Calories needed to complete weight loss

MJW12020

OK, I'm getting confused...
I am male, 55 years old, 172 cm (5 feet 7.7 inches) and currently 75 kg 165 pounds) after having started at 99 kg (218 pounds) six months ago. I am trying to lose another 3 kg (6.6 pounds).

My exercise has increased as I have become fitter. Currently I do fairly intense workouts around five days a week and walk on average 16 kms (10 miles) a day. I tend to walk further on non-workout days. According to my Fitbit (cross-referenced with a heart rate monitor worn during workouts and longer walks, and calculations) I average 3200 calories TDEE (based on the average for June so far).

I had been following a 1000 calorie a day deficit for most of my weight loss, but figure I should be more like 500 calories a day for the last part. I have generally been eating around 2300 a day, but according to my TDEE I should be eating more like 2700.

I know it's all simple maths in the end, but does 2700 sound right for me? That seems so much... Maybe 2500 to allow for some overestimation in the TDEE?

wunderkindking

With your exercise included, yeah, 2700 seems right. I'm 5'5", female, weigh 140 pounds and at lightly active for daily life (which involves a few short sessions of outdoor high intensity movement and a bog standard hike of about 2 miles - is 1800 to maintain. Add in extra activity like, oh, walking for hours or a cardio workout and I regularly maintain at 2300.

AnnPT77

It's plausible, yes. I'm a pretty small li'l ol' lady, age 65, 5'5", 125-ish pounds, fairly sedentary in daily life but with a decent exercise schedule (row, lift, walk, bike a little) and maintain in the 2200-2500 kind of range most of the time, depending on exercise load.

I'm mysteriously a good calorie burner for my demographic, but have found my own weight loss data to be the best guide to my maintenance calories, through almost 6 years now of logging experience.

Take a multi-week period of calorie totals eaten, add (3500 x total weight loss in pounds) for same time period, then divide by the number of days in the period. That will give you an experience-based TDEE estimate (which implicitly reflects your typical calorie logging precision/imprecision on average). If that's close to your Fitbit-estimated TDEE, your Fitbit numbers are validated. If not, you have some idea what adjustment to make to the Fitbit numbers to be closer to reality.

(Good quality devices seem to produce calorie estimates that are reasonable for a lot of people, presumably because those people are similar to the average people in research on which the estimating algorithms are based. One sees people here on MFP often, worried that such devices may overestimate calorie burn. Of course they *can* do that, for someone non-average in some possibly unknown way. My good brand/model fitness tracker - one that according to posts here gives pretty accurate estimates for some people - estimates my all-day burn way too *low*, underestimating by about the same percentage as MFP's estimate are too low for me. Somehow, I'm statistically weird. 🤷‍♀️)

Your own data will give you a handle on whether you're more average, or more weird. 😉

katiecakes1124

Maybe someone can help me? I can’t seem to get my calories right. MFP has me at 1200 but it seems so low. I’m 44, 120 lbs, 5”5’. I set myself at lightly active but I do some form of exercise every day as well as having a very active mom life. I’m looking to take a few more off then maintain. I’m super careful about my diet due to celiac disease and autoimmune issues. Thanks for any input!

MJW12020

That's really interesting and helpful - thank you. I haven't been tracking my weight change as regularly in recent times as I had been, but seem to have plateaued somewhat at around 75 kg. This plateau prompted my current questioning, but it may also reflect increased muscle development. It may be that the last few kilos is just particularly stubborn!

For most of the last six months I had been maintaining a 1000 calorie deficit with a view to losing 1 kg / 2.2 pounds a week and had been losing at almost exactly that rate.

AnnPT77

katiecakes1124 wrote: »

Maybe someone can help me? I can’t seem to get my calories right. MFP has me at 1200 but it seems so low. I’m 44, 120 lbs, 5”5’. I set myself at lightly active but I do some form of exercise every day as well as having a very active mom life. I’m looking to take a few more off then maintain. I’m super careful about my diet due to celiac disease and autoimmune issues. Thanks for any input!

How much weight per week did you tell MFP you wanted to lose? If you set a slower weight loss rate, you should get more calories to eat.

Also, remember that MFP intends for you to set activity level based on daily life activity before intentional exercise, then log exercise when you do it, and eat those calories, too.

I'm 5'5", 125, age 65, and if I wanted to lose weight (I don't - I'm fine at 125), I wouldn't go anywhere near as low as 1200, or even 1200 plus exercise, personally. Generally, the less total weight one has to lose, the slower one should lose it, for best health: You can only metabolize a certain amount of stored body fat per day per pound you have on your body, in my understanding. Usually, folks around here suggest not much more than 0.5% of current weight weekly when close to goal, so half a pound a week or just a fraction over that might be a good target in your case.

Another option in a case like yours - one that suits some people but others totally hate - would be to eat maintenance calories most days, then a couple of non-consecutive days each week at quite low calories, basically a form of time-restricted eating (TRE)/intermittent fasting (IF).

AnnPT77

MJW12020 wrote: »

That's really interesting and helpful - thank you. I haven't been tracking my weight change as regularly in recent times as I had been, but seem to have plateaued somewhat at around 75 kg. This plateau prompted my current questioning, but it may also reflect increased muscle development. It may be that the last few kilos is just particularly stubborn!

For most of the last six months I had been maintaining a 1000 calorie deficit with a view to losing 1 kg / 2.2 pounds a week and had been losing at almost exactly that rate.

If you calculated the deficit by eating 1000 less than your Fitbit's estimate, and lost at the expected rate, IMO you should be able to trust your Fitbit's estimate as a basis for slower weight loss, or eventually for maintenance calories.

kshama2001

katiecakes1124 wrote: »

Maybe someone can help me? I can’t seem to get my calories right. MFP has me at 1200 but it seems so low. I’m 44, 120 lbs, 5”5’. I set myself at lightly active but I do some form of exercise every day as well as having a very active mom life. I’m looking to take a few more off then maintain. I’m super careful about my diet due to celiac disease and autoimmune issues. Thanks for any input!

Hi Katie - you should probably start your own thread, but MFP has you at 1200 calories because you set too aggressive a weekly weight loss goal for someone who only needs to lose a few pounds.

Change it to a half pound per week and enjoy those extra calories!

heybales

Body has probably gotten all stressed out over that extreme deficit for the amount left to lose.

Yes - extreme.

But, perhaps a saving grace is your Fitbit HR-based calorie burn is inflated for intense workouts.
And if it's being used for your walks - inflated again.

So perhaps you really aren't causing a 1000 cal deficit which would be pretty bad for so little left to go.

But I'll bet body is still stressed for what you are attempting, gaining increased cortisol water weight and offsetting any fat loss on the scale.

Of course a body in that state is losing muscle mass too probably, so that's a bummer. Don't even imagine you are gaining muscle in some sort of rate even possible for fat to be lost. Sorry to say muscle ain't that fast, and neither is fat frankly.

If you had the last 4 weeks of stats where you were losing reliably, and had accurate logging for how much was eaten for that time, you could calculate your apparent TDEE.
Of course the math for that assumes fat loss, and you've probably added muscle to it, so....

But try this for TDEE estimate, then go on down to bottom and use the section to get observed TDEE with recent 28 days of data. Adjust as recommended, and use the new eating goal if your workouts are really that regular.

Just TDEE Please spreadsheet - better than rough 5 level TDEE charts from 1919 study.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1G7FgNzPq3v5WMjDtH0n93LXSMRY_hjmzNTMJb3aZSxM/edit?usp=sharing

heybales

katiecakes1124 wrote: »

Maybe someone can help me? I can’t seem to get my calories right. MFP has me at 1200 but it seems so low. I’m 44, 120 lbs, 5”5’. I set myself at lightly active but I do some form of exercise every day as well as having a very active mom life. I’m looking to take a few more off then maintain. I’m super careful about my diet due to celiac disease and autoimmune issues. Thanks for any input!

Probably should start your own thread.
But that 1200 is when you exactly match the activity level you selected - which had no exercise included.
So it would only be eaten on days with no exercise. Which sounds like doesn't happen - therefore you should never be eating only 1200.

PAV8888

Nope, 3200 is extremely plausible. Same age, same height, a few less lbs, no exercise other than walking/hiking and less km than op (terrain maybe different but ~30% less)….. and I'm usually averaging a good 3k+ tdee and at 2500 would be dropping a good lb+ a week

MJW12020

heybales wrote: »

Body has probably gotten all stressed out over that extreme deficit for the amount left to lose.

Yes - extreme.

But, perhaps a saving grace is your Fitbit HR-based calorie burn is inflated for intense workouts.
And if it's being used for your walks - inflated again.

So perhaps you really aren't causing a 1000 cal deficit which would be pretty bad for so little left to go.

But I'll bet body is still stressed for what you are attempting, gaining increased cortisol water weight and offsetting any fat loss on the scale.

Of course a body in that state is losing muscle mass too probably, so that's a bummer. Don't even imagine you are gaining muscle in some sort of rate even possible for fat to be lost. Sorry to say muscle ain't that fast, and neither is fat frankly.

If you had the last 4 weeks of stats where you were losing reliably, and had accurate logging for how much was eaten for that time, you could calculate your apparent TDEE.
Of course the math for that assumes fat loss, and you've probably added muscle to it, so....

But try this for TDEE estimate, then go on down to bottom and use the section to get observed TDEE with recent 28 days of data. Adjust as recommended, and use the new eating goal if your workouts are really that regular.

Just TDEE Please spreadsheet - better than rough 5 level TDEE charts from 1919 study.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1G7FgNzPq3v5WMjDtH0n93LXSMRY_hjmzNTMJb3aZSxM/edit?usp=sharing

You're probably right about bodily stress. I felt it when I started group coaching sessions at the gym about six weeks ago - that added about 400-500 calories to my TDEE and I was feeling undernourished at first. I feel that as well on weekend days when I do a lot of walking and end up (according to Fitbit) with more like 1300 deficit.

Your spreadsheet looks good - I will give it a try.

Thanks!

thisvickyruns

MJW12020 wrote: »

For most of the last six months I had been maintaining a 1000 calorie deficit with a view to losing 1 kg / 2.2 pounds a week and had been losing at almost exactly that rate.

if you have been losing as expected, then your TDEE is what your watch says. you should definitely expect much slower weight loss from now on. aim for 2700, your body will thank you for it.

You also might want to look at a diet break before you try and lose the last few pounds, given the large deficit you have had for the last 6 months. Enjoy the extra calories!