How many calories for losing with lots of exercise?

GoodnightJulia

New to MFP and I haven't yet settled on a calorie target; I think I'm going to wait for a few more weeks of data to see where my maintenance is. But meanwhile, I'm trying to lose weight while maintaining athletic performance, and I'm curious how many calories people with similar stats eat.

I'm 5'4", 147 lbs, female, looking to get to 125-130 lbs. I have a desk job, but I walk 3 mile round trip to work each day, usually walk around a bit mid-day, run around 20 miles/week (though as I was advised in a different post, I'm scaling that down a little), lift weights 3-4 times each week, and do some odd gymnastics and martial arts sorts of things. Very active apart from my job.

With "sedentary, lose 1 lb/week" selected (I figured I'd log my exercise), MFP gives me 1240 kcal/day. But mostly I just ignore that and eat between 1900-2400 kcal/day, and I figure I can work out where my maintenance is in a few weeks once I know my rate of loss/gain whatever. But you know, in those few weeks I'd like to still be on track to my weight loss goals, and I don't yet have a good feel for what my workouts are really burning, as the estimates (particularly for weight training, and martial arts is often too varied in intensity level/activity to accurately log) are notoriously off. Sooo for all you active people does my intake sound reasonable? How much do you eat?

dwilliamca

Are you sure you burn 700-1200 calories per day/everyday in exercise? Why don't you start with the number MFP gave you and add back exercise calories using the database when you actually do them? It has entries for all of the types of exercise you do. Since the numbers are known to be high, most people only eat back half of them. Therefore if one day you burned 1000 calories in exercise and ate back 500 you would be at 1740 calories a day. See how you do after a couple of weeks and change if needed. If you want to eat more then you could change to losing 1/2 pound a week.

lynn_glenmont

I think that approach is fine. In the end, your own data (assuming you are accurate and, what is more important, consistent in your logging) is better than any projection from a calculator. If you're patient enough to wait until you have enough data accumulated, this is a perfectly reasonable way to go at it. 2400 calories might be a little high to see a loss (at least one that won't be lost in the noise of normal fluctuations over the course of a few week, but I would certainly think you would see a trackable loss at 1900 with the exercise routine you describe.

Duck_Puddle

If you’re going to try to ignore Mfp and figure your maintenance level on your own via trial and error, it’s going to be tough to do that if you’re eating all kinds of different amounts while also not really having a good record/guess of what you’re burning.

I second the idea of following Mfp as intended. Log your food, log your exercise. After 4-6 weeks, see if you’re losing/gaining as expected or not. Then adjust as needed. But at least you’ll have a starting point to know you what to adjust from (meaning 250 calories more or less than Mfp said for example).

Aaron_K123

Hard to tell what the appropriate calorie target would be without more info. I think being active you are right to think it will be closer to 1900 than to 1200 though.

From personal experience as a 6' tall 180 pound man who was moderately active MFP put me at 1800 cal goal for 1 pound a week but I ended up eating about 2500 daily to lose at that rate. I'd say my activity level was either similar to or less than your activity level.

I think your approach is fine but only if you are methodical in your measurements of your calorie intake and stick to a target number of calories for like 8 weeks then evaluate.

GoodnightJulia

I don't think it will be that hard to find my maintenance level with a few weeks of logging, because my exercise is more or less consistent. My background activity from walking around is always there (as my step average indicates), I do more or less the same strength training each week, and I log my running as exercise. In that case it's as simple as fitting trends to my intake, and my weight, and accounting for any running above or below average.

Also yes, I'm decently certain I'm burning at least 700/day over the "sedentary" MFP setting, and as 1240 is below my BMR even for my desired weight, it would be unhealthy to try to net so few calories and I'd probably screw myself long term with hormonal changes and injuries. So I definitely don't want to try to hit that target.

I agree 2400 might be a bit high for a loss, those are the days when I want to eat everything. I have dropped 3 lbs in the last week, a good amount being water I assume.

Anyway I'm more just curious seeing what other athletic individuals take in during a day.

Aaron_K123

GoodnightJulia wrote: »

I don't think it will be that hard to find my maintenance level with a few weeks of logging, because my exercise is more or less consistent. My background activity from walking around is always there (as my step average indicates), I do more or less the same strength training each week, and I log my running as exercise. In that case it's as simple as fitting trends to my intake, and my weight, and accounting for any running above or below average.

Also yes, I'm decently certain I'm burning at least 700/day over the "sedentary" MFP setting, and as 1240 is below my BMR even for my desired weight, it would be unhealthy to try to net so few calories and I'd probably screw myself long term with hormonal changes and injuries. So I definitely don't want to try to hit that target.

I agree 2400 might be a bit high for a loss, those are the days when I want to eat everything. I have dropped 3 lbs in the last week, a good amount being water I assume.

Anyway I'm more just curious seeing what other athletic individuals take in during a day.

I doubt a few weeks of logging will be enough to detect the signal of your actual weight change (fat loss/gain) through the noise of fluctuations in water retention and the weight changes associated with that. I think it'll take more like 8 weeks to be confident in maintenance or loss.

GoodnightJulia

Aaron_K123 wrote: »

I think your approach is fine but only if you are methodical in your measurements of your calorie intake and stick to a target number of calories for like 8 weeks then evaluate.

Good to know what you saw, thanks. While I'm not a 6' man, at least I see your calories are reasonably higher than projections. (I'm not faulting MFP here, I realize I didn't select my actual activity level).

Sure, 8 weeks would definitely be better. But I figure I need at least 3 before I can even fit a reasonable trend, then I'll just keep it rolling from there.

Duck_Puddle

Well if you’re collecting random calorie intakes...I’m 5’4” ~160 lbs, I don’t know your age so I can’t compare that. I run 30+mpw, 2-3 strength training and other workouts. I don’t move around much otherwise. My base calories (per Mfp) for 1 lb/week loss is 1230. I am sedentary though outside of exercise. I lose ~3 lbs/months at 1600-1700 avg daily gross intake - which is pretty much spot on for what I should be losing based on my intake vs Mfp.

spiriteagle99

I am 5'6", weigh 121-123 while in maintenance. (I've been in maintenance for about 6 months.) I walk 2-3 miles a day and run 35-40 mpw. Otherwise I'm sedentary. My net calories are 1600, but actual is about 2200. The precise number varies based on my actual exercise each day. I use MFP to count both calories and exercise calories. When I was losing weight, I used 1200 as my net and that worked for me. I lost about a pound a week. If you exercise consistently as much as you say, you should lose weight on 1900 total calories. 2400 would probably be maintenance. If you aren't losing as you expect, you might try logging both your exercise and food to see what is actually going on.

nowine4me

I burn about 800 cals a day thru purposeful exercise. 5-7", 142#. I lose at a good clip at 1700, 1# per week at 1900, .5# per week at 2200. Those are my real numbers accounting for two years of logging. I think your maintenance could be a bit lower than you think.

Lillymoo01

GoodnightJulia wrote: »

Aaron_K123 wrote: »

I think your approach is fine but only if you are methodical in your measurements of your calorie intake and stick to a target number of calories for like 8 weeks then evaluate.

Good to know what you saw, thanks. While I'm not a 6' man, at least I see your calories are reasonably higher than projections. (I'm not faulting MFP here, I realize I didn't select my actual activity level).

Sure, 8 weeks would definitely be better. But I figure I need at least 3 before I can even fit a reasonable trend, then I'll just keep it rolling from there.

You need at least a month if you are a female to get any type of real starting point. Hormones vary greatly throughout a month and this has a huge impact on fluid retention.

I also suspect you may be overestimating your calories burned too. 700 calories is quite a bit of exercise when you are not that heavy to begin with.

lynn_glenmont

Aaron_K123 wrote: »

GoodnightJulia wrote: »

I don't think it will be that hard to find my maintenance level with a few weeks of logging, because my exercise is more or less consistent. My background activity from walking around is always there (as my step average indicates), I do more or less the same strength training each week, and I log my running as exercise. In that case it's as simple as fitting trends to my intake, and my weight, and accounting for any running above or below average.

Also yes, I'm decently certain I'm burning at least 700/day over the "sedentary" MFP setting, and as 1240 is below my BMR even for my desired weight, it would be unhealthy to try to net so few calories and I'd probably screw myself long term with hormonal changes and injuries. So I definitely don't want to try to hit that target.

I agree 2400 might be a bit high for a loss, those are the days when I want to eat everything. I have dropped 3 lbs in the last week, a good amount being water I assume.

Anyway I'm more just curious seeing what other athletic individuals take in during a day.

I doubt a few weeks of logging will be enough to detect the signal of your actual weight change (fat loss/gain) through the noise of fluctuations in water retention and the weight changes associated with that. I think it'll take more like 8 weeks to be confident in maintenance or loss.

^^ That's a good point. I've always used at least 8 weeks to calculate my maintenance.

GoodnightJulia

Lillymoo01 wrote: »

I also suspect you may be overestimating your calories burned too. 700 calories is quite a bit of exercise when you are not that heavy to begin with.

This 700-1200 calorie burn thing someone said is strange -- that would be assuming I lost at 1 lb/week on 1200 cals, which isn't the case. I don't know my loss/gain whatever right now because I haven't been logging long enough. But what I'm saying is that I'm eating total 1900-2400 and logging my runs, which come between 3-700 cals (usually on the lower end).

So, I'm not really seeing how 700 is a lot; say 300 from intentional cardio exercise, then a strength training session, and then the 4-6 miles I end up walking in a day, and any other movement that's not just sitting around.

I don't mean to say I know the right amount for me to lose weight, and I'm pretty sure 2400 would put me at a veerrrry slow loss if that ... but until I see where the cards fall I'm interested to hear where others are at.

@nowine4me you sound a lot like me, good ballpark numbers. Should add I'm 29. Also I work in a field based on statistical inference and analysis and I'm pretty much geeking out for when I get to play with this new dataset.

Dukare

I would just put your lifestyle up to active, and that would bring your calories up to where they should be.
.... then track your calorie burn each day from exercise.

I use a heart rate monitor to track the calories I burn with each workout, and my phone counts steps and gives ballpark calorie burn that way.

I find it easier than using math or different diaries.

TimothyFish

Based on what you say you are doing, it looks like you may be burning between 300 and 500 calories over what a sedentary setting will give you. If so, you shouldn't consume more than 1,500 to 1,700 to lose one pound per week.

maybe1pe

I will agree with others who have said that it seems you might be over-estimating your maintenance calories. I'm the same age as you and same height and weight 25 lbs more than you but am just as active if not more active and my maintenance is 2500-2600. Eating at 2400 would have me not even losing .5 lbs a week.

But I also say you do you and try what you wanna try and if it doesn't work readjust.

Good luck.

Noreenmarie1234

GoodnightJulia wrote: »

I don't think it will be that hard to find my maintenance level with a few weeks of logging, because my exercise is more or less consistent. My background activity from walking around is always there (as my step average indicates), I do more or less the same strength training each week, and I log my running as exercise. In that case it's as simple as fitting trends to my intake, and my weight, and accounting for any running above or below average.

Also yes, I'm decently certain I'm burning at least 700/day over the "sedentary" MFP setting, and as 1240 is below my BMR even for my desired weight, it would be unhealthy to try to net so few calories and I'd probably screw myself long term with hormonal changes and injuries. So I definitely don't want to try to hit that target.

I agree 2400 might be a bit high for a loss, those are the days when I want to eat everything. I have dropped 3 lbs in the last week, a good amount being water I assume.

Anyway I'm more just curious seeing what other athletic individuals take in during a day.

Id say seems right. I found my mainenance is 2100-2600) depending on hunger level and activity level. I am about as active as you but a little smaller so I am sure you can at least maintain on what you mentioned. I found mine through a few months trial and error. MFP says 1700-2000 with my activity level, but I also do some exercises that I dont count (yoga) because it's too variable and I have no clue what I am really burning.

Mouse_Potato

I'm 5'3" and my starting weight was 149. I was burning 2200-2300 in a typical day at that time with similar activity levels.