Calorie restriction versus increased activity
Options
Replies
-
I rely on both CI and CO to lose weight. My method:
1. Weigh self first thing in the morning.
2. Calculate CI at "s edentary" level (i.e., BMR +20%).
3. Calculate desired daily calorie deficit (based on how many pounds left to lose this year divided by days left in the year).
4. Calculate the day's needed activity level by adding the daily calorie deficit to the calculated CI.
5. Do gym time (cardio, strength, stretching), gardening, and/or walking to get to the activity level.
For example, today's weight is 212 pounds, with a BMR of 1,952 calories. My target CI is 2,343. I want to lose 26 pounds by January 1, which is 134 days away. This means I need a 679 calorie deficit today, so my target activity level is 3,022 calories today.
It sounds like a lot of work, but I have it set up in a spreadsheet, so once I enter my weight each morning, the BMR, CI, CO, and deficit are automatically calculated. I just have to (a) use MFP to achieve the desired CI and (b) monitor my FitBit to achieve the desired CO.
Results: Today, I am 1.9 pounds ahead of my goal (i.e., I'm on track to hit my desired weight by January 1). I also have a much better sense of daily nutrition needs, my blood pressure is way down, as is body fat/weight. Strength and cardiovascular fitness are up significantly. And (best part) just got a new pair of 36/32 Levi's 501s!1 -
It's far easier eating 500 calories less than it is burning 500 more on a daily basis. And that's assuming you were eating at maintenance. Eating 1000 less than you were because you were at a surplus is going to be even more of a no-brainer than exercising for 1000 calories every single day. And the higher the amount of calories gets the further does the difficulty get in favor of the eating part. "Not doing something" is always going to be simpler than "doing something extra", especially if that something extra is going to be an hour+ of intense exercise daily, or a ridiculous amount of exercise if done only every other day or less.8
-
everyone's body works differently. I found that calorie restriction works best for me personally. Eliminating dairy and and reducing my grain intake has worked wonders as well.0
-
Aaron_K123 wrote: »The biggest issue with people and their weight gain is over eating so it is where most of the focus needs to be. Things like too large of portions or taking in unnecessary stuff. So cut out one 44 ounce soda for a person that has one every day and they drop almost enough to equal a pound a week of calories. Conversely, the average person probably only burns about 350-500 calories in an hour session, if they can get in an hour. And they barely burn off that Pepsi. So exclusion and moderation in intake is best for weight loss.
Well here is where I philosophically disagree. I think people do overeat for their activity level but I think an equal and not at all insignificant reason for that is that people focus their attention on family and career at the expense of their fitness and are overly sedentary. Physical activity is important for our health but modern society doesn't place much value on it which is a problem. It can be hard to find time to be physical but that doesn't make physicality somehow unimportant for your health, it is very important.Aaron_K123 wrote: »The biggest issue with people and their weight gain is over eating so it is where most of the focus needs to be. Things like too large of portions or taking in unnecessary stuff. So cut out one 44 ounce soda for a person that has one every day and they drop almost enough to equal a pound a week of calories. Conversely, the average person probably only burns about 350-500 calories in an hour session, if they can get in an hour. And they barely burn off that Pepsi. So exclusion and moderation in intake is best for weight loss.
Well here is where I philosophically disagree. I think people do overeat for their activity level but I think an equal and not at all insignificant reason for that is that people focus their attention on family and career at the expense of their fitness and are overly sedentary. Physical activity is important for our health but modern society doesn't place much value on it which is a problem. It can be hard to find time to be physical but that doesn't make physicality somehow unimportant for your health, it is very important.
Do you have a wife and children? Someone has to take care of the kids and someone has to put a roof over their heads.
I do, and making sure you are healthy is a part of your commitment to wife and kids in my opinion. Hard to help them if you are sick, struggling or worse.1 -
hamlet1222 wrote: »Some good points here. I'm a big proponent of eating the calories for maintaining your target weight (not less in an effort to get there faster), and exercising at a frequency you can sustain in the long term. Fat loss will be slower, but you'll be getting used to eating the amount of food you need to eat to stay your ideal weight.
Exactly, you build the habits that lead to sustainable health rather than going into it doing something extreme short term and then expecting that after you do that somehow you will be healthy from there on out despite not having built any habits necessary to do so.0 -
Do you have a wife and children? Someone has to take care of the kids and someone has to put a roof over their heads.
This was really rude and unnecessary.
Priorities differ for everyone and can differ at times of your life, but it draws a false dichotomy between being responsible and getting any exercise at all.
4 -
I think the winning combination is to do both. Count calories *and* work out. I have never gotten satisfactory results just doing one of these things. If you don't work out, you will have more muscle loss with your weight loss. To some people this is acceptable but to me it is undesirable. I had my body composition measured repeatedly during my 40 lb loss and by lifting I managed not to lose muscle mass. By keeping muscle, you burn more calories just living than if you had lost some of it.1
-
Aaron_K123 wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »The biggest issue with people and their weight gain is over eating so it is where most of the focus needs to be. Things like too large of portions or taking in unnecessary stuff. So cut out one 44 ounce soda for a person that has one every day and they drop almost enough to equal a pound a week of calories. Conversely, the average person probably only burns about 350-500 calories in an hour session, if they can get in an hour. And they barely burn off that Pepsi. So exclusion and moderation in intake is best for weight loss.
Well here is where I philosophically disagree. I think people do overeat for their activity level but I think an equal and not at all insignificant reason for that is that people focus their attention on family and career at the expense of their fitness and are overly sedentary. Physical activity is important for our health but modern society doesn't place much value on it which is a problem. It can be hard to find time to be physical but that doesn't make physicality somehow unimportant for your health, it is very important.Aaron_K123 wrote: »The biggest issue with people and their weight gain is over eating so it is where most of the focus needs to be. Things like too large of portions or taking in unnecessary stuff. So cut out one 44 ounce soda for a person that has one every day and they drop almost enough to equal a pound a week of calories. Conversely, the average person probably only burns about 350-500 calories in an hour session, if they can get in an hour. And they barely burn off that Pepsi. So exclusion and moderation in intake is best for weight loss.
Well here is where I philosophically disagree. I think people do overeat for their activity level but I think an equal and not at all insignificant reason for that is that people focus their attention on family and career at the expense of their fitness and are overly sedentary. Physical activity is important for our health but modern society doesn't place much value on it which is a problem. It can be hard to find time to be physical but that doesn't make physicality somehow unimportant for your health, it is very important.
Do you have a wife and children? Someone has to take care of the kids and someone has to put a roof over their heads.
I do, and making sure you are healthy is a part of your commitment to wife and kids in my opinion. Hard to help them if you are sick, struggling or worse.
I asked this because it's not unheard of for one partner to get to spend time jogging, at the gym etc, while the other ends up spending all day and every evening doing all the childcare. There's also plenty of families where both work long hours because they couldn't get by on anything less and their mortgage/rent on their modest home is eye watering. My question may have been impertinent but it's also impertinent to suggest that people should devote less time to work and family and more to fitness.3 -
For those with limited mobility due to obesity or other things, there are alternate ways to get some exercise. They don't burn as many calories, but they will over time make you fitter so that you do burn more calories and so that you have more enjoyment of life because it leads to the ability to do more than previously. Some people can only sit in bed and use their arms to lift 3 lb weights. If that is where you need to start, then do that. some people have problems with dizziness and equilibrium. They can sit in a chair and lift with their arms, and they can use ankle weights and repeatedly straighten their legs from the chair to work their quads. Not a big burn, sure, but you will get stronger. You do what you *can* do. Increased fitness leads to better quality of life and improved health. Of course no one can be *forced* to exercise but I don't think there's any doctor out there that would recommend *no* exercise unless it's a very specialized and severe case of medical problems.2
-
I have gone both routes, exercising to to lose weight and eating less to lose weight. Been doing it for years. From my experience, this is what works best for me...
Keeping my calories below my bmr, the lower the better for weight loss. After I lose the weight, I get into an exercise regiment. I found that the weight comes off faster that way and exercising builds muscle tone after weight loss.
When I first started out, i exercise constantly but was not happy with my lack of weight loss. I was, though building muscle tone. I decided to try to lose weight via cutting calories first and then after losing the weight that I wanted, going back to exercising to keep muscle tone and for heart health.
0 -
I choose the third option: Finding an eating style that helps me maintain a calorie deficit suitable for someone obese like myself as well as trying to get in regular walking.
You cannot out-run, literally, a bad diet.2 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »The biggest issue with people and their weight gain is over eating so it is where most of the focus needs to be. Things like too large of portions or taking in unnecessary stuff. So cut out one 44 ounce soda for a person that has one every day and they drop almost enough to equal a pound a week of calories. Conversely, the average person probably only burns about 350-500 calories in an hour session, if they can get in an hour. And they barely burn off that Pepsi. So exclusion and moderation in intake is best for weight loss.
Well here is where I philosophically disagree. I think people do overeat for their activity level but I think an equal and not at all insignificant reason for that is that people focus their attention on family and career at the expense of their fitness and are overly sedentary. Physical activity is important for our health but modern society doesn't place much value on it which is a problem. It can be hard to find time to be physical but that doesn't make physicality somehow unimportant for your health, it is very important.Aaron_K123 wrote: »The biggest issue with people and their weight gain is over eating so it is where most of the focus needs to be. Things like too large of portions or taking in unnecessary stuff. So cut out one 44 ounce soda for a person that has one every day and they drop almost enough to equal a pound a week of calories. Conversely, the average person probably only burns about 350-500 calories in an hour session, if they can get in an hour. And they barely burn off that Pepsi. So exclusion and moderation in intake is best for weight loss.
Well here is where I philosophically disagree. I think people do overeat for their activity level but I think an equal and not at all insignificant reason for that is that people focus their attention on family and career at the expense of their fitness and are overly sedentary. Physical activity is important for our health but modern society doesn't place much value on it which is a problem. It can be hard to find time to be physical but that doesn't make physicality somehow unimportant for your health, it is very important.
Do you have a wife and children? Someone has to take care of the kids and someone has to put a roof over their heads.
I do, and making sure you are healthy is a part of your commitment to wife and kids in my opinion. Hard to help them if you are sick, struggling or worse.
I asked this because it's not unheard of for one partner to get to spend time jogging, at the gym etc, while the other ends up spending all day and every evening doing all the childcare. There's also plenty of families where both work long hours because they couldn't get by on anything less and their mortgage/rent on their modest home is eye watering. My question may have been impertinent but it's also impertinent to suggest that people should devote less time to work and family and more to fitness.
My wife is fitter than I am if that is what you are asking....after all, I'm the one on MFP.
I think people need to find a balance and I don't think it is impertinent to suggest that health should be part of that balance. I think this idea that devoting time to your health is somehow NOT devoting time to your family is the problem. I think it is a culture that views paying attention to your personal health as somehow "vanity" rather than the "Selfless act" of getting fat while focusing on career. I think its that skewed morality that is to blame. Is it really that our values say that the ideal family-man or woman will make themselves literally sick and unhealthy in their "devotion" to career and family? Is it really so offensive to suggest that looking after yourself is also important to your family?
Health IS important and taking care of yourself isn't a selfish act if you have a family. Personally I find it motivating and yes I might be sacrificing potential income to value my health, but I am not convinced that is the wrong call.3 -
ogmomma2012 wrote: »I choose the third option: Finding an eating style that helps me maintain a calorie deficit suitable for someone obese like myself as well as trying to get in regular walking.
You cannot out-run, literally, a bad diet.
I wasn't meaning to imply you should establish a deficit ONLY through increased activity. My focus on activity was because I felt like emphasis on the need for increased activity was lacking on the forum. I think it should be a balance, I think getting ones eating under control is a very important part of becoming healthier....I just don't think it is the only important part of becoming healthier.0 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »ogmomma2012 wrote: »I choose the third option: Finding an eating style that helps me maintain a calorie deficit suitable for someone obese like myself as well as trying to get in regular walking.
You cannot out-run, literally, a bad diet.
I wasn't meaning to imply you should establish a deficit ONLY through increased activity. My focus on activity was because I felt like emphasis on the need for increased activity was lacking on the forum. I think it should be a balance, I think getting ones eating under control is a very important part of becoming healthier....I just don't think it is the only important part of becoming healthier.
I think it's pretty important in a lifestyle change, I mean that way you have a grip on portions, fullness etc. but I do agree that no matter the eating style, exercise and healthy portions are good for general overall health and not just weight management.0 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »ogmomma2012 wrote: »I choose the third option: Finding an eating style that helps me maintain a calorie deficit suitable for someone obese like myself as well as trying to get in regular walking.
You cannot out-run, literally, a bad diet.
I wasn't meaning to imply you should establish a deficit ONLY through increased activity. My focus on activity was because I felt like emphasis on the need for increased activity was lacking on the forum. I think it should be a balance, I think getting ones eating under control is a very important part of becoming healthier....I just don't think it is the only important part of becoming healthier.
To be honest, that is exactly how your post came across to me.
But we've already agreed we agree. I just didn't get that from your OP.0 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »The biggest issue with people and their weight gain is over eating so it is where most of the focus needs to be. Things like too large of portions or taking in unnecessary stuff. So cut out one 44 ounce soda for a person that has one every day and they drop almost enough to equal a pound a week of calories. Conversely, the average person probably only burns about 350-500 calories in an hour session, if they can get in an hour. And they barely burn off that Pepsi. So exclusion and moderation in intake is best for weight loss.
Well here is where I philosophically disagree. I think people do overeat for their activity level but I think an equal and not at all insignificant reason for that is that people focus their attention on family and career at the expense of their fitness and are overly sedentary. Physical activity is important for our health but modern society doesn't place much value on it which is a problem. It can be hard to find time to be physical but that doesn't make physicality somehow unimportant for your health, it is very important.Aaron_K123 wrote: »The biggest issue with people and their weight gain is over eating so it is where most of the focus needs to be. Things like too large of portions or taking in unnecessary stuff. So cut out one 44 ounce soda for a person that has one every day and they drop almost enough to equal a pound a week of calories. Conversely, the average person probably only burns about 350-500 calories in an hour session, if they can get in an hour. And they barely burn off that Pepsi. So exclusion and moderation in intake is best for weight loss.
Well here is where I philosophically disagree. I think people do overeat for their activity level but I think an equal and not at all insignificant reason for that is that people focus their attention on family and career at the expense of their fitness and are overly sedentary. Physical activity is important for our health but modern society doesn't place much value on it which is a problem. It can be hard to find time to be physical but that doesn't make physicality somehow unimportant for your health, it is very important.
Do you have a wife and children? Someone has to take care of the kids and someone has to put a roof over their heads.
I do, and making sure you are healthy is a part of your commitment to wife and kids in my opinion. Hard to help them if you are sick, struggling or worse.
I asked this because it's not unheard of for one partner to get to spend time jogging, at the gym etc, while the other ends up spending all day and every evening doing all the childcare. There's also plenty of families where both work long hours because they couldn't get by on anything less and their mortgage/rent on their modest home is eye watering. My question may have been impertinent but it's also impertinent to suggest that people should devote less time to work and family and more to fitness.
Look I apologize if I am making an example out of you here but I think this needs to be said.
This part here:
"devote less time to work and family and more to fitness"
This is a problem. This embodies this idea that taking care of your health is somehow this selfish act that is wholly separate from taking care of your family. I'm sorry but that is utter crap. Taking care of yourself is VERY important to being able to care for your family and provide example to ones children. Acting like taking a couple hours in your day to go for a walk or a run is somehow neglecting your family is utterly ridiculous. Is the moral thing to do to allow myself to become less fit? To sacrifice my health for what? For more money? for more time in the immediate sense with my family (but less time in the future when I inevitably become sick from it).
No, I'm sorry, I stand in direct opposition to this. Taking the time to take care of yourself is NOT neglecting your family. It is part of being a solid foundation for that family and it is of value.0 -
Done with my walk so done posting for now.0
-
There needs to be a balance though, if the husband /wife is spending hours at the gym while the other is stuck at home doing the majority of the cooking/cleaning and kid care, imo that would be selfish..1
-
At my workplace, I am tasked with answering the doorbell. Recently the doorbell rang and I went to answer. It was the FedEx delivery, delivering yet another Autodesk standing desk. The FedEx man said he was delivering a couple of those every day. My workplace buys one each month, others are doing similar. A website called juststand.org has a calculator for counting the calories of the MET 2.0 exercise which is nothing more than standing to work at a desk. I'm technically overweight, at 202.6 today. Standing for one hour burns an additional 51 calories. How much does one need to stand? 3 hours each workday burns the calories equivalent to running almost 10 marathons in a year. Simply standing leads one to having a pulse about 10 beats per minute higher than sitting. I stand for 5-6 hours, sit for one, and resume standing for the remainder of my shift. Something as simple as that, with many employers willing to pay for it, is an exercise that allows the cubicle denizens of the world to have an exercise burn of, in my case, 25% of the calories I eat in a day. Can't find 1 hour to exercise? Use 8 instead.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 393 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
- 939 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions