Calorie deficit

jodiecornelius

Hi everyone, probably a silly question... but with a calorie deficit if I eat 1200 calories in a day, does that mean I have to burn over 1200 calories a day?
Thanks 😊

robertw486

That is exactly what it means.

Thankfully, this also includes your BMR (Basal Metabollic Rate) which is the energy required to function and keep your body alive. It's a much higher calorie numer than most people would suspect. MFP already accounts for BMR if you use it for logging, so properly adding food and excercise are probably more important.

trixsterjl31

jodiecornelius wrote: »

Hi everyone, probably a silly question... but with a calorie deficit if I eat 1200 calories in a day, does that mean I have to burn over 1200 calories a day?
Thanks 😊

Here is kind of a dirty explanation of how it works. Your weight x 10 is about how many calories a day your body burns just go survive. I'm 316 lbs. That means i burn 3160 a day. If i eat 2000 i have a deficit of 1160 calories. Then if I walk for an hour i burn roughly 400(this differs by a persons weight and walk speed). so that is 1560 deficit. 3500 calories of deficit equates to a LB of loss. 1560x7 = 10920 .. /3500 would be 3.1 lbs a week.
I put this here because i'm not sure of the question. Caloric deficit is the calories you burn above your BMR. If you are saying you are eating 1200 a day. Times you weight by 10 and add in calories added from exercise. Subtract 1200. That is your deficit. 1200 is a bare minimum or a woman. Weight x 10 is a rough figure. It works for me it can very between 8 and 12 depending on the person. (at least that is my understanding of it. I think MFP goes my x10. They then subtract 500 to 1000 calories a day depending on your goal. 500 a day 1lb/1000 1lbs.

claireychn074

jodiecornelius wrote: »

Hi everyone, probably a silly question... but with a calorie deficit if I eat 1200 calories in a day, does that mean I have to burn over 1200 calories a day?
Thanks 😊

Not a silly question and yes. You’ll burn a surprising amount of calories just being alive and breathing. 1200 per day is low by the way, and might suggest you’re shooting for too fast a rate of loss. It’s much better to go slowly and lose maybe 0.5-1 pound a week, as that gives you more calories each day, has a better chance of preserving your muscle mass and will be more sustainable.

The suggestion above re multiple calories by BW x 10 is interesting. I haven’t heard that before and it certainly wouldn’t work for me (I weigh 123 pounds and I I’ll lose on anything under 2000 calories per day). Granted I do exercise, but even comatose I definitely need more than 1230 calories to survive.

yirara

Yeah, like the lady above me said: you might be going too fast. Weightloss is not about losing a lot of weight as quickly as possible, but about making it as comfortable as possible, with all the food you enjoy. Then you have lost the weight you can slowly transition towards maintenance, still eating the food you enjoy. This way you learn how much is an appropriate amount to eat, and how much calories the food has that you enjoy. Also, if you eat too little there's a chance that you just crash, burn out and give up. Slow and steady wins the race.

jodiecornelius

Thank you, for your help 😊

trixsterjl31

claireychn074 wrote: »

jodiecornelius wrote: »

Hi everyone, probably a silly question... but with a calorie deficit if I eat 1200 calories in a day, does that mean I have to burn over 1200 calories a day?
Thanks 😊

Not a silly question and yes. You’ll burn a surprising amount of calories just being alive and breathing. 1200 per day is low by the way, and might suggest you’re shooting for too fast a rate of loss. It’s much better to go slowly and lose maybe 0.5-1 pound a week, as that gives you more calories each day, has a better chance of preserving your muscle mass and will be more sustainable.

The suggestion above re multiple calories by BW x 10 is interesting. I haven’t heard that before and it certainly wouldn’t work for me (I weigh 123 pounds and I I’ll lose on anything under 2000 calories per day). Granted I do exercise, but even comatose I definitely need more than 1230 calories to survive.

Ya. I've wondered about that. x10 works for me and is pretty consistent. I'm not sure how to figure BMR if you are a healthy small person. I kind of figure that at some point there is a minimum amount of effort every body need regardless of size. I think that is kind of where the minimums of 1200 and 1500 come in for man/woman. I'm defeinitely not an expert on it. For smaller people i'd probably start at 1800 and watch it and the scale and tweek it a bit if It didn't move or I always felt hungry. I average about 1900 at 315lbs with no real stress so i'm sure a 180 lb person trying to lose weight could do it too.

AnnPT77

trixsterjl31 wrote: »

claireychn074 wrote: »

jodiecornelius wrote: »

Hi everyone, probably a silly question... but with a calorie deficit if I eat 1200 calories in a day, does that mean I have to burn over 1200 calories a day?
Thanks 😊

Not a silly question and yes. You’ll burn a surprising amount of calories just being alive and breathing. 1200 per day is low by the way, and might suggest you’re shooting for too fast a rate of loss. It’s much better to go slowly and lose maybe 0.5-1 pound a week, as that gives you more calories each day, has a better chance of preserving your muscle mass and will be more sustainable.

The suggestion above re multiple calories by BW x 10 is interesting. I haven’t heard that before and it certainly wouldn’t work for me (I weigh 123 pounds and I I’ll lose on anything under 2000 calories per day). Granted I do exercise, but even comatose I definitely need more than 1230 calories to survive.

Ya. I've wondered about that. x10 works for me and is pretty consistent. I'm not sure how to figure BMR if you are a healthy small person. I kind of figure that at some point there is a minimum amount of effort every body need regardless of size. I think that is kind of where the minimums of 1200 and 1500 come in for man/woman. I'm defeinitely not an expert on it. For smaller people i'd probably start at 1800 and watch it and the scale and tweek it a bit if It didn't move or I always felt hungry. I average about 1900 at 315lbs with no real stress so i'm sure a 180 lb person trying to lose weight could do it too.

x10 works very poorly for me, too. Crazy low.

BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate), isn't total calorie needs, it's the amount a person would burn flat on their back in bed in a coma all day, not even digesting food. The all-day total calorie burn is TDEE, Total Daily Energy Expenditure. TDEE includes:

* BMR,
* TEF (Thermic Effect of Food, the energy used to process food intake),
* NEAT (Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis, calories burned doing daily life stuff like job and home chores), and
* EAT (Exercise Activity Thermogenesis, calories burned through intentional exercise).

MFP doesn't use x10 or anything like that to estimate calories. They use a research-based formula, Mifflin St Jeor, to estimate BMR, which takes into account your age, weight, height and gender.

They then multiply your BMR estimate by an activity factor based on your activity level setting to estimate maintenance calories (excluding intentional exercise if you follow MFP's directions). Finally, if you say you want to lose weight, they subtract calories from that number to create a calorie deficit (500 calories daily per pound, 1100 daily per kilogram).

The result is your calorie goal . . . unless the result would be below 1200 for women or 1500 for men. In those cases, they assign 1200 or 1500. The reason is that eating too few calories can have negative health consequences, and they think that's a minimum to avoid significant risks.

They describe the process here, but don't mention which research-based statistical formula they use for BMR. (Yes, there are multiple competing formulas. Some include other factors, such as body fat percent.)

https://support.myfitnesspal.com/hc/en-us/articles/360032625391-How-does-MyFitnessPal-calculate-my-initial-goals

A good strategy is to treat MFP's estimate as a starting point, no need for personal arithmetic at that point. Follow it for 4-6 weeks reasonably closely and carefully, then adjust calorie goal if needed based on actual average weekly results. Women who have menstrual cycles should compare body weight at the same relative point in at least two different cycles to estimate average weekly loss, rather than using calendar weeks, because hormonal weight fluctuations can be pretty weird.