Estimated Calorie Requirements

aschroeder2749

To start the new year off right, I wanted to be sure my calorie goal is accurate. I saw this link: http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/CalRequire.html on one of the information threads and filled it out. The information I used was:

Sex F
Age 28
Weight 144
Ht or BF 66 in

Then to account for how I spend 24 hours, I put 8 hours resting (which is very generous, as my seep is often interrupted), 12 hours of "light" activity (as I care for a child and do housework most of the day - from 6-6), and 4 hours of "very light" activity (from 6 pm to 10 pm I often read or do other relaxing activities - basically my day just "slows down" at that point). That equals my 24 hours.

The results were a BMR of 1454, plus 1212 activity calories, resulting in 2666 total calorie requirement for the day. I saw in the threads posted here that a 20% cut is recommended to lose weight. (533 calories).

Am I understanding this right? I could consume 2000 calories per day with what seems to me to be a relatively inactive lifestyle and lose weight? This goes against everything I've ever thought. It seems like a lot of calories available to eat. That said, if this could be true...I would find it not as stressful or difficult to stick with. In the past I've tried to limit my calories to 1200-1400/day (as that's what MFP's basic calculator tells me I need to do). I've not been very good at sticking with that number.

Does this seem right to you?

megsmom2

It seems a bit high...but could be correct. Why not try it for a couple of weeks and see how it goes?

Jambalady

The activity calories do seem a bit high, but could be right depending on what type of child care/housework you are doing and how active you are constantly througout the day.

Yesterday, I sat in my office all day at work, took a 1 hr intense class and only burned 400 activity calories, but this past Sunday, I spent the whole day doing laundry, cleaning, running after the kids, moving toys from the main floor to the attic, etc. and ended up burning close to 1000 activity calories and it didn't feel like I did anything at all.

RllyGudTweetr

Gives me an estimate of 2772 calories to maintain. If I take out the built-in deficit MFP's numbers give, that's not far off, I suppose.

jonnythan

1212 activity calories seems high for the activity you describe. I'd estimate your TDEE (total calories burned every day; Total Daily Energy Expenditure) to be around 2000. If I were you I'd start at 1800 calories a day and give it about a month. Weight fluctuates so mcuh, especially when you first start changing things, that you need a significant amount of time to see what happens. Raise it slowly if you're losing too quickly.

LeahFerri

Put in rough information for myself, and it gives me a BMR that makes sense to me, but not an activity estimate. I think if I were burning what this tells me and eating the way I do (I fully admit that I approximate food measurements), I would be losing weight really fast. Like over a pound a week with a normal-range BMI fast.

aschroeder2749

1212 activity calories seems high for the activity you describe. I'd estimate your TDEE (total calories burned every day; Total Daily Energy Expenditure) to be around 2000. If I were you I'd start at 1800 calories a day and give it about a month. Weight fluctuates so mcuh, especially when you first start changing things, that you need a significant amount of time to see what happens. Raise it slowly if you're losing too quickly.

I really think it seems high, too. I think I'll start with 1800 calories a day. However, if I put in my own calorie goal (instead of using MFP's), that means I should NOT eat back my exercise calories, right?

aschroeder2749

MFP tells me that if I want to lose one pound a week, with a lightly active lifestyle, and with exercising 3x/week for 30 mins/session, I should eat 1480 calories.

jonnythan

1212 activity calories seems high for the activity you describe. I'd estimate your TDEE (total calories burned every day; Total Daily Energy Expenditure) to be around 2000. If I were you I'd start at 1800 calories a day and give it about a month. Weight fluctuates so mcuh, especially when you first start changing things, that you need a significant amount of time to see what happens. Raise it slowly if you're losing too quickly.

I really think it seems high, too. I think I'll start with 1800 calories a day. However, if I put in my own calorie goal (instead of using MFP's), that means I should NOT eat back my exercise calories, right?

Well, that depends. The 2000 a day estimate was for the activity you describe. If you add exercise on top of that, increase that day's calorie intake accordingly.

The goal at the end of any given day is to eat moderately below the total calories burned that day. If you've already accounted for everything you did in your TDEE estimate, then you're done. If did something you haven't accounted for, take the opportunity to account for it by adding in a few exercise calories.

jonnythan

MFP tells me that if I want to lose one pound a week, with a lightly active lifestyle, and with exercising 3x/week for 30 mins/session, I should eat 1480 calories.

MFP's calculation doesn't include those 3 exercise sessions, because it expects you to log them separately. You can tell MFP you will exercise 7 times a week for 1000 minutes/session and it'll still say "1480 calories." It waits until you actually log the exercise to factor in those calories.

Anyway, this difference highlights how silly it is to use "lightly active lifestyle" or other such qualitative words to describe calorie burns. Everyone defines them differently. The best you can do is to estimate as best you can how many calories you burn a day. Start with BMR * 1.2 to get an estimate of how much you'd burn if you did nothing at all besides going to the bathroom, making food, etc. Add extra stuff on top and see where that gets you.

Personally, my strong recommendation is to get a Fitbit One. It's a little $99 activity tracker you leave clipped to your waist/bra/whatever all day. It syncs up with MFP and gives a surprisingly accurate estimate of calorie burn. Over the past year, mine has been accurate to about 1 or 2%.

Sabine_Stroehm

If it were me, I'd aim for a 15% deficit. You need to have plenty of energy to chase that cute little one around. I agree with jonnythan, get a fitbit (I'd get the flex, so the little one doesn't pull it off) and see how much you really burn.

robathealthsidekick

The BMR equation that MFP uses is general and should only be used when starting to log and you have no data to go by. Once you have a week worth's of data you have more valuable data than a general equation can give you. You can answer that question and wont have to ask it again.
I understand why people constantly ask this question over and over again, but it is a simple question to answer. How many calories should I be eating to lose weight needs to be answered by the information you get back from your logging. Healthsidekick always give this number and tells you based on what you did over the last week, 2 weeks months and so on.... this is how many calories you can eat of the food and exercise you are eating and doing to lose weight.
Your averages will always give you less food then the BMR equation. If you have 50-100 pounds to lose general will work, but if you have 0-50 pounds for most you have to get more specific to you.
Regarding Fitbits. They are OK if it gets you to move more. I personally don't want to be tied to looking at every step. I know for some it works and that is great, but every step you take is in your averages as well and unless it gets you to burn more calories they are worthless.

jonnythan

If it were me, I'd aim for a 15% deficit. You need to have plenty of energy to chase that cute little one around. I agree with jonnythan, get a fitbit (I'd get the flex, so the little one doesn't pull it off) and see how much you really burn.

I recommend against the Flex, because reported results are a mixed bag. I think the wrist is a rather poor place from which to measure body movement, which helps explain how erratic they apparently are. Plus, there's no actual display on them which is kinda frustrating.

aschroeder2749

Perhaps this is a silly question, but if I have a heart rate monitor with a chest strap, could it not log all the calories I burn in a day if I wear it all day?

jonnythan

Perhaps this is a silly question, but if I have a heart rate monitor with a chest strap, could it not log all the calories I burn in a day if I wear it all day?

No, it can't. HRMs can be extremely accurate, given two things:

1) The HRM knows your VO2max. HRMs use a function involving VO2max (basically a measure of how well your lungs and cardiovascular system can deliver oxygen to the tissues burning calories). Problem is that VO2max varies widely from person to person, and a single person's VO2max changes dramatically as they become more trained.

2) That you're doing steady state cardio. When resting, performing light activity, doing interval training, or doing resistance training, the relationship between heart rate and calorie burn breaks down to become virtually useless. HRMs worn during weight training will vastly overestimate calorie burn, for instance.

HRMs are, IMO, most useful as heart rate monitors for the purposes of optimizing training. They're, at best, marginally useful for estimating calorie burn. In the instance of someone with a Fitbit, a properly-calibrated HRM could be very useful for steady-state cardio activities that the Fitbit is poor at, such as cycling, spinning, or elliptical training.

aschroeder2749

HRMs worn during weight training will vastly overestimate calorie burn, for instance.

Well...that explains some prior issues I was having before. I was wearing the HRM and logging the calories burned into MFP. And then eating them back.

Thanks for the thoughtful explanations!