Blog I read had me thinking... hmmm?

brneydgrlie

To paraphase a blog I was reading earlier this afternoon, this woman's theory was you should eat like the weight you WANT to be at. In other words, plug your ideal weight into a calculator
(she suggest this one - http://www.cancer.org/healthy/toolsandcalculators/calculators/app/calorie-counter-calculator)
and make that amount your daily goal. This woman claims to have lost 25 lbs in a month this way.

That should make sense. However playing around with this calculator, if I use her logic, it tells me that for my goal weight I should need 1900 calories daily. WHAT??? And that is if I am SEDENTARY. There cannot be any way that I could lose 70 lbs by eating 400-600 calories MORE per day than MFP already has me at, and lose weight FASTER than I am now. I can only think that her theory is not completely sound.

Would anyone like to chime in on this? Thoughts?

BTW, if anyone would like to see the blog entry I am speaking of, here it is - http://www.debramoorhead.com/blog/index.php/how-i-lost-25-pounds-in-one-month/

i_love_vinegar

To paraphase a blog I was reading earlier this afternoon, this woman's theory was you should eat like the weight you WANT to be at. In other words, plug your ideal weight into a calculator
(she suggest this one - http://www.cancer.org/healthy/toolsandcalculators/calculators/app/calorie-counter-calculator)
and make that amount your daily goal. This woman claims to have lost 25 lbs in a month this way.

That should make sense. However playing around with this calculator, if I use her logic, it tells me that for my goal weight I should need 1900 calories daily. WHAT??? And that is if I am SEDENTARY. There cannot be any way that I could lose 70 lbs by eating 400-600 calories MORE per day than MFP already has me at, and lose weight FASTER than I am now. I can only think that her theory is not completely sound.

Would anyone like to chime in on this? Thoughts?

BTW, if anyone would like to see the blog entry I am speaking of, here it is - http://www.debramoorhead.com/blog/index.php/how-i-lost-25-pounds-in-one-month/

Are we supposed to eat like the sedentary thing says...or are we supposed to subtract the calories is suggests at the bottom?

It says I would need to eat 1352 calories to stay at 85 pounds. I can believe this, but I def won't get to that weight eating 1352 calories per day! :laugh:

SkimosGirl

I know it's strange, but recently I lowered my weight loss goal from "lose 2lbs per week" to "lose .5lbs per week" because I am so near my goal and keep getting discouraged on lower amounts of calories. And since I've been eating 300-400 calories MORE and doing less exercise (because I've been lazy, not part of the plan) I am losing again. I dunno it's weird. I don't even pay attention anymore to the scale, just the way I look and feel, and how my clothes fit.

Happy Losing : ) Nic

LizC26

Her logic is correct...it doesn't mean you will get there faster though....If you eat the calories your goal weight should eat to maintain, you will eventually drop to that goal weight, but you can eat less and get there much faster..

KMcBandit

Well I dunno about all that but mine was 2635 to stay this weight and a deficit of 500 to lose 1 pound per week! That's insane if you ask me however I wasn't losing for weeks at the amount MFP told me 1200 plus half of my activities sooo I upped my calories to 1450 and I'm losing again. Could be....

shesblossoming

Personally, I'm not sure that's very healthy. What I like about this website is that it promotes healthy weight loss and while some bodies might lose extra or less weight each month. For every ten punds you lose, you reevaluate your calorie intake and exercise, because you want to go for the next ten pounds. But to eat like you're at the weight you want to be, especially if it's 100 pounds or over, might not be a good idea. But from what I'm reading in the comments, they're showing that calorie intake should be more... very strange. I've been doing this for a little over a month and have lost ten pounds just by following my daily goals.

KMcBandit

SO eat more and lose more?

brit49

bump!!

drmastermind

wow.. according to that calculator I'd need to eat roughly twice what I currently do. That number is a maintenance number, the calories you would have to eat to maintain your weight. I went from 320 down to 260's using a plan similar to that: take the maintenance number for my current weight and subtract 1000 from it to get the calories. I'm sure it would work but if it's too much of a deficit I don't think it would work for you long term. I think a better way is to slowly change your eating and reduce portion sizes so that it becomes normal to eat smaller and healthier portions. If you take your maintenance weight and reduce it by 1000 calories you should loose 2lbs per week and probably wont even notice that the portion sizes are smaller.

I'd be really interested in seeing how long she keeps that weight off too. 25 lbs in a month seems pretty high to me since most of what I read says that 1-2 lbs per week is the limit to healthy weight loss and that's closer to 6/week. I'd be willing to bet that in a couple months she's gained it back.

i_love_vinegar

wow.. according to that calculator I'd need to eat roughly twice what I currently do. That number is a maintenance number, the calories you would have to eat to maintain your weight. I went from 320 down to 260's using a plan similar to that: take the maintenance number for my current weight and subtract 1000 from it to get the calories. I'm sure it would work but if it's too much of a deficit I don't think it would work for you long term. I think a better way is to slowly change your eating and reduce portion sizes so that it becomes normal to eat smaller and healthier portions. If you take your maintenance weight and reduce it by 1000 calories you should loose 2lbs per week and probably wont even notice that the portion sizes are smaller.

I'd be really interested in seeing how long she keeps that weight off too. 25 lbs in a month seems pretty high to me since most of what I read says that 1-2 lbs per week is the limit to healthy weight loss and that's closer to 6/week. I'd be willing to bet that in a couple months she's gained it back.

Oh Thanks! I was trying to figure this out. So I need 852 calories per day...?

KMcBandit

Here's another calculator i found interesting. http://www.freedieting.com/tools/calorie_calculator.htm

kaitimae

Very interesting. Bookmarking to come back to. I did the calculator and plugged in my goal weight (165), and it has me consuming about 400 calories more than MFP gives me to lose 1 lb a week NOW. So that's not too terrible of a difference! Seems like it would work, to me.

TripleJ3

It makes sense to me to eat like i'm at my goal weight.....and if I go by the calculator the amount to maintain my goal weight would be a bout 200 more than I'm eating now.

It also explains why some people go to maintenance to lose that last 10lbs.

Very interesting.

drmastermind

no.. 852 cal per day would be insane. At a certain point you should only be aiming for a pound per week weight loss, I think if your calories drop below 1200 or so it wouldn't be terribly good for you.

shallo

Interesting. That puts me at almost 500 calories a day more than MFP.

daisymae9801

This actually makes a lot of sense. Right now MFP has me at 1,200 calories to lose .9 lbs a week. But that calculator said to maintain my goal weight with a sedentary diet (I underestimated to be safe) I can eat 1,400 or so. Does anything think this is a good plan? Or is it just going to slow down the weight loss?

brneydgrlie

I think maybe part of the strangeness of it is that not everyone started out at the higher calorie count and is dropping to a lower one for their goal weight.

I am very overweight, yet I was not eating almost 2900 calories to be the weight I was (which is supposedly maintainence for that weight). When I came on to MFP, I found out (to my shock), that I was not eating ENOUGH. I was actually eating less than 1200 calories daily and never realized it.

So for me to go from 1200 - 1500 cals per day (per MFP) to 1900 calories per day (per this calculator and bloggers theory) is NOT automatically setting me up with a deficit, which is what I think the blogger may be assuming.

erisfreenici

LOL That American Cancer society counter says I should eat 2100 calories per day to maintain my weight at 154 pounds. I am eating 1400 calories a day at 172 lbs and I'm barely losing weight. According to MFP, I need 1900 calories per day to maintain my weight w/ sedentary activity.

Angeloftheshore

I started here at 1200 cals a day. It seemed to be counter productive for me since I wanted a permanent solution not a quick fix to gain it all back. So I upped my cals to my desired goal weight. I am losing weight and inches, not hungry, eat desert daily and feel fantastic. Plus I am learning how to eat for life now at the cals I will always want to stay at. It just seemed a more realistic and permanent change for me and it's working. I admit I do not eat healthy all the time, YET. My husband is away at a Navy school so my eating habits are a bit strange right now. But as soon as he is home, we both are working on the healthier eating part.

Angeloftheshore

Oh but I did not go by the American Cancer Society for maintenance goals for my desired weight. I went to a site via Jillian Michaels link, can't remember where :.(

daisymae9801

I used MFP and set my weight to 105 and maintenence.

Luthorcrow

Although MFP is not set up this way be default, I generally think calorie restrictions are the wrong way to go to lose weight. One because it doesn't teach your body to maintain a healthy weight on a normal diet, two because less calorie means a slower metabolism which is self defeating and lastly because your body needs your nutrients and it is harder to get that on crazy 1200 calorie, etc. diets.

In my view it is better to set your calories for maintenance on MFP (which should be your MBR) and use your exercise as your deficit (not eating for it). Obviously when you get to your desired weight you will have to start eating more for you activity levels but that is smaller change then climbing up from a more restricted diet. It is also very hard to estimate actual calories burned during exercise so constantly trying to eat for activity levels while losing weight is tough game of guessing.

sleepytexan

To paraphase a blog I was reading earlier this afternoon, this woman's theory was you should eat like the weight you WANT to be at. In other words, plug your ideal weight into a calculator
(she suggest this one - http://www.cancer.org/healthy/toolsandcalculators/calculators/app/calorie-counter-calculator)
and make that amount your daily goal. This woman claims to have lost 25 lbs in a month this way.

That should make sense. However playing around with this calculator, if I use her logic, it tells me that for my goal weight I should need 1900 calories daily. WHAT??? And that is if I am SEDENTARY. There cannot be any way that I could lose 70 lbs by eating 400-600 calories MORE per day than MFP already has me at, and lose weight FASTER than I am now. I can only think that her theory is not completely sound.

Would anyone like to chime in on this? Thoughts?

BTW, if anyone would like to see the blog entry I am speaking of, here it is - http://www.debramoorhead.com/blog/index.php/how-i-lost-25-pounds-in-one-month/

Are we supposed to eat like the sedentary thing says...or are we supposed to subtract the calories is suggests at the bottom?

It says I would need to eat 1352 calories to stay at 85 pounds. I can believe this, but I def won't get to that weight eating 1352 calories per day! :laugh:

You want to weight 85 lbs??????????? why?

Persipan

I've often thought that there might be an advantage to just eating the maintenance calories for my goal weight - it would take longer to get there, but it would avoid that awkward transition from weight loss to maintenance, so it really would be a lifestyle change; you could just adopt new sustainable habits and stick with them for good, and eventually you'd level out at the weight you wanted to be.

And then I think, sod it, it'd take ages and I'm doing OK. It's sort of my plan B, though.

cutmd

Gonna veto this one except for people with 30+ pounds to lose. Why?

I need to eat 1939 cals to maintain my current weight, and 1830 to maintain my ultimate low goal weight that is ten pounds lighter. This gives me a deficit of 91 cals a day! One trip to a restaurant in a week or mismeasurement or lazy day and that deficit is GONE. :noway:

Even if I maintained the 91 cal difference, I'm looking at 38 or so days to lose a pound of fat, and it would take me a year to lose 10lbs....

Luthorcrow

@cutmd you calculation on your deficit would be right if all you did was lay in bed and never moved. If you are working out and not eating back for it, then that along with your other activities becomes your deficit. It also has the advantage of not over estimating your calories burned then over eating those calories back.

For example if you ran for 30 minutes at a 7 MPH you would burn somewhere around 400 calories. Now you have 491 deficit for that day plus whatever else you did that day. Want to lose more exercise more. You never have to worry about your calculations being wrong on what to eat and your activity level determines your deficit so it encourages you to get moving.

Calorie restrictions and the default MFP set up is for sedentary people. It is set up to lose weight even if you do nothing. If you and judging by your photos you are. Eat makes more sense to eat more and use your activity as you deficit. You will actually lose more weight vs. calorie restrictions and be more healthy.