How to calculate maintenance calorie target at goal weight
emilysusana
Posts: 416 Member
I see a lot of people suggesting eating at maintenance for goal weight as a way to lose slowly and consistently and not have an adjustment to make at maintenance. How do you do this using MFP? Or do you need calculators from another website? My recommended maintenance at 124 lbs was 1510/day (my weight is up 5 lbs post-Christmas), and I'd like to get to 120. I plan to eat at a deficit till I lose the holiday stuff, but after that I'd like to try maintenance calories for the 120lb me. I'm 5'2 and 37 years old.
0
Replies
-
You could plug your maintenance stats into a TDEE calculator to get an estimate. There are a lot out on the web: http://www.fitnessfrog.com/calculators/tdee-calculator.html0
-
Thanks for the reply. All of these that I've found give me more calories at 120 lbs than MFP gives me at 124.0
-
I eat at my goal weight maintenance/sedentary calories and create a deficit with exercise. I'm only around 4-5lbs away from my goal, so the calories for now and then arent much different, hence the exercise.1
-
Okay, I figured out how to do it. Duh. I just updated my weight to 120 for a minute and changed my goal to maintenance, then changed it back. Now my friends might get an update that I've lost 8 lbs since my last weigh-in, but I have my magic number. 1480!2
-
emilysusana wrote: »Thanks for the reply. All of these that I've found give me more calories at 120 lbs than MFP gives me at 124.
Remember that MFP isn't a TDEE calculator so the MFP number is missing your exercise calories.
2 -
sorry for highjacking the thread,but i see the op. solved her problem,so i thought i'd ask my question.
i'm also close to my goal weight.3.5kgs away. using an online calculator,it calculates my maintainance calories at 1427 (light exercise),or 1245(sedentary). My exercise is running 3 times a week, where i burn (according to my watch),about 800cal/week. However the difference between sedentary and light exercise setting would give me about 1400cal/week.Why such a big difference?Am i missing something? 1427 sounds awfully high to be honest.0 -
jennypapaje wrote: »sorry for highjacking the thread,but i see the op. solved her problem,so i thought i'd ask my question.
i'm also close to my goal weight.3.5kgs away. using an online calculator,it calculates my maintainance calories at 1427 (light exercise),or 1245(sedentary). My exercise is running 3 times a week, where i burn (according to my watch),about 800cal/week. However the difference between sedentary and light exercise setting would give me about 1400cal/week.Why such a big difference?Am i missing something? 1427 sounds awfully high to be honest.
Isn't that just factoring in 200 cals/day for "light exercise"? Equaling the extra 1400 cals/week?0 -
jennypapaje wrote: »sorry for highjacking the thread,but i see the op. solved her problem,so i thought i'd ask my question.
i'm also close to my goal weight.3.5kgs away. using an online calculator,it calculates my maintainance calories at 1427 (light exercise),or 1245(sedentary). My exercise is running 3 times a week, where i burn (according to my watch),about 800cal/week. However the difference between sedentary and light exercise setting would give me about 1400cal/week.Why such a big difference?Am i missing something? 1427 sounds awfully high to be honest.
Are you you saying that 1427/1245 calories would be the calories you need to maintain your weight? That sounds awfully low to be honest, unless you're an elderly, short and very light woman??0 -
OP I think you got your answer already but I would say that the idea of eating at goal weight maintenance cals is really only best if you have a certain amount of weight to lose. If you have a lot of weight still to lose, then that could be too big of a deficit. If you are close to goal weight, like in your situation, it could be such a small deficit that the need for extremely accurate logging could become prohibitive.
In your case, I would just continue using the MFP method with setting your weight loss target of 0.5 lb/week with your current weight which should give you a 250 cal deficit. Now you have that maintenance number in mind though for when you do get there, but keep in mind the MFP numbers are excluding exercise whereas other website TDEE calculators may have exercise factored in.
I also agree with what @Jakep2323 said that the best numbers are the ones that come from your own results. I'm the same height as you, 5 years older, and currently maintaining my weight of 120 with a 2 lb range on either side of that that I'm comfortable with. The calculators for me estimate a low TDEE because I'm petite, but my actual TDEE is 2200 because I'm fairly active. This is supported not only by my actual results but by my FitBit as well. When I first started though, I fell into the assumption that I had to eat 1200 to lose weight because petite female with desk job over age of 40...0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »jennypapaje wrote: »sorry for highjacking the thread,but i see the op. solved her problem,so i thought i'd ask my question.
i'm also close to my goal weight.3.5kgs away. using an online calculator,it calculates my maintainance calories at 1427 (light exercise),or 1245(sedentary). My exercise is running 3 times a week, where i burn (according to my watch),about 800cal/week. However the difference between sedentary and light exercise setting would give me about 1400cal/week.Why such a big difference?Am i missing something? 1427 sounds awfully high to be honest.
Are you you saying that 1427/1245 calories would be the calories you need to maintain your weight? That sounds awfully low to be honest, unless you're an elderly, short and very light woman??
^This. @jennypapaje what are your stats (height/weight/age) and when you said 1427 would be your maintenance was that your TDEE or what MFP estimates not including exercise?1 -
I agree with you...you figured it out. I'm 5'6, small frame and have maintained between 119-127 for the last 2-3 years and go from 1300-1450 calories a day.emilysusana wrote: »Okay, I figured out how to do it. Duh. I just updated my weight to 120 for a minute and changed my goal to maintenance, then changed it back. Now my friends might get an update that I've lost 8 lbs since my last weigh-in, but I have my magic number. 1480!0
-
WinoGelato wrote: »OP I think you got your answer already but I would say that the idea of eating at goal weight maintenance cals is really only best if you have a certain amount of weight to lose. If you have a lot of weight still to lose, then that could be too big of a deficit. If you are close to goal weight, like in your situation, it could be such a small deficit that the need for extremely accurate logging could become prohibitive.
In your case, I would just continue using the MFP method with setting your weight loss target of 0.5 lb/week with your current weight which should give you a 250 cal deficit. Now you have that maintenance number in mind though for when you do get there, but keep in mind the MFP numbers are excluding exercise whereas other website TDEE calculators may have exercise factored in.
..
Yeah, once I realized maintenance calories at 120 lbs are hardly different from maintenance calories at 125, I figured that plan wasn't a great one. I've set my goal at .5 lb/ week and I'm going to eat at that till I get there. I'm also adding an extra 2 mile walk a day which I'm not recording in the interest of ditching this holiday surplus which doesn't seem to be falling off of its own volition.
Thanks for the suggesting everyone.
1 -
Christine_72 wrote: »jennypapaje wrote: »sorry for highjacking the thread,but i see the op. solved her problem,so i thought i'd ask my question.
i'm also close to my goal weight.3.5kgs away. using an online calculator,it calculates my maintainance calories at 1427 (light exercise),or 1245(sedentary). My exercise is running 3 times a week, where i burn (according to my watch),about 800cal/week. However the difference between sedentary and light exercise setting would give me about 1400cal/week.Why such a big difference?Am i missing something? 1427 sounds awfully high to be honest.
Are you you saying that 1427/1245 calories would be the calories you need to maintain your weight? That sounds awfully low to be honest, unless you're an elderly, short and very light woman??
i am sedentary apart from my running 3 times a week,or just an occassional long walk when the weather's nice. i'm also very short, and goal weight is 43kgs which would be on the lower end of a healthy bmi.0 -
according to the calculator, it defined light exercise as exercise 1-3 times a week though.not daily.jennypapaje wrote: »sorry for highjacking the thread,but i see the op. solved her problem,so i thought i'd ask my question.
i'm also close to my goal weight.3.5kgs away. using an online calculator,it calculates my maintainance calories at 1427 (light exercise),or 1245(sedentary). My exercise is running 3 times a week, where i burn (according to my watch),about 800cal/week. However the difference between sedentary and light exercise setting would give me about 1400cal/week.Why such a big difference?Am i missing something? 1427 sounds awfully high to be honest.
Isn't that just factoring in 200 cals/day for "light exercise"? Equaling the extra 1400 cals/week?0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »jennypapaje wrote: »sorry for highjacking the thread,but i see the op. solved her problem,so i thought i'd ask my question.
i'm also close to my goal weight.3.5kgs away. using an online calculator,it calculates my maintainance calories at 1427 (light exercise),or 1245(sedentary). My exercise is running 3 times a week, where i burn (according to my watch),about 800cal/week. However the difference between sedentary and light exercise setting would give me about 1400cal/week.Why such a big difference?Am i missing something? 1427 sounds awfully high to be honest.
Are you you saying that 1427/1245 calories would be the calories you need to maintain your weight? That sounds awfully low to be honest, unless you're an elderly, short and very light woman??
^This. @jennypapaje what are your stats (height/weight/age) and when you said 1427 would be your maintenance was that your TDEE or what MFP estimates not including exercise?
i'm 147cm tall,43kg goal weight(currently 46.7),30years old.1427 was the tdee according to another website.a couple of other websites actually.0 -
jennypapaje wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »jennypapaje wrote: »sorry for highjacking the thread,but i see the op. solved her problem,so i thought i'd ask my question.
i'm also close to my goal weight.3.5kgs away. using an online calculator,it calculates my maintainance calories at 1427 (light exercise),or 1245(sedentary). My exercise is running 3 times a week, where i burn (according to my watch),about 800cal/week. However the difference between sedentary and light exercise setting would give me about 1400cal/week.Why such a big difference?Am i missing something? 1427 sounds awfully high to be honest.
Are you you saying that 1427/1245 calories would be the calories you need to maintain your weight? That sounds awfully low to be honest, unless you're an elderly, short and very light woman??
^This. @jennypapaje what are your stats (height/weight/age) and when you said 1427 would be your maintenance was that your TDEE or what MFP estimates not including exercise?
i'm 147cm tall,43kg goal weight(currently 46.7),30years old.1427 was the tdee according to another website.a couple of other websites actually.
I find TDEE to work best for people who have fairly consistent exercise. If yours is more sporadic I would probably just use the MFP method of entering your stats and goal and then adding back in exercise when you do it and eating some of those back. Since you are quite petite MFP is going to give you 1200 cals as your target no matter what I think. You are also already at a healthy weight for your height though so focusing on slow weight loss or maybe even recomp with strength training would be prudent for you.
Are you currently losing weight? Are you logging and tracking cals? How many are you currently eating and what rate are you losing at?0 -
so i should use the sedentary number of 1245 and eat the exercise calories back when at maintenance.
yes, i'm currently losing weight.i use a digital scale to track my calories,but i don't track things like lemon juice, vinegar or herbs and things like that since i still lose at a good rate.
i eat 950cals now. it's hard to know exactly how much i'm losing per week,it's quite erratic. one week i will lose nothing, the next i might lose 0.5kg or more.or i might lose nothing for 2 weeks, and the week after that it will show a loss of more than a kilo. The past 2 months i've been weighing every 2 weeks because it has become pretty common.However, since the beginning (i have lost about 39kgs in the last 15 months)my average weekly weight loss is 0.63kgs.0 -
jennypapaje wrote: »so i should use the sedentary number of 1245 and eat the exercise calories back when at maintenance.
yes, i'm currently losing weight.i use a digital scale to track my calories,but i don't track things like lemon juice, vinegar or herbs and things like that since i still lose at a good rate.
i eat 950cals now. it's hard to know exactly how much i'm losing per week,it's quite erratic. one week i will lose nothing, the next i might lose 0.5kg or more.or i might lose nothing for 2 weeks, and the week after that it will show a loss of more than a kilo. The past 2 months i've been weighing every 2 weeks because it has become pretty common.However, since the beginning (i have lost about 39kgs in the last 15 months)my average weekly weight loss is 0.63kgs.
I know you're quite petite (4'10 in US measurements right?). But 950 is really very low, as the minimum is generally 1200 in order to get adequate nutrition. It also seems that you're losing at an aggressive clip (0.63 kg/week when you only have 3kgs to go, roughly). You're starting to think about maintenance which is good, but I think you should consider going ahead and upping your calories to slow that rate of loss down. Weight loss isn't linear but an average loss of 0.63 kg/week is greater than 1 lb/week (sorry I'm American it's just easier for me to convert to make sure I'm giving proper advice) when at this point you should be aiming for about half pound or roughly 0.25 kg/week. If you add in 250 cals that will get you to that 1200 minimum, you will probably still be losing slowly, and make it easier to transition to maintenance when the time comes.
Since you originally asked about your maintenance cals the numbers you are sharing and your actual results suggest that your maintenance is closer to that 1450 lightly active number than the 1250 sedentary one.
Congrats on the loss so far and enjoy those extra calories!
Edited to add... I looked again at your goal- are you sure 43 kgs is where you want to be? That's less than 90 lbs, right? Why aiming for the bottom of the healthy weight range instead of the middle?0 -
i think my height would be translated as 4'7 or 4'8 in feet.actually 950 is the upped number from 900,but like i said i don't log 100% so it's probably 1000.. Exactly because i wanted to slow down my rate loss i have upped it. then i can re evaluate in a month if i need to lose at a slower rate..it also gives me some wiggle room for the things i don't track which could be anywhere from 50 to 100 calories a day. (just today i had 2 bites of a dessert which i did not log ).it gives me the freedom to not log the most miniscule of things.
the 0.63kgs/week is the average since the beginning.back then i was losing 1kg/week but that was 39 kgs ago.to give you an idea of my latest weigh ins...
01-11-16 50,8
07-11-16 50.8
14-11-16 50,2
21-11-16 50.2
29-11-16 49,6
05-12-16 48
12-12-16 48
19-12-16 47,5
26-12-16 47.6
31-12-16 46,8
By doing the math, it's an average of 0.44kgs/a week.so by upping it by another 50cals/day it should decrease. i need to see my average for the next month and increase again if i have to.
i feel very scared raising my calories so suddenly, so i want to do it slowly and see how it progresses.
43kgs i believe is a good goal weight. i could go as low as 41 and still be in the normal bmi, but the 43 will give me some reassurance that even if i gain some when i enter mintenance,i'll still fit in my clothes.i'm also planning on getting pregnant this year, so the lower weight should be a plus.then i won't have to worry about pregnancy weight.
By the way, if you saw me you would probably not be able to tell of my low weight.for some reason my thighs just won't shed the fat.And i hate weight training, so i can only rely on running to shape my legs.
ok that was a long post. Thank you for the advice and i wish you a happy new year!
1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393K Introduce Yourself
- 43.7K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.8K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 416 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.6K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions