.
I myself have faith in the system as the system has been designed and have no need to try and out think it. Furthermore, I have seen people first hand try and out think it and fail and it has nothing to do with their activity level it’s all about CICO.
However, whichever method you attempt I wish you all the best of luck in reaching your goals.
V/r,
DW
Okay I'll break it down for you. Set your current weight as your GOAL weight. Choose MAINTAIN my weight. Eat calorie allowance given. This calorie allowance will be an actual deficit since you are not at your goal weight.
OP it will surely be slow but you could also stop eating back exercise calories closer to goal to create a more functional deficit.2 -
I think that is the approach that this site takes:
http://www.fat2fittools.com/tools/bmr/
If you put in your stats, current weight and goal weight, it will give you a target calorie goal based on activity level for the weight you want to be.
As others have said - this approach might work for a while but could either be too extreme (if there is a lot of weight to lose) or too slow (if there is very little weight to lose. For example, I'm in maintenance, but I put in numbers as if I wanted to lose another 5 lbs, and the targets it gave me were about a 50 cal/day deficit from the numbers it gave me to maintain. That would be a very lengthy process..
I found just using MFP to set a reasonable calorie deficit based on my goals, logging my foods and eating back my exercise calories from FitBit to be a very simple process. I lost the 30 lbs I set out to lose in about a year's time, and have been maintaining it quite easily for a while now.1 -
No harm in trying. See if it works. It did not work for me, but I have some metabolic issues.0
-
She is not suggesting anything, she is asking a question which is indicated by the first sentence in her post. Would this work? She goes on to state she wants to lose weight, not build muscle or tone up which could change the approach. But by all means please do show me where the system builds in a deficit at the maintenance level that would allow you to lose weight at any discernible measure. Otherwise give the young lady viable data to prove that it would work as she has asked.
I myself have faith in the system as the system has been designed and have no need to try and out think it. Furthermore, I have seen people first hand try and out think it and fail and it has nothing to do with their activity level it’s all about CICO.
However, whichever method you attempt I wish you all the best of luck in reaching your goals.
V/r,
DW
Okay I'll break it down for you. Set your current weight as your GOAL weight. Choose MAINTAIN my weight. Eat calorie allowance given. This calorie allowance will be an actual deficit since you are not at your goal weight.
OP it will surely be slow but you could also stop eating back exercise calories closer to goal to create a more functional deficit.
Thank you but I did and this is the result:
currently weight 193 goal to lose 1 pound a week, calories 1530.
Current weight 193 as my goal weight, goal set to maintain, calories 2030
I set my current weight at what my targeted goal weight, 175 and set goal to maintain and my calories were still 1930.
So based on this I will be consuming 400 to 500 more calories than what I should consume to lose the targeted one pound a week. Now if I didn't want to lose weight that would work but I do as does the OP.
As I stated, I will have to take a review of the aforementioned book and see what the professionals say about this approach.0 -
GalaxyGraves wrote: »Would this work?
I was thinking that if I work out what my maintenance calorie intake would be of my goal weight, then start eating that calorie intake now, that I would loose weight until my goal then stop there.
It would work, but it will be really slow because you're not going to have much of a deficit...you're also not going to have much margin for error.She is not suggesting anything, she is asking a question which is indicated by the first sentence in her post. Would this work? She goes on to state she wants to lose weight, not build muscle or tone up which could change the approach. But by all means please do show me where the system builds in a deficit at the maintenance level that would allow you to lose weight at any discernible measure. Otherwise give the young lady viable data to prove that it would work as she has asked.
I myself have faith in the system as the system has been designed and have no need to try and out think it. Furthermore, I have seen people first hand try and out think it and fail and it has nothing to do with their activity level it’s all about CICO.
However, whichever method you attempt I wish you all the best of luck in reaching your goals.
V/r,
DW
Okay I'll break it down for you. Set your current weight as your GOAL weight. Choose MAINTAIN my weight. Eat calorie allowance given. This calorie allowance will be an actual deficit since you are not at your goal weight.
OP it will surely be slow but you could also stop eating back exercise calories closer to goal to create a more functional deficit.
Thank you but I did and this is the result:
currently weight 193 goal to lose 1 pound a week, calories 1530.
Current weight 193 as my goal weight, goal set to maintain, calories 2030
I set my current weight at what my targeted goal weight, 175 and set goal to maintain and my calories were still 1930.
So based on this I will be consuming 400 to 500 more calories than what I should consume to lose the targeted one pound a week. Now if I didn't want to lose weight that would work but I do as does the OP.
As I stated, I will have to take a review of the aforementioned book and see what the professionals say about this approach.
You would still lose weight...you'd have a 100 calorie deficit...it would be excruciatingly slow...but you would have a deficit.
Also, I'm a little surprised your maintenance is that low as a guy...are you sure? Even before I started exercising my maintenance was around 2400 calories.0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »GalaxyGraves wrote: »Would this work?
I was thinking that if I work out what my maintenance calorie intake would be of my goal weight, then start eating that calorie intake now, that I would loose weight until my goal then stop there.
It would work, but it will be really slow because you're not going to have much of a deficit...you're also not going to have much margin for error.She is not suggesting anything, she is asking a question which is indicated by the first sentence in her post. Would this work? She goes on to state she wants to lose weight, not build muscle or tone up which could change the approach. But by all means please do show me where the system builds in a deficit at the maintenance level that would allow you to lose weight at any discernible measure. Otherwise give the young lady viable data to prove that it would work as she has asked.
I myself have faith in the system as the system has been designed and have no need to try and out think it. Furthermore, I have seen people first hand try and out think it and fail and it has nothing to do with their activity level it’s all about CICO.
However, whichever method you attempt I wish you all the best of luck in reaching your goals.
V/r,
DW
Okay I'll break it down for you. Set your current weight as your GOAL weight. Choose MAINTAIN my weight. Eat calorie allowance given. This calorie allowance will be an actual deficit since you are not at your goal weight.
OP it will surely be slow but you could also stop eating back exercise calories closer to goal to create a more functional deficit.
Thank you but I did and this is the result:
currently weight 193 goal to lose 1 pound a week, calories 1530.
Current weight 193 as my goal weight, goal set to maintain, calories 2030
I set my current weight at what my targeted goal weight, 175 and set goal to maintain and my calories were still 1930.
So based on this I will be consuming 400 to 500 more calories than what I should consume to lose the targeted one pound a week. Now if I didn't want to lose weight that would work but I do as does the OP.
As I stated, I will have to take a review of the aforementioned book and see what the professionals say about this approach.
You would still lose weight...you'd have a 100 calorie deficit...it would be excruciatingly slow...but you would have a deficit.
Also, I'm a little surprised your maintenance is that low as a guy...are you sure? Even before I started exercising my maintenance was around 2400 calories.
So you are right about the 100 calories being a deficit based on my goal weight and maintenance as well you are right that it would be a very slow process. But it would also leave very little room for error.
Also, based on your input I went back to verify all data and realized my DOB had been changed not sure how. So I redid the numbers, with my correct age and verified the rest of my data. The results are more over all calories but the difference is relatively the same.
Currently weight 193, goal to lose 1 pound a week, calories 1890.
Current weight 193 as my goal weight, goal set to maintain, calories 2390
I set my current weight at what my targeted goal weight is 175 and set goal to maintain and my calories are now 2270.
So I still have the approximate 400-500 calorie difference and yes 100 less calories is a deficit that would eventually show a difference but to get to my goal weight in my lifetime at that pace I hope I live that long. We all should.
0 -
I'll add that logged exercise based on database will also be based on lighter weight doing it - so actually calories burned there is lower than reality - extra deficit again.
So the more exercise, the bigger the deficit.
But it is slower than reasonable could provide. But it is a way to learn to eat if activity/workout routine doesn't change.
Sadly in life - it does, even seasonally.
Close to goal weight the inaccuracies would turn it in to more of a recomp - which could be mighty useful too - if doing enough lifting to benefit.0 -
If you're eating at future maintenance, and you're not that much bigger than you will be then, you don't won't be at a very big deficit. To lose, you need to be at a deficit. To maintain, you're balancing intake and output.0
-
GalaxyGraves wrote: »Would this work?
I was thinking that if I work out what my maintenance calorie intake would be of my goal weight, then start eating that calorie intake now, that I would loose weight until my goal then stop there.
That's what I've done. It's been very helpful as I'm unable to exercise, and at time bed-bound due to medical issues, but still able to lose weight during those times. (I calculated all calorie amounts at the sedentary activity level, and if I get more exercise and am hungry I'll eat back some of those calories.
It's interesting to see how future activity level will adjust final weight-- for instance, my current calorie allotment will gradually bring me to 180lbs if I'm sedentary, but closer to 150lbs if I'm lightly active.
This website makes it easy to play around and find the numbers to find the BMR and TDEE for various weights and activity levels:
http://keto-calculator.ankerl.com0 -
She is not suggesting anything, she is asking a question which is indicated by the first sentence in her post. Would this work? She goes on to state she wants to lose weight, not build muscle or tone up which could change the approach. But by all means please do show me where the system builds in a deficit at the maintenance level that would allow you to lose weight at any discernible measure. Otherwise give the young lady viable data to prove that it would work as she has asked.
I myself have faith in the system as the system has been designed and have no need to try and out think it. Furthermore, I have seen people first hand try and out think it and fail and it has nothing to do with their activity level it’s all about CICO.
However, whichever method you attempt I wish you all the best of luck in reaching your goals.
V/r,
DW
Okay I'll break it down for you. Set your current weight as your GOAL weight. Choose MAINTAIN my weight. Eat calorie allowance given. This calorie allowance will be an actual deficit since you are not at your goal weight.
OP it will surely be slow but you could also stop eating back exercise calories closer to goal to create a more functional deficit.
Thank you but I did and this is the result:
currently weight 193 goal to lose 1 pound a week, calories 1530.
Current weight 193 as my goal weight, goal set to maintain, calories 2030
I set my current weight at what my targeted goal weight, 175 and set goal to maintain and my calories were still 1930.
So based on this I will be consuming 400 to 500 more calories than what I should consume to lose the targeted one pound a week. Now if I didn't want to lose weight that would work but I do as does the OP.
As I stated, I will have to take a review of the aforementioned book and see what the professionals say about this approach.
No you are just eating at a less aggressive deficit. which is why you see all these responses saying how slow the process will be and how accurate logging will need to be to make it work. For instance, I am in maintenances at sedentary MFP gives me 1600 to maintain at 125. I recently had a big weekend and wanted a small cut so I put in 1lb per week loss and MFP gave me 1200 trying to get to a 500 cal deficit. If I had entered 125 and maintain as my goal (I'm about 126) it would have given me 1600 cals. and my current maintenance 1lb heavier that 125 is a negligible amount higher than 1600. So in this case what approach makes more sense? If you have a decent amount to lose and don't have a problem with it going slow setting maintenance at goal is fine. Its a personal choice but either approach will get you there eventually if you're accurate and consistent.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions