Frantic about adhering to the "right" calorie intake? Read t
stroutman81
Posts: 2,474 Member
This was originally posted in my newsletter. I then posted it on my blog. I've been getting an array of questions via email here and in the "relatively lean people getting leaner" thread about this topic, so I figured I'd post it on the forum as well. Hopefully it helps some of you.
*************************************************************
In the last installment we discussed the importance of defining and understanding the difference between calories and macronutrients. If you haven’t read that article yet, I highly suggest you take the time to do so before delving into this installment.
After reading the above-referenced article, some messaged me asking, “The article is great, but how do I go about determining how many calories I personally need?”
Before answering, I’d like to remind you that counting calories isn’t for everyone. That’s not to say some aren’t bound by the laws of energy. It’s just that some find it tedious and obsessive to a degree that detracts from real progress. The only way to find out if you’re a member of this camp is to give it a try. As mentioned in the last article, even if you determine counting calories isn’t for you, it will still provide an invaluable insight as to how quickly calories can add up as well as what serving sizes really look like.
With that said, let’s delve into how one goes about calculating caloric needs.
To summarize from the last edition, caloric expenditure is determined by BMR, TEF, TEA and NEAT which are basal metabolic rate, thermic effect of feeding, thermic effect of activity and non-exercise activity thermogenesis respectively. As these factors rise and fall, so does your caloric expenditure.
Once we determine what we’re approximately expending, we’re able to tailor our intake to match our goal of either gaining, losing or maintaining weight—eat more than we expend to gain, less than we expend to lose and the same as we expend to maintain.
So how do we determine total expenditure?
We could find a lab with a metabolic chamber where they use calorimetry to measure the heat our bodies produce or the levels of gas exchange (oxygen consumption, carbon dioxide production, etc). You’ll have to live in a small room for a day or two to get an accurate reading. If you’re normal, this method is about as practical as climbing Everest as your form of weekly cardio.
I’m sure some of you have watched the Biggest Loser television show. On there you may have noticed contestants wearing what’s called a Bodybugg. This nifty device estimates caloric expenditure using various factors including movement, heat, electrical conductivity, etc. So you could purchase a similar device to measure energy expenditure.
You could plug some of your statistics into an equation such as the Harris Benedict formula which will spit out an estimation of your basal metabolic rate. These vary based on sex and look like:
Women: BMR = 655 + ( 4.35 x weight in pounds ) + ( 4.7 x height in inches ) - ( 4.7 x age in years )
Men: BMR = 66 + ( 6.23 x weight in pounds ) + ( 12.7 x height in inches ) - ( 6.8 x age in year )
Once you complete the math, you then multiply your answer by an “activity factor” to get your estimated total energy expenditure per day. These factors look like this:
1. If you are sedentary (little or no exercise) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.2
2. If you are lightly active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.375
3. If you are moderatetely active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.55
4. If you are very active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days a week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.725
5. If you are extra active (very hard exercise/sports & physical job or 2x training) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.9
Formulas like the aforementioned are the basis for a lot of the calorie calculators that you see on the Internet. These are very simple to use typically asking you to plug in your age, sex, height and weight and with the click of a button you’ll have an estimated caloric expenditure. I know MFP has one in the tools section.
This isn’t a complete list of methods of calculating caloric expenditure but it is the most popular techniques. Frankly, I don’t use any of them—well I should say I almost never use any of them.
Here’s why.
Caloric needs are very individual and variable.
By individual, I mean two given people with similar body compositions and lifestyles may have varying degrees of variability in energy expenditure due to genetic factors affecting metabolism. It should be noted that this variability isn’t as great as many make it out to be—if you’re of the type that believes you have a “slow metabolism” thus making fat loss impossible without starving yourself, you better think again. But variability does exist and this is something that the above methods are not going to pick up (shy of the metabolic chamber).
By variable I mean caloric expenditure will change from day to day and month to month. For instance, our lifestyles will dictate how much energy we expend. Think about how some are more active during the week than the weekends or think of an off-season compared to in-season schedule for an athlete. Caloric expenditure will change based on your energetic state (or diet if you will)—meaning if you’re continuously eating less energy than your body needs, your body is going to adapt by slowing down your metabolism over time. The simple act of losing weight will reduce your caloric expenditure. You’ll have less tissue to support, less mass to move around, etc.
Beyond the fact that caloric needs are individual and variable, the accuracy of these rudimentary tools (sans calorimetry) tends to diminish as you approach the ends of the spectrum of leanness or obesity.
Hopefully you’re starting to see a) caloric expenditure is not a rigid, consistent thing and b) that unless you’re spending some time in a metabolic chamber the tools you use to estimate caloric expenditure are rudimentary in nature and at best give you an approximation.
Knowing this, it is beyond me why so many get hung up on calculating their total energy expenditure. Invariably I’ll see people at wits end ready to pull their hair out fretting over the option to eat 1850 calories or 1950 calories because they used two online calculators and each spit out a different determination.
They’re missing the forest for the trees.
I put an enormous premium on simplicity. I don’t see much a point in muddying the waters until I reach a point that requires some mud-stirring. Until that point arises, I like to use the K.I.S.S principle.
In doing so, I’ll typically calculate someone’s total energy expenditure by multiplying their bodyweight by 14-16 calories per pound. This calculation pans out for most people assuming they're not overly obese and that they're engaged in exercise most days of the week. And it’s not something to view as a rigid formula.
If you’re more active than most or if you have a hard time gaining weight, lean towards the high end of the spectrum or change it all together. Something like 16-18 calories per pound may be what the doctor ordered in your case.
On the flip side, if you’re more sedentary than most of have a very hard time losing weight, lean towards the low end of the spectrum. Something like 12-14 might be ideal for your situation.
Either way, what you select as your starting point matters little. The entire point is to base your caloric intake on how your body and weight is responding to your initial calculation.
Metabolism (energy expenditure) is not a static measure and therefore neither should your caloric intake be. It’s a process and that’s what most people miss. This process is consistent regardless of what method you use to determine your initial energy expenditure.
The process would look something like:
1. Estimate total energy expenditure.
2. Set your caloric intake at a level above or below the above estimation depending on whether you want to gain or lose weight, respectively.
3. Track your measurements, weight, body fat, pictures, etc every 2-4 weeks.
4. Based on the trend you’re seeing with your tracking, adjust your intake accordingly.
5. Rinse and repeat steps 2-4 until you a) reach your goal or b) your goals change.
Because I enjoy beating dead horses, let’s look at an example. Jane weighs 130 lbs. She is spends about an hour each day exercising and doesn’t feel her metabolism is off-the-charts slow. She calculates her total energy expenditure by multiplying 130 by 14 to give her 1,820 calories. She understands that we’re working with estimates so she drops that number to 1,800 for simplicity's sake.
Her goal is to drop 5 lbs of fat while preserving muscle. She’s not looking to do anything extreme in terms of dieting but she knows she needs to eat less energy than she expends. She reasons that a deficit of 25% would be suitable.
Multiplying 1,800 by 25% gives us 450. To start her “plan” she'll aim for between 1,300 and 1,400 calories per day.
She’ll also figure out her baseline data by weighing herself first thing in the morning after relieving herself. She’ll use a soft tape measure to measure the circumference of her arms, chest, navel, waist, hips and thighs. If she has the available tools, she might measure her body fat percentage. She’ll also take some pictures of herself.
After a handful of weeks eating between 1,300 and 1,400 calories she’ll re-measure the above variables. If they’re heading in the desired direction she’ll stay the course. If she finds that she’s losing weight too quickly, she’ll adjust her intake upward by 10% or so. If she finds that she’s not losing enough, she’ll adjust her intake downward by 10% or so.
And that’s the process. Next time you or someone you care about is frantically searching for the perfect calculation for energy expenditure, stop them and explain the process. Or direct them to this article. If you use the wrong calculation, the process will uncover that fact and you’ll make the necessary adjustments over time to get on track.
Although this article is primarily about how to calculate caloric needs, it’s important to mention that the types of foods that comprise your calories are vitally important as well. That’s beyond the scope of this article however.
Best to you!
*************************************************************
In the last installment we discussed the importance of defining and understanding the difference between calories and macronutrients. If you haven’t read that article yet, I highly suggest you take the time to do so before delving into this installment.
After reading the above-referenced article, some messaged me asking, “The article is great, but how do I go about determining how many calories I personally need?”
Before answering, I’d like to remind you that counting calories isn’t for everyone. That’s not to say some aren’t bound by the laws of energy. It’s just that some find it tedious and obsessive to a degree that detracts from real progress. The only way to find out if you’re a member of this camp is to give it a try. As mentioned in the last article, even if you determine counting calories isn’t for you, it will still provide an invaluable insight as to how quickly calories can add up as well as what serving sizes really look like.
With that said, let’s delve into how one goes about calculating caloric needs.
To summarize from the last edition, caloric expenditure is determined by BMR, TEF, TEA and NEAT which are basal metabolic rate, thermic effect of feeding, thermic effect of activity and non-exercise activity thermogenesis respectively. As these factors rise and fall, so does your caloric expenditure.
Once we determine what we’re approximately expending, we’re able to tailor our intake to match our goal of either gaining, losing or maintaining weight—eat more than we expend to gain, less than we expend to lose and the same as we expend to maintain.
So how do we determine total expenditure?
We could find a lab with a metabolic chamber where they use calorimetry to measure the heat our bodies produce or the levels of gas exchange (oxygen consumption, carbon dioxide production, etc). You’ll have to live in a small room for a day or two to get an accurate reading. If you’re normal, this method is about as practical as climbing Everest as your form of weekly cardio.
I’m sure some of you have watched the Biggest Loser television show. On there you may have noticed contestants wearing what’s called a Bodybugg. This nifty device estimates caloric expenditure using various factors including movement, heat, electrical conductivity, etc. So you could purchase a similar device to measure energy expenditure.
You could plug some of your statistics into an equation such as the Harris Benedict formula which will spit out an estimation of your basal metabolic rate. These vary based on sex and look like:
Women: BMR = 655 + ( 4.35 x weight in pounds ) + ( 4.7 x height in inches ) - ( 4.7 x age in years )
Men: BMR = 66 + ( 6.23 x weight in pounds ) + ( 12.7 x height in inches ) - ( 6.8 x age in year )
Once you complete the math, you then multiply your answer by an “activity factor” to get your estimated total energy expenditure per day. These factors look like this:
1. If you are sedentary (little or no exercise) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.2
2. If you are lightly active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.375
3. If you are moderatetely active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.55
4. If you are very active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days a week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.725
5. If you are extra active (very hard exercise/sports & physical job or 2x training) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.9
Formulas like the aforementioned are the basis for a lot of the calorie calculators that you see on the Internet. These are very simple to use typically asking you to plug in your age, sex, height and weight and with the click of a button you’ll have an estimated caloric expenditure. I know MFP has one in the tools section.
This isn’t a complete list of methods of calculating caloric expenditure but it is the most popular techniques. Frankly, I don’t use any of them—well I should say I almost never use any of them.
Here’s why.
Caloric needs are very individual and variable.
By individual, I mean two given people with similar body compositions and lifestyles may have varying degrees of variability in energy expenditure due to genetic factors affecting metabolism. It should be noted that this variability isn’t as great as many make it out to be—if you’re of the type that believes you have a “slow metabolism” thus making fat loss impossible without starving yourself, you better think again. But variability does exist and this is something that the above methods are not going to pick up (shy of the metabolic chamber).
By variable I mean caloric expenditure will change from day to day and month to month. For instance, our lifestyles will dictate how much energy we expend. Think about how some are more active during the week than the weekends or think of an off-season compared to in-season schedule for an athlete. Caloric expenditure will change based on your energetic state (or diet if you will)—meaning if you’re continuously eating less energy than your body needs, your body is going to adapt by slowing down your metabolism over time. The simple act of losing weight will reduce your caloric expenditure. You’ll have less tissue to support, less mass to move around, etc.
Beyond the fact that caloric needs are individual and variable, the accuracy of these rudimentary tools (sans calorimetry) tends to diminish as you approach the ends of the spectrum of leanness or obesity.
Hopefully you’re starting to see a) caloric expenditure is not a rigid, consistent thing and b) that unless you’re spending some time in a metabolic chamber the tools you use to estimate caloric expenditure are rudimentary in nature and at best give you an approximation.
Knowing this, it is beyond me why so many get hung up on calculating their total energy expenditure. Invariably I’ll see people at wits end ready to pull their hair out fretting over the option to eat 1850 calories or 1950 calories because they used two online calculators and each spit out a different determination.
They’re missing the forest for the trees.
I put an enormous premium on simplicity. I don’t see much a point in muddying the waters until I reach a point that requires some mud-stirring. Until that point arises, I like to use the K.I.S.S principle.
In doing so, I’ll typically calculate someone’s total energy expenditure by multiplying their bodyweight by 14-16 calories per pound. This calculation pans out for most people assuming they're not overly obese and that they're engaged in exercise most days of the week. And it’s not something to view as a rigid formula.
If you’re more active than most or if you have a hard time gaining weight, lean towards the high end of the spectrum or change it all together. Something like 16-18 calories per pound may be what the doctor ordered in your case.
On the flip side, if you’re more sedentary than most of have a very hard time losing weight, lean towards the low end of the spectrum. Something like 12-14 might be ideal for your situation.
Either way, what you select as your starting point matters little. The entire point is to base your caloric intake on how your body and weight is responding to your initial calculation.
Metabolism (energy expenditure) is not a static measure and therefore neither should your caloric intake be. It’s a process and that’s what most people miss. This process is consistent regardless of what method you use to determine your initial energy expenditure.
The process would look something like:
1. Estimate total energy expenditure.
2. Set your caloric intake at a level above or below the above estimation depending on whether you want to gain or lose weight, respectively.
3. Track your measurements, weight, body fat, pictures, etc every 2-4 weeks.
4. Based on the trend you’re seeing with your tracking, adjust your intake accordingly.
5. Rinse and repeat steps 2-4 until you a) reach your goal or b) your goals change.
Because I enjoy beating dead horses, let’s look at an example. Jane weighs 130 lbs. She is spends about an hour each day exercising and doesn’t feel her metabolism is off-the-charts slow. She calculates her total energy expenditure by multiplying 130 by 14 to give her 1,820 calories. She understands that we’re working with estimates so she drops that number to 1,800 for simplicity's sake.
Her goal is to drop 5 lbs of fat while preserving muscle. She’s not looking to do anything extreme in terms of dieting but she knows she needs to eat less energy than she expends. She reasons that a deficit of 25% would be suitable.
Multiplying 1,800 by 25% gives us 450. To start her “plan” she'll aim for between 1,300 and 1,400 calories per day.
She’ll also figure out her baseline data by weighing herself first thing in the morning after relieving herself. She’ll use a soft tape measure to measure the circumference of her arms, chest, navel, waist, hips and thighs. If she has the available tools, she might measure her body fat percentage. She’ll also take some pictures of herself.
After a handful of weeks eating between 1,300 and 1,400 calories she’ll re-measure the above variables. If they’re heading in the desired direction she’ll stay the course. If she finds that she’s losing weight too quickly, she’ll adjust her intake upward by 10% or so. If she finds that she’s not losing enough, she’ll adjust her intake downward by 10% or so.
And that’s the process. Next time you or someone you care about is frantically searching for the perfect calculation for energy expenditure, stop them and explain the process. Or direct them to this article. If you use the wrong calculation, the process will uncover that fact and you’ll make the necessary adjustments over time to get on track.
Although this article is primarily about how to calculate caloric needs, it’s important to mention that the types of foods that comprise your calories are vitally important as well. That’s beyond the scope of this article however.
Best to you!
0
Replies
-
This was originally posted in my newsletter. I then posted it on my blog. I've been getting an array of questions via email here and in the "relatively lean people getting leaner" thread about this topic, so I figured I'd post it on the forum as well. Hopefully it helps some of you.
*************************************************************
In the last installment we discussed the importance of defining and understanding the difference between calories and macronutrients. If you haven’t read that article yet, I highly suggest you take the time to do so before delving into this installment.
After reading the above-referenced article, some messaged me asking, “The article is great, but how do I go about determining how many calories I personally need?”
Before answering, I’d like to remind you that counting calories isn’t for everyone. That’s not to say some aren’t bound by the laws of energy. It’s just that some find it tedious and obsessive to a degree that detracts from real progress. The only way to find out if you’re a member of this camp is to give it a try. As mentioned in the last article, even if you determine counting calories isn’t for you, it will still provide an invaluable insight as to how quickly calories can add up as well as what serving sizes really look like.
With that said, let’s delve into how one goes about calculating caloric needs.
To summarize from the last edition, caloric expenditure is determined by BMR, TEF, TEA and NEAT which are basal metabolic rate, thermic effect of feeding, thermic effect of activity and non-exercise activity thermogenesis respectively. As these factors rise and fall, so does your caloric expenditure.
Once we determine what we’re approximately expending, we’re able to tailor our intake to match our goal of either gaining, losing or maintaining weight—eat more than we expend to gain, less than we expend to lose and the same as we expend to maintain.
So how do we determine total expenditure?
We could find a lab with a metabolic chamber where they use calorimetry to measure the heat our bodies produce or the levels of gas exchange (oxygen consumption, carbon dioxide production, etc). You’ll have to live in a small room for a day or two to get an accurate reading. If you’re normal, this method is about as practical as climbing Everest as your form of weekly cardio.
I’m sure some of you have watched the Biggest Loser television show. On there you may have noticed contestants wearing what’s called a Bodybugg. This nifty device estimates caloric expenditure using various factors including movement, heat, electrical conductivity, etc. So you could purchase a similar device to measure energy expenditure.
You could plug some of your statistics into an equation such as the Harris Benedict formula which will spit out an estimation of your basal metabolic rate. These vary based on sex and look like:
Women: BMR = 655 + ( 4.35 x weight in pounds ) + ( 4.7 x height in inches ) - ( 4.7 x age in years )
Men: BMR = 66 + ( 6.23 x weight in pounds ) + ( 12.7 x height in inches ) - ( 6.8 x age in year )
Once you complete the math, you then multiply your answer by an “activity factor” to get your estimated total energy expenditure per day. These factors look like this:
1. If you are sedentary (little or no exercise) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.2
2. If you are lightly active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.375
3. If you are moderatetely active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.55
4. If you are very active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days a week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.725
5. If you are extra active (very hard exercise/sports & physical job or 2x training) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.9
Formulas like the aforementioned are the basis for a lot of the calorie calculators that you see on the Internet. These are very simple to use typically asking you to plug in your age, sex, height and weight and with the click of a button you’ll have an estimated caloric expenditure. I know MFP has one in the tools section.
This isn’t a complete list of methods of calculating caloric expenditure but it is the most popular techniques. Frankly, I don’t use any of them—well I should say I almost never use any of them.
Here’s why.
Caloric needs are very individual and variable.
By individual, I mean two given people with similar body compositions and lifestyles may have varying degrees of variability in energy expenditure due to genetic factors affecting metabolism. It should be noted that this variability isn’t as great as many make it out to be—if you’re of the type that believes you have a “slow metabolism” thus making fat loss impossible without starving yourself, you better think again. But variability does exist and this is something that the above methods are not going to pick up (shy of the metabolic chamber).
By variable I mean caloric expenditure will change from day to day and month to month. For instance, our lifestyles will dictate how much energy we expend. Think about how some are more active during the week than the weekends or think of an off-season compared to in-season schedule for an athlete. Caloric expenditure will change based on your energetic state (or diet if you will)—meaning if you’re continuously eating less energy than your body needs, your body is going to adapt by slowing down your metabolism over time. The simple act of losing weight will reduce your caloric expenditure. You’ll have less tissue to support, less mass to move around, etc.
Beyond the fact that caloric needs are individual and variable, the accuracy of these rudimentary tools (sans calorimetry) tends to diminish as you approach the ends of the spectrum of leanness or obesity.
Hopefully you’re starting to see a) caloric expenditure is not a rigid, consistent thing and b) that unless you’re spending some time in a metabolic chamber the tools you use to estimate caloric expenditure are rudimentary in nature and at best give you an approximation.
Knowing this, it is beyond me why so many get hung up on calculating their total energy expenditure. Invariably I’ll see people at wits end ready to pull their hair out fretting over the option to eat 1850 calories or 1950 calories because they used two online calculators and each spit out a different determination.
They’re missing the forest for the trees.
I put an enormous premium on simplicity. I don’t see much a point in muddying the waters until I reach a point that requires some mud-stirring. Until that point arises, I like to use the K.I.S.S principle.
In doing so, I’ll typically calculate someone’s total energy expenditure by multiplying their bodyweight by 14-16 calories per pound. This calculation pans out for most people assuming they're not overly obese and that they're engaged in exercise most days of the week. And it’s not something to view as a rigid formula.
If you’re more active than most or if you have a hard time gaining weight, lean towards the high end of the spectrum or change it all together. Something like 16-18 calories per pound may be what the doctor ordered in your case.
On the flip side, if you’re more sedentary than most of have a very hard time losing weight, lean towards the low end of the spectrum. Something like 12-14 might be ideal for your situation.
Either way, what you select as your starting point matters little. The entire point is to base your caloric intake on how your body and weight is responding to your initial calculation.
Metabolism (energy expenditure) is not a static measure and therefore neither should your caloric intake be. It’s a process and that’s what most people miss. This process is consistent regardless of what method you use to determine your initial energy expenditure.
The process would look something like:
1. Estimate total energy expenditure.
2. Set your caloric intake at a level above or below the above estimation depending on whether you want to gain or lose weight, respectively.
3. Track your measurements, weight, body fat, pictures, etc every 2-4 weeks.
4. Based on the trend you’re seeing with your tracking, adjust your intake accordingly.
5. Rinse and repeat steps 2-4 until you a) reach your goal or b) your goals change.
Because I enjoy beating dead horses, let’s look at an example. Jane weighs 130 lbs. She is spends about an hour each day exercising and doesn’t feel her metabolism is off-the-charts slow. She calculates her total energy expenditure by multiplying 130 by 14 to give her 1,820 calories. She understands that we’re working with estimates so she drops that number to 1,800 for simplicity's sake.
Her goal is to drop 5 lbs of fat while preserving muscle. She’s not looking to do anything extreme in terms of dieting but she knows she needs to eat less energy than she expends. She reasons that a deficit of 25% would be suitable.
Multiplying 1,800 by 25% gives us 450. To start her “plan” she'll aim for between 1,300 and 1,400 calories per day.
She’ll also figure out her baseline data by weighing herself first thing in the morning after relieving herself. She’ll use a soft tape measure to measure the circumference of her arms, chest, navel, waist, hips and thighs. If she has the available tools, she might measure her body fat percentage. She’ll also take some pictures of herself.
After a handful of weeks eating between 1,300 and 1,400 calories she’ll re-measure the above variables. If they’re heading in the desired direction she’ll stay the course. If she finds that she’s losing weight too quickly, she’ll adjust her intake upward by 10% or so. If she finds that she’s not losing enough, she’ll adjust her intake downward by 10% or so.
And that’s the process. Next time you or someone you care about is frantically searching for the perfect calculation for energy expenditure, stop them and explain the process. Or direct them to this article. If you use the wrong calculation, the process will uncover that fact and you’ll make the necessary adjustments over time to get on track.
Although this article is primarily about how to calculate caloric needs, it’s important to mention that the types of foods that comprise your calories are vitally important as well. That’s beyond the scope of this article however.
Best to you!0 -
Just want this in my topics to read later. I have nothing to add yet, except, a bump!0
-
bump 2 read later0
-
Steve,
I hate to complicate a really useful article, but I have questions.
First, there seems to be a scenario of under-eating causing plateaus for some people, especially if they've dieted a lot before. When you get up to step 4, lets say you haven't noticed any change at all, but you already have a deficit that you think is in the region of 750-1000 cals/day. Is there any indicators as to wether you should reduce further on the assumption that your estimated deficit is just wrong, or wether you should increase on the basis that you're under-eating and hurting your own progress that way?
Actually, I'll save the second question because it isn't sufficiently related. I don't want to hijack the thread.0 -
I hate to complicate a really useful article, but I have questions.
No way, that's why I posted it. Guide some people who are struggling with something that typically isn't worth getting anxious about AS WELL AS hopefully stimulating some questions.
So thanks.First, there seems to be a scenario of under-eating causing plateaus for some people, especially if they've dieted a lot before.
The article is really geared towards people just getting into the weight loss game. People who've been dieting for a long while generally can follow the same advice. However, if they're truly plateaued, there can be a cause that's not typical of a newcomer, which I'll get into below.When you get up to step 4, lets say you haven't noticed any change at all, but you already have a deficit that you think is in the region of 750-1000 cals/day. Is there any indicators as to wether you should reduce further on the assumption that your estimated deficit is just wrong, or wether you should increase on the basis that you're under-eating and hurting your own progress that way?
If you're supposedly in that large of a deficit and you're not losing (given enough time) there's only so many possible explanations. They are, generally speaking:
1. You're eating more than you think you are, which is by far the most common case, even in those who feel they're overestimating if anything. I posted research in my other thread showing how even dietitians were significantly off on their own estimated intakes.
2. You're not expending as much as you think you are. This is also pretty common.
3. You calculated maintenance in the beginning, have since lost an appreciable amount of weight, thus lowering your calorie requirements, yet, you've not adjusted your intake. Smaller body means less tissue to support (even fat is metabolically active) and less energy required to move around. So obviously, and I'm sure most people around here know this, when you lose weight, you've to adjust your intake to follow suit. If you don't.... especially if you lose significant weight, what was once a deficit can easily become maintenance.
4. The calculation you used to determine your calorie needs was wrong - either entirely or wrong for you.
5. Lifestyle changes - remember - the energy out side of the equation is very much dynamic. Exercise comprises part of the energy out side, but so does NEAT or SPA (non-exercise activity thermogenesis or spontaneous physical activity respectively), thermic effect of feeding, and basal metabolic rate.
6. You're holding onto water, thus masking true fat loss, which is BEYOND common as I discussed in the lean people getting leaner thread.
7. You're adding muscle, which isn't typically significant or usual while dieting, but it does indeed happen. Especially if you're applying novel stimuli to the body - prime example would be someone doing true strength training for the first.
8. Adaptive thermogenesis. I'm guessing this is what you're getting at. This is what some people refer to as "starvation mode." And what it is is when metabolism slows down more than what would be expected given a specific weight loss. So you lose 20 pounds, you'd expect calorie needs to fall by 200 or so, yet, when you account for that 200 and eat what should be maintenance, you gain, indicating you're in a surplus. Which can be the case if adaptive thermogenesis is playing a role.
If this is the case, and more often than not I'd say it's not given all the above possibilities that are much more common, I'd suggest taking a break. And this is really topic for another article all together. But a population of exercisers exist who take the extremist approach. They workout hard enough to feel pain each time. They diet forever without letting up. They use huge calorie deficits for extended periods of time. They're anxious people by nature, always stepping on the scale, worrying about the next workout, wondering if they should try the next diet, or whatever. On and on it goes. Genetics can play a role too. But due to various stress response issues, adaptive thermogenesis hits them harder than others.
Our bodies are constantly working to manage stress. It's the good old GAS principle (general adaptation syndrome). Our bodies have finite capacities to handle stress. And stress is cumulative - physical and psychological. If we outpace our bodies abilities to manage this stress.... whacky things can happen and select dieters often display this repeatedly. This is why it's a good idea to remove some of the stress and let some of our "biology" settle down and reset.
I've had women ramp up to maintenance over a month's time and while doing so, remove exercise. Then they'd stay at maintenance for a week or so and by then, things should be settled enough where they can start back at the original goal but this time using much saner parameters.
Hopefully this is at least a start to answering what I think was a great question. Let me know.0 -
I personally think MFP's calculators are spitting out numbers that are WAY too low.
Here is my experience and reasoning:
When I first started here I was 130 lbs and was thrown into MFP's one-size-fits-all-eat-1200-to-lose category. I was ignorant at the time so I did it, of course it melted off, mostly water weight, and the first ten was gone like magic. Then I SLOWLY crept down another ten. I STOPPED SHORT at 110 but wanted to aim for 102-105.
Eventually I gave up and decided to switch to "maintenance". Which MFP told me was 1500. Once I went up to 1500, I went down to 104 lbs eating more!
Why was I losing more while on maintenance?
Because apparently My maintenance is more like 2000, according to the BodyMediaFit I have been wearing for the last 5 days. I have broken 2000 all 5 days! And have been eating 1700-1800, and NOT gaining.
All that time spent eating 1200 and getting headaches and being exhausted and cranky, I was STARVING!
People, you CAN eat more!!!!!! I can eat between 1800 and 2200 calories every day! And I weigh 104!!!!
Don't starve yourselves!0 -
Great post!0
-
great post0
-
If you're supposedly in that large of a deficit and you're not losing (given enough time) there's only so many possible explanations. They are, generally speaking:
1. You're eating more than you think you are...
2. You're not expending as much as you think you are...
3. You calculated maintenance in the beginning, have since lost an appreciable amount of weight, thus lowering your calorie requirements, yet, you've not adjusted your intake...
4. The calculation you used to determine your calorie needs was wrong - either entirely or wrong for you...
5. Lifestyle changes...
6. You're holding onto water...
7. You're adding muscle...
8. Adaptive thermogenesis...
...
I've had women ramp up to maintenance over a month's time and while doing so, remove exercise. Then they'd stay at maintenance for a week or so and by then, things should be settled enough where they can start back at the original goal but this time using much saner parameters.
Hopefully this is at least a start to answering what I think was a great question. Let me know.
Thanks, that gets right to what I was asking. This isn't my current situation, currently I'm loosing weight I put on over Christmas at what I consider my maxim rate of fat loss and I expect to change strategy to strengthening at the end of next month. But when I started with MFP I did have this issue, just like the women you mentioned and the previous poster here.
The background to my question is that before I used MFP I was always hungry and working out 15-20 hours a week. I'd been doing that for about 6 months with some, but not much impact on my weight. Then I used MFP and it told me I was being an idiot, so I basically doubled my food intake (at least, I think I did) and cut my workouts down to around 12-14 hr / week (split about evenly between high intensity cardio, low intensity yoga / stretching, and moderate intensity resistance work). Anyway, as soon as I did that I started loosing (not smoothly, but on average) 1kg/week all the way down to a BMI of 22 (from 87kg to 73kg, or 192lb to 161lb)
So of the eight likely scenarios, it seems to me two are more likely than the others:
1. I didn't double the amount I was eating at all, but just became aware of the amount I was eating.
2. Adaptive thermogenesis / starvation mode was causing me to be very efficient with energy use and this ended when I began feeding myself properly.
I have a tendency to fall into the category of someone who will maintain large deficits by exercising a lot (although I still end up eating around 2300-2500 cals / day, gross). So I do sometimes worry that I'm putting myself back in this situation, which means when I get to your 'step 4' I'm not sure which way to go.
[This time I doubt I'll have this problem because when I stop loosing weight or get close to my goal, I'm intending to change targets to strengthening instead of weight loss - I don't think I have enough to loose to bother getting past the next plateau, but its still a question I find interesting and other people seem to be in similar situations]
Thanks again, this has already clarified a few things that were confusing me most of last year!0 -
I'm glad. Don't hesitate asking questions.
And to put it bluntly, trying to beat your body into submission is almost never the answer. Rather, we want to gently coax the fat off our bodies. Stress can be a real bear if it's not respected and managed properly and overzealous exercisers/dieters find that out in a hurry when they do the equivalent of smashing their bodies in the face with a brick by ungodly exercise amounts paired with calorie deficits.0 -
I was wondering if you could offer any advice for my particular situation. The short version of the question is: what should I do differently?
I'm 5'8", borderline small/med frame, and trying to get back to what I feel is my optimal weight, in the low 130s. Over the past few years, I started grad school, got married, and turned 30, and my weight shot up to the high 150s before I noticed! I'm sure these factors all have contributed to my weight gain, and I want to reverse the trend before it's too late.
When I started MFP in November, I figured I was consuming around 2500 cal/day, much of that from sodas. So I've switched to mostly diet (not great, I know, but it's something), tried to get more water, and was aiming for about 1500 cal/day. I made my profile Lightly Active, but also counted most of my longer walks around campus, or while moving around a classroom teaching. Because of my schedule, I rarely exercise outside of these things.
This worked at first, and I dropped the first ~10 lbs., probably water weight. Then I plateaued, reevaluated my activity levels a little more realistically, and changed to Sedentary/1200 cal/day. I only log major exercise outside of my normal routine, such as extended, fast-paced walking, heavy house cleaning, etc. I've done this for a couple of weeks now with no change in weight. I'm back to hovering around 149, and constantly craving food.
What is going on? Outside of adding more exercise, which is simply not going to happen until I pass my qualifying exams in May, is there anything I can do to lose a little more weight? I know exercise is important, and it will be a larger part of my life as soon as my schedule allows, but do you have any suggestions on how to stay on track until then?0 -
bump0
-
bump0
-
bump0
-
bump to read in the am, sleepy time :yawn:0
-
Bump0
-
Bump0
-
bump to read later0
-
0 -
bump0
-
bump0
-
really interesting and explains to me why everytime I have lost weight I have put it back on again.- by not adjusting what my body needs0
-
I was wondering if you could offer any advice for my particular situation. The short version of the question is: what should I do differently?
I'm 5'8", borderline small/med frame, and trying to get back to what I feel is my optimal weight, in the low 130s. Over the past few years, I started grad school, got married, and turned 30, and my weight shot up to the high 150s before I noticed! I'm sure these factors all have contributed to my weight gain, and I want to reverse the trend before it's too late.
When I started MFP in November, I figured I was consuming around 2500 cal/day, much of that from sodas. So I've switched to mostly diet (not great, I know, but it's something), tried to get more water, and was aiming for about 1500 cal/day. I made my profile Lightly Active, but also counted most of my longer walks around campus, or while moving around a classroom teaching. Because of my schedule, I rarely exercise outside of these things.
This worked at first, and I dropped the first ~10 lbs., probably water weight. Then I plateaued, reevaluated my activity levels a little more realistically, and changed to Sedentary/1200 cal/day. I only log major exercise outside of my normal routine, such as extended, fast-paced walking, heavy house cleaning, etc. I've done this for a couple of weeks now with no change in weight. I'm back to hovering around 149, and constantly craving food.
What is going on? Outside of adding more exercise, which is simply not going to happen until I pass my qualifying exams in May, is there anything I can do to lose a little more weight? I know exercise is important, and it will be a larger part of my life as soon as my schedule allows, but do you have any suggestions on how to stay on track until then?
Just to make sure I have this right... you're currently at 149 lbs and consuming 1200 calories daily. Correct? If so, how long have you been doing this?
More importantly, how are you tracking your intake? Are you using a digital scale to weigh your food?0 -
really interesting and explains to me why everytime I have lost weight I have put it back on again.- by not adjusting what my body needs
Common mistake that many people make. I see it quite a bit with larger folks who lose substantial amounts of weight. It's definitely not a "light switch" effect. As they slowly lose weight, their metabolic "cost" gradually goes down. And people shouldn't be adjusting each pound they lose. But they do need to realize that a pre-determined deficit will get smaller and smaller as they lose more and more weight.
This too, however, would be picked up by the "process" listed in the article.0 -
Posts like this makes me question to eat back my "exercise" calories. I was relatively active before I join MFP, thus I set my activity level to moderate. So with working out 5 times a week, I have a maintanance of about 2000 to 2100 calories per day. I set my weight loss goals to 1 lb per week and eat 1500 without eating back my exercise calories...if I did, I'll be back at my maintanance again. I figured this out when I was working out as usual, kicking up the intensity and not losing more than 3 lbs per month. My maintanance is 2100 when I work out 5 times a week so it doesn't make sense for me to eat 1800 just because i'm "supposed" to eat back my exercise calories.
I truly believe "eating back calories" are for those who weren't active or set their activity level to sedentary. If I was sedentary, my maintanance would be 1660. If I added 500 calories burned that'll leave me at 1160, under the 1200 "golden rule", I must eat some of those calories back. However I'm regularly active, to lose weight I would have to reduce my calorie intake. My exercise have been accounted for in my daily calorie expenditure. The exercises I do on the regular basis should not be deducted from my daily calorie goals. But this is my logic, I feel like it explains why some may need to eat back their exercise cals and some do not.0 -
Just to make sure I have this right... you're currently at 149 lbs and consuming 1200 calories daily. Correct? If so, how long have you been doing this?
More importantly, how are you tracking your intake? Are you using a digital scale to weigh your food?
Yes, I am currently 149 lbs. I mis-typed, but meant to say I am at 1300 calories/day, and have been at that about 2 1/2 weeks. However, it's been surprisingly tough, after being at 1500/day for a few months before that.
I track everything I eat in MFP, but do not have a digital scale. I use measuring cups when eating at home, but often eat on the go. When possible, I go to national chains that have posted nutritional info. I know what you say about people, even nutritionists, under-reporting, and I try to be conscious of that.0 -
bump...0
-
Posts like this makes me question to eat back my "exercise" calories. I was relatively active before I join MFP, thus I set my activity level to moderate. So with working out 5 times a week, I have a maintanance of about 2000 to 2100 calories per day. I set my weight loss goals to 1 lb per week and eat 1500 without eating back my exercise calories...if I did, I'll be back at my maintanance again. I figured this out when I was working out as usual, kicking up the intensity and not losing more than 3 lbs per month. My maintanance is 2100 when I work out 5 times a week so it doesn't make sense for me to eat 1800 just because i'm "supposed" to eat back my exercise calories.
I truly believe "eating back calories" are for those who weren't active or set their activity level to sedentary.
In truth, it has nothing to do with that. There are no universal indicators of who should and should not eat back their exercise calories. And there's nothing magic about eating them back or not. In fact, since these educational type posts have been such a hit, I'm going to make another thread today about this very topic. Stay tuned. It's simply going to be a copy and paste job from my blog as this is a topic I've discussed in the past.0 -
Yes, I am currently 149 lbs. I mis-typed, but meant to say I am at 1300 calories/day, and have been at that about 2 1/2 weeks. However, it's been surprisingly tough, after being at 1500/day for a few months before that.
I track everything I eat in MFP, but do not have a digital scale. I use measuring cups when eating at home, but often eat on the go. When possible, I go to national chains that have posted nutritional info. I know what you say about people, even nutritionists, under-reporting, and I try to be conscious of that.
Watch this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVjWPclrWVY 0 -
Great info. Thanks. :happy:0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 421 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions