Calories Per Day...
J72FIT
Posts: 5,994 Member
How do you feel about the idea of eating maintenance calories per your goal weight?
Seems like it would overall be easier to manage consistency this way along with getting used to eating an amount of food once goal weight has been achieved. I imagine it would take longer but at the same time mentally seems like it would be easier.
Curious as too everyone's thoughts on this...
Seems like it would overall be easier to manage consistency this way along with getting used to eating an amount of food once goal weight has been achieved. I imagine it would take longer but at the same time mentally seems like it would be easier.
Curious as too everyone's thoughts on this...
1
Replies
-
My thoughts looking at my actual weight-loss: maintenance for what activity level? I started out sedentary, well and truly a couch potato and my current activity level is way higher than I would have predicted when starting out.
I think it has its merits on paper, but if you take exercise into account, don't forget that that number you're used to will need to go down if you're inactive for any reason (illness/injury/no access to gym etc) or up if you're more active (for example going from an office job to a more active job).
Going slow is pretty much a great argument in favor - good way to cement new habits 🙂
It certainly sounds like a much more sensible approach than many I've read here - I'd say try it!
It wouldn't be for me, considering that even at maintenance I don't have a fixed daily calorie goal, but we're all different!1 -
I eat the way I plan on eating as lifestyle so to me yes! It makes sense. It can take a bit more time to loose but from my experience it stays off because you are consistent.1
-
I think it's a valid strategy, and a way better than average approach. (There are way too many people in the world at large doing - or at least trying - "lose weight fast with extreme food restrictions and punitively intense exercise, then go back to normal" . . . which of course is the recipe for yo-yo regain.)
I sort of tried the "eat at future maintenance" approach for a while but got impatient. I'm all for sensibly slow loss, but that felt a little toooo slooow for me.
I'm maybe impatient. 
I agree about the advantage for habit development.
However, I felt OK about what I did on that front (which I'm not trying to talk you into, BTW, I'm just chatting). I decided I wasn't going to do anything to lose weight that I wasn't willing to continue forever in order to stay at a healthy weight long term, except for a sensibly moderate calorie deficit. As I got lighter, I reduced the deficit to lose slower, then eventually gradually increased calories until my weight stabilized. That also put a priority on developing sustainable habits, for me. (I'm in year 8 maintaining a healthy weight, at this point.)
Why not give "eat at future maintenance" a try? If you like it, stay with it; if you don't, tweak it in some sensible way. It's not like a starting point approach is a permanent commitment. Changing one's mind (and one's tactics) is always an option.
Best wishes!1 -
You could try it and it would probably work. There is a similar equation that is probably the same concept where you take in X calories for your goal weight. That could be anywhere from around 10-12 or so depending on exercise and NEAT requirements.
When my career became more supervisory and less physical I used 10 and it always was about right. 180 was 1,800 and it worked well1 -
Thank you for the replies!
I was thinking on this further and it occurred to me you could set a minimum and maximum calorie allotment as a range. Take your current weight and calculate your minimum and your target weight for your maximum. Example for me...
Current weight 180lbs
Target weight 175lbs
Give or take a few calories my minimum would be 2160 calories per day and my maximum would be 2800 calories per day. As long as training stays consistent (because as mentioned activity plays a role in this) you would be fine landing in-between those two numbers.
On the easy days when you are not hungry no sweat. On the days when you are hungrier you have a range to play with.
Is this crazy?
0 -
Thank you for the replies!
I was thinking on this further and it occurred to me you could set a minimum and maximum calorie allotment as a range. Take your current weight and calculate your minimum and your target weight for your maximum. Example for me...
Current weight 180lbs
Target weight 175lbs
Give or take a few calories my minimum would be 2160 calories per day and my maximum would be 2800 calories per day. As long as training stays consistent (because as mentioned activity plays a role in this) you would be fine landing in-between those two numbers.
On the easy days when you are not hungry no sweat. On the days when you are hungrier you have a range to play with.
Is this crazy?
Not even slightly crazy, IMO, especially if you have relatively little in total to lose. (Someone whose weight impairs activity or threatens health might be well advised to go faster.)1 -
Thank you for the replies!
I was thinking on this further and it occurred to me you could set a minimum and maximum calorie allotment as a range. Take your current weight and calculate your minimum and your target weight for your maximum. Example for me...
Current weight 180lbs
Target weight 175lbs
Give or take a few calories my minimum would be 2160 calories per day and my maximum would be 2800 calories per day. As long as training stays consistent (because as mentioned activity plays a role in this) you would be fine landing in-between those two numbers.
On the easy days when you are not hungry no sweat. On the days when you are hungrier you have a range to play with.
Is this crazy?
Are those numbers from the calculator or from your person experience with those numbers? They may or not be accurate. The daily numbers are seconndary to the overall weekly number. Daily will always fluctuate that's why you want to prioritize weekly amounts.1 -
tomcustombuilder wrote: »Thank you for the replies!
I was thinking on this further and it occurred to me you could set a minimum and maximum calorie allotment as a range. Take your current weight and calculate your minimum and your target weight for your maximum. Example for me...
Current weight 180lbs
Target weight 175lbs
Give or take a few calories my minimum would be 2160 calories per day and my maximum would be 2800 calories per day. As long as training stays consistent (because as mentioned activity plays a role in this) you would be fine landing in-between those two numbers.
On the easy days when you are not hungry no sweat. On the days when you are hungrier you have a range to play with.
Is this crazy?
Are those numbers from the calculator or from your person experience with those numbers? They may or not be accurate. The daily numbers are seconndary to the overall weekly number. Daily will always fluctuate that's why you want to prioritize weekly amounts.
From multiple formulas and personal experience.
I like the idea of a range. I think having one target number lends itself to some possible bad habits...0 -
Thank you for the replies!
I was thinking on this further and it occurred to me you could set a minimum and maximum calorie allotment as a range. Take your current weight and calculate your minimum and your target weight for your maximum. Example for me...
Current weight 180lbs
Target weight 175lbs
Give or take a few calories my minimum would be 2160 calories per day and my maximum would be 2800 calories per day. As long as training stays consistent (because as mentioned activity plays a role in this) you would be fine landing in-between those two numbers.
On the easy days when you are not hungry no sweat. On the days when you are hungrier you have a range to play with.
Is this crazy?
Not even slightly crazy, IMO, especially if you have relatively little in total to lose. (Someone whose weight impairs activity or threatens health might be well advised to go faster.)
Maybe for people with a lot to lose take the average of the two...?0 -
tomcustombuilder wrote: »Thank you for the replies!
I was thinking on this further and it occurred to me you could set a minimum and maximum calorie allotment as a range. Take your current weight and calculate your minimum and your target weight for your maximum. Example for me...
Current weight 180lbs
Target weight 175lbs
Give or take a few calories my minimum would be 2160 calories per day and my maximum would be 2800 calories per day. As long as training stays consistent (because as mentioned activity plays a role in this) you would be fine landing in-between those two numbers.
On the easy days when you are not hungry no sweat. On the days when you are hungrier you have a range to play with.
Is this crazy?
Are those numbers from the calculator or from your person experience with those numbers? They may or not be accurate. The daily numbers are seconndary to the overall weekly number. Daily will always fluctuate that's why you want to prioritize weekly amounts.
From multiple formulas and personal experience.
I like the idea of a range. I think having one target number lends itself to some possible bad habits...
In that regard, keeping an eye on your weekly intake is a good idea
if you have a range but are at the top of the range too often, you might not get results. I'm a big fan of the weekly nutrition view in the app, which allows me to still vary from day to day without going completely off-track. 1 -
tomcustombuilder wrote: »Thank you for the replies!
I was thinking on this further and it occurred to me you could set a minimum and maximum calorie allotment as a range. Take your current weight and calculate your minimum and your target weight for your maximum. Example for me...
Current weight 180lbs
Target weight 175lbs
Give or take a few calories my minimum would be 2160 calories per day and my maximum would be 2800 calories per day. As long as training stays consistent (because as mentioned activity plays a role in this) you would be fine landing in-between those two numbers.
On the easy days when you are not hungry no sweat. On the days when you are hungrier you have a range to play with.
Is this crazy?
Are those numbers from the calculator or from your person experience with those numbers? They may or not be accurate. The daily numbers are seconndary to the overall weekly number. Daily will always fluctuate that's why you want to prioritize weekly amounts.
From multiple formulas and personal experience.
I like the idea of a range. I think having one target number lends itself to some possible bad habits...
Yes that's why you prioritize weekly numbers over daily.0 -
Thank you for the replies!
I was thinking on this further and it occurred to me you could set a minimum and maximum calorie allotment as a range. Take your current weight and calculate your minimum and your target weight for your maximum. Example for me...
Current weight 180lbs
Target weight 175lbs
Give or take a few calories my minimum would be 2160 calories per day and my maximum would be 2800 calories per day. As long as training stays consistent (because as mentioned activity plays a role in this) you would be fine landing in-between those two numbers.
On the easy days when you are not hungry no sweat. On the days when you are hungrier you have a range to play with.
Is this crazy?
Not even slightly crazy, IMO, especially if you have relatively little in total to lose. (Someone whose weight impairs activity or threatens health might be well advised to go faster.)
Maybe for people with a lot to lose take the average of the two...?
It depends on what went into calculating the minimum, which isn't totally clear to me from your PP. Someone whose current weight creates health threat, who maybe already has relevant health conditions, can afford to lose pretty aggressively fast at first - might be the best thing, even, especially if they're getting close medical monitoring for deficiencies or complications.
At the opposite end of the scale (pun intended), someone with only a few pounds to lose is likely to have better outcomes from losing slowly (though there are limited exceptions, maybe). For myself, I wouldn't want to go faster than half a pound a week at this point,
So, it matters what weight loss rate is estimated into the minimum, IMO.
The person with lots to lose will also have a longer timespan losing, which makes "fast at first, slower later" rational IMO, and the focus on finding/practicing new habits can happen during the "later".
I think the range concept is fine, if it helps a person. In my own case, when I still had a fair lot to lose, I didn't use a range, but I was willing to eat at or over goal or even over then-current maintenance on truly, rare truly special occasions. Sometimes I'd estimate how many days later I'd reach goal weight if I ate X calories over goal or over then-current maintenance, and decide whether the delay was worth it to me. Sometimes it was. (In maintenance, I'm still willing to eat over my maintenance calories occasionally, recognizing that there may eventually be consequences.)
If you truly have only 5 pounds total to lose, if it were me I'd just cut back a little and not overthink it. But I'm a flake. 2
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
- 415 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